Rivoli: An Executive Summary of Battle

Fierce fighting on the Rivoli Plateau

The sun sets on the Rivoli Plateau and the battlefield is shrouded in darkness.  With darkness covering the battlefield, fighting slackens as visibility decreases quickly.  As the wounded, lost, and bewildered turn toward self-preservation in the cold January night air, I call a cessation to hostilities.

The battle began in the morning with Austrian General Alvintzi attacking south toward Joubert's exposed division situated upon on the Rivoli Plateau.

Alvintzi attacks Joubert

The initial troop dispositions were situated as shown in the figure below:

Initial dispositions

The battle began at 0830 and ended at sunset at 1700. Seventeen turns were put into the logbook. After fighting throughout the day, most formations neared exhaustion and the 1630 turn saw particularly heavy casualties as commanders attempted one last decisive push before nightfall.  The day-long battle raged over the heights that overlooked the Adige River valley and on the plateau upon which the town of Rivoli sits. Like two prize fighters, the armies bludgeoned each other repeatedly but neither wanting to yield.

The two opposing generals opted for different approaches to victory.  The French chose to go for a knock-out punch and win by Sudden Death.  The Austrians chose a double envelopment to cut the French army in half.  The initial plans looked something like this:

Initial battle plans

Each combatant was issued a situation briefing.  These briefings are provided in detail below:

French Briefing:
The Austrians have launched another relief effort for Mantua. Three attempts have failed before. This one should be no different. Alvintzi needs to break out of the Adige Valley into order to bring his superior numbers to bear. The only way to break out of the valley is to attack on the Rivoli Plateau.

Joubert was posted to the north of Rivoli and while fighting hard, has been pushed back to Rivoli and takes up positions along the Trombolare Heights. Reinforcements are on the way and will continue arriving throughout the morning. Holding the Osteria Gorge is critical. If the Gorge can be held, the large Austrian columns confined to the valley will offer no assistance to the Austrians on the plateau. If the four Austrian columns on the heights can be defeated before reinforced from the valley below, the battle will be won. The goal is the destruction of the Austrian army before it can break out and relieve Mantua.

Napoleon faces several problems. They are:

• Joubert’s position could be flanked on the west allowing the Austrians to break out towards Lake Garda.
• Joubert is initially outnumbered and spread thinly across the front but his troops are hard fighters and he has support from artillery and cavalry.
• If the Osteria Gorge can be forced then both flanks could be in jeopardy and the Rivoli position could become untenable.
• While the Osteria Gorge position may hold, the Adige could be bridged in a few places below Rivoli.

Game length: 0830 to 1900 (actually ended at 1700)
French Command Rating: Efficient
French Maneuver Doctrine: Impulse
French Reinforcement Schedule:

0900 Massena, Brune, 32nd Line, 29th Line arrive on road from Verona to Rivoli.

1000 Massena’s two batteries arrive on road from Verona to Rivoli.

1030 Monnier, 18th Line, 75th Line arrive on road from Verona to Rivoli.

1400 Rey, 58th Line arrive on road from Verona to Rivoli.

1530 8th Dragoons, 15th Dragoons, Rey’s batteries arrive on road from Verona to Rivoli.

Austrian Briefing:
With plans to relieve Mantua (fourth time’s a charm!), Alvintzi has set off down the Adige Valley with thoughts of breaking out into the more open territory in which his superiority in numbers can weigh heavily against the weaker French.

Alvintzi faces several problems. Almost too many obstacles, really. They are:

• To break out toward Verona and Mantua, his army must overcome Joubert’s division blocking his approach.
• The Adige River is unfordable and the nearest crossing is several miles to the north.
• Climbing out of the Adige Valley in order to make an attack against Joubert in the mountains requires that his cavalry and artillery be left behind.
• To access the Rivoli Plateau directly from the Adige Valley requires his army to pass through the Osteria Gorge. This is a narrow defile and easily defended. Reuss must overcome this obstacle to unleash his large column out onto the plateau.
• Until the Osteria Gorge can be taken, communication between Alvintzi on the plateau and his troops in the valley is nearly impossible. Therefore taking the gorge defile is key to the entire operation.
• His four columns on the plateau have been moving and fighting through most of the night and early morning. Austrian punches have not been as nimble as French counter-punches.
• Vukassovich’s column on the east bank of the Adige River is prevented from moving south through another defile by French troops. No possibility of overcoming the defenders guarding this defile. Vukassovich does carry along a pontoon train that can be used to bridge the Adige in a few places.

Game length: 0830 to 1900  (actually ended at 1700)
Austrian Command Rating: Functional
Austrian Maneuver Doctrine: Linear

Austrian Reinforcement Schedule: None

Victory Conditions:
Sudden Death (Assessed at end of each turn):

• Austrians win the battle and play stops immediately if all units from two columns have exited the southern board via either Rivoli-to-Verona or Affi-to-Verona roads. To count, each column must still maintain half of its units neither eliminated nor Demoralized.
• French win the battle and play stops immediately if at least three Austrian columns have been destroyed. To count as destroyed, all of the column’s units must be either eliminated, Shaken, or Demoralized.

If no sudden Death then points will be awarded.

Winning on Points (Assessed at end of game):

2 VPs for each enemy unit eliminated.

1 VP for each enemy unit demoralized.

3 VPs (Austria only) for controlling Rivoli-Verona road exit.

3 VPs (Austria only) for controlling Rivoli.

5 VPs (Austria only) for controlling Affi.

5 VPs (Austria only) for controlling Zuanne.

At the end of fighting, the situation looked like,

Situation 1700

As seen in the battle photo above, the French nearly destroyed two Austrian columns in the north while the Austrians nearly completed their double envelopment of the French.  The Austrians had a chance at snagging a Sudden Death victory by exiting Lusignan and Liptay off-table at Affi but chose to maintain their double envelopment and help spring Reuss from the gorge bottleneck.   

The Austrian column under Reuss, having battled hard all day to break through the Rivoli Gorge, finally succeeded.  The arrival of fresh troops for the French saw these Austrian gains onto the Rivoli plateau short-lived.  As daylight faded, Reuss' Austrians suffered reverses and their foothold upon the plateau became untenable.

In the north around Lubiana, the end of the day saw Koblos and Oksay retreating in disarray.  Based upon Alvintzi's earlier instructions and plan of battle, Koblos and Oksay withdrew back to the north to preserve the army.  Much of Lebley and Vial's commands were equally battered and in no condition to pursue vigorously (or effectively!).

The Austrians performed better than their historical counterparts but based on casualties suffered, I lean toward declaring a minor French tactical victory since the Austrians were unable to successfully break out onto the plain below Rivoli.  My long term plan is to collate all of the correspondence and combat results into a more detailed battle report at some point.  Perhaps this will include a series of posts highlighting portions of the battle?  The mounds of dispatches to sift through are daunting and much of the action will need to be condensed unless I plan on writing a book on this battle.  By the time I re-examine all of the data and tally casualty returns, the final result may edge back toward a draw.  It really is that close.

I know I asked a lot from the players in this venture and appreciate their diligence in feeding in their orders and dispatches. This battle has waged for over two months now and I am very grateful to all whom participated. The decisions made by the generals produced much enjoyment for me and generated an interesting narrative.  Not something I could have experienced on my own.  I was surprised many times and tried to follow the intent and spirit of each order.  It is fair to say that this undertaking would not have been the same without their generous and helpful contributions. Some of the dispatches were very entertaining. Some were very methodical. All were greatly appreciated as the players' participation added greatly to the battle refight.

I sincerely thank all participants for making this a very enjoyable game. I hope players found this enjoyable as well and this exercise provided some insight into the historical battle, itself.  All are worthy commanders.  Each turn, with limited information, they assessed the situation and made some profound and insightful inferences. Chapeau to you all!

Should they so choose, I would enjoy reading the thoughts, impressions, and perspectives of commanders whether as a reply here or on your own blog.

Situational Awareness on the Wargaming Table

Photo courtesy http://wargaming4grownups.blogspot.com/

Graham, our Master of Ceremonies for a continuing series of 15mm Spanish Civil War games featuring his recently published For Whom the Dice Rolls rules, has been very diligent in providing Game Briefings before the Tuesday night Zoom battles.  This extra effort has been quite useful in preparing for the task at hand.

MC Graham as puppet master moving our troops

This week's offering was no different.  In the battle packet were map, Orders of Battle, and a briefing.

Since one never knows which side will be assigned for play, I typically look over both OBs and briefings beforehand.  Approaching each battle as a puzzle to be solved, I mentally make notes of time/space considerations, relative strengths and weaknesses of each combatant, and potential avenues of attack and lines of defense.  The rules receive a quick skim too.  These pre-game exercises help to focus my attention toward improving my situational awareness on whichever side I land.

Battle map

Pre-Battle Notes:

• The Nationalists hold a numerical advantage in infantry, armor, and heavier artillery.  Republicans hold an advantage in field guns. Nothing more.  There are no Off-Table Assets in this game.  Wait.  The Nationalists have brought their Off-Table heavy artillery asset on-table!
• Nationalist terrain objectives are nearer to the Nationalist baseline than are the Republican objectives to the Republican baseline as shown in the two diagrams below:

  

  Nationalist entries and objectives (yellow)

  

  Republican entries and objectives (blue)

• One Nationalist objective is to 'control' the railway.  Does that mean simply to cut the rail line or possess all or parts of it?
• With numerical superiority and objectives within easier reach, I expect the Nationalists to attack.
• With inferior numbers, lacking armor, and objectives much farther away, I expect the Republicans will fight a defensive battle. 

Game Night:
On game night, the game was much more well-attended than expected so commands were shuffled around a bit to accommodate seven players.  I think four players were expected.  No matter, Graham quickly allocated commands.

Phil, Will, and the two Richards were promoted to commands within the Nationalist army.  Steve, Ian, and I were plopped into the role of Republicans.  Since I had a copy of the rules, Graham appointed me as CiC for the Republicans with Ian and Steve taking on the role of brigadiers.

Now with only a few minutes to formulate a battle plan, I made some quick time/space calculations.

--------------------- Begin Digression --------------------

OK. Has anyone ever been in a participation game at a convention (or anywhere else) in which the victory conditions are such that units must reach a certain point on the table within a certain number of turns (typically exiting the opposite side of the board) to claim victory?  On occasion, the post-mortem shows that the unit(s) could not have reached the objective under the most favorable conditions.  Well, I have witnessed this situation as well as suffered it. 

Show of hands?   

--------------------- End Digression ----------------------

My quick calculations showed that Republicans moving in the fastest combat-ready posture (skirmish order) would take about eight impulses (three turns) to reach the hills on the opposite board edge.  That is not reckoning on any active resistance from a superior force or having the correct mix of activations to actually perform these required impulses.  With enemy resistance, I figured one enemy battalion could add a delay of three impulses to the timetable.  Given that these games rarely last longer than three turns in the typical three-hour gaming session, I deemed the Republicans unlikely to reach their objective within the given time constraints.  Is that enough to shift the Republican battle plan firmly to a defensive posture?

Perhaps, but there is yet another piece of information to consider.  What about the players, themselves?  While I have only gamed with the Monday Night Gamers for about six months, that is enough time to identify a few, general player profiles tendencies.

Will and Phil seem to be tenacious and aggressive attackers.  I have witnessed both tearing up any opposition standing between them and their objectives.  Ian and Steve, on the other hand, appear more suited to defensive postures.  Calm and capable, these traits I want for commanders in the trenches willing to hold a line.  Of course, I could be very well wrong but this is how I placed today's wager.  With the Nationalists holding the cards in numbers, attainable objectives, and aggression, there was little question in mind that the Nationalists would attack.  The Republicans seemed better suited to take the defense and counterattack if the opportunity presented itself.  

Now, with Graham orchestrating scenario development and player assignments, were these same considerations in play for him too?  Hmm.

How did these quick plans pan out?  Please visit Graham's battle report at The Sunken Road Conundrum to find out.

The gaming session ended at the beginning of Turn 3 with the Nationalists holding initiative but the Republicans poised for counterattack.  Even unopposed, a Republican attack from the start could not have reached the Nationalist baseline before game ended.

Know thy self, know thy enemy, and know thy situation.

Two-fer Tuesday: Sea Peoples

Today brings forth another double-shot Tuesday.  Maintaining the recent Biblical theme, two units of Sea Peoples depart the workbench.  Only a couple of handfuls of these figures made it into The Lead Pile and here they all are painted in a blue/white motif.  Figures are from Wargames Foundry.

First up is a unit of mixed spear and javelin.  Perhaps, I ought to have placed the javelin in the front rank but I chose to put the tough guys in the front.  Maybe the spearmen are protecting the javelin tossers while they target the enemy from relative safety?

Second, is a stand of bowmen.  As Peter has shown over on his blog (see: Peleset Archers #2), these are very nice sculpts. Mine seemed to have more flash and mold lines than did Peter's figures.

Anyway, two more useful additions to the growing Biblicals project.  Still a few more Biblicals in work until I switch gears for another project break.

With all of the gaming of late, painting output is slowing down.  At least it seems to be slowing down.  Recently, I have been going several days in a row without ever picking up the brush.  Some of the non-painting time has been spent putting together another Battle of WotR figures from Perry.  Like the first Battle, it will field 52 figures strong.  Other bits of time have been consumed with the ongoing Rivoli PBEM game.  With the sun literally setting over the battlefield, the battle will be drawing to a close very soon.  Then, I will be faced with the decision of how to tackle the mountain of correspondence the game has generated. 

Tonight’s remote game features a return to the Spanish Civil War.  Having a hardcopy of the rules in-hand and another game under my belt, I may have gathered enough data to begin a review or posting on some aspect of the rules.  Perhaps a recap of Tuesday's action will be up first?  Graham sent out a battle briefing so I will be ready when the curtain is raised on the battle.

Does Figure Size Drive Collection Size?

One of the comments brought up in the previous analysis on collection size (see: Collection Size or Mine's Bigger) more than once was a question of relationship between collection size and figure size.  Do wargamers preferring the smaller sized figures tend to collect more figures than those gaming in the larger scales?  That question was not addressed in the earlier analysis because the answer cannot be derived precisely given the current questionnaire.  But since the question has been raised, let us see if can reach a conclusion or at least move in the direction of answering the question.  Laying out a few assumptions upfront and attacking the question using an indirect approach may be useful in providing some insight.

First, collection size cannot be directly mapped to composition of a collection's figure size.  While some respondents may focus on one figure size only, many (myself included) maintain collections with various figures sizes.  Survey respondents were asked to rank their figure size preference.  In this exercise, one collection size maps to one top figure size preference.

Second, does the top choice of figure size equate to the largest number of figures in the collection?  For some, that may be true.  For others, perhaps, not so much.  

Third, how many wargamers actually maintain the records on hand to assess which figure size dominates the collection?  For very large collections and those wargamers with diverse interests, this assessment may be at best an educated guess.

For this exercise, we assume that a respondent's first choice of figure size denotes the dominant figure size in the collection whether this represents the sole figure size present or shared.  The first two graphics (Figures 1, 1b, 2,2b) illustrate these results.

The second pair of graphics (Figures 3 and 4), look at the aggregation of respondents' top three choices of figure sizes.  Will differences surface between top choice and top three choices?

Collection Size by Top Choice of Figure Size (Scale)

Figure 1 illustrates that 25-28mm and Heroics dominate representation in the smaller collection sizes.  As collection size increases, the tendency to include Heroics decreases more rapidly while 25-28mm sees slight gains.  The smaller figure sizes see an increase in numbers as collection size grows.  In all collections except for the 0-100 group, 25-28mm figures are the preferred figure size.  Figure 1b shows these data as a percentage of total rather than by counts.

Figure 1

Figure 1b

Transposing the data in Figure 1 to show Figure Size by Collection Size (Figure 2), still nearly 25% of the respondents preferring 25-28mm have collections exceeding 2,500 figures.  As in Figure 1, we can see that 25-28mm and Heroics dominate the 101-500 figure collection size.  Wargamers favoring the smaller figure sizes tend to hold larger collections than their 25-28mm and Heroic compatriots.  For the 06mm, 10-12mm, and 15-18mm wargamers (or collector) their largest bin with respect to collection size is in the 2,500+ category.  Figure 2b shows these data as a percentage of total rather than by counts.

Figure 2

Figure 2b

Collection Size by Top Three Choices of Figure Size (Scale)

What if all survey respondents' top three preferred figure sizes are aggregated by collection size?  As in Figure 1, tendencies remain similar.  The noticeable exception is that in the aggregation of top three figure sizes, 15-18mm figures moves into a more prominent role as collection size increases. 

Figure 3

The prominence of 15-18mm figures within large collections is better illustrated in Figure 4.  Here, collections with 15-18mm figures within the top three preferences tend to be very large, indeed.  Notice that 06mm and 10-12mm figure sizes fit into this pattern too.

Figure 4

Given the limitations on the data, can any inferences be made?  I suggest that, generally, as figure size increases, collection size decreases.  As collection size increases, the presence of 28mm Heroics decays at a faster rate while 25-28mm figure show slight gains with collection size increases.  25-28mm figures remain a popular choice regardless of collection size.  Do these results hold for me, personally?  Having diverse interests across the spectrum of figure size and wargaming periods, my collection size seems to increase regardless of figure size.  For me, figure size does not matter.  Now, storage space, that is becoming a constraint.

Is your collection size dependent upon figure size?

Two-Fer Tuesday: Hittites

Today, a double-shot of Hittites musters out from the painting desk.  Of late a string of Biblical units has been marching across the painting desk with first Nubians, then Egyptians, and now Hittites.  When will it all end?  Soon, I think.  There are two units of Sea Peoples in work along with a stand of Assyrian heavy infantry.  I may interrupt the current Biblical procession with something non-Biblical to break up the monotony.   

First up today is a Hittite chariot and hangers-on.  The cab and crew are from Wargames Foundry while the runners are Newline Designs.  By my count, this makes Hittite chariot #10 to pass across the painting desk and report for service.  There may still be a few left in The Lead Pile.  Perhaps even a few more than that since my last two Newline orders may have included some. 

Next up, is a fourteen-figure stand of Hittite heavy infantry.  Figures for this batch are Wargames Foundry.  I know for a fact that these are the last of this figure in The Lead Pile.

Again, by my count, there are now four such units in the Hittite Army.  Seems I have painted more than four of these stands.  I wonder if this is a situation where my Painting Log counts do not tie to the figures in box?  I must pull the figures from their storage boxes and make a head count.  Perhaps, I forgot to add a unit into the Painting Log?  I will find out soon enough.    

With all of the Hittites piling up, one day, I will actually get this collection out on the table for maneuvers.  With twilight not far off on the Rivoli battlefield, a battle of Biblical proportions (or at least Biblical setting) may be a good way to clear the table of the French Revolution and turn the clock back about 3,500 years in time. 

For Whom The Dice Rolls

The latest entry from the growing stable of wargaming rules from Graham Evans dropped into my mailbox this week.  That rulebook is For Whom The Dice Rolls (FWTDR) covering brigade and divisional sized battles during the Spanish Civil War.  Graham sent me a copy of the rules, fresh off the printing press, as an acknowledgement of my playtesting efforts.  

Besides a small amount of reading on the conflict in fiction (Hemingway) and non-fiction (Beevor), I had little exposure to this war. Over four months of playtesting, I have learned a great deal more.

sample in-game photo

The rulebook is a hefty 95 pages and is printed in color. Lots of background information within as well.  FWTDR is a handsome production, indeed.

To reciprocate for Graham's generosity, I painted up a battalion's worth of Basque infantry.  These 15mm Peter Pig fellows will be winging their way to Graham soon.

15mm Basque infantry

With my growing familiarity to FWTDR over the last four months, I expect to return to this topic in future posts.  Having been involved in the later, nitty-gritty playtests, perhaps, a full review by me is not appropriate?  As I wrestle with that decision, other topics are fair game, though.  A number of rules-related topics are already formulating in my mind.  Perhaps a review is still appropriate since I have at least played the game several times and scrutinized the text and game mechanisms?  In whichever direction I ultimately decide to explore, this will not be the last you see of FWTDR here.     

For now, congratulations to Graham for publishing another interesting set of rules for yet another, somewhat obscure conflict.  Let me know when you buy that vacation place in the Bahamas.

For more information, please visit: Wargaming for Grown-ups.

Caesar Awards Nomination

What can I say?  Notification that Palouse Wargaming Journal was nominated for a Little Wars TV Caesar Award in the category of Best Wargame Blog landed unexpectedly.  Out of the hundreds of wargaming related blogs out there, making the cut into the Top Three by my peers is surprising.  Satisfying too.

Perhaps in today's world of specialization, division, and niches, there is still a spot for an "all-rounder" as they say in cycling.  PWJ covers a variety of wargaming topics that at some point may strike an interest to some.  What do I reckon are the keys contributing to this nomination?  Well, my hunch is consistency and commentary.  On consistency, I try to maintain a regular publication frequency with a post every three to four days.  On commentary, PWJ consistently experiences a regular flow of discussion on each post.  These frequent reader comments are not only of the acknowledgement type.  More often than not, readers' comments actually expand upon the post and further the main topic at hand.  I learn a lot from these comments and these discussions are always much appreciated.  I feel a strong sense of camaraderie among the regular commentators.     

For any reader making the effort to submit this blog into the nominating process, I thank you.  To my fellow nominees, I wish you good luck at the awards ceremony.

To see the full list of award categories and nominations, please visit,

Little Wars TV

Battle of Bunker Hill

Motivated by our series of three game mini-campaigns using Rebels and Patriots, Matt wanted to tackle something a bit larger than the standard R&P sized game.  The battle Matt targeted was the Battle of Bunker (Breed's) Hill.  As seen from the battle layout photo below, Matt spared no effort to present a most handsome game.  Fought over Zoom, Matt provided three cameras for the contest.  Each camera provided a different view of the battlefield.  One camera maintained a view from the north. A second camera had a near ground-level view from the behind the redoubt.  Finally, a third camera provided an overhead view from the southeast overlooking Charlestown and the British approaches to the redoubt upon the hill.

Battle of Bunker Hill Initial Dispositions
photo courtesy wargamesinthedungeon

As has become tradition in our series of AWI battles, Matt commanded the British while I took command of the rebels.  A few special rules were added for this battle.  A double six activation for the British allowed for an offshore naval bombardment.  A double six for the Americans allowed one additional skirmisher unit to arrive.  The Americans were allowed to fire for only six turns before ammo shortages began to tell.  A combatant takes an army morale test having lost 50% of his units (five units) and then withdraws at seven units lost.

On to the battle!

Charlestown militia look on 

View from the Mystic River Cam

Combined LI advances upon the American left

while the British step off toward the redoubt

The Lights advance while the Rebels hold fire.

Rebels continue to hold fire as Redcoats approach.

Finally, fire erupts all along the line!

Rebel left remains silent as the British approach.

Already, the British are becoming disordered

as volleys are exchanged.

Rebel guns fire as redcoats advance down the lane.

Nixon suffers from artillery as Doolittle offers support.

Rebel artillery sees off the first Redcoat regiment!

View from the sky cam

Stark opens up against the approaching light infantry.

Weakened from artillery fire,
Nixon is under pressure to hold.

The Grenadiers with Howe attached
 storm the earthworks!

Stark steps back out of musketry range on the left.

Doolittle suffers from naval fire as he supports Nixon.

British assault as viewed from above.

Gridley's artillery sees off a second British attacker!

The grenadiers in hand-to-hand with Nixon's boys.

Nixon is driven back with heavy casualties!
Grenadiers are in the redoubt!

The grenadiers are immediately counterattacked

and are driven out from the barricades.

Two British regiments flee on the Rebel left

and the Lights are put to flight for good measure!

British infantry fail a rally test and disperse.

Yet, the Redcoats keep coming.

With the British defeated on the left, Rebels redeploy.

British guns continue to pound
 the rebels in the redoubt.

Despite heavy losses, the Redcoats keep advancing.

Frye lets off one last volley as his ammo runs out.

His attackers recoil.

With empty muskets,
Frye charges across the defenses

engaging the British on their terms.

Frye is repulsed but makes it back into the redoubt.

With both his left and right vanquished,Howe concedes
defeat and withdraws back to the transport barges.

WOW!  This was quite the hard-fought and tense battle.

With limited ammunition, the Rebels waited until the British were well within range before opening up.  As the ammo clock ticked down, the Americans tried to make best use of this fleeting firepower.  The British never gave in and kept up its frontal assaults time after time.  Like the action at Concord's South Bridge (see Debacle at Concord's South Bridge), frontal assaults prove costly.  That lesson was reinforced at Bunker Hill.

What were the keys to an American victory?  Well, being able to defend a hardened emplacement, for one.  Two, the British attacks upon the Rebel left proved completely futile with three British regiments put to flight early in the battle.  Three, the Americans were equal in quality to their British counterparts with the exception of melee. Four, and probably most impactful, the British suffered from terrible Morale and Rally Tests throughout the game.  Attacks rarely got up enough momentum to follow through.  Every advance would suffer disorder (or even breakage) requiring a pause in the attack to recover.  By the time a unit recovered, the Americans would quickly disorder it again from musketry.  It was like marching uphill over very muddy ground.

The Victors parading through Charlestown
photo courtesy wargamesinthedungeon

Bunker Hill was another job well done by Matt.  Chapeau to Matt and thanks for a very entertaining battle!

Matt will likely have his version of the battle up on his blog very soon.  Be sure to check it out at Wargamesinthedungeon.