tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3379294652413632621.post443788897967800874..comments2023-05-15T03:02:41.806-06:00Comments on Curio Clashes: Regimental Fire & Fury ClashJon Fhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/15793819432785072298noreply@blogger.comBlogger5125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3379294652413632621.post-84754276493615587752013-01-11T18:03:34.375-06:002013-01-11T18:03:34.375-06:00Very nice looking game guys! We prefer F&F for...Very nice looking game guys! We prefer F&F for our ACW games and have done for many years. Now we use RF&F and enjoy them very much!Rodgerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14447816347472085277noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3379294652413632621.post-58960181222072579342013-01-07T15:49:37.285-06:002013-01-07T15:49:37.285-06:00Greg, I agree with you that while the Yanks had a ...Greg, I agree with you that while the Yanks had a decided advantage with rifled muskets, the outcome by night's end didn't really reflect it except for Jaye's infantry. Something will have to be done to speed up play in my opinion. It'll probably come with a combination of things; more balanced forces with reserves/reinforcements, clearer victory conditions, and with more of a familiarization of the rules. I cannot help but to believe that each side employing three 2-3 stand batteries spread across the table won't help more. It's really up to us (until we start running historical scenarios) whether or not we attach each battery to a brigade/division or have them start detached. There is a lot of information to absorb reading thru the rules. I don't know if anyone down at you end was doing it or not, but there's a sizeable section dedicated to attaching/detaching leaders and radii.Jon Fhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15793819432785072298noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3379294652413632621.post-62643080048927532572013-01-06T23:09:42.382-06:002013-01-06T23:09:42.382-06:00I enjoyed the game. Loved the look of the figs, n...I enjoyed the game. Loved the look of the figs, nice painting, and different representation of different units. I agree it would be nice to play more often, as more frequent play will help us learn and hence speed things up. Would be good to understand the core F&F rules better, but think it will be interesting to add in the additional elements and modifiers of RF&F (we played very vanilla). Was suprised at how few units were lost, even under such close quarter fighting and facing superior forces. I like Bill's take on reinforcements to exploit gains. I think there is a need to ensure the sides are more evenly created for strength prior to start, ie. if the union is going to have rifled guns, allow for more confederate troops. Then again, war aint always fair. As for the issue of additional cannon... I'm of mixed opinion, and probably need more play to make a determination, but... I found having only two cannon (gun) to be minimally influential during this engagement vs troops at a distance. Depending on die rolls, units might be disordered or may loose a unit, but quickly reordered upon next activation, and therefore not significantly affected. And the attack number (3) for just one gun firing on it's own was definitely insufficient to attempt any significant bombardament due to negative modifiers. The counter-battery fire also very quickly neutralized both side's guns, and then due to forced withdrawls, it would take a couple rounds to get gun back up to firing position (also, I understand troops withdrawing if low on ammo, but wouldn't guns stay in place and have the ammunition chest brought forward to the cannon, even if it would potentially expose the gun to enemy fire while rearming?) I was thinking that with more guns you could bring massed fire on units, however, not having the rules in front of me, I'm not sure if the rules allowed multiple guns giving massed fire to significantly attrit a unit, because as I recall, even with overwhelming fire (rifle or gun) a player only really faced loosing a single unit and being disordered. The guns did add a +2 if supporting a charge attack, so they could be helpful under the right circumstance. providing more guns to each Regiment might help support their tactics. At the link http://ehistory.osu.edu/uscw/features/regimental/artillery.cfm it read that until 1863, the Confederate armies and the western army of the Union assigned a battery to each infantry brigade, which was found to be a bad system since it eliminated the concentration of fire that was needed to beat back an attack. Four batteries were usually assigned to a division, and the composition of the individual batteries themselves varied in both armies and there was no set standard for either. Initially, a six-gun battery would have two howitzers; a 12-pounder battery thus had four 12-pound guns and two 24-pounder howitzers. A 6-pounder battery would have four 6-pounder guns and two 12-pounder howitzers. Seems there are several options.Sergeantsbunkerhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04418230738546313540noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3379294652413632621.post-48852092758392392152013-01-06T11:09:40.152-06:002013-01-06T11:09:40.152-06:00Bill, I agree with you on using reinforcements/res...Bill, I agree with you on using reinforcements/reserves. Also, what are your thoughts on additional cannon?Jon Fhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15793819432785072298noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-3379294652413632621.post-71449390356298115362013-01-06T10:52:47.914-06:002013-01-06T10:52:47.914-06:00It will get faster. If we play this with any cons...It will get faster. If we play this with any consistency, the game will speed up. I thought it worked fairly well for being the first time we played the rules with this group.<br />The casualty rate was pretty low. It was always hard to win F&F games with firepower. At some point, you needed to disorder them and just get stuck in.<br />I think we need a bit more unit density, so that we have reserves that can take advantage after the front units get chewed up a bit.<br />Billhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/17886933129961582137noreply@blogger.com