Category Archives: Campaigns

Campaigns in Martinstaat

This week I take a look at Henry Hyde’s “Martinstaat 1744 – A Detailed Wargame Campaign Set in a Fictitious World”. Writing what is in part a brief review of the book has been a little harder than I thought. Not because it is poorly written, far from it in fact, but rather due to it having a different focus than your typical wargames publication. It is, as stated by the author as being “A Wars of the Faltenian Succession Imagi-Nations Diary”. The emphasis being that it is a diary.

To those unfamiliar with Henry Hyde’s work he is well known for being something of a champion of campaigns. This is perhaps best illustrated in his tome “Wargaming Campaigns”. However, unlike this previous work “Martinstaat 1744” focusses very much on a campaign Henry has played. Further, unlike many campaigns we read of on various blogs, this campaign diary is painstakingly assembled from notes taken back in 1990. Testament to his ability to take and retain notes!

The campaign is relatively brief and deals with some fifteen weeks of campaigning between two imagi-nations. For those unfamiliar with the term imagi-nations they are simply fictional nations which are often, but not always set in the 18th century. For this campaign the nations are Prunkland and Faltenland along with their invasion of the neutral state of Martinstaat. What I found interesting here is that it deals with only one campaign in a restricted area. This to me an immensely sensible restriction and is certainly more manageable than a sweeping campaign involving multiple armies lasting several campaign years.

As regular readers know I am drawn to the concept of campaigns. Yet I am nervous of both the complexity and scale of such ventures. That said, I feel campaigns add significant substance to battles on the table. However, for me this is tempered by the fact that a well executed campaign does not always result in balanced table top encounters. Of course given I am tempted by the alure of a campaign it is hardly surprising that I acquired a copy.

A detailed map supported by miniatures.

The book starts with the expected background and introduction, before describing campaign events in some depth. This includes both illustrations of the original handwritten plans, notes and the author’s observations which are also duplicated in a modern printed format. This text is well supported by images of detailed hand drawn maps. Together they provide a glimpse of a campaign run 35 years ago while providing something that is up to date with current production expectations.

The author’s notes can only be described as detailed. Given that the nations are fictional he undertook to create detailed uniform and flag notes for his own armies, with more limited ones for his opponent. He then went on to document all this information. To bring these historic notes to life he illustrates these uniforms with modern water colour illustrations. They certainly add some colour to the diary and bring the armies to life.

What is missing are pictures of the actual historical armies deployed on the table. Yet here the author is honest and states that the miniatures he had at the time, in 6mm, were not well painted. The same limitations extended to the terrain. Instead he has used photos of more modern 18th century games to provide additional aesthetics at various points in the volume. I can certainly identify with this as my own armies have come a long way since first gracing my underwhelming wargames table several decades ago. Today Henry uses 30mm Spencer Smith figures and these armies capture the toy soldier feel that he enjoys. Interestingly however he mentions his 6mm collection which was used in the actual campaign and which I suspect holds significant nostalgia to him. I for one would enjoy seeing some of his 6mm collection on the table, even if some refurbishment was required.

Perhaps my only disappointment is that a few photos were of unrelated armies. I would have preferred only armies of the period in question. That however is a minor point.

Running to some 104 pages it is presented in an A4 format. My copy was hardbound though soft cover and electronic copies are available. I am pleased I purchased the hardbound version which, though more expensive, was not prohibitively so.

In all a most interesting read and for me a useful taste of another wargamer’s campaign. The book is not suited to readers that only wish to refight a campaign. However, if you enjoy reading of someone else’s campaign, while being provided with some inspiration, it certainly hits the mark. A most pleasing purchase.

Punic War DBA Series

In my previous post I made mention of a series of De Bellis Antiquitatis (DBA) games my son and I have been playing over the Christmas and New Year holiday period. In the end some 15 games were played and all were first rate. Now while DBA, or indeed the DBx system in general, is not for everyone I do find the rules excellent. This is especially so when time is limited. Yet for me perhaps the most pleasing aspect is the ability to build armies in matched historical pairs without too much effort. This means you can easily refight the battles and campaigns of history, or something similar, rather than points based games between unhistorical opponents.

This variety can be achieved in many ways but most obviously by using different armies or sets of armies. For example, the hoplite battles that we played at the beginning of our series had a completely different feel compared to the Punic Wars series we fought later. Likewise the engagement between Rome and the Seleucids (shown below) was very different to the Punic War games prior. But it is more refined than that.

15mm Romans & Seleucids engaged in battle

Simple variety in army composition, representing different contingents available in specific campaigns, increases variety. For example, the Carthaginian use of elephants changes army composition and was very apparent in several of our games. Likewise the use of Spanish infantry instead of Gallic mercenaries, representing those armies fighting in Spain, changes tactics and army usage. For the Romans the greater use of Italian allies or a Numidian allied contingent, depending on the campaign or period being represented, considerably changes the the army. All such variation can be done with little effort in DBA. While some troop types are on the surface are weaker, and will be avoided by the tournament players, with games lasting an hour or less it is great to experiment.

But back to the subject of this post. For those interested I have posted a summary of six of the games we played. In particular the report covers the Second Punic Wars games as well as an engagement between Rome and the Seleucids soon after the Second Punic War. This report can be found here. I trust some of you find it of interest.

Battles, Campaigns & Other Thoughts

I have been reflecting this week on the role of one-off games, historical refights and linked games. While the following has a Napoleonic and American Civil War references I see the concept as equally applicable to Ancient warfare through to the Cold War.

Regular readers will recall the American Civil War 160th anniversary series recently played. That is, six major historical battles all played in sequence. Casualties in one battle didn’t influence the next, but in some ways I likened it to being something of a campaign, though without all the hard work that comes with a campaign. The down side with such an intensive historical series is there was much terrain to be built, often in a short space of time between historical battles. Indeed, I completely failed to grasp the work required. The net result being my planned miniature painting for the year has suffered. Despite that, the project was extremely satisfying and I plan to repeat it in some form, though with different battles.

The next idea was to fight a small series of games leading to a larger game. Free from the restraints imposed by historical terrain fictional encounters seemed to offer less work. This series is also now complete. My cunning plan was to play two smaller encounters first before ending the series with a larger game with all set in 1813. The first involved the Prussians and Russians engaged against the French at the Battle of Aulzhausen in August 1813, shown below. This was a typical Friday evening game with the situation generated by a scenario system we use.

The second battle found the Prussians and Russians again engaged at the Battle of Zollengen, now set in early October 1813. Again no casualties were carried over.

The final battle of the series was that of the Battle of Kleindorf set in the middle of October 1813. This last game found Austrians, Russians and Prussians engaged against the French. While also a fictional the situation was influenced by that south of Leipzig and would result in well over 3,000 miniatures deployed and shown here.

I was pleased with the concept and how it played out. While I didn’t advertise it as a series of linked games to the players, it was my intent as is evident to the reader referencing the supposed battle dates. I think there is some merit in exploring mechanisms to enhance these games further. But what mechanisms should I consider?

The first and most obvious is casualties from one game feeding in to the next. However, I am nervous that will add too much complexity and potentially distract from the concept of an enjoyable game at the end of a busy week. The next is the outcome of a game influencing where the next battle will be fought. As I write this I am pondering the battles that made up the series of engagements between the French and their allies against the Austrians in 1809. The result of one battle influencing the location of the next.

Clearly more thought is required on my part. I wonder if others have experimented with such concepts and what worked, or indeed what didn’t?

Empire: 280 BC to 271 BC

Our Ancients campaign continues with another turn complete, this time covering the period 280 BC to 271 BC. I’m pleased with the changes to the mechanics and the support a number of locals are providing. This turn for example we have had five people involved in the games with a bit of a lottery on which armies you end up commanding. Everyone seems to be enjoying the context of the games than any focus on world conquest.

All the playing states are suffering a mix of success and setback which is adding to overall interest. Pyrrhus, who is currently King of Macedonian, is under particular pressure. Despite this after two desperate battles he still controls his Macedonian throne, just. Meanwhile while Rome and Carthage are locked in combat Seleucus was last seen campaigning somewhere in Bactria.

If you are interested you can find a full summary here.

Empire Campaign

Campaigns are something I always have a inkling to run but past experience has made me nervous of too much complication. Regular readers of my blog may recall that early last year I posted my thoughts on the Empire boardgame, developed by Phil Sabin. After some tinkering with the basic rules I converted the mechanics to a system that would allow it to be used with DBA.

Now, those who follow my Ancient & Medieval blog will have seen that we have recently completed the fourth campaign turn. Trying to simplify things further I recently moved away from dedicated players controlling states to a system where the decision process is automated. A basic decision tree is used to determine campaign offensives which is supplemented by a die roll where multiple options of equal weight exist. Games are now resolved by a group of volunteers subject to availability. The most recent series of six battles have now been resolved by a group of five players.

I’m rather pleased how this has all worked out. The revised format seems to be providing a better balance between my time investment and the value created by linking a background to an individual tabletop game. Further, it allows me to play in a few games while others are able use different armies, rather than being restricted to that of their player state. Placing the campaign in context, and despite only four campaign turns, the system has generated around 24 battles all of which have been resolved on the table using DBA. Given there are many more campaign turns ahead it will be interesting to see the campaign history develop.

If you are interested in the most recent campaign turn, covering the period 290 BC to 281 BC, you can find it here. If you are interested in additional background, visit the Empire Campaign Page.