Tag: wargame rules

Categories
Mid 19th Century Wargaming wargame rules wargaming

Ruletest D: Battles with Model Soldiers – The Battle of Orchard Hill

This game was thrown in firstly because Battles with Model Soldiers was the source of my original ruleset test scenarios for Fire & Fury.

Battles with Model Soldiers is really a 200 page design/ideas book with rules dotted throughout.

The rules I used are explained briefly at the end of this post. A key aspect is alternate moves with losses incurred before any responses. Initiative (who goes first in each turn) therefore matters.

Donald Featherstones book provides basic rules for American Civil War actions. he shows the mechanics through three stepped up siutations

  • infantry only
  • infantry plus cavalry
  • infantry, cavalry and artillery

In this game I used the last stepped up situation of infantry, cavalry and artillery.

Narrative – Near Rome in 1849

In this confused affair a wargaming Napoleon faces off against Garibaldi – I suppose the nearest real conflict would be 1849 at Rome where Garibaldi gave the French a shock defeat.

The forces were

Roman Republic (Garibaldi) on the left

  • Red Dragoon Volunteers in foreground left
  • White Legion Volunteers
  • Roman Artillery (in liberated Austrian uniforms!)
  • Milan Sharpshooters in distance

The French were led by General Oudinot looking a bit like the great Napoleon himself.

  • 33rd Line Regiment right foreground
  • Austrian Artillery on loan
  • 66th Line Regiment in distance
  • French Cuirassiers

In terms of “ground” the battle was fought on a low ridge (no effect on movement) crossed by a rough track (no benefit) and the fenced orchard (inaccessible to all forces).

The rings denote remaining strength – red = 4 artillerymen/5 figures, yellow = 10 figures, blue = 20 figures with green showing 15 figures in value.

What you see is almost what you get – counting actual figures equals strength. I don’t do figure removal normally – using rings and dice to show remaining strength. So 8 cavalrymen on show were actually 10 in value. I also did some selected base removal in this game (for visual effect) just to confuse matters!

The action was brisk!

This game is a bit short on images – it was quick – almost done in 3 moves really……

Move 1

Both forces deployed and marched forward to drive the other from the ridge otherwise known as Orchard Hill.

Move 2 – Oudinot won the initiative

  • the 33rd Line fired on the Red Dragoon Volunteers inflicting 3 casualties at medium range
  • The Austrian artillery opened up on the White Legion Volunteers missing them completely
  • the 66th Line fired on the Roman Artillery and the artillerymen promptly ran away (die throw = 6 hits versus 4 figures in strength)
  • The 10 French Cuirassiers charged the 20 Milan Sharpshooters.
    • Basically a melee is headcount times 1 point for an infantryman or 2 points for a cavalryman.
    • So this fight was on equal points. 1 d6 is rolled per 5 points – 4 dice each. Cavalry get +1 on each dice throw (2 to 7 range possible) for charging.
    • Cuirassiers scored 17 versus Sharpshooters 20.
    • The points tally HALVED equals the damage. So 17 points halved and fractions rounded down meant 8 points of damage to the Sharpshooters. Thats 8 figures lost from the 20 that started the fight.
    • Meanwhile the 20 points of damage halved was 10 and divided by 2 points per cavalryman gave 5 cavalry killed.
    • The survivors represent their basic morale – 10 points of Cuirassiers x 1d6 throw of 5 = 50 while the Sharpshooters at 12 points x 1d6 throw of 6 = 72.
    • The Sharpshooters won while the Cuirassiers retreated with 50% losses. (bit of Roman gloss there…..)

Garibaldi responded

  • The Milan Sharpshooters hit the 66th Line with 4 hits
  • The White Legion hit the Austrian Artillery for six literally – destroying them
  • The Red Dragoon Volunteers charged the 33rd Line
    • 7 remaining Dragoons x 2 pts versus 20 infantry x 1 pt meant 14 points versus 20 points or 4 v 3 dice (round up half or better fractions – 14 points becomes 15 points = 3 dice)
    • Cavalry get +1 for charging. The Dragoons inflicted 16 points damage halved = 8 infantrymen killed
    • The 33rd Line threw 12 in all = 6 Cavalry points damage or 3 actual dragoons killed
    • Now the Dragoons had already lost 3 casualties to firing so were now down to 4 dragoons
    • 4 cavalry x 4 die roll versus 12 infantry x 2 die roll was 16 v 24 or a victory for the 33rd Line
    • The Cavalry retreated

Move 3 Garibaldi won the initiative to move first

  • The Milan Sharpshooters fired on the 66th Line scoring 1 hit
  • The White Legion fired on the 33rd Line scoring 8 hits – destroying the 33rd

Oudinot in Move 3 sent his 66th Line against the Sharpshooters. In the melee the 66th won reducing the Sharpshooters to just 4 men who retired.

The game is almost over!

Move 4 Oudinot moved first

  • The 66th fired at the Sharpshooters but missed
  • The Blue Cuirassiers now returned to the fray

Move 4 Garibaldi

  • The Red Dragoons also returned to the fray
  • The White Legion now closed on the 66th Line
  • The Milan Sharpshooters scored 2 casualties on the 66th Line reducing them to just 10 men.
Move 4 the french right is now under attack – the french left having been destroyed
Move 5 the French Curiassiers charge in as the infantry trade fire

Move 5 Oudinot took the initiative

  • The French Cuirassiers made one last valiant charge into the Milan Sharpshooters.
    • The Sharpshooters killed 1 Cuirassier in turn receiving 3 casualties
    • The Cuirassiers won the melee driving off the Sharpshooters
  • The 66th Line fired on the approaching White Legion scoring 6 casualties (I allowed liberal firing arcs!)

Move 5 Garibaldi

  • The White Legion fired on the 66th Line inflicting 5 casualties in return
Move 5 the French Cuirassiers chase off the Milan Sharpshooters

Move 6 Garibaldi won the initiative

  • The White Legion fired on the 66th scoring 4 more casualities

Move 6 Oudinot attacks in desparation

  • The 66th Line and Cuirassiers charge home against the White Legion.
    • The White legion suffered 2 casualties
    • In return they inflicted 4 infantry casualties with 1 cuirassier loss
Move 6 The last knockings
Move 6 – the 66th Line break leaving the Cuirassiers alone to hold off the White Legion and the Red Dragoons

Oudinot knows the games up and in Move 7 his Cavalry retire covering the rest of his routing forces.

General Garibaldi triumphs capturing the ridge.

Rules used in the Battle of Orchard Hill

Donald Featherstone distributed his many periods (10) rules within the 200 pages of text. The basic rules presented were for horse and musket and his three stepped up situations used an American Civil War example.

My Summary of Rules from Battles with Model Soldiers

  1. 8 moves = 1 dayof daylight and 4 moves = nighttime
  2. Alternate Moves – I opted for “initiative” going to one side for whole move, fire and melee process.
  3. guns picked target after moving is complete
  4. Infantry Firepower
    1. 1d6 per 5 men with muskets/rifles
    2. modify -1 (0″-6″ short range) 1d6 = hit = casualities of 0 to 5
    3. modify -2 (6″-12″ medium range) 1d6 = hit = casualties of 0 to 4
    4. modify -3 (12″-24″ long range) 1d6 = hit casualties of 0 to 3
    5. -1 per dice for hard cover
    6. half casualties for cavalry
  5. Artillery
    1. hit on a 6 @ 18″-36″ then 1d6 = casualties
    2. hit on 5,6 @ 9″-18″ then 1d6 = casualties
    3. hit on 4,5,6 @ 0″-9″ then 1d6 – casualties
    4. half casualties for hard cover
    5. halve casualties for cavalry
  6. Melee
    1. INF v INF = 1pt v 1pt
    2. INF v CAV = 1pt v 2pt
    3. 1d6 per 5 pts fighting
    4. +1 per dice for charging cavalry
    5. +1 per dice attacking rear
    6. half result to get effect in points
    7. half effect for cavalry (they=2pts)
    8. survivors in points x 1d6
    9. compare result – highest is melee winner, loser retreats one full move
  7. Movement
    1. Infantry 12″
    2. Cavalry 18″
    3. Guns 18″ -3″ limber and unlimber
    4. Guns select target in their turn
    5. No firing if moved
    6. Gun target selection is not movement
  8. Morale
    1. Loss of Cin C (not used)
    2. 1d6 is thrown per unit
      1. =1 unit flees the field
      2. =2 retire from the field in good order – will defend itself
      3. =3 surrender
      4. =4 fall back 1 move and rallies
      5. =5/6 carries on

A simple set of rules although for some the melee points technique might feel complicated.

Categories
wargame rules wargaming

The Battle of Tinckermann

Table Top Battles – the Naval Rules, have been occupying my time recently. NavalTTB are a very simple set of rules using a grid based set up. They are part of a compendium of rules featuring fantasy, air, siege and land based warfare.

Having played the basic rules I could not help but tinker with them.

The Extras

First up, I used a 50mm grid and not a 100mm grid permitting greater granularity in manoeuvre.

a 50 mm grid gave each 100mm square a centreline to sail on. In turn all “lines” became sailable with some rules tinkering. The spaces cease to be occupied directly.

Second I took the single broadside characteristic value of 3 and changed this to three possible values – 3,2,1. I also allowed three steps in the degradation of a broadside after being hit. So a ship might start with a 3 then go down to 2 and finally 1. Note the numbers 1,2,3 are the actual values added to the die roll for a broadside scoring a hit.

The Blue Squadron’s ill fated Chippewa has lost all sail, while all its broadsides (3 per side) and its one of its close action firepower (2xCr=Crew) remain intact

I also permitted some ships to have say a 2 or 1 rating for their broadside from the start reflecting a weaker armanent. And then I still allowed those ships three hits absorption before that broadside would fall silent. So this might be 2,1,1 or 2,2,1 or even 1,1,1.

I left the score tables, crew attack and command values unaltered.

Finally I altered the sailing manoeuvre value. Essentially a hit on a sailing capability each time reduces the speed (movement per 100mm square) by 1. I applied some options, as in a large ship could have say a maximum of 2 while a small ship had a value of 4. In either case degradation of manoeuvre gave more granularity. So a faster ship might have “S” values of 4 then 3 then 2 and then nothing while a slower ship might have “S” values of 2,1,1, before being unable to move.

One final change I made was to sail ships on the “line” of the grid and not in the space. A ship turns on its centre and cannot overlap another ship when it does so. The standard rule of no ramming was retained.

This was a result of my using a 50mm grid.

The unintended outcome of this movement change was for ships to become stuck alongside each other. That felt ok though.

The Battle of Tinckermann – Fauxterre 1816

The Red Kingdom had found out that the Blue Kingdom was attacking some of its provinces and making an amphibious attack. The Red Kingdom dispatched a strong squadron of ships to disperse the enemy fleet.

The Blue Kingdom, well informed about the Red Kingdom actions sent a squadron to intercept the enemy squadron.

The Red Squadron

  • The Fortuna – a 3 decker 3 masted ship of the line
  • The Estedio – a 3 decker 3 masted ship of the line
  • The Meshuda – a 3 decker 3 masted ship of the line
  • The Zugarte – a 2 decker 3 masted FAST ship of the line

The Blue Squadron

  • The Chippewa – a 3 decker 3 masted ship of the line
  • The Allegheny – a 3 decker 3 masted ship of the line
  • The Abellino – a 2 decker 3 masted FAST ship of the line
  • The Firefly – 1 decker 3 masted FAST Frigate
  • The Lyra – a 1 decker 3 masted FAST Frigate

The Blue Squadron attacked the Red Squadron in two lines while the Red Squadron attempted to keep a single line and sail between both enemy lines attacking them at the same time.

Early on the Chippewa lost all sail control and drifted out of the battle. This in theory evened up the battle between 4 ships on each side. Then the Fortuna became caught between the Allegheny and the Abellino.

The Allegheny and Fortuna are in the positions that framed the rest of the action while Chippewa in top right drifts out of the action. The blue/red dice indicate a ship has acted in the turn.

Then the Zugarte, Estedio and Meshuda isolated the Allegheny although the Firefly gave aid.

Firefly attempts to aid the Allegheny

At this point in the battle both the Allegheny and Fortuna were stopped and the other ships manoeuvred to support or exploit the situation.

The final action saw the Red Zugarte and Estedio take on the fast Blue Frigates Lyra and Abellino. Lyra and Estedio had their sail control destroyed.

Lyra (blue) and Estedio (red) are stopped with no sailing power left – they have orange dice on them

At this point the Red Squadron broke off the action and the Meshuda escorted the Zugarte (now with no armanent left) away.

Actually the 12th game move finished. The standard rules are a 12 move game.

Outcomes

At the conclusion of the action the Red Squadron was driven off having to abandon both Fortuna and Estedio – both ships suffering so much damage to their masts that they could no longer manoeuvre.

Firefly and Abellino make sure the Red Squadron make plenty of sail.

The Zugarte had lost all its broadside and crew fighting power. It could still make sail and was escorted away by the Meshuda, which still had both fire and manoeuvre capability remaining.

The Blue Squadron despite driving off the Red Squadron had suffered badly.

The Allegheny had lost all sailing ability although it still had some broadside capability. The Lyra likewise could defend itself but needed repairs before it could make sail again. Early in the action the Chippewa had suffered complete loss of its sailing ability and as the action moved away it sustained hardly any damage keeping all its broadsides intact.

The Firefly retained sailing and fighting ability as did the Abellino – these two vessels were to be seen driving off the Red Squadrons Meshuda and unarmed Zugarte.

And so ended the Battle of Tinckermann with the Blue Kingdom free to continue its land attack on the Red Kingdoms provinces.

A mark 1 ship card – to make them reuseable I inked them in.
A mark 2 ship card! – more improvements required methinks

Afterthoughts

The difference between a win and a possible draw occurred in the last move of the game between slightly unequal forces. I will test this a bit more. It does mean the game hangs in the balance. And for the soloist it is not easy to see who is winning where – always a bonus.

If I was inclined a permanent sea table along with 3D models would drastically improve the visual aspect of this game. Indeed I do have some models from wizkids 2005 pirate game. Somehow I preferred the 2D test set up.

So this has proven a surprising distraction from my land battles. I tend to use TTB for land battles when the action does not lend itself to using Neil Thomas One Hour Wargames or 19th Century European Warfare Rules.

I like to think if Neil Thomas wrote some naval rules then NavalTTB would not be far off the mark.

Categories
wargame rules wargaming

Leadership, MacDowall, Callan and Mersey

Well I missed the Wargames Illustrated Magazine free rules giveaway this Autumn. The rules were “never mind the billhooks”. Written for Wars of the Roses. They are just one of many or should I say one of the “plethora of rules” that wargamers can access these days.

So what fuss would there be, given their free, should be more bargain basement than of any original value surely?

Well Andy Callan is the author and for me he has history and if he has authored the rules they will be worth a look. I first encountered Andy Callan as a writer in the 1980’s when I recall his ideas about rules were running against the grain: Something to stir up trouble in wargaming circles most of the time. After all we can be a fussy lot.

Over the years I have kept articles from magazines. Yes I know I have probably destroyed some valuable copies in the process. Still I have what I need. And more to the point I have articles that are still useful reading even decades on.

So back in Spring 1987 when I think Stuart Asquith was at the helm, Practical Wargamer published an article by Andy Callan entitled Leaders and Generals.

He covered three periods in the short article that was really about rules design. The medieval and dark ages era leaders should worry about unit formation – a measure of order, unit aggression – a measure of fighting spirit and unit strength. The latter being an amalgam of numerical strength, armanent and relative fatigue.

The Leaders would be allocated command points.

His main objective for this period was that the “big man” (he coined that term) should be focused on being a “leader” and not be a “general” standing at the back directing operations with so many staff officers.

Move forward a couple of years and we are back with Stuart Asquith who via Publisher Argus Books offered the “wargaming in history” series of A5 booklets.

Simon MacDowell authored Goths, Huns and Romans.

My Dark Ages – “as the lights go out” late roman end of the period has never got beyond a 15mm DBA army acquired at Triples about 20 years ago. Well I do also have a 15mm late byzantine DBA army. Neither have had much of a runout despite my love of DBA. A case of right period wrong ruleset maybe?

He offered a set of rules within a booklet that also gave some background history; explained the forces and troops involved; set out a variety of game options from skirmishes, through encounter battles to campaigns.

Simon required his leaders to personally intervene to motivate troops to act. Control Points were allocated to each Leader along with inspiration points.

Both these writers were contemporary with the first trials of what became DBA. DBA was conceived in 1988 and was first published in 1990.

And so I thought that all this was disconnected from today. Yet I happened then to rediscover an article by Daniel Mersey in Battlegames shortly after publication of his successful Osprey publication Dux Bellorum around 2012.

And nestled there is Daniels’ homage to that 1980’s wargames era and specifically Andy Callan.

I remember Andy Callan promoting what I consider to be important considerations when trying to replicate the feel of a period through command and control. And I think the other key theme is that you make your rules period specific.

I hope his latest rules “never mind the billhooks” carry on that theme of challenging the status quo and promoting enjoyable and satisfying wargames.

And one final point, Angus McBride bestrides the world of illustrated warriors. His work has become synominous with Osprey. Yet Rick Scollins had a way to engage you in the 1980’s and as you can see he even influenced the young Daniel Mersey (see above). And perhaps appropriately it is his West Saxon Thegn who illustrates that 1988 article in Practical Wargamer.

Happy wargaming whatever your rules preference.

Categories
wargame rules wargaming

Shieldwalls collide with One Hour Wargames

Not content with adding Table Top Battles to the test mix I have now decided to test my shieldwalls under the very quick ruleset written by Neil Thomas. “One Hour Wargames” (OHW or 1HW) does what it says – gives you a game in under an hour.

So my next posting will cover what happened when Earl Mathedoi caught up with Thegn Pyrlig.

Categories
1/72 scale figures anglo saxons wargame rules wargaming

Table Top Battles Tested

In my last post I explained my rediscovery of the ruleset published by Partizan Press and authored by Mike and Joyce Smith.

The Table Top Battles (TTB) ruleset uses a grid. Now I have dabbled in grid based wargaming and played lots of board games which are gridded games of some sort – not a tape measure in sight!

This post is a marathon and I hope you will see that this ruleset although “gamey” has a coherence to it. So the battle flowed and compared to AMW by Neil Thomas and more so with Daniel Mersey’s Dux Bellorum rules, I had little need to keep rereading the rules.

The usual sections follow – set up, then narrative and finally a picture based step by step report.

The rules require you have a base that will fight for each discrete unit. The term used is a “stand”. The General is another base who the way I read the rules is not a stand so does not fight.

I decided to use my leader bases and gave them stand status. The “tinkerman” at work already.

Essentially the line up was a shieldwall with some skirmishers at both ends of the kings battleline. At one end the single rebels skirmisher bow faced up to the kings skirmisher bowmen. At the other the Kings men had a foot bow skirmish stand plus a mounted javelin light cavalry stand facing a shieldwall of rebel spearmen stand.

The diagram below shows the set up. The playing area was kept to a minimum.

Narrative

Earl Toki now felt confident enough to split his forces which had grown due to his successes. He left Thegn Pyrlig with his main forces while he rode to meet some Mercians who promised to come over to his side.

While Earl Toki was away Thegn Pyrlig kept a good lookout and soon enough another force appeared who were yet another collection of the Kings men ready to fight the rebels. Thegn Pyrlig soon confirmed that these were western men but not any they knew or who could be “turned”. And Earl Mathedoi was at their head again, eager to avenge his recent defeat.

The battleground was simple – a flat plain. I used 80 mm squares here as my chosen unit type for 1/72 figures is the Impetus Rules with the 15mm suggested base width! Te grid is some cotton sheeting with penciled lines.
On the Earl’s left flank his mounted skirmishers rode forward confidently while his bow skirmishers looked with concern that they faced a solid rebel shieldwall.
In the game pictures you will see a peter pig pink die – this denotes the aggressor. Each turn dice are thrown and the winner has the advantage or the aggression in that turn.

TTB in effect uses the “pip” idea from DBA. It is simplified to give a +1 on ALL dice throws made by the aggressor.

The pink die reminds me that my wargame story has included gridded games in the past. My hex gaming with Kallistra never quite got going even though I thought the concept excellent. My problem was the geometrical look of hexes and the fact there is a “weave” for very linear types of warfare. Maybe I was just too focused on DBA at the time. Peter Pig rules for WW2 used square grids and his Poor Bloody Infantry (PBI) rules I really enjoyed before leaving that period altogether. There the grid worked – it did not impose itself in the way hexes did.

Clearly this is a very subjective matter. It is a case of each to their own.

This is my first return to the grid technique.

The orange 12 sided dice is used to decide who is the aggressor and therefore gets the valuable pink +1 dice
The right wing bow skirmishers got into action first. A game turn comprises phases – move, fire and combat with the aggressor going first in the move and fire phases. Crucially the aggressor inflicts firing losses before the passive opponent replies: Another advantage of having the pink jersey – woops – too much giro d’italia. Did I tell you my scenery ideas have benefited to my mind from watching hours of cycling tours riding across Spain, France and now Italy!

In the aggressors fire phase shown above both units have a value of one. This value is a combination of any fighting ability and morale. It is used in all firing and combat. To this fixed value you add the result of a single D6 throw. In this firing phase the aggressor has thrown a six and their opponent just 3. So no need for the +1 here.

The result is the loser score was “slightly lower” in the dice off so the stand is moved back. Not playing the +1 pinkie is an error because it applies in every throw. And in this case had it been properly used the losing score or “Target Player” score is now half. not just slightly less than that of the “Firing Player”. In this case the stand should be removed.

The Kings bowmen are happy to retire a square relieved they were not “removed” or were they?

TTB gives options throughout and I chose the harsher results approach. Stands either move back a square or are removed from the game.

On the kings left flank the mounted light cavalry (orange value 2) beat the shieldwall (purple value 3) 7v5 (yellow dice being the random addition). The kings bowmen managed a lowly 4 which being less than the shieldwall 6 proved ineffective. The net result is the shieldwall are discouraged and retire a square. Firing is between individual bases. Combat is additive.
The error is corrected and the Kings bowmen leave the field early losing to the aggressors fire turn 8v4.
The Kings men throw themselves against the rebel shieldwall. Even the kings reluctant bowmen, not doubt emboldened by the kings light cavalry, have joined the fray.
The General adds the value of any 1 friendly stand in an adjacent square to the combat phase. Combat is simultaneous unlike the firing. Here a shieldwall spearman stand adds +3 to both leaders. Later on the eagle eyed will see I missed a few +3 yellow dice although because the leaders never moved and were always head to head they simply raised the value of both the group scores making it harder to get a decisive result in the grouped combat.
The combat allows “grouping”. This speeds up the combat process. Because I had a simple shieldwall with all units the same I could use the grouping. The kings group shieldwall score was 7×3 (21 orange) +1 aggression (pink) and a measly +1 random throw (yellow) = 25 when you add the generals bonus of +3 (yellow)

Remember those brave kings bowmen? Well they were not so brave as the rules allow some stands to engage to fire and then retire if a 4 or more on a D6 is acheived. The kings bowmen threw a 4 and with the pink dice acheived a healthy 5 to retire

The Rebels amassed 7 stands at 3 value (base score of 21) to which they added support values of +1 (yellow)from each flank unit because they faced a different unit type or had no opponent. To that you added the generals bonus of +3 (yellow) and a random +5 (yellow). total score 31. I decided that as the rebel bow were a different unit they could not get the +2 flank attack and were just allowed the +1 supporting value.
The whole kings line recoiled to join the already retired bowmen in the bottom of the picture.
The Kings men retained the upper hand though and attacked again next turn winning the aggression dice throw with an 8 on their D12
The skirmishers attacked again the rebel right flank.
By chance the rebel bowmen offered a flank to the recently retired right flank kings shieldwall and they “slid” right as you do in gridded wargames TTB style.

In TTB movement is in any direction with only a few restrictions. No penalties apply for direction change or rather they are absorbed into the move allowance. Generally units face up to their nearest opponent without restriction. The exception is when a unit is pinned on one face – then flank and rear attacks can also be made.

The rebel left flank is driven back again
almost stalemate again but now the rebels have numbers in the group combat as well (7 purple dice v 6 orange dice)
yet again the kings men aggressively return to the fray (winning the D12 dice off with a 9 to get the prized +1 pink dice) having lost the last group combat
The rebel bowmen were isolated by the right flank kings spearmen and put to flight with better dice throwing and that useful +1 in pink
Next up the rebel left flank spearmen stand determined to remove the kings own flank spearmen
Its that pink dice again – the kings men win this round by just 1 and drive the rebels back. The small gaming space is relevant as if the rebels get pushed off the table (or out of the ring!) they lose those stands.
The rebels throw a 12 on their D12 to resume their own aggression and take the fight to the kings men.
The weary shieldwall resume their struggle with the kings left flank skirmishers. Yet taking no fire damage they see off the bowmen again while the light cavalry stay too close! (failed to get 4 on a D6)
7v7 is a draw in this combat so the aggressor (rebel shieldwall) gets the nod and drives back the light cavalry. The pink dice has lots of ways of rewarding the owner!
Close again as the kings men win the central group combat 25 v 24 despite the rebel having that pink +1. The rebels are driven back again.
The Kingsmen are feeling good and secure the pink +1 dice with 11 on a D12
Out of picture the kings yellow dice of 5 is forcing the rebels back into the group combat off to the left so destroying them instead. With a 90 degree retreat arc I could have had this stand retire towards its enemy baseline. I decided this would not happen and the shieldwall just melted away having been cornered.
The kings men again triumph in the pink dice competition and drive forward but it remains a stalemate
on the rebel flank the skirmishers cling to the shieldwall but remain ineffective
In the centre the rebels hold a small advantage while on both flanks the kings advantage in numbers is clear
bottom right is the A4 rule book – to hand – actually despite 42 pages in length only about 2 sides of A4 text are relevant in the heat of battle. And here the rebels again aggressively attack the kings line. In the distance the left flank rebel spearmen drift out to engage the kings spearmen on that far flank.
In their movement phase the kings skirmishers again crowd around the rebel right flank scenting blood
Despite driving back the kings spearmen on their left flank, the rebel right flank has collapsed although all units forced to retire have managed to stay in the game (that is “stayed on the gaming board”).
A rare aggression victory for the rebels allows them to create some space as they renew their attack. The left handside of their line though, is crumpled.
on the far flank the battle remains one of two evenly matched shieldwalls
The kings men begin to turn the rebel line
the javelins of mounted skirmishers still have no impact on the resilient rebel spearmen and neither do the bowmen.
On the opposite flank the rebel spearmen get the better of the fight driving back the kings spearmen
although their flank has been turned the rebel spearmen give the light cavalry short shrift when they fail to evade after another ranging attck with their javelins. The light cavalry fly from the field. Elsewhere the rebels lose the central group combat again and are driven perilously back towards their baseline.
Even so with renewed vigour the rebels defend their line defeating the careless bowmen who retire
again the kings men win the centre combat driving the rebels back further. BUT……………..
And then the rule of 12 lands! The game ends after 12 turns representing the part of the day the battle was fought. The rebels were still in the field but with more stands lost victory went to the Kings men.

Thegn Pyrlig led his men from the field. Already his camp alerted to the returning stream of wounded and fleeing men had begun to get ready to move.

Fortunately Earl Mathedoi and his soldiers simply remained on the field too exhausted to pursue the defeated rebels. Earl Mathedoi cursed has lack of a reserve and especially a mounted reserve. Come to think of it where had his light cavalry gone?

Categories
wargame rules wargaming

Dux Bellorum test drive: Two Shieldwalls

So this is part 3 of a three wargame test of shieldwalls using two rulesets – Ancient & Medieval Wargaming (AMW) by Neil Thomas and Dux Bellorum (DuB) by Dan Mersey.

In the first two games which used AMW I first tested two shieldwalls against each other and then pitched a mounted force against a shieldwall.

The introduction can be found here https://thewargamingerratic.home.blog/2020/09/06/prelude-to-wargames-rules-tested/

and also the two test battles are located here.

https://thewargamingerratic.home.blog/2020/09/07/amw-test-drive-two-shieldwalls/

https://thewargamingerratic.home.blog/2020/09/08/amw-road-test-shieldwall-and-cavalry/

The third game used Dux Bellorum. Now I have used AMW quite a few times whereas this was only a second time use of Dux Bellorum (DuB). DuB was published in 2012, 5 years after AMW and arguably a different offering. AMW perhaps looks back to traditional gaming techniques refreshed while DuB uses more recent approaches.

It emphasises the “leader’s influence” and is very much a game to be enjoyed. So although I think the latter applies to AMW, AMW is more about the collective 8 units working together to achieve victory? By that I mean the capabilities given to the units are the signficiant factor

I used the same “impetus style” elements (80mm x 60mm) to represent each DuB unit.

Instead of Nobles, Retainers, Peasants, Spearmen and Archers we have Companions, Shieldwall, Warriors, Riders, Bow and Skirmishers.

In keeping with a more modern terminology a stat line defines each type of unit.

Move – movement allowance in base widths (BW)

Bravery – equates to command, control and morale of the unit

Aggression (including missiles) – the striking effect of a unit

Protection – the defence value of a unit

Cohesion – endurance, numerical strength, will to fight ( so not the same as bravery above?) interesting that this cohesion is the stat that declines during the game though. Does that mean the unit always has the same morale but loses its will to fight?

Building an army is quick and simple. I went for two almost identical forces of 32 points maximum.

1 x 5 point companion + leader

3 x 5 point shieldwall nobles

3 x 3 point shieldwall ordinaries

2 x 1 point bow skirmishers

Except the “tinkerman” changed the Kings force swopping out one unit of foot skirmishers for some 2 point mounted skirmishers armed with javelins.

So in theory one side had the advantage of 1 point! 32pts (for the king) versus 31pts (for the rebels).

The Rebel Force was the Aggressor who normally goes first in each turn and each phase of a turn.

The battle took place on a plain devoid of any terrain features.

A companion or leader element was supported by 3 noble elements (1 unit to the left and 2 units to the right). At their left flank was 2 ordinary shieldwall units with 1 such element on the right flank. At each end of the line a skirmisher element of bowmen was deployed in the case of the rbels. The only difference was the Kings army having a unit of mounted javelin riders and only one unit of bow skirmishers. These horsemen were deployed on the Kings Earls right flank.

In the photos you will see some mounted troops in the centre of the Kings shieldwall – being a bit short of foot units these posed as foot companions in this battle! It should not affect the visual aspects of this post.

The arrangement being mirrored meant that each unit was matched except for nobles versus ordinary shieldwalls and the mounted javelin horse who squared up to some bow armed foot skirmishers.

roughed out set up of both forces before tinkering………

Narrative

Earl Toki continued his relentless march through the Wessex and even now the King still did not attend to him. He just sent another Earl, Earl Mathedoi, a Breton immigrant, to deal with Earl Toki.

Earl Mathedoi gathered a scratch force of infantry and again pursued the wily Earl Toki.

Earl Toki elected to give battle again on a flat plain confident that his men would be victorious whatever enemy force was sent against him.

Game set up

I used the set up rules positioning the two walls as close together as possible and aligned – 3 BW’s from an imaginary table centre line
The Rebels are on the right in this view above. The rules are in small font compared to the AMW rules – not so good for quick reading mid game but the quick reference sheets were very useful.
I used a large dice to show the units cohesion – red for the companions/leader. I used some silver beads to show their leadership points.
Rebel left wing bowmen with some leadership points and a failed bravery throw (2 x D6 needing equal or less than 6)
The right flank rebel bow skirmishers has more luck and moves forward. Generally small WHITE dice show hits for the rebels as well as tests such as bravery
Earl Mathedoi with his impressive 6 cohesion and golden leadership points – both armies started with the basic 6 points leadership allocation.
I like the leader bases even though neither DuB or AMW require them.
An Ordinary shieldwall fails to move needing 7 – they then used the leadership points to achieve the roll.
elsewhere on the rebel left flank good bravery throws were to be seen
Eventually Earl Toki and his rebels advance on the unmoving KIngs men

Earl Mathedoi elects to wait on events – he who waits………maybe?
fruitless exchanges between bow armed skirmishers on the rebel right flank. Blue or purple small dice show hits for the King or things like bravery tests
equally fruitless bowfire on the rebel left
The two shieldwalls make contact – the rebels moved as a group using the leaders successful throw for bravery.
Kingsmen at top throw basic aggression dice (three for ordinary shieldwall and four for noble shieldwall). The rebels moving into contact throw an extra dice on this occasion. The kings ordinaries won their fight and pushed back their opponents while their noble neighbours were both beaten and had to retire half a base width. Feels a bit like DBA here.
Rebel success on each flank while the Kings men drive back the rebel centre
The Kings men attack in the flanks but lose again some initiative in the centre
The rebel bow skirmishers on the right pick off(with a 5 die roll) some more javelin horseman on the left flank they can just be seen in the bottom left trying to stay clear of the pesky bowmen
on the rebel right flank some swift exchanges finally result in the rebel bow skirmishers fleeing the field
a bit disconcerting view that shows best the cohesion losses with the rebels having the worst of it.
however the aggressive attacks by the rebels still give them some advantages, in DuxB attackers are well rewarded with more chances to hit – the issue is can the dice role well and has the repeller played their leadership points not so well?
The rebels have the upper hand in the centre in attacks
and also on the rebel left flank the rebels have the potential to damage the kings men.
now the dice roll well for the rebels on their right flank as seen from the kings side here
in the centre it is a disaster as the Mathedoi throws well – very well.
On the rebels left flank they also stumble with the Javelin armed horse throwing in their lot as well.
Earl Mathedoi’s left hand ordinary shieldwall collapses though
in a blur they are gone!
again this pitcure shows the cohesion dice well – everywhere both sides are on the verge of collapse
The rebel left flank bowmen skirmish with their javelin horsed opponents – firing into a melee is permitted under certain conditions. Here Mathedoi has thoughfully put some leadership protection in place to save the day for now.
The battle reaches its height and yet the battle lines are still discernable
The rebels right flank shieldwall make contact with the kings left flank skirmishers who put up a fight using some valuable leadership points – opting to go for the kill rather than in this case saving themselves.
in the centre the battle goes against the Kings men
On the kings right flank disaster strikes – three rebel sixes destroy the kings ordinary shieldwall and Mathedoi’s right flank shieldwall collapses
The ordinary shieldwall retires from the field
Again the rebel skirmishers fail to make any impact on the kings javelin armed horsemen who bravely now face the rebel shieldwall alone. It is here you must remember Dan Merseys words that the battle is a whirling mix of individual fights and not the apparent order conveyed by our neatly based models!
The final act as everywhere the rebels inflict terrible losses on the kings line
The kings ordinary men still have some fight in them (the blue dice) though, as they destroy a rebel shieldwall while their noble brothers succumb at their side
Mathedoi, his companions and more nobles give up the fight. The loss of units earlier in the battle has reduced the kings leadership points and fatally weakened Mathedois ability to keep units in the fight including his own hearth troops
Even the kings javelin horsmen run out of luck
In the distance the javelin horsemen flee as do the nobles, companions and Mathedoi himself. Nearby some rebels give up the fight as well
As Mathedoi is swept away by his own troops he has no time to reflect on how his decision to wait on events probably made all the difference between victory and defeat.
Dux Bellorum on this occasion rewarded the brave and agressive rebels
As the fighting ends and the line thins out, the Kings men have just 3 units left and with their leader fleeing they are defeated. The rebels hold the field with 7 of their 9 units intact.

In my next post I will comment on these three battles.

Narrative ending for now

Earl Toki was beginning to feel confident as were his men who had now seen off many of the Kings forces. Who would come against them now?

Categories
wargame rules

Neil Thomas and one hour wargames

Here is my latest acquisition or should I say reacquisition as i gave my first copy to my son who preferring home spun rules finally found that one hour wargames really cuts the mustard so to speak. Basically I could not live without them. They are the ultimate unstructured “pick up war game” – if you will excuse the contradiction.

Neil Thomas delivers the goods with these simple rules. They are a complete package.

And his other book titles on wargames work well too. I will have to dig them out.