Cwbs

Steiner!

Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2004
Messages
371
Reaction score
1
Location
Mississippi
Country
llUnited States
I picked up Seven Pines in the Black Friday sale. Finally got around to trying it yesterday solo. I just want to say I'm very impressed. I like the feel of it, the speed of play and the simplicity of the rules. I believe I have found a new love.

If any of you haven't tried this series, I heartily recommend it!

Barry
 

Strabo

Member
Joined
Mar 9, 2006
Messages
175
Reaction score
0
Location
I dunno
Country
ll
How long do the games take to play? I've heard from some people that they can be rather slow. And is noting down the casualties and stragglers on charts as sfiddly as I might fear?
 

Steiner!

Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2004
Messages
371
Reaction score
1
Location
Mississippi
Country
llUnited States
I would rather mark the casualties on paper than have to place strength counters under the units as you do in GCACW.....talk about fiddly....
 

'Ol Fezziwig

Repressed Dissident
Joined
Nov 18, 2004
Messages
6,640
Reaction score
725
Location
hazy fold of reality
Country
llUnited States
How long do the games take to play? I've heard from some people that they can be rather slow. And is noting down the casualties and stragglers on charts as sfiddly as I might fear?
That depends; some of the larger battles that include a build up of forces will have longer periods of non-combat activity, but these periods also have a significant impact on how the battle fleshes itself out. Once the battle is joined, things can slow down a bit due to the number of units involved, fire/melee/morale results, but that tends to be the heart of the action and holds your attention more closely. I think the scrutiny of a battle joined makes the time fly even if the turn marker is crawling along. As for time, the best I can do is to have you check back at the couple of the AARs I've done (Second Manassas & In Their Quiet Fields 2) and presume each section was anywhere from 3 to 4 hours apiece. This doesn't subtract the sometimes lengthy BS time associated with each sitting, but will give a nice general estimate. (I also do not want to appear to be self-promoting, but it's the best method I have to give an estimate of the time involved)

As for the casualty/straggler charts, they really are no big deal at all. They're just like any other mechanism in any other system; once you get used to them, you hardly think them a bother. In fact, for this type of warfare, I think it far superior to show casualties in this manner than any sort of counter or step reduction. Not every casualty will have an impact on the fire level of a given unit; though once those "B" and "C" level markers start showing up, you know the unit is down to it's last 6(or less) strength boxes; I've found these units then tend to receive undesired attentions if not quickly replaced in the line.

Before discovering CWB, I had tried a fair amount of other systems for Civil War combat; most left a bad taste in my mouth because they just didn't feel like a Civil War battle. This system does. I am completely enamored of it (and it's close relative, the CWR series) because it gives what I presume to believe is an accurate feel to what it must have been like to handle a 19th century Army in action. If play seems to crawl a bit because of the lack of panzers or T-34s, I am quite alright with that. While the decision as to what constitutes "slow", "well-spent" or "mind-numbingly laconic" is up to the individual, I, for one, take the experience for what it is. If this type of combat require my guys to march by foot halfway across the map, so be it. I think the strength of the system is how it makes you, not only view, but act, in a similiar manner as the historical counterparts; it is part of the radiance of the basic design. In large part, the inability to (often times) bring your entire force to bear on a visible threat or propitious opening, as in most every other wargame, and the frustration or elation (delending on your point of view, of course!) that brings, is almost solely the province of this most superlative system.
If you have the opportunity and/or the inclination, you should give the system a try first hand and form your own opinions based on your experiences, I think if the ACW interests you at all, you will be most pleasantly surprised.
 

SamB

Shut up and play!
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
6,791
Reaction score
384
Location
Seattle, Washington,
Country
llUnited States
I've played board games for more than 30 years. The last ten years most of my time has be on ASL. I recently started playing CWBS and the Regimental Sub-Series by the Gamers.

I prefer the RRS myself, but both are good systems.

A word of advice, if you are a long-time ASL player, you have to be prepared to deal with the "spirit" of the rules. But if you get stuck, just ask here and someone will give you their take on it. That is really helpful. :smoke:
 

Steiner!

Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2004
Messages
371
Reaction score
1
Location
Mississippi
Country
llUnited States
I've played board games for more than 30 years. The last ten years most of my time has be on ASL. I recently started playing CWBS and the Regimental Sub-Series by the Gamers.

I prefer the RRS myself, but both are good systems.

A word of advice, if you are a long-time ASL player, you have to be prepared to deal with the "spirit" of the rules. But if you get stuck, just ask here and someone will give you their take on it. That is really helpful. :smoke:
I don't think I will have a problem....never been into "rules lawyering" :)
 

ScoobySnacks

Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2007
Messages
530
Reaction score
10
Location
CT
First name
Mike
Country
llUnited States
What does everyone think about the two MMP Civil War Series GCACW and CWBS/RSS. Which one do people like better? If you gave advice to a new player looking at both, which one would you tell him to go with?
 

SamB

Shut up and play!
Joined
Jan 29, 2003
Messages
6,791
Reaction score
384
Location
Seattle, Washington,
Country
llUnited States
I haven't played GCACW, but I am enjoying the CWBS and RSS games alot. I like the RSS a bit more, but it's personal taste.

My friend Mike and I are setting up to play the second day at Gettysburg. With the number of units in play and the size of the map, it will take quite a while.

I'm looking forward to it.
 

'Ol Fezziwig

Repressed Dissident
Joined
Nov 18, 2004
Messages
6,640
Reaction score
725
Location
hazy fold of reality
Country
llUnited States
GCACW concentrates on how the battle occured, CWB focuses on the battle itself. I like the theatre approach of GC, though the actual combat resolution aspect is a bit suspect in some regards (the length of battles, for instance). The fatigue rules add a dimension usually unseen in combat at this scale by limiting the effective usage of various formations and forcing a period of recovery on units with high fatigue levels (somewhat comparable to straggler recovery in CWB).

Both have their points (though CWB has less, far less, down sides) if portraying the war at a different scale. I am firmly in the CWB/CWR camp now, having fallen off the GC bandwagon with the seemingly interminable rules revisions-not that I wouldn't revisit it, but there's so much CWB/CWR to explore right now...
 

Keith Todd

Member
Joined
Dec 25, 2004
Messages
851
Reaction score
1
Location
Portland, Oregon
GCACW concentrates on how the battle occured, CWB focuses on the battle itself. I like the theatre approach of GC, though the actual combat resolution aspect is a bit suspect in some regards (the length of battles, for instance). The fatigue rules add a dimension usually unseen in combat at this scale by limiting the effective usage of various formations and forcing a period of recovery on units with high fatigue levels (somewhat comparable to straggler recovery in CWB).

Both have their points (though CWB has less, far less, down sides) if portraying the war at a different scale. I am firmly in the CWB/CWR camp now, having fallen off the GC bandwagon with the seemingly interminable rules revisions-not that I wouldn't revisit it, but there's so much CWB/CWR to explore right now...
GCACW has had standard rules for all the games for sometime now. They are a free download also. Most of the games are sort of hard to get now also. There will be a new one coming out, GCACW will move out to the west with the Chickamauga campaign.

Keith
 

'Ol Fezziwig

Repressed Dissident
Joined
Nov 18, 2004
Messages
6,640
Reaction score
725
Location
hazy fold of reality
Country
llUnited States
GCACW has had standard rules for all the games for sometime now. They are a free download also. Most of the games are sort of hard to get now also. There will be a new one coming out, GCACW will move out to the west with the Chickamauga campaign.

Keith
Oh, I know, I've actually kept up with the series as far as buying them and during that time, from around, oh, from Stonewall Jackson's Way to Here Come the Rebels I actually religiously kept up with the rules.

I think it was On to Richmond that broke the camel's back for me. The sad thing was, the campaign interests me, but between having seemingly constant new basic changes to the core rules set, life interfering and a rampaging ASL addiction, Great Campaigns fell by the wayside.

Having finally built a set of bookshelves in my reclaimed game room, I'm now looking at some of those games, such as GC, which were put on the shelf to languish lonely. Which game finally standardised the rules?
 

Blackcloud6

Elder Member
Joined
Apr 20, 2004
Messages
6,968
Reaction score
674
Location
New Baltimore, MI
Country
llUnited States
it gives what I presume to believe is an accurate feel to what it must have been like to handle a 19th century Army in action.
I have many of the games in the CWB series but have not played many of them nor have I played much. But I agree with the above statement from what little of the series I have played. I alawys felt that this system portrayed Civil War combat and battles well.

I also have all of the GCACW games but have not played them for a long time. But again, this series gives a great feel of how to excute (or screw up) a campaign of the era.

Both systems are great and I would love to play them... but ASL just sucks away my gaming time.
 

Steiner!

Member
Joined
Oct 16, 2004
Messages
371
Reaction score
1
Location
Mississippi
Country
llUnited States
Question about fire combat:

Pettigrew (AAB) un-extended, alone in the hex, fires: only an A fire level plus 5 gun points can fire out of the hex? so at 1 hex range a maximum of 4 fp's?

Is this correct?

I am at noon on the first day and I just discovered this....as a result its been a pretty bloody affair so far!
 

'Ol Fezziwig

Repressed Dissident
Joined
Nov 18, 2004
Messages
6,640
Reaction score
725
Location
hazy fold of reality
Country
llUnited States
Question about fire combat:

Pettigrew (AAB) un-extended, alone in the hex, fires: only an A fire level plus 5 gun points can fire out of the hex? so at 1 hex range a maximum of 4 fp's?

Is this correct?

I am at noon on the first day and I just discovered this....as a result its been a pretty bloody affair so far!

Yes, 4 fp out of the hex. Extensions are a double-edged sword: you can make more efficient use of larger units fp, but are likewise more vulnerable to fire/morale results in turn.

Have fun!
 
Top