Friday, January 7

Weekly Musings # 1 - ACW mini game

"Hood's men began the assault at 4 p.m., immediately overwhelming Warren's two regiments, the 5th New York (Duryée's Zouaves) and 10th New York (the National Zouaves). Within the first 10 minutes of contact, the 500 men of the 5th New York had suffered almost 300 casualties, 120 of them mortally wounded. This was the largest loss of life of any infantry regiment in a single battle during the entire war. The Zouave regiments had been wearing bright red and blue uniforms, and one of Hood's officers wrote that the bodies lying on the hill reminded him of the Texas countryside when the wildflowers were in bloom..." (from the Wikipedia article on the battle - my highlight..)

First post of the new year.. in the words of the Ramone's.. "Look out below!!"

Without a doubt one of the wargaming highlights of the Christmas period was/is the anthology [clicky] that Norm publishes on his blog - the reader of my end of the year blog/review will have known that there was a curious case of ennui in the Steve the Wargamer loft-waffe over the course of the second half/two thirds of last year, but one of the articles in his anthology has only gone and resulted in little metal men manoeuvring on Steve the Wargamers table top for the first time in 9 months!

The article in question was the skirmish/mini-battle based round the "The destruction of 5th New York Zouaves" at Second Manassas (or Second Bull Run according to your leanings)..  no idea why, but it really caught my imagination, and as I am increasingly these days a smaller battle, smaller game type of wargamer, I immediately hot footed it up to the loft to have a go myself..

So the scenario posits a part of the battlefield where two isolated Union regiments protecting a battery of artillery, are attacked by three regiments of Confederate infantry, forerunners of a bigger Confederate push on the day..

Setup..  
  1. all units start the game at full strength
  2. all Confederate regiments were described as 'Veteran', in the rules then they are classed as 'Zouaves' for firing/melee (+1 basically). 
  3. On the Union side the unit representing the 5th were of course Zouave, but the other infantry (representing the 10th) were classed as regulars, as were the artillery.
  • My rules don't account for senior officers but for this game I fielded them with the proviso they had 4 strength points they could allocate to whomever they wanted throughout the game..
  • To represent the initial skirmish in the woods that resulted in the 10th being ejected (and pretty roughly handled) immediately before the main feature, I allowed the Confederates one D6 of casualties on them before the game started - they threw well inflicting 5 points of damage (33% casualties before the game even started!)
  • Seven turns  only - the Confederates get a major win if they destroy the artillery, a minor win if they destroy both Union infantry regiments, the Union win by denying the Confederacy either of those..
Game:

Turn 1:

The Confederate infantry started out of range so advanced rapidly - the artillery inflicted their first casualties on the Confederate regiment to their front...


Turn 2:

A fairly early observation was that the Union were throwing well in this game and since that decides not only what unit activates first, but also of course casualties, they were moving and firing first a lot of the time meaning their casualties affected the Confederate units when their time came to activate..

At this point the Confederate regiments had closed to long musket range..


Turn 3:

A real blood bath this turn with both sides dealing out damage, and the Confederates now concentrating the fire of two regiments at the artillery..  they are not getting all their own way however, and the Confederate regiment on the left (following) is getting battered..


Turn 4:

Both commanders allocate their command points, the Confederate brigadier to the aforesaid regiment of foot, the Union commander to the artillery..  


Turn 5:

Further exchanges of fire - the Confederate commander is only waiting for the optimal moment to charge forward..  (in our rules unless it is flank or rear, you need a 5 strength point [SP] advantage over your enemy to be able to charge home) - this move would see that Union regiment on the left (following) falling below the 5SP difference..

In the first blood of the game the Union Zouaves cause the middle Confederate regiment to break and run - sheer weight of firepower has seen them done for..


Turn 6:

...and having thrown well for initiative - the Confederate regiment charges home and despite a retaliatory volley from the Union regiment sends them barrelling off the field, and at the same time opening up the Union flank..  Worth noting, that at this point in time, because of Confederate target priorities the Union Zouave regiment is unbloodied and at full strength. The artillery however is not, and uses it's move to limber up and start withdrawing..


Turn 7:

Talk about down to the wire.. initiative would be key for this move but two against one is always going to be difficult... the Union commander orders the Zouave regiment to turn and face the greater threat but this opens them up to a flank charge from the other severely depleted Confederate regiment - they charge home (and I was sure I could hear a tiny rebel yell) inflicted a huge number of casualties on them (12 for the record - flank and Zouave bonuses outweighed the casualty penalties)...  following up with a volley from the other Confederate regiment and the Union Zouaves were simply destroyed...  as were their historical counterparts..


End turn 7:

Boom.. 


The butchers bill..  exclamation mark indeed..  Pyrrhic victory for the Confederacy

Post match analysis:
  • right up to the last move I thought the Union were going to win it, and in fact, they could have if the damn Zouaves had just withdrawn instead of turning to face the onslaught (I think the idea was I was trying to save against any encroachment or fire on the artillery as they were on their last legs) - what a final melee though!
  • the idea of the commanders with their "strength point donation" ability has legs.. it goes against the ethos of the rules; they are quick play - and the moment you put in a flavour of  "saving throw" mechanism you extend the game, but it's an interesting mechanic though, and I will write it into the rules as an "optional" (along with some other idea's on points donation)
  • Cheers for getting some muscles and synapses working again after a long period of inactivity, Norm!

Further reading:

20 comments:

  1. Looks like an excellent little game Steve.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Paul/Grimsby - not exactly Waterloo but it got the little men put on the table after far too long.. :o)

      Delete
  2. Nice to see you back in action Steve. Further proof that it isn't necessary to have a large number of figures for a good game. Very enjoyable. Jim

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Jim - I blame you and Norm for everything that happened.. :o)

      Delete
  3. Grand to see you and your ACW figures back in action! I hope it inspires you to further effort in the coming year!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cheers David, and it has actually.. stay tuned..

      Delete
  4. That's a nice little game Steve and as others have said, you don't need loads of units on the table to get a great game in. Something I think all of us should try and remember, including yours truly!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. SteveJ. you are bang on.. I think given the effort involved the temptation is to add everything and the kitchen sink when we get the little men out, but a small game like this can often hit the spot more effectively..

      Delete
  5. I like those ACW rules. very neat adjustments to the OHW stable of rules!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks DF.. I do like tinkering with rules, and the Neil Thomas one's are perfect for that, the activation method however is purely down to DG, and I love it.. especially the solitaire/solo benefit of making one side decide allocation before the other

      Delete
  6. Job well done by both you and Norm. Hopefully this is good omen for the new year.

    ReplyDelete
  7. Good to see you’ve managed to shake off the ennui. My own is just beginning to slip off.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Nundanket - ennui was/is particularly discombobulating... I have come to the conclusion that the old "stiff upper lip" may have a grain of truth in it.. just keep bashing away and in the end you seem to work through it... I found/find it far too easy to sit back and just "do nothing"..

      Delete
  8. I agree with Steve - a good reminder that in wargaming, as in many aspects of life, less is more! Yay to the Rebs for winning - they seemed to be up against it for most of the game!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Rross - definitely - charging deployed artillery is mad..! :o)

      Delete
  9. Steve, thanks for the mention and that sure was a tight game and a nice excuse to get the zouaves out onto the table. Also great for a solo game that what you think is going to happen doesn't. It's funny, one might assume that three units per side would not create an engaging, dynamic game, but this scenario does exactly that.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Cheers Norm - and thanks for the anthology - it was a cracking read!

      Delete