Battle of Blore Heath

In my second gaming session of the week, I participated in a remote battle via Skype to refight the Battle of Blore Heath during the War of the Roses.  Richard hosted the battle and five players convened to fight it out.  Rules used were Richard's own Battle Commander rules.  This is my second game with these rules and there is a lot to like.

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). 

Again, even in defeat, this battle was great fun.  The interplay between the different arms and battle lines produces a very interesting and nail-biting game.

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. 

Jessop and His Scoundrels Escape!

Photo courtesy Wargamesinthedungeon

Having taken the siege gun 'Old Molly' in the previous episode (see Action at Oak Tree Forge), Jessop Callahan and his merry band set off to fetch the gun back into friendly territory.  Unfortunately for the colonials, the woods are teeming with hidden enemy ready to pounce when the time is right.  Flush with his success in securing the gun, Jessop thinks little of security on his march through 'Indian Country' and has neglected to send out flankers.  What could go wrong?

The gaming table is laid out and poker chips scattered about the beautiful terrain.  Jessop's colonials will be in march column with the goal of exiting the table in the lower right of the game table shown in the photo below.  His order of march is randomly determined. 

Similarly, the British ambushing forces are randomly allocated to jump off points too.  The British, under the command of Archibald Watts, are set on recovering 'Old Molly' lost during the heated action at Oak Tree Forge.  Archie's objective is to prevent the Americans from exiting with the gun and to destroy the colonials' will-to-fight by scattering Jessop's column.  

For more scenario details, better in-battle photos, and Matt's perspective on this action, please visit Wargamesinthedungeon, AWI Campaign, 'Old Molly' Part 2.

Initial dispositions
Photo courtesy Wargamesinthedungeon

Once again, my battle report is viewed from the Zoom-cam and told from the American perspective. Descriptions of the action are embedded within each photo. White arrows show movement. Red arrows show fire or charges. Yellow arrows show retreats. For me, viewing as a slide show works well.  Now, on to the action!

This action was really a nail-biter from the get-go.  When I first saw my marching order nearly surrounded by a ring of British jump-off points, my confidence was not high.  The Americans got lucky in that 'Old Molly' was in the middle of the column rather than at the back.  The British were unlucky in that only Archibald's regiment was situated on the far side of the creek.  If the Americans could push hard down the road and cross the bridge before Archibald could be reinforced, the battle may be won. 

Early on, Archibald had difficulty getting the Natives to act in a timely manner.  When the Natives finally closed, the warbands cut through the green troops and colonial skirmishers like a hot knife through butter.  That success was short-lived, however.  At a crucial time in the battle where Archibald could have dispersed the Virginians and perhaps the Delawareans as they approached their objective, the British failed two activations.  That, and the Natives inability to crush Jessop allowed the Americans to slip away.  As Jessop and 'Old Molly' exited the table, Archibald was heard to exclaim, "Jessop and his scoundrels escape!"  Oh, did I mention that Matt's newly painted British light infantry skirmishers, seen here, attacked quickly and retreated just as quickly?

Thanks again to Matt for designing and GMing a very entertaining action.  It really was a near run thing.  What waits for Game three?

Celtic Gaesatae in 6mm

Off the painting desk today are seven stands of 6mm Celtic Gaesatae, each of fifteen figures.  Total figure count in this batch is 105.  These naked Gauls are from Baccus 6mm. 

Earlier in the fall when I realized Telamon in 28mm would not see the gaming table until restrictions are lifted (well, more like on again, off again, on again...currently on again), I placed an order to Baccus to fill out the Celtic ranks.  If I could not conduct Telamon in 28mm, perhaps, I could field the forces to fight the battle in 6mm using Commands & Colors Ancients?  The order included Celtic Gaesatae, chariots, and warriors.  The chariots were completed earlier and a number of warrior stands were already present for duty.  With these Gaesatae, I may have sufficient Gauls for the battle.  I need to make a double check.  A handful of clothed, warrior stands may still need to be pressed into the painting queue.  

On the gaming front, activity continues to buzz with remote gaming.  Tuesday saw a return to the Spanish Civil War in 15mm for my second playtest of Send Not To Know by Graham Evans.  The battle photo below shows my Republicans tearing into the head of a Fascist column on the road to victory.

Photo courtesy Wargames for  Grown-ups

The game featured an interesting and fluid action wherein my Republicans were tasked with an impromptu defense of the approaches to Madrid while the Fascists raced toward the city.  In the end, my Republicans held out, for now.  To see the battle account, please visit, Cut Price Guadalajara on Grahams' blog.

On the gaming calendar for Sunday is the second of three planned actions in an AWI mini-campaign hosted by Matt at wargamesinthedungeon.  The British will attempt to take back the siege gun, 'Old Molly' before the rebels can make good their escape.  Should be fun!

Action at Oak Tree Forge

‘Old Molly’ captured by the Americans
Photo courtesy Wargames in the Dungeon

After two, one-off actions to get the mechanisms of Rebels and Patriots in-hand and to get me accustomed to gaming via Zoom, Matt suggested that we tackle a three-game mini-campaign.  I said, "yes", of course!  

The first action in this proposed tri-part series recounts the action at Oak Ridge Forge. To quickly set the scene, two enemy forces are converging on the forge at Oak Tree to take "Old Molly." The big gun is an old siege piece left at the forge for repair.  The colonists could certainly use the firepower the old gun offers and the British certainly do not want her falling into enemy hands.  I commanded the American forces under the able leadership of Major Jessop Callahan while Matt took the reins to guide the British forces under Major Archibald Watts.

Map of the battlefield (shown below) clearly shows "Old Molly" abandoned near the crossroads.  The entire British column arrives randomly at either blue 1/2/3, or 4/5/6.  The colonial units, on the other hand, each arrive randomly at either red 1/2, 3/4. or 5/6.  There likely will be not much coordination for the Americans early on.

For a more detailed background on the action and for Matt's battle report (with better game photos!), please visit, 'Old Molly' Part 1.  

Action at Oak Tree Forge
Photo courtesy Wargames in the Dungeon

My battle report is viewed from the Zoom-cam.  Photo descriptions embedded within each photo.  White arrows show movement.  Red arrows show fire.  Yellow arrows show retreats.  With formalities out of the way, on to the action!

Despite a near calamitous American friendly fire mishap threatening to put the entire American force to flight, Archibald called off the operation to secure the gun and disengaged his battered force.  Major Callahan gained 'old Molly' and a victory for his efforts.  I am sure we will meet again.

The action was sharp and played quickly for as many turns as we completed.  I lost count but guess we must have played at least 16 turns.  Matt has gaming via Zoom down flawlessly and was able to move and adjudicate both sides without hesitation.

Great fun and thank you Matt!  Until we meet again.

GWS2020: Game Era Preference Adjusted for Age

As mentioned in the previous post on The Great Wargaming Survey analysis (see: GWS2020: Game Period, Type, and Figure Size, Oh My!), I wanted to explore the effect of adding Age Group into the mix of already scrutinized attributes.  In addition to game period, game type, and figure size; age group is tossed into the blender and given a spin.

Like previous analyses, multiple correspondence analysis (MCA) will be the tool to compute groupings in an attempt to differentiate the various attributes.  How the survey respondents' favorite period, type, and size group with respect to age (and each other) are illustrated in Figure 1 below.  Adding age group into the analysis does not alter the relationships between period/type/size much but adds an interesting dimension into the picture. 

Figure 1

Are patterns easily discernable?  Clusters of attributes appear in Figure 1.  To make sense of these data points, overall results are broken down into manageable chunks to isolate some of the interesting relationships.

Dimension 1 (x-axis): Non-Historical vs Historical gaming

When MCA focuses on Dimension 1, a clear delineation between non-historical and historical gaming emerges.  In Figure 2, all of the non-historical attributes cluster on the left while all of historical attributes cluster on the right.  Only the attributes contributing to the Dimension 1 are denoted by borders surrounding their placement within the grid.  Distance between attributes of the the same class signifies similarity or dissimilarity.  The greater the distance between two points, the greater the dissimilarity.  What does Dimension 1 analysis suggest?

• Warhammer40k gamers are very dissimilar to Ancients and Napoleonics gamers.
• 28mm Heroics figure size is very dissimilar to 15-18mm figure size.
• Age group 31-40 is very dissimilar to the 51-60 and 61+ age groups. 

Figure 2

These results suggest there is clear separation between non-historical and historical wargamers in general and these subgroups in particular.  For example, wargamers in the 31-40 age group hold gaming preferences different from those in the 51+ age groups.

Dimension 2 (y-axis): Big Battles vs Skirmish gaming

This time, MCA focuses on Dimension 2.  Only the attributes contributing to the Dimension 2 are denoted by borders surrounding their placement within the grid.  In Figure 3, the attributes that are boxed in gray did not contribute in Dimension 2 explicitly but are assigned to Dimension 2 as the "Best" fit.  For the major bifurcation here, I choose the dissimilarity between Big Battles and Skirmish gaming.  Notice that Warhammer40k and Sci-Fi are very different too.

The big take-aways from Dimension 2 analysis are:

• Warhammer40k gamers are very dissimilar to Sci-Fi and WWII gamers.
• The preference toward skirmish gaming is very different from those preferring Big Battles.
• Age group 21-30 preferences are very dissimilar to 41-50 age group preferences.

Figure 3

Magic Quadrant Revisited.

As in the prior exercise, (see: GWS2020: Game Period, Type, and Figure Size, Oh My!), Dimension 1 and Dimension 2 analyses are further decomposed into quadrants.  The magic quadrant in Figure 4 shows a similar pattern to the magic quadrant in the previous analysis.  Generally, the attributes present in that earlier work (without age group) remain in similar relative positions to one another.  So, adding age group did not alter the relationships between game period, type, or figure size much at all.  

Figure 4

What general tendencies surface when age is added?  

In the upper left (yellow) quadrant, Warhammer 40k and 28mm Heroics remain as before.  Now we see that Warhammer40k is really a preference shared by the younger gamer cohorts.  Note that the 31-40 age group straddles the Warhammer40k and Fantasy/Sci-fi periods.  Perhaps this tendency suggests that the 31-40 age group is a cross-over age?

In the upper right (green) quadrant, Big Battles, 15-18mm, Ancients and Napoleonics remain as in the earlier quadrant analysis.  With the addition of age group, we find that this combination of gaming attributes are the domain of the Old Guard of the 61+ age group.  Notice that 51-60 age group straddles this grouping and the WWII grouping.

In the lower right (blue) quadrant, gaming preferences tend to concentrate on the combination of WWII, scenario-based gaming in 25-28mm.  Age Group 51-60 is a part of this grouping as well.

Finally, the lower left (pink) quadrant contains the Fantasy/Sci-Fi, skirmishing gamers.  Primarily age group 41-50 are found here but the 31-40 age cohort makes an appearance too.

Adding age into the collection of attributes, while not changing the overall traits and tendencies presented in the earlier MCA analysis, provides an additional dimension into the picture of the hobby.

Do these generalizations of gamer tendencies fit into the common body of knowledge of the state of the wargaming hobby or offer new insights?  

Does this analysis suggest a lifecycle approach to wargaming wherein young gamers tend to be drawn into the hobby through Warhammer40k, grow-up into Fantasy/Sci-Fi, convert to historical wargaming in their 40s, and continue this passion into old age?

Alternatively, perhaps wargamers enter into the hobby at a certain place and time, are attracted to what is popular, and then stick with that genre as long as they remain in the hobby?

When I entered into the hobby in the early 1970s, historical miniature wargaming was foremost.  That is where I landed and that is where I remain.  How many have a similar entry into the hobby?  How many entered the hobby in one genre (or period) and migrated into another?

Well, this is enough of this topic, for now.  I, at least, have a better understanding of the relationships between game period, game type, figure size, and age group.  I am firmly in the green quadrant with respect to Napoleonics but I prefer 25-28mm for Ancients.  Hopefully, this exercise has been useful to others as well.  Next time, I plan to dig into a new topic from the survey.  What next?  Perhaps something lighter.  Please stay tuned.

A Pair of SYW Irish Regiments and Virtual Gaming

Painting, of late, continues to focus on the 15mm side of the ledger.  Rather than continuing a steady stream of troops for the French Revolution, I break up the painting routine to field a pair of Irish regiments for the SYW.

Off the painting desk today are Irish regiments, de Clare and Rooth.  The 46 figures comprise Blue Moon foot and AB mounted officer.s  Flags are from Not by Appointment.  Both regiments saw limited service during the SYW but were much more active during the War of Austrian Succession.

de Clare

If these Irish regiments saw limited service during the SYW, why field them?  Should I not be painting gris-blanc Frenchmen if I am to field a French Army? Quite right.  I should.  But, sometimes I eat my dessert first!  With the colorful Irish finished (for now), SYW work will begin to pull French troops into the production queue.  First, other projects are seeing activity at the painting desk.

Rooth

On the gaming front, I enjoyed another fine game via Skype hosted by members of a wargaming group in the UK.  This marked my third visit and game with these fine fellows in the last three weeks.  Three games in three weeks?  Yes, indeed!  This must be a record for me.  In fact, over the last three weeks, I will have enjoyed five remote games.  Unbelievable, really, and definitely a record. 

While remote gaming during the pandemic has opened up a whole host of new opportunities for gaming, one downside is that I cannot take decent photos from my iPad during these remote games.  Therefore my chronicling battle reports from these activities is lacking.  I need to find a remedy for this.  Luckily, Graham captured a sampling of screenshots and retells the battle on his blog posting of Back to the 15th Century.   

Tuesday's battle featured a clash set during the War of the Roses (WotR) using 25mm figures and one of the member's developmental rules.  Rules are geared toward the tactical level with each commander leading one Battle.  The troops arrayed "en battle" looked great with banners and colors in abundance.  Interplay between the lines within a Battle is key and decisions are many.  My assigned Battle contained three lines of troops.  I fielded Longbowmen in the first line followed in support by two units of foot in the second and third lines.  Each line had varying degrees of armor and training.  My third line was peasant rubbish.  Having not gamed WotR, I did not know quite what to expect.

What happened? I enjoyed the game and rules very much!  My first Battle was sacrificed for the cause but I received a reinforcing Battle to deliver the coup de grace.  Rules seemed finely honed and play was smooth.  Looking forward to another trial run-out of the rules in the near future.  With exposure to so many new and interesting periods to game, I may be hard-pressed not to add on another project or two.  Did I mention the WotR game looked great?  Hmm.  Iain, are you taking notes?