Hex Adapted Koenig Krieg... Again!

In a slight diversion, I decided to revisit my favourite set of mid 18th century warfare rules and slightly amend my attempt to adapt Koenig Krieg rules to play on hexes.  See here for the first trial:  Koenig Krieg Variation Takes Shape!

From the original trial - 3 years ago - I only changed the position of units so they face a vertex of the hexagon instead of a side.  This is to more clearly define the front, flanks and rear of units.  I also introduced a limited amount of unit stacking.  More on that later.

With those things in mind, Steve and Dan joined me in a limited test game.  It was quite simple, Austrians and French marching towards each other.  Similar sized forces, though the French had more cavalry and the Austrians more infantry.

Each infantry brigade also contained a light gun.  The Austrian infantry units were larger.  However, their morale was no better than the French ones.  All units started in column.

Koenig Krieg is a game of actions.  In an action a unit can choose to one of the following: move 2 hexes, change facing/formation, backstep 1 hex or fire.  Typically, an infantry unit in line has one action; a cavalry in line has 2 actions.  The rules allow for the Prussian infantry to get extra movement but I don't tend to play this.

The Austrian columns advance.

The French brigades make their way forward.

Both sides advance towards each other.  The Austrians, Dan, being keen to anchor their flanks on the towns.  The French, Steve, looking to work his cavalry around those flanks.

On the southern flank, the Austrian cavalry quickly advance to check any French flanking movement there.  However, the French dragoons have quickly positioned themselves to catch some infantry in column and prevent the Austrians getting to the town.

In Koenig Krieg, movement and shooting takes place in the Action Phase.  This is then followed by a charge and melee phase.  If initiative can be controlled it can give the controlling side some benefit.  For example, it might allow an infantry in column to change formation in anticipation of an enemy charge.

Regardless of the phase, controlling initiative is important in either acting first or forcing the opponent to act.

Austrian cuirassiers give the French heavies a lesson.  Forcing them to retreat in haste.  However, they are not destroyed and may return to cause problems.

On the northern flank, the French dragoons catch the Austrian columns who run in disarray.

In melee, there are dice modifiers.  Not just additions and subtractions but also multipliers.  One multiplier is x2 when charging a flank or rear; another is x0 if caught in column.  Amongst others, these simple mechanisms mean that playing to the period of linear warfare and protecting flanks is advantageous.

One French dragoon exploits the situation to pursue on of the retiring columns.

While the other, crashes into the flank of the Austrian line.

After the melee phase, there is an exploitation phase.  This is where victorious charging units can redress their facing and/or continue their charging.  For cavalry, this is risky as they could become uncontrolled and race off the table!

Unable to recover from the flank attack, the Empress' infantry retreats...

... but is followed...

...and destroyed.  As were the two units in column.  This was not good news for Dan.

However, the Austrian cavalry was now on the exposed French southern flank.  Plus, the French had three units in retreat and their dragoons were out of command.  So, despite the Austrians losing 3 units, the battle was still in the balance.

Command and control is simple but works.  When a unit is out of command it must pass a dice roll to move (1-4 for cavalry; 1-2 for infantry and artillery).  So, once the lines engage and retreats occur, command and control friction is quickly introduced to the game.

The Austrian line advances into charge range of the French infantry.  Partly to engage; partly to put distance between themselves and the dragoons in their rear.

On the northern flank, the French infantry were able to overlap the Austrians with both frontal and flank attacks.  Now you see it!

...now you don't!

However, the rest of the Austrian line held.

Throwing back one French charge and destroying another French infantry regiment.

But on the northern flank, the French exploited their success and wiped out what was left of a brigade.

The Austrians passed an army test to remain.  However, time was called on the game.  Both players agreed to a draw.

Afterthoughts
We were all pleased with the game and how the rules worked with the adaptations for use on hexes.  In fact, it gave a very enjoyable game that flowed smoothly.

The Austrians had lost 5 out of 10 units.  The French had lost 2 out of 10 units.  However, one French cavalry was still in retreat, as were 2 infantry - both of whom had been severely mauled.

Interestingly, despite being able to stack infantry neither player chose to.  I have to confess to preferring the single lines.  I may just remove the stacking.  It gave little advantage anyway, other than preventing massive breakthroughs after a melee.

I will now reflect on how it played out.  At the moment, the only thing that I would change is the determination of victory.  In Koenig Krieg, it's based on a dice roll at the end of every 4th turn.  Getting more difficult with increasing losses.  I think this allowed the Austrians to take more losses than seemed likely.  I'm considering moving to a countdown system - something like having a number (say half the number of units) and minus 1 point for each destroyed unit and minus 1 when a brigade reaches half strength.  I'll ponder on that.

A question.  I see conflicting accounts of the use of squares in this period (1740 to 1786).  The rules allow it, and I know that the Austrians used massed squares against the Ottomans.  What are your thoughts.  Should infantry squares be part of 18th century European tabletop games?