I’ve started using a system that I originally designed to control my AI opponent to limit my own god like overview of the battlefield - so I thought I’d knock out a quick post to highlight the details for anyone interested in the experiment.
Not only can we normally see where everything is on the board but we often unwittingly end up controlling every aspect of our own forces, fulfilling the roles of Corporal, General, and every rank in between.
Now that’s not so bad in skirmish gaming where the levels of a forces rank structure is more condensed but I’ve started playing 2mm ECW again and my omnipotence at this level just seems historically and factually wrong. We do know how battles were fought in this period and we also know broadly what the role and limitations of a generals ability to shape events are - once battle is joined.
Okay so let’s get into the detail.
Once the defender and attacker have deployed their units (2 - 6 battalia organised into brigades) you as the general give each brigade leader (usually a senior colonel) an order counter that his battalia must follow. This is a reflection of the usual sedate pace of battlefield positioning, the assembly of a council of war and the agreement amongst the senior officers of how the forthcoming battle should be fought.
The orders are generic and represented by an initially hidden counter placed next to each brigade commander.
The four order types are:
o Attack (arrow symbol) Foot and horse units should move towards the nearest enemy with a view to engaging them in combat. They will continue in this mode until they are no longer able through loss or broken morale. Cannon may engage in ranged fire rather than move. Order defaults automatically to hold if one unit within the brigade routs from the table.
o Sieze objective (double arrow symbol) Foot or horse units must attempt to occupy the nearest marked objective hex. Once occupied this defaults to a hold order without the generals intervention. Troops with this order are allowed to INITIATE combat only when attempting to dislodge opponents in the objective hex but may always battle back if attacked prior to this.
o Hold (hand symbol). All units maintain their current positions but cannon may fire in ranged combat and units may battle back in their own defence if attacked. Units ordered to hold may not initiate close combat.
o Retire (bent arrow symbol). The brigades units must retire in an orderly fashion towards a nominated counter marked hex. Units will stop moving when they are on or adjacent to the indicated hex. Units may battle back if attacked in close combat / melee - but may not initiate same. Once on or adjacent to the nominated hex the order automatically defaults to hold and 1 unit within the brigade receives 1 strength point reinforcement (never bringing them back to full strength).
 |
| A brigade of 3 Foote battalia with a « hold » order. |
The kicker is that once battle is joined you as the general may only change a limited number of these orders and only change them when a brigade is activated (by chit draw). King Charles who I’ve rated as poor can only change 3 order counters during the entire game while Rupert can change 5. This can be increased by 1 if the general is placed on a hill higher than the bulk of his forces or reduced by one if he attaches himself to a particular brigade leader during the battle.
Testing so far has been limited but it seems to give a satisfactory result. When do you make a change to your plan and what should that change be? Can you afford to change early on to seek advantage or save any order adjustments to stave off a possible disaster later in the game?
It should be pointed out that this system is applied to both of the opposing forces.
 |
| A brigade of 2 regiments of horse with an « attack » order. Each stand is a troop, 2 troops to the squadron and 3 squadrons to the regiment. |
This mechanic forms part of my 2mm ECW home brew rule set originally titled « Standing on the shoulders of midgets »** (both to reflect the scale of the miniatures and the fact that the entire thing is a mash up of other proven system mechanics - Msr Foys Corporal John / C&C combat mechanisms, master Freitag’s brigade activation and a few bits and pieces of my own).
The rules will be used in my forthcoming ECW campaign and the assembly of two large armies for this is nearly complete - so I’ll be looking for faction leading volunteers to make strategic decisions in an ahistorical ECW in the new year I expect.
Toodleooh
* By way of compensation he usually gets to field a larger force than anyone other than Essex.
** Now more sensibly titled « Noe Quarter ». My lawyer has asked me to point out that it’s the miniatures and not Msr Foy or Master Freitag who are the midgets on whose shoulders I am perched.
Your order mechanisms look very good and provide an interesting touch especially for solo play. I went down a similar path for a Napoleonic set of rules years ago with preset orders. I will be very interested in seeing these mechanisms develop and watch as they play out on the table.
ReplyDeleteTaking only one of your orders, "Attack", how does your order system handle the following situations?
- How fast must the brigade move toward the target and must all components move at the same rate?
- Must all units of the brigade attack together?
- What happens if the brigade is attacked by an enemy formation that is not the target?
- What if Attack movement is directly obstructed by an enemy formation that is not the target (or terrain)?
- Does Attack continue even if enemy target moves away or leaves LOS?
If you are in search on volunteers for your planned campaign, I raise my hand.
Thanks Jon, I certainly can’t claim this concept is entirely new, I imagine a lot of people have done something similar at some point, though I’m not sure I’ve seen the limiting of the number of orders that can be changed during the game before.
DeleteAs to questions I’ll have a quick stab at answering them:
1) The brigade must move towards the nearest enemy with the intention of attacking it using all of their movement allowance. Terrain and movement allowances may not allow contact to happen straight away. A brigade can be composed of between 2 and 6 battalia and when the brigade is activated through chit draw a 1d6 roll determines how many of the battalia within the activated brigade can actually do anything. It may be that only 3 out of 6 battalia may actually attempt to carry out the order for example.
2) All of the eligible battalia within a brigade move individually and then attacks are conducted singly in any order the owning player desires.. The outcome of a single attack is determined including any battle back by the defender before another attacking batalia gets to make its own attempt. Note this is played on a hex grid and due to the scale and the ranges of the weapons, combat (apart from cannon fire) occurs between units that are in adjacent hexes.
3) A battalia within a brigade that is attacked by a separate or unexpected entity initially only gets to battle back when attacked. During the brigades next activation if the unit that attacked it is still adjacent then it automatically becomes the new target for the brigade.
4) The target of the attack order is mutable and may change from turn to turn. Whichever enemy is closest and visible at the time of activation becomes the target.
5) The attack order remains in place for the brigade until losses incurred or morale problems prevent its application, whereupon it automatically defaults to hold. The target of the attack order must be known to at least one unit within the brigade, and by known I mean within line of sight. Should an enemy unit move out of sight or become obscured by terrain from all of the units with the attack order it may not be targeted. In this situation any other visible opposing force would be substituted. If no other enemy units are visible the attack order again defaults to hold.
The rules contain all of this info (I hope) but I paraphrased the order details in the post to avoid exhausting the reader. Sorry if things were not entirely clear.
Perfectly clear and well-reasoned. I suspected you had given these situations considerable thought already.
DeleteTesting someone’s logic is never a wasted exercise - and one of the benefits of peer group appraisal.
DeleteWhat happens to a Brigade with Seize order is:
Delete(i) There are enemy units between them and the objective (not necessarily on the objective)?
(ii) They are attacked by enemy units, especially ones coming from a different direction to the axis of advance that the Seizing brigade is on?
Hey KK.
Delete1) As it stands at the moment the battalia in question must seek to reach the objective without initiating combat, even if the route taken cannot out of necessity be a direct one. Note that the battalia with a seize order is not obliged to initiate combat even if it is in an adjacent hex to an enemy unit blocking its path. The only flaw in this would be if there was literally only one route to the objective that an enemy unit was sitting on. Not sure how to legislate for that, but it’s unlikely to occur in very large battlefields that this scale of game is to be played on. Food for thought. The other option is to change the order to attack when the brigade next activates - assuming the overall general still has the capacity to change it.
2) If the battalia is attacked unexpectedly en route to its objective it is allowed to defend itself by fighting back as part of the combat process, an outcome which is often able to force an attacker to retreat. If the attacker is not forced to retreat it may be ignored as the battalia continues to advance on its target. Small scale losses will occur as the units skirt each other (these are abstracted away) but full on combat is not mandatory even when opposing forces are adjacent.
Hope that makes sense.
Thanks for input KK, I’ve amended the seize order to allow a unit to initiate combat when its best path to the objective hex is blocked by an enemy. Hopefully that’ll fix it.
DeleteInteresting ideas Mark. I share your view that a commander’s ability to control or change things was restricted once the battle commenced.
ReplyDeleteNice looking cavalry units. They look like proper units.
Happy to volunteer to lead a faction but I will stand aside to give others a chance.
Chris
Cheers Chris, I’ll keep everyone in mind for the two positions available but by way of a brief explanation here’s what I think people will be committing to do. As it stands at the moment the two faction heads will make separate moves on a strategic map with the intention of controlling more settlements than their opponent by the end of 1646. The movements on this map reflect sieges, beating up of quarters and all the smaller actions that occur day in and day out. Should both factions stage strategic map moves in the same geographical area then a major battle will occur that gets gamed out on the table. The faction leaders will be able to view the battlefield with both forces arrayed and then can choose their starting orders for each brigade. After that the dice gods take over. The winner of the major battle gets more points to spend on the strategic map than his opponent in the next seasons manoeuvrings.
DeleteClear as mud I’m sure. Although there is a random events die roll after each season there is none of the decision tree chicanery from the last campaign. It’s all pretty straightforward. I think we’re looking at moves submitted weekly with each turn representing one of the four seasons - kicking off in summer 1642. Much more detailed instructions are available on request.
The scale and solo involvement in gaming benefit from the restriction (chaos!) of an order system - anything that loosens the grip of player control.
ReplyDeleteSome years ago, I did a 2mm napoleonic game with orders. There was a game clock and if orders were to be changed the delay of receiving a new order would be the sum of distance from the commander plus a penalty to put the new order into action.
The interesting thing was that there was an Austrian unit that needed its order changed to respond to a new situation ….. however, it was clear that by the time the unit got the order, it might be too late and also by that time, the situation may have changed yet again ….. so the question became whether it was actually better to let a unit proceed with a bad / out of date order successfully or whether to risk that unit marching back and forth and actually not achieving anything (d´Erlon!).
Hi Norm, I never knew you did 2mm. Wow. The situation you describe is exactly what I’m hoping to replicate in one form or another.
DeleteHi JB, it was a long time ago when Irregular Miniatures first brought the scale out. I played on an 18” x 18” board. The blocks were as sold, i.e. I did not mount them and an Austrian Brigade had 8 pieces, set out 2 wide and 4 deep.
DeleteJust playing it, the aerial perspective made it look like a real battle, looking like a map from a book with units on i.e. the birds eye view and this just naturally lent itself to the player being detached from individual units and allow an order system with delays built in.
Around that time, there was a bit of 2mm fervour and quite a few of those old fashioned rulebooks, stapled in A5 with a card cover and black and white illustration and they broadly seemed to go full in for order type systems.
It was the days of the typewriter, not the computer, so I don’t even have a rule file that I could send you, but I think some of the old sets are still floating around out there, though I don’t recall anything ECW specific. There was a set called Blenheim to Balaclava which I recall had some nice ideas.
Should there be a chance (no matter how small) that when an order-change is made that it simply doesn't happen (messages get lost or commanders misunderstand or simply refuse to obey)?
ReplyDeletePossibly - KK, I had omitted the prospect to lower the complexity in general. Bear in mind that not all of a brigades battalia might actually get to do anything when the brigade is activated (see the bit about the 1d6 roll) so the buggeration factor is already sort of baked in. 1 battalia is always guaranteed to do something, but maybe not enough of the brigade to do anything worthwhile. We’ll see how it pans out I guess and I’ll keep it in mind.
DeleteVeering off on a bit of a tangent JBM - if you are playing solo and place the orders on all units of both sides, you must know what order each unit has - or do you mean they are just "dealt out" face down, unseen, and there is no ability to make a plan, the orders for both sides are just completely random?
ReplyDeleteHi Keith. The system came from something I used for a solo AI opponent but is intended for F2F games where both players can create a strategy using the order counters. I probably didn’t make that very clear. I have a new local recruit interested in F2F gaming so solo play isn’t really a thing nowadays - especially since I’m getting my main regular gaming fix via zoom.
DeleteThanks for the final disclaimer - I was about to write to the Times in a very squeaky voice. System is interesting.
ReplyDeleteThank you sir! Your Corporal John rules would work very well for the ECW as we’ve discussed before, however I began to tinker with a none card based version and it developed a Frankenstein like life of its own. Of course it may turn into a massive mess but it’s fun to fiddle with these things. The way my memory is going these days my unconscious quest seems to be for more and more simplicity. Future ECW battles may devolve into little more than lining the soldiers up and flicking stones at them. Even then I’d probably still have to repeatedly consult the rule book. Lol. I can see it now. 1. Select stone. 2. Flick stone at soldiers. 3. Repeat from the other side of the table. It could catch on, you never know.
DeleteAll well thought out Mark and certainly look forward to seeing it in action so to speak. The lack of the General's knowledge of what is happening across the whole battlefield etc reminded me of Channel 4's Game of War tv series, specifically the following one:
ReplyDeletehttps://www.youtube.com/watch?v=A4nU6vw_oHs
Cheers Steve. For some reason I never saw any of this series though I’ve seen it mentioned on other blogs from time to time. I’ll use your link to go and have a decko!
DeleteOMG!!!!!!! I know this was the 90’s but what’s with the cut glass accents and the ties…and and…Angela Rippon. Where’s the guy with the balding pate and the greasy pony tail? Where now the beer belly and the Metallica tee shirt? I notice nobody farted either, so that’s a first for a group of wargamers. I know they were on TV but jeez….they were soooooo serious. I wanted to shout… It’s a game guys! The one good thing is that after viewing this I’ve finally settled on a collective noun for us. Whenever we gather in numbers we should be referred to as a NERD of wargamers. Lol.
DeleteThe collective noun pretty much hits the spot Mark! IIRC the chaps making the decisions were serving or ex-military and quite senior, which possibly accounts for their take on things. A good friend whom I play with went to Sandhurst and at times it is fascinating to see him address a particular 'problem' on the table and how he talks it through to himself. Rather different from our way of doing things.
DeleteAgain I think the rules they were using were based upon those used at Sandhurst, but modfied to tv. Can't remember who was actually running the game, so maybe time to travel back to the 1990's for a blast of nostalgia;).
The blocks of troops look good, and I do like your ideas on limiting the number of orders issued.
ReplyDeleteCheers Peter.
DeleteThis all sounds very interesting JBM and of course it's my favourite period! I have to say that the Battalia are impressive looking, hard to achieve anything quite like that in any other scale. I'm trying to figure out which IM codes you used to create those big formations? I'll be following along to see where this goes. I'm suffering withdrawal symptoms from not painting for a while so casting about for a small project in the New Year.
ReplyDeleteAll the best to you,
Lee.
Knew that’d tickle your fancy! They’re the Swiss landschnekts pike blocks and forlorn hopes x8. I copied the Baccus big unit layout from their website. Looks about right I think. Given your usual painting output I bet it’s been a bit jarring having to come to a sudden stop. Hopefully you can recommence soon. PM me when you get a mo, just to let me know how you’re getting on. All the best to you and the missus. Mark.
DeleteGood looking battalias and the order system sounds particularly suited to the ECW, it reminds me a bit of snappy nappy over on Peter's Blunders on the Danube blog, might be of interest if you haven't heard of it?
ReplyDeleteBest Iain
Hi Iain. I’ve heard of snappy nappy but never looked at it cos it’s Napoleonic and not (whisper it) really my bag. With that said rules is rules and there might be something of interest in them. Cheers for the tip off.
DeleteThis looks a pretty good idea, Mark! It seems 'realistic' in that the actual commanders of brigades, wings etc would have been in this exact situation, following a written order (or perhaps deciding to ignore it for whatever reason!) until new instructions arrive. I think many of the 'old-school' Featherstone/WRG period rules tended to use pre-written orders in this way, and it didn't seem a bad idea (albeit some were allowing orders to be re-written every turn, just using them to govern simultaneous movement) .
ReplyDeleteI think Peter from 'Grid Based Wargaming' was doing something a bit similar with his ECW games recently, wasn't he? I think it was inspired by the 17th Century concept of the deployment /battle plan which would often have been quite formalised. Might be worth a look at his ideas too... I'll be interested to see your game reports with this method. p.s. Happy Xmas!
Hey David. Peters always got something good going on over at his blog I’ll nip over and see what I can steal…erm…learn. Lol. Happy Xmas to you too mate.
ReplyDelete