Lead Adventure Forum
Miniatures Adventure => Colonial Adventures => Topic started by: dhtandco on August 21, 2014, 11:46:00 PM
-
Today I took delivery of our Victorian Steel rules which are based on Company stands fast play and fun, covering all the usual stuff plus heatstroke, hidden movement, ambushes, gunboats, railways, engineering works, leader qualities and fatigue and supply issues. All main areas of the rules are covered by worked examples illustrated with real wargame figures. The natives if used correctly can and do win! I actually prefer to play the natives under these rules check them out at Victorian-steel.com
The covers and photos are by nevermore cheers Malc!
-
Rules sound interesting but are they more of the 'conversational style' or more like the 'american' style? I realize that is a challenging question for English rules writers but still an important question. I have several sets of English written rules and have yet to find any of them playable, some good ideas but not really something I would play. Certainly, to some extent, that is a personal idiosyncratic thing but not entirely. However, having said that, I am on the lookout for alternative colonial rules. The Sword And The Flame has its advocates but it is hardly the best rule set out there.
-
Rules sound interesting but are they more of the 'conversational style' or more like the 'american' style? I realize that is a challenging question for English rules writers but still an important question. I have several sets of English written rules and have yet to find any of them playable, some good ideas but not really something I would play. Certainly, to some extent, that is a personal idiosyncratic thing but not entirely. However, having said that, I am on the lookout for alternative colonial rules. The Sword And The Flame has its advocates but it is hardly the best rule set out there.
Well, I can't answer your comment directly as I've only seen the rules being played but the playability of the system seemed very good and everyone enjoyed their game. It was a demo game at Durham Wargames Convention and extensive pics can be seen on my blog below (unembarrassed plug that it is!):
http://justaddwater-bedford.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/durham-wargames-show-interlude.html
By the way, I'm not sure that there's really such a distinction between Eurpoean (conversational style) and 'american' style? It all just feels a little well, bit of a steryeotype to me. I'm sure that you didn't mean it to be so (?).
Darrell.
-
Well, I can't answer your comment directly as I've only seen the rules being played but the playability of the system seemed very good and everyone enjoyed their game. It was a demo game at Durham Wargames Convention and extensive pics can be seen on my blog below (unembarrassed plug that it is!):
http://justaddwater-bedford.blogspot.co.uk/2014/06/durham-wargames-show-interlude.html
By the way, I'm not sure that there's really such a distinction between Eurpoean (conversational style) and 'american' style? It all just feels a little well, bit of a steryeotype to me. I'm sure that you didn't mean it to be so (?).
Darrell.
Well I know there are several continuum * commonly existing in reality when trying to describe rules - the Most Extreme Organizationally is something like the old SPI board games structure and the other end is (no names) the "Rambling Conversation/Dissertation" style that is half "Look at How Smart (or Funny) I Am Monologue" and half "Unindexed Draft" in structure.
* a continuous sequence in which adjacent elements are not perceptibly different from each other, although the extremes are quite distinct.
"at the fast end of the fast-slow continuum"
Even if it is a stereotype (not always a bad thing when used correctly) it would be useful to know what the two styles meant in this case.
Gracias,
Glenn
-
Well I know there are several continuum * commonly existing in reality when trying to describe rules - the Most Extreme Organizationally is something like the old SPI board games structure and the other end is (no names) the "Rambling Conversation/Dissertation" style that is half "Look at How Smart (or Funny) I Am Monologue" and half "Unindexed Draft" in structure.
* a continuous sequence in which adjacent elements are not perceptibly different from each other, although the extremes are quite distinct.
"at the fast end of the fast-slow continuum"
Erm.... I really don't mean to be rude at all but that sounds a little patronising :). Many of us on this forum also attended uni or such like :D
Even if it is a stereotype (not always a bad thing when used correctly) it would be useful to know what the two styles meant in this case.
(Well, I certainly agree about stereotypes if used within the proper context). Anyway, for me it's the feel of the rules when played that matters be they WRG or WAB for example.
Darrell.
-
Another example of the continuum is rules that try with varying levels of failure to cover hundreds of years (ancients) or decades (colonial) in one set (Volley and Bayonet or DBA) versus ones (like Tactica) that establish firm limits on where the lanes in the road exist for the rules.
A third example are rules that are specific to one war/campaign (ACW) versus those very generic rules who try and cover "all war" in some large lump of time ignoring specific cultural or technological differences (or have optional rules to differentiate between smooth bore linear warfare and the machine/technological armies that became obvious after 1913.)
Gracias,
Glenn
-
Went to Victorian-steel.com web site and despite the FFL assertation in the front page it appears to be extremely Anglo-centric (I will definitely pass in that case) in both the rules coverage and in the future scenario books mentioned (reinforces the first.)
The Flag sheets (nicely done) are also pretty much Anglocentric in subject matter.
There is some potential on the rather empty (it is new so that should be expected) forum in developing beyond the "Colonials are British versus the native peoples" vibe (talk about freaking stereotypes!) currently.
Gracias,
Glenn
-
Rules sound interesting but are they more of the 'conversational style' or more like the 'american' style? I realize that is a challenging question for English rules writers but still an important question. I have several sets of English written rules and have yet to find any of them playable, some good ideas but not really something I would play. Certainly, to some extent, that is a personal idiosyncratic thing but not entirely. However, having said that, I am on the lookout for alternative colonial rules. The Sword And The Flame has its advocates but it is hardly the best rule set out there.
Not disagreeing - especially about TS&TF - but can you give a specific example (or even start a thread to keep me from hijacking the thread anymore) of this phenomenon?
Gracias,
Glenn
-
Erm.... I really don't mean to be rude at all but that sounds a little patronising :). Many of us on this forum also attended uni or such like :D
(Well, I certainly agree about stereotypes if used within the proper context). Anyway, for me it's the feel of the rules when played that matters be they WRG or WAB for example.
Darrell.
Well many did attend college but it would be patronizing to assume every one did. ;)
And while I think I know what you meant by WRG versus WAB stylistically I think a further detailed discussion would be hijacking (which I already did - posting right after waking up not a great idea obviously) the thread.
Gracias,
Glenn
-
Im not sure I understand your reference to Anglo centric rules and scenario book.
Half of the colonial world was governed by Great Britain and therefore is bound to dominate the period and we also fought some of the most interesting and formidable races on the planet ( often without cause) which is why the Sudan, Zulu wars, Sikh wars Boxer rebellion ,Indian Mutiny and North west frontier generate so many nice figure ranges, The scenario book covers the Boers v the Zulus (2 scenarios) the Zulu civil wars (2 scenarios) The Boer civil war (1 scenario) and the remainder The Anglo Zulu war and First Boer war so I have tried to spread the net. Our future releases include battles between the Germans and the He He tribe and we play tested them with French v North African tribes and Italians and Abbysinians Because the rules allow you to categorise between regular and tribal forces and four classes from elite to levy it is possible to fit most forces in there somewhere
Where would you place the emphasis if not on the forces of Queen Victoria ( god bless her!)?
-
<snip "All great and wonderful" stuff>
Where would you place the emphasis if not on the forces of Queen Victoria ( god bless her!)?
Which has been done, done again, and over done. ::)
But it sells well. :) lol Especially to Brits and Anglophiles, less so to Anglophobes or those who have no interest in the hijinks of Imperial Britain. Just stating my opinion/response to your announcement.
Where should you put your emphasis?
Put it where it interests you. Put it where it sells in your market area.
However, I won't buy the rules until I
1) try them out at a convention or
2) see multiple independent 3rd party AARs/BatReps/reviews that tell me what I want to know, mechanics, results of the play, and strengths and weaknesses.
and
3) see the rules expands beyond the limitations of Britain's Imperialism (there are so many flavors of Imperialism including Spain, Portugal, Germany, France, Belgium... and the hypocritical We are Not an Empire" of the USA.)
I wish you success but right now you won't get a penny of my money because of the focus of your rules.
Gracias,
Glenn
-
I didn't go to university, but I'll pitch on with this simple thought.
Write scenarios & lists for figures that are currently available first.
Picking "Old Glory" as a representative manufacturer, for the simple reason that they are US & UK based, that would give:
Indian Mutiny
Boer War
Zulu War
Sudan
North West Frontier
Boxer Rising
Maori Wars
Sons of the Desert
Lost African Tribes
Sikh Wars
-
Now by my simple count, that gives 10 distinct possibles, 7 of which feature the British as the colonial power.
As for other colonials from this list you'd get French (or possibly Spanish) for North Africa, and everyone and his dog for China, although the British did play some part in that one too.
OG don't list any particular forces to oppose the Lost Africans, but Zanzibari slavers might make a good choice.
Personally I like scenarios that have obscure exotic groups, but in the end, they'll probably only get played through using the figures that I have already got in the cupboard.
Fair enough, that includes paint conversions of Perry plastic zouaves (to Moroccan or Zanzibar infantry) and Perry plastic Ansar (using spare musket arms from zouaves) as native militia/askaris, who have in the past been drafted into Indian Mutiny games too.
We have a Hudson & Allen Alamo, but it rarely gets used in a Texan setting, although it has been used for the Indian Mutiny, North Africa, the Sudan and even Harad (!!).
Anyway. Good luck with the new rules, we'll probably order a set when we see what we are doing next term.
-
First, my apologies to dhtandco! I certainly did not mean to so derail the debut of your rules here. I guess that's what I get for posting so late when I should really be sleeping. And I must also correct myself, bad gaffe - my number one go to rules now actually come from England. The rules? Rank and File by Crusader Publishing. Again, too late in the day. I simply wanted to know the style of the Victorian Steel rules, conversational versus a more 'organized' style. I guess I need a neon bright embarrassed emoticon here.
So, can we all please keep the focus on the rules in question rather than semantics about what I wrote. I really do have a genuine interest in the rules and just want to clarify to make an informed decision, that's all. I do buy rules sometimes just for ideas. I'm sure the authors of the rules would appreciate it. Thanks folks.
And, again, my apologies to the authors.
(Atheling, no, I certainly didn't mean to imply a stereotype, just an observation about different styles of rules - and thank you for keeping your post focused on the rules.)
Oh, and for the record I'm neither Anglophone nor Anglophile. Just a Yank, California transplant variety.
-
Order placed - it's one of my favourite gaming periods, I've been inspired by some of the Grimsby club's games (and downloaded free flags in the past) so, whatever the exact mechanisms used, it's worth 15 quid to support a new venture and there are always fresh ideas that can be 'borrowed' - and I'd rather make up my own mind about the suitability of the the rules for the sort of games I want to play, based on what I've read and understood about the campaigns in question.
And I'll do the same when the new version of Peter Gilder's famous Sudan wars rules are released later this year - but I am a rules hoarder!
And of course the initial launch will focus on the best known (all British) colonial campaigns of the 19th century - heck, even TSATF did that at the beginning! Falstolfus sums it up quite nicely - what other campaigns, widely supported by existing figure ranges in both 15mm and 28mm, immediately come to mind? IIIR, an excellent work on the Herero wars was released recently, so why cannibalise that? And other wars, such as the Indian Plains Wars (another favourite of mine) has such a unique style of warfare in scope, scale and tactics, that it warrants a completely different approach rather than trying to adapt the core mechanisms.
Wishing the writers every success
Simon
(Definitely an Englishman, whose great grandfathers fought in both the second Boer and Boxer Wars - oh, and at Jutland, but that's hardly 'colonial' !)
-
Well the rules are differant and very well suited to the colonial wars, figure ratio can range from a section of figures as along as they are in group of 8 sections to 12, larger games would be called brigades.
So such battles as the Wha Hee Hee tribe againsted the German colonial can also be gamed, companies or groups/sections of men take random hits under the officer who is in control,this can make companies fall back or sections of soldiers and it takes a order to get them back into line, so you could have gaps, holes in your lines.
Movement is random, Zulu african tribes ect .. depending on the rank and period can be rapid, but lets say the Zulu attack, horns and head/loins, one horn might just move alot more ground than say the other, the head might not even move or loins, we had a game the other evening and both my horns out-flanked the British, they really did move how i wanted, but my head and loins, move as if they did'nt want to know and was'nt up for a fight.
We have had games doing the Indian Mutiny, where two of the gamers (including me) really thought we won, we really had the Brits ready to crumble, but these rules can turn on its head, the British had a double shot all over the tabletop and just blew us away, it was a touch and go game, and one minute i was full of joy the next i was gobsmacked. :o
This is one of the strong points of the rules, you really can againsted the odds turn a game on its head, we have had this type of game play for over six months and all games have been very close and we know that gaming the enemies of Victoria you got a chance and your not just going to be cannon foder, its no fun for the other gamer to lose each time they play againsted the colonial force, so we had to get the balance right, you still have to outnumber say 3-1, 4-1 againsted the colonial force, but hey it looks the biz once on the table and as always the colonial force(players) think they are not going to do it, but with orders and outmaneuver and hitting the right spot on the tabletop you can do it.
Weapon range is differant on each period as with command orders and its not all about just a colonial eurpean force, it can be European officers commanding Africans or Sudanese or Sepoys who are not as well trained as Colonial Europeans.
We did Peking 55 days again the other evening, sections of men defending againsted the odds, so the ratio can be as you see fit, it can be adjusted simple.
Well i hope that gives you some idea of the rules any questions just ask will be more than happy to answer.
malc :)
-
Well I bought this 2 days ago and the rules arrived this morning.
I'm an Indian Mutiny fan and have long waited for a set of rules that would work at company level.
I have not played the rules yet but on a read through I like the mechanisms and as think I can see them working well for the IM.
Well done chaps.
-
Well I bought this 2 days ago and the rules arrived this morning.
I'm an Indian Mutiny fan and have long waited for a set of rules that would work at company level.
I have not played the rules yet but on a read through I like the mechanisms and as think I can see them working well for the IM.
Well done chaps.
Thanks Smirnoff, i think i might add a scenario explaining the way the rules make the game play in a couple of week with maps and what happens ect .. should give you a better of understanding on how the rules affect the tabletop game.
I can do this for the Indian Mutiny, Zulu and boer wars plus a smaller scale battle with the Maori War, just to show how easy it can be adapted.
-
Wow! thanks for the input one and all, we are on a steep learning curve here so today I have forwarded a brief synopsis of what you get for your |£15 and why you should part with it (or not!) :)
I just want to repeat here that you will be able to use your French, Portugese or Spanish or US forces with these rules and we do not intend to prescribe their classification in the rule set, troops are regular or tribal for both orders and firing/melee and then levy third rate trained or elite, so Zulus can have all the advantages of regular forces for movement and orders and yet still fight as tribal on the firing and melee sections.So if you are fighting Shaka Zulus forces against other tribes they will still move more often than their less organised opponents (if the gods favour you)and yet their firing /melee factor is determined by their class This gives the player the flexibility of classifying his forces how he and his opponent see fit. We are aiming at people with a modicum of interest in the period and who probably have their own views on the power of various forces So for the Tugela with Boers and Zulus we give them a fire bonus to account for the looper ammunition and the effect on the Zulus of their introduction to well aimed Boer firepower. We simply cannot include army lists in a 40 page rule book that cover the whole period when performance by the same armies was so variable! rather we will classify the forces needed in the scenario books. So to answer one question they are aimed at people who want to play scenarios rather than at the Competition gamer. They are most certainly aimed at those who want an enjoyable fun game and to go home at the end of it without a headache or having to revisit rule 17.b para 2 subsection 17 for the definition of "cover"( no reference to any rule set past present or future intended here!)
Enough of the homily Thanks for your interest please revisit the site in a few days for more information and thanks for the good wishes :) :) :)
-
Here is what is going on the website I hope it answers most of the queries. Keep 'em coming if not!
THE BIG QUESTION
So why should you part with your hard earned cash?
You get a 40 page soft bound rule book, 2 flag sheets and a playsheet and we make a donation to Combat Stress through Henry Hyde’s Combat Stress appeal in Miniature Wargames for each copy sold as well as for the extra flag sheets.
To play the rules your miniatures need to be organised as ‘company stands’ .We usually base our figures (28mm in our case but other scales would work equally well) 2 to 6 to a stand depending on type it really doesn’t matter as it is the stand that is important. We use 3” squares but again as long as you can match up the frontages of opposing stands, in your armies, it is not that important. If you don’t have your figures based on stands then just agree how many figures equal a stand and away you go! It is consistency that is important.
Company stands are then organised into ‘brigades’ (aka Impi, Rubs, Mobs etc sorry for the European definitions but it is easier this way!) of 4 ,8 , or 12 stands. For a game you need at least one Brigade a side and a force of at least 8 stands in total. If it is Europeans versus native tribes you will need about two or three times as many native troops as European, unless using the ambush rules or the Europeans are quite poor quality, such as Hicks Egyptians.
Troops are then categorised as regulars or native which affects their ability to process orders, and in the case of non -tribal forces allows them in the right circumstances to ‘rapid fire’
They are then also divided into elite, trained, second rate or levy which affects their ability to instigate and stand against a charge. All this is achieved by giving each type a number to which certain additions or deductions are made and comparing it to a roll on D6 Play a couple of games and you probably won’t even refer to the playsheet.
Initiative is rolled for each turn then it is UGO-IGO with the winner deciding on whether he is U or I and the Europeans chance of winning being weighted in most cases.
It then follows a predictable orders, movement, firing, melee and morale sequence. One unusual aspect is under certain circumstances troops can fire and then charge in the same turn after they have weakened their target unit or that unit has been softened up by artillery fire. We don’t recall this being available in many other sets yet it seems to us a perfectly valid tactic.
Firing casualties are randomised amongst targets that consist of more than one company and there is a trade -off allowed between taking the hit and being driven back so it is possible to trade ground for casualties , and for your nice line to be disrupted and you wasting orders re-dressing the line. This is at the target players choice except on closing fire when it switches to the firing player. So you can either damage a charging unit or just hold it at bay when being charged. You may start off a charge with six Ansar companies but if you get badly hit and the random gods are against you, you may end up fighting a melee with a lot fewer companies.
Morale is very simple and troops tend to retire rather than rout so your beautifully painted miniatures stay in view for longer, even if they cannot contribute to the result. We do not want to spend hours in painting to condemn our units to the travelling box until we must!
Added to this rules for hidden movement, ambush,going prone, railways, gunboats, leaders abilities and engineering tasks and the rules let you, the player deal with most aspects of Colonial warfare.
I hope I have persuaded you?
-
dh, I'm guessing you must be Dave, yes?
Either way, from the explanations do I read it right that movement rates are randomized so that players have limited control of the movement of their forces? Similar to TSATF movement mechanism? (if you are familiar)
And thanks for the more detailed explanations. Oh, and I do hope someone did some serious editing of the rules! ;)
-
yes im Dave, and you have limited control depending on the orders received by each brigade.
Sorry don't understand the editing bit ? I must be a bit thick or its getting late!
Thanks for your interest in the rules
Cheers Dave
-
Thanks Smirnoff, i think i might add a scenario explaining the way the rules make the game play in a couple of week with maps and what happens ect .. should give you a better of understanding on how the rules affect the tabletop game.
I can do this for the Indian Mutiny, Zulu and boer wars plus a smaller scale battle with the Maori War, just to show how easy it can be adapted.
That would be useful. Indian Mutiny please.
Usual thing applies with new rules (especially when you take them down the club) i.e. make the first game a balanced scenario that gives a good game as well as allowing the lads to get a feel for the rules or risk the 'the rules are pants' reaction as someone gets his bum handed to him on a plate.....
-
Either way, from the explanations do I read it right that movement rates are randomized so that players have limited control of the movement of their forces?
The way I read the command & control is this (and am happy to be corrected authors):
The number of orders a brigade can get get based on the size of the Brigade (1 die for 6 bases or under, 2 die for 6-12) +1 Die if Leader Attached.
This does mean that small brigades (4 bases) can only ever get 2 orders a turn (if it has a Leader attached), 1 die for 4 bases, 1 die for a Leader Attached.
So under these rules small brigades are less manoeuvrable which feels a bit odd but I expect is a rule mechanism to account for degradation by attrition of larger brigades (8/12 bases).
I think it could be solved by creating (for example in the British IM forces) a front brigade of 4 bases with another one tacked on behind it in base to base contact, which bumps it to 8 bases and gives an extra die (or is this bending the rules chaps?). Rear lads could not shoot but would count when going in with the bayonet.
If it's possible then it's pretty historically accurate for the IM.
Each successful Order (score 4/5/6 for Regs and 5/6 for Tribal/Fanatics with Fanatics allowed to re-roll 1 fail) allows 1 function to be performed.
Shooting does not require an order.
So if a Regular Brigade gets 3 orders (max it can get...I think?) it can
1) move 3 times and fire (18" - 3 x 6" in Line) or
2) fire then move, or move/fire/move/move (I think?) or any combination of this? Or
3) it could use an order for a formation change (into square or column. If a square 1 order to form then 1 order to move is all it could do as squares may only ever move once in a turn),
4) or fall back 3" facing (bit of a waste as this is 1 order and thats all it could do.. I think...?) or
5) it could, with 3 orders, forgo any movement and fire twice in that turn.
I think that reforming brigades that are disrupted by fire or melee effect (where company bases from a brigade are forced back out of base to base with it's fellow companies) is done by manipulating the above to get bases back in base to base contact with a contiguous frontage?
What I like about this is good British forces in the IM should be able to outmanoeuvre the Indian forces (which was demonstrated historically in many battles, check out Havelock's actions) and allow the British to Schwerpunkt the Indian line.
Of course this depends on getting the rolls and failing them whilst manoeuvring in column in front of massed Indian artillery could sting a tad.....
-
Thanks Smirnoff let me hopefully deal with your points raised
We deliberately did not want small brigades to be too flexible and start swanning around the battlefield with a too great effect for their numbers if you want this you have to attach the C in C as well as the brigade commander to get extra momentum. HOWEVER we recently played a very small punitive expedition game where there were only 4 British companies and a brigade of 8 NNC troops against 4 brigades of 4 to 8 stands of Zulus and made a scenario based change to allow the British and small Zulu stands 3 orders if led by vrigadier reducing them by one dice when a stand was lost. That's the beauty of the rules you set the scenario and make the rules work for you not vice versa because of their flexibility.
Your solution also works well although we did not envisage stands having to be in base to base contact to be classed as a brigade so your 8 stands could still be a brigade it is just if they want to move indifferent directions etc in one turn you eat into the orders you have rolled for.
Yes one successful order allows one function in any combination so shoot and charge is possible in one turn with one order if within move range of target. As is softening up with artillery before doing this if in range and sight.
A regular brigade as any other can only have 3 orders max and your options 1 to 5 are all valid. You may think 3" fallback is a waste but if you are 22" from your Ghazi fanatic opponents and fall back 3" they cannot catch you next turn (max Move 24" and you have gained a turn of firing before they hit you! If armed with enfields or better. That can sometimes br crucial
You are not limited to one fall back per turn it is order based so 2 orders 6" fall back
Yes reforming brigades is a real pain and wastes orders which is just what we wanted.It also allows regulars to disrupt attacks which together with the test to charge home means your 12 stand Badmash brigade looks a whole lot worse to fight against than it actually is (unless your opponent is lucky) So British brigades in our games of 8 stands can be outnumbered 5 or 6 to one and still win if well handled.
Hope you enjoy the games and thanks for your comments /queries fire away if you hit problems with anything.
-
Thanks.
Makes perfect sense.
The Fall Back was not a crit BTW, makes eminent sense especially in the example you give.
If the Brigade does not have to be in base-to-base is there a limit to the distance that individual companies may act 'independently' in order to count to a brigade command die to be allotted?
I assume that companies that wander off require an extra order to get them back into a 'general direction' area?
-
Not taken as one I re read it and rapped myself across the knuckles as even I didn't think it was very clear :)
We don't have a limit as there are usually very few European brigades on the table and natives only win if they stick together. The penalty for separating is the separated companies are unlikely to be moving or maneuvering in the same direction as the mass so they require one of your precious orders unless they are just firing. We often detach companies to overlook hills etc in games with lots of cover to stop the natives using hidden movement by overlooking cover This can be lethal if not handled properly. We had a game with a dried up river bed running across the board 60" and the natives got in it rolled for hidden movement got 3 orders and a 6 multiplier for movement meaning they got 7 x 8" across the board and used orders 2 and 3 to erupt from cover giving the European player one heck of a shock! At that point Nevermore suggested none too politely that I should change the rule! :)
-
Thanks.
I see the point regarding the dislocation of companies for various reasons; players choice to divide his force and chew orders to reform.
I think I also see the idea behind no rigid base to base/contiguous unit structure...just need to try it having played lots of Armati where it's critical.
What would be very useful (for me) is a broad brush of Unit classifications you have used in the Mutiny play tests; who can skirmish, numbers of officers used etc etc
-
We shall do that, showing hows its done, we are setting up a game this Weds so we can do a step by step
-
Ok so we did a refight of Fatephur at Durham and the forces were as follows
Photos on Darrells site and the GY one may be slightly different as Im working from memory!!! :?
British
1st brigade
4 cos British enfield elite
2 cos Sikh Musket trained
1 lt foot arty Elite
1 co horse
all European trained Regulars =8 stand brigade
2nd Brigade
2 cos British enfield elite
2 cos British Minie rifle elite
2 co Sikh musket trained
1 co Horse Arty Elite
1 co Horse
All European trained Regulars=8 stand brigade
Mutineers
3 heavy guns
1 co Sepoys trained musket European trained
A total of 4 co Native brigade 5,6 for orders
1st inf brigade
8 cos Sepoy trained musket European trained
A total of 8 co brigade classed as natives for orders 5,6
2nd Inf Brigade
As above 8 cos etc etc
Cavalry brigade
4 cos Trained Cavalry melee weapon only European trained
4 cos 3rd rate native cavalry melee weapon only
A total of 8 cos classed as natives for orders
Badmashes
12 cos levy melee weapon only
A total of 12 cos classed as natives for orders 5,6.
The British have a commander per brigade and can choose or dice for the special factor each one gets (one each)
Mutineers have a commander per brigade and no special effects so just add an order dice
you will see the natives outnumber the British 40 to 16 and guns and attached co are in earthworks so it looks hard for the British. We have played it about 3-4 times and it is 2-1 to British with one stalemate
We also play the fatigue rule so measure from British entry point to the redoubt, the games objective is for the British to clear it and divide that distance by 6" that is the number of turns British player has to win plus a D6 roll only rolled when that turn has arrived. That is to stop them staying outside musket range and simply shooting the natives down with no time pressure.
I hope that helps you with the organisation and our thought processes when planning a game
Thr battlefield has a tree line about halfway acros it and the mutineer redoubt is in the centre about a foot from their baseline with 2 central buildings behind it (1 co each) and a marsh to either flank which the mutineer is told is impassable but the British player can cross deducting one order dice per turn whilst doing so
I hope you play it Enjoy!
oops forgot your skirmisher point you can replace one or two stands per brigade with skirmishers if you wish ( but get too many and you wont be able to clear the redoubt with a bayonet charge)!!
-
Thanks
That is really helpful
Time to dig out the lead for rebasing
-
You shouldn't need to so long as both sides have same frontage or you can match them up base against base?
You will notice our boxers are based differently to our IM and we still play them okay
still your choice and it does prevent damage if they are on one large company base
-
Hi, the rule mechanics seem quite interesting and I can see them working quite well with a new conflict I am considering - The Maximilian adventure in Mexico. The balance of forces would seem to fit the rules as described. I wonder though how the rules would work with conflicts like the US plains wars where you have tribal forces outnumbered by regulars. The "ambush" rules have been mentioned in this type of scenario. Does anyone know how these work?
-
We gamed a number of times the Franco Prussian war, they work perfect for 1870 - 1866 we even gamed up to the Russo Japanese war 1905 again the rules work perfect, i don't see why not they can work for the Maximilian adventure in Mexico.
We kept the title of the rulebook as "Victorian Steel" because we are so interested in the colonial period and we tend to game that the most.
Will take pictures tonight and do a run down of the game of each turn with ambush and skirmish and also get it on a video on our website i think it should explain alot about the system.
malc :)
-
You shouldn't need to so long as both sides have same frontage or you can match them up base against base?
I understand the basing is flexible, but mine are on singles (fasands of them)....
-
Will take pictures tonight and do a run down of the game of each turn with ambush and skirmish and also get it on a video on our website i think it should explain alot about the system.
brilliant
The more info the better gents
I posted a question on Sunstroke and Thirst on the Victorian Steel forum.
Do you want stuff posted on there...or here...or both?
-
Hi
Quick questions on Sunstroke and Thirst (p25). Probably being dim here but there are some bits I don’t understand the mechanics of:
1. How often do you roll for this and when?
2. “The only difference is that stands affected can still count the first battle casualty as the first hit and trade it for a withdrawal in the normal way.”
a) what is ‘the difference’?
b) if it can do a withdrawal then must it be on table?
3. “Rather than have to mark such casualties in a different manner for the above rule they may wish to simply remove whole stands or not allow the unit to trade a hit for a withdrawal”. So do thirst/sunstroke casualties not act like fire or melee casualties?
Rules look interesting (as I’ve posted on Lead Adventure) shame Grimby is at the other end of the country, as I’d like to watch/play a game with the creators.
Cheers
August 25, 2014 at 11:08 AM
dhtandco
Member
Posts: 3
so you roll for sunstroke once at the start of the game and mark the casualties allocating randomly like fire casualties amongst the European troops
Then you have a choice in how you play the rules one is more severe than the other so its how you feel about it
choice one is it counts as first casualty so stands affected can no longer trade a first casualty for a pushback withdrawal of 6" and will suffer more
or choice two it counts as a casualty for wiping out stands elite 4 levy 1 etc but not as the First casualty hence having to mark it differently
We prefer the first option but for small ganmes thought it might be a bit severe on our poor French Foreign Legionnaires!
Ambush rules are straightforward you get a D6 for number of ambush points you can nominate real or fake and these are shown on the table hills woods cover etc and then each turn the enemy forces are within a given radius specified in the rules the ambushing unit (not each company )has to roll under or equal its hit factor plus some additions to remain hidden otherwise some idiot has fired a shot stood up or given the game away! You are automaticcaly seen at 6" but that should not spoil the surprise ! So elite and trained have more control than levy who may as well stand there waving! (at least thats how its played in our games!)
-
There was no pun intended when I said one version of the sunstroke rules was worse than another we are not introducing severe or mild sunstroke(honest!) :) :) :)
-
Thanks
Sorted
-
These rules look really interesting. I'm looking forward to learning more about them! I've also found it challenging to find colonial rules that give a good feel for the period. Would love to see a play-through that explains more about them
-
Ordered at the weekend (inspired by Smirnoff's lead, and him saying they were delivered quickly.)
Arrived this morning. Pretty good considering there was no post at all on Monday (bank holiday for the UK).
Look good, 40 pages, includes colour pictures, 2 useful sheets of flags, reasonable smelling ink. (Admit it, how many of you sniff new rule books?)
Won't comment further until I've at least read through them.
-
To paraphrase Apocalypse Now! I love the smell of ink in the morning, it reminds me of victory.....or in my case defeat (usually) :)
Hope you like them and don't forget you can come across or if you have the premises we can come to you to have a game as you are only an hour away :)
-
nevermore has posted a nice report of a game using the rules set in the Indian Mutiny
-
Being dim, can't find it on the VS site...
-
Being dim, can't find it on the VS site...
Post on lead adventure smiroff :) you can read all on the report
-
Wow, my set of the rules were ordered Aug.24.
They arrived today, Sept.2.
All the way from GB to Portland Oregon USA in 8 days.
After just a quick read, I like what I see.
Hope I can have a game soon.
-
WOW ! :o that was quick
-
Was looking up at the siege of Delhi and the British assault on the city, so i thought i show you how easy it is to create a couple of brigades on the tabletop that was at the siege.
For historical wargame tabletop battle i would say this is about right.I'm more or less going for a stand equals 100 troops.
1st Column – Brigadier General Nicholson
75th Foot – 300 =3 stands of British
1st Bengal Fusiliers- 250 = 3 stands of British
2nd Punjab Infantry (Greene's Rifles) – 450 = 4 stands Sepoy
Total – 1000
2nd Column – Brigadier Jones
8th Foot – 250 = 3 stands British
2nd Bengal Fusiliers – 250 = 3 stands British
4th Sikhs – 350 = 3 stands Sikhs
Total – 850
-
Are you going to game it?
-
The thought is in my mind,i reckon i could build the Delhi wall no problem and it would be interesting to see what happens on a table.
-
The British assault on Delhi would be neat to game.
I have be working on a battle were a couple of Indian Mutineer brigades,
attack the British siege train as it was moving to the British lines.
I figure about a brigade of British Inf. and some Cav. the guns and supply stuff.
Mutineers would be about 2 Inf. brigades with Cav. and Artillery.
-
Love to see the photos of that and full battle report
-
Re: nevermore's list for Delhi. As I understand it, brigades in Victorian Steel are 4, 8 or 12 bases/companies strong, and this is important for both command and morale. None of these `brigades' fit that model.
I'm confused.
-
Yes Nevermore never fails to confuse and I have to wargame with him. :) :)I would round the 9 stand down to 8 and add the lost company to the larger brigade with a couple of Cos of skirmishers or the supporting artillery to give some covering fire
I must remind Nevermore how the rules work!!! Sorry!!
-
Re: nevermore's list for Delhi. As I understand it, brigades in Victorian Steel are 4, 8 or 12 bases/companies strong, and this is important for both command and morale. None of these `brigades' fit that model.
I'm confused.
Yea your right it was just a quick random thing, i think it would look more like this, i'm goning to have a crack at the whole column, see if i can convert it to the wargame table
1st Column – Brigadier General Nicholson
75th Foot – 300 =3 stands of British
1st Bengal Fusiliers- 250 = 3 stands of British
2nd Punjab Infantry (Greene's Rifles) – 450 = 4 stands Sepoy
75th foot - 3 stand brith 1 stand Punjab rifles
1st Bengal Fusiliers 2 stands of british 2 stands of Punjab rifles
8 stand brigade
Total – 1000
2nd Column – Brigadier Jones
8th Foot – 250 = 3 stands British
2nd Bengal Fusiliers – 250 = 3 stands British
4th Sikhs – 350 = 3 stands Sikhs
= 8 Foot 4 stand with 1 Sikh company
= 2nd Bengal Fusiliers - 2 stands British 2 stands of Sikhs
8 stand brigade
Total – 850
-
Love to see the photos of that and full battle report
You will have to wait about two weeks.
My daughter's wedding has taken up a lot of my time.
Now that it is over, back up really fun things. ;)
-
Look forward to it Randy, hope the wedding went to plan with weather ect.