Saturday 13 April 2019

The Battle of Falkirk - take 2


Last month I finally fielded my paper Jacobite armies in a refight of the battle of Falkirk (all the gory details can be found here).  On that occasion we used Black Powder, a set of rules I'm very familiar with and which I think are pretty good for all periods.

In the post and the subsequent comments my opponent, Anthony, and I had mentioned that the rules that come with the Peter Dennis book seemed a bit daunting.   This prompted a comment by Andy Callan, author of the rules, that his rules were a lot more streamlined than Black Powder so, taking that as a bit of a challenge, we decided to re-fight the game using Andy's rules.

As Andy pointed out in his comments,his rules stretch to 5 whole pages with another page devoted to design philosophy... would these be detailed enough to give a challenging game?

The rules include a deployment system which we didn't use as we were playing one of the scenarios in the book but this looks quite interesting. It uses playing cards to initially deploy regiments: players then try to redeploy into period appropriate formations  but once one side has met it's 'deployment conditions'  the game starts, even if the other side isn't quite ready.

In the main rules units fire first and then move (if they haven't fired) which makes for some interesting decisions about when to unleash that initial volley from the redcoats.  The fire and combat values vary for each side meaning the Government troops are very powerful in firing but, as expected, the Highlanders are very effective when charging.  An interesting rule for the Highlanders is that when a regiment of, for example, 6 stands advances it gradually shrinks in frontage which reflects the troops bunching up into a mass as they move forward.  It means the Highlanders will attack with a narrower frontage unless they decide to halt and redress their lines (which seems like a bad idea when faced with angry redcoats with muskets!).

Movement is suitably limited...troops in this period weren't the most mobile... and if troops are Raw or become Shaken then they can do even less.  Highlanders and cavalry are fast but move a variable distance.

Morale is pretty decisive.  We found that once a unit began to lose stands then they would quite easily rout.  As they pull back this forces other units to test and it can become very infectious as I found to my cost!  Due to the brevity of the rules we made a couple of assumptions;

  • that each lost stand added to the morale minuses (not just the ones lost in the active turn)
  • that hits over the target to remove a stand didn't carry over...not sure about this but it made record keeping easier

We very quickly found that these were a really interesting set of rules...as each turn progressed we'd find another facet of the rules which made us go, 'hmm...that makes sense'.  They certainly captured the feeling of warfare in this particular setting and they'd be equally suitable for other settings such as the French Indian Wars with very little tweaking.


So how did the battle go?  Let's just say I demonstrated very ably that I can lose a battle regardless of which rules we were using!  My line of Highlanders advanced at different speeds which meant they attacked piecemeal and once one unit routed on my right flank, the whole flank decided to join them.  That might be my only criticism of the rules...morale failures seem very infectious and it appeared very easy for units to scatter, although maybe that's just my loser's sour grapes!  :)

The Jacobites advance


Cavalry clash on the right flank

Bonnie Prince Charlie gives a last minute pep talk to his men, but too late
to stop them all running away!

15 comments:

  1. Interesting to read about your game and the rules. I have 40mm figures for this period and might try them out.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I was very impressed with them and the army books are very affordable

      Delete
  2. Very glad to hear you took up the challenge! My intention was to produce a unique set of rules for a unique set of tactical circumstances. Wargamers used to more traditional rules might find themselves shocked by the way things quickly get out of their control on the papery battlefield. Cope at Prestonpans and Charlie at Culloden must have felt much the same way...
    Let me know here if you have any questions about the rules. Space restrictions meant I could not spell everything out. Andy

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Andy, we loved your rules! I have never liked generic rules that try to accommodate different periods by adding a few special rules and much prefer period-specific rules where possible. May I also say that having read your Wars of the Roses rules over the weekend I'm itching to try them out! By the way, were we right not to carry over hits on a stand from turn to turn?

      Delete
  3. Been using these rules with my '45' project and find them very interesting and reflect the field battles well , not sure how they would handle 'what if' and meeting engagements scenarios

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. The deployment system looks interesting but we didnt try it out. I think planned scenarios are probably better

      Delete
  4. Very interesting. The rules sound like they have two key components for me. Fire then move, highlander bunching a they charge. Now tempted to get a copy. I must admit to being a bit sniffy about paper digs, but every time I see them, including in your pics, they look great.

    ReplyDelete
  5. I failed miserably with the paper figures but the book is worth it for the rules .

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. They're pretty affordable books so could be worth it for the rules alone

      Delete
  6. It was a great game and I am completely converted to Andy's rules. In fact I went and bought the Wars of the Roses book just because I knew Andy's take on that period would be innovative and realistic-they were! The Peter Dennis books are worth buying for the rules alone but I hope one day I might be able to produce good-looking paper armies from my WoR book as Alastair has done from his Jacobite book.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Now I am wondering if the rules are available separately, as I have some of the recent Kickstarter Jacobites.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Well done Anthony, for following up with the WOTR. Another quirky set!
    As the '45 rules, I hadn't considered the question of whether or not to carry forward spare hits. Losing a stand always provokes a Morale test so maybe that is sufficient jeopardy.
    Doug, sorry but the rules are not available separately and won't be unless/until Helion waive the copyright. But go on...why not buy the book anyway?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Get thee behind me Santa... seriously, I am trying to cut back the wargames expenditure a bit. For a few years I just accumulated so much stuff that I am unlikely to ever finish it all, and I'm old enough to hate the waste inherent in the idea of buying a book for the rules, and discarding the paper soldiers. Maybe I will find someone who bought a second copy of the book for the paper soldiers and wants to sell the rules :)

      Delete
  9. Andy, thanks for your reply-it made much more sense to us not to carry hits forward so we didn't. Re your WOTR rules I found it refreshing that armies have to form up in discrete blocks (Wards) and can't manoeuvre sub-units as if they were Napoleonic battalions, a fault far too common in almost every set of ancient/medieval rules. By the way I've just ordered the ECW book..!!
    Doug, you can always use the paper figures as a painting guide if you don't want to make paper armies. The rules alone really are worth the price of the book(s).

    ReplyDelete