Pages

Saturday, 18 April 2020

My first online Portable Wargame: The Battle of Hill Crossroads

Earlier this week I took part in my very first online Portable Wargame. It was organised by Gary Sheffield, and he provided the scenario, ORBATs etc., as well as the expertise. (I suspect that he might say that he was not an expert in this sort of thing, but as he had more experience than me, that made him an expert in my eyes!)


THE BATTLE OF HILL CROSSROADS, 1ST APRIL 1863

THE SCENARIO
Northern Mississippi, 1st April 1863. The Union Army under Ulysses S. Grant and the Confederate Army of John C. Pemberton are manoeuvring for position. Both have realised the strategic importance of Hill Crossroads, and have sent advance guards to capture the area. The two sides collide in a classic encounter battle ...

The map of the battlefield


Deployment
  • The Union (USA) force deploys first, up to 3 grid squares from the northern table edge (the roads runs north to south and east to west, and the hill is in north west part of battlefield)
  • The Confederate (CSA) force deploys second, up to 3 grid squares from the southern table edge.
Game length and Turn Order
  • The scenario lasts for max 15 game turns. The USA player goes first in each turn.
Victory Conditions
  • Victory is achieved by the side controlling both the hill and the crossroads at the end of the battle.

PRIOR PREPARATION
As anyone who has had dealings with the UK military will know, they work on what is known as the 7P principle*. Before the battle started, I drew up a Record Sheet for both sides on which I could record each side's moves each turn. The blank Record Sheets looked like this:



I wrote the initial deployment positions for both sides on the Record Sheets, but in the heat of tabletop battle, I only managed to keep mine (the USA side) up to date during the game. This is a pity, as it would have helped afterwards to retrace how the battle developed ... and where I went wrong!

I also printed out a 14 x 14 grid on pieces of green card. I glued these together to form my battlefield.


Each square on the grid was allocated a letter & number coordinate so that we could track each other's units ... and as the battle showed, this was a vital ingredient in its success!

I also made up unit counter for both sides.

THE ORBATS AND INITIAL DEPLOYMENT

The ORBATs
Union Army (Major-General Ambrosia Sideburn)
  • 1st Brigade (Colonel Chamberlain L. Joshua)
    • 1st New York Zouaves (Elite, Rifle Armed, 5SP)
    • 2nd New York Zouaves (Elite, Rifle Armed, 5SP)
    • 3rd New York Infantry (Poor, Rifle Armed, 3SP)
    • 4th Maine Infantry (Average, Rifle Armed, 4SP)
    • 5th Maine Infantry (Average, Rifle Armed, 4SP)
    • 6th Rhode Island Infantry (Poor, Rifle Armed, 3SP)
  • 2nd Brigade (Colonel Elisha Rhodes Hunt)
    • 7th Sharpshooter (Elite, Rifle Armed, 5SP)
    • 8th Iowa Infantry (Average, Rifle Armed, 4SP)
    • 9th Iowa Infantry (Average, Rifle Armed, 4SP)
    • 10th Iowa Infantry (Poor, Rifle Armed, 3SP)
    • 11th Minnesota Infantry (Average, Rifle Armed, 4SP)
    • 12th Minnesota Infantry (Poor, Rifle Armed, 3SP)
  • Cavalry
    • 1st US Cavalry (Average, Rifle Armed, 3SP)
    • 2nd US Cavalry (Average, Rifle Armed, 3SP)
    • 3rd US Cavalry (Average, Rifle Armed, 3SP)
  • Artillery
    • 1st Artillery (Average, 2SP)
Confederate Army (Major-General Scraxton Scragg)
  • 1st Brigade (Colonel K.F.C. Sanders)
    • 1st Louisiana Tigers Zouaves (Elite, Rifle Armed, 5SP)
    • 2nd Louisiana Tigers Zouaves (Elite, Rifle Armed, 5SP)
    • 3rd Kentucky Infantry (Average, Rifle Armed, 4SP)
    • 4th Alabama Infantry (Average, Rifle Armed, 4SP)
    • 5th Alabama Infantry (Average, Rifle Armed, 4SP)
  • 2nd Brigade (Colonel the Reverend Leonidas P. Kolk)
    • 6th Mississippi Infantry (Elite, Rifle Armed, 5SP)
    • 7th Mississippi Infantry (Elite, Rifle Armed, 5SP)
    • 8th Mississippi Militia (Poor, Musket Armed, 3SP)
    • 9th Mississippi Militia (Poor, Musket Armed, 3SP)
    • 10th Arkansas Infantry (Elite, Rifle Armed, 5SP)
    • 11th Arkansas Infantry (Average, Rifle Armed, 4SP)
  • Cavalry
    • 1st Mississippi Cavalry (Elite, Rifle Armed, 3SP)
    • 2nd Mississippi Cavalry (Elite, Rifle Armed, 3SP)
  • Artillery
    • 1st Arkansas Artillery (Average, 2SP)
    • 2nd Mississippi Artillery (Average, 2SP)
Initial Deployment
The following extracts from the Record Sheets show each side's initial deployment.


When seen on the two respective tabletops (mine and then Gary's), the deployments looked like this:

It was at this point that I realised that I had placed the east to west road in the wrong place. It took a matter of seconds to correct this error, as will be seen in following photographs.
Gary's collection of American Civil War figures in action on his tabletop.

THE TECHNOLOGY
In order to communicate with each other, Gary and I used Skype. This allowed us to see each other, talk to each other in real time, and to see what was happening at the other end ... so to speak.

The connection did go a bit flaky at times, but whenever the connection was lost, we arranged that Gary would contact me rather than me try to contact him in order to avoid needless 'the user you are trying to contact is busy' messages.

THE BATTLE
Rather than try to give a blow-by-blow narrative of the battle, I will use the Record Sheet to show what my units did along with photographs that both of us took during the battle.

The Union Army's Record Sheet


The Union Army's plan
My plan was to seize the hill with half of my infantry and to menace the crossroads with my cavalry and the rest of my infantry. I hope to lure the Confederates into attacking the hill, where I hoped to destroy them piecemeal.

Turn 1

The positions on my tabletop. (The road has yet to be moved to its correct location.)
The equivalent positions on Gary's tabletop.
Turn 2

The positions on my tabletop.
The equivalent positions on Gary's tabletop.
Turn 3

The positions on my tabletop.
Turn 4

The positions on my tabletop.
The equivalent positions on Gary's tabletop.
Turn 5

The positions on my tabletop. (I tried an overhead shot of the battlefield to see if the results were better ... but they were not.
The equivalent positions on Gary's tabletop.
Turn 6

The positions on my tabletop.
Turn 7

The positions on my tabletop.
The end of the battle
At this point things seriously began to go wrong. The Union side's loss of SPs was taking it closer and closer to its exhaustion point, and it had already lost two infantry units (8th and 9th Iowa Infantry Regiments), its artillery (1st US Artillery), and a subordinate commander (Colonel Joshua), whereas the Confederates had only lost two infantry units (3rd Kentucky and 5th Alabama Infantry Regiments) and a subordinate commander (Colonel Sanders). I therefore conceded the battle, and we both adjudged it to be a marginal Confederate victory.

The positions on Gary's tabletop at the end of the battle.
The positions on Gary's tabletop at the end of the battle shown from a different point of view .

LESSONS LEARNED
Gary and I had a short discussion after the battle about what we had learned from it.

First and foremost, it had been great fun, and we decided to fight another battle (possibly not an American Civil War one) in the near future.

Secondly, using a common grid with agreed coordinates made it easy to track the movement of the various units during the game. We also agree that trying to do that same with a hexagonal grid would not have been as easy, and would probably have led to confusion during the cut and thrust of a tabletop battle.

Thirdly, good and reliable communications is important before, during, and after the battle. Gary set up the scenario and sent a copy to me (along with his American Civil War variant of the PORTABLE WARGAME rules) in plenty of time for me to reproduce everything that I needed. We agreed to use Skype to talk to each other during the battle, and that he would throw the dice for both of us and adjudicate the outcomes. (We both kept a track of the SP losses, and at several points during the battle we checked each others tally.) Gary also took the initiative whenever the technology went wonky. (We had several instances of 'freezing' [i.e. the picture would freeze, and voice communication would be lost], which was usually followed by a loss of connection. When this occurred, Gary re-established the connection by Skyping me.)

Fourthly, the PORTABLE WARGAME rules lend themselves to fighting tabletop battles with a remote opponent. They are quick and simple to use, and because no measurement is involved, there were no disputes about things such as weapon ranges, how far units X or Y could move etc.

Finally, we discussed Gary's changes to the rules. The two main differences that Gary made to the original PORTABLE WARGAME rules were:
  • To introduce the 'Rebel Yell' factor into Close Combat. This came into play when three Confederate units in a contiguous line were attacking Union units. The 'Rebel Yell' gave the Confederates an additional +1 on their D6 die scores, and in my opinion, it added an interesting element to the battle.
  • To introduce some simple morale rules that came into play when a unit was about to initiate Close Combat with an enemy unit. Depending upon the quality and current SP of the unit initiating the Close Combat, it might be reluctant to actually engage in combat. Gary's morale rules determined whether or not it would. Now, I'm not a great lover of morale rules, but in this instance, I could see the point of including them. They did not drastically slow play down or affect the outcome, and only came into play a few times. Furthermore, when they did come into play, it was only already weakened units that were reluctant to engage, and this seemed to feel right in the context of the American Civil War.
(We also discussed a 'Foot Cavalry' rule that Gary had been considering adding to the rules. This would enable certain Confederate infantry units to move further in certain circumstances, rather like Native Infantry and Cavalry can in the original PORTABLE WARGAME rules. I agreed that this might be an interesting variant, just as long as players did not expect to field entire Confederate armies drawn from Stonewall Jackson's 'foot cavalry'!)

A FINAL WORD OR TWO
I really enjoyed taking part in this tabletop battle. The much larger grid (the 14 x 14 grid we used as opposed to my original 8 x 8 was 300% larger!) gave us more room to manoeuvre, and showed that the rules can be used to fight tabletop battles involving significant numbers of units.

It proved (yet again) that the basic core of the rules can be adapted to fight specific conflicts without loosing their simplicity, and that you do not need a table groaning under the weight of a thousand plus beautifully painted figures to have a fun and enjoyable time fighting a wargame. A good opponent is much more important ... and in Gary, I could not have wished for a better one!

* The 7Ps are : Proper Prior Preparation Prevents P*ss Poor Performance

Please note that the photographs featured above are © Bob Cordery and Gary Sheffield.

AN ADDENDUM BY GARY SHEFFIELD
Thanks for a great write up, Bob, and for your kind comments. I thoroughly enjoyed the game. Just to add a few more points:
  1. A handful of Confederate units were musket- (as opposed to rifle-) armed. These were the ones with a star token – you might be able to see these on some of the photos. This was to reflect the general Union advantage in terms of production of technology, and also to try balance out the Confederate advantage of the Rebel Yell rule.
  2. In the event there wasn’t very much cavalry action. Perhaps this reflects that I gave cavalry a distinct disadvantage when attacking rifle-armed infantry, to try to reflect the realities of the ACW. In previous games, cavalry have been used to get forward and then dismount and open fire. Sometimes that has been quite effective.
  3. Normally my PW games are played on a green mat which I have drawn a grid. For this game I improvised a mat out of Christmas wrapping paper, which conveniently has a grid printed on the back. I did was enlarge the squares, which made life much easier, although it did make the terrain look as though the armies were fighting through a snowstorm.
  4. Normally I would have a lot more terrain features; at a minimum squares of brown and green material, partly for aesthetic reasons, but in some cases (such as ploughed fields) terrain would have an impact on movement and cover. For this game, to keep things simple I only went for the roads and the hill.
  5. The figures are a mixture of 25mm from 30 odd years ago and some modern Perry plastics. I haven’t done very much American Civil War gaming until quite recently. About 20 years ago somebody gave me a small collection of 25s, some very slender, others more chunky, and they sat in a box for a very long time. I dug them out perhaps five years ago when I was playing trying out the ‘One Hour Wargame’ rules. I didn’t really like these, although the scenarios are great (the one we played was from this book) but when I discovered PW two years ago my Civil War figures came into their own. I have supplemented them with Perrys, and eventually will replace the more manky 25mm toys altogether.

28 comments:

  1. Looks like it was a very enjoyable game Bob. A grid is certainly the way to run a game over the internet.
    I like Gary's additions to the PW and will have to remember to try them next time I do an ACW game.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Maudlin Jack Tar,

      It was a great little battle, and the grid was an absolutely essential part of what made it all work.

      I hope to include Gary's rules in my planned VARIANTS OF THE PORTABLE WARGAME book.

      All the best,

      Bob

      Delete
  2. Hi BOB,
    Very interesting way of conducting your ACW Battle - 'Skype' would have been very useful and glad you enjoyed the experience to the fullest. Some weeks ago my friend Greg organised a AWI Battle where we were to do our General Orders on e-Mail by viewing some positional photos of the Battlefield - Greg was to do the dice rolling for us...alas, illness and Hospital put an end to my participation- however Greg and my opponent Peter pressed on and my British won the Battle. It was all very entertaining. I guess remote gaming will be the thing of the Future for us. Best Wishes. KEV.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kev Robertson (Kev),

      Skype proved to be easier to use than I expected, even though the connection was flaky at times.

      Hopefully, now that you are getting better, you might be able to take part in future online battles. I suspect that - as you write in your comment - it will certainly form part of our wargaming future.

      Keep safe and keep well,

      Bob

      Delete
  3. It really shows the flexibility of these rules and with todays technology, how easy it is to game remotely, subject to internet connection issues of course.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Steve J.,

      I might not be fighting online wargames every week, but I can see them being part of my regular wargaming life in the future,

      All the best,

      Bob

      Delete
  4. Gridded games are certainly the way to go in a competitive remote game. I moderated a semi-solo game with my son recently (with him as the active player and me controlling the other side) without a grid. Mikko on On Wargames and Such ran a remote kriegspiel style ACW game with two competing sides, reported on his blog. That looked a lot of work for the gamesmaster.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nundanket,

      Gary and I kept things as simple as possible to keep the workload manageable. The grid with its coordinates made everything so much easier, and I’ll be adopting it as my standard in future online battles.

      All the best,

      Bob

      Delete
    2. Keeping it simple is the key to the enjoyment especially when starting with new tech. I can see a lot of potential for remote gaming both traditional face-to-face and for other forms.

      Delete
    3. Nundanket,

      Since the pandemic hit us, there seems to have been a massive increase in interest in the use of new technology to fight wargames with remote opponents. It may well be the shape of things to come.

      All the best,

      Bob

      Delete
  5. A very interesting exercise! Your PW game system, Bob, is proving very versatile!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Archduke Piccolo,

      It was very enjoyable, and made me realise that PW has even more going for it than I had previously realised.

      All the best,

      Bob

      Delete
  6. There is a lot to be said for remote video link miniatures game when face to face isn't possible for any of a number of reasons.

    I've been doing it for 8 years and have enjoyed each game. I have yet to try a gridded one but have yet to have an issue with having the remote player measure for me whether to check distances for me or for actual moves etc but it does help that we are using 40mm figures and the video link is usually clear enough to see what is going on. Of course this means I don't have a written post battle turn by turn record log! (.of course I could write one anyway but.....)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Ross Mac,

      Being able to recreate a tabletop battle move by move is a useful byproduct of using a grid with coordinates, but it is not essential, and if you can fight battles online without a grid, it would give the players greater flexibility.

      Keep safe and keep well,

      Bob

      Delete
  7. StuRat,

    I deny all responsibility for the ORBAT. That was down to Gary, who also wrote the scenario.

    I think that the idea behind the ‘Foot Cavalry’ rule was to give a section of the Confederate army a minor tactical advantage. At present it is an option that is under development ... and may just remain that.

    All the best,

    Bob

    PS. Which part of Minnesota do you hail from?

    ReplyDelete
  8. Would be interested to hear a bit more about the morale rules.

    Simon

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Simon,

      I’ll ask Gary if I can share them with you.

      All the best,

      Bob

      Delete
  9. What a great battle report. It is my hope that, as far as can be told, that the men of the 10th Arkansas acquitted themselves satisfactory in battle.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Auston Jeff Butler,

      It was a very enjoyable action to fight ... and as far as I can remember, all the Arkansas troops fought well.

      All the best,

      Bob

      Delete
  10. StuRat,

    I thought that you might live somewhere like that! ;^)

    Keep safe and keep well,

    Bob

    ReplyDelete
  11. Interesting battle report and I like seeing others opinions on how the Portable Wargame adapts to the American Civil War. I think Grid based games are easier to play online as it is easier to reference an area compared to a table where everything has to be measured.

    Dave

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Dave,

      I gather from other people who’ve tried remote gaming that the use of a grid has made it so much easier for them. I am convinced that it is going to become a very useful tool for wargamers during the pandemic ... and possible afterwards as well.

      All the best,

      Bob

      Delete
  12. I like the idea of testing to go into close combat. I play the PW where units at one square can choose to shoot or charge, so testing to do the latter would make for an interesting challenge.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Kaptain Kobold,

      In the context that you describe, such a test would make perfect sense. It’s certainly an optional rules that would be worth including in the book of variants.

      All the best,

      Bob

      Delete
  13. Awesome report. I just recently re-read (and re-purchased) The Portable Wargame. Great publication. This battle report has me wanting to take part in some online Civil war Battles.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Gridiron,

      I’m very pleased that you enjoyed this battle report, and that it has encouraged you try an online ACW battle yourself.

      All the best,

      Bob

      Delete
    2. Also, with the grid system (and an honorable opponent), two could play a Portable War battle/campaign completely via email, right?

      Delete
    3. Gridiron,

      You could play by email, using Skype, or via Zoom.

      All the best,

      Bob

      Delete

Thank you for leaving a comment. Please note that any comments that are spam or contain phishing messages or that come from Google Accounts that are 'Unknown' will be deleted.