Just in case you think I dropped my painting project, what I ran out of was more time to take pictures and still get everything painted..  I had two games today, twice through the same scenario.  2 Cavalry (units of 9), 6 infantry (units of 24), 3 battalion guns and 1 battery gun in 3 brigades, vs. 2 cavalry, 7 infantry (1 grenadier), 2 battalion guns and 1 battery gun (also 3 brigades).  Great fun, conclusion in a bit more than 3 hours each time.

Pictures to follow, but I still have a day on vacation and figures to paint.

Good stuff - looking forward to the pics 

I'd be interested as to what mods you play, especially are you trying to limit movement?

Quote from: Last Hussar on 28 June 2010, 09:34:26 PM
I'd be interested as to what mods you play, especially are you trying to limit movement?

So far, just using centimeters; looks right with 10s.  This was a learning game, so we deliberately stayed away from special rules.  We experimented with counting the guns toward brigade breakpoint, which helped lend some endurance, given the small number of infantry units I have as of yet.

Sorry, by limit movement are you making it harder to do anything other than straight forwards movement?  I'm also flirting with firing being 'Peter Pig style' - at least part of the target must be inside the 'flank lines', and if the cenre line doesn't cross the target it is an partial.

Also the probability graphs for Command are a bit odd '2 moves' is the least likely result in most instances.  Have propoese 3 moves if roll is CV-3 AND no more than Half of CV (round down) SO a CV of 8 or 9- you need to roll 4 for three moves.

Quote from: Last Hussar on 29 June 2010, 05:20:16 PM
Sorry, by limit movement are you making it harder to do anything other than straight forwards movement?  I'm also flirting with firing being 'Peter Pig style' - at least part of the target must be inside the 'flank lines', and if the cenre line doesn't cross the target it is an partial.

I have not had any problems with the rules as written on those - only forward and back under 12cm, and the obscured target rules at least in a preferred target context.   When it comes to "lateral" movement, the rules as written have the virtue of simplicity.

Quote from: Last Hussar on 29 June 2010, 05:20:16 PM
Also the probability graphs for Command are a bit odd '2 moves' is the least likely result in most instances.  Have propoese 3 moves if roll is CV-3 AND no more than Half of CV (round down) SO a CV of 8 or 9- you need to roll 4 for three moves.

Again, seems fine as is.  I did a Monte-Carlo of the probability curve a while ago, but really the function of the roll is to give some risk of running out of steam unpredictably once you have issued your orders - I don't see the exact shape of the outcome curve as an issue.  In any event, the world tends to "did ordinary" and "did extraordinary", "did a better than average but not much" might as well be a slightly lower probability event.

I ask about the movement because I am doing WSS, and it feels wrong for them to be running all over the place with gay abandon.

Quote from: Last Hussar on 01 July 2010, 10:12:41 PM
I ask about the movement because I am doing WSS, and it feels wrong for them to be running all over the place with gay abandon.

I can understand that.  Don't know the WSS period well myself; and with these rules I am trying just to enjoy them as a "toy soldier" game.

Also testing Marlburian. Movement did not seem too bad to me. We deployed at maximum artillery range and have so far only engaged the two wings. It may look too fast if your orders succeed every move, but I think the failures can balance the apparent speed. Having said that there are only 2 of us and we are playing a large game so the overall feeling is not one of speed.

Chad

Quote from: Chad on 02 July 2010, 08:21:51 AM
we are playing a large game so the overall feeling is not one of speed.

How many units, and how large are your brigades?  I only have about a dozen battalions at the moment, and half a dozen battalions a side makes a very fast game indeed.

Brigades of 3-5 battalions, with about 5-6 brigades per side, plus horse. Our current plan once testing is finished is to double the battalion sizes from 12 to 24 figures to play 'smaller' games. I think we will see a faster game at that point, but as I said with only 2 of us and a permanent table we tend not to notice the speed element too much. The change of battalion size is more for visual effect than anything else.

Chad

What frontages are you using with these small battalion, and does it change the game if the ratio with the rest of the rules is changed?  My bases are 20mm ( this is 45mm at 40% ie Inch to cm conversion. Ok it should be 18mm per base but 1) 3x2 figures don't quite fit and more importantly 2) 20mm is easier to cut - it means my lines are 12mm too long!

My Prussian Brigade is 4 battalions  and I reckon the Austrians will be 5 and 6, + 3 cavalry, and 2 Austrian Currassiers

Quote from: Last Hussar on 02 July 2010, 04:34:47 PM
What frontages are you using with these small battalion, and does it change the game if the ratio with the rest of the rules is changed?  My bases are 20mm ( this is 45mm at 40% ie Inch to cm conversion. Ok it should be 18mm per base but 1) 3x2 figures don't quite fit and more importantly 2) 20mm is easier to cut - it means my lines are 12mm too long!

My Prussian Brigade is 4 battalions  and I reckon the Austrians will be 5 and 6, + 3 cavalry, and 2 Austrian Currassiers

I am using 3 30mm square bases and centimeters, 2 ranks of 4 files.  Using cm, it is not that different from the rule's recommended size in inches for the same number of figures.  You have to exercise some care to keep everyone within 12cm for a brigade order, which strikes me as a key point of the frontage exercise.

We are doing a straight conversion from inches to cm as well- the only place I haven't is as I said I'm using 20mm bases for a 3 figure frontage, rather than 18mm which would be mathematical.  My opponent, who sometimes posts here as Sunjester, is going for 4x30mm I believe.

The rules I am working on for the period I've linked to before, but I will shamelessly link to again http://lasthussar.wordpress.com/2010/06/02/war-of-spanish-succession-for-black-powder-rules/

Feel free to comment on the post - hits make me feel important!

There is something missing from this thread...

... Oh yeah

Black Powder are the worst set of rules ever. They are not even finished, just a tool box of suggestions.  Typical British writers who don't have the discipline of American writers

(rant continues ad nauseum)

At present we are not concerned about the base sizes. We presently use a single base we developed to use the rules from the Warflag site a while ago. We are simply testing the 'mechanics' of our mods to BP. (I've posted a few things on your blog).

The rebasing will be 30 x 20 for 6 infantry and 40 x 30 for 4 cavalry.

Chad

Quote from: Last Hussar on 02 July 2010, 09:57:18 PM
Typical British writers...

It is interesting that, in the split between BP-lovers and BP-haters the line of the split seems to be on a series of points both sides more-or-less agree to be true.

Lentulus

I think you're right. I also think that a lot of people who bought BP (and rage against them) didn't fully understand what they were buying and still don't. A recent 'discussion' on TMP tried to compare BP and Republic to Empire. I tried to point out that there really cannot be any comparison as the writers' intentions/ideas are miles apart. I have both sets and made sure I had read and fully understood what reviewers had to say. What I got was exactly what I expected, one generic set of rules for 'fun' games and one detailed period-specific set for what I would describe as the more common type of wargame.

Chad

I'm just looking at getting into BP (a new rule set) and 7YW (a new period) so the learning curve is going to be exciting.

At the moment I'm looking at converting the 25mm scales down for 10mm figures, at the moment I'm looking to use 20mm x 20mm bases with two rows of 6 figures as a "standard" base, 6 bases will make a "standard" unit so 36 figures to a unit.

As for distances I'm thinking of converting the rules inches to cm, dividing by 2 and rounding up any halves, so 6" becomes 8cm etc.  This should work but I think there is an anomaly in that units adancing in march columns won't have room to deploy into line but this seems the case i the 28m rules so I'll just see how it play and "tweek" the distances as I see fit.

Reading through the rules I must say I like 'em, almost every wargamer I've ever met (especially me) looks at a set of rules and says something like, "They're pretty good except..." or " the mechanics are ok but..." or " I don't agree with..." and then goes on to impose their own point of view on the rules.  Black Powder seems to be saying "These are the basic mechanics, we know you're going to tinker with the rules so get on with it, just play decently and have a good time".

Dan - just use the numbers as written, but use cm instead of inches, rather than muck about with the maths.  I've put my 10mm on 20mm bases like you  - the equivalent of 45mm bases in the rules (15mm frontage per man, 3 men).   I've posted before about this.

A cm is 40% of an inch. The rules are for 25/28mm - ie an inch, and we are using 10mm, ie a cm.

40% of 45mm is 18mm, so close enough.  Strictly speaking a line should be 10.6cm (45mm x 6, then @40%), but ends up as 12cm - what half an inch between freinds (fnar fnar)?  I can't be bothered to cut 16mm (40% of a 2 man 40mm base) or 18mm bases.

A 6ft by 12ft table from the book becomes a lot smaller - 6 ft = 72 inches.  Convert to 40%, and you get a table 72cm x 144cm - thats 2'4" by 4'9".  That's the ACW scenario moved from a full size snooker table, which you don't have room for, and can't reach the middle, to an average dining room table (minus condiments)

Of course you could use the rules exactly as written, but put 10mm figures on the 40mm base - should be able to get a frontage of 6/base, 36 per unit.