| Napoleonic Wargame Club (NWC) https://www.wargame.ch/board/nwc/ |
|
| Which Optional Rules to use? https://www.wargame.ch/board/nwc/viewtopic.php?f=5&t=7518 |
Page 1 of 1 |
| Author: | Thomas Borling [ Wed Nov 23, 2005 10:47 am ] |
| Post subject: | Which Optional Rules to use? |
This was surely asked before, but I cannot find the post. Which Optional Rules do you like best and which seem to be the most historical if not the same? Regards Ensign Thomas Borling 1st Bn/79th Foot Regiment "The Queens Own Cameron Highlanders" 7th Brigade 6th Division II Infantry Corps 
|
|
| Author: | bobbreen [ Wed Nov 23, 2005 12:12 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I'm sure there are many, many opinions about this one. To get things started. I'm pretty flexible with what rules are on or off. I will adapt my tactics to the situation. The rules are simply another factor in the game. Yes to Optional Fire and Melee rules -- unlike the talonsoft games where the optional rules changed the odds, this one simply makes the average result more likely. Without it you are letting dice rolls have as much influence as your fire tactics. If you think Tiller's fire and melee casualty process is correct, then I think you want to always play with these two rules. If you think his process is incorrect, more randomness is not a solution. Yes to weak zocs and partial retreats -- I will always vote to make zoc kills as hard as possible. Yes to Isolation, flank morale and terrain modifiers -- seems to me these are the rewards for good tactics and I like to play with them. Yes to multiple cav melees, no to multiple infantry melees -- I think this is historical --- it was way too hard to corrdinate phased infantry attacks against a single unit. Don't have much experience with the newer rules, but not allowing retreat overruns of skirmishers seems to be gong backwards relative to zoc kills so its not on my preferred list. Restriciting opportunity fire against skirmishers, if it means a better chance of firing at other targets would get my vote -- if it doesn't change things then why restrict it? Pass thru and target density -- I have no strong opinion, I will play either way -- if given the choice I will select it but only because I think the effect of canon fire is not adequately represented in terms of its impact of unit morale, so this allows more casualties, which increases the chance of failing morale checks, so it is a poor solution for the problem I see but moves things in the right direction. Rout Limiting and Line Movement restriction. I struggle with these two. I think they are historical and so the inclination is to use them. However, we are playing competively against others, not necessarily recreating or evaluating history and these two rules effectively enhance units with higher quality and better leaders. Can get a little complicated but I think these rules can easily shift the balance of game by giving (in most cases) the french player a 10-15% increase in effective number of troops -- has to do with the process of units recoverying from disorder. So I prefer to have rout limiting on and line movement restriction off. Points for leaders is a no brainer -- always on. Manual Defensive Fire -- or playing in phases. My preference is to play in turns and allow for a mix of movement, fire, melee -- seems to me that was real war. But in the game it also brings with it the downside of the blitzkrieg problem, which means you want to play with a house rule. I've recently played a few games in the ACW Club using phases and it was okay, so I wouldn't object to it, but its not my preference. Brigadier Sir Bob Breen KT 1st (The King's) Dragoon Guards Commanding 71st Highlanders Commandant, RMA |
|
| Author: | Le Tondu [ Wed Nov 23, 2005 12:57 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
I like them all checked except for Manual Defensive Fire with most PBEM games. All of them are nice for internet games. Rick Colonel Rick Motko 1er Bataillon, 33° Régiment d'Infanterie de Ligne 2eme Brigade, 11eme division IIIe corps, Armée du Nord Vive l'Empereur! |
|
| Author: | Mark Eason [ Thu Nov 24, 2005 9:25 am ] |
| Post subject: | |
One of them that I like to leave off is VPs for Leader casualties. The loss of a high order leader causes a less competent commander to be promoted in his place. This makes command checks harder to pass and, as we all know, the game is based around the ability to maintain command and control of your forces enabling them to re-order when disordered. If this capability is reduced because a high level leader is lost, for me, that is penalty enough and can be expolited by the enemy. Mark |
|
| Author: | Bill Peters [ Thu Nov 24, 2005 9:41 pm ] |
| Post subject: | |
All ON except for Manual Defense Phase, Multiple Infantry Melees, Partial Retreats, Isolation and No Retreat Overruns. All of those are left OFF. Reasons: Manual Defense Phase - I HAVE played using this style and I plan on putting up a forum AAR about it but right now its not standard operating procedure. Multiple Infantry Melees - good if you agree to allow it ONLY against skirmishers and mainly where the one side doesnt have alot of cavalry to begin with. Partial Retreats - have never liked this rule. Al Amos makes a good case for overstacking though but mainly I leave it off. Isoltion Rule - I used to be a big proponent of this rule but with it off less units end up living a bit longer cutting down on unhistorical casualty levels. No Skirmishers Overrun - I have never had a problem with this one. The Attacker calls the shots here anyway and with this rule ON you have to use MORE house rules. Certainly we dont need more of THOSE right? Just use it and use your noggin. When you go to surround a formed unit cuttoff its rear hexes and two front hexes and its toast. I always use Weak ZOCs now that I have learned how to handle it and it makes alot of sense in Village/City fights too. Units could be on one street and not know that the enemy was moving down another street due to the smoke, etc. My favorite optional rule? Multiple Cavalry Melees! That second charge can really knock out a unit that just lost in another melee. Really gives you a feel for multiple SQUADRON attacks. Hit the defender with one stack of fresh cav and after it loses hit it with another fresh stack. Run it into the ground - which is what they did if the infantry was not in square or Austrian closed column. (yeah Allies - we dont have a closed column formation ... been down that rout and I would love to have it as well as road columns and cavalry in column OR line) Bill Peters Former NWC President, Club Founder, Prussian and Austrian Army Founder [url="http://www.fireandmelee.net"]Fire and Melee Wargame site[/url] |
|
| Page 1 of 1 | All times are UTC - 5 hours |
| Powered by phpBB® Forum Software © phpBB Group https://www.phpbb.com/ |
|