I completed a playtest of my WSS amendments last night. A entertaining game with
some surprising results.
I went for a larger game format of 14 British units vs 15 French. The French had
more infantry but some of these were of lower quality and they had one less
artillery unit.
The French were to occupy two towns and hold these against the British attack. I
was fully expecting the British to advance with artillery support, perform a
successful assault through sustained musketry fire and sweep the French from the
field.
Nothing of the sort. The French took the initiative by forcing some early
cavalry duels. Again the superior British cavalry were expected to win this
contest. This didn't happen: the French firepower horse were effective in both
defensive and offensive fire and despite the elite status of the British a
couple of their units were impacted by poor morale throws. The French cavalry
captain was also able to use a local superiority of three units to two to
perform some flank attacks which neutralised the edge the British had in
hand-to-hand combat. Despite the success of the French I didn't get the feeling
I'd made the Firepower Horse overpowered. Like most aspects of the game there
seemed to be a consistent "bad luck" theme in the dice rolls from the British
side.
This also featured strongly in the infantry and artillery battle. The French
held their line and prevented the platoon fire of the deployed British units
disrupting their cohesion. They also had a reserve to plug gaps and their
artillery on the left flank performed an immense task in blunting the British
assault there. In contrast the British guns performed poorly.
Overall the French won in a comprehensive manner. They retained 6 Infantry, 2
artillery, their dragoons and most significantly three cavalry units. In
contrast the British conceded on three infantry and three artillery units(which
would shortly be neutralised by the unopposed French cavalry).
I was pleased with my amendments. I made some changes to my Dragoons when I had
them charged while still mounted. I ruled that they could not perform defensive
fire in these circumstances.
For aesthetics I dispensed with the 4 stand line and used 6 stands for infantry
arranged three to front with a depth of two (still counting as four for
casualties). The cavalry and artillery remained as per the rules.
This now leaves the Seven Years War to complete my initial first round of NW
period adaptation playtests. I'm finding that each H&M period I play not only
adds insight into that particular contest but also to the other peripheral
periods I've been looking at.
Saturday 30 October 2010
Friday 29 October 2010
Big Battle AMW Game
I've just completed a mammoth Early Imperial Roman v Early German battle using
the AMW Rules.
I based this on an earlier game I played to try out my SIP amendments for
Ancients. I enjoyed that game so much that I decided that a big battle AMW game
was in order.
The game was based on the battle simulated in the Gladiator Film's opening
scene.
The Romans were deployed in a long line with a tactical reserve of two legionary
units: 8 Legionaries, 4 Auxiliary Foot, 4 Auxiliary Cavalry and 2 Artillery. A
total of 18 units.
The Germans ranged against them were sitting on a long ridge, flanked by dense
woods. They amounted to 12 Heavy Infantry, 4 Skirmishers armed with javelins and
4 Noble Cavalry. A total of 20 units.
The artillery made an early impression and showed that the Romans meant
business. With fireballs shooting overhead, the Roman line advanced at a steady
pace, the auxiliaries moving towards the wood line and the cavalry protecting
both flanks.
The Germans were deployed quite deep holding at least four infantry in reserve
just behind the battle line. The Skirmishers flanked the infantry, occupying the
woods with the cavalry lurking on the extreme flanks.
The German general showed a willingness to get to grips early and not be
pressurised by the Roman advance. Cavalry and Skirmisher v Auxiliary battles
flared up early. Mixed success for the Germans. Lighter armour was already a
factor and this became critical once the legions engaged.
Roman Heavy Infantry are remarkable. They showed a distinct superiority over the
Germans in one-to-one line-ups, however, the German general did use his reserves
to create flanking attacks and on the right flank they were actually prevailing.
However, with the collapse of the left flank, the Roman infantry started to
roll-up the battle line and it was only a matter of time before the Germans were
reduced to five operational units and lost the game. The Legions were supreme in
this contest. It felt very much as I would expect for an opposing force taking
on the might of Rome.
One area that I do feel that the Romans are a bit short changed on is the impact
of the pilum prior to charging. I know this is supposed to be factored in but
I've always liked a means to simulate this offensive fire during a charge. It
would have probably meant making the Romans invincible but I was considering
giving them the ability to roll two dice during the charge phase to represent
pilum throwing. Just an idea: I didn't try it out in this game.
One house rule I did experiment with was a push-back move during hand-to-hand
combat. I liked this feature in the older WRG Rules where units were pushed
about a bit during extended melees. Originally I decreed that the difference in
hits inflicted would mean the loser would be pushed back that many centimetres.
This produced some larger movements than I wanted so I looked a the loser moving
1cm if beaten in hits, finally settling on twice as many hits initiating a 1cm
retreat for the loser and associated follow-up from the attacker. It meant there
were some ripples in the battle-line which created a pleasing effect and
presented the commanders with more tactical problems to address in maintaining
cohesion. I'll continue to play test this in future games.
the AMW Rules.
I based this on an earlier game I played to try out my SIP amendments for
Ancients. I enjoyed that game so much that I decided that a big battle AMW game
was in order.
The game was based on the battle simulated in the Gladiator Film's opening
scene.
The Romans were deployed in a long line with a tactical reserve of two legionary
units: 8 Legionaries, 4 Auxiliary Foot, 4 Auxiliary Cavalry and 2 Artillery. A
total of 18 units.
The Germans ranged against them were sitting on a long ridge, flanked by dense
woods. They amounted to 12 Heavy Infantry, 4 Skirmishers armed with javelins and
4 Noble Cavalry. A total of 20 units.
The artillery made an early impression and showed that the Romans meant
business. With fireballs shooting overhead, the Roman line advanced at a steady
pace, the auxiliaries moving towards the wood line and the cavalry protecting
both flanks.
The Germans were deployed quite deep holding at least four infantry in reserve
just behind the battle line. The Skirmishers flanked the infantry, occupying the
woods with the cavalry lurking on the extreme flanks.
The German general showed a willingness to get to grips early and not be
pressurised by the Roman advance. Cavalry and Skirmisher v Auxiliary battles
flared up early. Mixed success for the Germans. Lighter armour was already a
factor and this became critical once the legions engaged.
Roman Heavy Infantry are remarkable. They showed a distinct superiority over the
Germans in one-to-one line-ups, however, the German general did use his reserves
to create flanking attacks and on the right flank they were actually prevailing.
However, with the collapse of the left flank, the Roman infantry started to
roll-up the battle line and it was only a matter of time before the Germans were
reduced to five operational units and lost the game. The Legions were supreme in
this contest. It felt very much as I would expect for an opposing force taking
on the might of Rome.
One area that I do feel that the Romans are a bit short changed on is the impact
of the pilum prior to charging. I know this is supposed to be factored in but
I've always liked a means to simulate this offensive fire during a charge. It
would have probably meant making the Romans invincible but I was considering
giving them the ability to roll two dice during the charge phase to represent
pilum throwing. Just an idea: I didn't try it out in this game.
One house rule I did experiment with was a push-back move during hand-to-hand
combat. I liked this feature in the older WRG Rules where units were pushed
about a bit during extended melees. Originally I decreed that the difference in
hits inflicted would mean the loser would be pushed back that many centimetres.
This produced some larger movements than I wanted so I looked a the loser moving
1cm if beaten in hits, finally settling on twice as many hits initiating a 1cm
retreat for the loser and associated follow-up from the attacker. It meant there
were some ripples in the battle-line which created a pleasing effect and
presented the commanders with more tactical problems to address in maintaining
cohesion. I'll continue to play test this in future games.
Monday 25 October 2010
ACW Game: Old School Scenario
I played an ACW game last weekend just before I went on holiday this week.
It was based upon the classic Action in the Plattville Valley which appeared in
the Don Featherstone Wargaming book. I used identical line-ups, except for the
Union side, which on account of it's generally lower level of unit morale I
compensated it with two additional regiments of infantry and one gun battery.
The battle was a complete indulgence in nostalgia where I used as much of the
information re unit names and dispositions as I could. I've played it a couple
of times before. Once, back in the early 80's, using the ACW Rules written by DF
in his Wargamers Newsletter and a more up to date version using modified Shako
rules.
Enjoyed them all no matter the rules used - they all had their highs and lows.
I'd say I was consistently pleased with the Thomas version. I modified the
retreat rules following the recent discussion on the Group re this subject and
decreed that units retreat directly to the rear but were allowed to
interpenetrate blocking units, however, these would be subject to a morale test
which if failed would result in a base loss.
One feature of the rules I used far more than in previous games was rallying.
The Union side in particular gained significant advantage from resting their
battered units and regaining combat capacity to re-join the action. Having more
units gave them a greater flexibility to hold units in reserve and rotate their
engaged units with fresh ones.
The game actually ended very much as the original did. The Union were triumphant
on their right flank and were in a position to secure Plattville which was their
objective. The CSA General Jubal A. Early was able to retreat his largely intact
command under the cover of nightfall. He was still strong in cavalry and had two
thirds of the infantry intact, however, he'd lost both batteries and the Union
forces still had two and which were a persitant drain to his remaining offensive
capacity. Retreat to fight another day proved a compelling arguement.
The next game I'm planning to do is my Gladiator simulation, that I played using
modified SIP, as a 16 v 16 AMW game and see how this goes. I have a feeling this
will be a cracker. Masses of legions, masses of Germans. What more could you
want!
I'm also working on expanding my WWI and Colonial modifications to Colonial East
Africa and while on holiday have a noted a number of projects to keep me busy up
to Christmas.
It was based upon the classic Action in the Plattville Valley which appeared in
the Don Featherstone Wargaming book. I used identical line-ups, except for the
Union side, which on account of it's generally lower level of unit morale I
compensated it with two additional regiments of infantry and one gun battery.
The battle was a complete indulgence in nostalgia where I used as much of the
information re unit names and dispositions as I could. I've played it a couple
of times before. Once, back in the early 80's, using the ACW Rules written by DF
in his Wargamers Newsletter and a more up to date version using modified Shako
rules.
Enjoyed them all no matter the rules used - they all had their highs and lows.
I'd say I was consistently pleased with the Thomas version. I modified the
retreat rules following the recent discussion on the Group re this subject and
decreed that units retreat directly to the rear but were allowed to
interpenetrate blocking units, however, these would be subject to a morale test
which if failed would result in a base loss.
One feature of the rules I used far more than in previous games was rallying.
The Union side in particular gained significant advantage from resting their
battered units and regaining combat capacity to re-join the action. Having more
units gave them a greater flexibility to hold units in reserve and rotate their
engaged units with fresh ones.
The game actually ended very much as the original did. The Union were triumphant
on their right flank and were in a position to secure Plattville which was their
objective. The CSA General Jubal A. Early was able to retreat his largely intact
command under the cover of nightfall. He was still strong in cavalry and had two
thirds of the infantry intact, however, he'd lost both batteries and the Union
forces still had two and which were a persitant drain to his remaining offensive
capacity. Retreat to fight another day proved a compelling arguement.
The next game I'm planning to do is my Gladiator simulation, that I played using
modified SIP, as a 16 v 16 AMW game and see how this goes. I have a feeling this
will be a cracker. Masses of legions, masses of Germans. What more could you
want!
I'm also working on expanding my WWI and Colonial modifications to Colonial East
Africa and while on holiday have a noted a number of projects to keep me busy up
to Christmas.
Tuesday 5 October 2010
Skirmish Game: French Indian Wars
One facet of Neil's rules that I haven't gamed so far, but have been wanting to
for some time, are his skirmish rules in Introduction.
I used to play a lot of skirmish level games back in the 1980's, the majority
were sci-fi and based on RPGs or FGU Space Marines. I also played some
historical and fantasy skirmish games. Since then not much so it was a return to
the olden days for this type of gaming experience. I wasn't disappointed.
My chosen period was the French Indian Wars in Canada. I have always been
intrigued by an article in Wargames Newsletter which descibed a game using Don
Featherstone's Close War rules. It has captured my imgagination and finally I
decided to go for it and set something comparable up but use the Thomas Skirmish
rules with the inevitable tweaks and amendments I've already overlaid on the
original.
The British raiding party was to penetrate dense woods in order to reach the
St.Lawrence and cut loose three floating batteries, protected by a camp occupied
by French regulars and Canadian Militia. Things started well with rapid progress
through clearings and paths. My New England Rangers were deemed to be unaffected
by woods so speeded round the French flank. Some well placed pickets of French
Regulars supported by a couple of patrols of Huron Indians and Militia soon
slowed down the British advance and stalled progress while they were being dealt
with.
Meanwhile the alarm had been raised at the French camp and the French Colonel
was able to deploy his men to guard the batteries and advance on the British
thrust down the river bank. Some British light infantry had succeeded to cut one
of the moorings but were forced back by heavy musketry from the French.
Casualties started to mount and with a 50% morale check eliminating further
stands I decided the British were not going to progress any further and they
melted back the way they came.
Overall a great little game. The rules performed really well and my in-game
experiments with my house rules proved very useful. I toyed with impetus,
ambushes, concealment, flank and rear attacks, the effect of wounds on combat to
name some of them.
I liked the loading delay in musket fire. I made the rifles more musket like
than the rules which I think are based on early breechloaders. I think the rules
could be used for virtually any period. I've focused my amendments more on
Modern and Sci-fi but I don't see a problem going further back to A&M and P&S.
I do remember playing Paddy Griffith's skirmish rules in Napoleonic Wargaming
For Fun. These were great but I did feel like I was loading my musket for half
the game. The actions in these rules are limited, the gameplay is fast and the
action pretty decisive. The game took about an hour and a half to two hours but
I was typing away on my amendments during the action so this probably slowed
things down a bit.
Look forward to another skirmish game.
for some time, are his skirmish rules in Introduction.
I used to play a lot of skirmish level games back in the 1980's, the majority
were sci-fi and based on RPGs or FGU Space Marines. I also played some
historical and fantasy skirmish games. Since then not much so it was a return to
the olden days for this type of gaming experience. I wasn't disappointed.
My chosen period was the French Indian Wars in Canada. I have always been
intrigued by an article in Wargames Newsletter which descibed a game using Don
Featherstone's Close War rules. It has captured my imgagination and finally I
decided to go for it and set something comparable up but use the Thomas Skirmish
rules with the inevitable tweaks and amendments I've already overlaid on the
original.
The British raiding party was to penetrate dense woods in order to reach the
St.Lawrence and cut loose three floating batteries, protected by a camp occupied
by French regulars and Canadian Militia. Things started well with rapid progress
through clearings and paths. My New England Rangers were deemed to be unaffected
by woods so speeded round the French flank. Some well placed pickets of French
Regulars supported by a couple of patrols of Huron Indians and Militia soon
slowed down the British advance and stalled progress while they were being dealt
with.
Meanwhile the alarm had been raised at the French camp and the French Colonel
was able to deploy his men to guard the batteries and advance on the British
thrust down the river bank. Some British light infantry had succeeded to cut one
of the moorings but were forced back by heavy musketry from the French.
Casualties started to mount and with a 50% morale check eliminating further
stands I decided the British were not going to progress any further and they
melted back the way they came.
Overall a great little game. The rules performed really well and my in-game
experiments with my house rules proved very useful. I toyed with impetus,
ambushes, concealment, flank and rear attacks, the effect of wounds on combat to
name some of them.
I liked the loading delay in musket fire. I made the rifles more musket like
than the rules which I think are based on early breechloaders. I think the rules
could be used for virtually any period. I've focused my amendments more on
Modern and Sci-fi but I don't see a problem going further back to A&M and P&S.
I do remember playing Paddy Griffith's skirmish rules in Napoleonic Wargaming
For Fun. These were great but I did feel like I was loading my musket for half
the game. The actions in these rules are limited, the gameplay is fast and the
action pretty decisive. The game took about an hour and a half to two hours but
I was typing away on my amendments during the action so this probably slowed
things down a bit.
Look forward to another skirmish game.
Saturday 2 October 2010
SIP Playtest 2: Ancients
Just finished a rather epic Roman v Early German confrontation along the lines
of the opening scene in Gladiator. I chose a large game format with between 16
and 18 units on each side.
The Romans: 8 Legionnaries, 4 Auxiliary Foot, 4 Auxiliary Cavalry
The Germans: 12 Warband, 4 Skirmishers, 4 Cavalry
I was going to play the Germans as Heavy Infantry but I wanted to try out
Warband and was intrigued by this notion of "Fresh" that John introduced, which
I thought I'd go for instead of first round impetus.
To compensate I kept all troops on the same competency scale of morale. With
hindsight I think this was a bit over generous to the German side as Fresh works
really well if you're winning and the Romans would have benefited from ignoring
one DP on a number of occassions. Getting a precious extra 2 dice can really
make a difference.
The Romans had to attack a long ridge, flanked by dense woods. The Germans were
goading them to advance as per the film intro. Battle did commence but the
skirmisher screen put out by the Germans did a good job in delaying and
disrupting the advancing legion. I think this was a bit too disruptive, not from
the missile fire but the mere fact that they got in the way. Perhaps a dispersal
/ auto-evade type ruling needs to be in place. I allowed the LI to retreat a
move even though they didn't outmove the Legion. First rule change: no greater
than move restriction on retiral.
The auxilia then proceeded to engage the occupied woods while the Roman legions
finally advanced up the central ridge. The individual nature of combats meant
that other units couldn't get in to engage others that easily but did perform a
rather vital role of support to those who were doing the fighting. I spent some
time moving units into support positions near melee areas so that they sat
within the 10cm melee catchment zone. I liked this element of cohesion and close
support. Even the cavalry were helping when they couldn't get a clear run to
charge.
The combat was long and furious. Generally the Legions were supreme but Fresh
warband are a potent instrument particularly in favourable terrain and with
close support. I decided that terrain advantage should only last one round
otherwise it would factor too heavily.
The Romans won the contest but only narrowly. I decided that the Germans wanted
to keep their force intact to harass the Romans in the future so the game stood
at 9 remaining Roman units vs 6 German.
This game took a lot longer than my first tip-toe into the water. I would
estimate it lasted at least two hours but it was compelling stuff and I would
say that with some more modifications to the systems I should be getting there.
My main conclusion was that I liked what John had done to dumb down my
amendments which played in a rather cluttered way - I'll drop the Armour save
and probably the die modifier factors.
Look forward to updating the Group on my next foray which must be H&M as I
haven't even tried the original version yet!
of the opening scene in Gladiator. I chose a large game format with between 16
and 18 units on each side.
The Romans: 8 Legionnaries, 4 Auxiliary Foot, 4 Auxiliary Cavalry
The Germans: 12 Warband, 4 Skirmishers, 4 Cavalry
I was going to play the Germans as Heavy Infantry but I wanted to try out
Warband and was intrigued by this notion of "Fresh" that John introduced, which
I thought I'd go for instead of first round impetus.
To compensate I kept all troops on the same competency scale of morale. With
hindsight I think this was a bit over generous to the German side as Fresh works
really well if you're winning and the Romans would have benefited from ignoring
one DP on a number of occassions. Getting a precious extra 2 dice can really
make a difference.
The Romans had to attack a long ridge, flanked by dense woods. The Germans were
goading them to advance as per the film intro. Battle did commence but the
skirmisher screen put out by the Germans did a good job in delaying and
disrupting the advancing legion. I think this was a bit too disruptive, not from
the missile fire but the mere fact that they got in the way. Perhaps a dispersal
/ auto-evade type ruling needs to be in place. I allowed the LI to retreat a
move even though they didn't outmove the Legion. First rule change: no greater
than move restriction on retiral.
The auxilia then proceeded to engage the occupied woods while the Roman legions
finally advanced up the central ridge. The individual nature of combats meant
that other units couldn't get in to engage others that easily but did perform a
rather vital role of support to those who were doing the fighting. I spent some
time moving units into support positions near melee areas so that they sat
within the 10cm melee catchment zone. I liked this element of cohesion and close
support. Even the cavalry were helping when they couldn't get a clear run to
charge.
The combat was long and furious. Generally the Legions were supreme but Fresh
warband are a potent instrument particularly in favourable terrain and with
close support. I decided that terrain advantage should only last one round
otherwise it would factor too heavily.
The Romans won the contest but only narrowly. I decided that the Germans wanted
to keep their force intact to harass the Romans in the future so the game stood
at 9 remaining Roman units vs 6 German.
This game took a lot longer than my first tip-toe into the water. I would
estimate it lasted at least two hours but it was compelling stuff and I would
say that with some more modifications to the systems I should be getting there.
My main conclusion was that I liked what John had done to dumb down my
amendments which played in a rather cluttered way - I'll drop the Armour save
and probably the die modifier factors.
Look forward to updating the Group on my next foray which must be H&M as I
haven't even tried the original version yet!
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)