"Black Powder ACW: Thoughts?" Topic

I've only played them a few times, and altho I liked Epic back in the day [waaaay back in the day] I didn't care for BP, mostly because the rule book was lengthy and unintellible chattiness. I felt like I was always digging around for a rule.

I heard the rules in the Epic ACW starter set are a streamlined version, so I wonder if that works better and if there is less chatter and more focus on delivering a few rules intelligibly.

Opinions appreciated. My starter set is supposed to arrive this week, and if encouraged enough I may force myself to read the rules!

Black Powder is fine as a game, but regardless of period, I always feel I've played a game of Black Powder, not an ACW, or Napoleonic, or Zulu War game.

I like the Black Powder rules – as noted, it is tough to have a set of rules that provides a period flair for SYW, Napoleonics, ACW, Colonial – we have used some of the mods from the Glory Hallelujah supplement; more specifically, we use the "Rebel Yell" rule and have changed the bonuses for columns to encourage people to keep their units in line – plays pretty well

Never have liked the 'one size fits all' approach
to 1650-1890 rules.

D'rather play conflict specific rules.

Black Powder is not a good representation of ACW battles (or really any historical battles) as its main focus is pomp and pageantry, not the reality of battle.

Fire & Fury does a very good job of representing Civil War battles (despite my misgivings on some systemic mechanics) and is well supported with scenarios and forum.

Epic scale miniatures would easily be adapted to play.

Kim R Young

Our group has started playing BP2. Most are F&F die hard fans. Generally found BP2 better than expected, but not a replacement. However we are still learning the rules. Fought two ACW scenarios so far. May replay one using F&F just as a comparison. I also find people who complain about BP actually don't play them right. Probably because they are written in a chatty format as noted above. However, with the second set I find looking things up much easier.

BP2 is definitely better than the original. Most say little changed. I disagree. The Hand to Hand rule changes had a significant impact for the better.

The challenge with BP is how to use the special period rules. The right mix takes trial and error. The ACW supplement notes as much. Get it wrong and you don't capture the period.

I personally prefer rules that can be used over a major period with minor mods. Less to remember. It's like a car engine. Chevy V8s powered trucks, cars, Corvettes, and everything in between. Same engine, different mods. Simpler that way.

Heck, even Fire and Fury has rules covering the same period, just another engine. Works in every period in my experience.

It is also why the Commands and Colors series is so successful.

Yes, some good thoughts.

@Dan I say the same. If we are going to "generally" play a period, then the engine should run for most of the BP period, because until 1870 the concerns were largely the same and the battalion is the key unit.

I've been watching a helpful "play BP ACW" video series by a Brit [thick accent takes getting used to…may be Mancusan or Liverpuddlian] going by uncle cthulu. He gives simple explanations and simple summaries, which are a lot easier to grasp than looking for a rule in the rule book.

Overall, the game isn't as complicated as it looks from the lengthy rule book. I received mine with my ACW starter set, and aside from the tiny font and unnecessary length, I'm willing to try and read parts of it.

The video series seems to hit the fat part of the ACW bell curve [fight in a firing line, please] and he discusses a couple of the special rules like "Rebel Yell" which can unbalance it, perhaps.

Black Powder is fine as a game, but regardless of period, I always feel I've played a game of Black Powder, not an ACW, or Napoleonic, or Zulu War game.

I've heard that said a lot over the years and I don't recall it changing with BP2. Although, I do think BP2 is better than the original regardless of some opportunities for improvement being missed.

That said it was acknowledged by the author as a tidy up rather than a rewrite.

One question. A number of people have mentioned F & F in their replies. Which version are they taking about "Original" "Regimental" or "New Brigade"?

Not being clever just trying to see what's compared.

@Trajanus
What opportunities for improvement were missed?

It looks at first glance that Rick Priestly and Jervis Johnson wrote a set of Warhammer Historical rules that are not as cumbersome, altho it checks the same blocks, more or less.

Those blocks are not on everyone's list, I bet…

Trajanus:

We play or played all the F&F variants, currently using Brigade F&F, new version. They are different, but like BP, variations of the same basic engine…

Having played Naps, ACW and Zulu Wars with Black Powder I believe they are a fantastic set of rules for a game that will give you a result. For big games – 20-30 players they are fantastic. But remember, they are a set of rules for a game. For a more simulationist style of wargame there are better rules sets. I like Regimental Fire and Fury.