Judd Vance
United States
Wichita
Kansas
Now when I say, "Who's the master?" You say, "Sho Nuff!"
-
The American Revolution is my favorite war to study and game, and I always found the Battle of Cowpens the most fascinating battle from that war. American General Daniel Morgan (the victor) demonstrated the most original strategy in the entire war. I always hoped to find a good game dedicated to this battle. To my knowledge, Morgan's Rifles is the only one out there.
Details:
Morgan's Rifles is a hex-and-counter war game for 2 players. The game has 1 scenario covering the Battle of Cowpens Scenarios. The game takes about 2-3 hours to play. James Griffin designed it and Mayfair Games published it in 1981.
Background:
After crushing defeats at the Siege of Charleston and the Battle of Camden, George Washington assigned General Nathaniel Greene to take charge of the southern forces of the Continental Army. In the south, the British had already taken Georgia and South Carolina, and had planned on marching into North Carolina when their plans were derailed at the Battle of King's Mountain on October 7, 1780.
Greene divided his vastly inferior force in two and placed the other part in charge of General Daniel Morgan. Morgan was charged with harassing the western flank. Receiving intelligence that Morgan was going to attack the fort at Ninety-Six, General Charles Cornwallis (the leader of the southern British forces), sent Lt. Col. Banastre Tarleton out to crush Morgan's force on January 2, 1781.
Morgan kept his forces on the move and sent out the message to the local militia to meet at the Cowpens, a well-known grazing area. Rather than risk being attacked while trying to ford the swollen Broad River, he decided to use that place to mount his defense.
Unlike many leaders, Morgan could relate to the militia. He had his men get a good night sleep and eat a good breakfast. He went around and talked the militia men, asking them to give him two shots, and promised that he would beat Tarleton and the militia would be heroes for their part. Tarleton, meanwhile, set his men on a forced march to catch up. Tired and hungry, the British met the Americans on that fateful morning.
Instead of trying to line up militia like regular troops, where they often panicked when faced a British bayonet charge (causing a flank to collapse), Morgan lined his forces up in three lines. The first line was a skirmish line of the best riflemen. The skirmishers were to fire two shots and retreat into the the second line of militia, where again, they were to fire two shots before retreating through the third line of Continental Regulars.
The militia were armed with hunting rifles, that had range up to 250 yards, and the men firing them were generally excellent shots. The disadvantage was that the rifles were slow loading (about 45 seconds) and could not mount a bayonet. The musket used by the Continental Regulars as well as the British was not rifled, which meant it only had a range of about 50 yards. However, they were fast-loading (about 15-20 seconds) and could mount a bayonet.
By utilizing the strength of the militia, Morgan had figured out how to properly use the farmers that had frustrated American commanders for nearly 5 years. The British were caught off guard and the Americans executed a double envelopment and captured 712 British soldiers and 2 field cannons, while killing 110 and wounding another 200. American losses were 25 killed and 124 wounded.
For more information you can consult Wikipedia. And for even more information, the authoritative book on the topic is A Devil of a Whipping: The Battle of Cowpens by Lawrence Babits.
Components:
This game comes with a 12-page 8.5” x 5.5” black-and-white rulebook. The rulebook does not use examples and only contains illustrations for the counters, but the game is low complexity and the instructions are easy to understand. The last 2 pages contain the various combat tables and morale information
The map is an unattractive 17” x 22” full color paper map that displays the displays with an unnumbered hexagonal grid laid over the map. The map is color-coated for elevations in terrain.
The game includes 152 1/2" cardboard counters representing various leaders, units, and game markers. The counters are not much in the way of aesthetics, but do show the pertinent information: unit identification (printed) and type (color), combat and movement factors. By "unit", I am not referring to a single counter, but rather I am referring to a combat unit, such as the British 71st Light Infantry or McDowell's NC militia, made up of multiple counters.
The game also includes a turn track and a 6-sided die.
The game comes in a small box, approximately 9" x 6" x 1".
Objective of Play:
Each turn represents about 90 seconds. At the end of 40 turns, the side with the most victory points wins the game. Victory points are earned by killing or capturing units.
Overview of Play:
I will try to explain the game by breaking down a game turn. First, there is a reinforcement phase, where each side checks for reinforcements. Then each player has a phase where the following steps are conducted:
1) Rally:
If a leader is with routed troops, he may attempt to rally them.
2) Movement:
Units either move regularly according to their printed movement factor (with a bonus for being on the road) or it may move at double its printed movement factor if it can enter the hex of an enemy unit (causing melee combat). All of the counters in a unit must remain adjacent to each other.
3) Fire combat:
Both sides fire at each other. Instead of the typical odds/CRT that were popular in games from this time, instead, each counter fires separately. Its strength is determined (printed on the counter). The numbers 1-6 are listed as separate rows on the table. The columns are numbered 2-9. You sum the range with a die roll and cross reference this numbered column against the row (strength) of the firing unit. The result is a number of casulaties, ranging from 0-3.
In addition, you add 1 to the die roll (shifting the result one column to the right) if firing skirmishers or unstacked leaders and and also if the firing unit is a cavalry unit. Because the skirmishers were spread out, it was harder to hit the individual with a musket, than to air at a line of troops.
Artillery has its own firing chart, but the method is the same.
4) Melee combat
Resolve all melee combat. Melee is resolved in a method similar to fire combat, except from a different table. The counter strength is cross-referenced against a column corresponding to a modified die roll (+1 for cavalry, +1 against a skirmisher, +1 if the attacking unit charged and -1 if the attacking unit is a rifle unit). Like the fire combat table, a casualty number is listed (0-6), but unlike the fire combat table, the attacker wants to roll high.
Whether fire combat or melee, when a defender takes casualties, a marker with the number of casualties is placed on TOP of the unit. After all combat has been resolved, the marker is placed below the unit. The new strength of the unit is the printed combat strength minus the numbered marker(s) below it. For instance, a unit with 6 printed strength takes 2 hits. A "2" marker will be placed below it. The next time that unit initiates combat, it will roll on the "4" row. In addition, for simplicities sake, the counters are double-sided with reduced combat strength on the bottom side, so as to simplify the stacking of numbered counters.
5) Morale check.
Each player checks the morale of each unit.
To check morale, you sum up the total casualties under all of the counters belonging to that unit and compare it to the Morale Table. Each unit is listed along with the number of casualties required to cause a 1st, 2nd, and 3rd morale check. If the threshold has been crossed, then roll a die and look at the morale check table. The result is either no effect, rout, or the unit disintegrates/surrenders.
If the unit surrenders, it is removed from the board. If it is routed, it moves away from the enemy, toward its side of the board, at full movement value. It remains that way until it is rallied (see phase 1). To rally, the leader rolls on the same morale check table. If successful, you place a "Rally" marker on the unit. If all of its counters are contiguously adjacent to each other, the unit may act normally. If not, it may not fire and the "Rally" marker remains until it reforms.
Results:
I have mixed feelings about this game. I like the rout/rally rules. I think it does a nice job of modeling how the skirmishers targeted the officers and the effects that had on the British units.
However, I don't think this game does a good enough job of modeling the effectiveness of the skirmishers. The difference in the British and a skirmisher is only 1 column. However, the skirmisher has a weak combat value, whereas the British have a strong combat value, neutralizing the effectiveness of the rifle.
The skirmishers only chance is to stack together, in order to build up their strength, but then that defeats the purpose of the skirmish line. Also with movement values of 2 and 3, that means that when the British are within 4 or 6 hexes, they can charge and force the melee. At a range of 7 (just out of range), even rolling a "1" for the best result possible is 1 casualty, and ONLY if 2 of the skirmishers are stacked together.
I have tried various house rules, but have not been able to hit the result without overcompensating in favor of the skirmishers.
Conclusion:
When I learned about the existence of this game, I was very excited and put it at the top of my wishlist. I spend $30 on EBAY (+ shipping) because it is rare. When I got it on the table, I came away disappointed. The rules are solid, but the execution just doesn't quite work. I think Morgan's Rifles is a fair game. I don't think it is a great game, but with some more work, it could be a good game. Based on what I have seen and played, I would give it a 5, but since I know there is more to it, and because I am a fan of this time period, I'll rate it a 6.
-
Jon Williamson
Canada
Calgary
AB
-
Nice review Judd. Thanks for putting it together for us.
The fire resolution mechanic sounds interesting to me. Not sure about the morale checks though, but I trust your judgement when you state that rout/rally works nicely.
I have played a few games that dealt with skirmishers and have found mixed results, but in my case that was due to my not really understanding how to use them. In Wellington's Victory: Battle of Waterloo many years ago I was completely clueless, but by the time I tried the La Bat series I was OK with its handling of same.
-
jay white
Canada
Qualicum Beach
British Columbia
-
Good lord, that's an ugly game.
-
Greg Blanchett
United States
Lewisville
Texas
-
coffee demon wrote: Good lord, that's an ugly game.
Not for one that is THIRTY years old... 
-
Phil Garland
United States
Charlotte
North Carolina
-
gb1469 wrote: coffee demon wrote: Good lord, that's an ugly game. Not for one that is THIRTY years old...
My thoughts too on seeing the components, especially the map. Cowpens isn't that greyish and dark:
Where did the designer get the name "Mill Gap Road?" That's the Green River Road up which the Beast Tarleton came to his doom.
Still, components were much of a muchness with the other stuff coming out when I was in college. We've been spoiled by modern design. Since this is my home turf battlefield, which I must have visited several dozen times over the past thirty-five years, I've been wanting a good game on it myself. I hope that when GMT gets around to Cowpens in the American Rev series they do it real puurrty!
Thanks for the great review!
-
Judd Vance
United States
Wichita
Kansas
Now when I say, "Who's the master?" You say, "Sho Nuff!"
-
Thanks!
I went to Cowpens this last year and loved it.
If you play Hold the Line, I created a Cowpens scenario for it.
Since Hold the Line is an update to Clash for a Continent, I got hold of their Cowpens scenario, but I don't think it captured it. The rules set for the system can't work correctly in Cowpens, so my scenario has house rules in it.
I think it needs more plays to tweak it, but I think I'm on the right path.
When I read A Devil of a Whipping, the author said the battlefield had a downward slant. The Brits had a tendency to overshoot and having the higher ground, they would stand out against the sky background for easier spotting in the early morning. Then, their was a ridge that hid the Continental line, so that they couldn't be spotted until the end. I didn't notice this at the battlefield, but I think that had to do with the ground changing quite a bit due to farming, settling, and flooding in the last 200+ years.
I'm not sure the GMT series will be able to get it right. In that game, rifles have the same range as muskets. They just get to fire first in a special rifle firing segment and then fight normal combat with a -1 DRM. I figure to pull it off, they will need to change the system quite a bit, but let's hope.
-
Robert Ridgeway
United States
Greenville
South Carolina
-
OneTinSoldier wrote: gb1469 wrote: coffee demon wrote: Good lord, that's an ugly game. Not for one that is THIRTY years old... My thoughts too on seeing the components, especially the map. Cowpens isn't that greyish and dark:
Granted, but the battle was fought in dead of winter: tans & browns would be accurate.
-
|
|
Now when I say, "Who's the master?" You say, "Sho Nuff!"
