So Stephen and I just used the points system to generate a couple of 1000pt armies with Stephen fielding Austrians and I the Prussians. We took as good a mix of troops as points limit allowed to test interactions.
Must confess am not a big fan of KK system as always found several loopholes that needed house rules.
And indeed there were a number of issues that needed addressed (of course this was point of play test) the main one being multiple unit musketry and its potential deluge of firing dice.
We did eventually thrash out how we would play these aspects (the musketry took a bit of thought) so hopefully good to go on game day.
There is a lot to like in KK with its (ahead of its time) activation system but certainly as written not really to my taste and feel there are more dynamic sets now for the period, but perfectly happy to use them with our house rules.
great looking set up!
ReplyDeleteImpressive and superb lines of battle!
ReplyDeleteSiege Works Studio's v3 is a handsome (and thick) publication. Great looking setup!
ReplyDeleteYes nicely produced set and decent game system overall, but annoyingly (for a 3rd edition) it lacks definition in several aspects that leads to some head scratching/house ruling over what should be basic stuff such as shooting. The included army lists are well done.
DeleteI ought to pull my copy off the shelf and give it another read. Since I moved on to Honours of War, I really have not played anything else for SYW.
DeleteBack in the day these were a breath of fresh air but do seem tad dated now. Casualty removal not something most modern sets use. Winning initiative is major aspect of system as it allows a formation to go first or force enemy to activate a formation each phase of turn. This has implications in different phases especially in Close Combat if Inf facing possible Cav charge. If Inf forced to go first they cannot shoot (only defensively if charged with their action in hand) so can only really 'Tap Out' (do nothing) or form Square (rather Napoleonic reaction) to await Cav charge. Cav however need to 'Break the Bayonets' needing a 6 vs Square and 4+ vs Line (hmmm). With shooting being potentially powerful the loss of shooting in this phase can be key. We tried Honours of War which we liked for ease of play but found the artillery rather all powerful. Must give them another outing.
DeleteYeah, I do not carry much for casualty removal. To me, a unit ought to be either combat effective or not. On artillery in HoW, I found the same as you. Artillery is deadly. I resolved the issue for myself by following strict interpretation of 'Target Priorities'.
DeleteTwas the standard in rules of yore but does seem odd now.
DeleteIn HOW we tried restricting number of guns allowed to 1 per 2 brigades or something like that but never really played rules much afterwards to test out.
Lovely looking set up and nice to see someone else using/testing KK. I use version 2. It's full of typos but comprehensible. I don't quite understand the musketry you described - it just doesn't sound right. You would think at the range that KK works an infantry unit would have to fire at the priority target, ie what's in front of it.
ReplyDeleteI don't mind the casualty removal (I never take figures off, just place a tiny dice with the unit), it suggests the unit degrading in effectiveness and morale. Especially as morale penalties are closely linked to casualties. I can only speak for version 2, I'm not sure how in works in version 3.
I shall watch with interest at your future tests.
Yes lack of target priority is odd but as written (at least how we understand it) seems you could be 'gamey' and fire as outlined above. We just house ruled that you must fire on unit to your front which seems much more sensible. Of course waters muddied if you have 2 units to your front so we also allow some splitting of shooting dice in such situations.
Delete