Thursday, July 7, 2022

Same Game But No Hex

After trying a remote game using Koenig Krieg adapted to hex movement - see here, I just wanted to confirm my remote gaming bias which is inclining towards hex grid based gaming.  So, I decided to host the same game without hex and applying a measuring stick especially made.  This way the players could see a better representation of ranges, movement rates.

The armies and objective was the same as previously.

Here's the view of the table at the start.

The view from the French position with the objective of the hill ahead of them.

The view from the Austrian side of the table.  You get a sense of how outnumbered the Austrians are.  However, their heavy cavalry is the best on the table.

The Austrian view from the hill towards the French.

The French decided to throw their heavy cavalry around the hill and the woods. Forcing the Austrians to divide their cuirassiers to avoid their infantry on the hill being outflanked.


Both sides' cavalry brigades squared up against each other on the flanks.  While the French, hesitating in the centre, came under Austrian artillery fire from the hill.


The Austrian left threw back the French dragoons after bitter struggles which left them unable to fully exploit the situation. On the other flank, honours were even with both sides needing to time to reorder.



Meanwhile, the French infantry, seemingly waiting for the right moment, suffered losses from the cannons and one unit decided to retire to redress their lines.


The game was going much better than I anticipated. After a brief consultation, the players were happy to continue it to a conclusion on a second evening.

As the battle continued the Austrian cavalry gained the upper hand on the flanks. However, they seemed unable to exploit it as the French mounted remained in sufficient strength to curtail unfettered flanking movements.

Austrian cavalry loop around the woods, unable to grapple with the French infantry while a French dragoon unit remains intact.

Likewise, the Austrians' have to remain wary of the French heavy cavalry that is reordering after having been forced to retire.

This left the French infantry to advance on the Austrians set up on the heights.  With at last producing some accurate artillery fire, they convinced the stubborn imperial soldiery that it was getting a bit "hot" on the hill, and retire.

This withdrawal left only one artillery and unit unit on the hill.  With plenty of gallic infantry arriving on their flanks things look shaky.

Now the French launched a frontal charge at the enemy guns and, with a pinch of luck, swept it away before reorganising themselves onto the flank of the last Austrians on the hill.


At this point it was called a French victory.

The Austrians had not been able to turn the French flanks with their cavalry.  Plus, French numbers proved too much for the imperial quality.

I asked the players of both sides if they would have withdrawn their armies from the field if this was a game in part of wider campaign.  All sides said yes, as they would need to be mindful of the strategic situation.  I found this interesting if we were to play a campaign in the future - which remote gaming seems to offer very readily.

This is what the field looked like by the end.


This game was played to confirm me and the Rejects in using a hex grid system as the most practical and stress free means of playing a remote game via Zoom.  Well... what actually happened was this game worked really well and instead of crystalising the decision, it placed it in question and divided opinion in the group.  Personally, I wonder whether this is more about the rules used and how they translate to remote play.  For example, I would never dream of using They Died for Glory for a remote Franco-Prussian War game.

French infantry overwhelming the Austrian position.

From a technical point of view, having the terrain tiles out meant that the glare from the last game was gone.  I had also learned some lessons concerning cameras etc. which made this a better experience.  I suppose what it really means is that we can successfully play with or without hex.  Though I do believe that having the clear and coloured measuring stick gave a clarity that using a tape measure wouldn't via a camera.

I'll reflect on the experiences of these two games.  Considering the technical, but issues around practical upper limits on table size and number of units per side, and how this can change for games designed to reach a conclusion in one or two evening sessions.  In the meantime, I'll start with feeling a little pleased about how they went.



8 comments:

  1. It seems like that went well Richard, so now, it's really just about personal preference as to whether you use a gridded table or not for your remote gaming.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Everyone thought so. You're right. What am I happiest with. Time for reflection.

      Delete
  2. Good stuff, Richard! Very pleased to see you continue your remote gaming experiments. Table looks better without the table glare too.

    Grid v No-Grid; that is the question. I enjoy seeing you wrestle with this question pondering the trade-offs that each avenue may present.

    I have played both gridded and non-gridded games remotely and successfully. Both can work without issue, for sure. Ease of play may fall to the rules' choice and Sequence of Play as you suggest. I generally find gridded games can play faster with less ambiguity than their non-gridded counterpart. Player preference may play a large role in determining which is better. Next remote game on my table will be a non-gridded game. We will see if my preferences change after this next experiment.

    Keep testing!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you for the encouragement Jonathan. "Keep testing" is sound advice. The Rejects were divided in their preference. Another game and more discussion to weigh up the pros and cons I think. I look forward to reading your AAR.

      Delete
  3. I have to say I found neither the grid nor the reflection distracting from your previous AAR, and both approaches look equally as good to me eye. Interesting observation about both sides saying they would have withdrawn to preserve their troops if it were a campaign game. Campaigns really do lend a different perspective on things.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. That is encouraging to hear. Maybe as host I got a little too hung up about the reflection.
      I love the idea of campaigns Lawrence. The Rejects don't meet in the shed frequently enough to give a campaign sufficient sustained momentum. But we seem able to get onto Zoom more regularly. So, for me, remote gaming seems to open up the very real prospect of placing games in a strategic context within a campaign setting. It begins to concentrate the mind on the preservation of ones army for the future as well as victory in the present.

      Delete
  4. I know I only got to play the first half of the game (hence the reason my side lost in the second half) but I felt the use of a measuring stick worked as well as having hexes. I play a few games that utilise grids or hexes and, while I enjoy them, it does always feel a little constrained. I come back to the comment I made on your last post about this game, it comes down to the payers being brief and precise when giving their orders to the umpire. The art of issuing orders with clarity and brevity is a skill-set tabletop wargamers rarely get to develop (well, not the way we play our games anyway).

    I'm in the process of writing a video script to discuss this very subject in more detail. Mind if I reference your games and link to your posts in the description?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Lee. Happy to contribute how I can, so reference away.

      Delete