Jon put on a Napoleonic game for us. I haven't played a 25/8mm Napoleonic game for decades, I guess. He chose the Battle of Maida. This is well known to my generation of wargamers from Featherstone's "Battle Notes for Wargamers" because it has the rule suggestions about how to handle the Swiss troops in French service in red uniforms. You know, the ones who get mistaken for British.
The battle is commemorated in place names, notably Maida Vale in London, and more recently Maida Close in Northampton, as one of the precursor regiments of the Northamptonshire's was present, the 58th Foot.
I took command of the French, bottom of the picture, with Richard on my right and Steve on my left. Ian had the British, with Chris on his right wing, facing Steve, and Will on his left.
I was slow on taking the screen shots. This is after my first move, when I have deployed two units into line in the centre. The Swiss are on the right, and some reluctant Poles are on the left. I sent out some messages with orders for my supporting Generals. Steve was to act cautiously, but clear Chris from the woods on the left. Richard was to attack with vigour, as he had the only cavalry on the board. Alas I cocked up sending him my full intentions. My aim was to get his brigade to move last, and then win the initiative roll as we had a +1, so enabling him to cover the ground to the line with two back to back moves. My guess - which was right - was that Will wouldn't deploy into square immediately. However, I didn't send the message and...well, you'll see, probably.
Steve drew his men into line alongside mine, and sent a light regiment to face off with Chris' men in the woods. I counted the guns at this point, and noted we were outnumbered 2:1 in terms of artillery. Ah.
Chris fired his artillery, and Steve suffered an immediate adverse reaction, sending his troops tumbling back 12". That would take 2 turns to recover fully.
I moved our main General over to Steve's retreating troops and rallied them back. Richard fired his guns, to less effect, and then brought an infantry column up on his right, in preparation for clearing the scrub on that wing. He didn't advance his cavalry. Messages back and forth reveal my earlier error. The attack on the left goes in, but stalls immediately.
Steve backs up the stalled fight on the left by deploying his reserve into line behind it. On the right, Will deploys into square at Ian's prompting. We've missed the chance of riding them down, but on the other hand they now make a cracking artillery target.
Richard has his own masterplan. On his right an attack column plunges into the scrub, whilst he brings up another column to charge the square. The cavalry are lined up to ride down the guns.
However he has no need to charge the square, as another round of artillery breaks it.
With the square gone, the infantry column now charges the guns, and the cavalry pile into the supporting line infantry.
The infantry overrun the guns, but are repulsed by the supporting infantry. The cavalry come very close to winning the melee, but are instead bounced. On the left, Steve's infantry are repulsed from the woods. We're going backwards more than I'd like. However, Richard has driven the infantry out of the scrub on the right.
Steve charges in on the left against the weakened troops in the woods. The British artillery is starting to whittle us down all along the line.
Steve has some success in the woods on the left, and with that flank more or less secure, advances on the enemy. It's that or sit there and be blown to bits.
I push forwards too. Steve closes on the line, and continues to force his way through the wood.
Steve clears the wood, but is being driven back by the line.
The Poles push forwards aggressively. We just need a lucky break somewhere to swing this. We are all about creating chances now, rather than sitting and reacting.
Richard is pushing forwards on the right, but except for the unit in the scrub all of his units are weak.
Chris has broken both of Steve's line battalions in the open, and pushes forwards with his elite light infantry battalion. Has he pushed his luck too far? Can we catch him between Steve's reserves and the unit in the woods? Elsewhere we've stalled, or we're going backwards.
Total losses are now favouring the British. We might have broken through out of the scrub, and we had an outside chance of breaking the lights by the river. Another turn would have confirmed it, but I reckon we were beaten.
It's a tough battle for the French. They have a slight preponderance in numbers and the only cavalry, but the British have the edge in quality and artillery. The artillery meant we had to attack or lose by default. Still, we did better than the French did historically, who famously lost in 15 minutes.
Jon's home grown rules, based on the ECW rules we've used before, moved the game on apace, and provide decisive outcomes. Troops are quite nippy, but that means the players aren't constantly worrying about wheeling deductions and so on. This helps with the Zoom gaming where all troop movements go through an intermediary.
And that's us done for Christmas now, so Merry Christmas to you all from me and Shedquarters.
In the best traditions of Old School Wargaming, order writing. Sadly, now discarded. But it formed a useful function in wargaming, setting limits to instantaneous reactions on the table top.
ReplyDeleteYes, order writing did help but it created problems of its own and unless you were required to write several turns ahead, you could still react quickly. We use it for Richard's aerial games.
DeleteIt's interesting that both of Jon's refights of this battle have led to more closely fought and much longer actions than the original. Was there some element of the original that is not being picked up in the rules or do the French players not make a critical error of the original, I wonder?
ReplyDeleteIn both refights the British have sat back and used their firepower, as their predecessors did, but the French have taken their time to develop the attack more generally, rather than have one big thrust on the left. This might be because the "make weight" troops like the Poles are better quality in the game than historically. After one play I can't comment on whether the rules are or aren't picking up something vital.
DeleteIt is a long time since I played a Napoleonic game, and understanding of tactics has changed since I painted my last figures and gave them away. Maida is an important battle in the historiography of the period, until Oman's analysis was skilfully dismantled by Paddy Griffith in "Forwards into Battle", originally published in 1981 (a fact that seems to have escaped the author of the Wiki entry who places the revisionist view as emerging nearly 20 years later). I don't know what the current state of modern Nap rules is. Jon's favour a more traditional approach, which encourages attacks in columns and rolling musketry with an attritional methodology for combat resolution.
On a side note, if you re-read the Sharpe books in the order they were written you can spot where Cornwall reads "Forwards into Battle" and British infantry tactics in the books change.
Anthony, from the historical accounts, the French launched piecemeal attacks starting from the French left and working right. The 1st Legere went again against Kempt and suffered an unlikely catastrophic collapse. Kempt chased these crack French troops away within 15 minutes. Then the French 42nd Line attacked. It was similarly repulsed. Seeing that, Peyri's brigade of foreigners had seen enough and retired. By then, the battle had been decided.
DeleteIn these two replays, the French attacked across a broad front much different from their historical counterparts. That explains a much more attritional and bloody fight rather than historical push-over.
Certainly an important book, which I hope wargamers still read.
DeleteGraham, the Poles you commanded were not better quality that than historical counterparts. In game terms, I rated them rated poor; same as I would rate their historical equivalents.
DeleteI disagree with Oman that the French attacked in column at Maida. The contemporary evidence is pretty clear that Compere deployed into line before pressing forward. Do these rules follow a more traditional approach? Depends upon your perspective of 'traditional' I suppose. Can a solid British firing line stop an attack in column? Yes. Will it always? No. Can an unsupported attack column penetrate a solid British line without first softening up the defenders. Chances are low. These are excellent topics for a Designer's Notes discussion.
All of Paddy's books are worth a read. My FiB is a 1991 edition, and signed to me as well so it is a treasured possession.
DeleteOne of the things to be remembered is that this battle takes place before the Peninsula War and the Walcheran expedition, but after the Egyptian campaign. British forces were small and professional, so this size battle suited them just fine. Added to that is that they had no reason to fear the French, unlike most of the rest of Europe. The 1st Legere might have been crack troops, but they held no mystique for the British forces involved. With generally weak forces, comparatively, attacking piecemeal was just asking for it. Historically perhaps Reynier just thought that throwing one elite unit against the end of the British line would do the trick.
DeleteJon - I did say "might" in respect of the Poles. The other thing was that I wasn't tracking dice rolls for either side, so I don't know who was lucky and who was not - other than Steve's double 6 at the start I don't recall outrageous bad luck. I rolled my fair share of good low dice in the centre, which might have been why we held on and pushed so hard. I can't comment at all on the other game you played and how the luck played out. As I've indicated, Nappys aren't something I do a lot, despite having a good selection of books lying about. It is a period I'm unlikely to go back into as there's a lot of info about, and the challenge of getting it right is quite high. Oman at a tactical level is a disaster area, and he's a poor historian. Even in my small area of expertise there's clear evidence of him making stuff up to fit a thesis. As far as I can tell, no credible historian of the period has agreed with Oman on this subject since the mid-late 1980s. We have similar issues with people who use his Middle ages warfare book uncritically.
DeleteFull marks on the punning title. I doff my cap sir!
ReplyDeleteThankyou very much. I a-vale-d myself of an opportunity.
DeleteBa-da-boom. I bet you will be here all week...
DeleteYup. As discussed last night, not going anywhere.
DeleteGraham, excellent account of the battle. I enjoyed that. Hope the players did too. What I am slowly discovering is that multi-player games with three players per side and played remotely can consume much more time than the equivalent F2F games even when fighting a relatively small historical battle. I reckon it may take almost twice as long as in-person to reach a decision. Still, we did field a lot of troops for this one with about a dozen BMUs per side. I need to continue working to fit these battles into a three-hour, weeknight (for you) session. for me, it's a challenge. Thanks for playing.
ReplyDeleteIt was a good game, and an interesting scenario. Really manageable size. Multi-player games take longer in any event, and we do enjoy to chat and bicker during the games, which doesn't help. We also have a lot of "move it there - no put it back!" I await your write up.
DeleteLooking at my camera, I did not take many photos. You guys kept me hopping. My write-up may not be a lengthy, photo-heavy composition. I may simply point readers to your account.
DeleteI think some of my comments here may have fallen into a black hole or I didn't publish properly?
It is a challenge documenting the game and running it. Your missing comments are now in the feed. My spam filter seems to work on a random basis. You are in good company. It often hides stuff from Bob Cordery.
DeleteMerry Christmas! This is the second version of this game I've seen, and in both it sounds like it was a fun time.
ReplyDeleteIt's a really good sized scenario for the table top, to be sure, and more balanced than history would suggest.
DeleteGood game! I am interested in following your games and reading comments.
ReplyDeleteAll Jon's work. He's a man who paints figures like you. Beautiful in every way.
Delete