"AWI Rules" Topic

I recently have renewed my interest in AWI gaming and after searching for days finally found my 2 copies of 1776 rules and a box of unpainted Minifig 25mm AWI figures that I have had for years. I also have a copy of Black Powder rules and an assortment of other old AWI rule books. It seems Black Powder is not very strict on unit sizes other than a variety of four general sizes. 1776 is a 20 to 1 ratio that could be used to more accurately reflect actual unit sizes. If you have experience with either of these rule systems and their playability I would greatly appreciate your input.
Thanks
Ed

This past November, at Millennium Con in Round Rock, Texas, a fellow AWI enthusiast presented a Black Powder AWI scenario from "Rebellion", Black Powder's AWI supplement. The game played was Breed's Hill. I was one of four people who played and I was one of the American players.

Our host did a really good job of leading us through the rules, plus he explained the four unit sizes in Black Powder and how they applied to our scenario. The game we played was fun. Our host's British and American 18mm miniatures also looked great.

Unfortunately for the Americans, the British outnumber the Americans in a substantial way in Rebellion's Breed's Hill scenario. In our game, the British won. Looking at the initial set up of both sides, the British seemed to have the edge.

I know this might sound like sour grapes on my part, although I've lost my share of wargame battles and hope that I accept defeat like a man. The truth is, I had fun in spite of some bad dice rolls. But I'm an American Revolution enthusiast myself, and know that at least one researcher believes that the American and British forces actually engaged at Breed's Hill were nearly equal in size. So Black Powder's Breed's Hill scenario arguably might need some adjustment.

I'll admit that one game scenario doesn't make or break a set of rules. Also, I only have one game of Black Powder under my belt. Having said that, I prefer the approach of 1776 which uses a figure scale to determine the size of units, vs. using BP's four standard unit sizes.

Black Powder's approach isn't necessarily a bad one. But for the sake of fighting historical battles, some judgement is needed.

For the record, I own 1776 and Rebellion, but not Black Powder.

We usually use 1776 for AWI. We like the feel of the rules and have a lot of fun with them. The charts aren't well explained and take a minute of looking at them to get how they're set up, but aside from that, I think it's a great set of rules. They're pretty compact for what they accomplish, and not hard to read or understand. I don't have and haven't played Black Powder, but a lot of the newer rules don't hold much interest for me as I see them as history light in order to attract fantasy/GW players to history and others who aren't hard history buffs. I guess they fill that niche, but I find that virtually all of them have mechanisms I don't care for. IMO, 1776 is a solid set of rules that has stood the test of time.

Not the question, but we greatly enjoy "Guns of Liberty" for our AWI games.

Second the Guns of Liberty rules.

I've only played BP once and it was AWI using the White Plains battle from the Rebellion book. I also felt this scenario was unbalanced in the British favor and cut some of the British forces. They still won but it was a lot more "fair" and uncertain.
I think it may have been more "game" than simulation but it was fun and finished in a about 4 hours with three players all relatively new to the rules.
No experience with 1776.
Link to game AAR if intetested:
link

1776 is a game from the late 70s or early 80s.
That means a lot of WRG-ish mechanisms, like with numerous positive and negative factors.
I also seem to remember simultaneous movement but I could be wrong.

I don't remember any ambiguities in the rules.
If you like 80s style rules you will like 1776.
Nice uniform and flag charts, for the 80s. Also some notes about various armies and scenarios. In this regard it was ahead of its time.

We had some good fun games. I found it to have a better "feel" for the AWI than the generic Black Powder.

The basing used is way out of touch with today's figures. I switched my basing scheme to 3 figures on a 2"x1" base. The rules have figure removal, but that's easy to do.

I'd buy and most likely use the OFM's TSATF variant for this period.

I have seen some talk that The British Are Coming rules are a cleaned up version of 1776. I own both, and haven't played 1776 but they do seem to have a lot of the old school mechanisms carried into TBAC (calculating firing strength by figure to determine a percentage chance to hit being one of the most obvious). I like TBAC as it does have things like zones of control which at the time was a concept not found in many miniature rules.

TBAC has a Yahoo group, albeit not a super active one:

link

I like British Grenadier, a fuller version of that great old favourite American File and Scramble first published in WI all those years ago, it just feel right for the period.

To answer the OP's question specifically. Black Powder works fine for AWI. Most units will be normal sized, but any mounted units will be either small or tiny.

Per the question specifically. I only played Black Powder/Rebellion of the tw,listed. I found it works fine for AWI. There are others Rules that I like but would not hesitate to use BP if it was one of your choices.

Regarding unit size, you are right, it is flexible as long as it is consistent.

Guns of Liberty was also suggested to me on TMP. Don't bother looking for them, they are no longer available.

eBay – auction

Though Eric is finishing up 3rd edition.

I've played 1776 and enjoyed them. I've played black powder and liked it, but not enough to spend money on it.

What we now use is AWI Rule book. link

I played Black Powder's scenario of Freeman's Farm back in the day and found it balanced against the Yanks. Most accounts I've read have the Yanks in larger numbers than the Brits. Based on issues with the rules rather than the scenario, sold my copy of BP.

As for Bunker (Breed's) Hill, Urban's Fusiliers maintains that Gage's troops weren't all that much better trained than the militia who were holding the redoubts. That changed once Howe trained them in Nova Scotia.

But I'm an American Revolution enthusiast myself, and know that at least one researcher believes that the American and British forces actually engaged at Breed's Hill were nearly equal in size. So Black Powder's Breed's Hill scenario arguably might need some adjustment.

It's a while since I played BP (and that wasn't an AWI game), but I'm tempted to agree with you, although numbers are very largely conjectural for both sides. I'll let others look up what constitutes small/big units etc, but the Rebels fought largely as detachments of 100 or 200 men.

The British had 2 main flank battalions (400 apiece), and one minor (200); the two Marine battalions were 400 (1st) and 600 (2nd); the other line units (5th, 38th, 43rd, 47th & 52nd) had between 200-240 R&F each judging by April returns and what we know they left behind in Boston; the 63rd was newly arrived and it's unclear how many centre company men were available, but 320 would be the norm. Total, excluding artillery, was about 3,500.

The Rebels may have had as many as 3,300 in the front line, with another 420 in reserve on Bunker Hill, and 750 potentially available on the Neck. Now, potentially the whole army – bar the Roxbury contingent – was available to march onto the peninsula. However, one has to bear in mind the reluctance of the BH and Neck contingents to come forward (Gerish was later court-martialled) when called.

From North to South, the Rebel forces were:-

Beach/wall – Moore 150 (NH)
Fence – Stark 400 (NH), Reed 300 (NH), Knowlton 200 (CT)
Breastwork, fleches, redoubt – Prescott 1,600 (MA*)
Stone barn – Wyman 200 (NH), Nutting 200 (MA)
Charlestown – Crosby 100 (NH), Woodbridge 100 (MA), Nuttall 100 (MA)
Bunker Hill – Gerish 420
Charlestown Neck/Cambridge – Mansfield/Scammon 750 (MA)

[* Prescott's command was drawn from Prescott's, Frye's, Bridge's. Nixon's, Doolittle's, Brewer's, Woodbridge's and Little's regiments – this excludes other detachments from these regiments in Charlestown etc. ]

I hope that is of some use. I have played the BH scenario in British Grenadier a few times, and found it was easier for the British if you increased the figure:man ratio and replicated the number of units the British actually had, rather than amalgamating too many of them.

I have Mike Peirce and Arnold Hendrick "War In The Americas" and the companion book "Guide To Troops". Very detailed American Revolution tactical set.I was suprised that I cannot find any mention of these when I do a search. The scale is 1 fig equal 20 men. Units are battalions for infantry and regiments for cavalry. One gun fig equal 1or2 guns.
Just wondering if anyone ever played these.