Playing Wargames

 

 

Over the years my style of Wargaming has changed dramatically, as I suspect it has with most wargamers.   I started off playing on the kitchen table, then as the armies got bigger on the floor.   Eventually I managed to get a permanent wargames table, and they ranged from 4x4 foot to 12x6 foot.  

My main love has always been Napoleonic, but I have dabbled with Ancient and WW2.   My first wargame figures were a handful of Hinton Hunt 20mm metal figures, quickly reinforced by Airfix 20mm plastic figures as they became available.   My ancient armies were Romans and Ancient Britons, which was all  that was available from Airfix.   My WW2 much wider ranging because of their comprehensive range of both figures and vehicles.

The first few years was a very steep learning curve.   There was not material available, and my main source was the series of Don Featherstone books, which I bought as soon as they were published.

My first armies were just a collection of figures, grouped in units depending on the current rules available.   Finding a copy of Henry Harris “Collecting Model Soldiers”.   From memory it had chapters on infantry, cavalry artillery and how to go about collecting models.  It was aimed at Model Soldiers, rather than Wargaming figures, but it prompted me to reorganise my collection into correct military organisations.   I didn’t have enough figures for Brigades and above, nor enough to attempt any historical orders of battles.   But it did give me a structure and organisation which at least attempted historical formations.

For many, many years my wargames were a series of figures at either end of the wargames table, who would advance and fight a large melee.   There was no attempt at historical tactics, because I did not have the facilities to do so.  This was before skirmish wargames and the rules available did not have anything like orders of battle.  

As more reference material became available, and as I gained more knowledge about Napoleonic warfare, my collection began to take shape.   The games became more historical as the rules became more complicated.   But my main inclination was always the look of things, accurate uniforms and commercial period buildings.   When Wargames Illustrated arrived with its beautiful coloured photos of games from Peter Guilders Wargames Holiday Centre I, like many more, was inspired to improve the look of the table.   A couple of visits to WHC resulted in my first wargames table with sculpted scenery, though much smaller than Peter’s tables.

The games at WHC were spectacular in their scale and detail.    Waterloo looked like a diorama, with masses of figures to represent the various armies.   He did have orders of battle for each major battle, but they were not historical.   Each corps had a number of 36 figure units, but they were not grouped in brigades or divisions.   I followed this with my own collection.

It was only when I started my 1813 campaign in 2009 that I really concentrated on creating orders of battle that would not only suit the collection of figures I had available, but also fit both the campaign map and the wargames table.   The map was designed to be transferred to the table, so each map square had a corresponding square on the wargames table.    I put a lot of work into trying to transfer current road maps into campaign maps, but eventually designed my own campaign maps, working from the table up rather than the map down.   This required a lot of compromise, but the end result has worked really well.

Each wargame table is a military district on the campaign map, and each has a city or town.   These are the strategic objectives in the campaign, and the tactical objectives on the wargames table.  

Each wargames table has nine squares, and there is a physical feature on each square.   One of those is a town or city, and that is the campaign objective.   For many years the attacker had to defeat the enemy and force them to abandon the town.   This was very difficult to achieve within the 12 moves allowed, and more often than not at the end of the game the town had not been captured.   Most often the defender would retreat to the town, forcing the attacker to advance and have to deploy again.   I would often have to make a decision based on casualties or routed brigades to decide the winner.

It was only when I decided to have game objectives that I overcame this problem.  In the photo above there are nine squares, each with a terrain piece.   The town is at the top of the photo in the centre, and the defending army deploy in these three squares.   In the centre there is a hill on the left, a woods in the centre and a hill on the left.   Nearest the camera are three more squares, and these are where the attacker deploys.

So the battle for the town is fought in the three centre squares, and the player who controls at least two of the three at the end of 12 moves is the winner.   Having three objectives makes for a much more interesting wargame.  There are three corps per side, and each objectives is allocated to each corps.   The commander in chief can create a reserve by taking brigades from any of the three corps, which allows him to support one of the three corps and gives him a big tactical advantage.  It also encourages the defender to create his own reserve to counter this likely tactic.

But most important it clearly shows who won the game.  If the defender retreats he has to abandon one of the objectives, so this type of “gamesmanship” is no longer used.   It is possible, but very unusual, for neither player to control two of the three objectives.   Sometimes each player will hold one objective, but the third is still being fought over at the end of move 12.  In those cases we allow one more move, and if that does not work the game is declared a draw.   But the player with the most casualties or routed brigades must then retreat for the sake of the campaign.

I am at a loss to explain why it took me so many years to come up with this solution.   It now seems such an obvious way to decide the winner, and it also makes for a much more interesting wargame.

Nordhausen Campaign – Day Five

6 September 1813 – Nordhausen Campaign - Day 5

French start of siege of Weringerode
4 French army – day 1 of siege of Weringerode
5 French army – defend Nordhausen
6 French army – regroup at Ebelben

Russian attack Nordhausen
1 Russian army – day 1 siege of Weringerode
2 Russian army – attack Nordhausen
3 Russian army – regroup at Heldrungen

Battle of Nordhausen – table at the end of move 2

 French army is commanded by Marshal Moncey
Russian army is commanded by General Constantine

French – 12 infantry brigades, 3 cavalry brigade, 3 corps artillery
Russian – 12 infantry brigades, 3 cavalry brigade, 3 corps artillery

French have 7 infantry, 2 cavalry and 1 artillery casualties (3,100 men)
Russians have 5 infantry casualties (2,000 men)

Both armies start the battle with casualties, 3,100 French and 2,000 Russian

There are three objectives, all in the centre of the table
The hill on the left, the hill in the centre and the walled farm on the right
The side which hold at least two objectives at the end of 12 moves win the battle

The French start the battle in and around the city of Nordhausen
The Russians enter the table at the start of move one

On the right 15th French corps occupy the walled farm
4th Russian corps cavalry rout the French cuirassier brigade
This allows the infantry to advance from the woods and attack the farm
They fail to do so and retreat back to the woods

In the Centre Moncey takes command of half of 5th corps
He deploys the cavalry, artillery and infantry between the two hills
But he is unable to advance to support the attack on either hill
The remainder of 5th Russian corps storm the right hand hill
They quickly rout the defending French infantry and secure the hill

On the left 15th Baden corps hold the hill and area to the right
6th Russian corps deploy to the left of the hill but do not attack
Three Russian infantry brigades advance onto the hill
After a prolonged melee the Baden infantry retreat

The Russians have taken two of the three game objectives and win the battle.

Comments
Both commanders take command of one cavalry and one infantry brigade and corps artillery.
They deploy opposite each other in the centre between the two hills
Neither can gain an advantage, and neither will attack, so it is a stalemate in the centre

The French garrison the walled farm on the right with their jager brigade.
Despite a determined attack the French are unable to shift them
The French hold the farm at nightfall

The attack on both hills in an infantry affair, and the result largely down to luck
Both sides start with casualties and both have brittle morale.
The Russians take both hills.

The deciding factor on the right, was the artillery commanded by Marshal Moncey.
He lost both his cavalry and infantry brigades, but the gunners held to the left of the farm
From there they could fire into the attacking Russian infantry columns, to great effect
They also routed a heavy cavalry attack

This battle had a very Russian feel to it, with hard fought infantry fighting deciding the winner

What is Wargaming

Peter Guilders Wargames Holiday Centre 1984 

A recent post on TMP prompted me to consider just what are we all trying to achieve, and what is the best way to go about it.   The question asked why do most rules have what he called “myths”.   For example on the table cavalry move about twice as fast as infantry, though in real life they can move many times more.   This type of question has been raised for many years, and is an attempt to justify Wargaming as a serious attempt to recreate real battle.      

I started Wargaming  in 1969 when I found a copy of “Charge, or how to play wargames” in the local library.   This was long before the age of the internet, so I have no idea how other wargamers felt, but I assume that like me they just accepted the rules without question.

At the same time I discovered Don Featherstone and Wargamers Newsletter.   I bought each of his books as they were published, plus any other books available in England.   I guess I was about as informed as most wargamers.   I particularly remember Don writing something along the lines of “wargames can never be the same as war – it is a game”.   This idea has had a long lasting effect on my approach to Wargaming.   Not just because Don has served in the army in WW2, but because it just seems so obviously true.

WRG rules was the first attempt to turn our playing with soldiers into recreating history.   Very complicated rules requiring pages of charts to add or subtract from a dice throw attempted to cover every situation encountered in warfare.   They overlooked the fact that as soon as you use a dice you abandon any attempt to recreate warfare.  I used them for many years, but they were long winded and created not very enjoyable wargames.

It has always seemed obvious to me that if you want to refight historical battles they best way to do it would be using a board game.   This is similar to the military Wargaming, which was used extensively to test battle plans, however not with any great success.   I served in the military and was well aware of expression “the best laid plans are discarded when the first shot is fired”.

I suspect that most of us are drawn to Wargaming by the visual spectacle of large numbers of well painted model soldiers on attractive terrain.   However that is the diorama effect, not the wargame itself.

All wargame rules must compromise with historical fact to be playable.   You have only to consider that most of us play on a table 6x6 foot or less.   Those of us who use 28mm figures are faced with the most serious compromise.   If we wish to have any space to manoeuvre we must  restrict each army to about 300 figures per side.   The obvious answer is that we would stick to skirmish style games, but most of us really want to be Napoleon or Wellington.   Attempting to fight Waterloo on a 6x6 foot table with 28mm figures in never going to end well!

Wellington v Soult on my table 2024 

It is however possible to enjoy multi corps Napoleonic wargames with 28mm figures on such a table, but you have to accept that to do so you are playing a game – not recreating Waterloo itself.   I have done so for more than 20 years, and continue to do so.   I enjoy my Wargaming, but consider it a game of chance, with a pleasing visual effect.

I suspect that those who try to justify Wargaming as a serious attempt to refight historical battles are trying to convince everyone else that they are not just playing a complicated game of toy soldiers.   If they really wanted to recreate the tactical problems encountered by Wellington and Napoleon they would do so using computer or board games.

Trying to justify wargame movement rules for cavalry and infantry movement is never going to work.

Nordhausen Campaign – Day Four

5 September 1813 – Nordhausen Campaign - Day 4

French retreat to Ebelben
4 French army – defend Weiringerode
5 French army – regroup at Nordhausen
6 French army – retreat to Heldrunger

Russian attack Weiringerode
1 Russian army – attack Weiringerode
2 Russian army – regroup at Sangerhausen
3 Russian army – occupy Heldrungen

Battle of Weiringerode – table at the end of move 2

Fourth French army is commanded by Marshal Davout
First Russian army is commanded by General Wittenstein

French – 12 infantry brigades, 3 cavalry brigade, 3 corps artillery
Russian – 12 infantry brigades, 3 cavalry brigade, 3 corps artillery

French – 6 infantry and 2 cavalry casualties (2600 men)
Russian – 6 infantry and 2 cavalry casualties (2600 men)

The battle started with the French army in and around Weiringerode
The Russian army would arrive on the table at the start of move 1
The French would be allowed to move at the start of move 1

The three game objectives were in the centre of the Table
The hill on the left, the woods in the centre and the hill on the right

On the right 10th French corps reached and occupied the hill before the Russians could arrive.
The Russian artillery were deployed to the right of the hill, supported by cavalry and artillery.]
This made it very difficult for 1st Russian corps to attack the hill.
Both sides committed three infantry brigades to the fight for the hill
The Russians won the melee, but the hill was taken by the French reserve

The centre was the best of the three for the Russians to attack
The woods itself would be an infantry melee, but the area to the right was open
11th French corps deployed their artillery and cavalry, plus one infantry brigade

Wittgenstein took command of half the infantry from 2nd corps, plus the artillery
Whilst the remainder of the infantry took the woods, he pushed the centre back
He then turned right and took the hill on the right

The left was very similar to the right, and again decided by the infantry
Once more the French won the melee, and possession of the hill
Both sides took a battering, but the French had the last reserve and won

Comments

The deployment for this battle reverted to the earlier style, with one army of table
However the defender was not in possession of the objectives at the start of the game
The layout of the table meant that the French reached the three objectives first
They took advantage to deploy their cavalry and artillery to protect the flanks of the objectives
Their artillery also dominated the open space between the objectives.
This meant that, once again, the infantry would decide the outcome.

This is the fourth game of the campaign, and the first with casualties at the start
Both sides had six infantry and two cavalry casualties, which sounds very even.
However the Russians had two cossack brigades, both C class and already inferior
So the French had a considerable advantage in cavalry.
The elite Russian infantry, grenadiers and jagers, had less casualties than the French elite

The actual brigade with casualties would dictate the whole battle for the Russian army
They had to attack, and could not afford casualties during the approach
If one brigade failed morale and routed it was quite likely they would take more with them

The Russians were able to use their artillery and cavalry to more effect, because they were mobile
The French artillery and cavalry were deployed to hold open areas, but could not react so easily
So the Russians were able to force the French artillery and cavalry to withdraw slowly
This did not win the game, but it went a long way to not losing it for the French.

It is quite difficult to explain how important just one casualty can make to the whole game.
The attacker has to put everything into the first attack, and just one bad dice can spell disaster.

I was quite surprised that this game went the full 12 moves, and the winner only decided at the end. When both armies have existing casualties just one casualty to enemy artillery fire can make all the difference. In this game both players took great care to protect their weak brigades.

I would not be surprised if some of my readers wonder how we can fight games week after week which look so similar in the photographs. Given the size of the table, and the scenery available, it goes without saying that at first glance will look similar. But the composition of the two armies, particularly at this stage, is critical And the roll of the dice even more so.

Once again an enjoyable game, which to be honest they all seem to be.

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.

Nordhausen Campaign – Day Three

4 September 1813 – Nordhausen Campaign - Day 3

French defend Heldrungen
4 French army – regroup and resupply at Weringerode
5 French army – retreat to Nordhausen
6 French army – advance to border and defend Heldrungen

Russian attack Heldrungen
1 Russian army – regroup and resupply at Halberstadt
2 Russian army – occupy Sangerhausen
3 Russian army – Attack Heldrungen

Battle of Heldrungen – table at start of battle

Sixth French army is commanded by Marshal Poniatowski
Third Russian army is commanded by General Winzingerrode

French – 12 infantry brigades, 3 cavalry brigade, 3 corps artillery
Russian – 12 infantry brigades, 3 cavalry brigade, 3 corps artillery

All brigades are at full strength

The battle started with both armies deployed on the table, both out of artillery range
The three game objectives were in the 2 foot square between them
On the left the hill, in the centre a road junction, on the right a farm

On the right 16th French corps was delayed by having to move down from the hill
7th Russian corps arrived at the farm first, but did not immediately enter
To do so would expose the garrison to short range artillery fire
They wanted to pin the French artillery and cavalry to the right of the far
And attack the farm itself with three infantry brigades
The French heavy cavalry charged and routed the cossack brigade early in the game
Despite this the Russians took and held the farm

French deployment in the centre was delayed by having to move through Heldrungen
However the road junction was closer to them, which made up for this disadvantage
17th French corps took heavy casualties, and eventually broke and ran to the town
This allowed half of 8th Russian corps to swing right and support the attack on the farm

The attack on the hill would be decided by an infantry attack
The ground to the left of the hill would be decided by artillery and cavalry
The Russians manhandled their guns into range, and routed one infantry brigade
This forced the Polish cavalry and artillery to withdraw and allowed the infantry to attack
Both sides used their three best infantry brigades to attack the hill
Both had their elite brigade in reserve and attacked with one light and one line brigade
The Poles took the hill, greatly helped by both Russian brigades rolling a one for their morale

Having taken two of the three objectives the Russians won the battle

Comments

Both the terrain and the tactics were very similar to the last battle.
Only infantry can fight on hills, so cavalry and artillery play a secondary role
Only two brigades can fight side by side on the hills, so a third in support
This should result in a prolonged infantry skirmish and then melee.

Both players understand this basic fact, and must decide how best to use the infantry
One brigade is elite, good for melee but poor for skirmish
One brigade in light, good for skirmish but poor for melee
One brigade in average, average for both skirmish and melee
Skirmish range is 4”, which is the same distance for infantry to charge to contact

In this battle both sides held their elite brigade in reserve, but within supporting distance of 4”
This is where the chip becomes critical, to decide which side moves first.
The best tactic is to move when the other side draws first.
You move your two brigades to less than 4” from the enemy, and hope that you get first move

Today I moved first, having forced the supporting artillery and cavalry to withdraw
I moved my Russian infantry to within 3” of the Polish brigades, but the Polish chip was drawn
The Poles decided to skirmish rather than charge and melee
Their light brigade needed 4,5 or 6 to hit, the line brigade needed 5 or 6
They rolled 6 and 5, both hit causing 10% to both of my Russian brigades
My infantry both had the commander and a reserve brigade within 4”, each worth plus 1
They each had 10% casualties and were disordered, each minus 1
So they needed a roll of 4,5 or 6 to pass their test, they rolled 4 and 6, both passed

When the Russian chip was drawn they decided to attack rather than skirmish
With 10% casualties their light brigade would need 5 or 6, and the line brigade 6 to skirmish
If they charged they would get plus 1 for impact, but they had minus 1 for 10% casualties
So despite losing the skirmish fight they would still be equal in melee
They rolled a 3 and a 4, both sides had lost 10% and were disordered.

Because of my skirmish casualties I had 20% casualties and was disordered. Minus 3 for morale
The French only had 10% casualties, but was also disordered.
We both had a commander and supports within 4”, total of plus 2.
I needed a dice roll of 5 or 6 to pass morale, I rolled 2 and 4

My light brigade routed into the supporting grenadier brigade, who also routed
Jan rolled 4 and 5 and passed morale for both of her brigades

Jan lost the game, but the was still very pleased to hold the hill and rout two of my brigades

I have explained the process in some details, and I hope not too much
Because I wanted to explain that though decided by rolling 1D6, it is more than just luck
Having a commander and a formed reserve within 6” adds to morale and makes a difference
Despite taking skirmish fire first, and losing 10% casualties, I could still melee
Hopefully if unlucky (with the skirmish) I would be lucky with the melee
No so in this case, but I still won the game by taking two objectives.

Wargame Casualties

Over the years I have used many commercial rules, and without fail keeping track of casualties on the wargames table has always been a problem.   Some handled it well, some badly.   One of my favourites was Peter Guilders “In the Grand Manner” who used small curtain hooks (looking like Polo sweets) which were placed around the neck of one of the figures to represent each casualty.   It kept the clutter off the table and made it easy to move with the unit.   However, to my eye, it did spoil the look of the table, even Peter’s very large and impressive table.

In my campaign games it not only necessary to show the casualties on the table, but also to transfer them to the campaign, which is on the computer.

At the start of each campaign phase all brigades are full strength.   But after the first battle all tabletop casualties are transferred to the computer order of battle.   Most are replaced by reinforcements, but all brigades keep 10%  throughout the remainder of the campaign phase.  So the most casualties any brigade will start the wargame with is 10%

There are three army groups on each side, and each group has three armies.   Each army has three corps.   There are two orders of battle for each army, one on the computer and a hard copy to use on the table.   Above is the hard copy for 1^st Russian Army.   As part of the preparation for each wargame the hard copy is updated from the computer copy.   The figure 1 represents 10% casualties, and in this case eight corps have suffered casualties and now have 10% each.

Photo 1 above shows both armies at  the start of the game, 1^st Russian army is nearest to the camera.    You can see the casualty markers behind the brigades concerned.   1 corps (right) has two casualties, 2 corps (centre) has three  and 3 corps (Ieft) also has three.

Coloured plastic counters are used to indicate casualties.   There are four colours and samples are shown above.   The colour indicates the morale of the brigade, and the number the percentage of casualties.   Blue is fully formed, green is disordered, yellow shaken and red in rout.  Each 10% casualty is minus 1 on combat and morale tests.   Green is also minus 1, yellow and red minus 2.  There are also green, yellow and red markers without numbers.   These show the morale of the brigade even though they may not have any casualties.

The markers are quite small, but distinctive enough to be easy to see even at a distance.   When a brigade takes casualties during a game the marker is increased, but the paper order of battle is not affected.

 

This photo is a close up of 1st corps of 1^st Russian army at the end of move 8.  

1 brigade is in the centre and routing with 20% casualties, it has a red marker 2

2 brigade is still fighting on the hill, it is disordered with 20% casualties, it has green marker 2

3 brigade has routed and been rallied and is returning with 10% casualties, it has blue marker 1

4 brigade is in square supporting the artillery, it is formed with 10% casualties, it has blue marker 1

The artillery have no casualties and are formed, consequently they have no marker

Cossacks only have the 10% casualties they started with, they have a blue marker 1

You can see that even on the first photo, showing the whole table, each marker is easily recognised.   The marker is placed behind the brigade, so each player can easily spot their casualties.  They are less obvious to the other player.

We have used this casualty marker system for many years, and are still quite pleased with it.