DOCSLIB.ORG

STORM the CASTLE.Cdr

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
STORM the CASTLE.Cdr STORM THE CASTLE! BACKGROUND SET-UP Besides the constant strain of dealing with the Rach A game-board area of 4’x6’is recommended for this along their shared border, the Terran Federation is a frequent scenario. target of pirates and rogue military units. With an abundance The game-board will need several structures to represent of non-aligned planets spread throughout Federation space, the various walls and hardened areas used in this scenario. trying to root out these miscreants is a non-stop job that Refer to the map for building placement (see p.2) for typically falls to the Legion's lesser-known units. approximate size and elevation levels. The area around the facility has been cleared of any Castor III nearby ground cover, with only a few low-level hills to The United Terran Federation provide any protection. 9 February 2274 DEPLOYMENT Castor III is an independent world located in Federation The Defenders deploy .rst, placing their models space approximately 15 Light Years from Sol. The ocean world anywhere in Zone A while the Attackers will deploy in Zone B has several small continents scattered across the face of the using standard deployment rules. planet, with most of the population living in the southern The Defender will need to add three additional cards to hemisphere due to the massive hurricanes that frequent the the Draw Deck for the three turret“squads”detailed in the north. Special Rules & Force Group Sections. These will deploy as SyRaM has invested heavily in the world, establishing a normal, allowing the Defender to designate each turret’s large research facility on the planet focused on developing placement on the game-board. new nano-tech construction techniques. Protecting the The Defenders may deploy infantry models into the facility was a small mercenary unit, Rigel's Regents. Their infantry pillboxes. commander, Colonel Rigel Davis, had recently traveled off- planet to Argonne to pick up supplies and spare parts and it OBJECTIVE(S) was there when he learned of the companies' mutiny, Attacker: (Primary) Capture or destroy all of the following the killing of his second in command. defender’s turrets. (Secondary) Destroy all of the defending Seizing the central facility, the remnants of the Regents models. have taken several scientists and local citizens as hostages, Defender: (Primary) Destroy all of the attackers infantry demanding safe passage off-world in exchange for their lives. before losing all three of the control blockhouses. Negotiations have stretched out over the last two months (Secondary) Destroy all of the attacking models. and time has run out for a peaceful solution. SPECIAL RULES MISSION BRIEFING The SyRaM facility was working on enhancing nano- Infuriated by the desertion of the Regents on Castor III, construction techniques far beyond what is found in the executives at SyRaM have used their considerable common Deployable NanoTech Barriers. Downloadable in0uence in the Federation to pressure the Terran schematics would program these new nanites to quickly government in launching a raid to recover the research deploy various structures and complex devices in the facility and hopefully, rescue the personnel being used as fraction of the time it would take engineers to build using human shields. normal construction techniques. Additionally, locally sourced The Terrans have tasked the 111th Legion,“The Chosen materials can be used, saving on transportation space. 1s”to recapture the facility. While not a front line unit, the The Regents have taken this technology and put it to 111th was deemed capable of handling what was left of a good use to prepare for an eventual attack, though they had mercenary command that even in the best of times was planned on SyRaM trying to use local militia or at worst case, considered“rag-tag.”UTF commanders felt the mission was another security team, not the full force of a Terran Legion! very low risk—an underestimation that would prove costly. Upon landing, the Terrans immediately sent out their = Turrets are grouped into three seperate“squads,”each attached air-wing to scout the area, discovering that the controlled by a seperate control blockhouse (C1-C3). C1 Regents had heavily forti.ed the facility in anticipation of an controls turrets 1-3, C2 turrets 7-10, and C3 turrets 4-6. Each attack. Protecting several sections of the station were 40-foot control blockhouse/turret“squad”will receive an activation tall walls, supported by a series of armored turrets and card in the Draw Deck once play begins with 1 AP per turret pillboxes—turrets which promptly destroyed the circling (see Force Group list for combat details). aircraft, removing any hope of air superiority in the upcoming engagement. The only advantage left to the Legion at this = Infantry Pillboxes: There are also several infantry point were superior numbers, numbers that will be needed to pillboxes that may be used by them for protection and as “storm the castle!” .ring positions. 1 STORM THE CASTLE! = For purposes of this scenario, the hardened added for the support model. The attacking infantry will blockhouses and pillboxes may not be destroyed but may be receive a (+1) SM for each additional support model (limit 5) captured! currently in B2B contact with the structure. Turrets areModel State: Stationary . = Infantry models inside a pillbox are also subject to = To capture an unoccupied control blockhouse, an ranged-attacks but receive a (-2) SM for Heavy Cover to any infantry model must .rst move“inside”through an indicated ranged Combat Roll, adding the structures AV to their own “door” using the Mount/Dismount Action to enter and when determining a .nal MoS for the attack. remain there until the end of the following turn. Once Infantry models inside a pillbox may .re out with no captured, any turrets it controls may not .re for the additional penalty to their attack. remainder of the game. Up to two infantry models may occupy the interior of a control blockhouse (or pillbox). FORCE GROUPS If occupied by one or more enemy infantry models, a Defender - Independent Command control blockhouse (or pillbox) must .rst be cleared. Infantry Rigel’s Regents inside a control blockhouse may not be targeted by a ranged attack and may only be targeted by other infantry trying to Squad 1: (Attack) TVP 2962 (CP: 1) enter. Once inside, any infantry inside are unable to“shoot” x1 Centurion out (control blockhouse only). x1 Rhino x1 Assassin = To clear a control blockhouse (or pillbox) one or more x1 Sabertooth infantry models must be in B2B contact with the structure Squad 2: (Attack) TVP 996 (CP: 1) and initiate a Close-Combat attack. The defending infantry x2 Hunter inside the structure receives a (+2) SM to their Combat Roll x2 Chieftain for Heavy Cover. Squad 3: (Infantry) TVP 492 (CP: 1) If occupied by two infantry models, a (+1) SM is also x12 Light Infantry w/AT E1 C1 E1 PB4 1 E4 PB1 7 E1 2 E2 E1 PB6 8 3 E1 C2 E4 PB2 ABE1 4 9 E1 E2 PB7 5 E1 10 E4 PB3 PB5 E1 C3 E1 6 2 STORM THE CASTLE! Squad 4-6: (Turrets) TVP 948 (CP: 0) ODIN ARMORED TURRET x2 Odin Armored Turret []DAMAGE TRACK 0 1 2 3 x2 Hailstorm Armored Turret MOVE - - - - x4 Dragon Fangs Armored Turret ARMOR 8 7 5 4 x2 Birdshot Unarmored Turret CLOSE- COMBAT - - - - Total Force Group TVP: 5398 DAMAGE CONTROL - - 2 0 []WEAPONS MEDIUM PBG 6/6 5/5 3/3 2/2 x2 (T/T),RNG (6), BLITZ, OVERDRIVE, RAVAGE Attacker- The United Terran Federation 111th Legion, “The Chosen 1s” []SPECIAL [TV: 115] THE CHOSEN HARD Squad 1: (Attack) TVP 2460 (CP: 1) x1 Ronin x2 Falcon HAILSTORM ARMORED TURRET x1 Starhawk V []DAMAGE TRACK 0 1 2 3 x1 Talon MOVE - - - - Squad 2: (Mech Infantry) TVP 430 (CP: 1) ARMOR 8 7 5 4 x5 Heavy Infantry w/Rie CLOSE- COMBAT - - - - x2 Wombat DAMAGE CONTROL - - 2 0 Squad 3: (Fire Support) TVP 1834 (CP: 1) []WEAPONS x4 Raptor MEDIUM MRAC 6/3 5/2 4/1 3/1 x1 Talon x2 (T/T),RNG (12), LTD AMMO, MIN RNG (1) Squad 4: (Mech Infantry) TVP 414 (CP: 1) 111 x5 Heavy Infantry w/Rie []SPECIAL [TV: 100] x2 Tsukai HARD Squad 5: (Specialist) TVP 231 (CP: 1) x3 Heavy Infantry w/Rie x1 Wombat DRAGON FANGS ARMORED TURRET []DAMAGE TRACK 0 1 2 3 Total Force Group TVP: 5369 MOVE - - - - ARMOR 8 7 5 4 CLOSE- COMBAT - - - - DAMAGE CONTROL - - 2 0 []WEAPONS MEDIUM MAC 5/2 4/2 3/1 3/1 x2 (T/T),RNG (12), AMMO, BLASTER 1, STRIKE []SPECIAL [TV: 101] HARD BIRDSHOT UNARMORED TURRET []DAMAGE TRACK 0 1 2 MOVE - - - ARMOR 4 3 2 CLOSE- COMBAT - - - DAMAGE CONTROL - - 1 []WEAPONS MEDIUM GM 5/5 4/4 3/3 x2 (T/T),RNG (16), LTD AMMO, MIN RNG (14), SHOCK []SPECIAL [TV: 57] SOFT, TAG 3.
Load more

Recommended publications
  • The Early Effects of Gunpowder on Fortress Design: a Lasting Impact
    The Early Effects of Gunpowder on Fortress Design: A Lasting Impact MATTHEW BAILEY COLLEGE OF THE HOLY CROSS The introduction of gunpowder did not immediately transform the battlefields of Europe. Designers of fortifications only had to respond to the destructive threats of siege warfare, and witnessing the technical failures of early gunpowder weaponry would hardly have convinced a European magnate to bolster his defenses. This essay follows the advancement of gunpowder tactics in late medieval and early Renaissance Europe. In particular, it focuses on Edward III’s employment of primitive ordnance during the Hundred Years’ War, the role of artillery in the Ottoman conquest of Constantinople, and the organizational challenges of effectively implementing gunpowder as late as the end of the fifteenth century. This essay also seeks to illustrate the nature of the development of fortification in response to the emerging threat of gunpowder siege weaponry, including the architectural theories of the early Renaissance Italians, Henry VIII’s English artillery forts of the mid-sixteenth century, and the evolution of the angle bastion. The article concludes with a short discussion of the longevity and lasting relevance of the fortification technologies developed during the late medieval and early Renaissance eras. The castle was an inseparable component of medieval warfare. Since Duke William of Normandy’s 1066 conquest of Anglo-Saxon England, the construction of castles had become the earmark of medieval territorial expansion. These fortifications were not simply stone squares with round towers adorning the corners. Edward I’s massive castle building program in Wales, for example, resulted in fortifications so visually disparate that one might assume they were from different time periods.1 Medieval engineers had built upon castle technology for centuries by 1500, and the introduction of gunpowder weaponry to the battlefields of Europe foreshadowed a revision of the basics of fortress design.
    [Show full text]
  • Martello Towers Research Project
    Martello Towers Research Project March 2008 Jason Bolton MA MIAI IHBC www.boltonconsultancy.com Conservation Consultant [email protected] Executive Summary “Billy Pitt had them built, Buck Mulligan said, when the French were on the sea”, Ulysses, James Joyce. The „Martello Towers Research Project‟ was commissioned by Fingal County Council and Dún Laoghaire-Rathdown County Council, with the support of The Heritage Council, in order to collate all known documentation relating to the Martello Towers of the Dublin area, including those in Bray, Co. Wicklow. The project was also supported by Dublin City Council and Wicklow County Council. Martello Towers are one of the most well-known fortifications in the world, with examples found throughout Ireland, the United Kingdom and along the trade routes to Africa, India and the Americas. The towers are typically squat, cylindrical, two-storey masonry towers positioned to defend a strategic section of coastline from an invading force, with a landward entrance at first-floor level defended by a machicolation, and mounting one or more cannons to the rooftop gun platform. The Dublin series of towers, built 1804-1805, is the only group constructed to defend a capital city, and is the most complete group of towers still existing in the world. The report begins with contemporary accounts of the construction and significance of the original tower at Mortella Point in Corsica from 1563-5, to the famous attack on that tower in 1794, where a single engagement involving key officers in the British military became the catalyst for a global military architectural phenomenon. However, the design of the Dublin towers is not actually based on the Mortella Point tower.
    [Show full text]
  • Fortifications V1.0.Pdf
    “Global Command Series” Fortifications v1.0 A Global War 2nd Edition 3d Printed Expansion © Historical Board Gaming Overview This set features rules for many different types of fortifications, sold separately in 3D printed sets. These rules are written Global War - 2nd edition, however at the end of this document are a few changes necessary to play these with Global War 1st edition or Axis and Allies 1940. Set Contents Name Rules Sold Separately Atlantic Wall (German) Battery Fjell (German) Flak Tower-Small (German) Flak Tower-Large (German) Panther Turret (German) Maginot Line Turret (French) Maginot Line Gun (French) Anti-Tank Casemate (Generic) Machine Gun Pillbox (Generic) Fortifications General Rules 1. You may never have more than one of the same type of fortification in the same land zone. 2. Fortifications are removed from play if the land zone they are in is captured. 1.0 Battery Fjell – Unique coastal gun 1.0 Overview: Battery Fjell was a World War II Coastal Artillery battery installed by the Germans in occupied Norway. The 283mm (11”) guns for the battery came from the damaged battleship Gneisenau. The guns were then installed in the mountains above the island of Sotra to protect the entrance to Bergen. These modern and accurate guns had a range of 24 miles and were protected by several anti-aircraft batteries supported by air search radar. Extensive ground fortifications protected the battery as well. The battery had a crew of 250 men. The Battery Fjell unit featured in this set represents the battery itself but also a number of other defensive fortifications, garrison units and light weapons.
    [Show full text]
  • Soldier Illness and Environment in the War of 1812
    The University of Maine DigitalCommons@UMaine Electronic Theses and Dissertations Fogler Library Spring 5-8-2020 "The Men Were Sick of the Place" : Soldier Illness and Environment in the War of 1812 Joseph R. Miller University of Maine, [email protected] Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/etd Part of the Canadian History Commons, Military History Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation Miller, Joseph R., ""The Men Were Sick of the Place" : Soldier Illness and Environment in the War of 1812" (2020). Electronic Theses and Dissertations. 3208. https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/etd/3208 This Open-Access Thesis is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UMaine. It has been accepted for inclusion in Electronic Theses and Dissertations by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UMaine. For more information, please contact [email protected]. “THE MEN WERE SICK OF THE PLACE”: SOLDIER ILLNESS AND ENVIRONMENT IN THE WAR OF 1812 By Joseph R. Miller B.A. North Georgia University, 2003 M.A. University of Maine, 2012 A DISSERTATION Submitted in Partial Fulfillment of the Requirements for the Degree of Doctor of Philosophy (in History) The Graduate School The University of Maine May 2020 Advisory Committee: Scott W. See, Professor Emeritus of History, Co-advisor Jacques Ferland, Associate Professor of History, Co-advisor Liam Riordan, Professor of History Kathryn Shively, Associate Professor of History, Virginia Commonwealth University James Campbell, Professor of Joint, Air War College, Brigadier General (ret) Michael Robbins, Associate Research Professor of Psychology Copyright 2020 Joseph R.
    [Show full text]
  • The War After the War: Fort Kent Blockhouse, 1839-1842
    Maine History Volume 29 Number 3 Winter-Spring 1990; Vol. 29, No. 3 & 4 Article 3 1-1-1990 The War After the War: Fort Kent Blockhouse, 1839-1842 Sheila McDonald Follow this and additional works at: https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/mainehistoryjournal Part of the Military History Commons, and the United States History Commons Recommended Citation McDonald, Sheila. "The War After the War: Fort Kent Blockhouse, 1839-1842." Maine History 29, 3 (1990): 142-168. https://digitalcommons.library.umaine.edu/mainehistoryjournal/vol29/iss3/3 This Article is brought to you for free and open access by DigitalCommons@UMaine. It has been accepted for inclusion in Maine History by an authorized administrator of DigitalCommons@UMaine. For more information, please contact [email protected]. s h e i l a McDo n a l d THE WAR AFTER THE WAR: FO R T KENT BLOCKHOUSE, 1839-1842 On March 23, 1839, the Maine State Legislature passed a resolve removing Maine’s militia from the brink of conflict in the Aroostook War. On that day, the Fort Kent blockhouse, destined to become one of the most enduring symbols of the war, was still six months away from construction at the conflu­ ence of the Fish and St. John rivers. Fort Kent did not rise out of bombast and calls to arms. It instead assumed its very strategic location gradually as Maine pushed to establish a toe-hold in the territory claimed by both Great Britain and the United States under the nebulous terms of the Treaty of Paris signed in 1783.
    [Show full text]
  • St Andrews Castle
    Property in Care (PIC) ID: PIC034 Designations: Scheduled Monument (SM90259) Taken into State care: 1904 (Ownership) Last reviewed: 2011 STATEMENT OF SIGNIFICANCE ST ANDREWS CASTLE We continually revise our Statements of Significance, so they may vary in length, format and level of detail. While every effort is made to keep them up to date, they should not be considered a definitive or final assessment of our properties. Historic Environment Scotland – Scottish Charity No. SC045925 Principal Office: Longmore House, Salisbury Place, Edinburgh EH9 1SH © Historic Environment Scotland 2019 You may re-use this information (excluding logos and images) free of charge in any format or medium, under the terms of the Open Government Licence v3.0 except where otherwise stated. To view this licence, visit http://nationalarchives.gov.uk/doc/open- government-licence/version/3/ or write to the Information Policy Team, The National Archives, Kew, London TW9 4DU, or email: [email protected] Where we have identified any third party copyright information you will need to obtain permission from the copyright holders concerned. Any enquiries regarding this document should be sent to us at: Historic Environment Scotland Longmore House Salisbury Place Edinburgh EH9 1SH +44 (0) 131 668 8600 www.historicenvironment.scot You can download this publication from our website at www.historicenvironment.scot Historic Environment Scotland – Scottish Charity No. SC045925 Principal Office: Longmore House, Salisbury Place, Edinburgh EH9 1SH ST ANDREWS CASTLE SYNOPSIS St Andrews Castle was the chief residence of the bishops, and later the archbishops, of the medieval diocese of St Andrews. It served as episcopal palace, fortress and prison.
    [Show full text]
  • Fact Sheets: Des Braves Park and Blockhouse
    Des Braves Park Fact Sheet History of the Site In 1633 the French term banlieue (which now means “suburb” in English) referred to a distance of one lieue (league), or about 5 km, from Québec’s city limits. In 1639 trading post clerk Pierre Delaporte owned an approximately 40 acres property there where he built a small building. Seven years later, merchant Henry Pinguet purchased part of this land—a plot about 3 acres wide by 20 acres long—extending from Grande-Allée to about 5⅓ acres from the St. Charles River. In 1705 tanner Jacques Jahan acquired part of the land north of the current Chemin Sainte-Foy and built a new house there, as well as a tannery and a windmill. Jean-Baptiste Dumont, a trader from Québec, became the owner of the site in 1741. In 1747 he signed a contract to have a 12 foot (3.9 m) diameter stone bark mill built to replace the wooden mill. The same mill occupied a strategic location in the Battle of Sainte-Foy on April 28, 1760, during which it sustained heavy damage. In 1781 the property was purchased by the Honourable Henry Caldwell, member of the Legislative Council, who had the mill torn down. 1 Page Architectural Vestiges Pinguet House Two types of foundations were discovered at the site. The different construction techniques (masonry and dry masonry) point to two distinct uses for the site. The three foundation walls (south, east, and west) of a small house, which have buckled slightly under outside pressure, indicate a square building measuring 3.6 m per side.
    [Show full text]
  • Defending Scilly
    Defending Scilly 46992_Text.indd 1 21/1/11 11:56:39 46992_Text.indd 2 21/1/11 11:56:56 Defending Scilly Mark Bowden and Allan Brodie 46992_Text.indd 3 21/1/11 11:57:03 Front cover Published by English Heritage, Kemble Drive, Swindon SN2 2GZ The incomplete Harry’s Walls of the www.english-heritage.org.uk early 1550s overlook the harbour and English Heritage is the Government’s statutory adviser on all aspects of the historic environment. St Mary’s Pool. In the distance on the © English Heritage 2011 hilltop is Star Castle with the earliest parts of the Garrison Walls on the Images (except as otherwise shown) © English Heritage.NMR hillside below. [DP085489] Maps on pages 95, 97 and the inside back cover are © Crown Copyright and database right 2011. All rights reserved. Ordnance Survey Licence number 100019088. Inside front cover First published 2011 Woolpack Battery, the most heavily armed battery of the 1740s, commanded ISBN 978 1 84802 043 6 St Mary’s Sound. Its strategic location led to the installation of a Defence Product code 51530 Electric Light position in front of it in c 1900 and a pillbox was inserted into British Library Cataloguing in Publication Data the tip of the battery during the Second A CIP catalogue record for this book is available from the British Library. World War. All rights reserved [NMR 26571/007] No part of this publication may be reproduced or transmitted in any form or by any means, electronic or mechanical, including photocopying, recording, or any information storage or retrieval system, without Frontispiece permission in writing from the publisher.
    [Show full text]
  • Trenches in England Gazetteer Issue-01 Formatted.Xlsx
    Site Name Parish/District County NGR Description Condition References Mapping & AP Comments WWII Comments Designation Associated Files Source Aps EC Curwen air photo of practice trenches in Barbican House, Levelled by plough and some areas of scrub but Lewes. Assocacited with visible on AP and should survive. Appears to Thundersbarrow Hill Shoreham by Sea East Sussex TQ 2250 0850 Shoreham Camp overlie earlier Celtic field system on Google Earth Chasseaud 2014: Fig 2 NMP Plot + Kitchener's Camps at Seaford: A Trenches associated with First World War Landscape on Aerial Seaford Camp Seaford Head East Sussex TV 4992 9830 Kitchener Army camp. Extant, though overgrown on Google Earth Skinner 2011, pg 28 Photographs by Skinner EH Report 27/2011 Practice trenches on the side of the neck and on top of the neck Appear to be extant. Likely to be associated with Alfriston Alfriston East Sussex TQ 50918 03129 of the valley. Canadian Infantry Chasseaud 2014, pg 173 & Fig 9 Appear to be extant although some areas Chailey Common Chailey East Sussex TQ 374 208 Maze of practice trenches. overgrown. Chasseaud 2014, pg 175 & Fig 9 Practice trenches shown on aerial Exceat Exceat East Sussex TV 533 982 photographs. Not visible. Chasseaud 2014, pg 176 & Fig 9 Practice trenches shown on aerial Polegate Polegate East Sussex TQ 608 047 photographs. Not visible. Chasseaud 2014, pg 180 & Fig 9 Practice trenches including a Appear to be extant although difficult to discern Poundgate, extensive trench system on between archaeological features and trackways Ashdown Forset Poundgate East Sussex TQ 48804 29028 Poundgate Spur.
    [Show full text]
  • Field Research Uncovering the Bunker
    See, but not Seen: Field Research Uncovering the Bunker Olle Stjerne 2016 BA Thesis Tutor: Christel Vesters I was most impressed by a feeling, internal and external, of being immediately crushed. The battered walls sunk into the ground gave this small blockhouse a solid base; a dune had invaded the interior space, and the thick layer of sand over the wooden floor made the place ever narrower. Some clothes and bicycles had been hidden here; the object no longer made the same sense, though there was still protection here. Paul Virilio I turned the numbers of the dial, 5… 2… 5… 9… The padlock opened and the heavy chain rattled through the ringers of the blast door and fell to the ground with a heavy clatter. I pushed on the reinforced steel, and slowly the door came open, revealing nothing but darkness. I had been permitted to explore the big bunker, a former radio control central at Bungenäs. It had been abandoned by the military, but not before the soldiers had removed all equipment and smashed the interior, leaving it an empty, cold maze of concrete corridors. Some parts were recognizable as bathrooms, but the faucets, showers and toilets were gone; other rooms had pipes leading nowhere. I had heard from my friend Kees, an artist working with nuclear bunkers, that in every bunker he ever visited, it was always the same: the soldiers had left nothing but the last chair for the last man to sit on. 3 1. Introduction 6 2. Field Research 10 3. Our Field 14 4.
    [Show full text]
  • Rehoboth , Massa Both Chu Ho Se Massachusetts E Tt S R
    Rehoboth , Massa both chu ho se Massachusetts e tt s R Guide to Historic Sites Introduction Table of Contents Over a period of many years, the Rehoboth Historical Commission Early Rehoboth 1 has endeavored to mark historic locations throughout Rehoboth with Map of Historic Sites 3 descriptive signs. A guide to the locations was first published in booklet 1. Leonard Iron Mine 5 form in 1995 under the direction of the late, still-missed, Frank DeMattos 2. Perry Turning Mill 5 (1931-2002). Since additional signs have been erected since then, this revised 3. Indian Oven 6 edition has been prepared for 2017. 4. Carpenter Street Bridge 7 5. Perryville Dam 7 The center-page map locates all the historic sites in the booklet. Please 6. Bliss-Carpenter Saw-Shingle Mill 8 note that many of these sites are on private property and do not trespass. All signs, and all sites except the Indian Oven, can be viewed from a public 7. Anawan Rock 9 road. 8. Bad Luck Pond 10 9. Hornbine School 11 Rehoboth is fortunate to have a long and interesting history. It is hoped 10. Bullock Baker Sawmill 12 that documenting these sites will increase public awareness and apprecia- 11. Baker Gristmill 13 tion of Rehoboth’s historic past. 12. Original Oak Swamp Meeting House 13 13. Horton Signal 15 14. Liberty Tree Park 15 15. Rehoboth Town Pound 16 In Memoriam, E. Otis Dyer Jr (1960-2016). 16. Blockhouse Number 2 16 A life-long resident of Rehoboth, E. Otis Dyer Jr., was a also a life-long 17.
    [Show full text]
  • And on the Beaver River in 1788
    NOTES ON THE ARCHITECTURE OF FORT McINTOSH AND THE CONSTRUCTION OF A BLOCKHOUSE ON THE BEAVER RIVER IN 1788 Ronald C. Carlisle Introduction juncture of the Ohio and Beaver rivers was of strategic im- Theportance during the long years of the American Revolution. Here, along the stone terrace which forms the northern bank of the Ohio, General Lachlan Mclntosh in the fall of 1778 constructed the fort which bears his name. Fort Mclntosh remained an important out- post on the frontier throughout the American Revolution and into the post-Revolutionary period. Plagued by a lack of supplies, vandalism, and the forces of natural decay, however, the post's diminishing im- portance after 1785 prompted the construction of a blockhouse on the east bank of the Beaver River in 1788. For many years, the physical appearance of Fort Mclntosh and of the smaller blockhouse up the Beaver from the fort remained con- jectural. The archaeological and historical research which has now been accomplished permits some statements to be made regarding the design and construction of both installations. Much of what is known about Fort Mclntosh from diverse historical sources has already been published, but the reports of a succession of officers who commanded at the fort in the post-Revolutionary period offer additional informa- tion. These reports were discovered in the papers of Josiah Harmar, commander of the First American Regiment, and onetime comman- dant of Fort Mclntosh. The study has also revealed a previously un- published drawing of the blockhouse on the Beaver River prepared by Lieutenant Edward Spear in 1788.
    [Show full text]