Slitherine

Perhaps someone can clarify the rational in giving the late Qing in Colonies & Conquest firearms battle groups Arquebus capability rather than Musket or Musket*. Is it due to a view that they had a very low number of Muskets available duing this period (initially suppled by the Portuese & possibly the Dutch) or just a dim view of the Qing army in general. I must admitt I anticipated Musket* as an option for a few units mainly due to the shooting ranges given by the rules.

The Musket* option would have helped with the situation relating to the regimental guns available to the Qing. It is a quirk of the rules that the Qing and Ming, Bow & Crossbow battle groups have an option for regimental guns with a range of 6 mu's whilst a firearm equiped battle group which has the same type of regimental gun (ie a jingal type gun) has a range of 3 mu's. It is a bit counter intuitive!

jonphilp wrote:Perhaps someone can clarify the rational in giving the late Qing in Colonies & Conquest firearms battle groups Arquebus capability rather than Musket or Musket*. Is it due to a view that they had a very low number of Muskets available duing this period (initially suppled by the Portuese & possibly the Dutch) or just a dim view of the Qing army in general. I must admitt I anticipated Musket* as an option for a few units mainly due to the shooting ranges given by the rules.

A low opinion of the quality of their firearms I seem to recall.

The Musket* option would have helped with the situation relating to the regimental guns available to the Qing. It is a quirk of the rules that the Qing and Ming, Bow & Crossbow battle groups have an option for regimental guns with a range of 6 mu's whilst a firearm equiped battle group which has the same type of regimental gun (ie a jingal type gun) has a range of 3 mu's. It is a bit counter intuitive!

Indeed, but keeps it simple and avoids special rules.

I suspect this will keep down the number of firearm battlegroups fielded by the Qing & Ming . Perhaps this is historical.