I do not quite know why that number leaps out at me, but it has been great to have you all by.
In honor of achieving a nice, round, large number, may I invite all and sundry to come by my YouTube channel and subscribe -- or perhaps sign up for alerts -- if only because tomorrow, at ca. 1900 CDT, the gang from the Armchair Dragoons will return to the fields of (dis)honor and have a second go at the Black Powder 2 scenario we started a couple weeks ago.
It promises to be a good deal of fun and, perhaps, informative, although no warranty is offered or implied.
A Very Well-Intentioned YouTube Page
Friday, July 19, 2019
Sunday, July 14, 2019
And a Good Time Was Had By All...Except Some French Foot
Doug and I got back to our game of Aspern-Essling using Tabletop Simulator and Blucher. I ahould like to think my rules penance did some good as I do not think we mussed up too much. I, on the other hand, have utterly bollixed up my French.
The thing about Blucher that is not obvious when you first open the tin is that corps structure really does matter. The good professor goes so far as to point out in his F.A.Q. that he does not like rules that require corps to maintain divisional integrity, that he considered many of them, but eventually rejected any as unnecessarily cumbersome. As a result, divisions can park themselves fairly well wherever they like. So far so good. The problem becomes when one is trying to activate all of those dispersed divisions. Suddenly you have to wait until corps moves are over, each move costs two MO points not one, and you have to check to see whether you have burned through your MO points after each brigade is moved. This has turned the space between Aspern and Essling and the Danube into a disorganized French parking lot. Among other things, the Guard is parked what seems like 100 miles away from the action.
Napoleon would be very cross with me.
Still, at the moment, we have a one morale point lead and we ended the last turn of the session with one of my cuirassiers riding forward and smashing an Austrian brigade. That is something of which His Majesty would have approved.
And, of course, the video:
The thing about Blucher that is not obvious when you first open the tin is that corps structure really does matter. The good professor goes so far as to point out in his F.A.Q. that he does not like rules that require corps to maintain divisional integrity, that he considered many of them, but eventually rejected any as unnecessarily cumbersome. As a result, divisions can park themselves fairly well wherever they like. So far so good. The problem becomes when one is trying to activate all of those dispersed divisions. Suddenly you have to wait until corps moves are over, each move costs two MO points not one, and you have to check to see whether you have burned through your MO points after each brigade is moved. This has turned the space between Aspern and Essling and the Danube into a disorganized French parking lot. Among other things, the Guard is parked what seems like 100 miles away from the action.
Napoleon would be very cross with me.
Still, at the moment, we have a one morale point lead and we ended the last turn of the session with one of my cuirassiers riding forward and smashing an Austrian brigade. That is something of which His Majesty would have approved.
And, of course, the video:
Monday, July 8, 2019
Time for Some "Blucher" Confessions
Considering it is the most viewed video we have posted from the Saturday Night Fights (by a distance), I am a bit put out with myself for not getting back to "Blucher" generally and the Aspern-Essling game with my friend Doug (panzerde) in particular.
Here is the video of the first part of the first day:
That many viewers is a very fine thing, but it did prompt a fair number of game play corrections. Which, although they leave me a bit shame-faced given the relative simplicity of the rules, I still take to be a good thing. So, in the present confessional spirit (and anticipating part three this weekend), I proffer the following list of rules we either messed up or seem obscure enough to warrant posting this way. As was the case with "Black Powder 2", I would certainly welcome mentions of rules you forget, foul up, think are really important, &c.
In More-or-Less Turn Sequence Order
N.B.: I know that Tabletop Simulator does not quite pivot the units correctly. Yes, this messes the rules up a bit, but it cannot be helped and I do not think it makes that big a difference.
*Corps activations must involve two units.
*Garrisoning an urban area requires activation.
*Simple Move: Pivot first, then move in a straight line through non-rough terrain
*Difficult Move: Pivot either first or last but move in a straight line otherwise
*Charges may pass through difficult terrain
*The center line of a charging unit must pass through some portion of the unit being charged for the charge to be valid.
*Roads only matter in reserve movement. This is a weird one for me, but I get it.
*Artillery need only fire at the nearest eligible target if it is within 2BW.
*Firepower and Skirmish abilities do not apply against cavalry or artillery.
*Artillery may shoot into urban areas, although at a penalty. Infantry may not.
*Probably the biggest: Infantry that fights cavalry (attacking or defending) and is not broken, drives off the cavalry whether the infantry wins or loses.
*Retreat is conducted through the rear base edge but not necessarily straight backwards. Cf. the importance of making the retreat route as short as is possible.
Well, that was more than I expected when I started.
Here's looking forward to Saturday night and a return to Lobau Island.
Here is the video of the first part of the first day:
That many viewers is a very fine thing, but it did prompt a fair number of game play corrections. Which, although they leave me a bit shame-faced given the relative simplicity of the rules, I still take to be a good thing. So, in the present confessional spirit (and anticipating part three this weekend), I proffer the following list of rules we either messed up or seem obscure enough to warrant posting this way. As was the case with "Black Powder 2", I would certainly welcome mentions of rules you forget, foul up, think are really important, &c.
In More-or-Less Turn Sequence Order
N.B.: I know that Tabletop Simulator does not quite pivot the units correctly. Yes, this messes the rules up a bit, but it cannot be helped and I do not think it makes that big a difference.
*Corps activations must involve two units.
*Garrisoning an urban area requires activation.
*Simple Move: Pivot first, then move in a straight line through non-rough terrain
*Difficult Move: Pivot either first or last but move in a straight line otherwise
*Charges may pass through difficult terrain
*The center line of a charging unit must pass through some portion of the unit being charged for the charge to be valid.
*Roads only matter in reserve movement. This is a weird one for me, but I get it.
*Artillery need only fire at the nearest eligible target if it is within 2BW.
*Firepower and Skirmish abilities do not apply against cavalry or artillery.
*Artillery may shoot into urban areas, although at a penalty. Infantry may not.
*Probably the biggest: Infantry that fights cavalry (attacking or defending) and is not broken, drives off the cavalry whether the infantry wins or loses.
*Retreat is conducted through the rear base edge but not necessarily straight backwards. Cf. the importance of making the retreat route as short as is possible.
Well, that was more than I expected when I started.
Here's looking forward to Saturday night and a return to Lobau Island.
Sunday, July 7, 2019
"Black Powder 2": What I Vow Not To Forget
I am now officially "in" on the following rulesets:
Black Powder 2
Blucher
Sharp Practice 2
The Men Who Would Be Kings
What a Tanker!
Given this, I feel an obligation to write down those rules that I keep forgetting or got horrifically wrong in playing each of them. Thus this begins my Black Powder 2 list -- others will follow.
I would more than welcome comments about rules you bugger up regularly or think others do. Also, if you watched our Teugn-Hausen game and saw us get something wrong, I really would like to know about it.
In No Particular Order:
*Units using initiative movement may either move their 12'' forward or back or try to roll for command.
*Limbered artillery gets one free move, even if its commander fails. This does not apply to blunders.
*Divisional commanders can re-roll blunders.
*Enemy troops within 12'' of an ordered unit reduce command by one.
*The -1 for shooting at skirmishers or troops that are "not clear" does not stack. Only a single -1 is possible.
*Artillery shooting at any column (or square) gets a +1 to hit. I call this the "no, the artillery in Black Powder 2 is not under-powered" rule..
*Hits from artillery at long range receive a -1 on subsequent morale rolls. Hits at medium and close range are at -2.
*I believe the -1 modifier "To Hit" in close combat set out in Clash of Eagles for troops fighting in heavy woods would only apply if both units had 50% or more of their footprint in the woods. I am certainly open to correction on this one.
Black Powder 2
Blucher
Sharp Practice 2
The Men Who Would Be Kings
What a Tanker!
Given this, I feel an obligation to write down those rules that I keep forgetting or got horrifically wrong in playing each of them. Thus this begins my Black Powder 2 list -- others will follow.
I would more than welcome comments about rules you bugger up regularly or think others do. Also, if you watched our Teugn-Hausen game and saw us get something wrong, I really would like to know about it.
In No Particular Order:
*Units using initiative movement may either move their 12'' forward or back or try to roll for command.
*Limbered artillery gets one free move, even if its commander fails. This does not apply to blunders.
*Divisional commanders can re-roll blunders.
*Enemy troops within 12'' of an ordered unit reduce command by one.
*The -1 for shooting at skirmishers or troops that are "not clear" does not stack. Only a single -1 is possible.
*Artillery shooting at any column (or square) gets a +1 to hit. I call this the "no, the artillery in Black Powder 2 is not under-powered" rule..
*Hits from artillery at long range receive a -1 on subsequent morale rolls. Hits at medium and close range are at -2.
*I believe the -1 modifier "To Hit" in close combat set out in Clash of Eagles for troops fighting in heavy woods would only apply if both units had 50% or more of their footprint in the woods. I am certainly open to correction on this one.
Why I Do These Things.
It is not every day that you get one of those clarifying moments that reminds why you pursue a particular hobby or go about it a particular way.
Last night's Battle of Teugn-Hausen with the lads from the Armchair Dragoons was one of those nights.
First, for those with short attention spans, here is a video of the whole shooting match:
Yep, three hours and eighteen minutes of Black Powder 2 played using "Tabletop Simulator" and a Teugn-Hausen module of my own creation. We made it through three turns of a projected eight, although we certainly were not at the game for every minute. Why was it special?
1. The people. Watch the video and know these are the kinds of guys you would like to play games with. Sure they are playing to win, each in their way, but it is never an over-serious matter. The response to the French decision to run at those Austrian guns in the west should tell you that. While yours fondly was not always the most capable (coherent?) umpire, it never once devolved into the kind of rule-lawyering nastiness that we have probably all seen out there. It was the spirit in which Black Powder 2 was meant to be played and I was very pleased to be a part of it.
2. Black Powder 2. I have played an awful lot of Napoleonic systems in my time. No, really, a lot. Trust me on this. BP2 is presently my favorite for what it is. It plays with a good spirit, it is Napoleonic enough, and, as one of the player's discusses in the video, creates a tabletop that looks Napoleonic. I have heard the criticisms loud and clear -- oh, yes -- but this is a really good system.
3. The camaraderie of the tabletop. Once upon a time, in a world I can barely recall, we up here in Milwaukee were favored to have one of the finest wargame stores to ever exist, Napoleon's. Run by a man I came to call a friend, it sold miniatures for decades, beginning in an era when Minifigs came in blister packs. When I was a teenager I fell in love with the 32' X 6' table the store had in the basement on which Napoleonic battles could be fought. And all around the table there were friends who mocked one another, drank, celebrated their victories, and howled at their occasional bad fortune. I grew up thinking this is what fun was. I suspect it is why, almost 40 years later, I am still dragging my family to farm fields in Europe because they once had battles there.
These days, I have no time to paint soldiers and my eyesight would not let me paint them well if I did. Moreover, I have always been far too ADHD to ever paint just one army or even set of armies. Worst, though, is that Napoleon's was ground under the juggernaut that is the World Wide Web (that's still a thing, right?). There has been nothing even close to replace it.
So howling around a digital tabletop last night was very special and a fine memory. A few photographs:
As for the battle? Well, the Erzherzog Karl Jaegers are the battle's only casualties so far as both sides have struggled to get their troops forward. Still, as the third turn ended, the better part of half an Austrian division was finally shoved over the Buchberg to join the scrum. Much more left to be said.
Last night's Battle of Teugn-Hausen with the lads from the Armchair Dragoons was one of those nights.
First, for those with short attention spans, here is a video of the whole shooting match:
Yep, three hours and eighteen minutes of Black Powder 2 played using "Tabletop Simulator" and a Teugn-Hausen module of my own creation. We made it through three turns of a projected eight, although we certainly were not at the game for every minute. Why was it special?
1. The people. Watch the video and know these are the kinds of guys you would like to play games with. Sure they are playing to win, each in their way, but it is never an over-serious matter. The response to the French decision to run at those Austrian guns in the west should tell you that. While yours fondly was not always the most capable (coherent?) umpire, it never once devolved into the kind of rule-lawyering nastiness that we have probably all seen out there. It was the spirit in which Black Powder 2 was meant to be played and I was very pleased to be a part of it.
2. Black Powder 2. I have played an awful lot of Napoleonic systems in my time. No, really, a lot. Trust me on this. BP2 is presently my favorite for what it is. It plays with a good spirit, it is Napoleonic enough, and, as one of the player's discusses in the video, creates a tabletop that looks Napoleonic. I have heard the criticisms loud and clear -- oh, yes -- but this is a really good system.
3. The camaraderie of the tabletop. Once upon a time, in a world I can barely recall, we up here in Milwaukee were favored to have one of the finest wargame stores to ever exist, Napoleon's. Run by a man I came to call a friend, it sold miniatures for decades, beginning in an era when Minifigs came in blister packs. When I was a teenager I fell in love with the 32' X 6' table the store had in the basement on which Napoleonic battles could be fought. And all around the table there were friends who mocked one another, drank, celebrated their victories, and howled at their occasional bad fortune. I grew up thinking this is what fun was. I suspect it is why, almost 40 years later, I am still dragging my family to farm fields in Europe because they once had battles there.
These days, I have no time to paint soldiers and my eyesight would not let me paint them well if I did. Moreover, I have always been far too ADHD to ever paint just one army or even set of armies. Worst, though, is that Napoleon's was ground under the juggernaut that is the World Wide Web (that's still a thing, right?). There has been nothing even close to replace it.
So howling around a digital tabletop last night was very special and a fine memory. A few photographs:
 |
| That'll Do Pig. |
 |
| Austrians At Left |
Saturday, July 6, 2019
What, a Post? Surely You Jest!
I know, I know.
The problem is that there's so many very fine places to write to that I never quite know which one to choose.
I post this, though, because I wanted to send out a proper thank you to Sparker at Sparker's Wargaming for helping me nail down how to do Teugn Hausen in Black Powder 2. I had been using the same Osprey book he did, but it never dawned on me to play the map north to south rather than east to west. Unlocked a great deal for me and lead to this:
Yes, I now have a bit of an obsession with both Black Powder 2 and Tabletop Simulator. Perhaps more about that later?
But, for now, a note of gratitude where due!
The problem is that there's so many very fine places to write to that I never quite know which one to choose.
I post this, though, because I wanted to send out a proper thank you to Sparker at Sparker's Wargaming for helping me nail down how to do Teugn Hausen in Black Powder 2. I had been using the same Osprey book he did, but it never dawned on me to play the map north to south rather than east to west. Unlocked a great deal for me and lead to this:
Yes, I now have a bit of an obsession with both Black Powder 2 and Tabletop Simulator. Perhaps more about that later?
But, for now, a note of gratitude where due!
Friday, August 31, 2018
Napoleonic Bridges -- A World without C-4
Long time, no write, I guess. Work and extracurricular activities have directed me elsewhere.
But tonight I was playing through a few rousing sessions of "Holdfast:Nations at War" with my son. For the unfamiliar, it's a 75-on-a-side Napoleonic skirmish game. Lovely models and terrain wrapped around a combat system I cannot seem to get any better at. Still, there aren't enough Napoleonic shooters to let me complain overmuch.
In the midst of one fight, I wound up a British line infantryman trying to fight my way over a bridge "somewhere in Spain". After a lot of shooting -- and a lot of dying -- it hit me really hard. Hard enough that I stopped fighting and took a picture.
You see, over at www.grogheads.com, I'm one of two umpires running an 1809 Kriegsspiel using the Flight of the Eagle rules. Much in the early going in the scenario involves the Austrians crashing across either the Isar or the Danube and the French -- significantly outnumbered -- trying to stop them. As the game has unfolded over the past month, there have been numerous attempts to build bridges, destroy bridges, build pontoon boats, damage bridges, &c. My fellow umpire and I have agreed that folks don't quite seem to understand how difficult it was to either build paths across rivers or to significantly damage bridges. This was, after all, the era before the Army Corps of Engineers and C-4. I'm inclined to think most of the tasks imagined by the players were nigh impossible and the "nigh" got dropped if your opponent happened to have forces on the other bank to stop you.
The rules do an excellent job, I think, of getting at this, but the players are certainly kicking against the restrictions. I shall have to tell them a Holdfast story or two.
But tonight I was playing through a few rousing sessions of "Holdfast:Nations at War" with my son. For the unfamiliar, it's a 75-on-a-side Napoleonic skirmish game. Lovely models and terrain wrapped around a combat system I cannot seem to get any better at. Still, there aren't enough Napoleonic shooters to let me complain overmuch.
In the midst of one fight, I wound up a British line infantryman trying to fight my way over a bridge "somewhere in Spain". After a lot of shooting -- and a lot of dying -- it hit me really hard. Hard enough that I stopped fighting and took a picture.
You see, over at www.grogheads.com, I'm one of two umpires running an 1809 Kriegsspiel using the Flight of the Eagle rules. Much in the early going in the scenario involves the Austrians crashing across either the Isar or the Danube and the French -- significantly outnumbered -- trying to stop them. As the game has unfolded over the past month, there have been numerous attempts to build bridges, destroy bridges, build pontoon boats, damage bridges, &c. My fellow umpire and I have agreed that folks don't quite seem to understand how difficult it was to either build paths across rivers or to significantly damage bridges. This was, after all, the era before the Army Corps of Engineers and C-4. I'm inclined to think most of the tasks imagined by the players were nigh impossible and the "nigh" got dropped if your opponent happened to have forces on the other bank to stop you.
The rules do an excellent job, I think, of getting at this, but the players are certainly kicking against the restrictions. I shall have to tell them a Holdfast story or two.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)