Te-li_Ssu 1904 RJW using Bloody Big Battles

Started by Shedman, 15 January 2019, 06:20:33 PM

Previous topic - Next topic

Shedman


Duke Speedy of Leighton

You may refer to me as: Your Grace, Duke Speedy of Leighton.
2016 Pendraken Painting Competion Participation Prize  (Lucky Dip Catagory) Winner

paulr

Lord Lensman of Wellington
2018 Painting Competition - Runner-Up!
2022 Painting Competition - Runner-Up!
2023 Painting Competition - Runner-Up!

Steve J

Great game and nice scenario. Maybe 'The Edge of the World' issue could be sorted out by widening the table, to allow for more flank movements?

Leman

The artist formerly known as Dour Puritan!

Womble67

Enjoyed reading your battle report

Take care

Andy
The Wargames Directory

The Wargames Directory Facebook

2018 Painting Competition - Runner-Up!

Chris Pringle

Yes, super report. Next stop Mukden?  ;)

Quote from: Steve J on 15 January 2019, 07:59:59 PM
Great game and nice scenario. Maybe 'The Edge of the World' issue could be sorted out by widening the table, to allow for more flank movements?

Often what is beyond the 'Edge of the World' to hamper outflanking in a real battle is difficult terrain and/or a time constraint. Still, even where that is so, when I design scenarios I like ot try and 'draw the frame wider' to include that difficult terrain and at least give players the option of successfully outflanking through it - or getting pointlessly bogged down, or wasting time while the enemy gets away, or becoming over-extended and getting defeated in detail ... but yes, in general it is important to have room for maneuver where it existed.

Chris

Bloody Big BATTLES!
https://uk.groups.yahoo.com/neo/groups/BBB_wargames/info
http://bloodybigbattles.blogspot.com/

Chris Pringle

Quote from: Chris Pringle on 16 January 2019, 12:53:02 PM
I like to try and 'draw the frame wider'

Oh, and perhaps my favourite example of this is my scenario for the Alma, in the Crimean War (in the "Bloody Big European Battles!" scenario book). So many times people game this as just a frontal slog, across a river, up a hill, against Russian redoubts. I found myself wondering, OK, what was to the east and why didn't they try going round? The result is the scenario map here:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/127771552@N03/15502628426/in/photolist-pBV2k1-pDSX16-pE8a6w
This is a particularly interesting one because not only does it give the allies the option of trying to get round the flank on the east, it also gives the Russians an alternative deployment option in which they can deploy to the east, threatening the flank of an advance on Sevastopol rather than just sitting astride the Sevastopol road.

Like I say: draw the frame wider.

Chris

Shedman

Quote from: Steve J on 15 January 2019, 07:59:59 PM
Maybe 'The Edge of the World' issue could be sorted out by widening the table, to allow for more flank movements?

I have thought about using one of those 2 foot card tables to temporarily extend part of the table when players use a table edge as a secure flank

But ..

.
Quote from: Chris Pringle on 16 January 2019, 12:53:02 PM
Often what is beyond the 'Edge of the World' to hamper outflanking in a real battle is difficult terrain and/or a time constraint.

I think it was both terrain and time at Te-li-Ssu that made for a valid secure table-edge flank

As for refighting Mukden. Well it could certainly be a spectacle as it was the biggest and longest battle before WW1. I recall you suggested doing it as two separate battles with the Russians having to decide which table their reserves would be deployed on and the Japanese chosing  which table 3rd Army deploys on. I would like to do it as one big game  with markers for the Japanese outflanking forces that are not revealed until they come within artillery range