Another Solo "Battle Generator" Experiment..

Board Game Solo Protocols ("The 45")

Reenactment season AND visits from prospective buyers have interrupted play, so no game reports, but I've been working on using "The 45" board game as a scenario/battle generator (see previous posts on using AH's "1776" for same).

As part of this thinking I've decided to change (and formalise) my solo methods for such games. This will be yet another experiment, but having recently played some games using "Crossfire" principles and some "searching" board games with "hidden movement" protocols which actually represent forms of "delayed intelligence updates" (for want of a better term) I've decided to play around with these concepts.

Basically the games I've been playing required one player to "search" for hidden parties belonging to another player (these were games based on Tolkien's Lord of the Rings, where the Ringbearer/Fellowship's location(s) clearly needed to be kept secret). To summarise, each move the Searcher failed to locate the target the potential movement range of the target was extended; thus bringing the target closer to its destination. It seemed to me that this process could be applied to more military games, hence......

So, I will begin by working on the following processes.

A) Player Priority and Phases:

Before any action the Priority for Player Move must be determined by a 1x6D test. Highest dice score goes first, but modifier with +1 per Leader token value in play and minus 2 if the testing player was first to move the previous turn.

B) Phase Progression:

1) Active Player plays/moves as usual, subject to Activation tests for detached commands and Independent Action tests for same where appropriate. Government units within striking range may be attacked, but may evade where allowed in the rules. Government forces may intercept any Rebel forces as usual.

2) Battles arising from the above are fought out as normal on the Table wherever practicable. Post battle retreats will be dealt with by means of ad hoc tables.

3) A new Phase for the Rebel Player will be introduced after the reinforcement Phase. This is a Test for an Intelligence Update (Modified as follows: +1 per major battle won,+1 for -2 per major battle lost, +1 each Major Port and Fortress held, +1 (cumulative) for holding Dundee, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Newcastle, Carlisle, York, Bristol, Manchester, Leeds, Birmingham, Sheffield, Hull and Liverpool, + 1 per SP dedicated to scouting, +1 per cavalry unit Rebel controlled, -1 per Government cavalry unit known to be deployed on the board).

Throw 3x6D. On a throw of 10 or above Intelligence has been updated. A failure to update intelligence counts as a free move accrued to Government Forces (see successful updates).

The test is Modified as follows: +1 per major battle won,+1 for -2 per major battle lost, +1 each Major Port and Fortress held, +1 (cumulative) for holding Dundee, Glasgow, Edinburgh, Newcastle, Carlisle, York, Bristol, Manchester, Leeds, Birmingham, Sheffield, Hull and Liverpool, + 1 per SP dedicated to scouting, +1 per cavalry unit controlled, -1 per Government cavalry unit known to be deployed on the board.

If successful first check for any change in Government Policy (see below) by throwing 2x6D.

On a throw of 10 or more Government Policy may have changed.

Then throw 4x6D to check on what any Government Policy Change might be (Modified cumulatively as follows: -4 per major battle won by Rebels, +3 per major battle won by Government, -1 per English Port held by Rebels, -1 per English Zone held by Rebels, +2 per Scottish Zone held by Government, + 1 per French SP in England, -1 per French SP in Scotland, +1 per Sea Action won by Government.

"Och.. Away wi' ye, ya wee Lithuanian dwarf that ye are..."

C) Government Policy: This will determine Government action/movement.

a) Minus Result; Negotiation: Counts as a Move. Neither side may take any military action in England. Zones outside England are unaffected UNLESS a stack contains French units (such a may not move/act at all). Rebel/French Fleets must return to Port of Origin. Rebels (only) may suffer Attrition. Reinforcement/recruitment can take place.

b) Result of 0-5; Hesitation: Does NOT count as a Move for Government Forces to accrue movement. No Government movement except to garrison in the event of a French Intervention rise. Reinforcement/recruitment can take place.

c) Result of 6-9; Containment: Normal rules apply. Government will attempt to close/control routes towards London (in order of distance from nearest Rebels to London, shortest routes first) by occupation and digging-in. Government may move to within 3 Zones of Rebel forces but may not attack. If already within three Zones of rebels Government forces will dig in. March ranges determined by time since last Intelligence Update.

c) Result of 10 - 12; Consolidation: Normal rules apply. Government will concentrate forces (March range determined by time since last Intelligence Update) to form as many armies to match the largest Rebel Army strength and dig-in at points of concentration.

d) Result of 13 - 17; Indirect Action: Normal rules apply. Government will attempt to move armies past Rebel forces and press towards (in order of priority):
i) Any ungarrisoned but Government-held English port/fortification.
ii) Any Rebel controlled English port/fortification.
ii) Any Rebel controlled English city/town/zone (in that order of priority)
iv Edinburgh.
v) Other Rebel-held zones in the Lowlands.
vi) Rebel-held strong-points in the Highlands.

March ranges are determined by time since last Intelligence Update. Government will attempt to concentrate into Field Armies meeting largest Rebel Force value at move end. May Force March. Potential Overruns and interception options may be tested for by means of ad hoc tables.

e) Result of 18 - 24 or above; Direct Action: Government will attempt to concentrate a Field Army of at least equal strength to any Rebel force in order of strength (strongest first) and, in order of the following priority, and move to attack (within a march range determined by time since last Intelligence Update). Where there are multiple targets possible this will be decided by ad hoc test.
i) Any Rebel force potentially outnumbered and containing Prince Charlie.
ii) Any Rebel force in England.
iii) Any French (only) Force in England.
iv) Any Hostile Force in any Friendly Continental Zone.
v) Any Rebel/French Force in Lowland Scotland.
vi) Any Rebel Force in Highland Scotland.

Government forces may Force March. Overruns and interception may be tested for.

3) Successful Update/Government Move: Government forces may move in line with the Policy being adopted (above) using any or all accrued Movement Points up to maximum distance accrued (see below).

D) Government March Ranges:

Government forces can move up to the maximum move distance for ALL moves since their last move/the last Intelligence Update. I.e. if three Government moves have been "missed" due to lack of Intelligent Updates Government units may move three move's worth of distance. Government forces may be intercepted. Where alternative targets of equal priority present themselves then an ad hoc dice throw must be made to decide.

E) Government Targeting: Should normally be clear through the Policy being adopted. When in doubt use an ad hoc table test.

F) Government Reinforcement decisions: When relocating units to meet garrison demands (as a result of French Intervention rises) the NEAREST applicable units will be chosen. In any case where two or more suitable units are at an equal distance to the region needing garrisoning then a dice test will determine which unit moves.

G) Weather: At the start of each Player Movement Phase weather must be tested for on a 1x6D throw for each region where Player Field Forces are present and each Sea Zone.

On a throw of 1 or less (modified by -1 in any Winter Turn and a cumulative additional -1 for Regions in Scotland, -1 for The Hebrides Regions (all) and Central North East, -2 for the Western Isles and North Sea zones) NO movement can take place in that Region/Zone for that PLAYER move (exception Forced March - treated as Winter for losses, with + 1 to the Losses Table if actually Winter and Interception).

However, IF there is a 1 or minus result for the First player in any Game Turn these provisions affect BOTH players for the duration of that entire Game Turn.

Summary:

We'll see how things go over the next week or two. Any thoughts/queries, as always, welcome.

Post Xmas "Crossfire" etc.

Delayed Follow-Up..

Alas, seasonal duties and a series of seasonal bugs delayed my experiments (and some deliveries tempted me into some displacement activity), but here at last is the threatened "Crossfire" experiment write-up...

First thoughts were that this would work fine with a terrain-heavy table, say for an ACW or AWI game, where men are not necessarily standing in full view of each other in a "please shoot me" manner, but on a classic 18th, 19th, medieval or Ancient style "open battlefield" - or battles on wide sweeps of veldt or steppe or deserty scrub ?  Hmm.. My thoughts here, for those types of fights, were "This isn't going to work"...

So that, of course, would be the type I would try...

Normal "Hidden Enemy" rules would apply (i.e. test for each Potential Ambush Point approached) and anticipated that these would work fine in generating enemy reactive fire/presence, but my main concern was how I would manage any examples of long movement in the open and broad flanking movements, out of LoS of the other side's artillery and in areas uncontested/uncontaminated with PAPs and hostile troops.

My answer was, in the event of such moves, to test for enemy action for each significance terrain feature crossed/approached as I would for a PAP and also perform a scenario-specific Events Table test per such "move" (standard movement per troop type + 1x6D x inches) to allow for poor guides/getting lost/officer incompetence/ unexpected halts or delays ("Nice strawberries...") etc.

So, to the game. I foresee a simple scenario of two armies facing each other, with me playing one side and the AI the other. A quick set-up, and....

The field is the ground facing a corner of the friendly city of Feroozabad, which, for the sake of the narrative, is being blockaded by the enemy. MY job (coming in from the left of the top of the pic below, on the "Wrong" side of the river) is to see off the hostiles facing me, and get my lads over the bridge and ford.

I expect the immediate action to take place in the area below. There are plenty of potential PAPs, but also some large (in "Crossfire" terms) open areas where long movements could be made without interruption.

I must deploy and formulate my Plan and orders first. My troops arrive (below): three infantry brigades, in roughly three lines, two guns (in the centre) and some squadrons of cavalry in two units (one on my left, one in reserve behind the infantry left of centre). I make my plans.

My Right will advance to the ford, supported by the Centre. Once the ford has been secured we will then cross the open ground, dealing with any resistance, take the Bridge and cross with the main force there. No enemy are in sight while I make my plan. 

Oh, there they are (below)....

Six large regiments of infantry (in two brigades; each regiment being half as big again as one of mine) deployed in two lines on my side of the river between the Palace and the Royal Tombs. Also visible are two large bodies of cavalry (each roughly numbering my whole cavalry strength), on the other side of the river: one on a low ridge above the bridge, the other the other side of a nullah within attack distance of the ford. However, these are just the enemy I CAN see......

I dice to see who has the Initiative and I get it.

I move two regiments (one European, one Sepoy) on my right wing towards the mill, so as to attempt to control the ford. Under normal "Crossfire" rules there would normally be no measuring, but I throw a red die (to see how far beyond normal move my guys have to test other than for PAPS) and get a One.

The PAPS they would pass en route (the scrub by the river and the walled enclosures under the hill) prove "safe", however, at move end, approaching the Mill, we test again and get a 6; we must make a card draw for possible enemy action/reactive fire. 



This proves to be a false alarm (red numbered card). We throw to move again as we still have the Initiative. We can move nine inches (red dice) but must test at move end for enemy action (card draw again).

My chaps complete their move, blithely approaching the mill.



Then I draw the card - at the same time dice testing for the flanking PAPs.



Nine of Spades... This produces nine stands of enemy opening Reactive Fire at close range from the mill. Bad result for me.

My guys get nastily hit, their brigadier is killed, they are staggered - and the enemy gains the Initiative. Their two brigades facing my guys test - and will advance.



As the enemy start moving my artillery are permitted Reactive Fire, but I have to decide when to shoot - at long range - and keep them at a distance while reducing hits, and my chance to take the Initiative, or wait till they get closer - maybe even up to close range....

I decide to open up at medium range and my gunners shoot at the enemy.

Great result. Two enemy units are staggered by my guns. as a result. I regain the Initiative

My right flank units come under reactive fire (they don't need that), make a decision test (dice) and elect to fall back. 

Meanwhile, my left wing advances, triggering a hidden Enemy Test at "move end".



A six - I must make a card draw.



Oh dear... Joker - a enemy mass attack by previously unseen assailants. I throw a dice to see how many dice worth of Stands of three I face. 



Five - so five dice loads. 



I score eleven on the five dice - not too bad. But eleven stand of three enemy per stand. Now to discover where they are coming from. I throw three dice - one pip = one inch maximum distance - and get fourteen.



An enemy cavalry charge of eleven stands launches from the graveyard towards my Left.



As they charge my guys shoot reactively at close range, and the enemy are staggered. Excellent.

 

Over on the Right my general trots down the hill to try to stabilize things. He rallies my leading regiment, but his actions prompt reactive fire from the mill, and although more Shock is received it is not enough to allow the enemy to seize the Initiative.

Over on the left the enemy cavalry pull back, and as I still have the Initiative I advance my left wing. I am also able to launch my nearest cavalry at the discomforted enemy horse..

My donkey wallopers take serious casualties in the resulting melee, but the larger body of enemy is routed. 

The enemy perform long range reactive fire at my moves on the left, but to no effect.



I still have Initiative, so move back to my Right. My European regiment opens fire at the enemy at the mill and their Sepoy supports charge home; intent on taking this troublesome building. This action produces reactive fire from the mill.... 



......and THEIR supports.



My Sepoys manage to charge home, but are thrown back, staggered - and I lose the Initiative.



The enemy now have the Initiative, on my Right they continue to shoot at my troops, and stagger my troops. They advance a regiment to the base of the central hill, then attempt to rally other units in the centre, but are only partially successful - so lose the Initiative again.

Over on my Right my men simply take in cover behind some walls - prompting some ineffective reactive shooting from the enemy. I decide not to risk losing the Initiative by a failed rally attempt, so look elsewhere..



I focus on my Left, advancing and opening fire on the enemy's already Shocked infantry.

They respond, but cause only slight Shock and one of my regiments charges home, as I move my cavalry up to support and threaten the enemy flank.

The enemy Right is discomforted and withdraws.

With most of the enemy army shaken or pulling back, and only the men near the mill seeming determined to contest the field (and as this was a one-off, experimental fight, rather than part of a campaign) I decide that will do. I have tried the method as much as I feel necessary with this fight - and anyway have to clear the decks for visitors....    

Thoughts and Conclusions:

I felt that the procedures had definite merits. Certainly the Hidden enemy element worked fine with the "Crossfire" concepts - and would work equally well if applied to the kind of fight the rules are actually intended for. Next time I go down the WW2 skirmish route I will give certainly give Crossfire a solo outing.

I liked the fact that, as with the skirmishes for which the rules were designed, the Initiative aspect meant I spent a lot of thought in considering where and what actions I should carry out; balancing my wishes and needs with the fear of losing the initiative. 

As the game had to be played in spurts (due to other commitments) I did get a little lost at times - so some kind of marker system indicating who had the Initiative at any one time would have been be useful to me. 

When the Initiative lay with the enemy things were a bit scary - not a bad thing at ALL - as at any time a mass attack could come in, with me having to decide at what point to risk using my reactive fire (long, effective or close range). Luckily for me the AI had some dreadful failures in attempting to rally his Centre and Right. 

I'm not sure that the system doesn't make certain moves over-powerful (big, sweeping attacks), on the other hand that may be more realistic than the chess-like conventions of most wargames, where you have time to think and ponder (SO unlike the real world)

I will have to think a bit about the Reactive Fire and Morale aspects a bit, but feel that it will be worthwhile thinking and tweaking the concepts. The game was fun - and certainly MUCH quicker to play than my usual "Activation Draw" way.

So, there are. A worthwhile exercise..

Round-up.

Meanwhile, I have started the new year with some reading, researching and musing over 6mm gaming/Solo campaign priorities for 2023... 

Should it be the "This Ain't The 45" project (which I feel needs more Jacobites. The Irregular Miniatures ones are lovely, but ideally want mixing with the H&R ECW Highlanders, which are sweet and compatible, but which have not been re-issued yet) or the "This ain't Turkestan" one (which needs more folk painting up/converting)...? Hmmm....

Re. the former: an hour or two spent looking at lovely, lovely maps (links) may have swung the balance....

https://maps.nls.uk/military/scotland_text.html#roads

https://militarymaps.rct.uk/other-18th19th-century-conflicts/jacobite-rebellion-1745-46

We history lovers (& gamers) are SO lucky regarding the resources at our fingertips these days.

There will likely be a hiatus here on the old Blog - as we may well be moving house in the next few weeks and my playroom activities are likely to be mothballed as we tidy, titivate, throw all hands to the pumps and attempt to generally make the place look ship-shape for selling...  

Meanwhile, as always, comments, snipes and thoughts welcome...

A "Crossfire" Experiment...

Initial Thoughts for a Crossfire Principles Solo Experiment

Basics:

The principles follow those of the WW2 "Crossfire" rule set in that having "The Initiative" allows an Active Player to fire, spot enemy or move units/formations as many times or as far as he desires in a single move, until an attempted action fails or until action is interrupted by successful enemy reaction/action. There are thus, generally, no measured movements. 

The "Crossfire" rules are, however, intended for small unit WW2 skirmishes where distances are short and real-life weapon ranges, even when scaled to a ground scale, generally exceed the table dimensions. 

On large scale battles (e.g. in 6mm) and periods where missile weapons have limited ranges within the scale being used this will not the the case and there will therefore be a need for range distances to be applied to firing (as per the conventions of the rules being used). 

In some circumstances movements ("Have they moved into range?") may also need to be occasionally measured. 

Certain periods/conflicts, by their general nature (usually dictated by the scale of operations and command and control issues) involve large areas of open land. Given that "Crossfire" is designed for small (company level) scale actions in close-terrain situations we may find that the rule conventions simply do not work well for the actions I have in mind. However, that is, largely, the point of the experiment. 

1) Hidden Enemy (moving/spotting): 

Clearly, since I will be the "Human Player" I have to make a decision on how the AI will deploy and "act" in advance of playing. I considered using "Blinds" placed on the table, as used in some of my early games and as seen in some videos of certain online games of Crossfire where an attacker is approaching an unknown/unscouted defensive position. While these (a mix of "real" and "fake" Blinds) work perfectly well I have occasionally found them to be an unnecessary (if often visually pleasing) complication in solo games unless the Blinds are themselves called upon to move (i.e. as noisy/careless patrols, search parties,sentries etc.).

I have therefore decided that the standard "Hidden Enemy" conventions used in some of my recent 6mm games will be used initially (being tweaked per game or being Scenario-dependant as usual) i.e. that the Table is "Live" for its entire width and length - as may be its edges (other than, usually, the Friendly Player edge). 

Thus as well as the general "End of Move" Enemy Action test (see below) a unit in the open passing in LoS of a terrain item ("Possible Ambush Point" - hereafter "PAP") providing cover for Hostiles within the scaled "shooting distance "set for the scenario must test for any AI action from said cover (See my Pushna Valley and "Ain't Zululand" reports - among others - for examples).

ANY terrain item sufficient to provide cover for an enemy unit is a PAP and will need to be tested for when approached/passed by any Live Player unit moving with Initiative until "cleared" by a friendly unit (i.e. moved through or Scouted/subject to a successful "Spot" check and thus deemed safe). Once "cleared" no spotting or tests will generally be required for the PAP*.

(*Note however that ranges - and hostile equipment - will need to be taken into consideration and that some Scenario Card Draws may allow for "safe & scouted" locations to become hostile  - the pesky enemy can sometimes both creep about and hide).

Like single PAPs, some linear cover features (e.g. stretches, rather than clumps, of woodland, dongas/wadis, river banks, walls, scubby slopes, military crests of ridges/hills etc. etc) may also have to be tested for as PAPS. This will generally need to be done per six to twelve inches of feature length, depending on scale of figures and scenario being used.

The test is made on a 6D. On the throw of a "6" a card must be drawn from the Actions pack and the results applied. 

The above seems best suited to replicate the "Crossfire" conventions I have seen being used.

2) Hidden Enemy (end of move):

In addition to tests for terrain items, my standard, End-of-Move, card-based "Hidden Enemy" method will be applied at the end of each Human Player Initiative Phase (even if ended voluntarily).

As with PAPs, above, a D6 dice is thrown. On the throw of a "6" each Friendly Unit/Detachment on the table tests with a further D6 to see if it is the unit affected by the possible enemy action. This dice throw is modified as below: 

Units which have carried out an action that Initiative Phase add one to their dice throw (to see if their actions this move have prompted any enemy response).

Units which have taken no action this Initiative Phase have an unmodified test. 

Units which have taken no action this Initiative Phase AND are within one foot of the friendly table  edge take one from the test throw.  

The unit scoring the highest is the one affected and a card is drawn and placed on the table in accordance with my usual Hidden Enemy distance placement rules and the Card Effects Table applied to see what has occurred. 

In the event of a highest scores being a draw ALL the drawing units test ONCE more. 

If a further highest score draw occurs ALL high drawing units are affected and a card is drawn for each unit. 

The affected units draw a card from the card deck and apply the result immediately. 

3) First Move Initiative: 

Unless dictated by the scenario whereby the Active Player is the attacker on the first move Initiative is diced for (1x6D), with the winner commencing the action. The following modifiers to the throw are made: 

+1 to the throw of the Attacker (if any) according to the scenario/campaign, etc.

+1 to the throw of any force consisting of tribal or irregular forces with an Irregular/Tribal commander.

(Note:I had considered a modifier for "Commander Skill", but, seriously, I think that that to do so is best regarded as having an exaggerated effect UNLESS one is talking about a first-rate battlefield improviser/risk taker of Alexandrian or Napoleonic levels with a team of first-rate subordinates. Maybe more a "Boldness" rather than skill modifier needed..? Hmmmm.....)

4) Loss of Initiative:

Initiative passes to the other Player under the following circumstances. 

a) Initiative is always lost due to any of the following negative effects:

Unit/Formation is halted/ by a negative close combat result or fire results ("Suppression", Shock/Disorganisation/Pinning level exceeding the number of Command Stands for the Unity/Formation) or takes casualties.

b) Initiative is potentially lost due to any of the following negative effects. A Test based on the morale/training of the unit is made. Failing the Test results in loss of initiative:

Unit/Formation is Surprised by an attack (i.e. the attack comes from any previously unspotted source).

Unit/Formation is Pinned by negative fire results of more than three Pin Points in any one move.

Unit/Formation takes casualties from artillery fire/explosives (inc. IEDs).

General/subordinate commander falls - even if only wounded. Affects all units/formations in LoS.

Failure to physically cross an obstacle.

c) Voluntary Ceding of Initiative:

Either side my cede initiative to the other. However, the AI Player will ONLY cede initiative voluntarily IF the ONLY moves open to the AI involves exposing one of its units to close range fire in the open.

5) Human and AI Objectives:

The Human Player will have clear objectives set out as part of the scenario (as standard practice).

The AI Player will be working to its own objectives unknown to the Human Player. In general, when the AI is acting defensibly, these will be to hold position and prevent the Human Player from securing his objective/s. Other objectives may be to hold/seize certain terrain features, control/dominate certain access routes, get units off table etc. etc.

I MAY use my "Changeable Battle Plan" card method (a couple of examples on the Blog here) for AI "grand scale" decisions. 

6) AI Tactics:  

In general, tactical terms AI priorities will be:

1) For friendly units at immediate risk to seek cover.

2) To attempt to rally any friendly units suffering Shock/Pinning etc.

3) For friendly units to fire at or close assault any hostile unit currently threatening the safety of an AI unit. 

 

4) When the Initiative lies with the AI player and all actions related to the above have been completed successfully at least once, this action MAY be the action undertaken before any further action (Opportunity Test). 

Whenever there is the opportunity to complete /achieve a scenario objective or to throw units forward safely so as to by-pass or outflank Human Player units, gain a salient terrain feature or gain other advantage (e.g. close combat a weakened enemy, seize a feature offering LoS to attack Human Player forces) then a, Opportunity Test will be made for each unit with such an opportunity. 

If a test throw on a 6D totals 3 or more the testing unit will attempt to carry out that action. Leaders may modify this test throw up or down depending on their quality (Leadership Capability).

If this action is successful then a further such Opportunity Test will be made for every other potentially advantageous AI action. 

IF the AI fails ALL tests, yet still holds the initiative, one last such test for appropriate units to use an opportunity is made. If the AI player fails this last test then Initiative passes to the Human Player.

Pre-Trial Thoughts:

OK, I've set myself a target; time to play. It has struck me that the last "This Ain't Zululand" games would perhaps have proved faster to play using the above conventions. On the other hand I may find that my existing systems work just as well without the "Crossfire" principles. I'm not sure how more "formalised" battles (say, Ancient, Medieval or 18thC.) will work with the "Crossfire" principles. Only experimenting will decide. Watch this space...

This Ain't Zululand: Part Four

A Delayed Post:

I'm a bit behind with posts & write-ups thanks to the Reenactment Season (Evesham, Bosworth etc. and associated injuries), heat-induced lethargy, a bout of Covid which I'm still shaking off (dagnabbit) and family-issue wrangling, but here we go. Thoughts on a replay of the previous TAZ fights, but from the Other Side of The Hill.... 

Playing At Home.

Same set up and scenario as the first battle, this time playing as the Great King's general. My job is to stop the British achieving their objective while not losing too many men.

The reason for this (apart from the fun) is to play around with a situation where it is MY guys who are hidden, to see how I can manage a "secret plan" of my own with limited data AND how to manage the enemy's reaction to what they find. There may be some seat-of-the-pants flying but should be fun.

Decisions, decisions:

My first decision will be how to deploy my forces.

It doesn't take a military genius to see that the British will be most vulnerable if their convoy straggles (test throws will be as before, and as we have seen before, so this cannot be guaranteed) or when they are crossing the Drift (or drifts). Having men to hand to take advantage in these situations would be good, but placing them so makes their discovery by enemy scouts more likely.

Scattering my regiments will allow wider coverage. However, this leaves them open to defeat in detail and increases the chances of independent action on the part of my sub-commanders. Placing troops off-table keeps them safe, but makes them difficult to summon - and again risks independent action on their part. Also, do I expose certain troops to view (and thus fire) in the hope this affects enemy decisions ? Hmmm....

Once the British enter the field (via the track) they will be making their own decisions as to what to do. This will be hidden from me since while my general can guess at their route, how they actually approach and how (i.e. in column of march, deployed for battle or in mobile square) will only be "known to me" if I chose to place the general in Line of Sight of the column (i.e. close to the action) or when a report (Messenger) mentions this (see below: "Incoming Data").

The enemy "decision" will certainly affect the success of any moves on my part. Their decision may also affect how any of my sub-commanders react.

One thing I will need to decide is where to place my general. Ideally he should be able to see both the enemy and his own army. He should also be in a position to signal to his men so as to exert some kind of control over the action. However......

Given that on the two previous occasions the "Home Side" achieved their objective with just the AI as player (albeit at a cost) I feel that I should handicap myself. My general will therefore start the game in the kraal (let's say he is having "second breakfast"; one of the privileges of rank) and will not move from there until there is the sound of heavy gunfire (say at least a whole British company) within 36 inches of the kraal or a message arrives (see below) indicating that the enemy are here in force.

Incoming Data: 

Unless the enemy is in clear sight I won't know what they are doing unless informed by messenger. Unlike the enemy horse in the previous games I do not have separate Scout Units. Instead my units must spot the enemy, then send messengers to my general. These messengers are not professional soldiers (these are the junior ranks of the units - perhaps rookies or even herd boys). The process will work like this.

On an enemy force approaching within sight and within twenty four inches of a friendly unit or scout a test is made per friendly move on the table below to see if a messenger is despatched:

We then assess how long, in theory, a messenger will take to reach the General and test once that time is expended to see if the message has been delayed.

 

Once the message has arrived we test again on the table below to ascertain how good the data sent actually is.

Summoning /Activating Troops:

On-table troops will be activated in the normal way  - i.e. their commanders will react to messages, pre-arranged signals, react to ad hoc decision tests with regards changing situations and standing orders etc. etc. However, off-table troops must either have specific instructions as when to enter (written before play) or must be summoned by signal or messenger. They will NOT enter the table without orders. 

Messengers sent by the general will be subject to the usual problems/factors of messengers, with a standard "Delay test". Messages must be written out and must be interpreted based on the actual words - not the intentions of the writer.

Signals, if used, must have a pre-set meaning (written down at the start of the game, "e.g. On signal march to location of smoke", "On signal; march to Black Calf Kopje",  "On signal; march to Black Calf Kopje, attacking any enemy seen en route"etc.). Their implementation may be subject to a "Delay Test". Once on the field they will be subject to normal sub-commander reaction tests.

Pre-set instructions must be specific (e.g. "If many guns are heard march to them", "March to Black Cow Kopje when the sun is highest", "March to any Kopje from which I signal with smoke", "March to the Drift" etc.)  with a supplemental instruction if desired (e.g. "If many guns are heard march to them. Attack any enemy seen."  etc.).

Summary:  

Yet another "How Can I Introduce FoW into my Games experiment. OK, a lot of tables there, but I want to see how I can manage (or mismanage) on limited data. Playthrough next....