FAQs (5)

Hello Will,
I have been experimenting with your American War of Independence rules which I downloaded from the
internet from Peter Jones’ free wargame rules web site.
First of all may I thank you for making them available. I do like their feel and simplicity.
Secondly may ask you a few clarifying questions?

Tony, see below for comments for each item - since we converted to running the rules from a PC many years ago we have never spent much time checking some of the written details, rather we have concentrated on updating those on the PC. As per the origins they came from a Wargames Development session on the ACW with Charlie Wissencraft which when combined with some other ideas produced a workable and fun set of rules.

Q1. Item d) in the Move Sequence says that the firing unit may change face without enemy units to its front
within 6". On the other hand the section on Changing Facing says that a facing change may be made unless an
enemy unit is within charge reach of its current facing. This would be 3" for infantry (and 6" for
cavalry). Which measurement should I use?

Well spotted - we have always played charge distance 3" for infantry (and 6" for cavalry)

Q2. Again in the Changing Facing section it says the firing unit can change facing in order to fire or
receive a charge. How is the latter possible if it can only move if outside charge reach?

The unit can change facing to fire or receive a charge if it is not prevented from making the change by another enemy unit

Q3. Also can any firing unit change facing or only if one of these two conditions apply - to fire or receive
a charge?

If allowed it can do both - change facing and fire

Q4. In the Melee Table there is a -2 modifier in the cavalry column if the unit is in Open Order. The rest
of the rules seem to imply that Open Order only applies to infantry. Is this a mistake?

Again well spotted - the way I never use open order cavalry but it is consistent with the general intent - There are also some errors on the effect of buildings and obstacles where the infantry/cavalry factors are in the wrong columns

Alternatively is this meant to apply to light cavalry? If so, since all cavalry in the AWI was light cavalry,
why have this -2 modifier which is cancelled out in all cases for cavalry by the +2 Unit is Cavalry
modifier?

The +2 applies for (light) cavalry v's normal close order infantry if they get into close combat. But open order infantry suffers even more as they have a -2

PS a key feature is too keep the number of cavalry historically low as once the proportion gets too high the second charge rule makes them too effective.

Note the rules have been updated since this feedback

FAQs (4)

Replys, but I need to find the Questions

1) Lost strength points are lost for the game, they represent a mix of dead, wounded, run off, captured and loss of unit effectiveness. I do have a set of untested campaign rules that I wrote over ten years ago - I'll type them up and add them as a text file to the disk. - these calculate the new strength for the next day etc.

2) Howitzers - the short range is canister, then there is a gap as the fuzes for shell's cannot (reliably) be cut short enough to explode at under 15"

3) If you look at the move sequence:- (D) The firing player may change the facing of any unit without enemy units to its front within 6". what you have to do is have a unit to the front then another can attack the enemy unit from the flank or rear - especially effective if this unit is cavalry as it can then used its second charge to roll up an enemy line.

The computer rules allow you to randomise units effectiveness - so that you can't be absolutely sure that Grenadiers are better than Militia

FAQs (3)

(your comments prefixed **, mine with ####)

1/ When testing morale for a shaken unit, if you get the "retire a full move"
result (ie. 2 or 3) does the unit remain shaken at the end of the retirement, or is it then OK for the next turn ie. no need to test again?
** Unless It says so it is no longer shaken, consider it the same as rallying back.
#### Thank goodness for that - last game I had the entire British attack ended up continually shaken and heading for the back of the table and home!! :o)

2/ On the question of testing morale (for routing/shaken) have you given any thought to weighting the results for better/worse quality troops? At the moment the test is a straight dice throw for all troop types, but I was toying with the idea of using the unit modifiers as a modifier for the test as well? Thus European Grenadiers get a +2 when testing for being shaken/routed.. the only concern in my mind at the moment is that the +2 may be a bit high, it makes it an impossibility that they'll rout from being shaken for example...
** I had considered it and occasionally use it for Militia (-1), but the limitations of using a d6 restrict it. I could also argue that Militia units are more likely to become shaken so that in overall terms they are more likely to rout and vv. for Grenadiers
#### A -1 for militia, and a +1 for European Grenadiers would probably be all it needed - I'll try it next time I play - in conjunction with the clarification in 1/. it should make all units a little less jittery than they have been to now.

3/ Have you had any thoughts on the cumulative effect of the number of "shaken" results a unit gets in a turn? My thought was that if you get 2 or 3 "shaken" results in a turn, it would automatically become a "rout". At the moment once you get the shaken result, there is little extra benefit in "wasting" another shot against the same unit (this idea of multiple "shaken" results having a cumulative effect is a bit similar to the results multiplier in "Crossfire" which I always liked - it simulates the effect of multiple hits on a single unit eventually causing it to break and run)
** This is why in the computer version all the fire against one target has to be carried out together, if I made shaken cumulative, then I would have to distinguish further in the result of the firing scores e.g. 12= 2 hits etc. (ps I have boosted the result in the SYW rules). I have played crossfire a few times and I will have another look and consider if there is something I can add.
#### The effects of multiple units firing at a single unit is something I quite like - but I also wasn't aware that the program asked for all shooting to be "declared" at the beginning of the turn, so to speak. I was deciding who fired at what as I went along (I wasn't using the program). Will try out the "all shooting declared at the begininng of the turn" solution, and think about multiple hits later. I quite like the simplicity of the rules at the moment and am not in a hurry to make them more complicated for no good reason!

4/ Can cavalry shoot?
** On cavalry I have not found an example yet of cavalry using firearms separate from what could be considered melee.
### Cheers - guess my question would have been better if I asked whether the melee combat factors included firing (a la DBA) - cheers for that, obviously makes it more difficult for cavalry to close with the enemy so has to be more realistic!

FAQs (2)

Will - we played your AWI rules again over the weekend and had a fun set to. It
raised a few questions - hope you don't mind if I follow up with you??

Q1) In the Changing Facing rule

"To allow for the effect of alternative movement the firing player may change the facing of any unit after movement in order to fire or receive a charge. It cannot do this if an enemy unit is within charge reach of its current facing.
To change facing the unit remains in its current formation and rotates up to 180' around the centre point of the unit. If the desired rotation cannot be made due to either an obstacle or
other units then the unit cannot change facing"

Can u tell us what your rationale is on this?? The concern was that if you are the 'moving' player you only get to reface 45' for "free", and after this the refacing is taken as a full move. It seemed a bit generous to
allow 180' of "free" turning when you weren't even the moving player??

It was really introduced to prevent cavalry units wheeling right round behind an enemy unit and claiming a rear attack, it is generous when it happens but it does prevent unrealistic exploitation of the alternative move system.

>Q2) In the melee factors table, what does "overlapping enemy" mean?? Is this a bonus for a unit in line fighting a unit in column, or is this referring to adjoining units not directly involved in the melee supporting one that is (ie.
as per "flanks" in DBA). Also, is this a cumulative total (do you add 1 for each overlap) or a single score??

It is a bonus for a unit in line fighting a single unit in column, flanking units do not count

Q3) Last, in the melee factors table what does the "two or more bases deep" mean? Is this a bonus for attacking in column? We got a bit confused, one because we were sure that the predominant tactic in the SYW/AWI was linear rather than columns, but also because the "overlapping enemy" factor seems to cancel this out???

It is a bonus for attacking in column

You will notice that the two factors net off in most cases, so it can be ignored, this was deliberate as columns were not generally used as assault formations. However in a few cases it is useful to represent the effect of column e.g. assaulting across a bridge, a unit in line defending can maximise its firepower, but the column gets an advantage in melee if it gets there.

French units started using column in the AWI especially in the West Indies due to the restricted room for deployment. The best SYW example is Frederick's "secret" cavalry column in his instructions for his generals

FAQs (1)

From Steve

Hi Will, as per the following, and first off - nice set of rules. We had a club evening last night and played a game using your rules with myself umpiring (well I had played one previous game before so they said I was the obvious candidate!) Two equal sized forces in terms of modified morale points, comprising a smaller, higher class Patriot/German army versus a larger American (with French allies) army fought to a good result in about 3 and a half, to 4 hours. The guys said they enjoyed it, and I certainly enjoyed the umpiring... but just a few questions;

Q1) There doesn't seem to be anything in the rules for "about facing" - the situation we had was that a unit routed from a melee, and recovered (just before the table edge!) facing in the direction they were routing ie. off the table. We had a fair amount of discussion, but basically agreed that they should be able to about face, and that that should constitute their move - were we right?!

Yes, if they rally they halt shaken for that move facing whichever direction they choose

Q2) Artillery seems to be quite deadly over long distances - the players were happy with this, but I'm toying with the idea of putting an extra minus 1 on the gun ranges on my perception that at longer ranges (ie. medium to long), the effect of artillery is more moral than physical - what do you think??

There must have been some good dice rolls, I never do too well when using them.

Q3) Artillery turning to face in the shooting phase - are we reading correctly that everyone including unlimbered artillery, can pivot up to 180' to fire at an enemy (ie. assuming no enemy to front)?

Yes, it may be a bit extreme in the case of the heavier guns but it is intended to cover the alternative movement problem - if you wish you could give a probability for them being able to turn to face e.g. on a d6 light guns can face on a 2 or better, medium on a 3 etc.

Q 4) Morale test for being charged - are the infantry and cavalry values the wrong way round for "crossing an obstacle"??

The values are -ve to improve their chances of standing or counter charging so don't charge LI at cavalry even if it is weakened. e.g with a strength 2 cavalry unit you would have to roll 6 -2 (Cav by non Cav) -2 (CO by OO) = 2 which is rout a 1/6 chance but there is a 3/6 chance of them counter charging.