tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33041938.post4682001978532909961..comments2024-03-28T09:55:48.460+00:00Comments on <p align="right">Steve's Random <br>Musings on Wargaming <br>and other stuff...</p>: More ACW...Steve-the-Wargamerhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/07077311120172727690noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33041938.post-53340387293890007872009-04-01T09:39:00.000+00:002009-04-01T09:39:00.000+00:00I played many happy games with the horse and muske...I played many happy games with the horse and musket rules from Wargames. We tried the again a couple of years ago and had a really good game with them.<BR/><BR/>I used to think, 'poor old Don,they didn't have much of an idea of tactics in those days.' However I read an article of his where he says of course ACW cavalry fought dismonted but we like to have cavalry charges so thats the way therules are.<BR/><BR/>hat is an attitude i applaud.<BR/><BR/>Johnjohnpreecehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/05548014163096067684noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33041938.post-66926250375292665122009-03-26T11:14:00.000+00:002009-03-26T11:14:00.000+00:00Wise words as ever Jeff/Paul - and all the subject...Wise words as ever Jeff/Paul - and all the subject of a later post I think... suffice to say that at this stage of the project/thinking it'll be early war... got to have those zouaves while they were still wearing the fancy uniforms... :o)Steve-the-Wargamerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07077311120172727690noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33041938.post-47640245355891362132009-03-26T10:53:00.000+00:002009-03-26T10:53:00.000+00:00I'm not doing the ACW . . . but one of the things ...I'm not doing the ACW . . . but one of the things I would consider if I were would be if I wanted to "stagger" my troops (have the second rank be behind but between the front rankers).<BR/><BR/>I'm not saying that I would do it this way, but I'd consider it.<BR/><BR/>The great thing about starting a new period is that you get to play around with ideas of just what you want.<BR/><BR/>For example, what part of the war do you want to model? The early and late periods look different (and regimental size is different too -- due to attrition).<BR/><BR/>And remember, Steve, there are no 'wrong answers' to any of this . . . just figure out what you want and then go for it.<BR/><BR/><BR/>-- JeffBluebear Jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07595975572873838050noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33041938.post-65049872740906851322009-03-26T07:31:00.000+00:002009-03-26T07:31:00.000+00:00I agree with Jeff. Decide on the look and make th...I agree with Jeff. Decide on the look and make the rules fit your desires.<BR/>Bigger is better in my book!marinergrimhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/01393687295535460527noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-33041938.post-23694900437689821022009-03-26T01:33:00.000+00:002009-03-26T01:33:00.000+00:00Steve, If it were me, I would first decide how I w...Steve, <BR/><BR/>If it were me, I would first decide how I wanted units to look . . . then decide what rules will work with that "look" . . . not necessarily be written for it, but will accommodate it.<BR/><BR/>My impression is that the ACW was NOT a period with particularly "uniform" looking troops.<BR/><BR/>The terrain is usually much more broken and cluttered than European battlefields . . . and units would have a much more "irregular" look to them (in my opinion).<BR/><BR/>Anyway, I suggest that you decide what look you want and then find rules to fit.<BR/><BR/><BR/>-- JeffBluebear Jeffhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07595975572873838050noreply@blogger.com