by Peter Michels
Introduction While doing research for a scenario on the U.S. 2nd Armor Division against the German 2nd Panzer Division on Christmas, 1944 during the Battle of the Bulge, I decided I would do a modified scenario of Chickamauga, September 19-20, 1863 for a local game convention. Long story... Anyway, after reviewing the battle maps from a number of sources, it became apparent to me that the Fog of War had a lot to do with how various events came to be during the battle. I decided I needed some simple rules for representing the problems encountered by the commanders at Chickamauga. I needed something simple so the rules would be easy to understand and administer. Since FnF is a very popular set of rules, with a large following, I tried to design the rules modifications with as few changes to the core rules as possible. The "Woods Denseness" rules were added because, if I interpret the FnF rules correctly, much of the firing would be at 2" since that is the sighting distance in woods and most of the Chickamauga battlefield is wooded terrain. The "Surprise" rules were added as a playability mechanism to allow the Confederates to move with markers on the table but not allow any Union reaction to these movements for few turns. In the Chickamauga scenario I designed, the Confederates set up 12" on the table and are about 20" from the nearest Federal units. We played the game with Infantry movement as "half way between" rough terrain and regular terrain, the Infantry movement through the woods was at 3/4-movement rate. The "Fog of War" rules is a simple mechanism to allow people to move units around the table without their opponents having exact information on unit strengths. I also didn't want the players distracted by having to write down anything on a map. These were for a convention game, which I think should be playable and fun. The Confederates were given about 20% extra command stands as "dummy counters" to add to the Fog of War. The "Heavy growth movement" rules are arbitrary and purely based on judgement calls on my part, but I wanted some way to add the headache of having units not where you want them to be. I chose penalties of slower movement and variance in direction, since I didn't think units would "speed up" on accident. I also did not give any significant bonuses to commanders, although I figured that the divisional staff has enough personnel to add something to navigation through the woods. After play testing the rules 2 times, the chart below was modified to its current form. Lowered the possibilities of "No Effect" from 1 through 4 to 1 through 3. I also made the left and right deviations larger, since the units didn't seem to "get lost" enough. Please feel free to modify these to meet your own needs. I also added the artillery rules, since I hadn't thought of these in the original incarnation. Below are the rules that I came up with: Woods Denseness The woods block line of sight after 8 inches. The outer 2 inches are as per normal FnF rules. Fire effect is -1 for first 2 inches of the woods. Fire effect is -2 for 2 to 8 inches. When a unit is firing from within the woods across a clearing, these effects can be cumulative. As an example, if a unit is 1.5" from the edge of the woods and it fires at a unit through that 1.5" at a unit 1" in the trees across a 4" clearing, the cumulative effect is -1 plus -1 (total inches of trees is over 2" and under 8"). Surprise The Confederates get 3 free moves before Federals can react. Federal troops become "active" if Confederates come within their line of sight. Any units that are touching an activated unit or have line of sight to the activated unit become active themselves on the following turn. It turns out that some discretion needs to be applied. There was a case of multiple artillery units firing at the Confederates but the Union Infantry had no line of sight to their own artillery or the Rebs. It just didn't make sense for them not to "activate," given they could hear firing all around them, but could see no immediate threat. Fog of War: To simulate the lack of information on both sides of enemy strength, each unit on the table will be represented by only it's command stand. The entire unit is placed on the table once visual or physical contact with the enemy is made. Once the unit was placed on the table, we left it there, mostly for ease of play. Optionally, the unit can transformed into its command stand only again, if the players think it will add to the enjoyment of the game. Heavy growth movement To simulate the navigation problems while moving through heavy growth forests, use the modifications to the movement rules listed below. Players on both sides roll dice for movement as normal. Every time a unit moves through wooded terrain, the unit will receive one "lost" chit. When a unit is ALMOST at sighting range (minus 1 inch from the sighting attempt) and about to see an enemy unit... Count the number of times they moved (count the chits). Have player add the movement chit count number to the number rolled on a D10 and look up the results on the table below. Modifiers
Units "moving" into battle can optionally have 1, 2, 3 or more "chits" added to start the game. Optional: Attached Corps commander -2 Effects Table
Artillery rules Artillery batteries do NOT get lost when they are on roads or trails. If they are attached to a brigade of Infantry, the Infantry can get lost but the artillery will stay on the road or trail and will no longer be attached to the Infantry unit. As an optional rule, I considered cutting back the canister range of artillery in heavy woods from the 4" standard rule to 3". The density of the woods makes me think that canister would not carry through the woods as far as in the open. This didn't seem to matter in either of the play tests. Another option considered was that artillery would be halved instead of the -2 suffered by the infantry while firing through heavy woods. This would have made a significant impact on the game, particularly for the Union, as it has more artillery. I rejected both of the artillery options on the basis that it would add more complexity than it warranted and there were many corner cases that would have to be worked out. Not something I wanted to deal with during a convention game. Back to MWAN # 125 Table of Contents Back to MWAN List of Issues Back to MagWeb Magazine List © Copyright 2003 Hal Thinglum This article appears in MagWeb.com (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other articles from military history and related magazines are available at http://www.magweb.com |