Our second exposure to Arty's rules was a battle fought with Tactica, Carthage versus Rome. I fought for Carthage... we had 17 units (4 cavalry, the rest infantry). The Romans had 20 heavy intantry and 3 cavalry. Under Tactica doctrine, the Romans had to break (eliminate) 4 of our main battle units, while we had to break 8 of their 20.
Once you deploy your main battle units in Tactica, you're stuck. These units must set forth straight ahead... no deviation allowed. They're essentially on tracks. They've been given their orders in terms of a direction... "Advance and kill anything that pops up in your path!"
Jett Wiltrout and I were on the same side... Jeff took over as commander and assigned me my troops... out of our 17 units, he gave me 2 cavalry units, one elephant unit (2 stands), and one light infantry unit. Jeff takes this stuff seriously, and he wanted to handle the big guys, our main battle units - the ones on which victory depends - all by his lonesome. Shove over Unca Wally. The sketch below indicates that portion of the field (a 5 feet by 6 feet table) on which my troops cavorted.
We played 15mm figures, and the movement rates were:
- Infantry - 8 inches
elephants - 8 inches
cavalry - 12 inches
But these were not your standard, everyday inches... these were Arty Conliffe Inches (ACI). ACI's are only 3/4 size of their standard brethren. Thus a 12 ACI scale is really 9 regular inches.
Obviously, there's a reason for this reduced scale... obviously, to reduce the figure and inovcment scale proportionately... obviously.
What Scale?
But that brings us to the question... what scale? The Tactica rule book doesn't even discuss scale... either time or distance. Does Tactica really have a 'scale"? I noted that javelins can be tossed 9 ACI's. a distance slightly greater than the 8 ACI's which an advancing infantry unit can move each turn. Is this significant??
Now, if we don't have a scale, why do we shift from regular, normal, everyday inches to ACI's? The entire issue is rather confusing, and I've never heard a good explanation for it. The crappola over the scaled inches is hogwash... the game - whatever the scale is - would proceed just as well using 'real inches'. When infantry move 8 ACYs, which is 6 'real inches' does anyone out there think the entire gaming mechanism would crumble if a unit moved out for the full 8 'real inches' instead of 6?
The "changed scale routine" puts a gloss on the game which tells the reader: "Look at the intensive research I've done, culminating in specifically accurate scales for my game!" Hogwash! Bull pucky! But I digress...
Back to the game. My elephants were the first units to make contact. They trampled 2 Roman light infantry stands. In Tactica, light stands die when contacted by heavier units. Before they die, they fire,. looking for a 6 on a 6-sided die. Jeff set out all our main battle units to head 15 degrees to port. They were now deployed and would continue along this 15 degree course until they, or the enemy, died.
My light cavalry contacted the Roman heavy cavalry. As I remember, a toss of 5 or 6 caused a casualty on the opposition. Only front rank stands fight; each front rank figure receives a melee die. Back rank people keep filling in and nothing happens to a unit in melee until it reaches the 50 percent casualty point. Units thus stay put and keep hopping away at each other in consecutive turns until someone takes a morale test and breaks.
On our right flank, Jeff used his Carthaginian cavalry to run around the Roman flank, getting in back of their main battle line. The Romans had three supporting units which tried valiantly to keep the cavalry off, but they were subject to the "4-inch" rule... by definition, as support units, they had to remain within 4 inches of the flanks of their own main battle units. Hence, they weren't free to maneuver to obstruct the cavalry.
With the 15mm figures, movement seemed as "picky-picky" as in the DBM games I've watched, whereupon the stands seem to be micro-inched around the field. I've tried Tactica before, and it never fully found favor in my eyes due to the nitty-gritty measurements that must accompany movement. To wheel, you move the end stand - the stand which will be the one to move furthest - an inch. and then deduct 2 inches from straight line movement for every inch of wheel. This sounds simple, but, in practice, all eyes are on the mover, hawkeyes to ensure he doesn't exceed the prescribed limits.
During our game, there were innumerable occasions for which unit movement was accomplished millimeter by millimeter, with the incrementing necessary to ensure that the moveing unit didn't step on the feet of a neighboring one. As soon as one unit touches another, the moving unit halts immediately. I assume that the restrictions are put in the game to keep everybody honest, and prevent illegal free wheeling from constantly occurring. But I'm a Big Move Man... I want cavalry to zip forward 15 inches, 20, perhaps 24 inches. I don't care if they step on anyone's feet while doing so.
In the DBM/DBA wargame series, the "step on the feet" rules are even more serious. In combat, if your stand recoils, and your people step on the feet of people on another stand who happen to be looking the wrong way... your people die. As I said, this is serious business, and one more reason I avoid these gaming restrictions.
Way to Move It
Now I must note that during the game, Jeff intuitively knew that I, Unca Wally the Fumble Fingered, was simply not capable of properly moving and micro-inching my small assigned contingent of troops. And so, turn after turn, he'd nudge me aside and push my cavalry, saying: "That's the way to do it." And then he'd wheel my infantry, saying: "That's the way to do it." And then he'd advance my other cavalry unit, saying: "That's the way to do it."
At right is a sketch of our side of the table, indicating the table-side area in which I was permitted to stand... you'll note that General Jeff had the lion's share of the baseline... Jeff is a head taller than I am, and probably outweighs me by 30 pounds (30 muscular pounds) and so I had to be content with my assigned area.
Speaking of troop-pushing, I have noted many times in the past, that in the entire wargaming hobby, I seem to be the only one, the only one, who doesn't care if someone handles my troops. My philosophy is: if you get your jollies by pushing my troops forward... then PUSH 'em!
At my own ping-pong table, for example, I once made the terrible mistake of inching forward a unit commanded by Fred Haub. Fred, normally Mr. Easy-Going, Placid, Nice-Guy, Wargamer, suddenly reacted fiercely... "Why are you touching my troops?" Faced with Haub's snarl and bared tangs. I backed off, trying to remember when last it was that I had received a rabies shot.
I've never fully understood the protective, mother-like mode which gamers assume concerning their assigned units. It seems to me that as long as your troops get to where they're going, who care who does the pushing.
Back to Battle
But I digress. Back to the battle.
Remeber that our main Carthaginian battle units had been set out on tracks pointing 15 degrees to our left. The Roman commander essentially did the same... his main battle units were pointing some 15 degrees to his right. Which meant that both armies, instead of moving up to face each other frontally, were moving "on the bias", and would hit each other at an angle. I feel certain there was a method to this complex maneuvering, but it escaped me.
Our units all had broader frontage than those of the Romans, which meant that regardless of how they faced. each of our units would eventually be contacted by two Roman contingents.
My 2-stand elephant unit fought and destroyed a Roman light cavalry unit. The cavalry received one dic per stand in the front rank, while my elephant stands each received 3 dice. But disaster struck... two Roman units (cohorts(?)) came up to contact the elephants.
What was interesting was that one 4-stand Roman unit was deployed, while the other 4-stand unit was still in column (one stand behind the other). Deployed or not, each Roman unit got to toss 6 dice... the undeploycd unit, despite its narrow frontage, evidently got additional dice for -depth-. Which brings up the question... why should Roman units deploy at all?
With 12 dice being tossed against me, my elephants didn't last long.
The last four bounds presented a very 'stagnant' picture... just about all units were locked in combat, hence couldn't move until their opposing units dropped. The only moving units on the field were Jeff's flanking cavalry, now coming right for the Roman left flank. He contacted the first main battle unit, and his 16 troopers rolled 32 dice... the Romans went below 50 percent strength, took a morale test, and fled.
In a flank attack, the poor unit being flanked just sits there, taking casualties, unable to hit back... pitiful, pitiful.
Tactica mandates that a unit hit in the flank will flee directly opposite to the flank from which the attack came in. Here, Jeff's cavalry had hit the Romans on their Left flank, hence they fled to their right. The rout distance is 6 inches, and all friendly units which the routing unit bumps into must also take a morale test.
A 6-inch distance meant that the fleeing Romans would go through about 2 other units... this was critical, for all units on the field had suffered lots of casualties, reducing their morale level. This was the chance for the Carthaginians to destroy a couple of the Roman main battle units... we had to break 8 of the Roman's 20 heavy infantry to win, and we hadn't been doing too good job of it.
Alas! The Romans held, and shortly thereafter, we Carthaginians lost our fourth main battle unit. and the battle was over.
NYWA
Our battle took place at a meeting of the New York Wargamers Association (NYWA) which meets in lower Manhattan, New York City. Their meeting room is rented for some $300 a month and they have 6 tables, each about 5 feet by 8 feet, which are permanently set up for continuous gaming.
Funds are raised at each meeting by selling cokes, candy and other goodies for $1 apiece. The NYWA meets once a week, and seems to have no problem in raising funds.
Some years back, I tried this at the PW meetings and we were fairly successful at it. The problern at PW, however is that we have no room to stash the goodies between meetings at the church. hence some poor soul must take it upon himself to bring to each meeting a supply Ot soda and candy and whatnot. The NYWA has a large refrigerator on the premises, and so they can store their supplies between meetings in the clubhouse.
What's nice about 6 permanently set-up tables is that Arty Conliffe, for example, can commandeer perhaps 4 of the tables and have 4 simultaneous playtests of a given scenario. This is a blessing for someone interested in rules development. At my own ping-pong table, for example, after running through a scenario, and suggesting we do it a second time, the response usually is: "Do we hafta do that #$@! %& thing again?"
Yes, multiple-simultaneous playtesting is a luxury to be enjoyed.
Back to PW Review September 1996 Table of Contents
Back to PW Review List of Issues
Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List
Copyright © 1996 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