Great War Commander : Bleid, Belgium 22 Aug 1914 Again!

I set up the same scenario again on Saturday night only to realize about 90 minutes in and nearly done, that I had been playing incorrectly - units, for the most part, can only be given one Order per turn. I also kept forgetting the Fog hinderance until turn 6. I have the same problem with the mud turns when I play Battle for Moscow.

So, Sunday, I reset the board and had at it again.

The French setup is always the same per the scenario - except which infantry unit gets the MG, that's up to the player. Units with a functioning weapon, units within a leader's command radius, and units on their baseline are in cohesion. For the French, three of the units start the game already out of cohesion and will be marked suppressed after the 1st turn (which will be the Germans turn). That means they start their own turn already suppressed.

For the Germans, I had advanced up the right twice - which I think is the best approach as it provides fast access to a nearly undefended objective. So, to mix things up, I rolled a die to determine deployment and ended up setting them up to the left instead.

The setup. Rommel is personally leading the platoon with the MG.

Rommel's company consisted of the three platoons to the right. 

He commanded the MG to fire at the French unit which had taken cover in a house and had their own MG. A few bursts of the gun and the French unit broke right off the bat. Not an auspicious start for the French.

The Germans divided their force, with Hauptmann Waldau leading his company up the road on the left, using the craters/shell holes for cover. 

Still, the French managed to suppress one of the German platoons in the road. 

As Rommel's men moved through the fields, a French sharpshooter fired on them and pinned (broke) the lead platoon.

After consolidating their line, the Germans pushed their way towards the village in earnest but ahead of them a shell struck and set the woods ablaze, forcing the Germans to split up their command again as Hpt. Waldau took his platoons around the conflagration.

While firing on the French positions the German MG jammed - the crew labored furiously to clear the gun and bring it back into action. 

A broken weapon (MG in this case) checks every time a card is drawn to determine a random hex for some Event or Order. One band of numbers is a repair, one means nothing changes, and another is permanently broken

I'm missing some pictures here but the Waldau's company swung around the village while Rommel's company made little ingress, but the MG was repaired and unleashed on French units occupying the largest buildings in the village.

The French attempted to counter Waldau's advance by acting the aggressor, but were defeated in close combat and moments later, the French platoon in the building on the German left, was cutoff and surrounded.

Meanwhile French barbed wire emplacements were glimpsed through the fog blocking the German road approach to road leading out of the village.

In a valiant last stand, the Red Trousers held their ground against repeated attacks, but eventually succumbed to the combined fire power of multiple platoons against their position.

As the fog lifted, the extent of the French wire defenses blocking the road became clear.

Wire is places as the result of an Action. I just like the narrative of the fog lifting - which happens when the time tracker reaches 6.

The French maneuvered around the village to draw the Germans to them while avoiding coming under fire as much as possible, making their way back to the large building protected by the wire.

By Waldau ordered Rommel and his platoons to press onwards out of the village.

Geraman reinforcements arrived at the other end of the road. Any resemblance to Rommel and his company is purely coincidental.

Hpt. Waldau pushed his troops through the wire to reach the last French occupied building. When the dust cleared, the village had fallen.

 

The French had an event occur where a leader was recalled to return later as a reinforcement - on the plus side, the remaining units were so pressed together, they could not be out of choesion!  Notice too, the flames have spread!

The game ended with a French surrender and automatic loss.

Even if they hadn't, the score was lopsided, with the Germans scoring 34 vp vs the French 7 VP.

***

The French actually were doing OK for much of the game. Their downfall began in earnest when they drew an Event where command meddles and you're forced to draw a card and use it for your next order. It was an Advance order - the aggressive French attempt to counter the Germans lead to the isolation of the French unit near the end of the game.

Although I did enjoy witnessing their heroic last stand!

Playing the rules as intended, with one Order per turn for any given unit, changed the game a bit - more discards, waiting for the right cards to appear. This worked in the French favor on occasion, as it held up the German advance somewhat. However, they too were waiting for cards and more often than not the Germans got their needed cards first.

Also, eagle-eyed readers may notice Runners on the map. I had avoided using them unintentionally - I just wasn't reading the card text properly. The French runner could have earned them VPs but they never got a chance.

I'm ready for the next scenario, which introduces off-board artillery and an on-board howitzer!

Great War Commander - First Impressions

With Noble Knight announcing their Spring Sale, I took it as a sign to finally pull the trigger on purchasing Great War Commander (2nd Printing). It's been on my wish list for a while, and with Dominion of the Trenches covering the low complexity, fast gaming, it seemed only right to take advantage of the sale to move a bit in the other direction.

Image from boardgamegeek.com

There's plenty about the game on boardgamegeek.com, so this is neither an in-depth review nor detailed AAR. It is my impression of the game having played along with the example of play and then played the first scenario("Birth of a Legend" which takes place in Bleid, Belgium 22 Aug 1914, and includes Rommel as one of the Central Powers leaders).

Of note, I will mention ASLSK several times - it is the board game that I have played that is most like GWC - both are low-level tactical games in their respective periods. 

I have a little experience with hex-and-counter games but just a few titles so I don't have a lot of reference points, but I can say with some authority that the rule book is considerably more useful as an at-the-table reference document, than the ASL Starter Kit #1 rule book. The latter requires searching through dense paragraphs to find a rule you remember reading but can't quite recall where. Great War Commander's rule book is not perfect mind you and some things I found myself flipping forward and backward to find. 

Still, while everything wasn't entirely clear to me (and won't be until I've played a few more games I'm sure), it felt (on reading) far less complex than ASLSK. 

Of course, it may be that because I've read, and re-read, played and replayed, ASLSK #1, as well as Burning Mountains (not terribly complex,but certainly tedious), and Battle for Moscow (a game of minimal complexity), that Great War Commander seems more accessible. That is, I have a base of experience to draw from and had I started with GWC with no experience of any kind, I might find it completely opaque.

Speaking of complexity, boardgamegeek shows that ASLSK#1 averages 3.76/5 and GWC averages 3.17/5. For my money, I think it's more like 4/5 and 3/5(or probably more like 2.75/5) respectively. Boargamegeek also shows Burning Mountains has a 2.20/5 complexity rating. I think it feels more difficult than GWC on reading, frankly. In play, I would argue some of the math makes it feel more complex than GWC but the actual turn sequence is fairly straightforward. But I majored in Philosophy and ,later, Library Science, and was never much for math.

After reading the rules, as the rules themselves recommend, I played along with the example of play. I thought this was a genius approach to teaching the game! (Maybe other boardgames do this? I don't know.)

While it was a little cumbersome at times trying to find the card called for in the text, it really felt like I was playing a learning game, where I got to know what playing the game would feel like generally, how the more common rules worked, etc. 

My coffee table is wider at one end than the other - there is no way to line up the edges of the map with table that won't trigger OCD in many viewers. The skull in the upper right and fake phone in the lower right regularly reside on the table. EVERY day is Halloween, my friends!

Speaking of cards, GWC, as you may know, is in the Company Commander family of games and is card driven. No dice are rolled (although there are dice icons printed on the cards, so it's not quite like using playing cards).

The turns are considerably less structured than most other wargames I've played. There are no fixed phases unlike games like Battle for Moscow or ASLSK  or even One Hour Wargames for that matter.  There's also potentially ample opportunity for both players to play cards at any time, whether they are the  active player that turn or not.

But how much interaction and how fluid is all based on the cards that the players have in their hands. And I suppose that would be a sticking point for some. 

The initial French deployment for the scenario. They are starting with most units out of cohesion and this will plague them the entire game. I should have moved the leaders into positions where they could bring more units into cohesion but didn't figure that out until after my game!

For the active side, the cards are the orders you have available, and if your hand doesn't have something you can use, you can pass, discard cards (up to a specified limit for the scenario) and draw up to your maximum. 

This can go on for several turns until you get an order you can make use of. Possibly more so if you aren't great at shuffling the brand new decks *cough cough*

I bought this to play solo, so I'm always going to be doing something not matter what, but I can imagine it being annoying and frustrating in head-to-head games. 

The cards are also used of actions that can modify the situation - a +/- on a die roll, breaking an enemy formation in melee before the die roll, etc. So, you can make use of those cards that don't have useful orders on them, just not as orders.

Rommel attempted to lead his units to the right of the road but was caught by the French machine gun. I forget the Captain's name, but he and the units under his command had more success. Unhappily for the french, their MG jammed early and turned out to be unfixable.

 

I was concerned more about this than not being able to play an order, for playing solo. It turns out, I continually forgot what the other side had in their hand and it worked fine. Yay aging brain!

Also, because I personally feel like Fire/Op Fire is just something to expect and doesn't need to be a surprise, if a side had one or more of those cards, I kept those face up to remind me to use it. Otherwise, I quickly scanned through a side's hand for any useful action in response to the side I was playing as at that moment.  

That seemed to work quite well.

Another note, counter stacks are fairly minimal - I think the tallest stack I had was 3 counters: a suppressed (1 counter) platoon (1 counter) with an MG (1 counter). The hexes are big enough that you don't have to stack everything all the time. Which is great, because falling stacks are annoying (Burning Mountains I'm looking at you and your 5+ high counter stacks!)

Oh the weapon rules are a joy of ease and simplicity compared to ASLSK. 

Finally, playing the game was highly enjoyable, and felt like I was watching a story unfold (with opportunities to shape it). It was more towards the Dominion of the Trenches side of the equation in that respect. In my game, the Germans had a commanding victory. The French units struggle to coordinate a response felt right given my poor use of the French leaders. Air power played a small role for both sides. Rommel was wounded but survived. The Germans captured three of their four objectives, eliminated a few of the French units including the French officers, and then chose to bypass the remaining, totally ineffectual units (exiting the enemy's board edge is worth Victory Points).

I genuinely can't wait to play again. With an upcoming long weekend, I plan to play the 1st scenario again but this time I'll try to make better use of the French leaders!

  

Dominion of the Trenches - Caporetto

Having heard much praise for other Dominion of ... games as a roll-and-write game experience that gives reasonable narrative results that feel right, I plunked my hard-earned cash down for Dominion of the Trenches. 

Also, the author includes two Southern Front scenarios, so how could I not? It's so rare for the Italians and Austro-Hungarians to get any love.

This is a battle report of the Caporetto scenario in the rules document.

That said, I played my own scenarios quite a few times before giving this "official scenario" a go and I have some minor issues with the rules that came up in those games - but this is not a review and they'll wait for another time.

Nevertheless, I will say, the rules live up to their hype for feeling right despite their simplicity.

As a huge plus, they got me to get out my Italian and Austro-Hungarians for the first time in a bit which says something (they were packed away).

This is how I played the game.

Instead of photos of my game setup, since the lighting wasn't that great, I'll illustrate with some Junior General counters, with the game labels for units. 

You don't need miniatures to play the game at all or Junior General counters. You can scribble it out on a sheet of paper. I played multiple games on literal backs of envelopes! I just happen to have the ones you would need for this scenario (and of course, I will create my own scenarios based on various battles on the Southern Front). The games were all fun, regardless of the format.

Some other notes - I went looking for maps of the Battle of Caporetto so I could see which units were where, and I saw that, at least on quite a few maps, the Italian 46th Infantry Division and the Austro-Hungarian 50th stormtrooper divsion were opposite each other at the start of the battle.

I found a map of the region, zoomed it in, and overlayed how I imagined the units might have been. I think of them as regiments, and each game turn as two days. No reason other than it just seems right given the abstract nature of the game.

Artillery Barrage - October 24, 1917

In the early morning of October 24, 1917, stormtroopers of the Austro-Hungarian 50. Infanterietruppendivision wend their way through mountain passes towards positions held by the Italian 2nd Army's 46th Infantry Division.

The attacker gets to start the game with an artillery bombardment if they have artillery. Not only do the Austro-Hungarians have artillery, the E means it's Elite and as a result they get to roll 6 dice. 

I distribute two to each of the Italian units in the front line.

The results aren't as bad as they could be for the Italians, but they aren't great either

A massive barrage of explosives and poison gas erupts up and down the Italian lines.

The Italian units in the front line are all Unreliable (Ur), but they do have a Defensive bonus because they are dug in or have built-up defesive works and so the first hit removes the Defensive bonus, a second hit will remove the unit. In the historical battle, gas was used and so, when the center took two hits and had to be removed, I figured it was probably where they concentrated the gas attack.

 

On the right and left, defensive positions are shattered. but the troops hold on but the Italian center gives way as their regiment is overcome by gas and the close following stormtroopers. 

As soon as the bombardment completes, the defender can try to bring up reserves.

It's not automatic and in most of my games, they failed more than they succeeded. In any case the player decides which of the reserve units will come up. 

In this case, the Italians were able to bring up a standard Infantry unit. It's not Unreliable and not Elite.

Another of the 46th Division's infantry regiments miraculously were stationed nearby are able to plug the gap before the storm troops can break through to the Italian reserves.

October 24 - 25, 1917 

Turn 1 Round 1

After the bombardment, the first turn begins in earnest, with the attacker nominating one sector for action. 

In this case, I chose the Cente, because both the Italian infantry is arriving and theoretically the stormtroops are supposed to keep moving not hold the trenches. Yet, in the moment, I decide the stormtroops,would be on the defensive in this combat, taking advantage of the previously abandoned Italian defenses even as they advanced.

I could have also said they were on the attack, but it's up to the player either way and how you're imagining the narrative.

Because the defender in infantry vs infantry combat gets to roll first with a chance to eliminate the enemy before they attack, and the stormtroopers have +1 on their attack, I suspect that factored into my subconscous calculation.

But they are overwhelmed as momentum sides with the enemy.

As with artillery attacks, if a unit is removed, the side that lost the unit can attempt to put a reserve unit into that sector. Again the Italians succeeded on their roll.

Turn 1 Round 2

Unreliable troops test before the attack portion of the round, and if they fail they disappear. If they pass, they are no longer Unreliable. I like this a lot - you don't know what kind troops you have at your disposal!

This really suits the Southern Front where, while they were good soldiers, morale was an issue for both sides. 

In Round 2 of turn 1, the Defender gets to choose the sector. I for reasons I don't recall, chose the Right Sector. And there I had an Unreliable infantry unit. Who failed their check and fled.

In Sector Right, the surprised and shaken troops under pressure from the Austro-Hungarians turn to headlong retreat towards the Piave.

No matter how the space opens up, as long as a side has reserves, they can try to fill it as soon as the combat portion of the round ends.

Again, luck sides briefly with the Italians as another unit is close enough to be brought up to engage the invaders.

October 26-27, 1917

Turn 2 Round 1

In the 2nd turn, and all turns thereafter, a die is rolled to determine which sector will be see action, although there is a chance that side's will get to choose the most advantageous one.

Round 1 belongs to the scenario's Attacker.

The Austro-Hungarians choose (well, I choose) to attack the Italian Unreliable unit in the Right sector. That unit first checks to see if it stands, and it passes, so it is no longer unreliable.

Attacking an unreliable unit means there's a chance they will be removed without you having to risk being eliminated in the process.

As they passed, the attack is resolved normally.

The newly arrived Italian infantry in Sector Right rally to their officers' cries of Savoia! Savoia! Savoia! (which is surprisng as normally this has little positive effect). Still, they are unable to stop the relentless stormtroopers. Those who aren't killed or captured join the flight to the shores of the Piave.

They fled, but the Italians have no more reserves at this point. So it will remain empty. If the Austro-Hungarian Right sector is activated it can then attempt to flank attack the Italian center unit (as long as there is one there).

Turn 2 Round 2

In round 2, the Defender rolls to see which sector will see action (with a chance they will get to choose).

The Italians decide to press an attack in the Center. Recall I had posited the Austro-Hungarians here were making use of abandoned Italian defenses. This gives the stormtroops first attack. 

To my surprise, the Italians survive the attacks by the stormtroops and then score a stunning blow against them.

The attacker's artillery is ridiculously weak and kind of useless after the initial barrage - this one of my quibbles with the game - so, when they fail to advance to out of the reserves to fill in the opening in the line, it's not at all surprising.

The Austro-Hungarian reserves have been left far behind the quick moving stormtroops and are unable to fill the gap in their line.

October 28-29, 1917

Turn 3 Round 1

As I mentioned above, if a unit has no enemy opposite them the can flank attack an enemy in an adjacent space. In this case, the Austro-Hungarian in the Right sector attacked the Italians in the Center, but to no effect.

The benefit of a flank attack is there is no return fire from the enemy!

Seizing opportunity, the Austro-Hungarian Right turns the flank on the Italian center, but again the
Italians hold.

Turn 3 Round 2

The Italians nominate the Left sector, and their unreliable unit passes the test (this many successes is rare if my previous games are anything to go by)

They are the defender and get to attack first, which is really their last hope at this point.

But they roll a 3 which does nothing. 

The stormtroopers opposite roll a 6, +1 for being Elite. 7 points! They decisively destroy the Italian troops in the Left sector.

Outnumbered and with one unit left, the Italians have lost. Since it's Caporetto, they join the retreat that is the collapse of the Italian 2nd Army.

Unfortunately, in Sector Left, the Italians break. The Italians in the center are forced to retreat to the Piave with the Austro-Hungarians closing ground behind them. 

Somewhere on the Southern Front 1918ish

I hope you will forgive the indulgence of posting a non-monthly update, but the other day, for a change of pace, I played the One Hour Wargames "Machine Age" rules pretty much as written and I wanted to get my thoughts down sooner than later. 

The only rules modification was to treat cavalry as OHW "Rifle & Sabre" cavalry (mounted w/lances, rather than dismounted with rifles).  

The scenario is one of my favorites, "#12 An Unfortunate Oversight". The playing area is roughly36" square (roughly because I can't cut fabric in a straight line).

The Italians took the role of the Blue Force with 4 infantry units, 1 heavy infantry unit, and 1 cavalry unit. The Red Force was played by the Austro-Hungarians, with 4 infantry units, 1 heavy infantry unit, and 1 unit of artillery.

At the start. Italians have found a ford to cross on their right and avoid the bridge. Both sides are intent on holding the hill.

  

The Austro-Hungarian force reaches the hill first. Italian infantry, supported by machine guns, attempt to open the crossing at the bridge, while the majority of the Italian force crosses at the ford.

The village is cleared momentarily for the Italian infantry on the right. But they are battered and Austrian reserves are poised to move into the village as well.

Meanwhile on the Italian right, attempts to dislodge the Austrians from the hill top begin.

 

Lancieri make a final valiant charge to drive off an enemy heavy infantry unit. It was both their greatest and last success of the day.

  

At battles end, a lone Austro-Hungarian unit surveys the bloody ground; an abandoned field gun battery stands guard over the dead.

I used individually mounted figures but that didn't really change anything other than the appearance - still, it had an appreciable impact on my enjoyment of the game by giving it something of an "old school" look (to my eyes, having never actually played when old school was not yet old school) that I enjoyed greatly.

If there's a practical benefit of single figures with rules that don't have casualty removal, it's that the figures stay on the table far longer.

In any case, I had fun and was swept up into the game. Which also accounts for the minimal picture taking, but I'd rather be caught up in the game than snapping pics.

As it had been awhile, I had forgotten that in the Machine Age rules, artillery is direct fire - albeit with a 48" range (I just assume an officer has binoculars or similar).  Unlike the mortar rules for WWII, which can hit anything any unit can see, regardless of intervening troops and terrain, WWI artillery, in these rules, are equivalent to 75mm field guns, and require you to keep your own troops out of the way of your gun, lest you hamstring them.

In this game, that led to a swath of table that the Austrians tried to keep clear. It also meant if the Italians could move enough, they'd force the gun to have to rotate (move) and thus not fire that turn. This game of of cat and mouse was, well, gamey, but also fun.

And unrelated to rules in any way, for reasons which are known only to the dice gods, the lancieri performed terribly.

Early on they had a perfect opportunity to deliver a flank attack to infantry that had yet to take high ground. Instead of the double-digit damage that I hoped, they rolled a 1- a whopping 2 points of damage. Alas, rolling a 1 was repeated under less favorable circumstances several more times.  

When they finally rolled a 5 (reduced to 3, for attacking uphill) the unit they destroyed already had 14 points of damage to it, delivered primarily by Italian infantry.

It was, by any account, not their best showing. Perhaps they were trying to tell me to finish painting up the officer already.  

I still find the lack of infantry close combat in the Machine Age rules mind-boggling. That said, as long as the scenario requires one or both sides to take an objective or to exit the table, movement and getting close, rather than a stagnant long distance fire fight is the rule.. When opposing units got close, I just treated it like shooting combat - such as when the Italians tried to take the village and the Austrians counter-attacked.

The difference really is only of being locked in combat or not and it worked fine in this case. 

If I'd had arditi or stormtroops on the table, I'd have used the standard OHW close combat rules and given the assault units +2 (I also have them take 1/2 damage when attacked due to their dispersed formations and increased individual initiative, relative to the regular infantry, even late war, at least in Italy).

October Review

 

Role Playing 

For our Family Fall Festival this year, I did end up running a game after all - the player who had wanted to run a game just didn't have time to flesh out their idea. With two days to prepare, I went into research overdrive like I was writing a final paper, and like those days of yore, got it done at the last minute. 

For a visual element, with no time to make any bespoke terrain, I settled on atmosphere and re-used the LED candles and table cloth/runner, and autumnal wreath from last year, but replaced my DIY Shub-niggurath statue with a skull that was part of my son's Halloween costume last year. 

The setup: Every 66 years on the night of the Harvest Moon, a dark, crooked house appears on a hillside overlooking the small village of Hallowfeld. It disappears at sunrise. Of course, it is rumored that those who enter are never seen again.

The hook: This year is, according to a drunk merchant, the 66th year since the last appearance, and so the party decides to journey to Hallowfeld just to see it and partake in the Harvest Festival there. At the village tavern, while sitting around the fire and enjoying ghost stories, and old man comes in and tells them that he went in the house as a boy and managed to escape, but he left something behind - he doesn't know what, just that he needs it back, and he begs them for help.

It went pretty well ending with the party finding the lost thing (part of the man's soul), defeating the boss monster (a shadow, which should have been tough for a level 1 and 2 party, but between magic missile spells and the paladin's ability to have any one weapon be treated as magic once a day, it lasted one round), stealing the house's "battery", leaping from the porch as the house collapsed while throwing the unstable battery into the distance - where i took out a chunk of countryside.

We didn't have time to do administrative tasks after, but at least one PC leveled up (they had been trailing the others, having missed a few sessions). 

There are two sessions scheduled for November!

Wargaming

For reasons, I decided to break out my Southern Front WWI collection.

The scenario is, hopefully, recognizable - although I suspect the bridge would have an Italian name in this case - let us call it Esplodere Bridge.

Rules were G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. (modified for 8-figure infantry/4-figure cavalry units. MGs counted as having 5 crew members) with some Contemptible Little Armies and In Good Company thrown in.

The game area is 36" x 24". Movement and shooting ranges were cut in half. Movement was variable as per CLA. Victory would go to the side that controlled the bridge after 10 turns (which would mean having units on the other side of the bridge for my purposes and enough of a force to be able to hold the bridge)

The Italians have one infantry unit, one MG, and one cavalry unit. The Austrians have two infantry units (1 figure with an LMG) and an MG. 

Italian infantry storm the bridge while an Austrian unit struggles to ford the river.

Perhaps a turn later, the Italians are nearly across (at the expense of shooting, since in GASLIGHT, it's move or shoot). Meanwhile the Austrians continue to struggle crossing the river, but their other unit and MG prepare to slaughter the Italians on the bridge.

 < REEL MISSING > 

(I was all wrapped up in playing)

The Italian force is in ruins at the end of turn 10. Really at the end of turn 9, but i thought, what the heck, let's keep playing. The Italians are on the bridge but even with their MG intact, they have little to no chance in my opinion.Victory to Austria-Hungary

Miniatures

No paint was applied to anything this month - although I did re-base my WWI Southern Front collection to individual bases (cut from mat board) again - because rebasing is my hobby and toy soldiers are just an excuse to do it! 

 

Those new bases still need paint, as visible above.

I did however, pack away about half of my figure collection to see if I even want to keep them or if they can be sent to good homes. I tend to make no decision when presented with many options - hello Kanopy watch list, I'm looking at you - and so I usually end up not playing anything, even when I have time.

I am a huge fan of books and podcasts about decluttering (i like to *think* about doing it at least), but I really glomed on to "the container concept" from "A Slob Comes Clean". Essentially, she stresses that the purpose of a container is to limit things, not to store them, but to provide boundaries to how much you keep. 

"You can keep anything you want, but you can't keep everything" (more or less a direct quote)

This idea sings to me. As well as the one about designating a day of the week as laundry day instead of waiting until you're out of socks or whatever. I digress.

Anyway, I designated a single 6-bin (they are like 14" x 14" x 3" - for scrapbookers but handy for 54mm and 28mm/32mm figures /- especially those with banners and such - too) organizer for my wargaming figures and that's it. (I have 12 bins worth, hence half my collection will be kept out).

That means, I can have 6 collections at 1 bin each, or 1 that fills all 6 or any combination that adds to 6 bins. That's it. (OK OK, i did cheat by putting a bunch on display a bit ago - playing games isn't the only way to appreciate toy soldiers after all)  

What remains? 

1. 54mm WWI Southern Front - it came down to WWI vs Colonial England/French Foreign Legion and both collections give a similar kind of game - lancers, infantry, machine guns. Only the costumes change and that's not enough reason)
2. 1/35 WWI Horror - I mean, it's 8 figures, plus monsters, most of which serve for RPGs as well.
3. 54mm-ish North Pole '42 - Weird World War II. Germans and  robotic tin soldiers commanded by a greedy industrialist are the bad guys.
4. 32mm Grim Dark Sci Fi - it's a collection that my son expresses even a little interest in,so it of course stays. Plus, I love the figures. It also scratches the same itch as 1:1 WWII skirmish games, with the advantage that I can play with others locally when the mood strikes.
5. 28/32mm Fantasy - I'm choosing to focus on two factions (inspired by Norm over at Battlefields and Warriors): lizard folk and orcs. Any other factions - and even some of the orcs - are borrowed from my RPG figure collection. I can also include Blitz Bowl here, but that's really a board game.

So, what in fact got moved to "storage":

• 54mm Colonial
• 54mm Fantasy,
• Brick WWII
• 1/72 WWII.
• 54mm AWI (well, a handful of militia from last Christmas's game) 

In some cases, storage means unceremoniously tossed into a big jumble, while in some cases, it means the current bin is just earmarked to go into a closet (which has to be cleared first).

I feel greatly relieved by this situation already and I've already played a few wargames in November!

Of course, once all this was decided upon, I realized my orcs needed cavalry - and after watching eBay for a bit, I scored a great deal on 7 painted boar boyz and they are on their way. So an October figure purchase, with a November arrival.

If I don't post again before then, see you in a month! 

January/February Recap

 Lots of irons in lots of fires, and blogging regularly has received the axe, but I am still out here doing my thing, and I got in a bit of painting and gaming in January and February.

Finally got my Pozzuolo del Friuli scenario on the table using modified One Hour Wargames "Machine Age" rules

Morschauser Shock modified for Fantasy, One Hour Wargames scenario on 2/3 scale table, i.e. 24" square.

Morschauser Shock and Horse & Musket modified for VSF. One Hour Wargames scenario. Full scale, i.e. 6" bases and 36" square.

For reasons, I started painting the Battle of the Alps (Italy and France) in 1/72, with multi-figure basing. this is the first platoon of alpini.

I also painted five additional 28mm lizard warriors - one Reaper Bones and four Dark Heaven - and have gotten the first platoon of 1/72 French started.

Oh, and I played the classic GDW game, Battle for Moscow, several times in a single day, and also a game of Burning Mountains 1916, from Compass Games - with turns spread over three days.

Cheers!

One Hour Wargames Scenario Idea: Pozzuolo del Friuli

I am house/cat/plant sitting this week and I am away from my wargaming paraphernalia - so, I began looking at some of the non-painting/non-playing options I could pursue. 

Of late, I've been inspired by people taking historical battles and making scenarios from them. The problem, for me, is that I only rarely if ever have the necessary kit or space for those kinds of games. However, One Hour Wargames scenarios often approximate a historical situation (beyond the ones that inspired their creation), and those take up very little space and are forces I can muster.

So, taking my interest in the Battle of Pozzuolo del Friuli (October 1917, part of what is commonly called 'Caporetto', and which features Lancieri), I applied the OHW approach. 

None of this has been play tested yet and I probably won't until I get home. 

Rules will be some version of my modified One Hour Wargames Machine Age rules (here and here and here).

The Map:

Click to enlarge

The result is a sparse looking map admittedly - just like those in OHW. 

In this case, the land around Pozzuolo del Friuli is pretty flat and is mostly farmland, at least in modern photos. Scattered trees won't look out of place (but provide no cover bonus), but there are no forests or woods playing role in the battle according to my one and only source (see link below). 

Situation:

Battle of Pozzuolo - Wikipedia

Army Sizes:

Austria-Hungary 60th Infantry Division:  8 units

• Two Heavy Infantry
• Four Infantry
• Two Assault Infantry

Options: 

• May swap up to one Assault Infantry for Forward Observation Officer
• May swap up to two Assault Infantry for Infantry
• May swap up to two Heavy Infantry for infantry

Italian Force: 6 Units

• One Heavy Infantry of the Bergamo Brigade
• One Infantry of the Bergamo Brigade
• Four Lancieri of the Lancieri di Novara Regiment

Options

• May swap up to one Lancieri for one Infantry
• May swap up to one Heavy infantry for one Infantry

In the historical event, the Austro-Hungarians had a division vs an under-strength infantry battalion and an under-strength cavalry regiment. To reflect this, rather than doing a 6 vs 4 game which Neil Thomas does, I went with 8 vs 6. I get to use more of my toys this way.

A variant to consider is to allow eliminated Austro-Hungarian stands to enter via the road north of the village on subsequent turns to better reflect their numerical superiority.

While I came up with representative forces, I thought it might be fun to have some "legal" tradeoffs, for replay value. Note, my tradeoffs are limited by my collection, not by anything remotely historically influenced. I left out arditi as a swap for the Italians, as they were not present, but I suppose if you want to go down the "what if?", why not?

One reason I wanted to formalize my scenario idea is to lend some direction to my figure painting queue - having a defined scenario I know I need to focus on making two more cavalry stands, so 4 more figures.

Deployment:

My layout is inspired by the Flank Attack (1) scenario but adjusted to reflect the historical situation. The deployment zones I've specified allow for some options while keeping the general idea intact.

1. The Austro-Hungarian 60th infantry division approaches Pozzuolo del Friuli from the Northern table edge.
2. The two Bergamo infantry units are deployed in the village of Pozzuolo del Friuli.
3. The Lancieri di Novara deploy to the east of the village.

The downside for the Austro-Hungarians is that they may not all make it onto the table on turn one, depending on base depth (which might be a thing that becomes official later, now that I think about it).

 

Game Length and Turn Order:

The game lasts 15 turns. Austria-Hungary goes first each turn.

Victory Conditions:

        Austria-Hungary:

• For minor victory, must occupy the village by the end of turn 15.
• For victory, must occupy the village by the end of turn 15, uncontested (no Italian unit within range to attack)
• For major victory, eliminate all Italian units and occupy the village before 15.

Italy:

• The Italians win a major victory if they still hold the village with at least one unit at the end of turn 15.

I decided to give the Austro-Hungarian force the opportunity to achieve varying levels of victory, while the Italians have only one objective - hold out until turn 15. It might more in keeping with the historical event to have to move units off the map for the Italians, but they are a delaying force, and I felt that it can be presumed that when a unit is removed, it reflects that in addition to wounds, men retreating due to failed morale.

Plus, with so few units, I really hate moving them off the table.

Once I get a chance to play this a few times, there will likely be some changes, but I figured I'd share what I have so far just in case it's of use to anyone else.

I Feel Like I've Been Here Before

I was planning to work on Necrons this weekend - and I did, a little. But ...

For my birthday this year, I received a sprue each of Wargames Atlantic's WWI French and Germans, so that I could move my Weird World War I project down in scale. 

I know I know. 

In part, this was motivated by the fact that I keep breaking the bayonets on the 1/35 figures, as well as the fact that making the terrain I want for the game will just be too large to store in our apartment. More importantly, of late I have found I really enjoy painting the smaller (for me) figures, for reasons I don't quite understand.

This looks familiar.

 

The figures go together easily enough, although I had trouble pairing arms. There aren't many arms with empty hands that aren't made for cradling a rifle stock, which made picking the unarmed hands for the center and left figure more annoying than it needed to be, and I think they look a little awkward.

It still beats assembling the Necrons! 

Painting was simple - blocked in the colors and then a wash of Agrax Earth Shade. They look pretty grim dark past? I don't know - but I think it works. 

I still have 4 more French and 6 Germans (I'm not sure why the Germans have one less figure per sprue).

The walls of the trench are made with Dollar Tree knock-off Jenga bricks. Three bricks are glued long edge to long edge, then covered in strips of cereal box. Then two sets of three are glued end-to-end to make a single 3.75" wall piece. A cut down bamboo skewer acts as a post and hides the the seam down the middle. I think the next batch, I'll make the full wall piece, then cover in the strips - less cutting overall that way.

The walls were also given a touch of extra height from a Dollar Tree craft stick.

The craft sticks have a slight warp but they work well enough.

 The skewer ends just before the craft stick, so i can slide the floor under the posts, making it look integrated-ish (if you look at the picture below you can see what I mean)

This approach is far more portable and configurable - like dungeon walls for an RPG (which is kind of how I imagine this WWWI project) - than my 1/35 attempt.

Top-down illustrating what it will look like with walls on each side

My plan is to coat the non-trench side with wall filler to make raw stone tunnels.

I was aware of the tunnels used by troops on the Southern Front (through rock and glacier - like when the Austrian stormtroops burst from tunnels in the ice to surprise Italian troops and also to blow the tops off mountains) and I was aware about mining on the Western Front, thanks to two of my favorite WWI movies, Beneath Hill 60 and The War Below.

I had been thinking my Weird World War I conceit would be squads moving through strangely abandoned trenches and, possibly into those same tunnels (where else would Eldritch horrors and demons enter from?).

Hence the desire to look stone-like on one side.

While doing some research - loosely speaking - I came across an offhand mention of the underground fighting during WWI. 

Fighting IN the tunnels? That would further justify my choice (I don't need it - it's pretty much WWI fantasy but it means they can serve double-duty).

To fill in the gaping holes in my knowledge, I picked up Beneath the Killing Fields: Exploring the Subterranean Landscapes of the Western Front.

I'm not finished reading it, but it is an absolutely fascinating and eye-opening read about the extent to which the Great War took place underground, be it shelter, moving men to the front, or mining operations. 

The author goes through great lengths to discuss the sensory reconfiguration required for those working in the tunnels, and, in a bit of poetic flourish, he more than once emphasizes the inversion of life and death, where the dead lay in the open air of the battlefield, and the living are underground. 

He also describes it as Hell moving from the depths of the earth to above ground, while men hide beneath the surface. If that isn't an entire Weird World War I setting in a single sentence, I don't know what is.

Now, I picked this book up for a song. It's a hardcover book and was only $3.84 usd,(regular price is around $30 usd) which may be coloring my enthusiasm a little, but I highly recommend it, especially if you can find a used copy.

One Hour Wargames : More Machine Age Changes

Most of the changes from this post  and this post on this subject still apply in one form or another, but there are new additions that have lead me to a game I find even more enjoyable.

An Unfortunate Oversight - elongated to 2' x 4'. Units are on 3" wide bases. Each infantry base is a company. 1" = 50 yards approximately.

Activation:

• Each leader figure on a side rolls xd6 to see how many units in their command may be activated that turn
• A poor leader rolls 2d6 and takes the lower
• An average leader rolls 1d6
• An above average leader rolls 2d6 and keeps the higher
• Leaders activate for free.
• Assault units activate for free.
• Units already engaged in close combat from a previous turn activate for free.

 

A sturmpatrol assaults the Italian unit holding the town.

Assault Units:

• Always count as in cover (take 1/2 damage)
• +2 in close combat
• May attempt to self-rally to remove morale result failures.  Counts as activation.
  

Infantry Close Combat:

• Requires a Guts Check prior to rolling to move. If succeeds may roll movement. If fails, unit may not advance and counts as having activated.
• Otherwise, use the modifications from the linked posts above.
  

Movement:

• Infantry, Leaders on foot, MG/Heavy Infantry - 1d6"/2d6"
• Assault units 1d6"+2" / 2d6" 
  
• Field Guns  1d3"/1d6"
• Cavalry  1d6" + 3"/ 2d6"+ 6"

The first number is for rough ground (almost everything), the second is for roads, flat solid ground etc.

Leaders :

On their activation, a leader figure may move and one of the following:

• Before or after moving, choose a unit within 6" recover 1d3 points
• Before or after moving, attempt to rally a unit with a morale failure marker
• Instead of moving, call in off table artillery on a target within 12"
  

Rallying:

Leader rolls 2d6 and if less than the damage taken by the unit, remove one morale failure. Poor leaders -1 to the roll, Avg leader +/- 0, Above Average +1 to the roll.

Meanwhile on the Austrian right, the battalion there effects a river crossing. It is slow and some of the units were more hampered than others.

 

Hit Point / Strength Point / Cohesion Points Recovery

• A unit that does not move, shoot, or engage in close combat may automatically regain 1 point.
• A unit that withdraws (increases the distance between it and the nearest enemy) automatically regains 2 points.

Shoot out across the river in support of the sturmpatrol assault.

Morale Results Test:

Every time a unit takes damage, they take a Morale Results Test.

Roll 2d6, if less than damage taken, fails

1st fail - no penalty, just a marker
2nd fail - May not advance towards enemy, attacks are 1/2 damage
3rd fail - routed

 

Guts Check:

Performed as Morale Results Test with no Morale Results Test failure rules applied. Taken before charging, going over the top, etc.

 

The situation at the end of turn 15. I decided the Italians could not withstand much more, but the Austrians had suffered on their left (the battalion that tried to take the village suffered high numbers of casualties). I ruled it a minor victory for the Austrians.

Recently, having read this post over on Blood and Spectacles  about wargame design, and then reading back through various linked post, I realized that what I enjoyed most in Contemptible Little Armies and in Trench Hammer was the way leader figures mattered.

I determined I wanted to focus my WWI rules around Morale primarily, and its relation to the other Ms (Movement, Melee, Morale, Missiles).

Neil Thomas explicitly notes that hit points for a unit represent morale, as well as casualties, so their recovery had to play some role in this. I wanted to find a way to reflect the leader's impact in some way ( a la Contemptible Little Armies), but also allow units some opportunity to manage their own morale (a la Trench Hammer). 

I settled on splitting the loss of morale from the effects of that loss. The former could be managed by the company commander on down. The latter would require a combination of both the company leadership and assistance from the battalion HQ to keep the unit on the battlefield. 

Does this reflect anything in real life? No idea.

The game pictured played out 15 turns in an hour with over half of the units remaining on the table, as is proper I think. Rather than finishing the game with one or two units total left on the table, they were able to stave off morale loss in different ways.

The leaders had a lot to do putting out fires and I enjoyed the decisions between rolling to remove a morale failure or removing hits on a unit. Logically there are times where one always makes more sense than the other, but there were often times where it felt like a gamble and I struggled to make the "right" decision.

Other changes I added this time around were simply to increase friction in a way that I find leads to an enjoyable narrative and solo gaming experience - activation pips, test to charge, the variable movement rate, that kind of thing.

These points of friction make a more dynamic and interesting game in my opinion,while still maintaining the underlying beauty of the One Hour Wargames Machine Age rules.

p.s yes, I re-based AGAIN. I decided I like the multi-figure bases best for the majority of my WWI gaming. I easily see them as companies, and have followed Hordes in the Trenches basing suggestions for number of figures per base (doubled in width due to figure size). If I decide to do individually based figures, I'll do it in 28mm or maybe 1/72.