Just a few lines to report on the 'Reserve Demolition' scenario that I posted a couple of weeks ago. The photos are from the second game.
One thing in Black Powder that didn't make much sense, unless we are missing something, is the treatment of squares in the 'Break Test' phase. Let me set the scene.
- The French cavalry forced a British battalion into square before withdrawing to a safe distance.
- In the British turn, the British square was unable to come out of square for one reason or another - enemy not with 12"; failed order; not withdrawing under free move. -
- In the subsequent French turn the square was charged by infantry. The French infantry duly won the melee round to good effect, the British square was shaken in the encounter, and then the square rolled 5 in the Break test. Usually this would be a retreat, but the rule says squares ignore this result and stand. If attacked by cavalry I think that would be OK, and the other players thought so too, but versus infantry it seemed a bit odd - very, very odd - so we made it break because squares can't retreat. Personally, I've always been under the impression that squares assaulted by infantry were dog meat.
Anyway, onwards and upwards, as they say. Next up I'll be painting some more troops for the allies. I'm going to do four units of Portuguese - two line infantry a battalions, a battalion of Cacadores and a battery of foot artillery.
13 comments:
A scenario I have played through many times and I agree it often gives a good game. Rules issues aside, the game looks stunning.
Suitable to *start* your series of Peninsular War games with a French victory. :-)
Sounds great, amazing pictures!
We have had the same issue with a square assaulted by a column, which nobody can remember ever happening historically, and wondered if the square was not threatened by cavalry and could see the column coming would it not try and reform into line? Need to hunt through the rules again to see if there is such a rule as "Hasty Line" in any of the supplements.
Squares can retreat in Black Powder towards their own lines at half pace, (main rules book page 74) and I have allowed them to move at half rate in a straight line from any facing if on level ground and out of 12" (if using full distances) from any enemy units.
Great looking game and I'll be giving it a go once I get my engineers cart and engineers painted.
Fantastic looking game! I'm sure your aware, but I feel that I should say as a reminder that Black Powder is intended for players to "house rule" the rule set and is one of the reasons I like it so much so changing some rule in Black Powder is the norm and not the exception.:-)
Christopher
A fine looking game! Perhaps the new version may solve your rules issue, given the clues in the new WI issue?
Beautiful figures and terrain.
Superb looking game! Black Powder is very good indeed, but for me it is a system that responds well to evolution. I have been changing mine for years now - mostly just tweaks here and there, but The most radical being fire before movement. This prevents the odd situation of attackers racing up 3 moves and delivering fire into the face of the defenders. Now I can't see myself changing to any other rules system.
Ooo la la, that is beautiful!
Incredible looking table and figures.
This looks like a good and exciting game - thanks for posting.
I have a couple of thoughts on the square v infantry issue.
In rule terms there are a range of outcomes that can occur in any given circumstance and this is important for both players have some chance (not equal) of a good result to have a 'good' game - this means even if the overwhelming likelihood is that one thing will happen it is possible that an unlikely outlier occurs. We then scratch our heads and say 'that's not right. But ... unlikely things happen in real life - think of the loss of the square at Garcia Hernandes - if I remember correctly didn't a dying horse fall on one of the sides of the square making an opening for the rest of the cavalry to enter.
Thanks all.
I have played quite a few games using rules from the 'Warlord stable' now and I'm quite impressed by the tool box approach, which is very similar to the approach of Bob Jones and all those, including myself, who have written supplements for the 'Piquet stable'. Rules should never be hard and fast - inmost games here, we generally have a 'special rules menu of the day' approach.
Being a Piquet player, I also agree with Gareth to some extent. No combat should ever be a sure thing. However, the case of the square at Garcia Hernandes was a VERY rare event, and anyone reading Nosworthy's book 'Battle Tactics of Napoleon and his Enemies' can plainly see the strength of a square versus cavalry, as he goes into the occasions when a square was broken, how and why, in some detail - like the instance where lancers prodded one to death from out of bayonet reach following a heavy downfall of rain which rendered the use of muskets impossible. Indeed, BP largely accepts this by saying cavalry can never charge a square in good order.
In BP, the problem isn't the combat factors, which look about right for infantry Vs square and cavalry Vs square, and the break test is probably dead on for cavalry versus square. The problem is the break test for infantry Vs square.
My solution, following a week in Venice where I had time to think about it, will be as follows:
Following a combat where infantry are in a winning melee Vs a square, the break test will be treated as standard and if the square retires it will do so as a disordered line (because it has to change formation to retire). All troops in contact, including cavalry (if any), will get their full post combat options (such as sweeping advance).
I think that should work.
Finally ran this scenario at my club, went really well. Thanks for the info.
https://jabbaswargaming.blogspot.com/2019/01/peninsular-bridge-demolition-game-at.html
Post a Comment