"the last three turns of danes v english " Topic

Rules

At the start of the turn both armies roll 1 die the highest moves then the other moves then the first team assaults then the next one assaults then the first one shoots etc

The turn goes
rally
Move
Assault
Shoot

The fact that unlike most games the shoot is after assault then if you break an enemy unit you may the be shot at. People who charge strike first.
that's it simply if you want more rules just ask.

Right last time I didn't mention it was a breakthrough mission.

Turn 4
Movement
The Danes win initiative again and the levy forms a column to attempt to go through a gap next turn. The crossbowmen move into better shooting positions.
The English have a choice one of their units can go attempt to go for the edge or flank the huscarls…they go for the edge. The other moves forward as normal

Assault
The levy that aren't going for the board edge are just out of range of a flank charge on the Viking raiders. The Viking raiders then finally kill off the royal knight and form up in front of the levy. The 2handed axe men cause another minor wound on the royal knight and lose one of their number in return. The huscarls kill fell to and lose two at the same time. The knights, outnumbered break and flee unit the unit of 9 behind them breaking their ranks the fleeing men are cut down by the chasing huscarls who crash into the holding feudal knights kill three lose one, break the knights then charge them down.

Shooting
10 crossbowmen open fire on some levy and kill 3.

This must be the most critical turn in the game.

Turn 5

Movement
English win initiative but with one commander dead orders are scrambled the levy going for the edge decide if in doubt don't move. The other stumbles forward in confusion. The Danish huscarls move off the board edge.
Assault
One of the levy units charges the crossbowmen and is subsequently flanked they kill 3 crossbowmen and lose 5 and hold. But once again the other stands their and are charged by Viking raiders who kill three and lose one the levy flee and aren't cut down. The 2handed axe men lose another man but cause another minor wounds , he is getting weaker.

Shooting
None

Turn 6
The fleeing levy flee of the field.
Movement
None
Assault
The royal knight is killed for no return. 4 levy are killed for 1 in return the levy flee and are cut down. With no troops left the English lose

yes after that battle i have already increased the points value of the axemen
thanks
ps i am only thirteen so any ideas i will be happy for

Thank!!!!:)

i started gaming (lotr) at 9 years old and now play 6 game systems 3 of wich i made myself

Historical refights are truly the best benchmark, falsifiable, process by which to test historical rules. If you can get historical results out of well-documented battles, then your rules are at least accomplishing that much. If you get wildly varying results, or consistently have the historical winners losing, then you are back to the ol' drawing board.

1066.us

"Only thirteen!" Good on you then. I didn't create my first set of written rules till I was 21. (Of course, I didn't even hear of the existence of wargaming, as we understand it, till I was 20 :) .)

thanks (cheesy grin) :)

From your first thread:

hmmm the crossbowen where hitting on sixes on the stand and shoot i just got very lucky

to counter charge the unit charging if it is infantry charging it must be over 1.5 inches and must roll a 4+ (3+ if cavalry) for the unit to counter charge and a cavalry charge is countered 5+ (4+ with cav) but no one passed any of these tests.

The crossbowmen weren't lucky. There were 10 of them in each unit. Each time you roll 1d6 there is a 16.7% chance of rolling a six. What could easily happen when using 10 x 1d6 is no hits at all, and having the entire unit of five platie cav wiped out to a man. I don't like 1d6's because the results are too variable. 2d6 is much better in that regard, and gives you a far greater range to play with, with each increment being a mere 2.8% difference (not 16.7% bites): there is this nice probability curve in the middle, where 6,7.8 come up more often than the ends of the curve: with only a 2.8% chance in a series of rolls, of either 2's or 12's coming up. You can design into the probability more fine-tuning that way.

I would ditch the half inch measuring. Anything less than a full inch just increases the propensity of gamers to argue over nit-picky distances.

And counter-charging should be automatic when a unit was already moving fast enough. Picture this (your moving rule) as a representation of reality: just because the unit is moving sequentially doesn't mean that it moves and stops, moves and stops. If the cavalry were already moving "their maximum", and the Dane infantry started toward them, the cavalry are already defacto "charging". How can they get crashed into by infantry and have to check to counter-charge? If they were just standing there or barely walking, I can see the infantry getting lucky and making contact before the horses could be worked up in a body to charge speed.

converting 1.5 inch to 4cm and all other measurements to cm just fought agincourt with your suggestions ended with losses:
french
2500 crossbowmen dead
500 crossbomen had fled the battle
4400 dismounted men at arms dead
1900 dismounted men at arms fled the battle#
1500 mounted knights dead
4400 mounted knights fled the field
i did not use the 2d6 thus time
and in answer to comment 'the cavalry were already moving "their maximum", and the Dane infantry started toward them, the cavalry are already defacto "charging". How can they get crashed into by infantry and have to check to counter-charge? If they were just standing there or barely walking, I can see the infantry getting lucky and making contact before the horses could be worked up in a body to charge speed'
the cavalry were heading for the crossbowmren slowed turned to face the axmen and were barely moving at the time of the charge.

forgot to mention 1100 longbowmen died and i used historicly accurate numbers
so in mine 1100 english died in real life bettween 100-250 died

in mine 8800 french died in real life 6000 died

is this good (realistic)

Well, you made your French actually use their missilemen: if that had happened, of course, hundreds of longbowmen would have been casualties in the exchange.

(There were estimated c. 4,000 archers and crossbows on the French side! They were stuffed somewhere off to the right flank behind the first French battle of dismounted men at arms, iirc, and never got used in the battle at all.)

Your casualties seem within the realm of possibilities.

i used 3000 crossbowmen in my battle and they were all either dead or fleeing by turn four out of 11

have added command radii to the game each hero has a command rating they will roll 2d6 double it add their command rating and all troops within it in cm may move those outside cant but will shoot at the nearest target in the shooting phase

You might want to reconsider troops outside the range of your commanders not moving: especially in a field battle scale game, the reality is, that commanders were expected to know their job and deal with immediate situations. You can handle this by letting all units do their known tactics/drill; and you can require some sort of "performance check" (that's what we call it), in order to get the unit to respond. But the idea that troops just stand there unless told what to do is only allowing ONE of their possible responses in a non controlled (commanded) situation: other possibilities are: run away, attack impetuously, advance, retreat, move to merge with other friendlies, etc….

ok will do

I tend to prefer the 1d6 instead of 2d6 as it does make a more unpredictable game (being a solo gamer at heart).

I find that after a battle your have to explain how "impossible" things occured and that produces it's own "fog of war" that you didn't have to keep track of during the game.

For example if I had a group of guys charge another group and the result was no casualties – then fog of war was that they thought the target was "friendly" and thus no result.

1d6 has its uses, I agree. I use it almost exclusively in campaign random rolling. For instance: a 1d6 roll for each NP force gives it a strategical profile, from, "garrison the capital city", to, "bring to battle." This results in timid and rabid guard dog behavior, with an equal chance of either. The interpretation, when a force of 250 moves to "bring to battle" a force of 4,000, is explained by several possible factors: the leader is a Gerard de Ridefort (master of the Templars) personality, i.e. suicidal maniac; the reporting (scouting) was abysmally inaccurate; the anticipated reinforcements did not materialize, thus hanging the outnumbered force out to dry, and so forth. Of course, none of these are mutually exclusive: the baron IS a maniac, his scouting is non existant; he does expect friendlies to join him along his march to attack the enemy; and his troops are filled with hubris……