A Tale of Two Cedars

Receiving the latest from GMT Games recently, I drew a little inspiration from Dickens as I re-examined my ever-lengthening wargaming journey.  With the release of GMT's Twin Peaks, an old battle gets a new face.  One of the battles in the sixth volume of GMT's Great Battles of the American Civil War (GBACW) series refurbishes the 1981 edition of Cedar Mountain.  The GBACW must be one of the longest running wargame series seen.  Richard Berg began in 1976 with Terrible Swift Sword.  I began my series' journey with the 1978 big soap box game of Bloody April.  Even with space at a premium in a small apartment on campus, I had Bloody April mounted up on my wall so that I could game it PBM.  Anyone remember the old days of PBM and using stock quotes published in the Wall Street Journal as a random number seed?  Boy, we have come a long way.  

Being a subscriber to Strategy & Tactics magazine in those days, Cedar Mountain arrived in S&T86 in 1981.  GBACW series has undergone numerous changes throughout its history and through several publishers.  Early adopters to the system would unlikely recognize most of the system today. 

The battle of Cedar Mountain, has been an ACW battle that has interested me since the arrival of that S&T magazine 33 years ago.  Thirty-three years ago?  Wow, hardly seems possible that thirty-three years have passed under the bridge since that day in 1981 when Cedar Mountain first arrived.

Cedar Mountain has likely been replayed on my gaming table more than any other battle for any period.  I still pull the S&T from the shelf and give the game a whirl on a regular basis.  The battle has been refought in 15mm multiple times and in 10mm multiple times.  My last 10mm miniatures participation game is documented on the blog (see BatRep).  The fields of Cedar Mountain are often a starting point for new rules trials too and are well trampled. 

In a map comparison, the old Simonsen map still looks pretty good.  Pleasing to the eyes and both high ground and woods are easily discerned.  By the width of Cedar Run on the S&T map, I figured the waterway was a significant obstacle.  When I visited the battlefield in 2012 (see Cedar Mountain Walk), I was surprised how little water was flowing through.  Of course, much could have changed in 150 years but, still, I was surprised.

Cedar Mountain game map S&T86

Looking at GMT's map of the battle in contrast, it seems as if the S&T map was condensed vertically to fit the battle within a single map allowing space for all of the game charts.  Even though the scale of the game is the same at about 120 yards per hex, distances on the GMT map are much greater.  When I stood at The Gate, I was surprised by the distance between it and the Crittenden house.  On the S&T map, it did not look so far!  How will these distance differences alter my time/space relationship to which I have grown so accustomed?  Time will tell.  In any case, the GMT map is quite handsome but no rail fence surrounding the wheat field?  In the old game, that was a good defensive line to take.  

Cedar Mountain game map GMT

The counters have been given a significant face lift too.  From the functional but drab counters in the original, the gamer is treated to an explosion of color and information on the new unit markers.  I never cared much for icon counters.  Facing just looks odd.  A battlefield, seen from above, ought to display regiments from a birds-eye view.

S&T86 Countersheet

Twin Peaks' Countersheet

Rules wise, that evaluation must wait until I have been able to spend time reading and working through a few examples of the game mechanisms.  Perhaps, if a VASSAL module materializes soon, I will be able to give it a try.

The components of the new version of Cedar Mountain are quite inviting but there is comfort in looking into the face of a weathered, old friend.

GBACW

Two more games from the GBACW series arrived in Wednesday's post. Now I can add Pleasant Hill (S&T 106) and The Horse Soldiers (S&T 119) to the growing collection. Both games are unpunched and in mint condition. I also found a second copy of Stonewall (S&T 67) in unpunched condition at a bargain price that will be arriving shortly.
Getting back to ACW, boardgames, and miniatures, one of the mechanisms that I favor from the GBACW that I want to port over to RFF is Brigade Combat Effectiveness (BCE). With this rule, a brigadier can only push his formation so hard before it begins losing cohesion, effectiveness, and the ability to conduct offensive actions. BCE is governed solely upon casualties; the levels of which are computed as number of stands remaining.

By adding BCE, generals are encouraged to fight a balanced battle with no, one brigade taking the brunt of the punishment. If done, that brigade will quickly lose offense capability. Rotating brigades in and out of 'hot' combat zones helps to prevent any one brigade from sustaining crippling casualties. While RFF does have Regimental Combat Effectiveness (RCE) in the Effectiveness Levels of Fresh, Worn, and Spent, there is no such mechanism at the brigade level. Of course, RFF's Heavy Casualties level does affect performance at the army level.
How will BCE levels be computed? My thought is to sum all of the Fresh, Worn, and Spent values within each brigade to arrive at the equivalent BCE. Using the RFF OB from a Cedar Mountain scenario, Gordon's Brigade is given as,

Gordon - 3 BDE	Able
27 Indiana	RM 16/12/8	VET
2 Maine	RM 12/8/5	CRK
3 Wisconsin	SM 16/12/8	TRN
Pa Zouaves d'Afriq	SM 6/5/3	VET
Sum(Fresh)	50	Stand Effectiveness (SE)
Sum(Worn)	37	Combat Effectiveness (CE)
Sum(Spent)	24	Lost Combat Effectiveness (LCE)

Summing over all Fresh levels yields 50 stands at maximum effectiveness (SE). When the brigade falls to 37 stands, the BCE drops to CE. Finally, when the brigade has only 24 stands remaining, BCE drops to LCE. the effects for a brigade being at SE is that the brigadier has a +1 DRM to rolls the Maneuver Table. Brigades at CE operate as they normally do. Brigades that have Lost Combat Effectiveness (LCE) have a -1 DRM to rolls on the Maneuver Table, may not initiate assault, and may not voluntarily move into small arms range of enemy units.

There are other limitations for BCE but these lay a basis for thought. Tracking stand loss for BCE may require too much bookkeeping for some. Since each of my regiments begin the game with three flag bases (one for each effectiveness level) and I use the number of flags remaining on the regiment to denote its current effectiveness, tracking flags per brigade may provide an easy alternative. In the example of Gordon's brigade above, when the brigade loses a total of four flags, the brigade drops to CE. When a total of eight flags have been lost (or when only four flags remain among the brigade), the brigade drops to LCE. I'll try this in my next game.

Now, back to painting...

GBACW and 28mm Napoleonics

Painting totals for August have been amended to reflect the 24 French figures I forgot to add into the totals. So, August nows includes 2 x 12 figure French battalions for the Second Italian War of Independence. I also missed counting a gun and crew in July.

While I have long been a fan of the Gamers' Civil War Brigades series of games, my first, serial taste of ACW boardgaming was with Richard Berg's Great Battles of the American Civil War (GBACW) series. At one time, I owned Cedar Mountain, Jackson at the Crossroads, Corinth, Bloody April, Gleam of Bayonets, Guns of Cedar Creek, and Pea Ridge. From this collection, only Cedar Mountain and Guns of Cedar Creek remained. I kept Cedar Mountain since it is one of my favorites and Guns of Cedar Creek because it was a review copy I received from The Wargamer.

Also added to the ACW regimental collection was Road to Washington (RtW) by Command Perspectives. RtW is a regimental treatment of Second Manassas which I have been eyeing for more than 30 years after reading a bio of the designer and his designer's notes in an old issue of Fire and Movement. RtW infrequently appears for sale and I snatched up a used copy when I had the chance. RtW appears to be a game ahead of its time and The Gamers' CWB series seems to have its foundation on many of the concepts. My thought is to explore both series for ideas for translating into miniature rules.

28mm Napoleonic Project:
Painting progress on the British line infantry (to be designated the 26th) has been halted to make way for the British light dragoons. The dragoons jumped ahead of the infantry in order to have these troopers available for Kevin's Napoleonic game on 23SEP2012. The Front Rank cavalry will become two squadrons of the 14th Light Dragoons. Painting will resume on the infantry once the cavalry have moved off the painting table.

Arriving into my mailbox this week was an order from Brigade Games. In the package were French dismounted dragoons and French Gendarmerie from Lon's excellent early Napoleonic line. These are some of Paul Hicks' latest figures and they are the best to date. Exquisite detail and superb casting. Photos of these figures can be seen on Brigade Games website (http://www.brigadegames.com/French_c_346.html). In hand, these figures are even better than in the photos. Well done! The dismounted dragoons will become a welcome addition to the collection and I may field the gendarmes as consular guard or grenadiers.

I went back to the mounted command figures and gave each a treatment of the Minwax dip. The problem I am having is that a few selective, spots on a few figures are not being dulled by the topcoat. Repeating the process seems to work on some figures. What is going on? Is it a bad can of dullcote? The last batch of Dullcote I bought has a different label. I wonder if the recipe changed?