Having painted and based a reasonable number of figures for my 'Risorgimento' 1859 Italian campaign project, I have recently managed to complete some scenery too, and found I had enough of both for battle to commence.
This has all been inspired by Neil Thomas' excellent book Wargaming Nineteenth Century Europe 1815-1878, and I took a look at his suggested scenarios for a first game - one thing Mr. Thomas does very well is scenarios. As I have limited space and not too much 6mm scenery, and have not used the rules before, I thought a small battle would be the best place to start. It turns out he has just the thing: Scenario 5 - The Minigame. This is designed for a table only 2 feet ( 60cm ) square, and five units per side - ideal for me.
The terrain is very simple - a village at a crossroads, a wooded area and a hill. Using my Hexon terrain and 6mm scenery I was able to create the table layout quite easily.
The Battlefield: North at the top |
The hexes have no bearing on the game - just very easy to use and give a nice look! As you can see I don't have many trees, but there were just enough ( from Heroics and Ros, I think ) to mark out a 'wooded' area. Buildings are from Timecast and roads MDF from Pendraken, 'surfaced' and painted by me. The village and the hill are objectives for both sides - to win, both must be controlled by the end of Turn 10.
Dice were rolled and a table consulted to decide on army composition. The resulting Austrian force was as follows:
2 x Line Infantry
1 x Skirmishers
1 x Cavalry
1 x Artillery
Quite a nice mix of an 'all arms' force.
Their Piedmontest opponents came up with quite a different army:
3 x Infantry
2 x Artillery
This could be interesting!
Next, roll for sides: Piedmont won an opposed die roll, and opted to be 'Defender', which seemed sensible given their lack of fast-moving troops. As Defenders, the Piedmontese now rolled to discover their baseline - the dice determimed this would be the Southern table edge.
Finally 'Pre-Battle Events', an interesting way to introduce some 'friction' - quite fun for a solo gamer. Each side rolls a dice and consults another table : the Austrians rolled up 'Flank March', meaning that two of their units will appear on either enemy flank. At least one of these must be Cavalry, and none may be Artillery. Another die roll will decide upon which of Turn 2, 3 or 4 they arrive.
Piedmont was less fortunate, rolling up a 'Bogged Down' event - one Artillery unit is eliminated. Not so good!
Here are the resulting armies:
![]() |
Austrian attackers |
defending Piedmontese |
Figures are a mix of Baccus metals ( they have a Risorgmento' range for this exact period ) and Commission Figurines MDF ( a polyglot mix from their ACW and Napoleonic ranges )
Working more or less from the suggested army lists which are also in the book, the units are organised as follows:
Austrians: Line Infantry ( 2 units) Average Quality, Rifled Musket, Loose Order
Skirmishers (Feld-Jagers) : Elite, Rifled Musket
Cavalry ( Cuirassiers ) : Average Quality
Artillery : Smoothbore
Piedmont: Line Infantry (2 units) : Average, Rifled Musket, Loose Order
Grenadiers (1 unit ) : Elite, Rifled Musket, Loose Order
Artillery : Smoothbore.
Conveniently, both sides get just one Elite unit, and artillery are equally matched - the Austrians just have that one unit advantage owing to the poor quality of Piedmontese roads!
Now to deployments - Defender first, each side within 15cm of their baseline, omitting the Austrian 'Flank March' units. Here's how they deployed:
Initial setup - Piedmontese nearest the camera |
The defending Piedmont general secured the hill objective with a unit of infantry and his guns, placed his Grenadiers more centrally by the road, and was wary of a possible flank attack through the woods, hence placed his other infantry unit on there. The Attacking Austrian general was obliged to use his cavalry unit and one other for his Flank March - he chose his next-fastest moving unit, the Feld Jagers. That gave something of a quandry there were only remaining 3 units - two infantry and one artillery -on the table at the start. How to attack against superior numbers? He decided to 'demonstrate' at first, placing one infantry unit on the road through the village, guns in the centre and the other infantry unit out on his right ( East ) flank. The 'Flank March' force arrival time was diced for - they would appear on Turn 3, and on the East table edge. The more open flank would allow freedom to the cavalry, and hopefully allow the hill objective to be assaulted promptly. The Piedmontese may have made a mistake in assuming the woods on their left might be infiltrated..
Here's an 'aerial view', taken perhaps by an intrepid passing balloonist
The scene is set, the forces are about to engage. At the time of writing, the game has not yet been played through, so we will have to wait for the next post here to see the outcome. Let's hope it's an interesting one! Until then, keep well everyone.
Your battle is off to a great start! Thomas’ 19C book is one of my favorites although I have yet to play the rules.
ReplyDeleteMany thanks Jon, this is my first try-out of these rules, so we'll see how it goes! I really like the book, and it inspired me to try the period.
ReplyDeleteI made a QRS years ago if that would be helpful.
Deletethank you Jon, that would be very useful! I need another proper read of the rules before the battle..
DeleteInteresting; I suspect the Austrians will have the harder time of it lacking the prescribed numerical superiority for an attacker, all things being even. It will be interesting to see how much the dice decide matters.
ReplyDeleteNeil
Thanks Neil, I think the Austrians' best bet will be to 'demonstrate' to fix their enemy's attention until the flanking force arrives..
DeleteMr Thomas has a good reputation on scenario so interesting to see how it plays 👍
ReplyDeletethanks Matt, yes Neil Thomas scenarios are usually excellent, hopefully this is no exception!
DeleteVery neat looking set up. Hope you enjoy the game.
ReplyDeleteThanks Mark, glad you like it, I tried to keep things simple! Let's hope the game is fun..
DeleteA great book to use: decent, simple rules with sub-period ‘tweaks’ and further scenario tweaks if I recall correctly.
ReplyDeleteTough ask this one for both sides. Maybe the Austrians have a slight edge.
Chris
Thanks Chris, I really like the book and it has largely inspired me to finally have a go at this period - at least 30 years since first reading G.M. Trevelyan 'Garibaldi and the Thousand'!
DeleteIndeed the dice have delivered an interesting challenge for both sides. I think I agree with you on the likely outcome, but we'll see...
As others have said, a great book and lots of nice scenarios, plus of course the 'army lists', which can easily be used as a guide for other rulesets. Looking forward to seeing how this all plays out, rooting for the Austrians of course!
ReplyDeleteThanks Steve, indeed a great book and the army lists have been pretty useful. I am looking forward to playing this out, but I am of course strictly impartial!
DeleteI really like the battle set up and pre-battle events from NT’s 19C book. They create some really interesting games.
ReplyDeleteThanks Peter, I agree the scenario and pre-battle events are very clever, as we have come to expect from Neil Thomas!
DeleteVery nice looking game David - I like the Pre-Battle Events (random events) idea.
ReplyDeleteThanks MJT, indeed the random events are a very nice touch. Along with the random force selection and the random baseline selection, the scenario must have hundreds of possible configurations..
DeleteHave to join the praise for the 19C book although I must not get drawn into yet another period (once upon a time I did start 1859 figures). It seems to me that the ideas or even the rules can be adapted to ACW so may give that a go. It should be a good game you have planned and I look forward to reading about it.
ReplyDeleteThanks Jim, yes v. easy t be tempted into all sorts of new periods! I'd say certainly adaptable to ACW. As an aside, my Piedmont Cavarly in kepis (not shown here) and Austrian Jagers in broad hats are ACW figures with a 'paint conversion' - easy in this scale!
DeleteReally nice set up David. The game seems ready for some great action. Looking forward to the report of how it unfolds. Great looking units. It was hard to tell the Baccus from the MDF. Great job.
ReplyDeleteThanks Richard, glad you like it. Having just re-read the rules, I am fascinated to see how they work in practise. The two different makers' figures do seem to go together OK, as long as you stick to 'the 3-foot rule'. Actually I confess that all figures on table at the start are Baccus - the Flanking force is MDF, so obviously lighter and can march faster.. (!)
DeleteI have played a lot of the 19C rules set for Franco Prussian games (and we used them for our imaginations Battle of Dorking Game at Warfare one year). They always give a good game and provide quite close combats.
ReplyDeleteI have made a couple of additions with generals that add to morale rolls and also that units have to stay in range of their Brigadier or the CinC to be in command and able to do more than Fire or Move.
This enables you to play a multiplayer game with brigades and without units zipping all over the battlefield.
It also means that there is a reason to have generals on the table, which I always like - the Foundry FPW general sets are particularly good!
Thanks Mike, that's a vote of confidence in the rules! They do look interesting and clever - I think with the small number of units, the game may be quick and bloody!
DeleteVery interesting to hear about your rule tweaks, they sound like good ideas, and i agree nice ot have Generals on the table.
What a great set-up, scenario and initial dispositions for this action. Your 6 mm figs look wonderful and are perfect for a smaller table, who needs any more?
ReplyDeleteBest wishes, James
Lovely sized game, a 2x2 really concentrates the focus so that every unit feels like it is part of the story telling …. The loss of an artillery unit at the outset seems to be a powerful influence on this order-of-battle, it certainly mixes things up a bit.
ReplyDeleteI wish that Neil Thomas would pick up his pen again!
Thanks Norm, and apologies I did not spot your comment for several days, it's been a busy week for various reasons, both good and bad. You're right about the 2x2 game, every unit is vital - plus it's ideal for simply learning the rules mechanisms etc. The 'random events' really do introduce big variations in the scenario, too.
DeleteIn the unlikely event of Mr Thomas reading this, how about a 'Pike and Shot' book? Or perhaps ACW..
Looks like it should be a great game, David, its difficult to see which figures are which, which works well!!
ReplyDeleteThanks Ray, the game is afoot and has had its moments! Hot weather stopped play at the moment but will get back to it soon.
DeleteI was pleased that the MDF and metal figures looked OK together, possibly just because of their small size tbh, hard to see the differences!