Wednesday, May 01, 2013

Skirmish at Signal Tower Hill - Set Up after the furore that was Salute has settled, finally some time to sit down and organise the pictures and accompanying account of the game that DG and I managed to get in that same weekend.. I can only apologise to DG for how long this has taken - been busy!

Having just completed a couple of regiments for the American Civil War Project (more details here [clicky] and here [clicky]) and having unfinished business with regard to the rules for this period we decided that this visits game would be, ACW of course...

DG and I have tried a number of sets of rules for this period (they're documented in the ACW Project page [clicky]) but the latest set, "Regimental Fire and Fury", which had shown such promise, finally paled for me during the final game of our postal campaign (which I still need to write up)...  too many things to remember, too many variations, too many options, too restrictive in manoeuvrability (which may be historically accurate, but can be a little tedious in a game - there is a fine balance and they came down on the failed side for me though I appreciate this is very much a personal opinion).

Either way, DG had been playing "Rank and File" with his local club  and based on his recommendation we decided I should also give it a go... (NB. there are a couple of excellent posts by this chap to give you a flavour of the mechanisms, he posted these somewhat handily just before the game and I found them very useful (introduction [clicky] and play test [clicky]) An interesting aside, these rules are by Crusader who also wrote "Rate of Fire", the WWII skirmish set I use (and like)...

So, I decided on an encounter game given that DG and I were play testing  the rules - two infantry forces of six regiments and a piece of artillery each; I left the cavalry out for this first game. The infantry was arranged in two brigades  with relevant command (and at this point I realised I needed more command hence the purchase at Salute ) and once again for ease & simplicity were all classed as regulars with rifled muskets...

Union OOB:

First Brigade: Colonel Nathan Kimball
  • 39th Illinois - 5 bases
  • 8th Ohio - 5 bases
  • 67th Ohio - 5 bases
Second Brigade: Colonel Jeremiah C. Sullivan
  • 84th Pennsylvania - 5 bases
  • 14th Indiana - 4 bases
  • 5th New York Volunteer Infantry "Duryée's Zouaves" - 5 bases
  • Battery L, 1st Ohio - 12pdr Napoleon

Confederate OOB:

Garnett's Brigade
  • 2nd Virginia - 4 bases
  • 27th Virginia - 4 bases
  • 33rd Virginia - 5 bases
Jackson's Brigade
  • The First Louisiana Special Battalion: Wheat's Tigers - 5 bases
  • 4th Virginia - 5 bases
  • 5th Virginia - 5 bases
  • Carpenters Virginia Battery - 12pdr Napoleon

We played on the 6' x 4' version of my table, across the wide sides, so with 20mm figures the forces filled the table nicely while still allowing for a little flank marching if the need overcame us... a reminder of the table is as follows...


Having in the picture above the Confederates deployed on the left, Union on the right - the signal tower was the Union objective.

I played Confederates and deployed in an unsurprising manner given the objective and the terrain - the only significant difference was to keep one regiment back on each flank as it would allow me to deploy them left or right depending on what DG did. I kept my stronger brigade  (Jackson's) on the right close to the signal tower as I assumed that would be where most of DG's force would be concentrated..

In the picture above; Confederate deployment looking right flank to left.... Garnett's brigade in the foreground, Jackson's in the distance, artillery in the centre..

Union Deployment pretty much matched the Confederate one... DG is caught mid deployment... he put the 1st Brigade on his left, 2nd (with the Zouaves) on the right - his artillery was also with this brigade..

Stay tuned for the game report...


  1. Nice layout looking forward to the report.

    1. Cheers Ray - bit of a cop out really - but I was taking so long to get the post up I felt I needed to put something up, hence the two parter.. :o)

  2. Great little scenario. I want to try it at home.

    1. Dave - it's an encounter game dressed up as a scenario - but it was a good game and I'll probably play it again solo before I pack the table away.... :o)

  3. Looks good. Had a quick peek at the rules & links. Very promising, looks like the sort of rules I would be happy to play and finished properly to boot! Looking forward to the eating of the pudding.

  4. Ross - they played very simply and fast - game report should be going up in about 20 or so minutes.... I'm enthused enough to want to play again!