One Saturday morning, Bob and Jeff Wiltrout appeared in the doorway, carrying (a) a set of PIQUET rules, (b) two armies of Seven Years War 20mm figures, and, (c) most important of all, a huge pot of Miz Wiltrout's chili. We toasted Miz Wiltrout, made short work of her chili, and then began our PIQUET encounter.
Bob bought the PIQUET rules over a year ago, and he had promised us a demonstration game ever since his purchase. And today was the day! Fred Haub and Terry Sirk commanded the Prussians, while I and Jeff Wiltrout ran the French in this SYW scenario.
PIQUET (PQ) gives each side an action card deck of some 30 cards. For the first phase, we did the following:
- a. Each side tossed a 20-sided die. The Prussians' total was 14 points more than that of the French.
b. The Prussians thus had 14 'impulse points' with which to draw on their cards.
c. They drew cards. Each card used up one impulse just for the drawing itself. If, for example, they drew an "infantry move" card, then an entire brigade could move for the cost of another point. In this manner, all infantry brigades could move, until all the infantry units had advanced. A unit could break away from its brigade, but the individual, separated unit would now use up another point.
d. The Prussians, in this manner, kept drawing cards and eventually, went through their 14 point allotment.
e. Each phase has 20 points in it... with the Prussians having used up 14, there were 6 more points to be had, and both sides now tossed a 20 sided die to see who would get them. If the difference was less than 6, then there would be yet another round of comparative dice tossing and card drawing.
The decks of each side contained 3 "infantry movement" cards, and 3 "cavalry movement" cards"... other cards denoted functions such as "reload muskets", "reload artillery", "deploy", "deployment", "dress lines", etc. The meaning of most cards is obvious, but some, like "dress lines", isn't. The book says that this card is when a force "... pauses... (to)... generally muddle about". In other words, it's a non-action card, a useless card... but Bob, as host, generously interpreted this card to let us change formation when the card appeared. I think that each side had 4 such "dress lines" cards in its deck, and this interpretation helped to keep the action going.
The Prussian Haub/Sirk master plan was for Terry, on the Prussian left flank, to hold his units in position, while the Haub units, 3 cavalry squadrons(?)... regiments(?)... and 4 infantry battalions made their way around the right flank, seeking to eventually fall upon the left flank of the French army.
All units on the field were composed of 4 stands. In effect, there were only two permitted formations: march column, or line abreast.
As turn after turn went by, and the sides diced for their impulses, we French consistently got the short end of the stick, the result of some poor dice tossing. As I explained above, 20-sided dice tosses are compared, and the high roller gets a number of impulses equal to the difference in the tosses. The low roller gets nothing, but sits there, and hopes for the best.
When 20 impulses are used up, another phase begins, and the comparative dice tossing is done again. When either side goes through its entire deck, that's termed a 'turn', and both sides reshuffle their decks and start anew. A new turn is also started when the 20-sided dice throws of each side match each other. A turn, therefore, can consist of a number of phases, the extent of which is unknown.
Looking at the record for the first 3 turns:
| Side | Turn 1 | Turn 2 | Turn 3 |
|---|---|---|---|
| The French had | 35 impulses | 9 impulses | 62 impulses |
| The Prussians had | 65 impulses | 24 impulses | 96 impulses |
In all, therefore, for these 3 turns, we French 'won' a total of 106 impulses, while the Prussians won a total of 185 impulses. What was interesting to me was that, despite the Prussians almost doubling our French impulses, enabling them to draw almost double the number of function cards that we did, the Prussians didn't seem to get anywhere.
The Haub flanking force, trying to get around our left flank, came to a standstill, after having marched some 3 feet (halfway) up the table. The infantry battalions were all in column of march, not a fighting formation. Fred waited, and waited, and waited to draw a "deployment" card, to enable them to deploy, so that he could continue his advance. But when the card appeared (I think there were only 2 such cards in the Prussian deck), the time was not 'propitious', and he decided not to deploy his troops (keeping them behind his own cavalry). Another source of delay in producing a dearth of "deployment" cards, was that, when the 20-sided dice tosses matched each other, the decks of both sides were reshuffled. In reshuffling, the "deployment" cards which hadn't been drawn, were then tossed back into the deck, and the Prussians lost their chance to draw them.
Impatient
I am a rather impatient player, whether I'm engaging in a renaissance game, a 54mm modern skirmish, or a Samurai battle. And here, in this SYW battle, I decided to have my French left-flank infantry advance on the Prussians. For several turns, our troops had been staring at each other, doing nothing, and this didn't appeal to me at all. And so, off went my troops.
Facing me were several Prussian line battalions and one Prussian skirmish battalion. I made for the skirmish unit. Surely, my boys could make mincemeat of these light troops... surely!
During my advance, when I got within range, the Prussians used one of their impulses to have the skirmishers fire. These puny-looking skirmishers took out 1 of my 4 stands!
PQ outlines two ways to have units fire:
- (a) First, if you are the active side, simply use one of your impulses to have a unit blast away
(b) Second, when you're the active player, instead of using up all your impulses to draw cards, or move units, you can 'store' a couple of impulses, and then draw on them when the other side becomes active, for 'opportunity fire'.
It seemed to me that our battle didn't use (b), above, for we never had to 'store' our impulses to furnish opportunity fire. Instead, we 'bought' these 'opportunity fire' chips using a bank of chitties called 'morale chips'. More later on 'morale chips'.
In previous articles on PQ, I've termed it a 'groping for dice' game. The reason is that all tosses, for firing, melee, morale, etc. use comparative dice tossing, and different types of dice are selected (or groped for) according to the unit type.
When the Prussian skirmishers fired on my advancing battalion, I think the unit tossed a 6-sided die. The result on this die was compared with a 6-sided die that I tossed. The difference was my casualties. Big toss for the skirmishers, little toss for me, and one of my stands disappeared.
Some of the units tossed an 8-sided die when firing, but all were compared to a 6-sided 'defensive' die. I'm not sure, but I think that my unit, when firing, started out with an 8-sided die, but it was reduced to a 6-sider because it had lost a stand, and then to a 4-sider, because it was firing against skirmishers. The result was that the skirmishers remained untouched.
I believe I sent another battalion against these Dreaded Skirmishers. This unit, too, was decimated... the Dreaded Skirmishers didn't even blink... just WHAMMO!... and off went my troops.
I did note that because of the comparative die tossing procedures to determine casualties, there were wild swings in the number of casualties incurred. For example, the results of a 10-sided die unit (one of the elites), tossing against the defensive 6-sided die, could come up with comparative tosses of 10 for the elites, and 1 for the target, hence inflicting 9 casualties at a blow against a 12 figure unit. For this unit, then, the results of the volley could therefore swing between a minimum of zero casualties to a maximum of 9.
Terry Sirk's left flank Prussian units, dutifully waiting for his right flank units to complete their encircling march, simply stood in mid-field. Finally, I ordered my boys to advance, as did Jeff Wiltrout with the rest of the French army. I must note that this was a fairly slow advance, since "infantry move" cards were few and far between.
Despite the Dreaded Skirmishers, despite the lack of movement cards, and despite the paucity of impulses we obtained, we French were lucky. But not before the Dreaded Skirmishers struck again!
A third battalion charged these horrible skirmishers. Ordinarily, two units that come into contact, simply stand there until one side draws a 'resolve melee' card. This can take forever, and at one time late in the battle, on Turn 6, there were 5 melees awaiting to be resolved.
Here, because my Frenchmen were charging a unit of skirmishers, the melee was resolved immediately upon contact. We didn't have to wait for a "resolve melee" card to be drawn. My line unit tossed an 8-sided die, while the skirmishers tossed a 4-sided die. This is hard to believe, but I came up with a "3" while the skirmisher's die roll was a "4"... my boys had lost again! The Dreaded Skirmishers simply laughed as the French unit retreated.! Using the 8- and 4-sided dice, the Dreaded Skirmishers had only a 21 percent chance to win... one chance in five... but they came through.
The melee rules seem to assume that all melee is 1-unit-on-1-unit. With a 4-stand unit in line, it is possible that a single unit could contact two enemy units. This did happen in our battle, and Bob Wiltrout, on the spot, made up his own rule regarding the outcome.
One item of interest is that when two units are in contact, waiting for the resolution of the melee, if one side draws an "infantry move" card, a unit may simply retrograde, and back out of contact. This happened to me when two of my line units made contact with the Dreaded Skirmishers. While we were waiting for the "resolve melee" card, the skirmishers laughed, and deftly pulled back out of contact.
Several of our French volleys proved devastating. There are no direct morale checks in PQ. When a unit takes casualties, it stands there until the opposition challenges it and plays a 'morale chip' on it. Once a chip is played, again there's a comparative dice throw, with the type die depending upon the number of hits the target unit took.
At the battle's beginning, each side was given a quantity of 'morale chips'. Many Prussian units failed their morale tests, and each time they did so, they 'paid' one morale chip. The result of the failure (failure to toss higher than the comparative die) is either a disordered or routed unit.
Chips are also lost when a stand is lost, or a melee is lost.
With no chips, a side can't challenge the opposition to a morale test. And if it has no chips but must pay a chip, the opposition receives an additional chip. In all, loss of all morale chips is not a good thing.
I have no idea of how many morale chips the Prussians had, but eventually, they ran out of them. For that matter, I had no idea of the number of morale chips we French had, for Jeff kept them in his pocket. He was the self appointed chip treasurer, and as long as the Prussians were wilting under our fire, that was fine with me.
Fred Haub's flank-turning Prussian force, in not completing its maneuver, took out of action about one-third of the total Prussian forces. And when Jeff and I advanced into Terry's troops, our die rolls were favorable, and the Prussians melted away.
Theory
I've read articles on PQ, and visited their site on MAGWEB, and the theory espoused is:
- (a) You develop a 'Plan', and
(b) As your side turns its cards, you ignore all cards that are unimportant to the 'Plan', and act only on those that can help you in carrying out your 'Plan'.
This is horse-puckey! Here, the Prussian 'Plan' was simply to out flank the French. Fred's thought was that this 'Plan' involved a true Frederickian SYW maneuver, and the Prussians should have been able to accomplish this.
Not under the PQ system! Function cards come so rarely, that's it's hard to ignore any reasonably good card that comes along. Terry's troops on the Prussian left flank held back for so long, waiting for the Haub flanking attack to complete itself, that this permitted the French to get one-up on the Prussians.
PQ appears to allow very little intra-unit coordination. With an "infantry move" card, you can advance all your deployed units in the front line... but what about your reserve, the units in column of march waiting in the second line? And so you wait and wait and wait for a "deploy" card to get the second line ready, and then you wait again for another "infantry move" card to get the entire regiment going.
When the Prussians made their flanking maneuver, it was soon noted that there are "infantry move" cards, and "cavalry move" cards, but no cards for both. Which meant that this mixed force of infantry and cavalry sort of staggered forward... first infantry, then cavalry... until the host took pity on the Prussians and permitted the entire force to advance as an entity.
Due to all the waiting, PQ is inherently a slow moving game. With more than a single player per side, the theme of the game should be: keep the troops moving! There's very little entertainment value in a game in which all the players stand by and hope and wait for a good thing to happen.
Consequently, the sequence is choppy. First, cavalry move... a couple of cards later, infantry move... and a couple of cards later, you receive a "deploy" card, but you would have liked to have received it prior to your infantry movement. Does this mean that your unit officers were so stupid as to not be able to issue a 'deploy' order when required? Here, you can shout 'fog of war', 'fog of war', in not getting your orders accomplished... but there's a limit to the extent of the fog.
Another item which troubles me is the wide, swinging range of potential casualties resulting from the comparative die tosses in fire and melee. There seems to be no medium ground here, for while you can calculate what the average comparative die tosses should be and argue averages, the reality is that one whomping volley, and a unit disappears.
PQ has several clever gaming ploys, implemented via the card decks. There's a "brilliant leader" card, which, when drawn, will act as a wild card, permitting the side to choose any function desired. Then there's a "confused withdrawal" card, which permits the opposition to point to one of your units and have it withdraw, in disorder, one move away. Then, we have the "heroic moment" card... which doubles the effect of the next card you draw (move twice, etc.).
One of the things that the author, Bob Jones, always emphasizes, is that if you don't like the basic card decks and their content, you're always free to select your own cards and add them to the system. Our gaming host, Bob Wiltrout, stressed this and stated that this was an indication of the adaptability of the system.
To me, this is an argument which could be made by a rules author whose rules have just been published in Hal Thinglum's Midwest Wargamer's Association Newsletter (MWAN). The MWAN rules are free for the taking, and the reader can, using them as a base, develop his own system.
This should not be the position of a man who wants to sell you a complete, boxed historically-accurate game and charge you $39 for it.
Despite the choppiness, despite the slowness, I like the concept which PQ. expounds. I'm a confirmed advocate of action-card systems, and I think they produce a good, entertaining game. Perhaps not quite in the mold set out in the PQ rules, but almost.
In 1976, the year of the Bicentennial, I teamed up with Tom Elsworth and we tried out every card system you could think of, and some you couldn't. When Tom returned to England, Fred Haub and I continued to experiment with cards.
One of the systems which we tried was identical to that of PQ's. We had cards for "cavalry move", cards for "infantry move", cards for 'infantry fire", cards for "formation change", cards for "resolve melee", etc. Each side had its deck, and I believe we had about 10 cards for "cavalry move", and half as many for infantry. The sides drew from their decks in alternate fashion.
Due to the rapidity of cavalry movement... they drew lots of cards and seemed to whiz across the field... a cavalry unit could zip right across the front of an enemy infantry unit, before the opposing infantry could press the triggers of their muskets (draw a "fire" card). This lack of response didn't sit well with the gamers to whom we presented the rules.
PQ has, in part, solved this problem. The act of firing is taken out of the realm of the function cards... simply expend an impulse point to fire anywhere in the turn.
But PQ, to me, hasn't solved the relative movement problem. Each PQ deck has 3 "cavalry move" cards, and 3 "infantry move" cards. Which means that during the draw of the entire deck, each type of unit gets to move 3 times. Cavalry move distance is 9 inches, infantry is 6 inches. In the old rules with which I experimented, all units, when their cards were drawn, moved, say, 5 inches. With 10 "cavalry move" cards available, the cavalry would be able to advance a total of 50 inches per turn, given their multitude of 5 inch increments.
PQ seems to have reversed relative movement. In PQ, you move a cavalry unit, and it sits and sits and sits until you're lucky enough to draw another move card. And meanwhile, you might draw all 3 "infantry move" cards, energizing and advancing the infantry in more rapid fashion than the cavalry.
Just as with the relative movement problem, there's one with firing. In a WW II game I observed, I noted that once a heavy weapon fired, it had to wait for a 'reload' card (I think it was termed an "ammunition supply" card), before it could fire again. This seemed strange to me, what with the modern rapid-fire weapons in use. And Bob Wiltrout reported that in a renaissance game in which he participated at COLD WARS, when a bow unit fired, it, too, had to wait for a "reload" card before the archers could again whang off an arrow. This, too, seemed strange.
Summary
In short, there's somewhat of a 'dislocation' in defining the time span represented by a turn. With card systems, its always hard to pin down the time span... with the PQ procedures, it's impossible.
The PQ games I've seen are each purportedly oriented toward a different era. Simply put, this means that the decks for the games of each area have been altered to reflect the actions and the functions which the troops can carry out.
I've actually participated in 2 games (ACW and SYW), and acutely observed several others (WW II, renaissance, British colonial) and didn't find 'that much difference' in the distribution of the decks.
PQ is the type of game you love, or you love to hate. there's no middle ground.
Back to PW Review March 1999 Table of Contents
Back to PW Review List of Issues
Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List
© Copyright 1999 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