Two short articles this time, Remember these were written in the very early 70’s _ I don’t think that Larry had even thought of The Sword and the Flames rules yet. - ED All my “War Games” of late are simply table top “battles”. I use 30 mm figures on a 6x12 foot table and after many years, and volumes of rules trying to bring the flavor of “Grand Strategy”, wide flanking movements, reserve units rushing to the fore, and the like, to a table that actually scales out to 1200 by 600 yards, I gave up. I re-adjusted my grandiose vision, simplified my rules (six pages including charts), eliminated pre-game planning and map work, and adopted this elementary game concept: “All the grand strategy has been resolved. The corps, divisions, and brigades are en route. Cavalry patrols have located enemy forces and a battle will take place, ON MY TABLE”. All that the local commanders (the players) can do is hurriedly come up with battle orders, assign initial objectives and missions, hold on to a reserve force, and push on into the fight. Very simply, I fight a miniature tactical battle. In this battle I build in the confusion, loss of control and chronic uncertainty that a battlefield commander had to cope with. No longer do I have assured control of every battalion, the calm measured response to each move my opponent makes, or the assurance of so many hits based on coldly calculated probability charts. After some 20 years of miniature battles, I have finally decided that most of our present day concepts of miniature warfare are fantasy - like we, the players, have availability statistics, probability charts, potential morale response, etc., that no battlefield commander in history every had. How many Napoleonic commanders knew that for every 720 man battalion they had firing they would inflict “x” number of casualties based on certain probabilities? Or was he always sure that his 33rd infantry Regiment always had a morale factor of such and such, and if an enemy battalion moved 100 yards toward his flank on the next move, he could counter with his cavalry squadron moving 200? I say “hogwash!” We are too carried away with our newfound expertise and knowledge. Much of which is open to great debates and questionable in its own right, anyway. Do you really want to try your generalship? Try a battle like this: Determine opposing forces and sides of the table. On a simple map, indicate along the table’s edge your order of battle, your command organization (brigade, divisions and their commanders), and their initial tactical objectives on the table. Roll high die for first set-on. First set-on player rolls one die for the first of his tactical units (brigade/division, or whatever) to move onto the field. The number rolled indicates the number of table moves that unit can make towards its initial objective. Do this for each tactical unit until the whole force is on the table. The second-move player does the same and gets his force on the table. Any firing or melees incurred are abjudicated and casualties removed. Now, commence first turn in this sequence. Roll die for first move, high roller receiving it. First-move player decides which of his tactical units will move first. Roll one D6 (with its inherent, mathematically erratic, chance options). The number rolled plus the command value of said unit commander must total a certain number or the unit does not respond to the Army commanders orders, In such a case, roll another die to see what ‘local command decision is made. Each army does this each game turn until all its units have moved. Then fight the combat phase (firing and melee) of the turn. Erratic, is it not? You are starting to lose some control. Can you grasp the situation? One of your brigade commanders has attacked when he should have held back a little longer. Another is pulling back prematurely. Should you commit your reserve? Should you send another division commander (with a higher command value)? You are the general, what do you do? Here I think is the skill in a tabletop battle. Not the methodical, mathematical evaluation of carefully programmed probability charts. Can you handle it? Try it once. My erratic miniature battles also include these other heretical concepts: 1. No such thing as simultaneous written orders every so many minutes, and then simultaneous movement. That's ridiculous. Read the battle of Waterloo again, or any other, and see how often the commanders paused, wrote their orders, and then simultaneously moved their units. 2. No more carefully evaluated charts of combat efficiency or exact morale factors. Just roll that wonderful, erratic, six- sided die with its “unrealistic chance factors and take your chances. After all, how well do you really know those troop ers of the 6th Hussars? 3. No more simultaneous firing and removal of causslities. Its too calculated and oh, so unrealistic. Somebody had to fire first (if only by a split second) and get an edge on their oppo nent. Again, roll that die to see who fires first. Maybe youll think a little more about moving into a fire fight with a bat talion thats equal to yours. 4. No more “saving throws” or “rally numbers” or what have you. In my 30 or 45 minute scale time abattles, if a unit breaks and runs, it leaves the field. Why not? Thats what you routed them for in the first place. And erratically, erratically, etc., etc.... I make no claims to “histocial authenticity” nor do I list any ponderous bibliography of questionable historical expertise to verify my “findings”. I only know that after some 150 miniatures battles which I can verify and countless scores of unrecorded skirmishes, I have finally decided on a miniature abattle concept that is to me, worthwhile, enjoyable and challenging. Let's face it; none of us can be Wellington or Napoleon - they're dead. Besides, it's just a game. Back to Table of Contents -- Courier #81 To Courier List of Issues To MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 2001 by The Courier Publishing Company. This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com