After Andris’ forces received a thorough beating at Neuben another French attack puts pressure on the Austrians at Stautz. This battle begins relatively late in the day and will only last a couple of turns but what the Austrians don’t know is that the French have a flanking force on the march.
Two Austrian Armeekorps in defensive position at 1500. Stautz is in the upper right wedged between a stream and a ploughed fields which makes it easier to defend. Therefore the job falls to the battered III Armeekorps of Andris. Meanwhile Sandmeier deployed on and around the hill. In the distance Philidor arrives.
The forces arrayed for battle.
Dust clouds on the horizon mark the arrival of further forces as Philidor moves his forces forward to pin the Austrians in place. A heavy skirmisher screen is thrown forward to navigate the rough ground near Stautz.
On Philidor’s right Barnier arrives at 1600 with his Corps and immediately rushes his cavalry forward to bring disorder into the Austrian formations. Meanwhile his infantry traverses the stream and artillery is send down the road to support Philidor as it cannot cross the stream.
The defenders react by shifting the reserves towards Stautz and form some battalions in masse.
The First Attack
The French commit to the center while keeping away from the enemy on the hill. Artillery is brought forward and begins to wreak havoc among the Austrian defenders.
Barnier brings the full weight of his assault columns to bear but is beaten back in the first attack. The Austrians have successfully formed a defensive line on their left flank but these are the already weakened forces of Andris and they are missing artillery support.
The overall situation at 1800. Sandmeier had to retire somewhat on the right under mounting pressure. But Philidor’s men are tired and casualties are mounting. They don’t have another attack in them.
On the left the next attack is clearly aimed at Stautz which has been shelled by artillery for nearly 2 hours while French and Austrian troops battle at the outskirts of the town.
The Second Attack
The second French thrust easily dislodges the enemy from Stautz and supporting attacks along the defensive line makes any attempt to recapture the town already impossible.
As this goes on Sandmeier counter attacks Philidor’s troops with some success.
End of the Battle
After 2 hours of quick but intense attack maneuvers the Austrian forces retire from the left flank.
Word arrives Sandmeier while his forces are advancing against Philidor. He has no choice to pull back. The French hold Stautz and broke Andris’ foce again while narrowly avoiding Philidor’s Corps breaking. On the field of battle this would count as a tactical victory but in the strategical rules it is counted as a draw as neither side’s will to fight was completely broken. Casualties confirm this:
French losses: 1.500 Austrian losses: 4.000
But within the campaign this is not a good result for the Austrians. Andris III Armeekorps is barely holding together, nearly half in size after two battles and unknown to them there is another French Corps on the way.
After the first battle of the campaign near Porthaus the French are in a good position with far less casualties and better scouting. The have received 2 victory points for the battle versus the Austrain 1 victory point for holding the Weil node. I raised the morale value of all forces by +5 as these were too low.
The Austrian C-in-C Stroheim received reports of the costly defeat at Neuben on April 12. He decides to defend at Stautz in the south and use his three corps in the north for an attack towards Kreuznach. This would bottle up the French in the south somewhat.
The problem is that the exact location of three French Corps are still in doubt.
The French C-in-C Gérard tries to do the reverse. His successful II Corps will soon be reinforced and can attack Stautz while III Corps at Sägwell needs to hold the enemy while this happens.
Early April 13
At midday the situation clarified greatly for the French. The Austrians are attacking at Sägwell and another Armeekorps has been revealed at Weil. and Stautz. This brings the number up to five and all Dummy forces are therefore revealed.
Again the Austrians on their scouting. This time it is crucial, as French force D at Grinn gives them trouble. As long as it is not revealed it is far too dangerous to move V Armeekorps into battle at Sägwell.
Late April 13
Gérard saw no choice but to reinforce III Corps with the Reserve as Sägwell. Meanwhile I and II Corps attack at Stautz.
Finally force D has been uncovered as a dummy but this happens only after all moves for the turn so the V Armeekorps stayed at Weil. Whats more is that the reinforcing counters at Sägwell and Stautz have not been revealed. This means that the Austrians will neither know if more forces are on the way or where they will arrive.
The battles of Stautz and Sägwell are about to follow in separate posts.
Late in the second day of the campaign the French and Austrian forces meet for the first time on the field of battle. Volley and Bayonet will be used for all battles of the campaign. Deployment and reinforcements is influenced by the campaign movement of troops. The Road to Glory system from the rules is not used. There is a turn limit and formation breakpoints to govern victory in campaign turns.
The Austrians arrived at Porthaus roughly at 1400 and proceeded to seek good ground to block the French. The village of Neuben (center) some kilometres away from Porthaus was where the forces met.
French II Corps of Marshal Philidor in the foreground with Rochette’s cavalry to the left, Couvreur’s veteran infantry in the center, surrounded by thick skirmishers screens (not depicted). To the right Beaumanoir’s conscript infantry and Corps heavy artillery.
The Austrian III Armeekorps of General Andris consists of Boltzmann’s cavalry to the left. Faymann and Burger field an infantry division each in the center and to the right respectively. The Austrians also have heavy artillery.
The Austrians press on and take Neuben and have a strong central position with artillery on both flanks. Philidor reacts by moving his right wing forward to engage the enemy while the conscripts on the left advance more carefully.
Heavy fighting erupts at Neuben. French skirmishers seem to have the upper hand, though.
On the other side of Neuben long range artillery shells the maneuvering troops.
Around 17 o’clock Austrian cavalry made a move to threaten French infantry. General Rochette reacted promptly by charging the Austrians although he had only light cavalry at his disposal. As one might expect Austrian Cuirassiers routed the Frenchmen and put Rochette’s division into disorder. The French hussars fared better however and dispersed their enemy. A costly action but the danger to the infantry line has been averted.
Just right of the cavalry encounter the firefight showed mixed results. One French regiment broke (lower left) while the other charged (center) and broke their enemy which brought Faymann’s division close to collapse.
On the other side of Neuben, firefights began with the Austrians suffering. Both forces are close to their morale break point as determined by the campaign rules.
Fighting in the outskirts of Neuben continue. Although the Austrians are holding the village the supporting troops nearby are suffering heavily.
In a desperate gamble Andris orders Burger to send his men forward from the protected position on the hill to break the enemy conscripts. The French defend well and then counter attack which sends two regiments routing (top left). The ensuing losses are more than enough to break III Armeekorps and win the day. Although General Philidor’s force needed only two more hits to be broken as well.
General Andris retreats back to Stautz. During the battle I noticed that morale scores of 35 are rather low to start with and changed the starting value to 40. This means a force that loses 40% or more of hits of all their units is considered to be broken.
The situation after post battle moves, stamina and morale adjustments.
Casualty rolls were made for both forces and the Austrians suffered 8.000 losses out of 21.500 men. Boltzmann’s cavalry division has been nearly wiped out. II Corps only sustained 1.500 losses. The disparity is in part due to the pursuit of the losing force which generates additional losses on the losers side.
In the next post I will continue with the strategic side of things.
While reading about Napoleon on his campaigns i noticed that almost all the campaign systems I know are quite symmetrical. Armies are pitted against each other that may behave differently in the field but the campaign rules, as a battle generator of sorts assume that there are no differences on the strategical side of things. The systems Napoleon employed in his early campaigns before his enemies caught on would lead to a much less symmetrical campaign, though.
Advantages in scouting and screening, force concentration and a flexible approach about where the own center is situated are things that come to mind. Living off the land as opposed to long and slow supply trains is another difference that will influence how forces move.
I decided to work on a campaign system (code named Project Icarus) to model such differences in a simple way without a ton of bookkeeping. Nothing will be very detailed but in sum I hope to bring more realism to the campaign layer.
I set up a short and rather symmetrical campaign in order to test the systems in place first. Namely my rules for scouting, screening (preventing enemy scouting), morale, exhaustion and setting up field battles.
The map below is fictional but very loosely based on the Eckmühl campaign during the 5th Coalition in 1809. The French C-in-C Gérard has 4 regular Corps and one Guard Reserve Corps starting west. The Austrian C-in-C Stroheim has 5 Armeekorps at his disposal staring from the east.
This is essentially a map of nodes or locations armies can travel between and a rate of one move per turn. It is essentially a test map and not very realistic in regards to the river. More on movement later.
Scouting and screening is modeled by 5 dummy forces (the lighter blue/yellow) on each side. At a distance of two locations scouting rolls can be made to uncover various bits of information depending on the roll.
There is also a stacking rule of 2 per side in place which is very work in progress at the moment.
Stamina and Morale are tracked per force counter. Each move and battle costs stamina and depending on winning or losing the morale is changed. Morale is simply the percentage of losses a force can take during a battle before it is considered broken.
My aim with this test campaign is to iron out quirks in the rules first before applying them to asymmetrical scenarios. It will be quite easy to give one side more dummy forces, better scouting modifiers, stamina or morale. Marching speed itself is more difficult to change but stamina is a good start.
The campaign begins with a day of maneuvers on standing orders. As no contact was possible on day one I gave all forces a march order and just executed it instead of moving one force at a time.
At the end of the day the French look like they can project quite a few forces towards Weil. In reality they have their center around Kreuznach and are ready to shift their forces south. Gérard is ready to retire his Corps from Weil to lure the Austrians in. Scouting has been bad this turn as the enemy forces B and H at Rabenhaus are not revealed. A and G stay unrevealed as well. Gérard suspects 2-3 Armeekorps in total in the area.
The Austrian perspective shows the wall of possible French troops closing in on Weil. The Austrians indeed have two Armeekorps there but Stroheim’s other forces are too stretched out to support each other. At least their scouting has confirmed that the enemy at Weil is not a dummy but in fact III Corps of General Darche.
Early April 12
This day begins with the standard campaign sequence. Players roll for initiative and the winner decides who moves one force first. After that it is alternating between the two sides. There are two of these movement phases each turn, hence the early/late distinction of the day. Battles might start early in the day but are only fought after all moves have been completed to give reinforcements time to march to the sound of guns.
The situation for Gérard around midday. He drew his dummy forces closer to Weil in order to keep the enemy from launching an attack. It worked and French scouts also identified one dummy (which is discarded) and the names of two real forces around Weil. Unfortunately enemy force C at Porthaus has not been identified. The plan is to shift more forces to the south for a left hook while keeping the enemy at Weil busy with guessing Gérard’s real dispositions.
The Austrians failed at scouting as well and enemy force I remains veiled. So far the French could be anywhere. As III Corps stayed at Weil Stroheim believes that there are definitely enemy reinforcements on route to Weil. He probably should have attacked while he had the chance but hesitated.
Late April 12
The second movement phase begins with French initiative and Gérard decides to pull III Corps out of Weil due to increasing reports of enemy formations in the area. The Austrians don’t waste time and move in with their two Korps and possibly another one behind it. Force J up at Korik has to be dealt with in a day or two as well.
Meanwhile the southern column marches on and II Corps under Philidor discover a dummy at Porthaus before engaging a real enemy.
After said dummy has been discovered Stroheim decides to engage the enemy at Porthaus before forces can be concentrated. As enemy maneuvers around Weil become erratic Stroheim judges that his intel must be wrong and three Korps will be sufficient for the Weil area. He sends Sandmeier with the IV Armeekorps towards Stautz to help in the south and stays at Offen himself to keep both fronts in view.
Around midday two opposing forces clash somewhere in the area of Porthaus. As the encounter happened in the late part of the turn and both forces rolled high on their time to march, it will be a short battle. Andris’ III Armeekorps arrives first. This gives him choice of table edge but he also has to set up first. The battle will start on turn 10 of 15 for the day.
The battle will be subject of the next campaign post. Volley and Bayonet will make its debut on my blog as the rule set for the battlefield side of things.
Almost immediately after playing the Plancenoit scenario from the Bataille Empire rulebook (link), I converted the same scenario to 2×2 Napoleonics. The terrain remained the same but crammed into a 2 foot by 2 foot area. The armies were downscaled a bit without changing the ratios between both forces.
The Prussian divisions are deployed at the top from left to right: Prinz Wilhelm (cavalry), Losthin, Hiller. The French are similarly arrayed as in the prior report from left to right: with Domon and Subervie (Cavalry), Simmer, Jeanin.
The view from Plancenoit.
Some turns into the battle the infantry of Simmer and Jeanin try to hold off the Prussians. In the background Prussian divisions of Hacke and Ryssel arrive. French artillery has to keep the center together as a regiment retreats (lower left).
Left of this picture French hussars and lancers have trashed Prinz Wilhelm’s cavalry.
Roughly halftime in the scenario. Not much has changed which is by itself remarkeable. Two French infantry regiments and an artillery battery manage to hold of the bulk of the Prussian forces. Ryssel had to shift his forces to the open flank though to cover the hole left by Prinz Wilhelm.
The Guard arrives at Plancenoit. Other than in my last battle it is needed in this game.
With the last light of the day fading Tippelskirch’s infantry division arrives (upper left). The blue line denotes the imaginary front line. Observant generals will notice how the French position is held together by artillery batteries. Hardly a stable position. To the far right guards have charged the Prussians and stabilized at least the right a bit. Desperately needed as the right road is the only real avenue for the Prussians into Plancenoit.
At the end of the battle the Guard retired to defensive positions in Plancenoit. The two remaining units holding out against the Prussians will soon be surrounded and overrun.
After the battle I removed the French troops that would realistically be surrounded and straightened the Prussian lines. The French have precious little troops left for a defense. A French victory as they still hold the village but only a minor one as Prussians have free range of movement and enough troops to take Plancenoit. Only nightfall prevents them from exploiting the situation.
A very quick and interesting game as always with the 2×2 rules. There were some fortuitous rolls for the French. For example as a Prussian line regiment charged artillery in the open and the French won even with a hefty -3 modifier on their melee roll, keeping the line from buckling. As I classed all Landwehr as militia I finally discovered why they are so cheap. Militia costs half the points of a line regiment with next to no difference. The only difference is a negative rally modifier. This game showed how big the impact of this modifier is, as Disrupted Landwehr is notoriously difficult to rally (6 on 1d6 but only if an HQ is attached). The Landwehr was basically stuck in place and with so many of them needing the attention of both HQ’s.
With a less severe turn limit and a less congested battlefield the scenario seemed more fair than the original one. The French won again but this time it was way closer and there were some lucky rolls for the French.
One thing I noticed again, is the brutal effectiveness of ranged fire against cavalry. This is well balance with infantry and close range artillery fire. The problem is long range artillery fire which makes it easy to protect one’s flanks from cavalry with just an artillery unit.
As with several other modifiers that seem strange in 2×2 Napoleonics at first, there is usually some deeper thought or implication behind it.
Although I played Warhammer related tabletops in my childhood and adolescence my very first tabletop foray into Napoleonics was pretty late. In 2014 I played a Plancenoit scenario with Field of Glory: Napoleonics and a lot of paper counters and terrain. Here is the link, but be warned, its rather basic stuff.
I played countless battles since then but rarely historical scenarios. Their attention to detail and specific requirements of troops is not that interesting to me but for the sake of good old times I decided to revisit Plancenoit.
Bataille Empire (BE) has a scenario about the battle in the rulebook so I settled for it. This would give BE another chance to win me over.
The scenario begins at 6pm with several reinforcements still on their way. The deployment areas are relatively fixed but I decided that the French try to fend of the Prussians well before Plancenoit. With the reinforcement scheduled, a defense in depth might be possible.
The Prussians decided to lead with their Landwehr on the whole front to soften the enemy up. It would be up to the reinforcements to deliver the final blow. As the Prussians are the attackers the action is mainly depicted from their view.
Losthin’s and Hiller’s Assault columns are carefully advancing. French skirmishers and artillery take their toll. Red dice are hits. Infantry can suffer 4, cavalry 3 before they are packed into the box. Green/blue dice are half hits. BE calls these attrition but they are essentially half hits and an added layer of bookkeeping I find mostly unnecessary. I think attrition can be replaced by rolling a die roll. Even causes a hit, odd is ignored. This would add another roll to the procedure but it would declutter bookkeeping from attrition markers. The additional die could be of another color and rolled with the firing dice if attrition is scored which would not take too much time.
Some turns later Prinz Wilhelm’s attack on the Prussian right flank has been checked by far inferior (in numbers) enemy cavalry. Even worse, Jacquinot arrives with more cavalry (upper right) and supports Domon in holding up the Prussians. The two units with skattered base placement at the bottom are disordered Prussian units which retired from melee.
Hacke’s divison arrives on the far left on the march to Plancenoit. I don’t have enough Prussians so Hacke’s troops look suspiciously like Russians. Meanwhile the real Prussians are pushed back on the entire front.
Combined musketry and artillery ripped a hole in the Prussian center. This is not something the French can exploit as Hacke and Ryssel, who arrived with another infantry disivion, have more than enough troops to fill the gaps. But battlefield chaos and retreating troops keep them from doing so for a while. The French are content with redressing their lines and keeping the enemy at bay which is all they need to achieve at the end of this fateful day.
On the French side about halfway through the allotted turns Duhesme’s Young Guard arrives in Plancenoit. The enemy is still far from their objective.
Prinz Wilhelm’s cavalry has been pushed back to the edge of the map and Prussian reinforcements have no space to enter the battlefield. The entire Prussian right flank is up in the air for a turn but shortly after this picture opportunistic French Chasseurs are send packing by solid infantry formations.
It is the beginning of turn 6 of 7 in the scenario. I decided to end the battle here. Prussian losses are high (62% of of cohesion lost) while the French forces are still quite intact (33% of cohesion lost). What’s more is that the Prussians are still far away from Plancenoit, which is worth a big lump of victory points at the end of the game. There is no realistic chance they can win the scenario. This is partly due to the congested battlefield. About half the troops never saw battle and with the tight turn limit it is difficult to change that.
Part of the problem was the abysmal performance of Prinz Wilhelm’s cavalry on the Prussian right flank. They rolled badly turn after turn and a real threat to the French flank never materialized despite superior numbers. Subervie’s cavalry on the French side even stayed in reserve for the entire time as they were not needed.
French Guard reinforcements marching through Plancenoit as the day draws to a close. Waterloo is lost but the French retreat path has been secured.
The battle felt very one sided. Although Simmer and Jeanin had to give ground slowly at the end they still had more than enough fight in them to hold of the Prussians. Not a single Prussian unit ever advanced past their half of the battlefield! I don’t know exactly how much of this is down to scenario design or my unfamiliarity with the rules. In a previous scenario from the book (Jakubowo) I encountered the same problem though. Attacking is difficult and even more so with conscript level troops. This is neither a surprise nor unrealistic, but on both occasions I wondered about the very tight turn limit for the attacking force.
This is not a big issue as I’m not a fan of historical scenarios anyway. The rules are much more of a problem. Well, at least for what I want from them. Some parts are fiddly and long lists of detailed modifiers are time consuming, although they are all quite logical and easy to check. Add to that the reliance of 1d6 for almost every roll. Whether it is firing, melee, morale or maneuver tests. The high variance of 1d6 feels too random even with the ton of modifiers to add or subtract, yet the results are rather predictable as the casualty tables are designed that way.
The results still seem believable and detailed but the system does not feel fun to play for me. Especially as the turn sequence is geared towards individual divisions rather than IGOYOUGO which is more difficult to play solo.
If you like a bit more detailed rules that are still playable and you are not a solo player BE is probably way more interesting for you than it is for me. The very detailed army lists are a nice bonus. They go way deeper than the usual early-late distinction for the major powers and can be used for other rule systems easily.
With my recent interest in the “Allure of Simple Wargaming” I decided to give Neil Thomas’ rules Simplicity in Practice (SIP) from Battlegames Issue 23 a spin (available at Wargame Vault). The rules are 1 page long and probably the most simple ones I ever played Napoleonics with.
I also recently purchased the Adjutant Introuvable (AI). The author Nic Birt describes AI as an “auto strategy system for miniature wargames” (available at Wargame Vault as well). He has two videos (12) to explain the system and I liked what I saw, although the system is a bit limited. But more on that later.
As SIP has no command or friction mechanics whatsoever, I combined SIP with AI. Here are my findings.
As I’m currently reading about the early Italian campaigns I decided on French vs Austrians. In a new twist for me I actually had to choose sides so I took the Austrians. As AI always attacks and I heard attacking is quite difficult in SIP I gave the French a slight edge in forces.
French Army of Italy 10 Close Order Infantry 2 Light Infantry 3 Artillery 1 Heavy Cavalry 2 Dragoons
Austrian Army 9 Close Order Infantry 2 Light Infantry 2 Artillery 2 Heavy Cavalry 2 Light Cavalry
There is only one thing I changed regarding SIP. In the rules Light Cavalry and Dragoons can shoot. I don’t find this to be particularly realistic but kept it in as a kind of morale attack. Therefore I allowed heavy cavalry to shoot as well. What is modeled by this are cavalry skirmishes and the stress of infantrymen being close to enemy cavalry for an extended period of time. I thought about a mechanic like this for some time now, so here was a way to test it.
I deployed my forces first and designed a battle plan as per AI instructions.
Here is my deployment. What is difficult to see in this image is the hilly nature of the battlefield. I deployed one brigade with light cavalry support on each flank, two brigades in the center and my heavy cavalry is in reserve between the left flank and center.
A hasty battle plan. Here you can see the relevant hills as well. The Left flank had a commanding position for my artillery so I decided to defend the hill while light cavalry is ordered to probe. On the right flank the village and fordable river formed a strong defensive position. I decided to defend here as well.
My main thrust would be in the center, where I ordered one brigade to develop a strong position with artillery on the hill. The second brigade was ordered to use the road for a quick advance towards the central village. The force was relatively small but had artillery support from two sides and heavy cavalry in reserve.
I drew three of the nine available attack plans for AI and gave them points as per the rules to rank them in the order of validity. With two villages and very hilly terrain the scores were low but AI eventually decided to try a center attack. This means that the center would try to advance up into my deployment area while both flanks would advance as well but less aggressive and not as far. Given that the other two plans were involving aggressive attacks on the French left flank (French are top so right side in the image), this made sense. The flank was easy to defend for me, which AI noticed.
After rolling for troop assignments to each sector AI ended up with only 1 unit on its left flank (upper right in the image), basically denying the flank. This happened randomly but with my strong defenses again a good outcome for AI. Two artillery ended up on the French right flank which was a bit unfortunate but the angles should work out. In the center a balanced force of 3 infantry, 1 light infantry and 2 Dragoons would be available for the first push with a large reserve for the breakthrough.
French won initiative and would go first every turn. AI checks the tactics used in each sector (flanks and center) every turn and is at times careful and aggressive. There are guidelines how to interpret the rolled results but overall these are very careful. Even in the most aggressive setting “charge” units should only attack if their chance of success would be at least even. This is problematic as a real generals sometimes ordered costly attacks in the hopes to gain a better position in the long run. I tried to stay true to AI’s recommendations though melee attackers in SIP is rarely at advantage.
As I’m effectively playing as the Austrians the battle will be told from my perspective only.
Left flank: My artillery deployed in a way to reach up to the village in the center (upper left).
Center: My brigade on attack order in the foreground using the road to advance. To the left next to the heavy cavalry reserve you can see a lone rider. That’s me!
Right flank: This flank was easy defend even before AI deployed. To the left you can see light infantry holding a wooded area which connects my flank to the center.
Turn 3 left flank: The enemy steadily advances while my artillery bombards enemy Dragoons.
Turn 3 center: On the right my brigade has reached its designated position on the hill and artillery is about to unlimber. My other brigade is checked early by enemy Dragoons. Overall my deployment was a bit shoddy and gave the French time to close quickly. The speed of Dragoons certainly helped. This turn the French also released a limited amount of reserves to support the push. With AI you have to roll every turn if reserves are released and to what amount.
Turn 4 center: A view from the central hill. My artillery deployed and help to disperse light infantry in front of it. The French struggle to redress the lines.
Turn 5 left flank: By turn 5 the battle is in full swing. The enemy deployed his artillery in support and blasts my left flank. I don’t have enough forces to push aggressively.
Turn 5 between left flank and center: The quick push by enemy Dragoons is checked in turn by my infantry and artillery. The French cannot charge as the odds would be bad in a frontal charge.
Turn 5 center: Thick clouds of smoke envelop the center as the attritional firefight begins. The situation looks stable for me but my frontline troops are suffering and my line will be stretched thin soon if I can’t do anything about it. Meanwhile the French still have reserve forces in the back.
Turn 5 right flank: After initial defense my forces are ordered forward in a flanking move. A lone enemy line infantry unit holds the woods.
Turn 8 left flank: This flank gives under constant artillery fire and a bold infantry charge. I’m scrambling to reform my line around my cavalry reserve (just right out of the image).
Turn 8 a general’s view: The brigade once ordered to capture the central village has lost another unit. The center is beginning to look thin. In the distance you can catch a glimpse of enemy Dragoons retiring. They have taken too many hits and are relegated to a support role.
Turn 8 center: Both sides are losing units but the French keep coming (from reserve).
Turn 8 right flank: The French have retired behind the river and reinforced this sector with their last reserve. Both sides are maneuvering into firing positions.
Turn 10 left flank viewed from general: The game ended on turn 10. Here you can see my reformed line with reserve cavalry. The Cuirassiers charged this turn but were beaten back by canister fire.
Turn 10 center: The remnants of my center brigade turn and run. This is the reason I ended the game. With a collapsed center the Austrian position becomes untenable. As you can see there are still more than enough French soldiers behind the wall of smoke.
Turn 10 right flank: Here I am still in a good position. My troops in the foreground are fresh and most enemy units are worn down and close to breaking. Though with a broken center both flanks will be isolated and defeated in detail.
Both sides lost 4 units out of 15 (without artillery) and had multiple units low on hits. As the Austrian cavalry reserve is still fresh I judged this battle to be a clean French victory but not one that is strategically decisive.
Thoughts on Simplicity in Practice
I think, the system does what it sets out to do. After a few turns I memorized the important stats and the game flowed quickly. Melee takes more looking up as it has a list of modifiers you have to read carefully. It may be due to the larger number of units I deployed but melee seems almost suicidal for the attack in most situations. Modifiers have a massive impact on the result and the outcome is massive as well. In part this does reflect my reading but it is too hard to pull off. You would need a entire line of light infantry to soften up the enemy and then coordinate a fall back of the light infantry and an advance into melee with line infantry along the entire line. Even then your chances seem about even at best. All in all the game felt more 18th century than Napoleonic. I think at the battalion/regiment level formations and skirmishing are almost necessary to model in your rules in order to see Napoleonic tactics employed on the battlefield.
This criticism should not detract from the fact that SIP is a good and elegant set of rules in my opinion. Movement works is dead simple but works very well. It takes some time playing to see that it is actually difficult to extricate units from firefights. All because the movement rules make sense and not because added mechanics like disruption are used. The rules have several such gems of design. Together with the scenarios presented in the surrounding issues of the Battlegames magazine and the article in volume 22 about the genesis and use of simple rule sets you get quite a bit of material.
Thoughts on Adjutant Introuvable
An interesting system albeit limited. It emphasizes the general plan and deployment much more than actual gameplay. It gave a weighted and believable plan of attack but only if you play accordingly and give the system some leeway. It also can only attack. A defending enemy can easily played without AI of course but that’s not what I meant. Almost all its strategies are rather strong attacks and the tactical strategies cannot switch to retiring if an attack fails. With the terrain set up as is the better strategy would have been to use the central village as strongpoint.
Again, this critique should not detract from AI’s value. It delivered a good simulation of the command of an army where not everything goes like planned and troops are at times rather plodding, at other time surprisingly quick. I have a feeling that much hinges on the amount of troops, the battlefield terrain and especially the rules used. I will definitely give AI another try with another set of rules.
Thoughts on the Combination
During the game I was in the commander’s mindset of how and where to use my forces and saw with desperation how my situation got progressively worse. I was a bit dismayed by the tactical limitations of SIP in regards to attacking. In hindsight I see this battle in a different light. It was in essence quite Napoleonic in that two plans clashed with each other and all the commanders could do is use reserves to sway the battle in their favor. The French one was larger and released at the right time, mine was not.
One of the reasons I posted less in 2020 was my ongoing work on a simple rule set for space combat. I made quite a bit of progress. Most of the rules are written down and several iterations have been tested. I got stuck with some mechanics and took a long break. With the last test game I think I got some major problems ironed out.
Project Paradigm is a working title. The game aims to give a system generic enough to use with any known science fiction background material or without any. It puts emphasis on maneuver and tactics instead of detailed ship systems. So many space combat games I played focus heavily on ship construction and detailed damage but are surprisingly light on tactical gameplay. You mostly line the fleets up and shoot everything at one enemy with some maneuvering in between.
Of course there is vector movement to make things more interesting or the tons of depth of Starfleet Battles. The latter and its cousin Federation Commander are very much about interesting tactical decisions but still way to complicated for me. This is partly because I play mostly solo and you always have to control double the forces when doing so.
After years of Napoleonic gaming I saw that it is possible to develop simple mechanics which are about the interplay of units and tactics rather detailed ship status sheets or complex rules. My rules lose the details much like a high level historical wargame loses detail. You are the Admiral in charge of a small task force and it is not your job to target individual weapons in different firing modes. It is your job to maneuver your assets and determine where firepower should be concentrated.
The battle of Anselm
I used some counters I drew to try out Battlefleet Gothic (which I still have to do). The stats for each ship are the generic test stats used to design the rules and are based on strong frontal weapons rather than broadsides like the source material. Explanations are under each picture:
The Imperial fleet has two battleships in the center flanked by two groups. Two frigate groups (left) and a column of three cruisers (right).
The Chaos fleet has the same composition but chose a different formation. All their firepower is concentrated in a deathball with the battleships in the rear. Frigates flank the force.
This is the left part of the 3’x3′ mat with the planet Anselm in the center (impassable terrain in the basic rules). Both fleets chose to set up on one half of the mat.
After turn two Chaos threw their cruisers forward and concentrated their firepower on the enemy battleships. The Imperials are setting up flanking fire and already stripped the Chaos cruiser Styx of its shields (upper center). Blue dice are remaining shields, red dice are remaining hull points. No dice means the hull/shields is undamaged.
Close up one turn later. The Styx in the center regenerated some of their shields. This is an important aspect in the rules. It means that getting your ships out of the action to regenerate shields is a valid tactic. With the help of the cruiser Murder and long range battleship fire the Imperial battleship Retribution (between the Chaos ships) loses shields and takes three points of damage. This is dangerous as the ship will be counted as crippled on 6 hull points remaining and will have weaker weapons, shield regeneration and maneuvering thereafter.
After turn 4 the Retribution managed to thrust past most of the enemy ships reducing incoming fire (top left). It has some shields again but the mighty enemy battleships Acheron and Desolator are are still in arc and range. These battleships have a turn rate of 45° but can only turn once every two turns. The turning cool down is marked by the white dice. As you can see the big lumbering battleships are on cool down and will pass each other unleashing their less powerful but still formidable broadside weapons.
Meanwhile Imperial cruisers Dictator and Dauntless bring down the Styx (left with all the red dice as explosions) with concentrated fire. The Gothic, another cruiser swings wide around the planet (right).
Some time later: Imperial battleships passed the enemy on their starboard and received withering fire. The Retribution is crippled but not dead thanks to good maneuvering. The enemy cannot concentrate on it and shield regeneration keeps it alive. The firepower the Retribution was spared by is now hitting its sister ship the Overlord. It and the Chaos battleship Desolator are beginning to take hull damage.
The battle has been split in two. In a smaller engagement close to the Imperial set up area the Dauntless and Dictator are working in tandem to take out the cruiser Murder. As you can see Chaos has more ships present but the Imperials maneuvered better and the Murder could not bring to bear its powerful frontal weapons.
About halfway through the battle (15 turn limit), Chaos scores their first kill. A group of Firestorm frigates are destroyed. The fact that Chaos used their battleships for this kill helps the Imperial battleships to gain distance and regenerate shields. The Gothic completed its circle around the planet and pours fire into the nearly crippled Desolator (lower left).
The overall situation one turn later. Both Imperial battleships are crippled (top) as well as a cruiser (lower right). Chaos is worse off though. The Desolator is crippled and two cruisers are lost in contrast to only one frigate group. In the bottom left you can see Chaos Idolator frigates chasing the crippled cruiser. As cruiser and battleship stats I am using have no rear weapons it is a valid tactic to harass bigger ships with nimble frigates from the rear.
The second half of the battle begins with the Imperials concentrating all their firepower on the Desolator. It buckles under the massive barrage and breaks in half. Chaos is now seriously outgunned.
Concentrating firepower is a valid and necessary tactic in the rules but it also comes with a disadvantage. The first ship can fire normally in a turn but subsequent attacks on the same enemy are increasingly more difficult. Huge swathes of space are ablaze with nuclear explosions, laser fire and counter measures which makes it harder and harder to detect and hit the enemy effectively. The rules for this are dead simple but the effect is great. You have to make the difficult decision whether to bring down an enemy but wasting a lot of firepower or to split firepower damaging many vessels only a bit but dealing more damage overall.
In revenge for the Desolator the Chaos cruiser Slaughter maneuvers into the rear of the Overlord and finally penetrates all shields and armor of the damaged giant. With a big explosion the battleship rips apart, all hands lost.
The Slaughter is not finished though. Near the end of the battle it pushes its engines and lays into the crippled Dauntless coming around Anselm. The cruiser stands no chance and it wreck will continue to drift in orbit for month before finally slipping into the atmosphere and burning up.
Although the Slaughter managed to correct the tally somewhat the overall battle is a clear victory for the Imperial fleet. They inflicted more losses and would be in a good position to destroy the remaining Chaos forces. As you can see the Retribution, one of the first ships taking damage is still around crippled with 8 out of 12 shields regenerated.
I am satisfied with the result. It was fun, easy to play and had many interesting decisions. Even without a particular scenario or lots of terrain the rules delivered what I hoped for, although the new mechanics I tested are rather dice heavy. I rolled upwards of 40 dice in one side’s turn which takes time. But it also evens the odds quite a bit which is necessary to make tactical decisions meaningful.
There is still a lot of work to do with testing, balancing and scenario design. I tried a scenario generator this year but it failed to deliver interesting narratives so I will probably hand craft them.
I recently read an entry on SOUND OFFICERS CALL! blog about simple wargames. I really liked the reflections on why and how simple wargames appeal to people. The author goes on and plays some of the simple rule sets and gives his feedback. An approach which I and others have done several times as well and which I find fascinating to read about.
I’m leaning to simpler rules more and more albeit for different reasons so I thought I chime in with one or two battle reports myself. Now, what is a simple rule set? We will probably all agree that One-Hour Wargames are simple rules but when it comes to Black Powder some would not agree.
I played the same scenario with different rules several times and Black Powder was competing against Bataille Empire and General d’Armee among others. Napoleonic Black Powder always did it for me. Other rule sets took longer because of more realistic rules but the results weren’t more realistic or more satisfying.
That said I put quite a bit of work into Black Powder house rules which make it play that way. Out of the box the rules have some serious problems which is the sole reason some people hat them. Sadly the 2nd Edition was an utter disappointment in that direction as next to nothing was changed.
My theory here is that with careful preparation and tweaking you can mold Black Powder Napoleonic into a rule set that is simple to play (after getting used to it), quick and feels believable. A big part of the latter is the simple but elegant command and control mechanism which is lacking in some many (simple) rules. It has actually become difficult for me to play any Napoleonic set without some friction modeled nowadays.
To see if I can mirror a simple wargaming battle report we have to look at the scenario and rules before the battle commences.
I decided on the One-Hour Wargame scenario Pitched Battle (2) like the Simple Wargame #4 report. This will give me the same army sizes and I also decided to field the exact same composition without any national special rules. This makes possible balance problems less severe. The Austrians are the red army, the French take the blue side. Both armies consist of 3 line infantry, 1 light infantry, 1 medium cavalry (Dragoons), 1 foot artillery and one General SR 8.
Concerning the troops I decided to combine different approaches. The Hail Whoever house rules from Camp Cromwell simplify the troop stats by (mostly) getting rid of morale saves and adding more stamina points across the board. This shaves off another set of dice rolls in combat which will saves time as well. Artillery is less deadly with these modifications due to the save modifiers it normally has. This is actually a good thing as artillery was too strong in vanilla Black Powder.
I also took a page from the Blücher rules regarding skirmishing. Instead of one value for shooting which is used for close and long range, infantry now has volley (close) and skirmishing (long) values. Many extra rules regarding skirmishing (mixed formations, sharpshooters, etc.) are thrown out of the window, making the game simpler but actually not less detailed.
Here are the stat lines I’m using for 6mm figures with a unit width of 8cm (in line). Measurements are roughly 6″ to 4 cm. I use a measuring stick with 4 cm segemnts to further speed up gameplay. Infantry units are probably regiments in this scale:
Line/Light Infantry Move 8 cm H-t-H 4 Shoot 4/4 (cm/dice volley) 8/2 (cm/dice skirmish) +1 to skirmish dice if light Morale – (a positive modifier like assault column will still result in a 6+ save) Stamina 6 Light Infantry may use skirmish formation
Cavalry Move 12 cm H-t-H 5, 6 or 7 for light, medium or heavy cavalry Shoot – Morale – Stamina 6
I have more stats drafted for other troops like conscripts, horse artillery and elites but this will do. With this out of the way let us focus on other areas of Black Powder I changed.
The sequence of play has been simply reordered to address the problem that infantry can move up to defenders and shoot at them before they receive return fire: 1. Shooting 2. Command 3. Hand-to-Hand
Command is tweaked to even out the statistical odds. Rolls of command or 1 less gives one move, rolls of 2 or 3 less gives two moves and anything less gives three moves. Follow me orders from commanders are not used as these are highly unrealistic and silly.
Firing modifiers are based on the 2nd Edition. So no positive modifier for skirmishers. I also got rid of all range modifiers as these are already factored into the dice. Another modifier table cut in half.
When it comes to formations the rules have to be revised to reflect two different shooting values: Attack Column: 2 volley / 2 skirmish (3 if light) Square: 1 volley per face / 0 skirmish Buildings: 2 volley per face / 1 skirmish per face
Note that attack columns retain their skirmish value. This makes it actually possible to use them historically by softening up the enemy with the skirmisher cloud before charging.
The movement and shooting ranges above are tried and tested but are vastly different from the original rules / scenario conditions as I play on a small table with small unit footprints. Therefore I have to scale everything accordingly.
In the Horse and Musket rules of One-Hour Wargames the slowest unit can cross the entire table in 6 moves. Due to command rolls units in Black Powder have a variable move. With a command rating of 8 and ignoring any blunders this gives us 1.3 moves on average. Multiplied with the movement distance of the slowest unit (see above) and again multiplied by the number of turns a One-Hour-Wargame unit needs to cross gives us the table size we need.
8 cm x 1.3 x 6 = 62.4 cm rounded to 63 cm
For terrain scaling this gives me a factor of 1″ to 1.75 cm. I only need 6″ and 12″ measurements for terrain and deployment which translates to 10.5 and 21 cm respectively.
To check if this is valid we cross check with the army width. If I would deploy 6 infantry corner to corner I would field a formation 8 cm x 6 = 48 cm. This give me an army frontage that roughly fits with the average of the original rules.
The turn limit of 15 stays in effect. The scenario does not put much more time pressure on one side or the other so even if the number is wrong it won’t affect the outcome too much.
Battle Report 1
The battlefield and set-up. Austrians to the north, French to the south. Images will generally be takes from the French side. This should be known as my trademark already 😉 Yellow markers are for disruptions, red dice are for hits lost and red markers are for shaken units.
Austrians took the hill (far back) and try to march a flanking force around to the crossroads (right) covered by their Dragoons. The French advanced steadily, deployed into assault columns and blasted the Dragoons with artillery. Austrian artillery had managed to throw the light infantry into disarray though, which would hamper the assault on the hill.
More problems for the French. Early assaults were beaten back and French Dragoons are apparently not what they once were. They charged their disrupted counterparts and broke on first contact. The Austrians further complicated the situation by continuing the on board flank march to the crossroads (far right).
The attack on the hill was stuck.
Note the absence of French troops near the crossroads. With flanking fire/charges the Austrians absolutely obliterated their enemy. After a mere 6 turns the French had to retreat. With their cavalry lost early in the battle the Austrian cavalry was free to roam and the battle ended in a complete and utter French defeat. Cannons, eagles and prisoners were captured a plenty.
The Questions 1
How long did it take to play: 1 hour. I did consult the rules for post melee movement once and looked up a modifier or two.
What was the scenario: Scenario #2 Pitched Battle from One-Hour Wargames.
What happened, who won: The French neglected the crossroads while the Austrians performed a battlefield flank march towards it. This brought the French into a precarious position early on. After their Dragoons broke, one unit after another tumbled. With no chance to win, the battle ended on turn 6 with a major Austrian victory. A good example of two battle plans clashing with one being superior.
Extraordinary Events: The bad morale roll of the Dragoons was unfortunate but as mentioned this was a battle of two plans. To see this in such a small game was unexpected and quite nice. The on table flank march was also quite a cool thing to see. It confirmed my good scaling efforts.
Did you enjoy the game: I watched in horror as one of the two armies simply fell apart! It was very unexpected but felt realistic and fun. Some problems with the rules presented themselves but I decided that I needed more data before meddling.
Battle Report 2
I played the same scenario with the same troops again but changed the battle plans.
French forces in a dense formation that can swing to either flank or stay center. Dragoons in reserve (concerned about their morale ;).
Austrians deploy similar to game one but in lines and with their artillery in a more central position. I made a judgement call to at least use some period tactic constraints so the French favored assault columns and the Austrians lines.
Austrians had marvelous command rolls and took the opportunity to advance far with one of their columns. The French were lucky as well and began to surround the column. The image shows what I like about Black Powder. Some games are slow, some are basically all action from turn 1 on.
Austrians managed to support their column with a regiment from the hill (left). They also formed a line in the center. The French decided to ignore the Austrian skirmishers as the Dragoons could counter them effectively. Instead they tried to shift their central infantry to the sides. On the right the French commander rolled a blunder and the assault column awkwardly wedged in between skirmishers and the enemy.
After failed Austrian command rolls the French disrupted the Austrian lines with musketry and double charged on both flanks. The images show the moment of contact. This looked very grim for the overextending Austrians and like textbook for the French.
And here is the result. On the left closing fire was telling but then the Austrians lost heart and fled the field. On the right their brothers in arms not only held but broke one French column entirely. Disaster averted for the soldiers in white.
After the intense combat of the first turns the battle entered a lull. Both commanders tried to organize their mauled troops but only minor moves were made. Meanwhile the artillery of both sides blasted away turn after turn.
After the central Austrian light regiment quit the field the Austrian commander unleashed the cavalry reserve. French Dragoons counter-charged. This proved to be another pivotal moment and the Austrians won. This split the French in half which made command of the light infantry on the right almost impossible. What is it with French Dragoons these days?
The French commander rode to the right flank after a couple of uneventful turns but the Austrian commander had already rallied his forces. He would rally his Dragoons as well and overwhelm the French at the crossroads on the last turn of the game.
Meanwhile artillery dispersed one infantry regiment on each side. The only possibility to thwart an Austrian victory would be to throw the last French assault column up the hill to contest it. The roll needed to be a 6 or less on 2d6, it was a 7. A hard fought last minute win by the Austrians.
The Questions 2
How long did it take to play: 1 hour and 20 minutes. The game felt much longer and tense then the one before but was only 20 minutes longer in time. This is a good sign in my book. I looked up more post melee movement stuff. I need to put reminders on the QRS sheet to speed up gameplay.
What was the scenario: Scenario #2 Pitched Battle from One-Hour Wargames.
What happened, who won: Both forces started with very good command rolls which led to the Austrians advancing too far and the French encircling them. Both forces fought tooth and nail for every bit of real estate. Even though the Austrians saw a couple of turns with no action at all due to failed command rolls, their cavalry reserve was more successful. They eventually split the French in two forces making French unified command difficult. The French needed 1 less on their last command roll to contest the hill in turn 15. A close and bloody Austrian victory. Both sides lost three units.
Extraordinary Events: Due to command rolls the battle dynamic was great. An intense early game with sweeping maneuvers, a lull in the middle and small desperate actions in the end. French command produced 3 blunders which hindered them to develop their right flank.
Did you enjoy the game: There were many turns where tactical challenges had to be solved. We also saw the use of period tactics multiple times like softening up the enemy line and charging in with assault columns. This game also proved that I have to iron out some kinks. Overall a fun and insightful game.
With two games in about 2 and a half hours I think my quick and simple Black Powder experiment was a success. Games will obviously last longer with more units per side. But my thesis holds true, that good preparation can speed up gameplay and make it more satisfying.
I will address squares, post melee movement, artillery, shooting modifiers and initiative movement with what I have learned from these two battles. I sketched out some subtle national differences that I have to test as well.
Quite some time ago I gave the free rule set 2×2 Napolenoics a try. It is a set geared towards corps battles in 2mm on a 2′ by 2′ table. Perfect for my table size constraints and preferences. It also features the most restrictive pinning and disruption rules I have seen in rules for the period. If your infantry fires it is basically stuck in place unless there is no enemy around and it manages to rally (difficult). The authors call this the glue of war and it makes you think twice where and when to commit. It also makes reinforcements more important as you cannot simply shift some units to redress the line.
I can understand that such concepts are less strict in commercial rules as I think many players don’t like to lose control over their troops. When playing 2×2 it takes quite a bit getting used to it. My previous test where positive but the rules were unclear in some cases. The current version of the rules is much better though.
In fact I enjoyed the battles, the learning experience and different take on the period so much, I played three battles in an evening.
As these were test games and I didn’t want to label my troops again, I used C&C Napoleonics blocks as troops. The armies stayed the same for all three games:
French Army 1 HQ 1 Light infantry 9 Infantry 2 Light cavalry 2 Heavy cavalry 1 Foot artillery
Austrian Army 1 HQ 1 Light Infantry 6 Large infantry 4 Large light Cavalry 1 Horse artillery 1 Foot artillery
Th first table was deliberately plain in order to get acquainted with the rules again. Austrians were the attackers and brought light cavalry in via the flank.
The French weighted their right flank with heavy cavalry. Due to the lack of distinct terrain features the battle needed some time to find its frontlines and focal points
Every green marker shows a pinned unit (can pivot but not move otherwise). Every green marker with a yellow stripe shos a disrupted unit (immobile and weakened). As you can see the entire conflict bogged down to lines of troops stuck in. Only reserves and cavalry can move freely at this point and they decided the game. Combined infantry and cavalry attacks on the right flank secured a French victory.
Unfortunately, I didn’t take pictures of the second battle. It featured a good central position the Austrians managed to secure. Woods on one side where the Jägers and Grenz infantry shined and a village on a hill on the other side of the main road. The French committed their forces piecemeal while their cavalry tied up some forces on the flank. An Austrian counterattack in the center broke the French.
With every battle I added more terrain to the table. The rules suggest that you might want to go overboard as the scale of the game is quite large. The Field of Glory: Napoleonics terrain generator was used for every table.
In this battle the Austrians had an advantage in forces early on, as their reinforcement rolls were better. The French quickly managed to secure the village and hill as perfect defensive position though. The Austrians made the judgement call to challenge the position before more enemies arrive.
The French managed to hold on and began flanking maneuvers on both flanks while the center was pinned in place.
The end of the game with another French victory. While the Austrians could stem the bleeding to their right, French Cuirassiers and punched through from the left and scored the final blows.
I had a blast. This rule set is a hidden gem! I still made some mistakes and I’m still learning how to play strategically. For these quite simple rules, there is a lot to unpack. Some modifiers seem to make no sense at all at first but when you play the game they facilitate a game that makes sense.
There is no direct command and control friction, only rally rolls tied to your HQ. Rallying didn’t have that much impact on my games but what strategic decision making did matter. More so than in many other games. Where it might be costly to order a concentrated attack in Black Powder, Blücher or Bloody Big Battles, it can outright cost you the game in 2×2 Napoleonics because your infantry will get pinned and cannot retreat at will for a long time.
This glue of war, as the authors call it makes the game very interesting for me. I can see that it would cause problems with rulesets that have a long playing time (2×2 Napleonics plays very fast). No turn limit or geographic victory conditions can also cause problems of very static games against another human opponent.
I still have a bunch of 2mm stuff from Irregular Miniatures which now have a new purpose. I’m basing them for 2×2 Napoleonics to play some quicker battles with.
Rules wise I think most things make sense. Light infantry and artillery is very weak in melee to the point that they seem too much trouble to field in an army. I can live with cutting lights as units are brigades and skirmishing is beyond the scale and complexity of the game. This would mean that woods are basically impassible terrain though. Artillery could get a better melee modifier if assaulted frontally.
I will draft some house rules and test some out in the next battle.