Another version to test?

Feedback and questions from the magnificent 7 Play test groups in Edinburgh, Dumfries, Sweden, Cheltenham, Arizona, Georgia and Florida.
Post Reply
User avatar
flick40
Major General
Major General
Posts: 544
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 10:24 pm
Location: Kansas City , Mo
Contact:

Another version to test?

Post by flick40 » Sun Feb 14, 2010 12:03 am

So are we looking at a 6th edition of v.2 to test or are you beginning to finalize for publication?
"Is that your opinion or the game masters ruling?"
User avatar
barr7430
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 5851
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:22 pm
Location: EK,Scotland
Contact:

Post by barr7430 » Mon Feb 22, 2010 12:35 pm

I think we are just about there now Joe. We still have the FIBUA to playtest. Dave and I were discussing that yesterday. I think most of the rest of the bugs are ironed out. I am waiting on a little more input on Austrian tactics from Greg & Arafan in Tuscon.. Dave was having a bit of trouble with the Horse tactics stuff there!
Most other things have played through very well. I am still undecided on Army lists but think I will have to make some recommendations on that.

Our game yesterday went very quickly. I think we got in about 15 turns in 5 hours of play with a very clear cut result. Very few ambiguities, a wide cross section of situations:

Horse v Horse combats
Horse v Foot combats
Foot v Foot combats
Foot v artillery combats
Pike v non pike combats
Squadron consolidation
All or Nothing charges against both Foot and Horse
Commander losses
Multi gun batteries
Colours captured via routs

The no test for victors of close combat was very useful. At the end of the game the Swedes' Horse was all but gone however.. they had done their job.. clearing an entire flank. The 'blown' nature of their surviving remnants seemed very credible.

We got some good clarification on potentially 'tricky' battle situations to include in the text.

Alas.. no one used the DEFEND order.. what an omission however.. SWEDES do not DEFEND!!!!! :twisted:
"If you think you can, or if you think you can't, you are probably right"

Henry Ford
User avatar
Heneborn
Major
Major
Posts: 169
Joined: Mon May 26, 2008 1:00 pm

Post by Heneborn » Mon Feb 22, 2010 2:38 pm

barr7430 wrote:We still have the FIBUA to playtest.
Will that be with us shortly? We have a big game planned for this saturday...

I have actually forgot to report from our last game a few weeks ago. Probably because it went so good, everyone seemed really happy with the changes (especially during close combat) and the game went by really smooth. The only real opinions that was raised was that a few of us want something similar to brigade or army morale (we have whined about this before), but it's probably just the FOW-player in us talking... :wink:
User avatar
flick40
Major General
Major General
Posts: 544
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 10:24 pm
Location: Kansas City , Mo
Contact:

Post by flick40 » Mon Feb 22, 2010 6:29 pm

I am still undecided on Army lists
I would rather see scenarios than army lists. For army lists something generic is all that's needed, their special rules, and basic army build. In their consistency how different was each nationality? 70% foot, 30% horse? Some probably more raw troops or mercenaries, Austrians fielded more armored horse etc. Either way army lists are a whole other can of worms.
"Is that your opinion or the game masters ruling?"
User avatar
barr7430
Site Admin
Site Admin
Posts: 5851
Joined: Tue Jan 04, 2005 4:22 pm
Location: EK,Scotland
Contact:

Post by barr7430 » Sun Feb 28, 2010 10:40 am

Guys,

an update for you.. I have not been idle!

Dave and I had an excellent play test using the GNW speicial rules last weekend. This threw up a few little tweaks which I have been doing this wee together with:

Editing
Consolidation of certain data (slimming down tables and lists)
Modification of a few mechanisms


Still got to finish FIBUA.

If anyone has any further feedback from previous playtests please get them to me as soon as is convenient to you.

Thanks and next Rev to you soon (maybe the last!!!)
"If you think you can, or if you think you can't, you are probably right"

Henry Ford
Saxon Warrior
Staff Sergeant
Staff Sergeant
Posts: 50
Joined: Sat May 31, 2008 11:57 am
Location: UK

Post by Saxon Warrior » Wed Mar 03, 2010 10:09 pm

Had you and your colleagues considered the idea of adding a roster sheet to the rules? The sort of thing with little boxes you tick when you suffer a casualty, to avoid those horrible markers and individually mounted figures.
Many other sets of rules do this and, for what it's worth, I think they are a useful addition.
Perhaps you could sell them separately!!
DaveB.
User avatar
flick40
Major General
Major General
Posts: 544
Joined: Wed Sep 09, 2009 10:24 pm
Location: Kansas City , Mo
Contact:

Post by flick40 » Wed Mar 03, 2010 11:17 pm

considered the idea of adding a roster sheet to the rules
Hey Dave, that is something for Barry to consider with the rules and easy enough to create. Our group has not made the suggestion but we used MS Excel and made our own.

As for basing individual figures, that would be a personal choice as these rules are 6 figures to a stand for foot and 3 figures for horse. You don't actually remove any figures until 50% loss is reached. The rules lend themselves to a casualty roster or some sort of marker to track casualties. We found the sheet easiest as you mentioned.
"Is that your opinion or the game masters ruling?"
User avatar
quindia
General
General
Posts: 1255
Joined: Tue Jan 18, 2005 4:51 am
Location: Chesapeake, VA USA
Contact:

Post by quindia » Thu Mar 04, 2010 11:08 am

I'm sure we can add a roster sheet, similar to the one we designed for REPUBLIC TO EMPIRE. Even if there isn't space in the book, I'll make one available online.
Post Reply