Tuesday, July 19, 2016

Royalist Re-Organize

Hello readers, this is Murdock writing from Jeff's desktop.

The Royalist commander has encountered more than the usual Gout and had complications from the treatments of the past few years.

This has Jeff currently in hospital awaiting hospice availability.

While winded from this event, Jeff is still carrying on his jovial talks.

Jeff wanted there to be a note to the readers and to assure you all that we plan to continue the games projects.

Tuesday, July 5, 2016

My First "Pike & Shotte" Game

First of all, I should have cancelled Sunday's game . . . I had a pinched nerve in my neck and was in too much pain to concentrate and play.

David's photo of me in neck brace -- visible figures are Rob's.

Fortunately David, Rob and Alex were understanding and put up with my many mind fumbles due to pain.  (Please note that physically I am feeling much better today -- and also that clicking on photos results in a larger image).

It was my task to handle the "cavalry" end of our 1644 Battle of Montgomery.  And, never having played "Pike and Shotte" I wasn't sure just what to expect.

I am ready to charge.

Well, my very first "Charge" order die roll was . . . boxcars!  A BLUNDER! . . . well as it turned out, I moved straight right and the charge was nullified.

Well not quite how I planned it.

Okay, well if I were to get a bit lucky, Trevor's two squadrons might just reach a Parliamentary unit.  So I rolled . . . snake eyes . . . yes the charge went it . . . and even though I had more dice charging a smaller opponent just standing to receive the charge, I rolled poorly and Alex didn't. So I needed to "test" . . . so I rolled . . . snake eyes again  . . .  my charging unit destroyed and gone!

Yes, my first three 2d6 rolls for the game were . . . 12, 2, 2 . . . about as extreme as possible.  And therein lies the story of the night for our cavalry.  Not that there were any more horrible die rolls, BUT that all of our charges and fall-backs emphasized the "volatility" of cavalry actions.

Moments ago the two sides were in a "fur ball"; now open again.

Because of my physical pain, I don't recall details but I think that the overall feel of this volatility seems reasonable . . . there certainly seemed to be a lot of "ups" and "downs" for both Alex and I as the lead changed back and forth.

As for the foot action to my left, you will have to take a look at David's blog since all I did was click a few photos when so urged.  I believe that they experienced some questions and difficulties on their end of the fight.

West end, where Rob (Royalist) faced David (Roundhead).

I think that the action moved fairly smoothly throughout the night.  Our major question on the cavalry end was when would Alex's flank march arrive.  He missed the die roll he needed for a long long time (I think it arrived about turn 7 or 8) by which time I was better prepared for it.

If I win this, I will force him off-table . . . and I did!

Eventually I defeated all six of Alex's squadrons while losing four of my six . . . but because of the Parliamentary successes on the field's west end, Montgomery 2016 ended in a success just like the Montomery, 1644/

Trouble on the left . . . *sigh* . . . we lost again.
  -- Jeff 

Saturday, July 2, 2016

ECW Battle of Montgomery (1644) -- WWAE Version

Last Sunday Rob and Murdock came over and we played the Battle of Montgomery using the "Warr Without an Enemie" rules by the Wyre Forest Wargamers.

Some of Rob's Royalist Foot -- mid battle.

With my "chemobrain" memory problems, I won't try to recount the game.  Murdock has already done a bit of that . . . from the Parliamentarian perspective, of course . . . on his "Murdock's Marauders" blog . . . and he takes lots of photos (click on them for larger views).

The scenario we played can be found here -- but is now different than what we played because Rob did some more research and discovered that the flank march came from the east and not the west end of the field (as we played it) . . . so we plan to re-fight Montgomery using the correct flanking.

Without trying to tell a story, here are a few of my photos that weren't too blurry.
Some of my Royalist Cavalry -- early game

Rob's foot as incorrect flanking Cavalry appears on table edge.

Cavalry mid-battle, with little Roundheads left on this flank.

Near the end, my cav is intact but heavily battered.

Hopefully my health will permit us to replay Montgomery this coming Sunday . . . with perhaps a Royalist victory this time . . . or perhaps not.

-- Jeff

Monday, December 7, 2015

Royal Montgomery Forces

Well we hope to meet this coming Sunday evening to begin our Battle of Montgomery.  Here is an image of the Royal Cavalry wing:

And here is a view of the Royal foot:

I suggested to Murdock that the battle might be very quick since the Parliamentarians would probably simply fail their morale and flee once they face the Royalists . . . but he scoffed at the suggestion.

Well, "wait for Sunday" is what I say to him . . . then we will see if the Roundheads run.

-- Jeff

Thursday, October 8, 2015

QRS for "Warr Without an Enemie"

My gaming buddy, Murdock, created an edited version of the "Quick Reference Sheet" for the Wyre Forest Wargames Club's ECW rules, "Warr Without an Enemie".

I have simply done a bit of color management so that they can be more easily identifiable as to which page is which.

-- Jeff

Monday, September 14, 2015

Two "Battles of Whalley" Fought

Well, over the past few weeks we have now gamed the "Battle of Whalley" (April 20, 1643) at my home . . . and while I have been too "under the weather" due to my chemotherapy to actually play, David, Rob and Alex managed to fight it twice.

New!   David has posted his photos and comments from both battles:

First -- http://murdocksmarauders.blogspot.ca/2015/09/warr-without-and-enemie-battle-of.html

Second --  http://murdocksmarauders.blogspot.ca/2015/10/warr-without-enemie-battle-of-whalley.html 

Most Royalist troops start at rest in the Town.

We used the "Warr Without an Enemie" rules from the Wyre Forest Wargames Club . . . including the scenario for the Battle of Whalley (which is included in the rules as well as online).

Cavalry with 5 DPs moving over bridge.

Above you can see some Royalist cavalry moving over a bridge.  The dark rectangle on the left of the image contains its  (currently hidden) Orders.  The white square with the red "5" indicates that this unit already has five "disruption points" . . . (note that the opposite side has the numbers 1 through 4 on different sides so that it can be used to show how "disrupted" the unit currently is).

Because of the "mind fog" that my meds create, I only hosted the games and tried to somewhat follow them.  Once my chemo is over I hope to play myself.

I will leave it to the others to post their photos and accounts since they were both mentally sharper and are better photographers.  When available I will add links to their photos and accounts.

From behind Parliamentary lines mid-battle.

 -- Jeff

Wednesday, August 5, 2015

Battle of Southam (1642)

We finally got around to trying out the "Warr Without an Enemie" rules with their suggested 'learning scenario' a few days ago (i.e., August 3rd).

Early action from behind Royalist force.

Unfortunately I was unable to play (my chemotherapy leaves me very fatigued),  but I was able to host, watch and enjoy the battle as Rob (Royalist) and Murdock (Parliamentarian) battled it out.

More Royalist cavalry sweeps out as well.

In case you are curious, Murdock provided the the dark blocks in front of units have their orders written on them.  He also brought some "Disruption Point" markers (sides marked 1-4 and the reverse side with a dreaded 5).

Parliamentarian ponies move up to engage.

Sadly due to my medical state I wasn't able to follow the action well enough to recount it here . . . but hopefully Murdock will soon post an account (and much better photos) on his blog. . . . (which he has now done).

In addition, as of August 16th, Rob has posted his account and photos of the battle here.

Trying to flank the Parliamentarians.

As I mentioned earlier, I wasn't in condition to record the game BUT I do recall our all liking the rules.  For me (and I think the others) the main attraction was that the player is challenged to make lots of choices during the game.  I know that we also felt that the mechanics encouraged period results.

So the overall result of the night was that we will definitely play them again.

Oh, and the results of the battle? . . . I think that I will leave that to Murdock to write about. . . . (which he has now done).

In addition, as of August 16th, Rob has posted his account and photos of the battle here.

-- Jeff