AC04 Albuera (16 May 1811)

RiverWanderer wrote:

Stewart's Folly is an interesting rule. I wonder how you have found it in your own games @LocoNey?

In the standard scenario I accept that the rule seems somewhat flawed as it leaves the Spanish units at more risk than the British ones.

However, here in this Epic version, due to the wider board and the relative unit dispositions, Stewart's units seem safe for numerous turns (6 at least), whilst the French player would have to be working very hard to bring their cavalry to bear on him to exploit the rule.. even allowing for waiting for a Cavalry Charge card or two to make it worthwhile.

Whenever I've played it, I've positioned it far from the cavalry and in a second line with the attached unit and a few others, attaching the rest of the English units under the command of Spanish leaders.

I want to represent that the 2nd Division's movement was in the second phase of the battle to support and repel the second French assault on the Spanish troops.
The unit that was destroyed was the Colborne Brigade. I thought it would always be attached to an English unit, but I decided on the Take Command line of command.
The French cavalry units involved were the Lancers Regiment and a Hussars Regiment, a force of 800 men.

designing a similar Epic scenario , I considered making the British Line cost 2 cards to go into square, but really the Allies have enogh problems as it is, so I left Stewart's folly up to the player.

Richard Borg settled on a very straightforward rule for the standard scenario, easy for players to grasp just from the Battle Notes. More complicated rules may work in a facilitated game or a local group but, as here, they tend to open up caveats and loopholes that frustrate the intent of evoking historical events.

Adapting Richard Borg's approach to this Epic format, I can imagine a rule such as "Against a French Cavalry Charge, no British or Portuguese (red or brown block) infantry unit may form square nor use First Strike or Infantry Combat First". One might restrict the French to a "one shot" use of the rule, at their discretion, since the historical event was localised.

A benefit of this simplification is that the Allied player can't game around history simply by relocating Stewart to "other duties". At the same time, the intent of creating a vulnerability in the allied line is embedded into the game.

RiverWanderer wrote:

Richard Borg settled on a very straightforward rule for the standard scenario, easy for players to grasp just from the Battle Notes. More complicated rules may work in a facilitated game or a local group but, as here, they tend to open up caveats and loopholes that frustrate the intent of evoking historical events.

Adapting Richard Borg's approach to this Epic format, I can imagine a rule such as "Against a French Cavalry Charge, no British or Portuguese (red or brown block) infantry unit may form square nor use First Strike or Infantry Combat First". One might restrict the French to a "one shot" use of the rule, at their discretion, since the historical event was localised.

A benefit of this simplification is that the Allied player can't game around history simply by relocating Stewart to "other duties". At the same time, the intent of creating a vulnerability in the allied line is embedded into the game.

The simplicity of the rules is very important for the game's playability, but this simplicity cannot distort such an important historical event.

I considered introducing the rule in the same way it was in the official scenario, but that would be a huge distortion of the historical fact. This action only happened to one unit and not to all the troops that participated in the battle.

At the same time, it was due to the action of one man and not the entire command. That was the reason I decided to give Stewart's command that penalty.

Throughout the game, you make the decision about how to use Stewart's command. You might be interested in losing the abilities that leaders give you or positioning him on the battlefield where he is safe to use and cannot be penalized.

There are wargames where command ability is valued, and before giving an order, the level of execution is assessed. This is the most realistic representation of a battle.

In this scenario, you have the advantage Beresford didn't: not knowing how he would carry out his orders.

All the scenarios Juan Manuel and I are publishing are meticulously designed to represent the historical action and, to a modest extent, to put us in the characters' shoes at that moment. We adapt them to the game's rules and sometimes create, in the simplest way possible, new scenario rules so we can symbolize and play them.