GDA2

Moderators: Vis Bellica, Laffe, DCRBrown

Post Reply
Eg407
Posts: 3
Joined: Mon Aug 10, 2020 4:41 pm

Re: GDA2

Post by Eg407 »

Hi Dave and all,

I would like to add my vote to the possibility of creating more scenarios and campaign books over a fully revised version of the rules.

A possible thought on some of the comments. I wonder if there is an element of semantics. We have the brigades going 'Hesitant' but this might give the wrong impression of what is actually wanting to be modeled by the mechanic. Similarly the casualty tables, that are also modelling a loss of cohesion and further loss of battlefield effectiveness that are not totally linked to the butchers bill. Perhaps the update could change the wording slightly that might make it easier to get into the flow of the rules.

Best,
EG
nikjen66
Posts: 434
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 6:20 pm
Location: Cambridge UK

Re: GDA2

Post by nikjen66 »

Hi DB,

I agree with the comments around no change but focus your efforts on more scenario books for both GdA and O Group so we have the numbers that you have already provided for GdB but on different actions as many of the GdB ones are easy enough to convert already.

Cheers

Nick
Fairfax
Posts: 33
Joined: Tue May 30, 2017 7:36 am
Location: Cheshire UK

Re: GDA2

Post by Fairfax »

Hi All

I am struggling to get to grips with the rules again after a gap of about four years!! Having tried so many previous sets, I find myself encountering "rules merge" or confusion with some of the multiple processes required, particularly on charging. I posted questions on this subject years ago and got some very helpful answers. I suspect I may be a bit thick!

Maybe it's an age thing, having started with Don Featherstone's rules in the early seventies. On which subject a larger font QR sheet would be appreciated, my peepers aren't what they used to be 😳

I look forward to seeing the outcome of the debate.

Cheers
Keith
nikjen66
Posts: 434
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 6:20 pm
Location: Cambridge UK

Re: GDA2

Post by nikjen66 »

Hi Dave,

Following the previous comments, having played a few ‘real’ games recently and watched a few online videos on YouTube (big shout out to JP and the Boy Wonder) a couple of teaks that you like like to consider.
1. When units are destroyed due to losses (firing/melee/ discipline test) I think that they should still be considered to be making their initial rout/retreat move. It can often happen that when such a unit is removed the troops to rear are totally unaffected but, if the retreating/routing unit had only 1 strength point left it would cause as much chaos as a unit at almost full strength. The evaporation and sometimes exposing of victorious units who can be left hanging is an interesting/funny conundrum dependent on your perspective.
2. Artillery standing in the open, in particular against cavalry. I don’t get why there is no penalty for the gunners on the charge test? It seems to be too easy for gunners to stand, often following on from a crushing defensive fire, when infantry, who are arguably stronger in numbers and formation (even in line) than a hundred or so scattered blokes about to take on 3 or 4 times their number, who are on horseback, with buckets, sponges and fruit knives. And 3 dice in combat, really?
User avatar
DCRBrown
Posts: 1352
Joined: Mon Oct 31, 2016 5:04 pm

Re: GDA2

Post by DCRBrown »

N66,

1. When units are destroyed due to losses (firing/melee/ discipline test) I think that they should still be considered to be making their initial rout/retreat move.
It can often happen that when such a unit is removed the troops to rear are totally unaffected but, if the retreating/routing unit had only 1 strength point left it would cause as much chaos as a unit at almost full strength.


Well said! This has already been discussed and will simply follow the current rule regarding retreating/routing for the first 10cms.


2. Artillery standing in the open, in particular against cavalry. I don’t get why there is no penalty for the gunners on the charge test? It seems to be too easy for gunners to stand, often following on from a crushing defensive fire, when infantry, who are arguably stronger in numbers and formation (even in line) than a hundred or so scattered blokes about to take on 3 or 4 times their number, who are on horseback, with buckets, sponges and fruit knives. And 3 dice in combat, really?

I would look at this, not from the gunner's perspective, but the attacking infantry or cavalry.

Both infantry and cavalry were more inclined to close against musket fire than cannon shot and canister. Charging a battery of guns head on was a rarity. Why? Because in memoirs Napoleonic soldiers stated that they had a good chance of survival against musket volleys, they knew they were inaccurate, so unlikely to be hit or even if unlucky enough to be hit they could well survive.

Now turn your attention to the likelihood of surviving a hit by shot or heavy canister. There is no "I might get away with this one" thinking anymore - if you are hit you are dead. That's it.
Image
Therefore charging a battery of guns head on takes real nerve, hence that's why the gunners receive no negative and why they have 3 CD in "melee". The 3CD is their last ditch round of hasty canister, they either get lucky and see off their attackers or they are cut down. That's why batteries being overrun was often remarked upon as something special or exceptional and it is in GdA as well.

DB
nikjen66
Posts: 434
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 6:20 pm
Location: Cambridge UK

Re: GDA2

Post by nikjen66 »

Cheers Dave. All very sensible and well explained.
Cheers
Nick
Marshal Rob
Posts: 62
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2020 10:16 am

Re: GDA2

Post by Marshal Rob »

Hi Dave,
These are combined rules questions and points that could be explained better in V2.
1. From a terminology point of view Garrison Fire is neither skirmish fire nor volley fire - so the fire range rules don't cover this. What is the range of fire for Garrison fire? At the moment we are playing it as at volley fire range.
2. The melee result Firefight! (we got it for the first time a few days ago) - Do you actually perform an immediate fire resolution or is this considered to have happened with the melee hit rolls as the result?

Cheers
Rob
Archdukek
Posts: 5741
Joined: Tue Sep 03, 2013 11:49 pm
Location: Linlithgow, West Lothian, UK

Re: GDA2

Post by Archdukek »

Marshal Rob wrote: Tue Jul 20, 2021 9:21 am Hi Dave,
These are combined rules questions and points that could be explained better in V2.
1. From a terminology point of view Garrison Fire is neither skirmish fire nor volley fire - so the fire range rules don't cover this. What is the range of fire for Garrison fire? At the moment we are playing it as at volley fire range.
2. The melee result Firefight! (we got it for the first time a few days ago) - Do you actually perform an immediate fire resolution or is this considered to have happened with the melee hit rolls as the result?

Cheers
Rob
Hi Rob,
Not Dave, but hopefully these comments will help.

On 1, Garrison fire is just a form of Skirmish Fire. See paragraph 5 on page 76.
The range is given on page 69 and is the same as Skirmishers.

On 2, we have always assumed that the Melee casualties are the result of any Firefight! result. Basically the attackers have stopped before contact, hence the move back to the 5cm[3”] point, and have engaged with short range fire rather than cold steel.

John
nikjen66
Posts: 434
Joined: Tue Nov 25, 2014 6:20 pm
Location: Cambridge UK

Re: GDA2

Post by nikjen66 »

Hi Dave,

One more thing for consideration is the musketry firing table. I really like this as it’s simple with few modifiers and relies on minimal checks. It works well with the skirmish and artillery fire all being distinct but very simple whilst allowing for quality/target/situation all to be rolled in to one.

The one thing I sometimes struggle with is where quality and situation clash. The two main times this occurs are:
1. Small Elite units. Do they use the superior line or the inferior line. It feels like they should probably end up on the middle/regular row but.....?
2. Small or poor quality units . These always fire as inferior volleys even when they move. This means that the best units in the world all of a sudden become just as bad as the worst militia unit if they both move. Considering this is a larger scale game with each turn being quite long, Wouldn’t it be better to apply a small negative modifier, as with artillery, for any unit that moves perhaps -1/-2 rather than demoting all moving shooters to inferior? At present you can whiz around with poor quality troops blasting away all the time without any further penalty.

Nick
Marshal Rob
Posts: 62
Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2020 10:16 am

Re: GDA2

Post by Marshal Rob »

Hi Dave Nick and John,
First - thanks John, as usual the answer is in the rules. But - I am not happy with garrisons firing to 12. Add the size of the BUA then 12x2 and the danger zone is big. Put the 95th Rifles in a garrison and the zone of danger is enormous.

We have just finished 3 evenings of solid infantry fighting - 6 brigades French mixed Vet/Line standard and small (Reille's Corp for Quatre Bras less 4 Battalions) vs 4 of large line Austrians.

So, second - I agree with Nick - I noted that there was no difference if my small Line and Vet had been recruits. A fiddle with the firing rules should make recruits more honest.

The outcome was sad for the French - All (sic) charges rolled low and the Austrains rolled high. The French Artillery Assault shoots had poor dice too.

Third - At one point the Austrian player rolled 4x6's!!! So a question - does that mean 2 Destiny rolls???

Cheers
Marshal Rob
Post Reply