AAR Hittite v NK Egypt (Sword & Spear) 12Mar18

I have not met up with Ian for a few months and he wanted to get his newly painted Hittites on the table, so I gave him a match with my NK Egyptians. We were using Sword and Spear rules (S&S) with 350 point armies. The battlefield was very open although Ian restricted the width by placing a coastline on my right flank. Both our deployments matched up, with the medium foot facing off against each other near the coast, and the chariots opposing one another on the open flank. Because of the deployment we both expected this to be a bit of a slog, but it turned out to be anything but!

View from the Egyptian side, following deployment

Quite early in the game Ian’s Gasgan foot smashed a hole in my centre due to their ‘Impact’ ability, which I had forgotten to take into account. This was a bit of a surprise to both of us, although Ian clearly hoped this ability would yield an advantage in the initial stages of the combat. Meanwhile the chariot clash on the flank seemed balanced, especially after my Nubians KO’d a Hittite chariot unit by charging into its flank whilst it was engaged to its front. This proved to be the only highlight of the game from the Egyptian point of view. Unfortunately I had left a fresh Egyptian chariot unit (plus the flank Captain) exposed to a flank attack, which Ian duly administered. I thought I could survive for a turn at least, maybe suffering a hit or two which I could rally off reasonably easily. Instead the unit was KO’d (I failed all discipline tests for casualties) and in addition the Captain was killed. The destruction of this unit resulted in further tests for other close units, which were all duly failed because the lack of leadership and this chain reaction just blew my army apart!

Ian's victorious Hittites

All-in-all, a strange game and I’m not entirely sure why I lost. I cannot blame the ‘dice gods’ because both Ian and I threw poor rolls at times (Ian actually threw 3 dice for activation and got 3 1’s). I don’t feel I made catastrophic mistakes in deployment or tactical moves either. I certainly did not give the Gasgans enough respect, and allowing my chariot unit to be flanked were clear errors, but equally Ian must have been annoyed by my Nubians. With hindsight I could have avoided the flank attack on my chariot by moving it directly ahead and out of Ian’s path of attack, but I was confident I could survive the attack and punish the ‘pinned’ Hittites in following turns. I do think that luck deserted me at a few critical points such as when making discipline tests and this was combined with a degree of ‘rustiness’ with the S&S rules. I definitely need to play more games, and I congratulate Ian on a decisive victory!

AAR: Hittite vs NK Egyptian (Sword & Spear) 29 July 2015

Both armies in this game were supplied by myself and comprised 500 points using 15mm figures. The game was played at the Swindon club and lasted 2½ hours. These armies had been in their boxes for over 10 years and have not been used since I fell out of love with the DBM rules. My late Bronze Age armies had been heavily used in a DBM campaign fought over many months at the Scimitar club in Coventry in the 1990’s. This was another test for the Sword and Spear rules (Mark Lewis; Polkovnik Productions, 2014). I had previously been introduced to these rules a few weeks ago (see last AAR).

I commanded the Hittites, whilst Steve commanded the Egyptians. The 6’x4’ table was again fairly open with a couple of gentle hills and rough areas, none of which had a significant effect on the game. The more open left flank (from my perspective) was the scene of a clash of chariots, the centre was occupied by infantry of both armies. The right flank was occupied by most of the light troops and was slightly restricted by a couple of areas of rough ground. I failed to take my camera, so there no pictures of this game (sorry!).

Both armies advanced and soon the chariots were engaged. Steve’s Egyptians were fairly successful in their archery which reduced the effectiveness of my light chariots when they clashed. I did hit a unit of Egyptian archers with a unit of heavy Hittite chariots, but the dice badly let me down and, too the surprise of both of us, they destroyed the chariots in a single turn! The game progressed smoothly and in a fairly balanced manner. Both armies became demoralised in the same game turn. The resulting morale tests hit the Hittites more than the Egyptians. The following turn the Egyptians had a good (6:1) dice draw and could really apply pressure on key weak Hittite units. The Hittite units were rapidly destroyed and the army collapsed.

A narrow win for the Egyptians, although the Hittites were only 1 unit away from victory. The direction of the battle lines had shifted, the Hittites were in the ascendant on the right flank, while the Egyptians had turned the Hittite left. This was another very enjoyable game. The rules flow smoothly and fast, with little reference to the main rulebook (or even the QRS). As a player you are faced with interesting decisions and dilemmas with regard to dice allocation. The comparative combat dice rolls work well and have a good balance between predictability and uncertainty, and the loss of my best chariots to a unit of bowmen came as an unlikely surprise. A 500 point aside battle can easily be completed within 2-3 hours, and this makes the rules very applicable for club games.

I have played half a dozen solo games with the rules using Bronze Age chariot armies, Hoplites against Persians, and Hungarians against Ottomans. All these were playable match-ups and a couple photos are shown below. I have found Sword and Spear work very well for solo play, and may possibly be one of the best solo rules I have used. The core mechanisms of dice allocation and combat resolution are solid. I can already imagine adapting these basic mechanisms for other periods where I’m searching for a rule set I like. This is possibly a high complement for a rule set, but it is a potentially dangerous reaction: I have seen many rule sets becoming devalued by tinkering and out of period adaptation (e.g. DBA).

AAR NK Egypt v Hittite; Impetus

After Action Report; New Kingdom Egyptians versus Hittites (Impetus rules) 28 Sept 2014

The purpose of my after action reports are not to give a detailed, blow-by-blow account of a particular wargame, but rather to appraise the effectiveness of the rule set used, and the lessons to be learnt from the tactical plans employed.

Both armies in this game were supplied by myself and comprised 450 points using 15mm figures from a range of manufacturers. The rules to be used were Impetus (Lorenzo Sartori; Dadi&Piombo, 2008). My opponent, Ian, and myself are very familiar with the Impetus rules and both agree that they give a very satisfactory and enjoyable gaming experience. The primary aim of this game was to explore how well the rules covered the unique feel of late bronze age chariot warfare. To help facilitate this we both agreed to fight over a flat, open battlefield that featured only a couple of low gentle hills. Both armies had 3 generals, all rated as ‘fair’.

I commanded the Egyptians and my army comprised a large body of good quality infantry (mix of spearmen and archers), a few units of bow armed skirmishers, and 5 units of good light chariots. The Hittites had a numerical superiority of chariots (8 units), that included some heavier chariots. They also had a large body of infantry but these were lighter and poorer than the Egyptians.

I was nominated as the defender and therefore deployed first. I choose to deploy in a fairly classical manner with my chariots on either flank and an infantry dominated centre. I expected Ian to deploy a chariot heavy command of one of his flanks (which he did) but I could not predict which flank this would be. Even if I had concentrated my chariots to match his deployment, I would still be significantly outnumbered. My plan was to use my numerically weaker chariots to slow his advance by shooting and evading, allowing me time to rapidly advance my infantry and overpower his central command.

Ian did deploy all his chariots on my right flank, and unfortunately my battle plan rapidly fell apart. On the first turn I tried to activate my crucial right flank commander and threw double 1, which caused the commander to drop from ‘fair’ to ‘poor’ quality. On turn 2, amazingly I again threw double 1 for my right flank commander, dropping him down to ‘incompetent’ quality. Both armies were beginning to close with each other, and the next turn would be crucial. The importance of winning the initiative on my right flank was clear to both of us, and I was at a clear disadvantage due to the reduction in quality of my general. This time I threw a double 4, and because of the incompetence of the general, any double meant that his command failed to activate on that turn. The Hittite chariots smashed into my forces who were unable to react or evade, and as a consequence my command shattered and routed. Elsewhere on the battlefield, my left flank force did prevail over the small opposing command of Anatolian allies and routed them, but I took a surprising amount of damage in doing so (my dice rolling was poor throughout the whole game). In the centre my good quality infantry were only just getting into a position to attack his infantry, and again due to poor dice I did not inflict significant casualties with my archers. Now, because of the collapse of my right flank, I had to re-align some of my units to meet the chariot threat, whilst at the same time trying to inflict some rapid victories before my whole army broke. The only hope was to gamble that a couple of rash, unsupported charges would lead to a breakthrough in the centre. There was no reversal of luck, and my attacks failed; the left flank general was killed and my army broke.

This was a crushing, decisive victory for the Hittites commanded by Ian. With hindsight I can see that I was facing defeat from the very start because of poor deployment decisions, and although I did throw some unbelievably bad dice, I don’t think I can lay any blame on poor luck. The double downgrading of my right flank general and his subsequent failure to activate (approx 1:8000 probability) certainly did not help matters. The open battlefield did the Egyptians no favour; a few bits of difficult terrain would have helped to hinder the deployment and movement of the key Hittite chariot wing. My flank commands were too weak and needed to be bolstered by some solid infantry, which would have given my outnumbered chariots some protection. Regarding the testing of the Impetus chariot rules; I have to conclude that this battle failed to shed any light! The lack of hindering terrain allowed the Hittite chariots to move directly against me with no awkward manoeuvres required. In fact, the heavy chariots forming the Hittite second line never changed direction in the entire battle (nor were they engaged in any combat). My plan to shoot ‘n’ scoot with my light chariots also failed to occur due to the generals’ failure to activate! The one error I made with my chariots was on the other flank where I charged the opposing Anatolian foot rather than shoot at them, which would have been just as effective but would have risked little or no casualties in return. This clearly demonstrates how pressure on one part of the battlefield can distract a player making decisions on a quieter sector!

To conclude, although this wargame did not show off the chariot rules within Impetus, and it resulted in a major defeat for myself, a good enjoyable game resulted that was played to a conclusion in roughly 2.5 hours. For myself, Impetus remains the go to rule set for both Ancient and early Renaissance wargaming. Another game is planned in the near future, this time focussing on the use of the Schiltron in Feudal Scots armies during the time of ‘Braveheart’ and the ‘Bruce’ (rather