*

Recent Topics

Author Topic: Looking for Bolt Action WW1 rules  (Read 5156 times)

Offline racm32

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1060
    • Wyndehurst Productions
Looking for Bolt Action WW1 rules
« on: 23 October 2017, 03:14:00 PM »
Anyone have a set of modified rules for Bolt Action for WW1? I use them for modern day and enjoy the set better then some of the other WW1 rules I have played.

Offline Phil Robinson

  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • Posts: 3487
    • http://newsfromthefront-phil.blogspot.com/
Re: Looking for Bolt Action WW1 rules
« Reply #1 on: 23 October 2017, 04:00:06 PM »

Offline monk2002uk

  • Mad Scientist
  • Posts: 774
Re: Looking for Bolt Action WW1 rules
« Reply #2 on: 23 October 2017, 05:34:29 PM »
I provided a very detailed review on the Bolt Action Forum. It is currently down for maintenance at the moment but I can post you the links when it is available again. Feel free to raise any questions in the meantime though.

Robert

Offline racm32

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1060
    • Wyndehurst Productions
Re: Looking for Bolt Action WW1 rules
« Reply #3 on: 24 October 2017, 08:06:13 PM »
thank you Robinson and Monk I look forward to getting that link.

Offline monk2002uk

  • Mad Scientist
  • Posts: 774
Re: Looking for Bolt Action WW1 rules
« Reply #4 on: 24 October 2017, 09:28:14 PM »
No problem. Just waiting for the Forum to come back up. Will post here as soon as...

Robert

Offline racm32

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1060
    • Wyndehurst Productions
Re: Looking for Bolt Action WW1 rules
« Reply #5 on: 05 December 2017, 02:14:37 PM »
Any luck with those rules?

Offline Phil Robinson

  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • Posts: 3487
    • http://newsfromthefront-phil.blogspot.com/
Re: Looking for Bolt Action WW1 rules
« Reply #6 on: 05 December 2017, 05:06:40 PM »
Any luck with those rules?

The Warlord Forum is still defunct at the moment, New year earliest they say.

Offline racm32

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1060
    • Wyndehurst Productions
Re: Looking for Bolt Action WW1 rules
« Reply #7 on: 05 December 2017, 08:39:20 PM »
The Warlord Forum is still defunct at the moment, New year earliest they say.

thank you for looking.

Offline Metternich

  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • Posts: 2605
Re: Looking for Bolt Action WW1 rules
« Reply #8 on: 05 December 2017, 11:24:50 PM »
Phil Robinson, thanks for posting the WWI variant to Bolt Action.  Always on the lookout for good WW 1 rules (no one set does all things; some are better for skirmish, some for combat at the brigade level, and others for grand combat at the division or above - which is why I'm building armies in three different scales !  15mm FOW, 20mm (mostly plastic) and 28mm.

Offline Phil Robinson

  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • Posts: 3487
    • http://newsfromthefront-phil.blogspot.com/
Re: Looking for Bolt Action WW1 rules
« Reply #9 on: 06 December 2017, 08:08:25 AM »
Phil Robinson, thanks for posting the WWI variant to Bolt Action.  Always on the lookout for good WW 1 rules (no one set does all things; some are better for skirmish, some for combat at the brigade level, and others for grand combat at the division or above - which is why I'm building armies in three different scales !  15mm FOW, 20mm (mostly plastic) and 28mm.

Check out the Rapid Fire variants out here too

https://web.archive.org/web/20120324075508/http://www.worldoptions.com.au/fourpipers/rapid/scenario.html

Offline monk2002uk

  • Mad Scientist
  • Posts: 774
Re: Looking for Bolt Action WW1 rules
« Reply #10 on: 10 December 2017, 07:40:03 AM »
The Rapid Fire variants link does seem to be working today. When I looked at the content previously, it struck me that these were based on a WW2 ruleset. These means that unit frontages were significantly different from WW1. Also there were things like 'elite' status for BEF forces and delayed dispersion for the German troops, reflecting an earlier understanding of how battles like Mons actually played out at the time.

Robert

Offline monk2002uk

  • Mad Scientist
  • Posts: 774
Re: Looking for Bolt Action WW1 rules
« Reply #11 on: 10 December 2017, 08:33:09 AM »
We utilise these: http://gajominis.com/rules/rulesgajo.html

The GAJO Games adaptations are a very good starting point for Bolt Action v2. I totally endorse the point that 'the rules as published do not need significant changes to reflect World War One actions'. Here are some additional comments and suggestions, FWIIW:

1. Air Support was divided into two broad categories:

a. Artillery fire control, typically controlled by aerial observers in aircraft and/or captive balloons. Normally this type of fire was directed at enemy forces identified off-table. Firing at enemy in close combat with friendly forces, which is what Bolt Action represents, was not encouraged because of the very high risk of blue-on-blue. That said, Bolt Action is about introducing a taste of some of these elements of battle. The variant, as described, is ok from this perspective bearing in mind that the Air Force Forward Observer would actually have been in the air in reality.

b. Strafing and low level bombing runs from ground attack aircraft. Fighters and dedicated fighter-bombers began operating this way in 1916.

2. The Chauchat LMG has been given a 'jam' Special Rule. All LMGs were prone to this in muddy conditions. There is a famous video of a German MG08/15 being set up and fired in a training exercise. It jams multiple times in the minute or so of the clip. The French army conducted a thorough review of all weapons systems, including the Chauchat, when Pétain took over in 1917. There were lots of positive reports about the Chauchat. The issue of maintaining cleanliness during battle was emphasised but this was not unique to the Chauchat. Furthermore, the Chauchat was highly prized by Stosstruppen, who would receive financial and other rewards for capturing these weapons for re-use in their units. I recommend not using this Special Rule.

3. 'Infiltration Tactics' are frequently referred to in relation to German Sturmtruppen. The term is used to imply that units could slip between frontline defences. The attacks on British Fifth Army during Operation Michael in March 1918 are often cited as an example. The 'infiltration' achieved by German attackers was not down to something inherent in the units themselves. It represented the very dispersed nature of the British defences. In other words, you would model this by spreading out the defender rather than apply a Special Rule to the attacker. Operation Mars was a complete failure because 'Infiltration Tactics' could not work against normal defences.

4. Mk V* (often referred to as Mark Five Star). Apply the same stats as the Mk V but add the 'transporter' Special Rule. It transported MMG teams. The A7V transported a wider range of assault troops.

5. Captured Weapons - also allow the Germans to swap for the Chauchat LMG. The Madsen LMG can also be used.

6. Stosstruppen, Elite Stormtrooper, and Assault Squads should not have different Special Rules from their British, Dominion, and French counterparts. German histories refer to these counterparts as 'Sturmtruppen', reflecting the similar nature of assault tactics across all major nations on the Western Front.

7. Granatwerfer should have 3 crew, mirroring the requirements for the 37mm Infantry Gun Team.

8. Americans and French should have the Schneider as an option: 1 x MMG on each side; 1 x light howitzer - otherwise same as Char St Chamond Tank. Note that French tank forces used pioneers to turn difficult terrain into 'normal' terrain.

9. All tanks can disembark MMG teams when bogged.

10. The French should have the equivalent of 'elite' assault troops, reflecting the dedicated assault teams and/or the use of colonial troops such as the Sengalese for this capability.

11. Bergmann SMGs were very rare. I would leave them out or make them much more expensive to include in a squad.

12. Flammenwerfer are better modelled as separate teams IMHO. The French and Americans should have an option to include dedicated flamethrower teams as well (French flamethrower teams were attached to the Americans, eg the Big Red One's attack on Cantigny).

Robert

Offline Phil Robinson

  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • Posts: 3487
    • http://newsfromthefront-phil.blogspot.com/
Re: Looking for Bolt Action WW1 rules
« Reply #12 on: 10 December 2017, 09:26:37 AM »
Good points there Robert.

 We use our own rules for early war, modifying WWII rules doesn’t work for us, completely different ball game we think.

We have not tried the 1917/1918 Rapid Fire mods yet, that is planned for the new year.

The link works for me today btw.




Offline monk2002uk

  • Mad Scientist
  • Posts: 774
Re: Looking for Bolt Action WW1 rules
« Reply #13 on: 10 December 2017, 11:12:42 AM »
There were several differences between early and late WW1. Unit frontages was not really one of these though. By the end of WW1, an infantry battalion still covered about the same frontage as a WW2 infantry company. If it is just about having a fun game with a familiar rule set then absolutely no problem. If you want something that is closer to historical then a dedicated WW1 ruleset is recommended.

Robert

Offline Metternich

  • Scatterbrained Genius
  • Posts: 2605
Re: Looking for Bolt Action WW1 rules
« Reply #14 on: 10 December 2017, 09:23:49 PM »
   Monk, I respectfully have to disagree regarding the Chauchat (your answers 2 and 5 - fully agree re the Madsen).  Although reasonably well-designed, it was plagued by shoddy manufacturing which affected its performance. 

       First, it had a flimsy magazine (including a weak spring)  which was open on its right side (to provide gunners with a quick view of available ammunition), and this exposed the gun and its ammunition to the mud prevalent on the Western Front and greatly increased the risk of jamming.  Speaking as former (peace-time) infantry officer, while it is of course necessary to maintain a clean weapon in the field, the French gunner was already disadvantaged there (and any general staff officer who thought it likely that troops would be able to keep an open magazine clean in the mud has partaken of too much of the wine ration). The magazine itself was so shoddily made that the feed lips were easily bent and the entire magazine itself could be easily crushed or deformed. 

    Second, the Chauchat magazine contained a maximum of only 20 rounds (and usually was short-loaded, due to the weak spring).  Contrast that with the 47 or 97-round magazines of the Lewis Gun and  the 100-round belt container of the MG 08/15.  Even if his weapon was functioning properly, the Chauchat gunner had to pause to reload at least twice as often as the Lewis gunner and four to five times as often as his German foe - a serious disadvantage in a firefight where both sides are trying to gain fire superiority to support maneuver.
     Third, although accounts abound of German troops using and prizing captured Lewis Guns, I for one have not found any instances of such use of captured Chauchats (isolated emergency use in a captured trench, turning the enemy's weapons on him, is always possible).  The German War Ministry even diverted scarce industrial resources to set up a factory to rechamber Lewis Guns to fire German standard ammunitions -  don't think they did that for Chauchats.  And any reward for their capture may initially have been to allow for their study and an appraisal (which could include firing to destruction).   I have seen many pictures of German troops with Lewis guns, but no picture of Germans in WW 1 using Chauchats.  I know of one picture where a German is holding one (first link below), but that is a graduation photo of an assault course, where troops were taught the characteristics and use of enemy weapons (that could be used in an emergency, e.g. if they had just taken a trench).  There is a well-known picture (second link below) of four standing soldiers in Stahlhelms and trench armor, holding two Chauchats, a Mauser and the Mauser AT rifle, but these are Americans showing off souvenirs (the give-away that these are Americans vice Germans is the area of their pants at the side of the knee, where it flairs out); these same Americans also sometimes surface in a photo of them kneeling (but clearly the same men).  Posing with captured enemy equipment is certainly not unknown, as in this well-known photo (third link below) of three members of an Irish regt. wearing German Trench armor and holding an MG 08.  And the fourth link below is of a WW1 Bulgarian soldier (in Stahlhelm - probably on Rumanian Front - so some might confuse him with a German) posing with a Chauchat and surrounded by other booty.  But none of these shows German troops advancing into battle armed with Chauchats.     
 https://scontent-sea1-1.cdninstagram.com/t51.2885-15/e35/13413455_1647378508918504_1067493057_n.jpg?ig_cache_key=MTI2ODI2NDAwODE4MDQwMDU0Ng%3D%3D.2
http://www.usmilitariaforum.com/uploads/monthly_01_2011/post-67-1295716839.jpg
http://users.telenet.be/patrick.mestdag1/armour.jpg
https://i.pinimg.com/736x/a1/8d/96/a18d9684732024292c2d75430ed10950--bulgarian-military-history.jpg

      Fourth, as a testament to their value, both the Lewis Gun and the MG 08/15 continued to soldier on in the Second World War - although both were replaced as the first-line weapon of their respective countries (by the Bren Gun and MG 34, respectively).  The British still used the Lewis Gun in the Pacific and North Africa, and various German second-line units were using them right to the end of the war (and some SS units had them in 1939).  But rather than retain the Chauchat, the Americans adopted the excellent BAR.       

 

Related Topics

  Subject / Started by Replies Last post
2 Replies
2100 Views
Last post 30 March 2012, 01:39:45 PM
by NurgleHH
9 Replies
4585 Views
Last post 20 January 2013, 08:55:12 AM
by Arlequín
16 Replies
3736 Views
Last post 10 June 2014, 09:55:08 AM
by Atheling
1 Replies
715 Views
Last post 17 December 2021, 03:49:30 AM
by Dukewilliam
22 Replies
5922 Views
Last post 16 April 2024, 05:35:21 PM
by David H