I wrote in an earlier bog entry that the TABLE TOP BATTLES wargames rules looked like they could be adapted for use with hexes without a great deal of problem. I have a lot of HEXON II and HEROSCAPE hexes and it seems a waste not to use them.
In the following play-test I decided to use the same scenario as I used for my first play-test of the rules, and I recreated the terrain using HEROSCAPE hexes. The resulting tabletop was a bit thinner than the squared grid version, but otherwise it was basically the same.
I then placed the figures in the same starting positions.
Turn 1
The Mahdists had the initiative during this turn.
The Mahdists chose not to move, and the Egyptian Lancers units charged towards the line of Hadendowa Infantry units that was between the Egyptian column and its objective. The rest of the Egyptian force followed at a more sedate pace.
The Egyptians had the initiative during this turn.
The Egyptian Lancer units hit the right-hand end of the line of Hadendowa Infantry units. The Egyptian Artillery unit moved forward and deployed to the left of the Egyptian column so that it could fire at the left-hand end of the line of Hadendowa Infantry units. The rest of the Egyptian column continued its advance towards it objective.
The Hadendowa Infantry units chose not to attempt to avoid Hand-to-Hand combat with the Egyptian Lancers. The rest of the Mahdist force did not move and remained hidden from view from the Egyptians.
The Mahdists had initiative during this turn.
Seeing one of the Egyptian Lancer units fall back, the Hadendowa Infantry swarmed forward. The Mahdist Cavalry units moved towards the bottom end of the hill they were behind and the Jihadia Infantry units moved onto the hill they had been hiding behind.
The Egyptian Lancer units attempted to avoid further Hand-to-Hand combat, but failed. The rest of the Egyptian force advanced and shook itself into line to meet and engage the Hadendowa Infantry units.
The Hand-to-Hand fighting between the Egyptian Lancer units and the right-hand Hadendowa Infantry units resulted in the destruction of one of the Hadendowa Infantry units. One of the Egyptian Lancer units was, however, forced to withdraw.
The Mahdists had initiative during this turn.
Seeing that there was an opportunity to destroy the Egyptian column, the Hadendowa Infantry units surged forward. The Mahdist Cavalry units swept around the bottom end of the hill they had been behind - thus threatening the rear of the Egyptian force - and the Jihadia Infantry units began lining the hill they were on with the intention of firing down on to the Egyptians.
The Egyptian Lancer units again failed to avoid Hand-to-Hand combat with the Hadendowa Infantry. The rest of the Egyptian column tried to form itself into a defensive formation to meet the threats posed by the Jihadia Infantry and Mahdist cavalry units.
The Hand-to-Hand combat also went badly for the Egyptians, and one of the Lancer units was wiped out.
Turn 5
The Egyptians had initiative during this turn.
A sensible commander facing a conventional opponent would - at this stage of the battle - have capitulated. However, the Egyptian General knew that he and his men would receive no mercy at the hands of the Mahdists. He therefore attempted to break of action and retreat.
The Mahdists, seeing their enemy falling back, fell on them with a vengeance.
Conclusions
It is very easy to use hexes in place of squares, but ...
... although the terrain looks fine (it could do with being repainted so as to 'lose' the brown edging to each hex) the 'look' of the battle is somehow not quite right. I suspect it is the fact that colonial armies tended to fight in very linear formations (lines and squares) and that these cannot be created easily on a hexes. The less formal formations used by many native armies probably look no better or no worse on hexes than they do on a squares, but somehow this battle did not quite look right.
I have therefore come to the conclusion that for battles from the pre-20th century period fought using the TABLE TOP BATTLES wargames rules, squares are superior. However the more fluid formations used by armies during the mid to late 20th century should look all right on hexes. My next play-test will, therefore, be an attempt to see if the rules can be used for 20th century battles.
In the following play-test I decided to use the same scenario as I used for my first play-test of the rules, and I recreated the terrain using HEROSCAPE hexes. The resulting tabletop was a bit thinner than the squared grid version, but otherwise it was basically the same.
I then placed the figures in the same starting positions.
Turn 1
The Mahdists had the initiative during this turn.
The Mahdists chose not to move, and the Egyptian Lancers units charged towards the line of Hadendowa Infantry units that was between the Egyptian column and its objective. The rest of the Egyptian force followed at a more sedate pace.
The Egyptians had the initiative during this turn.
The Egyptian Lancer units hit the right-hand end of the line of Hadendowa Infantry units. The Egyptian Artillery unit moved forward and deployed to the left of the Egyptian column so that it could fire at the left-hand end of the line of Hadendowa Infantry units. The rest of the Egyptian column continued its advance towards it objective.
The Hadendowa Infantry units chose not to attempt to avoid Hand-to-Hand combat with the Egyptian Lancers. The rest of the Mahdist force did not move and remained hidden from view from the Egyptians.
The Mahdists had initiative during this turn.
Seeing one of the Egyptian Lancer units fall back, the Hadendowa Infantry swarmed forward. The Mahdist Cavalry units moved towards the bottom end of the hill they were behind and the Jihadia Infantry units moved onto the hill they had been hiding behind.
The Egyptian Lancer units attempted to avoid further Hand-to-Hand combat, but failed. The rest of the Egyptian force advanced and shook itself into line to meet and engage the Hadendowa Infantry units.
The Hand-to-Hand fighting between the Egyptian Lancer units and the right-hand Hadendowa Infantry units resulted in the destruction of one of the Hadendowa Infantry units. One of the Egyptian Lancer units was, however, forced to withdraw.
The Mahdists had initiative during this turn.
Seeing that there was an opportunity to destroy the Egyptian column, the Hadendowa Infantry units surged forward. The Mahdist Cavalry units swept around the bottom end of the hill they had been behind - thus threatening the rear of the Egyptian force - and the Jihadia Infantry units began lining the hill they were on with the intention of firing down on to the Egyptians.
The Egyptian Lancer units again failed to avoid Hand-to-Hand combat with the Hadendowa Infantry. The rest of the Egyptian column tried to form itself into a defensive formation to meet the threats posed by the Jihadia Infantry and Mahdist cavalry units.
The Hand-to-Hand combat also went badly for the Egyptians, and one of the Lancer units was wiped out.
Turn 5The Egyptians had initiative during this turn.
A sensible commander facing a conventional opponent would - at this stage of the battle - have capitulated. However, the Egyptian General knew that he and his men would receive no mercy at the hands of the Mahdists. He therefore attempted to break of action and retreat.
The Mahdists, seeing their enemy falling back, fell on them with a vengeance.
Conclusions
It is very easy to use hexes in place of squares, but ...
... although the terrain looks fine (it could do with being repainted so as to 'lose' the brown edging to each hex) the 'look' of the battle is somehow not quite right. I suspect it is the fact that colonial armies tended to fight in very linear formations (lines and squares) and that these cannot be created easily on a hexes. The less formal formations used by many native armies probably look no better or no worse on hexes than they do on a squares, but somehow this battle did not quite look right.
I have therefore come to the conclusion that for battles from the pre-20th century period fought using the TABLE TOP BATTLES wargames rules, squares are superior. However the more fluid formations used by armies during the mid to late 20th century should look all right on hexes. My next play-test will, therefore, be an attempt to see if the rules can be used for 20th century battles.
Thanks Bob for the game report, I'm about to try out the rules on hexes with 6mm naps so your comments are spot on!
ReplyDeleteI must admit that I was a little disappointed that the 'look' of the game was not as good as I had hoped ... but play-tests exist so that we can try things out, and I certainly did learn things from this play-test.
ReplyDeleteI look forward to hearing how your wargame goes.