Pages

Monday, August 15, 2022

There Was Such Great Promise

On Sunday, Matt (wargamesinthedungeon) and I met on the remote fields of Bassignana to witness the third playing of the battle.  For those following earlier accounts, the ground should be well traveled.  For those new to the battle, below is a photo of the battlefield showing initial troop dispositions and place names.   

Initial dispositions
Matt took command of the combined Franco-Spanish armies while I headed up the defending Piedmontese/Austrian armies.  Rather than umpiring, I actually took up a command in Sunday's contest.  With two games in the books and the decision split, which way would the battle turn in Game #3?
French wing ready to step off.
Spanish army poised for action.
Matt's initial attacks and probes.
De Gages' brigade reaches the Tanaro River. 
His cavalry cross and are immediately
attacked by enemy cavalry.
Unsupported, the rash Piedmontese cavalry are scattered.
Not a good start for King Emanuele.
Artillery at Rivarone causes casualties upon Arambou's
 infantry as it prepares to the cross the Tanaro.
Battle view looking from the east.
Maillebois' French brigades prepare to cross the Tanaro
opposite Chiesa de San Germano and Montecastelle.
The defenders await.
In the center, de Montal attacks
 de la Chiesa's brigade at Rivarone. 
View of battle from southwest.
Despite artillery bombardment from the heights above,
de Montal's attack ejects the militia from Rivarone.
The militia is dispersed.
De la Chiesa goes down in battle, hors de combat.
Flush with seeing success at taking Rivarone,
Arambou assaults the guns at Rivarone.
De la Chiesa's battery is overrun.
The Piedmontese center has cracked!
Against Chiesa de San Germano,
 de Grammont lines up two battalions on the banks
 of the Tanaro and fires into the defenders.
The Piedmontese grenadiers are unmoved.
Senneterre sends two battalions across the Tanaro
 in an assault against Montecastelle.
The first attempt is bloodily repulsed.
While the Piedmontese left and center crumbles,
the right stands firm. 
On the Spanish wing, de Gages establishes
 a bridgehead across the Tanaro.
de Gages forms up his infantry and blasts
 the light infantry in front of Bassignana.
The light infantry melt away.
Bassignana is undefended!
With Rivarone in French hands,
 de Montal and Arambou prepare to press ahead,
 up the heights. 
In a concerted effort, de Montal and Arambou overwhelm
 de la Chiesa's last remaining battalion.
With their general dead on the field,
the Piedmontese scatter.
Isolated, King Emanuele falls to the calamities of war.
Having split the Piedmontese line,
 de Montal changes focus to attacking
D'Aix' position at Montecastelle. 
Before de Montal can close,
 the defenders of Montecastelle destroy
 one of Senneterre's battalions with volleyfire. 
De Gages has a firm grip on Bassignana.
With King Emanuele dead on the field and de la Chiesa's brigade destroyed, even the timely arrival of Austrian cavalry cannot stabilize the situation.  The Franco-Spanish army has won the day!  Congratulations to Matt for a well deserved victory.  Before battle began, the position of the King’s army held much promise.  While the fighting may have extended another turn or two, left with mainly cavalry, the Piedmontese/Austrian armies could not have recovered and held lost ground.

As in the historical battle, the Piedmontese army was split and overwhelmed before Austrian reinforcements could intervene.  Casualties were surprisingly evenly distributed with each side losing about a half-dozen units in the action.  The Piedmontese army would withdraw back across the Po River as they did historically.  This time, without their King!
Matt's screenshot of endgame action as seen from his iPad.
Looks good, no? 
Game length clocked in at about 2.5 hours and six turns played.

Still, great fun and another interesting outing at Bassignana! 

47 comments:

  1. Great to see this game again and a well deserved French victory, matching the hostorical outcome

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Neil, I am glad you appreciate the replays. Another replay on the schedule for later this week. Matt did a commendable job on tearing apart my defense.

      Delete
    2. I think the replays are a great way of seeing how different players face the challenges of this battle

      Delete
  2. Splendid looking game and you can't argue with the weight of history!
    Best Iain

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks! Replicating the historical result on the gaming table always provides a sense of comfort.

      Delete
  3. Another game where casualties might have been fairly even, but the outcome most certainly wasn't. Once again this shows there is much value in re-fighting a historical scenario, whether for fun or to understand the battle much more.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Quite right, Steve! We are in areement on the value and pleasure derived from repeat perfomances on the gaming table.

      Delete
  4. Another entertaining run-through Jonathan and 2.5 hours seems like a quick and manageable session.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Glad you enjoyed the report, Lawrence! The game played quickly with the rules almost nvere getting in the way of tactics or strategy. I think the rules are in a good place. Perhaps time to codify them beyond a QRS and write them up?

      Delete
  5. I like the ‘spectacle’ birds eye view that your remote camera captured, a real feel of battle. Are your river sections new pieces - very tidy with two tone banking.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Norm! The overhead photos are captured by my handheld camera. I will go back and include a webcam screenshot for comparison.

      The rivers, I have had for ages. They were part of a Kickstarter years ago.

      Delete
    2. The iPad screenshot shows Matt had a very fine perspective of the battle from his remote position.

      Your own birds-eye views are, well more birds-eye and I enjoy that for this sized battle.

      Delete
    3. I try to provide a webcam view from over and behind each player’s side of the table. That way, we can almost suspend the disbelief that we all are not in the same room.

      Delete
  6. Another fantastic looking battle Jonathan!
    Best regards

    ReplyDelete
  7. Another cracking good game delivered Jonathan!

    Christopher

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks! Even in defeat, it was a most fun game session, for sure.

      Delete
  8. What an amazing batrep Jonathan. Playing such a games regardless of the result is reward itself!

    Cheers, Ross

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Ross! I enjoy the games, for sure. Very nice to have others willing to Zoom in for a game!

      Delete
  9. Great game! Terrific that these games have so much replayability (if that's a word). As people have said, there is something very satisfying about mirroring history too. I confess I was rooting for the French for the entirely trivial reason that they have so many of my flags! ;-)

    Cheers,

    David.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks! With the correct mix of rules, scenario design, and just the right amount of luck, most games can have rewarding replayability. That is a word!

      On rooting for the French, well, you may step into a command when your schedule permits. Oh, my "Spanish" carry your French flags too!

      Delete
  10. Hey, when you’re not umpiring game for a bunch of people you able to take lots of photos. And they are swell. Great looking battlefield; the troops and the buildings especially. ๐Ÿ˜€
    Have you ever tried black labels (with white words) like they recommend in Fire and Fury? I find they fade out a little better than the white ones.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Matt, is less demanding than having five or six players trying to be heard over the din of battle. That gives me s as little extra time to snap a photo or too. Umpiring multiplayer battles is quite fun too.

      On printing labels, I am a bit too frugal perhaps. Printing white on black consumes a lot of ink. My printer already uses more I think it should.

      Delete
  11. Jon a splendid battle and I can now go back and read the previous reports to see how they compare. The collection and the battle is beautifully set up and although a victory the balance of the victory conditions make it a really tough nut to crack. Not for now but I do wonder if there is a better defence line ? Perhaps not given the numbers that are pushing across the river. Could your cavalry have played a bigger role rather than pulling back ? Thanks again very enjoyable ๐Ÿ‘

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Glad you enjoyed the contest, Matt! You did not read the prior battle accounts beforehand? That is a good way to not be influenced by what others did before.

      What about Liguane is a good question. After our battle, I wondered what would have been different if Liguane (with his small cavalry brigade) stayed to fight rather than scurrying off to protect Bassignana? If Liguane stays to fight, he runs a very real risk of breaking his two unit brigade. That would spell disaster since de la Chiesa cannot maintain his postion in the center. Also, keeping Liguane on the right flank opens the way to Bassignana and the crucial pontoon bridge over the Po. If the Austrians do arrive in a timely manner, the Piedmontese could lose the bridge and their avenue of relief. I certainly did not use Liguane in a useful way in this battle. I need to do better next time.

      Consider a better line defense? Hmm. Where would that be?

      Delete
  12. Another excellent report, Matt and I are hoping to meet up again next month.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks! With Matt retiring very soon, the gaming possibilities open up. Maybe, one day, you will be interested in a remote game with you facing Matt over the remote tabletop??

      Delete
  13. Seems as if the Franco-Spanish always managed to have local superiority, bringing several units vs each individual Piedmontese defender. Hard to come out on top without the means (or a few good die rolls!) to disrupt the coordination that requires.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. With the Franco-Spanish holding about a 2:1 advantage, it is tough not to maneuver to yield local superiority! Matt did a great job in ensuring he did so. I did not play at my best and see opportunities for improvement. Next time. Yeah, I'll get him next time.

      Delete
  14. A great game, even if you lost Jon! I may be wrong, but seemed like Matt produced the most one sided result of all games played to date? Could this reflect the advantage of a unified command (one player making all the decisions) over multi player games?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Keith, does it matter who wins or loses? What matters is how we play the game! Matt played better than I and the Piedmontese fell in defeat.

      You make an interesting observation about single vs multiple commanders. Having mutliple commanders does introduce some added friction into the game. Situations difficult to replicate in a one on one game seem commonplace when multiple commanders are making decisions on both sides of the table.

      Game #1 that ended in a Franco-Spanish victory saw more casualties on both sides with the Spanish controlling the bridgehead on the south bank of the Po. In this game (Game #3), Matt did a terrific job of pinning D'Aix' brigade in place while cutting through the Piedmontese center and left.

      I classify both Games #1 and #3 as equallying the historical result. That is, if we ignore the fact that Matt took Piedmont out of the war by killing King Emanuele!

      Delete
    2. Agree completely Jon win/loss is irrelevant, I would question if I ‘played better’ but I certainly rolled two 1’s when needed to kill off de C and the King ๐Ÿ˜€

      Delete
  15. Excellent stuff! Looks like a tough ask for the Piedmontese. well done Matt.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks! Yes, the situation may be tough for the Piedmontese but the historical situation was too. From Game #2, we can see that the Piedmontese are not without options and opportunities as they came out victorious in the second contest.

      On Thursday, Peter takes a swing at commanding the Franco-Spanish armies.

      Delete
  16. Brilliant and engaging report Jonathan. Sounds like a good time was had by all.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Richard! Glad you enjoyed the battle account. It was a good game, for sure.

      Delete
  17. Excellent battle. But how many bad luck could the Savoy army have? Poor king of Savoy defeated and captured in the end.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Andrรฉ! Yes, the Piedmontese saw some bad luck luck including the loss of their King. C'est la guerre.

      Delete
  18. A great looking game, and better luck next time, Jon!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks! My opportunity to tackle the battle again comes up on Thursday.

      Delete
  19. What a splendid looking game, super table and toys and 2.5 hours of enjoyment. Just what makes this hobby first rate.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Much appreciated, Phil! This was a good day at the gaming table with a good opponent.

      Delete
  20. Oh come on, Best 3 out of 5! You know you want to....

    Looks good and reads like an engageing game. What more can we ask?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Ross! By time I am finished with Bassignana, five games looks very likely. Game #4 is scheduled for Thursday.

      Delete
  21. Ah, "The guns at Rivarone", I remember that film!
    That was a steady, grinding French victory. Aside from the initial cavalry charge it all seemed to go pretty well and them steamrolled the opposition in a slow, steady early 18th C manner!
    Regards, James

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Guns of Rivarone
      I know! I thought that was a good one! Yes, I was slowly and steadily steamrollered. Not a way in which I wish a battle to develop.

      Delete