Colonial Campaigns Club (CCC)

The French & Indian War contains a few scenarios where Native Americans make up the majority or entirity of the forces engaged. Nothing like a little inter-tribal rivalry to keep things hopping.

Here are a couple of descriptions to illustrate:

On Line Series #4 - Federations and Alliances

2:00 pm February 4th, 1758 --- Made up --- During the dead of
winter food becomes scarce, and hunting parties wander further
from home to find game. One such party of Seneca warriors was
wiped out when they ventured into Delaware country. The aggrieved
tribe sought help in their revenge from the their Iroquois brothers.
The council decides to send a large war party to avenge the deaths
of the fallen braves, and they hope to bring home enough spoils
to get them through the rest of the winter. Warned of their intentions
the Delaware call upon Mingo, Shawnee and Huron help in an uneasy
alliance. First player to move: British.

------

On Line Series #2 - Ambush

10:00 am August 12th, 1757 --- Made up --- A party of Huron are
ambushed on the way home from trading with the French. English
backed Mohawks are the culprits. First player to move: British.

Although scalping white men is fun, trying to show my wayward brothers the correct path can be satisfying also.[:D]

Thanks for the info Al.

Don't you fret, any White man stepping onto my land without the proper Peace Pipe may be scalped!

A fear ears too! [xx(]

Cheers!

Al and Rich - one thing about the Indians that really bothers me in the series is that:
1. While they dont operate in Line and didnt form ranks they also cannot win melees very easily either and that on a unit that is totally surprised in a ambush.

2. While in Extended order they are very hard to kill yet they didnt seem to be impervious to bullets either!

3. Much of the fighting in this period was in a loose order once the real fighting got started. Am speaking mainly of the fort actions. Surely a formed unit (British/French) would not fight in LINE when in a fort? I have the same thoughts on units in a town. Except where a town square (eg. Lexington) was present the clustered buildings made fighting more like Extended order.

4. I hope that someday we can get a Mixed Order for units that move into a town/chateau/behind fort walls hex(sides).

Some ways to rationalize Indian formations in our game.

They can use only two formations... column and extended order. I recommend you not think in European military terms when thinkng of Indian formations.

I recommend thinking of column for Indians when traveling as a single file formation, and for close combat think of a mass formation where the braves have momentarily clumped together for a quick rush to overwhelm the defenders. Extended order would be what it sounds like, scattered along a front for firing and observation.

Indians will get a 50% melee bonus due to thier weapons, but if committed to melee in extended order that bonus is more than off set by being in extended order. I recommend using column for them to melee in. As stated above it is more like a mass of men all rushing to one point to overwhelm that point than it is an organized column.

---

To respond to Bill's points ...

1. see above
2. see above, and they are spread out hiding behind trees, rocks, etc, etc. Even clear ground in this area will have places to for individuals to gain cover from.
3. To some extent you are correct.

Again, termonology (sp?) is improtant. 'Loose Order' is still two ranks only with a greater interval, that being 48" between files instead of 22" (roughly.) The extended order of our game is more for skirimishing Indian Style or perhaps formed ranks with 10' (foot) intervals.

When defending a fort one would not spread out that much, unless forced to do so. Troops would still, if there were enough of them, operate in two ranks althouugh this would be less formal basically the men would be in pairs - one firing, one loading. You have to put as many muskets per wall as possible to beat off an attack, that concept does not change merely because you have a wall present.

So in our game system, as is, line formation is appropriate. IF, the engine had target density, THEN I would have constructed the OOB's so that companies would have sub-units (ala CCC on Campaign in 1776 style) in order to allow players to chose from Closed and Extended (loose) Order. If players wish to do that with the present OOB structure they still can the guidelines are below ...

Closed Order ... approximately 100 men per hex (maybe 144 for British and French European Regulars if the player desires to portary a 3-rank formation.) (1 or more units or counters in Line Formation.)

Extended Order ... approximately 50 men per hex (troops in a 3-rank system did not seem to use this.) (1 unit or counter in Line Formation.)

Open Order ... use the game system's Extended Order Formation but limit troop density to approximately 25 men. (1 unit or counter in Extended Line.)

4. I don't see a need for it at this level, as companies operated in lines or columns or files at this level with out too much interference from physical structures.

Lines can be rationalized as ragged or conforming to a wall or fence or other linear terrain feature, if need be, at this level, and columns can be viewed any where from a single file, a column of 2's, 3's or 4's for movement ... and in some cases melees (over bridges, across fords, and against fortress walls - assumed to be through a breach.)

Yes, as Al state's we've attempted to address the way Indian's fought by altering their weapon type. They now get the 50% bonus, which reflects their skilled use of hand-held weapons and close fighting style, while reduced their ranged fire effectiveness. They now can only shoot at a range of 2. So this will (hopefully) prevent people from trying to use them like just another Line unit in their European army...time will tell.

Rich

Bill does make one point though, about how the game doesn't reflect city or fort fighting well.

What I have in mind is really fort fighting. When I fought Dierk at Fort Stanwix, one thing I noticed is that there was no way to protect my troops inside the fort from flank attacks. No matter how you face them, there will be units outside the fort who are able to fire into their flank, with the attendent higher losses, and morale penalties. That just doesn't feel right to me in the least. I would think that so long as you are in the fort, someone outside should not be able to put flank shots or the like on.

Gary,

My answer to that is 'Vauban'. He showed how one can attack a fortress and gain enfilade shots on troops manning the walls.

Your reference to Stanwix was from a game in 1776, no?

The forts in F&I War are multi-hex affairs, many with interior hexes to hold troops in and keep them out of the enemy's LOS.

These forts, which Rich did a great job with, were the reason we asked for, and got, supply source hexes and indirect fire.

The Supply Source hex allows units to be in a fort and totaly surrounded without suffering 'isolation', if that optional rule is being used. Indirect fire gives players a way to fire at troops sheltering inside a fort.

---
Although a bit out of the time period, and it is Hollywood, but if you see the movie Gods & General and watch how the Rebs utilize the stone wall at Fredericksburg ... look closely and you will see they are still in 'line.' The men are working in pairs or groups of pairs firing and reloading, they are formed together tightly ... and if Union guns could have gotten an enfilade shot at them the wall would have been of little help. [:)]

Looking for this, so "bump"<font size="4"></font id="size4">

Mike