We played the Battle of Auldearn where I played the Covenator forces under Hurry with Dave Parker.
Below our forces take the field
The forces of Montrose were played by Chen & John? ( a newcomer to the club). Their initial forces were deployed in a line ahead of us. (left side of image)
Things were going back & forth. Montrose arrived & dealt a blow to our pike in the centre. Meanwhile our 2 muskets were whittling down the pike in front of them. As the rules do not allow units within 3" of one another, it was quite a bottleneck. This meant units in the front were stuck in battle til they won or died.
Alas a failed morale by Montrose saw him flee from the field. Macollaugh who was next in command had his unit decimated (he was down to his single figure) & he withdrew.
Our remaining forces lined up, just outside of musket range & were in the process of moving around to the flanks, as marching ahead into musketry hidden behind walls was a fools errand. At this point the game was called & victory points were applied. Having succeeded in completing 2 of our objectives, the forces of Hurry won the day.
Thanks Dave for bringing it out.
That looks like a great evening's gaming Terry.
ReplyDeleteThanks Michael. Yes, it was looking a bit nasty when Montrose & his other mounted force caracoled into a couple of our units, firing & then charging the disordered remnants. However it did open up the field to allow our muskets to blast both units.
DeleteLooks like a great game! I've just been reading about the battle of Auldearn and thinking it might be an interesting battle to put together for The Pikeman's Lament - and here Dave's gone and done it!
ReplyDeleteJust so you know - friendly units can go within 3" of each other - they just have to be 1" apart. It's only enemy units you have to stay at least 3" away from at all times (unless fighting). I know in Lion Rampant and Dragon Rampant everyone needed to stay 3" away, but that's been changed in The Pikeman's Lament. (see page 33 under unit cohesion).
Thanks Tim, I will pass this along to Dave, unless he pops onto my blog & notes it!
DeleteThe 1" rule would allow closer coordination of pike and shot, that makes sense, on the other hand since there is a natural tendency to bunch things up, it will lead to units comingling and confusion especially when everyone is in hodden grey. As for Auldearn - the lack of room for the gov't forces to maneuver is a key element of the scenario if you want to keep the historical flavour. With 1" spacing I would tighten up the terrain funnel.
ReplyDeleteI did like the way the 3" rule made it clear which figures were in which units! I've tried to keep a little house rule that figures in different units have to be at least 1" apart and there must be more space between units than there is between figures WITHIN units - so that it is clear which figures are in which unit.
DeleteI have found that the 1" rule means it is easier to play on a smaller table top - I played a game with a full 24 points on each side on one of the 3'x3' boards I made for Sone of Blades and Heroes skirmishing! Also if you DO maintain 3-4' between forces on the table - it leaves room for battered troops to retire behind fresh troops - though, obviously, this is something you were trying to avoid with Auldearn!
Were you playing with two companies on each side?
32 points per side - I reckon around the upper limit for single companies. My next plan is to scale up to a 3 company game of something that looks like Dunbar (in a bathtub) so I can get Cromwell and the New Model Army on the table.
ReplyDeleteThat would be cool! Looking forward to seeing the game report for that one and cursing myself for living outside of easy commute range of Edmonton...
DeleteFunny that Tim, I think the exact same thing when your running your campaigns, etc.
DeleteThanks Leang for posting on all of my posts with your advertising links..As well for saying great to see me again at Cangames, Never happened, Cya!
ReplyDelete