Little Churchyard War

Army Dark Blue and Army Red met for a rematch on the dining room table.  We again used a super-simplified house-rules version of HG Wells' Little Wars.

My son had a better time this go-around, as he seemed to do better aiming Army Red's cannon on the table than on the floor.

Highlights included: a dead-on hit on an Army Dark Blue infantryman that sent him flying backwards a good foot and a half; knocking figures off the table edge and having my son say in complete seriousness "I don't think that even hit that guy"; and hiding a guy from ever-closer cannon fire by hooking his base onto the top of a house roof - I countered by hitting the house on my next shot, sending the poor chap tumbling down.

Pretty brutal game of attrition...

I lost, in the end, although I had to coach him a little to take advantage of gains he had already earned all on his own ("I think now would be a good time to use that reserve you've cleverly kept hidden all game.")

Showdown at Cardboard Creek

The third session of viking vs Anglo-Dane dark age battles using the SAGA ruleset was the other weekend.  Instead of using the 'Clash of the Warlords' scenario which is a quick-and-dirty six-turn dust-up which seemed to not favor the viking faction, we used the 'battle of the fords' which involves two bridges over a river or stream,with points assigned after seven turns based on how many figures each side has managed to get to the opposite bank - no fording the river, the bridges are the only way over.

I must praise the ruleset because this scenario produced a completely different game than the previous sessions.  Both sides used limit breaks special abilities not used before.  It was also fairly up-in-the-air until close to the end, with the Anglo-Danes not clearing a bridge, moving figures to the opposite bank, and earning points to win the game until the seventh and final turn.

Here's the situation at the south bridge. I parked a unit of warriors on there and then menaced with my archers at the bank.  Just out of shot on the left is a reserve of hearthguard elites.  Gabe had gotten burned bad enough in earlier games by the archers than he was content to let all of this sit as is for several turns - which was fine by me because the extent of my strategy for this game was "stall at the south, grind it out at the north."

I think this (the below photo) is after the first clash on the north bridge?  My front rank of eight warriors appears to be down to seven.  This was against a viking warrior unit of twelve.

The vikings continuing their push here...

Maybe after repelling the second attack?

Way later on: here's the viking warlord holding the north bridge all by hisself.

And here's his hearthguard flying to his side.

The last pic from the evening...

Pretty happy with that flag. I hope to add a few more to this army, since they help add a little narrative element.  Bonus prize if anyone can identify the design...

Little Wars

I played a(n even more) simplified version of HG Wells' Little Wars with my son (age 6) this weekend.  I played an 18 figure all-infantry Army Red against his combined Army Dark Blue forces of 24 infantry and 8 cavalry.  Each side was equipped with a Playmobil cannon.  Victory would go to the first side to get three figures to the opposite bound of the playing field.  Melee was decided by simply throwing a die each with loser tipping over a figure – in the event of a tie both figs were knocked over.  Terrain was board books stacked upon eachother and some Lincoln log structures. We obeyed Wells' rule of "guns first": that is, you fired your three shots with you cannon at the top of your turn, then did all your movement, then resolved any melee. All movement was 12 inches.

He won rather convincingly but highlights (which placed us firmly in the land of play) included my hitting a cavalry figure, and then having it fall over and knock his companion over, and so forth twice more, like a row of dominos, killing four in one shot! The other trick shot was firing a dart through the doorway of the Lincoln log structure and back out the opposite side to knock over two Army Dark Blue troopers who thought themselves protected.

Of broken vikings.

We played SAGA twice more.  Initial deployments of fist game seen above - my Anglo-Danes at top and Gabe's vikings at bottom.  His archer unit is just out of the left side of the frame. Gabe used the rock outcropping for cover, then tried to flank around it to attack the Danes' left flank.  

My counter was my a new tactic I'd thought of for the Danes, which was to burn a whole turn's worth of activations to slide my entire warband to my right by a full move. Dane warriors then fell upon the viking archers. Viking warriors counterattacked (burning up a lot of activations as a result) with the Dane's falling back but incurring a lot of collateral damage.

Meanwhile I'd been using the Anglo-Dane's Intimdate ability to cancel viking activations and keep the attempted flank move stalled. The end result was that we reached the fifth (out of six) turn and I had a big points advantage and (once again) all his forces were too far to engage for melee before the turns ran out.

The first game took longer to play than the previous session, so I suggested removing some terrain and then "mirroring" the rest of the board.  This was just a sort of staight up line-up-opposite and have at it game.  This eliminated Gabe's usual problem of getting the majority of his units in striking distance. However, the signature Dane ability (Intimidate - which cancels an enemy activation) gave me an edge again (I think), as the Dane right curled back in the face of advacing elite troops then stalled thier advance.  The game was decided on warlord vs. warlord combat which I won.

We then discussed the Viking faction and what its strengths were (if any).  Gabe read up online a bit and found a lot (A LOT) of instances of vikings losing.  My inkling is that the viking faction is poorly suited to the "Clash of the Warlords" scenario wherein the victory conditions favor conservative, low-casualty play (since each casualty is a point for the other side).  We're going to use the "Battle of the Ford" scenario next time which involves two bridges, with points at the end of turn six determined by how many figs each side has on the opposite side of the river.

Of Shieldwalls.

We ran two playtests of the Dark Ages skirmish game 'SAGA' the other weekend.  I played an Anglo-Danes warband and Gabe played a viking one.  I won both games, including a flawless first game where not one Anglo-Dane figure was lost.  Frankly my opponent did me a lot of favors by deploying his forces spread out and then having a solitary unit rush forward on its own with no support.

My only pregame strategy, which seemed successful, was I figured to take the learned Charles Grant's advice (something to the effect that if you play to the period, you will be rewarded) to heart, and do my best to replicate a shieldwall.  So, in both games I deployed my little dudes in a solid block - archers in the middle, flanked closely on each side by warriors, with my warlord and elite Hearthguard in reserve (see above photo).

It certainly paid off, as it allowed units to support each other quickly, and also allowed a bit more use of the higher-end special abilities since I did not have to use as many of my activation dice on movement.  On the other hand, the formation wasn't really tested - all it had to do was defeat one viking unit at a time (the solitary forward rush mentioned above).  Next time perhaps we will see if it can hold up to a more coordinated attack involving two or more units closing for melee in the same turn.

Hastenbeck (or something like it)

The goal in setting up this Seven Years War game in 54mm scale (again using the All the Kings Men ruleset) was to minimize or better control the effect of terrain on the gameplay.  The previous playtests had used an I-go-you-go system of randomized terrain placement (I place a hill, you place a river, I place a forest, you place a house, etc) that resulted in cluttered playing fields and games which relied heavily on artillery duels.  The result was that G___ and I decided to agree on terrain placement ahead of time.  I web-researched some historical battles and presented him with two options in the form of hand-drawn maps: Hastenbeck in 1757 and Lutterberg in 1758.  He chose Hastenbeck.

The map for Hastenbeck was simply rendered by me as allowing for the French to deploy along one full side of the table, while the Allies deployed in a more constricted, off-center stretch of the opposite side (however the Allied left was guarded by heavy woods).  As a bonus, we each took a copy of the map and drew out our initial placements.  I was Allies again, and tried to deploy mainly in a nice defensive line with the rest of the force piled up in column ready to advance on the left next to the woods.  

This was the first "large" game, 10 units total on each side, and the first to feature skirmisher units.  Needless to say, the prearranged map and the total blind deployment resulted in period-appropriate long and dense battlelines at start the game (as hoped for).

After the first few moves, the Allied right's artillery had succeeded in driving the French Mestre de camp Général Cavalerie from the field with some incredible good dice throws. Meanwhile the French began advancing along the edge of the scrubby light woods (no movement detriment but capable of obstructing line of sight for fire attachs) which protected the Allies' left flank.

Skirmisher firefights and cavalry charges and counter-charges then ensued in the light woods on the Allied left.  The end results were that dismounted French Schomberg dragoons (light troops) held the woods, but the remaining French cavalry had been driven from the field, as had the Allied jaegers (light troops) and Hessian mounted dragoons.  The British 12th Foot regiment was taking fire from the French Rouergue and Acquitaine regiments.

The British 12th breaks in the face of French musketry.  The Allies try to pivot their right over to compensate.  At a key moment Hanoverian foot artillery is manhandled into canister-shot range of the Acquitaine infantrie!  12 dice instead of 8 for the artillery attack!

Bad dice strike!  The French weather the grapeshot like it was a summer breeze!  A follow-up volley from von Reden's Hanoverian infantry is likewise uneffective.  The intention of these volleys was to soften up Acquitaine for a devastating charge from the British dragoons still standing by in column by the woods. This charge never precipated...

A Hanoverian artillery unit is destroyed by French musketry and von Hardenberg's Hanoverian regiment is also broken.  The Allies have lost half their starting units and so the retreat is sounded.

Bad dice aside, G___ gets credit for deciding on a overall plan of attach based on his initial deployment, and for sticking with it.  I get discredit for (as usual) letting more fragile units (artillery, skirmishers, and cavalry) take all the risks while letting the infantry linger too long.

All in all an enjoyable evening, not the least because it looked and felt right historically, as well as being engaging.  The pre-agreed terrain was a boon and the largest fielded armies to date gave things an epic feel.  Artillery was nominal - the French barely fired a shot the whole game but won rather handily anyways.

Another Seven Years War Game

Additional cavalry regiments having been mustered (as noted here), another clash of the French (played this time by my good friend Karl) and the Allies (again played yours truly) during the Seven Years War was diced out with about 130 shiny plastic little men. 

Since it seemed fair and worked well before, at my suggestion we used an ad hoc, I-go-you-go system to lay out the terrain.  However, this time the result was a rather cluttered table with little open space to maneuver or even advance short distances without intersecting woods, houses, walls, muddy fields, hills, or rivers.  As it was, the Allies ended up deployed before the bridge, and the French deployed on the other side around a hill directly overlooking said bridge.

The rules where again All the Kings Men, and again the deck-of-playing-cards activation system charmed all involved.  When the allies drew a deuce, which prohibits all further activations by a unit of one's choice for the rest of turn, the cause was ascribed to "oh dear! the colonel's hemarrhoids have flared up again."

Things would probably have unfolded predictably if the Allies had not marched a Hanoverian infantry regiment across the bridge and then (on a consecutive activation) right up onto the hill, where they formed up in line and delivered a volley into the French artillery.  However, bad dice throws meant the artillery was not wiped out, and said Hanover regiment was now in a state of disorder and stranded in the middle of the French line with no friendly forces nearby.
 

It then proceeded to take enfilade musket fire and canister shot from French artillery to its front and rear, but awesome dice resulted in it weathering the fire (huzzah!).  In a following turn it was finally broken.

The rest of the game was dominated by artillery dueling and a cavalry charge by the French which broke an Allied infantry unit, although the French cavalry was broken as well in the combat.  French artillery won its duel, destroying both Allied gun positions and also hitting the Allies' break point and ending the game.

Future games will employ some kind of agreed upon terrain before hand, and probably involve a wide open field in the middle - enough of these confounded fights from two sides of a river!  K___ was quite adamant about some sort of blind deployment, or an I-go-you-go placement of units.  I suggested a combination of both, with cards with "infantry," "cavalry", and "artillery" written upon the placed I-go-you-go face down.  The cards would then be flipped and the wee little figures placed. 

More units are also in the works: a few more infantry regiments for each side as well as light infantry.