GDA2
Moderators: Vis Bellica, Laffe, DCRBrown
Re: GDA2
Otto,
If we take a look at this diagram what has happened to Durutte?
If we took this as four GdA brigades attacking, we could interpret this as Durutte has been Hesitant for at least one or more turns and hence his attack, although echeloned, is still well behind the others and coming in late?
He's not stopped, he's just advancing more slowly than the other formations.
DB
If we take a look at this diagram what has happened to Durutte?
If we took this as four GdA brigades attacking, we could interpret this as Durutte has been Hesitant for at least one or more turns and hence his attack, although echeloned, is still well behind the others and coming in late?
He's not stopped, he's just advancing more slowly than the other formations.
DB
Re: GDA2
Hi to all,
I’ve been following the discussion here closely and thinking intently on the possible repercussions of change to my favourite set of rules.
I have to lay my cards on the table here - I’m in the “no change” to “very nearly no change” camp. Perhaps the CinC being a bit more involved could work well.
I play larger games, use skirmishers frequently as was the doctrine of the time, enjoy the command and control wrinkles of limited adc’s and the effect of formations being recalcitrant at the least convenient times.
I would rather see the efforts on a GdA 2 reboot to go to more scenario and campaign books Dave. I really feel these are the most enjoyable and atmospheric Napoleonic rules we have ever used in many, many decades of gaming the period.
For what it’s worth.
Carlo
PS - Either way you know I’ll be in the front of the queue with PayPal account waiting
I’ve been following the discussion here closely and thinking intently on the possible repercussions of change to my favourite set of rules.
I have to lay my cards on the table here - I’m in the “no change” to “very nearly no change” camp. Perhaps the CinC being a bit more involved could work well.
I play larger games, use skirmishers frequently as was the doctrine of the time, enjoy the command and control wrinkles of limited adc’s and the effect of formations being recalcitrant at the least convenient times.
I would rather see the efforts on a GdA 2 reboot to go to more scenario and campaign books Dave. I really feel these are the most enjoyable and atmospheric Napoleonic rules we have ever used in many, many decades of gaming the period.
For what it’s worth.
Carlo
PS - Either way you know I’ll be in the front of the queue with PayPal account waiting
Re: GDA2
Hi Rob,Marshal Rob wrote: ↑Thu Jul 01, 2021 7:25 am Hi Again,
Here is an example of an unclear rule - is it in fact a rule? Page 43 example supports in a charge - case B. It says the rear column may support the lead column...then "It cannot, however, join any potential melee." Is this a rule? - or - Where are the rules about what supports can join ..."any potential melee"? It can reinforce a melee from the rear, by contacting the rear of the friendly unit - page 90
This is not clear and why the distinction in diagram B?
As usual I am probably missing something. And thanks again Dave it is a very good game as is.
Cheers
Marshal Rob
The rule you are missing, which case B in the diagram on p43 illustrates, is in paragraph 14 on page 49 which deals with the process of Closing to Melee after completion of the Charge Procedure. “Rear supports … do not close to Melee in the first round but may reinforce if there is a second turn of Melee, …”
Seems clear enough to me.
John
Re: GDA2
I'm firmly in the "No changes" camp and I agree with Pyjamas/Carlo in that efforts could be better spent on scenario books. A book of historic or generic scenarios with any rule changes served up as 'Optional" rules would be my preference.
Re: GDA2
Thanks for your piece on Durutte Dave. What I was getting at is how do you prevent or restrict a tabletop commander who has ordered an attack on a position from changing his mind once he sees the enemy counter-moves because of players helicopter views? So while troops can go hesitant (which is a great mechanism) it is too easy for commanders to cancel attacks once they see enemy countermoves.
Re: GDA2
I am an inveterate "rules tinkerer" and have left these well alone - my favourite Napoleonic set! That said there has never been a set of rules (or much else) that couldn't be improved - I am still scratching my head over massed columns to be honest - so clarifications/explanations/examples always welcome, but these rules pretty much do it for me!
Re: GDA2
Never thought I'd find myself so closely aligned to and in complete agreement with a "StralianPyjamas wrote: ↑Thu Jul 01, 2021 1:10 pm
I would rather see the efforts on a GdA 2 reboot to go to more scenario and campaign books Dave. I really feel these are the most enjoyable and atmospheric Napoleonic rules we have ever used in many, many decades of gaming the period.
For what it’s worth.
Carlo
PS - Either way you know I’ll be in the front of the queue with PayPal account waiting
Great rules Dave, I've never been able to play large games without an headache before GdeA appeared
Re: GDA2
The biggest draw for me for this rule set is the charge phase, I just find it provides the full flavour of what I personally feel and believe Napoleonic warfare to be.
Although I’m conscious meddling with this may negatively effect it. I do trust, understand and appreciate the historic reasons you provide within the book and forums for the rules created. Also helps immerse me into the battle and theme as opposed to number crunching.
I like the ADC and command system but I am curious how a card system similar to sharp practice may work, although that may break the games other mechanics. Hesitancy for example, but may open the game up for more solo and drama. Not sure if this will steer away from accuracy that makes the rule set great mind you.
Never has an issue with the skirmishes shooting. I also enjoy having a table for the volley firing aspect.
So all in all. I’m going for a, however I trust you for b. Option c doesn’t sound like it would be general d’armee version 2 to me.
I own black powder edition 2. Not sure they made too many drastic changes from version 1.
Although I’m conscious meddling with this may negatively effect it. I do trust, understand and appreciate the historic reasons you provide within the book and forums for the rules created. Also helps immerse me into the battle and theme as opposed to number crunching.
I like the ADC and command system but I am curious how a card system similar to sharp practice may work, although that may break the games other mechanics. Hesitancy for example, but may open the game up for more solo and drama. Not sure if this will steer away from accuracy that makes the rule set great mind you.
Never has an issue with the skirmishes shooting. I also enjoy having a table for the volley firing aspect.
So all in all. I’m going for a, however I trust you for b. Option c doesn’t sound like it would be general d’armee version 2 to me.
I own black powder edition 2. Not sure they made too many drastic changes from version 1.
-
- Posts: 62
- Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2020 10:16 am
Re: GDA2
Hi John,Archdukek wrote: ↑Thu Jul 01, 2021 9:13 pmHi Rob,Marshal Rob wrote: ↑Thu Jul 01, 2021 7:25 am Hi Again,
Here is an example of an unclear rule - is it in fact a rule? Page 43 example supports in a charge - case B. It says the rear column may support the lead column...then "It cannot, however, join any potential melee." Is this a rule? - or - Where are the rules about what supports can join ..."any potential melee"? It can reinforce a melee from the rear, by contacting the rear of the friendly unit - page 90
This is not clear and why the distinction in diagram B?
As usual I am probably missing something. And thanks again Dave it is a very good game as is.
Cheers
Marshal Rob
The rule you are missing, which case B in the diagram on p43 illustrates, is in paragraph 14 on page 49 which deals with the process of Closing to Melee after completion of the Charge Procedure. “Rear supports … do not close to Melee in the first round but may reinforce if there is a second turn of Melee, …”
Seems clear enough to me.
John
Yes, it is very obviously the answer - as usual it is the one paragraph I could never find when faced with the issue - such is life.
Thanks for the help.
Rob
-
- Posts: 62
- Joined: Sat Mar 07, 2020 10:16 am
Re: GDA2
Hi All,
IF you modify hesitancy, maybe it should only have effect when within a certain distance of the enemy. This also assists game speed/grand tactical movement. Further to this you could introduce a variable move distance die roll as an effect for hesitancy that excludes full movement distance and can go no nearer than X inches/cm - then Durutte can "go slow" and lag behind the rest of D'Erlons big effort.
Marshal Rob
IF you modify hesitancy, maybe it should only have effect when within a certain distance of the enemy. This also assists game speed/grand tactical movement. Further to this you could introduce a variable move distance die roll as an effect for hesitancy that excludes full movement distance and can go no nearer than X inches/cm - then Durutte can "go slow" and lag behind the rest of D'Erlons big effort.
Marshal Rob