Click on pictures for larger size. Depending on your machine, you can use your figures to enlarge or shrink the picture, or there may be a '+' on the picture which will expand again and allow you to slide the large picture to see all of it. Click on the header arrow pointing left to go back to the regular screen.

Showing posts with label wargamers digest. Show all posts
Showing posts with label wargamers digest. Show all posts

Friday, January 14, 2011

My Tin Heart's in the Highlands

I managed that 4th run through of the Wargamers Digest Dec 1974 Battle Stations this morning, and I'm really glad I did. It was still a small, short game but an interesting and engaging one. It took me about 1/2 hour to play 10 turns and it was the closest the Yankees have come to winning. Actually by turn 5 I was starting to think that there was no way the Confederates could win then the Union General made a mistake and his Confederate opponent jumped on it. (no bias other than standing behind the Rebs, in 15mm I was always a Reb but in 20mm & 54mm I am usually a Yankee).

The game started off with the same deployments and initial moves as in the previous games. I really liked the way the brigade movement worked and the move or fire  which I had copied from Don Featherstone. It really made engaging in a musketry dual a tactical choice as opposed to a "might as well while I'm here" thing. It also lends some drama due to the turn by turn initiative, it takes a strong nerve to march forward into the enemy's range if  you move first as you know you are up for one blast before you can return fire and may be up for 2 if there is a flip. On the other hand, if you can force the other guy to go first, you can march safely into range and who gets the first shot will be decided by the initiative die. A bit artificial given the turn lengths but it does add that touch of drama to the game and reflects the tension one must have felt advancing with close ranks on a waiting enemy. (Its also the way the original MacDuff rules worked although in that case it was fire before moving rather than instead of, something to think about)

The simplified fire also worked well and with the threat of a morale test removed again,  the effect was as it should be, significant if it sustained but almost never decisive. At some point you have to go in if you want the ground. That has always been the intent, used to work and does again. Hurrah!

 Back to the game. Things went fairly smoothly with the Union defenders getting in the first shot and doing more damage that they suffered thanks to their hasty entrenchment. The cavalry rode about the hill and belatedly the Union Commander realized that he forgot about reacting to this visible threat as it developed. Luckily his Confederate opponent graciously allowed him to face about even though the turn was over.
The reb cavalry, faced with a steady line of rifles up a steep hill, couldn't work up the nerve to charge, suffered a hit from long range fire then fell back to watch developments. (my decisions)

The fire fight had now extended along the whole hill with the Rebs having moved their reserve regiment out to the left to outflank the Union position. The Yankees responded by splitting their reserve in two. 1/2 the regiment blocked the cavalry while the other half moved swiftly to extend the blue line. Despite the support of 2 batteries, the Union were still dealing out more than they were taking, all along the line, an assault looked impractical. Then the Reb General saw the mistake, when the detachment moved up into line to face the Georgia infantry, they forgot about  the cavalry and left their flank in the air. With a Rebel Yell the two Confederate infantry regiments surged forward while the cavalry wheeled and galloped up the hill. The Federals turned a company to face but had to give up their defensive fire to do so. Along the line, they rolled low but so did the opposing infantry but with 7 stands against 4 (The Yankee line bent around the ridge so 2 of the defending stands were out of arc once the line had charged in.) The cavalry, elated by the opening, rolled up and the blue line gave way.

" They ran through the rocks and they ran through the briars" (oops wrong war)

The cavalry surged forward in pursuit, cutting down a few more, but the enemy took cover in the rocky crags where the cavalry couldn't follow.  It occurred to me belatedly that once again I had removed the stops and the cavalry could just keep pursuing until the enemy broke unless they had supports or cover or ran fast enough to out pace the horses. This was actually having the effect I wanted. If the infantry is steady, a frontal attack by cavalry is iffy at best but if the infantry cracks, they are toast.

Another view of the turning point.

The Yankees were far from broken, however, and reformed across the hill, their line forming an L with the short arm being behind the breastworks and the long line stretching back. The Rebs shifted their extremely useful horse artillery around to the front to thicken the fire then realized that the Union line on the hill was perfectly aligned with the foot artillery, an enfilade target.  (duh)  It took two turns of effective fire before he  woke up and pulled the line back, the end regiment having to conform to avoid being flanked and of course having to forfeit a shot in order to retreat ( in his defense, the Blue general was suffering from sleep deprivation after a low blood sugar incident in the middle of the night and was trying not to think about the phone message from the Real Estate agent about an offer coming in on the house in town, so not at his best)

By now the Yankee Brigade was nearing its break point and, with over 1/2 their men in the open, were suffering badly from artillery fire. The Southern General waved his hat and galloped forward, leading a charge of the whole line. A few minutes later the remnants of the Federal force was streaming across the valley with the cavalry in hot pursuit. At the cost of 2 companies, the Rebs had cleared the road.
"Your prisoner Sir". The Federal commander is captured during the rout.

It was the nearest the Confederates came to defeat but in the end it was  the most decisive victory. (Felt like an even bigger victory for me as the rules finally feel like they were supposed to again.)



Time to break out the '40mm and go back to Oregon

Tuesday, January 11, 2011

Black Powder at Belmont. Battle Station replayed

This was the 3rd and final play through of this small scenario. It was a small game for any of these rules but it was obviously way too small for Black Powder. So perhaps not a fair use of the rules but a fair comment on their flexibility in terms of game size as the other rules coped well.  I didn't keep careful track but this may have actually taken less time than the 15 minute Morschauser game!

I used the stats from the book for the troops and rated both commanders as staff value 8. I decided to treat the squadron of cavalry as a small unit of marauders. They and the artillery did not count towards the force's break point.

Once again I kept the same battle plans for consistency sake. On the first turn, the Rebel general ordered the cavalry to move around the enemy flank and they galloped off a triple move. The infantry refused their order. The Yankee infantry concealed on the hill declined to open fire at the cavalry skirmishers so it was on to turn 2. I started with the pinning force and this time it obediently marched forward 2 turns, unlimbered the gun and opened fire on the waiting Union infantry inflicting disorder and 1 casualty. The flanking force of infantry refused its order so the cavalry couldn't be given an order either. The Union reserve was ordered to about face and prepare for the cavalry but declined. The regiment blocking the road opened fire and disordered the Confederate pinning infantry.

On the 3rd turn, the flanking force kicked into gear and advanced 3 turns while the horse gun galloped forward and unlimbered next to them.  I now ordered the cavalry to sweep around the hill and attack and they duly did so with another triple turn. As in the first game, dismounting would have been smarter but I decided to repeat the charge, this time into the rear of the Union reserve. The cavalry had penalties for being a small unit and in skirmish formation so had 3 dice for 4,5 or 6, the infantry was unable to conduct closing fire and had a penalty for being attacked in the rear so had 6 dice for 5 or 6. When the dust settled the infantry was unscathed and the cavalry was disordered and shaken. It duly failed the morale check and was removed from the table,

Cell phone snap of the Yankees repelling the rebel cavalry by sheer indifference  

On their turn, the reserve moved smartly forward into the breastwork and the Yankee infantry opened fire all along the line leaving the lead unit of the flanking force disordered with 2 casualties. The 2nd line passed through into close range and they and the horse artillery blasted the enemy. The Yanks returned fire, shaking the pinning force. Another volley from the Confederates saw the end Union unit shaken with an extra casualty, they failed morale and routed while the regiment blocking the road also went shaken. This meant the Union brigade was now broken and on their next move, the remaining units would be forced to retreat as the enemy were within 12". The road was open.

Of all the games, this one was the least interesting and exciting. The jerky neck or nothing movement resulting from the command rolls was not as satisfying to me as the steady march of troops as the game unfolded even though they ended up at about the same spots at about the same game move. I also found the combat less engaging despite getting similar results. The cavalry attack in particular felt odd, it seemed unlikely that the Yanks would watch the cavalry making a wide sweep around the hill without reacting and then be charged in the rear and calmly disperse the enemy. If they had of faced about, the result would have been the same or worse but it would have felt better. The fire combat is as jerky feeling as the movement,  lots of die rolling leading to dribbles of casualties or nothing and then suddenly a lucky roll and an enemy goes shaken and 1 die decides if they stand or rout.

So, the rules work and I'll play them when a game is offered but I'm not likely to use them for my own games.

I also spent some time today thinking about  the question of how common it was for troops retreating from combat to rally and return to the fray but more on that tomorrow.

Monday, January 10, 2011

Morschauser on the Mountain: At point does less become too little?

I reset the game this morning and gave a play through using the original Morschauser rules including the roster concept. John Curry has republished the original book bundled with extra material so I won't go into too much detail on the rules. Basically each stand is a Basic Unit which gets 1 die when shooting and in melee and is destroyed by 1 hit. The roster takes this a bit farther and makes each stand 5 basic units, so more dice flying but no changes. The rules are bloody in the extreme with elimination of one side being the only possible melee result.

As usual when comparing rules, I followed the same battle plans. In short, the game took about 15 minutes and 5 turns to reach the same outcome as the first game. About 1/3rd of that time was spent rolling dice to resolve melees during the penultimate turn.

The last stand of defenders is surrounded.

 The game provided a good example of how simple rules can support an interesting game where basic military principles rule. Concentration of force by means of a flank maneuver was the decisive factor with superior firepower and superior numbers of maneuver units overcoming static defenses which would otherwise have been a sufficient force multiplier to pretty much ensure victory for the defender. The use of reserves almost reversed the decision but were stretched too few by the cavalry turning movement.

It also provided a good example of how a historical minatures game can be stripped down too far to provide satisfying flavour.

Regiments and generals had no role. Stands stand and fall on their own though a player can maneuver them to gang up on an enemy, where the individual stands come from is beyond the game's concern. Likewise since each stand is a unit, there are no formations though if using a road bonus, one would be forced to form a sort of road column by default. There is also no variation of troop quality but that can easily be added and indeed there are suggestions in that direction in the book.

 Rifle fire is effective enough at long range to do the work more safely than melee and gun crews stand in deadly peril at extreme rifle range. There is no rule for cover from shooting though there is a modifier  for being uphill in melee which I extended to the breastworks. In hind sight, I could have easily modified the shooting by reducing the odds to hit by one. (For example rifles hit on either a 4 or a 6, this could have been reduced to only hitting on a 6.)

The worst part to my mind is the complete lack or morale leading to the all or nothing melee, no chance of a defender being forced back or an attack stalling or being repulsed and no chance of a retreat spreading. At a higher level than the unit though, one can see a player whose front line has been decimated, willingly pulling back stands to regroup them as a tactical decision rather than as a result of direct rule mechanics, so perhaps it is a matter of focus and how you look at it. I suspect the roster system actually plays against this and perhaps lots of stands would be better after all. The rules would certainly be fast enough to handle massive games.

Hmm, odd, I feel better about the rules now after a bit of thought than I did right after the game and I can see why my earliest adaptation worked better for me than many of the later ones. In any case I once again pleased that the focus was really on the player's battle plan and getting through to a decision and not on die rolls or minor tactics. I think perhaps that that will o'whisp that is the essence of what I am seeking from rules is becoming clearer and maybe the most important bit is actually slightly different from what I was thinking.

 

Sunday, January 9, 2011

Battle Station Dec 74: Featherstone at Belmont Pass

This is the first play through of the Battle Stations from Wargamers Digest, December 1974. Please refer to the earlier post for set up and details.  

Overview of the battlefield before the game.

Having considered the various rules to be used, I ended up adding 50% to the distances in the scenario. This still isn't a precise translation but its as close as I can get without modifying move distances and ranges. After assessing the situation, I decided to deploy the foot artillery and 1 regiment of infantry as a pinning force while the cavalry went on a wide flanking movement on the left. The 2nd regiment I ordered to move left and assault the corner of the enemy hill supported by the horse artillery and the 3rd regiment. (I can't believe that I haven't named any of these regiments yet!)

Turn 1, the blue and the grey toss for initiative. 
The flanking move begins aided by a Russian limber.
The game started smoothly, the Yankees hunkered down behind their breastworks (built for my 15mm ACW and pressed into service) while the Rebs marched off smartly. (a bit of a relief actually having no command control test or variable move dice - UhOh!) On turn 2 the Reb foot artillery galloped forward and unlimbered on the flank of their infantry supports.  I decided that it was time to roll for the strength of the Yankee defenders (remember, this wasn't specified in the original article, only the black and white picture provided any guidance) and ended up with 3 regiments of infantry and no artillery support. I deployed 1 regiment hidden on the wooded hill on the right of the Federal position and the 3rd in reserve in dead ground behind the hill. The Federal commander had won both initiative rolls thus far and chosen to move second each time, this gave him the right to fire first (at least according to how Don explained it when laying out the rules as opposed to what is described during the example game). The regiment had 4 stands and thus had 2 dice of fire. The range was 16", over 1 foot but less than 2 feet so 2 was deducted from  each dice resulting in 1 hit on the infantry. First blood! The gun then fired needing 3 or better, a 2 was duly rolled, a miss. Now I turned to the Rebel infantry and only just remembered that it was fire OR move and they had moved so, no return fire.

The ball commences.

There seemed no reason to alter the plan on either side so the next turn rolled on with the Confederate pinning force standing and trading fire at long range while the flanking move continued. On turn 4 the Rebs won the initiative roll and forced the Yankees to go first, seemed like a good idea since they had a chance to knock a stand off the enemy thus reducing his fire but the Federals also had hidden infantry and I decided that these could not be fired at until they moved or fired or someone moved within 6". So, the cavalry moved around the hill, the horse artillery unlimbered and looked for targets and the infantry advanced. The pinning force opened up but both gun and infantry whiffed! Seizing the moment the 2nd regiment of infantry stood up and opened fire.

   Surprise!

This began a lengthy fire fight with a slow trickle of casualties, thanks in part to some fickle dice. The odds of assaulting the hill didn't look comforting so I decided to see what effect the cavalry flanking attack would have. With my other hat on, I split the reserve, moving 2 stands to face the cavalry  while the other 2 moved to the breastwork to thicken the defenses. The cavalry drew sabers and charged (more out of curiosity about the melee rules then anything else, dismounting and opening fire would probably have been wiser even though not covered under the rules). The infantry leveled their rifles and fired with -1 for range and x1/2 for cavalry resulting in the loss of 1 cavalryman. In the melee then, the cavalry rolled 2 dice, subtracting 1 from each die for attacking uphill then halving for effect, inflicted 1 hit. The infantry on the other hand rolled 1 die after halving inflicted 2 points or 1 cavalryman, and I removed a stand. (In retrospect, I had given each cavalry stand the offensive power of 4 men so should have either allowed each to take 4 hits or have treated the 4 men as 1 stand, oops) This left 1 stand or 2 cavalry facing 2 stands or 7 infantry, I rolled the morale dice while I debated whether to multiple by stands, figures or melee points. The cavalry rolled a 2, the infantry 6, making it a moot point, the cavalry turned and retreated. .

(ok this is 2 turns before the cavalry melee, in the heat of action I think I reloaded the camera with several rounds without firing a shot...)
. .
The cavalry rallied at the first opportunity but declined the opportunity to make a 2nd attempt. The fire fight was starting to wear down both sides as each fed in replacements. The holding force thought it saw an opening and surged forward but when the artillery missed, their (ie my) nerve failed and they halted on the next turn and opened fire at point blank range. So far the entrenchments had given the Yankees just enough of an edge that they would have won the firefight if it wasn't for the Confederate artillery. One more round of fire saw two of their regiments reduced to a single stand. With a rebel yell, the grey regiment swarmed over the breastwork taking out the last defender. I decide to use the rally test to check morale on the remnants of the other 2 regiments upon seeing this and both fell back 1/2 a move and rallied. With only 3 stands between the 2 regiments, it was time to go home.

     The Yankees falling back in good order.
 The last defender has been put back in place for dramatic effect. 
.   

And so ended an enjoyable little affair. It took me about an hour to play through about 10 turns and once again, a severely stripped down set of rules seemed to provide a better game than many, if not most, more complex ones. Obviously there are a lot of things not covered by the rules. Even leaving aside things not relevant to the scenario like engineering, there were no  rules for formation or direction changes, passage of lines, detailed weapon variations, troop quality etc,  but most of what was missing, wasn't missed!  Instead of worrying about such details, the focus was on the plan and basic tactics and worked. A cavalry assault uphill on rifled armed infantry was easily repulsed, an attack on entrenched infantry only worked because of artillery support and a flank attack which split the defenders at a crucial point. A successful assault on the position might have worked but it would have been a gamble and it was easier to stall and trade fire. In other words, the game felt right.

To my surprise, I didn't miss the command control restrictions or my variable moves either. The long moves and unpredictable, sometimes severe combat results gave sufficient unpredictability to keep things interesting and made reserves not only useful but necessary. (oddly the same is true of Charge! and the original Morschauser rules but is not true of many newer or more complex rules).

Not only that, but, if you are wondering what the scrap of paper visible in the lower right hand corner of the 1st picture  is? Its the entire rules hand chicken-scratched onto 2 post-it notes. Next best thing to a postcard!
Rules on a post-it. Admittedly scrawled in abbreviated form.

My enthusiasm for breaking out the copy of Black Powder has waned even farther but it is the rule set Jerry & I have selected for an upcoming occasional campaign so I will persevere.  The 3rd game is more up inthe air, Morschauser, straight up as planned, the early Morschauser Meets MacDuff variant or the latest Hearts of Tin? The game is short enough that I could try them all and F&F as well but there is something mystical about 3 so we'll see.

Oh and the solution you ask?
Nope, I didn't cheat, but all those years of training must have sunk in.
Picture from WD Dec 1974

Friday, January 7, 2011

Battle Station Dec 74


Advance Guard: 15mm ACW Minifigs leading the way onto ebay.  (seller id rmacfa if anyone is interested). Keeping up my determination to make 1/72nd my smallest scale, my 15mm ACW brigades have begun filing onto ebay in search of a new assignment. I'll hold onto a strong division of Rebs since I have still have friends in town with F&F based 15's and one never knows. That leaves 6 or 7 brigades of infantry (its been a while, I think there are 12) some artilIery and a couple more cavalry brigades. I can't remember now why I painted up 4 or 5 brigades of Rebel cavalry, mounted and dismounted, I must have had Bedford Forrest in mind. 

The first game for this year will be, as advertised, a Battle Stations from Gene McCoy's Wargamer's Digest. Most of these were WWII but I don't have enough suitable stuff to fudge any of them at the moment. I have, however, turned up 2 ACW ones. Both look like fairly simple, straight up games (actually they are almost a variation on the same game) and I think I have enough 1/72nd troops done up to try them out so this will be their official debut. (There was a skirmish or 2 between the Blue & the Grey back in '82 when the paint was new on the original regiments but even the veterans don't recall the details.)  The game in hand comes from December 1974.

The problem is set up as an attack by a Confederate Brigade against a Union blocking force of unknown strength. This is one of the fairly early ones, it contained a photo of the battle field from the player's position, some background, mission, notes on your strength and some ranges and rule distances to help you interpret the photo and make your plans. In this one, they never do reveal the strength of the blocking force so I intend to make my plan, write orders and then dice for the strength of the opposition. Since I have more boys in Blue painted up than boys in Grey, I may also switch the sides so I can make the game as big as possible. The game is unlikely to take long to resolve so I intend to emulate last year's fight for the stonewall from Featherstone's BWMS and repeat the game using various rules, in this case, Featherstone's rules from BWMS which for reason's I don;t recall, I didn't play last year, Basic Morschauser straight up out of the book and last and hopefully not least, Hearts of Tin. If it goes really quickly I may throw in Fire & Fury as well.

This picture was originally published in the December 1974 edition of Wargamer's Digest. Note the use of Airfix figures. My boy's will feel right at home.

I'm not going to quote the original article but will instead summarize the information.

You as the player, have a Brigade of infantry supported by a squadron of cavalry, a battery of artillery and a battery of horse artillery. The enemy has a force of unknown strength in improvised defences across the road up which your army is moving but there is no sign of cavalry or artillery. Your mission is to clear the road.

The brigade is composed of 2 regiments each of 7 companies each of 6 men, 1 of which is a skirmish company. The batteries are of 2 guns each. The cavalry  totals 12 figures.

If I use my Confederates which is what the magazine calls for, I have 1 brigade painted up which in my case is composed of 3 regiments each of 4 stands/companies (15 men per regiment), 2 guns as well as 2 stands of cavalry (ok actually they are Steel's Scouts from the Riel Rebellion but they are willing to sub in),  If I flip sides and finish the 6 cavalry currently on my painting desk, I'll be able to field 6 regiments of 4 stands, 2 guns and 3 stands of cavalry.  The jury is still out.

Assuming I use the original 1 brigade attacking, when I deploy the defenders there will be 1 regiment manning the line and I will dice for reserves: 1,2: another regiment of infantry, 3,4: 2 regiments of infantry, 5: 1  regiment of infantry plus a battery, 6: 2 regiments of infantry plus a battery. If I make the attacker 2 brigades of Yankees, I'll start with 2 regiments of Rebs and modify the dice to be 3,4 a battery and 5,6 a 3rd regiment + a battery.  

The rules used by the author have an 8" move for infantry and artillery, 12" by road,  16" for cavalry, 24" by road and 12" for the horse artillery, 16" by road. Ranges are 8" for rifles and cannister, 16" for shot & shell.

It is roughly 21" from the cavalry in the picture to the Union line. A few other distances are given to various hills etc. but one can estimate well enough from the picture once you have that scale.

The movement distances aren't too far off what I will be using, a little shorter than Featherstone and Morschauser but close to the average for both HofT & F&F (assuming some tardy results). The shooting ranges are a problem though, about 1/2 to 2/3 of those in all of the rules except for the musketry in F&F. Actually they are not that  far off from what HofT had before I lengthened the ranges last year, that was one of my "hmmm" items from the December game. I may increase the distance between terrain features in order to bring them in line, or I may adjust the ranges as an experiment, or both.  

With luck I hope to get this laid out and play the first game on Sunday.










  

Th  



.

Monday, January 3, 2011

A New Year, A New Old Resource

As I've said before, my first wargaming influences were Featherstone, followed by WRG, Lawford & Young and HG Wells. Who I haven't given enough credit to is Gene McCoy and his Wargamer's Digest. (Not to be confused with the similarly named Scruby/Featherstone publication.) When I came across issue Volume 2, Number 1 in November, 1974 (at International Hobbies in Montreal if memory serves) I was thrilled and eagerly awaited each issue through my college years even though the gaming presented tended to be of a very different style to what I was used to. The different gaming and rules style commonly used may have made it harder to relate some articles to my own gaming but the articles were still interesting and useful. Many dealt with things like applying military principles to your games (surprise, concentration of force etc), translating historical organizations into practical wargame  formations or translating historical actions into table top battles and articles on game theory and design.

I never did convert styles, and while I have played many of the slightly later CS Grant "Tabletop Teasers", I'm not sure that I ever played out any of the similar concept, "Battle Stations: Small Unit Actions"  despite reading many of them over and over. This year I intend to put that to rights. I got rid of most of my original copies during a purge of magazines in the early '90's, most, but not all and there is a Yahoo group which includes some articles in its files. Unlike the Grant Teasers, McCoy's Battle Stations came with a suggested solution,  so I'll have to take care not to re-read the solutions before playing them out! (Some of them had limited intelligence about enemy forces, I haven't decided yet just how to handle that!)

(Scan of the cover of WD1.2 from the Yahoo Group, my own copy is not in such good condition.)

Oddly enough, my first issue, one I still have, contained an article discussing Marathon, Thymbra and Double Envelopment. Yes, Thymbra, the battle where Croesus, King of Lydia was defeated by Cyrus the Great, King of Persia. Those who have read my other blog, Gathering of Hosts, will be aware that I am in the process of reforming my various ancients into Mede/Persian and Lydian armies. Last year I fought Marathon, it seems only right that this year I fight Thymbra. I have more troops to paint so look for it in June. A Battle Station should appear later this month.