We have been voting on a club project for next year and 10mm ACW with Pendraken figures (of course) came out on top, probably using Black Powder rules. I was just wondering if anyone else had done this and if so, what base size have you used and with how many figures to a base/
Thanks for the help (in advance).
Don't know if it will work for black powder, but i based 8 men on a 40x20 base:
(http://i1236.photobucket.com/albums/ff441/petercooman123/DSC03604_zpspqkr13yb.jpg) (http://s1236.photobucket.com/user/petercooman123/media/DSC03604_zpspqkr13yb.jpg.html)
Thanks for that, it looks like it could work well. :)
Some more pics here:
http://www.pendrakenforum.co.uk/index.php/topic,12877.0.html
I'd go with 25mm squares incase you find something preferable to BP.
Entirely your choice, those look good.
IanS
20mm square is my choice, just for the flexibility
All food for thought, thanks chaps. Black Powder is the probable rules of choice but if anyone can suggest a set of rules that would provide a good club game I would be interested.
Quite frankly BP does give a good club evening off-the-peg game (especially if you use the ACW supplement - Glory Hallelujah). Square bases mean you can also look at other options: Longstreet, both forms of F&F, the new Lardie game, PP's Civil War Battles and many more. I am increasingly finding that square bases give much more flexibility than oblong, which clearly resulted from a 90s over-infatuation with DBAnything.
Larger rectangular bases do allow for mini dioramas
For rules I would suggest Volley & Bayonet
Lots of info, including ACW scenarios here https://volleyandbayonet.wordpress.com/ (https://volleyandbayonet.wordpress.com/)
I've gone for 30mm square bases. F&F is 1"1/8th inch by 7/8ths (???WHY) so almost 30mm across the front. TCHAE is inches, so a little smaller than 30mm. We sub cm for inches in BP, so 4x30mm base is the same size as a unit in the inch ground scale. As I've said before using cms gives you a really large battlefield on the same size table. Use 2 artillery stands for 1 battery - this is about the right frontage (see 1mm=yard below).
Sunjester and I did a BIG battle with BP - 3 corps US v 2 CS, manoeuvering on a map until we generated a Divisional battle. After all battles took place we gave more orders, and ran it until the next lot of battles was generated. We take 1mm (again at the cm measure) as 1 yard, and a turn as being 6 minutes or so.
We didn't play any period specific rules, just our normal amendments:
Fire before Movement. Firing units -1 command
Brigades are broke at OVER half units shaken lost. Units in a Broken Brigade CAN be rallied in an attempt to unbreak a brigade.
3 moves on Command -3 AND Half or Less (eg, Command 9 needs a 4 to get 3 moves. This makes the 1-2-3 moves frequency more sensible)
The other reason for the 30mm square is you get 4 in a compartment neatly of a Really Useful Box hobby Tray!
My troops front line is 4 figures, 3-4 behind, and maybe 1-2 at the rear- dense on the firing line, thinning towards the reloading men. I use different poses, but all roughly the same action to give the impression of men 'firing at will' and/or the less drilled/disciplined armies compared to the rigid Europeans.
Quote from: Leman on 30 November 2016, 06:30:45 PM
the new Lardie game,
Assuming you mean Picket's Charge it isn't a Lardie game, it's published by Rich (Reischwitz Publishing) but it's a Dave Brown (General d'Brigade) game, it has very little in common with your typical Lardie game
In a sense, you are both correct. David Brown is indeed the author. However, Reisswitz Press appears to be a Too Fat Lardies venture. :)
From the Too Fat Lardies blog:-
The founding of Reisswitz Press will allow us to publish wargames rules which fall outside the traditional scope of Lard but which share our dedication to historical gaming.
[source: http://toofatlardies.co.uk/blog/?p=6201 (http://toofatlardies.co.uk/blog/?p=6201)]
F+F is also being considered by the club as a possible rules set. No doubt more discussion will take place this Friday night, but thanks for all the input.
Basing on squares lets you shift to BBB really easily as well, for the big engagements!
Quote from: Westmarcher on 30 November 2016, 08:07:39 PM
In a sense, you are both correct. David Brown is indeed the author. However, Reisswitz Press appears to be a Too Fat Lardies venture. :)
From the Too Fat Lardies blog:-
The founding of Reisswitz Press will allow us to publish wargames rules which fall outside the traditional scope of Lard but which share our dedication to historical gaming.
[source: http://toofatlardies.co.uk/blog/?p=6201 (http://toofatlardies.co.uk/blog/?p=6201)]
I agree but when someone describes a rule set as "a lardie game" that usually brings a bunch of assumptions with it - cards, blinds, heavy on friction, etc which whilst not always strictly true (Chain uses dice not cards for example) is likely to lead to misunderstanding for a game which is 'merely' published by Rich. If Rich was happy for them to be 'lardie games' you'd think he'd publish them under the TFL logo :D
BTW I make no aspersions as to superiority or lack thereof of rules published by either, just the dissimilarity 8)
And of course there are also the various incarnations of Johnny Reb and friends and the Lardie game They Couldn't hit an Elephant, which does use cards.