This is a fictional battle to try out my new 2mm Napoleonic figures. The reason for having a look at this scale is the possibility of playing the largest Napoleonic battles on my maximum (7'6" x 4'6") table and not taking years to paint the figures. Each base represents a brigade and therefore suitable rules will be used. In this particular action I am using my version of Fast Play Grande Armee. Essentially this is pretty much as written with a few tweaks.
This scenario is by Tom Barkalow and is downloadable from the Grande Armee website.
The setting for this battle in the 1809 campaign and is a fictitious corps engagement assumed to be fought a few weeks after Apern-Essling. The premise is that French scouts have located an unguarded road that leads behind Austrian positions and a corps is dispatched as an advanced force to get as far along the road as possible. The Austrians detect the movement and hurriedly rush the nearest corps into a blocking position while pondering what to do next.
The French goal is to open the road being blocked by the Austrian forces and to hold it open off the table. The Austrian goal is to prevent this.
Weather: sunny.
Ground is hard
Game length is 4 turns.
Continued -
The map is for a 4'6" x 3' table with each square representing 9".
Deployment areas are as shown. The river cannot be forded and can only be crossed by the road bridge. The towns shown can each be garrisoned by 1 infantry unit. Woods are treated as rough.
ORBATS
The bases column was purely for my reference and shows the number of different strips of figures for each brigade. The casualty column was not needed - more of that below.
Figures used are all Irregular Miniatures.
Overview at start. Note no roads! My 6mm versions turned out too big so have omitted them for now. Something I will have to consider for the future. |
French 2nd Division in centre |
Austrian 1st Division |
French left flank |
French cavalry division |
French 1st Division and Corps troops. |
Austrian 2nd Division and Corps troops. |
French line from Austrian position |
Austrian 2nd Division. |
Rather than attach Grande Armee style labels, I have adapted 'Blucher's design with the unit strength displayed. This allows casualties to be marked on on the label rather than continually referring to the roster.
The French 3rd Division suffered a 'Hold' command test result and thus failed to advance with the rest of the French force.
The French had the initiative with both 1st and 2nd Divisions advancing to contact.
Part of the Austrian line is pushed back but all did not go the French way with one brigade being comprehensively repulsed (middle left).
The French 2nd Division found themselves outnumbered without the 3rd Division.
The French 2nd Division fail to break through and take heavy casualties.
The Austrian 2nd Division becomes steadily worn down with a new threat emerging on their right flank. The French cavalry division swung around the Austrian flank towards their rear (top of photo).
In response the Austrians move their mixed brigade that had been held in reserve to counter the threat (middle right).
On the French right flank, the 3rd Division finally joins in the attack and stabilises the line.
An overview at the end of the 3rd pulse in turn 1.
The French cavalry charge into the Austrian mixed brigade -
- and were repulsed. The French 1st Division suffered heavy losses but the Austrians fared little better.
On the Prussian left, the strong brigades of their 1st Division held out well against the mounting French pressure but with the French 2nd Division, having broken through the Austrian line, threatened to encircle them.
The inevitable happened with French numbers beginning to overcome the Austrian 1st Division.
With the French 1st Division reduced to just one weakened brigade, the cavalry division threw themselves back into the fray.
This photo and the following two is the situation at the end of pulse 2, turn 2. The French have pulled a brigade back to rally with losses on both sides pretty evenly spread.
A close look at the Prussian left show the 2 surviving brigades cut off from the rest of the Austrian force and in a precarious position. The French though are severely weakened with several brigades down to just one strength point.
The Prussian right is still holding with the French failing to decisively overcome Austrian resistance.
Another Prussian brigade is destroyed on their left flank by a combined French brigade attack.
Two photos of the situation at the end of pulse 3, turn 2. I called the game at this point as a French victory. Including artillery bases the Austrians had lost 9 to the French 6. The Austrians had also reached their break point but I could see little sense in continuing with the game as there was no way back for the Austrians.
So, my thoughts on this. Allowances had to be made as this was just a basic test game and I was not expecting anything earth-shattering. However, there was something lacking compared to my 6mm games with the General de Brigade family of rules. Over the past few years I have got used to seeing everything from battalions through to divisions fighting for survival or performing heroic feats of arms.
It's probably the fact that I have always struggled to really enjoy element based games as they tend to feel more like boardgames. In this game, as it progressed I started to look at each base merely as a counter with a value rather than the formation it was supposed to represent.
All that said I am not entirely giving up on these rules or 2mm Napoleonics. A large game - Aspern-Essling comes to mind, should produce a more exciting encounter.
Another aspect that caused me a little concern was the size and appearance of my bases. In my desire to make them scenic they have at least partially overwhelmed the figures. I am considering reducing the size to something like DBM 40mm x 20mm from the current 50mm x 30mm. Omitting skirmishers and having less scenic bases will hopefully make the figures stand out a little more.
I had intended to try out 'Blucher' rules but there is a conundrum that I have yet to resolve. The command and control system revolves around 'momentum' which your opponent rolls for. You are not aware of that result until you have reached a point with your orders (or momentum) would exceed the result diced for by your opponent. At that point you have to stop and your opponent takes his turn. There is no easy way around this that I have found yet when playing solo. I will therefore place on hold the testing of these rules until when or if I find a solution to this.
It's probably the fact that I have always struggled to really enjoy element based games as they tend to feel more like boardgames. In this game, as it progressed I started to look at each base merely as a counter with a value rather than the formation it was supposed to represent.
All that said I am not entirely giving up on these rules or 2mm Napoleonics. A large game - Aspern-Essling comes to mind, should produce a more exciting encounter.
Another aspect that caused me a little concern was the size and appearance of my bases. In my desire to make them scenic they have at least partially overwhelmed the figures. I am considering reducing the size to something like DBM 40mm x 20mm from the current 50mm x 30mm. Omitting skirmishers and having less scenic bases will hopefully make the figures stand out a little more.
I had intended to try out 'Blucher' rules but there is a conundrum that I have yet to resolve. The command and control system revolves around 'momentum' which your opponent rolls for. You are not aware of that result until you have reached a point with your orders (or momentum) would exceed the result diced for by your opponent. At that point you have to stop and your opponent takes his turn. There is no easy way around this that I have found yet when playing solo. I will therefore place on hold the testing of these rules until when or if I find a solution to this.
This is a really interesting post in my view. Lots to think about.
ReplyDeleteMy favourite part is the very honest assessment of the rules & the figure scale versus basing conundrum. To be frank I'm going to have a think about this!!!
Great post, I'll reread, dwell & comment again I think...
Very best wishes,
Jeremy
Thanks Jeremy. Pleased you found this useful.
DeleteAll the best
Jon
Jon, for the momentum thing. How about (this has not even been properly thought through, so with that in mind). Each time you activated a unit and act, upon completion you roll whatever dice best suits your system and if you score less than (or even equal to) the number of elements that you have so far activated, you pass play over to the other side.
ReplyDeleteI am thinking about a D10 here, but it depends if you want a straight percentage of failure, or whether 2D6 and the bell curve hinging on an average of 7 turns is more to your wants.
Anyway, it gives a semi random chance of failure, with a growing chance of failure as more units are activated and works perfectly for solo.
I have gone down the 2mm route three time (napoleonic, ECW and Ancients - The Trebbia), each time I have felt a total impartial detachment from the bases, which in one sense is what an army commander might do .... but in another sense, I tend to feel my figure gaming is about being visual. I do a lot of boardgaming so perhaps that is where I draw my line in terms of function.
Many thanks for this Norm. Something to chew on here. I am not, incidentally against boardgaming and have played occasionally over the years. Its probably the old school in me that figure gaming has to look and feel the part. I have not given up on 2mm as I see it to a potential route of playing the large battles of the period. Will have to weigh that up against possibly using fewer 6mm representing larger formations.
DeleteWill try out the smaller base and see how that looks.
Excellent stuff, Jon and I very much enjoyed your appraisal of the limitations (if that's the right word?) of 2mm. Lots to think about. As to roads, I adapted your excellent advice on acetate rivers/streams and quickly produced a large number of road sections for both 6mm and 2mm.
ReplyDeleteI will have to take an idea off you Kevin. I can see roads made of acetate being an easy answer and should be fairly quick to make. Many thanks for your comments.
DeleteAn interesting read Jon. I have tried 2mm and although I do like the look, it somehow leaves me cold. I don't think re-basing will help, given my experience as the strips are too small. Yours are some of the best I've seen and really stand out.
ReplyDeleteIn the end I stuck with my 10mm figures, sold my 2mm stuff to try and concentrate on one size/scale. However I have recently bought some more 2mm to use with Bob Cordery's gridded rules for those quick pick up games we all need now and then.
I must admit Steve, having had another day to think about it I am gradually coming to the same conclusion. I have more than enough 6mm projects on the go and an alternative would be to use a unit representing a brigade as I do for larger ACW battles. I intend keeping the 2mm for now - they don't exactly take up much space!
DeleteVery interesting analysis from multiple gaming perspectives, thanks for the thoughts Jon!
ReplyDeleteNo probs Chasseur. Pleased you found it of interest.
DeleteHi Jon
ReplyDeleteMore please!
Regards Peter
Lol. Not completely given up on it Peter but some serious thinking to be done before continuing with 2mm.
DeleteHi Jon
ReplyDeleteReally more to do with your battle reports which I find very interesting. The scale does not matter so much,
Regards
Peter
Plenty more of those to come. If you have not seen it already, the 'My Collections and Projects' tab at the top of the page lists planned battles. Occasionally one or two change but I endeavour not to. Keeps me focussed!
DeleteHi Jon
ReplyDeleteIn light of the above comments why don't you replace the units in the final image with near equivalents in 6mm retake the image and see what comes out. I am sure now that I am reading this on a large laptop not an Android tablet that the 2mm figures look isolated and lost in the landscape of your excellent boards.
Regards
Peter
Hi Jon, do not know why but the above comment went before I had finished editing, I think the figures although giving a realistic range of battle on the boards do look isolated. go to 6mm and I suppose the artillery range is not realistic. Some more thinking required here, still a very useful exercise that is stretching some grey cells across the globe from your followers.
ReplyDeleteRegards
Peter
I am not sure quite what I was expecting, probably not entirely dissimilar to 6mm when I used large bases for them. But is not the case with 2mm. I agree that as the game progressed and brigades were lost they did become isolated. Onward and upward for 6mm methinks!
DeleteAs much as I love my 28 mm figures, I have come to really appreciate your wonderful 6mm figures. The 2's, though leave me completely cold, and if anything, i think it's worse once they actually take the field. They just look like boardgame counters. Cardboard would be faster and cheaper! :-)
ReplyDeleteSorry Peter. I have just picked this up! For some reason your posts are not emailed to me. I think part of the problem is also the way I have based them overwhelming the figures.
DeleteSorry for dredging up this old post. I just reread it and I play Blücher solo a lot. The problem with the momentum dice is quite easy to solve. Instead of ordering your troops, you put dice next to them, showing the order you want to move them. Put 1's next to the units of a corps you want to activate as a corps, then 2's for the next, them maybe 3, 4, 5 for individual units thereafter. After that you can roll the momentum dice and see which units can actually move. It gives you some hidden knowledge as to which units can't move that you won't have in a two player game, though. But I usually plan my moves beforehand and then just check which ones go through.
ReplyDeleteI play in 6mm but basically have the same problem sometimes. You field armies of 20.000+ soldiers per side but the table looks empty. I condensed the table somewhat to alleviate this but still don't have a good solution. In battalion scale the table is teeming with soldiers and it looks like a spectacle.
Many thanks for your thoughts on this. Looks like a potential solution for the Blucher Command & Control system and will bear it in mind. As you may have seen elsewhere I am placing my 2mm figures on 'hold' for now and will consider revisiting it at some point in the future.
DeleteI am also considering doing something along the lines of what you have done and using movement trays to accommodate my smaller bases.
Movement trays are quite interesting and challenging in my experience. Mine are just green colored cardboard but they stick out to much among the game mat and bases and give no stats or name of the unit. I have been experimenting with some form of attached label where you can write stats/names on with a dry erase marker pen. Problem is the plastic foil to write on is notoriously hard to glue onto anything ;)
DeleteIn the end, with your numbers of figures and dedication to painting large scale battalion games are always a possibility and they look gorgeous.
Thanks for that Pascal. The problem is one of time. Not sure I am going to live long enough to paint all I would need alongside my existing projects. The thought of playing out those large battles in the same way I did with Waterloo would be fantastic.
DeleteThis looks great Jon. I really like the grand tactical effect that you have achieved.
ReplyDeleteI can understand that they are not for everyone, but I really like Irregular's 2 mm range. I picked up some a few years back. My (slightly tongue-in-cheek) aim was to play a wargame on an aircraft dinner table (or a small area at least)--modern airline rules would prevent this, unfortunately! I had a bit of a go with them and then have left them for many years. I have recently pulled them out again and have them amongst my painting so as to i) finish them and ii) add them to other scales of figure to play Napoleonics at a range of scales (figure, ground and operational). After much musing I settled on square bases (30 mm x 30 mm for infantry and cavalry and 15 mm x 15 mm for a gun and crew). These were inspired by the Polemos General de Division and Marechal de l'Empire rules for 6 mm figures. I plan that they will be able to be used for large scale games (each base representing a regiment or brigade, probably with an adaptation of Napoleon's Battles) or down-scaled for smaller scale games when each base could represent a regiment, battalion, or even smaller (a range of battalion-scale rules could apply). I may use them in their own right, but chiefly to have them as part of games that scale in and out to focus on a particular section of the battlefield with larger figures or zoom back to the overview of the battle in its entirety with the 2 mm fellas. Hopefully I'll be ready to have some sort of a go at this come the end of the year.
How have your own ideas for the 2 mm figs progressed since this game?
You have some interesting ideas there James. I particularly like the idea of zooming in and out of a battle. My 2mm are on the back-burner for this year as I concentrate on my 6mm. Not sure yet for the future. I have seen examples of 2mm figures on small bases and they are definitely more prominent. So easy to lose them on a large or detailed base. I also placed skirmishers which, with hindsight, I would not do again. Just adds more time in painting and basing for no meaningful gain. I too like the Irregular figures and not giving up on them yet.
DeleteThanks for responding Jon.
DeleteI really like the look of your basing in the photos above. Of course they are small, but the overall look is good, gives a broad, strategic look and feel to the battlefield.
My comment above was long enough already, so I did not say that I have based three stands of line infantry with skirmisher 'ribbons' (cut into two or three bases). For a bit of variety, I've arranged the line infantry one behind the other, two up one back and in echelon. The cavalry is four bases in two lines. I'm doing a few different things 'concurrently', but hope to have something to post in a month or two.
Sounds good James. Look forward to seeing the results.
DeleteI know this is a an old post. Hope you are still plugging away with 2mm.
ReplyDeleteIf you like the idea of 40mm x 20mm base sizes you could try DBN.
Many thanks for your comment and recommendation John. I have not given up on 2mm as yet but is on the back burner while I progress with my 6mm projects. It will be the case though that I will be looking at potential rulesets to use should I return to 2mm in the future and will bear in mind your suggestion.
DeleteIn regards to the "Blucher" momentum in solo using 11 playing cards (as a short deck) and a joker works well. Merely set two cards aside from the 11 and shuffle the remainder with the joker. Than put the two cards back on top of the short deck and draw cards as you perform moves. When you draw the Joker you have no more momentum. In regards to basing the 2mm I find it looks best treated the same as a 6mm unit with a base just large enough to prevent tipping. My current method is with a paper map under plexiglass using a Croupier's Stick with sticks to control movement distance (Not fully tested). For 2mm Rules 2x2 Napoleonics, and OneTwoOneTwomm are designed for it.
ReplyDeleteMany thanks for those suggestions Wargame Addict. Very helpful. My 2mm project is on the backburner at present but if it does get resurrected I am considering rebasing closer to how you suggest. It would fit closer to my own style of gaming rather than have one base representing a brigade or division.
Delete