HISTORICON 1991 I attended the HMGS HISTORICON convention, July 25, 26, 27, 28 in Harrisburg. I must extend my congratulations to Bob Coggins and crew for another successful effort. Although I never heard an official figure I did heard estimates from between 1,000 to 1,400 attendees. More than one person remarked on the large number of women and children roaming the game floor and dealer area. That's a good sign for the hobby if it means garners are bringing their families. There were approximately 221 games listed in the convention program plus numerous pick up games. The tables in the gaming area were in almost continuous use throughout the four days. Despite some long lines and delays in registering on Thursday afternoon Bob Coggins and his staff seemed to have everything under control and deserve credit for an outstanding effort. NAPOLEONIC GAMES There were a wide variety of Napoleonic games in attendance, spanning the period from Napoleon's Egyptian campaign to Waterloo. Napoleonic games represented 25 or just over 10% of all games listed in the Convention program. By comparison there were approximately 23 American Civil War games listed. It would be interesting to track the proportion of games in various periods at successive conventions. The LEGACY OF GLORY team of Matt and Doug Delamater and Jim Stathes ran at least 4 games for newcomers and one for experienced players, as well as organizing the details of a 1813 campaign. More on that later. Other Napoleonic games included EMPIRE, BATTLES FOR EMPIRE, NAPOLEON'S BATTLES, NAPOLEONIC WARFARE, and various other rules sets. There was an interesting range of figures used in the games, including 5mm, 15mm, 20mm and 25mm. William Keyser presented a series of games in 5mm using his VALMY TO WATERLOO rules. I sometimes think I would like to game in 5mm to maximize the space, but then I see 5mm games played and I resolve to put the thought far out of my mind. I give alot of credit to people with the patience to paint those figures. At the other end of the figure scale was Don Hazelwood putting on a couple of games using his EMPERORS WARS rules and 25mm figures. With regard to my contribution to the Napoleonic gaming at Historicon all I can say is that my mother told me there would be days like this. I agreed to run a 15mm Napoleonics game at Historicon using a computer rules system. Early Friday morning I set up the figures and fired up the computer. I was using a new set of computerized tactical rules, CARNAGE AND GLORY, and had tested this scenario in Raleigh two week previous. Everything worked just fine and there were no problems as I briefed the players and we jumped in. The scenario had the French poised to capture a strategic cross-roads from a mixed Russian/Prussian force in 1813 Saxony. Three French divisions launched a coordinated assault and the Allies unleashed a furious artillery counter-attack. The French assault moved ponderously closer and closer to the Allied lines. French and Allied battalions began to exchange musket fire. The Prussian landwehr and reserve regiments holding the Allied center began to waver. One French division sent a cavalry regiment on a flanking maneuver which surprised a Russian infantry battalion and charged. We went through the charge sequence and into close combat and nothing. The program crashed. The game had been moving so quickly that I hadn't bothered to save after every turn, so I lost the entire battle up to that point. I was in shock ... the players were in shock. The entire French force was within 100 yards of the Russian/Prussian positions and the game ended. I apologized profusely to the players and tried to find the problem. The program on the disc had gone bad. There was nothing I could do. Just about that time a tremendous thunderstorm rocked the Penn Harris and the power flickered, not once but twice. I would have lost the game due to those power surges in any case. There was nothing wrong with either the basic program or the game file, I somehow had damaged a file in the basic program and that resulted in the problem. If I had brought along the original copy of the tactical program could have avoided most of the problems, but I didn't. This whole experience has only served to reinforce what I already knew. Expect the unexpected. When using a computer for wargaming save as frequently as possible, certainly after every turn. Also, have available a back up program and data file, just in case. I violated all these rules and paid the price. I have no one to blame but myself. Most of the players in the game were sympathetic to my plight, having used computer programs themselves. We did get far enough into the game to give them a good feel for the rules system, so it was not a total waste of time. On a more pleasant note, Hal has commented before on the commraderie that exists at these wargame conventions and this one was no exception. I had many people introduce themselves to me and say they read the FAN ION column. They didn't all agree with my evaluation of certain things, but they thanked me for taking the time to raise the issues. Jim Getz in particular ferreted me out in the bowels of the gaming area to introduce himself and I appreciated his effort. COMPUTER ASSISTED GAMES Computers were in attendance and were used in a wide variety of games that included LEGACY OF GLORY, EMPIRE, CIRCUS MAXIMUS and a JOHNNY REB campaign. The JOHNNY RED game was in the room with me during the thunderstorm and suffered the same fate as my game, due to the power outages, although there were only using the computer to assist in the strategic campaign portion of their game. It didn't appear that they were adversely affected by the power interruption. OLD GLORY FIGURES I spent some time at the Old Glory booth looking at their new 15mm releases, 1809 French light infantry and Austrians. Both are of the same quality as their previous efforts. The Austrians are in helmet and come in a variety of poses. The Old Glory staff told me that they were planning on finishing up the 1809 campaign with Saxons and Bavarians, then moving quickly onto 1812 with Russians and Poles. They estimated that they would have the 1812 line ready this time next year. I bought two packs of the French light infantry. The light infantry pack provides 100 or so highly detailed figures in a variety of poses and outfitted in different combinations of campaign dress. The command pack includes more of a variety of figures, including foot officers, trumpeter, drummer, standard bearers and fanion bearers. Also included are mounted commanders and a few dead or wounded figures. I've pick up some rumblings from some quarters about the Old Glory figures and flash on the figures. I've purchased 10 or 11 (900-1000 figures) bags of figures and have never found excessive metal flash on any figure. Most have none, but a few do have very thin strands of lead attached to their bases. This flash can be easily removed by just picking it off. I've never had to file anything off these figures. If people are complaining about this type of flash there must be some awful lazy people out there. AMERICAN REVOLUTION in 25mm Although this column is primarily devoted to the Napoleonic period, I chose to define the boundaries of the period rather liberally, when it suits my purpose of course. Since I have intended to devote attention to the French Revolutionary period I will go one step further and report on an interesting American Revolutionary game I participated in at HISTORICON. For you Napoleonic purists, remember that Berthier was a staff officer for the French Army in America, so there. I will confess that I have branched out from the Napoleonic period to dabble in the American Revolution. The American Revolution interested me because it seems to be a good period to game in if you'd like to try 25mm figures but don't have the time or money to acquire hundreds of figures. The Bedford Irregulars, represented by Chris Hughes of Durham, N.C., and Brian Buchanan, Dave Chopsky and Alan Joslyn of Bedford, V.A. sponsored a mammoth Revolutionary game on Friday night. They set out an eye-catching terrain system that included a two-foot high mountain, complete with meandering stream, wooded heights and twisting mountain trail. The mountain overlooked a lakeside village in which the Americans had established a burgeoning shipbuilding program. This shipbuilding had caught the eye of the British who promptly sent an expedition to deal with the pesky rebels. In addition to the terrain the Bedford group had assembled over 600 25mm American Revolutionary figures. Many of the figures had been painted by Chris Hughes who has won several HMGS painting competitions. The figures included a variety of manufactures, including Minifigs, Hinchcliffe and Front Rank. The game was run using Chris Bell's THE BRITISH ARE COMING American Revolutionary rules system. The terrain also included a ship under construction and two highly detailed redoubts, one held by the Americans and the other by a combined Loyalist/ Hessian force. The scenario revolved around the fictional battle of Bridgeton, at the southern end of Lake Champlaign. The Americans are hard at work building a fleet that will challenge British control of the Lake. General Burgoyne has devised a two pronged thrust at Bridgeton. A force of Hessians would land southwest of the village, while the main British column would drive towards the village from the north. A separate force of light infantry under the Earl of Balcarres was directed to secure the heights above the village. On May 16, 1777 the Hessians under Von Reidesel landed and were surprised to find that the Americans had established redoubts on either side of the village. One was complete, while the other was still under construction. The Hessians attacked and captured the incomplete redoubt and waited in vain for the British attack, which was delayed. Meanwhile, General Greene at Crown Point organized a relief force composed of American brigades under General Arnold and Stark and hurried to relieve Bridgeton. Also included in this relief force was a brigade of the newly arrived French. The game began on the morning of May 17, 1777. The game was set with specific objectives, each with a point value. Control of the redoubts, the village of Bridgeton and the heights above were the main objectives. Points were also given for the number. of enemy units routed off the table. The game was designed to really be three separate actions, one on either flank of the village and one in the mountains. Chris, Alan and Brian each oversaw the actions in a specific sector and although there was an attempt to keep everyone in the same turn, the variations in action resulted in disproportionate progress. At one end of the table the British force, composed of the brigades Fraser, Phillips, Hamilton and Powell, totalling 4,175 men faced Wayne's and Reed's Continental brigades, with a major portion of the militia brigade assisting them. The American force in this area totalled about 3,725 men, although about a third of this force Nas made up of untested and largely unreliable militia. At the other end of the table Stark's, Arnold's and the Royal French brigades, totaling 3,175 men were prepared to assault a Hessian/Loyalist force totaling 1,850 men. This force contained Tarleton's and Breymann's origades. On the mountain Morgan's command of 950 men was slightly outnumbered by the 1,075 man British Light Corp. Bedford Irregular member Dave Chopsky was overall commander of the British, while I was given overall command as General Greene and as the commander of the French brigade. Both Greene and the French were part of the relief force moving against the partially completed redoubt. I ordered Arnold and Stark to bypass the redoubt and head towards Bridgeton, while I intended to assault the redoubt with the French. I decided to delay the French assault while the Loyalist/Hessian positions were softened up with an artillery barrage. Tarleton's cavalry made a brief attempt to threaten my flank, but artillery fire drove them off and resulted in their routing off the board, leaving Tarleton, alone, seeking refuge in the redoubt. On the other flank, a strong British force slowly pushed back the outnumbered Americans. The Americans were thrown either completely or partially out of the main redoubt at least twice, but were able to retake their positions before the British were able to react. This was the result of the initiative system in BRITISH ARE COMING, which requires each side to roll a die to determine who wishes to move first. On those turns following that in which the Americans temporarily lost control of the redoubts the American commander was able to win the die roll and move first, allowing the Americans to re-occupy the redoubts. In the mountains there was interminable skirmishing over the four objectives. Colonel Morgan's riflemen and light infantry ranged over the mountain-side battling the British Light Infantry and Indians. The action in this area moved much faster than the others. The action in my sector was about one turn ahead of the other flank, so that we ended the game on turn 6. My French had finally assaulted the redoubt, having broken through one of the unfinished sides. The game was called at that point, with the other flank having completed turn 5. The Americans had just been thrown out of the redoubt for the third and last time. In the mountains they had progressed to turn 10 or 11 with the American riflemen in control of two objectives and the British light infantry and Indians with two. Although the Americans had lost control of the completed redoubt, their French allies had just broken into the unfinished redoubt. The Loyalist/Hessians were surrounded. But the gamemaster assessed the victory points at that point and I did not have total control of the redoubt, so I could not count those victory points towards my total. In addition, there were, on balance, more American regiments that had routed off the board than British. Although the Americans still controlled the Town the game was declared a minor British victory. HISTORICON RELOCATION PLANS Proving once again that you should never listen to rumors, the HMGS Board of Directors announced that HISTORICON will be moving in 1992 to Lancaster, PA., not suburban Philadelphia. It seems that the Board has found a convention facility that is similar to the Penn Harris and can accommodate the ever increasing demand for gaming, dealer and flea market areas. From the comments I heard after the announcement I think most people were pleasantly surprised and are looking forward to the change of venue. CARNAGE AND GLORY Those of you who have followed this column know that I have been a proponent of computerized rules systems for the Napoleonic era. I was enthusiastic about the Battle Honors EAGLEBEARER system when it was first released and eagerly anticipated the release of similar systems. While there has been some subsequent activity in computer rules, including the release of BROADSIDES, a Napoleonic naval rules system, from Battle Honors, I have been somewhat disappointed in the slow progress of computer rules. Just when many wargamers had just about given up hope that there would be a Napoleonic grand tactical or strategic or American Civil War computer system CARNAGE AND GLORY released the next generation of computer based wargaming rules. The CARNAGE AND GLORY (CG) rules systems include Napoleonic tactical, grand tactical and strategic campaign systems and tactical and strategic campaign systems for the American Civil War. The rules systems have been developed by Nigel Marsh.. an English programmer and wargamer, who lived in the U.S. for a time. I have obtained the tactical and strategic systems from Nigel. I am also in the process of obtaining the grandtactical system. Nigel has produced a very playable and realistic system for fighting historical Napoleonic wargames. The tactical and strategic systems are integrated so that campaigns can be waged using the strategic system, which contains considerations for logistics, morale, fatigue and related strategic factors. Once opponents come into contact the same units can be transferred from the strategic system to the tactical system for resolution of combat, then returned to the strategic system, for continuation of the campaign. Losses due to combat are also transferred with the units back into the strategic system. The strategic system also allows for the automatic resolution of minor contacts and scouting actions without resorting to the tactical system. The tactical system is similar in some regards to the EAGELBEARER tactical system, but there are also some very important differences. The time scale is 15 minutes in the CG system rather than the 10 minute EAGLEBEARER system. This increase; the flow of the game and is reflected in increased movement and casualty rates. CG allows for the creation of up to 200 units and 100 commanders. Units can be infantry, light infantry, horse or foot artillery of various calibers or various types of cavalry, including light, heavy, cuirassier or lancer. Units are created in the same way in both systems. Total unit strength must be entered, with the appropriate number of subunits, such as companies, sections or squadrons. In the CG system you must indicate whether light infantry companies are included in the basic infantry unit, as well as whether battalion artillery is present. Light infantry companies and battalion guns allow for an increase in the effective firing range of the units, and the option of only firing skirmishers during the fire phase to limit fatigue to the entire unit. Individual units are rated for their combat, morale, experience and fire capabilities. Combat and fire ratings can range from excellent, good, above average, average or poor. Experience levels include crack, veteran or conscript, while the morale level is a range between A and D. The CG system does not include any option for using nationalities in rating troop capabilities. The EAGLEBEARER system did provide nationalities but it was always unclear just what affect these ratings had on individual units. The CG philosophy appears to be that if you rate unit capabilities appropriately national differences will be reflected. The CG rules also include an appendix with suggested ratings for units by nationality and type. The basic CG system provides a much more comprehensive game system than did EAGLEBEARER. The basic EAGLEBEARER system did not include couriers, or detailed army organization capabilities, requiring the purchase of additional modules to allow for these options. By comparison the basic CG system includes most of these couriers and army organization capabilities. Commanders are rated based on a 12 point scale that reflects their tactical and leadership capabilities. Their leadership can be rated as impetuous, excellent, competent, mediocre or cautious, while their tactical ability can range from excellent to poor. One additional option that the EAGLEBEARER system offered through add-on modules was the ability to change ground conditions to reflect varying degrees of mud and the ability to open up individual units after combat to determine their current morale and fatigue levels. While these options sounded interesting I never really used them to any great extent. Command and control is the biggest difference in my mind to the two systems. In EAGLEBEARER commanders had the ability to influence events by attaching themselves to individual units. Attachment to units was not automatic and depending on a variety of factors, individual brigade commanders might not be able to accomplish this task. Once attached, the program generated messages from the brigade commander to the ,overall commander detailing the units current strength, morale and fatigue levels. Brigade commanders were then required to request separation from the unit. During the course of a game brigade commanders that had attached to units that were routing, in an attempt to reform and rally them, routed off the board with that unit because the program did not allow them to detach themselves. In the CG system commanders player a bigger role in the flow of the game. Commanders at brigade, aide, divisional, corp or army levels can influence individual units that are within 150 yards of them. They can request information about units within that range and are not limited to just a single unit. The program may require that the commander is closer than 150 yards, including being physically attached to the unit it it confused or routing. Commanders at all levels can be used to rally units or gather information. Any commander can attach himself to a unit, whereas in EAGLEBEARER only the immediate commander could attempt to attach. The information that the program provides on the computer screen is much more detailed than in EAGLEBEARER. Both morale and fatigue are represented by bars which show the current status ranging from good to bad. CG allows for commanders to actually rally units if requested, although the individual command ratings of commanders will influence the affect rallying. Officers with good command ratings will "encourage the units to the cheers of the troops" while poorly rated commanders will usually illicit the message that "General X is generally hated and despised by the army'. During the rallying process the screen shows the morale bar moving in response to the impact of the commander. Unit firing, close combat and morale reactions are very similar in both systems. In the CG system firing distance is requested in ranges, such as less than 75 yards, which acts to speed the game. Units will rout or be pushed back in the CG system and commanders can be wounded or killed if attached to units that have taken fire. In CG artillery fire does not request ammunition required, either ball or canister, assuming that the individual battery commander knew what ammunition to use in any given situation, but does allow for doubling the rate of fire, with the resultant fatigue being assigned to the battery. Bounce-through is also provided for. CG has a unit reaction phase in which units that have taken fire or been in close combat will suffer from morale problems. These units will rout or disordered and may not be able to move during the next turn unless an officer is directly attached. CG also will send messages during the morale phase that a number of men in the unit have been shaken and ran away to the rear. This further reduces unit cohesion and strength. A nice feature of CG that relates directly to the strategic system is that after a battle the results can be run through what is referred to as the campaign caIculator, which reviews the status of each unit, taking into account factors such as whether it is routing, whether it routed off the table, fatigue, etc, and determines the number of casualties that are temporary in nature and can be returned to the unit. It also determines permanent casualties reflects these in the new units Strength and modified morale rating. Perhaps the biggest benefit is that its creator, Nigel Marsh, is both a wargamer and programmer This combination has resulted in a simulation system that has largely anticipated the desires of the Napoleonic wargamer, but also ensue that t problems with the program are worked out quickly. I have had the CG system since June and in that time received from Nigel one update for both the tactical and strategic system. I have also written to Nigel, asking questions and suggesting some enhancements and have received prompt responses to my questions and have seen a couple of my suggestions incorporated into the software. Those of us that have dealt with Battle Honors can appreciate these distinctions. I'll review the CG strategic and grand tactical rules in future columns, as well as possibly the Civil War rules system. Back to MWAN # 54 Table of Contents Back to MWAN List of Issues Back to MagWeb Magazine List © Copyright 1991 Legio X This article appears in MagWeb.com (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other articles from military history and related magazines are available at http://www.magweb.com