Pages

Tuesday, 9 June 2009

Wargame Rules for the late 19th and early 20th centuries

As promised, I have finished drafting my wargames rules for fighting small battles during the late 19th and early 20th centuries. They use a gridded tabletop and are designed to be used with 15mm figures and equipment.

I will make a PDF version of the rules available in due course. It will be an A5 four-page booklet that can be printed back-to-back on most inkjet or laser printers.

- o 0 o -

LATE 19th AND EARLY 20th CENTURY BATTLES

PLAYING EQUIPMENT:
The following equipment is needed to fight battles using these rules:
  • A battlefield and suitable terrain
  • Two armies
  • A scenario
  • Two D12s (i) – one for each side (ii)
THE BATTLEFIELD:
Battles are fought out on a gridded tabletop. The grid is marked in 50mm squares. The battlefield must be no less than 12 squares wide and 12 squares deep (iii).No more than two stands may be placed in a square at any one time, and then only if there is sufficient space within the square for this to happen. They must be placed one behind the other and face in the same direction.
Terrain (e.g. a group of trees) must, wherever possible, fit within one square on the battlefield. Where pieces of terrain are larger than an individual square (e.g. a hill) they must be sized in multiples of squares (e.g. 2 squares, 3 squares, or 6 squares) and be marked in 50mm squares in the same way as the battlefield.

STANDS:
Figures and artillery are mounted on stands. All stands are 40mm wide.
    Infantry stand: 20mm deep
    Cavalry stand: 30mm deep
    Artillery and Machine Gun stand: 40mm deep
    Transport stand: 40mm deep
    Command stand (on foot): 20mm deep
    Command stand (mounted): 30mm deep
Each stand is allocated a value that may be marked on the rear of the stand to aid players during the battle.

STAND VALUES:
The value for each type of stand is as follows:
    Guard Infantry: 4 points
    Regular Infantry, Regular Cavalry, and Heavy Artillery: 3 points
    Irregular Infantry, Native Infantry, Irregular Cavalry, Native Cavalry, Field Artillery, Mountain Artillery, and Machine Guns: 2 points
    ‘Exceptional’ General: 3 points
    ‘Average’ General: 2 points
    ‘Poor’ General: 1 point
    Transport: 1 point
    50mm of entrenchments: ½ point
ARMIES:
Before the battle begins both sides must decide how many stands their armies will have. For campaigns this will be determined by the events leading up to the battle; in the case of one-off battles this can be decided by either mutual agreement between the players (iv) or by the throw of dice (v).
Each side’s army must have a Command stand (i.e. the stand with the General on it). The value of this stand is not included in the cost of an army.

GENERALS:
Before the battle begins both sides must decide how good their respective Generals are. For campaigns this will be determined by the events leading up to the battle; in the case of one-off battles this is decided by the throw of dice (vi).

TURN SEQUENCE:
The battle lasts a maximum of twelve turns. At the beginning of each turn both sides throw a D12; the side with the highest score has the initiative for that turn (vii).
The side with the initiative throws a D12; the score determines the number of stands – or pairs of stands that are sharing the same square – they may activate this turn. Once they have activated all their eligible stands, the other side throws a D12 and follows the same procedure.

ACTIVATION:
When a stand is activated it can move and then engage in combat or engage the enemy in combat and then move.

MOVEMENT:
All movement distances are expressed in squares.
    Irregular Cavalry and Native Cavalry: 5 squares
    Regular Cavalry and Command (mounted): 4 squares
    Irregular Infantry and Native Infantry: 3 squares
    Guard Infantry, Regular Infantry, Dismounted Cavalry, Artillery, Machine Guns, Transport, and Command (on foot): 2 squares
Stands can move through friendly stands but not through enemy stands.
Stands cannot move diagonally between enemy stands or between an enemy stand and an obstacle (viii).
Artillery stands may not be moved into a square that is adjacent to a square occupied by an enemy stand.
Only Infantry may move off-road through woods or can cross vertical obstacles (e.g. walls, hedges, fences etc.)
Stands making their entire move along a road may increase their movement distance by 1 square.
Stands crossing a hill contour reduce their movement distance by 1 square per contour crossed.
Stands that are forced to withdraw as a result of combat must withdraw until they are one square away from the nearest enemy stand. This movement must be within a 90° arc to the rear of the withdrawing stand. If the stand has to withdraw more than four squares to comply with this rule or it is prevented from doing so because of an obstacle or enemy stand, the withdrawing stand is deemed to have been destroyed and is removed from the tabletop.

COMBAT:
Combat is stand vs. stand. If there are two stands in the same square, only the front stand may initiate a combat with an enemy stand during a turn (ix). A stand may only initiate combat once per turn although it can be engaged by enemy stands many times.

Fire Combat – General Rules:
A stand may only fire at enemy stands they can see. The enemy stand must be within range and within a 90° arc to the front of the firing stand. Both the firing and the enemy stand throw a D12. Additions and subtractions are made, and the scores are compared.

Fire Combat – Ranges:
All ranges are expressed in squares.
    Hand-held Weapons and Muskets: 1 square
    Single-shot Rifles: 2 squares
    Magazine Rifles: 3 squares
    Smooth-bore Mountain Artillery, and Machine Guns: 4 squares
    Rifled Mountain Artillery and Smooth-bore Field Artillery: 5 squares
    Rifled Field Artillery and Smooth-bore Heavy Artillery: 6 squares
    Rifled Heavy Artillery: 8 squares
Fire Combat – Additions and Subtractions to the D12 score:
Add the stand’s value.
Add the value of any friendly Command stand that is in an adjacent square.
Add 1 to the firing stand’s score if the firing stand is Artillery firing at an enemy stand that is in an adjacent square.
Deduct 2 from the firing stand’s score if the enemy stand is behind a wall, in entrenchments, or inside a wood.

Close Combat – General Rules:
A stand may only engage an enemy stand that is in adjacent square. Both the stand initiating the close combat and the enemy stand throw a D12. Additions and subtractions are made, and the scores are compared.

Close Combat – Additions and Subtractions to the D12 score:
Add the stand’s value.
Add the value of any friendly Command stand that is in an adjacent square.
Add 1 for each friendly stand of the same type that is in an adjacent square.
Add 2 for each friendly stand of the same type that is in the same square.
Add 2 to the score of the stand initiating the close combat if the stand initiating the close combat is on the enemy stand’s flank or rear.
Add 3 to the score of the stand initiating the close combat if the stand initiating the close combat is Cavalry attacking Infantry or Artillery in flat, open country.
Deduct 2 from the score of the stand initiating the close combat if the stand initiating the close combat is in a square that is downhill from the enemy stand’s square.
Deduct 2 from the score of the stand initiating the close combat if the enemy stand is behind a wall or in entrenchments.

Combat Results:
If the final score of the stand that initiated the combat is lower, the combat has been ineffective.
If both stands’ final scores are equal, each stand throws a D12 and the stand with the lowest score must withdraw until it is one square away from the nearest enemy stand.
If enemy stand’s final score is less than final score of the stand that initiated the combat but more than half the final score of the stand that initiated the combat, the enemy stand must withdraw until it is one square away from the nearest stand on the same side as the stand that initiated the combat.
If enemy stand’s final score is less than half the final score of the stand that initiated the combat, the enemy stand is destroyed and removed from the battlefield.

NOTES:
(i) Dice marked 1 to 12.
(ii) For one-off battles where dice are used to determine the value of each side’s armies, at least eight D6s – marked 1 to 6 – will be required.
(iii) A battlefield that is 18 squares wide and 12 squares deep (or vice versa) is recommended.
(iv) A total of 36 points per army is recommended, with no more than 12 points in total being spent on stands worth 4 points.
(v) It is recommended that each side throw eight D6s to determine the value of their army. It is recommended that no more than 33% of the total value should be spent on stands worth 4 points.
(vi) A D6 is thrown. If the score is 6, the General is rated as ‘Exceptional’; if the score is 3, 4, or 5, the General is rated as ‘Average’; if the score is 1, the General is rated as ‘Poor’.
(vii) In the event of a tie, both sides throw again until one side gains the initiative.
(viii) An obstacle is any vertical or horizontal obstruction that requires a degree of physical effort to cross. This includes walls, hedges, fences, fordable rivers, streams, and trenches.
(ix) The stand that is the second row of the pair of stands in the same square supports the front stand in any Close Combat.

Monday, 8 June 2009

COW2008 - Some of the games we played

With just under four weeks to go, I thought that a selection of photographs taken at last year's COW (Conference of Wargamers) would be a nice wargaming appetizer!

Martin Goddard and Rob Roriston demonstrate the latest version of AK47 whilst Tony Hawkins, Jonathan Evans, and Mark Jarvis look on.

The Battle of Knuston Box - An opportunity for those present to play-test Ian Drury's latest World War II wargames rules COMBAT 300.

Another of Ian Drury's sessions - this time it is a battle from the Sikh Wars using his REDCOATS AND RAJAHS wargames rules.

Jim Wallman explains an aspect of his SINEWS OF THE SOMME logistics game to Tim Price, Martin Rapier, Michael Young, and Tim Gow.

Mike Elliot's THE SUNNE IN SPLENDOUR session was well attended and sparked off a lot of interest in the Wars of the Roses.

Sue Laflin-Barker's smuggling game - WATCH THE WALL MY DARLING - used some wonderful buildings and was a nice mixture of role-play and conventional wargaming.

Sunday, 7 June 2009

A quite Sunday designing a wargame and having some retail therapy

Having thought long and hard about what to do next, I decided to sit down and write some simple wargames rules for me to play about with! Using the same planning structure I outlined when I designed my operational-level wargames rules, I jotted down what I want to achieve, and then set about designing a solution. Basically what I want is:
  • A set of rules suitable for small battles during the latter part of the 19th and early part of the 20th centuries (i.e. the combatants could be using anything from spears to magazine rifles, be armed with mechanical and automatic machine guns, and field ancient smooth-bore cannons through to modern breech-loading artillery with recoil buffers)
  • The tabletop to be up to 4 feet x 3 feet in size (and likely to be 3 feet x 2 feet to allow for space around the playing surface on my wargames table)
  • The tabletop to be divided into a 50mm squared grid
  • A simple combat resolution system that uses a minimum number of dice throws
  • No record keeping
I have started the design process, and I am well on the way to finishing the first draft. DBA/HOTT and TABLE TOP BATTLES have heavily influence my design but is not a straight clone of either system. Hopefully it should be ready for play-testing later this week, and if manage one I shall report back on how things go.

My day was not spent just thinking about wargames design and pounding the keys of my word processor; it was interrupted by a visit to the local shopping mall so that I could buy my wife lunch and undertake some retail therapy.

A visit to the bookshop gave the opportunity to glance along the shelves in the military history section, and my eyes came upon a title in Osprey’s Men-at-Arms series that I had not seen before. The book was US ARMED FORCES IN CHINA 1856 – 1941, and I bought it.

I have only been able to give this book a quick ‘once over’ but it seems to be up to the usual standard one expects from Osprey. More importantly it is about the period of the 19th and early 20th centuries when all the major powers – including the United States – undertook ‘colonial policing’ actions, and these a just the sort of small campaigns and battles that I want to fight. I look forward to plundering it for scenario ideas in due course.

Saturday, 6 June 2009

Size does matter … when it comes to your wargames table!

Last February – the 3rd to be exact – I did some thinking about the sort of wargaming that I enjoy, and I wrote the following list on my blog:
  • I like to play large-scale, all-day, operational-level wargames – preferably World War II – with a group of friends
  • I like to play (and design) small face-to-face or solo wargames that can be fought to a conclusion in a couple of hours
  • I like to fight campaigns
  • I like to use gridded playing surfaces
  • I like to use card-driven turn sequences
  • I like to use simple combat resolution systems
  • I like to find out about early wargames designers and – if possible – try out their rules.
Recently I have been concentrating on developing a set of operational-level wargames rules. The resulting rules seem to work well and – in my opinion – have potential for further development into an effective method of fighting large-scale battles within a reasonable time frame. This concentration on operational-level wargaming has meant that I have tended to ignore smaller-scale face-to-face and solo wargames, and over recent days my thoughts have returned to that style of wargaming.

The reason for this change of direction is due in no small part to several related stimuli:
  • The first is the realisation that the size of my wargames room and wargames ‘table’ actually militates against me fighting large wargames at home.
  • The second is the publication of the latest edition of HORDES IN THE TRENCHS (HITT) by Matt Kirkhart on the WHEN TECHNOLOGY MEETS TRADITION group on YAHOO! GROUPS.

The WHEN TECHNOLOGY MEETS TRADITION page on Yahoo! Groups

Paul Farrow’s MRFARROW2U (+JACK & AMYS!!!) DBA 1500 ONWARDS PAGE blog
Most of my wargaming is solo, and as a result the size of the wargames that I fight is not governed by any considerations other than those that I set myself. That said, the size of my wargames room, the storage space available in it, and the size of the tables I can use all place some restraint on what I can or cannot do.

My wargames room
The room is approximately 13 feet long and 10 feet wide, with a large window across one end. Other than a door in the corner of one of the long sides, the other walls are taken up with bookcases and storage cupboards. The centre of the room is occupied by my tables, which are both 3 feet x 2 feet unextended – which is how they are usually set up – and 3 feet x 4 feet when extended. This gives me a total table area that can be either 6 feet x 4 feet or 8 feet x 3 feet. When the tables are extended there is just enough room to get around them to fight a wargame, but it is almost impossible to get terrain and figures out of the storage system.

Here lies the rub; I can set up largish wargames on the extended tables, but they can be difficult and time consuming to set up (and take down) or I can set up smaller wargames (e.g. using the TABLE TOP BATTLES rules) which I can put on at almost no notice and little inconvenience. Since I started this blog I have tended to fight smaller wargames much more frequently than I did before, and I have enjoyed the experience.

As I stated above, I like to fight campaigns because a series of linked battles seems to more satisfying than ‘one off’ battles. Paul Farrow’s blog has reports of the Sudan and Boxer Rebellion colonial campaigns he has fought using a variant of DBA. I liked the look of what he has achieved and feel that it is something that I could and should emulate.

I have now begun to realise that although I like fighting large wargames, the space I have available makes it impractical to do so on a regular basis. I am therefore drawn to the conclusion that it would be far better for me to concentrate my efforts on smaller wargames that I can fight regularly. It means that I can then build up lots of small armies – which I will use – and I will not lose heart or interest before a project is complete. It will also be much easier to fight campaigns where one battle leads on to the next rather than ‘one-off’ battles, which is what my larger wargames tend to be. I will still be able to prepare for large wargames, but these can be special occasions rather than the norm.

Friday, 5 June 2009

COW - Origins, date, venue, and location

It has been rightly pointed out that many readers might not know much about COW (the Conference of Wargamers), so here is a bit of background information.

In 1980 Dr. Paddy Griffith – a lecturer in War Studies at RMA Sandhurst at the time – organised a conference of people who had written books and articles about wargaming to discuss possible ways in which wargames could develop. The conference took place at Moor Park College near Farnham on the weekend of May 23rd to 25th 1980, and it was as a direct result of this that Wargame Developments was founded.

Since then Wargame Developments has organised an annual conference – called the Conference of Wargamers or COW for short – where members can meet, play experimental or developmental wargames, talk about military history, and discuss wargames design.

This year the conference will again be held at Knuston Hall in Northamptonshire. This venue has been used since 1981, and the staff are used to some of the unusual events and games that sometimes take place! It will take place over the weekend of Friday July 3rd to Sunday July 5th 2009, and the cost is £200.00 full board. Anyone who is interested can book a place – subject to the maximum limit of 50 attendees, some of whom have to share bedrooms – and they automatically become a member of Wargame Developments for the following twelve months.

Knuston Hall

This year’s conference is almost fully booked, and bookings have already been pencilled in for 2010. That will be the thirtieth conference and promises to be a very special occasion.

COW - Four weeks to go!

I realised this morning that there are now only four weeks before the highpoint of my wargaming year - COW!

I have attended every Conference of Wargamers – except one, when I was too ill – since Wargame Developments was set up in the early 1980s, and having seen this year’s list of sessions, it sounds like it could be a very enjoyable weekend.

The attendees are a mixture of old hands and novices, with just enough of the former to ensure that there will be some good sessions on offer and just enough of the latter to make things fresh for everyone.

I am pretty well fully prepared for what I am doing at the conference and when the other Conference Organiser sends me the timetable, I will begin selecting what sessions I will be attending.

Thursday, 4 June 2009

Nugget 227

I will be collecting the latest issue of THE NUGGET (N227) either later today or sometime tomorrow, and it should be in the post and on its way to members by Saturday. It should, therefore, be with members by early next week.

The PDF version is now available online via the Wargame Developments website. All members should now have received the password they need to read the PDF, but if they have lost it or cannot remember it they should contact me.

This issue is the last before COW (the Conference of Wargamers) and contains the most recent list of sessions that will be available.

Tuesday, 2 June 2009

Nugget 227

I took the latest issue of THE NUGGET to the printers this morning and I should be able to pick it up on Friday. With any luck I hope to get it out in the post on Saturday, and it should be with members later next week.

I hope to upload the PDF versions of the latest issues of THE NUGGET and THE NUGGET COLOUR SUPPLEMENT to the Wargame Developments website on Thursday so that members (including e-members) can read it before the printed version arrives in the post.

This is an important issue as it is the last that will be published before COW2009, and it contains a list of the sessions that will be taking place.

The terrain system time forgot … the effect of flocking

To give some idea how flocking Heroscape™ can enhance the appearance of the basic terrain, I have taken a couple of ‘before and after’ photographs.

The basic Heroscape™ terrain as it comes straight out of the box …

… and what it looks like after it has been flocked.

Monday, 1 June 2009

The terrain system time forgot … well, sort of!

As regular readers of my blog will know, I like hexed terrain. In fact, as I discovered this evening whilst continuing to sort out my wargames room, I have quite a lot … but it isn’t all Hexon II!

Some time ago I was in a branch of Argos and saw that they had Heroscape™ sets for sale (I understand that the manufacturer was revamping the game and wanted all the ‘old’ sets sold off before the ‘new ones went on sale). They were very cheap, and seeing that they used a hex system – approximately 4cm across from face to face – I decided to buy some. In fact, I bought quite a lot … much more than I had intended to buy but it was a bargain …

Not being able to leave anything as it is – and inspired by David O Miller’s MELEE & WIZARD website – I spend some time flocking at least a couple of sets of Heroscape™ hexes, and it improved the look no end. However the company that supplied the flock I was using stopped stocking it, and the project fizzled out … until tonight when I found the boxful of flocked terrain and two draft sets of rules that I had been working on at the time.

I do not intend to stop work on everything else that I have planned, but it has made me realise that I have a lot of stuff that I could – and should – be putting to better use.