"He jumped on his horse and rode madly off in all directions"

The title quote is from Stephen Leacock, the celebrated Canadian humorist. I never met him, after all, he died before I was born, but sometimes it feels like he knew me.

After more thinking, wild and sober alike, about a gridded horse and musket game, I realized that I had missed a crucial step. I was looking at "How should it work?", without looking at the 5 W's.

Why was I working on it? A mental exercise because I was intrigued? A replacement for or new version of  Hearts of Tin? or an adjunct, a card table game for when my table isnt available?

What sort of games did I plan to use them for? Skirmishes? Small battles? Tabletop Teasers?

Who did I expect to play it? Myself? friends that I play against here? multiple players at a convention? others elsewhere?

 Where did I plan to play it?  At home on my main table? in the garden? at friend;s houses? at a convention?

All of these things affect the design of the game but I can't quite answer them yet. In the meantime, I will press ahead using instinct as a guide and doing my best to use existing troop organization and basing and avoiding special equipment beyond a gridded cloth or table.

I have, however, made some progress and done some practical tests of various ideas.

First some more thoughts around what wasn't quite right with Crysler's Farm.  Scale was one issue. The original proposed rule amendments proposed a ground scale of 150 yds per square which led to 400 pr so ken per unit and no musket volleys. When I rechecked it today, it should have been 100 yds per square which means a 2 square musket range is quite acceptable, along with 300 men per unit.

 However, when I laid out the troops, I ignored the scale and fielded 11 units and a general against 8 and a general. Instead of 10 vs 5. The extra troops possibly improved the game given 1 hit kills a unit but it changed the dynamics since the British were not nearly as stretched as they should have been while the gap in the American center was not as wide as it should have been. I don't want to get too hung up on scale but if its hard to avoid giving it some consideration when recreating an historical action and its good to have a general feel for whether units are companies, battalions or brigades!

Having a musket fire option would also have helped the feel of the game and given the British a safer option than attacking or sitting and waiting. Mind you, if I'd used the proper ratios, the British might have lost 1/4 of their army to a stray shot. This is less of an issue if playing a skirmish but it is really going to be an issue if I use these rules for battles in India.Using multiple bases as a variation of Morschauser's roster system  helps get around this but I have another idea for when not using a roster. I'll explain it later.

The "rallying one man and a dog for a last attack" syndrome is also an issue for me, especially when recreating an historical action. There were heavy casualties but most of the units involved were still functioning at some level at the end of the battle. Even considering removed units to be "ineffective" rather than destroyed, it just doesn't feel right.  Increasing the number of units partially gets around this but doesn't eliminate it. One thought I had today was to make a change to the activation dice quota by rounding down instead of up. This means that a force that loses its general will be unable to keep attacking if it drops  to 2 stands and will have trouble once it drops to 5. Not much, but its something. Victory conditions will have to do the rest. .

I briefly worried about battalion integrity for 2 unit battalions, how to represent close order formations and what the role of Brigadiers should be but in the end decided that these were not germane for a small simple game. For larger games with more than 12 units, armies can be divided into brigades or divisions with a commander and a group of units and each of these will determine their activation separately.

The rigidity of close order formations and their vulnerability to flank attacks needs to be addressed though. Keeping the movement at 1 square for infantry is a good start but the  close combat rules which can lead to units spinning about work well for the late 19th Century but feel wrong for earlier, in particular when attacked by 2 or more enemy units. This is partly optics but I think a return to Morschauser front and flank melee values may be a start.

Lastly there is the issue of grid size and rosters. Here I cause myself problems  by my choice to use large figures. If I use a 6" grid, I need a minimum playing area of 4'x4' and on my planned table will be able to fit a grid of 10x12 squares which after last weekend's games, seems ample to me. This allows me to fit terrain + troops in a square and to employ 3 bases each with 4 or 6 infantry or 2 cavalry. On the 3" grid, I can fit a grid of 20 x 24 squares on my table or somewhat over a square mile at 100 yds per grid but I will have to mark woods by felt bases and make some new houses that 1 stand can fit inside. I was in the middle of choosing a base size before starting to use the squares. If I go with the small squares and 1 stand per square then the 60mm wide bases will look best. If I go wit big squares, then 3 x 2" wide bases look best. It would be nice to have the rules work the same way for both.

Its late and I won't  get the revised rules written up today and probably not tomorrow as I am heading to Halifax for the day but to summarize my current thoughts:

1. Movement rates as per the 19thC game. Light infantry and cavalry can double move if 2 activation points are used.

2. Either use the roster system as per Morschauser (on the large squares I will  remove bases)  or keep units with 1 combat die but the effect of hits are  as follows: militia 1 hit destroys, regulars, the 2nd hit destroys, veterans/guards 3 hits destroy.  I have to say that I particularly liked the effect of rolling 3 dice for rockets and howitzers today. The fire scattered all around and on the target rather than all hitting or all missing.

3. each unit has a frontal melee value if fighting only to the front, and a flank value if the front of an enemy unit is adjacent and facing a unit's flank or rear. Moving units may change face after they move. A unit must be facing to attack or count as flanking. A unit attacked in flank does not turn before melee. If there are more than 1 attacking units only 1 unit actually attack. The owning player decides which. The defending unit fights back against the attacker even if not facing.  A slight change to the melee results, if the attacker inflicts a hit and does not receive  one then the defender must retreat if not destroyed.

4. Musket fire has a range of 2 squares and hits on a 5 or 6
  Rifled muskets have a range of 3 squares and  hit on a 5 or 6.
If the target is in cover or is light infantry or artillery then it is hit on a 6 only.

5. The close combat value of cavalry is reduced by 2 if in or attacking woods or a village.
The close combat value of line infantry is reduced by 1 if attacking woods or a village.
The close combat value of light infantry is  not reduced by terrain  (but it is 1 lower by default)

These are rough ideas only but I'm off to bed. .




  






.

Little Crysler's Farm

The final game of this "Cold Wars at Home" weekend (actually a co-incidence but the last Cold Wars that I missed was 1999 and I did miss it) was the mini version of Crysler's Farm which was actually played Saturday night. When I wrote the rule amendments for Bob's 20thC game, I thought I would be using a 4" grid with 2x2" square bases of troops for each unit. When I ended up playing on the 3" grid, I had to cut it to a single stand per unit. I could have marked hits and still used the roster idea but I decided to try it in basic 1 unit per square mode. It was while deploying the troops and comparing it to my map that the 7th & 8 grid rows re-appeared from an alternate reality, so this game used all 64 squares unlike the RCW games.

In order to fit the 12 unit format (I see no reason why this can't  be adjusted  but it has implications for board size, command elements and more so one thing at a time), I started with the larger force. Allowing for a commander, a unit of cavalry and artillery, I had 9 units available for the 8 US regiments present. These varied in size but many were severely understrength. Nine stands  worked out to roughly an average of 200 men per stand. (This is about 1/2 the amount suggested by the ground scale but I didn't want to play with 7 units vs 4.)  Since the majority of American guns arrived  during the battle, I started them off board, allowing the US commander to activate them on turn 2 or any later turn. Since the American attacks seem to have been poorly co-ordinated and conducted with almost no input from the acting general, I contemplated just not fielding one but instead ruled that  he was not allowed to join any units and that the American player would roll 1 activation dice less than he was normally allowed.

Applying the same troop ratio to the British but halving it for the light units I got 2 stands for each of the 49th & 89th regiments plus a stand for the advanced guard and 2 stands of light infantry. I decided that a single gun would be about right for the combined effect  of the gunboats and artillery.

I deployed the troops and started in.

The first turn was uneventful but in Turn 2, Colonel Morrison led the 49th in an attack on the ragged American line. With a plus for veteran and another for an attached general it seemed like a bold move. Something General Brock might have approved of. Yes, the attack was repulsed meaning the good Col was shot down at the head of his men.

The fighting continued on a sporadic basis with the US left wing struggling to cross the gully which I treated like a stream while the right was making poor headway in the woods despite knocking out 1 light infantryman.
Undaunted by the loss of their leader though struggling to roll enough activation points, the British advanced to exploit the gap in the US line. They managed a 2:1 against the end of the line and on the next turn attacked an defeated a unit stuck in the gully. In the woods, the light infantry continued to hold.

Finally the US player brought up his gun and cannister started taking its toll. On the other side shooting by the light infantry and British artillery were also taking a heavy toll. By the time the artillery ceased fire on turn 8, all the US infantry was gone. The last hope was for a gallant cavalry charge to sweep the field. It almost worked, the dragoons rode down 1 unit and then were attacked at 2:1 but rode down one of their attackers. That was the end of  it though, on their next attack, they were shot down by the Fencibles, these and the Voltigeurs were the last infantry units on the field.

This wasn't a bad game but it didn't compare well with the HofT version I had played in February. I've been struggling to put my finger on the issues (apart from the obvious one).

One issue has popped up before, the fight to the last man syndrome. In the RCW game, the game conditions gave players had an incentive to not fight to the last man in the 1st game, in this case there was none.  Once again a scenario or victory condition rule could have been used to handle this but possibly the proposed roster system would also help somewhat as the activation dice quotas would give players an incentive to retire weakened units before they are destroyed and make it foolhardy to attack full strength units with understrength ones.

Another issue with the game was the feel of not having long range shooting or close combat options for line infantry, especially if playing skirmishes.

I like the way that the 1 square moves work for infantry, making it hard to maneuver. It makes it impassible to move through another unit which is questionable but one could allow 2 adjacent units to swap places. (in other words have them move simultaneously)

So where would that leave light infantry? I don't want to ban line infantry from entering woods so perhaps combat and cover modifiers will be sufficient as well as a longer move, possibly even a fire and move option.

At any rate, since Hook's Farm was still set up, I decided to try out the 6" squares with 3 stand units. (smaller squares with smaller figures would also work or smaller bases, say 2 figures each) 1 combat die per stand, 1 hit destroys 1 stand. Hook's Farm, Oregon Territory. After 4 turns, it seems to be working well.

I'll post revised horse and musket suggestions later this week.
.

Morschauser Attacks Hook's Farm!

Red moves swiftly to seize Hook's Farm.

For those readers who may  have missed the lead up posts, this game was played using a set of rules by Bob Cordery inspired by Joe Morschauser and mostly Britain's figures, nearly 1/2 of which are vintage originals from the 1920's. The game uses dice not spring-loaded canon and is played on a grid which in this case has been marked with a series of crosses on the field of battle.The game deals with "units" not individual soldiers but it is simple and generic and seemed like a good fit for a Red vs Blue game based on Hook's Farm. The terrain and forces were translated from the original to fit the rules as was the original deployment. From there on General's Me and Myself were on their own to fight out the battle as they saw fit. Instead of a dry rendering of die scores and rules interpretations I shall turn to an impartial observer for a narrative of the event and add some commentary afterward. Alas H.G Well's wasn't available so the narrative of Second Hook's Farm may not be quite as stirring as the original. Clicking on the pictures will bring up larger versions.

>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>

" What a stirring sight it was! From the basket of my hot air balloon, I could see the 2 armies laid out below.me like   toy soldiers.

To my left was the Red army, evidently deployed to strike every where at once. On his left by the church was a field gun supported by 2 companies of the Guards and a troop of cavalry, on his right a Heavy gun, 3 troops of cavalry and 3 of Highlanders as well as the general himself. Blue, having scouted Red's position, deployed his 4.7" heavy gun, manned by Blue Jackets from the fleet, supported by 4 troops of cavalry and more sailors. On his right was a field gun, ready to move forward along with 3 companies of infantry, militia, riflemen. and more sailors. A flank guard of Ghurka's and the General himself held the left.

As the heavy guns on each side opened fire, Red seized the Initiative and surged forward, occupying the church and moving his gun forward onto the hill. Blue responded by advancing his cavalry, sending his infantry into the woods and deploying his field gun on the hill, ready for a duel.

Shells screamed through the air and high explosive burst with a dreadful roar, all the brutality of modern war seemed unleashed as the crack of the Guards rifles added to the noise.  Suddenly,  a bugle rang out above the din, like knights of old, Red's cavalry charged forward heedless of the odds,  seeking to drive Blue back down the hill. Undaunted Blue's horsemen spurred their horses forward, eager to meet the foe.

Alas, what a bloody business is war. In minutes these fine bodies of horsemen were a shambles, those horsemen not struck down were scattered to the winds.

It is a wise general who holds a  reserve and Blue's cavalry now dominated the center. They cantered forward to forestall any attempt by Red to move forward into the Farm. Behind them the Blue Jackets worked calmly but with speed and purpose as shells rained down, calculating carefully, the PO aimed his gun over the intervening woods and brought his shells crashing down on Red's Horse Artillery, silencing their fire.

Red seemed to stagger under this blow but the steady Guardsmen, long service veterans all, poured their rifle fire into the woods driving out the militia. Inspired by this, Red again seized the initiative and determined to switch his attack to the flanks while shifting forces to hold the center. The Officer's Troop trotting forward on the left supported by the Guards while shells from his remaining gun rained down on Blue's field gun. Blue, caught off guard and out of position, starting recalling infantry that he had started to shift to the center and recalled cavalry to deal with the threat to his right. The result was a terrible jumble of order, counter order and disorder as units got in each other's way.  Suddenly the pipes struck up and with a loud cry, the Highlanders charged forward, over running the farm and woods.

Luckily for Blue, his gunners were solid. The 4.7" gun shifted its aim and silenced the Red heavy while the field gun, which appeared to be firing at the Guardsmen who had occupied the woods to their right front, overshot and scattered Red's cavalry as it pulled back into cover. General Myself rode forward with his staff to protect the 4.7" gun but courage is no protection against rifles and he was shot down instantly. As the stretcher bearers came forward to clear the field, a temporary calm seemed to settle over the field as both sides gathered their remaining strength for one last struggle.

Left without direction, the field gun commander decided to cease fire and pull back before he could be over run but before they could limber up, the guards in the woods, who briefly appeared to be preparing to charge,  opened up at point blank range, mowing down the helpless gunners.

Spying the top of a proudly waving flag sticking up from behind Hooks' farm hill, the 4.7" fired again and the flag disappeared and Red's General with it. Cheered by this Blue's counter attack at last went in. Seeking revenge for the slaughter of their gunners, infantry surged forward from 2 sides while cavalry rode up and around, striking Red from the  rear. But these were veterans of many a stricken field and not easily daunted. Calmly the rear rank turned and shot down the cavalry while sending the Jack Tars and riflemen tumbling back down the hill.

After this, with both armies leaderless, the battle settled into a long range firefight as the weary soldiers held their positions. But the 4.7" gun was still well manned and pounding the enemy infantry. Eventually with the 4.7 being manhandled around to train on the woods and a company of blue jackets advancing on the now empty farm, the last company of Red's Guards conceded the field "

I was expecting this to be a brief little skirmish, an excuse to get some favoured toys out on the table more than anything. It turned out to be an exciting little game taking nearly 3 hours to play with twists and turns of fate and despite the basic rules and a-historical setting, it proved in the end to be a test of generalship and tactics (in the general sense as opposed to the reproduction of specific historical small unit tactics)  more than an exercise in die rolling, despite some lucky/unlucky rolls here and there  

Isolated attacks were usually a waste of troops, the maneuver rules made it hard to bring up poorly placed reserves and made countermarching troops highly unproductive. Combined with the adjacent square close combat zone, it made it hard to by pass strong points.

The command rules may not mirror how orders are given but are effective.  The loss of Blue's General who rashly rode forward because he had no troops available to protect his gun, robbed them of a chance for a decisive win. At that point they out numbered Red nearly 2:1 but had trouble activating their remaining forces while Red was able to get full use of his troops until a lucky shot took out his command. Not that he had enough left to launch an effective attack.

The repulse of the attack on the guards is a good example. The attackers needed a 1,2 or 3 to win when attacking into the wood and rolled a 4 which was unlucky but it was a 50/50 shot. Whether the guards hit back or not, the attack was repulsed if it failed. It seemed fairly safe . since 2 supporting units reduced the Guards from hitting on 4 or less to 2 or less but that's still a 1 in 3 chance.  As it turns out the attack failed and took a hit but considering that these were rifle armed troops holding a wooded hill, it's not that surprising. Since that wooded knoll wasn't part of the objective, it might have been better for Blue to fall back sending the cavalry around to the Farm and forcing Red to abandon his cover to attack Blue's infantry in their cover or else give up the game.      

Admittedly, by the time the game ended on turn 13, the battle field was looking pretty sparse with small groups of infantry hiding in woods sniping at their opposing numbers but if one considers the destroyed units as being "combat ineffective" and pulled out of the line as opposed to being lying dead like the toy soldiers in a couple of the pictures, this seems a not unreasonable end to a day, though a Pyhrric victory if not a drawn battle.  

If there had been some sort of campaign setting to encourage one of the general's to save his troops or if the battle had swung decisively one way or the other then the game might have ended sooner. As it was, it was partly exhaustion  that led me to abandon the idea of trying to counter attack with the last remaining company of Guards at 1:3 odds. 

.

A most enjoyable afternoon.

 .