About a week ago, I officially entered middle age ... an attack of the gout during which I thought my right leg was going to fall off. As soon as the doctor told me that I had to give up steak and ice cream and chocolate and english muffins (nooks and crannies and all), I knew I was not long for this world, and I told myself, before I go, it's only fair that I give WRG Ancients another shake. And so, off the shelf came WRG 7th Edition, WAR GAMES RULES, 3000 BC to 1485 AD, with my first inquiry directed to the Casualty Chart on page 35. In an earlier article on LES AIGLES, the WRG Napoleonic clone, I had noted that the Casualty Chart used in those rules had displayed a correlation between the casualties picked off the chart and the product of the Number of Figures (N) involved times the Factors (F), i.e, the casualties could have been directly computed from the NxF product, with no need to reference an imposing array of apparently scientifically derived battlefield casualty assessments. The WRG chart shows the same correlation; below is a comparison of the contents of a portion of the charts: Number Of Figures (N) Factors (F) Casualties From Chart In Product Of NxF Les Aigles WRG 7th 5 6 25 25 30 6 7 36 36 42 7 8 49 52 56 8 9 64 76 72 9 8 63 67 72 It's interesting to note that the WRG casualty rate for the higher N,F pairs, is even greater than that for the Napoleonic version. The basic WRG figure scale is 50:1, while the LES AIGLES figure ratio is 40:1. What I was really looking for in the WRG rules manual was something unique... some clever ploy to "borrow" and incorporate in a set (f rules I was generating for my 54mm figures. Well, obviously the casualty chart wasn't a unique item, nor was it clever... in fact, it was downright unnecessary. Cancel the casualty chart. What had attracted me to the WRG 7th book in the first place was the sequence, in which a "grand tactical" movement phase is intermeshed with the normal table-top tactical movement phase. And so I focused on the sequence. The phases of interest tome were in the following order: (a) Approaches... normal movement (b) March movement... grand tactical movement (c) Preparatory firing (d) Charges... moves to contact (e) Support Fire... fire on chargig units (f) Melee I tried to figure out why Phil Barker had instituted two fire phases... one prior to charging, and one after. It appears as if a unit can get zapped on both phases ... at least, that's my interpretation of what the book says. (I must mention that this was the first time I had ever sat down to read the WRG book and I thought I could perhaps decipher the "whys" of the sequence from the text.) Following normal movement, the preparatory fire phase (c) consists of "shooting NOT at or by bodies which are charging ... (or)... being charged." The emphasis is mine and, in essence, the definition is an exceptionally delightful way of making your head spin and referring to all units having nothing to do with charges. Supporting fire of (e), on the other hand, "includes all shooting at or by bodies which are now charging or being charged." This means that if I move the Calaphragalistic Light Cavalry during the normal movement phase, designated (a) above, they get shot at in the fire phase following, (c). Then, after this phase of fire, (c), if the Calaphragalistics declare a charge in phase (d), they get zonked in the support fire phase of 1,e). If units can only fire once per turn, then one possible reason for the two fire phases is to "fake out" the defense. For example, if A thinks B is charging, and holds his fire during (c), thinking to get B on (e), and B does NOT charge, ~ i,- -Immune to fire on (e) and escapes unscathed. This also works in reverse fashion: A fires on B during the preparatory fire (c) phase, and then B, knowing that A has already fired, simply declares a charge during (d) and cannot be fired on during (e). If units can fire twice, however, all the above is not relevant, and it leaves unanswered: why two fire phases? A bit of research concerning the frequency with which units may fire revealed that artillery are specifically mentioned and CAN NOT fire in both phases; the rules say nothing about infantry, and in light of the silence, I must assume that infantry CAN fire twice. Having done my research, it would appear that two fire phases are an unnecessary complication. Scrap the fire phases. All this decided me that the movement/fire sequence was neither unique nor clever... this, too, was jettisoned alongside the casualty chart. Next, I looked at movement itself, i.e., the integration of "march" moves (grand tactical) and "approach" moves (tactical). Here, at last, WRG has a good thing going. Here's a technique definitely worth copying (as the years go by, I care less and less whose thoughts I adopt). March moves must stop when a unit comes within 240 paces (a little under 10 inches for 25mm figures), and approach moves take it from there. The rules define a column as a formation one element wide... which I take to mean one stand in width... but they do not specify that a unit must be in column to make a march move. Evidently, any formation will do. Foot bows fire up to 240 paces (600 feet), so that a unit that has "marched" may come under fire before it has a chance to make any tactical movement. This is good, but I'd go it one better; in TX adoptation: a. Units making a march move MUST do so in column, and b. The march move ends within firing range of the enemy. C. It takes one action to deploy from column to line, hence d. The enemy may fire before the unit can deploy. Something that did look unique was the fact that as a unit takes losses, cumulative casualties are NOT recorded, and figures are NOT removed. In short, WRG 7th incorporates a morale game concept. Here, fatigue points are tallied from marching, charging, meleeing, and being fired at, with the critical parameter being the casualties-per-figure ratio. Five fatigue points and a unit is "tired"; 15 and it is "exhausted", at which time dire things happen. Exhausted troops are "shaken", and shaken troops failing a "waver test" become "broken", and broken, exhausted troops that lose a melee - as they are wont to do - and are pursued, are destroyed. Times are tough when you've accumulated 15 fatigue points. The fatigue points are essentially another version of "Endurance Points", with which I've experimented tefore. For now, however, we'll skip the fatigue concept. Now we come to "prompting", in essence, an allocation of command points. A commander is given "15 minutes" each turn to issue orders, commence charges, etc. Why use the term "minutes"? Probably because Barker thought his Ancients fans wouldn't swallow the concept if he simply said "Command Points". And so he tagged the points "available communication time". Which brings up an interesting item. Regarding the turn itself, the rules "define a bound as equivalent to 15 minutes of battle." The time to issue a particular order is the sum of a 6-sided die roll plus a 1, 2, or 3, depending upon the situation. For example, if a unit is not within sight of the commander, +2 is added to the die roll, hence as much as 8 minutes out of the available 15 could be eaten up in issuing and transmitting the order. The receiving unit, however, suffers no penalty... it still moves and fires for the full extent of the bound, i.e., 15 minutes worth. The time scale of WRG 7th is somewhat distorted. Light infantry,' for example, move 120 paces (100 yards) per bound, after which they fire. If it takes them, say, two minutes to move the 100 yards, this leaves them 13 minutes for firing, melee, etc. But suppose the lights choose NOT to fire... why can't they continue moving for the remaining 13 minutes? By not apportioning time in the manner prescribed by George Jeffrey, the WRG time concept goes to pot. And just to ensure there's no spark of life at all in the time scale, the coup de grace is delivered by the "prompt" system of issuing orders via "available communication time". But try and tell that to WRG Ancients buffs. They will merely stand there, eyes glazed, thumbs along the seams of their trousers, until you're finished, and will then mutter about how the rules are realistic and historic and accurate and march off to go about their business as if you didn't exist. And for them, in truth, you, as a heretical nonbeliever, don't. Back to my search for the unique. I like the Command Point (CP) concept... never mind about "available communication time". Various types of CP systems have been described in the REVIEW over a period of several years. Recently, we've been experimenting along the following lines: a.Each turn, all the regiments under a Brigade Commander start with one action apiece... they can fire, reform, move, etc. b.The Brigade Commander may dice to obtain an additional action for his units. If so, they may fire twice, move twice, etc. C.There is the chance, however, that when he dices, he loses all, i.e., the one action originally possessed by his regiments is taken away and the entire brigade is immobile. There are 547 variations on this theme, and just to give one example; Dice throw: Actions 01-33: 1 (no more than 2 actions may be assigned to each regiment) 34-66: 3 66-100: 5 In using the above, the Brigade Commander starts out with his guaranteed one action. If he decides to use the chart, however, he must abide by the number of actions allocated to his brigade by the dice throw. Dice modifiers are: add: +5 for each regiment in the brigade subtract: (distance between the Brigade Commander and the regiment furthest from him Back to PW Review October 1988 Table of Contents Back to PW Review List of Issues Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 1988 Wally Simon This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other articles from military history and related magazines are available at http://www.magweb.com