Campaign Map
The
campaign opens in the north
1st
Austrian army attack the northern border town of Dingolfing.
1st
Austrian army – attack Dingolfing
2nd
Austrian army – hold centre, east of border
3rd
Austrian army – hold south, east of border
7th
French army – in and around Dingolfing
8th
French army – hold Reisbach
9th French army – hold Muhldorf
Start of battle of Dingolfing
Most of the
French are deployed west of Dingolfing
This is for
ease of supply
19th
Bavarian corps in reserve the top right
20th
Bavarian corps in and around Dingolfing
21st
Bavarian corps in reserve top left
The
Austrians are deployed out of artillery range
1st
corps on the right
2nd
corps in the centre
3rd
corps on the left
Austrians win battle of Dingolfing
1st
Austrian corps attack through the woods on the right
Schwarzenberg
has taken half of 2nd corps to support this attack
They break
19th Bavarian corps and then swing left to outflank the town
2nd
Austrian corps artillery fire on the town, supported by half the infantry
Only when
the garrison is weakened, do the infantry advance and skirmish
No attempt
is made to attack the town until the defenders withdraw
3rd
Austrian corps have orders to pin 31st Bavarian corps
Their
artillery are deployed on the right
The
intention is to create a gap between the woods and the town
Towards the
end of the battle their jager brigade enter the woods
By
nightfall the Austrians have taken the town and broken the French right
With half
of his army in retreat, Massena orders a general retreat.
The French
have lost 12 infantry, 3 cavalry and 1 artillery casualties (5100 men)
The
Austrians have lost 2 infantry and 2 cavalry casualties (1000 men)
Comment
Normally we
accept the outcome of each wargame, no matter how it affects the campaign
This goes
back to the PBEM campaign, when it seemed like cheating not to do so
However it
does seem silly to ruin a whole campaign phase, just because of bad dice rolls
And this can
happen more often with our new rules which rely heavily on the luck of the
dice.
This game
was a good example of how things can go wrong.
Each
campaign phase is based on one side crossing the regional border to attack
It is
important that the attacker wins the first three battles, or at least two of
them
Otherwise
he has to retreat and the campaign is at an end
The
campaign should provide six battles, one for each town
So one
which produced just one or two would be disappointing
Therefore
the first battle of a campaign is particularly important
A defeat
for the aggressor makes it hard to justify the winner retreating
If it is
the third battle, and the attacker has won the first two, it retreat is
reasonable
The first
time we wargamed Dingolfing everything went wrong right from the start
On move
three the Austrians had advanced within artillery range
The first
shot fired by the Bavarian gunners (rolled a 6) hit Austrian gunners.
The
Bavarians failed their morale test (rolled a 1) and they routed
A nearby
infantry brigade had to test, failed (rolled a 2) and also routed
Without
artillery that Austrian corps would find it difficult to continue to attack
To recover
the situation they ordered their cavalry to charge the enemy guns
This is
always risky, particularly if the guns have their own cavalry support
The
Bavarian gunners hit the charging cavalry (rolled a 4)
The cavalry
failed their morale and halted disordered
The
Bavarian cavalry charged and caused more casualties
The
Austrian cavalry failed their morale test (rolled 3) and also routed
The
Austrian corps now had no cavalry or artillery, and only three infantry
brigades
The
Austrian attack moved to the opposite flank
They had a
6 pdr gun, which cannot hit enemy artillery at long range
So once
more their cavalry was sent to removed the enemy gunners
They
received fire at short range (rolled 5) and had to test their morale
They rolled
1, and routed without any help from the Bavarian cavalry
Meanwhile
the other two Austrian corps artillery were firing on the enemy gunners
Counter
battery fire requires a roll of 6 for a hit, 5 or 6 for 12 pdr guns
The
Bavarian 12 pdr battery in the centre rolled 5, which was a hit
The
Austrian gunners tested their morale (rolled 1) and routed
At the
start of move 6 the game was half way through
The
Austrians had lost two artillery batteries and two cavalry brigades
It was
clearly impossible to continue to attack
It was bad
enough that the aggressors had lost the first battle of the campaign
Worse still
their cavalry and artillery would start all future games with 10% casualties
It is
really important to accept setbacks in a wargame, particularly dice
Otherwise
what is the point of Wargaming?
However
this defeat would, in effect, end the whole campaign phase
We solved
the problem by accepting that Jan had won the wargame
But we
would ignore the rest and refight the wargame for the campaign
The battle
report above is the result of that refight
The
Austrians won, as they needed to do
However we both felt very guilty “cheating” the campaign!
Thistlebarrow,
ReplyDeleteI really enjoyed the longer, more detailed report on your 1813 Campaign blog.
I can see how the result could have stopped your campaign in its tracks … but sometimes things do go wrong, and I think that you made the right decision. Perhaps the French might recover and give the Austrians a bloody nose, especially if the latter overstretch themselves during the next couple of turns.
Good luck with your new campaign.
Bob
Hi Bob
DeleteNice to hear from you again, I hope you are feeling a little better.
As you know, all of my campaign phases are designed the same. They rely on the attackers winning at least two of the three opening battles, and the defenders retreating to provide another three battles. A total defeat for the attackers would be similar to Napoleon being decisively defeat by the Prussians at Ligny. It would have been the end of the campaign and there would not have been a battle at Waterloo. Despite the logic of my decision, it still felt wrong to ignore the outcome of the first game.
best regards
Paul
Thistlebarrow -
ReplyDeleteIt is hard to accept an unexpected outcome that compromises the integrity of the narrative imagined - and equally hard, for other reasons, to set aside that outcome. Over the years, I have concluded that it is better to accept the result, and see where that leads, even if it means altering for the nonce the parameters of the campaign.
For an example, in my First Blacklands (Balkans) War, the Battle of Stalacz ended with the 52,000-strong Turcowaz II Army's victory against 71,000 Bejelan-Chervenian (Serbian-Romanian) combined army that threw the whole war into a completely unforeseen narrative path. By the end of the second week of the war, two of the Allied invading armies had been completely repulsed (for the time being), and Turcowaz was able to carry the fight into the territories of a third.
I'm glad it did. It made for a much more interesting and eventful story. The overall result was far from my expectation at the beginning of the whole thing! As I intended to run a second Blacklands war (based on the Balkans wars) I am faced with the question:
(a) Run a 'one-and-a-halfth' Blacklands War and hope THIS time it goes 'per book'?
(b) Run the second Blacklands war with the belligerents cognate with those of the Second Balkans, with the Rhum-Baba (Romanians) coming in on against Chervenia (Bulgaria).
This second war would not look much like the Second Balkans, but ... that might be well and good!
Mind you: it is nice to see the Austrians handing out a few licks of their own!
Cheers,
Ion
Hi AP
DeleteI think it depends on the purpose of the campaign. If you are recreating a historical campaign, or creating a one off campaign, then it is important to accept the outcome of each battle/wargame. In fact a serious setback early in the campaign may well make it more interesting.
However my 1813 campaign was created to provide us with a never ending series of interesting battles to wargame. Each phase of the campaign is to take a regional city, and in doing so provide (usually) six battles to wargame. It is important that the attackers gain an initial victory, otherwise they would have to abandon the whole campaign phase.
It sounds like your Blacklands (Balkans) War is not designed just to provide battles to wargame. With such a campaign the work required to produce maps and orders of battle is not wasted if the campaign comes to an untimely end - you can always refight it which would provide an new set of objectives.
The important thing is that the campaign provides a setting for each of the battles, and a strategic as well as a tactical objective. Having fought campaign wargames for many years I could never go back to "one off" wargames.
regards
Paul