"Fire and Frustration - An ACW BatRep" Topic

Last weekend my wargaming buddies got together to play an ACW game using our hosts massive collection of 15mm figures. We used the Fire and Fury rules but by the end of the game I think we were all feeling rather exasperated by them. I've now posted a ful Battle Report on my Blog here Battle at Jacobs Church BatRep

As usual more pictures and a full report of the action (including Orders of Battle) can be found on my blog here: LINK

BigLee
blmablog.com

I don't understand the need for an umpire, since there are really just a few simple modifiers. Maybe since it has been so long since you played.? These are my go to set for ACW period. I love them and have ever since I started playing them. You may take a look at the newer edition, some more chrome added to it. Great looking game though! I would loved to have played in it.

Weren't a lot of Civil War battles actually frustrating and indecisive in outcome? We dropped F&F long ago in favour of Featherstone-style rules for this period, such as those in George Gush's Guide to Wargaming. But then, we're heading towards old age and dementia.

Our group plays two sets of rules for ACW – Black Powder (not my favorite by far) and BBB (like this one).

BBB is similar to FF except it's pared down, less modifiers etc. Also instead of using a D10 with its huge swings in variables, you used 2 D6 added which gives much more of a bell curve.

Ive done Shiloh, Wilderness, and Cedar Creek to name a few with BBB and finished the battle in an evening with 4-6 players.

BTW, Lee, loved the AAR, nice collection too. You guys do some great games.

I am not a fan of the 1D10 either. But 2D6 can create just the same kind of frustration- needing extremes to get somewhere becomes even more difficult.
The level, the rules are for ( BBB or BFnF) are about the maneuver and that of Corps force size.
ACW battle, end to end on a board will get you just that you experienced ( much frustration and little visual result- IE a battle of attrition). Thus the "maneuver" piece gets removed.
An ACW "moving engagement" should be something like:
All forces are off the board except a guard ( at town or other prominent terrain and only from one force [union or confederate]) that is the catalyst for the battle.
Have the players decide what roads they will use to move up on, on there allowed side of the table. Allow the the sides for either to use ( one who wants to gamble- an possibly find them selves marching side by side with the enemy who also picked the board side) as an additional wild card to all so the comfort regarding the flanks are protected gets removed.
Adding to this anxiety would be to keep some units off board in reserve, so the enemy calculating your forces in is his strategy is left "on the ropes"/uneasy, as to a possible surprise!
All forces march on a road and in road column, unless enemy already with in the "move and 1/2" from your board edge- then allow to one move on to the table with units re-deployed.
Having the side with the larger number of forces ( then # roads available) will have to double up on one of the roads, automatically creating reinforcements/ initial level playing field for the smaller force.
So re-play your game again, with the rules( but without empire) and see if this goes more excitingly.

Recommend getting the newer version of the BFnF. Much more fire combat and less melee as it was in the ACW ( an thus removes the impact of the big swings in dice too).
Good wargaming and good luck!

Looks very good to me!

That wasn't a meeting engagement- those were two armies deployed for a slugfest, and it played out like one.

Great looking game. Sorry it's not the rules for your group.

You might also want to look into Altar of Freedom – plays "whole battles" really well and has an interesting C&C system. Black Powder might also work for your group.

A very good buddy of mine nicknamed them Fire and no fury! He had fought about a dozen games with them. He really wanted to like the rules. Just was not pleased with fire combat.

My beef is that they fell like you are maneuvering a regiment. I like the charts and basic mechanics. I also give them credit for setting the standard for great presentation for rulebooks a long time ago. They are still nice looking.

Thanks.

Very entertaining AAR, as usual. I agree completely with your comments regarding F&F. Our group used them and enjoyed them when they first came out but we have since moved on to BP (Glory Halleluja)and Pickett's Charge, both of which give fast and fun games with lots of period flavour.

We tried them and went back to JR2

Thanks for all the great feedback. Some excellent ideas and suggestions for our group think about. I think Postie is using the original rules. I have the new edition and may have to donate it to him!

Love Regimental Fire and Fury. Butt that is just my opinion.

I think Darth Fozzywig has a point. With two ACW armies starting the battle deployed and no one coming in on a flank, an indecisive bloodbath is what you ought to expect.

Which is not to say the rules are perfect. Starting out from CLS, I was fascinated the first time I saw single die roll melee resolution. Then I realized that two or three bad die rolls could be more important than tactical decisions. These days I try very hard to avoid games with activation rolls OR single die combat resolutions, let alone both.

If you look at the fire ranges and movement in BBB, you will find that it is perfect for Regimental level ACW battles. We have tried them that way several times and it works well.

And I agree about F&F. So, it is either JR2 or JR3 or BP if not BBB.

An, being an old curmudgeon, I still like On To Richmond.

Robert makes a great point about dice rolling mechanics.

I've come to use skirmish-style systems for BP periods that work by rolling dice by figure count for combat resolutions (or dice-per-stand if multi-mounted). Frankly, not only is it fun for many of us to cast hands of multiple dice, but, players tend to blame themselves for the results, rather than questioning an outcome occurring as the result of a single die roll.

Talkin' something that touches on observed human nature here.

Btw, can't stand Fire & Fury (it's a ruleset that I feel "plays the player", rather than the other way around)…..but just my opinion [experience].