Black Powder 2 First Impressions

So I went in and pre-ordered BP2 earlier this fall.  My copy arrived in the post on Tuesday Oct 9th having been shipped on Sept 24th, not bad turnaround for shipping from the UK to the Canadian backwoods.  Curt got his copy on Friday the 5th, but we had the Thanksgiving Weekend in between so that's only one business day between.  Judging by forum and FB chatter, I'm actually ahead of the curve on this one - that's ominous IMHO!

First off, BP and it's stable mates are a bit like Marmite - either loved, hated or just put with since we don't want to make it ourselves - in the war-game community.  I find that they give a good game and allow a fun game to be played out in an evening.  They are easy to pick up and that works well with new players those unfamiliar with the period in play.  Furthermore they give a good framework and allow the players to tailor them as desired.  Basically you can follow BP like my wife follows a cookbook recipe - keep to the way it's written the first time mostly and then mess around with it once you know how things work out.

I won't go through an in-depth review of changes, because I don't have time to do a side by side comparison, I play HC, P&S and BP and can't keep the subtle changes straight anyway and since we tend to work from the rulebook as we play anyway rather than rely on aging and fading memories.

Briefly here's the good points on the new edition.

• Visually it's what you expect - high quality printing with lots of eye candy - too bad the proof reading wasn't up to the same production standard (see below).
• It's well organized.  Hallelujah there's an index!!  I found it very easy to navigate and had no trouble finding the rules I wanted - often there's cross referencing.  Well done lads.
• I like the selection of scenarios - a wide range covering mainstream and no so mainstream periods.  There's also some valuable design notes on fitting historical battles into war-games scenarios.  Well done again.
• They've expanded the rules on Generals, adding personality traits and other features.  Most of us could do the same but it's useful to have the rulebook examples as a template to follow along or ignore as we wish.
• Having pre-ordered my copy came with a lovely figure of Russell Crowe from Master and Commander.  He won't fit into my current projects, but he might appear if I get back into War of 1812.

There are various fine tunings along the way that seem to bring the mechanisms in line with BP's younger siblings HC and P&S.  The ones I noted based on my read through and from following interweb chatter are.

• Artillery can now ignore skirmishers and fire on supports.
• Enfilade fire now retools misses instead of rolling twice the dice.
• Evade rules are more variable- you might get away or you might get caught.  Also I believe March columns can also evade.
• I think there are subtle changes within the command rolls and unit characteristics but have better things to do that work them all out!
• There are subtle changes to Irregular units, mostly who gets considered irregular.  In the Napoleonic age Riflemen and Voltigeurs count as irregular skirmishers which seems appropriate.  Furthermore in the 1815 rearguard scenario, both British and French Light Cavalry units are Irregular.  This is no hard and fast rule, but there's interesting scope for the scenario designer or tailor.

Ok now the not so good - the typos.  Here are the one's that jump out at me so far.

• This one is just annoying and has no effect of play but on p19 a picture of two lovely Napoleonic Chasseurs a Coeval Cheval Elite Company is labeled as French Cuirassiers.  Seriously?   You couldn't find a proof reader with even a rudimentary knowledge of the most well studied army in your period? Not one of you read a Blandford or Osprey or bought a box of Airfix Waterloo French Cavalry?  Reminds me of the first club armour game I played as a 13 year old and I confused T34s with Stalins.
• This one is far more serious.  On p49 the Morale Dice (Saving Throw) modifiers in the table are completely wrong - they cut and paste the mods from the command roll table.  After 5 minutes of WTFing about why distance from the General affected casualties I worked it out.  Luckily the table on the QRS got it right, and it hasn't changed from what we're familiar with.
• The enfilade fire rule mentioned above is correct in the rulebook p53, but wrong on the QRS p96.  So now we're left with the conundrum of is the rule book right (as with enfilade) or the QRS (like Saving Throws)?

Frankly I am disappointed with Warlord over the typos.  Personally I am a typo machine (ask my students) and I can work with typos in a lot of the hobby press.  But this was a high production, big box store rule book from an outfit that occupies a leadership position in the hobby.  I expect high production, leadership type production quality in proofreading as well as glossy pictures.  Warlord are not a cottage industry or a hobby press, they need to pull up their socks.  I've yet to see an official errata sheet or FAQs and that needs to hit the web ASAP.

However, once the typos are worked out I'm sure that BP2 will generate lots of fun games and get a lot of usage.  Hopefully it will generate interest in the Horse and Musket period in the hobby.

Painting Challenge - 9th US Infantry

Next up for me is the US 9th Infantry regiment, but once again only 8 of the 24 figures should count towards the Challenge.  I've been beefing up my 16 man units to 24 strong and the US 9th was next to get the upgrade.  These are a mix of 16 Perry figures and 8 Victrix.  The new additions are all Victrix and I partially rebased the unit to mix the two makes.  These were all painted up straight out of the box - ok, out of the box and then assembled as per the box as closely as I could get.

I've represented the 9th in the Official uniform - blue coat with red facings and white lace and the 1812 shako.  As with the 16th US,  the packs are a fudge as they regulation pack was shorter, softer sided and had black straps (not white).  More over there shouldn't be a blanket roll on top - I clearly painted these before I worked out that I should trim off the blanket roll like I did with the 16th.  I learn, but slowly, so the next US battalion will be the Perry figures with the shorter pack and the blanket roll trimmed off. 

I quite like how the unit paints up, but having looked at the photos I need to fix the flags a little.  RossMac noted that my 16th gave the impression of soldiers taking individual aimed shots rather than volleys, and I've aimed to get that appearance here as well.  I should really do a red coat unit that mimics the look of platoon volleys rippling up and down the line.

For the last two shots I have added the 2nd Light Dragoons.

That's 4 units of Americans.  Now I need to work on the good guys!

Painting Challenge - US Second Light Dragoons War of !812

My next entry for the Painting Challenge are these 6 members of the US 2nd Light Dragoons.  They will serve as a small unit in my war of 1812 Black Powder based games.  The figures are Perry Miniatures plastic French Dragoons, from the same box that provided the light infantry unit the Trojan Greens.  Conversion work was minimal - I trimmed off the Plastron of the jacket otherwise everything else was paint work.

The French dragoon sword is really too heavy for light dragoons but it works.  I retained the dragoon muskets instead of rigging carbines, I also used an arm from the dismounted figures so that one trooper carries a firearm in hand.  I don't have a lot of info on the horse furniture (I love that term, it makes me think of equine recliners) but i think the French sheepskin and shabraque works OK.  I really enjoyed painting these figures, especially the horses.  However, my patience is not really up to the task of the assembly and gluing as I always rush things to get to the good stuff (the painting).

There were two regiments of US light dragoons and between the two of them detachments served at mos of the actions of the War of 1812.  likely their best moment was a Crysler's farm where the 2nd charged British regulars.  They were repulsed by fire but their action allowed most of the artillery to get away.

Challenge Entry #2 - US 16th Infantry 1813

Eight of this 24 man unit make up my second submission.  These are the US 16th Infantry Regiment from the War of 1812 in 28mm.  The original 16 men I painted much earlier this year are Perry plastics and the 8 men I painted this week are Victrix plastics.  

These figures are based on a plate in the Osprey on the American War,  The US Army had difficulty obtaining blue cloth for its units, due in part to the trade embargoes that led to the war in the first place.  Many units made due with other colours, including the 16th who had black tunics with red facings and white lace.  Since officers bought their own uniforms they typically had the regulation blue faced red (although one expects as a premium price).  

My original plan was to put the Victrix figures on two separate bases and leave the 16 Perry-men as they were.  However, the two figure manufacturers have very different interpretations of the packs issued to British infantry.  The Perry figures have a shorter squatter pack while the Victrix packs are tall and skinnier.  Worse still, I took the blanket rolls off of my Perry figures (since the US didn't typically store their blankets on top) but left them on the Victrix figures.  I course noticed this right after I finished painting them in black tunics ….

I  decided that a miss-match of equipment was likely in 1813 and that using captured Brit kit to supplement was done as required.  But it looked better to blend the Victrix into the Perry masse rather than have them stand out on their own.  The two makes fit together well.  Once they were based I was telling them apart by their base shapes (Victrix's are square and Perry's round) or their packs.  

Given equipment and uniform issues, I gave the lot of them different coloured trousers.  My Trojan Green's faces didn't show the level of detail that I like so I gave these guys an extra wash of Raw Umber to bring the details out more (I hope).

Anyway the 16th fought in many of the key actions in the Niagara, Lake Ontario and Montreal campaigns.  Elements who present at York, Stoney Creek, Crysler's farm and Cook's Mills.

War of 1812 - Malicious Yanks and Malicious Canadians

OK now for the can of worms that is classifying Militia units for the war of 1812.  Once again I will use Black Powder as my starting point.

The big problem is that this is a wide catch-all phrase that covers units ranging from well-to-do new Englanders playing toy soldiers in fancy uniforms to farmers and shop keepers defending their homes to Kentucky backwoodsmen with rifles!   Variability also appears in results - as in some cases militia units fought very well and at others they melted away at the sight of the enemy.

I'm going to make things a little easier for myself to sticking to the campaign area that I am most interested in - the US/Canadian border along the Niagara, Lake Ontario and the St. Lawrence.  Patriotism aside, this area saw 3 years of back and forth actions with lots of opportunities for "Table Top Teaser" actions as well as pitched battles.  The Western, Chesapeake and Louisiana fronts are all interesting but of more limited scope.

A few generalizations.

• In general, the Canadian militia was more reliable than the US militia.  
• Units who stayed in arms for entire campaigning seasons did better than part-timers who showed up when required.
• Militia units did better on defence than on the attack.
• Militia units often performed better when they were defending their own areas.  I'm not sure how to apply this one to the Canadian Volunteers in the US armies.  One could argue that having a bounty for treason on one's head would be a powerful incentive to fight to the end or alternately run away!

Rather than attempt to classify each type of militia unit separately, I am going to list potential BP "special rules" that can be applied to militia units.  Note that I am planning to treat the best Canadian militia units (the Incorporated and Select Militias and permanent light infantry units) as regulars.

• Unreliable (no move on an Equal Command Roll).  This is pretty much a given for most militia units.  It simulates both unfamiliarity in drill and manoeuvre and also the animosity on the US side between militia and regular officers.
• Freshly Raised (random effectiveness on first shot or melee).  This seems tailor made for the part timers.  Regular officers never quite knew the metal of their militiamen until the point of contact.
• Untested (random stamina).  More variability, which represents that generals could never be sure how many militiamen answered the call, or their willingness to stay in the fight once they got there.
• First Fire and Form Square- nope and nope.
• Rifles:  some US militia companies carried rifles, notably New Yorkers playing dress up and Kentucky back woodsmen.  Some Canadian militia units also had rifle companies but these were much less prominent.
• Sharp Shooters (reroll one miss)  it seems apropos to give a very select few of the Davey Crocket's of the backwoods this bonus.
• Skirmishers militia seems to either fought in line (badly) or in skirmish (with mixed results but generally much better).   I would suggest that once a militia unit goes into skirmish order, it should not be able to form up again.  They can arrive on table in column or line and go into skirmish, the the reverse shouldn't be available.  Mixed Formation also seems too complex for militia, it's an all in skirmish or none thing.
• Marauders would only apply to very high quality back woodsmen (Kentucky vets of Indian campaigns).

So in summary, I expect to field militia units which are Unreliable and often Freshly Raised.  In the case where militia are raised quickly following an alarm I would count them as Untested.  I will field them as small units to make them brittle and allow a proportion to skirmish.

Next time round - Cavalry and Native troops.

War of 1812 Black Powder Ideas

As my recent Painting Challenge entry shows, I'm dusting off my War of 1812 collections and plans.  Gaming wise, I like the simplicity and flexibility of the Black Powder system so will use this as my starting point.  One feature that really appeals is that a "unit" can represent a battalion for larger actions and a company or detachment for a small actions.

Most frustrations with BP deal with the orders and activation phase, which lead to all or nothing results that differ from command to command.  Perversely I think that this works for 1812 where nothing seemed to go according to plan.  However, I think I'll graft on the old chestnut of the Control Check from RossMac's With MacDuff to the Frontier rules.  Any command that fails it's Order rest rolls a d6 with results as follows.

• 1-2 Unit may make a single move but may not advance
• 3-4 Unit may make a single move as ordered.
• 5-6 Unit continues its last move (e.g. units in a fire fight stand and shoot)

Once a commander fails an order test, any units without orders will also take a control check.

The other nice feature of BP is the "selection of useful rules" used to differentiate between unit qualities.  My first cut on applying this to 1812 goes as follows.

Redcoats:  By this I mean the numbered British regiments of foot who are acting as a collection of companies as a line infantry unit.  Basically, these are units who are trained to fight in the line of battle like Wellington's troops and include officers and NCOs with line of battle experience.  I don't include small detachments, composite units from several battalions, detached light companies, foreign and fencible regiments, royal marines or the Royal Veteran battalions.  The BP rules First Fire (extra fire dice on first contact), Reliable (+1 on command rolls), and Elite (may recover disorder on a 4+ without rallying) would apply to these units to give them an edge in fire fights and more likely to follow orders.  The BP  Mixed Formation (detached skirmishers)would not apply since they detached their light companies to skirmish.  Also the  Form Square (as a charge response) would not apply in North America - the one cavalry charge in the war was repulsed by fire from redcoats in line.

Regulars:  This includes most U.S. infantry regiments, US artillery serving as infantry, Canadian Fencible regiments, permanent Canadian (i.e. Incorporated and Select) militia units, marines acting as line infantry, Swiss and any British units not meeting the definition of redcoats.  These units are bog standard BP units who may used the Mixed Formation  (they frequently detached pickets) but can't use the Form Square rule.  US units trained by Winfield Scott prior to the 1814 Niagara campaign would get the First Fire bonus.

Regular Light Infantry: This includes detached British light companies, Canadian Fencible light infantry, US Rifle regiments, and infantry detachments acting as standalone roles.  They can Skirmish and have the Marauder (ignore distance penalties on command rolls) rule.  These would typically be small units.  Some units might get the Sharp Shooters rule (re-roll 1 missed shot) but I'd use this infrequently for flavour in particular scenarios.  The US Rifle regiments have rifles, but everyone else uses muskets.

Regular Light Cavalry: This includes British and US light dragoons, but not militia units.  They can Skirmish and have the Marauder (ignore distance penalties on command rolls) rule.  These would be small units.

Artillery: I would include not only regular artillerymen but also militia, sailors and marines manning guns.  No need for special rules here, although Crack and Stubborn could give morale bonuses for occasional scenario flavour.  There was a big range in gun calibre used (6-24 pounders) so pick your gun ranges to suit.  The smaller units mean that some howitzers (and mortars) can be used, and don't forget the marine rocket batteries.

Next time around we'll look at militia and irregular units...