Command and Control

 

French (blue) and Russian (green) armies advance to contact

One of the most important elements of our wargame is command and control.  It has taken many years to develop the current system, and I have no doubt it will continue to develop in the future.

Each game has three objectives, situated in the centre of the table.  In this game the hill on the left, the woods in the centre and the hill on the right.   Each side has an army of three corps.   One corps per side is allocated one of those objectives.

There are four commanders per side, one commander in chief (CinC) and three corps commanders.   Each commander has a chip with either C or a (corps) number.   All of the chips are placed in a bag, and drawn one at a time.   The commander represented by the chip issues orders and goes through the move,fire, melee, morale sequence for his corps.  When all chips have been drawn, and all corps had their turn, the chips are returned to the bag and the next turn starts.

The role of the corps commander is obvious.   He must be within 12” of each brigade to issue orders, if beyond that range they can defend themselves, but not move or attack.   If he is within 4” of a brigade they get  plus 1 on morale tests.   Each square is 12”, so the corps commander is encouraged to keep his brigades close together, but also position himself within 4” of any brigade likely to have to test their morale.   It is not always possible to do both.

It took a lot of trial and error to decide how best to use the CinC.   When I wrote the rules his task was to issue orders to each corps commander, who then had to follow them to the best of their ability.   His movement rate is 16” and due to the width of the table is was pretty well impossible to change more than one or two corps orders during the game of 12 moves.

We have now refined his role to allow him to have a much more vital role.  Any brigade within 4” will add plus 1 to their morale test (but only if their corps commander is not already doing so).   The CinC can take command of any brigade within 4” and can move them from one corps area to another.   He can also create a reserve before the game starts, but must remain within 4” of each brigade as long as he wants to issue orders.

CinC supports Russian corps on the right

The CinC has created a reserve of one artillery and two infantry brigades from the corps in the centre.   He remained with that corps until they captured the woods in the centre.   He then took his reserve to the right and supported the attack on the hill.   This is a good example of the role of the CinC in our game.

Close up of attack on the hill 

The corps commander is in the centre, at the foot of the hill.   He is within 4” of the brigade still fighting on the hill, He is also within 12” of the other three infantry brigades, plus the cavalry, who have rallied and are coming forward to support the attack on the hill.   His artillery is on the right, preventing a flank attack.   He is about to lose the hill because there are three French brigades attacking his remaining one brigade.

The CinC is approaching from the left.   His artillery is in support, but cannot fire on the hill unless the French line the edge facing them.   The two infantry brigades are about to attack.   The leading one will support the melee, and the other one will support.   The CinC is within 4” of both infantry brigades and the artillery.

Our command and control provides the type of wargame we like to play.   Each commander plays an important role, but not a critical one.   The player always has to ensure that he is within 12” of all six of his brigades, or lose control of them.   He can help morale of one or more brigades by moving the commander within 4”, but only at the risk of moving out of 12” of his furthest brigade.

More important it gives a vital role to the CinC.   He can create a reserve by taking brigades from all three corps, and placing them in position to support his battle plan.   However it  must be kept in close contact with the CinC figure always within 4” of all brigades.  If not commanding a reserve he can quickly move to support a brigade in distress, or to gather a couple of brigades to support an attack or cover a retreat.

Getting the Balance Right

Typical game French v Prussians in north Germany

A recent comment on the blog caused me to consider getting the balance right in wargames, and also the once highly regarded subject of National Characteristics.   I remember well the many and lengthy discussions about the rights and wrongs of different national combat ability, which came under this heading.   On the surface it seems a very sensible consideration, but having played a couple of wargames it soon became obvious that it gave too great an advantage to some nations.   For example British infantry in line, British riflemen in skirmish or the French Imperial Garde in general.   On the other hand pity the wargamer who had to play a game commanding a Spanish army.  

Looking back it reminds me of the lengthy and complicated charts in Wargames Research Rules, which were my favourite Napoleonic rules for many, many years.   I shudder when I think of the many hours spent adding and subtracting for morale and combat tests.   And then the whole thing was decided by the roll of a dice.   Why did it take me so long to realise that all wargames rules are decided by the roll of a dice, and if you add to many points to one side the other will always lose.

I also remember the highly regarded muilti player large wargames, including those I was fortunate to be able to take play at Peter Gilders Wargames Holiday Centre.   The great thing about these games with large metal armies on large wargame tables was the sheer spectacle.   I remember the first time I saw Waterloo laid out on Peter Gilders terrain and was completely blown away.   I had seen similar in the pages of Wargames Illustrated, but seeing the real thing was something else.   I had two holidays at the centre, and really enjoyed the experience.   But the actual games were actually disappointing.   Much too many figures to command, much too big an area to move around but most important too many players who did not understand the rules.   I took part in a game of Leipzig when I was one of 20 players.   My opponent had never used In The Grand Manner rules before and just did what he wanted.   I had so many figures and such a large area that  I was fully occupied just trying to control my army, and by the time I realised he was pretty well ignoring the rules the game was spoiled.   But I still had to spend many more hours of heated discussion trying to explain why he could not continue to attack when all of his army should be retreating in rout.

This, and many similar wargames, finally convinced me to look at wargames from a different view point.  Instead of trying to recreate the spectacle of Waterloo or Leipzig, I would approach the rules from the player angle.   Different  players want different things from a wargame, I wanted a fun enjoyable experience for all players.  I also wanted a game which did not take weeks to plan and set up.   We spend an hour Wargaming most days, and I wanted to be able to complete a full game in about a week.   The games are a maximum of 12 moves, so if I could complete two moves in one hour I could meet my target.

If you get  the basics right, the whole thing falls into place very quickly.  

Getting back to National Characteristics.   We use French, Austrian, British (and Portuguese), Prussian, Russian and Spanish.   On the wargames table all armies have three corps.   Each corps have four infantry brigades, one cavalry brigade and corps artillery.   All are equal, except Spanish which are still a work in progress.

All artillery have the same short and maximum range.   All gunners are trained, no elite or conscript.   Thus all artillery are equal in combat and morale.

Cavalry are heavy and light, heavy get plus 1 for combat.  Most are trained, cossacks are conscript.   There are no elite.

Each corps have four infantry brigades, which have different morale, melee, firing and skirmish grades.  There are three grades, which are elite, trained and conscript.   The combination of these grades make each brigade suitable for different tasks.

First brigade is elite, they have plus one for morale and combat.   Minus 1 for skirmish.

Second brigade are light, they are trained, have minus one for volley fire and plus one for skirmish

Third brigade is standard, they are trained but no plus or minus

Fourth brigade is conscript, they have minus one for morale, combat, volley fire and skirmish

You will see that  there is very little difference between any brigades.   Imperial Garde get plus 1 and Spanish get minus 1, a total of 2 difference.   All tests are decided by rolling one D6.   So if the Garde have one casualty and roll 1 they will lose.  

None of this is perfect, but it is simple and it does give a fast moving and (for us) most often enjoyable game.   Given that we game most days that  is quite an achievement.

 

 

Wargame Rules - Artillery

A few weeks ago I mentioned that I was having problems with the Artillery rules.   In particular the effect of crew casualties.   In our current rules casualties are shown as a percentage, for example 10%.    Such casualties affect the combat and morale tests by imposing a minus 1 on all tests.

This created a particular problem with counter battery fire.   At long range artillery required a roll of 6 using 1D6.   This meant that a battery with just 1 casualty could not hit enemy gunners at long range.   Long range artillery is 12” and short range 4”.   This gave a massive advantage to the side without any gunner casualties and their gun dominated each game.

Counter battery fire had become a standard tactic in our games, particularly for the attacking player.   The attacking player would unlimber his artillery at long range of the enemy guns, with the rest of his army out of range.   Both sides would then fire away at each other, usually with no effect at all.  

Apart from counter battery fire, the only other option was to charge the enemy guns with cavalry.   Cavalry charge range is 12”, the same as artillery long range.   The cavalry would have to move into artillery long range, and then charge the next move.   This meant that the artillery could fire once at long range (3 or more for a hit) and again at short range (2 or more for a hit).   

I am play testing a new rule which restricts counter battery fire to short range.   I have never experienced a game where guns are able to deploy that close to the enemy guns.   In practice they would be engaged by either cavalry or even infantry.

With this rule change cavalry is the most favoured option for removing enemy artillery, though a very risky one.   The sequence for cavalry charging artillery is:

Cavalry advance half move (6”)

Gunners test morale, if they pass they can either fire at short range or evade to nearby supports

If gunners evade cavalry can either halt disordered, or retreat 6” to their start line

With cavalry the only option to take out the enemy gunners, this tactic is used much more often than when counter battery fire was an option.   We draw chips to determine the sequence of corps moves each turn.   If the cavalry are drawn after the enemy artillery they can move into charge range of the gunners without risking fire at long range 

The artillery reaction has become an interesting choice.    If they pass their morale test they must choose to either fire at short range or evade.   If they evade the enemy cavalry can prevent them returning to the guns.   If they fire they will probably hit the cavalry, who must then test their morale to charge home.   They require a roll of 3 or more to do so.   If they pass they charge and the gunners rout with 10% casualties.  If they fail they remain at short range of the guns and are either disordered or shaken depending on their test result.  

In our first game using this new rule there were two cavalry charges against artillery.  In one the gunners already had 10% casualties, passed their morale test but ran to a nearby infantry square.   In the second the gunners fired, the cavalry failed their morale test and were counter charged by enemy cavalry and routed.

Lots of possibilities with this rule amendment and it has added a new challenge to our wargames

Wargame Rules – Artillery

The use of just 1D6 to determine all combat and morale rules has proved a great improvement on the previous rules, which used 2D6. It has simplified outcomes and also made them much more unpredictable.

However to determine artillery fire casualties it has raised problems which I am currently struggling with. The artillery rules are as follows:

Total require for a hit
06 – Artillery at long range
05 – Artillery at short range
05 – Building, woods or hills at long range
04 – Building, woods or hills at short range
04 – cavalry at long range
03 – cavalry at short range
03 – infantry at long range
02 – infantry at short range

Combat factors
each casualty – minus 1
walled town – minus 1

When all artillery crews are at full strength there are no problems. However after the first three battles of a campaign each army will have battle casualties. These are reduced to just 1 per brigade when the army is regrouped (receive reinforcements and redistribute casualties). So when at the start of the fourth, fifth and sixth battles it is normal for many brigades, including artillery, to start the game with one casualty.

The photograph above shows the artillery casualties at the start of the game. 4th and 6th French corps artillery each have one casualty. The Prussian artillery do not have any casualties. This is quite unusual, more often only one side will have a casualty, or else both sides will have a casualty thus sharing the problem for both players.

The attacking army must try to reduce the effectiveness of the enemy artillery. Failure to do so will almost always result in failure. For example an infantry brigade will be receive casualties twice before they reach defending artillery. At long range the gunners require 3 to hit, at short range only 2. Each time they receive casualties the infantry have to test morale, they deduct 1 for each casualty plus 1 for being disordered. With two casualties the infantry are very likely to fail their morale and retreat or rout.

Counter battery fire is the usual way to reduce the effectiveness of enemy artillery. However at long range the gunners require a total of 6 for a hit. If they start the game with one artillery casualty the maximum they can achieve is 5. They would have to move to close range of the enemy gunners (4”) to be able to hit them.

When I wrote the rules I anticipated that rolling a 6 in counter battery fire would not happen very often. I don’t know what the odds are, but I do know that it has happened surprisingly often in our wargames. And, of course, it always seems to happen to the wrong side! If the attacking army are unable to hit the enemy gunners their infantry are at a huge disadvantage in launching an attack.

Balance is all important in wargame rules, and I am not sure that I have it right in this particular case. In all other circumstances the artillery rules work quite well. With two dice, allowing a maximum of 12 outcomes, I could adjust the tables. This is not possible with jus t one dice.

Despite my reservations I am inclined to keep the existing rules and just accept that rolling a 6 to hit the enemy gunners is actually quite hard. And when it does happen it is just luck. Sometimes it is better to accept an apparent unfair advantage, and accept that you can’t always find a solution to every problem.

Infantry Combat and Morale Values - The Problem

 

Typical Bavarian Corps 

All of the corps in my campaign, except for a few Spanish, have the same order of battle.

4 infantry brigades
1 cavalry brigade
1 corps artillery

I have always retained an element of national characterists in the infantry brigades, despite wanting both commanders to have an equal chance of winning on the table top. The order of battle for a typical Bavarian corps is as follows:

1 infantry brigade 4000 CA FB SB
2 infantry brigade 4000 CB FC SB
3 infantry brigade 4000 CC FC SC
4 infantry brigade 4000 CC FC SC
9 cavalry brigade 1000 CB light
9 corps artillery 1000 CB 12 pounders

The combat ability and morale of each infantry brigade is shown in the three columns on the right. C is class, F is firepower and S is skirmish ability

A is elite, B is average, C is poor.

All of these are affected by casualties, with one casualty (10%) reducing all three by one
For example a class A skirmisher becomes the same as class B with one casualty.

These abilities are different for each nation, but also for each corps within all armies. There are 1440 infantry brigades in the current campaign order of battle, and every one is slightly different.

Deploying an army on the wargames table requires some study of the ability of each infantry brigade, taking into account which have casualties. When I adopted this system, many years ago, I liked complicated rules and really enjoyed pondering the strengths and weakeness of each brigade in my army. But at that time we used to wargame once a week, at best. I did not run a campaign, so each wargame was stand alone. I was quite happy to spend considerable time planning each wargame and trying to be very clever pitting different abilities on the table. At that time I ran a wargames club from my garage, and we used my figures and scenery. There were up to 10 players, of very different abilities, knowledge of the rules and even interest in Wargaming. The games were mostly every march to the centre of the table, rolls lots of dice have plenty of casualties and fight until the last man standing – or we got to 11pm and the game just ended. Next week a different game with no reference to the outcome of the last one.

My wargaming is now confined to battles derived from my campaign, and my only opponent is my wife Jan. Over the years, and particularly since we retired, our preferred type of wargame has changed drastically. We started our 1813 campaign in April 2009 to provide us with interesting and enjoyable wargames. Since then we have played 511 wargames generated by the campaign. That works out at about 32 games a year. Our preferred type would now be called “fun”, as opposed to “aggressive”.

That is a lot of wargames to transfer from the campaign map to the wargames table, which is my job. I also deploy both armies on the table, though Jan can (and often does) amend the location within the game guidelines. To do so she has to study the combat ability of each corps in her army. It is to make this process easier that I am rewriting the orders of battle.

I will explain the new order of battle in the next post.

Infantry Rules for Army Level Wargames

Typical Army Level Wargame

I don’t get nearly as many comments on this blog as I would like, but a recent one from Archduke Piccolo caused me to reconsider one element of our current wargame rules.   The blog commented on was about hills in wargames, but the comment was about skirmishers in different levels of wargame.   For example how to represent them on the table at brigade level, division level, corps level and army level wargames.

My own wargames are currently army level, with three corps per side.   The above photo will illustrate what I mean.   All games are a maximum of 12 moves, to coordinate with the campaign 12 hour day.  I have written the rules to allow for fast and fun games, but also I want to reward historical tactics.  I also want to achieve a clear winner within this relatively short number of moves.   And most important I want a large element of luck, because my wife is my regular opponent and having gamed together for more than 50 years we can anticipate what each other will do in almost any wargame situation.

The campaign includes all of the major Napoleonic armies, and many of the minor ones.  I wanted to give an element of national strengths and weakness, for example the British were well known for their effective volley fire and the Russians for their stubborn fighting style.   Equally important I wanted to avoid making any one brigade too powerful, for example British Riflemen or French Imperial Guard.   I wanted to ensure that whilst elite formations had an advantage; it was not so great that they would always win.   And at the same time historical poor performers, such as the Spanish, should also have a chance to win.  

To this end I created an order of battle which gave infantry brigade’s three combat abilities.    These are skirmish, firefight and melee.   Each brigade is graded A, B or C in each of these functions.  

A British rifle brigade would be class A skirmishers, B class melee and C class firefight.  

A French guard brigade would be C class skirmishers, A class melee and B class firefight. 

A Spanish line brigade would be C class skirmishers, B class melee and C class firefight.

Each corps has four brigades, and most have at least one class A brigade in one of the three combat types.  The exception is the Spanish, who are lucky to have more than one B class.   They always have to rely on a good defensive position, such as a village, woods or hill.

This allows the player to decide which brigade is most suitable for which task.   And even more important which brigade is weak, and must not be exposed too much.

The distance of a brigade from the enemy will determine what type of combat takes place.   If 2 to 4” it will be a skirmish combat.   0 to 2” will be musket volley.   Base contact will be melee.   A rifle brigade would pick skirmish combat; a British line brigade would prefer musket and a Spanish brigade would have to try for melee.

However it is not always possible to ensure the type of combat you want.  The move sequence is determined by drawing a poker chip from a bag, each corps has a chip.   Your rifle brigade may halt at 3”, but if the Spanish chip is before them in the next round, the Spanish brigade can charge into contact and decide the outcome by hand to hand combat.   The brigade which charges into contact gets a plus one for impact, which gives them a slight advantage.

It all sounds complicated, but it’s really quite simple and fast flowing.  The element of luck, in the form of the 1D6 and drawing a chip for who goes first, is what makes the whole game so unpredictable and enjoyable.  

I suspect that for most wargamers our reliance on the dice would be unacceptable.   I went through many different types of rules over the 54 years I have been Wargaming.   All tried to reward historical tactics.    The early ones were very simple, and then came very complicated followed by moderate complexity.   All were enjoyable, at least to start with, but lost their appeal through frequent play when the shortcomings became obvious.   Most, if not all, did not have a time limit on the wargame.   This resulted in very long games with the complicated rules, which were often abandoned due to loss of interest.

We are very happy with our current rules.   Having written them myself, and only having to keep both of us happy, I can change them at will.   So when the failings become obvious I can just tweek the rules to overcome the problem.   Will not work for everyone, but works well for us.

Wargame Objectives

Battle of Ramales

We recently changed the game objective from the town or city to three objectives in the centre of the table.  This was to deter the defending player from slowly retreating as the attacker deployed to attack.   The defender could inflict casualties on the attacker, but retreat before the attack could be delivered.   In addition it took so long for the attacker to pursue that nightfall usually prevented any attack at all.

However our recent battle of Ramales proved that this might not be as easy to achieve as I had expected.

The game would be decided by three separate combats, one for each of the game objectives.   On the left was the hill, in the centre the woods and on the right the farm.  Although this was an encounter battle, the British and Spanish troops would reach their defensive position well before the French attackers.

The Hill

This was held by the Spanish corps, by far the weakest of the three allied corps.   However it was attacked by the Italian corps, the weakest of the French corps, and not a lot better than the Spanish holding the hill  

Hills are best held, and attacked, by infantry.  So the British Army commander took command of the Spanish cavalry and artillery and deployed them between the hill and the woods.

The French Army commander also took command of the Italian cavalry and artillery, but that was to support the Westphalian attack on the centre.   It also countered the Spanish detachment, but that was not the intention.

The attack on the hill was an easy victory for the Italians.    They used their two best infantry brigades to spearhead the attack, and routed one Spanish brigade by skirmish fire.  The remaining three Spanish infantry brigades quickly followed suit.   They ran to the woods in the rear, where they eventually rallied.  But they did not make any counter attack on the hill.

The French had taken their first game objective

The Woods

The 4^th British corps, who held the centre, included two rifle brigades which represented the famous light division.   The senior brigade held the woods, supported by the second brigade and the corps artillery between the woods and the hill.

The Westphalian corps was given the task of taking this objective.  They were better quality than the Italians, but only just.   They could not risk an attack on the rifles in the woods, at least until they could drive back their supports and attack the woods from at least two sides.   This proved extremely difficult.

Supported by the Italian cavalry and artillery they easily outgunned the weaker British 6pdr guns, and also the poorly trained Spanish gunners.   However it requires a roll of six on 1D6 to hit a gun, so they would have to be very lucky.   Their reinforced cavalry should also be able to defeat the British hussars and Spanish irregular lancers.   However their artillery failed to roll any sixes, and eventually turned their attention to the supporting infantry.   Their cavalry finally won the cavalry combat, but not until they had lost one brigade.

It took 10 of the 12 game moves, but eventually the rifle brigade were driven from the woods.   The nearest infantry rushed the woods, but were halted by a counter attack by the supporting British brigade.   At nightfall only two British brigades still remained, but they continued to contest the woods.

The Farm

3^rd British corps had one elite infantry brigade, and a heavy cavalry brigade.   Apart from that they were two line and one conscript Portuguese brigades.   However the foot guards held the farm.

The attacking French corps was young guard.   Not only good infantry, but also a 12 pounder artillery battery and a brigade of heavy dragoons.   Their attack should have been the easiest of the three combats.  It was not to be so

To attack the farm they had to secure at least one side as well as the front.  They could then attack with two brigades against one.   They would also hope to weaken the garrison with artillery and skirmish fire.   But first they would have to persuade the British supports to retreat.   The dragoon brigade was sent to drive off the British cavalry.   Due to really poor dice the French not only lost two cavalry combats, but they routed with 20% casualties without inflicting any casualties on the British horsemen.

The attack turned into a real slog, and by nightfall the farm was firmly held by the British.   The French managed to get into the farm, but a prompt counter attack resulted in a stalemate.

So at the end of the game the French held one objective, but the other two were still held by the British.   Victory conditions were the side which held two of the three game objectives.

The British could claim that they still held the woods and farm, even if they were contested.   Had the game gone on for another two or three moves the French would probably have taken the woods, but they would have been drive out of the farm.   But the deciding factor was that the French clearly held one of the three objectives, and contested the other two.

I gave the game to the French player.  

Hills in Wargames

Battle of Gadebusch

Hills have always played an important part in my wargames, and particularly since I started a campaign to provide battles to wargame.  

In a campaign it is difficult to recreate mountain ranges, such as the Alps.   To do so would require the whole table being covered in terrain which was impossible for corps and divisions to deploy on.   In Napoleonic campaigns these large areas were obstacles to be crossed, rather than areas to deploy and fight battles.   In some campaigns, such as the Iberian Peninsula, they would be the scene of small scale guerrilla combat.   More suited to skirmish type wargames, rather than corps sized games.  

In my campaign wargames hills are represented by largely flat topped oblong shapes, looking more like a series of ridges rather than mountain ranges.   This is because I wanted to allow my corps to deploy and fight, rather than struggle through a table where they could only follow one narrow track and fight a series of skirmish actions.

All arms are allowed to cross these obstacles, but at half movement rate.   Combat is usually fought as if on a ridge.   The defending artillery usually deploy on the forward edge facing the enemy.  The infantry usually slightly further back, to avoid the attacking artillery.    This makes them a very difficult target to attack.  

It also creates a lot of debate about whether attacking artillery can hit troops who are not at the front of the ridge, and therefore not in direct line of sight.   And if that is allowed why not defending artillery deploying in a similar position.   Then there is the question whether cavalry can charge on a hill, or up or down from a hill.   All of this would be allowed on a flat topped ridge, but would not be possible on a mountain range.

We have struggled with these questions for quite a long time.   One obvious decision leads to a less obvious one and so on.   Finally we have decided to redefine who can do what on “hills”.

In future only infantry will be allowed to engage in combat on “hills”.   Infantry, cavalry and artillery will all be allowed to move across hills, but at half movement speed.   However only infantry will be allowed to fight, and will do so exactly the same as on flat ground.  Artillery will be allowed to deploy on the forward edge of the hill, but nowhere else.

It will be interesting to discover whether this clear cut decision actually results in a series of unintended consequences.   This often happens when we bring in a new rule to overcome problems resulting from long time game play with two players who both know the rules extremely well.                     

Wargame Command and Control

The welcome response to my recent blog on our new wargame rules has made me consider how best to represent command and control in wargames. As always this is a very personal response, based entirely on our wargame experience and the type of wargames which we enjoy.

When we first started Wargaming, way back in the late 1960s, we had no understanding about Napoleonic warfare, let along Napoleonic wargame rules. Our first set was “Charge, or How to Play Wargames”. This was a splendid hard cover, glossy page with lots of black and white photographs – what used to be called a “coffee table book”. The rules were pretty simple, and very easy to grasp. I remember that it was a very well written book, and very easy to follow.

Our next rules were Wargames Research Group 1750-1850. These were the very opposite, with lots of charts and very difficult to understand or use – or at least that was my impression. It was fortunate that we did not attempt our first wargame using these rules; it might very well have been our last wargame.

Then came Peter Guilder’s “In the Grand Manner”. Probably my favourite rules, certainly with the warm glow of distant memory. We used these rules for many years, including two visits to Peter’s Holiday Centre in Scarborough. These were the first rules which we adopted until they became what used to be known as “house rules”. That is to say based on the original, but adopted to overcome problems encountered due to repeated use.

Our next were Le Feu Sacre, which really caught my imagination. I really liked their approach, which seemed so fresh and new. Once more we adapted them over the years, and they became the basis of our own wargame rules used for our 1813 campaign.

Our recent rules were my first attempt to write rules completely from scratch, without any influence from a commercial set of rules. It took me a very long time to feel the need to do so, and I really wish I had done it much sooner. I had been very happy using commercial rules, but always became frustrated with what I considered failings. This was usually due to something feeling wrong in a game. I would change the rules to meet this challenge, but usually found that in doing so I created a whole set of new problems. This was, of course, because I did not fully understand the intentions of the writer of the rules.

So with a blank sheet I could create my own rules, and should be able to modify them as this time I did understand the intentions of the writer. I once read that there are almost as many Napoleonic rules as there are Napoleonic wargamers. If you could modifications I suspect this is probably correct.

First I wanted a fast flowing and fun wargame, but it had to feel like a Napoleonic wargame. This meant what used to be called “National Characteristics” However I also wanted a Spanish army to be capable of defeating a French army. Otherwise what is the point of having a Spanish army at all? However this would mean that aspects of the campaign, such as lines of supply and ambushes, would have to be taken into account.

I soon decided that the answer lay in a combination of combat and morale charts, adjusted by luck in the form of dice. For example infantry combat would be decided by the type of troops, their skirmish and their musket firing ability. This would be adjusted by any casualties and finally by rolling one six sided dice.

Morale would be decided by type of troop, supports, how close the commander is and casualties. Once more adjusted by the dice roll.

It sounds simple, and it is. But it also works really well. I keep charts to a minimum, and only adjust them after a lot of consideration and play experience. The most important aspect is the dice roll.

My objective in writing these rules was to allow the player to react as an army commander would in the Napoleonic Wars. There are three levels of command in my 1813 campaign. The theatre commander (for example Wellington) commands three armies each commanded by a commander in chief. Each army has three corps commanders. The first two are concerned with strategic planning and command, and this is confined to the 1813 campaign on the computer.

On the wargames table there are four commanders, the CinC and three corps commanders. The CinC has a tactical role on the table; he can take command of any brigade on the table, or created a reserve by taking brigades from each corps.

I believe that at this level each commander would be allocated a role or objective, and then left alone to achieve it. His main role would be to deploy his corps taking advantages of their various strength and weakness. Once deployed his role would be to direct and control each of his brigades in action. I don’t believe that any commander would rely on luck, though it might well influence the outcome of his battle plans.

So in my rules the dice roll is the element of luck. It should not win or lose the battle, but it should be capable to creating an unexpected crisis for the corps commander to react to. The player can prepare for bad luck by moving close to a threatened brigade, and making sure that they have steady supports. These will add to his dice total. Poor quality troops or casualties will detract from the total. By using one six sided dice the player can easily calculate the odds in favour of his planned move.

Total 1 – rout full move away from the enemy
Total 2 – retreat shaken full move away from the enemy
Total 3 – retreat disordered full move away from the enemy
Total 4 – remain in place, but is disordered
Total 5 – pass morale test
Total 6 – pass morale test

Wargame Rule Review

 

It is seven months since I did a comprehensive rewrite of our wargame rules. During that time we have fought almost 15 wargames, more than enough to have discovered whether they work or not.

My objective was to create a fast moving game with a distinct feel of Napoleonic battles. I wanted to remove as much checking of plus and minus factors for combat and morale as possible. But most important I wanted to introduce a strong element of chance. My wife and I have wargamed together for more than 50 years. We are fortunate to have a permanent wargames table, so we game at least three or four days a week. So neither of us make any significant tactical errors, and both can anticipate what the other will do in most circumstances. This can lead to very predictable wargames. And one error, or one bad run of dice, can determine the outcome of a game.

I wanted to retain the roles of artillery, cavalry and infantry. But I also wanted the game to be decided by the infantry. This balance can be difficult to create, particularly in the early stages of writing rules. It is often only with extensive play that the weakeness can be seen. I have found this to be particularly so when using commercial rules sets.

The key to all of this would be the use of just one six sided dice for all combat and morale tests. There would have to be a minimum number of plus or minus adjustments. This is essential to cater for class of troops, supports, casualties and command. Particularly in my order of battle where troops are classed A, B or C for both morale, skirmish and musket fire. I have taken great care to create complicated orders of battle for each of my five campaign areas. I feel it is important for all armies to have historical national characterises. But also to give all armies a reasonable chance of success, even the Spanish.

With just one dice it was easy to control the eventual outcome. A roll of 1 would mean disaster, a roll of 6 would mean Prussian landwehr infantry could defeat French Imperial Guardsmen. But, of course, it must not happen too often.

I am very pleased with how our new rules have developed. They give a distinctive Napoleonic feel to our games (at least in our opinion). Equally important they allow the battle to develop and reach a conclusion within the 12 moves (equal to 12 hours in the campaign) maximum

The result of casualties is particularly pleasing. When a brigade has a “hit”, which is 10% of its strength) is must test morale. It deducts 2 points for the hit and for being disordered. However it gains 1 point if supported by a formed brigade within 4” and another 1 point if the corps commander is within 4”. It also gets 1 point if elite or loses 1 point if conscript. The dice is then thrown and with the following consequences:

5 or 6 – pass morale
4 - disordered
3 – retreat full move disordered
2 – retreat full move shaken
1 – retreat full move in rout

However it is relatively easy to rally shaken or routed brigades, providing that they roll a good dice. But if they retreated they then have to form up and move back to their original position on the table.

The overall effect is a much more fluid wargame than we have ever experienced. An attack or defence can crumble with just one roll of 1. Using previous rules this would have resulted in certain defeat for the side which rolled the poor dice. But in these rules it is quite possible to recover, but it will take two or three moves.

It is great fun to play a wargame which is so unpredictable. It means that the outcome of a game can change right up to move 11 or even 12. We are both very pleased with the new rules.

Campaign Orders of Battle

 

11^th French Corps 

The detailed orders of battle on the 1813 Campaign Diary were designed to allow the ten players in our PBEM campaign to understand the combat ability of the corps under their command.   The number of corps used, and the brigades in each corps, has changed over the years.   But the basic four infantry brigades, one cavalry brigade and corps artillery have remained the same.   As have the class, firing and skirmish ability of the infantry brigades.

To illustrate how it works I have chosen a standard French corps.   Elite corps like the old and young guard would have a higher proportion of elite troops.

11 French corps – General Albert (Average)

25 infantry brigade  CA     FB      SB

26 infantry brigade  CB     FC      SB

27 infantry brigade  CC    FC      SB

28 infantry brigade  CC    FC      SC

11 cavalry brigade   CB     dragoons

11 corps artillery      CB     9 pounders

The corps commander is Average.   Were he Gifted he would be more effective, but less so were he Poor.   His main role is to issue orders to the brigades under his command, and to do so he must be within 12”.   He can also add to their morale test providing that he is within 4”.     So each move he must be positioned within 4” of those brigades most likely to have to test their morale during the next move, yet still within 12” of all of his brigades.   A difficult task and often one will have to be sacrificed to achieve the other.

Each infantry brigade has (C) class, (F) firing ability and (S) skirmish ability.   A will add plus 1 to the combat or morale test, C will deduct 1.   To melee a brigade must be in base contact, to skirmish within 4” and to volley fire within 2”.   25 brigade is the best within the corps.   If 27 brigade were an enemy they would be at a disadvantage in melee or volley fire, but would be even in a skirmish fight.

Cavalry brigades also have class types, but not skirmish or firepower.   However the type of cavalry does make a difference in morale.   Heavy cavalry are more effective than light cavalry, both against infantry and other cavalry.   Lancers are the most effective against infantry, but the same as light cavalry against other cavalry.

Artillery again have types of class.   However I have abandoned the complicated tables in most rules depending on distance and weight of ball fired.   I have 12pdr, 9pdr and 6 pdr.   All have a maximum range of 12” and all a most effective range of 4”.   12pdr receive plus one and 6 pdr minus one.   A 9pdr firing at either would a dice roll of 6, a 12pdr 5 or 6.   The 6pdr cannot hit other artillery at more than short range.  

In addition to the above, casualties have a major effect on morale and combat effectiveness.   Casualties from all combat are 10%, and these results in minus 1 on morale or combat tests.   Each additional 10% results in a further minus 1.   During the campaign corps can reduce casualties by halting within supply range of their depot.   But the final 10% remains for the duration of the campaign.   So an elite brigade which receives 10% casualties in their first battle will become the same as a B class (or average) brigade.  And they will remain so throughout the campaign.

The position of each corps on the wargames table is dictated by their location on the campaign map.  At the start of the game each player needs to consider the morale and combat effectiveness of each of his three corps.   It would be unwise to order a corps with considerable battle casualties to attack one with no casualties.   However each army commander can take brigades from his three corps and form an army reserve.  This can be used to support the corps tasked with the main attack.  Or alternatively placed in a central position to support a weak position.

It is also important to deploy each corps so that the best infantry brigade will be in the right position to lead the final attack.   It is easy to overlook these details when faced with a table full of figures when the artillery, cavalry and infantry all have to be placed in the best position depending on their role.   But the player who gets the initial deployment right in this respect will stand a much better chance of winning the game.

However, as always, the dice is master.  The best planned attack will still fail if the dice rolls a one.   A poorly planned one will often succeed if it is a six.

These rules will not suit everyone.  But they have worked well for Jan and me.   And since April 2009 our 1813 campaign has provided 459 enjoyable wargames of battles provided by the 88 campaign phases spread throughout Germany and Spain.

Wargame Rules – Morale

I have felt for some time that our current morale rules make it too easy to pass when casualties are received.

They are decided by 1D6, plus or minus from a short chart.  The most important plus is 1 for a general within 4” and the same for a formed brigade in support.   The most important minus is 1 for C class troops and for each casualty.   The current morale chart is:

3 or more – pass test

1 or 2 – fail and shaken

0 or less – fail and rout

In general most brigades pass test with 1 or 2 casualties.    When they lose 3 casualties they automatically rout.   This usually results in melee lasting at least three rounds, when both sides often rout with 3 casualties.

I wanted to provide a wider range of possibilities.   First to reduce the number of rounds of melee, but also to introduce more uncertainty into the game in general. 

The new rules are also decided by 1D6, plus or minus from the same chart.   The new morale chart is:

6 – past test

5 – pass test

4 – fail and disordered

3 – fail and disordered and retreat full move

2 – fail and shaken and retreat full move

1 – fail and rout full move

Disordered - rallied automatically at the start of their next move

Shaken - has to rally by passing morale test next move

Rout - causes brigades within 4” to test morale

 

We have only used these new rules in one wargame, and the result has been dramatic.

First brigades are more likely to rout

Second they are quite likely to retreat either disordered or shaken

 

Trained brigades with no casualties almost always rally next move

But it does cause considerable disruption for the defending player

And it can cause delay for the attacking player

 

I am not sure how much I like these new morale rules

It does reduce the number of melee considerably

And I quite like the unforeseen consequences of a low dice throw

But I am not sure whether either of us like being the one who rolls the low dice

It will take a few games to confirm whether the balance is right

And it has given me a project until we start hill walking again in September.

Wargame Rules Review – Bayreuth Campaign

Bayreuth Campaign Map

Over the past sixteen weeks I have used the Bayreuth Campaign Phase of our 1813 campaign to play test the new rules.   Rather than set up one off wargames, I have run the Bayreuth campaign as a normal phase of the ongoing campaign.   Bayreuth was the next campaign due to be run, and it has in no way affected the running of the campaign on the computer.  

In fact I planned this when I first decided to rewrite the wargame rules.   In March 2023 I started work on a new set of rules.   At that time I was nearing the end of the Merida Campaign Phase of the campaign.   I expected that it would take at least weeks, and possibly months, to write and play test a new set of rules.   So rather than put the campaign on hold, I decided to use the battles from the next phase to wargame the new rules.  

When I started work on the campaign map for Bayreuth I took care to ensure that as wide a variety of terrain as possible was available.   This is quite normal because the regional map, in this case Erfurt, only shows major terrain features such as roads, rivers and cities.   These are transferred to the district map, which is the one used for the campaign.  

On the campaign map I have freedom to choose where to put hills, woods, villages and farms.   It is these minor terrain features which determine the wargames table and the flow of play. 

The rules worked well playing the wargames provided by the Bayreuth campaign.   There was no need for any major rewrite.   It was only during repeated Wargaming that I could determine how well firing, melee and morale worked.   For example in this campaign the French had a big advantage when skirmishing.   This is because the Russian infantry have good morale, average musket fire but poor skirmish ability.   The French infantry would move to skirmish range (4” from the enemy) and skirmish.   The Russians would then have to advance to musket range (2” from enemy) where they would be on a par with the French musket ability.

On the other hand the Russians have very effective artillery.   I have simplified artillery fire so that all guns have a maximum range of 12”, which is the same distance as cavalry charge range.   In counter battery fire guns need to roll 6 at long range, or 5 or 6 at short range.   However 12 pdr guns have plus 1.   6 pdr guns have minus 1.   9 pdr guns fire par.   The Russians have 2x12 pdr and 1x9 pdr guns.  The French have 1x12 pdr and 2x9 pdr.   It does not sound like a big advantage, but on the table it often proved decisive.   As the French advanced the Russian artillery always got at least one chance to fire before they could unlimber.   One hit would reduce the French fire ability by minus 1.

These changes were deliberate, but they still took a little getting used to in the fast ebb and flow of a wargame.   Cavalry was used to threaten enemy artillery, or at least force them to redeploy to counter the cavalry.   For example if the French artillery were deployed on the left of the corps, the cavalry were placed on the right. The Russian guns could not cover both targets.   They could, of course, use their own cavalry to counter the French horsemen.     But half of the Russian cavalry were Cossacks, who were at a disadvantage against the better trained French horsemen.  These were factors which had to be taken into account before the game started, and would take a little time to adjust to.

There was only one major change in the rules.   All combat is decided by using 1D6 dice, plus or minus factors such as casualties, training, supports etc.   The side with the highest total would be the winner, the other the loser.   This was my first draft:

Total 1          Winner lose 2 casualties    Loser lose no casualty

Total 2-5       Winner lose 1 casualty       Loser lose 1 casualty   

Total 6          Winner lose no casualty     Loser lose 2 casualty

I quickly found that this gave too much advantage to a roll of 1 or 6.   The side who lost the two casualties would often fail their morale and rout.   The winner would have no casualties and could continue to attack.   This gave winning cavalry in particular a very strong advantage.

I only have to make a minor change to remedy this unexpected result.   The second draft was:

Total 1 or 2   Winner lose 1 casualty       Loser lose no casualty

Total 3 or 4   Winner lose 1 casualty       Loser lose 1 casualty

Total 5 or 6   Winner lose no casualty     Loser lose 1 casualty

This still gave a decided advantage to the side that rolled 6, but it still gave the losing side a reasonable chance of winning the resulting melee check.

I am still working on towns, and particularly walled towns.   I am looking at different options to either storm or lay siege.   At present sieges are a paper (or rather computer) exercise.   The garrison can hold for as many days as they have supplies.   But this is often 2 or 3 days, which is a long time is the usual 6 or 7 day campaign.   I would prefer the storm option, but getting the balance right between attacker and defender is difficult, particularly with the high or low dice throw problem

But I am confident enough to have replaced the printed rules with the new ones.

Wargame Rules Review – Seventh Wargame

Start of wargame

It is very unusual for us to fight a seventh battle in a campaign phase.   Normally we fight one battle for each town, and then decide the winner based on casualties, routs and supply situation.

In this campaign, possibly due to the new rules, it was really hard to decide the winner at the end of the sixth game.   So I decided to fight a seventh game, mostly because I wanted to see if I could resolve fighting for a large built up area.

I used a little artistic licence to rally routed brigades at the end of the sixth battle, and also to redistribute battle casualties within a corps.

The French started with 9 infantry brigades, 2 cavalry brigades and 2 corps artillery

The Russians has 10 infantry brigades, 2 cavalry brigades and 2 corps artillery

The Russians put 4 infantry brigades in the city, and divided the remainder on either side

End of wargame

The French had a formidable task.   They had similar numbers to the Russians, and most brigades on both sides had 10% casualties.   The sheer size of Bayreuth made it very difficult to attack with infantry.

However the attacker does have the initiative, and can reinforce the corps tasked with the main attack.   This is done by taking infantry, cavalry or artillery from the other two corps and putting them under the command of the CinC.   He can then commit this reserve at a critical time and in a critical place.  

In this game he supported 10^th (Young Guard) corps on his left.   However this did not work as well as expected, mostly due to the very effective Russian gunners.

It also allowed 1^st Russian corps to attack his right flank.   They routed the French cavalry, artillery and half the infantry.   But a determined counter attack by the remaining two French infantry brigades held the Russian advance.   The result was a draw.

In the centre the French did force the Russians to abandon the southern half of Bayreuth.   But the Russian artillery prevented them from occupying the two sectors, and they were never able to attack the northern half of the city.

At nightfall the Russians still hold half of Bayreuth

They have three infantry brigades and two artillery batteries operational

The French have five infantry brigades, but no cavalry or artillery

The Russian gunners prevent the French infantry from holding half of city

 

The French have lost 5 infantry, 4 cavalry and 1 artillery casualties (2500 men)

The Russians have lost 13 infantry, 5 cavalry and 1 artillery casualties (5800 men)

The French have 5 brigades in rout; the Russians have 9 brigades in rout

The Russians were declared the winners.

Comments

The Russians had a considerable advantage in their artillery.   Both batteries had 12 pdr guns, which gave them a plus 1 advantage.   Neither had any casualties, unlike the French artillery who both had 10%.  Repeated attacks on the Russian guns were driven off, mostly because the French cavalry had casualties from previous battles.

The French advantage was their superior skirmish skills.   Most of their infantry were B class; most of the Russian infantry were C class.   The French required a roll of 5 or 6 to inflict a casualty on the garrison.   The Russian infantry required a 6, and if they had 10% casualties could not hit the French at all.   It was this advantage which forced the garrison to retreat from the southern half of the city.

At nightfall both sides had fought to a standstill.   The French infantry still outnumbered the Russian by five brigades to three.   However they had lost all of their cavalry and artillery, and the Russians still had two artillery batteries.   Each had 10% casualties, but still prevented the French from entering the city.   Without cavalry or artillery the French had no answer to the Russian guns.

So despite an apparent French win, having caused more Russian casualties and routed more brigades, the Russians won because it would be near impossible for the French infantry to attack in the face of such effective artillery.

The French were also running very short of supplies.   Normally they would have regrouped and resupplied after the first day of fighting at Bayreuth.   By attacking again on the second day they used up their final supplies and would have to withdraw in order to resupply.

Another very enjoyable game and a fitting one to decide the winner of the Bayreuth campaign phase.   It was also a real test of our new rule system, with all forms of combat taking place and extensive morale testing.