Armchair Dragoons Forums
Wargaming => Age of Gunpowder => Topic started by: panzerde on September 21, 2018, 11:06:33 AM
-
David Van Hoose and I gave this game a try last night during our regular gaming session. We played the introductory scenario (which in some sort of weird Italian logic is scenario #2 in the rules...). We ended up in a draw, with the French besieging Novara.
There's a lot to learn in this game and the rules are pretty wordy. Having said that it has strong narrative and does a fantastic job of depicting the realities of campaigning in the 16th century. The French activations resulted in a desultory advance on Novara, while the Swiss were quick with their reinforcements. Once the French did arrive in turn 3, rain hampered their artillery effectiveness, preventing any possibility of a breach in the walls. While the French managed to repel the sortie the Swiss attempted, they were just never able to really muster the wherewithal to make a successful go of the siege. The Swiss were cautious though and refused battle, resulting in both sides glaring at each other over the walls and entrenchments at the end of the game.
Overall, we really enjoyed the feel of the game. I think as we play more and the mechanics become more practiced, this game will become a favorite for us.
BGG page for the game: https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/22940/all-lost-save-honour
-
What was the historical outcome of that battle? Sounds like yer results would have been pretty typical for the time.
-
Historically the French lifted the siege due to the arrival of the Swiss reinforcements. The Swiss, being hyper-aggressively insane in that era, pulled off an early morning march, caught the French encamped, and routed the entire army. Novara was really the last time the Swiss were that successful. German Landsknechts and more widespread artillery/firearms started to limit the success of the pure pike Swiss formations.
But yes, this was a very plausible outcome for the period. I'd say at least 50% of campaigns in the Italian Wars ended up with either a siege that had to be abandoned, or a previously successful army needing to withdraw at the end of the campaigning season and give up most of the territory it had won. From that perspective the game felt very in tune with reality. The narrative of the French advance bogging down and then rain ruining the siege operation was spot on, as was the not insignificant attrition the French suffered from having most of their advance pass through swamps was very reflective of campaign accounts I've read.
Historically, everyone would have gone home and taken another stab at it next year. Unless over the winter the French and Swiss had decided to ally, and go beat on the Venetians, or the Pope, or the Empire. Which also happened all the time.
-
Interesting.
So what was the actual effects of the rain? Damp powder or just an increased inability to move the guns into proper positions and general damping of fighting spirit?
-
Interesting.
So what was the actual effects of the rain? Damp powder or just an increased inability to move the guns into proper positions and general damping of fighting spirit?
There are primarily three effects from rain, one of which directly impacted the ability to create a breach:
- Movement by a force across a river bridge or ferry is increased to +2 MP in addition to the terrain in the hex. If the force is a Major Force (defined in the rules) any addition of 2 or more additional MP causes that force to be disrupted (reduced movement and combat effectiveness)
- Any weather except Fair adds a +1 DRM on the attrition table, causing a higher chance of strength point loss during an attrition check
- And the one that impacted the siege: Cannon have a -2 DRM on the artillery table during rain. In this case, the French had 3SP of artillery, requiring them to roll a '5' on a D6 to create a breach before the rain DRM. With the rain DRM, the best the could hope for was NE
Now, the French showed up with the worst gunners in France in this game. Not only did the rain ruin their party in turn three, in turn 4, which was fair weather, they rolled so poorly that some of the guns burst, reducing overall French artillery by 1 SP! It was definitely not a campaign where the French covered themselves in glory.
Next week we're going to try the 1509 campaign of the League of Cambrai versus the Venetians. This should be interesting in that there are much larger forces involved, the supply/activity point rules are in play, and the victory conditions require capturing multiple cities and towns. I'm particularly interested to see how well the game models operations by light cavalry forces for scouting and raiding. The command system is definitely designed to support it.
-
Sounds like a fairly detailed game. What the time spread it covers?
-
It was definitely not a campaign where the French covered themselves in glory.
Well, that narrows things down! :2funny:
I'm particularly interested to see how well the game models operations by light cavalry forces for scouting and raiding. The command system is definitely designed to support it.
that sounds pretty neat
-
Got any pics of yer play?
-
Sounds like a fairly detailed game. What the time spread it covers?
First quarter of the 16th century.
-
It was definitely not a campaign where the French covered themselves in glory.
Well, that narrows things down! :2funny:
Shhh...Cyrano will hear you!
I'm particularly interested to see how well the game models operations by light cavalry forces for scouting and raiding. The command system is definitely designed to support it.
that sounds pretty neat
The command system is pretty detailed, if at times a bit fiddly. Each capitano has his own card. Units are placed on these cards on a numbered grid that indicates SPs for that unit. In addition, they have spaces to store the counters for subordinate and unemployed capitani that are under their command. Only the counters for the capitani commanding forces are placed on the map. If the force/capitano in question enters the map as a reinforcement they are placed face down, so your opponent doesn't even know what leader that force has.
If there are available capitani, a force can be split up. Each force then needs to have an order (Attack, Maneuver, Garrison, Stand, or Retreat). Orders can only be placed or changed at the beginning of the turn (5 days) and require action points to be spent to do so. Action points are allocated to the capitano generale every four weeks or so, provided he can trace a LOC to a designated supply head.
So definite opportunities to detach raiding forces, and definite opportunities to use those forces to interdict lines of communication. Forces have to reveal their composition if adjacent to an enemy force, so scouting forces come into play as well.
The activation system itself is almost a meta-game. It's possible to force your opponent to activate when he might not want to; it's also possible to deprive him of an opportunity to have his second activations during a turn. Knowing what force is in a stack might have a significant bearing on what you do with your activations, so the scouting bit can be important for that.
-
Got any pics of yer play?
We usually do but we didn't last night. I think we were too involved in trying to figure out the rules. I have a screenshot of the same scenario played in Vassal on my blog and Facebook. I'll grab some next week, which will be more interesting anyway.
-
I was actually looking at this game recently from the same publisher;
https://www.secondchancegames.com:7081/index.php/ww1/gorizia-1916-detail
-
Here's the map at start for Scenario #1. French versus Venetians.
(http://i.imgur.com/wk9dPEJh.jpg) (https://imgur.com/wk9dPEJ)
-
Yikes, that's a lot of yella!
-
It's all that Swiss cheese.
-
You guys didn't know that all of northern Italy is bright yellow since the Great Yellow Dye Flood of 1375?
-
No one knew about it until aerial photography was invented.
..........unless you happened to live there of course.
-
The Montgolfier Brothers might have gotten a peek.
-
.................Dinsdale !....................
-
So, several days ago I posted in the "Sessions" forum of the BGG page for All is Lost Save Honour. When I logged in today I found this in my GeekMail:
"We're sorry, but your recent article was not awarded any geekgold, and has not been posted to the forum:
AiLSH Game played on 20 September 2018 for All is lost save Honour
Reasons:
70% Poor Structure
20% Irrelevant
10% Wrong Item
Here is the text of your original article:
Subject: AiLSH Game played on 20 September 2018
We played the introductory scenario during a regular Thursday night gaming session. This is a four turn scenario (Scenario 2 in the rules) We ended up in a draw, with the French besieging Novara.
There's a lot to learn in this game and the rules are pretty wordy. Having said that it has strong narrative and does a fantastic job of depicting the realities of campaigning in the 16th century. The French activations resulted in a desultory advance on Novara, while the Swiss were quick with their reinforcements. Once the French did arrive in turn 3, rain hampered their artillery effectiveness, preventing any possibility of a breach in the walls. While the French managed to repel the sortie the Swiss attempted, they were just never able to really muster the wherewithal to make a successful go of the siege. The Swiss were cautious though and refused battle, resulting in both sides glaring at each other over the walls and entrenchments at the end of the game.
Overall, we really enjoyed the feel of the game. I think as we play more and the mechanics become more practiced, this game will become a favorite for us."
Are these people for real? Are the moderators over there actually mentally handicapped? I won't even argue the "Bad structure" evaluation - though what I posted is certainly no different than any other post I've seen on any BGG forum. But "Wrong Item?" "Irrelevant?" Are you fsking serious?
I'll note that there are zero posts about any play sessions for this game on BGG. In fact, there are only a total of six posts in total, spanning nine years that the game has had an entry on BGG. Less than a post a year. I think we know why.
Remind me next year at Origins when I walk past the BGG booth to kick their table over. I sure as hell won't be bothering to ever try and post anything at Hanseatic Wheat Orgy Central again. I definitely won't be contributing money any more either. Pencil headed morons...
-
BGG have got a bit of a reputation for this sort of thing though.
-
20% Irrelevant
10% Wrong Item
:ROFL:
Out of curiosity, do they post somewhere what the "proper structure" looks like?
-
BGG have always had a problem with wargames, esp when people try to cast of series of war game photos that to the average non-wargamer just looks like 10 pics of the same thing over and over
-
20% Irrelevant
10% Wrong Item
:ROFL:
Out of curiosity, do they post somewhere what the "proper structure" looks like?
I can't say that they don't, since I've never looked for one. If it's there it isn't obvious.