The Loose Association of Wargamers

Given that the rules worked well and are firing up lots of suggestions could I be brave enough to suggest that you keep the elegant simplicity of the core set but just add an appendix of optional extras for those aspects where people put forward more complexity. The pitch of the rules for big battles felt just right for me and I think it would be a mistake to lose that feel.

I'm reading with great interest. I can't respond properly yet because I'm about to trek across Suffolk.
I'll answer properly this evening.
Very much obliged for the comments thus far.
E

Maybe the distance of 3" should be measured from the centre of the rear unit? As it stands, a retreating unit almost certainly won't impact the unit behind because of its base depth but a supporting unit has to be more than 3" behind the rear of the unit it is trying to pass through. Just feels the wrong way round to me. As a general principle I like the idea of complete freedom of movement, but perhaps that should only apply to voluntary movement.

I also agree about the 'optional rules' appendix. Things like terrain effects, alternate brigade sizes, pikes, irregular infantry (for Highlanders maybe?) could go there

From (extremely) past reading, I seem to recall that some armies actually practiced "passage of lines" during their "field days" in the 18th Century. I realise that it's difficult with imagi-nations (where somebody has almost inevitably split the atom 200 years early), but most minor historical contingents - aside from the execrable Reichsarmee - managed to affect passable levels of training and competence, based on their dynastic connections and personnel exchanges with either Prussia or Austria-Hungary.

Essex Boy wrote: ↑Mon May 09, 2022 9:58 am I'm reading with great interest. I can't respond properly yet because I'm about to trek across Suffolk.

It is a feck of a long walk back from Ayton, isn't it!

Oh very funny.

But I am too knackered to write anything tonight.

Laters.

E

I enjoyed this rule, except the times you were cheating...

Hmmmm. Fair comment.

Thanks again chaps. Subject to Tim's agreement, I propose to make just one small change.

Formed until passing through.....
Stick with the rules as they are. This recognises that, in the normal course of events, passing through will rarely have any impact. This fits nicely with the rule's ethos.

When the 3" proximity rule does apply, it's very likely that something bad happened, e. g.
an earlier failed attempt to pass through or a bounce back from melee. In such circumstances, it's not unreasonable to impose the penalties currently imposed.

Broken unit passing through........
If the passed through unit is formed, ihe usual 3" proxy rule applies, and........

The passed through unit tests morale when it next activates.

So no real material change.... Mostly just an explanation for why the passing through rule seldom applies.

Happy?

E

cool