Reply To: Historical and Modern Wargaming – Where the "Fluff" is Real Life

[oriskany 60771xp 1]

@phaidknott –

Indeed, I haven’t had the best of luck with most AWI rules.  People try to use 7YW and Napoleonics … an approximation at best.  I haven’t tried the British Grenadier rules to which you prefer.  Indeed those Guards Regiments sound fearsome, but I’ve checked my records and only find three such regiments in the American Revolution: 1st Regiment Foot Guards (modern: The Grenadier Guards), the Coldstream Guards, and 3rd Foot Guards (modern: The Scots Guards) – out of the 63 regiments recorded to have served in the conflict (of course none of this includes Hessians, Loyalists, or Iroquois).  Seems about right for the small, elite, “tip of the spear” regiments in Howe’s 1776 New York invasion force.

Yes, it’s damned near impossible for the American player to “win” a battle, reflective of the historical record.  It’s far easier to list the battles they won than those they lost.  And many of those they “won” were against Loyalists, Hessians, or Iroquois … others were “won” under cover of massed French artillery.

But like many rebellions, they win simply by continuing to exist.  AWI wargames should reflect this with steeply asymmetrical victory conditions.

I do see quite a bit of British bias in many British games, including some of the favorite ones.  To be fair there’s plenty of jingoist “star-spangled awesome” in American games, too.  But while I’m not familiar with the “Grenadier” system you mentioned, it doesn’t SOUND like British bias is too much at work here.  The AWI really WAS this lopsided, probably one reason AWI isn’t a terribly popular wargaming subject even here in the States.  Many more prefer American Civil War or (for some ungodly reason – Napoleonics … which I’ve never understood why it’s so popular over here).

I also agree that the forces on both sides greatly evolved over the course of the war (damned thing lasted almost eight years, after all).  Looking at the Americans between engagements as close together as Boston Road in April 75 and Bunker Hill in June 75 shows the Americans switching from sniping from behind trees to actually trying to stand and fight eye-to-eye behind fieldworks … although the latter certainly didn’t work very well.  It wasn’t until the winter of 77-78 and the recruitment of European officers like von Steuben that the Americans could actually stand and look the British in the face in open battle and at least come out with a draw (Monmouth, 1778).

Conversely, the British began to rely more and more on Iroquois in the north, other native tribes in the west, and Loyalists in the south, where a lot more guerrilla warfare takes place.  Hell, they even started flirting with the ideas of rifle units, thanks to the good Major Ferguson.

So yeah, that TSR Battlesystem solution is a bit of a kitbash.  To be honest we’re really only using the movement and morale system, which I really like and plays smooth as butter.  It combined realism, playability, and accessibility in a way other games like Kings of War (from what I’ve seen) just doesn’t match.  The combat system is a little AD&D, with all kinds of different size dice and tons of “armor saves.”  Well, there’s no “armor” in AWI, but certain formations get “save bonuses” and since it’s a unit-based game, elite troops get a better save just because their files, platoons, and companies hold together better under fire.

But at this club they don’t like games with different sizes of dice, and the idea of excessive saving throws they feel slows the game down.  This seems to be a feature, again, of a little of British-designed game.  Americans are impatient, give us a tougher to-hit roll if you want to manage the game’s lethality, but ditch all these saves!

Which brings me to what I don’t like about our kitbash rules so far, I may have made the game “too punchy.”  Not OP British or OP Patriots … just OP muskets and especially artillery in general.  Not to drop any spoilers for Part 2 of the video, but we never really come close to a bayonet brawl, which was always the best British weapon and hands down how they won 90% of their victories.  If the game relies too much on muskets and rifles, even weaker and more fragile American units are a little overpowered because it will never come down to the ultimate British trump card in the AWI … the cold steel.

Anyway, thanks for the great comment!  Good to talk to you again!