Re: DbECW development thread.
Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2019 11:09 am
There's also the White Syke Close at Marston Moor and the Sulby Hedges at Naseby.
The Loose Association of Wargamers
For wargames and wargamers
https://looseasswargamers.org.uk/
DbECW development thread.
Page 5 of 15
Re: DbECW development thread.
Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2019 12:03 pm
No units with any distinguishing attributes and no interesting terrain. I can see why you all love this period so much
Re: DbECW development thread.
Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2019 12:04 pm
Let me at this stage say that, in my ever so humble opinion, the Pike and Shotte rules deal with the interaction between pike and shot of the same 'battalia' (regiment, to you and I) in a way which seems quite acceptable. The pikes and the two sleeves of musketeers are three separate units which act independently but with the option for the musketeers of dashing back to the protection of the pikes if need be.
Re: DbECW development thread.
Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2019 1:22 pm
Alex T wrote: ↑Tue Feb 05, 2019 10:19 amDoesn’t matter. Why?Norman D. Landings wrote: ↑Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 am
Norm, from a gaming point of view I really like what you suggest, however as EB says, what would the musketeers be doing during this 'push of pikes' ? is 'push of pikes' just something that reenactors & movie makers like?
I’m glad you asked, I’ll tell you.
Because we’re coming at this from the wrong angle.
We can say “we don’t know if they did this”, or “we don’t know if they did that”, all day.
What we need to do is to decide what we actually DO want our units to do... and come up with a mechanism to reflect it.
If that mechanism can be as straightforward as possible, and stay within the existing mechanics of DBN: BONUS.
Re: DbECW development thread.
Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2019 1:43 pm
I like this man. And i dont even know what i'm talking about.Norman D. Landings wrote: ↑Tue Feb 05, 2019 1:22 pm What we need to do is to decide what we actually DO want our units to do... and come up with a mechanism to reflect it.
If that mechanism can be as straightforward as possible, and stay within the existing mechanics of DBN: BONUS.
Re: DbECW development thread.
Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2019 1:47 pm
Really not sureabout that. Hedges were an established way of delineating prperty for a long time before this period. Specific tools were created for hedge laying etc... I don't have my books on the subject to hand but will have a look when I do.BaronVonWreckedoften wrote: ↑Tue Feb 05, 2019 11:02 am Hedgerows were quite rare in England at this time
Re: DbECW development thread.
Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2019 1:53 pm
Norman D. Landings wrote: ↑Tue Feb 05, 2019 1:22 pmNorm, what a thoughtful response, where did you find that ?Alex T wrote: ↑Tue Feb 05, 2019 10:19 amDoesn’t matter. Why?Norman D. Landings wrote: ↑Tue Feb 05, 2019 6:52 am
Norm, from a gaming point of view I really like what you suggest, however as EB says, what would the musketeers be doing during this 'push of pikes' ? is 'push of pikes' just something that reenactors & movie makers like?
I’m glad you asked, I’ll tell you.
Because we’re coming at this from the wrong angle.
We can say “we don’t know if they did this”, or “we don’t know if they did that”, all day.
What we need to do is to decide what we actually DO want our units to do... and come up with a mechanism to reflect it.
If that mechanism can be as straightforward as possible, and stay within the existing mechanics of DBN: BONUS.I totally agree. My considered take on the wargaming of command & control in the ECW will be the reverse of the normal. In other words the CinC will be trying with much difficulty to stop or deflect his units doing stuff rather than making them do stuff. If I can make that happen it may make for an interesting and fun game, which would be my aim. If Tim W comes up with the figures !?
Re: DbECW development thread.
Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2019 2:02 pm
Totally agree with that. My thought is that once battle is joined the CinC or Wing Commander would have very little interest or even influence in whether the shot is attached to the pike or not and in what proportions. So I believe that 'the unit' should be a fixed combination of pike & shot. Maybe options of units with varied p & s proportions ?Purple wrote: ↑Tue Feb 05, 2019 10:41 am I always feel the difficulty in wargaming the ECW is that from my little reading on the subject, it appears a lot of the fighting was pure random chaos that we as overseers of the battlefield will find hard to replicate.
I remember one book stating that the musket smoke of the period was so thick that after a couple of volleys across the line, the entire battlefield was engulfed in heavy fog.
That along with the randomness of uniform, limited training? And some of the close hedgerowed battlefields, etc - led to many instances of regiments blundering into there own men and firing off volleys at each othe completely unaware they are on the same side, others drifting off entirely.
And of course certain cavalry wings are going to relentlessly pursuit or just try get some baggage.
I’ve always thought that you should barely have any control in an ECW wargame.
Re: DbECW development thread.
Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2019 3:20 pm
Yes, the c in c does not care about the infantry make up, just that they do the job of holding that bit of line there until he tells them otherwise.
So a case of what levels of command do we the players want to make decisions at.
So a case of what levels of command do we the players want to make decisions at.
Re: DbECW development thread.
Posted: Tue Feb 05, 2019 3:21 pm
Alex T wrote: ↑Tue Feb 05, 2019 1:53 pmActually this applies to every british army ever....Norman D. Landings wrote: ↑Tue Feb 05, 2019 1:22 pmNorm, what a thoughtful response, where did you find that ?Alex T wrote: ↑Tue Feb 05, 2019 10:19 am
Doesn’t matter. Why?
I’m glad you asked, I’ll tell you.
Because we’re coming at this from the wrong angle.
We can say “we don’t know if they did this”, or “we don’t know if they did that”, all day.
What we need to do is to decide what we actually DO want our units to do... and come up with a mechanism to reflect it.
If that mechanism can be as straightforward as possible, and stay within the existing mechanics of DBN: BONUS.