Once more into the breach… this time with Black Powder

Yesterday L. struggled his way to my place through the first snow storm of the winter. As a reward, he was given opportunity to repeat his achievement of taking Battery Robinett, this time around with ‘Black Powder’ rules. As it turned out, this game was quite different from the previous one and the outcome gave both of us something to think about.

The scenario and setup

For details about the scenarion, have a look at my after action report of our first attempt at ‘Battery Robinett’ scenario, played with ‘They Couldn’t Hit an Elephant’. In brief, it’s an assault/defence scenario, with Union side hunkering down in rather well fortified position, while Confederates try to charge the short distance from a wood’s edge toward a big siege gun that they attempt to capture.

Worried about the fact that Black Powder allows for quite rapid movement, I modified the terrain setup slightly and added another 15 centimeters between Confederate jumpoff point and Union line. Otherwise there were no changes whatsoever – two confederate, rather experienced, brigades were to charge pretty green Federal force of similar strength, but enjoying powerful artillery support and an entrenched position.

The game

The game was yet another short and sweet affair, with the whole thing being decided in three turns and requiring less than two hours to complete! And that time includes at least half an hour of rules discussions and clarifications!

Yet again, let’s have a look at pictures and supporting narrative.

As the purpose of the game was to compare and contrast Black Powder with TCHAE, L. declared that he would use same plan as in previous game – concentrated assault at the center of Union line with both brigades formed in two regiment wide formations. One slight deviation consisted of his placing the skirmishers on his extreme left flank; in first game, T. used them to screen the front of his brigade.

Following L.s suit, I distributed my forces in similar fashion as in previous engagement.

 

In first round the exact thing that I feared did take place – L. rolled extremly well on initiative for his left brigade, allowing him to move two of its regiments and skirmishers all the way toward abattis in front of Federal entrenchments. This in itself was also the biggest ‘rule failure’ of the game, as he shouldn’t have been allowed to that, since all units moving on brigade order need to end within 6’’ (or cm in our game) from each other and the rearmost brigade couldn’t advance as far as the units in front of it.

At that time however we were blissfully unaware of our blunder and I immediately had reason to fear that the game would end in rapid collapse of Union line similar to that which I experienced in TCHAE game.

L.s right brigade managed to pull off a ‘two orders’ roll for the other brigade commander, allowing it to briskly cover one third of the distance to Union entrenchments.

Confederate fire that followed was pretty ineffective, which was hardly surprising considering strength of the Union position.

Then it was my turn. In pure desperation, I sent my CinC to the right, hoping to quickly activate my two regiments that guarded that flank. The fact that both of them were low on ammo (“minus one dice to shoot with” house rule) wasn’t very encouraging, but desperate times and all that…

The effects of my fire during first phase were much more telling than L.’s, with both artillery and infantry scoring several hits on L.s lead regiments. Two of them were also disrupted, which stopped them from moving in next round and buying me some additional time before inevitable close combat.

 

Second round started with a ‘lucky’ two order activation roll for L.s brigade on the left. This allowed him to charge my lone regiment on that flank and just barely managing in throwing it back. Yet again, a flashback of previous game appeared in front of my eyes. This time around though, the regiment that was forced to retreat was still very much in the game.

On the right, L.s luck run out and his roll for brigade order failed. This effectively meant that his advance on that side stalled in the middle of nowhere, with dire consequences.

My second round was a mixed affair. My CinC failed with his first activation roll, leaving the regiments on my right flank in limbo. However, the results of my shooting phase were fearsome – the regiment that managed to charge beyond Union entrenchments suffered enough hits to force it to take a morale check. It stood its ground, but was now shaken. The front regiments of L.s right brigade took a fearful pounding, mainly from the entrenched siege guns, with yet another regiment becoming shaken.

 

In final round of the game, L. found himself under a lot of pressure. His right side brigade was in a lot of trouble. One regiment was shaken, the other was one hit from reaching that state. This was very significant for reasons described below and forced L.’s hand. He really only had one option here - try for brigade order and hope for two orders. This would allow him to bring forward the two rear regiments and mask their stricken comrades from even more fire. He managed to roll an activation with single order, which wasn’t enough to pull of that manouver and left his damaged regiments exposed to further punishment.

On the left, things went even worse for him – he failed on his first activation roll, leaving his regiments in a very exposed position…

…a fact of which I took full advantage of. My CinC finally managed to finally get his ‘s**t’ together and led the entire force on my right flank into firing position. Two artillery batteries I pulled from my left flank toward the center of my line also reached their newpositions, but were yet not able to deploy. The rest of my units just waited for orders to fire.

Once the order came, the Union fire was as effective as in round two. Multiple hits were scored on front regiments of L.’s right brigade. One of those units didn’t make its subsequent morale check and was destroyed. The other pulled through, but was shaken.

L’s other brigade suffered similar fate, only difference being that both of the regiments that suffered casualties managed to survive their subsequent morale checks. Both of them were however ‘shaken’ as we started fourth round of the game.

The game ends

‘Black Powder’ has this neat rule about brigade morale which says that once half or more of brigade’s units are either destroyed, retreated from the table or are in ‘shaken’ state at the start of controling player’s turn, that brigade has to break off the engagement. Furthermore, if half or more brigades reach that state, the entire army has to retire, in effect giving up the fight. Because of this rule, L. had to accept complete defeat at the start of round four - both of his brigades were at that time broken and needed to pull back.

Musings after the battle

Our little game clearly illustrated couple of things. First of all, ‘Black Powder’ and ‘They Couldn’t Hit an Elephant’ are two very different animals! Perhaps the most important difference between those two rulesets consists of fragility of individual units in ‘Black Powder’. Two hits in ‘TCHAE’ are, at least initially, nothing to think twice about. In ‘BP’ such event is a reason for very serious concern and could require immediate damage control. I’d go as af as saying that the thought process in a player used to ‘TCHEA’ robustness of even inexperienced units requires a major adjustment if he’s to have any success in a ‘BP’ game!

This game also confirmed another of the conclusions I presented here after the first ‘BP’ game L. and I played about a year ago – ‘BP’ is a very fast ruleset when compared to ‘TCHAE’. Not only are the units much more fragile, but movement distances are (potentially) much longer. This makes for very eventful games and quick decisions achieved in reasonable playing time. This is of course a good thing, but it also has a flip side – small games, with two or three brigades will with all probability end rather quickly, unless players really take time to nurse damaged units back to reasonable health state.

Finally, I can’t help but notice that nothing in our little engagement made me really feel we played an ACW battle. Don’t take me wrong, it was a fun and entertaining game, but it did feel like a generic game. Say what you want about TCHAE, but when you play a game with that ruleset, there are certain aspects in it that make you understand the difficulties and intricacies of the real conflict a tiny bit better. So far I have been unable to find that aspect in ‘BP’ and I can’t help but miss it a little allready.

Of course, there is a flipside also to this ‘coin’ – ‘period chrome’ has a natural appeal for a historical wargamer, but it comes at a cost of time. Many of my TCHAE after action reports include the phrase ‘…and then so and so left for home’, more often than not long before the game was decided. I suspect that ‘Black Powder’ games won’t suffer this problem and that has its own appeal.

To each his own, horses for courses, your mileage may vary…. One thing is for sure, this certainly wasn’t my last Black Powder game!

Double-dipping ACW

After using ‘They Couldn’t Hit an Elephant’ exclusively for my ACW games for last couple of years, taking the plunge and trying out another ruleset wasn’t an easy decision. At the same time, as I mentioned in my post about the re-fight of the action at Shiloh Church, I’ve reached to a point where I was ready to try something new. Thus, enter ‘Black Powder’.

‘Black Powder’ has been around for couple of years now and I’m sure that it has been reviewed and analysed to pieces on other sites. Therefore, it hardly needs an additional introduction here. Instead, I’ll try identify its pros and cons in a comparison with ‘TCHAE’.

The game
Since the primary purpose of the game was to give ‘Black Powder’ a good work-out, I put together a fictional scenario with one side acting as numerically inferior defender holding excellent defensive position. The attacker, enjoying almost double numerical superiority, would be challenged not only by the opponent holding high ground, but also by quite rotten terrain – woods, gullies, a stream, swamps and build up areas. In other words, I took out all my terrain and tried my best to put together the nastiest possible terrain configuration allowed by my collection.

In tests of this type, I don’t care much about victory conditions, but for the sake of argument I arbitrarily decreed that all three hills in possession of the attacker would gain him a decisive victory, two hills granted minor victory, anything else was a defeat.

How it played

L., having graciously accepted the command of the attacking Confederate force, started out of board. His brigades were to enter in succession along the two two roads crossing the field of battle. It took but a couple of rounds for one important fact to dawn on us - the importance of command ratings of individual brigade commanders revealed itself. Commander activation in ‘Black Powder’ is based a roll of 2D6 against officer’s command rating, with the goal of rolling equal to or below that value. Dice result equal to or one below command rating allow single activation of units, while better results allow up to three activations. As it turns out, I decided to give all commanders rating of 7, which in practice means about 50 per cent chance of success… which in turn is quite similar to the success rate of unit activation in TCHAE with single ‘Tea Break’ card in the deck (if it’s played long enough ). Thus, somewhat ironically, the initial phase of the game reminded starkly of what both L. and I was used to see on the ‘TCHAE battlefield’ – Confederate advance was slow and spasmodic. Nature of the terrain that the rebels had to negotiate didn’t make things easier for L’s sluggish advance.

Over the course of the game, difficult terrain combined with rather mixed success rate of L’s activation rolls caused his units to become spread out along the roads and hinterland. This more or less negated the advantage of his superior numbers. At the time his foremost regiments finally came into contact with opposition, they were unsupported. Nevertheless, L. chose not to waste any time and he threw his regiments against my centre and right flank without any delay. Long range fire of my light artillery batteries was more or less ineffective, which was encouraging for this course of action. However, as soon as L.’s rebels came into small arms range, they became quickly embroiled in intense firefights and more often than not, disrupted by increasingly effective fire of Union troops. After a couple of rounds, as the effect of this two-way fusillade  started to take its toll, another conclusion could be drawn about ‘Black Powder’ – it doesn’t take much to simply blow away complete regiments in this game, especially if one enjoys a bit of luck as I did at that moment.

Following sequence repeated itself in both places where L. attempted to close on my position – as his foremost regiments came into range of my small arms, they deployed into line and engaged the enemy while remaining regiments attempted to deploy on their flanks. Unfortunately, L’s front regiment was invariably opposed by two of my own regiments and supporting artillery, which at that range became rather more effective. Ensuing firefights resulted on all occasions in either a throwbacks or complete destruction of confederate regiments. Compared with TCHAE where individual regiments are usually very resilient and can at least initially withstand being battered by superior numbers, units of regimental size in games governed by ‘Black Powder’ seem to be more brittle and give way much quicker.

Having realised that fact, L. subsequently exercised a bit more patience, which paid off couple of turns later when he mounted successful charge against my position on the big hill in the centre. The result was something of a mixed bag – I lost an artillery battery which auto-broke (!!!) and my line was pushed back. This feat did however cost L. another regiment shot to pieces and removed of the table.

This rebel charge was the high point of the game. We did continue for a couple more rounds, but with L.s continued bad luck in his activation rolls for brigades on his right and Union troops executing a veritable massacre on his disorganized troops attempting to cross the stream on the left, we decided to break off the engagement at at that time.

Start of the game

Confederate troops preparing to charge centre of Union line. A fumble by Rebel CinC delayed this action by couple of rounds.

Situation in the middle of the game – disjointed attacks by Rebels at different points of Union line, all defeated by concentrated firepower.

Throughout the game, Federal troops on the left flank poured in salvo after salvo into the flank of Confederates in the centre. Rebel attempt to carry their position was disjointed and easily repulsed as individual regiments were thrown into disarray and repulsed by accurate rifle fire.

Climax of the game – brave rebel charge up the middle hill.

Musings after the battle
Even based on this single trial game, it is safe to say that ‘Black Powder’ is a completely different animal than ‘TCHAE’. The most prominent difference lies of course in the fact that ‘TCHAE’ is hard-wired for a American Civil War. ‘Black Powder’ on the other hand is obviously something of a toolbox, a Jack all trades, trying to cover long time-span and conflicts of different nature. The toolbox aspect of this ruleset is perhaps most evident in its command&control system relying on 2D6 rolls against command rating of individual brigade commanders. In this game all our commanders had a rating of 7; a simple adjustment of this one variable to 8 increases the chance of brigade activations from around 50 percent to close to 75 percent – a difference which would most probably provide a game with completely different tempo.

Another difference between TCHAE and Black Powder can be found in how the two rulesets treat individual regiments. Once again, the morale, behaviour, movement rates, formations, equipment of regiments in TCHAE are tailored for ACW and only for ACW. ‘Black Powder’ on the other hand is far more generic, with basic ‘out of the box’ units being rather bland and undistinguishable from each other. The ‘flavour’ of a particular conflict is added to them with help of by around 30 optional special rules. Those rules can be “bolted on” to individual units giving the units special abilities alternatively handicapping them in varied ways and making them more ‘true’ for the period or even individual battle. In our game we had a bit of fun and rolled a D6 for each individual unit. On a roll of 6 the controlling player was allowed to select one characteristic for the unit, on a roll of 1 the opponent had that pleasure. The effects of our choices on the battlefield were quite amusing on a couple of occasions. I think that this feature of “Black Powder”, when treated a bit more seriously, can provide a bit of entertainment all in its own right; finding the right combination of characteristics for a particular period or specific battle could be quite a challenge.

The most obvious difference between TCHAE and Black Powder is easily identifiable – individual regiments are in Black Powder infinitely more fragile than in TCHAE. Not only do they seem to break quicker, but when they can break in a blink of the eye. In TCHAE, the commander has plenty of time to spot and react to a crisis. In Black Powder a gaping hole in the line can appear due to a single bad dice roll. This difference is in my opinion very important and will probably take a while for me to get used to. I also dare to say that because of this characteristic, Black Powder will render very different games than TCHAE. I suspect that once command rating of the leaders is increased to 8 or even to 9, the games with ‘Black Powder’ will be significantly quicker and much more dramatic than TCHAE games. This means being able to play even large games to a conclusion in a single evening, something that so far has been a rarity in my wargaming ‘career’. On the other hand, I can’t help but worry that these potentially fast and furious games won’t have much in common with historical ACW battles , which more often than not were slow grinding affairs.

In other words… further testing is required and will take place in near future!

First WhifF of Black Powder

A lot of ‘firsts’ this month, it would seem! Couple of weeks ago I’ve gotten the opportunity to get the first taste of ‘Bolt Action’ and last weekend it was its sibling’s turn to try to impress me.

Now, ‘Black Powder’ has been around for quite some time, and a compulsive ruleset hoarder that I am, I have acquired it pretty much as soon as it was released. Since its arrival at my doorstep, it’s been gathering dust on my Ruleset bookshelf until last month, when L. discovered it along with the ‘Raid on St Michel’ mini-campaign booklet from Caliver Books. At first sight, it’s a rather attractive combination and Unlike me, he has the miniatures and terrain suitable for the period and seeing an opportunity to use them, he quickly commandeered both books.

It took an additional couple of months before L. was ready with  his preparations, but last weekend T. and I were summoned to face off in initial clash of the above-mentioned campaign. Once at L’s place, we received our orders; I was to assume command of a vanguard force tasked with a quick capture of a bridge, thus making it possible for the rest of the army to get over the river. Three infantry regiments of various quality, two cavalry regiments, an artillery battery and some light infantry rabble were made available for me to complete the task. T.’s force was nominal – two infantry regiments, small cavalry force (reinforced in the middle of the game) and an artillery battery would try to do their best to stop me in my tracks.

The game

I won’t spend much time on the game itself – it was a small affair and both T. and I knew that its outcome was pretty much a foregone conclusion, mostly due to my superior numbers. At the same time, for the very same reasons, the scenario was a perfect test bed for us getting acquainted with the ruleset, which previous to this game was completely unknown to both of us.

Let’s make a rather long story short… My advance toward the bridge was veeery plodding, in equal parts thanks to ‘Black Powder’s’ rather arbitrary unit activation system and dismal quality of my commander. This gave T. plenty of time to bring up his paltry force into position. After a while both sides faced of each other over the bridge, which caused my commanding officer to enter a comatose condition. Turn after turn, I failed to activate even a single unit. It is therefore hardly surprising that when the dice finally allowed me to act, I sent my best cavalry regiment over the bridge with every intention of smashing into smithereens whatever stood in their path.

Well… off they went, only to be promptly disrupted by a well aimed musket salvo from T.’s militia while still on the bridge. A long delay and couple more disruptions followed, but when I finally reached that pesky regiment barring my way, I had all reason to believe that I would instantly punch my way through their lines. Imagine my surprise when the melee that followed spanned over five (!!!) rounds, before being decided in my favour. While that rather odd clash of arms run its course, L. was generous enough to allow me to push my infantry to the other side of the bridge, even though it was really blocked by my cavalry, still stuck in column formation.

Once my infantry was on the other side of the river, the game was in most respects over and done. T., unable to stop me, ordered a slow retreat for those of his units which were still on the field (that stubborn militia regiment, once defeated, actually ‘vaporised’ into thin air) to the high ground nearby and I was quite satisfied with just the fact that I was finally in possession of the bridge. It was as good time as any to call it a day.

Musings after the battle

Just like in other aspects of life, when it comes to rulesets, sometimes things just “click into place” pretty much from the start. For me “Check Your Six” and “I Aint’ Been Shot Mum” are perfect examples of such rulesets – things just immediately felt right! Then there are rulesets that take a little time to get used to before their potential can be properly appreciated – “Dux Britanniarum” is the most recent experience of this type for me. And then there are rulesets that give you that feeling that something just doesn’t fit. I’m afraid that “Black Powder” may very well be one of those rulesets for me.

Now, let me say this – it is far to early for me to make an authoritative judgement of any kind regarding “Black Powder”. I am yet to read it (once in L’s hands, they are surprisingly hard to reclaim) and we have played only a single game with it (with all misunderstandings and messed up rule interpretations such games are usually plagued with). Furthermore, the scenario we played was rather small and if I understand things correctly, the ruleset is intended for large engagements. In other words, I am hardly in a position where I can dismiss “Black Powder” as a bad ruleset. Quite contrary, I am happy to say that in some respects “Black Powder” is rather likeable. Its core mechanics seem to be simple and based strictly on D6 dice, which makes the ruleset almost instantly playable for most people with basic wargaming experience. Also, it seems to be rather quick – a quality claimed by many rulesets, but provided by far fewer!

At the same time, I can’t disregard the fact that I found some of the rules that are defining for the “feel” of “Black Powder” to be either annoying or worse, not really “anchored” in my perception of black powder era battlefield. Until I actually read the rules and try to grasp designer’s philosophy, I won’t go into further details of that statement. But there is no denying the fact that first “Black Powder” whiff of mine left me rather underwhelmed.

Next game in our campaign is to take place in a couple of weeks. Rest assured that next post about “Black Powder” will be posted shortly afterward.