Forum adverts like this one are shown to any user who is not logged in. Join us by filling out a tiny 3 field form and you will get your own, free, dakka user account which gives a good range of benefits to you: No adverts like this in the forums anymore. Times and dates in your local timezone. Full tracking of what you have read so you can skip to your first unread post, easily see what has changed since you last logged in, and easily see what is new at a glance. Email notifications for threads you want to watch closely. Being a part of the oldest wargaming community on the net. If you are already a member then feel free to login now.

Hello all,

It was recommended that I post this here instead.

I'm looking around for a good 28mm ACW tabletop game. The closer to 40k in my opinion, the better, but I'm open to any suggestions!

Specifically, I'm trying to avoid the '1 man=5' nonsense of the 15mm and 20mm civil war games. And I'd like to have at least 100 models on each side. So long as the rules support going bigger of course!

So basically, a rule set that can incorporate Perry Miniatures. I've already checked up on warlord gunpowder rules though.

Any ideas?

Cheers!
DaBestest

So you want skirmish rules?


Cos all mass battle rules use a figure scaling regardless of the figure size used. If you dont have a figure scaling, how will you represent a unit of 700 Union Infantry...

I suppose skirmish rules could work.

Well, basically, I'm looking for a warhammer-esque game, in that 40k is supposed to be played with 1500 points, but if you wanted to, you could up the game to 30,000 with no problems. The rules transfer no matter the size of battle.

So yeah, if skirmish games are the only way to avoid figure scaling. So long as the rules let me make the battles larger, I don't mind.


why, with 700 Union models, of course! (I have a very large living room that is not in use, so space is not a problem. I was actually considering setting up a fredericksburg battle across the entire room, once I got enough troops.

EDIT: So, I received an email from three different rule creators. Brother Against Brother, General De Brigade: Guns Of Gettysburg, Johnny Reb III. Does anyone know which one of these would fit my requirements best? I don't want to shell out $60+ to buy all three rule books.

EDIT2: Also if anyone knows of a better company than Perry for detailed plastic kits, please share!

(Though I will if that's the only way to find a good game!)

Cheers!

Guns of Gettysburg uses figure scaling and has no points sytems as does Johnny Reb III.

Brother Against Brother is a skirmish game at 1 - 1 but again doesnt have points or army lists.

In fact I cant think of many ACW games that do.

I use Guns at Gettysburg and Black Powder for large games.

There was a Warhammer Historical ACW under development and I believe there is a Yahoo group for it.



Good luck painting the 186,500 figures you will need for Fredericksburg with no figure or ground scaling.

What do you have against figure scaling, specifically?

Even with figure scaling games are plenty big.

Actually yes, this question has made me consider my reasons more carefully:

First and foremost, most scaled games are small, like 15mm or so. And while I can paint 28mm no problem, those tiny models look like a pain in the rear to paint, and they also skimp on detail because you're supposed to be looking at 1000 of them all lined up. I actually have no idea how I'd even start painting 15mm, or if it's even possible to convert things that small.

Second, I think figure scaling also takes away from the immersion, which is what I'm looking for in games that take hours and hours to do. I also have a tradition of modelling 'dead' guardsmen, and wherever they die, I place a dead or wounded model. Soon the battlefield is cluttered(if only because of my infantry only doctrine) and it looks like a proper war, rather than a moving diorama.

It also reminds me of risk, in that it seems that figure scaling is used so the creators don't have to go into detail about how models interact with one another on the field, for big games at least. They just represent armies bashing away at each other, and you have to envision the whole battle in your head. Which I think, defeats the purpose of building, painting, and playing with models.

I guess a perfect example would be Civilization vs Total War PC games. I hate that 'armies' of the Civ series are 9 giants wandering around the map, and you have zero control over how battles go, tactically, with the other giants. Total War, while they use that scaling for the campaign map, go to great lengths to make their battles almost movie-like. I feel (when I'm not zooming around 200 ft above the battle on free cam) like I'm actually there.

I guess I just don't like the detached feeling of supreme command. If forced to make a choice, I'd choose leading 50 individual models as opposed to 50 blocks, each representing 500 models. At least with individuals, I can pick them up, look at them, place a certain man exactly where I want him. And maybe it's a little bit of the guard player in me that blanches at losing a whole squad just because they're all on the same base.

Mostly, it's that I like realism, and 4 Union men spread out on a square base representing 10 just doesn't cut it for me. I think it also defeats the point of wanting to play a massive game if you can't physically see the troops in line. It just looks like a very loose line of skirmishers is moving across the board. And are armed with semi-automatic rifles to pour out the fire of 10.

That all said, this is my personal opinion. I don't really hate any game, nor do I have a problem with others playing them. However, for myself, I want that extra bit of realism. It adds suspense, especially when you know your opponent is focusing on your pretty models(like my beloved regimental standard) and you're willing the game gods to make him miss.



Also, the rules don't have to be specific to ACW. So long as they can translate in some fashion to 28mm, 1:1 models ACW combat, they would work fine. 28mm Napoleonic, ACW, Revolutionary War... any of these could be bases for a civil war game. I hope.



I contacted the producer of General De Brigade, and he sent me a few pages of his rulebook. From what I've seen, this looks almost like Warhammer Fantasy, in that true line of sight and formation facing are important, and morale is taken care of via dice rolling.

Whew! That enough text for y'all? haha!

EDIT: Big P, if in fact I did do a Fredericksburg, I'd probably just paint a few hundred men on each side. When one Union line fails and breaks, I'll take the dead and use them as the second wave. After all, they advanced in double line one division at a time, so I wouldn't need thousands of models. Hundreds, yes. But I'm already knee deep in hundreds of guard and orks and Empire, what's a few hundred Confederate and Union?

Cheers,
DaBestest

How is a figure scaling any different to what you do?

Its still the same models on the table...


Im not quite sure you know what the figure scaling is there for. Its to allow battles to be re-fought with unit sizes reduced to a manageable size.

Its also there to conform the models footprint to the reduce distance scale so that you dont need a car park to play on.

It doesnt mean there is only 4 men on the table...

It also has nothing to do with the size of the figure, I play in 28mm ACW and always use a scaling.


We used a figure scaling of 1 - 25 in this re-fight of Brawners Farm;

Well, then I suppose I can use your picture as my example. The bottom right set of units, starting with the most forward infantry. By my count, 20 models. But I'm supposed to imagine that a horde of 500 men are bearing down on my line?

And right behind them, another thousand are pushing up?

What I see is more akin to a 2,000 pt Empire v Empire battle, than an epic clash of thousands of men.

The reason I don't like scaling is because I want the battle to look like a "Battle". The picture you posted looks like two regiments bumped into each other(and had a lot more flags and officers than usual) and are skirmishing over a farm.

Now, like I said, I mean no offense to your way of gaming, and text has a way of putting tone where none exists. None of that was sarcasm of scathing. I'm sure most people would have tons of fun playing a scaled game. However, scaling is just not for me. I have to be able to see the pieces, the individual soldiers, cannon, horses, etc.

What do you do when a cannon ball bounces through a double line, for instance? In Fantasy, the cannonball would kill the 2 men it physically hit outright. But does scaling mean 50 men are just dead? I suppose scaling means the cannon represents more than 1 cannon but...yeah, I can't explain it more than I have. I just really prefer to not play with scaling.

I definitely do understand why scaling is there. And it makes perfect sense to scale the battles rather than move around hundreds of individual models. However, I don't want to scale my battles. I'd rather fight out a massive battle over a weekend than have a representation of a massive battle finished in an evening.

"How is a figure scaling any different to what you do? "

I'm not sure what you mean. I thought I was doing the opposite? Unless you're talking about re-using pieces for Fredericksburg, but I still don't see how that is scaling. It's more that I don't have the money, as a college student, to pay for the literal thousands of models. So I either have to re-use, or fight just a section of the line.

So, has anyone actually played General De Brigade? From what I've seen and what the producer has told me, it's like warhammer but for napoleon era, and they have an offshoot for the civil war. The page he sent almost looked like a page from the fantasy rulebook.EDIT: I already asked this huh? haha, short term memory loss.

Cheers all,
DaBestest

If you don't like the look of Big P's picture above, then General De Brigade is not going to be your cup of tea.

In fact, it may be that you'd be better off writing your own set of rules, from the requirements that you're asking.

Hmmm. I never considered writing my own. I guess I figured there had to be some game somewhere that had the ruleset I'm looking for.

I'll look into it, thanks infinite.

I've heard good things about General de Brigade, but as far as I know it has scaling as well.


Automatically Appended Next Post:

 Hordini wrote:
I've heard good things about General de Brigade, but as far as I know it has scaling as well.

Almost all non-skirmish horse and musket/Napoleonic/ACW games have scaling of some sort.

Hmmmm....

Almost all!

Well shoot. Does anyone have maybe a less-known game that I could use as a base for a new ruleset?

The only idea I have so far is basically jack GW Fantasy rules and tweak them for primarily ranged combat.

The game I posted above was played with Guns at Gettysburg. Thats the ACW variant of General de Brigade, which has a scaling... In that a British Line Regiment would be represented by 32 figures for a full strength unit.

ACW with points system? Pretty sure it doesnt exist

Usable with Napoleonics, American Revolution, etc? Prolly doesn't exist (huge huge HUGE difference in warfare between the two).

Figure scaling... I'm sure there is something out there that will allow you to do 1:1. I'm not really a fan of the scaling myself, BUUUTTTT I can justify it at 15mm by footprint. I.E. in real life a regiment of x many men would occupy a space of y many feet. Even though I have modeled that unit as being composed of z many men, it still occupies the space of y, and the basing is dense enough that at a glance it looks "right".

I think it is worth pointing out that even in Warhammer Fantasy, there's 'unit scaling'. If there wasn't, then these 'epic battles' in the Fantasy universe would never contain more than 500 men on both sides.

Hmm. You know Infinite, I never actually thought about Warhammer like that. I figured that the Apocalypse rules were major engagements, and regular warhammer more a skirmish, say over a town or refinery.

Well then, if there's really nothing for 28mm, how about 15mm or 20mm? I'm still looking for a 1:1 scaling, but all my other points can be discarded if there's simply no game made for them. But there has to be at least one good non-scaled game, in some size model. Right?

I would even be fine with just a game that allowed enough space on their bases for me to put the proper amount of troops, whether or not they'd be counted individually.

EDIT: Also, yes Chaos, I know there's a difference, but the core is the same(mainly musket battles). And if there's a ruleset for that, I can play a few games and get a feel for the game, then make up rules that fit with ACW.


Cheers all!
DaBestest


Automatically Appended Next Post:
Here's a picture of apparently 15mm models. They don't mention on the site what rules they're using, but they do make it clear that it's a 1:1 scale for troops.


This would be perfect!:

http://i263.photobucket.com/albums/ii140/warrior_081/P1010003_25.jpg

Only 1:1 sets I know of are like 3/6mm. I'll have a look around and see if I can find something, i've been looking for a good set for use w 10/15mm for a while now and still no luck really, for the most part ACW rules seem too abstract for my tastes.

If you haven't, I would check out The Miniatures Page. They know many, many more rulesets for ACW (and historicals in general), and probably a lot of really obscure ones as well.


http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/boards.mv?period=acw

Edit - Here is a ink to the ACW boards.

chaos0xomega wrote:
for the most part ACW rules seem too abstract for my tastes.

You're going to find that a lot in, well, essentially everything pre-WW1, unless it's at a skirmish level scale. Before that, armies stayed together (due to limited communications and logistics), so that any real combat was army v. army, where the order of the day was, essentially, 'line up and march towards each other'.

That's a huge simplification, by the way, but it's why you'll see a Roman Cohort or Napoleonic Regiment 'represented' on the table by a whole lot less miniatures.

Thats not what I mean by abstraction, I mean in terms of representing command/control (and communication necessary for this), morale, fog of war, maneuver, and so on. Most systems cover one of these areas, several cover some of these areas, none cover all of them (except maybe chef de battalion for napoleonics). I'm presently in the process of gathering various rulesets together so I can bastardize them into something new that has the scaling, level of detail, etc. that I'm looking for, hopefully I can cook up something good

chaos0xomega wrote:
Thats not what I mean by abstraction, I mean in terms of representing command/control (and communication necessary for this), morale, fog of war, maneuver, and so on. Most systems cover one of these areas, several cover some of these areas, none cover all of them (except maybe chef de battalion for napoleonics). I'm presently in the process of gathering various rulesets together so I can bastardize them into something new that has the scaling, level of detail, etc. that I'm looking for, hopefully I can cook up something good

Aaaaah, gotcha!

So, TMP did in fact have a ton of additional information.

Has anyone ever played or heard anything about a game called Sharpe Practice? Apparently it's a pretty close shot to what I'm looking for(though to be fair that is only based on google, blogs, the producer website and game reports).

Cheers all!
DaBestest

Napoleonics skirmish game AFAIK, personally I'm loathe to use a Nappy ruleset for ACW as the wars are extremely different, though at a skirmish level a lot of those differences probably dissipate.

It has a ACW expansion named (appropriately since a lot of Toofatlardies' titles are puns) 'Terrible Sharpe Sword'.

No army list, those there's a campaign system. I think 100 miniatures per person is about the max limit. It has a card driven activation system, where your 'Big Men' - your dashing, heroic officers and NCO's - order units around.

Also look at The Sword and The Flame. It's Victorian Colonial and can probably cover ACW pretty well.

Hmmmmm....


Well like I say chaos, I'm hesitant to use them too, but once I play a few games and get my head around them, I can just tweak it to fit ACW.

Another option might be HG Wells's Little Wars. I think it is in the public domain by now. It's more of a Toy Soldier game but it could give you some ideas.

The Free Wargames site has a load of ACW rules so check that too.

I think you may end up writing your own rules. The kind of games you want to do are not what "mainstream" ACW players are into, so there isn't much on the market.

Most rulesets on the market started that same way (written by someone who was unhappy with the current offerings).

I was really hoping it wouldn't come to that, but if I have to....


At the very least if I make it I'm not going to sell it. Rules and game guidelines should be made for free and distributed freely.

I'll call it... hmmm... I'll have to work on it.

http://www.freewargamesrules.co.uk/acw.html

Southern Fury and State Of War say they are skirmish level rules, which is what you are looking for.