Peninsular War scenario game on Thursday 18th April

Uncle Billy wrote:If the game is at 21:00 I may be able to attend.

I'll send you one side's briefings just in case.

Martin (J)

The charge was being sounded.

How had this happened?

Major General Rowland Hill rode with the Guards in a last desperate bid to escape their encirclement. French battalions surrounded them.

Nothing had made sense. 2nd Division had not followed orders, officers were reporting problems with their maps, but he had been getting reports of victory from all fronts.

The guards fought valiantly, but were severely outnumbered. Now a second French battalion charged into the fray. General Hill looked for a way out but there was none.

What had happened? What had gone wrong? The plan had been sound, and his subordinates had reported inflicting great losses upon the enemy, but now he was facing his last moments. Where had he gone wrong?

Rowland paused for a moment in the maelstrom of melee around him. He grabbed his map and looked at it for the 100th time that day.

Earlier, when all had been well, he had galloped down to see the bridge - the objective he was to hold, but there was no bridge there, only a deep ford. As he galloped back, he found his corps in disarray. Where was the bridge?

Rowlands eyes scanned the map. He scanned the hills, the roads, the river. A bullet whizzed through his hat and knocked it off his head. He glanced round, and looked a young guardsman in the eye as he fell to the ground. He looked back at the map - the scale, the legend, the signature. He focussed on the signature. He was expecting the signature of his chief cartographer Captain Campbell.

Campbelle? Since when did Campbell spell his name with a postfixed e? Why, that made the Scottish name look Frenc....

At that moment a musket ball knocked Rowlands out of his saddle. He fell to the ground still clutching the map.

So this is how it would end. His command and his own life would be destroyed by some damn French cartographic spy. Damn his eyes. Damn all their eyes. Damn them all to...

And then there was nothing.

The game would definitely merit a replay with this time everyone having the correct scale maps.

I don't know - the element of surprise is gone.

I should point out that while General Hill believed his 2nd division had not followed orders, they of course had, and excellently, surpassing his expectations. When General Hill had followed 2nd division in their apparent random direction, he was in fact partly fulfilling his original plan of encirclement, but without realising this was it. As a result, the encirclement and complete attack did not happen.

The following combined drive on the objective also failed to materialise on account of not having any idea where it was.

In hindsight I can see that, while Steve was also afflicted with the wrong map, he probably knew his way around that battlefield off by heart, and was able to complete his mission in good fashion, while his commander rode around with a confused look on his face for 2 hours.

Apologies to my corps - I did not realise that I had the wrong map until the end, and relied upon it fully. This meant I did not support 2nd division at all the critical moments. And riding off to find the objective was probably not a good idea on retrospect, but it was the action of a man whose head was being properly messed with.

It's still screwing with my head. I had trouble sleeping, and can't drop it.

Martin - it was a splendid scenario - more like that please. Now that I have learnt to recognise that I may have the wrong map, I may be able to deal with it. The difficulty was not recognising that I did, and hence I did not adapt to it.

But it did put another thought into my mind.

To be truly Kriegsspiel, really, there should be no marker on the map as to your current position. Normally when out and about, you have to work out for yourself where you are, using hills, roads, woods, etc.

It would add a lot of realism if the eye on the map could be made to disappear. Plus if the big "commander objective" markers hovering over the field could be removed.

Imagine how difficult that would be. Can it be done?

Please - something positive must come out of this hideous brain-ache that I am still trying to deal with.

It was funny hearing all the other players who had similar problems, riding off in random directions.

But I still can't drop it.

Err...sorry about the maps guys.

To be honest I'm still not sure what the problem was. From post game chat I think it relates to the fact that some of us use 'small' mini maps and some 'large'. Those of us who use large ones had no problem, and those who use small found the map scale was wrong. Have I got that right?

I'm also not sure on the pros & cons of the two map sizes. Could I ask Kevin to take us through them, and how to avoid this situation in future for Nappy games, where we use the JustCouriers mod instead of the usual CouriersAndMaps mod.

Martin (J)

Blackstreet wrote:I don't know - the element of surprise is gone.

I'm inclined to agree. Personally, I always prefer to play a different situation, rather than replay a previous one. Granted that both sides will learn lessons form the previous outing, and so there will still be uncertainty in how your enemy will approach the game. But it's a different kind of uncertainty - more game-related and less military-related, at least to my mind.

This one was created using Stefan's excellent Scenario Generator, which does take a lot of the drudgery out of scenario creation. So I'm hoping that others will have a go.

Martin (J)

Martin wrote:Err...sorry about the maps guys.

To be honest I'm still not sure what the problem was. From post game chat I think it relates to the fact that some of us use 'small' mini maps and some 'large'. Those of us who use large ones had no problem, and those who use small found the map scale was wrong. Have I got that right?

I'm also not sure on the pros & cons of the two map sizes. Could I ask Kevin to take us through them, and how to avoid this situation in future for Nappy games, where we use the JustCouriers mod instead of the usual CouriersAndMaps mod.

Martin (J)

I'm confused what happened as well. There is no Couriers&Maps mod any more (with Nap Mod), there is "JustCouriers" so there is no option to chnage map sizes that I'm aware of, so I blindly assumed the map you sent out Martin would work okay. I was very surprised to see that it was a LargeMap when JustCouriers seems to use only a SmallMap with no option for a LargeMap.

I'm therefore completely stumped as to how some players got the LargeMap working when I didn't.

The game was a blast and the. "Bad maps"
Just added more period feel. When. I realised I had a bad map I thought it was just me.

Well it seemed as if I did have a good map at one time...... I think that rogue of a cavalry officer I have switched maps with me. He got the good map and I got the French version.
You know how those Cavalry dandies are they took.the detailed map to go off carousing.
Looking for women and booze certainly would seem likely.

kg_sspoom wrote:Well it seemed as if I did have a good map at one time...... I think that rogue of a cavalry officer I have switched maps with me. He got the good map and I got the French version.

Yes, that was me folks.........don't play with that sabre, Dolores, it's not a toy.

Here's a brief AAR from the scenario designer........

In this scenario a mixed Allied corps under Rowland Hill of about 12,500 British and Dutch-Belgian troops had the objective of seizing the key bridge at Union Mills, so that a Spanish army could use it the next day to bring a heavy siege train up to besiege the French-held fortress of Lerida.

The French under General d'Erlon did not know this was the enemy objective (although there was a clue in the briefing), and as far as they were aware their main task was to secure their LOC along the main NE-SW road, and the two supply depots along it at Silver Run and Yingling.



The French had more men, and probably better troops, but the enemy were more concentrated, had more cavalry, had better intelligence and knew what they had to do. A lot of asymmetries there, and I was curious to see how it would turn out.

The Allied commander came up with what I thought was a good plan. He would aim to concentrate on the southernmost French division under Durette, defeat that force, and then move north in full strength to secure the key bridge against the remaining French.

Unknown to the Allied team, the French had a report of the presence of British troops near the W Frock Farm, although it was very unclear how reliable this was. In the event they correctly responded by moving to concentrate their forces around Union Mills.

Given the distances involved, the Allies got the bulk of their troops into action against Durette's Young Guard Division quite quickly. However the quality of the French troops, and skilful work by the French commanders (Kevin & Digby) enabled them to hold quite a while and eventually make a retreat eastwards, albeit with the loss of several battalions.

At this point the battle seemed to be going very much the Allies' way, and I was actually rather concerned that I had made things too unbalanced. However the next 15 minutes saw things totally reverse, as the fresh French troops under Bachlu and Lefebvre came into action from the NW. In fact I have rarely seen a battle swing so dramatically. Desperate Allied attempts to hold the infantry line and mount cavalry charges failed to halt the French attacks driving SE from Union Mills, and their army began to disintegrate. At this point Durette's Division re-entered the fray to assist in the victory.

So overall a bloody but decisive French victory. That bridge is still in French hands, and is likely to be destroyed before Castanos and his Spanish even reach it. Well-played the French team.

That however is not quite the end of the story. This is a scenario game, and points and casualties are not everything. Notwithstanding the need to protect the depot at Yingling, Durette opted to evacuate the place. This did of course allow him to engage at full strength, and Pingling was an exposed position, so it may have been the correct decision. It might though have also meant that the French would have been on half-rations for a while.

Having just watched the replay however, I see that Bachlu did the same thing at the Silver Run depot! Given how specific the French briefing was on the need to garrison the depots against the roving armed Catalan bands, I think we must assume that both depots have been lost to the French, and that a lack of supplies will be a major constraint on French operations for some considerable time. This will also likely be a significant factor in any future Spanish siege of Lerida.

If anyone has a good leather and wood recipe, please post it here..............

Martin (J)

Blackstreet wrote:
The following combined drive on the objective also failed to materialise on account of not having any idea where it was.

I beg to differ. That drive looked pretty coordinated from my saddle. We were nearly surrounded. That whole time my division was being pummeled, Soldier's division was sitting in the shade somewhere nibbling on flaky pastries and discussing the latest musings of Victor Hugo. What eventually roused him into action is still a mystery.

Apologies to my corps - I did not realise that I had the wrong map until the end, and relied upon it fully. This meant I did not support 2nd division at all the critical moments. And riding off to find the objective was probably not a good idea on retrospect, but it was the action of a man whose head was being properly messed with.

I wonder how many times generals have cursed the incorrect maps they had been given. Although it was unfortunate it occurred in the game, it does seem like a perfect twist to put into the scenario. Well done Martin, you are devious.

It's still screwing with my head. I had trouble sleeping, and can't drop it.

I should think the ball that yet again penetrated your noggin would have stopped all perturbations.

It would add a lot of realism if the eye on the map could be made to disappear. Plus if the big "commander objective" markers hovering over the field could be removed.

Imagine how difficult that would be. Can it be done?

The eye can be removed easily. However, I'd suggest that the scenario writer give the initial location of the troops to its commander. They would probably have a reasonable idea of their initial position from scouting done by their command. After that, it would be up to the player to know where he is located.

Please - something positive must come out of this hideous brain-ache that I am still trying to deal with.

From my perspective, the results were completely unsatisfactory. After the battle, the men proceeded to plunder the British supply wagons. No soft cheese, drinkable wine or even snails were found. Rather, all they discovered were kidney pies, vile, grey boiled beef and barrels of small fishes you shopkeepers eat for breakfast. Most unsatisfactory, sir.

Yes, who would have thought that people would bake kidneys then cover them in a disgusting gravy and pack them inside hard pastry. Guh.

Thank God we have some delicacies like frogs, snails, fresh garlic and gently aromatic runny cheeses to look forwards to back at barracks.

EDIT: So joking aside, how in heck DO I get the right sized map in the 'JustCouriers' mod?

So joking aside, how in heck DO I get the right sized map in the 'JustCouriers' mod?

This evening I will post two versions of Just Couriers, a large and small map variety, just as we have for Couriers&Maps. I will also add the ACW Pipe Creek maps to them. When I get back from vacation, I'll begin work on making spanish versions of them. The mod will also include the modified flank and rear fire penalties that we have in Couriers&Maps. Note that the frontal fire is kept at the stock value, due to these professional armies having better discipline and experience. They would not fallback, reform and rejoin the battle as frequently as the ACW units did.

Uncle Billy wrote:
The eye can be removed easily. However, I'd suggest that the scenario writer give the initial location of the troops to its commander. They would probably have a reasonable idea of their initial position from scouting done by their command. After that, it would be up to the player to know where he is located.

This sounds fantastic. I move to propose we ban the eye from future HITS games, on account of it being unrealistic! Although there are possibly gamey tactics like using the battlefield markers to cheat, we're all gentlemen, I'm sure none would abuse this power.

You see, I'm permanently damaged, and intend to make everyone suffer.

kg_sspoom wrote:The game was a blast and the. "Bad maps"
Just added more period feel. When. I realised I had a bad map I thought it was just me.

Actually, I think these are the things I need to focus on:

1) It was frankly, hilarious, to be involved in a scenario where some divisions ended up marching all over the place because of confusion over the maps their officers were supplied with. Some officers dealt with it better than others, but the final spectacle was, as you say, far more like how I imagine a real historic engagement would have been.

2) Early on in the game, you did send me a courier saying your map was not working properly, but I totally failed to interpret this as "so, yours might be too". You reacted to this observation by working on what you could see in front of you, rather than using your map. I just went ahead and continued trying to use the map, because that's what I'm used to.

I really do now believe the way forwards is without the "you are here marker". I mean, we've turned off all the others for realism, why on earth have we left that one there?

The result will be more pandemonium, no doubt, but of a more expected variety

Blackstreet wrote:

Uncle Billy wrote:
The eye can be removed easily. However, I'd suggest that the scenario writer give the initial location of the troops to its commander. They would probably have a reasonable idea of their initial position from scouting done by their command. After that, it would be up to the player to know where he is located.

This sounds fantastic. I move to propose we ban the eye from future HITS games, on account of it being unrealistic! Although there are possibly gamey tactics like using the battlefield markers to cheat, we're all gentlemen, I'm sure none would abuse this power.

Yes, I think we should try this out and see how we like it. Ditto the suggestion that the scenario writer give the initial location of the troops to its commander.

There is at least one way around it though. If you use the command map to order your brigade or division, won't you know for certain where you're going, even if you're not sure where you are starting from? How useful that will actually be in the heat of battle I'm not sure.

Martin (J)

I would consider that to just be a notation made on your map by one of the staff officers. They're super-efficient of course...

Can we try a 3 yards visibility height as well in our next game? From the Waterloo game's height of 4 yards I really didn't see any great problem there, although the view down upon the infantry's heads was a little odd!

Mr. Digby wrote:Can we try a 3 yards visibility height as well in our next game? From the Waterloo game's height of 4 yards I really didn't see any great problem there, although the view down upon the infantry's heads was a little odd!

Sounds good to me. Worth a try anyway.

Martin (J)

Do we want to retain the objective symbol that can be seen on the map? Also, do we want to get rid of the objective symbol that hovers in the air? We can also get rid of the yellow circle that is on the ground below the floating objective symbol. How far do we go?

Uncle Billy wrote:

So joking aside, how in heck DO I get the right sized map in the 'JustCouriers' mod?

This evening I will post two versions of Just Couriers, a large and small map variety, just as we have for Couriers&Maps. I will also add the ACW Pipe Creek maps to them. When I get back from vacation, I'll begin work on making spanish versions of them. The mod will also include the modified flank and rear fire penalties that we have in Couriers&Maps. Note that the frontal fire is kept at the stock value, due to these professional armies having better discipline and experience. They would not fallback, reform and rejoin the battle as frequently as the ACW units did.

Many thanks for your continuing efforts on our behalf, Uncle Billy. I still don't understand why we have 2 versions though. Due to various psychological issues, I have always gone for the large map version. But am I missing a trick?

Perplexed of Harpenden

Uncle Billy wrote:Do we want to retain the objective symbol that can be seen on the map? Also, do we want to get rid of the objective symbol that hovers in the air? We can also get rid of the yellow circle that is on the ground below the floating objective symbol. How far do we go?

Personally I would ditch the lot for scenario games, but can we do that without mucking things up for other types of games (eg sandbox and ad hoc games produced with the scenario generator), where we might wish to use objectives?

Martin (J)

Personally I would ditch the lot for scenario games, but can we do that without mucking things up for other types of games (eg sandbox and ad hoc games produced with the scenario generator), where we might wish to use objectives?

It would require having the necessary files in a separate mod. Perhaps we call it the KS Scenario Mod. You'd only have it on when you want to use it.

This is all fantastically exciting. Yes, I think an additional mod is the order of the day.

OK, I'll upload the KS scenario mod this evening along with the Just Courier mods.

Brilliant! I'm looking forward to trying this out.

Of course you're now going off on vacation and won't be here when our heads explode