During the past two years with two friends I have been fighting a Peninsular War Campaign. Our rules have gradually become more and more complicated, until so complex that I seriously wondered if the mental anguish experienced in evaluating simple situations was worthwhile. Most of the trouble lay in a very complicated morale system and my musket rules which allowed a unit to fire up to three times per move. Obviously something needed to be done if our battles were not to grind to a halt in a morass of arithmetic. I set about trying to find a simpler system that would still achieve realism and it looked as if the fact that "if you want realism you get rid of simplicity" was true. However, it suddenly dawned upon me that I was calculating the same thing twice -- that morale and casualties are very closely linked, and that as one depended somewhat on the other, wily not join the two together? Each of my units now has a value attached to it - a 'MAC' value: morale and casualties. This represents both the losses and the morale-level of that unit. Each unit starts with the value 0, and all MAC values are added to this during the game, as a result of casualties, etc. For example, if a unit is fired upon by a group of 100 men who are 50 yards away, then that unit adds 5 to its MAC score. One MAC value is added every move that a unit is fired upon or involved in a melee, and two is added every move when a unit routs. Where does morale come in? Well, this is calculated using the MAC value. Each unit is given a rating of one to ten (eg. 7. Spanish militia are one, French Old Guard are ten). Every time morale needs to be tested four average and one normal dice are thrown and the scores added up. The morale for a unit is then read off from a table (shown below) that requires the units present MAC value, its rating, and its dice score. If morale is to be tested more than once in a move, then the some dice score is used throughout. My rules have four levels of morale A, B, C, and D. These can mean different things in different situations, e.g. if a unit is being charged by cavalry:- A Fire at50 yards, melee if cavalry charge home. B Fire at100 yards, rout if cavalry charge home. C Fire at 150 yards, D No firing, rout. The table below gives the least number needed on the dice score for a unit to attain A, B or C level. Otherwise it is level 0, which is always a rout. If a unit is in disorder, only four average dice are used, and if a unit is routing only three average dice, to test morale. If a unit tests morale, becomes disordered and tests for morale again during the same move, a normal dice score is subtracted from the dice score to get the effect of disordering. Also, if a unit is testing for morale, and units of its army are routing past it, then two is subtracted from its dice score for every unit that it can see routing. Of course, one can use ones own additions and subtractions, but I find that the above simple few give a very realistic result. Here would begin to greatly complicate the rules, which is what I really intend to get away from. What About Casualties? In fact I have not calculated any, just a number that represents them. This I find extremely appealing, as one never quite knows how many casualties one has. I know it sounds ridiculous, but is it not true that a commander never knows exactly how many men he has lost until after the battle? Many may just drift to the rear, or have minor wounds that put them out of action for the battle only. The MAC value gives you a vague idea of casualties, but an accurate idea of fighting strengths. Each of my MAC values is worth approximately ten men. So a unit with a MAC value of ten, has lost roughly 100 men for various reasons. I keep a total of each unit's MAC value, so that at any time during the game I can say how many men of that unit are able to fight. For instance, an English battalion at full strength with a MAC value of 10 can only fire with 800 muskets. At the end of the total casualties for each unit be calculated by multiplying a unit's MAC value by the added score of two average dice. So far the above unit with MAC value of 10, I might throw two fours, that makes eight, and the casualties for that unit are 80. Presumably, the other 20 Ten had had minor wounds, or lost or just drifted to the rear. The system provides a method of confining casualties and morale so that only one thing is used to calculate both. Also the MAC value gives a good estimate of a unit's fighting strength during a battle, and only a rough nuericl strength. One often feels like a real commander must have felt at the end of a battle, when one throws double fives, and the losses slowly mount up as each unit's losses are calcu1ated! However, a few words of warning about the system. As a statistician, I can appreciate the probabilities concerned with a unit routing, etc., with any dice throw. This is very important.. Before devising the system I calculated them and drew up 8 table. This is no minor point, as a lack of appreciation of distributions of dice scores (9 to 26 for four average and one normal) can lead to weird results. The system relies on units being of roughly the same size. For example, say , during a mov two units rout. One is 100, the other 1,000 men. Two MAC values are added to the score of each unit for routing. This represents a loss of 20 men only! If the latter were ten units each of size 100, it would lose 200 men! Difficulties such as this are very inherent in the system, and much care is needed in a battle to ensure that the basic unit for morale is approximately the same for both sides. Whatever the faults of the system though, I do feel that it is reasonable and possible to use a combined value for morale and casualties. These two things are linked; and the above system does allow a reasonable amount of variation, so that the two are not directly dependent on each other. A good unit with few casualties can still rout using this system; as can one with many casualties remain holding their ground. I have used the system for many battles now, and although I change it slightly as time goes on, the basic idea is still there, and will I think, remain there. Back to Table of Contents -- Wargamer's Newsletter #143 To Wargamer's Newsletter List of Issues To MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 1974 by Donald Featherstone. 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