GDA2

Moderators: Vis Bellica, Laffe, DCRBrown

baxterj
Posts: 82
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 9:20 pm

Re: GDA2

Post by baxterj »

Dave, we've played plenty of games here and they remain the only set we use. We have tinkered with them, including a card based activation process which works well, and a few little tweaks. I do think that the items you suggested under b) makes sense. My thoughts:

- I think skirmishers are a little too powerful by comparison to volley and artillery fire. Either reduce skirmishing (maybe one D6 per base, but hitting on a 6 only) or make V and A fire a little stronger;
- The Hesitant rule can make really impact games. Having a brigade stuck at the back of the table can be frustrating. I understand the friction effect and you can use ADCs to reduce the likelihood of Hesitant rolls, but I think it can have an exaggerated affect on games. We have the following house rules:

If brigade close order troops are not within 20cm’s of enemy close order troops or deployed artillery it only goes Hesitant on a roll of ONE.
If the C-in-C is within 10cms of a Brigade Commander who failed his Command Test he can automatically re-roll for that Brigadier. This is limited to one brigadier within 10cms (6”) of the C-in-C. Similarly, Brigades comprised fully of Guard rated units automatically re-roll a failed Command Test.
Last edited by baxterj on Fri Jun 11, 2021 4:52 am, edited 1 time in total.

Markconz
Posts: 45
Joined: Fri Jun 02, 2017 3:44 am

Re: GDA2

Post by Markconz »

Option b sounds good to me also.

The overall Napoleonic feel of GDA is something I very much like and prefer to many other Napoleonic rules. That said, as I mention in this review, a few of the mechanics are also pretty crunchy to work through, and the changes you are hinting at would seem well focused to me.
https://chasseuracheval.blogspot.com/20 ... armee.html

Of course this also just my personal preference, based on game size and time and what other people around me are prepared to play. I think it's important you stick to your own vision and type of game you yourself want to play, deciding on prioty of and approach to the categories I mention here, and spelling out some of the rationale for decisions to help players understand the intent and reasoning (as you did in GDA and very frequently on this forum):
https://chasseuracheval.blogspot.com/p/ ... leset.html

Otto
Posts: 10
Joined: Sun Jun 18, 2017 7:55 am

Re: GDA2

Post by Otto »

I'm another vote for your option 2 approach, however, given a number of people are quite happy with the rules as they are you could simply make the modifications/adjustments as optional rules. So what options would I like?
1. More streamlined approach to the command mechanics when you have limited time - probably something like TFL card approach.
2. Make the CnC relevant. Currently he could be with the brigade he is sending orders to and it doesn't make blind bit of difference.
3. Also, would like to see more emphasis on the brigade commanders in the testing. At the moment it doesn't make much difference if he is brilliant or incompetent in the brigade command test.
3. Agree that skirmishers can be too powerful. I've seen them take on artillery batteries and wipe them out mainly because artillery battery casualty levels are so much lower than say 3 or 4 bases or skirmishers. Yes I know all that stuff about supporting your artillery batteries but doesn't help much if the skirmishers are just as well supported.
4. Lastly. given these COVID times and that many gamers are solo players a solo system as per many boardgames would be a real benefit and something to make the rules standout even more from the pack.
Good luck

Smithy1854
Posts: 1
Joined: Thu Feb 04, 2021 12:42 pm

Re: GDA2

Post by Smithy1854 »

I agree with the majority of comments above , "if it aint broke, dont fix it" . The rules play perfectly well and do not need simplification , if you want more dice play warhammer. If anything is needed it is maybe a rules clarification supplement.
Please leave the rules as they are.
cheers Kev

User avatar
john de terre neuve
Posts: 1922
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:37 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: GDA2

Post by john de terre neuve »

Well, I have not played a lot of games and nothing since the pandemic started. I Have played quite a bit of PC as well and I do like the streamed lined charge/melee In that rule set. So maybe I agree with option B, but I have not played as much as those commenting above.

Generally, I am not averse to a 2nd edition of rulesets about 5 years after they come out as nothing is going to be 100% on first go. After a 2nd edition I think any further adjustments can be made in source books. But of course I think CoC really needs a 2nd edition which many disagree with.

This in no way diminishes GdA 1, it is my Napoleon is ruleset, I am not going to change.

JoHn

User avatar
john de terre neuve
Posts: 1922
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:37 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: GDA2

Post by john de terre neuve »

I should say the review by Chasseur is first rate and although I do not agree with all his points, I do agree that the game needs to be quicker. I have played maybe 7-8 games and not finished one. Every PC game I have played has come to an end.

bellebsc
Posts: 194
Joined: Mon Jul 09, 2018 10:57 am

Re: GDA2

Post by bellebsc »

John.

If your games are not coming to an end ?
I've played many and watched many in where they finish with a result albeit some not in my favour.

Are you playing scenarios as they have a turn limit along with objectives of which again can finish the game before the allocated amount of turns.

If your playing non fiction games then maybe you need to look at how big the game is, turns and objectives to give you a more balanced game that can be played in a day / evening or a weekend for bigger games.


Ricky

User avatar
john de terre neuve
Posts: 1922
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:37 pm
Location: Massachusetts
Contact:

Re: GDA2

Post by john de terre neuve »

I think I am saying that maybe there is a little too much complexity to some of the mechanics!

Contrarius
Posts: 490
Joined: Wed Mar 28, 2018 1:35 pm

Re: GDA2

Post by Contrarius »

Otto wrote:
Fri Jun 11, 2021 5:14 am
2. Make the CnC relevant. Currently he could be with the brigade he is sending orders to and it doesn't make blind bit of difference.
3. Also, would like to see more emphasis on the brigade commanders in the testing. At the moment it doesn't make much difference if he is brilliant or incompetent in the brigade command test.
I would agree with all of Otto’s points but especially these two.

The CnC figure seems to have too little to do in the battle. Would be good if his location had more of an effect on the orders process and on troop morale/order.

When testing for orders/hesitancy and charges, etc, the character/skill of the brigadier should play some role. Perhaps something like Leader Level could be borrowed from Sharp Practice, with more talented leaders having more ‘actions’ or ‘initiatives’ that can be used each turn to influence the behaviour of their brigade, perhaps in the form of an extra D6 in firing or combat or reducing the risk of hesitancy.

As I’ve said from the very beginning, I’m not altogether happy with the hesitancy system as it is. I know this is not a popular view as it works for most players, but it just seems too random to me. The rules are still great overall, so this is really just a minor niggle.

Chaingun
Posts: 86
Joined: Sat Jan 03, 2015 9:17 am

Re: GDA2

Post by Chaingun »

I agree with John and stick with option A. Yes it would be nice to see Melee happening after the charge, but otherwise it’s fine where it is. I think changing the volley fire and artillery mechanics to that of like skirmishes fire will start to move the excellent rules to being just like Black Powder. The I like both PC and GdA is that it’s not like Black Powder.

If I was looking at tinkering with anything, then I would align PC along with GdA. And in both sets be clearer on unit size and numbers of bases etc. As this can be confusing looking back through both rules categories on this forum. 😁👍
https://battlebunkerblog.com Wargaming for fun :D

Post Reply