Samurai rules

[mmcv]

Yeah sounds like a sensible approach. The mixed unit formations tend to be more applicable for really huge scale battles where each unit may be an entire formation at the strategic scale. But trying to cover the few battles of that scale is likely impractical for a ruleset that also covers smaller more common battles where the tactical considerations are different.

Can I ask what general mechanics the system will use or is it to be a surprise?

[Nick the Lemming]

"Maintenance of the aim" is not one of my strong points

I have no idea whatsoever what that's like.


Phew, I think he bought it. Right, so which nation should I concentrate on next for my League of Augsbe - ooh, new samurai figures!

[Nick the Lemming]

As per previous discussions on this thread - I don't believe (from my own research) that units operated in a mixed capacity - like European Pike & Shot (for example).

I'd be interested to know what sources you've used to come to that conclusion, since it seems to go against everything known about samurai warfare. I don't think anyone's ever claimed that their armies lined up as like and shot units, but similarly, any work on sonae and te formations show that there's a good mix of troop types in a unit. This blog has a good general overview of such: http://gunbai-militaryhistory.blogspot.com/2018/03/sengoku-period-warfare-part-1-army-and.html

I'd encourage you to have a read at some of the sources that actual historians have used. How do you propose to depict any of the hachijin for example?

[Ithoriel]

Yeah sounds like a sensible approach. The mixed unit formations tend to be more applicable for really huge scale battles where each unit may be an entire formation at the strategic scale. But trying to cover the few battles of that scale is likely impractical for a ruleset that also covers smaller more common battles where the tactical considerations are different.

From what I've read, sonae seem to be about battalion sized (300 - 800 men roughly) with mixed troop types with the possibility of occasional sonae of almost entirely teppo armed ashigaru. One base of 30-80 3mm figures per sonae is my aim.

That sounds perfect for the smaller battles. Sekigahara will have to wait 'til I win the lottery

My problem is how to depict the myriad possible variations within that. Currently playing around with Pendraken Warband sabot bases and strips of figures representing the various lines of troops.

Still a work in (very, very slow) progress!

[DaveH]

Personally I am going with the Peter Pig Battles in the Age of War rules, the units of Ashigaru are largely mixed arquebusiers and yari, though Samurai are less differentiated.

[hammurabi70]

Do you want me to ask Barrie if he still has a copy? 

Yes, I would certainly be interested.  Currently I have a borrowed copy but eventually I will have to return it to its owner.

[hammurabi70]

As Leon states - we have something being worked on at present

I have played Samurai armies to a lot of rules in the past - from specialist sets - through to the larger commercial rules - such as Armati, WRG, DB, Art de la Guerre etc but have never really found anything that captures the flavor of the period. I'm a huge fan of the epic Akira Kurosawa films - Seven Samurai - Throne of Blood - Kagoshima - The Hidden Fortress and ultimately Ran. So I am looking for sweeping moves and bloody combat.

Lock-down has allowed some major reworking and much more solo play-testing to take place ...  and we are heading towards a final play-test copy shortly.
The army-lists are also under construction as I type this. The idea being to allow players to create forces that range from small but extremely effective and highly trained professional retinues - through to huge peasant rebel armies (Ikko-Ikki being a favorite of mine).

Sounds most interesting and I am sure you will get a lot of interest.  Certainly I will be very interested in reading the reviews when they appear.

I'm told Peter Pigs "battles in the age of warfare" are good - I've not played them myself though and like all PP rules they're likely chalk or cheese for people!

Yes, my view too!  Not yet had a chance to play them.


It would appear that we will all soon have a much wider choice!

[mmcv]

From what I've read, sonae seem to be about battalion sized (300 - 800 men roughly) with mixed troop types with the possibility of occasional sonae of almost entirely teppo armed ashigaru. One base of 30-80 3mm figures per sonae is my aim.

That sounds perfect for the smaller battles. Sekigahara will have to wait 'til I win the lottery

My problem is how to depict the myriad possible variations within that. Currently playing around with Pendraken Warband sabot bases and strips of figures representing the various lines of troops.

Still a work in (very, very slow) progress!

I suspect we've read a lot of the same stuff. I'm guessing these rules will be representing a sonae as a division and an entire army as a te. That would work well for smaller battles and modelling the interplay of troops without the sonae. Not so much when dealing with some of the huge battles with each "division" commander within an army having tens of sonae themselves.

Ideally though I'm wanting to do a sonae as a single unit for larger battles having them all represented on a single base. I've been toying with sabots and mixed bases (e.g. using 40x20 or 25x25 bases of each unit type and combining them to make sonae of different strengths). So a line of yumi/teppo, line of yari then some samurai and command behind. I have pages and pages of notes on combination ideas as well as homebrew rule ideas.

I've yet to get any figures for the period (beyond a few 28mm figures untouched) as have been thinking a lot about representation first. Plus had hoped after a (now cancelled) trip to Japan would have been the best time to kick off. It is one that has long fascinating me though so it's definitely high on my to-do list.

Doing the above in 10mm may not look so well without ending up with quite large bases and an unreasonable amount of figures to paint. I don't have the space or time for those huge tables and thousands of figures some do. So a smaller scale might be necessary for that. I'd been thinking 6mm as seen some spectacular ones done there, but hadn't realised there was 3mm options too so that's definitely a possibility as I've been using 2mm for some large scale 19th century stuff.

It might be a case of doing 10mm for smaller battles and clan warfare then 3/6mm for the grand scale ones. Which probably means two different rule sets. One that handles mixed units and one separate. Sounds like I'm getting some 3mm sample samurai in my next MM order!

[Big Insect]

Yeah sounds like a sensible approach. The mixed unit formations tend to be more applicable for really huge scale battles where each unit may be an entire formation at the strategic scale. But trying to cover the few battles of that scale is likely impractical for a ruleset that also covers smaller more common battles where the tactical considerations are different.

Can I ask what general mechanics the system will use or is it to be a surprise?

If you mean Command mechanisms - then there should be no surprise in that the rules will use adaptations of the Commander mechanisms.
So you will have an overall commander and then a couple of different lower levels of command. There will also be the ability to include allied commands into your army - with varying degrees of loyalty.

Hope that helps 

[Big Insect]

I'd encourage you to have a read at some of the sources that actual historians have used. How do you propose to depict any of the hachijin for example?

Thank you for your advice Nick ... I shall bear it in mind.

I have read that blog and the issue I have with it is that it does not quote historical sources for the specific conclusions stated by the author.
It also makes sweeping generalisations such as ", the sonae were composed from 300 to 800 men, and inside one sonae there were each type of troops present at the time, so ranged units, polearms unit, support units and cavalry units." This is actually incorrect as we know that certain Clans were much more heavily orientated towards cavalry 'heavy' sonae and an impact charge and that their sonae were often all of horsemen, with fewer infantry brigaded separately and in a subordinate or supporting role.
Also other poorer clans were very short of mounted samurai and were much more infantry focused.
The blog's author also goes on to contradict himself later on by stating that units were often made up by a majority troop type - particularly if missile armed.

So, according to the blog, not only are we expected to consider that a sonae - a single unit - has a mix of missile and melee foot units but also cavalry and that these operated as a single mixed formation on the battlefield, despite the operational and command difficulties that implies. However, there is no indication that ranks of teppo were mixed in with ranks of yari (for example). The two weapon types are depicted separately. This is also confirmed by the deployment of separately armed troops in the model deployment of an army camp.

It is all a matter of scale. If you are depicting the force of a major lord, that army will be made up of many lesser subject contingents - as well as having larger formations that directly belong to that lord. Having small groups of cavalry under separate command and attached to infantry formations scattered across the army front is both unrealistic and unworkable.
To back up the consolidation of troop types, looking at contemporary wood-block prints we see mixed heraldic banners in larger units of cavalry and infantry. So I'd suggest that smaller contingents were banded together. The designation between missile armed troops and polearm armed troops also makes sense as each operates very differently tactically.

As to the issue around depicting the hachijin formations - again it is a matter of scale. Using individual bases of differently armed units a player is perfectly capable of representing the elements in the formations - such as in the Gyorin (fish scales) formation, where this approach works well.

many thanks
Mark

[Nick the Lemming]

Thanks for the reply Mark; like Ithoriel I think I'll stick with something based on Tenkatoitsu though. I'm not persuaded by your claims, as I don't believe they accurately describe Sengoku-era warfare.

Ithoriel: When / if you do your home-made Tenkatoitsu rules, I'd be interested in what you've come up with.

[mmcv]

My understanding of the warfare is that you'd typically have a front line of guns covered by archers while reloading, mostly in loose groups rather than a continuous line. Then the spears would advance to combat. The samurai, cavalry or foot, would typically be used to fill gaps in the line or charge into areas of weakness to break the enemy.

From what I can tell, cavalry in the period were not a major component of the warfare due to the lack of powerful horses and the rough terrain not lending itself well to horses. There are a few notable exceptions where full units of cavalry were fielded but that seems to have been fairly rare and only in the more northern regions where it was less mountainous. So small groups of cavalry interspersed through the infantry formation does make some sense in a support role when massed cavalry charges are impractical.

This means there was certainly less need for the close order pike and shot style formations seen in Europe, but does seem like various troop types would have worked in mixed formations, certainly in the earlier stages. One of the reasons Oda was so successful was his massing of firearms from different clans together into concentrated units rather than the loose formations favoured previously. This would indicate that mixed formations had been in common use.

The Sengoku Jidai covers a wide period and the warfare did seem to change a fair bit over the course of it. And there are very much different scales. I don't think a single ruleset could cover both the smaller battles between clans and the huge battles towards the end where the likes of Tokugawa was fielding 20 sonae himself let alone the other allied commanders and sub clans.

[Ithoriel]

Mark, I will await your rules with interest .... and am not above stealing good ideas to incorporate into my own

My aim at the moment is to produce a game with a dozen or so units a side, which models my own view of how things may have worked, that is set in the middle 1500's period of the Sengoku Jidai, that models the friction inherent in any battle and also the challenges of commanding troops without radios or even megaphones! Nothing like giving oneself a challenge

I suspect your aims are not radically different!

On cavalry, all the accounts I've read (all secondary sources as I don't read Japanese) of the period I'm aiming for refer to small groups of cavalry attached to the sonae to exploit success or cover failure.

Even the accounts of the supposedly massive Takeda cavalry charge at Nagashino has groups of 30-50 horsemen riding up to the barricades, half a dozen to a dozen being shot off their horse and the rest riding off.

The few stats I've seen show 5% to 15% of samurai armies fighting mounted with the higher percentages being Eastern Japanese clans.

I'm not a big fan of the view that Japanese horses were broken down nags capable of no more than 9mph when loaded. I believe they were small, sturdy and agile. Ideal for raiding, skirmishing, tip and run tactics and pursuits but not for devastating heavy cavalry charges.

As ever, YMMV

[YORSTONS]

Well thanks for all the comments. Some very interesting ideas to work with. I'll maybe get a copy of the Peter pig rules to start with and wait for the new rules release.

[AndyT]

As Leon states - we have something being worked on at present

I have played Samurai armies to a lot of rules in the past - from specialist sets - through to the larger commercial rules - such as Armati, WRG, DB, Art de la Guerre etc but have never really found anything that captures the flavor of the period. I'm a huge fan of the epic Akira Kurosawa films - Seven Samurai - Throne of Blood - Kagoshima - The Hidden Fortress and ultimately Ran. So I am looking for sweeping moves and bloody combat.

Lock-down has allowed some major reworking and much more solo play-testing to take place ...  and we are heading towards a final play-test copy shortly.
The army-lists are also under construction as I type this. The idea being to allow players to create forces that range from small but extremely effective and highly trained professional retinues - through to huge peasant rebel armies (Ikko-Ikki being a favorite of mine).

For those planning ahead - buying paining and basing your forces - basing will be 100mm x 50mm for 6mm-10mm-15mm figures - 120 x 60 for 20mm -28mm - 30mm+
There are some basing exceptions - around Artillery and Ninja formations - which will be 50 x 50mm or 60 x 60mm respectively (NB: Ninja are included for specific smaller scale scenarios and campaigns rather than larger battles).

The idea is to try to allow players to create big battles - so it is about spectacle and the 100 x 50mm bases allow for a lot of figures on a base.
So hopefully this will give you all the motivation to start buying and planning armies.

Mark

Did these Samurai rules ever see the light of day?

[Big Insect]

Did these Samurai rules ever see the light of day?

Sadly not. Other things have kept getting in the way unfortunately - such as CWCII lists, The Forgotten War (BKC supplement), FWCII prep and my heart operation 
But they are not forgotten - just a fair way back in the writing queue I'm afraid to say 
Cheers
Mark

[paulr]

Good to see you have your priorities right Mark

[mmcv]

I have a playtestable set I've been working on in fits and starts, happy to share, discuss or run a game with on Table Top Simulator if anyone is interested. DM me if you're interested.

[Ithoriel]

I've been playing around with a variant of Strength and Honour for mid-1500s samurai warfare, tentatively called Koku and Katanas.

Nowhere near ready for play testing but the basic building blocks of forces are sonae of mixed troop types - ashigaru and samurai, mounted and on foot.

There are options for units of teppo, peasants and of mounted samurai. Teppo units can be split to beef up sonae.

I am using the 80mm x 40mm bases I got for Strength and Honour with things scribbled on top to show unit type, deployed on the 50mm squares mat I designed for S&H.

Am still working out how I'll be using Oddzial Osmy 3mm miniatures to show different unit types. No artillery, monks or ninja from O8 so unless I can work out how to make them none of those. A paint job might just let me create monks. The loss of Magister Militum as a supplier may scupper short term plans

[steve_holmes_11]

I'd imagine 3mm Ninjas are ... invisible.