The Solo Wargaming Guide: Counterpunch
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 15 сен 2024
- Things get a little cross-wise when the Sinistrean Army Group South lays siege to the capitol of Dextramania. Negotiations are tense, messengers are flying all over the place, and it's anybody's guess how the belligerents can find peace amid the chaos.
Lots of good stuff here, and in earlier videos. I've taken all of your advice and comments, and have the next episode recorded to incorporate them into a tidy resolution of sorts. Look for it on February 26th.
Yes, I'm recording that far in advance these days. It mostly keeps me out of trouble.
Would be interesting to know what happened to both Royal Households seeing both capitals were captured 🤔.
Maybe you could have a negotiated peace with the to side possibly losing Territory and then advance 5/10 years and maybe play out a new campaign?
Anyway really enjoyed these series of videos, well done 👏 👍
I love this stuff! Just got around to watching the playlist up to this point... Bought the Solo Wargaming Guide and Potable Wargame books; reading the first tonight. Looking forward to watching the rest of this play list and starting a campaign. My choice for resolving the table combat will be Morale Napoleon but only if the armies are large. Many great choices. What a great hobby.
Great series! I have now bought the book and getting ready for a campaign. Thanks for the push! Looking forward to more updates.
The ruler may have remained in the capital but honestly I would think it is more likely after the first engagement went so poorly he would probably have moved back on his lines of supply and attempt to raise a force capable of taking on the invaders. At the same time leaving a trusted and competent commander in the capital to buy him and the forces striking at the invaders capital time. By doing this he would force the invaders to divide forces reducing there numerical advantage as they would need men for garrison duty to secure the city, once it had fallen, as well as stretch their supply chain which would need more guards as now you could use harrying cavalry troops or even local raiding parties to hit the supply convoys. With the bulk of the enemy's forces committed to that first strike on the capital in the hopes of a swift victory those couple of early victories could prove to be pyrrhic victories as they may just loose the war.
In hindsight, probably best to resolve what a defending monarch does before his capital is besieged.
Strategically withdrawing the ruler to safety would be the prudent choice, but would obviously have an adverse effect on the enthusiasm of the remaining defenders.
Depending on the intelligence brought by the messenger, the Dextramanian generals could just send one force to slap down the Sinistrean army and relive the siege on the Dextramanian capital while maintain their siege on the port. It would be a great prize in the negiotiations. They could also send out smaller forces to disrupt life in Sinistrea and put more pressure on the Sinistrean king to surrender.
I think that the lack of battles is a product of a few things; the map, which I love, the strategic decision to have the opposing armies go in opposite directions, the armies being grouped in such large groups.
Imagine if the Dextramanian generals, had four armies; two small ones, one in the north to go ahead of the main army, one to hold the gap in the south, one in reserve to react either in aiding the invasion or in defending the border, one main attack force. A disposition like that would have resulted in a less one sided first battle,, and campaign, a second battle in the south, and other battles depending on the results of the battles.
Of course, all of those thoughts are due to hindsight, when I fiirst watched the episode with your plans I thought it looked good.
I like how a war starts after a man and a woman elope and yet it’s 100% the woman’s fault!!! Typical! Lol. I am really enjoying this story. Thanks for the entertaining videos.
The face that loaded a thousand cannons!
I think BOTH the royal brats need to spend a couple of weeks walled up in the city that is raging with bubonic plague, and spend all their time there feeding and washing the sick people.
@@dartmart9263 I suspect a handful of scheming barons and arch-dukes would have been rubbing their hands in the background at the prospect of this romantic union / excuse to invade / contract to provide boots and saddles. This is a big part of, apologies to our host, the joy of wargaming.
The attackers must defeat the last remaining land army of the defender (the ones who lost their capital). If they succeed, they win and can dictate terms. While the enemy has a land army and can continue to supply it, they are a threat. The country that took the enemy capital must go north and finish off their last hope.
Part of the issue is depending on the dice at the start and ending up with two forces dancing around the map ignoring each other.
Could you implement a scouting force (on paper or skirmish games) to give advance warning and move the armies based on reports of the scouts?
Messengers could use telegraph posts (think large towers with signal arms) to speed up message transmission around the country and this could lead to a few battles to control the network.
I think the common experience with this guide is that sieges make the wheels come off the campaign too easily. Aside from the question of how realistic these virulent outbreaks are, I think there might be a case for modifying such terrible results in the first instance. (A bit like, no new characters die on their 1st dungeon crawl) I also think there is a case for a compulsory division of forces on the 1st roll for possible courses of action. dividing your force might prevent a hostile force walking into your capital practically unopposed and massacring the royal family. This was what Sinistria effectively did. The fact that Dextramania mirrored their course of action was achieved by victory in the field over an inferior foe. Dextramania left the back door open. This brings me to the final thought. The political consequences of capturing the capital would be greatly important but I don't think the guide covers that. If the king, emperor, etc., is killed or captured, but their enemy counterpart escapes to rally troops overseas and return like the defeated often do, the campaign goes on! Vacant throne = opportunistic allies.
The wargoal decides....The most likely outcome in my opinion is both sides negotiate over the fate of the princesses dowry.
Only a suggestion but if you run the campaign again and want more battles , it may be you need to have a "tighter" map, or at least a map that has more potential objectives that lie within a week's or at most two weeks march of each other, as well as perhaps much larger starting forces - divided into several corps?.
A ready made source is something like the map from the block boardgame Napoleon, might be a great one to campaign ove- at a push you could even tweak that games orders of battle.
Potentially this could help in deciding supply chains ( an important part of campaigning in this era) and with the tighter focus, allow some scope for manouvere followed by the need to concentrate forces for a decisive battle. Other things you might consider are that sieges are unlikely to succeed without a dedicated sige train , of which there is only one and is very slow moving comparedto the rest of the army.. Me I would ignore seiges all together
It really depends on the fate of the royal family, treasury and government of each country. Troops would soon desert if they could not be paid. Or, they would be filled with nationalistic fervour to resist if their monarch escaped and joined up with the army in an effort to retake the palace. If one or both monarchs were captured, then negotiated peace would be most likely.
The king is dead . Long live the King! The south appoint the old Kings son as King and the kingdom is outraged. Landowners and peasants alike rally to the new Kings standard and a new army is raised whilst gorilla warfare makes life for the Northern army. Ambassadors are sent out and support from a neighbouring state arrives in the guise of mercenary troops.
The Northern kingdom is neutralised by the capture of their king and without leadership dilly dally, allowing the South and its new ally to grow strong enough to make a decent challenge.
Somehow I have missed something.
I was thinking, "shouldn't there have been a battle over the sinestrian capitol?". But then you said the campain only generated 1 battle. That's what I missed. Why did it not generate more battles? I've watched all your episodes on this campaign, I don't know how I missed it. Anyway I may go back and re-watch because it is a fascinating exercise in world building and a very interesting way to create both a game, and a story.
That said, maybe all the citizens of these two countries are stuck in a loop of attacking each other, retreating as they loose their capitol cities and then migrating to the other city since they swaped sides 😅
Then, they spend a generation rebuilding and refortifying to do it all over again. Maybe, they have been at it so long, they can no longer recall which country they actually came from in the first place.
There certainly are real-world precedents! The example campaign in the guide invloves an expeditonary force invading a neighbour to effectively teach them a lesson after a previous dust-up
It sounds as though you have three questions.
1. Would the Sinistrian king have signed a surrender after his capital fell meaning that the siege of Forthright city occurred after the war was over?
2. How will the Dextran army react to news of the siege of Forthright city? (Probably only relevant if the answer to question 1 is No).
3. The broader question. How might one alter the campaign to have more battles (and perhaps less sieges)?
--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
Concerning Q1
I don't know anything from the earlier era your campaign fits but there are two examples from the Napoleonic period of states continuing to fight after losing their capital fell. In 1809 the Austrians fought two battles after Vienna fell only sueing for peace after defeat at Wagram. More famously the Russians didn't give up in 1812 when Napoleon captured Moscow (of course they had St Petersburg as a capital too). In both cases there was an undefeated field army available. So perhaps the Sinistrians might fight on in hopes of the southern army triumphing. Using Mr Sylvester's 3 plans system perhaps; 1,2 Surrender; 3,4 temporise with an armastice; 5,6 fight on?
Concerning Q2
I think a large part would march for Forthright city. Exactly how much could be a random choice.
Concerning Q3
I think you had three problems; the location of the Sinistrian capital, the greatly superior numbers of the Dextrans, and the speed of the sieges.
Capitals are generally in the heart of a state so perhaps not rolling a separate die for the capital but instead picking a centrally located city would have been justified.
Pre-Napoleonic armies had difficulty in concentrating large forces because of supply problems so how about a limit on the number of regiments that could be supplied down a given road. That way the battles would be more equal even because the Dextrans couldn't use everyone at the same time.
On sieges a quick look at history suggests that they averaged from 20 days to 3 months so it would be justified to amend the rules to make them so. You mentioned using systems from Tony Bath for the post battle losses in an earlier video. I guess that's from his "Setting up a wargames campaign" book. The siege rules in there look promising. With them lasting longer there might be a chance for relieving armies to march to the siege and fight a battle before the city fell.
Maybe I am thinking in very modern terms here, but is there a mechanic to consider infrastructure development? Seems like carving/ laying new roads to strike at the enemy would be worth it. How long does that take? would it be too expensive? I don't have any education in premodern military logistics, but it seems like it might be useful here.
Have the king's fight a duel to the death. winner takes all. Probably need to zap some of the losing nobles too. 😈😈😈
I think some of my orc upbringing is showing in my comment...lol