A little family project. We’ll keep the posts in this topic as we progress.
So… after collecting ESR second edition and every campaign guide. Looking, reading, dreaming, and started learning the rules with the figures we had (6 and 10mm), life happened...
Time went by and now 3rd edition is here. Streamlined and to the point. Haven’t found anything yet that doesn’t make sense, except perhaps the “stuck” artillery when withdrawing, retreating, and breaking vs abandoned guns. But we can always house rule that if need be.
We’re from Denmark and paid twice as much in taxes and customs than the actual product, but it was worth it. The cards? They’ll have to wait until we can get them all at once.
But something stuck in my mind. Here we have all these beautiful campaign guides. So much love and work has clearly gone into creating them, yet it seemed not many (if any) yet, used them the way we believed they were dreamed to be used. We wanted to pick a campaign guide as a complete project, play every battle in order and win or loose a campaign, and doing it all over again as a campaign rematch. But to do this we needed something where the terrain, setup, and forces could be created for each battle in one or two weekends each (for the small battles). We wanted the helicopter view - the true look of a massive battle from above, a moving scale model. And it became clear to us that we were going for 2-3mm units. The search was on..
My son (12) and I then stumbled on a guy on YouTube - Project Wargaming and a blog - Forward March Studios. The YouTube videos showed that with 3D printing you could actually create decent small scale minis worth painting, as in there’s a difference between a shako and a bearskin. Now, we are aware The Wargaming company is launching its own miniature line of 10mm and we do hope it becomes the next Flames of War and wish it the greatest possible success. But for this project idea it wouldn’t work with the time we have on our hands (I work 50h+/week in an office 60 miles from home).
Forward March Studios also had some 3D files, but that was not for us. It was meant for blocks that somewhat looked like men - a no go. But he had this “crazy” idea about fast modular battlefields for doing many different battles with accurate roads, rivers etc. that really looked good. It had that helicopter view we were looking for.
And so, putting all three together and diving into the works of Ian Castle, George Nafziger, and Michael Leggiere we were ready to set of. We got our 3D printer, wash&cure station, plexiglas map panels, posca pens, some woodland underbrush, small buildings, some 5mm foamboard sheets to cut hills and ridges, and most importantly our 3rd edition rules of ESR.
We chose 1805 Roll up that Map to start with because a) the battles are small (except the last one obviously) and b) because its the first one in the chronology.
This was it. We can now print, paint, and build up each battle as we go. Learn the rules proper and build a massive collection week by week and each battle can be depicted exactly as in the campaign guide down to every road turn and little building. Our units are 30+mm on 40mm bases (artillery 20mm) but we believe they work well for 150y/“. We posted a few pics in the ESR Facebook Group of our first handful of 3D printed units.
So this weekend is Battle of Wertigen weekend. We’ll keep this thread as a little journal and see how far we make it.
So.. first of the “translation” of the OoB in the second edition does require “some” fiddling. Not all commanders have 3rd ed. stats and the unit’s old CR rating must be fudged into threat and cohesion values. One could blindly rely on the unit stat lists provided but, in this scenario, (and compared to the CR values in the guide) it would make the numerous French dragoon units (19!) overpowered.
We settled for a threat/cohesion value of 2/1 for the French dragoon units and upped the values for the 9th and 10th French hussars to 4/1 to match more closely with the OoB from Roll up that Map.
Lessons so far:
- Roads should be in tan/beige colours next time.
- Rivers/streams in a brighter blue.
We haven’t finished everything yet. Units need painting of flags, headgear, weapons, and flock on bases. Hills and ridge haven’t been cut but simply drawn with brown.
We’ll see how it all come together 🙂
Fighting around Wertigen. I definitely had too forward a position as my sons’ dragoons came pouring out of the woods. Hoping to trade fatigue for time Gingens cavalry brigade quickly broke to the rear...
After repulsing the first onslaught of the French dragoon divisions, Auffenberg changed his own objective to Blinswagen to the west withdrawing and taking up a new defensive position on the high ground. Exelmans kept up the pressure and prepared a shift in the attacking dragoon divisions. Kleins dragoons had amounted to much fatigue to lead the renewed assault, so orders were issued to change the leading attack division to Beaumont’s 3rd Division with Klein in support.
We were 5 turns in at this point (12 turns to survive as the Austrians) and the situation was looking dire with the French 9th and 10th hussars moving in from the north and coming up on the Austrian flank. Being a two-unit formation it deployed easily and unlimbered their guns to support the eminent attack of the dragoon divisions.
It was to no avail. Little did it help poor Auffenberg and his exhausted men. The dragoons charged up the hillside (we had the ridgelines as terrain that halved the dragoons’ threat) and pushed Auffenberg into Blinswagen. Fauconnet’s hussars converted to attack orders and launch their own attack up the hillside from the north. Gingens broken cavalry brigade had fled the field at this point (keeping a 12” distance to all enemy units).
The first assault did not succeed as Exelmans would have hoped. But it did compel the Austrians to convert to withdraw and move further towards Blinswagen leaving the plateau open to the French dragoons, who came pouring on in a final onslaught.
And finally, Oudinot had arrived with his ten grenadier battalions moving ployed towards their set objective at Blinswagen, not that they were really needed at this point.
It was game over at the end of turn 7. The battle was lost. Baillet’s infantry formation finally broke and fled the field with Auffenberg running after them.
A fine learning game. A few minor mistakes were made, and lessons were learned regarding setting up situations with conversion opportunities. The son is hooked and a rematch (or two?) before moving on to the battle of Günzburg. Next time with proper terrain and fully painted units (hopefully).
First rematch at Wertigen. This time around the Austrians had a more sensible position at start - or so they thought. Quickly pushed out of Wertigen the Austrians scrammed for the hilltop but were caught regrouping and broke. The arrival of the 9th and 10th hussars through the wooded areas to the north caught the remaining Austrian cavalry in the flank and broke them on contact.
Turn 5 spelled the end with both Austrian formations broken and the French in full control of the field.
The only mistakes this time was sometimes forgetting to deduct fatigue in both threat AND cohesion during combat and once we forgot the “double” fatigue deduction on cavalry formations. But a good fight overall. Playtime was ~90min.
A little family project. We’ll keep the posts in this topic as we progress.
Very cool, excited to follow along!
We settled for a threat/cohesion value of 2/1 for the French dragoon units and upped the values for the 9th and 10th French hussars to 4/1 to match more closely with the OoB from Roll up that Map.
Yes, we'd encourage 2-3 Threat at contact for the French Dragons with Cohesion of 1|1/4 and the French Hussards similarly Threat of 2-3 but with Cohesion of 1|1/2. But tell us how what you use goes!
Haven’t found anything yet that doesn’t make sense, except perhaps the “stuck” artillery when withdrawing, retreating, and breaking vs abandoned guns. But we can always house rule that if need be.
Yes, or do a Leader Action to limber them up before you issue Withdraw [W] – Assuming it is voluntary!
The only mistakes this time was sometimes forgetting to deduct fatigue in both threat AND cohesion during combat and once we forgot the “double” fatigue deduction on cavalry formations.
Those will have a substantial impact in the future.
We’ll see how it all come together
Looking forward to the next one!
-David
So getting ahead of ourselves the wife wanted to build a battlefield with one of the spare plates.
She’s painting up the russians for Bagrations rearguard action at Amstetten.
Amstetten 1805
Bagration has chosen his ground and gazes towards the woods to the north..
Turn 1
Objectives and directives issued. Everything still outside threat.
Turn 2
Murat with Fauconnet under attack orders charged the Hungarian hussars on the slopes in the clearing and were routed on the spot. Overwhelmed (23 threat/3 cohesion) the tiny formation broke on contact and dispersed to the rear.
Turn 3
Oudinot marches on to the battlefield through the fleeing french hussars, knowing he now has to deploy in the face of the enemy.
Turn 4
Sending Oudinot slowly forward while deploying, Murat desperately attempts to rally his broken hussars to no avail.
Turn 5
Miloradovich arrrives at Amstetten and is issued a support directive. Oudinot finished his deployment and selects to halt within enemy artillery range. Combat phase sees the Russian battery deployed along the road to Amstetten open fire on the French grenadiers coming out in the clearing putting 1 fatigue on Oudinot’s formation, and the grenadier skirmishers advancing towards the foot of the hill with no effect.
Oudinot converts to defend at the end of the combat phase.
Turn 6
Miloradovichs support directive activates, Oudinot is issued attack orders, and Murat is still meddling about in the rear yelling at his broken cavalry. The Russian battery increases the grenadiers fatigue to two and Miloradovich moves towards the Russian left flank as rear support.
Turn 7
Oudinot receives his attack orders and prepares his men for the task. The formation is Enthusiastic, so less likely to withdraw out of the action. Murat rallies the cavalry which converts to retreat in the movement phase.
Oudinot’s attack goes in, the grenadiers shouting Vive l’Empereur and exerting 33 threat after dierolls vs the Austrians on the Allied center and 12 threat against the Russian hussars counter attacking (adjustment move on defend directive - allowed?). The allies exerting 29 threat (4 threat deducted for 2 fatigue as majority of formation is cavalry). We added Oudinot’s contact bonus to each opposing formation threatened.
The Russians took 1 fatigue, the French 3, and the Austrians 4 and a routed sqn group. This was enough to break the Austrian formation as its base cohesion of 13 was reduced to 1 due to 6 fatigue and the majority being cavalry. Having Miloradovich deploying in the rear might save the allied lines yet..
Interestingly enough the grenadiers are at 6 fatigue with a cohesion of 12 and should normally convert to withdraw, but being enthusiastic they increase their fatigue to 7 and stay in the fight awaiting Lannes arrival with Suchet’s 3rd division.
Questions:
In our Amstetten playthrough we had all arriving formations on no directive. So on their turn of arrival we issued directives to them and waited for activation before moving them onto the battlefield proper although the force which they belonged to had an active objective at the time of arrival. Was this correct or should they be assumed to be on move directives upon arrival and move towards the force objective unless directed otherwise?
Also, we had Murat rallying the broken cavalry in the rear, and had two lucky rolls in a row during leader actions. But because the formation is so small and only starts with 3 cohesion (1 with two routed units), the fact that the first unit was rallied by a roll of 12, the second rally leader action was executed with a different modifier for the fatigue-cohesion ratio. Was that correct?
Turn 8-13(?) awaits! Will the French push through to Amstetten before nightfall? Or will the Russians be able to launch a succesful counter attack before Lannes arrives next turn and deploys?
And yes, neither the units nor the terrain is finished, but motivation comes through actual gaming 🙂
Oudinot fully deployed and preparing the attack.
Contact is made and the Austrians are about the break to the rear.
Miloradovich deploying to shore up the failing allied line. Austrians fleeing in the upper part of the picture. Sorry for the horrible photo quality, but money goes to rules and miniatures instead of phones and cameras 🙂
the Russian hussars counter attacking (adjustment move on defend directive - allowed?)
Not sure what "adjustment move" means here, but Formations on Defend [D] are allowed to move to contact with the enemy, so I believe the answer is yes.
In our Amstetten playthrough we had all arriving formations on no directive. So on their turn of arrival we issued directives to them and waited for activation before moving them onto the battlefield proper although the force which they belonged to had an active objective at the time of arrival. Was this correct or should they be assumed to be on move directives upon arrival and move towards the force objective unless directed otherwise?
Yes, that was correct: Note that the table edge is not considered the "edge of the world" unless the involved players mutually agree to such, and therefore players can issue Directives to off-table Formations so long as they compute modifiers for how far away the target Formation is when rolling for activation.
Also, we had Murat rallying the broken cavalry in the rear, and had two lucky rolls in a row during leader actions. But because the formation is so small and only starts with 3 cohesion (1 with two routed units), the fact that the first unit was rallied by a roll of 12, the second rally leader action was executed with a different modifier for the fatigue-cohesion ratio. Was that correct?
I can't verify your math for the first roll because I don't know what all modifiers were involved (the Fatigue of the Formation, the Commanders involved and their Cohesion modifiers, etc…), but assuming the player makes the first Leader Action and then goes on to make a second, each one is computed independently, so yes, a second Leader Action modifier could differ from the first.
-David
Interesting. So given that the force cmd is present on the field and issues directives to off board formation(s) at any prior command phase, the force cmd can then, given he is 1 mile from the arrival point and a formation is arriving say at turn 8 and moving towards the battlefield ployed on good roads (so 12” per turn), he could roll for activation of the directive with a 3 mile negative modifier on turn 6. And in so doing could have the formation(s) arriving with activated directives? This would imply any potential delay markers are placed on the formation card/roster, and reduced as normal each turn?
