"Age of Valor Russo-Japanese Test Drive Free Download" Topic

OK, so here we go.

This is a free pdf download that included the title pages, table of contents and one of the 12 conflicts sections, complete, as a free PDF download. Take a look and remember that the rest of the book will be designed and formatted this way. In particular, all the imbedded hyperlinks should work, so try them out. If one has a problem, just report it to me.

link

You can also access the PDF and the play test pictures from Cold Wars 2014 via the AOE homepage. Enjoy and comments welcome!

Warmest regards,

/// BILL ///

Wilbur E Gray
Colonel, US Army (Ret)
AOE, PSS, HMGS WFG+

ageofeagles.com

"The society that separates its scholars from its warriors will have its thinking done by cowards and its fighting done by fools." Thucydides

Thanks Bill!

Yes, many thanks, Bill!

What a wonderful gesture and actually very timely for me. I shall take a good look at this and, noting the other battles mentioned, I am interested in purchasing in the near future.

Much appreciated. Thanks.

I've been toying with RJW for a while now. I just ordered some test minis from historifigs. I was just about to start looking for some rules to use. Thanks, Bill. Not only did you provide a rules set for me to watch for, but there is a great set of resources in those links. Now I've got some reading to do.

Brilliant and thanks Bill.

Very timely in my planning cycle

Is this the latest date to be covered by AoV as I am looking at thinking of trying to use it up to mid 1914 if possible [with suitable house rules if need be]

We play lots of AoE and my player group are more likely to try early 20 Century with a simular format set and hence my interest in AoV.

Looking forward to AoV being available.

Well, I figured it was just a nice thing to do, for one. Its not like this little business puts food on the table, although it does provide me with a little coin to spend at conventions. Mostly it pumps my ego and its simply fun.

But its also smart IMHO. It allows people to try out the system before they buy it and this means some will discover enjoy it, pick up a copy and hopefully tell their friends. it also means that some will try it, not like it, and hopefully not tell their friends because they haven't spent their hard earned shekels and come out disappointed.

This is going to be a pretty radical presentation, so it will be interesting to see how well it works out, if at all.

Ciao, Colonel Bill
ageofeagles.com

Bill

There is a lot of good work here. Congratulations.

The general use of indirect artillery fire was the significant tactical advance in this conflict, but it is not clear to me from the PDF just how this is represented. Has it been considered?

Interesting that you should ask that question. Yes it was considered and – at least right now – no, it will not be modeled.

I consulted several sources and one of the best was a book called Field Artillery and Fire Power, by Major General J B A Bailey (2004). He indicated that yes, indeed, the RJW was where the use of indirect fire achieved a degree of normalcy. However his overall feeling was that the technique was still somewhat infrequent and in its infancy. He noted both the Russians and the Japanese knew how to fire indirectly but that the former more often chose not to as a command decision, with its artillery officers preferring "commanding ground." The Japanese artillery, however, evidently suffered from range problems and could not properly support their infantry without being dragged forward to direct fire positions where they then became vulnerable. The author goes on to say that it was only after a couple of years of experimentation in WWI that indirect fire without prior observation began to achieve any sort of effectiveness.

After the war the Japanese nevertheless recommended that indirect fire become the norm, under centralized control to boot, but given the facts above, I decided not to include it.

Your question is also interesting because while many have wanted me to extend AOV to the opening 1914 battles in WWI, the very reason I decided not to was because of the emergence of indirect fire as the absolute norm. Its really outside of my scope of interest, so if it were critical to the RJW, I likely would have stopped the book at 1900.

Oh yes, and the uniforms weren't as snazzy as well, but that's a different matter :).

Ciao, Colonel Bill
ageofeagles.com

Bill, 'indirect fire without prior observation' is only one variant of indirect fire. It is often referred to as pre-planned bombardments or similar, as you know. The real issue here is the ability to conduct indirect fire with a remote observer, whether FO or by aerial observation. The latter was already in play from the outset of WW1 though to a more limited degree. The FO role was developed well before WW1 but I am uncertain of the role in RJW.

Robert

Here I think the situation of doctrine vs reality, because both armies clearly had some sort of doctrine in hand to do so.

I found a post war report by one Russian Captain A Degtyarev who described the process like this. A battery would be placed in a "covered" position, ie, behind a hill. The battery commander would position himself at the top of said hill so as to be in direct line of sight of the FO who was with the infantry, as well as in direct line of sight of his own guns. The FO would use signal flags to relay corrections to the battery commander who, seeing the flags, would turn and direct changes to his guns. Degtyarev made it clear that although telephones were preferred, flags were more practical and more likely to be used. He also makes it clear that the primary purpose for indirect fire was to protect the guns.

Yet when I looked at the battle of Telissu, I found something much different, assuming the British official history is correct. The position of the three Japanese artillery regiments and their recorded targets, as specified in the text and on the accompanying maps, is with the infantry in direct fire. Given the short 5 km range of these guns, I really don't see any other alternative if they wanted to support their advancing infantry properly.

As for the Russians, although the commander Baron Stackleberg specifically told his artillery commanders to fire indirectly from covered positions, these officers protested that they could not do so effectively at moving targets, and thus refused to comply. Evidently only one of the 13 batteries used the technique on the 15th.

Given that environment and doctrine, and the level of combat AOV represents, I don't see the need for having indirect fire in the game.

Colonel Bill
ageofeagles.com

Hi Colonel Bill

Thanks for these details and taking the lack of indirect fire into account this may be a better period for my player group than WW1 [as we get plenty of indirect fire in our WW2 games].

The following site has some nice pictures as well:-

link

Colonel Bill

I note from the QRS that the Japanese Hotchkiss is rated better than the Russian Maxim.

Does this relate to the weapon performance, number available or deployment doctrine.

Thanks

Numbers was really not a factor, since a stand is a stand. The other two items are what caught my eye. The Hotchkiss had a much greater rate of fire ( 600 rpm vs 250 rpm for the Maxim) and simply looked less bulky and more transportable than the Russian gun.

Perhaps this is the reason behind the superior doctrine – I've never been able to determine whether official or practical – of the Japanese. The RJW saw the Japanese use their machine guns in a couple of new and unique ways. First was the large scale use of the weapon on the offensive in direct support of the infantry. The second was the use of the Hotchkiss as an indirect fire weapon (but this only happened once, so don't expect to see it allowed in the game).

And in a nutshell, those are the reasons.

Ciao, Colonel Bill
ageofeagles.com

Hi Colonel Bill

Thanks for this.

I was not aware the difference in rpm was so large.

I suspect wrt sustained fire they were closer with the Maxim being belt fed and the Hotchkiss strip fed.

From what I have seen you are correct that the Hotchkiss is more mobile as it is air cooled.

This would make it easier to use offensively [a little like a modern MMG].

Overall I like the different fire factors.

This period is looking very interesting and as you say in the notes there are some good possible "what iffs" also