HISTORICON took place in mid-July in Lancaster, Pennsylvania. I wandered through the gaming areas, the flea market, the dealers area, attended the HMGS meeting, observed several games (actually played in a couple), and, along with the 2,000? or so other attendees, had a good time.
I watched, for about a half-hour, a battle pitting Carthaginians and Romans against each other, using something called MIGHT OF ARMS (MOA). MOA has appeared at several prior conventions; the battle always seems to be between the Carthaginians and the Romans. Having been published some time ago, one would think that the subject of multiple melees (combats with more than'two units) would have been settled. But no.
In the sketch, I've indicated, via the arrows, who wants to charge whom:
Carthaginian unit C1 wants to charge Roman unit R1. Noproblem here.
C2 wants to charge R2. No problem here.
R3 wants to charge C2's flank as it comes into R2. Problem because
C3 wants to charge R3 and cut that unit's charge off, while
R4 wants to charge C3's flank as it comes in on R3.
Tired old man that I am, I got so bored that I actually dozed off while the umpires debated and argued and finally adjucated the above. Whatever, MOA lost its fascination for me.
Volley and Bayonet
Tony Figlia bought a copy of VOLLEY AND BAYONET (VAB), touted as a hot set of rules written by Frank Chadwick (of COMMAND DECISION fame) and Gregg Novak. A group of us sat down and played a game in the ACW era. We were lucky enough to latch onto someone who had played the game, and he led us through it. The text has 15 pages of rules, and 75 pages of scenarios. I'm afraid that 15 pages didn't seem enough to explain the goings-on. For example, for our Manassas scenario, we wanted to find out how many command figures we should set out on the field. Command stands are a 'must'... a unit more than 6 inches from its commander moves only at half speed.
But what is a unit in the scenario? And how many units does a commander control? VAB doesn't really tell you. Only when our guide appeared did we find out. In our scenario, a unit (one stand) was defined as a brigade, hence 2 or 3 brigades became a division, and we needed one commander per division.
We ran the rules through for some 6 or 7 turns. Infantry move 16 inches, cavalry 24... hence the need to stick close to your commander. Due to the large scale (one stand equals a brigade), musketry occurs at 1 or 2 inches. Which means that due to the large movement distances, you'll get one volley in before an advancing enemy closes to contact. A unit that moves and fires tosses 4 6-sided dice; a unit that's stationary tosses 6 dice. A roll of "6" on the die is a hit. The same procedure is used in hand-to-hand combat.
If there are any negative aspects to the firer in the fire phase (target in cover, firing unit is in disorder, etc.) then the target gets to toss savings dice for each inflicted hit... a 4,5,6 knocks off one hit. If there are any negative aspects to your side in melee, then the opposing side gets to toss savings throws... again, a toss of 4,5, 6 knocks off one hit. In essence, therefore, both fire and combat are treated in the same manner.
VAB is a simple-minded throwback to the mid-60's Don Featherstone / Tony Bath rules wherein 6-sided dice were used because there was no other type available, and when you ran up "against the stops", due to limitations imposed by the 6 levels of the die, you added savings throws to the game.
I was quite disappointed about VAB, about which I had heard so much. About the only thing that did impress me was the fact that it was published at all. It looks to me like the publisher is banking on the name of Frank Chadwick as one of the authors to pull the whole thing off. The publisher is certainly not banking on the rules to sell themselves. But note that I've been wrong before. Just look at the simplistic horrors that the WRG people have let loose on the wargaming world and the vast success that has resulted.
As for me, I do not wish to play a miniatures game in which "6's" are hits, I do not wish to play a game which uses savings throws, I do not wish to play a game in which units within 6 inches of a commander obey orders, while others outside the 6-inch radius hobble along at half speed. VAB may resurrect, as some say, the 'elegant simplicity' of yesteryear, but to me, it's something to be avoided.
What's interesting... to me, at least... is that I make a distinction between a miniatures game and a boardgame. The table-size games I lay out on my ping-pong table are boardgames, and in these affairs, a '6 is a hit' is a permissible ploy. Single-token boardgames are meant to be played at a lower level of complexity than miniatures... otherwise, why set out all the miniatures, all the infantry and the cavalry and the artillery, etc.? Enough of my ranting... my basic conclusion is that $14 is $14 too much to pay for a copy of VAB.
Other
PROTECTOR OF THE REALM... this neat little game was set up as a module for DBA in the War of the Roses. It was nicely laid out on a 2-foot by 2-foot field, but modules for DBA don't excite me... I passed it up.
THE KING'S MEN (TKM)... I played this Napoleonics game for some 3 hours. Six-sided dice again, but this one was palatable. The rules were authored by Mike Schundler, who's looking to get them published. Mike has some interesting procedures in TKM... for example, that of 'ineffective fire'.
When firing, the negative aspects (target in cover, artillery firing over 15 inches, skirmishers firing, etc.) are covered by the basic rule that no matter how many hits you score on the target, you can register a maximum of one hit per firing unit. This is termed 'ineffective fire'.
The morale tests in TKM are critical. Two of my units failed after taking hits and were destroyed. For each hit you take, you toss a die. Then you knock off, from each die roll, the casualties you suffered, and look at the lowest resulting number.
I seemed to roll nothing but "'1's", which, when modified by the casualties, resulted in negative numbers. Not good. The morale chart looked something like:
0 Destroyed
1 Rout
2 Retreat
3 Disorder
4+ Pass
In firing, every 4 men received one die (an 18-man unit received 4 dice). Toss your dice, add up all the numbers, and divide by 6 to get the number of hits. Something similar to the procedure used in AGE OF REASON.
The game started at 0900. I had 10 units, battalions, to start with. By 1030 (Bound 6), my command had lost 3 out-of the 10, exceeding the critical 25-percent-loss criterion, and I had to test every round to see if the entire command broke and ran. I lasted for 3 tests, and then everyone took off for the baseline.
After the fire phase, the sides diced to see which checked morale first. Usually, there seemed to be 4 or 5 casualties inflicted, and if you tested first, and your units took off, the other side didn't need to test. The morale phase, as I said, was extremely critical.
In one instance, my infantry was in square, and were charged by Cuirassiers. I didn't understand why the fire issuing from the square was termed 'ineffective', i.e., I could score no more than a single hit on the cavalry. I fired... tossed a 6-sided die looking for a "6"... no luck.
In the melee, the Cuirassiers got a '+3" for being heavy cavalry, and a "-3" for charging a square, bringing them down to zero. I got a '+1' for my square. We each tossed a die and added our modifiers. I thought my square had been short-changed... there should have been more of a negative modifier for the horsemen. To win, your total must be 1.5 times or more that of your opponent's. If not, it's a tie and the units remain locked in combat.
The above procedure only tells you who won... after deciding upon the winner, you determine the casualties. The loser tosses a number of 6-sided dice equal to the number of men in his unit... a toss of 5,6 is a kill. The winner tosses half the dice of the loser, and only a 6 kills.
Some 3 1/2 hours into the game, I had lost all 10 of my battalions. I had no one to command except my 25mm general, who seemed to shy away from me. I decided to quit.
I next sat down for 20 minutes to view some sort of medieval skirmish. Lots of armored knights, peasants, etc. I couldn't, for the life of me, make out what was going on, who was fighting whom. I think it was a battle between two contingents of crusaders, but your guess is as good as mine. Everyone, however, was having a whooping good time... lots of laughter, and shouting and wisecracks... I wandered on, leaving the happy people to themselves.
WWII Armor
Next, a WW II armor battle. A 12x6 table absolutely loaded with terrain... demolished houses, debris, rubble, and a large impressive Casino-type mountain, some 2-feet high. The British were advancing up a road laid out along the center of the table, and defending German indirect fire was pulverizing the units on the road.... lots of red smoke puffs up and down the road column. There were 13 people around the table. The umpire said the 1st British Battalion was attacking (single mounted 20mm figures... some 40? 50? men). He stated that when the 1st Battalion got wiped out, the 2nd British Battalion would come on. And when the 2nd was wiped out, the 3rd would appear. A long game. I watched the 1st Battalion advance for some 4 turns. They had moved about 20 inches in from the edge of the table... a very long game.
One huge microarmor game was laid out on a 12x12 table. There was a 4x4 cutout in the center of the field for the umpires. This didn't look exciting to me... but that's standard for all microarmor games.
More VOLLEY AND BAYONET (VAB). This was a 15mm Napoleonics game which I observed for 20 minutes (20 minutes is my standard exposure time. More than this and there's danger of my picking up something debilitating). The VAB setup had too many markers... a green ticky said a unit was stationary, a red one indicated routing, a yellow for disordered. Plus a data sheet for each unit showing how many of its 5 hit boxes had been crossed out. The Napoleonic version seemed to be the same as the ACW one we had played. A toss of 6 was still a hit, and so on.
Ed Mohrmann hosted a Larry Brom kiddies Napoleonic game in 30mm. In melee, when two units came together, the figures were paired off... each side tossed a die, the higher number won, and the lower number died. I noted that one kid was using a 'crushed' or broken die... part of the side showing the 6 was missing.
This meant that the side with the 6 on it was lighter than the others, or, to put it another way, the side opposite the 6, being heavier, should land on the bottom more often than the other sides. Hence more 6's should show up.
I was curious about the lop-sided die, and if it would benefit the kid, generating more 6's. Nope. He lost his melee and I moved on.
Vietnam
Next was a Vietnam-type game. Here, the host, at the beginning of each round, played a tune from the 60's. Both the Vietnamese and the American commander guessed the name of the tune... he who guessed right got the initiative.
This was a clever, innovative idea, but I think there were too many boom-boxes around at the convention, too much music in an already deafening area. If 'twere up to me, I'd ban the boomboxes.
In the Vietnamese game, the table was gridded into 12-inch squares. Movement was from square to square. I think either AIRFIX or ESCI 20mm figures were used.
The host had a deck of 52 cards, and gave some to the commanders, to be played as desired, and randomly spread some out, face down, on the squares of the playing field. The cards contained good things and bad things. An infantry unit entering a square would automatically spot any cards in the square. One might say "You've discovered an ammo cache." or "You've run up against a Viet Cong battalion."
The Americans had a helicopter force. The helis could fly way up high, and not get shot at, or fly low at tree-top level. At the lower elevation, they had a percentage chance of spotting cards in the square below, which might say "You've shot up a Vietnamese platoon." or "A Vietnamese has fired a SAM at you. Hard Cheese!"
The American commander next to me had his infantry capture two sets of bunkers and a heavy machine gun. Another commander ran the helicopters at low level (they were mounted on auto antenna whips and could be adjusted for height) and took more than he gave out.
I was impressed by this game... a well thought-out affair.
To Market
At the flea market, Bob Hurst bought an old boardgame... HERO QUEST (HQ)... a D&D game. We all sat down to play it, and ran our barbarians, dwarves, wizards, etc., around the gameboard. This was a kiddy game, pure and simple, but it was late Friday night, and it was all we could handle. Jim Buffers came by, aghast at the thought that we PWers were knee-deep in D&D. It will take me years to live it down.
I'm not sure if it is a sign of maturity or senility, but as I wandered through the dealer's area and flea market, I could find few things to purchase. I did buy some 300 20mm WW 11 figures (Americans, Russians, etc.) from Jerry Lannigan, a long-time REVIEW subscriber. My reason for the purchase was the Vietnamese game described above. No doubt I'll soon be reporting upon the exploits of the Lannigan Brigade in future issues.
Sat down and observed a test run-through of Rich Hasenaeur's armor game in 15 mm. Rich's FIRE AND FURY (FAF), his ACW rules set, has conquered the world... nothing else compares to it in terms of popularity for the ACW era. He's just published a scenario book for FAF, and so his latest efforts are now focused on a WW 11 armor game.
The basic sequence under test was composed of:
1. Active side's indirect fire
2. Active side's direct fire
3. Active side gets 2 actions:
-
(a) It can move once, reserving an action for opportunity fire on the next half bound, or
(b) It can move twice
5. Close assault
The players thought the above sequence was way too slow because of the opportunity fire phase (I should note that COMMAND DECISION has several firing phases within the bound... its devotees never complain of the game being too slow... in fact, its devotees never complain about anything). Rich vowed to go back to the drawing board and cook up a more rapid sequence (forgive me for mixing metaphors here).
GAMES WORKSHOP set up an absolutely superb-looking WARHAMMER 40,000 scenario. They had constructed a huge table-size 3-dimensional gorge... a river surrounded by 2-foot high cliffs. Lots of ray guns and zap guns and laser guns...
Prior to HISTORICON, Bob Hurst and I hosted a contingent of Brits who came across the Atlantic specifically to play in the DBM tournaments. These diehards started at 12:00 noon Thursday and continued non-stop until Sunday morning, completely immersed in the back wash of the DBM universe. I don't know how they did it. But their single-mindedness of purpose proved successful. They seemed to win and win and win...
Tom Elsworth and Tim Stubbins won the DBM 15mm Open Team competition, Tom won the overall DBM championship, he won second place in the 15mm Bronze Age DBM tournament, lain McNeal won the 15mm Bronze Age tournament, Paul Robinson took second place in the DBM 15mm Open, and 3rd place in the Bronze Age competition... this goes on and on and on... I'd have to fill up an entire page of the REVIEW to list their medallions and certificates and plaques and honors.
I think that the Brits should be banned from the tournaments. They're depriving we Americans of our well deserved medals. At the least, the HMGS staff should mail them a couple of plaques prior to the convention... "Here's your prizes, hang them on the wall, and don't bother coming."
As a last note, I sat in on a demonstration game of PIQUET, authored by Bob Jones of the Napoleonic rules set LE JEU DE LA GUERRE, written many, many years ago. PIQUET is his latest set, and it's structured for play in several different eras.
The sum of $38 buys you a box containing a rules set, a deck of action cards for each side, a measuring stick, a 'clock' with which you track the impulses used in the bound, a set of different types of dice (20-sided, 12-sided, 10-sided, etc.). You have choice of one of two boxed sets... one configured for the ACW, the other for Napoleonics.
The heart of the game rests with the action decks... they're 'era specific'... the Napoleonic decks contain actions relevant to the Napoleonic period, the ACW decks are configured for the mid-1800 period. If you're an ECW buff, an additional $19 gets you a boxed 'ECW module', containing decks and rules variations pertinent to the ECW period. Other modules are available.
At the beginning of the bound, the sides each toss a 20-sided die... high number wins the initiative. He can now draw cards from his deck, in succession, equal to the difference in the initiative dice rolls. For example, if I tossed an 8 and you tossed a 12, you could now play 4 cards in succession.
Each card says something like 'infantry advance', or 'fire and reload', or 'cavalry move', or I straighten your lines', etc. I'm not sure how many cards there are in a deck, but what could happen is that while you wait and wait to draw a 'cavalry move' card, your opponent's infantry, thanks to a greater number of impulses available, can move up and blast your immobile cavalry.
Over a decade ago, Tom Elsworth, Fred Haub and I tried this sort of action deck and abandoned it. It produces a rather 'jerky' type of sequence, as first one type of unit does something, and then another type of unit does something. The sequence in itself is interesting, because you never know what card will be drawn and what your troops - or your opponent's troops -- will be able to do, but we received too many complaints... people were unhappy with the 'waiting times' inherent in the card deck.
In a sense, the sequence reminded of the ON TO RICHMOND sequence. Here, each brigade is listed on a card, and you wait and wait and wait and waft until your brigade's card is drawn... then you do something and then you wait some more.
ON TO RICHMOND proved quite popular, and, perhaps, so will PICQUET.
Back to PW Review August 1996 Table of Contents
Back to PW Review List of Issues
Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List
© Copyright 1995 Wally Simon
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