Minifigs 7YW 'First Firing' : Gros-Jagersdorf 1757

While continuing with what will very likely be a long project to re-base my recent acquisitions of vintage Minifigs 7YW and AWI  figures,  I did want to try actually using some of them for a game.  I wanted something quick and easy, and conveniently  I had also acquired a copy of the (very simple indeed)  Dominion of Frederick the Great  rules.  

These come with 24 scenarios depticting Battles of the War of the Austrian Succession and the Seven Years War in Europe, so that's very handy. The collection of figures  includes a box full of Russians, and I thought I'd give them a go. Hey presto,  the rules have a scenario for the battle at Gros-Jagersdorf, 1757 - the first major clash between Russian and Prussian forces.  

In the battle, the scenario notes say that a force of 55,000 Russians under Marshal Apraksin invaded East Prussia.  The Prussian Marshal  Lehwaldt made an early morning  suprise attack on them with his much smaller force of about 35,000 troops. In the DoFtG rules, these numbers translated into the following miniature armies: 

Prussians :     2 x Cavalry (Elite),  2 x Line Infantry (Elite) 

Russians:      2 x Cavalry, 1 Cavalry ( Unreliable) - Cossacks,  2 x Line Infantry (1 Fortified),                                      1 x Artillery  

So the Russians have the numbers with 6 units, but all four  Prussian units are 'Elite', which gives an advantage when attacking.  

Initial Deployments: Prussians to the Left

 

I followed the suggested deployment - see above, with Prussians on the left, Russians to the right. The rules don't specify terrain - any advantage or disadvantage is factored in to the unit ratings, for example the 'Fortified' Russian infantry unit.  But I thought I should make it look like some sort of  landscape -  hence the trees, because in reality the Prussian infantry emerged from woodland to attack, I think, and the  river, becuase the Russians had just crossed the River Pregel when attacked.  Prussians simply have Infantry in the centre, cavalry on the flanks; Russians with Cossacks on the left (nearest camera),  the 'Fortified' (i.e dug in, or otherwise prepared for defence) Infantry in the centre and Cavalry on the right.  The second line of units in both armies are the reserves, which may be  brought forward into any sector to replace defeated units.  The opposing armies take alternate turns to attack in one sector (left, centre or rght), and the Prussians being attackers, they go first. 

Turn 1 - Cossacks gone! Guns move up 

 On Turn One, the Prussians duly attacked with their cavalry against the Cossacks - being 'unreliable' these had to take a die roll to see if they would stand, and they promplty  ran away!  The Russian commander moved his guns up from reserve to replace them.  That made an interesting match-up, becuase in the rules when cavalry fight artillery, the guns get to 'fire first', and thus may shoot down the cavalry before they can charge home - but if they miss, the cavalry have an easier die roll to overrun the guns ( and there is a  +1 factor for the 'Elite' cavalry). However,  if the resulting combat is inconclusive, then BOTH units are removed. Therefore if cavalry 'charge for the guns', then they may get wiped out by canister fire, or rapidly sweep the gunners away; but if neither of those then a general melee leaves both gunners and horsemen so disorganised and bloodied as to be ineffective for the rest of the battle. That doesn't seem a bad rationalisation to me, what do you reckon?  So for the Prussians, attacking in that sector would be something of a gamble..   In their turn, the Russians attacked  with cavalry in their Right sector, against Prussian 'Elite' cavalry, and the combat was inconclusive  (both sides rolled a '1'!).   

In Turn Two, the Prussians continued the cavalry fight on the Russian right, and routed the Russian Cavalry there - replaced by the other Cavalry unit.  The Russians attacked in the centre with their Infantry, but could not defeat their opponents - both sides rolled a 'miss'. 

Turn 2 - one less Russian Cavalry..

 For Turn Three, the Prussians pushed their cavalry advantage by attacking the Russian right wing again, and with 'Elite' advantage, routed the second unit of Russian horse.  The last Russian reserve unit (Line Infantry) moved up to hold the flank.  the Russians repeated their Infantry attack in the centre. but rolled low, and saw their Infantry shot down by Elite Prussian musketry.  That left a big hole in the Russain centre, and only two units left.  But each side can try to rally one lost unit per game, and this the Russians did successfully, bringing one of their routed cavalry units back to hold the centre. Would it be enough? 

Turn 3 Russians hanging on, just 

 In Turn Four, those Prussian cavalry just kept pushing forward on the Russian right, and the dice were with them,  routing the Russian infantry there and leaving that flank exposed. The Russians flung their rallied cavalry in the centre into the attack, only to have them shot down by Prussian musketry.  That left them with only their Artillery unit remaining, and an emphatic Prussian victory (re-writing history, as in real life the dogged defence by the Russian troops surprised the Prussians, who were forced to withdraw).  

Turn 4 - all over for the Russians! 

 So, that was all over very quickly, in fact a grand total of 16 die rolls, and I should say that the Russians were quite hard done by, their die rolls didn't produce one 'hit' in the whole game! The Prussian 'Elite' status did give them quite an advantage in combat, especially the Cavalry - an 'Elite' Cavalry charging home against Line Infantry will rout the foot on 'anything but a one', though they might be shot down before being able to contact. I did wonder if the Prussians should be reduced to just three units, or perhaps both the Russian infantry be given the 'Fortified' advantage to reflect their stubborn defensive qualities.   I really should have had a rematch, but it was getting rather late at night, so I left it at that.  I know the Dominion of... series of rules are rather 'Marmite', as they say, but for me they have the advantage of  being able to get a game on the table very quickly and simply, and there are some interesting subtleties in the very simple rules.  I've enjoyed reading Martin Rapier's reports of games in multiple Dominion of..  periods on his The Games We Play blog, and a recent post by 'Prufrock'  on Here's No Great Matter showed how he approached the ancients version (Dominion of the Spear)  sceptically, but was to some extent won over.  As for me, I've got 23 more battles to fight if I want to! 

In other news, the great re-basing continues, with some progress on the next three French infantry units, being Regiments Soissonais, Italian and Touraine. Here they are having been soaked in water to remove the old bases :     

 .. and now some of them attached to their new MDF bases, ready for a couple of coats of nice plain 'old school' green paint  

(hmm, that guy in the front rank has had a few too many vin rouges while waiting for his glue to dry, he'll need straightening up.. ).  Progress a bit slow owing to 'real life' taking us away on family business last week,  but I am hoping to pick up again this week and at least finish these chaps. I will then have at least six French and Swiss regiments ready for action, it will be great to be able to field them en masse with their distinctive 'white cross' royal army standards, just like in the pictures in Charles Grant's The War Game all those years ago (where French units represented the army of the fictional Duchy of Lorraine, and also stood in for the Austrians at Mollwitz, if I recall correctly!).  

I will hope to report more progress next time, plus showing a new acquisition which may give a 'nudge' to both D-Day Dodgers and Ancients projects.  Until then, keep well everyone, and a Happy Easter to you all.  

Dominion of the Spear : Gaugamela 331BC

Having tried, and enjoyed, Dominion of rules in both Pike and Shot and Bismarck  variants, I saw the 'Ancients' version  Dominion of the Spear being used at The Other Partizan show last month, by Wargame Developments for their Alexander the Brief game.  Of course, that made me think 'I have Macedonian and Persian armies for DBA, could I use them for this?' Well, of course I could!  I also liked the printed booklet edition of the rules that they were using - so I ordered myself a set of 'DotS' from Lulu.  I bought a combined book of the basic rules and army lists, plus scenarios for 36 historical battles from Megiddo (1479 BC) to Agincourt (1415 AD). 

 One of those is Gaugamela ( or Arbela ) from 331 BC,  in which Alexander The Great's Macedonians  fought Darius III's Achaemenid Persians - deciding the fate of the Persian empire.   So let's give it a go.. 

The scenario has opposing armies as follows: 

Macedonians:     1 x Elite Armoured Cavalry ( Companions )  

                            1 x Cavalry ( Thessalians) 

                            1 x Elite Armoured Pikemen ( Phalanx )

                            1 x Spearmen ( Peltasts ) 

 

Persians :             3 x Cavalry

                            1 x Chariots (scythed) 

                            1 x Horse Archers

                            1 x Archers

 

So the Macedonians are outnumbered  6 units to 4, but have two very powerful units in the Companions and Pike Phalanx.  I don't yet have a Persian Chariot unit, but in the rules they are equivalent to 'melee mounted'  cavalry, so I simply replaced them with another Cavalry unit, making 4 in all.  I set up a very minimalist table, like this: 

 

The Persians are on the left of the picture, Macedonians to the right. At the top ( Left sector )  the Persian Horse Archers face Alexander's Companion cavalry; in the Centre  we have Persian Cavalry (standing in for Chariots)  against Macedonian Pike Phalanx;   and in the Right sector (bottom of picture) another Persian Cavalry unit is up against the Thessalian  cavalry.  In reserve (far left of picture) the Persians have two further cavalry units and the foot archers,  while the Macedonians (far right) have just their single unit of  Peltasts.    These dispositions were as specified in the scenario booklet.   And so, to battle.. 

 

First of all,  I diced for Attacker/Defender roles - the Persians rolled highest, and were deemed 'Attacker',  meaning they would go first in each turn. There are no less than three suggested variants for activating units in the rules, and I chose 'Option B', whereby on each turn the Attacker chooses one of the three sectors to initiate combat, and after that combat is resolved then the Defender in their turn  gets to choose one sector to fight in (which may be the same one as the attacker chose). 

 

Turn 1 began with the Persian 'attackers' choosing to attack with their cavalry in the Right sector against the Thessalian cavalry - the least powerful front-line Macedonian formation. Both are 'melee mounted' troops, so combat is a simple opposed 1D6 die roll  with a target of 4,5 or 6 to 'hit'.   The Persians rolled a 6 (hit), the Macedonians a 3 (miss) - so the Thessalians were defeated and removed from the game - simple!   When a unit is removed, it is replaced by a unit from the Reserve, if available  - accordingly, the Macedonian Peltasts moved to the Right sector to plug the gap. 

 

After Persian turn 1 - Thessalians gone, Peltasts move up

 

In their turn, Alexander's Macedonians set their Pike Phalanx moving forward to attack the Persian cavalry in the Centre sector.  Having 'Elite' status gave the Pikes an advantage in attack, and being 'Armoured' gave an advantage in defence, so it was not too surprising when the  cavalry was scattered by the mighty Phalanx ( it didn't help that the Persians only rolled a '2' ).   Darius ordered another cavalry unit to move up from Reserve to replace their defeated comrades.  At the end of Turn 1 each side had lost one unit, leaving 5 Persians against 3 Macedonians. 

 

Macedonian Turn 1 : one less Persian Cavalry! 

 On Turn 2, Darius ordered his Cavalry in the Right sector to attack the Macedonian Peltasts, again steering clear of the Companions and Pike Phalanx.  Cavalry and Peltasts being both 'melee' types were evenly matched - this time the dice went Persians 3 (miss) , Macedonians 5 (hit), and the Persian cavalry were routed.  Darius then ordered his foot Archers forward from Reserve.   With only average units facing  'Elite Armoured' Macedonians in the other two sectors, things looked pretty tough for Darius.  And then...

 

Turn 2 : Macedonian Phalanx overthrown! 

 For his Turn 2 activation, Alexander decided to keep his Pike Phalanx rolling forward in the Centre, ordering them to attack the Persian cavalry there. With advantages for being 'Elite' and 'Armoured', it seemed likely to be a repeat of the previous turn  - until the Macedonians rolled a '2' (miss)  and the Persians a '6' (hit!).  With that, the Phalanx dissolved and routed off the field - a serious blow for Alexander!  With no more units in Reserve,  this left their Centre sector empty - a very big hole in Alexander's battle line.  At the end of Turn 2, the Persians had 4 units against the Macedonians 2. 

On Turn 3, could Darius exploit the advantage so unexpectedly gained? He ordered his Centre sector Cavalry unit to make a Flanking Attack on the Peltasts, who would not be able to fight back. Now this was also 'match point', because if the Peltasts  were to be destroyed, Alexander would have only his Companions left on the field - and the rules say that if an army has zero or one remaining unit, and fewer units  than their opponents, at the end of a turn, the battle is lost.  So, rolling for the game - the Persians' dice showed - a '1' !  The Peltasts survived, and Alexander was still in the game.

 

Persian Turn 3 : Cavalry outflank Peltasts 

 

Now Alexander really needed some success to level things up - time for the Companions to attack! Facing them were Persian Horse Archers, and the combat rules decree that these ('Missile Mounted')  would shoot first at the charging Companions ('Melee Mounted'). They did so, a difficult shot owing to the Companions 'Armoured' status  - and perhaps unsurprisingly, missed.  The Companions charging home, had a 'plus 2' on the die roll  ( Elite status and 'Melee vs Missile'), but could only roll a '1' - no result. So, Turn 3 left the overall situation unchanged.    

 

For Turn 4,  the Persians had little option but to repeat their previous attack - their Cavalry in the Centre making a flanking attack on the Peltasts. Sadly for Darius, they also repeated their die roll of '1' - no result, and the Macedonians breathed again.  In their turn, they too repeated themselves, the Companions charging again at the Persian Horse Archers.  Again, the Horse Archers shot and missed, again the Companions charged home, and this time were not to be resisted. the Horse Archers were routed, to be replaced by the last Persian Reserves, their fourth unit of Cavalry. 

 

End Turn 4 :  can Alexander hang on? 

 

Thus at  the end of Turn 4, things looked a bit more equal - 3 Persian units vs. 2 Macedonians. The Companions still a powerful threat, but the gap in the Greek centre equally dangerous.  Could Alexander save himself?  

 

For Turn 5,  the Persians again had really only one option - keep attacking those Peltasts! Accordingly, their Centre sector cavalry charged for a third time at the flank of the Peltasts - and this time the dice gods were with them. They rolled a  '6' , and the Peltasts were duly destroyed.   

 

Turn 5 : Peltasts finally routed

 

Now this spelled doom for Alexander - even if his Companions could destroy their immediate opponents, at the end of  Turn 5 he would have only one unit against two Persians, and would thus lose the battle. So I could have called the game at that point, but I thought I would give Alexander his chance to even things up a little, so I played the Macedonian round. Of course the Companions attacked the opposing Persian cavalry,  but it seems both sides were becoming tired at this point; the Macedonians rolled '2' and the Persians '3', giving no effect. That ended Turn 5, and with just one Macedonian unit facing three Persian,  a famous victory went to Darius.  Perhaps history would be re-written, as Alexander's invading force  was forced to retire and the Persian Empire lived another day..

 

Turn 5 end: Alexander's last charge can't save him

I rather enjoyed that - once again the 'Dominion of..' rules proved very simple but quite clever. Things looked very tough for the Persians at the start, with no unit really matching up to  Alexander's Companions and Pike Phalanx, all 'Elite' and 'Armoured'.  But the dice intervened and the Pike Phalanx must have become disorganised, to be broken up by Persian cavalry - after that, Darius was in with a real chance, and eventually prevailed, not without some difficulty!  I think 'Quantity has a Quality all its Own' also applied, the Persians being able to keep feeding in their cheaper  units to replace losses, stay in the game and hope the dice came up in their favour, whereas Alexander relied on fewer if higher quality units, and was thus more vulnerable to attrition.  Losing the Pike Phalanx was the real killer!      

 

Not everyone's cup of tea, I'm sure, and very much dependent on '1D6'  results, but a fast and furious game  with some tactical subtlety required when deciding where to attack and  which units to call up from Reserve. Actually having a Reserve is perhaps unusual in table-top wargames, and very welcome  (see Big Lee's recent discussion) - in that respect, does this very simple game prove more 'authentic' as a command challenge than many more complex systems? 

 

Like many a simple game, I'm sure there is scope for tinkering and  expanding - the author (Steve Parker)  discusses options for larger armies ( simply more units in reserve, or perhaps  more powerful units ), and for larger battlefields ( increase the number of sectors ), and I wonder if multiple units per sector might be interesting - I assume all these would make for a longer-lasting game and perhaps less of a 'sudden death' style.  The small numbers of units required for a basic game makes it attractive to try out different armies - I have a few very vintage  Airfix Ancient Britains , who might become a Gaulish army, and I think I bought a box of HaT  Carthaginians - so obviously I just need some Romans now.. and so the megalomania starts! 

 

I hope this has been interesting for you; it was certainly good fun for me, and I will no doubt return to the theme. The next big item on my hobby agenda is the Warfare show at Farnborough  next weekend,  which I hope to visit and will try to report on, and those vintage Minifigs 7YW/AWI armies need some proper storage and organisation - and of course, to be used in a game! Until then, keep well, everyone .

'Proper Wargaming' : Edgehill with Pike & Shotte

Earlier this week I was fortunate to have a really great day's 'proper wargaming' - thanks to old gaming friends Reg and Tony. We met at Reg's place at Haverhill, which is a nice easy trip for me. Reg had set up his table with his  15mm ECW collection for a re-fight of  Edgehill (1642), the first big battle of the English Civil War. We  used Warlord Games  Pike and Shotte rules, which I had not played before, though I have been introduced to the Warlord  Black Powder system on which P&S is based, in a couple of previous games with the same guys - and I have thoroughly enjoyed playing them.  

I took some pictures during the day, in a slightly haphazard way - as one does when busy playing the game and learning the rules! I'm afraid  some of them are a bit dark, but I'll include a selection  here to give a flavour of the game. Here is the table at the start of the day: 

Initial setup - Parliament to the Left

I should say that nearly all the scenery ( roads, stream, fields, trees etc ) was purely for decoration and did not affect play, except for the hedges at bottom left, lined with Roundhead dragoons. Tony played King Charles,  and Reg and I shared the Parliamentary command, with me on the right (nearest the camera, left of photo)  - each side had two cavalry wings and the central infantry and guns divided into two sub-commands ( called 'Battalia' in the rules, I think - I'd just call them Left and Right Wing of Infantry), so it was easy to split the Parliamentary army.   Reg had put in a few special rules - the main one being aimed at realistic behaviour from the Royalist cavalry.  Prince Rupert over on the Royalist Right ( top right of picture) had 'Galloper' cavalry up against Parliament's less dynamic  horsemen, who used 'Caracole' tactic (they could not counter-charge, which seemed quite a disadvantage) - so Reg made a rule that if the Royalists routed their opponents, they would automatically then have to attack the Parliament baggage train, which was placed nearby. They would fall to looting and be out of the battle, unless actually attacked by further Parliamentary units. That seemed quite an appropriate rule, and I'm sure we all assumed it would happen - more on that, later! 

For obvious reasons, I was more involved and took more pictures of my side of the battlefield, which was perhaps a shame, as the really decisive action took place over on the other wing, as Reg's horse  battled with Tony/Rupert's Cavaliers!  Anyway, here's my cavalry wing  ( slightly better quality, as I had 'Gallopers'),  and the foot beyond: 

Parliament right-wing cavalry

   and my opponents on the Royalist left :

 Reg's figures were fairly 'vintage' ( I mean that in the nicest possible way) and included both 'second generation'  and 'third generation' Minifigs 15s - I have some of the '2nd Gen' myself, and I rather like them, I think they are  well-proportioned, crisply-sculpted and simple.  And  I reckon they were from the early 1980s, so 'vintage' indeed!  

Over on our left wing,  here are Reg's sturdy 'Caracolers'  moving up steadily:

Parliament left-wing cavalry 

 ..and here are a couple of Rupert's regiments coming in at the gallop ( or maybe 'a good round trot' at least) 

..vs. Rupert's Cavaliers 

 

To give an idea of how things developed, here's an overview of the battle, about the mid-point of the day : 

 Reg and I pretty much stood our ground and let Tony come to fight us - Tony attacked on both wings with his cavalry as expected, and used an interesting manouevre in the centre. He brought forward  most of his second line infantry units into the first line, hence coming at us with just one line  of infantry, and aiming to get superior numbers into action early on and overpower our first line ( not having moved forward much, we didn't have space to imiitate him, but equally I was happy to be more 'conventional' and keep the second line as reserves to feed into the fight as required.  Tony also came forward in something of an 'oblique order', having spotted that my cavalry wing was not going to advance beyond the hedgeline, so would not threaten his infantry flank, therefore  his left-wing foot could move further forward.  

The cavalry wings got stuck in, but not perhaps as expected. It's got to be said that Rupert had something of a bad day! As Reg likes to say, his favourite part of the Black Powder system is the 'Command Rolls',  required to allow units and groups of units to carry out their orders. A very simple die-roll mechanism means you just can't be sure if your orders will be carried out - and I think failures can easily be rationalised as due to messengers not getting through, orders being misunderstood, or regimental commanders being indecisive, incompetent or perhaps even drunk! Anyway for whatever reason, 'Rupert' had quite a lot of problems getting his splendid horsemen to dash forward - he wasn't alone as his opponent had quite a few failed rolls as well! Instead of the expected Royalist steamroller going over the Parliamentary wing, things developed in an much more back-and-forth way. Reg's cavalry could not counter-charge but there was nothing stopping them just charging, and they managed that well enough several times! Quite a classic 'whirling cavalry fight' developed, as you can see here 

Cavalry fight on Rupert's wing - not the expected walkover!

Reg used a simple token system for keeping track of unit status - the 'puffs of smoke' indicated Disordered units, the small green dice were for tracking casualties , and when a unit took enough hits to  reach 'shaken' status the green die was placed on a circular mdf token. So you can see the nearest unit in the picture ( Royalists) is looking rather battered! 

On my cavalry wing, I was well-cast as a cautious early Roundhead leader, deciding to hold the hedge line with my cavalry if possible, thus negating any charge bonus for the other side. Tony wasn't dicouraged by that, and got stuck in of course! We tussled long and hard over those hedges, but I'm glad to say my chaps held their ground, and the Royalists could not break us. Here's a typical melee across the hedge, with the larger red dice used to keep track of hits taken in the melee ( which may of course be 'saved'  before translating to the green casualty dice ).  Looks like my chaps (left) are getting the better of this one, just!   

 

I have to say I managed to miss photographing the most exciting incident on my wing - isn;t that always the way, too busy rolling the dice and reacting to the results! I got a bit complacent and moved one of my central foot regiments forward ( I had been maintaining an alignment with the hedges overall), and they were pounced on by Tony, who sent a cavalry unit galloping hell-for-leather to attack them in the flank  - aided by a highly successful 'up to three moves' command roll!  My regiment was able to go into 'hedgehog', and in fact the Cavaliers never made contact, as they had charged across the front of another Parliamentary regiment and a gun, who all fired like crazy - the horse took enough hits to force a Break Test, which sent them reeling back to their own lines.  They did however have an impact, as the poor Parliament infantry unit was now stuck in 'Hedgehog' and shot to pieces by Royalist foot and guns!

Infantry firefight on the Parliament centre left 

 All along the line the infantry and guns carried on firefights, with plenty of casualties taken and dished out, and Tony's tactic of bringing forward more units came close to working - at one point Reg had three adjacent units all teetering on the edge of breaking, which would have left a massive hole in our centre!  Lucky for us, Tony's next round of firing saw some low die-rolls, Reg was able to rally off some losses and we breathed again! 

and on our centre right 

 Above is my side of the infantry fight, and you can see where a first-line unit had routed under fire, but I was able to feed a second-line regiment into the gap - that felt like authentic tactics. 

Allowing for a lunch break etc,  I reckon we got about five hours of solid gaming in, and it was always absorbing and fun, thanks to my fellow players and the very 'playable' rules.  And the result? Well, on my flank we held those hedges fairly well, and didn't look like we'd be shifted; in the centre there had been fiercesome firefights but no-one had actually closed to 'push of pike', and things looked pretty evenly matched.  But on our left wing, Rupert's Cavaliers actually took quite a bashing from the Parliamentary horse, and I think in the end Rupert's wing lost half its units, and was therefore 'Broken' - quite the opposite result to what I had assumed! That left Reg with enough cavalry in good shape to start rolling up the Royalist foot on our left ( and remember they had advanced in a single line, no reserves - that may have been a fateful decision! ).  So at that point, and with an  appointment for dinner at the local pub, Tony graciously conceded, and 'twas a famous victory for Parliament!  Below you can see the final situation and my excellent fellow players :

 That was a great day's gaming!  Many thanks to Reg for hosting, great figures and table  and  a really good scenario, and Tony for his usual cunning and dynamic play, and all in a great friendly spirit!

We all had some thoughts on the game - we did wonder if the artillery were a bit too powerful, not so much due to the rules,  but perhaps there were too many guns? Both sides were  a little reluctant to charge their foot forward into melee, partly due to the expected effects of close-range guns on the chargers. I have Peter Young's book on the battle somewhere, and am interested to have a look at the OOBs and the numbers of guns.   I wondered if we had also set up a little too far apart - we had both light and medium guns, and both had to move forward slightly to get into range. I think historically the armies deployed within artillery range, and the battle opened with an exchange of cannon shot, as was typical at the time. So perhaps we should have started a bit closer, and given at least the medium guns the chance to shoot from the start, rather than the first couple of moves being taken up with shuffling forward into range. 

The rules, I thoroughly enjoyed - I've talked about about the command rolls, and I do think they are a very neat way of introducing 'friction' to proceedings, in a reasonably authentic way - note that a better commander will succeed with his orders more often, and your C-in-C has the opportunity to 're-roll' some of your failures, which allows you some more agency.   The firing and combat rules are really simple 'roll a bunch of D6', with generally 4,5 or 6 to hit, the opposition allowed saving rolls and the crucial '6 inflicts temporary disorder', which gives a further level of uncertainty - you might save all those hits, but still be disordered by the enemy fire.  As a beginner I didn't get all the concepts and mechanics  straight away, but certainly picked up enough to be playing quite happily, pretty quickly. Reg and Tony are big fans of rhe Warlord BP system, and I can entirely see why ( I just noticed Norm Smith his excellent Commanders web page giving a great little run-through of how the system works for a Napoleonic infantry 'column vs. line' assault - see  'A Run Out With Black Powder', 25th Aug 2025 - , he is clearly a fan too!).   Now I must say that from pure cussedness I think I am not going to get entangled in the Warlord 'universe' and start buying all the multiple editions and formats of rulebooks and scenario books and starter sets, but I'm more than happy to play them as a guest; might even look out for a second-hand set of 'BP' on ebay or whatever, just to be a bit more prepared in future!  

All in all, a really good day's gaming, in good company - many thanks indeed to both Reg and Tony. I look foward to further outings - hmm, it may be my turn to host next, and those recently-acquired 7YW figures might be useful..  I hope this has been interesting for readers, it was certainly enjoyable for me, both to play and to write about.    

Next time, I may be able to present some sort of 'parade' of vntage Minfigs 25mms. Until then, keep well, everyone. 

'Dominion of Risorgimento' : Palestro 1859

In between counting and photographing vintage Minifigs,  I fancied a quick and easy bit of gaming with my 6mm Risorgimento 1859 armies.  I have to thank Bob Cordery for his most timely pointing out that the latest  'Dominion of..'  rulesets to be release included  Dominion of Otto von Bismarck,  which cover the period from the Crimean to Franco-Prussian wars. at around £5 from Wargames Vault, they looked worth a try.   

As you may be aware, these are very simple rules, designed for solo play and using only about 6 units per side, so games can be played in pretty quick time - and from my experience with the Pike and Shot version, they have some interesting and subtle mechanisms. In this case, Infantry are defined as 'Line' (mainly relying on firepower)  or 'Column'  (mainly fighting in assault columns), and this seems a fair reflection of the period. Artillery can be kept in the 'reserve' area and used for bombardment in support of attacks by other units, which can be very effective.

The rules include scenarios and army lists for 24 historical battles, one of which is Palestro 1859, which suits my current  'Piedmont vs Austria'  setup (really must get some French next!),  and with  the forces  comprising five or six units each side, very easy to  find armies for.  So I gave it a go, and here is the intial deployment - Peidmontese nearest the camera. 

 

Historically, the Piedmontese had counter-attacked the invading Austrians and re-taken the village of Palestro on the River Sesia, and the Austrians then attempted to push the Piedmontese out of their defensive positions. In the suggested scenario,  Piedmont has three 'Line' Infantry units in defensive  positions  ( denoted by the walls )  as their front line, with the right-hand unit also being Elite status - these were the French 3rd Zouave regiment on the day, but I used Piedmontese Grenadiers (must get some French next!).  That unit was concealed (hence trees) and could not be bombarded by artillery until they had revealed themselves by engaging in combat.  In reserve (back line) they had two 'Column' infantry units, which were deemed 'unreliable' to simulate the uncertainty of reinforcements arriving. 'Unreliable' units have to roll a die before their first combat - they will either rout and be eliminated, or become 'regular' and fight as normal. You might have noticed that I deployed 'Column' units in a sort of T-shape formation representing the attack column with skirmishers out front, and 'Line' units in simple blocks. 

The Austrian force had three 'Column' infantry units on the front line and ready to attack, plus two more 'Column' units and one Artillery unit in Reserve - the latter being able to fire in support of attacks by the front-line units. So, they had the advantage of one extra infantry unit and supporting srtillery, but were facing 'dug in' defenders, one unit of whom had Elite status. And so, to battle..

The basic turn mechanism is for the attacker to go first and specify one sector of the table (Left, Centre or Right ) to mount an attack, with combat taking place between the opposing front-line units in that sector  ( note that since this is a solo game, it's easier to keep the same sectors as 'Left' or 'Right' for both sides - in this case, as per the photos ). Once that attack is resolved, the Defender takes their turn to attack in their specified sector. The choice of sector is decided by the active player rolling a die - they may be able to choose their attack sector, or have the choice forced upon them, depending how the die roll goes. So there's an element of uncertainty in that decision, the Commanders are not in complete control of their forces and fighting may break out in unintended places - which seems quite a reasonable, 'fog of war' effect.

Turn One opened with an Austrian attack in the Left Scctor (having rolled a high enough score to choose), where on of their 'Column' Infantry faced an entrenched  Piedmontese 'Line'. The Austrians could also have their Artillery fire on the enemy unit first - it did so, but missed.  In the subsequent combat, 'Line' units fire first (all combat rolls are one D6), but have less chance of scoring a hit, then surviving 'Column' units can charge home, with a better chance - rather subtle.  In this case the Piedmontese shooting was too good, scoring a hit and eliminating the attacking Austrians.  An eliminated unit must be replaced from Reserve - so one of the two reserved Austrian  'Column'  units stepped up.  In the Piedmontese turn, the Die decided on a 'Centre' attack;  there were no Piedmontese artillery, so no bombardment. In the combat the  tables were turned, with the Peidmontese scoring a 'miss'  and the Austrians rolling high - the Piedmontese unit was Eliminated, and had to be replaced by one of the two 'Unreliable Infantry 'Column' units from Reserve.   Each side lost one unit in Turn One, but perhaps Austria did better, knocking out a dug-in unit which was only replaced by 'Unreliable' reserves. 

Turn One: Piedmont centre weakened?

 

Turn Two started well for Austria; again getting choice of attack sector, they chose the Centre. Their artillery missed again, but the 'Unreliable' defending Piedmon unit rolled low on its reaction test, and promptly routed! It was replaced by the second, and last, also 'Unreliable' unit from reserve. Piedmontese pride was restored on their turn; the die roll forced them to attack on the Left, but their 'Line' unit there rolled high and defeated the opposing Austrian 'Column' unit. It was replaced by another 'Column', leaving only the Artillery in Austrian reserve. Losses still even at two units each, but that Piedmont centre looked quite worrying, and reserves were denuded..

Turn 2 : Front lines holding, but Reserves almost gone

On Turn Three,  fighting broke out on the Left (decided by the die roll), and the Austrian  Artillery finally got the range, scoring a hit which removed the 'Dug-In' advantage from the defending Piedmont unit.  Piedmont's 'Line' unit then missed, but so did the attacking Austrian Column, so no decision there. The Dice Gods favoured the Austrians, however, as Piedmont's roll  indicated the same Left sector again, the defending Line unit's shooting was again ineffective, and the attacking Column charged home and overran them! With no units left in Reserve, Piedmont could not replace the loss, leaving their Left sector undefended.  Things looked bad for the Italians.. 

Turn 3 : Piedmont Left gone - is it all up for them?

 Would Turn Four spell the end for the Piedmontese?  The Austrian die roll denoted fighting breaking out on the Right, where all had been quiet until then - and here lurked the Elite Piedmont Grenadiers. As noted above, these were concealed and could not be bombarded by artillery, so the Austrian Column had to fight unsupported - and were promptly shot down by the Grenadiers' musketry. This was a double blow, as it forced the Austrian artillery to come out of reserve to fill the front line gap, leaving it unable to bombard in support of other sectors AND facing an Elite enemy!  On Piedmont's turn the worst promtly  happened for Austria - the die roll decided on the Right sector again, and the artillery were sent packing by the Piedmont Grenadiers!  That Elite unit had really proved its worth. 

Now the opposing sides are each allowed one attempt to 'Rally' and bring back one routed unit, and at this point ( luckily I remembered the rule!) both sides took advantage of that  - and both sides rolled high and succeeded. The Austrians were able to rally their Artillery (hmm, perhaps an Infantry would have been better?)  and put it back in place on the Right, and Piedmont rallied one Line Infantry, and filled the gap on the Left.  With three units each left, the Piedmontese had held things together, at least, and their Grenadiers looked well placed for potential further success. 

Turn 4 : successful Rallies fill the gaps

 

Turn Five opened with  the Austrian die roll indicating combat in the Centre, where Column faced Column, so combat rolls would be simultaneous - but first the 'Unreliable' Piedmont unit must test, and failure could spell disaster.  The die was rolled - success, the Piedmont unit held its ground! Better yet for them, in the ensuing combat the Austrians were defeated, leaving their Centre wide open, no reserves available. The Dice Gods were merciless then - the Piedmont roll indicated 'Centre' again, and this allowed the unopposed  Piedmontese centre unit to attack the flank of the Austrians on the left..

Turn 5 - Piedmontese flank attack

 In a flanking attack, the attacker gains an advantage on its die roll and the defender cannot fight back - and the Piedmontese attackers rolled high. The last Austrian Infantry unit was sent routing, and with only their Artillery unit left to oppose three enemy units, Austria was soundly defeated! 

How it ended - only Artillery remain for Austria! 

 

So that was that; I rather enjoyed the game. For such a simple syatem, there are some interesting and subtle features which felt 'right', and for fans of quick games, it probably would have taken only about half an hour, had I not been taking plentiful notes and photographs.  Apart from just 'a quick game', the obvious use for this would be for a 'mini-campaign' where map moves could generate  multiple battles which could each be resolved very simply and quickly.  I also think that it would be interesting to 'tweak' and add to the rules; I think it might be worth making 'bigger' games,  perhaps increasing the number of sectors on the board and/or maybe the number of units per sector, and perhaps bringing in more terrain effects and thus enabling more 'meaningful' terrain to be placed? My only hesitation about the basic system is that  the commander's choices can feel quite limited  ( the downside of the die roll for sector choice), and there isn't really a concept of 'manouevre' - would it be good to be able to move units between sectors, to bolster weak points or reinforce successes?  I'm sure others have been thinking along some or all of these lines.

For a quick and simple game, that has set quite a few thoughts running, as well as simply  being enjoyable.  I hope my description has been of interest to you, too! 

Now I need to get back to sorting through the 'Minifigs haul' - more pictures to come soon, Probably before that happens, though, I am  lucky enought to be promised a bit of 'Face to Face' gaming this coming week, with Black Powder's  Pike and Shotte variant and Edgehill 1642 as the scenario, which promises to be interesting and fun, and will be fully reported in a future post, if possible.   Until then, keep well everyone and (if in the UK)  enjoy your holiday weekend!

Risorgimento 1859: Primo Incontro

 In my last-but-one post  I set out the initial deployments for my first game using 6mm scale armies for the Italian war of 1859 - now the game has been completed, and I can report how things went. 

To quickly recap, I used the 'Minigame' scenario fron Neil Thomas' excellent Wargaming Nineteenth Century Europe   - and of course the rules from the same book.  The defending Piedmontese are nearest the camera in the picture below, with attacking Austrians in the entirely fictional village of Primo Incontro and ranged along the road at the top.  

 Unbeknown to the Italians, a flanking force of Austrian cavalry and Jagers would arrive from  the East (right) on turn three.  Whoever controlled the village and the hill after ten turns would be the winner. 

 The attacker always goes first, so on Turn 1 the Austrian 1st Infantry (on the road East of the village) formed column and began to advance on the hill, while their 2nd Infantry deployed for the defence of the  village. Their artillery (on the road between the two infantry units) opened fire on the Piedmontese (2nd) Infantry unit on the hill.  The general idea was to 'pin' the Piedmontese near the hill and keep them busy until the flanking force arrived, while simply holding the village against any attack.  It seems that the Austrian gunners were somewhat  out of practise, missing with their first shot.  

The firing mechanism is simple - assuming in range and line-of-sight, roll a number of D6 dice per firing base (artillery have one base), which in the case of Smoothbore Artillery is 2 dice. The score required to hit depends on the target type - in this case Loose Order Infantry ( i.e. lots of  skirmishers backed by a formed 'main body' )  in Line, among  the hardest to hit. Needing 5 or 6 on each D6, the gunners rolled a 1 and a 3 - better luck next time. 

In response, the Piedmontese  Grenadiers advanced up the road towards the village, with the 1st Infantry unit following them up.  Piedmont's artillery near the hill opened fire on the advancing Austrian 1st Infantry - a slightly easier target as the Austrians were in column formation - and were clearly more practised than their opposite numbers, scoring  2 hits with 2 dice.  If a unit suffers 4 hits, it will lose a base ( infantry have  4 bases ), so no immediate effect, but the Austrian foot were taking casualties..  What's more, their advance had brought them within range of the Piedmontese 2nd Infantry's  rifled muskets - these let loose a volley ( muskets get 1 D6 per base, so the fresh unit rolled 4D6 ) and scored a further two hits.  Thus the Austrian foot had suffered 4 hits and must lose one of its four bases:  this in turn triggered a morale test. 

Morale tests are very simple, triggered by (a) losing a base to fire (b) cavalry fired on by a unit they are charging, or (c) losing a hand-to-hand combat. The procedure is a simple 1D6 roll, with poorer quality troops less likely to pass. If the test is failed, a complete base is removed - simple but quite 'impactful'.  The Austrians rolled - and failed, losing another base, as men presumably dropped out of the formation rather than face the withering fire.  So this Austrian unit was reduced to half-strength by concentrated fire in one turn - clearly these rules lean towards the 'fast and furious'!

With apologies for the strong shadows of a sunny afternoon in Lombardy, above  are the somewhat battered Austrian foot (top)  facing musketry and cannonade at the end of the first turn.

 For Turn Two, the Austrian 1st Infantry came to a shocked halt and formed firing line, rather than trying to advance further.  Their  artillery  and 2nd Infantry (in the village) held position. All three units gave fire:  the artillery and 1st Infantry versus Piedmont 2nd Infantry on the hill, and the 2nd Infantry from the village fired on the Piedmont Grenadiers column. The diminshed 1st Infantry and obviously poorly-trained gunners both missed, but the 2nd Infantry scored two hits on the advancing Grenadiers. In Piedmont's turn these same Grenadiers thought better of advancing under more fire, and formed line to return fire. 1st  Infantry came up on their right in column, to give support. The Grenadiers opened fire on the village - and missed.  On and around the hill, the Piedmontese guns and 2nd Infantry kept pounding Austrian 1st Infantry, between them inficting three more hits. That Austrian unit was looking very ragged by now - the flanking force couldn't arrive too soon!  Piedmont's general may have had some reasons for confidence, having almost shattered one Austrian unit and massing infantry for a possible attack on the village - hopefully his artillery could switch to fire in support. 

End of Turn 2 : Piedmont looking strong

 And so to Turn Three - and things started to happen very quickly!  The Austrian flanking force could appear anywhere on the Eastern (right) edge of the table - of course they chose to arrive near the hill. They were close enough to allow the Austrian cavalry to immediately charge the Piedmont (2nd) Infantry on the hill, taking them in the flank! In these rules, cavalry are pretty vulnerable to fire, and must check morale if fired on during their charge ( even if no bases lost ), so frontal charges look authentically ill-advised : but from the flank, the infantry have no chance to fire..   The accompanying Jagers, in skirmish formation, advanced in support on the cavalry's left (South).   

Before the cavalry attack could be resolved, the remaining Austrian firing must be carried out - and the appearance of support must have raised morale along the line.  The 2nd Infantry in the village inflicted another hit on the Piedmont Grenadiers, the  Austrian gunners finally found their mark, and the battered 1st Infantry also scored a hit - these latter two on Piedmont 2nd Infantry, to add to their woes as the cavalry thundered in! 

Turn 3 : Cavalry charge - to the flank! 

 For Hand-to-Hand combat, each unit rolls a number of dice per base, and for cavalry vs, foot in Line that is 3 dice, plus one dice per base for the flank attack. Which gave the Austrians 16 dice.. needing 4,5 or 6 to hit. This is what 16 dice looked like: 

 

Seven hits, that will be pretty devastating. The Piedmont infantry had a basic one D6 per base, and I generously gave them a couple of extra dice because half the Cavalry unit was downhill of them - 6 dice. They did relatively better -  4 hits - but not well enough to stave off disaster...

Having already taken 2 hits from firing, the Piedmontese foot suffered 9 hits in all, therefore lost 2 bases.  Suffering 7 hits to 4 in the melee, they had lost the hand-to-hand combat round, and had to take two morale tests as a result.  One of these tests was failed, so another base gone, leaving only one base. The shattered remnants of the unit must retreat 12cm, and fell back alongside their artillery (which was now looking very vulnerable!).  The victorious Austrian Cavalry, having taken 4 hits, lost one base, but needed no morale check having won the combat, and might now inflict further mayhem.  A disasterous blow for Piedmont! 

On Piedmont's turn,  frantic re-aligning was needed, the guns swinging around 90 degrees to face the rampaging cavalry - but as a result, could not fire. The threatened attack on the village had to be abandoned,  with 1st Infantry turning East and marching hurriedly to support their comrades on the right.  The Grenadiers pulled back from the village, out of musketry range.  The only firing was from the shattered 2nd Infantry's sole remaining base, which did at least score a hit on their Austrain cavalry nemesis. Small compensation..

End of Turn 3 - quite a change!

 

Turn Four, and  the inevitable happened: the Austrian Cavalry just kept going, charging at the Piedmont guns! Now the procedure is that the defenders fire first, before the chargers move in. So the guns fired at long range, rather than close (canister) range. Which does leave a rules quibble - musket-armed troops , for example, being charged are allowed to fire even if the chargers start out of musket range - but there is no equivalent statement about artillery being able to fire at close range using canister. I wondered about a 'house rule',  perhaps a die roll test to see if the gunners can hold their nerve and wait to fire case-shot?   Anyway, I treated the cannon fire as long range, the guns had 2D6 and scored 1 hit. That was enough to trigger a morale check on the cavalry, who failed the test and lost a base - but two bases still remained to charge home.  

Meanwhile the Jagers (skirmishers)  had the capability to fire and move (or move and fire), firing first at Piedmont 2nd Infantry ( missed) and then moving forward, swinging round to threaten the flank of their target.  At the same time, Piedmont's 1st Infantry was hurrying across the Austrian front, and attracted fire from both the Austrian guns and their 1st Infantry, who needed to turn 45 degrees  - this reduced their fire effect somewhat.  The Piedmontese escaped unscathed - both guns and muskets missed. 

Which brings us to the crucial clash as the Austrian Cavalry charge hit the Piedmont guns.. The cavalry rolled 4D6 per base - so 8 dice in all.  The gunners had only 1D6 in reply, and things went all too predictably - the cavalry rolled no less than 6 hits, and the gunners none.  Six hits of course wiped out the Piedmont artillery - strike two to the Austrian horsemen!   

In all that excitment, I omitted to take a 'before' picture for the cavalry vs artillery melee: all I can show is the 'after', with a gap where the guns used to be.. 

 On their turn,  more frantic re-organisation from the Piedmontese - their 1st Infantry in column was now looking at the still-rampaging enemy cavalry and feeling quite nervous!  They hurriedly formed line, ready to fire. 2nd Infantry's single remaining base formed into column and retreated as fast as they could, taking shelter behind their comrades.  The Grenadiers were summoned to help too, marching to meet the Austrian Jagers and prevent an envelopment. All thoughts of taking the village were forgotten..  In the Firing phase, 1st Infantry loosed off a volley at the enemy cavalry and did well - 4 hits! ( Cavalry are very  vulnerable to fire )  That took another base from the cavalry - they passed the required morale check, but had only one base left. Perhaps their run of luck was ending at last.

Turn 4 End: Piedmont shoring up their flank

 On Turn 5, the Austrian commander wisely pulled his cavalry back, moving the Jagers onto the hill - thus for now,  Austria held one and contested the other battlefield objective. Their 1st Infantry held position, and their 2nd Infantry were emboldened to advance from the village, up the road to threaten the Piemont left.  No less than 3 Austrian units ( artillery, 1st Infantry and Jagers) poured fire onto Piedmont 1st infantry, but only the gunners were accurate, and scored just one hit. Piedmont in their turn formed the Grenadiers into line, turning to face the Austrians coming down the road; the remnants of 2nd infantry supporting them, while 1st infantry held position, giving fire at the Austrian 2nd Infantry, who are within range and a 45 degree firing arc.  Their volley scored 1 hit, but the Austrians had accumulated 3 hits previously, hence lost a base - and then failed their morale check, and lost a second and final base.  Austrian 1st infantry fell apart, some respite for the Italians.  the Austrians still seemed to have the upper hand, but had taken greater losses ( 7 bases to 4 ) and had only one full-strength infantry unit against two Piedmontese.

End of Turn 5 : the hill is contested 

 

The Austrians might still prevail, if they could  hold the objectives, so on Turn 6 their 2nd Infantry halted on the road, the Jagers held position on the hill, and the remaining cavalry base manoeuvered to threaten the flank of the Piedmont 1st infantry.  Their guns and Jagers kept up a steady fre on that same infantry unit, which suffered two more hits. This was worrying for the Piedmontese, but did not stop them wheeling to fire on the enemy cavalry - with good effect, scoring no less than three hits, enough to remove the cavalry's fourth and final  base.  A short but spectacular career for those Austrian horsemen!

By Turn 7,  it was clear to the Austrians that they could no longer win, but hoped they might hold out for a draw. Their 2nd Infantry retired towards the village, intent on holding that objective. The Jagers still held position on the hill, and the gunners kept firing. But the dice weren't with them - firing on Piedmont 1st Infantry, both Jagers and guns missed.  Piedmont's commander was now determined to recover the hill, with 1st Infantry turning their muskets on the enemy Jagers (scoring 1 hit) while the Grenadiers formed column and marched towards the South of the hill - the Jagers now threatened by two full infantry units and at risk of being outflanked.

Turn 7 : Austrian Jagers  (right) under threat

 Turn 8 saw the end of the battle.  The Austrians simply held their positions, and their gunners dealt a blow to 1st Piedmont infantry, scoring a hit which removed a base, with the infantry then failing their morale check and losing a second base. But in their turn, the Piedmont infantry were able to form column and  charge at the Jagers - the latter's fire scored one hit, but to no effect, and the Italians charged home. In the resulting hand-to-hand combat the skirmishing Jagers were no match for an infantry attack column, suffering 2 hits to 1 and losing the combat. Being forced to retire 12cm, the Jagers were dislodged from the hill, with no real chance of retaking it.  

With losses at 8 bases for the Austrians vs. 6 bases for Piedmont, both sides had taken pretty heavy casualties. Each side held one objective; Austria the village, Piedmont the hill. Piedmont could hold the hill with two infantry units while keeping out of artillery range, but did not have the strength to take the village, which was  occupied by infantry and supported by guns. Austria could hold the village, but had nothing available to take the hill.  At which point, I called an end to the fighting, and declared a draw. 

Turn 8 and the end : an honourable draw

 

The butcher's bill: Austrians at front

 I thoroughly enjoyed this game, and really liked the rules - in true Neil Thomas style, simple but subtle, I think!  The action moved quickly, rules were assimilated easily, and felt 'right' for the period. In particular the effects of firepower are becoming more powerful, and cavalry is very vulnerable to musketry, so don't try a frontal charge - but if you can take the enemy in the flank...! Only one rules query came up ( the one about guns using canister when charged ), and I feel a simple 'tweak' should sort that out. One 'classic' tactical scenario did not come up, as no infantry column managed to get within charge range of an enemy infantry line; it would have been nice to work through that situation and see how it worked out - bloodily, I suspect!  I have perhaps given  too much detail  here for some,  given the small size of the game, but I did want to explain some of the basic mechanisms - I think they work pretty well.  Given the quite fast and furious nature of the game, I think these rules should be pretty good for much larger battles, too - better get  painting  some more units! 

I hope this has been interesting and fun for anyone thinking of trying these rules and/or  this period - well worth a go, I'd say!  I am much encouraged and will try a more ambitious setup next time. 

My next hobby event is due this very evening,  as I step up to enter the medieval mincing machine that is Jon Frietag's  WotR  Battle of  Mortimer's Cross!  I look forward to that, and to his report after the game. Next time here, perhaps some more thoughts on the Risorgimento, orders of battle and possible future games.  Until then keep well, everyone.