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.

Gentlemen (and Ladies),

I need your help. Here are some ideas that I am considering.

In the threads below I introduced my idea for a simplified American Civil War rule set utilizing the Bolt Action mechanic. I think I will be doing a test game in the coming weeks along with a video battle report to see how well I like it. Those rules were designed to simple and fast. I want a beer-and-pretzels type game. Easy to learn. Easy to play. My group didn't like "Black Powder."

What I would potentially like to add are rules to capture how ACW battles were fought. That is, engagements began as skirmishes with limited information about position and strength of the opposition. Unavailable to ACW generals were accurate maps of wilderness passage, and precise knowledge of the disposition and quantity of troops they would be facing. Perhaps there were maps of a hill roughly here, a creek there, a town here, or a farm there. Generals relied heavily on Cavalry. Further and perhaps most importantly, I want to capture how cavalry was really used. This is one of the several ways I feel that “Black Powder” and “Glory Hallelujah!” fail. Don’t get me wrong, I love the books.

In the ACW, there were rarely giant Cavalry charges a la Napoleonic or the Crimean war. A notable exception was the Battle of Brandy Station. When ACW cavalry fought, they often fought dismounted. Cavalry reconnoitered in force. The Cavalry would choose battle fields. Gather intelligence on opposing forces. Find roads. Find River crossings. Find lines of invasion and retreat. I want that aspect in this game.

So there are two things I am thinking about, but may ruin “goal of simplicity” of my game system.

TERRAIN IS NOT COMPLETELY KNOWN:
Somehow, based on forward scouts (preferably cavalry), terrain can either change or be placed during the early game as it unfolds. I think major formations like creeks and towns and roads should be placed before the game starts. For instance a creek now has a ford that is not mentioned on the map, or a ford mentioned is no longer there. Perhaps there’s an impassible marshy bottom land adjacent to a forest. Maybe there’s a forest. Maybe it’s open fields. Your cavalry dictates the battlefield to your benefit and the detriment of your opponent.

OPPONENT STRENGTH AND DISPOSITION IS UNKNOWN:
Also based on proximity of enemy cavalry your exact deployment is obscured from your opponent. Conversely, you’re not too sure what lies beyond that stretch of land before your mightily arrayed legion. Is there a battery of rifled artillery on those hills? Do you send your cavalry to investigate, or do you march forth, heedless of the hills overlooking your battlefield?

I have some ideas, but they seem complex. Has anybody given this any thought? I tinkered with it as an umpire in our black powder game, but it didn’t seem to work well. You can see it in the batrep posted in the historical section if you’d like.

Thanks
DrG

To make opponent strength unknown and have the "follow-on/Meeting Engagement" feel of a Civil War battle, perhaps you should just make liberal use of Reserves style rules for deployment? That would be the "simplest" way but not necessarily the best way.

Some games to look at that maybe useful around how to get this "escalating" engagment feel could be:

1. Chain of Command- They sort of wrote the book on this. The Patrol phase allows you to place "jump off points where units actually deploy from. Very innovative and would fit the feel nicely.

2. Jovian Chronicles- Beta Test Rules- Engagment forces tend to be split into groups and enter the board as individual elements at different points, with few or none coming on together.

3. Battlegroup Series- They have specific rules for Recon elments at the beginning of the game, and how having these elements benefit your later reserve roles, deployment options, and cause soem ill-effects to your opponents.

4. Blucher- They have a pretty good "blinds" system using cards and when a card is revealed.

These might all give you some ideas about how to approach it. I also recommend you check out Johnny Reb III, Longstreet, and Across a Distant Field as resources to consult for pretty solid/popular Civil War rules.

Sadly, I do not have any written reviews to point you at for any of these games. :(

Have you looked at Battle Cry? It's very good!