Turn 8: British reinforcements (104th New Brunswick Regt and Canadian Fencibles) and the rallied 89th Foot counterattacked and retook the ridge. |
Well the short answer is "Longer than you would think" but luckily its not the only option.
Turn 9 saw both sides regrouping on one flank while the long range firefight continued on the other. |
Turn 10: The British left starts to crumble while the American left rallies and starts to prepare for a renewed assault. |
that is, if you are one of us who play in multiple periods. Would this scenario work in WWII? What about in Medieval Europe or in Zululand?
Historical battles with a twist are an interesting option. Just played a game based on Waterloo? Got a choice of other periods on hand? Instead of clearing the table completely what about resetting it, maybe 300 years earlier with the King Henry VIII's English bills and bows on the ridge awaiting the French onslaught while watching for the Emperor's Landsknechts to arrive? Will the different weapons and tactics make it a wholly different battle or might it still resemble the later one if the same over all plan is adopted? Since you are controlling both sides you can give it a go without focusing on beating your friend and opponent.
Rule vs Rule. Solo games are also a good way to test out new rule sets, especially if you don't have a regular weekly opponent. What I particularly like to do is to play a test game of a new set of rules using a familiar, reliable, scenario such as Sawmill Village or Blastof Bridge, one I know from experience works well with multiple rules in multiple periods. (eg see Ma-theyre-at-it-agin)
I have also been known to play the same scenario a couple of times in a row with different rules to get a feel for how they compare with each other whether for playability, historical feel, fun or anything else. (eg Wargames Digest Battle Station - 5 posts, 3 rules )
Square Brigadier, found myself modifying it as I went and finally ended up rolling back most of the changes and that was what I used for this game. The replay of the same scenario confirmed my feeling that the rules had wandered off course and had needed to be brought back.
Square Brigadier, found myself modifying it as I went and finally ended up rolling back most of the changes and that was what I used for this game. The replay of the same scenario confirmed my feeling that the rules had wandered off course and had needed to be brought back.
The one thing I always try to do is to set an time scale for when the game ends , either by the number cards drawn or simply the number of turns .
ReplyDeleteA day is only "so" long. (plus, it is a game so clear parameters are god)
DeleteThat couldn't of been any closer! Clearly a re-run will be capable of flipping the result either way. The War of 1812 is great for small actions like this although I suspect the inspiration was from the biggest open fight in that war. I've always stayed from the conflict as my partisan nature would struggle with many of the outcomes... ...yes, I do know it's only a game.
ReplyDeleteThat's a good aspect of generic scenarios, you can use generic armies to avoid that. Probably one reason my 1812 armies don't get out as often as my fictional ones.
DeleteIn a solo game I must admit to liking "army break points" as they do a little more random than "victory points" in my experience. Whatever, if you're having fun results just enjoy it. Whatever the weather or global conditions our hobby can take the strain!
ReplyDeleteI usually include some form pf "army morale" quite separate from victory conditions and tutn limits. If an army's morale breaks before the game has reached the end then the other side usually wins by default.
DeleteAmazing how much time is take up with daily living even in such times. I might struggle with balance if I lived alone!
Hi Ross,
ReplyDeleteYou may recall I had tried out your Plastic Army of the Potomac rules dated 12 SEP 2020 and said how much I liked them. While in my ACW phase I used them a lot. I went to my "ancients" phase for awhile and now in my "Napoleonics" phase. I believe you were working on some possible changes and I was wondering if you had made them.
I play solo exclusively, by necessity but also by choice. Those of us who do know why, so I don't need to repeat the reasons. We just know. Anyway, I've been following some of the interesting comments about solo wargaming, so I wanted to chime it with a few thoughts.
How long should a battle last? I simply end it when it seems hopeless for a side to continue, or wise to withdraw. Part of the decision-making process you make as general for both sides. I've tried arbitrary rules like DBA's 4 elements lost and it's over, or when 1/3 or 1/2 the forces are lost, it is over, or when morale reaches a calculated number it's over. To me it's over when it's over. I know.
Randomizing the tactical decision-making in a battle. The old "let the dice decide" rule is a very effective method when different options exist. Or just follow Yogi Berra's advice, when you come to a fork in the road, take it. DBS (De Bellis Solitarius) rules can be adapted to any period and provide a
pretty good framework. I also use a trimmed down version of William Sylvester's SCMR (Solo Campaign Mobilization Rules - see below) to determine the initial plan for a battle.
Solo campaigns. I love this aspect of the hobby. My guiding light for this was William Sylvester's (see above) book The Solo Wargaming Guide. His SCMR rules allow any kind of solo campaign to be set up and proceed in a way that can challenge the general in all of us while creating the fog of war which makes it so much more fun. I have found inspiration in quite a few other authors and blogs along the way and have borrowed from many of them to set up my own solo campaign rules. I created a blog to share a couple of them for Napoleonic and Ancient campaigns. Search on Dalethewargamer and you'll find it. I hope to add more to that as time goes on. Meantime great blogs like yours are fun to participate in.
Thanks and stay safe.
Dalethewargamer (or just Dale)