War From Below

I suppose that it behoves us, every once in a while, as wargamers, to ponder what it is we are trying to do. I mean, war is a very human activity, and is, as far as we know, ubiquitous across history. The number of wargame periods, after all, should suggest that it is the case. Still, we do go for a sanitised version of conflict. As is frequently pointed out, there are no lead civilians who are murdered or raped, no lead widows and orphans, no looting, pillage, refugees, epidemics and so on.

Now, I sanitise my games as much as the next wargamer, possibly more. I do have an interest in more skirmish or role-playing types of games, but these tend to be more along the lines of ‘try to retrieve that vital document’ or ‘help the villagers to get their village ale back’, rather than ‘go into the caverns, kill all the monsters, and come back loaded with their possessions’. Perhaps that is a sign of maturity.

Still, occasionally an article gives me pause for thought. As those of you who follow the blog might have noticed, at present I am running a large, open-ended campaign called ‘1600 – Something’, part of which encompasses Europe. It looks very much like a set-up for the Thirty Years' War. Indeed, much of the background for the campaign came from books about that conflict. So my eye was arrested recently by an article in History Today: Fight and Flight (vol 76, 9, February 2026, p. 28-39). This is about a man called Hans Heberle, who was caught up in the TYW.

Hans lived near the Imperial city of Ulm, in Swabia, and started keeping a diary in 1628. The war came to Swabia in 1631, when Ulm signed an alliance with the Swedes. This lasted until 1635 when Ulm signed up to the Peace of Prague. I doubt if this was of much interest to Hans, however, as between 1631 and 1648 he and his family were forced to flee to Ulm 28 times. You read that correctly, he fled his home twenty-eight times in seventeen years.

As the article notes, the most common reason for leaving home in a hurry was the approach of soldiers. While we might think that the Swedes might have left the village of one of their allies alone, this was not the case. Most troops did not bother to check whether the people they were robbing were friends of enemies, and it was not worth hanging around to find out if they did.

Violence was not always the case, admittedly. Bavarians were quartered in the village in 1646, and Hans records no problems. On the other hand, the arrival of troops always came with the threat of robbery, violence, sexual assault, murder and extortion. The states could not control or supply the massive number of troops they fielded, over 100,000 in the 1630s. That is not to say the field armies were that size, of course. As with the English Civil War, garrisons made up the bulk of the troops, and local exactions made up the bulk of the problems for the civilian population.

There were other risks as well. Hans and his family fled to Ulm in 1636 because of famine. He lost two of his children at that time. Even Ulm was not safe, of course, and Hans lost his stepmother, sister and two half-sisters to plague in 1634-5, within three weeks of each other. Ulm had a population of about 19000 before the TYW. November 1634 saw 8,214 outsiders living there in addition. No wonder it was calculated that 15,000 people died from plague in 1635.

The question of where to flee to was a problem for the civilians, of course. Hans had two choices. Either he walked the 10 km to the walled town of Albeck, or the roughly 20 km to Ulm. Albeck was nearer but weaker and was besieged in the summer of 1635. Ulm was a much more powerful fortress and, as Hans’ village was a dependency of Ulm, he could get access much more easily than many, so it was to Ulm he went.

Refugees could weaken the defences of a town like Ulm. They could, and probably did, eat food stored for a siege, and so the time the town could resist was reduced. On the other hand, the refugees provided defensive manpower and were set to work strengthening the defences, as Hans did in 1634 after fleeing to Ulm after the Battle of Nordlingen. Nevertheless, Ulm’s resources were such that the shopkeepers stated in 1635 that the refugees (16 – 22,000) of them) would have to be expelled unless the city signed the Peace of Prague.

The supply of food was another concern. Ulm drew much of its supplies from its dependent villages, and the fields were untended while the villagers were sheltering in the city. This led, in 1636, to the city authorities sending the villagers home with seeds and instructions to restart agriculture. The war had many implications of which we are probably not aware.

Eventually, of course, the Peace of Westphalia was concluded. Hans was in Ulm at the time, having fled there to avoid French soldiers. The sense of relief was massive, and the propagation of the peace was a massive party. Hans returned home to try to rebuild a disrupted life.

As a wargamer, of course, I ignore all this. My excuse is that my armies are small, the states are rich, and the discipline is good. They pay their way, and none of my troops would so much as smile at a local young lady without marrying her first. To some extent, of course, I know that this is all a fiction, and, perhaps, it is good to be reminded of the nasty realities of war, even though I could just read the news and achieve the same.

Still, wargaming is a hobby, a fiction, a means of storytelling. I can take such liberties and not have a problem with that, so long as I am doing so consciously, not trying to avoid or ignore the unpleasant (to say the least) aspects of conflict.

1600 – Something: Luxembourg

 As my loyal reader may recall, the Autumn 1605 campaign turn is drawing to a close. The final action is the French invasion of Luxembourg. As the French failed their GOOS roll, they have to face a host of the Luxembourg’s finest, drawn at random.

The final Luxembourg army consisted of 4 bases of cavalry, 1 light horse, 5 shot and 2 pikes. Quite a handy little army, I thought. The French were a single army themselves, consisting of their regulars: 4 cavalry, 1 light horse, 4 shot and 3 pike. Interestingly evenly matched, I thought, with the Luxembourgers being slightly shot heavy, and the French with the pike.

The terrain rolling favoured the defenders, with a handy hill in the centre of their line to defend. Above, the Luxembourgers are to the left, the dark-coated infantry on the hill with half the cavalry behind. The rest of the cavalry is refused on their left with only the light horse forward, while the rest of the infantry is on the right, nearest the camera.

I confess, I was a little concerned about the position, mostly because the infantry on the hill is a newly painted bunch who have never been in action before. Still, the idea was to have a cavalry trap on the left of the hill, so any advancing French horse could be charged in flank and downhill by the central cavalry. The idea was similar on the right, with the hope of trapping the French infantry in a hail of musketry.

The plans developed, somewhat slowly, admittedly. As you can see above, the French right was delayed by a lack of tempo points. The left did get going, and the main French infantry force ran into the predicted musketry barrage, so much so that the general brought up some cavalry to support them. On the far side, you can see the light horse has been exchanging shots as well.

I should mention that before this game, the tactical rules were subject to some minor revisions, which revealed that in the previous version, the move of light horse had been increased to 3 base widths, so they can tank around the battlefield more quickly, and, crucially, get out of trouble a bit faster. We shall see how it works out.

There was a fair bit of cagey manoeuvring. As you can see above, the French got their right wing moving eventually, but their left has fallen back a bit to avoid being trapped. On the Luxembourg side, their right-wing infantry advanced to try to trap the left, but will now fall back a bit to try to avoid a clobbering by the pike-heavy French.

In the event, the French decided to bite the various bullets on offer. On their right, the first line of cavalry stuck their heads in the noose, while on the left, the infantry got moving again, aiming at the Luxembourg right. It all looked a bit risky, particularly for the cavalry with a juicy open flank begging.

In the event, the Luxembourg general took over and charged in with his left flank cavalry. His own base has, as you can see, severely damaged the French, but the other has, remarkably, been bounced. On the right, the infantry are near to clashing. In the centre, the French second line cavalry are in the firing line, while their second line infantry are arriving in support.

It got a bit busy. On the French right, the damaged cavalry fled, pursued by the Luxembourg general and base. On the near side, the Luxembourgers attacked, securing victory on one flank with the musketeers, but not on the rest. Nevertheless, French morale was starting to look wobbly, although they survived. The bounced Luxembourg cavalry, by the way, has been withdrawn in front of their camp on the left of the picture to recover.

In the foreground, you can see that the French right has emerged victorious in the infantry battle. Two Luxembourg bases are fleeting, while the other has retired to a hill for safety. On the French right, the cavalry has been charged by the rallied Luxembourgers and is coming off second best. The remaining Luxembourg cavalry is creeping forward, looking for a target.

The French general, however, was not going to lose another cavalry base if he could help it, and led a base of musketeers into the flank of the Luxembourg general’s horse. The horse fled, but the general survived. This really is the point where the French began to scent victory.

The Luxembourgers fought on, however, thinking that their temporary cavalry superiority might count. But the French soon organised an infantry attack on the front and flank of the hill. In spite of fierce resistance and the reserve musketeers moving across to prop the flank up, the game was pretty well up for the defenders.

The coup de grace came on the French left with the flanking attack up the hill. While the pike in the centre were driving back their opponents, down the hill, the loss of another base pushed the Luxembourg morale to fall back. This led to their cavalry and light horse retiring from the field, so at that point, they decided that further resistance was futile.

That was, as a wargame, a lot of fun and intriguing. The French had a tough nut to crack, I think, and managed to do it by not over-committing. I did toy, for example, with charging the French cavalry up the hill at the infantry there. It might have worked, particularly with the large numbers of musketeers stationed there. After all, the Muscovites managed a few games ago. But discretion, and the fact that the Luxembourgers gained the tempo and moved back, suggested otherwise. Patience told, in the end.

As for the wider picture, the French are now in possession of Luxembourg, which means that the Spanish Road is in peril. I am not sure how the Spanish will respond. They are fairly thinly spread along the frontier. But the next campaign move is winter 1605, so I will have to wait until spring to find out.

1600 – Something: The Unlucky Lucky Muscovites

As my loyal reader will know, I am currently wargaming my way through the Autumn 1605 move of the\ campaign. This has now rolled around (moving east to west) to the Muscovites defending Courland against a Danish Expeditionary Force. As you might recall, if you were really concentrating, there is a bit of history here, the Muscovites having routed a previous Danish force supporting the Courlanders.

The Danes have control of the Baltic, and so, with a move card, it was a simple matter for the army from Jutland to be switched to Courland, and a few dice rolls indicated that the landing was unopposed, but the Courlanders did not rally to the cause of the Danes. Presumably, they wanted to wait and see what happened next. After all, the Danish force sent to support them did not cover itself in glory.

The Muscovites may well have been happier with the terrain rolled for this encounter. Above, they are to the left, Cossacks and cavalry to the fore. The remaining foot is on the lower slopes of a hill in front of the camp, with a reserve of streltsi in the rear. The Danes had some more head scratching to do. While the ford would minimise disruption crossing the stream, doing so in the face of the Muscovite cavalry would be difficult.

A few moves in, and the Danes are crossing the stream in numbers. The infantry on the road is across, and getting organised and deployed. On the far side, the cavalry is mostly across and rallying. The only fly in the ointment so far is that the second regiment of foot has been mostly delayed at the stream. On the other hand, the Muscovites are too far away to really bother about at present.

A few moves later, and things are heating up. On the near side, the Danish second infantry regiment is reluctantly crossing the stream, while the first is deployed. The cavalry which crossed the ford is now aiming for the Danish right wing, and has become a significant cavalry combat. The two bases of Danish cavalry which had crossed the stream (the third is still rallying), decided to charge, rather than be charged, even though they were outnumbered. Initially, they had great success, pushing back and shaking the Muscovites, but, just as I thought that the Muscovite baggage was in peril, both bases were bounced. Hence, the disorganisation of both sides.

As you can also see, I had decided that the Muscovite foot on the hill would be more useful on their right, and they were moving towards it. In retrospect, this was probably a mistake on my part, as staying put on the hill might have been a better bet. The other thing to note is a misfortune for the Muscovites after their fluky combat dice rolls. I had to make a general’s risk roll, as the general’s base had been recoiled and shaken. He needed 1-4 on a d6 to survive. Of course, I rolled a 5. Oops.

Surprisingly, the Muscovites did not fall apart. On their right, nearest the camera, the cavalry charged. While one base was halted on the road by musket fire, the other base of muskets was destroyed, and the pike sent reeling back. On the far side, the Danish general is attempting to take some advantage from the cavalry melee, but the Muscovites have started to rally as well, so he might be a little late.

It got a bit complicated, and I think I missed a photograph. As you can see above, things have changed quite a bit. The third Muscovite cavalry base on their left charged the Danish cavalry by the stream and routed them, only to fall victim to the Danish general and his base who were relishing having just routed another of the Muscovite bases, seen fleeing top left. On the right, the hitherto successful Muscovite cavalry fighting the Danish pike has been routed by a flank charge by Danish cavalry sent from the other flank, who are pursuing at the bottom of the picture. Meanwhile, the Muscovite foot have deployed, just at the foot of the hill.

Both sides had to make morale rolls at this point. The Danes were three bases down and were deemed to be at the ‘waver’ level. The Muscovites, two bases and a general down, rolled a fallback result, which is why there is a big gap between them and the Danes. Another charge disposed of another Muscovite cavalry base, if you look closely, the Muscovite camp is now under threat from marauding Danish cavalry. Muscovite morale went to withdraw, and discretion was the better part of valour.

Strategically, the Muscovites will have to withdraw from Courland, and I suspect that the losses will cause the state to plunge even deeper into debt. The Danes, with the customs revenue from the Sound, are better off financially. And so will probably hold Courland, along with their enclave on the Baltic coast of Poland.

In the game, I think the Muscovites were both lucky and unlucky (hence the title). They were unlucky to lose the general (again) but fortunate to beat off the Danish cavalry. I really was having visions of the Danes looting the camp before the game was half-finished. The Muscovites continued to roll well, in fact, nearly overwhelming a base of pike with a frontal attack, which is no mean feat. In fact, they would have succeeded had the Danish cavalry not intervened.

For the Danes, the stream was a problem, obviously, but the ford certainly helped them get across with minimal disruption. The second line cavalry and infantry, crossing directly, did not fare as well. Perhaps I should simply have fed more troops, particularly the second infantry regiment, across the ford.

Still, while this goes down as another Muscovite defeat, it was a close-run thing. Mind you, the Muscovites are now looking for net another general. What do you think of the job advert: ‘Wanted, a general. Short-term contract’?

The Score

I have been reading, very slowly (due to other commitments), The Score, by C Thi Nguyen. It is certainly worthy of attention as a wargamer, let alone as a citizen of the 21st-century world. If you would like a bit of an introduction, Nguyen was on BBC Radio 4’s Start the Week program a bit ago, and you can still listen to it here.

Wargaming is not Nguyen’s main point in writing the book, of course. The main aim is how our lives are taken over and, ultimately, controlled by numbers, usually imposed upon us by parties beyond our control. Our values, he maintains, are captured by these. For example, Facebook is dominated by how many ‘likes’ you get, and how many ‘followers’ you can claim. Instead of using it as a medium for communicating with other people, you slowly become captured by the numbers, and start writing posts which will maximise your number of likes, keep and grow your camp of followers, and so on.

This value capture works more seriously (perhaps) in other areas of life. For example, the assessment of schools is (still) given by a single word or phrase in England, despite its devastating potential. As Nyugren observes, this sort of thing makes, in principle, it easy to compare schools. Thus, as a parent, you choose the school for your child that comes with the highest rank. The rank, of course, abstracts from all the context of a particular school. It might, for example, be a wonderful school for a certain sort of urban child who, simply, would not fit into a normal academic environment. But that context is ignored.

Nguyen uses a lot of examples from games. He observes that games hold a sort of middle ground in our lives. They have rules, scores, and assessments, but they also allow us to be creative. A simple example is of soccer. The rule is (among others, of course) that you cannot touch the ball. This forces you to do other things, to get creative with feet and head. The rules force creativity.

Nguyen does not specifically address wargaming, but he does say some things about role-playing games. He observes, for example, that actually, role-playing games, or rather the players, need rules of some description. Apparently, if the players are left rule-less, the stories become staid and repetitive. It is the dice rolling, the attempt to make a score, which leads to the storytelling. The failure to achieve something forces us into creativity, by making account for the unexpected.

I do not think it is too much of a stretch to apply this to historical wargaming. We can, if we so desire, re-fight Waterloo every week, but probably, most of us would eventually find that a bit boring. That might be so even if the results, as a consequence of dice rolling, would be different each time, at least slightly. But we can start imagining the what-ifs. ‘What if Ney had not gone so far?’ ‘What if Hougomont had held out less long?’ ‘What if the Prussians were delayed?’ Some of these things might give us greater insight into the outcome, but would we still be re-fighting Waterloo?

By giving us different outcomes within an overall envelope of possibility, our imagination and creativity are put to the test. Perhaps it is this that we risk outsourcing to artificial intelligence if we start using it to create our scenarios and campaigns. Nguyen observes, as do other commentators, that we are heading in a direction that leads to us outsourcing almost all our decision-making. This is done by reducing our choices, essentially, to numbers, even if they are probabilities in a large language model, and relying on the computer to decide for us.

Of course, this is what we do when we write rules. In my case, I can ponder how many points in combat a charging cavalry unit should get compared to, for example, a base of dispersed skirmishers. We abstract away the details of all the encounters we are aware of between such troops and come up with an answer. Then, through various factors,, such as terrain, training, and morale, we add context back in. That is pretty much how the wargaming world works, I think, whatever rules and mechanisms we might use.

The scoring system in a game is, however, important. Nguyen observes that a lot of game designers start with the scoring system. This conditions the players, and what they can and choose to do in order to win, whatever winning might mean (he has some interesting examples). I have encountered this in the difference between one-off and campaign games. In the latter, keeping your force in being might be more important, a bigger win, than dying gloriously but vainly on the battlefield. Sometimes, in my campaign games, it is simply better to march away. What it means to ‘win’ has changed.

Incidentally, on that matter, I have just been reading an interesting article in History Today on the run-up to the disaster (for the Crusaders) of the Horns of Hattin. A few years earlier, they had gathered a large force and seen Saladin off without a battle. But this was regarded as cowardice. So in a similar situation, an advance to battle was ordered. We know how well that worked, but the point here is that in real life, the goal was altered, and not being thought a coward was placed above winning.

The above might be a little less than coherent as an argument. My excuse is that it is a very rich book and I am only halfway through it. But it has made me think about what sort of goals we set in wargames, and how these affect the ways that we might play the game. Indeed, the nations in 1600-Something do have strategic aims which, on occasion, do suggest courses of action. So the French, for example, want to break the Spanish Road, and are piling up forces on the frontier to that end. But each individual battle is directed to attempting to obtain that strategic outcome, rather than just destroying the enemy.

A fair bit to ponder then, even leaving aside the complaints about how big businesses and government go about evaluating everything and controlling outcomes. I shall, quite probably, return to the subject.

1600 – Something: Mongol Swings and Roundabouts

The second wargame of the Autumn 1605 move was between Mongol tribes. The dice rolling indicated that the Mongol activity reported here continued. The White and Black Sheep tribes amalgamated, and the White Sheep commander, having won the card game, entered the fray as White Sheep. Their opponents were another tribe of Mongols, known, for reasons of convenience, as the Green Sheep. I am not aware that there is a type of sheep which is green, but the name followed from the dice colours.

The setup is above, with the defenders, the Green Sheep, to the left. It is harder to see, but the centre(ish) of the field consists of a line of hills. The Green Sheep militia is on the near side, the Green Sheep heavy cavalry and skirmishers are on the hill in the middle, with their light cavalry in front of them, while the rest of the heavy cavalry hold the hill on the far side.

From this, you can deduce that in their card draw for forces, the Green Sheep drew three Kings, two of which were militia, and the third a base of skirmishers. This gave me some head scratching, as you can imagine. After all, this was supposed to be a cavalry battle. A bit like armies in the Western Desert in the 1940s, once the tanks were gone, the infantry had to surrender. With this lot, I suspect it is much the same with the cavalry. And, having fewer bases makes the lack of cavalry more likely.

The White Sheep commander was almost equally unhappy. He found himself facing enemies on all three hills, and while he did have an encouraging numerical advantage in both light and heavy cavalry, assaulting uphill is, well, uphill work. The plan was to mask the centre of the Green Sheep position with the light cavalry, and hopefully overwhelm their lights, while taking the hills on the flanks with the cavalry. The then triumphant heavies could turn in and crush the centre. The general would command the left wing to make sure things got moving in the right direction.

The plans slowly lumbered into life, both sides affected by a tempo point famine. In the centre, the light cavalry are clashing, ineffectively so far. On the Green Sheep left, far side, the White Sheep heavies are looming, while on the near side, the White Sheep cavalry are ascending the hill. At this point, the Green Sheep commander realised that his militia would need a bit of help, and he is heading there himself with reinforcements.

The whole battlefield suddenly got busy. In the centre, the light cavalry exchanged shots, to the advantage, as you can see, of the Green Sheep. On the far side, however, the White Sheep cavalry, although hampered by the hill, has routed their opponents, and the Green Sheep left is now wide open. On the right, however, a bit of manoeuvring has led to the militia falling back off the hill, while the Green Sheep general and his cavalry have charged into the Whites and are causing damage.

Some fluky combat dice rolling later, and the Green Sheep cavalry have been repelled, falling into confusion as thwarted chargers do. The White Sheep cavalry, however, is in no position to take advantage, being shaken themselves. In the centre, the outnumbered Green Sheep light cavalry are continuing to chip away at their counterparts.

Both sides needed to reorganise. The Green Sheep pulled back the militia into the fields in the foreground, and the disorganised cavalry back to regroup. The White Sheep cavalry recovered from their shaken status remarkably quickly and crossed the hill, charging their counterparts down I, as seen above. This activity starved the right wing of tempo, however, and the exploitation of the victory there has barely started. In the centre, however, the Green Sheep light cavalry has scored a second success, routing another White Sheep base.

There were more highly unusual combat rolls. Firstly, the Green Sheep general, in spite of the status of his base, managed to recoil his opponents, although the other base was lost, as seen. Secondly, a base of Green Sheep light cavalry from the hill moved down it and took the third White Sheep cavalry base in flank. This base was, at the time, supporting the general’s one in close combat and could not recoil, so it was lost when the light cavalry made a good roll. Nevertheless, the overall situation for the Green Sheep was poor.

They were saved, remarkably, by one of the militia units. These jumped the wall of the enclosure and attacked the disordered White Sheep cavalry in flank, while the general’s base supported them as best they could from the front. The militia is, in fact, also doubly terrain shaken from crossing the linear obstacle, but still rolled sufficiently well to recoil the White Sheep cavalry, which, with a base to their front, meant they were removed.

At this point, the White Sheep had lost 4 bases, with the general about to leave the table in pursuit of the routed enemy, while the Green Sheep had lost 3. Both sides were, in fact, at ‘fall back’ morale status, so I decided to call it a draw.

That was an interesting wargame. Like the last time Mongols clashed, there was no clear winner; in fact, the result was even less clear-cut this time. I kind of expect cavalry actions to be fast and furious, quick games and fairly decisive. These cavalry versus cavalry contests have been anything but, both fairly sedate, positional and close. Mind you, in this wargame, some of the combat rolls where shaken bases go on to bounce their charging opponents have been unusual, but it happened to both sides, so I cannot claim any bias.

On the other hand, I still have not painted any further Mongols. By the time I get to them, Mongolistan will probably be quiet for many campaign turns. But the next action up is the Danes against the Muscovites. It will be nice to see a few pikes again.

1600 – Something: Khmer Bashing

The Autumn 1605 move in the campaign yielded four wargames. In the West, the French invaded Luxembourg. No one seemed particularly minded to aid the Luxembourgers, but the French failed their GOOS roll and so would have to fight their way in. Further east, the situation in Courland got ever more perilous. The Danes, to avenge the loss of their force supporting the Courlanders in the last action there, landed a full-scale army. They then failed their GOOS roll, and so will face the wrath of the Muscovite army already there.

In the east, the Moguls made a critical initiative roll, which indicated that an advantageous dynastic marriage had taken place. In the north, the White Sheep Mongols carried on their campaign, and so another wargame is to happen there. In South-East Asia, the Siamese are not taking being invaded by the Khmer lying down and have counter-invaded. The nature of the geography (or, in the case of my map, I suppose, geometry) means that the two forces are of equal, 12-base, armies. The Siamese cannot support the invasion, but made their GOOS roll, so the remaining Khmer army is resisting without any local help.

There were, of course, the usual rounds of diplomacy, which did not really achieve much. The Chinese managed to persuade the Japanese to disband their fleet, which the Koreans had chased off in the last move. However, the Japanese drew a 'raise military force' card and promptly gathered another. As in real life, sometimes things move slowly, even in a crisis.

Still, moving as ever from east to west in the wargames, the first action is the Siamese invasion of Cambodia. Both armies consist of 12 bases: 8 of tribal foot, a general on an elephant, a cavalry base, and two archer bases. I do not, of course, have sufficient tribal foot for both sides to have their full complement of appropriate figures. The appropriate figures are, in fact, in the house, but rather far back in the painting queue. As the Estimable Mrs P. will not permit unpainted figures to be used, and I do not want to lose the momentum of the campaign, I have raided the Chinese box for their blade-armed figures and shall use those. Incidentally, the same will be true, I should think, of the Mongols, in that I have a second Mongol horse, but they are not painted and are unlikely to be in time.

I rolled up really quite a dense terrain for this wargame, as seen above. The Siamese are to the right, and behind their right is, in fact, a hill. The plan is to use the bulk of the tribal foot, in the centre, to assault the Khmer-held hill in the centre (where the Khmer elephant general is), while the archers (in the field on their right) and the rest of the tribal foot secure that flank, and the cavalry and general secure the left. Well, that was the plan.

The Khmer plan was, essentially, to stay on the defensive, enticing the Siamese into range and then charging downhill at them, with the advantage, of course, of the slope. The nearest tribal foot and the Khmer archers on the far side are on hills, and the rest of the Khmer tribal foot that is not with the general are in valleys, securing the flanks of the central hill.

This was one of those wargames that was a bit slow to start, due to a lack of available tempo points. However, eventually the Siamese go moving, as seen. On the near side, the cavalry is facing the right flank Khmer tribal foot (who are still, just about, on their hill). The rest of the Khmer tribal foot, which is not actually on the central hill, is heading in that direction, while the archers are causing disruption to the advancing Siamese on the left.

The Khmer cavalry launched a charge, downhill, at the leftmost Siamese tribal foot in the centre. Initially successful, they were eventually routed (by some lucky dice rolls, it has to be admitted), and the Siamese line held. In fact, the Siamese pulled back a bit, not wishing to be charged downhill by the assembling Khmer foot.

The Khmer cavalry can be seen above, exiting stage left. On the Khmer left, the Siamese tribal foot are still suffering from archery fire and subsequent disruption, while on the right, nearest the camera, the Siamese cavalry and some Khmer foot are engaged in a stand off where neither managed a charge.

At this point, the battle could have rather petered out in a draw, but the Siamese tempo rolling improved a bit, and they got their right flank advancing up the hill. While the Khmer bowmen resisted manfully, one base was routed, while the other managed to stave off its opponents. On the other wing, the Khmer foot managed to get a charge in against the Siamese cavalry and pushed them back in disorder, but the Siamese general with some tribal foot is rushing to the rescue.

The end came when the Siamese general charged his attached tribal foot into the flank of the hitherto winning Khmer foot on the Siamese left. This was more than the troops could put up with and was a straight rout. The Khmer morale roll indicated a ‘withdraw’ result, which, at 4 bases down, was probably reasonable. The Khmer did have the option to try re-rolling to stabilise the lines, but with one flank gone, the other nearly gone, and only a slight advantage in the centre, they decided that prudence was the better part, particularly as they had the only Khmer army in the country, and really withdrew.

That was a surprisingly slow wargame, as it happened. Neither side threw particularly well for tempo, and the Siamese were very wary of getting too close to the central hill, especially when the Khmer had concentrated their foot there. The Siamese were left trying to nibble away at the flanks, eventually emerging victorious, but without the decisive defeat of the Khmer, which they were seeking.

And so, on to Mongols!

1600 – Something: Battered Bavarians

The final action of the Summer 1605 move is, as you might recall (if anyone has been paying attention) in the west, where the Bavarians, subverted diplomatically by the French, have invaded Austria. Unfortunately for the boys in blue, two Austrian armies are waiting for them. In my head, the French have agreed to pay for the Bavarian action, while the Bavarians rather expected the Austrians to have moved at least one army to support their incursion into Ottoman territory further south. The Austrians (I mean the Austrian Habsburg or Holy Roman Emperor) have just found that indolence, or a lack of move cards, sometimes helps.

Anyway, I am now left with another lop-sided battle, a single Bavarian force against one and a half Austrian armies. The Bavarians muster 5 bases of cavalry, 2 pikes, 4 musketeers, and a light horse. The Austrians deploy 4 bases of cavalry, 2 light horse, 4 pike bases and 8 musketeer bases. It has to be admitted that the terrain gods were not kind to the Bavarians. Whereas the terrain for the Muscovites in the last battle enabled them to defeat the foe in detail, the terrain here was broken up and left little scope for manoeuvre.

The Bavarians are to the left, with a rather thin-looking line. Beyond their left-hand regiment of infantry, by the way, is a ridge, which is steep in places and hence impassable. I pondered the Austrian deployment at some length. Initially, I thought of deploying them forward of the village and wood, the idea being to launch an all-out attack and attempt to rout the Bavarians once and for all (as the loyal reader of the blog will possibly recall, the Bavarians and Austrians have some history, here). Common sense prevailed, as the gap through which reinforcements would be fed is rather thin and, after all, the Austrians were on the defensive.

The Bavarian plan was to mask the foe with their right flank while attacking with infantry and cavalry on the left. I thought it looked reasonable on paper, as the Austrian left would not really be in a position to interfere. Well, maybe.

A few moves in, and you can see the progress of the Bavarian left. Fronted by the blue-coast under command of the general, they are making good progress, having seen off one base of Austrian light horse (fleeing just behind the redcoats), although their foot has suffered a bit of disruption, and a lack of tempo means that the cavalry supporting them is a bit close behind. The Austrians have moved the sub-general from their quiet left, and he is bringing a second foot regiment up to support the right. From the Bavarian point of view, that was not in the plan.

Crunches came in various shapes and sizes. The Bavarians got their right moving towards the gap between the village and the wood, hoping that the now denuded Austrian centre might be vulnerable. In the right-hand foreground, you can see the unengaged Austrian left on their hill. On the far side, the Bavarians are now starting to struggle, having lost a musketeer base to the Austrian foot, and also the general. Ouch.

Things did not improve much for the Bavarians, now unable to control their left. The infantry stumbled on, the remaining musketeers to be routed by the Austrian sub-general’s redcoats, while the remaining pike, now unsupported, attempted to contact the Austrian cavalry and was repulsed. The losses led to a morale check, and the Bavarians were wavering, which meant that the attempted assault on the gap between the village and wood faltered (or, in fact, stopped).

The end was not far away, of course. Under the command of the Austrian sub-general, the redcoats have now driven into the Bavarian cavalry on their left. Actually, the musketeers managed to rout one of the cavalry bases through sheer firepower, which is unusual. It has to be said that the Austrians got two lucky combat rolls to achieve it, and the Bavarians had no tempo to try to intervene. The remaining Bavarian pike on that flank has also routed. They were too far away from any support and, while bravely having a go, were not going to make much progress.

In the foreground, you can see the rest of the Bavarian army stuck in front of the gap between the village and the wood. The Austrians have sealed the gap with infantry anyway, but at this point, Bavarian morale collapsed, and the army was routed.

This was always going to be a tough battle for the Bavarians, attacking while outnumbered. There was little option for defeating the Austrians in detail, at least once I had decided that deploying in front of the wood was a bad idea.

The Bavarians had a bad day, dice-wise. The terrain was against them, and some of their tempo and combat rolls were awful. They were actually defeated by 10 bases of Austrians, and a third of the Austrian army never moved throughout the entire game. Yet the Bavarians had to attack, as the Swedes did at Nordlingen. And the outcome is possibly as bad.

Strategically, the Bavarians had better hope that the French step up to the mark with money for a new army, if nothing else. Bavaria is open to Austrian invasion. The line of Spanish armies on the western border of France would preclude any direct intervention by them in Germany. On the other hand, this is the second time in five years that the Bavarians have upset the Austrians. It did not go well for them the first time; it could go a lot worse this time.

And so, finally, we reach the end of the Summer 1605 move. As you would expect, little was really resolved internationally, as the invasions were mostly defeated, apart from the Koreans in Japan. I am being forced to consider moving my diplomatic tables onto my laptop, as with 22 nations, it is a bit tricky keeping all the numbers legible, and I would like the option of adding a few more nations as well, in South India, and possibly some emerging Jurchen tribes.

We shall see, or maybe it is just that my megalomania is still not satiated….