Heretical Gaming is my blog about my gaming life, featuring small skirmishes and big battles from many historical periods (and some in the mythic past or the far future too). The focus is on battle reports using a wide variety of rules, with the occasional rules review, book review and odd musing about the gaming and history. Most of the battles use 6mm-sized figures and vehicles, but occasionally 15mm and 28mm figures appear too.

Thursday 10 March 2022

Neil Thomas Horse & Musket Scenario 012

There has been a bit of a lull in my gaming recently, partly as some real-world responsibilities kicked-in and some personal issues weighed heavily, but mainly because the pre-war tension and then the invasion of Ukraine were so awful and depressing.  Bad real-world events don't make me think that gaming itself is bad, far from it - it is more that if I am feeling really down, then I don't generally feel like gaming.

But I did manage to get a game in this morning, at last.  I had it set-up for a few days before actually playing the thing, so if there are slight fluctuations in the shadows and scatter terrain on the photographs, that is why.

The game is the next scenario from Neil Thomas' One Hour Wargames book.  This features a defending army caught slightly short by an attacking army patrolling and finding a river crossing over the flank.  I think it is quite clear which real battle this is ultimately based on, but I don't think it is mentioned in the actual OHW book - instead that is adapted from a Grant scenario.  But to my mind, this battle is strongly reminiscent of Second Oporto (and my refight of it, here) from the Napoleonic Wars.


 

Anyway, as ever, I am using a slightly modified version of the Neil Thomas' Simplicity in Practice rules from Battlegames 023.


 

The Forces:
 
The Hanoverian Army: 
6 units of Infantry
2 units of Dragoons
1 unit of Artillery

The Franco-Jacobite Army:
5 units of Infantry
3 units of Dragoons
1 unit of Artillery

The aim in this scenario is for the attacking force to get across the river and take the high ground.  The attacker moves first, but cannot fire during that first turn.  This will allow them to seize the crossing point, as the defending army is restricted to being within a certain distance of the town.  I have some thoughts about this in the Game Notes!

The Set-Up:

The Franco-Jacobites are on the near side of the river, the British are on the far bank.

Another shot

An English and a Scottish regiment guard the town.

The main body of the defenders in a somewhat improvised line of battle.

The Franco-Jacobites are ready to carry out their attack.

Another view

And another, this time showing the regiment detailed to watch the town and pin its defenders.

The Battle:

Action breaks out as the Franco-Jacobites cross the river.  Some of the dismounted French Dragoons fall victim to British fire (top-right) but the musketry of the the Irish and Royal Ecossais regiments causes heavy losses in Fergusson's Regiment (centre)

The Franco-Jacobites have managed to get their Dragoons and a Swiss regiment across the river.

Despite local inferiority, the British infantry attack with the bayonet to disrupt the Franco-Jacobite line

The Dragoons' fire is insufficient and they are pushed back with heavy losses.

The balancing part of the equation: French Dragoons charge the now exposed flank of the British Foot

And the British infantry are thrown back with heavy losses in their turn: the French Dragoons suffer from musketry fire and are recalled but ignore the order and charge home; the British infantry rally and turn the tables on their pursuers!

The French Dragoons are defeated!

The lead French Dragoon elements have been isolated and cut off by the advancing British infantry and dragoons

Meanwhile, the British regiment (top-centre) has collapsed from the intensity of the converging fire, although the French artillery has been suffering heavily from counter-battery fire.

The position by the bridge; the narrow bridgehead is secure but the overall position is so poor for the Franco-Jacobites that they may struggle to exploit it.

Especially as the British counter-battery fire has now destroyed the French artillery

The Franco-Jacobite Foot is redeploying to support the effort at the bridge

The wider shot

Seymour's Marines put the final attack in on the remnants of the dismounted French Dragoons; the mounted French Dragoons are in a nearly as poor a state

A wider shot

The British Dragoons charge home - there is little hope for the isolated French Dragoons

The Franco-Jacobites face almost impossible odds now, but refuse to give in, renewing the attack (bottom-right)

But the lead regiment is driven back on the bridge: the Franco-Jacobite general comes forward to try and rally the wavering regiment.

A wider shot

But the British  sense that they are not going to be stopped today and launch another charge.

And that sense is proved correct, as the Swiss regiment cannot stand the sharp bayonets and manly bearing of the advancing 17th Foot...

They are broken, the general is taken, and the Franco-Jacobites must concede, having no chance of making further progress and their army on the brink of collapse.

A wider shot.


Game Notes:
If I am correct and this battle was inspired by 2nd Porto, then we can see, perhaps, how the small change in scenario compared to history can make a big difference: in that battle, the British (who were the equivalent of the Franco-Jacobite force in this game) not only crossed the river but fired first too, so the first counter-attack of the defenders was in trouble from the start.  In this scenario, the situation is rather different, with the attackers under heavy fire first - crucially this allowed the British (in this game) to weaken and break the Franco-Jacobite line quite early on.  I am not quite sure I understood the point of the 'no fire' in the scenario instructions anyway - why not just allow the attackers a certain number of units and distance across the river and then let the defenders have the first turn?  This scenario rule seems somewhat redundant.
In terms of the actual flow of the battle, the big moment was the failure of the French Dragoons to change orders and let the infantry continue the attack on the discomfited British; an infantry attack would have certainly destroyed the British regiment, whereas the way it happened was that the French Dragoons were destroyed and the regiment escaped.  Allied to the early cutting off of the French Advanced Guard and the Franco-Jacobites were in for a thin time - as it proved.  I wasn't too enamoured of my tactical handling of the Franco-Jacobites all round in this battle actually.
One thing I have always played but not written down as an amendment, is that if a defeated unit's retire move would take it off the board, I allow it to stop at the edge of the board rather than be lost.  However, if it is forced to retire further, then it is lost.  This seems fairer than not.

Figures as ever by Baccus 6mm, buildings by Leven and Timecast.

6 comments:

  1. An interesting scenario, very much driven by terrain. I like your 'retreat off the table' amendment, I have found in some games like the Perry's Firepower (ACW) units can quickly be put to flight and that table edge can be a huge decider, especially for troops that set up near the edge on defence and don't move.

    Again, in rules like firepower this is encouraged because in a turn a unit can either move or fire, so defenders will want to sit tight and a smaller table doesn't really give much scope for giving defenders a deep table space to retreat into.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Norm, I appreciate that. 'Falling off the end of the world' is pretty unsatisfactory without at least some mitigation. In practice with these rules, a unit would almost always have routed anyway by the time it is pushed back a second instance.

      Delete
  2. I think I've only played this scenario once before. I'm impressed how far the Franco Jacobite dragoons got! It may be one of those scenarios which works better with less shooty units (Ancients or whatever).

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That makes some sense now you mention it - it would make the best defensive options much less obvious, for a start.

      Delete
  3. A nice game there and good post game thoughts. I've found some of these scenarios work better than others, with this one needing some tweaks for sure. I'm not sure if this is due to other rulesets being used compared to his own, or as Martin has said that maybe less shooty units work better.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Steve. As you say, the scenarios aren't always particularly balanced to each side and period, although I wouldn't want to be absolutist about it until I have tried a scenario a few times.

      Delete