Wargamer's Guide to the English Civil War - review

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).

I have mentioned my love for renaissance gaming in general, and the English Civil War period in particular, several times during this series of reviews.  This time, I would like to review a set of miniature rules that I came to in the mid 1980s, although they were first published in 1974 (a second edition came out in 1977, and that is the edition that I own).  These rules are the 'Wargamer's Guide to the English Civil War' by Bill Protz.  These are still available for sale on Bill's website, along with some of his other excellent rules.

Curiously enough, the first edition of Bill Protz' ECW wargaming masterpiece (i.e. - the volume I am reviewing here) came out in 1974.  It was published by the Myers and Zimmermann wargaming house of Z&M Publishing (Myers and Zimmermann were the lads behind the Angriff rules, and they went on to form a publishing house for wargaming rules - mostly from their neck of the woods up in Milwaukee).

The interesting thing about the publishing year, is that it is one year after the first appearance of Cavaliers and Roundheads, by Gygax and Perren (published by TSR).  From Bill's website, he got interested in the English Civil War, as a wargaming topic, because of Cavaliers and Roundheads (C&R), and also the availability of the Hinchliffe ECW figures.  I seem to recall that TSR needed cash for their new publishing idea, the Dungeons & Dragons boxed set, and that they rushed out C&R for publication in order to raise cash.  The English Civil War must have been a popular period at this time, to not only inspire two great rulesets coming out within a year of each other, but also to convince Mssrs. Kuntz and Gygax at TSR that they could raise capital from selling an ECW rule book.  But they did.  And, furthermore, the Protz book (WGECW) is still highly regarded, and as mentioned above, still for sale.

The English Civil War continues to be a very interesting topic for wargamers, as it not only features in generic, broadbased rules sets such as DBR and Field of Glory Renaissance, but also continues to inspire specific rulesets in popular series' such as Warhammer English Civil War (sadly, now out of print, like the rest of the Warhammer historical series), and Pike and Shotte from Warlord Games (which covers the broader Renaissance, but which has an ECW specific period book - 'To Kill a King' -  due for release the month that this article is being written).  Of course, it has been, and continues a period of interest for me, as well.  On to the rules . . .

WGECW is presented as a 5x8 booklet, 76 pages long.  The book is divided up, generally, into three sections: (1) is an introduction, which gives a very brief overview of the English Civil War, and also reasons for wargaming in this period, (2) is the section containing the rules themselves, and (3) is a series of appendices that introduce information about army composition, painting and uniform information, rules for fighting sieges, and other bits of extra information.  It is this third section that lifts this book from being just a tactical rulebook, to being a wargamer's guide.  C&R did this, somewhat, but not to the extent that Bill Protz has done here.

Initial Concepts
One thing to establish up front, is that the miniatures within the units don't really matter.  Well, that is to say, they matter because it is a miniatures game, and they matter because they bring the splendor and pageantry to the wargame, but they don't matter in the sense of combat being based on particular figures in contact, or even specifically how many figures there are in a unit.  What does matter, is the units CR or Combat Rating.  Now this is typically computed initially from the number of miniatures in a unit (and the point value of those miniatures), but it will change up and down with circumstance, and in fact, the initial CR of a unit might be increased by 25% if the unit is elite.  The unit's CR is what matters, in WGECW.  Combat effectiveness is based on the CR, and losses are subtracted from the CR (although the author suggests that miniatures be removed from a unit, in proportion to CR losses that the unit undergoes).

 The CR is calculated from points values of the miniatures in a formation.  This includes extra points for figures such as officers, flag bearers, and sergeants.  For a mixed formation, such as an ECW formation with a body of Pikemen, and perhaps two flanking bodies of Musketeers, each of those divisions would have its own CR calculated and recorded on a unit roster.

Scale and Unit Types
Game scale is given at 1 inch to 15 yards for the ground, 1 figure to 20 men for the troops.  Basic types of figures are foot, horse, and artillery.

Foot troops can be Open Ordered (such as skirmishing forlorn hope), Ordered (typical musket and pike formation), Double Ordered (half the depth of Ordered formations), or Close Ordered (tightly packed infantry, in order to defend against enemy cavalry).  Finally, there is the possibility of a Ring formation (like a hedgehog, or square formation).

Horse troops can be either Ordered (such as typical charging cavalry), or Open Ordered (such as dragoons or other cavalry, spread out in order to screen), or Caracole (designed to allow pistol fire and recall against an enemy unit).

The rules give basing sizes for troops, which generally doesn't change for the different ordering listed above, EXCEPT for Close Ordered Infantry.  In that case, the player is to remove half the stands of the unit from the table, but to record and remember what their CR is - they have just gotten denser.

Foot unit stands represent three ranks of troops, and Ordered and Close Ordered units are 6 ranks deep, so they should be two miniature ranks (or stands) deep.  Double Ordered infantry are only 3 ranks deep, so are only one stand deep (called Double Ordered, because by halving the depth, they double the length of the formation line).  Horse units and artillery have their methods of representing Ordering on the tabletop.  Open Ordered units, it should be pointed out, have the stands dispersed by a short gap between them - typical skirmishing formation representation.

Turn Sequence
The game turn is divided up into a sequence of events.  Since this is a game that practices simultaneous movement, it features order writing.  Regular readers of this blog will know my affection for simultaneous movement and order writing (similar to my affection for root canal).  When we played these rules, so many years ago, we would write general battlefield orders at the beginning of the game, and our specific turn orders were only changes to those, as well as announcing charges etc.  It helps to have a referee.

The sequenced events of the turn, however, are these:

1. Both sides write down orders for their units.
2. Both sides read out their orders, alternating who goes first every other turn.
3. Moves are performed simultaneously according to orders.
4. Skirmish Fire is assessed, and casualties immediately calculated and removed.
5. Artillery Fire is assessed, and casualties immediately calculated and removed.
6. Other Small Arms Fire is assessed, and casualties immediately calculated and removed.
7. Melee is adjudicated and resolved.
8. Turn is complete.

Morale tests can be triggered in any of the firing or melee events.

Movement
Movement is quite straight forward, and is based on some simple charts showing inches, based on the type of movement (and troop type) performing it.  There are some simple reductions and additions based on different circumstances (road movement, move and fire, direction change, etc).  There are some specifics to be followed if a unit of musketeers is going to be firing by introduction (that is, as the ranks fire, and are replaced from the rear, that they slowly move forward), or extroduction (the same, only the unit as a whole slowly moves backward, as firers run to the rear of their file).

Movement for cavalry is slightly more involved, although the chart is every bit as simple.  For mounted troops, the player must determine if the horses are trotting, cantering or galloping.   Rules are given about accelerating through these different states.  A horse, cannot, for instance, go from a simple stand-still to galloping in one move.  It must start at trotting, then the next turn can proceed to cantering, and finally to galloping.  As with foot troops, there are some simple additions or reductions based on circumstance and operations.

Finally, there is a similar table, with similar rules for artillery pieces of different sizes, and different situations.

Small Arms Fire
Once the type of fire (regular, introduction/extroduction, pistol caracole, etc) is determined, then the number of figures, and their CR, can be assessed.  The following procedure is used to determine the number of casualties (expressed in CR reduction to the target unit) is finalized.

1. Determine CR
2. Determine Range
3. Toss 1 die
4. Check Die Adjustment Chart for mods
5. Cross reference die results with range, to get an Effectiveness Letter
6. Cross reference the effect letter, and the CR firing on the Small Arms Casualty Chart, to get the casualty integer.
7. Modify the casualty integer by modifiers on the final casualty adjustment chart.
8. Take the final modified casualty integer, and multiply it by the point value of the target troops, and deduct the result from the target unit's CR

One final consideration, is that armored units (foot and horse) have a reduced calculus of how much total CR damage is inflicted.

Artillery Fire
The procedures for doing Artillery Fire, are somewhat different from small arms fire.

• First,  determine your target, and then based on range there is a chance for the artillery shot to go awry.  If at short range, it is a definite hit, but at medium and long range there is a chance to miss.
• Second, determine the ranks penetrated (light guns penetrate 2 ranks, medium guns penetrate 3, and heavy guns will penetrate 4).  
• Third, for each rank penetrated, there is a one point casualty integer, and these are all summed up (so for 3 ranks penetrated, there is a total casualty integer of 3).  This is reduced by terrain (such as firing up- or down-hill).  
• Finally, multiply the casualty integer times the CR of the troops hit, and reduce this from the target unit.  This total amount is reduced by half in a number of situations.
• The final CR total is subtracted from the target unit's CR.

There are similar procedures for other types of shot (the above, is for regular round shot, that does damage by bouncing through multiple ranks of soldiers, and killing them).  Shot types include exploding shell and langridge (case, or hail) shot.

Melee
Not surprising, the CR system is core to how melee engagements are adjudicated in these rules.  Each side calculates their current CR (lots of modifiers, such as Horse vs. non-Horse gets multiplied by 125%).  Then, the winner of the melee is determined.  This is done by each side rolling 2d6, and multiplying the result by their unit's CR.  The high score wins the melee combat.  Now, casualties are inflicted as a percentage of the original CR (not the product of the CR multiplied by dice).  The losing side will deduct (from their base CR score) an amount equal to 25% of the winner's CR.  The winning side will deduct 10% of the loser's CR.  The loser then takes, and applies, a morale test.  There are rules for fleeing, pursuits, and how officers affect things.  That is it - it is easy to play out melee combat, and although the impact of multiplying your CR by a 2d6 roll at first blush seems like there can be a lot of variability, the actual casualties (CR deduction) and morale results are more important.

Example combat - Lets say a Royalist Pike and Shot unit, with 12 pikemen (including 2pt command figures), and 12 musketeers will have a total CR of 36.  It is facing a Parliamentarian unit with 8 pikemen and 16 musketeers, or a total CR of 32.  The Royalist player rolls a 7 on the dice, and a total of (7x36) or 252.  The Parliamentarian player rolls a 9 on the dice, and a total of (9x32) or 288.  The Parliamentarian unit wins.  The Royalist unit subtracts (.25 x 32) 8 points from it's CR.  The Parliamentary unit subtracts (.10 x 36) 4 points from it's CR.  The Royalist unit, as the losing unit, will have to test morale

Extras
The rulebook is about half full of appendices. The first few of these go over how units should be organized on the wargames table, and a short guide to painting and flags, as well as advice to the 15mm player (a new scale, for the most part, in the early 1970s).

But then the appendices get more interesting.  There is a subset of rules for doing siege games.  These cover the specifics of affecting fortifications and buildings, as well as rules for grenadoes and other siege equipment.  A series of six different classes of storming/sieging are described, as scenarios and what is to be done in each (as well as victory conditions, and how to represent that sort of siege on the tabletop).

There is a set of notes regarding the organization of armies and the proportion of units, etc, in the years of the First Civil War (1642-1646).  And finally, there are some blank and sample unit rosters (showing a clean way to record unit CR and orders/status).  Lastly, the book ends with a nice glossary of ECW military terms.

Assessment/Conclusion
I owned this book before I owned either Forlorn Hope or 1644 (both of which I played more than these rules).  In fact, the only renaissance/ECW rules I owned before these were the George Gush rules from WRG (and, eventually, Universal Soldier).  I only played these a few times, but I returned to the book for information about the period, and units, artillery types, etc many times over while in my early years of ECW playing.  This was one of those rulebooks that back then (in the 1980s) was in many of the wargaming shops I visited, and also on the rack at vendor booths at wargaming conventions. I saw it a lot, but unfortunately the people I played with did not use it.

One of the things I found disconcerting (more below, as I discuss this effect in regards to shooting) is the fact that the unit is kept track of by its CR, and casualties and effects are based on total CR engaged, and not individual stands or figures.  I understand the reason for this, with mixed units of pike and shot, but it seemed to introduce as many difficulties as it solved, see my comments below about shooting (both musketry and artillery).

The basic scale and representation of the game (in terms of figures per unit, movement and shooting ranges, and also turn/time sequence) works very well.  But for some reason, these rules never quite were the thing in the group I played with. I include it here, because of the impact the book had, and Bill Protz's excellent writing about wargames, not so much because I played it so often (I played almost all the other ECW rules mentioned in this review series - Forlorn Hope, Cavaliers and Roundheads, Universal Soldier, Hackbutt and Pike, and the forthcoming Gush rules and 1644 - more than I played the Wargamer's Guide to the English Civil War).  Eventually, I would get other resources on wargaming units and uniforms and army lists, etc (Forlorn Hope was excellent in that regard, but also great books from Caliver), but early on - this is the book that made me fall in love with wargaming the period.  Even if the rules in this book did not.

Pros/Cons for Musketry and Artillery
Okay, this seems (to me) to be a bit overly complicated, mostly because of the basic structure of WGECW.  The casualty integer is a number of enemy figures killed.  But the final step, of converting it back to points and then deducting it from the CR, is because of the requirement to discuss everything about a unit in terms of CR, rather than in terms of figures. 


I give the author (Bill Protz) the benefit of the doubt, because there are benefits of doing a unit as a whole, even when it is comprised of disparate parts (like pike, officers, halberdiers, and shot all in a large battalia, for instance).  That is always hard to do, and rules for the period (even the latest modern rules) always struggle hard in how to do hybrid units.  The CR system is an elegant way to do it, it just didn't appeal to the people I was playing with.

reade more... Résuméabuiyad

Card based system for wargames deployment

One of the features I like about the various strains of card driven board wargames, is the decision involved in playing a card for activation.  Clearly this does not apply to all card driven systems, but the ones I am thinking of have cards with multiple options on them, that the player must choose from when playing a card.  Does the player use the card for bringing on reinforcements, or to activate an event, or for a special ability/modifier, or simply to activate units/leaders already in the game?

 

This seems like a useful thing to try and bring into a miniatures wargame, to put a little spin on that old standby scenario - the meeting engagement.  So what I am considering here is a system of cards, each with two different pieces of information on it. Each player would, in turn, place one of these cards, from a small handful they have to choose from, on the table, in one of three different sectors.eventually, each player will play two cards in each sector.  Each sector would have one card, for that player's forces, that corresponds to one of the two categories of information on he cards (so, one card for forces, and one card for deployment).

The first piece of information is a partial basic order of battle. It would list a number of units that would belong to one of three sectors on the battlefield (left, center, right).  Depending on the period and the number of units a player owns, this could be tailored so that a personal collection could provide the figures needed. This could easily be three or four units, or as many as a dozen, depending on period, scale, and rules used.

The second piece of information would control the deployment of forces in that sector.  Are the forces arrayed in a single line? Some units off board? In column on a road?  Dug in with scouts deployed?  Again lots of possibilities, depending on period, scale, and rules.

An example might be this, for Blue Army's Left Flank... (Fictional situation, of course)

Forces Card: Infantry Division, 6 units of line infantry, 1 medium gun battery. 

Deployment Card: Probing Line, All units in a battle line, 12" in from base edge.  Up to two subunits (converged flank companies, or detached squadrons) can be deployed up to 24" in from base line.  

I can see this used in several ways. The easiest, and maybe most interesting, is to deal out six cards to each player, and they need to use all six.  The second way, is to deal three cards each, and as a player places a card, they draw a new one.  Other possibilities exist, but in all cases, the players roll initiative, and high roller places one card, and then the players alternate until all six cards for each side are played.

I am looking forward to trying a set of these, maybe for Napoleonics first. Loads and loads of possibilities exist, including special event cards, special decks for special scenarios, and ancillary effects of cards, like logistical conditions, weather, or affects to limit or increase command.

A neat project to ponder.

reade more... Résuméabuiyad

Chainmail Variant Rule - Post-Melee Results

Chainmail has many ways in which to recommend itself as a fast play set of big battle Medieval rules.  One of the more troubling areas, however, is in post-melee morale.

To a modern eye, this is a set of mathematical calculations that will slow down the flow of the game.  It is actually all just simple math (addition and multiplication, for the most part), but it does seem to be out of favor with modern war game design philosophy.

To that end, I offer the following system (but first, present the current system, for comparison).

The Post-Melee Morale system, as is
On page 15 of the rule book, there is a procedure for calculating Post-Melee Morale.  It involves three factors, added together:

1. A factor for the side that took fewer casualties in the melee.  This is the difference between the two casualty counts, times a d6 roll.  Only the side that took fewer casualties gets this factor.
2. A factor based on the current size of the unit, as number of total figures times their Morale Rating.  Both sides get this factor.
3. A factor based on who has more figures surviving after the melee.  This difference between the two totals of surviving figures, and is multiplied by a d6 roll.  Only the side with more figures gets this factor.

Add up the factors.  Each side will have at least one of these (number 2), but only one side or the other will benefit from the others (numbers 1 and 3).

Compare the two totals, and then consult the difference on this table:

Difference	Result
0-19 difference	melee continues
20-39 difference	lower total side moves back 1/2 move, but in good order
40-59 difference	lower total side moves back 1 move, but in good order
60-79 difference	lower side retreats 1 move
80-99 difference	lower side routs 1 1/2 move
100+ difference	lower side surrenders, and victorious side may continue a charge if possible, leaving behind 1 guard per 5 prisoners

Factor number 2 above, is the current total value of each unit - meaning the total number of remaining figures, multiplied by the Morale Rating of the figures.  In a mixed unit, each figure is multiplied by it's own Morale Rating, and then the subunits are added together.  Here are the Morale Ratings:

Troop Type	Morale Rating
Peasants	3
Light Foot and Levies	4
Heavy Foot	5
Elite Heavy Foot	6
Light Horse	6
Armored Foot, Janissary	7
Medium Horse, Landsknechte	8
Heavy Horse, Swiss Pikemen	9

The New Post-Melee Morale System, Proposed
First, the concept - This method involves taking a morale test.  Both sides calculate what their target number would be, and the lower total tests first (2d6, trying to roll the target number or less).  If the first test fails, then depending on the nature of the fail, it will consult the Post-Melee Morale Test Results table below.  If the first test passes, then the second unit will make a test against it's target number.  If the second unit fails, then it will also suffer the results from the table below.  If it passes, then both units are still engaged in combat, and the melee continues next turn.

Method -
Each side determines their target number.  This is based on the Morale Rating from the above table.  To that number, add/subtract the following:
+1, if larger than the enemy
+1, if took fewer casualties than the enemy
-2, if 1/4 of the original unit is dead
-4, if 1/3 of the original unit is dead
-6, if 1/2 of the original unit is dead, or more

Each side will calculate this target number.
The side with the lower target number tests first.
If the first testing unit fails, then it consults the results table below.
If the first testing unit passes, then the other side will test.
If the second unit has to test, and it fails, consult the results table below.
If the second unit has to test, and it passes, then that means both sides have passed, and the melee continues.

In practice, this amounts to a quick comparison of target numbers, and the lower number tests.  If it fails, that is the end.  If it passes, then the other side tests.  That's all.

If the two target numbers are tied - both sides roll.  Either side that fails will suffers the results.  If (extremely rarely) both sides try to surrender, then both sides rout instead.

Post-Melee Morale Test Results

Test	Results
Pass	Continue
Miss -1	back 1/2 move, good order
Miss -2	back 1 move, good order
Miss -3	retreat 1 move
Miss -4	rout 1 1/2 move
Miss -5 or more	surrender

Miss -1, etc, means the 2d6 dice roll missed the target number by 1 (i.e. target=7, and 8 is rolled on the dice).

Here is the whole process reduced to a flow chart, and with the Morale Rating, and Test Results charts included (click to make bigger/more readable).

Multiple Units
In order to apply this method to multiple units, calculate the Target Number for all units involved on all sides.

1. Starting with the lowest value unit, begin testing.  Apply results to each unit, as it tests.
2. If any units have the same Target Number, always test them simultaneously.  
3. Apply the "Took Less Casualties" modifier to each unit on the side that took fewer overall.  
4. Apply the "Larger than the Enemy" modifier to the side that has more total figures (counting all units involved), to each unit on that side.  
5. Apply the modifiers for unit loss to each unit individually.
6. Stop testing when only units from one side or the other remain in contact.
7. If a unit is to Surrender, but the final results have a friendly unit still in contact, then that unit Routs instead.

Example - A heavy foot unit (12 figures), and a medium horse unit (9 figures) hit a large armored foot unit (24 figures).  In the melee, the heavy foot unit loses 4 figures.  The medium horse unit loses 2 figures.  The armored foot unit loses 5 figures.  Start by calculating Target Numbers:

• Heavy Foot - base value of 5
• Medium Horse - base value of 8
• Armored Foot - base value of 7

After the Melee, the Armored Foot unit is larger (19 remaining, vs a total of 15 remaining on the other side).  The Armored Foot also took fewer casualties than the other side (5 figures killed, vs 6 figures killed).  So the Armored Foot unit gains a +1 for Fewer Casualties, and a +1 for larger than the enemy.  The Heavy Foot have lost 1/3 of their figures, so take a -4.  That makes the Heavy Foot unit have a target of 1, the Medium Horse unit still has a target of 8, and the Armored Foot unit has a target of 9.  
Rolling, in order, for the Heavy Foot (roll of a 6, which means that they will surrender to the Armored Foot).  The Medium Horse is next, and must test (even though the Heavy Foot failed) because there are still units in contact from both sides.  The Medium Horse rolls a 7, and remains in contact.  The Armored Foot rolls a 6, and also remains in contact.  The melee will continue next turn between the Medium Horse (with 7 figures remaining) and the Armored Foot (with 19 figures remaining).
Because the Heavy Foot still had a friendly unit in contact after all tests, rather than surrender, they rout instead.

Thoughts
In practice, trying this out with just nominal units fighting it out using pencil and paper, this works fine.  It rewards the better quality unit (very medieval), but also modifies that by the realities of the melee.

This method seems to work, it only has to be put into practice in a few solo games.  If anyone reading this tries it out, please let me know your results.

reade more... Résuméabuiyad

Hackbutt & Pike - review

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 review is of Hackbutt & Pike, the Tac-50 series rules for Renaissance wargaming.  These were printed in 1977, but copies are still available through Cotton Jim Flags (write and ask - I think they are $5, which is a great price for a rulebook these days, and they still read well).

The period of the renaissance has remained (through most of my adult life) one of my favorite periods of history for both study, and for wargaming.  As you can tell, if you have been following this series of reviews from the beginning, I have dabbled with or played a number of different rulesets for the period.

• The Universal Soldier
• Forlorn Hope 
• Dominance 
• Cavaliers and Roundheads 
• Tercio 

And I am at least planning to do the Protz ECW rules, and the Gush Renaissance rules in the series.

Chesapeake Military Society - a Reminiscence
Along side all those other Renaissance rules, why am I reviewing Hackbutt & Pike?  Simply for two reasons.  First, they are rules that I played in the 80s and 90s (which fits the criteria of this series of articles).  Second, they are part of a series of rule sets that helped to define my earliest exposure to a wargaming club.

In the early 1980s, while in High School, and shortly after I began driving, I discovered (through an advertisement at a local bookstore in a mall - remember mall book stores?) that there was a local wargaming club that met in Hampton, Virginia at the local National Guard Armory.  That club was the Chesapeake Military Society (CMS).  Prior to my exposure to the club they previously met at one of the old batteries at Fort Monroe.  By the time I encountered them, they were meeting once a month at the Armory.  Now, the National Guard Armory, in Hampton, consisted of a large muster area for the Guard meetings, plus a large building that included a basketball sized gymnasium. This is where the gaming club met.  As a testament to the gross popularity of tabletop gaming at the time, they would fill up the place.  There would be all sorts of miniatures games going on, and when I first went, there were also some role playing games.  There was a terrific WW2 naval battle (using Seapower III I think), with 1:1200 ships, on the floor of the gymnasium (the old school - with long surveyor's tapes run out to lengths of 20+ feet between ships for salvos, etc).  And there was a large Napoleonic game, in lovely 25mm, being played on a large table.

This Napoleonics game being played (and refereed) by the core members of the club, although there were many other games going on.  The rules for the game were Valeur et Discipline, written by the luminary behind the club - Mr. Ben King.  Ben had several other rules that the club used, and in this particular series (which is called Tac-50 - as they are all based on a 1:50 scale) there are four sets proper - Mitre, Mustache & Musket for Seven Years War (and mid 18th century), Valeur et Discipline for Napoleonics, Kepi & Pickelhaub for mid 19th century, and Hackbutt & Pike for Renaissance.  Another set, for Vauban era siege warfare and early 18th century field battles exists called Fusil & Fortress, but it is on another scale of detail from the rest of the series, and covers so much more than the rest.  I plan to review several (or perhaps all) of these in this series.

Shortly after this time, the peninsula location of Campaign Headquarters (the original was in Norfolk, Virginia) would open, and CMS would change to have their monthly meetings at the store.  It was at these meetings that I became familiar with the Tac-50 rules.  Usually, but not always, refereed by Ben, the rules are very clear, and are also quite "bloody" - leading to a high casualty rate, for quick play games.

Hackbutt & Pike is not the set of Tac-50 rules that I played the most often (that is probably Valeur et Discipline), but it is the set that I refereed several times, and the set I played most often outside of the CMS club meeting settings.  And it is one of my favorite periods, as mentioned earlier.  The ruleset does not lay down a specific time period (probably for the best), but could easily stretch back to the 14th century (as the introduction to the history section begins there), which includes the later Medieval period, and could run up to the middle of the 17th century - the Monmouth Rebellion or War of the Grand Alliance might be possible, but would be a stretch.

Battle of Rocroi, by Augusto Ferrer-Dalmau

Introduction
The rules come in a nice 8.5x11 booklet, running to 44 pages in length.  They are divided up into eight sections:

1. Game Structure
2. Terrain & Weather
3. History, Tactics & Organization
4. Movement
5. Melee
6. Firepower
7. Casualties
8. Control, Reaction & Morale

They follow up with a nice bibliography.  This ruleset's bibliography first introduced me to Charles Oman's Art of War in the Sixteenth Century, so for that alone I am forever indebted.

The Game Structure is basically an overview of scale (1 model soldier represents 50 men), and how to base figures for the game.  Time scale is given, also - turns are 25-30 minutes, and ground is 1" to 25 yards.  This is followed by some basic game concepts - you should write general orders for your army, and also fire priority for all your missile troops.  There should be a command figure representing your general on the tabletop, and each turn, both armies should write tactical orders detailing things like charges, changes in move, etc.  If a player wishes to change the overall battle orders for a unit, they must be carried from the general to the unit by a courier figure (the general has two such figures at the start of the game), which may be captured or killed in the process.

Swiss Mercenaries crossing the Alps, by Luzerner Schilling

One word right up front.  I have remarked in this series of reviews over and over again how I don't care for simultaneous move rules (which Tac-50 sets all are), and how I dislike writing orders.  However . . . every rule has it's exception.  Some of the Tac-50 games I played were extremely enjoyable, and with a knowledgeable and active referee it can work.  Arguments can still arise, but if the referee is respected by all the players, it works out well.  Forward.

The next section covers terrain and weather this has several sections in it.

• Roads - how to depict them, and what they mean for movement
• Ground condition - roll 3d6; 3-7 bad ground; 8-18 good ground.  Optional of course.
• Weather - what it is, and how it changes.
• Forests - dense and light
• Hills - 10 yard contours, and how they affect movement and visibility
• Obstacles, Barriers, and Field Works - how to pass them, how to lay them, and war wagons (Hussites?)
• Rivers and Streams - how to depict them, how to ford them
• Bridges and Boats
• Houses

This is followed up by a nice, but sadly too concise, section (running about 6 pages) on the history, tactics, and composition of some major armies of the Renaissance period. Following this, which includes some nice diagrams showing some of the major battalia formations of the period (such as the Spanish Tercio, or the Swiss Keil), we then move on to section 4, which begins the meat of the rules.

Turn Order and Movement
Section 4 is called Movement, and begins with a short overview of the turn structure.  The turn is intended to be simultaneously executed, with both sides moving, and then fighting and shooting all taking place simultaneously.  This works well if you have an organized and knowledgeable referee guiding things.

The turn sequence, as presented here, is this:

1. (Implied) - Write Orders
2. Skirmishers may fire weapons
3. Movement of Troops
4. Fire of weapons by Formed Troops (and artillery)
5. Hand to Hand Combat 

As mentioned, skirmishers may fire before all moves.  Or, they may do a split move and fire.  If, while doing this, they come into range of enemy troops, they may still be fired on by those troops in the proper turn sequence.

Other actions other than regular moves are covered, as a function of how many they can perform in a turn (or how many turns they will take).  This includes such things as infantry moving backwards, crossing obstacles, entering a building, passage of lines, or forming a wagon lager.

The movement chart gives moves for formed units and skirmishers.  For cavalry it also lists Caracole movement (moving up, discharging pistols, and return).

Artillery and Wagons are given movement rates for draught animals (being pulled along), or being manhandled.


Hand-to-Hand Fighting

The next section of the rules covers hand-to-hand fighting, or melee combat.  Although this period, in history, and as described in the history section of the rulebook, is a period when disciplined soldiery began to replace the heavy knight on the battlefield.  However, the heavy knight is still a superior weapon, even if it cannot win battles on its own any longer.  And, much of the replacement of the knight is in the form of pikemen and other polearm supplied troops (although this would give way, and evolve into, the bayonet).

While there is currently a debate about the use of the pike (see my earlier article Push of Pike), in wargaming the possibility exists that they may be exercised effectively - so rules have to exist.  And with these two arms of the renaissance battlefield (the horse, and the pike) being focused on hand-to-hand fighting, it is fitting that this is a major focus of the rules.

A side note - although above I make that case that hand-to-hand fighting is a major feature of renaissance warfare, and thus the Hackbutt & Pike rules, it is true that close combat is a major feature (a battle winning feature) of all the Tac-50 rules.  This is appropriate, because it is what wargamers seek to engage in.  And whether the encounter reflects the actual casualties that occur from bayonets and pikes piercing the enemy soldiery, or if those casualties reflect a fleeing soldiery that lost their nerve in the face of such weapons, it matters little - it is a part of combat in these periods, and something wargamers regularly rely on to win battles.

In these rules, the key to Hand-to-Hand fighting is the point value of the soldiers involved.  Light Infantry figures are worth 1 point each, up to Heavy Cavalry (Knights) are worth 4 points each.  The basic procedure is to total up the number of points you have fighting, more on how that is calculated is described below, then find that row on the casualty table, roll some dice, and you get a number of points inflicted (by consulting the proper column on the table).  Divide this number of points by the point value of the target unit, and you get the number of figures killed.

The Casualty Table

How many figures will fight?  This is found by consulting a table called the Melee Matrix.  There, you will cross reference two different letters - each reflecting the weapon system of one of the two units involved (attacker on the left, defender across the top), and the result will give which column to roll on, on the casualty table, and will also tell you how many ranks of figures get to fight.  From there, take a look at the point of contact - all figures on the front rank in contact, and all those to their flanks within 2" (about 1 multi figure stand) on either side of the contact, will get to fight.  Plus a similar number of additional ranks, if additional ranks get to fight.

Melee Matrix, and Point Values of Figures

Difference of Dice is printed boldly across the top of the Casualty Table.  This is how the exact number of points is determined.  The players will roll 2d6, and determine the difference between them.  So if a play rolls a 6 and a 3, the difference is 3.  Doesn't matter which dice is first or second, it is only the difference that matters.  Doubles must be re-rolled.  In this way, a weighted series of results is determined (take a look at a simple 6x6 matrix, with the odds of each difference counted up to see what I am talking about), and a curve is introduced into the casualty table, while still preserving only 5 columns of numbers.

Which column on the Casualty Table to use?

The basic system is similar to a few other rule sets (point values goes back to Charles Grant, I believe), but of those reviewed in this blog, it is very similar to Forlorn Hope, the biggest difference being that the results in Hackbutt & Pike are in points, rather than in whole figures.

As mentioned, one of the lacking elements of the (otherwise excellent) quick reference sheet provided with the game (the book comes with two copies), is the table of letters defining a unit's fighting style.  Here is the table (note that there are two entries for 'E'):

A - Dry Pikes

B - Supported Pikes (with swordsmen, dopplesoldners, polearms, etc)

C - Short Hafted Pole Arms (halberd, glaives, etc)

D - Targeteers - Sword and Targe (or Buckler) armed

E - Disciplined Soldiers with Misc Weapons (sword, axe, spear, etc)

E - All troops that are in Open Order (this is usually missile armed troops)

F - Infantry in Skirmish Formation

G - Dismounted Warriors - trained, but undisciplined, such as foot knights or most Turkish infantry

H - Cavalry in Close Order

I - Cavalry in Skirmish Order (horse archers, etc)

Example: A unit of 18 'dry' Medium Infantry Pikemen (3 stands across, in two ranks, 1.5 points each) are facing a unit of 24 Sword & Buckler Light Infantry men (4 stands across, in two ranks, 1 point each).  Consulting the weapon system table in the book (frustatingly, this is the one table that is not on the quick reference sheet, but the letter of each unit could be recorded on an order of battle sheet), we find that 'dry' Pikemen (so called because they are not supported by zweihanders, polearms, or other supporting infantry) are the letter 'A'.  Also consulting, we find out that the Sword & Buckler men are the letter 'D'.   Comparing this, we find that an A unit vs a D unit (on the Melee Matrix) rolls on Column I, and uses 1 rank of troops.  Similarly, the D unit vs the A unit rolls on Column III, and uses 1 rank of troops.  Both units will use their whole front rank (9 figures for the Pikemen, and 12 figures for the Swordsmen).  Checking for the pikes first, we find 9 figures times 1.5 points is 13.5, or rounded up, 14 points on the casualty table.  The dice are rolled, a 4 and a 2, or difference of 2 in column I.  This means '2' points have been inflicted, which means 2 whole Swordsmen have been killed.  Returning the favor, 12 swordsmen, at 1 point each, is the 12 roll on the table.  Consulting column III, with a dice difference of 3 (a 4 and 1 were rolled), we see that 9 points were inflicted, which means (at 1.5 points each) 6 pikemen were killed.

Not mentioned in the above example, which serves to illustrate the use of the melee matrix and the casualty table, but there is a list of possible dice modifiers.  Compared to many rulesets this list is blessedly short, as can be seen here.

 Now for the exciting part.  Combat is fought in (potentially) up to 6 rounds.  First, assuming that both units pass morale tests, they enter combat, and fight three rounds.  Then some mid-combat tests are further performed, and if both pass, they fight another three rounds.  The second three rounds assume that there is now a general melee and discipline is flown out the window, so all the niceties of the melee matrix is ignored, and all combat is only in column I.  What can stop this slaughter?  Well, if a unit has taken results that meet their Maximum Allowed Loss (M.A.L.), then it can trigger an end to the hostilities, or if the morale tests dictate so (see morale below).  Usually, three rounds are fought, and that is decisive.  Those three rounds are fought in rapid succession, not over three turns, by the way.  So when a unit hits another, there are (possibly) three or six casualty rolls for each side.  It is bloody, but is is also dramatic, as you see how one unit starts to fail and eventually is swamped.  Stubborn units get to go all in for six rounds of fighting - massive carnage!

The close combat section ends with rules on how to fight encounters between leaders (say, with a personal duel).  Also, once a combat is over and one side or the other retires, it is important to determine if either side captured a standard.  This can have an impact on morale tests, and provides for great bragging rights. It is based on a reaction test (see below).



Ranged Combat

The whole series of Tac-50 rules, if taken chronologically (and including the 18th century set Fusil & Fortress), is a series of wargaming rules charting the evolution of firepower from the late medieval period (the eponymous hackbutt of the set being reviewed here), up through the height of the age of rifles (the end of the 19th century, as portrayed in Kepi & Pickelhaub).

This period we see not only the muscle powered weapons of antiquity and the medieval period (spears, slings, bows, etc.) but also the introduction of gunpowder weapons.  This includes the hackbutt (or arquebus), the musket, the pistol and of course gunpowder based artillery.


A weapons table details the range of the firepower based weapons, and also which column to use on the casualty table.  It also includes such useful information as to what the effect is if the target is wearing no armor (the default case is that the target figures are wearing some armor), and also what happens if they are fully (plate) armored.  There is also a detail about which factor row to consult when firing artillery.

Not every weapon can fire every turn, and the loading table details how much of a turn's worth of movement must be sacrificed to reload the weapon.  In practice, we found that marking a unit with gunpowder blasts (i.e. - cotton balls) is effective to show they are unloaded.

As was clear from the die modifier table, most of the modifiers in the game for combat have an affect on missile fire.

Unlike close combat, there is only one round of missile fire per turn.

Casualties
This section of the rules details (as described above) how to use the casualty table, and how to get a dice difference. It also points out that the vagaries of the point system mean that sometimes a unit can never inflict enough points to kill a single enemy figure.  In those cases, it suggests that the total number of attacking factors/figures be multiplied by 2 or even 3 to get a reasonable result - but this must be done equally for both sides in a melee or firefight.

Since the rules (especially the close combat rules) are so very bloody, there is also a section here that allows you to detail, after a combat, exactly how many of those "casualty" figures are actually casualties, and how many return to your ranks, ready to march again immediately.  In this way, even though tabletop battles are quite bloody, forces remain relatively intact for the purpose of playing campaigns.

Reactions and Morale
Units are rated, according to their training and dedication, as one of five different classes.
Class I - Untrained, Undisciplined -  peasants, feudal levy, untrained burghers
Class II - Semi-Trained - town militia
Class III - Trained - fighting for a cause, such as Royal body guards, noble's retinue
Class IV - Trained - mercenaries or national troops
Class V - Arrogant - Swiss, Knights, Fanatics

Using this class, a unit will have to occasionally make a reaction test (reasons are listed below), and will result in one of four reaction results - 0, A, B, or C.
0 - Leadership has lost control, Unit takes matter into their own hands, Advance at nearest enemy
A - Unit will continue to follow orders
B - Unit will retire from the battle, but in good order, and will defend itself
C - Unit has given up hope and will throw down weapons and flee

The reasons for making tests are as follows:

• When enemy first comes into view.
• Prior to melee (on contact)
• After each three rounds of melee
• After leader of army is killed or captured
• After M.A.L. (Maximum Allowed Loss) is reached
• After all unit leaders are killed (rules detail if one of three leader figures are killed in combat)

A unit rolls 2d6, and applies modifiers (such as based on MAL, or situational modifiers) and then consults a chart based on their class. This gives one of the four results (0,A,B,C).

The reaction section also details such events as asking for quarter, units that are NOT granted quarter can roll for desperation (determine bonuses to morale for fighting on); looting; the chance of capturing a standard based on morale results from melee combat; and others.

Review/Opinion
I like the Tac-50 sets of rules, but they are somewhat dated these days.  One of the things I will still decry, in spite of having numerous successful (and memorable) games with these rules, is the simultaneous nature of the turn sequence.

They are fast - the method for rolling multiple close combat rounds in a single turn will see to that.  But these are (approximately) 30 minute turns, so each combat round represents 5 minutes (more or less) of hard fighting.  That isn't exactly so, because the turn can also include movement, but it does represent a possibly large amount of fighting.  Still, the casualties generated are extreme and obscene - but they work very well.  The game is very playable, and very fast.  I have played in games with hundreds of stands of figures on each side, to a complete result within 3 hours or so of playtime.

These work great, in my opinion, for the Italian Wars, and other wars of religion.  As well as the later medieval battles (These would be great for Hundred Years War as well as Wars of the Roses games).  They are intended to cover English Civil War and Thirty Years War, and do so pretty well, but the rules for mixed battalions of pike and shot are not included.  Each body is its own "unit" for the purpose of the game.  Equally, there is not a chance (that I recall) to evade, so a shot unit cannot, for instance, run for cover under the pikes.  Most of the other Renaissance rules I have reviewed in this series of articles do such representation with either maneuver, combat, or morale rules (or a combination of all three).

Cavalry is dealt with exceptionally well here, and the simple rules for pistols, caracoling, and so forth give the different tactical systems of the time good coverage.

These may be something of a challenge for me, in a future article and perhaps some solo gaming, to come up with a You-Go-I-Go variant of the game.  Perhaps allowing for reaction moves?  Not sure, but it could work.  The rules are too good to keep that bugaboo of simultaneous turns in the way of playing them.

reade more... Résuméabuiyad

Angriff! - review

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 is a review of the Angriff rules, by Myers and Zimmermann, from 1968.  The version I have, and am reviewing (in particular) is the version I played just after high school, from the 1982 printed version.  While I only played these, by themselves, a little in the 1980s, I liked them, and would continue to use the infantry rules with other sets of tank rules, for a very long time.  Before I get into the detailed review, a little history and nostalgia about my history with WW2 rules and wargaming.

 World War 2 wargaming, has been a very large part of my wargaming experience from the beginning.  Before coming to miniatures and miniature wargaming, I started with board games that had a WW2 flavor, and also I had been an avid military model builder, mostly of US ground vehicles from WW2.  Moving into miniatures, my first foray was into Napoleonics, as described earlier in another review, and that gave way to medieval skirmish gaming very quickly (as something my co-gamers at the time were interested in).

However, my brothers and I, like lots of kids from that generation, also grew up on a steady diet of WW2 war movies and books.  So when the possibility of building some WW2 miniatures, and coming up with rules, came upon us, we used the plastic HO (including all the near-HO scales, 1:87, 1:76, and 1:72) models for infantry from Airfix and Atlantic, as well as all the many HO scale models we had built and painted.  The rules were based on my experience, at the time, with the Hinchliffe guide, as well as some books from the library on wargaming.  It seemed to me that these types of games, unlike the "obviously" much more scientific SPI and Avalon Hill games, could be written by an amateur.  So I came up with some rules.  They were simple.  Tanks moved 8".  Jeeps moved 12".  Infantry moved 4".  Shooting was by numbers of D6, and the number of 6s rolled were casualties.  A US Sgt with a SMG was by far the most dangerous element in the game (thanks John Wayne movies).

Moving forward, I got a little more interested in more formal rules.  I got a copy of Tractics, from TSR.  I really liked the first book - Tank and AntiTank, but it was just a little bit too much detail.  That remains true today for lots of people who encounter Tractics.

Moving forward, I tried some other rules sets, eventually (later on) setting on Overwatch, but in the meantime, I tried the Angriff rules and also the WRG 1925-1950 rules.  One thing I encountered early on was the fantastic magazine, Wargamer's Digest, from Gene McCoy.

The pictures of battles, and the fantastic tabletop scenarios and maps, along with Gene's system 76 order of battle system were extremely exciting, and one of the things that drove my interest in this period.  So when I got into Angriff, and saw the possibility of representing troops in a way similar to Gene's - with a single tank for a command vehicle, and then a tank representing each platoon, so a company might have a total of four models.  That works great for Angriff, and was the scale of gaming I wanted to do.  I never used a total of 30 miniatures on a stand to represent the infantry, as Angriff requests, but usually I would have a stand of three miniatures to represent a platoon or section.

The rulebook itself is divided up into (roughly) two sections.  The first, up to page 24, is the actual wargames rules.  This covers a variety of different topics:

• Unit organization
• Preparing for Battle
• Movement of Forces
• Sighting
• Terrain Descriptions
• Artillery Fire
• Tank Fire
• Small Arms Fire
• The Melee
• The Charge
• Percentage and Direct Fire Tables
• Engineers
• Urban Warfare
• Morale Factors
• Odds-n-Ends

The second section is the set of detailed appendices.  This runs from page 25, through to the end of the book, at page 62.  This is an excellent set of charts covering not only the modeling of combat phenomena in the wargame rules (such as vehicle parameters, and weapon systems range and accuracy), but also things like typical order of battle charts for common organizations from WW2.  As a very useful resource from the time, there is also a list of manufacturers that make HO and Micro scale WW2 models.

Scale
So, as mentioned, the rules call for a 1-to-1 representation on tabletop by vehicle models, but using stands for infantry is recommended (a stand for 10 men is perfect).  However . . . as mentioned, most of the time when I played these rules, we used 1 vehicle for a platoon, when translating a historical OB or one of Gene McCoy's excellent scenarios.  That gets a little funky sometimes, but seems to work for most scenarios.

• Ground scale is 50 yards to an inch.  (I can't find it now that I am looking, but I recall that in micro scale it is 100 yards to an inch).
• Turns appear to be about a minute per turn (calculating backwards from the movement rates).

Turn Sequence
Angriff has each player roll 2d6, to determine initiative.  High roller gets to chose to be player A or player B in the following sequence.  Note, as you read through this, that phases 1 and 2, as well as phases 6 and 7 are each roughly simultaneous.  So, while player A does phase 1, then player B does phase 2, the results of those are simultaneous.  Everything else, happens when it happens.

1. Side A moves 1/3 of its move, plus an additional 3" for all vehicles or men on roads.
2. Side B moves 1/3 of its move, plus an additional 3" for all vehicles or men on roads.
3. Artillery fire, if any, commences.
4. Tanks or vehicle mounted weapons fire.
5. Small arms fire, if any, commences.
6. Side B moves the remaining 2/3 of its move (but only 1/3 if it has fired).
7. Side A moves the remaining 2/3 of its move (but only 1/3 if it has fired). 
8. Melee combats.

No movement plotting, no order writing.  The importance of moving first or second, in turn phases 1/2 and 6/7 is of course the psychology of giving away your intended position before your opponent moves, so it may be useful to move second (i.e. choose being Player B if you are high roller for initiative).  Equally, being player A could be important, it is up to the player.

Movement
As can be expected from the turn sequence, all movement distances (given in the rules by vehicle type; or a total of 6" for dismounted infantry) are divisible by 3.  So dismounted infantry can move 2" in the first move phase, and then 4" in the second move phase, if they did not fire.

Infantry that are dismounted, can also move an additional 6" at the end of a move, representing a forced march.  This takes place, simultaneously for infantry of both sides, following phase 8 of the turn (i.e. - after everything else, include melee combats).  An infantry element can only force march three rounds in a row, and then has to take a break of a Full turn with no movement.  If an infantry element force marches for two rounds in a row, then it has to take a Half turn rest.  Alternating force march with regular moves mean that no rest periods are needed.

What this 'force march' business means is that an infantry element can cover 12" of tabletop distance in a turn, by force marching (pretty good for most WW2 rules).  Also, while force marching, the infantry can fire, but only at half effect.

Terrain, in the game, is officially in four different types - Woods (which may be moderate/light or dense/heavy), Hills (which are assumed to be contoured, like "wedding cake" hills), Swamps, and Rivers (which come in 3 classes, or widths).

Loading a vehicle is handled very much like old school rules handled Artillery in horse and musket games.  Infantry in Angriff, as regards loading and unloading, can do any two actions.  These can be (1) loading, (2) moving, and (3) unloading.  The same applies to towed guns and equipment.  Large artillery can only be moved by heavy movers, not being manhandled.

Sighting
The typical sighting distance is 1750 yards, or 35 inches.  The game handles units that are out of LOS, or beyond sighting distance, by using poker chips to represent small groups of troops.

Looking into or through woods is even more limited (10" if looking  into moderate woods; 5" if looking into dense woods).

Rules are in place for how much can be hidden in a building, and how and where visibility markers are replaced by actual units, etc.

Artillery Fire
The rulebook covers barrage fire, but recommends against it for the scale engagements the rules are representing.  That never stopped a wargamer, however here I will cover the recommended use of artillery pieces in direct fire (and limited indirect fire, such as with a forward observer).

So, firing an artillery piece, or even a tank weapon, that is firing High Explosive rounds (rather than armor penetrators) allows the weapon to have an impact on crew members of towed weapons, and exposed infantry, within 2" of the point of attack of the weapon.  The effect is very simple, and is a number of casualties in that impact circle based on the caliber of the weapon.  If this kills all the crew of a served weapon, then the weapon is also considered destroyed (for game purposes).  Note that such fire is limited to the normal 35" sighting range.

Indirect fire, by using an observer, is allowed for any range up to the maximum for the weapon, as long as an observer is within 35" of the target.  The rules prohibit towed AT and AA weapons from firing this way, as they were designed and intended to work differently.

As mentioned, barrage fire is defined in the rulebook, for artillery assets that might be off board, but it is advised against because it is out of the scope for the engagements envisioned in the rules.  One of the interesting things about barrage fire in these rules is how simply it is handled (another mark for the elegance of these rules).

1. Construct a grid like the one pictured here, on clear acetate (12"x18" for HO; 6"x9" for Micro).  
2. Place the star over the aiming point of the barrage fire, with the top of the star pointing aligned in the direction of the barrage (i.e. - pointing away from where the firing battery is located).  
3. Then roll 2d6.  
4. If you are using a small battery (i.e. tubes smaller than 135mm), then the two numbers are the squares that are hit by the barrage.  
5. If you are using a large battery, then those two numbers, as well as the sum of the two, are the squares that are hit.  
6. If you roll doubles on the dice, then that is a bad barrage, and only the one square is struck (plus the sum, if a large battery).  

The book then gives a series of four charts corresponding to different artillery tube sizes (75-99mm; 100-135mm; 136-175mm; and 176mm and up).  The sum of the two targeting dice are consulted on the corresponding table, and it gives the total number of AFVs, soft vehicles (listed as trucks), and dismounted Men that are killed in each square affected.  Simple, and fast.

Direct Fire - Tank and Anti-Tank
Considering the era that these rules were first published, and the rarity (at the time) of percentile dice, the method that the rules handle percentage-chance-of-hit for firing direct heavy weapons is rather clever.  Also, consider that for most WW2 land rules, the bread and butter is the tank-on-tank set of adjudication rules - and for Angriff this is no different.  They work well, and that is what makes the ruleset memorable.

First, the chance to hit with a weapon is determined from national weapon characteristics tables (in the appendices) that give a basic chance for each range bracket, for each weapon type.  That basic chance represents the typical chance to score a hit, with no significant modifiers.

The possible percentage numbers (resulting from the weapons/range chart), along with the hit numbers for 2d6, are:

Percent Chance	Hit on (2d6 scores)
78%	2 3 4 6 7 8 10 11 12
72%	3 4 6 7 8 10 11
67%	2 4 6 7 8 10 12
61%	4 6 7 8 10
50%	2 4 6 8 10 12
44%	6 7 8
33%	4 7 10
28%	2 6 8
17%	4 10
11%	3 11
6%	2 12

Second, look up that percentage on the Percentage Table (above).  This will then give a number of results on a pair of D6 dice (2-12).  If those results are added up, the percentage is approximately the numbers represented on the table.  Scoring any of those numbers on 2d6 (with one of them being red, more later on that) means a hit is scored.

The simplest modifier for this is that if the weapon is stationary (i.e. - did not move this turn) then the number 5 (in the 2-12 spread) is also counted as a hit (if you look at the above chart, you will see that 5 and 9 are never regular hit numbers).  And if both the firing weapon and the target are stationary, then the numbers 5 and 9 are added in as hit results.

If firing at a concealed target, the first time firing at it, the percentage table drops one category.

Third, determine the effects of a hit.  If against a towed weapon, it is automatically destroyed.  If against another AFV, then the red d6 comes into play.  There is a hit location table, for direct fire combat. It is divided up into five columns, corresponding to the facing of the target vehicle that the hit came in on.  It can come in on the Front, Side, Rear, or Front-Side (front corner), or Rear-Side (rear corner).  Then, the red d6 is consulted, and a location is generated.  These include:

• Gun Shield
• Front Turret
• Front Driver
• Front Bottom
• Track
• Side hull
• Side Turret
• Rear Hull
• Rear Turret

For each location, the national vehicle characteristics tables will give an armor thickness.  For each range bracket of a weapon, in addition to giving the accuracy of the weapon at that range, the amount of armor penetration is also given.  If the shot penetrates the armor, the target vehicle is dead.

Here is an example of the hit location chart.  Assume that the shot is coming in the front of the vehicle, and consult the red d6:

1. Gun Shield
2. Front Turret
3. Front Drive
4. Front Bottom
5. Front Driver
6. Track

This is a very elegant system, again from a time when percentile dice were not common.  Tractics, if I recall, tried to get away from a dice spread that was different from what you could easily do with d6s, and they used a random number generator that was based on 20 numbered chips in a bag, draw one to simulate rolling 1d20.

PzMkIV F1

Modification/Houserule: Rather than using the d6 system... you could just roll percentile dice against the number you have gotten from the weapon/range chart.  To this add 11% if  you are firing while stationary, and 22% if you AND the target are stationary.  Example: if you get 61% chance, then roll percentile dice, and on a 61 or less, you have a hit.  Of course you then have to roll 1d6 for hit location, and of course, that means that you will lose the charm of certain hit locations not happening on certain percentile rolls (because of how the 2d6 method works), but it means one less chart look up during direct fire adjudication.  This assumes that a modern wargamer could get, and want to use, percentile dice rather than the one pure die type - the sacred d6.

Example of direct fire AFV combat -
A Panzer Mk IV F1 tank is facing off, face on, against a T34 A.  The range is 1000 yards (20") and both tanks moved this turn.

The MkIV fires a 75mm/L24 gun, so we consult the German chart for that weapon, and find that at 1000 yards the 75mm/L24 has a 44% chance to hit and penetrates 51mm of armor.

The T34 fires a 76.2mm/L30 gun, so we consult the Russian chart for that weapon, and find that at 1000 yards, the 76.2mm/L30 has a 61% chance to hit, and penetrates 85mm of armor.

The firing is simultaneous.  According to the percentage hit table, the German tank will hit on 6,7, or 8 on the dice.  The Russian tank will hit on 4,6,7,8 or 10 on the dice.

The German player rolls, a 3 and a 5, with the 5 being the red dice.  A total of 8 means a hit, on location 5.  Looking at the Front table for hit location (above), we see that a 5 is the Front Driver position of the tank.  Looking at the Russian vehicle table, we find that the T-34 A has only 45mm of armor at that location, so the German gun (which penetrates 51mm) will score a kill.

The Russian player rolls a 5 and a 2, with the 2 being the red dice.  A total of 7 means a hit, on location 2.  Looking at the Front table (above), we see that a 2 is the Front Turret position of the tank.  Looking at the German vehicle table, we find that the PzMkIVF1 has only 30mm of armor at that location, so the Russian gun (which penetrates 85mm of armor) will score a kill.

T-34/76 A (1941)

Direct Fire - Small Arms
This system is, if anything, even simpler than the tank/anti-tank system.

It involves calculating the total number of firing points (from a chart) that are firing on an enemy target (which could be a single stand, a weapon team, a group of stands, or a vehicle).  These points come from infantry stands (1 pt per stand, if it represents 5 or more men), LMGs (2 points), HMGs (3 points), Mortars (2 points), and Flamethrowers (2 points).  there is a slight modification to the total number of points for the range.  Then 2d6 are rolled against a Kill Factor table, which gives a resulting number between 1 and 3.  Multiply the kill factor by the number of calculated points, and that is the number of casualties.  This is simultaneous.

If firing small arms at vehicles, the only which may be affected in this system are soft vehicles, and wheeled armored vehicles (such as armored cars).  Tracked AFVs are immune to small arms fire, in this sytem.  Against a soft vehicle, if the vehicle takes small arms fire, and that includes either rifles or MGs, then there is a 50% chance for a hit (roll 2d6, as above, with a hit on 2,4,6,8,10,12).  Further, if the results are either 2, 6 or 8, then it is a kill (otherwise a disable).  Against a wheeled AFV, this chance drops to 33%, so a hit is on 4,7,10.  No chance to kill a wheeled AFV, only disable it.

Close Combat
As with Small Arms fire, the close combat system is interesting, works well, and is based on a number of points of Attackers vs Defenders.  Infantry is easy, with 1 point per man involved in a close combat.  Vehicles get points for thickness of armor, and also for the number of machine guns.

The procedure is to add all the points for each side in a melee together (Note: a melee is when a group of attackers end their last move of the turn within 1 inch of the defender - this makes for an interesting twist on the turn order - in order to be the attacker you have to be Side A).   Compare the two points totals, and derive a ratio.  The attacker must have at least 1-2 odds in order to attack.  Then the attacker rolls 2d6 on a Melee Effects Table, and it gives a resulting letter.  Look up that letter on the Melee Losses table, and you will find what percentage of Attackers or Defenders have died, in terms of the points for their side.

The results on the loss table will be a percentage of loss for each side, and an indicator of which side (attacker or defender) has to retreat (which is a full move for vehicles, and Infantry must retreat 18" or to the nearest supporting unit).

Charging
Units can charge into combat, which they announce at the start of a turn, then move.  Vehicles get a whole move, and infantry gets 9".  If contact is not made, then the unit gets no further move that turn, but can engage in small arms fire at half effect.

If the charge is successful, then both sides can (possibly - 50% chance) engage in small arms fire before the melee.   This is at point blank range, and the chance is determined by rolling 2d6 (again, the percentage table is consulted, so at 50% success is at a 2,4,6,8,10,12 on the dice).  If this is successful (each side rolls separately), then the Defender can fire at full effect, and the Attacker can fire at half effect.  If the Defender is successful at the 50% test, then he may also introduce reinforcements from units within 6".

On turns after a charge, infantry can only move 2" and vehicles only 1/3 of their normal move.


Extras
The rules cover a number of extras including the following:

• Engineering (including entrenching, vehicle repair, laying bridges, demolition, mines and obstacle breaching, and laying smoke).
• Urban Warfar
• Morale (which affects campaign moves and committment to combat)
• Weather
• Capturing equipment

Thoughts
As you could probably tell from my review of the rules' sections above, I am a big fan of Angriff.  Yes, there is the problem of having to consult four different tables for each AFV firing (weapon table for the firer's chance and penetration, percentage table for dice chance, hit table for location, and target vehicle table for armor).  But this is no different from other rule sets.  Consider Overwatch, very similar.  But Angriff plays fast, and it gives great results.  It was relied on by the gaming groups I was in for many years as a means of providing reasonable Infantry (and other small arms fire) adjudication for other tank-centric games (like the already mentioned Overwatch).

Some of the problems in the system are the problems of scale - in some places, the scale is different for HO (or more commonly these days, 20mm or 15mm in addition to HO) and Micro scaled vehicles and ranges, but it is never clearly laid out (like the 9" move for infantry charges - is that only 4.5" in micro?).  But these are minor problems, and could easily be settled on by a group as a set of rules by practice, rather than rules as written.  It lends itself to all sorts of additional house rules (aircraft, parachuting operations, landings, etc) - but in the end it is a very solid set of move and shoot rules for armor and infantry, with reasonable artillery rules that play fast.

More modern rules might do things differently - for instance, I love the command and control rules in Blitzkrieg Commander.  Other rules might introduce a random factor for penetration (such as in Firefly, if I recall).  But as written, for a nice evening game, or a convention game where you want your gamers to know the rules after just a turn or two Angriff is still excellent.

My own house rule suggestions

• Angriff works great if you prepare vehicle information cards for each side, or a  simple vehicle information sheet, that has the vehicle and weapons stats JUST for the platforms used in your particular game.
•  Add in an extra factor to small arms and close combat for command stands/vehicles.
• Use the percentile dice system (described above) instead of the Percentage Table.

reade more... Résuméabuiyad