After their rather sharp disagreement at the Emperor's Ball, it is no surprise that the Marquis des Aix-En-Pains and the Duke of Bad Schmaltzberg found themselves embroiled in war!
Game Note: This is the first game of my replay of the War of the Emperor's Balls
campaign, and the associated Simplicity in Hexes
rules which can be found at the Numbers,
Wargames and Arsing About blog. Many thanks to Kaptain Kobold of The Stronghold Rebuilt for posting about it; that is how I found the rules/campaign. Now back to the story!
The Duke stole a march on his rival and advances into the Marquis' territory. His vanguard runs into a force defending a hill.
Game Note: The first battle uses scenario 4 from One Hour Wargames
, in which the entire Blue army enters on turn 1. For this play-through I added an activation mechanic; roll 2D6 and use the higher roll to indicate the number of units that can act in the turn. The mechanic is borrowed from Squad Hammer
.
Accurate fire by the artillery on the hill drives off some cavalry. However, the Duke's full army advances onto the battlefield.
Infantry and cavalry try to assault the artillery on the hill. The cannon fire is just to much to bear.
Reinforcements from the Marquis arrive. The Marquis' horse routs the Ducal cavalry.
Repeated assaults on the hill left the Duke's second cavalry in tatters and an infantry unit in full flight.
The remaining Ducal cavalry also flees as firefights break out across the field.
Another Ducal infantry routs.
The remaining infantry persevere.
Game Note: I also added an army morale mechanic, a la the Portable Wargame.
Once an army passed 50% casualties it had to roll morale or would be forced to call off attacks. The Duke's army passed its morale test.
But the volume of fire against them is too great.
And they are cut down.
The Marquis des Aix-En-Pains has inflicted some pain upon his rival. He is confident that the Duke will retreat, and he will be ready to pounce!
Game Notes
When I read Kaptain Kobold's test game of
Simplicity in Hexes I was intrigued. I had perused Neil Thomas's
Simplicity in Practice rules (the basis for
SiH)
before but ironically found them unnecessarily convoluted. If they could be simplified, however, they could very well meet my needs. I took a peek (they're free after all) and liked what I saw. I decided to give them a test run.
For my first test, I played them as written, aside from adding activation and army morale mechanics (as described above). Also, obviously, I used a square instead of hex grid.
Overall, they are a well done set of rules. Movement is pretty standard although the movement rate is shorter than my typical rules (1 space for infantry). However, the rate works well on the small grid (I used 8 x 10 but standard
SiH uses a 6 x 6 grid). Firing is straightforward - for each unit firing roll a D6 with a target number based on the unit firing. Success = 1 hit. Modifiers are kept to a minimum. So far so good in my eyes.
At first glance, I was a bit concerned about melee (or charge combat as labeled in
SiH). It uses an opposed die roll mechanic, with the combat result dependent on the difference between rolls. I'm usually not a fan of having to calculate differences; I prefer to look at the die roll and immediately know if I hit or not. Nevertheless, I decided to give the charge combat rules a try. I must admit that they worked better than I expected. The math was not too onerous (at least I did not have to divide!). Furthermore, I found a few advantages to this system:
- Because of the different mechanic, melee felt different than fire. I think that's appropriate.
- The defender has a chance to damage the attacker. Again, it felt right.
- I forgot to apply the roll of 6 = 2 hits rule in fire combat. As a result, melee tended to be a bit more decisive than fire combat. Ironically, that also seemed appropriate.
- Interestingly, melee is automatic if a unit enters a space adjacent to an enemy. This simple rule solves a problem with which I have struggled lo these many years. Are adjacent enemies engaged in a firefight or crossing bayonets? Well, Jay Ward (author of SiH) has come to my rescue!
- Although it never came up, the retreat rules also simply yet effectively account for troops in defensive positions. If defeated in melee, defenders typically retreat. If it is a minor defeat, however, troops in defensive positions may stay put. A serious defeat will see them bail out regardless of their position. Again, it is simple yet makes sense.
I am a big proponent of miniature rules having to feel right. I must say that SiH gets it right for melee, as well as for the rest. There was not one area of the rules that I had a major disagreement with. There are some areas I still need to explore (I did not use a leader and I'm not sold on the SiH approach yet). At the core, however, I enthusiastically say that these rules work really well! You will definitely see more SiH on my table!
If that were not enough, Mr. Ward also provides a short and simple campaign. It is only 3 games long, which should be perfect for an evening of battle (My first test game lasted 39 minutes). It utilizes the scenarios from
One Hour Wargames. I have been a big fan of
OHW scenarios for years. They are interesting tactical situations but are short games that require only 6 units per side. They are perfect for this
Lazy Gamer!
Overall, I must say kudos to Mr. Ward - Simplicity in Hexes is a real winner!
