7 replies to this topic

[gregoryk]

What is the point of putting an officer out front, to the side, or to the rear? Does it make them more likely to be killed or wounded? I have looked, but cannot see anything that seems to relate to their position having any influence other than to help or hurt morale check chances if in the wrong place. So why would anyone not put the leader out front?Gregory

[Bob Benge]

They are there to influence morale as leaders influence morale of their unit. More detail need to be added to force their movement as why would someone place an officer to the side or rear to no or negative benefits. We have known of this and were working on this.

[Dewey LaRochelle]

We have used it a little bit. We do make it more likely the officer will be hit if the unit takes any hits (have a separate roll after the hits). If there is an indicated officer hit and one is out front, then he is automatically the first out. Have not had any to the rear yet, so I am not sure what we would do there, except perhaps to give them a chance to avoid getting killed if officer hit is indicated.We have lost plenty of officers in line, so they are somewhat loathe to go out front.

[gregoryk]

I am looking at deleting this, as attaching an officer seems simpler and has the same beneficial effect. The officer can then be at risk, also.Gregory

[Bob Benge]

Except that an attached officer cannot give his benefits to other units in his command range as he can now.

[Colin Upton]

I don't use the regimental officer rule. Besides having to rebase my figures it doesn't make sense to me. If we assume the players represent the brigade commander theres a limit to what brigade commanders could do. Were they able to supervise every regimantal officer, ordering them forward or back? Surely it was up to the officers themselves how much risk they would expose themselves too! It's like the old rules were every time you fired a cannon you had to guess the ranges before firing canister and if you guessed wrong and you were out of range you were out of luck. But surely the brigadier (player) was not directly responsible for firing the guns but the battery commander!

[bobman]

Sorry for dusting off this old thread, but...

What is the current outlook for the regimental officer corp?
How are people using the unit officers?

I've always used the officer position to indicate a scenario-based (or random) officer quality.

For example, AWI battles (especially the early ones) continental militia not only have a random troop quality, the quality of unit officers is also random. The figure's position in relation to the unit notes this as per the rules.

Alternately, every unit officer's quality is rolled at the start of the game with modifiers based on army quality, training, etc. (e.g., Militia/conscript @ -1, Combined Grenadiers/Lights @ +1, etc).

This especially helps add a layer of decision-making (i.e., worry) for the Brigade Commander in multi-player games. It also works quite well in multi-battle campaigns. Factors outside the immediate battle can effect an officer's performance (as well as the troop's).

roll a d6, add the modifiers, and:

1-2: Poor/Green officer, place figure in rear, -1 to Morale checks.
3-4: Average/Trained officer, place to side, no Morale adjustment.
5-6: Good/Veteran officer, place to front, +1 to Morale checks.

And when there's a "Bellcurve-ist" at the table:

roll 2 d6, add the modifiers, and:

2-5: Poor/Green officer, place figure in rear, -1 to Morale checks.
6-8: Average/Trained officer, place to side, no Morale adjustment.
9-12: Good/Veteran officer, place to front, +1 to Morale checks.

[Bob Benge]

Sorry for such a delay in responding, Bob. I really like your comments here. I will ensure we get this to the group and review the merits.