Sunday, 5 October 2025

Nordhausen Campaign Phase


Map of Europe

Our next campaign phase is set in central Germany where the Second French Army Group is opposed by the Russian Army.   This is the 23rd campaign phase of the sixth campaign, which started in June 2020.  Nordhausen is the one with the white star.   Each star is a campaign phase and the colour indicates which side won.

There are five campaign areas and each one has a French army group plus an Austrian, British, Prussian, Russian or Spanish army.

Central Germany

There are three regions in central Germany, and the sixth campaign is fought in Erfurt region.   There are nine districts in each region, and each district is a campaign phase.   This campaign is fought in Nordhausen district.   There are nine squares in each district, each one is a wargames table.  

The French won two of the previous four campaign phases, and Russians also won two.  

Nordhausen Campaign Map

The campaign map  covers the area from Nordhausen (on the left) to Halle on the right.   The district border is the dotted purple line in the centre.   The Russian army is deployed to the right of the border, with its headquarters at Halle.   The French army is to the left, with its headquarters in Nordhausen.   The Russian army has orders to cross into Nordhausen district and take the city of Nordhausen.   It  is anticipated that they will have to fight six battles to do so, one for each town.  

Each square on this map is a 2x2 foot square on the wargames table.   There are six tables, one for each town.

Each army group is divided into three armies, and each army has three corps. 

 

Table at  start of wargame


Comment

Most campaigns last approximately 6 to 8 weeks and each wargame about seven to ten days.

I often use a campaign to test new wargame or campaign rules written as a result of the previous campaign.   For a long time our battles/wargames have consisted of one army in defence attacked by the other army.   This photo of the start of a wargame shows what I mean.   The game objectives are the centre three squares, the woods on the left, the hill in the centre and the bridge on the right.   An advance guard of one corps is in position on the hill in the centre.  The other two corps are in the squares either side of the town.   All three attacking corps are off table at the top of the photo, and will arrive at the start of move 1.

For the next  campaign we are going to test play a new deployment.   The three game objectives will be the three squares in the centre of the table.   One army will be in position on the top three squares,  the other on the bottom three.   At the start of move 1 both armies will march towards the three objectives.   This will be similar to an encounter game, where both armies march towards each other.  

There are a maximum of 12 moves in each game, and at present it is not unusual for the attacker to run out of time and the game is decided before either side has really won.  This is because it takes about four moves for the attacker to come within 12” (long range artillery fire) of the defender.   Two to four moves are required for the attacker to use his artillery and cavalry to try to gain an advantage, and then the final four moves for the attacking infantry to reach the defending infantry. 

This new deployment will allow the attacker to fight the artillery and cavalry part of the game, and to reach the enemy infantry.  In addition there should be time for a second or third round of melee to take place, which will allow for rally and counter attack.

Looking forward to seeing how well this works in practice.

4 comments:

  1. Thistlebarrow,

    I've been away for a fortnight and I'm only just catching up with blog posts I've missed.

    I enjoyed your last campaign in Spain, and felt that it was - in Wellington's own words - a close run thing!

    I know that it probably doesn't fit in with your campaign time-frame, but have you ever run a campaign where the French have faced an allied army of - for example - a Russian Corps, and Prussian Corps, and and Austrian Corps?

    All the best,

    Bob

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Bob

      Welcome home, hope you enjoyed your latest cruise. Looking forward to reading about it soon.

      We are fortunate to have enough model soldiers to field whole armies of each major nationality. By that I mean we have more than enough figures to fill our wargames table, which is 6x6 foot. Our campaign is designed to make use of all of those figures, and all of our scenery, by having five campaign areas, each of which has its own French and allied army. That is to say that there is a campaign area for Austrian, British (and Portuguese), Prussian, Russian and Spanish armies. Each area is used in sequence, so each nation gets its moment of glory on the table.

      In addition I have deliberately adjusted the combat and morale ability of each nation so that in all battles, whoever the opponents, both sides have an even chance of winning. Otherwise the player with the Spanish army would have a pretty miserable six weeks fighting the campaign in southern Spain.

      Before I set up the campaign I did, for example, fight multi nation battles like Leipzig. At that time I used national characteristics, so each nation had its particular strengths and weakeness. At that time I was running a small wargame club who met each week in my converted garage. There were usuall about 8-10 players, most of whom did not know a lot about wargaming. These were all "one off" games, and to be honest were often a shambles. It is one of the main reasons I did away with commercial rules, and in particular national characterists, when I wrote my own rules for my current campaign.

      This is not meant to be critical of commercial rules, or indeed national characteristics. We all go through different stages in our wargame journey, and it took me fifty years to reach my current stage. Obviously I enjoyed the various stages, otherwise I would have packed it all in. But for me it is necessary to have a constantly changing (if not improving) set of rules to maintain my interest.

      "Horses for courses" as the very true saying goes

      best regards

      Paul

      Delete
  2. Thistlebarrow -
    I think as time goes by, all war gamers find what they prefer to get from their hobby. On the whole I've gone the self-made rule sets - especially on a 'free' table. But, through the influence of Bob Cordery and others, have become a semi-convert to grid war games for their convenience.

    On the matter of 'national characteristics', I am inclined to look very sideways at such things, unless they happen to involve doctrine or practice. Revolutionary France favoured infantry columns covered by heavy clouds of skirmishers; The Austrians favoured large battalions and squadrons of light horse. Sometimes the weaponry might make a difference. The superb Austrian artillery of the 7YW had largely been overtaken by the ordnance equipping the British, French and Russian.

    But one ought not exaggerate any of these differences. With the exception of my 16-figure Austrian hussars, I don't bother with them. Generally (in my view) such things are bogus, pretty much.

    I always like looking at your battlefields, and the way the armies look on them. I sometimes think it would be nice to see more pics of a given battle, though...
    Cheers,
    Ion

    ReplyDelete
  3. Hi Ion
    Thanks for your comments

    I suspect that if we didn't change out approach to wargaming every so often, particularly in the early years, we would just lose interest. Like you I have gone through many stages, from simple to complicated to "realistic" and everything in between. Each change usually prompted by the release of the latest commercial rule set. Some lasted years, some days. But all proved disappointing in the end. Usually because something happened on the table which I found unacceptable, but when I tweeked that rule it then threw up many more problems. I found that writing my own rules meant that I could fine tune them to the exact type of game I wanted at that particular period. It helped a lot that I only game with my wife now, so there are only two of us to please.

    All of my games take a maximum of 12 moves, to keep pace with the 12 hour campaign day. I used to take a photograph at the end of each move, and I also used to give a more detailed description of the game itself. But all of that is very time consuming, and I often feel I am just doing it for my own satisfaction. So a few years ago I decided to take one photo at the end of each two moves, and to formalise the battle description to make it easy to follow the progress of the game. For me the 1813 campaign blog is just a daily diary of the campaign from 2009. I don't know if anyone else reads it, certainly I never get any feedback. In fact that is the reason I started to include a summary on this blog, where I do get occasional feedback.

    Starting the blog was a good idea, because it provides a discipline to post an update every week. The result has been a fairly strict weekly routine during which I try to fight one wargame, post the report on the 1813 diary and then a summary on this blog. Without that discipline and routine I doubt very much that I could have kept it all going for 16 years.

    regards

    Paul

    ReplyDelete

I have set the settings for comments to come to me before posting so that I will not miss any