"Latest Ruleset from Crusader Publishing: March Attack" Topic

Having looked at the crusader website as well, I think I've found the rules I'll be using! Just as soon as I buy and paint another three plastic sets from the perry's.
These rules look really promising to me though!
NB

I've found 'troop quality' to be the source of many arguments.

Many of our rules have troops forever rated as crap or gods just because of one day's good or bad die rolling.

I recommend them *very* highly. There have already been a few threads here and on the Crusader forum where I have gone on at more length, but in sum they are an elegant and enjoyable set of rules that abstracts combat and morale just enough so that you can see multiple corps unfold on the tabletop in an evening, and yet retains enough battalion level detail to make the command of an individual division interesting.

Cheers,

Christopher

What is the scale per miniature?

Units are battalions of infantry, regiments of cavalry and batteries of artillery. Cavalry and Infantry are two bases and artillery one base (6-8 Guns) or large batteries such as Russian two bases (12). There is no specific figure to man ratio as such. Each unit has a combat rating (CV) that is determined by a combination of actual numbers of men in the unit (or guns) against perceived efficiency e.g. Conscript, Veteran Guard). Better quality units have higher CVs so.., as an example in the rules states, 400 Veteran Troops could have the same Combat effectiveness as 800 conscripts.

There are sections in the back of the rules that provide ratings on troop types but you can use your own ratings if you wish.

So if a there are 2 bases a battalion & 4 figures per base, then there are 8 figures per battalion. 8 x 80 =640 and that will give 80 men per figure as a ballpark.

Played our first game over the weekend. 4 Players, 30+ battalions and 1500 (6mm) figures. Very enjoyable and easy to comprehend set of rules with a good interaction between the tactical aspect and the sweeping panorama of the larger battlefield.

As regards basing….

The bases in the rules have 8 infantry in two ranks or 3 cav in a single rank on a 40mm by 30mm base. Artillery is based with a single model gun on a 40mm by 40mm base. I don't think base sizes and figures matter too much as long as bases have similar frontages and both sides use the same conventions. The CV factor is the main characteristic in the rules.

Thank you for those indications jimchris. They read as though 15mm was the figure size of reference. Are there alternative base sizes or figure numbers for 28mm? Anyone can make up their own I suppose, just curious whether the author had anything in mind. (I can't seem to access the files on the Crudsader site just now)

Having 400 vets the same as 800 conscripts is fine, as long as the foot print for the 400 vets is half that of the 800.

Otherwise the groundscale is screwed

They have an interesting mechanism for skirmish combat. You divide the table up into sections and use the skirmish value of the units in those sections to "attack" enemy units in those sections.

While it's an interesting idea, I wonder how easy it us to apply in game?

There is a suggestion about using varied base widths to match frontages to strengths, but that they found in playtesting that it didn't actually cause any issues due to the overall scale.

"Having 400 vets the same as 800 conscripts is fine, as long as the foot print for the 400 vets is half that of the 800."

I could get over that…I think the of the "base" as a pretty loose zone that the companies of the battalion are arrayed in or conversly one could assume that the unit is centerd on the base and its comanies may well overlap it on some occasions and just not be noted.

I am intrigued and will check them out. I note the basing seems "Lasalle" compatable. I like seeing more and more rulese sets with compatible basing conventions.

Shop link for this (£20) & other Crusader physical rules here:
link

Digital download version (£6) here:
link

More info (nost the Gallery & Downloads links top left)
link

March Attack seem to be for large battles – corps size forces? Rank & File (also by Crusader) appears to be more for divisional size engagements:
link

400 veterans as the same COMBAT EFFECTIVENESS as 800 conscripts. The post didn't mention how this example was based. Phil Sabins ancient rules do it this way IIRC, but I think there is a better argument for levy ancients being in deeper masses than guard units for that period.

Since the # of figures just seems to be a suggestion for looks. Maybe your Veteran units could be mounted with less figures, maybe 6/base.

One might consider the base more of a "zone of control" thing where less vets have a similar ZOC to more conscripts due to better effectiveness/more skimishers/etc.

Musketier,

Are there alternative base sizes or figure numbers for 28mm?

I don't have the rules yet (a delayed Father's Day present), but I believe that the web site for the rules says to just double all the dimensions and distances. I think that as long as everything is in somewhat the same proportion as in the basic rules that one shouldn't have much of a problem.

Jim

I think, (like V&B and GA) these will call for a new way of thinking for most Napoleonic gamers. You have to give up worrying about numbers of men and instead concentrate on the relative combat strength/effectiveness/force of the "unit". Be that unit a battalion, regiment or brigade.

Does anyone know if Crusader USA is going to stock it?

I went a head and did the download. $9.93US on PayPal. Looking forward to trying them out. I've been remounting my collection for Lasalle, which I like, but am happy that the same basing will be usable with March Attack for the bigger battles when I want to fight those.

I think its fair to say that some people are not going to like, or even try, the rules because of the basing conventions. The system used – and some designers notes as to why I did it this way – is described in one of the sample chapters (link kindly supplied above by alphus99).

In brief I would say that any every set of rules has a certain level of abstraction and March Attack is no different in that respect. The system can quite easily cope with alternate basing but when a player can have 20+ units to control and you have a game with 5-6 players I think that the rules need to concentrate on a higer level.

What I hope that I have been able to achieve is a set of game mechaincs that allow you to retain the detail of individual battalion, battery or regiment but still able to field a Corps or Army and actually complete a battle in a day or evening.

I think that Crusader USA will have copies soon as they stock all of the other books. I should just drop them an email as they'll know more accurate dates.

I've had a go with the other set (Rank and File) mentioned by alphus99 above. They also use the 'stand' which represents between 50-250 men and the stands must be grouped in units of 4-10. Different to MA I know, but I found that my thinking is now more unit oriented rather than figure oriented if that makes sense? I'd only ever played figure based rules. Does not interefere with the game (I like R&F) as the mechanics are designed for the 'stands' and 'unit' approach. Medieval Warfare by Terry Gore is the same stand based approach and works well.

cheers
jon.

I like the look of these.

How is the C&C, is it suitable for solo? Matt.