Introduction
A couple of One Hour Wargames (OHW) were bashed out this morning using the Late 19th Century "Rifle and Sabre" section (Chapter 13) of Neil Thomas's popular tome. I have been enjoying the SYW OHW games being umpired by another Neil over at Toy soldiers and dining room battles ; definitely worth a look if you haven't seen them already.By default these games are fast and very bloody on my small gridded board, even after reducing the ranges to the minimum. One grid square = 6" in the rules; this means that Infantry and Artillery move 1 square, Cavalry move 2 squares. Rifle range is 2 squares, Artillery 8 squares (the length of the board!) Both scenarios had a similar theme; an attempt to get part of a force away from the enemy. The fly in the ointment for the army on the move in OHW is that a unit can either move OR fire which slows down a hasty retreat. The first scenario involved an outnumbered Army Red...
Game 1: Encirclement or Breakout
This game saw Army Red (Albiona) going too deep into enemy territory and having to breakout before being encircled. The setting was based on Scenario 4 of Scenarios for all Ages (CS Grant & SA Asquith). The objective for Red was to retreat and get 50% of its force back over the baseline to its rear. The objective for Army Black (Swarzlandia) was to destroy at least 60% of the Albionan force. 8 turns were allowed.
About 20% of the Red force limped off the field. A resounding victory for Swarzlandia.
Game 2: Flank Attack (1)
This game was based on Scenario 6 of OHW. Each side only had 5 units; Army Red's objective was to get past the Army Black road block and get 2 units off the table. Black had 2 units of cavalry on Red's right flank. Again only 8 turns were allowed.
Fast, furious and frivolous fun for a wet Bank Holiday Monday.
Excellent stuff here. I always thought that the OHW rules would make for excellent campaign games, since the battles are fast and bloody.
ReplyDeleteI was thinking that perhaps card play or some for of trying to outwit the opponent at each map point, might allow them to pick the format/design of the battle, and each battle mounts to give an overall victory to the campaign. Will be following the games with interest here.
Thanks! The OHW games are certainly bloody.
DeleteNice idea for a campaign...
Great looking games sir, i have heard nothing but good things about OHW but have yet to pick them up (shame on me!). Im with the Duke in thinking simple systems make the best basis for a campaign. You want to be able to get a result quite quickly so you can build the narrative arc without getting bogged down in rules slop!. Looking forward to seeing where you take this!.
ReplyDeleteCheers Mate!
DeleteGet yourself a copy of OHW Mr Sprinks - its full of good ideas
Two nice looking games. Are those Irregular Minis?
ReplyDeleteI have to admit that I'm curious why you cut the number of turns in 1/2 when your board is bigger than Thomas's? (At 1 sq=6" his board would be 6 squares by 6 squares.)
Thanks Ross. Yes Irregular Miniatures 28mm figures.
ReplyDeleteThe grids on my 2 foot square board are 3 inches so I've cut all the moves/ranges in half as NT's are all divisible by 6 inches. His 48 inch Artillery range becomes 8 grid squares (24"). As for the number of turns, I usually find 10 is enough for OHW. On an impulse I reduced it to 8 today!
Having thought about it some more Ross, you are correct to query the move reduction. Despite starting with some units well on to the board it was going to be a difficult task indeed to move the remaining 5 squares and get past the blocking forces in 8 turns! Albiona was short-changed! Having said that, the few remaining men that would have got past the enemy lines would not have formed a fighting force, such is the devastation caused by the rifles in the late 19 Century rules - hence trenches and hitting the ground became the sensible option.
ReplyDeleteWasn't saying it was wrong, I was just curious.
DeleteSometimes I'm too impatient to manoeuvre but it can make a big difference or not.