Home Forums Medieval Fighting the Genpei War with 'Bag The Hun'

This topic contains 7 replies, has 6 voices, and was last updated by Usagitsuki Usagitsuki 3 days, 17 hours ago.

Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)
  • Author
    Posts
  • #126124
    Usagitsuki
    Usagitsuki
    Participant

    I’ve been working on a set of Genpei War skirmish rules based on Too Fat Lardies’ WW2 air combat rules ‘Bag The Hun.’ At first, and indeed second, glance it may seem like a crazy idea to use a set of WW2 aircraft rules for medieval Japanese skirmishes. However, I think it provides a useful example of how looking outside the obvious period or genre can be rewarding. Wargamers tend to be rather conservative when it comes to rules. If you’re playing a game in the early 19th century Europe, you’ll use Napoleonic rules etc. But where it comes to warfare that isn’t typical of the period, sometimes it’s better to look further afield. If you wanted to model Wellington’s campaigns in India for example, you may be better off using late 19th century colonial rules and changing the weapons rather than using Napoleonic rules with a lot more additional rules to represent warfare very different from Europe.

    With that in mind, the initial thought for a Genpei War skirmish game came from reading Karl Friday’s “Samurai, Warfare and the State in Medieval Japan.” In his reconstruction of late Heian warfare, Friday suggests that it “involved individuals and small groups circling and manoeuvring around one another in a manner that bore an intriguing resemblance to dog-fighting aviators.” This led me to try and see if it were possible to convert a set of dog-fighting rules to a period 700 years before the invention of powered flight. I decided on ‘Bag the Hun,’ mainly as it was the only one I knew of that didn’t involve writing orders every turn…..

    First, it’s important to point out that in some older history books, it’s said that Heian period warfare consisted of a serious of single combats that followed on from individuals issuing ‘challenges.’ I don’t think any serious historian believes this anymore, even Stephen Turnbull has pretty much given up on it in his last Osprey volume on the Genpei War. There are various theories on how Heian warfare was conducted, but most of these are only available in Japanese, so Karl Friday’s theory is rather more accessible to the English reader, and it’s this that has provided the model here.


    ^Minamoto bushi appear out of the sun.

    The dominant warrior of the Genpei War was the mounted archer. However, the Japanese mounted archer differed significantly from the equivalent on the Asian mainland. There were 3 main factors that contributed to a different battlefield role. Firstly, Japanese bows were much weaker than the composite, re-curved bows of the Asiatic horse archer, greatly reducing their effective range. Secondly, the heavy armours of the period provided protection that further reduced the effective archery range to little more than ten metres. Lastly, the geography of Japan itself was very different. There are no large flat areas where the sweeping moves of the horse archers of the steppes could be utilised. The overall effect is a more claustrophobic battlefield ideally suited to the wargames table.

    So, where are the parallels with fighter planes? Well, a fighter has a narrow field of fire to its front. Similarly, the long bows coupled with the restricted movement of the box-like armour of the Japanese bushi, meant that they too had a restricted field where they could shoot. Effectively this was to their front-left, a bit narrower than the arc of 9 o’clock to 12 o’clock. Both forms of warfare, then, involve carefully manoeuvring in order to get a shot. A dogfighting pilot will attempt to get behind the enemy and follow them, so as to keep them ‘in the sights’ for longer. For the mounted bushi, this would mean trying to get behind and to the right of the target, to keep them in the shooting arc while moving in the same direction and better react to any attempt by the enemy to cut across to the shooter’s right. So, the tailing mechanic could be ported over.


    ^ Bad form from the Taira as they appear sneakily out of the clouds, oops I mean bushes.

    But, on a more fundamental level, a game involving mounted archers circling around each other needs to have a model that has a feel of constant movement. Clearly this is something that is similarly imperative to dogfighting games, and I think it is this basic concept from which everything else follows.

    The initial draft also simply crossed over the damage results, where pilot hits were the rider and ‘plane hits were the horse. ‘Wing damage’ became a horse injury reducing manoeuvrability, ‘gunsight damaged’ became an arm injury to the rider reducing archery ability etc. Even the presence of flak became a way to represent the intervention of infantry followers of the mounted bushi in an abstract way.

    Since then, it’s become a bit more refined, but I think the game is still recognisable as ‘Bag The Hun.’ And what began as a ‘thought experiment’ has actually turned out to be a very enjoyable game.

    "Gareth Bale is running amok here, he's running an absolute mok." - John Hartson

    #126125

    OB
    Participant

    What an interesting post.  Thank you.

    OB
    http://withob.blogspot.co.uk/

    #126167
    Darkest Star Games
    Darkest Star Games
    Participant

    This is a brilliant bit of outside-the-box thinking, kudos!  Sounds like it will work pretty well too.  I see how the card draw activation system can really work with this sort of combat, with really excellent dudes getting that extra ‘Ace’ possibility of activation too.  Can’t wait for you to give it a go and to read an AAR!

    "I saw this in a cartoon once, but I'm pretty sure I can do it..."

    #126170

    Thomaston
    Participant

    Never would have thought of this, very cool and fitting.
    I’ve onlt gone the other direction using ground rules for air games but this makes so much sense.

    Tired is enough.

    #126195
    Steelonsand
    Steelonsand
    Participant

    Agree with the other posters, that is a very well reasoned argument – and seemingly counter-intuitively, makes a lot of sense – I think the approach could even spread over to other forms of ‘Knightly Warfare’ – where individual heroes co-operate in groups but soon devolve into chivalric one on one challenges – sometimes to be disrupted by the ‘Flak’ -brought down by a foot soldier – Honour forbid that you end up in the mud having been brought low by the peasants/AA gunners –  sort of King Arthur meets Richtofen !

     

    #126199
    Usagitsuki
    Usagitsuki
    Participant

    There’s possibly the basis for some kind of chariot game there as well. Probably Homeric-style with javelin throwing.

    "Gareth Bale is running amok here, he's running an absolute mok." - John Hartson

    #126437
    Tony S
    Tony S
    Participant

    Brilliant bit of insight!    You should consider putting it into an article and perhaps sending it off to TFL for inclusion into one of their Specials.  I think Richard would love such an idea!

    #126469
    Usagitsuki
    Usagitsuki
    Participant

    I did send a version to Nick at TFL a few months ago. But if they don’t use it I’ll get it into some kind of readable shape and put it on my ‘blog.

    "Gareth Bale is running amok here, he's running an absolute mok." - John Hartson

Viewing 8 posts - 1 through 8 (of 8 total)

You must be logged in to reply to this topic.