Help support TMP


"Horse, Foot and Guns...slow!?" Topic


Horse, Foot and Guns

8 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

In order to respect possible copyright issues, when quoting from a book or article, please quote no more than three paragraphs.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the Horse, Foot and Guns Rules Board


Areas of Interest

18th Century
Napoleonic
American Civil War
19th Century
World War One

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Featured Ruleset

Phil Dunn's Sea Battle Games


Rating: gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star 


Featured Showcase Article

Cheap Buys: 1/300 Scale Hot Wheels Blimp

You can pick up a toy blimp in the local toy department for less than a dollar.


Featured Profile Article

First Look: Barrage's 28mm Streets & Sidewalks

Personal logo Editor in Chief Bill The Editor of TMP Fezian looks at some new terrain products, which use space age technology!


Featured Book Review


1,085 hits since 9 Jan 2017
©1994-2025 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?


TMP logo

Membership

Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Tony S19 Jun 2005 4:39 p.m. PST

I just played a small game of HFG (four corps each of 1805 Russians vs French) and found it to be quite fast moving and fluid.

There was another thread somewhere wherein a number of people mentioned that HFG was very slow to play. I'm just wondering what table size was used for those games?

Barker suggests a table only three scale miles deep…which translates to only two tabletop feet which of course is unusually narrow. The defender's setup area is half that; the attacker sets up 12cm from his table edge. After about ten minutes of play we were already exchanging artillery fire.

Are other players using a four or five foot deep table? Or do larger battles with more corps (as in all of Austerlitz rather than only four corps as we played) really slow things down?

Ditto Tango 2 119 Jun 2005 5:52 p.m. PST

I've played a fair bit of HFG and other DBA variants. How on earth anyone can complain aout these games being slow is beyond me.

Well, yes, if you start marching on at opposite ends of a 16 foot table…

Personal logo Extra Crispy Sponsoring Member of TMP19 Jun 2005 6:22 p.m. PST

My game took forever as we were using a 1:1 scale model of the Danube valley…

cyjayne20 Jun 2005 1:27 a.m. PST

How did you fit it on the table?

SteveJ20 Jun 2005 1:52 a.m. PST

Now that's what I call a wargames table.

SirGiles7120 Jun 2005 5:07 a.m. PST

If anyone wants to play a DBx varient for the period for the SYW, Napolionic threw to the ACW we play a home grown version that in my opinion has vast improvements in the game mechanics.

link

We call it DBK after the one of the rule tweakers. You will need to have a copy of DBM (and familiarity with the game) to play this rule set.

We think it's great and I would love to hear feed back on what others think. Currently we are working on campaign
rules that so far have been a blast!

Gary

Personal logo Extra Crispy Sponsoring Member of TMP20 Jun 2005 12:23 p.m. PST

It was great until some twit built a new highway right on my III Corps deployment area….

Martin Rapier21 Jun 2005 4:00 a.m. PST

Compared to the original HFG, which was essentially a nineteenth century DBA, the current version is a bloated monster, especially the endless list of combat modifiers and incomprehensible qualifiying text. Yes, I am sure it plays reasonably fast if you've learned the rules in minute detail and played several test games, but that isn't what I look for in a set of fast play rules. The original version let us play Waterlo/Wavre as a paired battle in an hour and a half on a table 2' wide–that is fast playing.

Martin

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.