A Rebellion in the Colonies

My recent cataloging efforts revealed to me that it would be nice to know a little about what I have in each collection, in terms of numbers and composition.  And since my 15mm AWI collection is strewn across my work area, in a variety of trays and boxes, due to the recent rebasing operation, I thought it would be a nice place to start.  So here are the totals (below).  

 

All infantry are based on 40mm wide bases, with three figures per frontage. 

Cavalry are on 30mm wide bases, with two figures each.  

Artillery are on 40mm square stands, with 4 crew each (fewer crew for my two grasshopper gun models).  

Generals are on 40mm squares with three mounted officers.

Brigadiers are on 30mm squares with two mounted officers each.

Division Officers are on 25mm squares with one mounted officer.

American (Rebellion) Forces

Infantry 1092 figures

Cavalry 34 figures

Guns 12 guns and crew

Officers 38 officer figures

French Battalions

Infantry 132 figures

Natives (Indians) 

Infantry 78 figures

British Forces

Infantry 627 figures

Cavalry 30 figures

Guns 8 guns and crew

Officers 27 officer figures

Hessians/Germans

Infantry 249 figures

These, of course, are all divided into units, with unit command figures, including officers, colors, and musicians.  

Americans include Continental Army, Colonial Militia, and Minutemen.

British include regulars and Tories (Loyalists).

Valley Forge - review

“Our cruel and unrelenting Enemy leaves us no choice but a brave resistance, or the most abject submission; this is all we can expect - We have therefore to resolve to conquer or die: Our own Country's Honor, all call upon us for a vigorous and manly exertion, and if we now shamefully fail, we shall become infamous to the whole world. Let us therefore rely upon the goodness of the Cause, and the aid of the supreme Being, in whose hands Victory is, to animate and encourage us to great and noble Actions - The Eyes of all our Countrymen are now upon us, and we shall have their blessings, and praises, if happily we are the instruments of saving them from the Tyranny meditated against them. Let us therefore animate and encourage each other, and shew the whole world, that a Freeman contending for Liberty on his own ground is superior to any slavish mercenary on earth.”
― George Washington

[This is another review in the Once and Future Rules series, of wargame rules that are out of print, but that got a lot of play at one time (at least, in the clubs and groups I played in since the early 1980s).  This one is less like the others I have written, in that this set of rules is not one that I have played a lot, but I still find it (at least personally) influential.  I would like to discuss why.]

The frontpiece - the cover is a lovely color version of the same painting,
but mine has a big SALE sticker on it

Let me start this by saying that I would be surprised to find gamers who are currently still playing Valley Forge.  However, I have fond memories of this ruleset, and it has a fascinating history (and conceptual lineage), so I would like to say a few things about it.

This is from the set I own, which is Valley Forge, published in 1976 by TSR.  I purchased my set from a hobby store (the still operating Denbigh Hobby, in Newport News, Virginia) back around 1981, while I was in high school. This was in reaction to having purchased and painted maybe a dozen or so 25mm American War of Independence figures (probably Hinchliffe figures, but possibly Minifigs - they had come from open packages, and were repacked in plastic baggies, which made them much more affordable for my high school student budget).  A second edition (Valley Forge II) was published the same year by Dave Wesely, the Author of the rules, by himself.  I have never seen a copy of that edition.

David Wesely - author of Valley Forge

This is a set of rules that has (according to both the introduction written by Dave Arneson, and a blurb on Boardgame Geek) inspiration taken by the author, from a much older set of rules from the US Army, written in the 1880s by Lt. Totten.  These were based on the Kriegspiel rules.  A good history of wargaming from that time is found in a book chapter that I co-wrote on the history of combat models and simulation (1).  That source does not mention Totten, but it mentions some of the other developments that came out of the Kriegspiel rules in the 19th century.
 

Towards that end (rules based on Kriegspiel), the Valley Forge rules make perfect sense - they are a tabletop simulation of combat during the American War of Independence, with particular detail to the number of actions that can take place in a 1 minute turn.  Also, the (mostly) deterministic nature of combat is based on the number of casualties that a volley of fire, from 100 men, can result against a massed enemy infantry unit, at different ranges.  So, for instance, the movement and volley rates are given for infantry for a 1 minute turn.  An example - British infantry can fire 6 rounds with a Brown Bess musket, in a turn, if performing Rapid Fire.  An American Rifleman with a Kentucky Rifle can only fire once in the same period, but at a range of 25 inches (250 yards), will be 42x as likely to inflict a casualty.  The rules are not wholly deterministic.  There are some random factors, and also a method for determining the chance of a Probability based activity being successful.

Why is this important?  Because it illustrates that rules designed to be a simulation (as all in the Kriegspiel family are) first, and a game second, will be excruciatingly detailed in things that are important for the simulation to show.  In the case of Kriegspiel, to allow Officers in training to make realistic decisions about battlefield conditions, based on how effective troops behave.  In the case of Valley Forge, it is to allow wargamers to see what the realistic behavior of the troops were on a Colonial American battlefield.  All games, especially wargames, are somewhat of a simulation - but equally, all simulations are based on abstract models.  Typically, it serves the community of gamers who will play a wargame to include more abstraction and introduction of random elements (dice, cards, etc) to make the game "fun" and to introduce a sense of chance that we like in our hobby pursuits.  Valley Forge has less of that, and is much more detail oriented - closer to a simulation, than a game (if you allow there to be a continuum).

Some particulars of the rules - they are designed for 25mm figures; 1 turn is 1 minute; 1 inch is 10 yards; 1 figure represents 30 men.

Here is the turn sequence -

1. Referee gives information and messages to players
2. Players write orders
3. Players declare orders, perform initial volleys, and announce charges.
4. Simultaneous movement
5. Effects of fire are calculated
6. Effects on morale from movement and casualties are calculated
7. Final volleys calculated
8. Melee is fought, if applicable, and results applied
9. The referee may execute through steps 6-8, for isolated parts of the battlefield, before returning to the whole scene, if appropriate. 

So, a number of things that would turn off a modern gamer (simultaneous movement, order writing, requiring a referee, deterministic casualties, and realistic times to reload and fire artillery - many turns in between shots, for all but the smallest pieces).

Okay, so why am I writing a review of a set that I never played in a club or at a convention, and only halfheartedly tried at home?  Because of the detail and research that David Wesely invested in his rules.  He was a graduate student in Physics at the time that these were put together, and he would go on to take a commission in the US Army and work at Aberdeen, and other places.  This certainly means he appeals to my Engineering Professor persona, but also a wargamer he appeals to my attraction to accurate military historical detail.  The musketry information, and other information in Valley Forge has been raided by yours truly over the years for rulesets I have put together myself, albeit with mechanics that were closer to a Game than to a Simulation (more random chance involved, and more abstract results).

As a wargamer, I would prefer to play British Grenadier, or Black Powder, or any of a number of rules (including some coming up in this series of reviews, such as Koenig Krieg), but I have fond memories of Valley Forge.  Mostly because it was the first scholarly wargame I ever encountered, and also because of the tie to Kriegspiel type rules, and mostly because of the debt for the scholarship that I owe David Wesely.

---

(1) Margaret Loper and Charles D. Turnitsa: “A History of Combat Modeling and Distributed Simulation,” Chapter 10 in Tolk (ed.) Engineering Principals of Combat Modeling and Distributed Simulation. Wiley & Sons, 2012.

AWI game using Black Powder

Last weekend (Thanksgiving weekend, which if I can be sincere for a moment, is a very important holiday for me, because I am Thankful to the Almighty for everything in my life...but I come close to being serious) I was lucky enough to get to host a 15mm AWI game at my house (on the GwC grand command center wargaming table - located in the basement).  I had a few great friends come over (which made it a perfect Thanksgiving weekend activity, see my earlier serious comment).

We played Black Powder, using the 50% reduction suggestion for 15mm (basically, the game is identical, as it should be, but all distances are halved).

The game featured 3 commands on each side (for the planned 6 players), and each command controlled two brigades.

The scenario was a fictional fight based in late September, 1780, in South Carolina, and is based on the premise that the Americans won the Battle of Camden.

The thesis is this:  First, the Southern Towns of the Cherokee Nation did not join the British against the Colonials, but remained neutral (so rather than being attacked by the SC Militia, they were harassed by the Carolina Loyalists).

Cherokee vs Soldiers: Imagine they had been British?

Second, imagine the war in the South if the Battle of Camden (fought on my birthday, but 185 years early, on August 16, 1780) had been an American victory.  If the Militia and States troops (Virginia and NC) had followed the example set by the Maryland and Delaware troops, and they all stood and fought, then the American force would have retained it's numerical superiority, and with 1,500 Continentals vs. 1,500 British regulars it very well could have gone the way of General Gates, rather than towards Cornwallis.

Battle of Camden: Imagine if the Colonials hadn't run?

Now, with the Cherokee's in the area being neutral, and leaning away from the British, and the Continentals having just won a large victory, the premise was that the Cherokee's would send two warbands to join the Continental army, along with a locally raised militia (both infantry and mounted) under a Colonel Von Ottendorf, based on Armand, who had been sitting out the conflict so far.

Colonel Von Ottendorf, from his home in Asheville NC

The British, in response to the defeat, would have had Cornwallis taking the south much more seriously, and calling down reinforcements.  But, with the situation in the north what it was in late 1780, that would mean shifting Hessians, which is what we reflected in the game.

Hessians - tired of New Jersey winter raids, 

The army under Gates started to swing south, planning to reinforce Columbia, but after reports of Cornwallis being in pursuit, and having met up with the Hessians brought in from Charleston, the Continentals instead veered to the southeast, along the Congaree river.  In the area that is now the Congaree National Park, about 15 miles southeast of Columbia, is where I envisioned the battle to take place.

Continental troops defend the tributary bridge

So the Colonial forces had two brigades of Continentals (same as at Camden), two brigades of various states regiments and Militia (mostly NC and Virginia), and also a brigade under Von Ottendorf, and a mixed brigade of SC Mounted Militia and Cherokee Indians.

Banastre Tarleton

The King's Army had one brigade of British Regulars, one brigade of Tarleton's British Legion and cavalry, two brigades of Carolina Loyalist infantry (Tories), one brigade of mixed Hessians and Philadelphia Tories (shifted down with the mercenaries), and one brigade of pure Hessians.

The Congaree river was on Gates' right, and the battle was fought on the southern side of the river.  On his right were the two Continental brigades ("B"). In the middle ("A") were the Virginia and NC regiments, and on the left ("C") were Ottendorf and the Cherokee.  The middle of the field was pretty clear, except for a manor house, with some planted plots of vegetables, and a peach grove.  The far southern end (where the Cherokee and militia were located) was forested, and the northermost end of the field (where the Continentals were located) had a tributary to the Congaree running through it, with a stone bridge across the stream, and a town.

Battlefield, showing tributary stream (upper right) and road network

Cornwallis left was also anchored at the River, and that was where his Regulars ("D") were placed.  In the middle were the British Legion (Tarleton) and the Tories ("E").  On the right end of the field (facing the Cherokee and Von Ottendorf, mostly to the left of "C") were the Hessians (at "G").

The game was pretty good, even though out of the six players, only one had played Black Powder many times.  I had one previous game under my belt, but not enough to count as experienced.  The other four players had never played before.

States regiments and the Militia - Hold the Line!

It is a testament to the rules that it went so well.  Each player had two brigades, and after the second turn the concept of initiative moves, and command moves, and issuing verbal orders before rolling for command was almost second nature.  The rules for shooting and combat are straight forward enough, and we got to concentrate on the scenario (which was great).  The rules were great, the scenario was fun.  Lots of misquoted lines from "The Patriot" including (several times) "Hold the Line". Thank you Benjamin Martin.

British Legion Cavalry - led by Lucius Malfoy

I definitely sense more Black Powder in the future!

These are the times that try men's souls

One thing I am interested in doing more of, in the coming months, and that I have already begun actively preparing for, is some 15mm wargaming in the American War of Independence.  I recently came into the possession of a large collection (and very complete) of 15mm armies, representing Americans (of various shapes and hues - colonists, loyalists, state militia, minutemen, continental army, etc), French, Hessians (and other German mercenaries), Indians, and many, many British.  Oh, and an odd Tory to kick around.

I have set up a wargaming table and have already started parsing out terrain for my first battle.  I am relying, initially, on a great overview of the battles of the American Revolution that exists in the single volume history of the military affairs of the AWI, called Patriot Battles, by Michael Stephenson (Harper/Perennial 2007). I have a couple of other nice historical volumes to consult on the topic, but I find Patriot Battles to be a good starting point, when researching a battle.  A matter of taste, I suppose.

The battle I am planning to start with is going to be Germantown.  A few reasons are in order, I suppose.  First, I like the whole of the Philadelphia 1777 campaign.  But I have never been a fan of the battle of the Brandywine.  No hobbits, I suppose.  Second, I think that Germantown exhibits Washington's genius for a tactical solution, but it also shows his weakness, early on, in estimating the abilities of his generals and men.  His battle plan for Germantown is brilliant (almost Napoleonic), but it is a little bit optimistic (and the results showed it).  Third - the Chew House (which would be a great name for a Dog Treat company).

Vicious fighting at the Chew House.

The unfolding of events allows for all sorts of military scenario event listing (MSEL) items to occur.  The arrival (or not) of American reinforcements on the British Flank).  The ability of the Americans to actually engage and carry against a smaller Hessian force.  The firing on friendly troups.  And the Chew House.  I suspect that there is a possibility (while we are rewriting history) for British troops to arrive by flat boat, from down river, assuming that they completed their work against the American forts (not part of the battle, but it did leach off some of the British troops in the area).

Great map, from 1877, but it doesn't show the initial American disposition.

The battle features 11,000 troops under General Washington's command, and some 9,000 troops under the command of General Howe.  According to the (useful) website British Battles the units involved were:

British Manifest
Light Dragoons (not clear which regiment 16th or 17th)
Two Composite battalions of grenadiers
Two Composite battalions of light infantry
Two Composite battalions of Foot Guards (1st, 2nd and 3rd Guards)
5th Foot later Northumberland Fusiliers and now the Royal Regiment of Fusiliers
25th, now King’s Own Scottish Borderers
27th Foot later the Inniskilling Fusiliers and now the Royal Irish Regiment
40th Foot later the South Lancashire Regiment and now the Queen’s Lancashire Regiment
55th Foot later the Border Regiment and now the King’s Own Royal Border Regiment
(and Hessians)

American Manifest
Wayne’s Pennsylvania Brigade
Weeden’s Virginia Brigade
Muhlenburg’s Virginia Brigade
Maxwell’s Light Infantry
Colonel Bland’s 1st Dragoons
Stephen’s Division
Stirling’s Division
Pennsylvania Militia
Maryland Militia
New Jersey Militia

The Pennsylvania units were (supposedly) armed with rifled muskets, but I don't know how much of an impact that had on the battle.  Still, it adds flavor and interest for a wargame.

I will consult the scenario book for British Grenadier (miniature rules) to check for a more detailed manifest, but that is my starting point.  It is possile that the West Point military atlas also has more detailed OB information.

Attack against the British 40th Infantry, inside the Chew House

For the tabletop map, I plan to have the table stretch from the American right, past the Manatawny road (southwest of Germantown) where Armstrong was supposed to push past the Hessans at the Schuykill River side.  The other end of the table will be the American left, past the Old York (northeast of Germantown) where Smallwood and Greene were supposed to attack the British right flank.

Map of the battle from the US Military Academy

The American side of the battlefield will include Mount Airy (where Washington's HQ was), down to where the Frankford Creek crosses the Old York Road (including Howe's HQ).

At about the middle of the table, slightly closer to the American side, will be the Chew House.

British Troops entering the Chew House (the architecture is wrong in this picture)

I intend to fight some other battles of the AWI, now that I have this great collection of miniatures, but this will be the first.

As far as rules  - I have not decided.  I have considered several old school sets of rules, and have only soundly rejected one completely (Valley Forge).  I have also considered Piquet, British Grenadier and the Neil Thomas rules.  And, of course, Sons of Liberty. In the end I will most likely write my own rules for this period, but I am just not sure about this first battle.  Pictures of the table top, terrain, and the units will of course follow.

The quote used for the name of this blog post, "These are the times that try men's souls" was the opening line from Thomas Paine's first issue of his series of articles published in Philadelphia during the war, called simply The American Crisis.  This first issue was proclaimed on December 23, 1776, in Philadelphia.  The battle of Germantown would be fought, just outside of Philadelphia a mere 10 months later (on October 4, 1777).  The opening paragraph of that first article is worth reprinting here, and will no doubt stir your own soul (ignore all that financial motive related to taxes...).

THESE are the times that try men's souls. The summer soldier and the sunshine patriot will, in this crisis, shrink from the service of their country; but he that stands by it now, deserves the love and thanks of man and woman. Tyranny, like hell, is not easily conquered; yet we have this consolation with us, that the harder the conflict, the more glorious the triumph. What we obtain too cheap, we esteem too lightly: it is dearness only that gives every thing its value. Heaven knows how to put a proper price upon its goods; and it would be strange indeed if so celestial an article as FREEDOM should not be highly rated. Britain, with an army to enforce her tyranny, has declared that she has a right (not only to TAX) but "to BIND us in ALL CASES WHATSOEVER" and if being bound in that manner, is not slavery, then is there not such a thing as slavery upon earth. Even the expression is impious; for so unlimited a power can belong only to God.

Rules for AWI wargames

The rules used by ODMS during our recent Community Day presentation of American War of Independence (AWI) wargaming were written by the staff of Gaming with Chuck, based heavily on the Napoleonic Warfare rules, presented in Neil Thomas' book, Wargaming: An Introduction.

The rules use the same basic unit sizes (4 stands for infantry and cavalry, 1 stand for artillery), but represent some of the differences for AWI (different unit types, and two very basic army lists, for instance).

They are presented (at the right) here on Gaming with Chuck for your enjoyment. Please, if you like these, continue on to buy the real thing from Neil Thomas - all of his wargaming books so far are spot-on!

Tags: wargaming, miniatures, American War of Independence, Revolutionary War

Loose Files and American Scramble

Chris B tells me that Loose Files and American Scramble are a good set of rules. From reading them, I am intrigued enough to want to play.

They use a basing of three figures per stand, and work based on "d. points" where the "d." can stand for anything bad (damage, disorder, disintegration, democratic, diabolical, delightful, etc). They represent the cumulative burden a unit acquires both from the receiving of casualties, and also from fatigue and loss of command and control.

Movement is by dice (one or two average dice for infantry, an extra d6 for skirmishers, and an extra one or two d6 for cavalry). Not a bad system.

Bayonet and saber are resolved by comparing d6 rolls, higher rolling unit wins, difference determines results (even a unit that wins BIG takes a d. point - I like that).

Musketry are resolved by rolling 1d6 per stand (or per three figures, if a skirmish unit), and rolls of a 6 cause a d. point. Skirmish units also inflict d. points for approx half of the 5's rolled. Not bad - nice and simple.

These look pretty good - and they are free.



Tags: Revolutionary War, miniatures, wargames

AWI Rules for Wargaming (miniatures)

Interesting rules from the internet for American War of Independence. Prompted by a quest by Brian Compton for recommended rules, and fueled by some suggestions by a friend of mine in a far off land, here are a couple of internet rules that look to be of interest. An interesting online forum discussion on the topic is located at here.

Fire and Discipline by Rudy Scott Nelson. I always like Rudy's rules (Glory, Gard Du Corps, and others), and these are from the Deep Fried Mice website. They look interesting. Note that there are three versions - the "Firepower" ruleset, which emphasizes combat. The "Discipline" ruleset which emphasizes morale and command. And the "European" version that emphasizes streamlined play for convention battles. The sample armies are interesting, and they cover the British forces for the 1770s, but not the American. They could be extrapolated, however.

Bloody Backs looks to be quite good (my sort of game). It is fast, and resolves fire by a point system, with 1 point per base (usually a 6 figure base). To this total add 1d3, then modify by situation. Result is number of casualties. So a 12 figure (2 stand) unit starts with two points, rolls 1d3, adding an additional two points, but then gets this halved by target being behind hard cover (stone wall), for a total of two points. Two casualties suffered by the target unit. Simple, and fun.

American War of Independence by Will McNally. These rules have a similar flavor to some I have written. Movement is simple. Combat is based on a contested D6 roll for the entire unit. Firing is based on rolling 2d6 to get a score of 7+, after modifiers. Morale works the same way. Simple, elegant.

Tags: revolutionary war, miniatures, wargames