I've been watching a few programes on Discovery about the Vikings and their
warrior ethos. This got me enthused to play a good old Dark Age slugging match
with their traditional enemies the Anglo-Saxons.
Both lined up and looked pretty similar, however, the armies have subtle
differences. On one side the rush of the warband, more mobility and the
integrated bondi archers. On the other the shieldwall (which in this game proved
to be decisive).
The Viking charge was concluded with the huscarls crashing into the Anglo-Saxon
nobles, however, the bondi held off and performed some rather useful initial
fire on the Saxon fyrdmen which was designed to soften them up a bit to get the
decisive base removal in the first round and perhaps trigger a morale collapse.
As it transpired the initial luck on missile fire was not consolidated in the
close combat rounds that followed and the superiority of the shieldwall as a
defence grew as the battle raged on.
I modified my pushback rules which are now simpler - the difference in bases at
the end of a close combat is the number the lesser unit is pushed back in base
depths. Worked well and made that snake like ripple up and down the battle line.
Back to the contest despite the Vikings getting one of their bondi to the other
side and forcing the Saxon general to make some hard choices regarding the two
units to remove, the Anglo-Saxons still had a preponderance in active units to
defeat the remaining Vikings 5:2 in the next couple of turns.
Great game, nice representation of a rush and attack tactic vs a solid defence.
In future games the Viking mobility should feature more with strategems to flank
or use terrain better. This would seem to adhere to their style where they
weren't renowned for seeking pitched battles but preferred applying their
seaborne strategy of surprise and speed to their land operations.
Saturday, 28 May 2011
Saturday, 14 May 2011
Battle of Trimsos
I decided to put on a pet project of recreating the inspirational battle of
Trimsos, the one depicted in Wargaming which uses the Tony Bath derived Rules.
This I now played using the AMW Classical rules.
My Hyrkanians were based on a Persian Army, my Hyperboreans looked distinctly
Greek.
Both were deployed as per the photographs in the book and I used my reversed
borard and desert terrain to give the game an arid look and feel.
The game was great. I initially plumped to play the Hyperborean commander but as
things developed and the lines started to clash I decided to become a more
neutral party. The Hyperboreans fought some great set piece actions but didn't
seem to have the overall strategy right. In contrast the Hyrkanian general
exerted a steady superiority on his right flank and centre with the elephants
crushing the Hyperborean centre. The Hyperboreans sent two units to take the New
Bridge and this proved a wasteful use of the mobile elements in their force. The
Hyrkanian general had two static infantry units which helped to keep their
opponents out of the main battle where they would have proved very useful
countering the Hrykanian mounted threat.
As the game progressed the Hyperboreans were gradually reduced and encircled,
the chariots arriving too late to help their comrades now reduced to one
remaining unit.
The Hyrkanians had five units left and just like the Wargames battle shared the
same result of a convincing victory.
Great game and scenario - certainly got my Old School fix from this game.
Trimsos, the one depicted in Wargaming which uses the Tony Bath derived Rules.
This I now played using the AMW Classical rules.
My Hyrkanians were based on a Persian Army, my Hyperboreans looked distinctly
Greek.
Both were deployed as per the photographs in the book and I used my reversed
borard and desert terrain to give the game an arid look and feel.
The game was great. I initially plumped to play the Hyperborean commander but as
things developed and the lines started to clash I decided to become a more
neutral party. The Hyperboreans fought some great set piece actions but didn't
seem to have the overall strategy right. In contrast the Hyrkanian general
exerted a steady superiority on his right flank and centre with the elephants
crushing the Hyperborean centre. The Hyperboreans sent two units to take the New
Bridge and this proved a wasteful use of the mobile elements in their force. The
Hyrkanian general had two static infantry units which helped to keep their
opponents out of the main battle where they would have proved very useful
countering the Hrykanian mounted threat.
As the game progressed the Hyperboreans were gradually reduced and encircled,
the chariots arriving too late to help their comrades now reduced to one
remaining unit.
The Hyrkanians had five units left and just like the Wargames battle shared the
same result of a convincing victory.
Great game and scenario - certainly got my Old School fix from this game.
Monday, 2 May 2011
War of 1812 Game
I used the Bank Holiday weekend to fit in a game using one of my period
adaptations. This time an escalating engagement between a defensively postured
American Force under the General Buckley against a probing assault force under
General Arnott.
The rules used were my AWI Rules based on NPW with War of 1812 lists.
I fully deployed my solo, command and control and incorporated some scenario
setup features, up to now restricted to my modern simulations. I'm also going
through the Charles Grant Programmed Wargames book to pick out features and
ideas to use. I picked up on the Chance card concept and built this into the
game. Taken together I had a very interesting encounter develop.
The British had the initiative and maintained this throughout the engagement.
Both sides started with three units deployed on table with a Reserve release
rule in play to allow units to appear on the baseline during the course of the
game. Throughout the British scored better rolls and had a steady stream of
reinforcements. The Americans in contrast had a dearth of reserve units until
the end. By that stage it was too late as their front line units were depleted
to the extent that they started a general retreat. With the British objective to
reach the American base line, this was achieved by a unit of line by Turn 7.
I deliberately proceeded at a slow and deliberate pace keeping note in my battle
diary of events, die rolls and following the sequence to the letter. This paid
dividends as a truly unique gaming simulation emerged. It had the pleasing feel
of watching a game being simulated where I was involved but not in control.
adaptations. This time an escalating engagement between a defensively postured
American Force under the General Buckley against a probing assault force under
General Arnott.
The rules used were my AWI Rules based on NPW with War of 1812 lists.
I fully deployed my solo, command and control and incorporated some scenario
setup features, up to now restricted to my modern simulations. I'm also going
through the Charles Grant Programmed Wargames book to pick out features and
ideas to use. I picked up on the Chance card concept and built this into the
game. Taken together I had a very interesting encounter develop.
The British had the initiative and maintained this throughout the engagement.
Both sides started with three units deployed on table with a Reserve release
rule in play to allow units to appear on the baseline during the course of the
game. Throughout the British scored better rolls and had a steady stream of
reinforcements. The Americans in contrast had a dearth of reserve units until
the end. By that stage it was too late as their front line units were depleted
to the extent that they started a general retreat. With the British objective to
reach the American base line, this was achieved by a unit of line by Turn 7.
I deliberately proceeded at a slow and deliberate pace keeping note in my battle
diary of events, die rolls and following the sequence to the letter. This paid
dividends as a truly unique gaming simulation emerged. It had the pleasing feel
of watching a game being simulated where I was involved but not in control.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)