 |
General de Brigade
Wargaming Discussion
|
| View previous topic :: View next topic |
| Author |
Message |
Belisarius
Joined: 30 Sep 2008
Posts: 60
Location: Newcastle uponTyne
|
 Posted: Thu Mar 26, 2009 2:26 pm Post subject: Some rule questions prior to next game... |
 |
|
We are planning our next game of BG on Saturday and just looking for some clarifications here:
Melee Results:
Push-Back: takes place immediately after melee resolution. Enemy infantry follow-up and maintain contact?
Retreat: unit marked to retreat and then does so in Compulsory Moves of next turn. Does the victor take a pursuit check after the melee or after the retreat in the Compulsory Move Phase? Both retreat and pursuit are dice roll based so contact not guaranteed?
Rout: similar to retreat?
Skirmishers: rifle armed militia (3 to a base) don't seem to be particularly effective needing 6's to get a hit? Is their effect meant to be gradual and accumulative, so that once they hit a unit on 3DP then they actually cause some damage? Likewise for skirmishers in general?
Unit sizes: have raised this in another thread, but looking through the Scenario books the size of units seems to rarely get above 24, with 16-20 being more common. When we played our first game we had some big 40 fig units and these seem to skew the fire results so the plan is to keeps units around the 20-24 figure range. As I'm using 1:10 as a ratio would it be better to split some say a 32 fig von Bose in to 2x16? I had been keeping brigades to 3-4 units max and this could push that up for some but I'm not sure creating more brigades is the answer?
Range: when referring to 'in Charge range' is this always the maximum possible that could be rolled on the dice? Seems that if you keep some cavalry around then militia are very hard to keep steady - probably fair really...
Cheers
Andy
_________________
My AWI Blog |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
Paul Marsh
Joined: 03 Dec 2005
Posts: 129
|
| Posted: Sun Mar 29, 2009 11:57 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Andy,
Bit late now for your game but been a bit busy so only just logged on(can't sleep).
Yes push back is immediate and enemy follow up and maintain contact without rolling their own die.(pg 53)
Retreat is done in the Compulsory phase of the next turn. Pursuit test taken immediately after melee(pg 56) and both retreat and pursuit movement are die generated so anything can happen!
Rout is similar to retreat except backs to the enemy.
All skirmishers need a six to hit whether militia or light bobs. Quality comes out in the ability to rally off the DP and rifles outrange muskets. Skirmishers can be "effective" especially at long range(still need a six) and regardless of enemy formation(still need a six). Skirmishers are definitely nuisance value and ther is always the possibilty of a double six! I think they work pretty well.
Most of my units are in the 12 to 20 range with only the early war Hessians, and Highlanders, getting up to 24(and even 32 for the close order Hessian types). I think the rules have a 1:20 scale in mind but apparently work well at 1:10 if you operate battalions as wings so keeping figures to a unit down. I suspect the 42+ line in the Musketry table is a holdover from GdeB. 3-4 units in an average brigade sounds about right.
We always take "in charge range" to be the maximum possible as well.
regards
Paul |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Belisarius
Joined: 30 Sep 2008
Posts: 60
Location: Newcastle uponTyne
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 10:45 am Post subject: |
|
|
I can see the point of dividing a battalion into wings but I just want the visual effect of the bigger units with a brigade still of 3 regiments. Splitting them into wings would give 6 units in the brigade.
And it still doesn't solve the issue that if I have a small British unit advancing on 2x20 militia it'll probably get there, but if the become 1x40 militia then the casualty rate goes up too high I think?
Maybe I'm not getting my point across well. Need to retire and regroup and put my case together.
Agree with your comments re skirmishers though.
Cheers
Andy
_________________
My AWI Blog |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Herkybird
Joined: 30 Mar 2009
Posts: 9
Location: Newcastle upon tyne
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 3:08 pm Post subject: British Grenadier rules |
|
|
Hi everyone!
I have been playing with Belisarius and have a few queries too on the game mechanics!-- My big Bugbear is:
I am unsure why the majority of Hessians are classed as second line?
From my research I have the following conclusions;
They outperformed the English at long Island, Fort Washington and White plains. They were only slower as they tended to operate in closer formations. At White plains, they were slow as they had a deeper ford to cross. The fact that most later ended up as garrison troops may have been due to the fact they couldnt recruit locally, unlike the English,and they had taken heavy losses at Philadelphia and elsewhere.
What do you think?
I am no expert on AWI and would welcome feedback! |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Paul Marsh
Joined: 03 Dec 2005
Posts: 129
|
| Posted: Mon Mar 30, 2009 5:49 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Hi Andy,
Right, now I get it. You just want to have bigger units from an aesthetic point of view. I had no idea how you might do this but Mikeb suggested in your other post counting each two figures as one for firing purposes etc. Will that work?
Herkybird, I am no expert on the AWI either but there are plenty of them on this forum to give you the definitive take on Hessians.
My understanding is that the German troops were apparently quite "slow and deliberate" in their movements compared to the British who adapted to the nature of warfare in the colonies by loosening up their formations. Making them 2nd Line will tend to force them to halt and rally more often. That is the main difference between Line and 2nd line; fighting power is pretty much the same and nobody can fault the courage of the German troops at various actions.
And not all German troops are rated 2nd Line. Grenadiers are usually Line and then you have those very useful jaegers. The von Bose regiment that operated with Cornwallis in the south is another example of a good Hessian regiment.
Maybe if the Brits had spent more time training the Hessians, as Howe did the British regulars post Boston, then maybe they would not have been relegated to garrison duties.
regards
Paul |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ronan the Librarian
Major
Joined: 21 Jul 2004
Posts: 833
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 11:04 am Post subject: Re: British Grenadier rules |
|
|
| Herkybird wrote: | | I am unsure why the majority of Hessians are classed as second line? |
Paul has dealt with this as regards the rules; be aware though that some of the units were Garrison regiments, and that others had needed influxes of recruits. I think their status within the rules accurately reflects their overall performance throughout the war, since even the grenadier battalions were a little lacklustre at times. Perhaps a bit tough on them in relation to the 1776 campaign, when they were still relatively fresh and eager to show what they could do - but then you can always alter their stauts if you are gaming those actions, if you wish.
| Herkybird wrote: | | They outperformed the English at Long Island, Fort Washington and White plains. |
Hmmm....not sure that it's true that they outperformed their British allies.
Long Island the British had the harder tasks - Grant's feint was against the best units (and commander) that the Continentals had at their disposal, and Howe's flank march required endurance, as well as fighting quality. The Hessians formed the erroneous impression that it was the looser formations that had led to the British suffering heavier casualties, but if anything this may have potentially reduced them.
Fort Washington was undoubtedly their finest hour, but then the point of the two British attacks (from the east and south - the latter including some Germans as well) was to "pin" the enemy and distract their attention from the main (northern) attack.
White Plains is arguably the one time they did, as the British attack stalled due to poor fire discipline (an officer discharging his fusil and halting to reload, which encouraged his men to do the same) and, as you say, the Hessians had the tougher route across the Bronx.
| Herkybird wrote: | | They were only slower as they tended to operate in closer formations. At White plains, they were slow as they had a deeper ford to cross. The fact that most later ended up as garrison troops may have been due to the fact they couldnt recruit locally, unlike the English,and they had taken heavy losses at Philadelphia and elsewhere. |
Whilst they immediately went from three ranks to two on their arrival in America, the Hesse Cassel troops (unlike the Brunswickers in Canada) were expressly forbidden from adopting the loose files by their ruler, despite numerous requests from the filed commanders right up to the Yorktown campaign and from their British colleagues. In fact, they were considerably slower - anything up to 30% according to their own officers - as they steadfastly refused (even at a local level) to adopt the faster paces of the British troops, many senior officers believing it created a dangerous level of disorder. At Germantown, a Hessian grenadier battalion took so long to form up and get under way, that it had to be moved off the road in order to allow their British counterparts (who had received their orders to move much later) to "double" past them.
The Hesse Cassel units were also subject to an agreement that they had to be commanded by their own generals. Whilst the grenadier brigade tended to form part of the Reserve under Cornwallis after 1776, the line units invariably served within a distinct division commanded by Heister and then later Knyphausen. Because of that, Paul's suggestion that the British should have trained them is actually a non-starter - it would have been politically indelicate (and probably impossible) to interfere with the training and administration of the units themselves.
As regards recruiting, they were in exactly the same position as the British who had to bring replacements 3,000 miles from Europe. Heavy combat losses - as opposed to disease - were limited to a very few units only, mainly the grenadiers and jaegers. Most of the "ordinary" corps (ie the musketeer, fusilier and garrison battalions) lost fewer than ten dead in combat over the entire war - a few had none at all; even the Trenton regiments lost relatively few dead. The hardest hit Hessian units still took the field with almost twice the manpower of a typical British battalion.
If you don't have it already, try to obtain a copy of Rodney Atwood's book "The Hessians" - it's very good and analyses the Hesse Cassel contingent's participation in the AWI in minute detail.
[/b]
_________________
You can lead a horse to water, but a toy soldier can no longer be lead (due to Health & Safety Regulations). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Cornet
Fusilier
Joined: 06 Jan 2009
Posts: 202
Location: Philadelphia, Pa.
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 1:45 pm Post subject: |
|
|
I don't mean to pile on the Hessians here, but some of the standard practices of the Hessians put them at a disadvantage. For instance, their marching cadence is reported by Raoul F. Camus in Military Music of the American Revolution to have been 60-72 steps per minute (similar to the British and American 60 steps/minute at 30 inches/step; and French 70 steps/minute at 24 inches/step), but unlike the other armies the Hessians had no quickstep -- meaning the Hessians had but one speed and they couldn't hurry in an organized body.
Quickstep was 120 steps/minute for the British, Americans, and French. Standard line units would employ quickstep as needed, while elite units (light infantry, grenadiers, etc.) would march in quickstep as their normal cadence. Interestingly, Washington played on this convention to make his entire army appear to Philadelphians as elite by marching the whole body through the city at quickstep.
_________________
Then let us fill a bumper, and drink a health to those
Who carry caps and pouches, and wear the loup'ed clothes. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Eclaireur
Brigadier
Joined: 03 Oct 2001
Posts: 1032
Location: London, UK
|
| Posted: Tue Mar 31, 2009 5:40 pm Post subject: |
|
|
Herky, RtL et al
do you mind starting a new strand on the Hessians ? I think it's a really good discussion point and I want people to be able to find it in the future. Alas I dont have editor privaleges on these boards (grrrr) so I can't do it myself, but if you wouldn't mind re-posting your comments in a new strand, leading odd with Herkbird's original post 
EC |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Ronan the Librarian
Major
Joined: 21 Jul 2004
Posts: 833
|
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
You cannot post new topics in this forum
You cannot reply to topics in this forum
You cannot edit your posts in this forum
You cannot delete your posts in this forum
You cannot vote in polls in this forum
|
|
FAQ
Search
Memberlist
Usergroups
fChat
Register
Profile
Log in to check your private messages
Log in
