Thursday, July 18, 2024

First Look at Rebel Fury by GMT and Mark Herman

Hello friends:

Not a lot of activity here due to time constraints but the gentler pace of summer beckons, I devoutly hope.   Some gaming and painting happening nevertheless.

Recently I had a chance to open and play a recent tabletop game purchase, Rebel Fury: Battles of the American Civil War by legendary designer, Mark Herman, and published by GMT Games.   It promises to be the first in a series of games using the same rules and mechanisms.  It's a somewhat abstract game, at divisional scale, but with an interestingly fluid turn sequence rather than the traditional IGUGO approach.

I only had the chance to play the introductory scenario, Fredericksburg, using the solitaire rules, which is basically a chance to learn the basic game system and not have a good time as the Federal player.  

Here's the initial setup.  The glossy counters on the river are the pontoon bridges.   Most of the Federal force is well back and the limited number of turns (four if I recall) mean that the Union divisions will be committed piecemeal.   In the solitaire rules the Confederates don't move, they just sit in their entrenchments and blaze away.  It's a stark realization of what a foolish battle plan this was.

The game uses a fairly conventional ZOC mechanic which can favour the attached if the attacker can get a supporting unit into the same ZOC as the defence, which can work in the first attacks if the Union is lucky with die rolls.   Here French and Getty were able to dislodge one of McLaw's units and force their way onto the Heights.   However, in most of the attacks, when one attacker is destroyed or forced to retreat, its adjacent friends have no support and their attacks will inevitably fail.

At the end of the game, the Union had two divisions inside the Confederate positions, which was a better result than I expected, but the US needs five units inside the Confederate lines to win the game.

I replayed the game without the solitaire rules, which gives the Union more freedom of maneuver, but it's hard to outflank the Confederates because in the two-player scenario they get extra units which can enter the map from the south and fill in the lines.   So other than learning the combat mechanics, the Fredericksburg scenario is as much fun as a root canal.  Even so I liked the mechanics, and found the combat resolution quite simple once I mastered the basic system of modifiers.   There is command and control, but it's not overly constraining.   Herman's basic idea here, I think, is to help players understand what brittle instruments Civil War armies were.  Divisions can burn out quickly and players should husband their forces for decisive strokes and broad flanking maneuvers.

I look forward to playing the Chancellorsville scenario using the same map, it promises to be much more interesting.

Blessings to your counters,

MP+


1 comment:

  1. Attractive appearance the game has, although I would have liked to have seen a little more contrast between the blue and the grey - I mean, gray. I tend to think of ACW armies as not so much brittle as flexible in manoeuvre, elastic in defence (especially the Union), but not very durable in attack.
    I think Fredericksburg is war gameable only if you allow that sad and damp little tract of woodland on Jackson's front remain unoccupied by the Confederates, permitting some pugnacious general like Meade to strike there.
    Cheers,
    Ion

    ReplyDelete