Monday 12 August 2024

Fightin', drinkin' and mateship in Mt Barker

"Turn 1 saw the French win the initiative and add 6 ADCs."
(Caption from Steve's notes sent along with the photos)
Unter Laichling table-centre, nearest camera.

Well... a wargame and a few drinks; but the mateship bit is definitely accurate.

John provide venue and troops (aside from Mitch's limbers) and he used the Laichling scenario from Michael Hopper's 1809 scenario book, adapted where necessary for General d'Armée (second edition).

He and Steve (initially) and then Mitch (once he was able to get there) played out the first two turns the previous Thursday afternoon/evening, "...bringing the forces into contact for the proper fun" as Steve put it in an email that he sent along with photos from the first two turns. I have used his photos and notes here.

"Two of these were added to Gilly's 15th léger, in the woods on the French left (forwards tasking). Another was sent to Lorencz's skirmishers, commissioned with the attack on Unterlaichling. Mitch arrived as the French were moving or just before and took over rolling etc. for the Austrians. The French rolled 'snake-eyes' for their additional (forwards tasking) move, but still caused some panic in the Austrian lines"
"The Austrians got 5 ADCs and used a couple of these for artillery assault. Despite a re-roll, the Austrian cavalry brigade and their brigade holding Oberlaichling, hesitated. The French were successful with all of their activations."

"Turn 2 saw the French gain 11 ADCs (out of 9 dice), thanks to rolling 4 sixes. These were used for forward tasking Davout's Immortals, and continuing to rouse the skirmishers at Unterlaichling. The Austrians weren't so fortunate and subsequently suffered another one or two hesitant rolls. The Austrian ADCs were busy at the heavy battery on the hill behind Unterlaichling. Despite an embarrassment of ADCs the Bavarians also hesitated, having been fine the turn before without any interference from the brass hats."

"The Immortals surged forward (this time Gilly's brigade rolled a 3). The Terrible 57th added 18 cm (rolling an 8). The Austrians were checking rules for 'moving back'. Sounds like RETREAT! to me [Note back packs facing the enemy, JF]. Up on the hill the Austrians were trying to move forward but were struggling with congestion." 

"The French began their fire phase. The only roll of note was the columns facing the Grenzers in the woods which scored two of three possible hits. Mitch shouldn't have worried. With his illegal blue dice in hand (these should be French) he delivered some devastating fire left and right. The French skirmishers at Unterlaichling suffered the brunt, losing a stand. However, with great rolls comes a reckoning. The Grenzers in the wood (near Unterlaichling) panicked and lost their fire discipline. Oooh. Mitch was right to worry."

This was where I joined in.

I left home on Thursday morning, arriving a little after midday. "Good timing," said John, "Steve and Mitch should be here around 1 pm."

That gave me a bit of time to see the table for real, to hear more about what had transpired and so be ready to 'leap in'. Steve arrived first and, realising that Mitch had been delayed, we made a start.

John had a 'wicked' plan for allocating commands. He wrote little cards for Austrian and French right and left and then we drew from those available. I got the French right, Steve the Austrian right, John the Austrian left, which would leave Mitch the French left once he joined us. For the time being, I was the sole French commander.

Steve had set-up an attack on the Grenzers in the small wood beside Unterlaichling, so I duly sent Lorencz's lead troops in under infantry assault (having rolled well for ADC availability).
With their lost 'fire discipline' (indicated by the smoke), the Grenzers inflicted minimal casualties,
... and were easily swept from the field. 

Overview of the centre of the table, from the French side, featuring Unterlaichling in the middle of the photo.
From the (roughly) northern end of the table, the independent brigade of the French 15th léger progressing towards the Austrian right flank, while the bulk of Gilly's men moved towards the Austrian line north of Oberlaichling. The French had also managed to bring on reinforcements—a small brigade of light infantry (top right of photo).
Mitch had arrived, so took over the French left, continuing the advance towards the Austrian defenders (above and below).

I tried to organise Lorencz's men for a feint against Unterlaichling, while the newly arrived reinforcements headed to support the French centre-left.
A successful roll to bring on the Bavarian cavalry bolstered the Franco-Bavarian right, while the Austrian light cavalry floundered in the heavy going (indicated by the areas of lichen) and due to hesitant brigade activation rolls.
Another particularly successful roll for ADCs—not quite matching Steve's record in the first turn, but a 'yield' of 10 was d@mned fine—allowed us to allocate infantry assault and forwards to 'The Terrible' 57e ligne.
Mitch's dice rolling did the rest. His blue dice now legally playing French! This was the beginning of too many poor rolls by Steve.

Clearly David Brown—or the Browns plural, since his son is now a co-author (which must be a huge buzz for David, I reckon)—likes the dice to feature heavily in his/their games. The random factor is given a large weighting in General d'Armée and its impacts are entirely random.

Brigades have a one in three chance of being hesitant. There is a one in six chance that a (non-élite) infantry unit will lose its fire discipline, or receive a fatigue casualty if artillery (increased from one in 12 in the first edition), and a one in 36 chance that an artillery battery will go low on ammunition or a unit will achieve a 'destiny' roll (bonus) when firing or charging.

This emphasis on the random factor has been increased in the second edition, since all combat modifiers are played out by adding or subtracting dice or re-rolling one or more die, rather than adding or subtracting factors.

The 2/57e ligne followed on and attacked the next Austrian battalion, but was not as successful this  time.
 Better rolling from Steve and much poorer by Mitch resulted in a bloody nose and a retreat.

Before Unterlaichling, Lorencz's men had copped a pasting from the Austrian guns on the high ground. John's rolling nearly as good as Mitch's.

Help was at had though as more Bavarians had arrived to bolster the Franco-Bavarian right.

A period of manoeuvre and less effective artillery fire affords these pictures featuring John's beautifully painted troops and Mitch's limbers.

Plenty of low rolls for infantry fire resulted in losses of fire discipline in the two main sectors of action (indicated by the 'smoke' markers).
A real mixed bag over on the French right. The battalion in line nearest camera incurred all nine hits in the one turn; thanks to two double-sixes for the Austrian artillery. In contrast, two of the six hits on the French battery were self-inflicted; rolls of four or less resulting in a 'fatigue casualty'.

We concluded the evening at that stage (end of turn 7).

The second part of John's 'wicked' plan came into effect the next day; our commands were re-allocated. This time John had the French left, Mitch the French right, Steve the Austrian left and me the Austrian right. Like the mercenary commanders of the previous age, or perhaps the emigré or even 'turn coat' commanders of the day, we would put our all into the service of our new 'lords'.

The pressure on the Austrian right had left brigades interpenetrated and unformed. A hesitant activation roll did not help matters.
John formed the 15e léger from the woods into l'ordre mixte ready for a big putsch,
...as did the remaining troops on the French right. 

Around Unterlaichling, Lorencz's weakened legions prepared to attack through the small wood.
The Bavarians advanced in force.
An overview of the battlefield from the (roughly) south.

On came the 15e léger.
Blunted by Austrian defensive fire of the 'helmut' boys.
More success for the French against my hesitant Austrian brigade beside Oberlaichling.

A clear shot for the battery from the recently arrived 'be-helmeted' brigade was wasted with a loss of fire discipline and fatigue casualty. 

The French light cavalry were intended to charge, assisted by a forwards command, but a real command blunder (by the French players) failed to estimate (or to measure*) the distance correctly, so they were unable to charge. The Austrians formed square in readiness for the next attempt.

*Pre-measuring is allowed in General d'Armée. We were slow to come to it as I don't think that any of us particularly like it, but it is in the rules as writ, so we began to do the 'sensible'(?), if 'gamey' thing and to check all distances during and prior to movement, more and more as the game progressed. 

On the French right, Mitch had the French and Bavarians ready for their big putsch.

On the subject of measurement. Steve used the imprimatur to the full to position two regiments of Austrian hussars, in the heavy going, at the appropriate distance to attack the Bavarian cavalry on the right flank of the Franco-Bavarian army.

Steve had to leave us at this point (end of Turn 9), leaving me as the sole Austrian commander. [He probably saw the writing on the wall, so filled his saddle-bags with the Emperor's gold and headed for greener pastures.]

Mitch was available for a bit longer, probably enough for two more turns.  It was time for some 'last turn' specials!

On came the 15e léger,
... into a mêlée,
... driving the 'helmut' heads from the table.

A little further south, their contemporaries proved a bit tougher.

The defenders around Unterlaichling blunted the Bavarian attack!

Perhaps Steve's parting gift of the cavalry poised to charge could tip the scales a bit in the Austrian's favour?
Time for some 'magic'. Two ADCs allocated to provide a C-in-C command of post of honour. Automatic activation of the brigade, recover of a casualty and a charge with glory!
Unfortunately, I had 'wasted' all of my good dice rolls on the infantry. Mitch's famed blue dice came through.
Being a cavalry mêlée, the four to one 'hits' was not completely devastating, resulting in a retreat for the unit in combat. Or should that be for both? We spent some time looking for the answer in the rules and had a long discussion about which made more sense, given the intention of a first round mêlée (or 'combat' as it is termed in the rules) in General d'Armée—which, surprisingly to us all, "... represents the psychological battle in the last stage of the Charge, where one unit would probably break before actual melee."

The rule book for General d'Armée second edition is generally clear and well written (and in a fairly large font size, so the Lardies know the demographic of their current clientele!). Still, improvements are always possible.

Rules for specific aspects are dotted throughout the chapters. There is an index and table of contents, but neither of these is sufficiently detailed to allow one to go to the precise page(s). To check a question such as 'what happens to the support unit(s) in a combat?' required us to check every page indicated in the index and then to go through the rules, chapter by chapter to try to find the answer. Either we missed it or it is not there. Being heavily invested in the rules, John was going to pose the question on the forum.

This long pause and discussion had two effects.

Firstly, I found more typos and grammatical errors. This was pretty frustrating and disappointing, given the length of time that had been taken to check the rules prior to publication (something well advertised by devotees of the system as well as the writers/designers). It's not the first time that I have considered that publishers need to ask an anal proof-reader like me to go through the text! 😀 [I am not meaning to 'blow my own trumpet', although it's good to have (small) skills (hahaha), but I reckon it is reasonable to expect such attention to detail, perhaps minute detail, isn't it?]

Secondly, we decided to call the game at that point (end of Turn 10). That was no matter as the Austrian position was weak to crumbling. More importantly, the intention of the session had been to give the rules a good 'work out' and, hopefully, to bring up so 'tricky' situations for us to work through.

What is more, we had a great time while doing so!

John is firming in his comfort and liking for the rules, so I reckon we'll be having another game at his place in the not too distant. That will be just beaut!

Thanks so much John for the game, for the sensational dinner that you provided us all on Thursday evening and to you and Vanessa for letting me stay chez vous.

A couple of final photos of the field at game's end.
The pressure on the Austrian positions is in clear evidence.

Some details of the game
Rules: General d'Armée second edition
Scenario: largely based on Michael Hopper's "Eagles Over Bavaria"
Figures: 1/72, mixture of Esci/Italeri, Hat and Zvezda, all painted by John (except Mitch's limbers which were Hat Austrian and 3D printed for the French).
Mat: vinyl material painted and flocked by John

16 comments:

  1. A beautiful looking game and quite a novel way to divvy up commands between one day and the next, James - a bit like a Scrabble type game we used to play with our kids - you just get to a point where you are in a winning position, then a "chance" card (for want of a better term) makes all players move one place to the right - and you inherit an absolute dogs breakfast of letters!
    Interesting to read your comments about proof reading of the rules, given it appears to be a Two Fat Lardies offering - have you seen Keith Flints piece on recent comments by Richard of TFL fame - here - https://keefsblog.blogspot.com/2024/08/amateur-or-professional-response-to.html worth a read and given Richard is extolling the manifest benefits of a "professional wargaming industry", it might behoove him to make sure the rules he produces and sells are "professionally" proof read and edited before being published! (I agree about premeasuring BTW although our house rules have always allowed it.....)

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Keith for your interesting, amusing and thought-provoking comment.

      Bloody hell, your family played Scrabble for keeps!
      The changing of commands was about the idea of working through the rules as a group—wargame by committee, as we jokingly called it. Of course, as the game wore on, we became more focussed on our own commands and partisan! This did not change when we change sides, happily 'going at' your previous troops. "Sorry fellas, nothing personal, it's purely who is paying for my dukedom!". It was a beaut idea and I reckon would be good to use again (esp. in a large, multi-player game played over several days). Spreads the luck and, if the case, knowledge of the rules or period.

      I read Keith's post. Most interesting. I should probably find a copy of the issue of Wargames, Soldiers & Strategy and read the article myself so as to comment on the actual rather than on Keith's thoughtful and interesting impressions. I won't though, since that would require buying the mag. I went off wargame magazines tens of years ago, when I considered the articles to be getting lighter and lighter and the commercial content more and more over-bearing! :) I'd far rather read a history book, history paper or uniform book... I have purchased several issues of 'Ancient Warfare' magazine, including recently, but to me it contains useful and insightful content (with plenty of references or leads to more). Not to mention an absence of advertorials posing as articles.

      On a slightly different tack, the 'desk top publishing' in General d'Armée is generally attractive to the eye and pleasingly not 'over the top'. A useful addition would have been for the colours to carry through the book and on to the quick reference sheet. A chapter could have a unique colour which is used for the 'splashes' of colour and that same colour then used in the appropriate tables in the chapter and on the quick reference sheet. (Also fixing the couple of mix-ups of colouring that exists presently would help). This is not a 'new' idea and certainly not mine. I have seen it used in several publications. Some of them are wargame rules.

      Delete
  2. We are on to our second game of GDA2 and I am still enjoying it so it is great to read your thoughts and comments James. I find the rules quite easy to navigate, and like the way they have put the main sections in bold next to each item in the index.

    It does feel a little dice heavy at times, although the maximum with two units per side in a reinforced melee is around ten or eleven depending on the factors. It still allows for a few odd results though, such as happened last week when an average Austrian cavalry regiment managed to bounce two veteran French units. We are finding it good fun though at the end of the day.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for your comment and input Lawrence.
      I am really pleased that you are enjoying them. John is settling into them as his 'house' set and I am and will be happy to use them more with he and the others. I'd like the dice to impact less, but it's the nature of the beast.
      I agree 100%. Putting the page in bold in the index to indicate the main text for a rule is really useful. We used it several times. It was those occasions when the word was not a keyword in the index that we found frustrating. There were quite a few of them.
      You don't happen to know the answer to the question about what happens to supports in a lost combat do you?

      Delete
    2. This has happened a couple of times in the two games we have played. The supports are subjected to the same outcome of the combat as the lead unit. If the lead unit dissipates because it has reached its casualty limit, then the support must still withdraw or retreat etc. Probably still worth double checking on the forum though as I can't see that this is explicitly covered in the rules.

      Delete
    3. Thank you for replying Lawrence.
      That was one interpretation that we came to. I was reading between the lines and focussing on the few snippets written about the 1st and 2nd round of combat, so only unit(s) involved in either round are affected. It turns out that I guessed correctly on this occasion as John has just sent me a text:
      "I got an answer to our combat results dilemma from DCR Brown. The supporting unit stays put—it was not involved in the combat."
      A few uses of unit(s) would help and also more attention to detail in the use of plural forms in the writing as well.
      One (of a number) for a coming/necessary rules errata, I'd say!

      Delete
    4. Ah yes. Thinking about it the ones that were subjected to the same result as the lead unit were involved as second round reinforcements. I'm trying to think back now as to whether we have erred, but will definitely remember that going forward.

      Delete
  3. The game is certainly good looking, I like your local switching commands idea. Your experience with the rules is interesting, it can be intensively annoying for rules to be unclear about something like combat and then be difficult to find passages. Looks like I missed the 'excitement ' about professional business versus the players. Nothing like the fury going on in the RPG industry, though.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Is it real fury or are they simply role playing?

      Delete
  4. This comment has been removed by the author.

    ReplyDelete
  5. As one of the players (with the illegal dice). I second James' comments on the enjoyable time had by all.

    Swapping the sides around worked well from the fun aspect, as well as helping keep players non-partisan.
    The battle moved slowly, but this was deliberate, as we were treating it as a training experience & referencing the RAW at every stage.
    The rules certainly create an interesting game, with results a little too dice roll dependent for my liking. But I am totally ok with this approach, it increases the fun factor & you are always in with a chance. (Especially if Steve is your opponent).

    The table looked fantastic, especially John's home made ground surface. The textured sand & grass (to match perfectly with his mini's bases) brings it all up to the next level, matching the 'eye candy' shots in wargaming magazines. The houses weren't bad either.

    Looking forwards to the next one.

    Cheers
    Mitch...

    ReplyDelete
  6. I don't think I've ever played the same game over multiple evenings like this; sounds like fun. It's nice to look at for sure. 😁
    The more you play the rules the more familiar one becomes, and that can lead to some good play as everyone gets better at knowing what is what.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Stew, you gotta try it. Big games played over several sessions are the most enjoyable kind; as far as I am concerned.

      Delete
  7. Splendid looking game,sounds like fun,I picked up the first edition, just before the second edition came out with my usual impeccable timing!
    Best Iain

    ReplyDelete
  8. Grand looking game - nice to see the figures are 1/72nd (which many of us started with). I've played General de Armee once before, and do recall the font being large enough for me to read without glasses.

    ReplyDelete
  9. It does look an excellent game. I'm very much looking forward to an oppportunity to try the rules out.

    ReplyDelete