Wargaming Projects - 1 of 4 - The Prehistoric

A Potted History of my Wargaming Projects - part 1 of 4

Prehistoric, Past, Present, and Pending

A commenter on a previous post remarked on how many armies I have.  While not as many as some gamers I know, when I thought about it, it came to more than I realised.  So, I decided to list them all for the record and own the shame.

To keep these posts to a manageable size I've broken them done into four categories which will each get their own post, namely: Prehistoric; Past; Present; and, Pending.  

Part 1 - Prehistoric Projects: that date back to the origins of my wargaming (with rules as opposed to just playing with toy soldiers, e.g. my Britain's multi-part 54mm Wars of the Roses and ACW figures - now sold).

Like most gamers of a similar vintage, I started with Airfix 1/72 kits and moved on to HO/OO plastic figures, or 1/76 as they're now marketed.  I have no photographic record of any of these as they were all thrown away when I went to Uni' as I felt such childish past-times should be left behind[1].  Imagine my anguish when I discovered the wargaming society at the Freshers' Squash, AND they had Airfix armies as well as metal ones - D;oh!

My first 'proper' metal wargame figures were Hinchliffe 25mm Napoleonic's, my Dad buying me half a dozen to get me started on what became a small King's German Legion force all based for the Airfix rules by Bruce Quarrie and consisting of: 4x Line Battalions, 1x Light Battalion, 1x Horse and 1x Foot Artillery Battery (each having a gun, crew, limber and team); 1x Regiment of Hussars; ½x Regiment of Light Dragoons; and, a few command figures.  All now sold and being shown some love by another.  As these were only finally sold off recently[2], still in their original Humbrol gloss enamel paint-jobs, I have a few photos of these

My next army, started back at Uni in the 70's, was another 25mm Hinchliffe collection, only this time it was Ancients.  WRG Ancients was the big thing in the Wargaming Society.  With thoughts of emulating one of my heroes, I opted to start putting together an Alexandrian Macedonian army, and by this time I was using Humbrol matt enamels.  As it failed to replicate the success of the original it soon morphed into a more generic Hellenistic Successor army.  This one, is however, still going strong so will appear in a later post on Present projects.

Perhaps the inspiration to move on to a Successor army was influenced by my best friend from Uni who had a Seleucid army.  Sadly, he passed away a few years ago but left his army to me, as it was what had brought us together[3]. 

But while I still have, and still use, these figures, they are now the oldest I have, so I thought I would feature them here, in the beginning so to speak.

They have some really nice painted shield designs.

All I did with these figures when I got them was repair any wear and tear and re-base them to match my army.  Also, he had a half-painted general that I finished off and added a shield to the base to have a go at the shield pattern and blend him in with the army.

I did repaint the tents from his camp; they were just painted as plain canvas so, I thought they should be jazzed up a bit.

This army also came in for some recent attention, when I expanded the pike blocks.  The original army (not based to DBA/M) were about a dozen figures too few to make 2-element wide blocks so I bought some painted Hinchliffe Successor pike of eBay and re-touched them to match the existing pike; effectively doubling the number of pikes that could be fielded - covered in an earlier post here.

The other really early project was a collection of 6mm Napoleonic's by Heroics and Ros, nice and cheap and easy to paint in those days when I didn't need to wear glasses.  But, like my Hinchliffe Ancients these are still in use and will be covered under Present Projects.

And finally, back in the day, I did buy and paint some Warhammer Fantasy figures to placate my Tolkien urges, but they have been sold off and I can find no photographic record of them anywhere.

Next in this series will be a litany of abandoned projects, often only with a few figures being painted - the lure of the pretty figure range.

Notes:

[1] The fact that my parents were moving house at the same time and obviously didn't want too much of my junk cluttering their new home, also played its part in this.

[2] They were let go, because I was let go and needed to move and down-size, but they hadn't seen a table-top for many a year before that.

[3] I'd heard about someone with an impressive army in the same hall of residence so I tracked him down and knocked on his door.  I was somewhat taken aback when a 6' 5¾" giant opened the door, but, right from the start, we just hit it off; he is still sorely missed.

Gaming Weekend - Pt.2 - An Austrian Waterloo

After Friday's gladiator games, on the Saturday morning we dug out Steve's delightfully sculpted Waterloo terrain for a 6mm clash between the French ...

... and the Austrians (at Waterloo?).

This game was a follow-up to our first attempt (Link) to use Neil Thomas' Napoleonic Wargaming Rules (NTNWR) with 6mm figures, but using a brigade of 4 units, each of 4 bases, to represent what is a single unit in the rules.  As we're still tweaking, Steve commanded the French and Martin the Austrians (including a few of his beloved Bavarians) while I took notes on anything we felt wasn't right and suggestions for changes.

After two turns the table looked like this ...

... I like to think this looks like a Napoleonic battle, or at least a contemporary print of one.

In the foreground of the above, the French heavy cavalry ...

... and their Austrian counterparts ...

can be seen facing off against each other as they protected their infantry who were in a foot-race to occupy Hougoumont.  Beyond that, the French columns can be seen advancing (left to right) to the attack ...

... while the Austrians seek to take up a more advanced defensive position[1].

And, in the far distance, at the top right, the Bavarian cavalry are seeking out an opportunity to turn the French left flank.

Inevitably, it was the cavalry on both flanks that first came to blows.  The honours were roughly even with the French heavies prevailing ...

.. while their lighter brethren were bested by the Bavarians.

Observation 1: heavy cavalry combat is more lethal than that between lights as they throw twice as many dice in combat.  I see no reason why an even fight between two bodies of heavy cavalry (HC) should be bloodier than one between light cavalry (LC).  Also, cavalry on cavalry combat usually results in few losses until one side ends up being pursued by the other.  I propose making all cavalry fight on the 'default' one combat die per unit (like LC) when fighting mounted opponents of the same type.  I am also considering making defeated cavalry rout, removing the option to simply fall back facing their opponent when defeated.

While the cavalry on both flanks were whittling each other down over several turns, the French voltigeurs (open order light infantry) won the race to Hougoumont; occupying it just as the Austrian infantry rocked up[2].

The resulting Austrian assault on Hougoumont was repulsed with loss.

In the centre, the Austrian guns were still advancing to get into position, while the French guns, taking advantage of 'Wellington's ridge' (La Haye Sainte in the background) were already starting to inflict losses[3].

While the light cavalry contest was dragging on, ...

... the heavy cavalry fight, courtesy of their higher lethality, had ended leaving the victorious French heavies unopposed.

This in turn forced the Austrian infantry that had been rebuffed from Hougoumont to form square or face the consequences.

The French infantry, in the centre, had still not reached the Austrian line ...

... which had now shaken itself out into some sort of order and finally got their guns into action.

The much-anticipated infantry clash did not take place; the French brigades (units) being unable to close as the rules do not allow formed infantry to charge formed infantry unless they are stronger i.e., they have more units.  

Observation 2: without a significant artillery advantage this makes it difficult to put in an attack that is strong enough to go in after advancing through the enemy's artillery and facing defensive musketry.  I haven't formulated any rules mods for this yet, and maybe I'm okay with it as is.

After realising their attempt to whittle down the Austrians was only going to be a case of mutual annihilation the French chose to pull back to their ridgeline, ...

... take up a defensive position, and challenge the Austrians to attack if they fancied their chances were any better.

The French, were heavily influenced in their decision to not press on by the presence of the Bavarian cavalry (at the top left table-edge in the above) that were now wandering unopposed in their rear having finally disposed of the last few French chasseurs à cheval.

With the Austrians declining the invitation to attack, the battle ended indecisively in a draw - not surprising for a contest between two, supposedly, matched forces.

Post Mortem

Overall, I felt the rules gave a convincing game with few exceptions.  First, expanding on the two observations made in the narrative above: 

Observation 1: in addition to the earlier comments, the cavalry combats dragged on far longer than I would expect.  The rules say the defeated side in a combat chooses to retreat either half a move facing the enemy or full move facing away from the enemy.  The former means the cavalry just bounce off each other and then try again.  The proposed rule to make defeated side (not if a draw) in a cavalry vs cavalry mêlée do the latter (I shall call it 'rout') solves both these issues.

Observation 2: while I agree with the rule writer's view that formed infantry will be unwilling to close with formed infantry unless they believe they have an advantage I think troop quality to be as important as numbers.  Here I propose that higher quality units would, only for the purpose of determining whether they will charge, be treated as having an additional unit for each level of quality they are higher.  For example, an elite brigade charging a levy brigade, being two levels higher, could still charge even if weaker by one unit.  Poorer quality brigades wishing to charge would ignore any quality difference i.e. they just take account of numbers.  I may even allow generals, attached to chargers, to be counted as an additional unit.

Additional observations.

Observation 3: limbered artillery getting the same, generous, saving rolls as deployed artillery seems very wrong.  This is a simple fix; just reduce the effectiveness of their saving throw when limbered, but I need to give some thought as to how much to reduce it.

Observation 4: the rules are unclear as to whether brigades (units in the rules) can, or should, split their fire between targets to their front.  I am leaning towards enforcing the ±45° arc of fire for each unit (base in the rules) but otherwise letting them choose their target.

Observation 5: there appears to be nothing stopping brigades / units fighting to the last man / figure or 'hit'.  These remnants, especially cavalry, will find it easier to slip through gaps and to get round behind the enemy and be a severe nuisance.  I propose that any brigade reduced to one unit may not attack and must retreat to avoid combat that would result in the enemy throwing three times as many dice in combat.  They would retreat before contact in the opponent's turn such that they do not impede the opponent's move.

Observation 6: on more realistic terrain, like that we used in the above game, not allowing cavalry and artillery to at least pass through woods and towns (impassable in the rules) is very restrictive.  The proposed change is that such troops stop on reaching the terrain, then in their next turn, just one unit is placed on the other side.  In the turn after that it is joined by the rest of the brigade, and can move off in the next turn after that.  The single advance unit that passes through first, if engaged, fights on its own (discount the rest of the brigade).  If it does not win the mêlée it must retreat to rejoin the rest of the brigade which takes a morale test.  This passage will not be allowed if the terrain is occupied by enemy, but is allowed if occupied by friendly, formed or light, infantry.  Only one brigade may pass through in a turn.

I hope to try out these rules again soon to see if these proposed modifications deliver the desired effect.  Watch this space.

Notes:

[1.]  Doing this in the face of an imminent French attack was risky, but necessary to avoid fighting in their deployment area and suffering from the bane of all wargames, the table edge!

[2.]  The Austrians had set out in line, and only changed to column en-route.  Had they been in column when deployed they might've got there first.

[3.]  We had finally realised that in NTNWR only the troops and guns of the player whose turn it is can fire (with the exception of defensive fire when charged).  This was why we had found artillery and musketry overly bloody in earlier games.

Gaming Weekend - Pt.1 - The Circus

The past weekend was a long overdue meet up with some long-time wargaming friends, Steve and Martin, at Steve's place - unfortunately the fourth, Keith, couldn't make it.  Martin and I arrived Friday evening and after a good supper (Green Curried Fish and beans) we moved on to the beer and a couple of quick games of Ludus Gadiatorius using my mini-amphitheatre featured in an earlier article: When it's Too Hot to Paint.

In the first game our randomly selected characters ...

   Me             Steve           Martin

... sized each other up across the sands of the arena.

But why am I not looking at my two opponents you ask?  Well, my attention had been seized by a couple of lions that someone had let loose to enhance the entertainment. 

As a Bestiarius, I decided I would take on the lions and leave the other two to their classic gladiatorial match up.  This was a mistake, as apart from encouraging the lions to take chunks out of me they also stabbed me in the back when opportunity presented.

Then, as they realised that I, in my badly wounded condition, offered little threat they turned on each other.  At the same time the lions also decided that I wasn't the one they wanted to eat, and so down went Steve ...

... shortly followed by Martin as I carefully backed away towards the exit.

Being munched by lions, meant the Emperor's thumb could not influence their fate and both were ruled dead.

For the second game, we randomly selected some new personas:

  Me             Steve          Martin

This time there was only one lion, which Steve rapidly dispatched while Martin and I hammered away at each other to little effect.

I succumbed next as I recklessly neglected my defence to put everything into an all-out attack on Martin, not helped by a dart in the back from Steve.

Steve might've regretted his choice of target as Martin made short work of him once he managed to catch up with him.

So, with Martin declared the winner (sole survivor) the Emperor, clearly entertained, gave both Steve and myself the Thumbs Up to fight another day.

The WHC - An Anniversary Post

The anniversary of my blog that is, not the Wargames Holiday Centre.

[Pre-Cabinette Archives c.1980s]

It's a year since I started my blog so, as a sort of commemoration, I thought I'd post the photos of my visit to the Wargame Holiday Centre back in the 80s when it was still up near Scarborough and being run by Peter Gilder.  The photos have already featured on the Peter Gilder tribute site but I rather fancied putting them up on my blog as well.  

Back then it was all film, no digital, so I've had to scan in the printed photos that I still have.  The quality isn't great, but it's in line with what we were used to seeing in the magazines of the time.  But nonetheless, classic units like these Saxon Cuirassiers still look pretty good to me.

I went with a couple of friends to do a 'Leipzig Weekend'; well, if you're going to go big, that's surely the one to do.  The table was probably the same dimensions as that featured in Peter's magazine articles[1] called 'Let's Fight Leipzig' which included the map shown below (north is at the top).

The first of my photos was taken looking east along the upper / northern edge of the table.

And then one looking east along the bottom / southern edge of the table.

This final one showing some of the players (luckily old-fashioned cameras didn't do selfies), is taken from the middle, looking north-east towards the deployment area of the Army of Silesia.

Comparing this with the map, shows that Peter was either using different 3-foot square terrain boards or had assembled them differently from the map.  Also, the gap in the western edge was the same width all the way, but there was a spare terrain board that could be used to fill it if required - leaving the French players surrounded in the middle.

IIRC I was in charge of Marmont's VI Corps and Latour-Maubourg's I Cavalry Corps.  Unfortunately, I was assigned the north-east corner to defend.  This meant was that I was advancing out of a corner and into a terrible cross-fire.

My cavalry corps, suffered terribly, as units were destroyed or driven back through those following up behind, which prevented them from advancing while being interpenetrated.  And so was born the amazing 'disappearing cavalry corps'!

Into the Jaws of Death ...

Into the Mouth of Hell ...

... rode the six hundred!

Clearly someone had blundered, or had I just been set up?  Never mind, aside from being disappointed by my cavalry's poor showing I remember it as a closely fought action.  In fact, I recall it being a fairly bloody draw.

And, as I can recall not much more at this remove, I'll just post some more photos without comment.

All in all, a memorable weekend.

What do you reckon ... shall we call it a draw?

Notes:

[1.] Miniature Wargames issues 4 and 5.