I recently decided to play-test Steve Parker's DOMINION OF THE SPEAR AND BAYONET RULES that I reviewed at the beginning of the month.
The first thing that I did was to create a suitable gridded battlefield on the back of one of my spare 30cm square 6mm-thick cork tiles. As my 15mm figures are mounted on 40mm-wide bases and none are deeper than 40mm, I decided to to make each of the sector grid areas 50mm x 50mm. The end result looked like this:
I then chose two armies from the army lists that are included in the rules.
Mahdist War (1881 - 1899 AD)
- Mahdist (1881 to 1899):
- 1 x Skirmishers (Baggara Arab cavalry armed with muskets and spears)
- 1 x Elite spearmen (Hadendowah Beja tribesmen)
- 1 x Elite line infantry (Jihadiyya riflemen)
- 1 x Ambushers (Ansar spearmen on foot)
- 1 x Skirmishers (Ansar with bows or old firearms on foot)
- Egyptians (1882 to 1885):
- 1 x Cavalry (Dragoons)
- 1 x Line infantry (Sudanese)
- 2 x Line infantry (Conscripts)
- 1 x Spearmen (Sudanese native levies or auxiliaries)
- 1 x Artillery (old cannons)
The Mahdist Army.
The Egyptian Army.
(The figures I used came from my 15mm Belle Époque collection.)
Background and Initial Positions
As the power of the Mahdists increased across the Sudan, the Egyptians decided to mount a punitive military expedition against them in the hope that it would stop a full-scale revolt in its tracks. They selected retired British Army Major Archibald Higgs to lead the expedition, and gave him the rank of Pasha. Having gathered his troops together at Jakdun Wells, he set off across the desert to find and fight the Mahdists.
Three days after setting out, the Egyptians were passing through an area of scrubland near a plateau when the Mahdists attacked them. (During the battle the Mahdists were the attackers and the Egyptians were the defenders.)
Turn 1
The Mahdist Baggara Arab cavalry skirmishers attacked the Egyptian Dragoon cavalry in the left sector. Both sides threw a D6 die and scored 4 and 2 respectively. As a result, the fighting was indecisive.
In reply, the 1st Egyptian line infantry attacked the Mahdist Ansar skirmishers in the centre sector. Both sides threw a D6 die, and scored 3 and 4 respectively. As a result, the fighting was indecisive.
Turn 2
The Mahdist Baggara Arab cavalry skirmishers attacked the Egyptian Dragoon cavalry in the left sector for a second time. Both sides threw a D6 die and scored 1 and 2 respectively. As a result, the fighting was indecisive.
In reply, the Egyptian Sudanese spearmen attacked the Mahdist Ansar ambushers in the right sector. Both sides threw a D6 and scored 3 and 4 respectively. As a result, the fighting was indecisive.
Turn 3
The Mahdist Baggara Arab cavalry skirmishers attacked the Egyptian Dragoon cavalry in the left sector for a third time. Both sides threw a D6 die and scored 3 and 5 respectively. As a result, the Mahdist Baggara Arab cavalry skirmishers were destroyed ...
... and replaced by the Mahdist Elite Jihadiyya.
In reply, the Egyptian Sudanese spearmen attacked the Mahdist Ansar spear-armed skirmishers in the right sector. Both sides threw a D6 die and scored 1 and 5 respectively. As a result, the Egyptian Sudanese spearmen were destroyed ...
... and replaced by the Egyptian Sudanese line infantry.
Turn 4
The Mahdist Elite Jihadiyya attacked the Egyptian Dragoon cavalry in the left sector. Both sides threw a D6 die and scored 3 (+1 for being Elite attackers) and 6 respectively. As a result, the Mahdist Elite Jihadiyya were destroyed ...
... and replaced by the Mahdist Elite Hadendowah spearmen.
In reply, the Egyptian 1st line infantry attacked the Ansar Arab skirmishers in the centre sector. Both sides threw a D6 die and both scored 6! As a result, both the Mahdist Jihadiyya and the Egyptian 1st line infantry were destroyed!
There were no Mahdist troops in reserve but the Egyptian 2nd Line Infantry were able to replace the Egyptian 1st line infantry.
Turn 5
The Mahdist Elite Hadendowah spearmen attacked the Egyptian Dragoon cavalry in the left sector. Both sides threw a D6 die and scored 5 (+1 for being an Elite attacker) and 2 respectively. As a result, the Egyptian Dragoon cavalry were destroyed …
… and replaced by the Egyptian Artillery.
In reply, the Egyptian Line Infantry attack the Elite Hadendowa spearmen in the flank. They throw a D6 die and score 5 (+1 for an outflanking attack). (Because the Elite Hadendowah spearmen were being attacked in the flank they were not able to fight back and did not throw a D6 die). As a result, the Elite Hadendowa spearmen were destroyed ...
... and the Mahdist force was defeated! Against the odds, Pasha Higgs had led a successful Egyptian punitive expedition against the Mahdists!
This battle took a lot less time to fight than it did to photograph and write about, and I can see myself using these rules to fight a simple campaign in a day at some time in the future.
One thing that this simple type of battle lends it to is the narrative style of battle report. My play-test shows how the rules work, but does not impart the flavour or feel of the battle. What follows is the battle report I would have written (in the character of Higgs Pasha) had I wanted to include it in a campaign that was going to be recorded for posterity.
To his Excellency, the Governor of the Sudan
From Higgs Pasha
Sir,
In accordance with my orders to seek and bring to battle the forces of the so-called Mahdi, I assembled a small field force comprising a regiment of Dragoons, two battalions of Egyptian line infantry, a battalion of Sudanese line infantry, a battery of artillery, and a group of locally-recruited auxiliaries at Jakdun Wells.
I led my force into the desert, and after several days of fruitless searching, we approached a small plateau that seemed to dominate the surrounding area. I suspected that the Mahdists might have chosen it as a base as there appeared to be an abundant supply of water near the plateau’s base.
I sent the Dragoons forward, flanked by the by the one of the Egyptian line infantry battalions and the unit of auxiliaries. Almost at once, a large group of mounted Baggara Arabs appeared from cover and engaged the Dragoons, who gave a good account of themselves.
Seeing a host of Ansar spearmen behind the mounted Arabs, the Egyptian line infantry engaged them with somewhat ineffective rifle fire.
Whilst the two mounted forces continued fighting, the Sudanese auxiliaries attacked another group of Ansar that had suddenly appeared with more vigour than I would have expected of them, although the results were inconclusive.
The Dragoons finally prevailed, and the Baggara Arabs quit the field, only to be replaced by a force of Jihadiyya riflemen. By this time the Dragoons were exhausted, and the arrival of a such a fierce and aggressive enemy caused them to falter slightly … but they proved to be brave fellows and fought their new enemy with great vigour, causing them many casualties. The Mahdist unit withdrew from the fight, only to be replaced by some fearsome Hadendowah infantry.
At the same time, the Sudanese auxiliaries finally succumbed in their somewhat unequal struggle with the Ansar, only to be replaced by my steadiest unit, the Sudanese line infantry. Fighting in the centre was particularly fierce and saw both the Egyptian line infantry and the Ansar unit that was facing them mutually annihilated, but the other Egyptian line infantry unit stepped forward over the bodies of their fallen comrades to continue the fight.
This was none too soon as the hard-pressed Dragoons finally gave way, to be replaced by the Egyptian artillery battery. At this point the Egyptian line infantry proved themselves worthy of their reputation for dogged steadfastness. They enfiladed the Hadendowah with a devastating volley … and the Mahdist unit disintegrated. As only a unit of Ansar spearmen remained, victory was ours!
I remain, Sir, your obedient servant,
Archibald Higgs Pasha
Great report Bob - I like the dispatch from Higgs Pasha.
ReplyDeleteI have used DotS for resolving battles in a Campaign recently and they are certainly good for quick games.
Maudlin Jack Tar,
DeleteI’m very pleased that you enjoyed Higgs Pasha’s report. I had great fun writing it!
I am very likely to follow your example and to setup and run a short campaign using these rules. They certainly make doing so even easier than FP3x3PW.
All the best,
Bob
When I first tried out Dominion of the Spear rules, the game played out well. Like you, after replaying the game in my mind, the narrative actually was very exciting, and I found myself wanting to play out a campaign with these rules. Reading your report, it's time to revisit these rules.
ReplyDeleteJhnptrqn,
DeleteReading the Army Lists in all of Steve Parker’s rules has made me realise that I could easily create a large number of ‘ Dominion of the …’ armies for very little outlay … especially if I use figures from the various iterations of RISK.
I sense that a number of narrative campaigns might be taking place in the near future!
All the best,
Bob
A nice battle. Things started out slow but then quickly heated up. My experiments with the system went like that as well. Like you I can see myself using it for campaigns, perhaps with a 3x3 game for the final battle. The army lists are wonderful and the pamphlets are worth picking up just for them.
ReplyDeleteMark Cordone,
DeleteI was worried that I might have misunderstood the rules after the first couple of turns … and then things began to really happen and the action stepped up.
I agree that the cost of the various booklets is exceptionally good and the Army List are wonderful … and could easily be used with FP3x3PW!
All the best,
Bob
Great stuff Bob ⚔️⚔️
ReplyDeleteThe “Dominion” series of rules provide a quick battle resolution and lend themselves to creating a suitably interesting narrative.
Cheers,
Geoff
Elliesdad, (Geoff),
DeleteI also love the way the swift resolution of the fighting encourages the player to create a narrative of the action, even if it is only a mental one.
All the best,
Bob
Bob -
ReplyDeleteI haven't been following events closely enough! This simple system seems to offer sprightly action, although it looks like a 'dice rolling' game.
Whilst reading this I had some thoughts about the artillery. Without delving too deeply into what is happening 'beneath the grain', the artillery replacing a defeated unit seemed to me a little odd.
So I wondered how artillery might be used differently. Perhaps the artillery (we're talking rifled ordnance, here) remain permanently in the reserve zone, but can support (+1) ONE combat per turn. The effect is to advantage the army with artillery in combat, but that army is defeated when it loses four units rather than five.
I've not tried this game at all (my thoughts being elsewhere right now), and this method of handling arty might turn out to be too unbalancing.
Meanwhile, I have discovered several units of 18th Century horse wanting painting up. Half way through Batthany Dragoons (Trockenbeeren-Auslese), it looks as though Altmark-Uberheim might be getting some (more?) dragoons as well... That will keep the war games momentum going for a little while, methinks!
Cheers,
Ion
Hi Ion,
DeletePerhaps if one views "artillery replacing a defeated unit" more from the viewpoint of that the enemy unit has penetrated the front line and is now directly threatening the artillery. Hence the artillery unit now finds itself in the new front line.
Steve
Archduke Piccolo (Ion),
DeleteAt first glance, the rules do appear to be little more than a dice rolling exercise BUT like so many ‘simple’ systems there is an underlying subtlety in the use of unit types and penalties/bonuses that actually mean the players has to make decisions about where to place their units initially and who to attack/defend with.
Had the battle in my play-test progressed to another turn, I might have been able to use my artillery. I did contemplate using it earlier but the tide of battle seemed to make it unnecessary.
I look forward to reading more about your 18th century armies in due course.
All the best,
Bob
Steve,
DeleteI’d not thought of it in that way … but it makes perfect sense to do so!
All the best,
Bob
It's a bit funny how I interpreted the narrative differently than you.
ReplyDeleteI imagined each side only half heartedly committing to the battle at first but as each side rebuffed the other's attacks, things escalated. A lot of, "Oh yeah, izzat all you got? Give us some more, I dare ya" until the fighting began and blood was drawn.
Once units began swapping out each side held on as best they could until the threat of a last, desperate stand ended the fighting.
This set of rules has me thinking they could be adapted to a simple BASIC program on my Apple II emulator!
Mr Pavone,
DeleteIn actual fact, your description of events is equally true as far as the ‘facts’ of the action are concerned. What you describe sounds very like the posturing I’ve seen school children go through before they actually fight, with both sides hoping that someone will intervene before a punch or kick actually takes place. ‘Hold me back, hold me back!’ ‘Come on, if you think you’re hard enough!’ In these case, once the fighting starts it all goes a bit pell mell, with lots of swinging haymakers that often don’t connect!
A computerised version would be an interesting.project. I’d love to hear more.
All the best,
Bob
Great demo, thoroughly enjoyed. Please do another demo.
ReplyDeleteAnother plus is these rules don't require the need to draw out a grid as the positions of the units are obvious. Unfortunately I didn't see your artillery go into action. Do these new rules still use the fire first (missile vs melee) combat?
Spearhead,
DeleteHopefully there will be more battle reports in due course … and will see artillery in action.
You are right about the grid not being absolutely necessary but I used one in this battle report to make the action easier to follow.
I don’t have my copy of the rules to hand, but I think that the missiles first then melee weapons rule is there.
All the best,
Bob