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 .

'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!