"Carnage & Glory - PC-moderated rules" Topic

Does anyone use these? The website spiel says they are

"suitable for all figure and ground scales, with no requirement for rebasing of figures. This is possible because the system 'thinks' in terms of real men and real distances, not numbers of figures or distances measured in inches or millimeters. Typical ground scales are 1" = 25 paces [1 mm = 1 pace] for 20 – 40 mm figures.."

That sounds quite interesting because 1 figure = 33 men and 1mm = 1 pace is the standard I grew up with.

Thoughts anyone?

Awesome system ! Very flexible when it comes to ground scale and number of figures. Very, very smooth and realistic experience ….highly recommended !

Data entry is a bottleneck

What are the unit sizes? Can you just use your existing figures, or what?

Agree with Bede19002 but the fog of war is cool.

To be up-front, I am one of the GMs in the C&G room at any HMGS convention, so may be a bit biased, but here goes:

Love the system.

Where in most games, most players max out at 5-8 units per person, most players in a C&G game are comfortable running 10-12. More concentration on tactics and commanding your units and less focus on die rolls and calculating modifiers.

As long as you have consistent basing, you should be able to use your current basing. The game is based on unit frontage, so you can make the ground scale anything you want. You just have to make your measuring tools (pace sticks) match. The standard is 1"=25 paces for >= 25mm and 1"= 50 paces for smaller figures. You can make sticks to whatever and a number of GMs in our group have templates, which you can ask about on the fairly active io group. The author of the rules is active on the io group also, so most questions get answered by "the horses mouth".

While I will admit there is potential for a bottleneck with data entry during play, my experience is that I am waiting for players to make decisions much more often than they are waiting for me to get things into the computer. For a game in your basement, usually multiple people are willing/able to run the computer (it isn't difficult) and things move quickly. In a convention setting, there are GM techniques that help to keep a game organized and moving at at fairly good pace. I would say it works best with 3-5 players per side in a multi-division sized Napoleonic battle. Other periods are a little different, but generally comparable.

The largest bit of work for the GM, which the payers don't really see, is the building of the OB and rating of units/officers. Depending upon your desire for historical accuracy, this can take a lot of time and effort to research. All before the game starts, not during.

As I said prior, we have a Club Room at most HMGS conventions. If you are interested in trying out the system, and able to attend, would be glad to have you in one of my games and show you the system. Cold Wars, if they have it?

4th Cuirassier…….you decide the figure ratio……what's more important is unit frontage and ground scale……I use 15mm at 33:1/at 50 paces per inch, but you can use whatever you want.

Once players understand the sequence of information to be provided to the GM there is no "bottleneck" in the flow of the game…most new players find the streamlined system in which you focus on tactical decisions rather than fire tables moves quickly and there is far less downtime in the game.

I have been told how well the rules work as a buddy of mine has them. He actually has a couple of them. I would disagree with the notion that most games, players max at 5 to 8 units. Most that we play, they will readily control 12 of them.

Thanks

John

That's interesting. I am (lockdown project) painting my way through a fairly big stash of plastics – about 1,250 infantry (66 battalions) and 280 cavalry. I'm about 10% through it and I find it takes me about a week of free time to paint and base a battalion so I should be done by early '22 if I can keep this up.

I have been all over frontages for this. The rules say 8mm for 3-deep French and 11mm for 2-deep British but the French don't fit on 8mm bases. So I've made those 11mm, grossing the 2-deep up to 15mm which is proportionately right.

At 11mm per figure, a figure being 33 blokes 3 ranks deep, that's 1mm per man, which means 1mm is about one pace. Everything jives with that. I spent about £70.00 GBP acquiring all the necessary MDF bases up front and it was money well spent.

Interesting indeed.

Speaking as someone who used NOT to like the system,
I'm now a FAN.

The rare unusual results caused me some trouble accepting that
those things can happen.

However, with a good scenario, gamers who know the system
and a GM (such as oldnorthstate) who knows what he/she
is about, a player who knows the tactics of the period and can
execute his/her maneuver elements focusing on the tactics
will have no trouble.

I look forward to the next time I play the system –
hopefully soon !

Could you play it solo or do the mechanics not work? I'd then not be worried about data entry as there'd only ever be a single list of units I'd need to include.

Used in Charlotte, NC by Dr. Bob's crew…I like the ability to anchor my line and blast people sneaking up on my flanks, I also liked the physical leader moving to the unit to rally and results like 'the men ignored his speech', the detail that can be carried on a campaign like sick, wounded, and dead. Much like a commanding officer would get briefs of numbers after an action, even after a lost battle. Serious campaign potential.

Big drawbacks: somebody has to operate a computer (could be nice for solo?) and makes you miss rolling your own dice.

I love it for solo play…….you just have to do data entry for both sides……the system also auto-saves, so you can leave a game up for an extended period of time.

So you play your battle out on your tabletop but the program resolves fire and stuff? How does it keep track of where your units are?

The campaign potential is really interesting. I quite like the idea of keeping track of casualties and recovering wounded. Can you feed it your own maps? There's a range available but I'm after south-east England (!) which quite reasonably isn't among them.

The computer tracks morale, fatigue, casualties, disorder, ammunition, but it doesn't track the tabletop……….you control movement…….you only input fformation changes. Each unit will have a number………..for example….unit 102 fires at unit 501……….you will input range, percent of unit firing, whether it's on a flank/rear……..and if the unit moved more than 75 paces.So essentially, the system is a morale and fatigue tracker by unit……you still control the tabletop.

Tracking fatigue was another benefit I forgot about, so important. Nice explanation Mac 64

Heck, I may give these another look, as I don't own them.

Best set of rules for a convention because everything is on one sheet of paper. The data entry is a bit of a bummer for the guy doing it, but it moves as fast as any other rule set.

Have to say only played C&G once at a convention but really liked it and pondering to get it for Napoleonics

Hi

I've been using C&G for getting on for 30 years! Further to the above the computer also keeps track of a units formation and if it is in built-up-areas or earthworks. Pre battle you can also set weather options (which can effect moving and firing), fatigue and ammunition levels, reinforcements and flank attacks. Currently in the middle of a playtest with the author Nigel Marsh, of the ACW campaign system. Currently Jackson is 'stalled' undertaking a flank march around the Federals in late August 62…. Gen Lee will be having words with Jackson, without tea and biscuits! Bother just realised, I hope my opponent doesn't see this!

Cheers Paul

Cheers Paul

I like the system, but there are a number of issues, hard of hearing and dyslexia being two that may not have been mentioned. If the unit numbers are entered incorrectly and not corrected before the computer processes it then it can sometimes be very hard to "undo", which sometimes can effect a game outcome.

There are also occasional issues where things are happening simultaneously but the data has to be entered in some order so the unit entered first might benefit from modifiers the other unit doesn't receive, but should have. Actually, in the case I am thinking of it was negative modifiers due to enemy in rear (for the first unit) that didn't effect the second – even though it should have – because the situation resolved before it got to that point. At least from the point of view of the computer. If the other unit had been entered first the situation would have been reversed.

Otherwise I like the rules. I particularly like that units get fatigued. And that one doesn't KNOW how they are fairing, one has to learn to judge it.