The search for the perfect set of ACW rules #2... "They Couldn't Hit an Elephant"

By way of brief interlude before the next riveting instalment of Scottish history, let me bring you another episode in DG and I's continued search for a decent set of rules to use when we play American Civil War games....

In the last post I brought you (and summarily discarded) "Rebel Yell" [click here] - this time however, we have a much newer set from the Too Fat Lardies [click here] team...

Price £7 for a soft copy (PDF format), add £5 for hard copy..

Format: A4 coloured glossy paper, typed, black and white drawings, no photo's, contains pull out A4 quick reference sheet..

The Rules Brigade level

The rules are designed (optimally) for 15mm figures (also 10-12mm) though they can cater for 25's with some scale and measurement changes.

Figures 4 to a base for regular infantry - representing 100 men - Cavalry are 2 figures to a base and represent 50 men. Multiply the bases to make a regiment (according to historical numbers) so 3-4 bases make the regiment. A number of regiments then makes the brigade - with brigadier.

Skirmishers/dismounted cavalry are represented by leaving gaps between the bases or fielding specific (wider) bases...

The Lardies rules focus on a couple of key concepts, and this set is by no means different to the rest... firstly they, rely on a system of hidden movement called "blinds" to provide the fog of war at the beginning of the game - put simply, they use a blank card of specific size to represent a number of units until the formation is "spotted" (on a dice throw). These "blinds" have the ability to move multiple times so as to bring the game to a quick start. In these rules the organisational level is the "brigade", so each blind represents a brigade of combined arms... if you've played "Principles of War" rules, then the concept will be known to you...

The other concept is the card driven turn - each brigade commander is given a card, while there are blinds on the table they also are given a card - in addition the C-in-C's get one, and there are also cards that allow customisation of commanders eg. bold, inspirational, gifted, and another card for the Confederates in the early years of the war that allows them an extra move... all movement is card driven, with each side acting on the card they draw.

DG and I played an introductory scenario to try the rules out, and I have to be honest and say that it was quite possibly the most frustrating experience he and I have ever had with a set of rules... so what's the problem?? Well among others, these:

• The rules are crying out for some written examples of how the various rules actually work... these are noticeable by their absence.
• A key concept as we know is the cards, but DG and I spent at least two days of emails trying to work out what cards should have been in the deck for the introductory scenario that was documented in the rules! It seems to me that as an introductory scenario, this would have been an obvious inclusion?? (By the by, the introductory scenario is huge - what we needed was a brigade a side, what we got was 3 brigades a side... in the end we cut down the scenario for our trial run...)
• We never did manage to get to grips with how the blinds did things.. blinds have the ability to "spot" - who does this? Where is it measured from? etc.
• the rules don't seem to have been proof read very well eg. with the tactical level that the game is set at commanders, both brigade and C-in-C are key - but commanders are referred to as 'commanders' throughout so you have to try and figure out which one is being referred to. There are contradictions in the rules, the one that had us going for a while was two statements, one that blinds could do spotting, and the other that only commanders could do spotting... DG and I came to an agreement, but the rules smacked of being a bit 'rushed' to us...
• The role of the C-in-C is unclear to me even now - and that after three turns of play.. sphere of control rules (ie. what units the C-in-C can influence) are complex...
• ...

All in all - purely my opinion (and it's by no means universal, as can be seen from the Lardies huge Yahoo group) but not an enjoyable experience.... onwards and upwards though, the next one is "Mr Lincoln's War"...