Is the AWI best served with our current crop of rules?

[phaidknott 7254xp 0]

“Am a tad late to the party… I’ve been home-bashing a 6mm solo variant of Andy Callan’s old “Loose Files and American Scramble” (adding SP type activation, use of Blinds in woods etc.. etc.). Still a WiP, but the games are fun and flavoursome..”

 

Be interested in hearing more about these (as they sound perfect for refighting the smaller battles such as Cowpens or Hubbardton). I’m starting to come to the conclusion that you’ll not find any one set of rules to play ALL of the battles in the AWI due to the scope of some of the battles (with some of the battles have just a few hundred a side). My stuff is all 10mm (Clibinarium’s excellent Pendraken sculpts), so I’m not far off 6mm 😀

[EyeDeeDee 29xp 1]

Personally I reckon that for AWI (like many other conflicts) the variation in potential scenarios and scale of operations (let alone terrain types and local variants) kicks  the “One rule set to play them all” idea out the window. Most wars are like this, but AWI is an extreme example of this (for the Black Powder period). Hence any system that tries to have one set of rules to cover everything sets itself up to fail – and anything for AWI which is just a variant on Napoleonic or 7YW is definitely short-changing the buyers….

To reflect the war the rules (like WW2 and good Napoleonic rule sets) have to change to reflect different types of fight, different theatres, – AND the vital changes that occurred as the war progressed. For a start any rule writer needs to look at the “score sheet”*, the reason for the individual results, and adapt the rules to suit. SOME historical battles SHOULD be almost always unwinnable for one side (I never have an issue with that anyway, as most of my games are solo).

(*E.g. https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_American_Revolutionary_War_battles)

It sounds as if British Grenadier is out of a similar stable LFAAS. British aggression is fine and historical. British success ditto – where circumstances are equal, in a set-piece battle, a lot of the time. But do the rules reflect the above score sheet – or the actual methods used for success in different theatres/time periods..?

As for me, I’ve never found a “perfect” AWI rules set, and I don’t believe one exists to cover the whole of this complex conflict. Some approximations are better than others; but that’s all they’ll be, so we have to compromise  – unless we’re prepared to do the research/writing/tweaking ourselves…

[EyeDeeDee 29xp 1]

Oops, missed your last post before I replied to the earlier one… I think we’re singing from the same songsheet… 🙂

Here’s a link to  “Loose Files and American Scramble” (below).  VERY 1980s. Very basic (three pages).

https://www.gf9.com/Portals/0/all_images/WargamesIllustrated/WI1-WEBLooseFiles.pdf

As with all rules I tweak them quite a bit for extra colour and add processes for solo play. I’ve revisited them again this year while fighting a campaign (using one of the scenarios from AH’s 1776, with the battles fought on the table in 6mm), so they are evolving again as I go….

[WeeDavey 25xp 0]

@phaidknott, I also play British Grenadier and I must say I thoroughly enjoy the rules set. That said, I think the problem you are talking about arises from the selection of battles represented in the scenario books. Although British loyalist troops do appear in several scenarios it is usually in a supporting role to the regulars because these are the major encounters of the war.

If you are looking to represent the smaller battles and skirmishes I would also suggest having a look at Sharp Practice and the associated scenario packs ‘Swamp Fox’ and ‘With Fire and Sword’ which foreground the militia conflict in South Carolina.

[Wolfie65 1281xp 0]

Not sure if this would help, but I had good success playing a fantasy version of the battle of the Alamo – a very uneven contest to say the least – using the Flintloque rules for the defenders and the  Slaughterloo rules for the attackers.

[Author]

Posts