AWI rules preference

[Grenadier]

Ok, I'm very new to AWI gaming and am determined to build forces for both sides but am hesitant to dive in because of basing issues and which rules to use.  So I'm going to open pandora's box and ask which rules are you AWI guys using and WHY?  I will tell you my druthers regarding mechanics:
1) NO figure removal to represent casualties. I prefer to keep my units intact and use a reduction of unit effectiveness   (strength, capability or whatever you want to call it) along with casualty figures(markers) to represent damage.
2) Restrictive(realistic) command and control.
3) Basic unit is the regiment(battalion) represented by however many figures you want-as it doesn't matter to mechanics.
4) Manuever and formation is somewhat clumsy and time consuming-no miracle Prussian parade drills!
5) Give a good flavor of 18th century colonial battles that is fun!

Brian

[goat major]

I'm basing up for British Grenadier. It meets most of your criteria except that it does have figure removal (you can use casualty markers though i suppose but firing effectiveness does work on number of figures). The rules have a lot of period flavour, really create challenges  in command & control and are also quite flexible in figures scale allowing you to play quite effectively at 1:5 & 1:10 as well as 1:20.

I bought a copy of the Realtime Wargames AWI rules at Salute which have a lot of interesting mechanisms so I may also give these a go.

For a different approach the boardgames Clash for a Continent/Hold the Line use a simple hex based system that could easily be adapted to 10mm games. The rules are very simple and slightly abstract but do force you to make sensible decisions as the commander (do i bring up reinforcements, fire or move to attack with bayonet) without getting into the minutiae of company level facing etc. The rules are free to download and worth a look http://www.worthingtongames.com/downloads.html

[Grenadier]

Thanks for the reply goat major, BG seem to be the rules of choice.  Just how is basing for BG?  I see some guys placing 2 ranks of 4 per base with 3-5 bases per battalion, like Andymac.  What is the number of figs per battalion in BG?

[goat major]

I'm using 4 figures on a 20mm square base (2 ranks of 2). This is the 15mm basing size according to the BG rulebook but looks about spot on to me for typical loose files in 10mm. BG battalions vary from 12 - 30ish depensing on the scenario (and also because of the variable troop scale). You wont go far wrong if you do 24 man battalions and then sometimes field them weaker.  If you check out my pics in the photo section you can see how this basing looks with 10mm figures(http://www.pendrakenforum.co.uk/index.php?topic=156.0). Theres also an excellent support forum for the rules too that you can find here http://generaldebrigade.13.forumer.com/viewforum.php?f=13.

One word of warning - BG isnt a fast play set of rules and i have seen some criticism that they can be a bit ponderous for some. For me they really capture the essence of the period though.

[Leon]

I bought a copy of the Realtime Wargames AWI rules at Salute which have a lot of interesting mechanisms so I may also give these a go.

I think we've got some of these to sell, so if you give them a go, you'll have to let us know how they play.

[T13A]

Hi

I am currently painting up Pendraken armies for the Seven Years War and intend to 'morph' into AWI as well. Anyway when I have enough figures for a game I will be purchasing Nigel Marsh's 'Wars of Frederick the Great [Incl AWI]' computer generated rules. I have been using his rules for ACW and Napoleonic games for years and what I particularly like about them is that they allow players to focus on the tactics of the period rather than having to understand intricate game mechanics. They also seem to cover most of what you are looking for in a set of rules. Here is the link to Nigel's website (where there is a further link to the Carnage and Glory Yahoo discussion forum):

http://carnageandgloryii.com/index.htm

Cheers Paul

[Grenadier]

Paul, this looks interesting, but... It doesn't describe how the tabletop is integrated or "in sync" to the computer. How is movement, or any other action, on the tabletop inputted to the software and visa-versa? Since you've played for years, I'm sure I'm not the only one that would be interested in a review.

Thanks
Brian

[nikharwood]

You're right...I'm intigued too...more info would be really useful

[Grenadier]

  I've thoroughly explored the carnage and glory site and have come to the premature conclusion that there must be massive amounts of data entry involved for each unit every turn for the software to "know" what's going on and determine the status of each unit.  It may indeed eliminate rolling dice and refering to paper charts but it sure appears someone has to refer to the many windows data entry(modifiers) charts to determine the outcome and status of everything.
  Still, it looks very interesting and if you're a statiistician at heart it looks to have incredible detail for end-of-battle results and campaigns, but please, Paul, give us a "step-by-step" example of how a turn unfolds.

Brian

[T13A]

Re: Carnage and Glory rules, please see the attachment.

Cheers Paul

[Grenadier]

Paul,
 
Thanks for the run down, I suppose the intial data entry is no different than setting up OOB's on paper, it's just different from the way we learned to game.  I will surely look into this system further.

Thanks again.
Brian

[Grenadier]

Well, I had an email conversation with Nigel at Carnage and Glory, here is our correspondance:

Hello,

  I've been corresponding with a gamer about how your system works and have become intrigued.  I have Windows XP and I see by your description that it isn't compatible, is this true? Also, I realize that the software doesn't know anything about what's going on where on the tabletop and that it deals strictly with resolution and unit status. So, my question is, after each action/function on the tabletop, is that action/function then entered into the software for each and every unit, each and every phase of each and every turn?  If so, it seems like pretty tedious work, but again, this is a foreign approach to me.


Brian,
Thank you for you interest in the systems.


The system is definitely compatible with XP, Vista and Windows 7.


When it comes to the mechanics of the game, the interaction with the computer may sound onerous at first, but in fact it's only at those times that you would be checking charts or rolling dice in any traditional ruleset. If you are simply moving your figures there is no interaction with the computer - it's only if you elect to charge, or change formation. In the latter case, you'd type the number of the unit wishing to change formation, select the new formation, hit initiate, and then the computer will tell you whether you've been successful or not, and how much incremental movement you can perform in addition to the actual formation change. Behind the scenes, the computer adjusts the units fatigue, the formation, the unit's status and records all that and more, without you even needing to think about it.


I started gaming back when I was ten, some forty years ago - and much as I enjoyed the hobby, I rarely finished a game without an intense headache. I can remember making tactical decisions based on how much fumbling through charts and accounting and die rolling I was looking at - if I felt like it would take me five minutes to figure out whether I could charge or not, I would more than likely not charge - computers fixed that problem - the computer does all of the nitty gritty part of the game, whilst bringing into play some very complex concepts, such as variable weather and ground conditions, variable fatigue, morale, and ammunition consumption, with absolutely no effort for the player.


I'm not sure if you're in the States, but if you are, and you have an opportunity to make it to one of the HMGS E conventions, you should drop by one of the games and check it out - I think you'd be pleasantly surprised.


All the best
Nigel

2nd email

Nigel,

Thanks for the quick response, now I am really intrigued.  My last question is how are the different eras and nationalistics tactical querks dealt with in the software?  I'm most interested in the 1700-1780 period but also game the ACW.  Are the REAL differences in maneuverability, command/control and firepower capabilities from the 1700's to the 1860's replicated in the system?

Brian

Brian,
Each system identifies the troop formations differently by period and nationality, so it will understand that a Prussian battalion in 1756 is formed in three ranks, whereas a Confederate unit in 1863 is in two ranks, and a French battalion of 1708 is in four ranks. The formations that are available may vary between the periods, so the 1708 battalion won't have the opportunity to form open order, but the Confederate unit will. The French battalion which doesn't employ cadenced movement, will move more quickly, but will take more time to change formation.
The weaponry will be the biggest variable between the periods, and each period will provide those weapons most commonly used during the respective periods. The efficiency of the weaponry will change according to the use of wood or metal ramrods, the refinement of the powder, or the use of percussion caps, smoothbore or rifled weapons etc., etc.
At the end of the day, the intent is to emulate the mechanics and tactics of the periods as closely as possible to ensure that the 'feel' of the game reflects the period differences.
All the best
Nigel


Sooo, this looks really promising! Thanks to Paul for opening the window on this!

Brian