Angus Konstam's Edinburgh Wargames
Old Journals: 2006 2007 2008 2009
_________________________________________________
For King or Parliament?
A review of the Perfect Captain’s Very Civil Actions
This first appeared as an article in Battlegames magazine (Issue 3), accompanied by a scenario for the Battle of Powick Bridge.
Col. Sands beinge at the front, the Prince asked him whom he was for, he answered “For Kinge and Parliament.”
He replyed “Not for the Kinge alone?” He answered, “No”. Then said the Prince, “For the King have at you.”
The Colonell answered “For Parliament have at you”. And so they discharged each at other.
Nehemiah Wharton, Letter, 1642
The Period
Wargaming allegiance is a funny thing. Although it usually follows political and cultural lines, sometimes it goes a little off kilter. Take the American Civil War for example. I was a staunch Yankee … until I moved to Florida. Now I wargame on the side of the Bubbas, defending slavery, Tennessee Whiskey and the right to eat grits. Where the whole Confederate thing came from I’m not quite sure. This strange allegiance thing also rears its head in our own late Civil War. I have wargaming pals who appear quite normal, except when the English Civil War comes along they can’t wait to fight for the King. Are they opponents of parliamentary democracy, do they believe in the “divine right to rule” or do they support unrepresentative autocracies? Of course not. They just want to be dashing Cavaliers!
Why wargame the period? Well, it really has everything – colourful units, a good range of troop types and quality, great flags, and a string of battles. It involved the Scots, the Irish and the Welsh as well as the English, and battles were fought all over the place, from the Highlands down to Cornwall. Then there’s the personalities involved – Charles I, Prince Rupert, Oliver Cromwell, Sir Thomas Fairfax … the list is even longer than Bicorne’s list of 28mm ECW personalities. Then there’s the fact that most of the battles were fairly small – in fact many of the smaller engagements were little more than clashes between regional militias or “associations”. In other words, its eminently “do-able”, it has lots of flavour, and bags of wargaming potential.
Despite this the English Civil War has long been a back-burner wargame period – never popular enough to be considered mainstream, but always a favourite amongst the “also rans”. In recent years the period has enjoyed something of a revival, what with the publication of the glossy but flawed Warhammer ECW rules, and the appearance of figures from Bicorne, the Perry twins and Renegade which could take your breath away. In the smaller scales Peter Pig (15mm) and Baccus (6mm) produce really nice little ranges of new figures, but for me, if ever a period cried out to be games in the larger scale, this is it. Every time I see him Pete Berry from Baccus he tries to convince me otherwise, but I’m afraid I’m a wargaming grognard for whom size is everything.
Given all this leaden potential, it seems surprising that the period is so badly served by rules. I’ve already (and probably rather unfairly) dismissed Warhammer, but then I’m just probably too old to throw dice by the bucketload without good reason. Don’t even get me started on the whacky artillery rules, where grapeshot could demolish half a regiment on the far side of the table! The other popular set is DBR. Unfortunately I care for history too much to go down that road. One look at a DBM/DBR game is enough to make me fail my morale test. Not only does it emphasise a system over both playability and historical accuracy, it’s also so poorly written that gamers seem to spend half their time poring over the rules. More period specific sets include Warfare in the Age of Discovery, Forlorn Hope and 1644, all of which have their strengths and weaknesses. Of these, Forlorn Hope is probably the most accurate, and 1644 the most playable. Of the freebie stuff out there gifted Clarence Harrington’s Victory without Quarter seem well worth a try (www.quindia.com/studiointro.htm).
Now, I’ve long been a fan of The Perfect Captain He (or rather they) produce freely downloadable rules of exceptional quality, covering a range of periods. One of their products is Spanish Fury, a games system designed for the late 16th century (i.e. the Dutch Revolt, the French Wars of Religion and so on) which combines rules for battles, smaller actions, sieges and even naval engagements into an elegant and integrated whole. Unfortunately I’ve never been that keen on the period, but I have used their Actions component (the smaller actions level rules) to play Border Reiver games, which were great fun. A couple of months ago they came out with Very Civile Actions, an English Civil War version of the basic (and clumsily named) Spanish Fury: Actions rules. Like the original, these feature warfare at a level which isn’t normally covered on the wargames table.
People seem to fight big set-piece battles, or small skirmishes, but nothing in between. This always struck me as a shame, as for every Marston Moor or Naseby there were dozens of smaller actions, fought with less than a thousand men a side. Just think of harassing rearguards, beating up winter quarters, raiding outposts, screening armies and attacking supply convoys and you get the idea. What’s more, the “Captain” also came up with a great little campaign system, which was perfect for fighting actions at this level. If any of you have a copy of 1644 you’ll remember the little campaign set in the fictional county of Scruttockshire in the back of the rules. Well, these are similar, but the system is a lot more flexible. I decided to give them a go, using them as an excuse to inspire others in my local club in Edinburgh to take up the period, or at least to rediscover it. What follows is an account of my experiences with the rules, followed by a scenario for a great little action we fought using them.
The Rules
Very Civile Actions are designed to be played at the battalion or squadron level or thereabouts, although for many games you won’t be fielding complete units in the conventional sense. A base with four foot figures on it represents around 50 men, which means that with a figure ratio of around 12 ½ to 1 you’ll need the best part of 48 figures to make up a battalia or small regiment of foot. Rather confusingly the rules call each stand a “squadron”, and each unit of 2-6 stands a “company”. In effect this regiment of foot would usually consist of a “company” of four pike stands, flanked by two more companies” of shot, both of a similar size. Cavalry are based in pairs (i.e. “squadrons” of 25 men apiece), and with a six “squadron” limit on units that means the largest cavalry “company” would consist of 12 figures – representing about 150 troopers. OK, you’ve already got the idea that you’re not going to refight Naseby using this system!
Each unit (or “company”) is led by an officer, represented by a counter drawn at random at the start of the game. I also like sticking an officer figure on the table, but you don’t really need to. This is where the fun starts. Each of these officers has certain characteristics. For example, officers can be Fanatical (they never surrender), Bookish (they think before wading in), Terrible (they cause panic amongst the enemy), Undisciplined (their unit is a shambles) or even a Coward (you don’t want to know)! While this may all smack a little of role-playing, it really works for this level of game, where the characteristics of various officers would be all important.
The combat system is simplicity itself. After working out which side has the advantage that turn (decided by a modified die roll) the winning side gets to move and fight with one of his units. This “I go–you go” sequence continues until everyone has performed an action. Actions include moving and firing, charging, reforming, changing formation ... even routing. The only things in this Actions Phase which are simultaneous are melees and shooting. To keep things simple the Perfect Captain has produced cards, each covering a particular troop type. It lists the movement rate for the stand, plus his fire factor, firing range, and morale factors, as well as any special characteristics. These characteristics (similar to but not necessarily the same as the officer ones) impart certain benefits or limitations to the unit. For example, the King’s Lifeguards are both Disciplined (meaning they can fight an extra round of melee) and Terrible( which modifies the charge morale test of their enemies).
For both shooting and melee you count up the factors for each “squadron” (stand) involved in the fighting. Obviously the better the troops are, the higher the factor. For instance, “Cavaliers” fight melees with a factor of 8, but only shoot with a factor of 1 (3” range), while early and uninspiring Parliamentarian horse fight with a melee factor of 5, but fire at a factor of 3. This goes some way to representing the caracoling pistol tactics that seem so suicidal early in the war. Musket range is around 12”, while infantry move about 4” a turn if formed, and horse move 6”. Of course all these distances were originally designed for 15mm figures. We’ve tried increasing them, but in the end we opted for the simulation of tighter control afforded by the shorter movement distances.
In order to charge the enemy you need to pass a charge test (rolling two D6), with the number needed to pass listed on the unit card. This can be modified by the state the unit’s in, or the abilities of its officer. Other morale tests are rolled when a unit is “charged by betters”, when it loses a stand, when it suffers a “serious” result, or when it tries to rally. Once again all the numbers you need are listed on the unit card. The effects of shooting are modified by target size, cover, experience, and whether the firing unit is “formed” or “unformed”. Results include Retire (the target unit falls back a move), Terror (it has a “terror marker” placed beside it), or Lose Squadron (it loses a stand and take a morale test). Some results also involve a “serious” result which means an extra morale test and the chance that your officer comes a cropper. It’s all pretty simple. A terror marker makes it harder to perform actions, and you fire and fight with one stand less than normal. If a unit accumulates more terror markers than it has stands, then it routs.
You’ll either like the melee system or rant and rail about it. It follows the same basic procedure, with stands working out their combat factors to produce a ratio (3:2, 2:1, 3:1 etc.), a bit like in a boardgame. Modifiers include defences, terrain and once again, whether a unit is “formed” or not. The stronger side then rolls a D6. What might seem particularly irritating (or amusing) is that a 1 always results in the stronger side losing – either gaining a terror marker or else being “humiliated” – gaining a terror marker which can’t be rallied off. Other results include being Locked in combat, Stand Off (where both sides pull back a little), or else in something nasty happening to the weaker side – either gaining a terror marker, losing a stand (with the attendant moral check that entails), or being Defeated (where it loses two stands and the survivors rout). Personally I like the lack of certainty created by the chance of being humiliated or inflicting the same on your opponent!
Units usually fight two rounds of melee, although Canny or Slippery units or officers can avoid a second round, while Disciplined troops fight an extra bout. Obviously morale and leadership are pretty crucial. A bookish and cowardly leader will mess up the chances of even the best unit, but usually things work much as you’d expect them to – good quality troops have a distinct edge because they’re more likely to charge, to fight well, to stand and to rally than their opponent. Units can disengage and rally off their terror makes (another 2D6 morale roll), which means it’s important to keep pressing home an advantage over a battered opponent.
Finally, the system includes rules for ambushes, fieldworks, boats, fighting at night or in fog, securing prisoners or buildings - all the stuff you’d need to fight some of those smaller raiding actions. The whole package is well thought out, but like any set it isn’t infallible. Inevitably there are gaps, so you’ll probably have to come up with your own house amendments. The layout of the rules is as far removed from DBM/DBR as you can get, involving a question and answer format which is easy to understand, but takes some getting used to. For my part I think they’re pretty darned good, particularly as they’re available as a free download, along with all the counters, cards and markers you need to lay on a game. The only thing The Perfect Captain asks is that you make a purely voluntary contribution to an on-line charity when you download the package.
You can find the rules from the Perfect Captain's Website (off-site link)
Note: You’ll need to download Spanish Fury: Actions (the late 16th century rules system), plus the Very Civile Actions ECW bolt-n.
For those who feel inspired to fight something larger, try their ECW campaign Tinker Fox.
_________________________________________________
Old Journals: 2006 2007 2008 2009