Thanks for the responses. Traveling always trumps answering online queries. I am presently on the coast of Maine, enjoying the prospect of the temperature going above freezing later today. Cold, yes but also quiet and beautiful. Back home in a few days.
After Christmas we either give the Monongahela another go or try the Plains of Abraham. All of our French regulars are painted as those regiments. For some strange reason we have never fought that battle yet.
With a game under my belt, NOW I have given them a good look, the sort of look I should have done before the game. Ah well, t'is the season of good cheer. Perhaps too much good cheer.
I have espied what seems a typo. Melee rules note that artillery cannot advance after winning a melee, but the new charge rules state that gunners evade and if they cannot are dispersed.
Overall, the game is even more decisive than before. Weakened units are highly likely to retreat (or worse). In the previous version of the rules, weakened units often stood for several turns. Now they are a real weak spot. I also like units in bad morale causing hits to those who see them, even though we only started doing this part way through our game. More questions later.
Now the inevitable questions. In our game the 78th became weakened and then fell back in bad morale. Jay sent them back through the artillery rather than through a wing of the 48th, putting hits on the guns. They failed to rally. On the next turn they were sandwiched between the guns and another wing of the 48th. Continued retreat would run through the 48th. We rolled dice to see if the 48th could move first and that was the decision. The 48th moved through the retreating highlanders and were spared any hits for being run through. I guess that was the correct sequence.
But we did not give hits to the 48th for seeing the kilted runners. We did to a couple other units (everything was rather haphazard). We decided that a running unit only dealt out hits the first turn it was running. If true, the 48th should have taken a hit upon seeing the highlanders when they ran. Should they have also taken a hit seeing them on the next turn? Seems a bit severe. It might make passage of lines a problem.
Anyway, we like the game just fine even if we are confused from time to time. We are unlikely to cease having wine with dinner and we need extremely simple directions. Hmm, that may make us the perfect target test group. Or an immense pain.
OK, link to the AAR will be along soon. I do have a few questions. We had a unit (grenadiers) that retreated, giving out hits to the friends who saw it. They routed on the next turn, dealing out hits yet again. This put paid to the British center (and another rout the same turn hit the army break-point). I think that was right but want to check. Units that saw the retreat were only affected once by that but were liable for more hits when the unit routed.
Or would the rout after the retreat just affect units that were run through?
One more: gunners were charged and failed to stop the charge with their fire. They hid behind a unit of grenadiers, who then failed their morale check and retreated. I ruled that the gunners fled the field. Is that right? And should they have also given out hits to those who saw them? (Didn't do that)
Last Edit: Jan 25, 2019 14:00:37 GMT by vtsaogames
Thanks for the input. On your first point, I think it best that hits for passing nearby are only taken once - don't apply more hits for further retreats or routs by the same unit. Otherwise it gets a bit ridiculous. But hits for passing through (interpenetration) should be taken in addition to hits for passing nearby.
On the second point, yes, I'd agree the artillery crew are routed with the grenadiers. But don't give out further hits by treating the artillery crew as separate from the grenadiers.