"Pickett's Charge Rules" Topic

I'm researching the Pickett's Charge Rules by Dave Brown and wondered what other people thought of them.

I note that they use ADCs – did the ACW even have ADCs as such?

All general officers were allowed ADCs. It was a very important staff position. Higher ranking generals could have several ADCs.

Great rules. Great fun but give a realistic feel for the period.

I like them; lots of decisions.

We began with the Napoleonic set, 'General d'Armee' & loved them & recently had our first ever ACW game where we decided to go with the sister set.

See here:

TMP link

They work well, seem historically correct and are lots of fun. Can you ask for more?

Cheers guys

Just to answer the OP question.

Yes indeed there were ADCs in the Civil War. Army, Corps and Divisional Generals all had their own staff officers some of whom were highly competent and were even tasked with directing (in terms of physical guidance rather than planing) major attacks.

Outside of that most were used as messengers with a briefing to be the eyes and ears of their General at the point of delivery.

In PC they are representing the Command & Control function in a broader sense than just message delivery by acting as the focus point of the General/players intentions and attempts to control the battle.

So in effect they are an extension of the Generals ideas translated into a physical representation and a recognition that he can't be focused on everything all the time and things will get delayed. As anyone who has played the game and been short of ADCs will testify!

They are a key stone to an excellent set of rules!

Thanks. I was listening to an interview with Dave Brown last night and he said basically it's the DBA PIP system, but using better terminology.

It isn't a DBA point system. But it is a clever mechanism to represent command and control in the ACW.

Very much more layered than the PIP system. Excellent set of rules.

Cheers, I went ahead and purchased a copy.

Most people like PC, I like PC, but not more than RFF so I don't play PC that much.

the things I found frustrating in PC:
Some of the command choices (ADC uses) have real limited uses, so limited in fact that you never really use them.

I find the turn sequence wonky. Charge, move, then shoot, except that when units charge everyone involved ends up shooting and doing other stuff so when you return to the normal sequence, you have remember which units have already acted.

there's no risk to commanders / generals

I find the charge rules maddening vague. Every game I played seemed to have a situation not covered by the rules and we had to make it up.

two small regiments can shoot the hell out of one big one.

can't refuse flanks

--I'm not saying PC is bad, it's a good game especially if you want to do a somewhat larger scenario using regiments bc RFF can play a little slow and PC definitely is more streamlined.

I was listening to an interview with Dave Brown last night and he said basically it's the DBA PIP system, but using better terminology.

Mr Jones – I am very surprised by that. Could you post a link to that?

So how are these rules better or different than GaG?

Anyone?

HG,

This link may be of use:

link

DB