Welcome, Guest. Please login or register.
March 02, 2021, 02:23:56 AM

Login with username, password and session length


We Appreciate Your Support

  • Total Posts: 1482795
  • Total Topics: 103624
  • Online Today: 374
  • Online Ever: 1675
  • (December 28, 2020, 04:48:59 PM)
Users Online


Author Topic: Russian Civil War/Back of Beyond Rules?  (Read 3438 times)

Offline leadfool

  • Mad Scientist
  • Posts: 854
Re: Russian Civil War/Back of Beyond Rules?
« Reply #30 on: September 01, 2020, 12:54:45 AM »
You could check out what we are using in the Interwar forum for the campaign "ACW II New Sacramento Campaign"  It is the Osprey rules called "The men who would be king", which is a colonial era set.  But we modified it to what we call the men who would be warlord.  Armored cars flame throwers etc. 

Democracy is two wolves and a lamb deciding what to have for lunch.  Liberty is a well armed Lamb, contesting the vote.
B Franklin.    ----

Offline Panzerfaust 150

  • Assistant
  • Posts: 29
Re: Russian Civil War/Back of Beyond Rules?
« Reply #31 on: September 03, 2020, 01:58:06 PM »
How many are working on their own rules for the period?

Offline leadfool

  • Mad Scientist
  • Posts: 854
Re: Russian Civil War/Back of Beyond Rules?
« Reply #32 on: September 03, 2020, 11:49:07 PM »
How many are working on their own rules for the period?
Isn't that the same as how many are playing the period?

Offline sukhe_bator

  • Mastermind
  • Posts: 1573
  • bad hair day
Re: Russian Civil War/Back of Beyond Rules?
« Reply #33 on: September 14, 2020, 08:46:49 AM »
'Triumph of the Will' gets my vote, though I have been tinkering with the armoured trains section for my 15mm RCW. I want to have Train v Train encounters and have trains debouching and supporting troops since a lot of that took place particularly in the two theatres I'm interested in; The Far East bordering Mongolia and China, and Transcaspia...
Here are some thoughts on TOTW and armoured trains. I'd be interested to know if anyone else out there has been thinking along the same lines (pardoning the pun!)

Some thoughts on wargaming with WW1/RCW armoured trains

I've been taking tentative steps to look at how I might use armoured trains on the wargames table. The main issue to my mind is coping with the far greater average length of the train against the need for a mechanism to plausibly deploy the train on the table.

Movement and Firing

My preferred ruleset is 'Triumph of the Will' by TwoFatLardies. However, they restrict firing to stationary trains, but in the WWII rules 'I Aint Been Shot Mum' firing while on the move is permitted. The reason cited in IABSM seems entirely sensible. Unlike other more primitive AFVs, railways provided a far smoother motion enabling easier targeting. Acceleration/Deceleration incurs a penalty on permissible actions as does emergency braking.

In order for spotting to occur weapons should be on-table so off-table barrages are not permitted. Spotting is automatic up to 12” in flat terrain.

The movement rate for trains in TOTW is up to 5DAV per turn with 2DAV acceleration/deceleration. Given the length of trains (a carriage is on average 4", a loco plus tender 6") thus a standard echelon of flat wagon, artillery car, loco & tender, artillery car, flat wagon is around 20" in length.  This means that only a high roll would enable the entire train to emerge onto the table in one turn. However, the limited deceleration might mean the train takes several turns to come to a halt and be able to fire by which time it is too close to enemy lines. This seems contrary to the tactical usage of trains.

A phased movement system seems the way forward. By declaring starting speed from the choice of STATIONARY, AHEAD SLOW (up to half movement), AHEAD FULL (half to full movement) subsequent alterations have to cycle up or down through the selection. As TOTW quotes a full speed of 25” I have opted for Full speed at 13”-24” and Half speed at 1”-12”. Markers can be used to indicate ‘Half‘ or ‘Full’ speed and whether the train is ‘Accelerating’ or ‘Decelerating’. No firing is permitted if the train elects to ‘Emergency Brake’ and a train must remain stationary for a full turn while the brakes are manually reset on each attached part of the train.

Rolling stock variation

Since I have 7 types of loco ranging from standard to fully armoured versions it seems churlish not to reflect this somehow in both performance and damage.

Others have suggested limitations on haulage based on motive power. However, motive power is less of an issue since train length on the table will place practical limitations on the number of carriages etc. way before this becomes an issue. Exposed running gear etc. on the loco will however be more prone to damage from small arms and shell-fire and should be reflected in increased chances in damage rolls.

Variation can also be employed on the different types of wagons and armament and used to create a points system. Based on the following examples a ceiling of 25-30pts per train is recommended. This can always be adjusted for different scenarios.

A proposed points system

1pt   Flat wagon
2pts   Open wagon
3pts   Box van or carriage
4pts   Loco (plus tender)
+1pt per vehicle   improvised defences (sand bags, baulks of timber etc.)
+2pts per vehicle   ‘blindirov’ part-armour concrete or plate metal reinforcements
+3pts per vehicle   plate armoured throughout
+1pt per vehicle   HMGs
+2pts per vehicle   Artillery and HMGs

Thus a standard fully armoured train echelon will cost between 25 & 29*pts;
1pt for a flat wagon (x2 sacrificial wagons fore and aft)*
8pts (3pts + 3pts + 2pts) for each artillery car (x2)
7pts (4pts + 3pts) armoured loco and tender

*Further MGs stationed on the flat wagons fore and aft in improvised defences will cost an additional 4pts.

A more ad-hoc train arrangement will cost somewhat less @ 21 to 23pts;
6pts for 2 flat wagons with MGs in improvised defences (1+1+1) x2 fore and aft
5pts (2pts + 2pts + 1pt) open blindirov with MGs only
4pts unarmoured loco and tender (+2pts if partially armoured)
6pts (2pts + 2pts + 2pts) open blindirov with field guns and MGs

You get the general idea… I'd be particularly interested to hear from anyone who has used trains on the wargames table and since one of the scenarios I'm working on is the dustup at Dushak on the Trancaspian Railway... from any members of the Devon Wargames Group, and of course our esteemed stars in the League...
Warriors dreams, summer grasses, all that remains

Offline Mark Plant

  • Scientist
  • Posts: 441
    • Pygmy Wars : Russian Civil War and Related Stuff
Re: Russian Civil War/Back of Beyond Rules?
« Reply #34 on: September 15, 2020, 01:12:34 AM »
Ammunition  supply is one reason to disallow firing while moving. They simply couldn't fire off round after round at high rate hoping one would hit. They fired each round to hit.

Trains avoided engaging at short range because it left them too vulnerable to artillery and being cut off. Their advantage was they had better range, so they used it. Rather than go close, they used spotters and fired from distance.

No matter how much you want it, train versus train at tabletop ranges was always the exception, usually when one side had stuffed up badly.  In the examples in can think of, it is either a desperate ploy because the fight was going very badly or the engagement had one side desperately trying to leave because it had been caught out.