Peter (Grid based wargaming) and I joined up on Wednesday (Thursday for Peter in New Zealand) to exercise the latest iteration of my WotR rules. The rules saw a few changes after my first game trial and post-game discussion with Richard (My Wargaming Habit) the week before (see Trial By Fire...).
Changes for this trial run included:
- Disorder state dropped
- Response Test Results modified to reflect disappearance of Disorder
- Defend and Reserve orders given more distinction for Response Tests
- Support modifier decreased from +2D6 to +1D6.
The battle was laid out as before with three Battles/Wards in each army facing off opposite one another. Peter commanded the Yorkist Army (red dice) while I commanded the Lancastrian Army (blue dice). As we rolled for leader attributes, Peter's Center Battle came up as "Timid". We would see that Sir Timothy the Timid was anything but!
 |
| Battle Array |
 |
| Lancastrian Army |
 |
| Yorkist Army |
Battle Recap
Having not played the rules, Peter ordered all of his wards onto the defense at start. The Lancastrians ordered their three wards onto a mix of orders with rightmost ward on Maneuver and the other two wards on Engage. The Lancastrians were planning to take the fight to the enemy!
 |
| Lancastrians step off to close the distance. |
The Lancastrian Left was first to come under fire as it advanced toward the enemy. Under a hail of arrows from the defending longbowmen, Lancastrian archers fell back behind their block of melee troops. As the Lancastrian MAA supported by billmen closed upon the Yorkist longbowmen, these archers decided that standing in the face of such might was a reasonable option. They were wrong! The Lancastrians MAA hit the archers with great force. Having suffered moderate losses, the archers fell back behind the cover of their own melee troops. The Lancastrians came on and smashed into the awaiting Yorkist melee line. The Yorkists were driven back onto the archers but losses were light. Exhausted, the Lancastrians did not press their advantage.  |
| Lancastrians attack! |
Buoyed by the success to their left, the center Lancastrian ward advances toward the enemy to their front. Again, Yorkist longbowmen drive off Lancastrian archers before falling back, themselves, through their own lines as the Lancastrian melee block threatens.
Under orders to engage the enemy, the Lancastrians pile into the awaiting Yorkists. In the clash, the two melee lines hack and slash in a prolonged battle as the two combatants wear each other down. Finally, the Lancastrian will to fight breaks and the Lancastrians retreat toward the rear having suffered mightily.
 |
| Central Lancastrian ward goes in! |
 |
| Fighting is hot and heavy... |
 |
| until the Lancastrians have had enough! |
Seeing the center Lancastrian ward give way, the leftmost Lancastrian ward redoubles its efforts against its opponent. The Lancastrian melee line goes in again. Again, the Yorkists are driven back behind their covering archers and cling to the table edge. Again, the Lancastrians fail to follow up and finish them off! Each army has seen one success and one setback. One pair of unengaged Battles to go.  |
| Situation mid-battle. |
But wait! The fighting is not over in the center. Sir Timothy the Timid in the Yorkist Center successfully changes his orders to Engage and attacks! Shooting a volley of arrows to soften the enemy, the Yorkists advance upon the enemy archers. The Lancastrian archers are driven back as the Yorkist melee line comes on. With the Lancastrian archers moving to the rear, the already wavering melee line is now exposed. The Yorkists smash into this body of men and destroy the MAA in the front ranks. The surviving billmen retire back behind the relative safety of their archers. There is no relative safety on this battlefield. The Yorkist melee line continues forward. Already out of sorts from their earlier efforts, the Lancastrian archers fail to react and are scattered by the crush of the enemy. The Lancastrian Center has broken!  |
| Yorkists attack again! |
 |
| Driving the enemy back... |
 |
| and destroying Lancastrian MAA! |
 |
| Carnage is not over yet. |
Back on the Yorkist Right, the situation looks dire. With its melee line just clinging on and its archers scattered, the Yorkists prepare for the attack they know is coming. They do not wait long. The Lancastrian melee line comes on and hits the Yorkists. In the chaos of battle, the wavering Yorkists actually manage to repulse their attackers! Huzzah!  |
| Yorkists in a tight place! |
With its center gone and its left repulsed, the Lancastrian Right sets into motion. Sensing victory is close, Peter quickly changes the Yorkist Left's order to Engage and marches forward. In a hail of arrows, Yorkist archers drive off their enemy counterpart. As the Lancastrian archers retire, the Lancastrian melee line is uncovered. The Yorkists crash into the enemy and the enemy turns to run. This retreat uncovers the Lancastrian archers. The Yorkists hit the unsuspecting archers and they break for the rear! Disaster! Not only are the archers in flight but the retreating Lancastrian MAA are caught from behind and cut down. The Lancastrian Army has broken!  |
| Yorkist Left on the attack! |
 |
| Lancastrian MAA prepare to stand... |
 |
| but they cannot and the archers are scattered. |
 |
| Lancastrian Right is broken and on the run. |
With the collapse of the Lancastrian Right and the Lancastrian Center gone as well, this battle is over. Fighting lasted about two hours.
Victory to Peter and his Yorkist Army! Well done, Sir! Sir Timothy the Timid, with his heroics in the center, may need to lobby for a new nickname!
Now, one might think that the title of this post refers to the Lancastrian Army getting a bloody nose from this horrific defeat. No! Peter has been fighting off a cold. During play, Peter had to step away for a few minutes to address a bloody nose. While my Lancastrian Army was utterly defeated, it was I who gave Peter a bloody nose! Ha!
Great game and great fun. Thank you, Peter, for a very enjoyable game. Until we meet again.
Another great run out for your rules Jon, how did you think the changes made to the game? It seems to me they have worked and the rules are taking shape nicely.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Donnie! Dropping the Disorder State sped the combat engine of the game up a bit but really did not change any of the core mechanisms nor materially affect the game. Also, DEFEND and RESERVE orders have more meaning within the engine as well. For me, it worked.
DeleteExcellent report Jonathan. You don't often get a literal bloody nose in a wargame.
ReplyDeleteHow did you find your amendments worked?
Thank you, Richard! What makes the bloody nose even more notable is that this was in a REMOTE game!
DeleteAmendments worked well. Didn't really miss DISORDER especially when adjusting for support and it simplified the process. Having a benefit in Response Tests for formations under DEFEND/RESERVE orders provided these wards a bit more resiliency and control. Let me know when you are ready for a rematch.
Once again, a real humdinger of a game with plenty of action and both sides seeing some success, great stuff Jon....the rules seem to be a winner 🏆
ReplyDeleteIt was another good contest and went down to the wire. Peter's Yorkists really hung in there better than my Lancastrians. In the end, I was soundly beaten. Given that Peter never said, "I'll never play these again" is a positive take-away.
DeleteThe game narrative suggests that the players were variously engaged and influencing events (or had the opportunity to) as the fortunes waxed and waned--a good outcome!
ReplyDeleteGiving players enough interesting decision points is important especially in a period known for “fire, forget, and hope for the best.”
DeleteA most enjoyable game Jon. The order mechanism worked very well, and ties in nicely with the follow up mechanism after combat. So even Battles with defensive orders are able to counterattack after melee. Such was the was with “Sir Timothy the Timid”. You are definitely on to something with these rules.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Peter! Timothy did not play timidly. As soon as he was attacked and repulsed the attacker, he immediately changed orders to Engage cleared out the center of the battlefield. Next game, we will mix it up some either with an historical battle or with randomly drawn wards.
DeleteSounds good!
DeleteVery, very impressive, Jonathan. Not only the many beautiful figures, but your rules too.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Dean!
DeleteAnother lovely game Jonathan!
ReplyDeleteThanks, Michal!
DeleteWell done the intrepid Sir Timothy. It's interesting to hear about the rule developments.
ReplyDeleteStephen
Timothy’s exploits provided much enjoyment and added to an interesting narrative. I may dive into design philosophy in an upcoming post. Perhaps, after a few more games.
DeleteA fine game there. The rules look to be maturing nicely going by the way the game transpired.
ReplyDeleteThanks! The pieces seem to work together reasonably well.
DeleteVery cool looking game, AAR is grand,, complete with snazzy title. Your take on the rules seems to be working. Just back from a short trip to Key West, now to catch up on blors.
ReplyDeleteThanks, Joe! Lucky you! Were you off enjoying a Spring Break in sunny Key West?
DeleteAnother good run out for the rules, how did you find your amendments?
ReplyDeleteNothing in the proposals prompts me to revert back. They worked well.
DeleteExcellent, looking forward to seeing how these rules evolve
DeleteYeah, me too.
DeleteThe rules certainly seemed to flow and provide a flowing and fun game. Why did you drop the disorder state? Was it just an additional step that didn't add anything? It sounds like it would be covered in the modified response tests.
ReplyDeleteYou ask a good question on Disorder, Lawrence. Dropping this state had more than one benefit. Dropping it did simplify the process. Since Close Combat can be a decisive choice with the possibility of both combatants degrading quickly, including the degradation from Disorder seemed overkill. Literally! With units degrading in combat and the penalty for Disorder, units were fighting in (oftentimes) protracted melee with decisive hits hard to come by. In these no result melees, the attacker was simply pushed back and all were much weaker from earlier losses and compounded by Disorder. Eliminating Disorder sped up Close Combat and removed any semblance to a Double Jeopardy situation.
DeleteThe flow of battle in Game #2 without Disorder was really no different from the flow of battle in Game #1 with Disorder. Why keep it?
Yes, it seems sensible to me. I think disorder makes sense in a rule set such as Napoleonics where a unit can be softened up by artillery fire prior to combat, but in Ancients/Medievals/Renaissance it seems superfluous.
DeleteGreat sounding game and a victory for the good guys, well the less unpleasant bunch of armoured thugs, seems like it ran well and played out in a believable historical feel, a very successful game I think?
ReplyDeleteBest Iain
The game was a good one, Iain! Successful? I think so but that assessment really falls to my opponents.
DeleteJon, are you use any grading differentials for troop types? I'm thinking particularly of array/tenant militia types as against the more professional "fee'd men"/retainers?
ReplyDeleteYes. There are six grades of troop attributes.
DeleteInteresting that you have opted to write your own rules for what's something of a crowded market (WotR), no doubt prompted by the Perry figures.
ReplyDeleteWhat was it about published sets you disliked?
What, if any, current research lies behind the decision? Or is it more about mechanisms?
From personal experience (C20th experimental operational set) you cannot have enough playtesting! Preferably by others...
Once you are happy with the basic combat and movement rules, the idea to attempt historical battles is a sound one; if the narrative produces results close to the real event you know you are on to something. I see you are not afraid to weed out "sacred cows" of ideas (disorder) if it provides no benefit - have you considered disordering terrain effects? What impact would such things have and how to model it?
Neil
Neil, you ask a seemingly innocent question as to why we do what we do. I am sure this reason for striking out on your own quest for writing a set of rules is different for everyone. Really, this might be a topic better handled in a separate blog post. To answer quickly, I have many reasons for doing so including:
Delete(1) I enjoy the process, research, and discovery.
(2) I can remember the nuance and understand the design philosophy.
(3) I need not wonder about any particular (mis)interpretation.
(4) I can answer all questions from a position of authority.
Jonathan,
DeleteWhat struck me was more the decision to write a set of WotR rules as there see.s to be so many on the market at present; new Warlord book, Test of Resolve, Billhooks, Blood Red Roses, and many others...
Neil
The number of commercially published rulesets has never been a deterrent to testing my mettle in the design and development process. I am an avid collector of these rules, though.
DeleteDo you think these changes are gonna make in the final edition?
ReplyDeleteWell done Peter for carrying on with a bloody nose! I think I would have called the battle. I’m squimish around actually blood you know…
lol
Only time will tell but I think, yes. I have another addition to throw at the players next time.
DeleteYou don’t like blood or the outdoors. What else is on this list?
Another great game there Jon and good to see the rules tweaks are working well. I'm currently reading 'Richard III and the Battle of Bosworth' by Mike Ingram to try and get a handle on how armies operated at this time, both in the build up to, during and after the battle. Early days so far but fascinating reading, even if everyone seems to be called 'Edward' or 'Richard' ;)!
ReplyDeleteThanks, Steve! Ingram's book has been sitting next to my computer for a few weeks! I am still on the hunt for THE book that explains exactly how these armies fought.
DeleteI think we are all after THAT book, if one even exists! The preface to the Hail Caesar! supplement basically says we can at best make an educated guess, which is probably not that far from the truth. I'm hoping Ingram's books sheds a bit more light on the whole period, alongside comparing it with what was happening in Europe at the time.
DeleteIf you find, it pass it on! I am revisiting Graham's Edgcote book to see if he offers any insights.
Delete