Welcome to Scribd, the world's digital library. Read, publish, and share books and documents. See more
Standard view
Full view
of .
Look up keyword or section
Like this

Table Of Contents

0 of .
Results for:
No results containing your search query
P. 1
Shako and Bayonet[1]

Shako and Bayonet[1]

Ratings: (0)|Views: 22 |Likes:
Published by doorman46

More info:

Published by: doorman46 on Mar 07, 2014
Copyright:Attribution Non-commercial


Read on Scribd mobile: iPhone, iPad and Android.
download as RTF, PDF, TXT or read online from Scribd
See more
See less





Wanting to shoot people with muskets on a large scale I mused on the form that the future ‘Shako and Bayonet’, as one of the companion rules set to HFG, might take!ather than idle speculation I decided to write up the following "y way as a suggestion for the rulesgi#erI ha#e "ased this upon the scraps of information we ha#e a"out S$B, ie #irtually nothing "ut the idea that it will show units in formations and that "attalions will "e depicted "y two elementsIn writing these up I ha#e tried to translate HFG to the new scale and second guess how the particular  pro"lems of this translation might "e sol#ed In parts this has in#ol#ed creation of whole sections of rules, such as formations, "ut I ha#e tried not to change %ust for the sake of change Guidance was sought from &Br and &B'' when a new mechanism was needed  (ew or altered sections are in red 'ostlyI ha#e mo#ed a"out a few sections, necessitated "y remo#al or increasing detail to suit the new scaleStripping out the )* HFG troop types not appropriate for the S$B era did reduce comple+ity and word count, "ut not "y much I ha#e taken the li"erty of creating only a few e+tra troop types that of
 which are poor -uality "ut enthusiastic foot em"lematic of the era, ‘
‘Skirmishers Ahead’
.lephants are treated as "roadly analogous to /uirassiers "ut with some special strengths and weaknesses Skirmishers 0head are those assumed for Bayonets and 1ight Infantry in HFG  "ut not depicted separately2hey are linked to such types in S$B and must remain in close association with them 0rtillery can "e
 or fluky ‘
in addition to their other grades
 are included as a train #ariant to "uild or destroy field structures2he class of &ismounta"les has "een remo#ed as only &ragoons would "e mem"ers of it 2hose few mounted formations that dismounted in "attles, rather than for the occasional special task, ha#e this capacity noted in their army list and an appropriate foot type is nominated for them !ules for mounting and dismounting are includedFirelocks ha#e "een retained to cater for non3.uropeans that may fit the type 1aager has also "een included e#en if its prime users are not significant in the era Strong 4oints ha#e "een altered to match the new game scalesFormations of
Line, Square and Assault olumn
 are included for those infantry types using them, some other foot or mounted types may "enefit from 0ssault /olumn'ost "ut not all foot types must "e depicted in ‘
 of two elements that ne#er separate Such a unit represents a "attalion or similar formation of
 5663766 men and officers 8so *563966 per element: Some types, such as supporting artillery not in concentrated "atteries must "e single elements while the remaining types ha#e a choice of "eing in units or as single elements depending on their historical organisation 'ounted ha#ing a choice to "e depicted as singles or units recognises that there was great #ariation in nations’ organisation of their ca#alry s-uadrons into larger regiments or similar groups If nothing else it allows a small num"er of ca#alry to pose a threat to footGround scale is set "y the troop scale at 96mm, one element width for )5mm troops, e-ualling )66 paces 2his has had se#eral conse-uences for translating HFG Firstly the mo#e rates of all troops has "een scaled  "ack a: to keep playing ta"le si;e managea"le and troops making outcomes from e+iting the ta"le too easily and ": the more tactical feel of S$B does not always suit wide sweeping ‘semi3strategic’ marching0 conse-uence of changing these scales is that the time scale should pro"a"ly "e condensed slightly, although none is here suggested as mo#e rates represent initiati#es not theoretical marching speeds 0 more profound change triggered "y altering the ground scale and reducing mo#e distances is that the HFG re-uirement for some ad#ancing troops to formally stop and compute shooting "efore close conflict is
not needed But these mo#es may cost more 4I4S 4layers must use their tactical skill to a#oid or ma+imise shooting 2he option to press forward after shooting may "e too generous at the new scale, any feed"ack on this is most welcome/om"at outcomes ha#e likewise "een altered to cater for the changed troop scale and the new formations I ha#e not altered troops’ "asic com"at factors for consistency with HFG "ut ha#e altered other charts 2he com"at charts themsel#es ha#e "een separated into close com"at and distant ‘shooting’ com"at sections for ease of use4lay should "e on a ta"le of at least )*66mm + <66 8=+9 foot:, e+pect your troops to "e hotly engaged early in a game 2errain si;e and num"er of pieces has "een altered to suit the ground scale Scale Issues >nresol#ed at this stage0ny need to separate out 1ancers as a su"3type of 1/a# 1Horse??? It looks like horse and porta"le artillery are separate things "ut I think @am"urak Awasps camel gunners whose name and what can "e gleaned a"out their role suggests an emphasis on mo"ility could "e "oth 4orta"le and Horse 2he effect would gi#e them a reduced range compared with other horse artillery2he 4ersian Shah had 966 of them descri"ed "y one .uropean source as part of his guard, at least two  pro#incial rulers had *66 man formations
 Larger battles may need the troop scale altered to 1 inch = 100p, I have not tested this and there may be unforeseen consequences.
0rmy si;eI sur#eyed )76 .uropean (apoleonic armies in "attles "ut not sieges to gauge their si;e characteristics Where accounts of num"ers differed I a#eraged them 2he num"ers are presented with some rounding up of the lower percentages63)6C men DE, ))3)5C men )E, )=3*6C men )*E, *)3*5C men )6E*=36C men DE, )35k men )6E, =396C men )6E, 9)395C men 5E9=356C men 5E, 5)355C men E, 5=3=6C men E, =)3=5C men *E==3D6C men E, D)3D5C men E, D=376C men *E, 7)375C men *E7=3<6C men *E, ))63)*6C men E, )*)C men =EI suspect there is a "ias against the smaller end at say fewer than )5C men as these tend to "e reported 8in generalist pu"lications: only when they are particularly interesting or important for some reason  (e+t I took pairs of com"atants 8"ut e+cluding those conflicts where a #ictor mops up an enemy that has recently lost as ma%or conflict and often has a massi#e numerical disparity: and a#eraged the num"ers of the two armies 2he idea here is to take out #aria"ility for position, troop -uality and similar>sing this method armies tend to ‘group’ at the following si+ num"ers )=C men, *C men, a 539C clump, 55C, D5C, giant )*6C "attles0t the S$B scale of one manoeu#re item of two elements per )666ish men, the first four groups up to 55C should "e managea"le under the rules 2he D5C group lends itself either to a large S$B game or HFG/learly HFG comes into its own for the titanic )*6C men per side "attles2he a"o#e si;es might "e a useful guide to the #arious 04 totals for play&a#id Brown

You're Reading a Free Preview

/*********** DO NOT ALTER ANYTHING BELOW THIS LINE ! ************/ var s_code=s.t();if(s_code)document.write(s_code)//-->