Through the square window , some more thoughts!

The ruleset's author, Gordon Crawford, has been in touch via  Facebook and kindly shared his thoughts on why the game does things the way it does and what he would change if he were to make changes.  We also exchanged opinions on how to make the rules more closely mirror the combat experience of the British Civil Wars.  Rather than paraphrase here is Gordon's comment from my FB post on the '17th century wargaming' board.

"I agree about the out of command/army morale test order. It is quite difficult to fail the ACT unless your army has already largely voted with its feet. I wonder if I originally intended to have minuses in it for OoC units.

On the morale, use of D8s would mitigate any harshness. My knowledge of ECW battles is very superficial and I would like to hear any tweaks you think improve the rules for ECW

Of course the rules were written for 30YW battles

Most 30YW battles were over very quickly and the significant disparity between victors and losers loses is down to most casualties occurring during the flight of which only a minority seem to have been caused by the victors.

There are also numerous examples of units taking off while in in real peril and therefore I think the fragility of units under the morale system is about right for 30YW.

The dominant feature of battles as opposed to smaller actions is CHAOS. The examples of generals influencing events once the battle begins are few and much depends on the initiative of individuals at btn and sqn level. There is too the natural reluctance of troops to close and this is built into the morale system.

It also emphasises the superiority and importance of the "well trained".

Sorry to have gone on so long but lastly two things I would definitely change (there are plenty of other things I would do differently but I don't believe on 2nd editions when things are working ok).

1. In the morale results under 2. If a unit when charged gets a retire result it does not retire but instead halts. This anomaly has suddenly begun to crop up in our recent games.

2. Light guns unlimbered should have 2 actions but may only perform any action once.

Regards. Looking forward to your next blog"

I went on to suggest that for British Civil War actions an additional cavalry type mid way between Cuirassiers and the existing Arkebusier type would be a possibility. My thinking was that they would shoot like the current cavalry type, melee with 3D6 per base but not have the charge bonus or first charge bonus of the charging cavalry type. It is quite spooky how closely his thinking on pike and shot warfare aligns with my own as independently Gordon suggested 3D6 melee combat per base as an option.

This is the type of cavalry I have in mind as a 'later arkebusier'

He then raised the issue of Scots Lancers!  As I understand it these were not formed into separate squadrons but each formation had a troop or two armed with lances.  That leads me to think that they might be best modelled by giving Scottish horse a lower combat rating but a charge or alternatively first charge bonus against cavalry to account for the lance at first contact.  The alternative is to simply ignore them and assume they are included in the unit but only in small numbers, which is what I did in the play tests.

Scottish lancer (I think this is from a Blanford publication)

As for morale I have an idea to simply reduce the chance of a routing unit dissipating on a failed rally from rout test.  Instead of it dissipating on a 1,2 or 3 I'd reduce it to on a 1 or 2 and have a roll of 3 or 4 be continue in rout with (as before) 5 or 6 is a rally.  This coupled with only the roll of a second 6 allowing poor troops to rally would still leave those poor units at a significant disadvantage as they automatically dissipate at the end of a second rout move.

As for pursuit my issue is that rout and pursuit moves appear to occur both following melee and again after any failed rally from rout tests at the start of the following turn.  This may be intentional but I'm hoping Gordon can enlighten me further.

More markers!

As mentioned in the previous post I needed to create some additional markers to show when troops have; dropped their pikes on routing, haven't made their first charge (for Charging Cavalry) or are ready to fire a salvo.  These are all temporary statuses which I need to keep track of  hence the need for markers.

So these are what I came up with from left to right they are "Salvo fire available", "First charge available" and "Pikes Dropped".

The latter are used to show both where they were dropped and which units now don't have their pike for melee so I need two for each unit which routs as dropped pikes can be recovered.  I just need to glue them to some card now ready for next time.

More 6mm Pike and Shot troops

 A few weeks back I made a purchase from the new supplier of Irregular Miniature 6mm.  These consisted of some Cuirassiers, some early pike and shot (in helmets), light artillery and as a bonus a free base of sheep (of all things).  I have also been rebasing a few bits and pieces I hadn't gotten around to when I was doing the rest of my Irregular pike and shot figures.  I still have a fair number to paint but I moved these new figures to the head of the painting queue to see what they look like when completed.  The others, well that is a job for next month.  At the last count I actually have over 1,000 unpainted 6mm figures airplanes and vehicles languishing in the lead pile, so next month and quite a few months after in reality!

These figures are a joy to paint

And look just as nice from the rear

The pike and shot figures and artillery are nice castings but the cuirassiers are starting to show their age and have more flash between figures than I would like.  Rather more than I could manage to remove in fact.  Thankfully once painted it doesn't really show up too badly.  I could go with Baccus for any further cuirassier purchases but the rest of my troops for this period are from Irregular so I'm going to stick with them and maintain continuity.

The heavies!  Three quarter armoured cuirassiers

As always with Irregular's 6mm stuff they paint up far better than the raw castings suggest will be the case and I don't think they look half bad once finished and painted.  I have painted the foot as part of the Swedish Yellow Brigade, but will actually split them into two units when I add an additional pike base to give me two thirds of that brigade as it was deployed at first Breitenfeld.  The Cuirassiers are more generic TYW types who will be equally at home in several different armies for that conflict.  The same goes for the artillery.  As for the sheep they don't seem to care whether they are Catholic or Protestant sheep as long as there is grass to munch!

Artillery: smallest calibre to the left getting larger as you move right

Sheep may safely graze mainly because the Yellow Regiment is as far away as possible

Through the Square Window second test game.

Onwards to battle with a new understanding of the melee combat rules under my belt.  The scenario remains the same as the first test game although I have now added some small woods for the Scottish Dragoons to lurk in and both sides have a base of light artillery.

As last time the Scottish infantry is better than the English but their horse is less effective in melee being Harquebusiers v charging cavalry.  Thinking about how the rules work both sides decided to start the game with a slower advance than last game.  This is to keep back an action for emergency use if charged.  To offset the impact of IGO-UGO mechanisms units may keep back an action for use in evading, counter charging or forming a pike square if the other player declares a charge in their turn.  This is of real value as cavalry counter charging are not subject to a disadvantage in melee and evading makes sense for lightly armed types.  It creates a dilemma for players though as by hold back an action they must either not move (to be able to shoot) or not shoot to be able to move!  Units which have not advanced at least 5cm can suffer badly on poor morale rolls. 

Other than some ineffective artillery fire both sides restricted themselves to moving forwards in the first turn.  I have learned the value of keeping moving forwards if morale tests are required.  Remember if a unit hasn't advanced at least 5cm and they are required to take a morale test it is much easier to rout them!  

Move two was where both sides got down to business.  The Scots having won the initiative dice roll open fire with their harquebusiers and one infantry battalia targeting the English horse to try to whittle down their advantage in strength points as this has a direct impact on melee performance as well as triggering morale tests if hits are scored.  The result is some minor casualties and two units are stopped in their tracks.  In reply the English continue their steady advance and then their entire infantry frontage erupts in musket fire, while their horse declare charges against their opposite numbers.  In response the Harquebusiers elect to counter charge, hoping that the previous round of shooting will weaken the incoming English.  This is going to be interesting.

The end of the second turn.  The English are advancing.

Charging cavalry have more combat dice than harquebusiers (3 per base versus two per base) plus they gain an additional dice per base for charging or counter charging and a further additional dice for their first charge of the game).  Hmm I need a 'not yet charged' marker for their unit bases to keep track of that.

Surprisingly the lighter Scottish horse weather the storm and none of them rout!  While the English don't loose any combats ,their are a couple of drawn fights and a couple where the Scots morale test requires them to retire.  Still the Scottish horse live to fight for another turn, which is a result for them!

Turn three sees the Scots win the initiative roll (again) and they elect to stand so that they can both shoot and keep an action back to handle any English charges to contact.  This is not at all what the English wanted!  If they had won initiative they could have charged home before the Scots had chance to do anything.  This is due to the way the turn sequence works.  Player one moves and shoots then player two moves and shoots and then melee occurs.  The key is that units which charge or are contacted by a charge cannot shoot.  So the player with initiative has the chance to contact their enemy before they have chance to shoot.  BUT that only allows a counter charge or an evade not a round of shooting.  Clever mechanism really.  

Both sides have gotten down to it at the end of turn three

Anyway back to the game where all of the above is of no consequence as the Scots have the initiative. As in the previous turn the Scots stand their ground relying on firepower to weaken the English as they attempt to close to to contact.  Lets just say that their shooting was a little lack lustre some hits are inflicted but no halts or retirements.  The Dragoons in the woods are advancing and I'm beginning to see the value of difficult terrain.  Difficult terrain gives a small cover bonus for shooting and limits the troop types which can enter the knock on effect being that it limits the enemy ability to close to melee.

On the English turn they continue to close in and where ever possible they declare charges.  The poor quality English Foot are at a lesser disadvantage once they close to contact than they are when shooting so really want to move through the beaten zone as fast as they can.  That of course assumes that they will be able to weather the musketry and pass the charge test.  The charge tests didn't go exactly to plan with multiple units refusing to charge.  However some units do charge home and one Sottish foot unit panics and routs at the sight of the incoming cavalry unit rather than wait to slug it out!.

The Scots are starting to look a little ragged as those  English cavalry squadrons which manage to charge home inflict casualties and break one arquebusier squadron on the Scot's right wing.  It could have been a lot worse if all the English horse and foot had charged home.  As it is two Scottish Infantry battalia are retiring along with two cavalry units, but overall they are hanging on in there looking for their chance to dish it out.

Turn four has now come around and for the first time the Army Morale test could be failed by both sides.  This test takes the army strength point value (slightly confusingly this is not the total of all the units individual strengths, but a separate and lower value based on the number and types of units in the army)   This number is divided by six (rounding down) to decide the number of D6 rolled to check each army's willingness to continue in combat.  If the total score on the dice is equal to or lower that army strength points lost. routing or retiring from morale tests the army withdraws.  In this game both armies are rolling three dice so the lowest score they can roll is, of course, three. Both armies have units valued more than this routing, retiring or lost (just).  However both sides roll good and high and the fight goes on.  The Scots manage to rally a couple of routing units which avoids having gaping holes in their line but those units cannot do anything else for the rest of turn while they reorganise.

This time the English win the initiative roll and elect to move first in an attempt to get to grips before the Scots can shoot.  Remember chargers and chargees (is that a word) cannot shoot and this includes troops who declared a charge and failed to move!  Again the tests for charging don't go as well as the English had hoped and several units stall.  Most of their cavalry had elected to close up and shoot which with hindsight might not have been the best idea.  Still they manage to pursue the broken Scot's cavalry staying hard on their heels.  Elsewhere one English infantry unit panics and routs rather than charge home and two others simply stand where they are rather than close upon the Scottish foot.   This is not a good place to be as they are under the Scot's muskets at close range!  One unit does close to melee though. 

It was all looking so good for the English at the start of turn four

At the end of the English turn they have seen one Scottish infantry unit routing and have destroyed two cavalry squadrons.  

The Scots now ramp up the pressure.  Two Infantry units are eligible to fire salvoes and do so, into the ranks of the already wavering English foot.  Both target units break and flee (remember all the English foot are rated as poor and so cannot rally from rout so that is the end of their battle).  A third battalia is then broken in the melee combat phase.

Now we do the checks at the start of turn five and the English fail their army morale test ending the game.  They needed to score better than eight and only managed to roll five.  The Scottish dice were kinder rolling twelve which is more than enough to pass their army morale.

The end game. 

The red line shows the extent of the English advance and how their cavalry were starting to work around the flanks of the Scottish centre.  With hindsight it would have been better to refuse the centre for a couple of extra turns to allow the English cavalry to exploit their advance.

Further thoughts on these rules

I still really like these rules, although the way they are laid out creates some slight confusion.  Some examples of play would have helped make things clearer.  In the end I created a quick reference sheet and expanded on the sequence of play to remind myself about exactly what happens at each stage of the turn.  The main area of confusion was (and remains) pursuit as it is possible to read the references (which are in a couple of separate places in the rules) in two ways.  

There are a couple of things I would change (come on you knew I was always going to fiddle with things).  Firstly I'd switch Army Morale testing and Army Command phases around so that Morale comes first.  After all if the army has broken it doesn't matter if units are out of command range.  Secondly the morale test rules are a bit harsh for my taste.  Units have a basic one in six chance of routing on any morale test other than one taken to commence a charge, followed by a fairly hefty 50% base chance to dissipate (be removed from play) on attempting to rally from rout.  I like the morale mechanism but I'm less keen on the outcome tables.  Still I will play a few more games before meddling with those.  Lastly, and this is a really minor thing.  Poor units can't rally from rout.  I'd be tempted to give them a very slim chance of doing so perhaps by giving them a 2D6 rally test and only rallying on a double 6 result with a hefty chance of dissipating and an auto dissipation after the second rout move.

For me the key is that the rules are easy to learn, reasonably easy to remember and give a good game once the details of the turn sequence are nailed down. 

Lies, Damn Lies and Statistics

Way back when I took a class in statistics, it taught me an important lesson.  Never trust anyone else's data analysis unless you can see exactly how they created the statistics.  this, of course goes double for politicians!  It also provided me with one of my favourite quotes "It has come to my attention that politicians use statistics rather like a drunk uses a lamp post, more for support than illumination".  Still I like statistics, or at least I like my data sets.  So it upsets me when my own data bites me in the bum.  You see it turns out that since retiring and loosing my weekly fix of tabletop action with Trebian's Monday Night Gamers (you know the ones who meet on a Tuesday) I am actually less of a wargamer and more of a writer about wargaming!

So far this year I have played three, yes that's THREE, games only!  I really need to get my finger out, don't I.  After all the numbers don't lie.