Friday, 10 April 2009

The Last Act

The game finally ended last night with as usual both sides having their own interpretation of the outcome. We were all agreed that it was an Allied victory but there was quite strong disagreement about whether the French would have been able to withdraw with much of their forces intact. Things started quite well for the Allies, Steve's Austrians finally took the village on the French left, effectively finishing any resistance on that flank and on the left Justin's' Russians were slowly pushing the remaining French out of the walled enclosure. However I let the side down with a failed Prussian attack in the centre. Despite a numerical and class advantage I could only manage to roll snake eyes for my melee dice followed by a total of six with three dice for my morale. Predictably the Prussian assault was short lived.
Fortunately for me the French left wing also collapsed around this time with units streaming back towards safety. At one stage there were seven separate routs taking place and if you play using ITGM rules you'll know how that can lead to whole divisions taking flight. This effectively ended the game, the French had no choice now but to withdraw with as much of their force in one piece as possible. In my opinion this would have been difficult, the routing left wing was already beginning to pin the centre which itself now had only one effective division and there was little space for the French to use their cavalry advantage. In addition more routs would have been generated possibly causing the centre to collapse. Admittedly the allies had little cavalry to take advantage of the situation but I think it's safe to say there would have been dancing in the streets of Vienna and Moscow, though Berlin might have remained discretely silent.
At the end of the day the little lads all go back on their storage trays before being put on the shelves to await their next outing, the only casualties being a bruised ego or two. The game did however get us thinking more seriously about running a campaign as opposed to one off battles. We've tried campaigns in the past with varying degrees of success but I think all of us agree that some method of linking our battles and their knock on effects is what we need to be aiming at. We've set a provisional date of mid July to get something up and running which will tie in with our return from a weekend at the WHC in Scarborough. This should give us plenty of time to leave it to the last minute before deciding anything. Either way it will all be recorded here with pictures in glorious colour.
Finally as no one tried to guess where I got the title for my last post, the answer is, David Chandlers "Campaigns of Napoleon" the chapter dealing with the 1809 campaign.

3 comments:

BFG said...

Noel lokks and sounds fantastic, one method I found very good for campaigns is the "Box" system used in the ACW board game "A House Divided". The key towns and cities are linked by lines, all casualties etc asre recorded after each confrontation, with an ide on what instigates a full blown battle on the table top. i.e. The size of the forces. A simple equation and dice roll for anything smaller providing results.
I can show you a copy the next time we get together.
In my opinion this system allows the feel of a real campaign, with consequences on your decisions coming to the fore, while allowing you to do the most important things, playing with the figures.
The aim is to avoid the player throwing away key troops early and with gay abandon.
Great photos as usual, relly inspirational.

Noel said...

Cheers for the comments and I'll look forward to seeing the campaign system you mentioned. It sounds pretty like much what I'm after.

Jeff said...

Perhaps you should take all photos and paraphenalia with you to Scarborough and get Mr Ingham to adjudicate the result, after all, he is 'famous' for his judgements.