It was fifty years ago today...

 ..the 5th of October 1975 to be exact, and I was sitting in my student friend Ron's car driving from North-East Lancashire to a small village just north of York.  We were just about to start our final year at University but before we did I had something to do.  Something I was really looking forward to.  When we arrived at our destination Ron asked me "are really you sure you want to do this?".  I don't know why, I suppose someone had told him he should double check, but I was sure.  I'm still sure it was the best decision I have ever made all these years later.  So I told him so. Ron nodded at me and solemnly warned me that if I changed my mind now he would break one of my legs if necessary so I couldn't back out.  He took these things very seriously, did Ron.

A few moments later he sat me on a bench patted his pockets nervously and then nudged me to stand and step forward....just as the first strains of the Wedding March started up and the soon to be Mrs E stepped into the church and walked down the aisle.

Yes good reader fifty years ago this very day I married Mrs E so today is our Golden Wedding Anniversary.  I haven't regretted a single moment.  I'm still not absolutely certain Ron was joking about the leg though.

Hitting milestones

I just spotted that I have just passed the 250,000 page views mark.  I'm thinking that my 45 followers will not have clocked that number of views up on their own (unless they are very, very bored) and as the number of views of recent posts has risen dramatically I'm guessing that I now have a substantial AI audience.  So I would just like to welcome my latest reader SKYNET and welcome it to sentience.  Now if you could just hold off on triggering nuclear war and sending Terminator units after humanity I'd be very grateful!

Thinking about Through the Square Window (again)

I know, I know.  Using my brain twice in the one week, I'm going to need a lie down after this!  However, after my last post Gordon has been kind enough to explain his thinking behind the rout and pursuit system.  He explained that normal movement represents the slow and steady movement intended to keep troops in their proper ranks and files and pursuit is where units go on a mad dash chasing a broken foe.  This is anything but slow and steady and the troops are disordered and so able to move much faster.  My own view, supported by experience herding cats (or as it is properly known marshalling re-enactors) leads me to agree with this.  Once troops move forward in a charge their officers have lost most of their control over what they do next!

Based upon this the rules provide pursuing troops multiple moves across the full turn to simulate such events.  It also creates unpredictability which again seems right.  Rupert's Horse and their tendency to pursue and loot rather than sticking to the job in hand comes to mind.

So to clarify how I think it works I need to show a simplified version of the turn sequence.

1.  Command phase.  This includes rallying routers and pursuers (where they were in rout or pursuit from last turn) and where they fail to rally from rout or pursuit making further rout and pursuit moves, BUT not any resulting combats which happen at step 7.

2. Player one moves and shoots.  This includes declaring charges and making tests on the charging unit and the testing unit.  There is a small chance that the target may rout rather than fight melee.  They may also retire or voluntarily evade.  Player two's rout, retires and/or evade moves are now made and player one.  Player one now charges, pursues or follows evaders.

3.  Player one shoots and player two again has a chance of routing if casualties are inflicted.  Player one may pursue routers arising from this step

4.  Player two moves and shoots  and reactions are tested as at step 3 above.

5. Melee combat.  Both sides fight so both sides have a chance to retire, rout, follow up or pursue depending upon circumstances.

Ah the Victorian idea of heroism.
It probably was not this heroic and involved far more running away

The turn now ends and you move back to the command phase.

So using a pair of units who haven't been in combat prior to the current turn as an example (and only looking at things from player one triggered combats).  Nothing happens until step 2 as there has been no previous combat so nobody has to be rallied.  Units can rout at steps 2 from the being charged test or from casualty reaction tests from shooting.  Units might pursue or follow up following these actions.  Either way there is one potential rout and pursuit move originating here either from being charged or shot at.

My boys are fleeing!  Damn those dice or is it di?

Ignoring player two's charges and shooting to keep things simple next we fight melees and again there are potential routs, pursuits and follow ups.  So player two has three possible rout triggers from the being charged test, being shot at and lastly melee outcomes.  Player one also has the same three events where they may pursue the routers.

We then move to the command phase of the following turn where failing rally tests will trigger another rout and pursuit move but not combat.  Add to that the fact that pursuers will make full pursuit moves until rallied and may contact other enemies where they will fight melee immediately and make further follow up pursuit moves from those fights as required and it is clear that it is possible for pursuits to cover a lot of ground very quickly.  Just to add to the fun pursuers are classed as "not rallied" in melee combat and will run the risk of becoming out of command on multiple pursuits moves!  Gordon did say he wanted chaos once units engaged!

I'm not sure I would be keen to hang about to face this TBH

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.

Back through the window

It turns out I'm not as smart as I thought I was! It turns out that I had misread a key part of the ‘Through the Square Window’ rules and used far too many dice in the melee combats!  I have edited my previous post to highlight the mistake so you can pop back to it if you want to see the details.  Still it gives me a good reason to play another game of these really rather nice rules.

In the meantime I have been making up some markers for use in the game.  These show unit status after combat and morale tests.  Because the game works on alternating turns (I go-you go) these are necessary as some effects can last across more than one turn.  So here are the markers I have created so far.

Event markers

I need something to show where routing pike bases have dropped their pikes.  These can double up to show those stands now have a lower combat value in melee until they recover them.  Lastly I knocked these unit data labels up.

Unit data labels

The card label bases don't show up as much as the small ones I used last time did as I have sprayed them in similar colours to the cloth.  The dice show the current unit strength and the label the unit type and training  level. The number in brackets is the starting strength so my poor addled brain can see when they are at half strength or less.  There is space on the pro-forma label for a commander's name if I do any historical refights.

I'm part way through a refight of the test game now I understand the melee rules correctly and it has changed the complexion of the fight entirely.  More when I do an AAR in a couple of days time. 

Trying 'Through the Square Window' rules out

I finally found a window (Yes it's a a square one) in my busy schedule to give these rules a run out.   As previously mentioned they take a very similar approach to the rules I wrote for the period.  A case of parallel evolution as I was totally unaware of them when drafting my own set.  They are less complex than mine as they don't have rules for the initial deployment stage or for weather and the terrain rules are more straightforward, but are more complex than DBA and it's offspring.

My earlier review is here BTW Small but Perfectly Formed: Through the Square Window Rules review

Setting up the game

Before the game starts there is a bit of admin to do.  This is to calculate the strength of each unit as a numerical value derived from the troop type and the number of bases it has.  This is because there is no casualty removal rather a unit's strength points are reduced by combat until at zero a unit breaks.  The next bit of admin is to determine the Army 'break point' in this case derived from the number of units and their size.  Lastly all units have to be defined with a tactical formation type such as Dutch battalion or Kurassier and a training level.  This influences the tactics they may use and in some cases the number of dice rolled in combat or morale tests. It sounds like a lot of faff but it is very easy to do and given a couple of games would be something I could do in my head.

The appendices to the rules give some general (and quite useful) information on the main armies for the Thirty Years War. Other than that the rules are not specific about how to deploy troops beyond stating that the troops should be within heavy artillery range of 70cm but not closer than 50cm from the enemy.

In my test game I didn't use any artillery and I kept the terrain as a totally featureless plain.  The two armies are vaguely connected to the Bishop's Wars of 1639 and 1640 as one side is Scottish and the other is English.  Although that's about as accurate a reflection of the real history as you are going to get!  It's nice to get my 6mm pike and shot troops onto the table as they haven't been out to play for a few years!

Both sides are set up with three commands; an infantry centre and two cavalry wings.  

The Scots have a unit of Highlanders as a Forlorn Hope in advance of the main infantry formation.  Well there are optional rules for them so I thought I should try them out (I did warn you that it isn't all that accurate).  The pike and shot units are using Swedish tactics to allow a musket salvo and charge to contact option and are classed as trained.  The cavalry are arqubusiers and trained.  I did initially think to define them as light cavalry as a nod to Scots cavalry having lighter horses than the English but it reduced their effectiveness too much.  There is a small unit of dragoons deployed ahead of the Scots horse at the top of the picture.  Overall the Scots horse is outnumbered and probably out classed but they have more and better foot.

Over on the English side the cavalry are 'charging horse' who will attempt to close to melee straight away rather than sitting back and shooting.  They are classed as trained.  The foot is Dutch style so no salvo fire and is classed as poor.  This reflects that the English foot in the Bishop's War were not really enthused about taking on the Scots and were badly trained new recruits in the most part!

A quick  unit count and the resulting army strengths are 17 for the Scots and 18 for the English meaning that the Scots will roll 2D6 and the English 3D6 in any Army morale tests (more on this as it happens).  The unit strength points are as shown in the the next image these are not the same as the Army Strength points..  I'm showing this on the table using the micro dice and dice holders from my 2mm rules.  I know the dice holders are a bit intrusive, that's because I haven't painted them yet. The unit at the top left with a strength of one is a single base of Dragoons.  The largest a dragoon unit can be is two bases so that would give it a strength of two. Dragoons are rather fragile under these rules.

Unit strength points are based on the troop type and number of bases and are a measure of how much damage they can take before being destroyed.  Army strength points are based upon the number, type and size of units.

The end of turn one with individual unit strength points in yellow

The detail orientated will notice that the cavalry formations have changed some what.  That is because my original deployment was by units from my Marston Moor Orbat.  TTSW rules place limits to how many bases make up a unit so I had to change things to ensure that units were not larger than the rules allow.

The games afoot!

On the first turn the English advanced their horse as quickly as possible, while moving more slowly with the foot.  The idea is to get into contact ASAP on the flanks and delay things in the centre.  For the Scots the reverse is happening.  They want to get to grips with the English infantry and hold off the horse to allow a decision to be achieved with their infantry.

Turn two started to show how things can develop very quickly under these rules.  The English horse attempted to charge their Scottish opposite numbers, well they are charging horse it is what they do!  However, the wily Scots elected to evade, which they did successfully.  They then turned back towards the English horse and opened a galling carbine fire upon them.  In the centre their foot closed to close range and opened fire. This stopped some English units in their tracks and caused casualties all along the line.  

Melee combat is resolved using 1D6 per strength point per base so a three base unit of eight strength points can be attacking with 24 dice looking for sixes to to hit.  On average that should be four hits on the opposition.  Firepower is less deadly as it only uses one dice per shooting base but it hits on fives or sixes at short range and sixes at long range and happens before melee.  The number of dice in both types of combat can be increased or reduced according to troop tactics or training although there are only about six possible amending factors.  Plus and this is a big plus hits from shooting trigger a morale test for every hit inflicted. 1D6 is rolled for every hit and extra dice for secondary factors.  These are all rolled together and any twos or ones are failures.  Twos cause an advancing unit to halt in place as does a single one but if two or more ones are rolled the unit routs!

EDIT

Following a helpful comment from Tradeston Wargames Group (the authors of the rules see comments below).  It is clear that I was misreading the rules on melee combat.  I should have been using the strength points for each base to calculate the total dice so a unit of strength 8 is made up of a pike block strength 4 and two musket blocks strength 2 each totalling the units eight strength.  So I should have ben throwing eight dice for the unit NOT eight dice per stand.  This actually removes my one niggle with the rules (as well as making perfect sense and showing that I should read more forensically).

The second turn opened with the English horse attempting to charge home against the Scottish arquebusiers again.  This succeeded in most cases This time the Scots couldn't evade They would have had to have saved an action from their previous turn to use on an evade move.  In the centre the English opened fire all along their front hoping to stop the Scots closing.  This was only partially successful which would have consequences.  The Scots declared charges with their foot and the resulting morale tests were 'interesting'.  Three English foot battalia routed rather than standing to fight and one retired.  The melee phase offset that disaster with Scottish horse being destroyed or routed off the field.

Turn 2 - the position after the Scots opened fire. 
Sideways on Retire markers are halted units

So turn three looked to be hanging in the balance, except both sides failed their army morale test.  That means that they both withdraw from battle.

The army morale test compares the result of a dice roll with army strength points lost, routing, or pursuing off table and not yet returned.  The number of dice rolled is calculated by dividing the original value of the army strength points by six (rounded down),  If the result is equal to or lower than the lost points that army withdraws.

So game over after only two full turns.  However, they were action packed turns with both sides being busy and having decisions to make throughout.

Gratuitous close up of old Scots castings blowing holes in the enemy

You may have noticed that I'm not using the basing suggested in the rules.  It doesn't impact game play in any serious way as far as I can tell.

Oh and the Highlanders never fired a shot or swung a claymore.  They routed on turn one under threat of charging English foot and then spectacularly failed a rally test at the start of turn 2 and broke up and fled!

Conclusions

These are rules that repay a careful reading, which in my case that included taking notes.  This is because some important information is only found in the 'sequence of play' section and isn't repeated in the main body of the rules.  This includes some things that might seem obvious but left me thinking " I'm sure I saw a rule about xyz, but where was it?".    These include:

• No firing after starting a charge move,
• No firing after being contacted by chargers,
• Confirming that firing normally comes before movement unless specifically noted otherwise (any troops who can use salvo fire and Highlanders are specified and possibly Swedish Cuirassiers although that later may be a typo),
• When rout and pursuit moves are made following morale tests,
• When rally from rout and pursuit moves is attempted.

Melee combat is brutal and units can be wiped out in a single combat round due to the large number of dice being rolled.  I may introduce some mitigation against that effect in a future test game.  On the other hand using larger armies than I did in this test game with support lines in depth may alleviate the issue and would include an additional level of decision making about conserving units.  Watch this space to see what I come up with on that topic.  EDIT See my edited blue text above and the comments below.  I was misreading the rules on this point.

Morale tests can break a unit which has taken limited casualties but even routers can be rallied so that balances out and the Army morale test can end a game by forcing an army to withdraw even when you think you are ahead.

I rather like these rules, they have a hidden depth and are going to repay repeat plays to fully get to grips with the subtle challenges they pose.  How much do I like them, well lets just say Irregular Miniatures will be getting an order for cuirassiers in the very near future and I will be making some game markers to aid in solo play and upgrade those dice holders once I get this article posted.  I'm also going to attempt to create a QRS,  although I found I could remember the majority of the rules after a couple of moves.

World war two rules

The first set of wargame rules I ever used were what became Charles Grant's Battle.  These are a simple set of World War Two rules designed for 1/72 Airfix figures and vehicles, with the odd Roco Minitanks vehicle thrown in.  Exactitude in scale not being such a big thing back then.  After all Airfix Infantry might be 1/76 or 1/72 so we just lived with slight differences.  The rules were simplistic, if you hit a figure it was taken out of the game.  No pins or suppression just a straight KIA or equivalent.  Same for tanks you either 'brewed it up' of you didn't.  This had the advantage of making the rules fast to play but also gave an advantage to having numbers on your side as games could be won by attritional tactics!  Games generally used a couple of vehicles and a section or so of infantry a side.

Having dusted off my WW2 stuff recently, for the 'Army Parade' post, I fancy having a game and wondered what rules people favoured for this scale of encounter.  What I would like is a smaller game than Fistful of Tows with a 1:1 model to man/vehicle ratio.  Fairly simple mechanics would be nice.  Infantry based as fire teams/sections and where reasonably accurate World War Two tactics are required.  So for example infantry combat results would be: pinned (can't move but can shoot), suppressed (can't move or shoot), and then neutralised (removed from play) by close assault.  Artillery is generally offboard and vehicles can suffer mobility hits or weapon hits or neutralised rather than being destroyed as an only result.  I can live without turret rotation rules or at worst very simple ones.  Oh and cheap is also good, I like cheap.  Suggestions very much appreciated along with some information on how they meet my wish list.

Of course I would have to finish painting these first!

These are almost done, but I have some still in bare metal as well!

Failing anything floating my boat I suppose I could attempt to adapt Battle.  Change the hit dice to give more scope for a range of results and add some morale rules.  

Joy of Six 2025

It's taken me a couple of days to assemble this show review, partly as it took me a little time to decide on my view on how I found the event.  It's not the largest show on the circuit, in scale or in scale (if you see what I mean), but it is a nice little show within an easy sixty minute commute of Chez Elenderil.  Joy of Six is dedicated to all things 6mm, which makes sense as it is organised by Peter Berry and the team at Baccus 6mm.  It is held at Sheffield Hallam University right opposite the Sheffield rail interchange.  With good parking and transport links including a park and (tram) ride it isn't a difficult show to get to.

I haven't attended this show for a couple or three years and it is a bit larger than I remember it.  It's held in three rooms and a connecting hub where the lifts and stairs are.  One of the rooms also has catering facilities.  All of the games on show are (of course) 6mm as are all of the vendors apart from one who had naval stuff in even smaller scales (Three Deck Dockyards).  I almost bought some resin 1/4800 Russo Japanese war ships from them.  When I got home I took a look at their website and the models are 3D prints using licensed STL files from The Wartimes Journal and at a much reduced price to buying them direct from WTJ's online shop.  They do look rather nice too, even at 1/4800.

Commission Miniatures - Not bad for MDF

And cheap enough to use en masse

Sticking with the trade stands I have a confession to make, I didn't buy a single solitary thing!  Not one.  I know this is a bit of a shock and I think it must be down to the heat welding my wallet closed or something.  I did want some stuff from Heroics & Ros but couldn't get near their stand as it was really busy for the entire time I was there.  I did have a nice chat with the owner of Commission Miniatures, the chap who does the MDF 6mm figures.  It's the first time I have seen them in the flesh (or the MDF) and they don't look half bad given the material is almost 2D.  They have more depth than I expected and at arms length look almost as good as cast or printed figures.  They have the bonus of being very inexpensive at £2 for 96 foot figures.  Something that would make them attractive to me for a period I didn't want to spend a lot of time or money on (hint that's Napoleonic's).  They do some nice MDF railway tracks too.

Rob's Scenics trade stand with pre-painted very tempting models

Baccus were doing good business but I didn't need anything from them (want yes...need, not so much).  I also spotted Brigade Models in attendance with both 6mm and 2mm scenics on display.  I have quite a lot of their 2mm stuff but hadn't considered the 6mm offerings but they do look nice.  Another good set of terrain was on display from Rob's Scenics.  I had a look the Rapier Miniatures stand where painted and based 12 element DBA armies was retailing for around £85.00 which seemed fairly reasonable.

Baccus put on a fast play Battle of Lens 1643

Having wandered around the traders I turned my attention to the games.  These were of a high quality with some really nice terrain on display.  What was noticeable is that the vast majority were full scale battles and only two were not historical refights.  As usual there were a good number of participation games alongside the demonstration games. I missed spotting a couple of games and a couple which were advertised were actually missing.

Baccus' Battle of Lens was using big bases so the entire battle only had just over a dozen combat formation a side.  It's one way to make things move faster I suppose, restrict the number of units a side, but it doesn't really work for me as a concept.  It sort of turns a battle into something like a skirmish game when there are only a handful of combat units a side.

First El Alamein courtesy of Maidstone and District Gamers

The MAD display game was one of those who were keen to interact with passers by which was nice.  A good chat ensued about how after the real battle Rommel felt Montgomery wasn't playing fair as he refused to follow up into Rommel's AT gun lines.

Lovely terrain here probably my favourite table at the show

Total Battle Miniatures displayed the Battle of Lobositz 1756 Prussia v Austria and I think the opening battle of the Seven Years War.  The terrain was excellent and shows what can be done in a small space.

Those troops look like an army and sit well into the terrain

I spotted the Yarkshire Gamer taking part in Champion's Hill 1862 (I think).  Lots of Adler 6mm on displayin this game.

ACW action from The Yarkshire Gamer himself

Another rather nice table this time showing a Franco-Prussian war battle

Per Boden put on a Bloody Big Battles game from the Franco-Prussian war.  Again really nice terrain.

Meanwhile in 1960s Goa.  India v Colonial Portuguese

Battle of Bouvines 1214 (or so)

There were the obligatory strange hats on offer

A big cold war gone hot game.

Just after the time frame I set my cold war gone hot game in.  East Germans trying to move down the length of the table against BAOR opposition.  Whether they managed it I don't know.  If all they had were T55s I don't fancy their chances unless they had an awful lot of them!

Overall some nice tables but for some odd reason I wasn't really feeling enthused.  It may have been the heat but it seemed like a lot of the games had their own private force field around them that repelled spectators from getting involved with the players.  Or maybe I'm just getting old and grouchy, who knows.   At other shows I have friends who are running games or trading so I can have a chat but none of them are 6mm gamers so were not at this one. The jury is out on whether I will return next year.

I promised an Army parade

Well I suppose I should deliver then!  So here they are:

By my count this is a smidgen over 4,200 little lead warriors plus vehicles

If I ever do this again I'm going to need a bigger kitchen table!

By way of giving a vague idea of what's on the table

For World War Two we have 1940 Germans, some 1940 British Home Guard (the BEF are still waiting to be finished) and some Late war Soviet Armour and support.  The BCW troops are Covenantors, Montrose Highlanders and Irish and both flavours of English (good guys and bad guys you may decide which is which).  The rest are Late Imperial Romans, Justinian Byzantine, Goths, Huns, Moors, Dacians, Early Sassanid Persians, Picts, Strathclyde Welsh, actual Welsh, Scots-Irish, Middle Anglo-Saxons and Vikings.

It appears I have been a busy bloke these last few years.

Be Gad, but it's warm

Of course it's summertime but even so this is hot!  I'm actually finding painting difficult as paint is skinning over on my coffee jar lid palettes and glue is going off before I finish mounting figures.  Time to do something different I suppose, but what?  I'd play a game but my usual venue, the conservatory, is self identifying as a sauna at the moment.  I've caught up on my SK regimental admin and read all my favourite blogs.  Hell, I even did some gardening until the heat beat me.

All of that said I have now reached the point where I have painted more 6mm cavalry than I have bought so far this year (so far being the operative phrase) and have rather a lot of 6mm foot on the painting table, so failing a sudden rush of blood at the Joy of Six show this coming weekend I'm on target to reduce the lead pile again this year.

In other news I had one of 'those' birthdays at the end of June.  One of those that ends in a zero, yes one of those that causes you take stock of the remaining time before you.  Sensible me says you really shouldn't keep buying more troops but the other me doesn't agree and points out how much I like looking at the serried ranks of completed figures.  Possibly time for an army parade for my little lead warriors?  At the last census I'm well over the 4,000 figure mark so it should be impressive.  I just need to clear a table top to lay everything out on.

Finally again in reference to birthdays I was lucky enough to receive the gift pictured below from my family.  Signed by the Under 21 and  First Teams courtesy of my granddaughter's boyfriend who worked for the club as an intern and then under a fixed term contract and provided performance analysis to both those sides.

Signed Blackburn Rover's shirts first and second strips.