Some thoughts on De Bellis Solitarius

I’m currently doing the groundwork for a solo DBA campaign set in the Dark Ages and provisionally titled ‘Mighty Albion’. As part of the preparation I’ve played a few solo DBA games using the De Bellis Solitarius rules variant written by Chad La Mons. Although this is a generally excellent variant, some aspects have proved a little problematic in the games I’ve played. This has led me to think about making some changes for the purposes of the campaign:

1. Deployment

As written, this is quite rigid. For example, all of the NPG’s (Non-Player General’s) elements are grouped according to their type (e.g. all Spears will be grouped together). This fails to allow for mixing missile troops and other foot, or for mixing horse and foot. The deployment table also throws up, occasionally, some quite bizarre set-ups. So as an alternative, for each of the NPG armies in the campaign I intend to map out four ‘typical’ formations; then, prior to deployment, throw a D6. If the result is a one or two, I will consult the DBS rulesheet, throw again, and proceed as per the original rules. However if the throw is a three, four, five or six, I will set out the NPG army as per the equivalently numbered ‘typical’ formation.

2.  The Tactical Engine

While this is quite powerful as written, it does throw up some odd results from time to time. The NPG may fail to make an ‘obvious’ move, because of the constraints placed on him by the battleplan generator; or he may become excessively (and unrealistically) static and defensive after sustaining a couple of losses. These criticisms are partly dealt with by Chad’s caveat towards the end of his document, where he writes: ‘Exercise your best tactical judgement while at the same time remaining within the parameters of the NPG’s mood… It might be helpful at this point to view the NPG as your Commander, issuing out orders that you must manifest as best as you see fit.’

Despite this caveat, using the rules as written I’ve found that there will still be points where you think to yourself: ‘Hmmm, the NPG is committed to a defensive strategy, but in fact if he chose this moment to move his whole line into contact with my disordered one he would most likely win the game.’ It seems to me that in these circumstances – and equally for example where it would be madness to attack, or alternatively to not move that single element into a potentially game-winning flanking support position against my general – there needs to be a mechanism for varying the strictures of the DBS tactical engine.

To reflect this, I intend to try the following rules variant. Faced with the sort of quandary described above, rather than automatically implement the course of action prescribed by the DBS tactical engine, instead use percentage dice to determine the NPG’s actions based on the probability of how a competent player/general would act in the circumstances. For example, if a general assault rather than a defensive realignment might win the game for the NPG at a pivotal point in the battle, you might allocate a 75% probability to this assault occuring and a 25% probability to the NPG sticking to his defensive approach. Use this mechanism no more than three times per game. I’m hoping that this option, used sparingly, won’t break the tactical engine but will instead add to the enjoyment and realism of the game, and provide me with a greater challenge!

The Moyry Pass

In the year 1600, as Lord Mountjoy succeeded the Earl of Essex as viceroy of Ireland, Hugh O’Neill was at the height of his power. He had given the English a bloody nose at Clontibret (1595) and The Yellow Ford (1598), and had successfully prevented the enemy from encroaching into his earlship of Tyrone. His first confrontation with Mountjoy, the man who was eventually to prove his match, occurred in the autumn of that year when the English leader attempted to force the Moyry Pass, the difficult and well-defended gateway to Ulster. The succeeding battle – ‘one of the greatest fights that hath been seen in Ireland’ – provides excellent material for a solo scenario. For a full account of the battle see G.A. Hayes-McCoy’s comprehensive ‘Irish Battles – A Military History Of Ireland’. You can also read a brief account of the battle on Wikipedia.

The battlefield should be set out along roughly the following lines (click on image for a full size version):

As you can see, the battlefield is effectively divided into three distinct zones. In the centre, the pass is blocked by three barriers, “long traverses with huge and high flankers of great stones, mingled with turf and staked on both sides with palisadoes wattled” (Fynes Moryson, Mountjoy’s secretary). Plashed barriers separated the central highway from the rough rising ground on either side.

As a solo scenario, you take the side of the English commander, who must force the Irish from two of the three zones in order to win the day. The English forces consisted of 3,000 foot – a mix of pike and shot, some of largely untried quality – and 300 horse. The number of Irish troops is unknown, but for the purposes of this scenario we should assume that they significantly outnumber the English; as a rough guideline allow them at least 50% greater strength. The Irish appear to have fought well and to have had both high morale and a high degree of mobility, and it is likely that they would have been armed similarly to the English (though perhaps with a greater preponderance of calivers over pikes). The actual number of figures or elements used should be tailored to your preferred ruleset in order to give both sides a chance of winning the battle.

The following scenario notes apply:

A. Initial disposition of Irish troops unknown. As the English commander you can see that some troops are manning the first barricade, and there appear to be some troops on both sides of the pass along the rising ground. Lay your plans and deploy your troops.

B. Dice for Irish dispositions once your troops have begun their advance into the pass. Note that you cannot re-allocate or shuffle your infantry once you have seen the Irish dispositions, but must continue with your initial plan of attack. You can however freely move your cavalry to whichever side of the battlefield you wish at any time. Throw a D6 to determine the Irish dispositions:

1,2: One third of all troops placed in each of the 3 combat zones (left, right and centre)

3,4: Half of all troops placed in the pass itself, remainder divided equally between flanks

5: Irish centre and Irish left strongly manned, Irish right screened only

6: Irish centre and Irish right strongly manned, Irish left screened only

C. The English will fight at a combat disadvantage of minus one on the flanks of rough, rising ground, and will suffer a movement penalty on that terrain of minus 25%.

D. The Irish behind the barricades count as being in soft cover.

E. Irish casualties: eliminated or routing elements have a chance of rallying and reappearing along the Irish baseline, in the sector of the battlefield from which they fled. Throw a D6 at the start of the Irish turn to determine this for each such element, a throw of 5 or 6 meaning that they have successfully rallied.

F. Irish at the barriers: any elements pushed back from the barriers will automatically retreat to the next barrier to their rear. They will do this successfully unless their retreat is physically blocked by an English unit.

G. Any Irish shot along the rough ground will attempt to enfilade the advancing English in the pass unless they are attacked to their own front.

H. Irish troops on the rough ground attacked to their front will attempt to close with the English if they outnumber them by a factor of 3:2 or better. Otherwise they will engage the English in a fire-fight whilst slowly falling back to avoid contact. They will however hold their ground at all costs if they have fallen back to the line of the last barricade in the pass.

I. As the English commander you must attack the barriers in the pass with a minimum of one quarter of your force, though these troops may be used to hold or pin the Irish at their barrier(s) rather than attempt to actually storm them.

J. To reiterate, you win if you succeed in pushing the Irish off the field in any two sectors of the terrain; should this happen the Irish will have lost their overall advantage and will melt into the hills. Any other result means that the Irish have won.

Good luck and happy gaming!

Mercenaries And Their Masters

Pen And Sword have recently republished Michael Mallett’s ground-breaking 1974 study of warfare in early Renaissance Italy, ‘Mercenaries and their Masters’. Mallett’s study is a detailed refutation of the thesis advanced by Oman and others that the early Italian Renaissance military scene was a backwater blighted by the anachronistic heavy cavalry tactics of the condottieri.

I can heartily recommend this book, which is full of detail but also immensely readable. Mallett surveys Italian warfare and its social context from the 13th century through to the Italian Wars of the 16th century, focusing in particular on the development of the complex relationship between city states and condottiere captains, and their contribution to the refinement of the art of war. He explodes a number of myths, including that of the ‘bloodless battle’ derided by Machiavelli and his successors, as well as the notion that mercenaries were inevitably venal and treacherous. The reality was far less straightforward, and Mallett cites much original source material to back up what is now widely regarded as essential reading.

This is an excellent, detailed introduction to the subject which has inspired me to investigate early Renaissance Italy further as a fruitful arena for wargaming. If you have any interest in the period it’s well worth the cover price.

Pictured above: Bartolomeo Colleoni, prominent condottiere and commander of the Venetian army from 1455 to 1475.

The Last Apostle

“It was a pleasant sight, if a man’s skin had not been in hazard.”

John Taylor, Chaplain and Chronicler to Henry VIII, 1513.

The Background

This scenario is loosely based on an incident that occurred during Henry VIII’s 1513 invasion of France, though it may readily be adapted for any period between the Renaissance and the late nineteenth century.

When Henry’s army assembled at Calais in the summer of 1513, it had with it ‘twelve guns of unusual magnitude each cast in the image of an apostle’ (Charles Cruickshank, ‘Henry VIII and the Invasion of France’, Alan Sutton 1990). The king was inordinately proud of the large artillery train he took with him on the expedition, and the apostles were his particular favourites. But when the English were surprised by a French force in the neighbourhood of Tournehem in late August, one of the apostles – St John the Evangelist – became separated from the main body of the army in the aftermath of the fighting, and slipped into a deep stream in the ensuing confusion. An English detachment assigned to fish out the gun – which weighed over three tons – was overwhelmed by a body of French troops, and the apostle was lost.

Henry was furious. The Earl of Essex and Sir Rees ap Thomas set out to see whether they could retrieve the gun, as well as a bombard that the French had seized at the same time. When they arrived on the scene they realised that whilst the bombard had already been removed to safety by the enemy, they had a good chance of saving St John, which was still mired in the stream. The great gun was dragged from the water, but while they were preparing to move off with it a large French force appeared. Essex wanted to attack at once, but Thomas pointed out that they were outnumbered, and moreover that their orders were to retrieve the apostle – not to fight a general engagement. The Welshman’s counsel prevailed, and the English – with the apostle harnessed to a team of Flanders mares – headed back to camp. At this point the French cavalry launched an attack on the rear of the English column, but they were beaten off with great spirit. Essex and Thomas arrived back at Henry’s camp in triumph.

The Scenario

This small action provides a number of possibilities for solo scenarios, with either or both of the discrete phases of action providing enough material for an interesting game. I have chosen to concentrate on the second phase, i.e. Essex and Thomas’s rescue of the gun, and to assign the NPG (non-player general) role to the French, and the human general to the English side. This however could be reversed with little difficulty should you wish to do so.

The balance of forces engaged in this fight clearly favoured the French, but other than that details are sketchy. I would suggest the following order of battle, which you will need to adjust to fit your chosen rule set (I tend to use the movement and combat values in DBA, with some house amendments):

The English:

1 x Knight General (the Earl of Essex and Sir Rees ap Thomas)

3 x Demi-Lances (medium cavalry)

4 x Border Horse (light cavalry)

2 x Bowmen

1 x Limber Team (plus out-riders)

The French:

3 x Gendarmes (knights) inc. General

4 x Stradiots (light horse)

2 x Mounted Crossbowmen

2 x Mounted Arquebusiers

2 x Skirmishers

The Battlefield

The engagement is fought out on a battlefield consisting of good going dotted with four small copses. A stream crosses one edge of the battlefield diagonally; it should be treated as impassable terrain for the purposes of this game, except for the French skirmishers and English bowmen. At the start of the scenario the apostle is in the stream. See the map for further information including the starting positions of the two main forces. Note that this is my own interpretation and is necessarily a highly impressionistic one! Click on the image below for a larger version:

Winning The Battle

You will achieve victory if you meet all of the following game objectives:

1. The limber team and attached apostle exit the battlefield safely.

2. Your general exits the battlefield safely.

3. At least 50% of your units manage to leave the battlefield in good order (i.e. not pushed back across the baseline or routing).

Note that the English can only exit from the corner of the board where they were initially deployed. If you meet the first and second objectives but lose more than half your troops, you have achieved an honourable draw. Any other result and the French win!

Playing The Game

As commander of the English side, you will have to deal with a number of unknowns:

1. How long will it take to drag the apostle out of the stream?

2. When will the main French force attack, and what form will their attack take?

3. Where have the French deployed their skirmishers?

Once the battlefield has been set up and the two forces have been deployed, the English are free to move towards the stream to retrieve the gun, and take the first game turn. You may choose to throw out a defensive screen to cover any French advance, or you may prefer to concentrate on getting your troops to the stream as a single body. Note however that you may not attack the French at this stage. When the English move is completed, throw a D6. Results as follows:

1 – 4 : the French hold back, no action this turn.

5 : the French are indecisive, throw again.

6 : the French will attack this turn.

Repeat this procedure at the end of each English turn until the French force attacks.

Following the completion of the first English game turn, throw a D6 to determine the position of the French skirmishers, with the following result:

1 – 3 : the skirmishers are positioned across the stream.

4 : the skirmishers are hidden in the copse nearest the English entry point.

5 – 6 : the skirmishers are deployed in the copse nearest the stream.

Note that the French skirmishers will attempt to disable the limber team. Failing that, they will harrass the nearest English unit(s). If positioned across the stream, they are able to cross it without suffering a movement penalty, but fight at a minus one combat penalty if caught in the stream itself by any of the English horse or foot.

Once the English limber team has reached the apostle, throw a D6 – this determines the number of turns it will take to pull the apostle out of the water and limber it up.

Once a French attack has been triggered, you must determine the tactics that the French general will employ. You may well choose to use your own solo ‘house rules’ to this end, but here are a few suggestions based on simple dice throws. Throw two D6 and proceed as follows:

2 – 3 : Gendarmes and Stradiots move to block the English exit point. Other troops deploy to harrass the English at the stream and at any weak points along their line.

4 : Mounted Crossbowmen and Mounted Arquebusiers move to screen off the English exit point while other troops concentrate on destroying the limber team.

5 : Mounted Crossbowmen and Mounted Arquebusiers move to screen off the English exit point while other troops concentrate on killing the English general.

6 – 7 : All French units move to block the English exit point.

8 : The whole French force launches a general attack along the English line.

9 – 10 : All French troops focus on killing the English general.

11 – 12 : The whole French force focuses on destroying the limber team.

Final Thoughts

I hope that this simple scenario, based on a small-scale engagement in Henry VIII’s 1513 French campaign, will provide plenty of scope for adaptation and variation. Most of the suggestions I’ve made here – for example as to the composition of the two sides, the French tactics, and the victory conditions – are tentative proposals which would undoubtedly benefit from further development. Scales and distances will have to be tweaked to fit in with your favoured ruleset – the English need to have a reasonable chance of accomplishing their mission, and the French of engaging them en masse!

It should be fairly straightforward to transpose this game into other periods. It will neatly fit into most historical periods from the late medieval age to the beginning of the modern era. And of course by replacing the stranded gun with, for example, a supply wagon or siege engine it would also be possible to morph it backwards into earlier times.

Top Tip!

I’m currently play-testing a scenario based on an incident from Henry VIII’s invasion of France in 1513. It should be ready to post in a week or two, but in the meantime here’s a ‘top tip’ for anyone out there who fancies a quick game of solo DBA without shelling out the money for armies…

I used to be a fairly regular player of DBA online (DBAOL), which (as the name suggests) is an internet implementation of the DBA ancients/medieval ruleset. In recent years the number of players has been on the decline, and there have been a series of reported issues that have made it a less attractive option (flaws in the program that unscrupulous players can exploit, and other alleged problems which I won’t go into here). However, it’s still a cracking game, and it’s still possible to freely download it onto your computer to play solo ‘hotseat’ games.

Why bother, you might ask… Well, for one thing DBAOL can be played solo as it stands, or it can be made a little more challenging by using the De Bellis Solitarius rules variant (print out the rules and equip yourself with a couple of dice). For another thing, the DBAOL program gives you access to 180 painted virtual armies, and allows you to play any match-up you like with a minimum of fuss and zero expense. I fancied a couple of quickies this morning, so I’ve just pitted the Later Imperialists against Burgundian Ordnance, and Italian Condotta versus the Later Hungarians. And I haven’t even had breakfast yet ;o)

So what’s not to like? Hopefully the guys behind DBAOL will resolve the outstanding issues sometime soon and I can go back to playing my favourite online game against real live opponents…in cyberspace. In the meantime, I’ve got the perfect computer based simulation for ancient/medieval solo play. You can download the game for free here: http://www.dbaol.com/

Happy gaming, companeros!

Lone Warrior – New Issue Out Now

Many thanks to Bob Stewart for permission to reproduce the following excellent review of the latest issue of Lone Warrior, which he originally posted on the Solo Wargames Yahoo Group :

Lone Warrior is the quarterly publication of the Solo Wargamers Association, and currently averages 52 pages (with no ads or other bumph), dedicated to all aspects of Solo Wargaming.

From an historical point of view, a lot of Modern era Wargaming started off (by default) as Solo Wargaming, simply because there were so few people who were into the hobby, after WWII (although the roots of Solo Wargaming go back a lot further, and even Napoleon used to move counters around to try and optimize what he foresaw as the attack and counterattack options against his opponent states). The Lone Warrior is a bit of a stand out, because it was founded in 1976 by John Bennett, and has the active support of such well-known Soloists as Don Featherstone, Terry Wise, and Stuart Asquith. The current editor, Rich Barbuto, is a Professor at the US Army’s Command and General Staff College, no less. Some of the other names on the masthead (and authors who have frequently appeared) may not be as well known as these gentlemen, but their additions to the hobby have been legend.

With that, here’s the latest slate: Steve Turner is first up to bat, with another excellent installment of his “With Fife and Drum” series (18th Century Wargames Campaign). You can jump in anywhere with Steve’s reports, and the quality of the writing has you scratching your head and reaching for an historical atlas, sure that he must be writing about a “real” campaign, he does that great a job in bringing it to life. His computer generated maps are delicious, and the quality of his battle reports (with the trumpet calls and the ground shaking with the horse charges) is awe-inspiring (no matter what YOUR period of interest — this is a high standard for us ALL to try and emulate).

Jim Zylka has had a number of articles on a new approach to AI in solo gaming, and in this issue he has a nice little review of the reprint of Stuart Asquith’s “The Partizan Press Guide to Solo Wargaming”. It’s nice to see one of the cornerstones of Modern Solo is back in print, under the guidance of Stuart (who says he is ostensibly “retired”). There is a short list of back issues on the same page, which brings the shocking discovery that (now that MagWeb is currently struggling), there has been a run on back issues! Better get them while they are still around, folks. Think it’s about $7 each, what with postage (and a bargoon, for all of that). Lots of us go back and re-read old issues,
when the urge to game Solo, wanes.

Next up is a VERY entertaining interview with Russ Lockwood (yes, he of the redoubtable MagWeb), about how he orchestrated a Space Empire Campaign (well, what else could the article be called but The Decline and Fall of the Fifth Space Empire, subtitled, Lockwood’s 5th Space Symphony). These are so called Big Picture questions, that equally apply to almost ALL periods — like the start off question, “What inspired this?” Through to “How to you rank Realism versus Playability?” This is a rare chance to peek behind the mask of a very successful rule writer, and see what goes into writing rules that really seem to “work”. I would highly recommend you read this, and read this, and store it under your pillow and read it again.

Marvin Scott is up with the next home run article on Communication. This is a nice 2-pager with a good overview of how the technology of the times dictated the quality of the coordination of the various elements. Marvin has a nice crisp style, and brings you effortlessly along through various periods, and then gives us a nice little one-pager Indian Scout Game, with a little Bibliography (these are SO important because once your interest is whetted up, then you need to know where to go to get more details).

Jonathan Aird may not be a name that jumps to your mind when you think of Solo Wargames, but it should be. He’s been a regular contributor, and this time he turns his laser sights on Warhammer 40K and a scenario based on Laserburn, titled simply Clear the Bunker. He gives some really clean ideas for using cards and dice to set up variable opposition, and with 700 plus variations, you can play this scenario through a whole bunch of times without it getting stale. Don’t think this is “just” for Space-heads, either, cause it would be easy to transcribe the ideas to a lot of other eras or theatres, from Biblical to WWII.

Then there’s some drivel from that old rattle-bag, Bob Stewart. Something to do with The Poacher’s Plunge, and the Forlorn Hope. It reads like something from a Harlequin series for men, but for some reason, they keep on publishing the stuff. Lots of generators for Terrain, or Constructing a Frontier Fort, so it’s not all a loss, I suppose. I guess they’re trying to cater to the geriatric crowd, too, with a bed-time story. Think of it as an interlude with Musak, before the next significant Act.

And that Act comes in with a BANG. Graham Empson delivers some great ideas about an approach-to-target (translatable into lots of periods) using ACW as the specific vehicle. Each side gets a partial map, with a cross-roads as the target. Graham goes through the mechanics of how this gets set up using Solo and variability (for both terrain squares and who might be skulking there), so that you almost never get a 100% repeat when you replay the module again. The thing I appreciate with Graham’s work, is that it is really detailed, and serves as a complete game-inna-couple-of-pages. He also points out some areas where YOU can tweak the tables to get your own flavor, if that’s more to your liking.

Isn’t a Solo Gamer at a Convention a kind of Oxymoron? Well, Jonathan Aird doesn’t seem to think so, and he takes us on a guided tour for Soloists, of Salute 2009, one of the biggest 1-day shows in the UK. Makes me want to pack a backpack, and hire a rowboat bound for England (with fond hopes of getting there, in time for next year’s Salute 2010). Thanks, Jonathan! (Almost as good as going there).

And the whole LW thing is skillfully piloted, annotated, and perked up with line graphics under the most capable hand of the Ed. The end result is a thing of beauty. And you too can have this thing of beauty delivered right to your doorstep, 4 times a year, for the paltry sum of $25 per year (North American rates) or $30 if you live across the pond, or some equally remote part of the global village (sorry Graham, no offence). Back issues are being flushed out at $5 for North America, and $8 for GB’ers (Global Villagers). Don’t do the usual procrastination trick! GB’ers are going to have to pay $40 come 2010, because of increased costs on postage, and tightening production and mailing costs for mail sent into the Great Ether, so if you snooze, you lose! You can pre-pay for 2 years at the old price, and assure the arrival of cheap thrills, quarterly. Check, International Money Order, or US cash goes to Solo Wargamer Association, 1707 Ridge Road, Leavenworth KS, USA 66048. Paypal can be sent to this account: lonewarrior@kc.rr.com (and make sure that you include YOUR mailing address in the Paypal note section, otherwise Rich is gonna think someone is sending him a free turkey dinner coupon!)

Bob
Seur D’Armadilleaux

New Links Added

I’ve just added links to a couple of excellent wargames blogs. First up is Mark Davies’ Hesperiana blog, which mainly features Mark’s HoTT and DBA gaming, campaigning and armies. Secondly I’ve added a link to  Robin Sutton’s Wargamingnz blog, which currently showcases an inspiring ‘Lost Worlds’ HoTT campaign. Neither blog is specifically about solo wargaming but both are full of ideas and well worth a visit. Both blogs are New Zealand based – nice to see that wargaming is flourishing there!

The Battle Of Maldon

The battle of Maldon, 991 AD, is mentioned both in the Anglo-Saxon Chronicle and in a famous eponymous poem of the period. It was an important engagement which led to the humiliating Saxon practice of paying ‘danegeld’ in exchange for peace. Wikipedia provides the following concise account of the battle:

“The Vikings sailed up the Blackwater (then called the Panta), and Byrhtnoth called out his levy. The poem begins with him ordering his men to stand and how to hold weapons. His men, except for his household guard, were peasants and householders from the area. He ordered them to “send steed away and stride forwards”: they arrived on horses but fought on foot. The Vikings sailed up to a small island in the river. At ebb, the river leaves a land bridge from this island to the shore; the description seems to have matched the Northey Island causeway at that time. This would place the site of the battle about two miles southeast of Maldon. Olaf addressed the Saxons, promising to sail away if he was paid with gold and armour from the lord. Byrhtnoth refused.

Olaf’s forces could not make headway against the troops guarding the small land bridge, and he asked Byrhtnoth to allow his warriors onto the shore. Byrhtnoth, for his ofermōde ["pride" or "excess of courage"], let all the Vikings cross to the mainland. The Vikings overcame the Saxons after losing many men, killing Byrhtnoth. An Anglo-Saxon called Godrīc fled riding Byrhtnoth’s horse. Godrīc’s brothers Godwine and Godwīg followed him. Then many Anglo-Saxons fled, recognizing the horse and thinking that its rider was Byrhtnoth fleeing. After the battle Byrhtnoth’s body was found with its head missing, but his gold-hilted sword was still with his body.”

This battle provides excellent material for a solo game. The map above provides the initial dispositions (click on the map to go to a larger version). Note that the marshy ground does not appear to have affected the fighting and may therefore be disregarded as a terrain factor, at your discretion. The following scenario has been designed with a standard small-scale DBA battle in mind, but it would be a simple matter to adapt the opposing forces to other rulesets – the Danes were (as usual) tooled-up professional raiders, while the Saxons fielded a few housecarls and a mass of inexperienced levies.

The Scenario

The Danes: 1 x Blade General (Olaf Tryggvason), 11 x Blades

The Saxons: 1 x Blade General (Byrhtnoth), 2 x Blades (Housecarls), 8 x Spears (Fyrd), 1 x Psiloi (Light Troops)

Deployment: all Danes are deployed in a single, one-element wide column on the causeway, with Olaf Tryggvason at least three elements back from the front. They are faced at the end of the causeway by a single element of Saxon Housecarls (not Byrhtnoth’s element). The causeway is one element wide.

Phase One

During this Phase the Danes on the causeway must attack the Housecarls holding its landward end. During this Phase the Danes fight at a – 2 combat penalty, reflecting the historical performance of the respective troops. The Housecarls will hold their position and will not advance further down the causeway if the Danes are pushed back. However, if pushed back the Danes must attack again next turn.

At the start of each game turn during this Phase throw a D6. On a throw of 1 or 2, Byrhtnoth calls on his Housecarls to retire to the main body of his army, and the Phase ends immediately. At the end of game turn six this will be automatically triggered, and Phase One will end.

Phase Two

Redeploy the Housecarls as part of the Saxon line, then draw up the Danish force (minus any casualties they have suffered) opposite them, i.e. with all Danish troops now across the river and over the causeway. The main battle may now commence. Note that the Danes will fight on until two thirds of their original strength has been destroyed (8 elements) and the Saxons will fight on so long as a Housecarl unit remains on the field (but see below).

To reflect the historical weakness of the Saxon Fyrd in this battle, all Spear elements will fight at a penalty of – 1. In addition, if a Housecarl unit is destroyed, throw a D6: on a throw of 1 all Saxon Fyrd will immediately flee the battlefield.

This gives a reasonable re-play of the original battle. However, for added spice any or all of the following extras can be included:

1. Saxon Morale. At the start of Phase Two throw a D6 and note the following results. If a 1 or 2, the Saxon Fyrd will fight on a – 1 factor for combat as in the main rules. If a 3 or 4, they will be inspired by Byrhtnoth’s honourable behaviour and fight at their regular combat value. If a 5 or 6, they will be imbued with martial spirit and fight at a bonus of + 1 during their first combat, and at their usual combat value thereafter.

2. Byrhtnoth’s Single Combats. To reflect the poem’s account of Byrhtnoth’s individual prowess, he will take on three Danish warriors at the start of Phase Two. You can either place individual figures on the table to represent the combatants, or run it as a ‘virtual’ combat. Dice for each separate combat in turn, throwing a D6 for each combatant and adding + 2 to Byrhtnoth’s dice score. If he is beaten, Byrhtnoth is deemed to have been killed and his element must immediately be removed from play. If he wins all three combats then the Danes will be deemed to have become demoralised, and will fight at a penalty of – 1 for the remainder of the battle. If Byrhtnoth is unbeaten at the end of the three combats but has drawn one or more of them, then Danish morale will be temporarily shaken and they will fight at a penalty of – 1 during the next round of combat only.

3. Godric’s Treachery. To recreate another aspect of the poem’s account of the battle, dice for the reliability of Godric and his kin once the first round of fighting in Phase Two has been completed. Throw a D6 and proceed as follows: if a 1 or 2, Godric defects and two Fyrd elements flee the battlefield (dice or draw a card to determine which ones); if a 3 or 4, Godric flees and one Fyrd unit follows his cowardly example; if a 5 or 6, Godric overcomes his fear and stays to fight…in which case history has done him a grave disservice!

Feel free to mix and match any of these additional rules or to add others, as you see fit. After all, this was a Dark Age battle – who knows what really happened ;o)

Lone Warrior

Getting back into solo wargaming after many years’ absence, I was really pleased to find that Lone Warrior is still in production. I came across it years ago when I first got into the hobby, and found that although it didn’t match the production standards of the glossy wargames mags it more than compensated by providing a wealth of  content packed with inspiring ideas for the solo gamer. Lone Warrior is produced in the US these days (see below for details), and has expanded to A4 format. I sent my subscription off to Rich Barbuto in Leavenworth KS and received the latest (April/June) issue not long after.

The bigger format makes the magazine a lot easier to read than the old version was, and this issue has articles covering everything from full scale ancient wargaming using Armati Persians and Palmyrans, through to modern tactical air combat. Along the way there are pieces on Bob Stewart’s ongoing colonial campaign (featuring extensive use of the Mythic game engine), an ACW ironclads scenario and ruleset, a skirmish game featuring Aztecs versus Conquistadors, a Napoleonics ruleset, a quick guide to making your own 6mm armies, notes on constructing an ACW campaign, and a discussion forum.

Of particular interest to me was Jim Zylka’s article on ‘Enemy Behaviour In Action’, which describes in detail the way he has modelled the typical behaviour of a Swiss force of the Renaissance period during battle. Jim has come up with a set of possible deployments and battlefield behaviours which enable the solo player to field the Swiss as an ‘automated’ opponent capable of providing a decent game, based on his own research into the actual tactics of Swiss armies of this period. This is a fascinating approach to solo play which, as Jim points out himself, could be extended to other armies and other periods. His article has inspired me to start looking into the possibility of adding a small Swiss army to my Italian Wars collection!

In fact there is something for everyone in Lone Warrior, and I can warmly recommend it to other solo wargamers. For subscription details contact Solo Wargamers Association, 1707 Ridge Road, Leavenworth, KS 66048, USA. Alternatively, email: lonewarrior@kc.rr.com

Take The High Ground – Battle Report

First of all, apologies for the delay in getting this battle report written up! Isn’t it awful when ‘real life’ impacts on your wargaming activities?!? Anyhow, here – finally – is the report-back on the ‘Take The High Ground’ scenario (see previous post for full details) and how it panned out in practice. The only change that I needed to make after some initial testing was to amend the rule whereby a D10 is thrown at the end of Turn 12 to determine how much longer the scenario lasts; given how slowly the infantry move, I changed this to throwing a D10 at the end of Turn 20 – this gives the attacker a reasonable chance of taking out the defenders before time is up.

As I mentioned in the original post, I decided to play out this game using my 15mm Italian Wars figures. Above, you can see the view from the Spanish troops defending the hill line towards their French attackers. You can click on this (and the other photos) for a bigger image. Bear in mind that the Spanish are ‘run’ by an NPG (non-player general), while I control the French. Below is a closer view of the French lines (apologies for the mediocre picture quality, I’ll be investing in a better camera sometime soon):

My attack on the Spanish position began with an assault on the enemy right – flanked but not entirely covered by marshy ground – by my detachments of Light Horse:

I diced for the enemy reaction, and found that the Spanish general with his knights moved up to support the shot and swordsmen on that flank, and that they in turn would re-position themselves to repel the attack – which they did all too successfully! After some heavy fighting I decided to pull my Light Horse back and move up some Gendarmes (Knights) to support them before trying again. Meanwhile my main line advanced towards the high ground and the main body of the Spanish defenders, pike and shot in front and Gendarmes in rear to repel any Spanish reinforcements that might appear.

As my infantry engaged the Spanish centre, enemy reinforcements appeared in force on the eastern edge of the battlefield – four detachments of Light Horse and four of Spanish knights:

As they made for my right flank and rear, I turned the main body of my Gendarmes to face them, and began to pull a couple of infantry units back from the hill in support:

After fierce fighting (and some lucky dice throws for my  lads!), the Spanish reinforcements were finally beaten off:

Meanwhile on the hill itself my infantry in the centre, combined with my Light Horse and Gendarmes on the flank, were gradually penetrating and then rolling up the Spanish position – but progress was slow, and time was running out. If a single Spanish unit was left on the high ground at the end of the game, scenario rules meant that I would have lost! It actually came down to the last turn – I had to destroy a unit of swordsmen on the Spanish right, and the Knight General on the Spanish left, in order to win the battle. The dice were kind to me, and my French won the day…but it was a close thing!

All in all this scenario produced a very enjoyable battle with much scope for further development. The chance elements – if and when reinforcements will arrive, what they will consist of, where they will appear, and what their orders will be – along with the variable scenario length, meant that the final result was in doubt right up to the end. With better dice the Spanish ‘general’ would have been victorious…and I would have been left with an ignominious defeat to report back on!