BB 30

[Colonel Kilgore]

A few comments on the latest (version 30) iteration:

Page 30: Hedge: "Cavalry may not assault into stream scenery" should presumably read "Cavalry may not assault into hedge scenery"?
Page 30: Ditch: "Cavalry may not assault into stream scenery" should presumably read "Cavalry may not assault into ditch scenery"?
Page 48: 71. Saves: I don't get the reference to an 18-sided dice, when the odds provided are all out of 36...
Page 54: 81. Books and films: I would still humbly submit that "The Military Campaigns of the Wars of the Roses", by Philip A Haigh, deserve an honourable mention here

[martin goddard]

Thanks Simon

[Leman (Andy)]

Have to agree about the Philip Haigh book. It's a little gem on the subject. Unlike most books on the WoR it doesn't spend the first 17 chapters explaining what happened between 1386 and 1455.   

[John Watson]

Re Philip Haigh's book. I would be careful referencing it if you want your rules taken seriously. It came in for a lot of negative criticism at the time of publication although I can't remember precisely why. I think there were suggestions that the author did not know his subject.
As chair of the Society I would hope that the Lance and Longbow Society would get an honourable mention along with all their publications on the subject. After all they have been supporting the period for close on 30 years.
Cheers
John

[Leman (Andy)]

Still rather refer to it for actual battles, unlike most of the books on the WoR which are predominantly political histories with a couple of lines on a battle thrown in. The Battlefield series of books have some interesting volumes on the WoR as well, including walking the battlefields.

[Leslie BT]

John as part of the play test group, I hope your sending Martin your constructive comments and results from the games your playing.

[lowroller]

Hi, guys

I've been over on the Hammerin' Iron pages, so haven't looked in here recently.
I am intrigued to see the work towards a new gridded BB system.  I will watch this with interest.

I also endorse Philip Haigh's book, although I note that for First St. Alban's (which I am solo playing at the moment) he mentions defending 'the town gates', not the usually-quoted street barricades. (Has anyone found any suitable medieval-looking barricades?).

Regarding cavalry, have you considered allowing cavalry to be replaced (for the whole game) by dismounted figures as a small fighters-only foot unit, if the terrain is unsuitable?  It would mean buying a few more figures, of course, but I'm sure Martin wouldn't mind that!
(Just re-reading the rules, I notice that dismounting during the game is already allowed, but I am suggesting this as part of deployment.)

[Nick]

BB30
Page 6 - the game setup table - the compulsory scenery hasn't been updated, still refers to marsh, not meadow.
There's also a reference to the points total of 65 which should now read 70?

Nick

[Nick]

A couple more (just arisen from setting up for next game).
39 Army Deployment (top of p25 - Forward zones) - "The off table units allowed to deploy in its new zone cannot include any units put off table by the scenario." - but scenario generator comes after deployment anyway, so this couldn't arise.
46 Scenario Generator. Page 27. Scenario B - Battle Craft and reputation. The 3+ outcome allows a player to swap two opponents zones completely - what do you do about guns if they would end up in a zone with scenery they can't deploy in, are they lost?

Nick

[Leslie BT]

Game using BB30.
Half hour to run through the game setup, one and three quarter hours to play and do the victory points.
At the start the defender lost 3 units and 8 half bases, piggy chase put us in the 8 - 20 band.
The index needs updating.
Comments.
1.  Guns shunting free? We could not find any information.
2.  In the scenarios we end by selecting change one item of scenery, we changed the "Happy Meadow" into a marsh, the meadow had had two light guns deployed in to this Zone so after the exchange we moved the guns to a permitted scenery type in the reserve zone.
3.  If swapping zones and the general is not attached to a unit does he have to go with the ward or can he remain in the zone.
4.  On the play sheet "Turn Sequence", item 11 should read "Ward Recovery" not "restore Ward".
5.  When carrying out ward recovery.  There are four units in the selected Ward for recovery. So 4 dice are rolled. I have 4 successes. So 4 half bases will be created. One of the units in the Ward is down to 2 full bases, so can I add the 4 new half bases to the same unit.
6.  Again on the  "Turn Sequence" we need to add where the "Within Markers" are placed.
7.  In the shooting sequence we need to add a bullet point list as to the exact sequence.  If the Ward is in the woods, and they are the passive player. The active player declares and assault, can the ward then declare they are within?
8.  In the dice calculation for a fight does a gun count as "Other unit".
9.  We found the cap on fight dice at 14 negated one players advantage. we both ended up on 14 dice and the assaulter lost even though he had better quality units.
10.  What happens to a general who is attached to the cavalry who lose a fight, he was picked up in the charge and charged forward three zones. Where does he end up after the charge.
11.  Again through the game we only had one charge, most kills came from shooting.

Game end. Attacker 11, 4.5 bases lost.  Defender 16, 7 bases lost.
We played with the "Best quality" army (13 units) as the attacker.  And the "Poor quality" army (20 units) as the defender.
The attacker was unable to use his cavalry due to the defender remaining in or behind scenery.
We felt there were not enough zones in width, and the defender with 20 units did not allow the attacker an advantage in any zone. The defender did not get two units on from reserves. The attacker had one general that also stayed in the reserves.

[Leslie BT]

The table layout for today's game.

Attackers edge

Gentle hill   

   

Rough hill

l   
   

Meadow that became Marsh

Marsh

Wood

Buildings

Defenders edge
[/size]

[Nick]

I've also found the width of the game table a bit restricting so far. Would be interested to hear whether more zones in width is a possibility, or if 3 is written in stone.

Nick

[martin goddard]

Hello
I am back in my chair!
Good to see people are lay testing. Thank you.

[martin goddard]

Les i will get all of that in the rules today and get a new set out for tea time!
Nick. The 3/4 zone matter is interesting.

Number of zones
Here is some of my thinking which we can all discuss.

3 zones
1. Simulates the army being into 3 wards
2. Allows templates to make the "gridding" obvious. one aim of the rules is to allow gamers to use grids without the psychological/dogmatic barriers.
3. Zones do get quite crowded but that seems historical.

4 zones
1. Gives better tactical flexibility. Good for battle plans. This might also be created by fewer units on the 3 zone width.
2. Can be done with 15" zones on a 5x3 cloth.

[Stewart 46A]

4 zones on the current 4x3 would be 12" wide, advantage of using 12" templates from other Peter Pig rules.
Interesting game if inital deployment is to 3 zones only (2 centre, + left or right).
Army size can remain at 70 points, 3 commands.