Colonial Campaigns Club (CCC)

<font face="Comic Sans MS">Just finished G'town 1776 with Capt, Jeffery McDonald, Royal Highland Emigrants - and a fine opponent he is too. This scenario has quite a few light and militia troops in it and we played the single phase system.

It seems that the lights, good morale and nearly impervious to melee; and the militia, even with their poor morale, but long range rifles rule the battlefield. The effect isn't as noticeable in smaller engagements, but in large battles the presence of large numbers of troops with long range weapons or that are not particularly disturbed by melee seems to be just the opposite of the reality.

Yes, the militia tended to rout, sometimes in large numbers, but there are huge numbers of them to fill the line. The lights almost never rout no matter what. And both can run around in extended line all day without disrupting!

I like the single phase system - it's all I play because it feels much more like a battle. You have the same problems the participants did in deploying in the face of the enemy and especially when attempting to retreat.

Maybe the lights should not have such good morale when in extended order. And maybe the militia shouldn't fire quite so often. And maybe both shouldn't move so fast in extended order or at least have some chance of disrupting.
What do you guys think? </font id="Comic Sans MS">

Good to hear from you William, I agree lights (and to a lesser extent milita) are pretty powerful on the battlefield, as indeed they were really the defining element of warfare in the New World. Getting back to the c1776/1812 engine - I feel they shouldn't disrupt (as line do) during movement or fire less, but they <b>do</b> need to be weaker in melee.. the number of times I've seen 2X British (A) lights in extended order see off 50 Colonials (C) charging them.. that hurts. To my mind they should automatically fall back, not repel a bayonet charge, but this is a topic sure to get some more replies.. que Larry and Al stage left methinks.... [;)]

BTW Jeffrey McD is a very good opponent for any Colonial/US player - I may even ask for another game at some point to revenge Monmouth.. a fine player!!

This is a fairly consistant problem for the Brits. Militia can trudge through swamps, for example, in X order with zero chance of disrupting, all the while firing a long 9 hexes distant, so it's hard to approach them to even melee the cowards.

I've found the only way to deal with this from a Brit perspective is to use terrain against them. At Germantown the lights/militia usually approach from lower ground than the Brits occupy. So what a Brit player needs to do is to line up one hex away from ridges on the higher ground for protection against their long range fire. Now the rifle toting $#&%#*s have no targets and <b>must</b> approach for any sort of effectiveness. When they get close to the ridge, an all out Brit charge in columns (if using line disruption on) can usually cause quite a bit of havoc among their ranks, especially with rout limiting off. The Brit will take some casualties and disrupts due to defensive fire, but he has to do this to have any chance of neutralizing the militia. Once they start routing and running, pursue pursue pursue.

Woods and forests can also be used against rifle carrying mobs of farmers. The Brit player takes temporary refuge in or behind these hexes as the rifle bearing zombies approach them. Again, the rifles are robbed of targets and must either stand around chewing tobacco, or approach. When the time's right, a lunge out of the woods to melee is then in order.

Melee is the ONLY way to scatter these militia ragamuffins, even at the expense of initial casualties and disruptions in moving against them. But the Brit payoff is that you eliminate long range weapons and long term casualties, and some of the clownial riflemen may be scooped up in surrounds with a series of lucky melees.

So, take away the militia long range reach by obstructed hexes and hexsides. If they advance, bark out a "fix bayonets!" order on your own terms and in your own time.

I haven't <i>too</i> much of a problem with the way miltia is set up now, aside from a too far reaching firing range and the "go anywhere undisrupted in X formation" syndrome.

"I haven't too much of a problem with the way miltia is set up now, aside from a too far reaching firing range and the "go anywhere undisrupted in X formation" syndrome." - Phil

Ummm... oh never mind. I think Bart slipped Phil some catnip [:D]

eh what [?]

This is the same X line debate that seems to crop up quite regularly - presumably because most people realize that the X formation is far too powerful. Perhaps it might have been better, and more realistic, if there were skirmisher units, as in <i>Eckmuhl</i>, instead of a whole unit - or whole stack of units - being able to deploy from line into an all-powerful X formation. There should be some sort of limit to the number of skirmishers a unit can deploy at any one time and, in open terrain, the skirmishers should be particularly vulnerable to cavalry.

If the X formation is retained for 1776 (it now seems to be on the way out for 1812 militia), and militia deploy in it, they should be far more likely to run away at the slightest danger - the mere sight of advancing British regulars should be enough to cause a morale check. The militia should rarely stand firm until actually meleed - perhaps there can be a check to see if a militia unit routs whenever an enemy unit advances towards it, just as there's a check to see if it fires?

In fact, there should really be a possibility of any unit (except undisrupted A grade troops) falling back or even routing in the face of advancing enemy - not just militia - although militia in X formation should be particularly prone to this.

Lt.Rich White
28th North Glos Rgt
Right Wing British Army 1776

I am getting tired of repeating all the old arguments every other month. Let's stick with what's already been done.

http://www.wargame.ch/board/ccc/topic.a ... ended,Line

http://www.wargame.ch/board/ccc/topic.a ... a,Question

Deirk, et al.

As new players come into the club they are bound to come upon issues that we have already discovered. Let's not turn them off by dismissing them off hand.

Posting the links to prior discussions is a very good move so they may read what has been discussed. I hope if they have any ideas they wish to add to the subject that they will do so.

Just like rifle effects optional rule, X formation is a good concept, but it needs to be tweaked. I do not think tweaking it is on John's do to list [:(], therefore designers and players must take it upon themselves to provide the adjustments.

These adjustments can be an agreement between players to voluntarily withdraw x formation troops in the face of an advance, especially if the x formation troop have no bayonets, or they can be a remaking of the oobs to eliminate 80-90% of the M & L status given to troops and converting Militia to low morale grade line troops, or to more properly display how some Light troops actually operated.

If you want to see how Militia works as poor line troops, or British Lights operate by extending the line open order instead of skirmishing, you may try my Bunker Hill scenarios. You can find these at Rich Hamilton's SDC site.

Butch is hardly a new player ... I am not opposed to opening the debate yet again, I am just tired of repeating what I have said so often. <b>I want a density modifier and no x-line.</b> [8)]

<font face="Comic Sans MS">DS is right, I'm not a new player. I rarely play these large scenarios (moving 14,000 men in units of 20 men each gets old) except as MP so I hadn't seen the rather devasting effect of massed rifles before.

I have seen the lights in the woods where you melee them, they retreat, they don't rout (their good morale), and in their turn they fire at your disrupted melee force - and they do rout. This is pretty tiresome; as is the trick of meleeing, knowing you will lose but not rout immediately, and that defenders (who won the melee) may. I really wish JT would fix that one.

Anyway thanx for the the discussions. I don't read this board as often as I should perhaps.

Jeff did try waiting below the ridge line and fighting in the woods - sort the opposite of the way I would think the British army would choose to fight. And I avoided woods if I could, also not the way the militia are at least pictured as fighting. But then I don't consider "The Patriot", or as many of the people I know call it, 'Braveheart with a civics lesson' or 'MadMax without dunebuggies', to be the definitive Revolutionary War film either.

If we can fix it with .pdt & .oob files then fine.

And I would have bet any amount of money Al would respond!</font id="Comic Sans MS">

Okay let's try a little experiment.

I just finished redoing the Brandywine.oob. I'll make a new scenario this afternoon. Both the oob and scenario will be based soley on John's Brandywine_a.scn using his map, pdt file, deployments and other header info (times, length, vp conditions, etc.)

I have removed the M from the colonial roster replacing it with I. Most of the militia also turned ther R bayonetteless rifles in for K bayontteless muskets.

All L troops for both armies have been broken into platoons, so the are 24-32 men per counter. It is strongly suggested that when these troops go into X order they only stack one per hex.

I recommend all British and American units only fire up to 100 men from a hex when in line, and Hessians fire up to 150 men per hex.

To assist in this, and to reduce the number of counters I reorganized the battalions. Each battalion now has 2-6 counters depending upon thier strength. A few examples....

<ul><li>A 296 man Brit/Amer unit has a 98 man right, 100 man center and 98 man left.</li><li>An 84 man Brit/Amer unit has a 42 man right and a 42 man left.</li><li>A 432 man Hessian unit has a 66 man right, a 150 man center-right, 150 man center-left and a 66 man left.</li></ul>

Some of the larger Brit/Amer units also have 4, 5 or 6 counters per battalion. The idea was to get the unit's center of gravity in the center. So counters of 100 men (2-rank) or 150 men (3-rank) were made and then the remaineder was divided in two for the wings. I tried to make sure the wing counters would be over 50 men if possible.

I am hoping that the larger units firing will be able to defend themselves against the smaller units in X formation (which is why I urge players to only stack 1 X formation unit per hex.)

The Light troops will be able to exert more ZOC's because they can spread out more than the line units, so they can be used more for scouting and screening.

The cavalry was kept about the same so they could scout and screen better as well.

So, players may find this version easier to play since the number of counters dropped drastically ... for the Americans it went from over 570 counters (not counting leaders or wagons) to under 200 counters (not counting leaders or wagons.)

Formed units should be able to push back light units in X formation, <b>AS LONG AS PLAYERS KEEP THE X FORMATION UNITS TO ONE PER HEX OR ABOUT 25-30 MEN</b> to reflect that skirmishing troops <b>WERE</b> spread out very thinly, and to stack 200 men in a hex in X formation is taking a gamey advantage of the game engine! [:)]

Without target density modifier, that John would have to put in, this is the best (I think) I can do to solve the problem.

Stacking is still 200 men per hex, but if players will please try to stay within the spirit of this exercise and not fire more than 25-30 men from a hex when in X formation, or 100 men if the unit is in a 2-rank line (Brit/Amer), or 150 men if the unit is in a 3-rank line (Hessians*.)

*Note: The Hessians that fought in the Saratoga campaign adopted the 2-rank style of the North American British Expeditionary Force, while the Hessians that fought in the Philidelphia campaign stayed with the 3-rank line.

<blockquote id="quote"><font size="2" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Richard</i>
...the X formation is far too powerful.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Then why are my Indians, in Extended formation, being slaughtered [xx(] in their hundreds by Morgan's men in the fields outside Detroit? [B)]

<font face="Comic Sans MS">I rather like this idea, Al. And I don't usually go for many 'house rules' that you have to remember. Basically, one really shouldn't stack at all, except maybe the flank companies of adjacent units, and you pretty much have it.
This is sort of "Norris" for CCC - but we'll call it "Amos". I'm willing to give it a go if anyone would like to try it.

Can the stacking be changed in the .pdt like ACW games? If so, you could limit it to 2 units and 150 men (for the 3-rank Hessians)' or possibly to 100 men if it allows you to place the single 150 man units on the map with the scenario editor. I'm at work so can't try it right now.

Maybe the smaller unstacked rifle armed militia won't be so deadly and you can give them their rifles back.

Less units makes rout somewhat more important, which isn't a bad thing for the larger battles where it tends to be more of an annoyance that anything.</font id="Comic Sans MS">

Butch,

Not my idea alone really. Rich White, I think it was expressed this idea too, and another gentleman that was in on a thread WAY, WAY back ... he went to China for business so he dropped out of the thread, can't remember his name, maybe it was Rich White that went to China ... well anyway.

As you may have read elsewhere, I have a few little experiments on going [;)] with this system. I like the format for the CCC on Campaign in 1776 series. I do like this idea as well and have been toying with it as I've studied the 1777 campaign this summer.

I won't make any pdt file changes for this one so we can test the oob restructure to see how that works.

Just starting to place units on the map. This one probably won't have an AI script written for it, we'll see.

Al,
I like everything except the large number of men in one "hatman" company/icon. Most of what "should be" is accomplished by arming the militia with bayonetless muskets, changing them to infantry and restricting the number of lights in a hex when in X mode. Most companies ranged around 30-50 men, (excluding French and Germans.) Having 100 man icons takes some latitude away from the commander. Your main intent here is to hone down the effects of X mode and the militia swarming I think. The other part, massing the fire of regulars should be left to the commander of the army. If we go back to the idea of volley fire by firing sections, the commander can make the firing section as large or small (down to company size) as they wish. If a commander is faced with lights in X mode... and the opponent is abiding by the rule you set up, then he could throw many or few companies at the X lights at his discretion. You may want to just occupy a company of lights with a company of regulars, but take the balance of your regiment elsewhere. The strength of the regulars is in keeping massed, but that should be left to the player. If you do not have enough regulars tackling some lights, then you might get taught a lession. On the other hand, a gamble could pay off. I think forcing the massing of regular's companies may be unnecessary if the other things are in place. Sorry if this is starting another debate, just meant to be some feedback.