Author Topic: 30YW/ECW Variant  (Read 8991 times)

kac

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 53
    • View Profile
30YW/ECW Variant
« on: September 02, 2012, 03:36:54 PM »
Well, the big cheese solicited it, so why not?

I'm willing to work with anybody on the board reviewing the rules page by page to come up with an official(?) variant to submit to Sam per his post on this board. First, a downloadable variant then maybe an official card deck with historical notables. I see doing the rules first, then going through the cards to come up with ideas and changes.

Any takers?

Paul.b.garnham

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 65
    • View Profile
Re: 30YW/ECW Variant
« Reply #1 on: September 02, 2012, 08:38:18 PM »


I'm in.


Paul

Paul.b.garnham

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 65
    • View Profile
Re: 30YW/ECW Variant
« Reply #2 on: September 02, 2012, 09:46:29 PM »

Although I expect some lively discussion. I see the lack of troop type in Maurice as a weakness, some issues can be covered by using different grading but not always.

Do you propose starting offline, I can send you my email address .


To start I suggest that we build a list of tactical characteristics for each army in the period. Then decide how to relate that back to Maurice. Perhaps the broader community could contribute to this phase even if they elect not to be in a working group.


Paul




kac

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 53
    • View Profile
Re: 30YW/ECW Variant
« Reply #3 on: September 03, 2012, 09:18:37 AM »
Paul, I look forward to working with you. Please feel free to message me your email.

Let's give the rest of the board till the end of the week before we start so as many as want to can participate.

I anticipate lively discussion and disagreement as well, but I believe that will make the result all the better!

Cincinnatus

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 67
    • View Profile
    • The Shrine of Sadness - My Wargaming Blog
Re: 30YW/ECW Variant
« Reply #4 on: September 03, 2012, 12:09:02 PM »
Great idea!  I've been thinking about this as well as ECW is one of my favourite periods and Maurice one of my favorite rulesets.  I'm in if you'll have me! :)

Old Grognard

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 144
    • View Profile
Re: 30YW/ECW Variant
« Reply #5 on: September 03, 2012, 02:38:34 PM »
More than happy to be a play tester.

kac

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 53
    • View Profile
Re: 30YW/ECW Variant
« Reply #6 on: September 03, 2012, 06:20:35 PM »
I am so pleased to hear from you. I certainly don't hold myself as an expert on 30YW/ECW, although I have studied them with pleasure for over 35 years now.

Everyone should feel free to send me his email address by personal message, I will respond immediately to let you know I got it, then we'll start organizing next weekend.

Thistledo

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 6
    • View Profile
Re: 30YW/ECW Variant
« Reply #7 on: September 05, 2012, 04:49:03 AM »
I am interested in using the Maurice mechanics for the ECW.  (Don't know much about the TYW.)

I think one of the basic questions to be sorted out first is basing. I have based my foot on three stands. Two sleeves of shot and a central base of pike. I prefer to treat this as one unit (unlike the Warlord P&S rules). So in Maurice there are 4 stands which can fire. Would I continue to roll four dice and just imagine the unit frontage divided into four parts? This is the simplest solution but I can see problems when the part  of the unit is blocked from firing. I don't want to measure the frontage and work out if that is the equivalent to one base or two which are blocked.

On the whole I would like to keep things as simple as possible while injecting period flavour. For example I think the difference in cavalry tactics can be covered in quality rating, rather than trying to model the firing of pistols before conact vs the charge home. On the other hand pursuit rules would be a must.

So far I have more questions than answers but look forward to trying out your ideas.

Alasdair

kac

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 53
    • View Profile
Re: 30YW/ECW Variant
« Reply #8 on: September 05, 2012, 06:42:45 AM »
Thanks for your thoughts. These are precisely the kind of issues we will be considering in our effort.

Paul.b.garnham

  • Jr. Member
  • **
  • Posts: 65
    • View Profile
Re: 30YW/ECW Variant
« Reply #9 on: September 05, 2012, 07:41:34 PM »

Not to pre-empt discussion but I also like 3 base units, have done so - always use 4 dice with 4 disruptions.

Old Grognard

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 144
    • View Profile
Re: 30YW/ECW Variant
« Reply #10 on: September 05, 2012, 07:49:19 PM »

Not to pre-empt discussion but I also like 3 base units, have done so - always use 4 dice with 4 disruptions.

Not against that idea, I assume each unit maintains 4 shooting dice?  Do you give teh middle base 2 shots (for things like LOS etc this becomes important)

Peter Clarke

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 211
    • View Profile
Re: 30YW/ECW Variant
« Reply #11 on: September 06, 2012, 12:48:02 AM »
If you are going to maintain four fire dice, then to keep things consistent with the 'sleeves of shot' approach, perhaps assigning two dice to each of the outer bases would be appropriate.

Alternatively, if you think that firing was considerably less effective in the early to mid-Seventeenth Century, you could consider having only a couple of firing dice per unit.

You would also need to consider whether you are going for a 'real' three base unit which is killed on 4 disruptions (with all that that implies) or treating them as 4 bases.

Peter

SteveBurt

  • Sr. Member
  • ****
  • Posts: 409
    • View Profile
Re: 30YW/ECW Variant
« Reply #12 on: September 06, 2012, 04:57:11 AM »
Well, I can tell you what we did for ECW.
1. Infantry fire using 4 bases, but need a base '5' to hit instead of '4'. We used 2 bases each Pike & Shot
2. Pure shot units (commanded shot and firelocks) fire needing 4s to hit as normal.
3. Cavalry which hit P&S frontally take the -2
4. The Pike bonus against infantry only kicks in if you charge a non-Pike armed unit
5. Dragoons are irregulars which move like cavalry but fight as infantry.
6. Cavaliers seems like to a good national characteristic to give the Cavaliers, and Clerics to Parliament.
7. Cavalry can fire at 2BW range to simulate caracole.

Peter Clarke

  • Full Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 211
    • View Profile
Re: 30YW/ECW Variant
« Reply #13 on: September 06, 2012, 05:25:21 AM »
7. Cavalry can fire at 2BW range to simulate caracole.

I could see this being too effective against infantry, potentially being able to get a few disruptions in before charging and getting a quick break against what were originally fresh infantry.  What 'to hit' number do they use?

Peter

Zhenya

  • Newbie
  • *
  • Posts: 4
    • View Profile
Re: 30YW/ECW Variant
« Reply #14 on: September 06, 2012, 06:30:04 AM »
To what extent did cavalry caracole in this period? It was more of a 16th century thing with deeper columns of cavalry firing in turn then trotting to the rear. It's my understanding that most cavalry of this period world ride forward, fire their pistols and charge home if the enemy faltered. Would be better dealt with as a melee?