Each commander takes on leadership of one Battle consisting of three lines of troops. While three maneuver elements may not seem like much to command, the rules offer much in tactical nuance between each of the lines and decisions are aplenty. Casualties and morale levels are tracked via a roster. Each roster is arranged in such a manner that everything needed for the commander is at-hand and available at a glance.
Without further adieu, on to the battle. Battle commentary is embedded within each game photo and arrows signify movement (white), attacks (red), and retreats (yellow).
Thanks to Richard for hosting such a fine presentation and to the group for an enjoyable gaming experience! WotR is suddenly becoming even more tempting...
For another battle perspective, please visit Graham's battle report, The Battle of Blor-e Heath.
Good to see others getting in some gaming. Of course WOTR will be coming to the dungeon at some point but I haven’t started yet 😀
ReplyDeleteWotR seems to be everywhere suddenly. Did this resurgence of interest begin with Wargames Illustrated's "Never Mind the Billhooks" rules?
DeleteAs for remote gaming, you are a big reason why my gaming has increased markedly.
Like Norms ACW effort, this looks like a nice sized, small scale encounter Jonathan. Glad you enjoyed it...when does the first order for WotR figures go in?!
ReplyDeleteThis was a nicely sized action. I think the smaller actions are more suitable to remote play.
DeleteAs for thoughts of a new project, are you suggesting I am a wargaming butterfly? I am shocked! Oh, I have been looking at vendor websites of late...
A nice little game and your annotated photos make it easy to follow the action. Thw WotR is very popular at present and certainly provides a refreshing change. I can imagine a New Year purchase will be in the offing... ;)
ReplyDeleteThank you, Steve! Do you prefer the game commentary embedded within or as regular text alongside each photo? For me, reading the text within each photo makes it easier to follow the action but my commentary real estate is limited.
DeleteAs for New Years' purchases, both you and Keith think I am easy to peg. Well, you may be correct!
Embedded certainly makes it easier to follow the action Jonathan. Sadly when clicking on the photos to enlarge them, the normal captions don't show up, which is a shame.
DeleteThanks for your confirmation. I tend to have the same issue. I will be reading a BatRep, zoom into the photo to see what is being described, then lose my place and my train of thought.
DeleteIt must be interesting playing these game remotely where in a sense you are just issuing orders to be followed by the umpire/game organiser.
ReplyDeleteYou are exactly right, Peter! It is similar to directing a movie (I suppose). I give orders to the troops and sit back and watch the action unfold. I still get to roll dice, though!
DeleteJonathan, it appears the virtual gaming is actually enabling MORE tabletop battles than before?? A silver lining to our current situation??
ReplyDeleteSteve, for me, my gaming frequency has increased off the charts. Before COVID, one F2F game per month was about average. Since November, I have been gaming twice a week. Amazing, isn't it? I have another gaming session today to make it three for the week.
DeleteAlways nice to see what the Yorkist spin doctors make out of a crushing defeat. It was a good, tense, game, and I think Richard has got something that has some excitement and decision making whilst staying true to what the WotR is about. Passage of lines is absolutely key, and having your leaders in the right place doing the right thing is essential. Most other sets for this period may give an interesting or exciting game, but they have very little to do with WotR combat.
ReplyDeleteTrebian (aka Lord Dudley)
The Yorkist spin doctors may be at work but it is a difficult task to turn a sow's ear into a silk purse. I thought my report was fair, balanced, and mostly accurate. No?
DeleteI am really enjoying Richard's WotR games. There is a lot of tactical nuance and choices; all compacted into a few Battles. This is a period I had not gamed (or thought much about) before now.
That looks a nice 3 battle action with a figure count that makes a very do-able project and as you say, with the nuance within each battle being represented to bring an engaging game.
ReplyDeleteWotR is certainly getting a lot of exposure at the moment,with a goodly number of bloggers and vloggers raising retinues.
Very doable project, Norm!
DeleteAs I wrote this battle report, my thoughts returned to your recent Bull run game and my comments about the limited number of BMUs. You game had seven BMUs and this one had six. In your game I commented about the possibility of hand of fate playing a large role in the outcome but not in this game. I wonder why? I conclude the difference is that this game is more attritional in nature with each BMU consisting of essentially three sub-units. While one die roll may wreck one of your units, it takes much dice rolling to spoil one of these large three-part Battles.
So in effect you have 18 sub-units to spread ‘effects’, though the two games may be closer in nature than you think. Under the Black powder rules, there are attack dice and saves, so various combinations can fall out of that, plus a ‘6’ always causes a disorder and a leader may be able to rally off a hit. So you could do three turns of firing and not cause enough harm against one of the units for it to matter. In that regard the dice are dampened down a little, which is more ‘small game friendly’.
DeleteMedieval battles have always been in need of interesting and nuanced mechanics to show more micro level ‘happenings’ because they are essentially 3 blocks attacking 3 blocks, usually in a head on clash. Your system sounds interesting and my own recent WotR games with Sword & Spear (Great Escape Games) and Never Mind The Billhooks have also managed to bring nuance to within each ‘battle’ formation.
One of the things I did deliberately choose to do in my last AAR was to give a very short broad-brush account of the action, instead, favouring to put most of the wordage in describing the scenario - I am trialling that after the comments Steve J recently made, but of course the consequence is that all the drama and nuance that I got is not presented in the AAR.
I think what probably more separates the games and highlights your point is that games that have more critical locations probably feel more nuanced, so your 3 battles gives three locations even though they are very close to each other, whereas my small game really only had one critical location (the gap between 5th VA and the fence at Robinson House. Perhaps it is this, more than the system itself or the number of BMU’s that are in effect.
As always, you make interesting points. For battle reporting, I think it important to include some of the nuance and exceptional events that pop out from a game. These embellishments bring the narrative to life. Like in this battle report of Blore Heath, Dudley's extraordinary re-roll to turn the melee in his favor was a critical piece of the narrative and would have been greater lessened the drama of the entire battle. Well, pointing it out also gave me a scapegoat for why Stanley lay down his arms. It was terrible luck, I say!
DeleteCritical locations? This could be a fascinating treatise to dive into further. I need to think about what you are proposing here. In the meantime, please expand!
Well, I think a table or boardgame typically needs 3 (or more) separate locations that are independent of each other. In many games these would likely default to the centre and two flanks, but they could well be, say, a bridge and two hamlets, where a player could be winning at one location and losing at the other.
DeleteI have done a Hastings game, where the Saxons have one long line, but that wall is composed of different locations, so that nuances of penetration on the left flank are made in total isoltaion to other parts of the line that are holding firm.
In my last post, the critical location was only really between Confederate 5th VA and Union 1st Connecticut, Any other presence on the battlefield would either be drawn to supporting that fight or at least behave in a way in which it associates with that location.
Bodies of men could also be considered ‘locations’ in terms of this argument, even though they are fluid. In some respects, Black Powder is doing this by forces being organised into brigades and then those brigades being subject to independent collapse once they take 50% casualties.
To my thinking, 3 - 5 brigades per side, where the object of the game is to shatter opposing Brigades is doing exactly that. These situations within the overall situation are bringing independent points of interest across the game space.
That's looking fantastic Jonathan!
ReplyDeleteI agree!
DeleteNice looking virtual gaming Jonathan...
ReplyDeleteIndeed, it is, Phil!
DeleteThis e-battle is a nice e-idea :D
ReplyDeleteI think it is too!
DeleteImpressive Johnathan. I am currently painting up a small army of the Stanley family to use fighting the wonderful Andy Callan free rules, Never Mind the Billhooks. This first civil war is an interesting period in Britain's history with some excellent small battles.
ReplyDelete"First Civil War"??? If you are counting the WotR as the first civil war, then you are overlooking quite a few others, 1st & 2nd Barons Wars, for example. I would suggest that the medieval conflicts aren't "Civil Wars" in the way that the 17th century conflict was, in that they are divisions amongst a small political elite, whereas the ECW is a full on conflagration involving all levels of society.
DeleteGreat to hear from you again, Robbie!
DeleteThe game was fun too! Before these two games, I really had little notion of how Battles fought in the WotR. Quite an eye-opener for me.
I always think of the war of the Roses as resembling more of a turf war between different gangs than a civil war,more like a bunch of mobsters!
DeleteBest Iain
Yes. Definitely more like a bunch of gangsters fighting over a protection racket. It's not like there's any deep philosophical differences other than "I think I should be in charge".
DeleteA mobster turf war; I like that!
DeleteThey look like an interesting set of rules, and quite detailed. I was on the Perry Miniatures website only last night and stumbled into their War of the Roses range instead of ECW, and had to mentally tell myself to not look any further (their new 1806 Prussians looked good as well). This does look like a very doable project under Battle Commander.
ReplyDeleteI was browsing on the Perry website yesterday too. Oh, Front Rank as well.
DeleteDon't forget Wargames Foundry. Some of the Perry's best work, and not overly muscled. Possibly a bit dated by modern standards, but I painted a load a year or so back for the Edgcote project, and thought they were lovely.
DeleteYep. I was browsing Foundry too! Do I REALLY need more armies when their comrades may be 4,500 miles away?
DeleteMy advice is focus on finishing the Sumerians, so you can write another blog focussing on my rules, promoting sales for me. Don't forget you need to leave time to start to order and paint up some Spaniards as well. Besides, Perry and Foundry aren't going anywhere.
DeleteYou are so funny...
DeleteThat is a great looking game Jonathan. Lots of dramatic action going on! I have not yet played by Skype but it looks like the an option if things don't improve soon. The War of the Roses is fascinating, with the highest of stakes for losing in every battle and the threat of treachery ever at your back! If I recall I think my longest painting spell on one particular period was for the WOR - I managed 2 years painting the same period with no deviation...which for me is miraculous! :-D
ReplyDeleteBest wishes,
Jason
Thanks, Jason! I had no hand in the troops or presentation but simply a participant as Stanley. The game was great fun and I have really been enjoying remote gaming.
DeleteTwo years spent painting one period? That is real dedication. Good job!
Very engaging battle report (poor Exeter, seen off early on and then a spectator for the balance of the fight?). Also inspiring to see the growth of remote gaming as another aspect of the hobby.
ReplyDeleteGlad you liked the BatRep, Ed! Exeter certainly jumped out on his own, quickly found himself isolated, and paid dearly for his boldness. Remote gaming has prompted a resurgence in gaming for me.
DeleteA couple of games a week and still producing your wonderful painted figures. That's nirvana-like time on the hobby! :)
ReplyDeleteRegards, James
Unbelievable good fortune, I think.
DeleteFine game Jonathan! WoTR battles are always hard fought.
ReplyDeleteThank you, Mike! I am discovering that WotR battles are hard fought, for sure.
DeleteVery cool gaming Jonathan. WotR is a favorite of mine.
ReplyDeleteThe game was challenging and fun. I can see myself enjoying this period especially due to these interesting rules.
DeleteThought I had commented on this Jonathan. I had a large collection of WotR figures and used Poleaxed rules, very historical and although I enjoyed them a bit boring as a game. I sold the armies eventually, of course now I wish I hadn't.
ReplyDeletePoleaxed are very much "of their time". No one would write rules like that any more. The source books are handy.
DeleteThanks for giving this post a second look, George. Regret is a risk of selling off armies. You could rebuild them?
DeleteI had all the books, they went as well. As the guy drove off with the sojers in his car it was though I had sold my children.
DeleteHeartbreaking...
DeleteSounds like great fun games that look lovely!
ReplyDeleteBest Iain
Those old minifigs really benefit from being shot by a cheap webcam that can't be properly focussed!
DeleteThese two games have been great fun, Iain, and I am now looking at figures. A local friend has armies in 6mm so that may be a possibility.
DeleteGraham, Richard made a similar comment to me about his armies...
DeleteBTW The Baccus 6mm are really, really nice. I used them for a small scale Edgcote model. There are some photos on Wargaming for Grown Ups from October last year.
Delete
DeleteI was browsing Baccus’ website yesterday and the figures look very nice indeed. I will revisit your Edgcote setup.
A nice looking game Jonathan...
ReplyDeleteI remember playing a Blore Heath a few years ago... I think I came second... or maybe even third... it was still fun...
All the best. Aly
Richard did a good job on producing an enjoyable game. The outcome could have gone either way. Blore Heath may be due a rematch.
DeleteHappy holidays, Aly!
That's something different. Very nice presentation.
ReplyDeleteVery different for me too!
DeleteLooks good; I have played more WotR games this year than anything else - at least a dozen playtest games with Tim Couper and David Knight in Scotland, including Blore Heath at least twice. Their pending rules set, titled Test of Resolve, is becoming pretty settled. It is a conflict I also knew little about. Having playtested a lot of different scenarios, it is interesting how many are NOT straightforward 3 battles against 3 battles - at least not lined up opposite one another.
ReplyDeleteI don't see myself doing WotR armies, but you never know, as I have HYW troops. I would of course do 25's, but 10's would be a nice compromise scale for this era, where really uniforms are limited, and it is the banners of the great Lords that stand out.
Peter, sounds like we are both learning a new period of warfare in 2020. Who says you can't teach old dogs new tricks?
DeleteYou considering 10mm from 25mm? Now, THAT would be a new trick!
I am increasingly tempted to build at least one battle if for no other purpose that to see figures up close during a remote gaming session.
There are so many scales to choose from but 25/28mm is my odds on favorite for now. With an Old Glory Army Card, building one battle would be inexpensive.