Game: Under the Lily Banners

Thread: Re: Thoughts about the game and the subject.

castiglione — 2008-12-01T03:03:34+00:00

Rindu wrote:
War is so strange: why don't the foot soldiers ever just talk to each other?

Probably because the following might happen:

French Soldier: Soldier of Spain! Let us forget this war of our masters which concerns us not and enjoy a bottle of w-

BANG!

French soldier collapses gurgling blood.

Spanish Soldier #1: What the heck was he saying?

Spanish Soldier #2: [Shrugs as he reloads his musket] Heck if I know. I don't speak French.

Thread: Re: Under the Lily Banners at hefty discount!

Bulwyf — 2008-11-29T22:50:50+00:00

Using my p500 discount I just scored it for $17.50. Now that's some value for entertainment.

-Will

Thread: Re: Thoughts about the game and the subject.

benhull — 2008-11-12T04:30:40+00:00

Nice post, it is very gratifying that all the work is being studied. Thanks.

Ben

Thread: Re: Thoughts about the game and the subject.

Tygo — 2008-11-11T18:14:56+00:00

Just like most countries throughout history. If you get tapped to go fight, then you do it. Or they kill you. And your family.

The "Can't we all just get along" Rodney King era happens in about another 300 years.

Now we just throw you in prison for life.

Thread: Thoughts about the game and the subject.

Rindu — 2008-11-11T17:56:00+00:00

One of the coolest games I own is Under the Lily Banners, designed by Ben Hull. It includes five battles from the 30 Years War: Rocroi, Freiburg, Mergentheim, Second Nordlingen, and Lens. The first and last were fought between the French and the Spanish; the other three, between the French and the Bavarians.

The thing about this game that I like is that it really is more than a game: it's a work of history. Hull did a lot of research, plumbing sources in four languages in order to precisely reconstruct the flow of each battle, to determine exactly what forces were present, and to discern the topography of the site, which is itself no mean feat since old battlefields don't remain just as they were. In his design notes he retells how many primary sources disagree with one another; it was thus his job to adjucate between them. And if I happen to doubt his reconstructions, I can verify them, since this “game” contains a bibliography. In fact, I wouldn't be surprised if this “game” represents ground-breaking research in this area. He even says as much concerning the battle of Lens: “This was one of the most challenging puzzles to put together. The Spanish OOB (Order of Battle—basically a list of the units present) was even more difficult than Rocroi. The three primary sources were French, though there were disagreements between them and they contained horrible spellings of non-French names. What we have is still not 100% perfect given the source issues, but it is one of the first comprehensive works on the Spanish OOB in print.” (p.48) I can tell you this, at least: this game has taught me quite a bit about the 30 Years War between 1643 and 1648, at least in this theater.

I did set up the “Frieburg” August 5th scenario and I studied it for a while. Hull wrote, in his introduction to this battle (he writes 2-3 pages covering not only the battles themselves, but the campaigns surrounding them): “Enghien felt that...an attack on this naturally strong position had a good chance, despite what it looked like on the surface.”(p.12) (Enghien would become the Prince de Conde in the next year, and even fight for the Spanish later on.) Studying the dispositions of the armies, however, I was pretty shocked. The Bavarian position really does seem impregnable. They are situated on a hill with plenty of defensive fortifications, and the French have to advance through forest to get to them. Advancing through a forest is bad, since it ruins the troop's formation. Needless to say, the French lost this battle—as was the case with all the battles against the Bavarians in this game. Well, they “won” Nordlingen, but that was only because Mercy, the Bavarian general, was killed. Before that happened the French were in really bad shape. Hull describes the end thus: “With the French defeated on the right and center, it would seem that the Bavarians had all but won the victory. Fate intervened. Mercy was shot and killed, some say by a sniper from the church steeple (one of his own men) by accident. Turenne approached the town under a flag of truce and in flawless German convinced the garrison that they had done all that honor required and that they should surrender. The defenders took his advice and lay down their pikes in the churchyard.”(p.23)

Many of the characters in the 30 Years War were absolutely despicable. There was this bizarre subculture (or perhaps I should say “superculture”) of nobles who seemed to pursue warfare as a mere hobby. Nations were more like gentlemen's clubs than responsible political entities--clubs of nobles with masses of peasant soldiers and mercenaries at their disposal, wrecking Europe with wars over nothing more significant than one's personal pride and honour.. This was the era of the Three Musketeers (based on real people) and Cyrano de Bergerac (again, a real person). But man, the battles were so bloody and horrific. Hull says that in one battle, 4,000 people were killed in only two hours. War is so strange: why don't the foot soldiers ever just talk to each other? What drove the peasants to take part in the killing? Why didn't they recognize the common humanity of those standing opposite them on the battlefield? Why?

Thread: Re: Under the Lily Banners at hefty discount!

castiglione — 2008-11-04T03:41:43+00:00

FALL0820, I believe.

Thread: Re: Under the Lily Banners at hefty discount!

jgong101 — 2008-11-04T02:23:39+00:00

anybody got the coupon code?

Thread: Re: Under the Lily Banners at hefty discount!

liberor13 — 2008-11-02T22:24:50+00:00

Go and buy it right now everyone! Its a great game!

Thread: Under the Lily Banners at hefty discount!

castiglione — 2008-11-02T15:06:36+00:00

Under the Lily Banners is available at a hefty discount from GMT. It's going at 30% off and I got an additional 20% off (I forget why but I think it's one of those "virtual coupons" good for a certain time period).

Thought others would like to know.

Thread: Re: Initial doubts turned into adoration!

bartman53d — 2008-10-24T02:45:52+00:00

after paying for it

Hysterical

Thread: Re: Army Commanders

brian s — 2008-09-11T12:27:18+00:00

Ben,

That answers my question very clearly. I was looking for some sort of statement to that effect but just didn't find it. Thank you!

Thread: Re: Army Commanders

b5mith — 2008-09-11T06:43:38+00:00

If I'm understanding your question correctly:

From 5.1.1 "In addition, AC Actions override Orders restrictions,
and counts as a unit’s action for that Activation Phase."

So only one action per unit per Activation.

Thread: Army Commanders

brian s — 2008-09-10T11:52:51+00:00

I'm probably missing the answer to this somewhere in the rules but I'll ask anyway. If an Army Commander is involved to perform one of the actions, can a unit perform two Reform/Rally actions in a single activation? For example, if a unit is under Rally orders (and is part of the active wing) and performs a Reform action can the Army Commander also perform a second Reform action on that same unit?

I didn't see anything that disallowed this and I got the impression from the AC rules section that when an AC performs a Rally or Reform action it doesn't count as action for the target unit. This also seemed to be the case since an AC can Reform/Rally a unit that is not part of the active wing.

I'm a veteran wargamer but this is my first venture into the Musket and Pike series and my first real experience with this era of warfare. I'm really enjoying the game and learning a lot, although I feel like a fish out of water when it comes to tactics.

Thread: Re: Cavalry questions

Carlo M. — 2008-09-05T09:25:40+00:00

Well, it seems that Nordlingen must wait, we are on the Alerheim field right now, and my french cavalry is cautiosly closing with the hills.

I've played Nordlingen on thirty year's war quad a bunch of times, and the swedish have a hard fight but, if the Allbuch goes the right way, they can win.

Carlo

Image

mrbeankc — 2008-09-04T16:57:01+00:00

Box cover

Thread: Re: Sunset of the Tercios (Rocroi)

Grell — 2008-08-12T19:14:20+00:00

Hi Peter,

Great AAR, really got me revved up.

Hi Ben,

Great game you've made here!

Regards,

Greg

Thread: Re: Initial doubts turned into adoration!

Grell — 2008-08-12T18:56:13+00:00

Great review HB!

Regards,

Greg

Thread: Re: So I'm at it again.

tppytel — 2008-08-11T19:14:51+00:00

It's not really an appropriate comparison. CWBS is a very touchy-feely game system. I enjoy it, but it's a terrible choice if you're trying to be even slightly rigorous and competitive as there's a tremendous reliance on player judgment in interpreting the rules (and not just the command rules either). M&P may be slightly more "gamey" in the way it dictates certain actions under certain orders, but at least the rules are clear. Depending on my mood and on my opponent, I may choose either one. So I do understand your objections, though I think you rather overstate their impact. But mostly it sounds like your design expectations are simply different than Ben's goals.

Thread: Re: So I'm at it again.

masaakunokouchi — 2008-08-11T18:51:45+00:00

the charge order is historical. I disagree with your basic order system, I believe that it, combined with other parts of the system, is flawed. Individually the other parts of great, but I have played games with more complex or less complex order systems. I am experienced of the Civil War Brigade Series (and the Napolonic one of the that.) which has a 'historical' style of writing orders.
WHILE that game does not FORCE you into following your orders like you should be doing do to playing fair, you following them with reasonable gusto, you can produce realistic, historical results. The inflexibility, and plain out, rigidness of the order system in this game does not allow it to mirror how a WING commander might actually act.

Thread: Re: So I'm at it again.

benhull — 2008-08-07T15:49:13+00:00

You have touched on one of the important tactical lessons in the game. Historically mounting the hill and defeating the Imperial-Bavarian cavalry there, the wing was unable to exploit to the center. One of the most common mistakes I see is players going into charge orders much too soon, especially if there is terrain involved. As pointed out your options for mounting the hill are staying in Make Ready and clumping key units around the Wing Commander so he can reform them, then change to charge. The other is using Open Order. At Alerheim, I used the former as the morale of the Weimarian cavalry corps is high and that makes up for the formation problems. Turenne is a -2 leader so odds are you will do well, but he can have a bad day like anyone else.

Thread: Re: So I'm at it again.

markus_kt — 2008-08-07T11:58:41+00:00

The command rules are why I love this game system. So many wargames give us far too much control over our forces, and so it's wonderful to have one where command is more realistically out of our control. Obviously, your commander disagreed with you and thought it was worth the risk of going over that hill.

Thread: Re: So I'm at it again.

b5mith — 2008-08-07T09:37:27+00:00

So changing to Open Order formation before moving up the hill isn't an option? There's no chance to use your Army Commander to influence Order changes?

Thread: Re: So I'm at it again.

masaakunokouchi — 2008-08-07T07:15:46+00:00

its not that you should it's that you HAVE TOO... I try to change the orders really. And it's not like the enemy is right at the top of the hill, they were far back, about 4 hexes. far enough to be out of reaction range. NO commander would do that to his troops, but it was forced, and there is no other way to manuever up hill with out taking hits. A commander should be able to move his troops with out either being in "receive charge" or rally, in which case he would not be able to move closer anyways, and receive charge only allows one space per turn. The rules are wrong, I see no problem in saying that they don't fit actual events.

Thread: Re: So I'm at it again.

b5mith — 2008-08-06T09:53:19+00:00

So you're absolutely certain your decision to go charging up the hill was not at fault? I would like to think you have tried a whole bunch of different tactics before resorting to "fixing" the rules!

Thread: So I'm at it again.

masaakunokouchi — 2008-08-06T07:31:55+00:00

So while I love this game, there are a few things that irk me. One is the command system, but I'll get by. What really annoy's me is something that happened when I just finished a battle of Alerheim. For those who play, the hills there are step, meaning a formation hit as one goes up or down. Now as the left wing of the french army 'charged' up the flank, it took a formation hit to the entire wing! Unfortunatly for 3 turns in a row, I could not roll change order roll to save my life. So slowly my formation broken units moved forward 1 hex a turn, as I despertly tried to change to make ready, or rally even! Just so I could reform for the final charge!

What I propose is this:
When moving through terrain that might produce a formation hit, A unit can choose to take it slow. Moving at 1/2 it's total MP for the turn and not take any formation hits. Also any unit that is using 'going slow' resets momentum each time it would normally take a formation hit. So if a defender is right behind the crest of a hill, and any enemy unit "goes slow" up the hill it would not get momentum at that point.

This would I think, greatly increase my enjoyment of the system, as I doubt any commander would willy nilly charge his unit into the enemy. You could, for the sake of cheating avoidance, disallow a unit to "go slow" through two hexes, say moving from one wood hex to another.

Thread: Re: Cavalry questions

masaakunokouchi — 2008-08-04T04:53:20+00:00

Carlo M. wrote:
Thank you for the quick replay.

I hope to play it again, actually I'm eager to try Nordlingen, my fovourite battle from the period.

Thanks

Carlo

Man Nordlingen is hellish for the Swedes, both in SFO and Thirty years quad...

Thread: Re: Musket and Pike 2.0

Sturmkraehe — 2008-08-04T00:29:51+00:00

Ben - I'm curious...I am a fan of your system btw and it looks like I am going to get a chance to play this with the author of this review so I am really looking forward to finally actually playing. Anyway, how much of your design survives the GMT production process? Were there changes that GMT made that weren't there before or did they edit anything out?

Thanks for the games! I have Gustavus Adolphus and can't wait to get some time in with that one as well.

Thread: Re: Cavalry questions

Carlo M. — 2008-07-30T18:18:39+00:00

Thank you for the quick replay.

I hope to play it again, actually I'm eager to try Nordlingen, my fovourite battle from the period.

Thanks

Carlo

Thread: Re: Musket and Pike 2.0

benhull — 2008-07-30T12:45:33+00:00

Nice review, thanks. Sounds like you have a good understanding of the rules.

Thread: Re: Cavalry questions

benhull — 2008-07-30T12:44:03+00:00

Carlo M. wrote:
After a very satisfying first try at Mergentheim (but I fear my opponent will revert to his boring WWII habits ) I have a couple of questions s'il vous plait :

1. Seems that a cavalry can intercept without moving, waiting till the unit came in contact; it's right? My opponent used this tactic to mantain a line of cavalry, it's a sound option?

2. A pursuing cavalry trigger reaction (and possibly interception) but only in the last hex of the pursuit? In other words, it's "teleported" in the eliminated pursued unit or moves normally here?

I'm very pleased with the game, now I hope my friend will give it a second chance.

Thank you

Carlo

1. Yes, they can intercept in an attempt to spoil the momentum of charging cavalry. They also may chose not to engage in close combat either.

2. In a Pursue and ELiminate result on the prusuit table, reaction can occur, "only at the completion of the pursuit" so yes only the last hex. What this is simulating is the fugitives from the eliminated unit were in the way previously being ridden down and dispersed, once they have dispersed other units may react.

Thanks for giving it a try, and hope you continue to enjoy it!

Thread: Cavalry questions

Carlo M. — 2008-07-30T08:50:23+00:00

After a very satisfying first try at Mergentheim (but I fear my opponent will revert to his boring WWII habits ) I have a couple of questions s'il vous plait :

1. Seems that a cavalry can intercept without moving, waiting till the unit came in contact; it's right? My opponent used this tactic to mantain a line of cavalry, it's a sound option?

2. A pursuing cavalry trigger reaction (and possibly interception) but only in the last hex of the pursuit? In other words, it's "teleported" in the eliminated pursued unit or moves normally here?

I'm very pleased with the game, now I hope my friend will give it a second chance.

Thank you

Carlo

Thread: Musket and Pike 2.0

masaakunokouchi — 2008-07-28T05:58:31+00:00

Ok, so I reviewed Sweden Fights On, and I gave it an ok review. I recently gave it away to some on who liked it more than I did. How ever, my tastes have changed, and I have recently gotten a hold of Under the Lily Banners. After one game, and having played "The Devil's Horsemen" which is a kinda similar system in some ways, I have to re-evaluate my like/dislike of this system. Btw, I probably got some of the rules wrong when I first played SFO. Also I'm getting better at the system, (GMT Systems in general), and I play it smoother now.

So lets go over this again, and even though I wrote a lot on SFO, I will go over it again, and since there have been a few rules/changes, and clarification now.

Components:
So what can I say? Compared to I got to say, it's not much different, but it seems a little more refined. Also, the outlined the maps in a dark color which I seem to think gives them a better appeal. The counters are a little better, they have more of them, there is one for each unit, in each battle, even for infantry, unlike SFO, it even comes with replacement parts for all the SFO pieces that had to do double, or triple duty. The counters also say where they belong, even what line part. This is are nice improvements, but are not a big difference.
So what is it:
B+

Rules:
Clear, cleaned up from SFO, and well written, these are a nice set of rules, plenty of examples. More the SFO and makes any ambiguity clear, they are really.
So what is it:
A

Gameplay:
Ok so how does it play out. Well, the game play follows a impulse system, where wing commanders make activations and enact there orders. The orders, while not the crux of the game like in CWB or the NBS, they are important to the game, as they limit what you can do. So let's go over that right now.

There are four orders that a wing can be in.

Charge: Must move closer to enemy, may move contact, move normal.
Make Ready: Move normal, no contact, may reform a little.
Receive Charge: Move only one space, but reform a lot, and a little rally.
Rally: Reform and Rally a lot, move 'normal' as long as you never move closer to an enemy unit.

With each wing commander under there own orders, players determine who goes first by who has the most charge orders, ties move to make ready, and so on. Then all charge orders are taken, with the first player making the first charge, then the other player making the next, and so on. Then onto the make ready... and so on and so on. All units in command can act upon the orders of the wing.
You can attempt to continue acting up too twice more when you have finished acting with all your units in a wing, with charge orders being easier and rally orders being difficult. The quality of commanders helps.
The second attempt at continuing is more difficult.
You can also preempt. This is where you try to make one commander go before another, same kinda mods. When preempted, the commander who was preempted goes after the commander who just did preempted you, unless you were continuing, then your done like dinner. Failure to preempt causes you to loose the ability to continue, and if you press it, the ability to act period.
There is also trying to change your orders. It's harder to go from the more aggressive orders to the less ones in one big step (charge to rally) and visa versa. How ever, you can be forced into Rally, if your wing is really struggling. It's a die roll, and if you fail, your stuck with your order that turn.
Movement, is simple, with facing and set points, 4-8 depending on the type of unit. Stacking very limited. Some heavy infantry are two hexes big, and very slow as such. Terrain for the most part is your enemy as it causes you to loose formation. You can be normal, shaken, or broken, and a few special ones. Almost all terrain affects your formation, negatively. If your charging this is a problem, as you can't do any sort of reforming! Defensive orders this is not to big of a deal, but it will slow you down, of course, your on defensive orders, either you can't move close the enemy, or you only move 1 hex!
Fire can be done instead (or in the case of cavalry, also) and comes in different forms. You can use advancing fire, to move up to the enemy and fire. Retreating fire, a retro grade maneuver to disengage. Skirmishing, for standing and shooting when your already mixed up in it, and SALVO, which is basically the same as skirmishing, except that one shot is more powerful, while the rest loose something, how ever, if you follow up with CC it will help.
Fire is simple table roll, with a few mods. A # result or a miss can result. #'s produce casualties, and units can get withered away. When your down to little, you reach a threshold, close to breaking. Cannons produce formation hits and Morale checks, no casualties, but these are like wise useful. Causalities also make further fire harder.
Close combat is BRUTAL. A few mods are applied to one roll. When involving cav on both sides, it can be a short contest. The minimum result is a shaken morale, formation hit, and a retreat for one side. Complete and utter annihilation at the ends of the results. Cav will pursuit when the combat goes well for them, which can lead to them being removed along with the target. While the opponent does not get points for cav that pursuits off board, it does remove them and any leaders stacked with, from the game.
Cav btw, has limited ammo, 2 infact, and must make reforms to regain. This means after there is a cav battle, there is much time to reform and rebuild your wing.
An important thing that I have missed is the reaction allowances. Every time an opponent moves around your units, your units can react. If they are in front of yours, BANG, and so on. Cav can also intercept moving units, breaking the normal turn order to fight. This can lead cav battles to be messy, with units intercepting and what not all over the place. A really mess. Once you get used to it though, its pretty simple. It also keeps it from being a "i go, you go" game, as you can't simply swing around the enemy just because it's your turn.

Grade:
B+

Overall:
Fun, I got to say, it grows on you. The GMT way of doing things can be a little convoluted at times, but it's worth it. After playing Devil's horsemen my whole world changed, and I really started to like this Musket and Pike series. (even though it's not involved at all!). The bigger battles may take a while, but they are worth it. My gripes that I declared with SFO are the same, but less griped now. I would still of done things differently my self. My suggestion is that if you like 30 years war, or tactical war games, this is for you. If your not willing to put a little effort into a game however, not just play like in Lost Cities or something, then stay away!

Edit to add this PS:
Compared to SFO there are a LOT LOT less 2 hex Heavy infantry, only Lens and Rocroi have them, and Lens only has a handful. The rest have 1 hex HI and that's a lot more maneuverable. SFO 1 hex HI is the exception, in this one, 2 Hex is, except in Rocroi.

Thread: Re: Rocroi

Joek — 2008-06-01T21:09:15+00:00

Interesting result. Die rolls must have really been horrible for the French to lose this badly.

The Order of Battle, on paper, looks to favor the Spanish. The slight advantage with position and the large advantage of leadership, however, give the French, in my opinion, a decided advantage. Couple Gaisson and Enghien together on the French right, and one has probably the strongest cavalry wing in all the battles presented. Couple that with an ability to move far out to their right, and the Spanish left should be a sitting duck. La Ferte is almost worthless, but Isenberg cannot swing as far to his right and must make a more direct attack. After La Ferte is mopped up, Isenberg's already small wing should be contained easily with either the reserve wing or a detachment from the main infantry wing.

Head-to-head, the tercios have a definite advantage, but lack of a reserve wing seems to result in an infantry wing asked to do too much with regard to command control.

Every solitaire play of mine has resulted in a sweeping French victory. The leadership is just too much for the Spaniards to handle. Perhaps being more aggressive with the Spanish left is a way to win, but that is certainly less than obvious given the vast difference in unit quality on that side of the battlefield.

Who knows, though. I am quite certain it takes more than a couple plays for one to think of himself as an expert with this series. One of the finest tactical simulations out there.

Thread: Re: These Few Brave Men (Mergentheim)

Joek — 2008-05-01T21:55:43+00:00

My experiece with a slow advance on the Bavarian right is similar to what is described in this after action report. This wing is the most vulnerable for the Bavarians and seems to always get roughed up badly. I think the best approach is to stay with charge orders from the beginning. That way, the Bavarian at least gets to set the tone and probably has a better shot at gaining momentun in close combat, nullifying the arquebusier's inherent close quarters weakness. The argument given to me after one game, when the Bavarian right started under Make Ready, was that I, as the French, would be forced to charge and run into these same arquebusier's strength. I'll take the one point of damage in this case since I get to keep momentum and plow through the line. The arquebusier is going to be hurt either way. Might as well take your shot on the delivery end of a close combat. Much rather attack at +1 than defend at -2 or -3.

Image

tac_ope_tokyo — 2008-02-24T13:11:09+00:00

Spanish Heavy Infantry.

Image

tac_ope_tokyo — 2008-02-24T13:10:18+00:00

Image

tac_ope_tokyo — 2008-02-24T13:08:50+00:00

Image

tac_ope_tokyo — 2008-02-24T13:08:17+00:00

Image

tac_ope_tokyo — 2008-02-24T13:01:57+00:00

Isenburg.

Image

tac_ope_tokyo — 2008-02-24T13:00:54+00:00

Spanish cavalry.

Image

tac_ope_tokyo — 2008-02-24T12:59:06+00:00

Rocroi senario set up.

Thread: Re: These Few Brave Men (Mergentheim)

sdiberar — 2007-10-23T18:50:46+00:00

We played historical orders, which meant all the Bavarian wings start on Charge.

In retrospect, I might have tried a slow advance with the right cavalry wing, and let my numbers force the issue on the infantry in the center.

Thread: Re: These Few Brave Men (Mergentheim)

garysax — 2007-10-21T19:25:05+00:00

Charge can be such a dangerous order but you have to do it to get into real combat... but then once you do, shifting out of it, especially as cavalry, is hard. Particularly if you've been successful and your units aren't too banged up (which would make it easy to or automatically move to rally).

Moving from charge to receive charge is so difficult and not worth the try, but that's usually what you want to do after you've collapsed one opponent's flanks and want to regroup.

Thread: These Few Brave Men (Mergentheim)

jormungandr — 2007-10-21T15:10:45+00:00

“These Few Brave Men”

Being an account of the Battle of Mergentheim between the French (Peter Bogdasarian) and the Bavarians (Scott DiBerardino)

Result: French decisive victory

Thanks to von Mercy’s brilliant maneuvers, six thousand French now faced twelve thousand Bavarians in the wooded valley near Mergentheim. The French, having dispersed to go into winter quarters, were unprepared for this fight and having had it thrust upon them, would have to fight with unparalleled ferocity lest they be swept away.

The Bavarians opened the battle with an advance on the right, against the French cavalry. The two lines of horse swirled together and Weimarians under Rosen got the better of their old rivals, driving three of Gayling’s squadrons from the field and trampling the Bavarian leader into the earth.

In the center, de Werth’s men ignored their leader’s orders and advanced, entangling themselves with Ruischenberg’s foot, who had drifted to the left as they advanced. The resulting snarl would buy du Passage’s foot precious time for every second Turrenne and his (paltry) reinforcements would be drawing closer to the battlefield.

Rosen’s men continued to overpower the Bavarian flank and, having chewed up the foe, then fell back in good order to reform. They dressed their lines quickly and efficiently – these were veteran horse, well led and better trained – and they responded to directions as quickly as their leader’s limbs.

Seeing the disaster developing on the other flank, de Werth called off his attack and shifted his squadrons there. The sudden change in the axis of the advance caused some confusion among his men and they moved more slowly than von Mercy might have liked.

Eventually though, the second Bavarian cavalry wing put in its attack. They dispersed two regiments of French horse and things looked excellent right up to the point where some of Rosen’s men smashed into the cavalry regiment von Mercy was reforming, leading to it quitting the field with the army commander attached. The Bavarians had lost their general!

The fighting turned general as Ruischenberg’s men contacted the French foot in the center. The initial volleys broke a regiment on each side, but the French soon attained fire superiority, shattering two Bavarian regiments completely and killing their leader. Against all odds, the French had held! Du Passage could not celebrate though, for his men had suffered heavy losses, including many of their officers – it seemed unlikely they could repulse a second attack.

A party of de Werth’s cavalry raised their pistols at a muddy, unhorsed figure approaching their lines, only to gasp in surprise and glee – von Mercy had escaped! One of the cuirassiers gave up his steed and the army commander rejoined the ranks. A cheer went up from the Bavarians and they began fighting like the berserkers of legend, much to the dismay of the French.

The second wave of infantry, led by a plucky Oberst, plowed into the French positions, carrying them handily. Two badly worn regiments gave way completely after a single volley and several battle standards fell into Bavarian hands.

De Werth’s men continued to chew into the French horse – Rosen’s spent troops were simply no match for the fresh squadrons and he lost two more of his regiments for but one of the foe.

The French offered little response – du Passage and Rosen rallied those men near their positions but their commands lay in tatters and many of the fighting men had lost contact with their commanders. Just as things looked bleakest, the commander of the French cavalry hit upon an ambitious plan.

When a regiment of Bavarian horse reformed to his front, he led Baden’s cuirassiers forward. They scattered the foe, but more importantly, seized a position near his remaining two regiments, bringing his wing back together.

The Imperial infantry refused to listen to orders and continued to attack – even von Mercy could not convince them to halt. Unfortunately, their formations had come apart in the woods and they possessed little power with their attack.

Now came Rosen’s finest hour. In a display of amazing prowess, his three regiments reformed – one of them under fire from the broken infantry in the woods. One of his squadrons had surged forward to scatter some more of the foe and now it found a Bavarian battery to its fronts. In moments the gunners had been seized and bound – a coronet immediately took the prisoners and made for the rear, hoping to bring the secret of the foe’s quickshot ammunition back to France.

From the distance, the thunder of hooves – Turenne had arrived. The Bavarians, seeing his approach, lost heart – their infantry were not ready for a renewed fight and Rosen had cut a swath through their horse – already their losses far exceeded those of the French. With a heavy heart, von Mercy withdrew his men and the remaining French chose not to pursue.

Retrospective

The key point in the battle came with Rosen’s excellent continuation rolls under receive charge. Twice he made all his continuations and reformed his cavalry with incredible speed, allowing him to redress his lines in time to meet the fresh Bavarian squadrons as they came up.

The Bavarians fought hard but proved unwilling to abandon the attack. They failed no less than four attempts to switch from charge orders, rolling a nine each time. This forced them to push a little harder than they would have liked and allowed the French cavalry to attack through interception.

Image

mwda — 2007-03-05T02:17:18+00:00

Map: Lens

Image

mwda — 2007-03-05T02:16:57+00:00

Map: Mergentheim

Thread: Re: Initial doubts turned into adoration!

Alexiusexfalso — 2007-01-23T11:54:56+00:00

I think this game has a special appeal if you already have an understanding and love of the era - the rules may need to be worked through, but they do make sense, and result in a game with a special atmosphere.

If someone approached it unaware of what a tercio or harquebusier is, the chrome could well be off-putting.

However...even then, it would be worth persevering as it is definitely worth the journey.

One of the consequences, I found, was I became profoundly disenchanted with existing 18th century rules - The Pike and Shot system reveals their lack of nuance, and their lack of period flavour. Likewise, after Pike and Shot, existing Medieval rules sets often appear lacking, as well.

This is a rules set that could easily be expanded both forwards and backwards in time - it has enormous potential.

Thread: Re: Initial doubts turned into adoration!

Hannes — 2007-01-23T07:51:17+00:00

Harae wrote:
It was lying on the shelves crying for attention

I guess, this is a pretty common fate of many wargames

I got UtLB because I am interested in the old tactics...
What broke UtLB the neck on my table was the fact, that I fear that it is no game I can "explain" to my opponent. And this is todays primary demand: a game what can be learned just by instructions.
And I am not that much of a solo player. Unfortunately this didn't find it's way to vassal yet.

Thread: Re: Initial doubts turned into adoration!

Alexiusexfalso — 2007-01-22T21:09:31+00:00

Nice review!

This is a great game from a great series - it really is worth the time and effort to master.

At first, I too found the record keeping a bit of a drag - pistols on, pistols off, counting the casualties and cross referencing them to see if the threshold has been reached, keeping track of formation and morale status... But by the second game, it all fell into place and played well. Very well.

Thread: Initial doubts turned into adoration!

Harae — 2007-01-22T15:38:26+00:00

This review is based on my experience that it took me an effort to realise how full of flavour the Musket & Pike system is and that it took time to really appreciate what is done here!

It all started as that I wanted something different in my collection and no surprise that my eye quickly fell on the Musket and Pike series. However, here started my initial doubts as well: I read some info on the geek and was asking myself if this game would suit me as some geeks expressed concerns about bookkeeping and too much chrome charts etc. and I decided to pass. Some time past bye and I spotted Under the Lilly Banners in my local game store and before I knew it was in my bag (after paying for it) and was on the way home.

Initially my worries proved right:

I am not faint of heart and quite an experienced war gamer but my head was spinning a the first couple of times. The rules were clear but the system had so many phases and status markers & charts that it overwhelmed me. There was so much going all the time and the situation is ever changing and I felt I was busy keeping track of every phase and status rather than examining tactical opportunities.

Bookkeeping was the name of the game as far I was concerned: keep track of the different phases with different status markers of different units. It proved difficult for me to keep the overview and decide what to do to beat the enemy. This was what actually frustrated me. I felt the system and mechanics lacked intuition and had simply too much chrome and unfortunately I left the game for what it was.

Over time my intial worries proved wrong:

Now, a few tries later I am realising that I simply kept missing the point of the Musket & Pike era. I am not sure why but I think I just was expecting something different and more straight forward. After I tried again a few weeks ago it started to sink in and now, few plays later I can say that the system is exactly what distinguishes the game from other era’s and makes it really exiting. What I thought was its weakness -too much chrome & markers- is in the fact its biggest strength.

Let me further elaborate:

Again, I am not sure why but after I tried again I suddenly saw the function of the mechanics and the system started to sink in. I simply did not understand the Musket & Pike tactics.

So Initially I faced trouble with its accessibility due to the order of play combined with the charts and markers. I was simply not familiar with it and I had difficulty placing them in the game context (e.g. 4 different type of orders, pre-empting, continuation, intercepting, different markers and tables & charts).

Let me describe what happen a few weeks back as I changed my approach to the game. It was lying on theshelves crying for attention and when I changed my game cabinet I opened the box again and found the Play Book. The Play Book is really superb and decribes the background of the battles with historical comments. This got me so excited that I had to give it another go. Thank God!

I actually believe the play book gives the game the depth in a way that the battles become more three dimensional. Rather than playing a battle with the musket & pike system, you are now doing all over what happened back then!

After reading some pages in the play book I did the following
-I set up the short Mergentheim scenario
-I read the playing order again at the back of the rule book
-I followed the playt hrough of Mergemntheim step by step

After the first round I played the second round myself and third round etc.

The play throughs of Mergentheim really got me going and rather than seeing the initial blockades (charts, phases, markers) I got the hang of it and really got a feel for the tactical combat of this era.
Where I thought it was too much chrome and too much markers, I now can see the function of the various phases and appreciate them in the light of the Musket & Pike era.

So what is to like:

-Quality of the components:
Very good quality maps, counters. I would have appreciated two charts & tables (one for each player).
So overall, GMT did a great job as usual.

-The rules:
The rules are clear and not long (around 25 pages) so no issues here. The system however is another matter as it requires some time and effort to gasp and it will take some practice before you are familiar with the Musket & Pike era tactics.

-Historical background:
Superb research, simulating this type of warfare and the incredible feel it represents for the musket and pike era, replay value it deserves a 9+. The Play book really makes the difference as it gives great background information that brings you right at the scene few hundred years back!

-Scenario’s:
I can’t comment on the other volume’s in the series but out of the 5 battles I played three. You will find a bit of everything : from Mergentheim being a smaller affair, to bloody slugfest and classic engagements at Lens and Rocroi (the most impressive for me)

-The game system:
I won't elaborate too much here as it will end up to be a book but the core is the historical feel of musket and pike tactics. The different orders, the leaders, the pre-empting, the continuation, the momentum all come together. It is extremely interesting to see the battlefield develop where ech move can be countered and each confrontation will trigger something else. Chaos that is sometimes controlled and uncontrolled at other times. Once you get into it you forget about anything else except from traying to manage the chaos where all of a sudden the enemy has to flee and you cut through the infantry rears and flanks with your cavalry. But beware that the same might happen to you!
Expect the unexpected, adobt the flexible tactic where unplanned successes can turn into a winning strike and where careful plans fade in a cloud of smoke by a devastating salvo from heavy infantry. Do I need to say more?

-Simulation value:
The rules actually come together when playing more often and you resolve them much quicker resulting in a action - counteraction with bloody result. Chaotic and bloody encounters with short but intense engagements. I was not there but it seems this represents it in a realistic fashion.

What is to keep in mind when you thinking about the game:

-The game has a steeper learning curve than I expected wehen looking at the rules and is not put on the table and played just like that (well, it was not designed for that anyway). It has many different phases with action and reaction. I initially mistook the phases and markers for too much chrome that bogged the game play but now I can see their function in a better perspective

-The game system requires effort. It will require practice before you really gasp Musket & Pike tactics and can actually come up with a good plan. The best tactic is flexibility and not to plan too far ahead. The more effort, the more rewarding it is to me. If you don’t like it the first time, you have to give it another go and maybe even a third time for the system to sink in (as in my case).

-The game takes time: the first time you play –depending on the scenario- it will take a lot of time to get used to the mechanics so start with a smaller battle. Rocroi absorbes a lot of time but is a SUPERB experience. The more you play the quicker it goes and the shorter the battles.

-It is chart heavy. The initial overwhelming charts (4X A4 pages) might some make them think to pass on the game. However, in my experience it proves more interesting rather than just being chrome.

-It requires some bookkeeping. The different orders and unit status makes the marker density rather high. This combined with the different charts & tables and playing order might overwhelm, however, imo it is not just chrome but a reflection of typical tactics and that gives the game its flavour.

-An interest in Musket and Pike Era is an absolute must as it makes for an easier gateways through te system. If you are interested it is very likely you are more receptive what is done here. I had too much tunnel vison from previous war game experiences. So being open mimnded is the key here!

Conclusion:
Musket & Pike in my experience proved to be a game that needs effort and an open mind in order to get rewarding and that my impatience and misunderstanding of the combat in that era proved me initially wrong.

The game flow is really up & down, action – reaction, battlefield chaos of the time and above all giving an insight in the tactical combat of the battles that were fought those days.

The research is great and the Play book offers the historical dimension the game can be placed in and which translates it into a game with a superb historical feel.

The system combined with its historical research and play book make for an amazing historical game that is tense and has great replay value.

This game is certainly not for all war gamers out there but for those who are interested in the era and are looking for a simulation type of game the musket and pike series is a must.

The more you play, the easier and quicker it goes. Learning the best tactics is a real challenge and not obvious at all as the situation changes all the time.

It takes effort but really: the more effort the more rewarding. Those who own Musket & Pike but struggled initially I can advice to give it another try!

Thread: Re: Appropriate for Solitaire?

benhull — 2006-12-29T18:03:33+00:00

I have played a great deal solitaire. The order systems helps in this regard as your actions are constrained. For reactions I create a set of rules for optimal reaction/interceptions that I apply equally. Over time I have adjusted the reaction criterion in an effort to find the best approach, this has helped my FTF play.

Thread: Re: Appropriate for Solitaire?

Fidel Helms — 2006-12-27T20:31:53+00:00

Most people seem to fall into "love it" or "hate it" camps when it comes to solitaire MPBS. Personally, it just doesn't work solitaire. The cavalry interceptions, preemptions, etc. just don't lend themselves to solitaire IMO.

The other side of the coin is that these things make for excellent FTF gaming.

Thread: Appropriate for Solitaire?

ElJoeb — 2006-12-27T03:44:49+00:00

Heya,

Does this game work well solitaire? GMT's infamous 'solitaire rating' is around a 6 (I think). I recently played through the Deluxe Great Battles of Alexander and enjoyed it and wanted to try something else (other than preordering SPQR...). What exactly makes the GMT solitaire rating (relatively) low?. I really enjoyed the detail and learning about the time period in GBoA; does this game do that too?

Thanks

Thread: Re: Sunset of the Tercios (Rocroi)

Kevin Moody — 2006-09-19T21:54:34+00:00

Who was that masked man?

Thread: Re: Sunset of the Tercios (Rocroi)

benhull — 2006-09-19T17:04:46+00:00

Karel wrote:
Kevin, would you mind expanding a bit about the differences between sGboH and the Musket & Pike serie? I just took a quick look at the rules of the latter, and there seem to be many similarities. Thanks in advance.

Yes, there are many similarities in scale and concepts. The two sources of complexity in MPBS are from the unit states (Morale, Formation, Casualties and Pistols for Cavalry) that are tracked separately and the reaction rules, especially cavalry interception. The tracking of various states is more complicated than cohesion that combines them, but I felt we could do it to allow for a strong order tie in and the lower unit density. The involved reaction rules are there to keep both players engaged in the action through out the game, as well as provide historical incentives to your actions.

Thanks

Thread: Re: Sunset of the Tercios (Rocroi)

Karel — 2006-09-19T14:08:21+00:00

Kevin, would you mind expanding a bit about the differences between sGboH and the Musket & Pike serie? I just took a quick look at the rules of the latter, and there seem to be many similarities. Thanks in advance.

Thread: Re: Sunset of the Tercios (Rocroi)

Kevin Moody — 2006-09-19T04:03:09+00:00

Is this game comparable in complexity? MPBS vs SGBoH? Yes. However, I suspect you'll find MPBS a little bit more difficult to play well.

Thread: Re: Sunset of the Tercios (Rocroi)

Karel — 2006-09-18T19:23:27+00:00

Very nice!

Your session report makes me want to give this system a try. I have played Great battles of History (simple rules). Is this game comparable in complexity?

Thread: Re: Sunset of the Tercios (Rocroi)

jormungandr — 2006-09-18T17:20:39+00:00

Trevor, we probably got through it in 4 hours, including 30 minutes or so for lunch. We did play very fast though!

Thread: Re: Sunset of the Tercios (Rocroi)

FuriousCorgi — 2006-09-18T16:53:44+00:00

Great report! This makes me eager to give my copy of Accursed Civil War its first spin. Also, out of curiosity, how long did this game take?