The Cornfield at Antietam, game or simulation?

 What is the difference between a wargame simulation and a wargame in general?

I've been playing Richard Borg's Battle Cry with my two grandsons. Ian is fourteen, and Cameron is nine. Although Cameron's knowledge of the American Civil War is limited, he has no trouble with the mechanics of Battle Cry. Battle Cry is an abstraction on one hand but a simulation on the other- a simulation that roughly recreates ACW battles.

I wondered if I could create a simulation of the cornfield scenario for Battle Cry on the tabletop and get Cameron involved in his first Rebels and Patriots game.

The answer is both yes and no. The no-part recognizes that Rebels and Patriots is a glorified skirmish scale, not written for a game based on regiments and brigades. Having said that, I used it successfully to represent larger scales. And so that's the yes part. You can do it, but that doesn't mean it's the best way. (It was not, just for the record.)

I used the map of the Cornfield Scenario from Battle Cry and the order of battle to create the simulation.

The scenario is unique in that two of the most famous brigades in the ACW faced off against each other in and about the cornfield at Antietam. The Texas Brigade was part of Hood's Division, which the Texas\Arkansas units were a part of. At Antietam, the brigade consisted of Hampton's Legion (not in my game), the 1st, 4th, 5th Texas, and the 3rd Arkansas. The brigade lost over 80% of its strength at Antietam.

The Texas Brigade would face off against the famous Iron Brigade, which consisted of the 2nd, 6th, and 7th Wisconsin and the 19th Indiana. The Iron Brigade also suffered severely at Antietam, so much so it was joined by the 24th Michigan after the battle.

The Battle Cry scenario focuses on Hood's counterattack to retake the cornfield and hold the west and east woods. Historically, the cornfield would change sides fifteen times during the bloodiest day in the ACW.

In my simulation, I copied the idea from Battle Cry, which was that the Union forces were surprised by the Confederate attack. The first two turns would be heavily weighted in favor of the Confederates. IMO, in retrospect, I over-engineered that aspect.

Most of the figures are from Musket Miniatures in 22mm but are supplemented by plastic 1\72 from Revell, 

If I had to play the game again, I'd opt for a bigger table and use my ACW rules, which have been heavily modified from the old Rally Around the Flag rules.

My son Justin, with his youngest son Cameron, getting ready to roll some dice, Justin's other son Ian picked the Confederates, so Justin commanded the Union.

My oldest grandson, Ian. Ian had played Rebels and Patriots before and so needed little advice from G'pa. I served as the gamemaster, trying to keep the simulation a simulation.

Cameron again. The game moved far too slowly, especially at first, to hold a nine-year-olds attention. Cameron was patient and happy to be a part of what the guys were doing.

The center of the Confederate line was the 4th Texas, led by Hood.

I used my Cutler's Brigade of Gettysburg fame for the brigade that was supposed to hold its ground and take the West Woods.

The Union center was held by Battery B, 4th US and the 2nd Wisconsin, affectionately known as the "Raggedy Ass" 2nd.

The 6th and 7th WI and the 19th Indiana hold the Union right flank.

I did not name the Confederates in either woods since the focal point is the cornfield.

The Texas units cover the cornfield end to end while the 3rd Arkansas is in reserve.

The Confederate brigade in the West Woods.

A nice shot of the Iron Brigade and Battery B. Brigadier John Gibbon is attached to the 6th Wisconsin.

A small breakthrough in the upper left fence line is in the making. The 3rd Arkansas is seeking to exploit it.

The Union tries to force a new line.

Up close and nasty!

The crux of the battle.

The Rebs are in the East Woods.

And making some progress...

The start position of the Texas Brigade. Their front is well covered by a strong skirmish line.

The Iron Brigade is not move much, but the 2nd Wisconsin was virtually destroyed.

The scenario was over-engineered, and the Rebs had too many advantages. The fence line and a "breakthrough" were the victory conditions.

Early in the game, the Reb skirmish line is engaging.

Nice pic of my Cutler's Brigade that I used for the Union left flank.

Russian Renaissance Army 1620 (Muscovites)

 My friend and I are doing a conversion of Lion Rampant 2 for the Eastern Renaissance. My contribution is these Muscovites. 

George Gush wrote an excellent book on Renaissance armies in the 70s. He characterized the Muscovites as a "cavalry horde" army that was not dissimilar to the Tartars. 

The infantry was starting to impact the Russians more as they formed standing regiments of Strelsti. Strelsti were shot-type infantry but double-armed with a Berdiche axe instead of a pike. 

They were supplemented by mercenary Cossack shot and cavalry.

My collection is old-school Hinchcliffe with a few Essex. Hinchcliffe was marketed as 25mm but is closer to today's 28mm.

My friend has Poles, including the famed Winged Hussars, which are beautifully done. When we do a game, I will post the pictures.

The Eastern Renaissance is not a common wargame period, at least not in the US and maybe that's why we did it.

Light Cavalry on the left, Heavy Cavalry (Boyars)

Light Cavalry

Boyar Heavy and Light Cavalry

Cossack Shot

Command unit of Divorani Heavy Cavalry

Cossack Skirmishers

More Boyars

Strelsti Shot

Two unts of Strelsti

Boyars

Elite Heavy Cavalry (Divorani)

Boyars

Boyars

Cossack Shot

Two units of Strelsti

Boyars

Alba gu bràth: The 42nd Black Watch in the French and Indian War:

 I started a diorama project many years ago to portray The Battle of Bushy Run. The project did not materialize beyond purchasing some excellent French and Indian War (FIW) from Dixon Miniatures in the UK.

Dixon figures were marketed as 25mm but were always closer to today's popular 28mm figures.

I painted some up but they served as a garrison in a cigar box until I reentered wargaming. A friend wanted to do the period using Rebels and Patriots and I was all in.

My FIW collection is large. I have core units for three configurations using Rebels and Patriots. One core force consists of British Foot, and another consists of Provincials, regulars, and militia. 

The third consists of four units of the famous Black Watch, the 42nd Highlanders.

A core force in Rebels and Patriots is 24 points, although we frequently go up to 36 points in our games.

Below is my core force of the 42nd Black Watch for Rebels and Patriots.

This unit of Highland Grenadiers is from RAFM. RAFM makes a small but fine line of figures for the period. The scale is old school, 25mm, which I like. A unit of 12 Grenadiers without an upgrade costs 6 points.

These figures are the "line" RAFM Highlanders for the period. I use them as line infantry, and without an upgrade, the unit would cost 4 points.

 My friend had painted a unit of Dixon Highlanders that also garrisoned a cigar box for years. He gave them to me as he was more interested in doing French and Native Americans for the period. I use this unit as line infantry. Without an upgrade they cost 4 points.

These Dixon figures are the batch I ordered for the diorama that never was. I liked the action poses in the front rank followed by the marching figures in the second line. The figures captured the moment in the Battle of Bushy Run when the 42nd broke out of the ambush. I use this unit as light infantry in Rebels and Patriots given the action poses. The point cost is 6 points without an upgrade. Alba gu bràth

The two RAFM units side by side.

The two Dixon units side by side.

The total point cost for the four units without an upgrade is 20 points, but seeing as Highland units rate the fierce upgrade and the discipline upgrade, we would be way over the 24 points for a core army.

Late Romans vs Sassanid Persians (Lion Rampant Variant)

The pictures are from a recent game between Late Romans and Sassanid Persians. My friend a I used a variant of Lion Rampant.

The scenario was an adaptation of one in Lion Rampant. The Romans had to cross the gaming board (4' by 4') diagonally with Persians on both sides.

It turned out very one-sided. The Persian heavy cavalry were all double-armed with bows. The Persian infantry consisted of two units, one of which was levies and the other bow-armed. The Sassanid cataphracts were not double-armed.

The Romans had two units of heavy cavalry, one unit of javelin cavalry, one of Roman horse archers, and one of mercenary Huns. They also had one unit of Auxlia and one of Legionaries, neither of which were split units that featured archers. The third Roman infantry unit was archers. They did serve to protect the other Roman infantry units.

The Romans (me) suffered from horrendous dice. We use the one activation failure rule, which determines whether you are done for the turn. Many do not like this rule, but I prefer the uncertainty associated with it, even though I had three consecutive turns that paralyzed an army whose goal was to exit the board! 

I have no complaints.

My most effective unit was the Roman light cavalry with javelins. When they could fire and move, they were very effective. The Hun unit got shot to pieces early, and the Roman horse archers did little better.

The Roman heavy cavalry started out well, giving as good as they got, but the paralysis came into play, giving the Persian heavy cavalry ample opportunity to shoot with impunity.

The Roman infantry, slow to begin with compared to the cavalry, basically occupied space that was not useless but accomplished little, given the paralysis. 

My friend Jim commanded his Sassanids (superb paint jobs!). He placed all his light troops (protected by a stream) on one flank and the heavy units on the other.

I threaded the needle between the two but never gained much traction. In retrospect, trying to force the stream may have been the better option, but that would have meant enduring the Persian heavy cavalry on the other flank. I thought it better to try and destroy the heavier troops before the lighter troops could make much of a difference.

Whether we win or lose is not really important. You try to attain the victory conditions, but in the end, it's all about a fun set of rules and a parade of finely painted miniatures.

The scale of the figures for the game was 1\72, and all are plastics from Zvezda, Hat and Italeri.

Lion Rampant is a fine set of rules, in my opinion. Ordinarily, I do not like picking a game force using a point system, but when my opponent is my friend, Jim, it works very well since neither of us suffers from the all-too-common temptation to field super armies. In other words, upgrades are rare.

However, within Lion Rampant, there are just enough upgrades, especially regarding weapons, to allow a gamer to field a force suitable for whatever the enemy is.

In that sense, a Late Roman army was far more versatile than a Sassanid one.

After the game, I painted up another unit of Auxilia, but this time it's a split unit ;-)

Enjoy the pictures!

Roman Auxlia (Italeri)

Roman Heavy Cavalry (Hat)

Hun Mercenaries (Hat)

Roman Legionnaires (Italeri)

Roman Lt.  Javelin Cavalry (Hat)

Roman Auxiliary Archers (Italeri)

Two units of Roman Heavy Cavalry (Hat)

Sassanid Cataphracts (Zvezda)

Sassanid Heavy Cavalry (Zvezda)

Sassanid Heavy Cavalry (Zvezda)

Sassanid Lt. Cavalry Horse Archers (Hat)

Sassanid Levy Infantry (Hat)

Sassanid Lt. Infantry Archers (Hat)

Sassanid Heavy Cavalry (Zvezda)

Roman Light Cavalry attempted to flank the Sassinids.

Roman Heavy Cavalry attempted to hold the hill.

Roman Cavalry attempt to break out!