This is an experiment in an old guy trying to use new methods to teach a game. I do these solo and it takes a bit of time to make them so they are not perfect. Several times during the video I misspoke, at 23:48 I state that a Detachement is placed in a manner like an HQ. That is mostly correct, BUT a detachment does NOT have to be closer to a friendly unit than an enemy unit. That said, it conforms to all of the other rules such as not in an enemy Zone of Influence/Control, etc. The good news is the rules are correct and hopefully the video will aid you in quickly coming up to speed but in all cases the rules not this video takes primacy.
The opening of the vid immediately sent me into Ken Burns Civil War series mode. I just preordered this from my fav online retailer. If this becomes a series, I'm on board for the long haul. I'm very excited about this game/series as it represents a low entry barrier, which means you can teach younger players some history with it. At the same time, my older war game veteran friends will love the shorter playing time and (hopefully) the vast array of battles to explore/learn about.
I realized I had a copy of the c3i with Gettysburg in it, so got it out and played. Very good first impressions, so I went ahead and P500ed Rebel Fury. Mark makes great games, and this one doesnt have card RNG.
I misspoke 21:35, when I'm filming, talking, and stating the rules I often make subtle mistakes. This is not helpful to those who are using this as a way to learn the rules. Grant has two battle stars and you ADD, not subtract his battle stars (makes it more not less likely he can change mode). So a 3 die roll +2 stars is a 5, which I correctly played that he is removed from the map.
Mark: This is a great game. I was never into Civil War type games except for a few on Gettysburg. Looking forward to Army of the Potomac, Vol. 2 in this series and I hope you will seriously consider a game in this format on Gettysburg.
Thanks for this Mark. It's also helping me get to grips with Waterloo Campaign 👍. Great music too - although once you hear the haunting Ashokan Farewell, it's in your head for the rest of the day!
Good suggestion, but to add the corrections I would have to redo the video, which takes way too long. The rules of the game are correct and once you get the basics, the player aid card will make knowing the corrections irrelevant.
Interesting concepts (as always), however the out of command "magnet" rules (having to always move CLOSER to a distant commander if out-of-command) bring to mind specific questions: would a CSA unit in a Seven Days/Peninsula or Gettysburg campaign in this system be able to have JEB Stuart make his famed "ride around the Union Army" or duplicate his fateful foray to the east in Pennsylvania (leaving Lee effectively blind)? Would Lee be able to break up his Army of Northern VA to both defend at South Mountain and also send a force down to occupy Harper's Ferry in the '62 Maryland Campaign (culminating in Antietam)? That question notwithstanding, this looks very interesting. I wonder how the different dynamics would make this feel a LOT different than, say, the Great Campaigns of the ACW series?
Simple answer is yes as Lee in maneuver mode covers around 8 miles so Jeb at Richmond is always in range. For other situations I use a second HQ like the French at Waterloo.
Congratulations! In my opinion, this is the most logical (what I usually call "plausible") set of movement and combat game mechanics for simulating Civil War tactical engagements I've come across in years. I do think the players have too much knowledge of enemy dispositions, but otherwise, it looks brilliant. I do have one question. I think you said a unit in Battle formation can only move one hex. But you also showed a Battle formation unit that retreated three hexes. So, I assume a retreat is treated as an exception to the one hex movement constraint on units in Battle formation? Why not limit retreat in Battle formation to one hex or stop as soon as the unit leaves an enemy ZOI?
This is something I covered in my various c3i Clio's corner articles and in my upcoming book. Time scale matters and what is being simulated matters. A unit in battle formation is moving one hex in an orderly (as much as possible) attack. A retreat which is not movement, but the result of the attack has the unit falling back either in a somewhat orderly fashion or a disorderly fashion (broken). A unit will retreat until it is no longer under fire. A ZOI represents at the half mile/hex scale artillery fire and as such a unit will not retreat and remain within artillery fire range. Three hexes or two hexes into defensive terrain is where they are going to stop and reform. I hope that answers your question, something that will be in my next Clio's corner article in issue 38.
@@markherman50 Like most of Rebel Fury, your answer makes perfect sense to me. I almost included this concept in my question. It was just confusing because in the video, you seem to contradict your two statements. Rebel Fury should win a few awards. More importantly, it should teach designers that less is more (including less units, less hexes, and less rules). Thanks for leading the charge!
This rule and note are in conflict. What is correct? If a completed Field Works is ever alone in a hex it is immedi ately removed from play. If a Division in a hex with a Construct Field Works marker leaves the hex for any reason, even if stacked with a Detachment, the Construct Field Works marker is removed. If a Division with a Field Works or Construct Field Works marker on it attacks or supports an attack, the marker is removed. Play Note: During Detachment placement you can, if other conditions are satisfied, stack a Detachment with a Division in a completed Field Works. If the Division subsequently vacates the Field Works the Detachment prevents the Field Works from being removed
The game is correct, this video was done prior to publication and as often happens I misstate something. In all cases, the rules that I published are correct and as far as I can tell several months after release, zero errata.
This is an experiment in an old guy trying to use new methods to teach a game. I do these solo and it takes a bit of time to make them so they are not perfect. Several times during the video I misspoke, at 23:48 I state that a Detachement is placed in a manner like an HQ. That is mostly correct, BUT a detachment does NOT have to be closer to a friendly unit than an enemy unit. That said, it conforms to all of the other rules such as not in an enemy Zone of Influence/Control, etc. The good news is the rules are correct and hopefully the video will aid you in quickly coming up to speed but in all cases the rules not this video takes primacy.
The opening of the vid immediately sent me into Ken Burns Civil War series mode. I just preordered this from my fav online retailer. If this becomes a series, I'm on board for the long haul. I'm very excited about this game/series as it represents a low entry barrier, which means you can teach younger players some history with it. At the same time, my older war game veteran friends will love the shorter playing time and (hopefully) the vast array of battles to explore/learn about.
I misspoke at 18:57, I said Fieldworks, I meant to say Entrenchement, Fieldworks do not create mandatory attacks, Entrenchments do.
I realized I had a copy of the c3i with Gettysburg in it, so got it out and played. Very good first impressions, so I went ahead and P500ed Rebel Fury. Mark makes great games, and this one doesnt have card RNG.
Looks like it's in "charging" at GMT. Hope it ships soon.
Correction: At 12:59 I state that Attack Support is a +1 modifier. It is a +2 modifier as is correctly stated in the rules.
I misspoke 21:35, when I'm filming, talking, and stating the rules I often make subtle mistakes. This is not helpful to those who are using this as a way to learn the rules. Grant has two battle stars and you ADD, not subtract his battle stars (makes it more not less likely he can change mode). So a 3 die roll +2 stars is a 5, which I correctly played that he is removed from the map.
Mark: This is a great game. I was never into Civil War type games except for a few on Gettysburg. Looking forward to Army of the Potomac, Vol. 2 in this series and I hope you will seriously consider a game in this format on Gettysburg.
Just got my copy today. Looking forward to playing it later this week.
Thanks for this Mark. It's also helping me get to grips with Waterloo Campaign 👍. Great music too - although once you hear the haunting Ashokan Farewell, it's in your head for the rest of the day!
great explanation of the system, thank you! IMO you should add your corrections to the video description.
Good suggestion, but to add the corrections I would have to redo the video, which takes way too long. The rules of the game are correct and once you get the basics, the player aid card will make knowing the corrections irrelevant.
@@markherman50 I mean just add them to the text description of the video, you can do that without redoing the entire video.
@@nathanwailes OK, that is quite doable... I'll try and figure out how to do that. Thanks for clarifying your suggestion.
Also, a big thumbs up to this "teaching style" of video.
Interesting concepts (as always), however the out of command "magnet" rules (having to always move CLOSER to a distant commander if out-of-command) bring to mind specific questions: would a CSA unit in a Seven Days/Peninsula or Gettysburg campaign in this system be able to have JEB Stuart make his famed "ride around the Union Army" or duplicate his fateful foray to the east in Pennsylvania (leaving Lee effectively blind)? Would Lee be able to break up his Army of Northern VA to both defend at South Mountain and also send a force down to occupy Harper's Ferry in the '62 Maryland Campaign (culminating in Antietam)?
That question notwithstanding, this looks very interesting. I wonder how the different dynamics would make this feel a LOT different than, say, the Great Campaigns of the ACW series?
Simple answer is yes as Lee in maneuver mode covers around 8 miles so Jeb at Richmond is always in range. For other situations I use a second HQ like the French at Waterloo.
Congrats, I find RF fun to play and easy to learn.
Thanks for this video, very helpful, I have my copy on the table starting Fredericksburg scenario
Seems like I ordered this game on GMT P500 ages ago...hopefully it will be released soon...
It’s at the printers.
Congratulations! In my opinion, this is the most logical (what I usually call "plausible") set of movement and combat game mechanics for simulating Civil War tactical engagements I've come across in years. I do think the players have too much knowledge of enemy dispositions, but otherwise, it looks brilliant. I do have one question. I think you said a unit in Battle formation can only move one hex. But you also showed a Battle formation unit that retreated three hexes. So, I assume a retreat is treated as an exception to the one hex movement constraint on units in Battle formation? Why not limit retreat in Battle formation to one hex or stop as soon as the unit leaves an enemy ZOI?
This is something I covered in my various c3i Clio's corner articles and in my upcoming book. Time scale matters and what is being simulated matters. A unit in battle formation is moving one hex in an orderly (as much as possible) attack. A retreat which is not movement, but the result of the attack has the unit falling back either in a somewhat orderly fashion or a disorderly fashion (broken). A unit will retreat until it is no longer under fire. A ZOI represents at the half mile/hex scale artillery fire and as such a unit will not retreat and remain within artillery fire range. Three hexes or two hexes into defensive terrain is where they are going to stop and reform. I hope that answers your question, something that will be in my next Clio's corner article in issue 38.
@@markherman50 Like most of Rebel Fury, your answer makes perfect sense to me. I almost included this concept in my question. It was just confusing because in the video, you seem to contradict your two statements. Rebel Fury should win a few awards. More importantly, it should teach designers that less is more (including less units, less hexes, and less rules). Thanks for leading the charge!
@@lesliedavis775 A pleasure to continue discussing game design with you... been too long.
This rule and note are in conflict.
What is correct?
If a completed Field Works is ever alone in a hex it is immedi
ately removed from play. If a Division in a hex with a Construct
Field Works marker leaves the hex for any reason, even if
stacked with a Detachment, the Construct Field Works marker
is removed. If a Division with a Field Works or Construct Field
Works marker on it attacks or supports an attack, the marker
is removed.
Play Note: During Detachment placement you can, if other
conditions are satisfied, stack a Detachment with a Division
in a completed Field Works. If the Division subsequently
vacates the Field Works the Detachment prevents the Field
Works from being removed
The game is correct, this video was done prior to publication and as often happens I misstate something. In all cases, the rules that I published are correct and as far as I can tell several months after release, zero errata.
@@markherman50 thanks Mark. The referenced text was in the printed rule book
Great game!
Well, you had added quite a bit of chrome since Gettysburg!
Are all six battles solitaire play?
No, only Fredericksburg
Id live to see this same scope of game but covering the Franco-Prussian War.
Any advice for someone interested in getting a game made? Thanks
Contact Blue Panther
Interesting system