Forum Replies Created
-
AuthorPosts
-
vtsaogamesParticipantThank you.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantWith Crossfire a going concern in my group, painted up some Esci/Italeri Soviet infantry in summer uniforms. Won’t win any painting contest but they’ll be on the table after varnishing and basing.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
22/08/2023 at 21:33 in reply to: Any Crossfire veterans out there? I could do with a little help. #189891vtsaogamesParticipantA fire-group: one squad/section is the fire-group leader. Other participating squads/etc. must be within a base width of the leader and of the same platoon. Usually limits it to 3 squads.
Crossfire: all must be of the same platoon, but no distance requirement. All must be able to see the platoon CO and the target. The PC must be able to see the target also. so the platoon (and attached (HMG) don’t need to be in close proximity. A company commander can organize a crossfire of unattached HMGS. Not near doing this with my collection.. yet.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantAnd three more games, introducing our newest recruit to the joys of automatic weapons and off-table artillery. details here.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantVery nice! 15mm?
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantThank you, gents. This is a zombie thread, coming back to life after two years!
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantI played a fair bit of Square Bashing back in the day and we generally found the game to be quite balanced, if rather dice dependant. I switched to historical scenarios after a while so didn’t bother with points etc. If you’ve got stuff based at one base per company, Great War Spearhead works very well. Division and up.
Thanks for the tip. I had GWS mixed up with Over the Top. Never got around to trying the latter, writing style didn’t grab me. I sold my copy during a rules purge some years back. I note GWS II is stand-alone, don’t need to buy the original Spearhead.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantWhy do you think FM makes it more likely German FOOs would be in touch with their artillery?
Because Dunnigan thought so back in the day. What can I say, I’m no expert on radios, beyond listening to some good stations over the internet; WWOZ roots music from New Orleans, Hatteras Radio from the Outer Banks.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantOnly knew of the Lardies version, will have to give these a look. Divisional, eh? I have German, British and French for mid-late war in 15mm, and British-Indian-Aussie vs. Ottomans in 10mm.
Thank you.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantMost excellent, thank you!
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantAgreed they often didn’t work, as 1st Parachute found at Arnhem. But one per battalion? Means that Soviet infantry had less chance of responding rapidly to changing conditions. Also means that their tanks had to operate within visual range of the lead tank, which wagged flags out of the turret hatch.
German C&C would vary vary from radios working (faster response) to not working. Below battalion level, Soviets don’t have radios at all, where the Germans are when things go wrong.
Just thinking in terms of C&C rules. Germans had FM radios while Soviets had AM. Means German FOOs were more likely to be in touch with their artillery.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantThank you for this, will give Barrage a pass. Complex rules went the way of bell bottoms for my crew.
We played a bit of Square Bashing a few years ago, mostly Brits vs. Huns. A number of games saw defenders winning every game, sometimes close, sometimes not. Then we tried one with my 10mm Mesopotamia figures. The Turks attacked and got absolutely creamed. Realistic, but not much fun.
I do have a 9×13 hex mat, 4 inch hexes. Maybe I’ll have to try my hand at Great War rules. Maybe not.
I have a copy of Trench Hammer, will have to give it a go.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantWhere did you get that fort? Are they still for sale?
Needs a covered way and glacis but maybe I could knock those up.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantUseful opinions, I must think about it.
OTOH if they are not happy in the open, it would hinder their efficacity and/or morale, even if good shots. Anyway the rules should discourage players to let them fight in the open. There are different ways to do it, more or less smartly…All good ideas. They were most at home in the woods. The excellent film “Black Robe” has the Jesuit (the black robe) panicking when lost in the woods. His Indian guides are perplexed after finding him. How could he be lost in the woods? Great movie. Wife liked it too. The Jesuit is quite handsome.
Thanks to you gents for the compliments.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantMy take is that they’re not worse shooters in the open, but not happy there, no cover. They are much happier (and dangerous) in the woods. But then I don’t know the Argad rules.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipant… I read something about it this last couple of days when I was getting my head around my original question and the answers. But I can’t for the life of me remember where it was!
The story of my life.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipant[PS Napoleon? Self aggrandising Johnny come lately standing on the shoulders of giants and stealing other people’s ideas without attribution.]
Ooo, now you’ve done it…
Apparently it was because he was a Minifig among Hinchliffes.
Smaller, better sculpted, and in an overly dramatic pose?
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantAfter all my prattling about the changing nature of the battlefield, it must go back to improved, faster drill. Battalion commanders no longer had to make advance appointments to form squares. The Swiss battalions at Rossbach had advance notice: they could see the rout of the marching columns closest to the Prussians. They were further away.
Close order drill kept evolving. Back in the days of pike squares, some chap with a chart of square roots had to be found to figure out how to keep the number of files and ranks the same.
By the 18th century, battalions were divided into 4 equal divisions (small d) regardless of the number of companies. which were administrative units, not tactical. Columns of platoons (half divisions) were intended for marching and not combat. The average battalion could only form line by wheeling platoons to the left. The increased drill of the Prussians was not so much a product of evolution as of ceaseless practice. Also, marching in step made the formations much tighter, since troops weren’t stepping on each other’s heels. Forming square was still a lengthy procedure. Sometime after the SYW, French drill went through a serious evolution. Companies became tactical units, columns of companies and divisions (pair of companies) were intended to fight as such; several different methods of deploying were developed. Forming square became something a decently trained unit could peform without an appoinment. It could be formed quickly from an attack column. Attack columns were a new feature.
Does anyone know when companies became tactical units, rather than just administrative? Likely when French and British battalions stopped having 14 or more companies, whenever that was. Seems to have been before the American Revolution. Talk about tangents…
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipant… But Vincent says the Austrians were using them in the same year at Rossbach. …So what does that do to Horse and Musket rules? Do we reflect a lack of need to form square prior to 1788ish and a compelling need to do so post French revolution until the breech loader? Is it a tweak to a whole period mechanism or a new set of rules for each subdivision? Does it constitute a ‘break point’ in rules writing? Or does it depend on the level of command/combat and therefore tactical abstraction being modelled?
French at Rossbach. Don’t recall Austrians using squares, though they later went in for columns of battalions deployed in line. Must have been quite a sight.
Grand tactical i.e. Bloody Big Battles where the basic unit is brigade or larger means not worrying about squares at all. Troops are in march column, line or massed (two lines deep).
The old WRG rules 1750-1850 had a simple rule: before 1792 infantry could stay in line and shoot cavalry who were foolish enough to attack them frontally, though raw infantry would flee from small mounted forces. From 1792 on infantry would have to form square upon first sighting cavalry, and stay in that formation until ordered to change formation by messenger or higher command. The rules were fast and fun, though the eventual discovery of various glitches put an end to our use of them.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantActually I think I do know a little about this from the Austrian perspective. An early notable successful use of approaching in multiple columns was the Austrian victory at Hochkirch (1758). This became the template that I believe was written into the Austrian 1769 regs. However, I think these still prescribed as an ideal that the artillery should travel up the central road, infantry columns either side, and the cavalry in the flanking columns. (I haven’t read the regs myself and stand ready to be corrected.) Anyway, the point is that their purpose was primarily to facilitate movement into a pre-arranged conventional battle line at a pre-determined location (Rivoli is a later great example). This is a very different creature from Napoleonic combined-arms columns designed to move and fight independently, wherever the foe might be encountered, and hold on until the other combined-arms columns could march to the sound of the guns and flexibly join in. The Austrian model is primarily logistical in purpose, the Napoleonic one tactical. Sorry, Guy, we’ve wandered a bit away from your original squares question. But insofar as it relates to what I think is a major transition between the 1750s and the 1790s, hopefully still relevant.
Agreed not quite the corps-level fix-and-fight of Napoleon, but the western theater of the SYW (thanks to my wife for gifting me Savory’s book) shows late war fights that feature much hard marching, with reinforcements arriving on the field from various directions. Brunswick was rather good at this. Pity about his nasty mortal wound in 1806. Davout was not only good, but lucky.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantAgreed that the main reason squares were used was because improved drill enabled squares to be formed in a timely fashion.
The changing nature of the battlefield required more frequent resort to the formation. The rapid expansion of continental armies (to match the French levee en masse) resulted in many newer less well-drilled units. The British, safe behind the Channel and guarded by the incomparable Royal Navy were able to rely upon a smaller professional army. Even their army doubled between 1792 and 1815, to ~200,000.
I also suspect that having troops practice forming square while being told that this formation would hold off any cavalry might have put a seed of doubt into all but the most confident infantry about their chances of holding off cavalry while in line.
At the SYW Battle of Rossbach, two Swiss regiments formed square to cover the retreat of the routed Allies. I believe they were in 4 battalion squares.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantMy two cents: one cause is the ongoing development of close order drill. Better and faster in the SYW than earlier, better yet in the 1792-1815 wars and even better with Zouave and Chasseur drill after that, until breech loading rifles made close order fit only for the parade ground.
The main cause is the larger armies and the resulting breaking up into discrete units, corps and divisions. During the SYW each army tended to march in on a single road and deploy in a single group, infantry in the center, cavalry on each flank. Prussian drill practice allowed them to deploy faster, an advantage. De Broglie figured French soldiers wouldn’t match them so he divided his infantry force into 4 divisions (before this division referred to a quarter of a battalion). Each division in theory marched parallel to the others and deployed simultaneously, rather than one grand procession. That’s how divisions were born, later merged into corps by that Corsican chap.
The increasing size of armies led to them marching on different roads, since a single large force might not see the tail of the column reach the deployed head in one day. Later battles of the SYW started to resemble battles of 1792 and later, with detached columns marching onto battlefields after the action had started. More exposed flanks for cavalry. A more chaotic deployment made cavalry more dangerous.
Further, I just read where some of Davout’s admittedly well-drilled infantry in line repulsed Prussian cavalry at Auerstadt, since both flanks were anchored.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantThat is an imposing sight. Thanks for the photo.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantBefore discovering the Funken books (in the pre-Cambrian era), I relied on guides by Jack Scruby and such: blue French, red British… Not just uniforms, but history too: while books about the history of the Napoleonic Wars weren’t that hard to find, stuff about the French Revolutionary Wars preceding them were thin on the ground, so I relied on the canned histories in various wargame rules. It was quite a few years before I discovered that the way Revolutionary France got into wars with just about every major power in Europe was by declaring war on them.
Beware the “facts” in wargame rules. Some are actual facts, others less so.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantProof reading? Spell check, more often.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantInteresting idea about that fate card. They are drawn every turn but you can hold them. Of course, nothing to stop you making a house rule.
I have nothing against the Prussians. They are my only army that is all AB figures. But they have been getting the crappy end of the stick in all these tests. Using the V&F point system, they are also greatly out-pointed. Perhaps just because they move second?
EDIT: I screwed my Prussians again: the fate card doesn’t stop them from activating, it stops them from automatically activating the first brigade. That brigade has to roll, looking for 2+ on a D6. Screwed my boys again.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantvtsaogamesParticipantI’ve purchased the Kindle edition and have begun reading it. Perhaps a scenario or two lurks in the future. Convenient that both sides have similar battalion organizations.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantYou can get away with ACW Union lads for the Danes for 1864. Most period drawings and paintings show them in great coats. You might even be able to use FPW French if you aren’t too fussy. For 1864, the battalions were expanded to regiments of 8 companies, all armed and equipped uniformly. I absolutely cannot find my copy of Svendsens book right now. I recall the maps being okay but not too special.
I used 15mm Battle Honours firing line pose in my first Oeversee game rather than my greatcoated figures because they are not nearly as nice as the firing line. Methinks Anthony Barton did the firing line and someone else did the greatcoats. For the second game I used FPW French Naval infantry. Wrong uniforms but the white snow bases looked good on the snow table.
Thank you Konstantinos, guess I know what my next reading will be.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantI see Nick Svendsen’s book is available on Kindle for $5. Kindle doesn’t do maps well. If the maps aren’t wondeful, then $5 sounds good. What say you gents who own the book? How are the maps?
Also, my NYC apartment is almost out of book shelf space, between my history books and my wife’s art books. She reads actual literature too. Amazing.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantAh, so 5 companies per battalion seems right. I am tempted to purchase just enough 15mm Danish infantry from QRF to play Oeversee with the right troops. But no more, I tell you.
The easiest way to find typos is to publish.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipant…The intended issue was 200 tap rifles and 840 smooth bores for infantry battalions, while Jæger should have 200 tap rifles, 600 rifles and 240 smoothbores. .
Earlier there was a statement that battalions would have 200 troops each, yet here we see 1,040 weapons per battalion. You see the source of my confusion…
AARs, two versions of the 1864 Battle of Oeversee first game, second game.
Warning, I don’t have any actual Danish troops. Have smelling salts at the ready.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipant>>… And who were the rebels?? Clearly I know nothing… dave
Try this.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantNot surprising that Blucher didn’t take part; I believe he was pregnant at that time wasn’t he? (Although I now understand that fascinating anecdote was based on an English literal translation of a German idiom). I’ve run through simple assaults solo a couple of times myself, before trying a new ruleset with a real life opponent. Quite helpful to figure out rules ahead of time, or even to realize that a certain set of rules was not at all appealing to me!
I wonder how many other strange tales arise from literal translations of idioms. Yeah, a few times that solo tests of new rules say to just pack it in (speaking of idioms).
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantWilliam of Orange would be so proud.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipant…It was around that time I discovered I didn’t like painting tartans…
Need to buy some of that tartan paint.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantI am happy that my 15mm figures look pretty much like the correct period. That said, I field 1805-9 Austrians at Marengo and such. At least they’re not WWII soldiers. And sue me if the facing colors might not be the exact shade.
In the American Revolution, my British fusiliers wear bearskins. And my SYW grenadiers have colors.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantSuggestion: for Shadow of the Eagles, if you have 3 Landwehr battalions and the rules suggest 50% regular / 50% inferior, make one regular, one inferior and have the third be a mix, with motivation one and training the other.
An interesting excercise. Might try it myself with SotE and Valour & Fortitude.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantVisited in-laws, so a mix of vacation and duty.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
vtsaogamesParticipantI have some Union infantry. Each strip is just under 1 inch wide and 7 or 8mm deep.
I have them mounted on 1 inch square bases in two ranks. My buddies said they’re too small so I never got past 12 bases of them. I kinda like them.
Sorry for the late reply, I was out of town and distracted upon return.
It's never too late to have a happy childhood
-
AuthorPosts
