Bits. And Pieces.

Every once in a while, some nagging questions come calling that make me think that I should write a blog post about them. On the other hand, they tend to be fairly ephemeral, and I usually cannot think sufficiently about them, or I do not have the knowledge and expertise, to take them further. So they remain unwritten about, which is often a shame, as others might be interested.

Anyway, this post, out of sequence and likely ignored, is a compendium of such items. I hope you find something interesting in some of them, at least.

Firstly, I wrote a blog a while ago about the idea of principles, models and algorithms as applied to wargame rules. This was picked up by Jon at Palouse Wargames Journal. I think that I agree with what Jon commented about what I said, and the comments on both pieces are worth reading as well. I suspect that the outcome is largely ‘it is more complicated than that ’, which is fine, but perhaps we do need these ways of thinking about what we are doing in writing rules, creating scenarios, and playing wargames. In this age of artificial intelligence, it might help us to think where human judgment comes in.

Along those lines, I have been reading a little about AI. It is not something I am, to be honest, all that interested in, certainly in my wargaming life. I will happily concede that it could be useful for some things, but, as I have mentioned elsewhere, I prefer to keep computers out of my wargame room, even though 1600 – Something has reduced me to running the campaign moves on spreadsheets. However, my most recent reading has indicated what, I think, is one of the differences between computer and human decisions.

The case in point is the autonomous vehicle. Here, apparently, artificial intelligence can bod along quite happily, and can deal with all normal circumstances. Apparently, the problem arises in so-called ‘edge conditions’. These are those aspects of being on the road where there is ambiguity and human anticipation of certain outcomes. For example, suppose a ball bounces out into the road in front of you. As a human, you quite likely slow down, anticipating that a child may well run after it. This is, it seems, very hard to replicate in an artificial intelligence large language model. Similarly, suppose you see a couple embracing on the edge of the pavement. You, as a human, may well anticipate that they are saying goodbye and one will then step off the pavement onto the road. Again, AI struggles with this sort of thing.

So we are back to the question of algorithms and principles, at least. Principles are fuzzy-edged guidelines which help humans to make a decision, such as ‘if there is a ball, there will likely be a small human around’. These are difficult to encode. On the other hand, algorithms are easy to code and highly predictable and reproducible. If I give you a formula, say force equals mass times acceleration, and some masses and accelerations, you should be able to work out the answer, and it should be the same everywhere, all the time. Thus, in wargame rules, the algorithm gives us a certain value, which we can vary using tactical factors and a dash of randomness. But if I am playing another human, they should be getting the same result. This is not the case with what has been termed a principle, and probably leads to a lot of arguments over rule interpretation.

Still, on to other things. I discovered recently a discussion in History Today about the usefulness of military history. I think it is available freely, and it is worth a look, if only to try to grasp why contemporary military history of little use to contemporary wargamers. There are various views on its utility or lack thereof, but mostly the practitioners seem to worry that it is going the same way in the academy as most arts and humanities subjects. But that is not a discussion for here, particularly.

A few other things have cropped up. As the Straits of Hormuz have been in the news recently, History Today ran an article on the place in late medieval and early modern history, as various ‘crusading’ states attempted to get around the Ottoman Empire to the riches of the east. The bulk of the piece is behind a paywall, but it mentions an intriguing wargame opportunity: a joint attack by Persian and British forces on Portuguese and Ottoman outposts in the Gulf. I mean, given current problems, what could possibly have gone wrong?

Still further afield, I have been pondering expanding the 1600 – Something campaign to Africa, about which more will be said in a while. But I found I could not consider Africa without the Americas, and the Atlantic World includes, of course, the slave trade. As it happens, in the August 2026 edition of History Today there is an article on the slave trade, observing that the first slave on British territory landed on St Kitts on 4^th August 1626 – 60 West Africans shipped in as cargo. I am now wondering whether this presents me with an opportunity, in terms of trade and something to get the powers arguing about, or an ethical dilemma, as to whether such a trade should even be included. I have not decided, but would be interested if anyone has views.

And finally, in the same edition of the magazine, there is a longer article about F D Roosevelt in the 1936 election, declaring to an audience that he hated war. A few years later, of course, he led the USA into the largest conflict that the world had seen to date. I will just end by noting that Harold Macmillan, after leaving office as British Prime Minister, was asked what the hardest part of the job had been. ‘Events, dear boy, events, ’ Macmillan is reputed to have replied.   

1600 – Something: Big Bash in Burgundy

Well, after the cramped, abandoned battle reported last week, I had to try to get things moving again. Bitter experience has shown that even hitherto successful campaigns can falter with such problems, and I did not want that to happen here. The game is too much fun for that (and that is the point after all).

So, now I have a central section of the battlefield, as shown last time, with too great a density of troops thereon, and two edge sections, which were populated in the usual manner by dividing the distribution of terrain table into two. On the French left, there were some enclosures, a village on the Spanish side, and some rough going. On the French right, there was another stream and a wood on the Spanish side.

The forces involved were now properly worked out. The French had eight cavalry bases, two light horse bases, seven shot and five pike bases, and two artillery bases. The Spanish had five demi-lancer bases, two light horse bases, eight shot bases, seven pike bases and two artillery bases. A total of twenty-four bases a side, with three generals (one general in chief and two sub-generals) each.

The picture shows a number of things, not least the problem of taking photographs of 6 mm figures six feet away from the camera. At least you cannot see the poor state of the painting on some of the figures. Anyway, the Spanish are supposed to be attacking, but have set up fairly defensively, largely because they are outnumbered in cavalry. Nearest the camera, you can see a substantial presence on a ridge that runs right to left, peaking where the Spanish artillery battery is. This wing has more infantry support and two bases of cavalry and is commanded by a sub-general. The Spanish were concerned about being outflanked on this side.

The centre is more lightly held by the other artillery battery and a regiment of foot, together with the commander-in-chief. On the far side, the fields and village are held by Spanish musketeers, and the rest of the demi-lancers are lurking out of sight (and cannon shot) behind the buildings (you can just see them in the corner).

The French possibly had a harder task. Their idea was to use their cavalry superiority to sweep across the open spaces on their left and roll up the Spanish centre. The hope was that this would negate the Spanish forces on their right. In the meantime, there would be an infantry assault on the hill, directed by the commander in chief, along with the cavalry and a sub-general on the French right, outflanking it.

Strategically, you might remember that the French have a problem with a mutinous army of rebels in Languedoc approaching from the south. There is a bit of an onus on them to firstly win this battle quickly, and secondly to win with as few casualties as possible. These may well be, in wargame terms as well as historically, more or less mutually exclusive goals.

The French had a bit of difficulty getting going, and only those troops under the direct command of a general have actually moved. On the far side, the cavalry has swept forward, although the French light cavalry covering them has suffered at the hands of their Spanish counterparts. In the centre, artillery bombardments have been taking place to little effect. All the action is on the Spanish left, really, where the guns and muskets on the hill have forced back the initial French assault. If you look closely, in the top right corner, the Spanish cavalry has crept out from cover. This will become important shortly.

Things started to heat up as the French eventually got moving. On the Spanish right, the French cavalry has swung back to oppose the Spanish demi-lancers. I decided on this as I did not fancy letting the demi-lancers rip on the French flank and gun line. However, the French cavalry is now running the gauntlet of musketeers in the village and fields to both the left and right. These did not cause much damage, but they did disrupt the line slightly.

In the centre, the French column of infantry and one of cavalry are moving forward, under cannon fire. Again, however, most of the action is on the Spanish left, with another assault on the hill by the French infantry, the pike of which has just been routed, and the musketeers recoiled. However, more infantry are moving up, and the French cavalry is now outflanking the hill. The main French problem is that their commander-in-chief has become a casualty.

The action proceeded. In the centre, the French infantry column in the woods has been stopped by cannon fire. On the far side, after some hesitation, the demi-lancers have charged home to devastating effect. On the Spanish left, the fighting on the hill is going the Spanish way, with the rest of the yellow-coats being routed.

Just for the avoidance of doubt, above is a closer image of the cavalry fight on the Spanish right, and the deep trouble which the French cavalry is in. The overlap which the musketeers gave the Spanish cavalry by halting one of the French bases has paid handsome dividends, as the French are now being driven back in disarray. In the foreground, the next column of French cavalry is, perhaps rather hopefully, approaching the Spanish infantry line, which is adjusting its position to give them a warm welcome.

And there, I am afraid, the photographs stop. The French cavalry attacked up the hill on the Spanish left and drove the infantry back, despite attempts by the Spanish general to flank them. The rest of the French infantry on this flank were, however, themselves routed. In the centre, combined artillery and musket fire stopped the French cavalry advancing (and they never got the tempo to deploy, anyway). On the far side, two bases of French cavalry were routed and the sub-general there was lost. At this point, French morale went to withdraw, and so, seven bases and two generals down, they did just that.

The post-wargame reflection centred mostly on the French deployment. The Spanish had focused mostly on their wings, and this seems to have been the correct decision. The French changed plan for their left halfway through the game, and switched the cavalry from attempting to outflank the Spanish centre to taking on the Spanish cavalry. This failed spectacularly, although with different dice rolls it could have succeeded. The French right attacking the hill struggled until the cavalry intervened. Better coordination here (my fault, both forces were general-controlled) could have increased the pressure. Perhaps even better, a greater French cavalry presence could have exploited the gaps more. The three bases which were stalled in the centre could have made life even more difficult on the hill for the Spanish, although I suppose they would have deployed more infantry to their left.

So an interesting, if large, game. Now, a rather depleted French force of the 17 remaining bases has to tackle a rebellious French army of twelve, with Spanish allies. I think. My notes say the mutinous French are an army plus an artillery train, but I do not believe that, as I think the second pin in Languedoc is a fleet.

Falling Off the Horse

I suppose it had to happen. Sooner or later in any wargame career, you make a mistake, get confused or forget where you were. The question is, what do you do about it?

I have a case in point, which is the thirty-seventh wargame of the 1600 – Something campaign. This seemed, from my list of actions in Spring 1606, to be fairly straightforward. My note said Spain against France in Burgundy. Both armies have (A + T) against them – army plus train. So I knew exactly where I stood. Two armies of twelve bases, plus an artillery train each, of six bases, of which two are artillery. A total of eighteen bases.

I set to, and rolled up some fairly dense terrain, which led to some fairly lengthy thinking about how to deploy the forces. There were plenty of hills and woods, and not much in the way of open terrain. But I bashed on, as one does, and deployed what, hopefully, would be helpful dispositions.

Then I looked at my notes for the move. Puzzled, I checked the map. Then I looked at my notes again. The actual forces were an army, plus an artillery train, plus support from adjacent armies – the French from the Ile de Paris, and the Spanish from Savoy. So, each side now had twenty-four bases. I dug out another two cavalry, two shot, one light horse and one pike base a side.

Now this was slightly straining my resources, but not too much. I could still delve into my hordes of Scottish and Irish pike and shot foot, and I had plenty of cavalry. But deploying them was starting to become a problem. I ended up with both sides deploying in significant depth, four or five lines.

You can see the problem in the photo above. The French are to the left, with their baggage on a hill behind the stream, while the artillery is deployed to try to command the only really open bit of ground. Even so, they are a bit cramped. The Spanish are, if anything, worse. Concerned about their relative lack of cavalry, they are five lines deep on their right. The artillery is deployed on the hills in the foreground and to command the gap between the woods in the centre. It all felt a bit wrong, but I could not quite explain why.

I bashed on. The Estimable Mrs P was out, and so I pressed the ‘forward’ button, and it commenced. In spite of being the defenders, the French advanced. The Spanish light cavalry and artillery on their left threw back the assaulting infantry on the hill. The Spanish light horse on their right was routed. The French advanced through the woods in the centre. Yet something did not feel right to me.

The Estimable Mrs P returned and, after a while, had a look at the table. ‘Very nice, ’ she said. ‘There are a lot of soldiers on it. ’ In that instant, I had a lightbulb moment. The reason why I was struggling with the wargame was that there were too many troops on it, and no flanks to speak of, nor really any possibility of tactics except ‘advance and get it over with, boys.’ So I stopped.

Some time ago I wrote my first guideline for solo wargaming in that book: What happens on the table stays on the table (see pages 8-9 if you don’t believe me). And here I was, breaking my own guideline. Ho hum. These things happen. The battle was to be dismantled, and I had to have a think.

It possibly did not help that at the same time, I was trying to regularise my rules for setting up a battle. Typing up a process for choosing army lists, determining terrain and deployment, while making mistakes in creating the wargame in real life, is never likely to encourage one, especially as the original process was for a single table. So, just after typing, they needed to be modified.

Still, I am nearly there. The original table has been dismantled. The armies are sitting in a box waiting to be redeployed. And I am trying to work out how to create the edges of the battlefield. The idea is to keep the original (or nearly so) intact and simply add two ‘sleeves’ of terrain to give me some flanks to work with.

So, there you are. I have broken one of my own guidelines for solo wargaming. A good job, I think, that I decided to name them guidelines and not rules, or I would have broken my own rules. I think that had I realised originally that this was a twenty-four base-a-side action, rather than eighteen, I might have thought of extending the table. But, on the other hand, I might not.

Nothing daunted, I will bash on with the campaign. These sorts of things happen, and if we let every mistake, error or disaster hamper us, we would never get any soldiers onto the table, and would become collectors rather than wargamers. And that, I think, would be a rather sad thing. After all, wargaming is a creative sort of hobby, with its rules but also with a dynamism of its own. The 1600 – Something campaign has got momentum, even if this is a bit of a bump in the road.

In campaign terms, the Estimable Mrs P wondered if France and Spain are the superpowers. They are, sort of. Or at least, Spain is, as it is sitting on a massive treasury. It does not, really, have that many troops. The French, on the other hand, have quite a few military forces, and some, but not that much, money. Both sides are committed to the western side of Germany and the eastern corridor of France as part of their strategic objectives are to maintain or otherwise the Spanish Road from Milan to the Low Countries. This is the first real effort by Spain to force the French back. On the other hand, with Luxembourg lost, they still have work to do.

1600 – Something: Swedish Rebellion

And so to wargame 36, number 7 of the Spring 1606 campaign turn. As you might recall, this action arises out of the same financial crisis for Sweden as the last one, just closer to home. The collapse of the Swedish debt system has provoked not only mutiny from most of the armed forces, but also rebellions in Estonia, which has been covered, and Gotland. So, here we are, with a rebel Swedish army facing, well, what, exactly? All the Swedish armed forces in Gotland have deserted except for the artillery train (six bases), so some frantic raising of forces is necessary.

This caused your game master some head scratching. I decided, eventually, to give the Swedish government their train, consisting of two artillery, two shot, and 2 cavalry bases. This would be augmented by a randomly drawn force of six bases of hasty recruits from a random Swedish list. The rebels would consist of twelve bases from the same modified random list. I add the caveat ‘modified’ because I put in the option for the random list to include militia, drawn from my armed peasant bases.

The upshot of this was that the government forces got two artillery pieces, five cavalry bases, four shot bases, and one militia base. The rebels got six shot bases, one cavalry, and five militia. This seemed reasonable to me, given the context of civil strife and tax-related uprisings.

The terrain really did neither side any favours, or, rather, was equally hostile. The main feature was a large wood in the middle of the field, the edge of which was just in the rebel deployment zone. I had several goes at deploying the rebels, who are to the right in the above picture. I tried putting the shot safely in the fields on the flanks, but that risked them simply being isolated and ignored. Eventually, I got to the scheme shown, with the militia in the terrain hoping to ambush any passing government troops, and the shot protecting the baggage train and in the centre hoping to destroy anyone challenging them. The lone cavalry base, with the general, is aiming to stop any outflanking moves aimed at the baggage.

Government deployment was a bit easier. The artillery went on the flanks, aiming at the rebel musketeers (although without much hope of hitting them at that range). The cavalry was to advance and threaten the flanks, while the shot moved up to engage the rebel musketeers.

After a few moves, the government cavalry was getting into position. At the top of the picture, centre right, the government cavalry is now starting to threaten, while the left flank shot, commanded by the general, is advancing. On the government right, nearest the camera, the government cavalry advanced, was shot at, halted in front of the musketeers, and then one base was charged and routed by the rebel cavalry. The artillery, predictably, has not hit anything yet.

The victorious rebel cavalry and their general ran into trouble. They are still pursuing the routed government horse, but are in a situation where there are shot to their flank and artillery to the front. Actually, I was not too worried at this stage, as the cavalry should be able to run down the guns fairly easily. On the other flank, the rebels are withdrawing their shot to the relative safety of the baggage train.

It went badly for the rebel cavalry and general. Firstly, they were recoiled by the artillery, which led to them incurring two levels of terrain shaken, as well. Then they were shot by the government musketeers, and good combat dice for the foot meant that they were routed. This included the general, who was removed.

The rebels were now in a little difficulty. The government foot on the rebel right was closing in, and the cavalry on that side was dividing itself, one base to watch the shot by the baggage train, the rest to look threatening the rebel centre. On the other flank, the rest of the government shot were moving up, while the remains of the government cavalry on that wing were looking threatening. The rebels launched two of their ambushes. One lot sallied forth to prop up the yellow coats, while another jumped out of the woods at the government shot on the rebel right. This latter was spectacularly unsuccessful, the militia being recoiled, shaken, back into the woods.

The coup de grace came from the government right flank cavalry, who charged in against the rebel blue-coats. As you can see above, one base was immediately routed, while the other, made of sterner stuff, was recoiled and shaken. However, the successful government cavalry pursued and hit a base of yellow-coats from the rear, routing them as well. With that, the rebel morale went to withdraw, so they did. Actually, I think they were a move or so away from being routed, as the second blue-coat base probably won’t last another move, and that means the yellow-coat base remaining will probably go as well.

I suspect that this will spell the end of the Swedish rebellion, given that the rebel general is lost. On the other hand, the Swedish kingdom has a lot of rebuilding to do, not to mention key territories having been lost. Still, a win is a win for all that, and so they will have to be happy with it.

Could the rebels have won? That is a good question, and when I was deploying, I was wondering whether a militia army really could stand up to a cavalry one. The terrain sort of helped the rebels, giving me plenty of places to hide the militia. So much so that if you look closely, you will see the central militia in the wood was actually deployed facing towards their own rear. The idea was that they could ambush anyone attacking the shot in the centre. Unfortunately, the demise of the rebel general meant that they did not have to tempo to do so.

Still, onwards. Next up I have to try to sort out the invasion and rebellion in Burgundy.

1600 – Something: Estonia Again

 Somehow, I have managed to get to the thirty-fifth game of the campaign. This seems to me to be quite something, as most campaigns I have run in the past tend to end up with three or four battles, and then one side has lost. Still, we live and learn, and so the 1600 – Something campaign has now rolled around to game 35.

This turned out to be a bit more complex than normal. If you have been paying attention, you will have noted that due to a financial crisis, the Swedish Empire in the Baltic is in a state of collapse. Most of the armed forces have mutinied. This has left a train unit in Gotland (IIRC) and an army in Estonia. The rest have disbanded, except for the fleet in Finland, which has defected to the Muscovites, and the army in Estonia, which was gearing up to fight the Estonian rebels (for the province has revolted) when French diplomacy and money intervened, and the army also defected to the Muscovites. It is remarkable how a relatively simple campaign system can throw up such situations.

Aside from the implications domestically for the French (of which more later in the turn), this left a Muscovite–Swedish army facing the rebels, as the defection did not stop the latter. This is where it started to get even more, um, interesting. I needed to find out what an early seventeenth-century Estonian army would look like. A quick Google turned up … my own previous post about fighting in Estonia. Humbug. Still, a little further digging found that Estonia had been held by the Kings of Sweden (as Dukes) for over 50 years, so it seemed eminently reasonable to give them a randomly drawn Swedish army. The Estonians got 5 cavalry and 7 shot bases via this process.

The situation with their opponents was even more complex, with a Swedish army having defected to Muscovy. Should they be Swedes, Muscovites or something in between? I decided on the in-between, reasoning that a lot of Swedes might just have taken the French money and gone home. A random mixed army was drawn, with red cards being Swedes and Muscovites, black cards, and then the value of the card gives the troop type. This yielded a Muscovite-Swedish army of 3 Swedish shot and two Swedish cavalry, along with 4 Muscovite cavalry and 3 Cossack light horse bases. I was happy with this draw as it implied that the Muscovites had rushed mounted reinforcements in as the Swedes deserted.

The battlefield, as rolled, was quite dense with terrain, which favoured the Estonians, I thought, even more so when another dice roll indicated that they were defenders. They are set up to the left, above, with 3 shot bases on the central hill, 2 in the village on the near side, and 2 on the banks of the stream to prevent any adventures by the Cossacks. The cavalry has two bases by the village, two in reserve on the left and one with the general on the hill.

The Muscovite-Swedes had more of a problem in deployment, hampered by impassable (to cavalry) terrain and other features that would cause disruption if crossed. After a lot of thought, I opted for a relatively high-risk strategy of pushing the cavalry through the gaps in the centre, hoping to be able to deploy before the Estonians got moving. The Swedish shot in the foreground would assault the village or bypass it and aim for the baggage. The Cossacks would try to outflank the Estonian left and also raid the baggage, but I was not expecting much from them as light horse are usually seen off by shot (which is as it should be).

The action got off to a fairly slow start, with tempo for the Muscovite-Swedes being in short supply. However, they did get going, as shown above. The Muscovite cavalry on the far side has got past the rough ground on their left and is trying to deploy. The Swedish cavalry by the field, however, had only just passed onto the open ground when they were charged by Estonian cavalry and routed. That was not part of the plan. The Cossacks across the stream, incidentally, never got any tempo, so sat and admired the view all game.

The Muscovite-Swedes had a poor morale dice throw to go along with the loss of the Swedish cavalry, and fell back. This meant that one of the Muscovite cavalry had to fall back through the rough going, which disrupted them. The victorious Estonian cavalry pursued. Some were stopped by a field boundary, but the general and his base careered on, deep into Muscovite lines. Now, if the Muscovites could only gain the tempo, he could be in trouble….

It was not to be. The Estonian general realised the danger, gained the tempo, and pulled his rallying cavalry back to the road. The Muscovite cavalry and the Swedish infantry pushed forward again. The Estonian cavalry from the hill charged down it and was bounced by the Muscovites, leaving them vulnerable, as seen above. The infantry around the village engaged in firefights. The Estonian general was demanding just one tempo point to finish the Muscovites, but also needed to pull back the bounced cavalry out of danger.

Again, the Muscovite tempo dice let them down. The Estonian general and his base charged the Swedish shot from behind, routing them, while another Estonian cavalry base hit another shot base on the flank, routing that too. In the meantime, the next Estonian cavalry base in the centre charged some Muscovite cavalry in the flank, while the general frantically tried to get up close to help.

The end was clearly in sight. Another poor morale roll had the Muscovites (there was only one Swedish base left now) falling back again, while the Estonian cavalry in the centre routed the base they had charged. Another fallback morale result meant that the Cossacks (top right) were more or less off the table. While morale was still relatively good and he had survived a general’s risk roll, the Muscovite general decided to quit while he still had an army and ordered a retreat.

Up until now, I have largely managed to ignore the effects of lumps of terrain on the battlefield. That is not quite correct, of course, but the impact has been minimal. Not so with this action, and my rules now have copious scribbled notes about moving around, into and through terrain. The Muscovite-Swedes were considerably impacted by having a mainly cavalry army in dense terrain, and their attempts to manoeuvre around it were either moderately successful, in the case of the Muscovite cavalry by the stream, or disastrous, in the case of the Swedish cavalry on the left.

Still, it made for an interesting game, and Estonia is now, more or less, a free state again. The Swedes now have to face a revolt in Gotland with only a scratch army and a couple of guns.

1600 – Something: Muscovites at War

Those of you who have been paying attention will know that the next action is a Muscovite civil war in the province of Muscovy itself. This arose, in part, from a winter rule change. It came to my attention, while perusing the diplomatic table, that several states were in a state of internal warfare, that is, the diplomatic score on the diagonal (so, the state’s relation with itself) was a one. Never being one to pass up the opportunity for a wargame, I decided that such states should roll each year to see if armed conflict had broken out.

There were a number of states in this perilous situation in the winter of 1605-6, and dice rolls were made appropriately for all of them. The only one which failed the roll was the Muscovites. You may recall that a Muscovite civil war was the subject of the first action in the campaign. As it happens, the internal tensions in Muscovy have never been resolved, and now the dice dictate a second go.

The government forces have the basic Muscovite force, six bases of cavalry, two mounted Cossack light horse, two streltsi shot, one Cossack shot and one Cossack spears. The foot Cossacks are not the classic Cossacks whom we normally think of, but urban dwellers. The rebels drew for their army, and got six bases of horse, two light horse, three bases of streltsi and a base of Cossack shot. So, fairly evenly matched, I thought.

The terrain was a bit interesting for the action. On the far side, there is a river, and the government forces are deployed on the left. Their lines are a bit broken up by woods, and on the near side, where their baggage is, is a hill, on the front face of which the streltsi are deployed. The cavalry is in the centre, and the foot Cossacks are on their left, between the wood and a marsh. This was a late deployment to block any attempted outflanking manoeuvre by the rebel horse.

The rebels deployed their baggage in the relative safety of the far side of the stream and put their shot on their left. They did, indeed, intend to outflank the government forces along the river, while hoping to keep the government cavalry at bay with firepower.

As you can see, the plans developed. The government streltsi advanced off their hill and are exchanging potshots with the rebels. On the far side, rebel cavalry is advancing along the river, while in the centre, the government Cossacks have been taking a gentle pounding by the rebels and are in some disarray.

A few moves later, and the rebel right centre cavalry has advanced into the government Cossacks, routing one base and driving the other back. Meanwhile, on the rebel left, the government streltsi are disrupting their rebel counterparts. On the far side, the rebel outflanking cavalry has come into contact with the urban Cossacks.

It all came to a head quite quickly. On the government's left, the rebel cavalry charged home and hit the infantry quite hard, but did not rout them. On the government centre left, the cavalry has charged home against the rebels, again causing damage but not destroying them. The possibilities are still open. If the rebel outflanking force can break through quickly, then the government's rear, baggage train, and the rest of the foot could be vulnerable. On the other hand, the loss of the rebels’ main force cavalry could be devastating to them. It was all down to the timing.

As things developed, the pendulum started to swing in favour of the government. On the far side, the urban Cossack shot were routed, but the spears put up a much stouter resistance, seeing off one of the charging cavalry and, at present, holding off the reserve cavalry who have charged in. The remaining government mounted Cossacks have been dispatched to help out, as, under the rules, bases under fire cannot rally.

In the centre, two bases of rebel cavalry have fled, pursued by government forces. A rebel attempt to outflank and trap a government cavalry base using a Cossack base has failed. On the other hand, the government moved up the rest of their cavalry in the hope of smashing the streltsi, but good shooting from the rebel foot has disrupted their formation. On the other hand, the government streltsi have hit the rebel foot with a recoil. You can just see the recoil base by the general.

Ah, yes, exactly. The rebel general, having been attached to a recoiled base, has to throw on the risk to leaders chart. It should not be a problem; anything but a six will do. However, this being Muscovites, I am sure you know what happened. The rebel general bit the dust.

That was not quite that, as the rebels managed to keep fighting for another turn or so. The reserve cavalry of the outflanking force managed to inflict damage on the urban Cossacks, but were themselves bounced. The remaining rebel cavalry in the centre was routed, while the rest of the centre degenerated into a long-range firefight.

However, the outflanking cavalry was badly disrupted, and the loss of the final central cavalry base was too much for the rebel morale, and it slumped to withdraw. The loss of the general, which was, to say the least, unfortunate, was just too much.

Wargames including the Muscovites, often turn out to be quite fast and fun, and this was no exception. The key here was the speed (or lack of it) of the outflanking force. They could not deploy fully due to the terrain, and while the shot were routed, the Cossack spears just about held out, delaying and blunting the effect of the outflanking manoeuvre. In the centre, the government could not exploit their local superiority much, but did enough to defeat the remaining rebel cavalry and, through shooting down the general, win the game.

So, I will need to decide whether the rebellion continues or not, but that is for next turn. The next action is another consequence of rule changes and also subversive French diplomacy, which has echoes even further west.

1600 – Something: The General's Gamble

The next action in the Spring 1606 turn was, again, in South-East Asia. This was a little more complex than usual and needed a bit of checking on recent moves. The Laotian main army had, in fact, just moved into Luang Prabang, so it was not available to support the garrison of Vientiane when the Vietnamese army arrived. You might object that the Vietnamese were engaged this turn in defending Dai Viet from rogue Burmese invaders, but that was a local defence force, not the main army, which moved from Dai Viet as its regular turn.

As the Laotian garrison no longer had an army in the province, I decided to permit it to become an army and oppose the Vietnamese. Thus, we have both forces with their ‘normal’ 12 base lists. This gave the Laotians, the defenders, an elephant and general base, a cavalry base, eight tribal foot, and two bow bases. The Vietnamese have a little flexibility in their list, and this time came up with two elephant bases, one of which was the general, two cavalry bases, three bow bases, three blade bases, and two skirmishers. As noted before, the skirmishers seem to be a bit of a weak point in this army, and I had some thinking to do to ensure they were firstly safe and secondly, possibly useful.

The setup is above. On the left, the Laotians have, after some consideration, put a base of archers in the village on the far side, along with their cavalry. The other archers are holding the fields on the near side. In between, the tribal foot is in two blocks, along with the general. The idea was to let the Vietnamese come to them, and then hit them with the tribal foot.

The river caused the Vietnamese even more head scratching. As the road crossed the river, I diced for whether it was a ford or a bridge and, somewhat unusually, came up with a bridge. This means that troops in march column are not disrupted by crossing the terrain. After a bit of thinking about it, I put the Vietnamese cavalry and skirmishers on the road, with the infantry and elephants already across the river on their left.

The Vietnamese deployment actually arises from the battle set-up rules I have devised, where the defenders can set up 15” from their baseline, and the attackers 10” from theirs. Thus, the Vietnamese left is across the river, while the right is not. I toyed with the idea of deploying the Laotians at their limit, but they would only have had a toe hold on the hill in the foreground, and might have been vulnerable in the fields in the centre, so I pulled them back.

Both sides were fairly cagey in the opening moves. As planned, the Vietnamese cavalry and skirmishers crossed the bridge, and the cavalry have deployed, facing their Laotian opposite numbers. The skirmishers are moving towards the centre, in the hope of becoming flanking overlaps for any combat there. In the centre, the Vietnamese foot has advanced, and have just placed their archers at slightly less risk in the central field. On the near side, the general has taken control of the main infantry block and is reorganising it, so the blades face the tribal foot.

The Laotians were a bit hamstrung by poor tempo dice rolls, but mainly because they did not really want to move the tribal foot forward very far. Tribal foot are a one-shot weapon, and you need to harbour them until the decisive moment.

Eventually, it started to come to a head. The Laotians moved their central tribal foot into charge range, and the right-hand column went home, pushing back the Vietnamese blades. The other column refused to charge the elephant base initially. The Laotian general also took control of the right flank tribal foot and moved them up against the Vietnamese on the hill.

In the second round of combat, the Vietnamese blades got lucky and recoiled the tribal foot, while the other column in the centre got its courage and charged home, only to be bounced by the elephants. So, that attack was a lot less successful than had been hoped. In the foreground, you can see a base of Vietnamese bow sneaking past the field, while their compatriots keep the Laotians in the field engaged. This was a cunning outflanking plan the Vietnamese general had come up with, which also had the advantage of keeping the bows out of range of the tribal foot.

The second crunch point came when the Laotian general and his tribal foot attempted to charge the Vietnamese on the hill. The foot, perhaps sensibly, refused to go uphill against blades. The general, with more heroism than sense, did charge, and, indeed, recoiled the enemy general, who survived the risk to general roll. However, on the next turn, the Vietnamese won the tempo and had one tempo point left. So they turned a base of blades against the Laotian general’s flank. Only a recoil was needed, and was duly obtained, and the Laotians became general-less.

In the foreground, the Vietnamese archers have opened fire against the Laotian camp and killed a base of it. This is bad news for the Laotians, as they are now 6 morale points (out of 12) down. They managed to survive with a waver, but the writing was on the wall.

It did not, perhaps mercifully for the Laotians, go on much longer. The Vietnamese archers in the central field plastered the shaken tribal foot with arrows, which firstly shook them, and then, as seen above, routed them. The archers attacking the Laotian camp drove off the rest of the camp followers, while the Vietnamese cavalry and skirmishers started to lumber into action. However, the end-of-turn Laotian morale roll came up ‘rout’, so that was the end of the game.

Strategically, the Vietnamese have now conquered the Laotian home province, although the Laotian army in Luang Prabang next door may have some comments to make about that in due course. Still, the Vietnamese managed to win the battle, due to their firepower, my misplacement of the Laptian camp (I thought it would be safe enough in the corner), and the staying power of blades and elephants against tribal foot. The Vietnamese were a bit lucky, really, in that I decided, as Laotian commander, to fight well within my deployment zone rather than at the front edge, and the Laotians were slow to respond anyway.

Still, onwards! The next action in the campaign move is a Muscovite civil war. India is still a bit quiet, but I dare say it will liven up in a few months time...