Playing pre-set scenarios on a constant basis can become boring for even the most ardent ACW enthusiast. They tend to be fairly confining and predictable, taking away the "joy" of the unknown. Most scenarios leave one stuck trying to undo mistakes made in deployment, etc. which were made by the historical commanders. In the same vein, I have come to dislike the idea of army lists such as exist in WRG Ancients and Renaissance, simply because they artificially even out the sides, making the contest a push/pull event. That kind of situation does not realistically test the competency of the wargaming commander.
I believe, as do many of my wargaming companions, that there is much fun in meeting for a day knowing what the objective is, but having no clear idea on what the numerical or qualitative odds are. Flexibility and quick decision making are the hallmarks of the truly great generals. Why not try to create an atmosphere of uncertainty to test your mettle as a skilled tactician? The thrill of taking a numerically inferior force and defeating your opponent is the ideal in ego gratification. Such is a true accomplishment and adds greatly to the flavor and enjoyment of getting together around the game table.
A further plus for this type of get together is that it eliminates one of the more irritating components of personality clashes between players. It seems, from my experience, that when there is no pre—set scenario to work with and gamers are expected to show up for such a showdown, Union players tend to try and field Berdan's sharpshooters, the Iron, Irish, and Vermont Brigades, while Confederate commanders unpack Robert E. Lee or Stonewall Jackson, along with Hood's Texas Brigade, A.P. Hill's Light Division, the Stonewall Brigade, and the Washington Artillery (all 5 companies!). It's amazing how soon we forget that there were lesser troops involved.
In almost all real life battles the commander, once initial orders were given, was left chewing his nails and developing ulcers wondering whether or not units would arrive in time, or even at the specified spot. It is this "fog of war" that I am attempting to simulate with random factors.
Of course, one must decide how to throw random factors into a game without totally upsetting the purposes of a rules set. We use Johnny Reb rules, and have occasionally gamed with Rally 'Round the Flag. To my knowledge, the random conditions we use will work with most rules sets and any number of brigades, divisions, or corps. I accept that such conditions add time to the game, but our experiences using a division per side in an engagement show that all random conditions take a total of less than 10 minutes to determine. The added flavor is well worth such a small expenditure of time!
The factors listed in the enclosed tables cover historical trends and strengths in both Confederate and Union forces during certain time periods in a general way. While we play with one reinforced division per side, and the article is written that way, players may choose to convert to multiple regiments, brigades, divisions or even corps.
BEGINNING THE GAME
Each side, whether there are one or more players per side is irrelevent, starts the game off with 3 brigades, cavalry, and artillery of unknown strength. Because of the differences in forces during certain times of the war, the people playing must determine what theatre (eastern or western) and what time period (1861-1863 or 1864- 1865) their engagement will be representing. The Factor Tables cover the following assumptions:
- 1. That Eastern theatre Confederate generals were superior to their Union counterparts.
2. That Western theatre generals for both sides were equal in skill (or lack thereof).
3. That Confederate cavalry was far superior in morale and numbers in both theatres until 1864, at which time the quality and quantity gap was closed to a great extent.
4. That Union artillery was more numerous and had better guns than the Confederates during the entire war.
5. That the Union infantry were more numerous than the Confederates throughout the war.
6. That in the Eastern theatre, C6nfederate infantry had better morale, but that the Western theatre saw both sides relatively equal in their fighting skills.
If you can accept the above listed premises, this type of scenario is for you, and a roster sheet must be made to keep track of your troops and their morale when setting up the Order of Battle. The random factors used by us include number of regiments per brigade, number of cavalry regiments, number of batteries, along with number and type of guns in each battery, and morale of all troops involved. I have also included an optional table that we use covering small arms. It is somewhat subjective and meant for use by those who do not have the patience or reference sources to decide for themselves who should be armed with.
The tables covering all of these random factors are weighted to bring out ratios that are fairly consistent with history, yet leave room for possible advantages for one side or another. Our experiences using the tables in our own battles show that the six suppositions listed are brought out quite well, frequently making commanders rethink and adapt their strategy with out giving either side severe advantages.
A vital note to remember is that terrain is all, important to Civil War scenarios and the use of our random factors since, often enough, it allowed a numerically inferior force to hold its own. Very few ACW battles were fought out in the open as in Napoleonic times. With woods, ravines, hills and terrain obstacles such as houses, fences, walls, and even earthworks being more often used than not, small arms fire tended to equal out even if one was superior to the other. Examples include the smoothbore musket and the shotgun, both of which were limited in range and accuracy. However, in the woods, such deficits were little noticed, and in some cases those weapons proved to be superior! To use the random factors listed in this article to best advantage, one must THINK and ACT as a smart Civil War general would have done.
Step number 1 is to make a roster sheet to keep track of your units and their weapon and morale status. At the top of a sheet of paper you should make the following column headings: Brigade Name or Number, Unit Name, Unit Morale, Weapon. Since, in our way of playing, there can be no more than 13 regiments on a side, you need not have mere lines than this for the infantry. The remainder of the page should be set aside for the cavalry, artillery, and generals, listing their appropriate status. However, before you begin, you must decide among the players which theatre and which time period your scenario will be fought in.
Having done this, it is time to begin rolling for random factors. You will only need one regular six sided die for all factors other than for artillery, which requires two dice. Roll the die for each general and check Table 1 for the results. Next, roll to see how many regiments will be in each of the brigades, using Table 2. The next steps involve rolling to see how many cavalry regiments will be available (Table 3), how many batteries, the number and types of guns in each battery (Table 4), the morale of all troops (Table 3), and the type of small arms for each fighting unit (Table 6).
Having completed your Order of Battle (06) roster sheet, it's time to begin actual play. It is highly probable that each side has certain advantages and also areas of weakness. Players should not announce their 0B results to opponents, leaving each side somewhat in the dark as to enemy strength in both numbers and arms.
Final Portion
The final portion of adding the "fog of war" involves placing the units on the table. In our games, we designate entry areas for each brigade, artillery battery, or cavalry regiment. Our only rule is that only one infantry brigade can enter the table at a certain area, meaning that we choose three entry points per army for our games. To make the game interesting and a challenge, such entrances should be on the far left side, the middle, and the far right side of your table edge. Artillery that is not attached to a brigade, and cavalry can enter at any designated area on your side of the table. We roll for each unit, a "5" or "6" allowing that particular unit to be activated. This gives you a 33% chance of getting all of your units on the table in any given turn, a highly unlikely possibility.
Such a random system is sure to throw monkey wrenches in even the best laid plans and leaves players in the same dilemma as the real commanders. We do not allow for a change of orders to be given to the brigade commanders until the 3rd turn, simulating a delay in knowledge from the front which division leaders usually had to deal with. Using our method of play, an army which is out—manned and out—gunned has a good chance of victory if they can get a sufficient force on the table early enough. An example of this was a recent game in which the Union force was outnumbered in cavalry AND infantry, plus had poorer morale in general than the Confederate force. Added to this was some poor die rolling which allowed the Rebels to get more infantry units on the table in the first turn. Fortunately, the Union force had both of its cavalry regiments enter the game or the first turn (and both had been lucky enough to roll well for morale), making it to the terrain objective before the Confederate foot. Further luck with the dice allowed the Federal cavalry to hold the objective until reinforced, winning the game.
There is certainly a need for players to keep on their toes and to write orders that allow for some independent decision making. It is the ability to be flexible and compensate in your plans that makes this type of scenario exciting. Think of how much more proud you will be of a single regiment that holds its own against superior odds in order to give the rest of the brigade time to be activated.
Future issues of THE ZOUAVE will contain war table setups, complete with terrain maps and objectives, to assist members in playing random scenarios. For those who plan to use our scenarios, plan to acquire some HO scale railroad tracks, plenty of fences and buildings, and hills with more than one contour. As I said earlier in this article, terrain can make or break a real interest in a scenario. I think that you will become re-energized in your love of ACW miniature gaming. Remember that the tables on the next page represent actual historical trends, and while not totally representative of every engagement fought, are accurate when considering the Civil War as a whole. I would like to hear from members after they engage in battles with this concept, and would look forward to printing accounts of your own scenarios with the system. Good luck in your own "fog of war."
More Fog:
Back to The Zouave Vol I No. 1 Table of Contents
Back to The Zouave List of Issues
Back to Master Magazine List
© Copyright 1987 The American Civil War Society
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