Help support TMP


"Just completed: Playtest of the Shenandoah Mini-Campaign" Topic


11 Posts

All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.

In order to respect possible copyright issues, when quoting from a book or article, please quote no more than three paragraphs.

For more information, see the TMP FAQ.


Back to the ACW Battle Reports Message Board


Areas of Interest

American Civil War

Featured Hobby News Article


Featured Link


Top-Rated Ruleset

On To Richmond


Rating: gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star gold star 


Featured Workbench Article


Featured Profile Article

ACW With a Twist at Gen Con 2008

This campaign game, begin in 2007, marches on at Gen Con!


1,014 hits since 18 Nov 2015
©1994-2024 Bill Armintrout
Comments or corrections?

Ponder Supporting Member of TMP18 Nov 2015 9:23 a.m. PST

Howdy,

Result: Union Victory

We played ten campaign turns, covering May 1862. At the end, the Confederate had four brigades at half-strength of less, the Federals had one brigade in similar straits. Continuing the game past Turn 10 would result in accelerating attrition for the Confederates.

Several lessons from the game, and adjustments for the final version:

(1) Aggressive Union commanders make life difficult for the Confederates. This highlights the significance of Jackson's actual accomplishment.

(2) The supply restrictions on Fremont moving south need to be increased.

(3) The Victory Point penalty/incentive for recalling Shields to the Valley to be increased. Doubled actually.

Overall the campaign play was an enjoyable experience. The game was international in flavor, a shout out to the campaign players and their commands:

Confederates
Jake Strangeway – Jackson
Joe Collins – Allegheny Ed

Federal
Peter Kamp Nielsen – Fremont
Conny Edman – Banks
Todd Jahnke – Shields

A big thank you to Joe Collins (northern battles) and Jim Nevling (southern battles) who ran the table-tops battles.

Battle history, a brief summary:

Northern
Front Royal – Banks defeats Ewell
Strasburg – Shields defeats Jackson

Southern
Port Republic – Ewell & Johnson defeats Fremont
1st, 2nd, & 3rd Harrisonburg – Fremont & Blenker ultimately defeat Johnson; Jackson present at 3rd Harrisonburg, the final campaign battle.

I had fun. I hope some of the players will chime in with comments.

The campaign will be published as Scenario No. 6 in the upcoming A Storm in the Valley 1862 scenario book for Volley & Bayonet from Test of Battle Games.

Ponder on,


JAS

KTravlos18 Nov 2015 10:18 a.m. PST

Interesting

Ponder Supporting Member of TMP18 Nov 2015 10:24 a.m. PST

Actually, we only played nine turns. My error – JAS

vtsaogames18 Nov 2015 11:32 a.m. PST

9 campaign turns, 6 battles. How long did it take for you to play this?

Not playing V&B these days but V&B scenarios are easy to translate for other rules so I'm looking forward to buying this.

Ponder Supporting Member of TMP18 Nov 2015 11:42 a.m. PST

Howdy,

We started in February. So February to October, 9 months. So, about one turn per month. A little quicker at first, but summer was the slowest. It was fun, not difficult to referee or (I believe) play.

Done in "Battalion Scale" V&B, so it would easily translate to any regimental level game.

JAS

lkmjbc318 Nov 2015 4:17 p.m. PST

Yes, quite a fun campaign.

Jessee has worked very hard on it. I hate the fact that it is over.

Joe Collins

Personal logo Yellow Admiral Supporting Member of TMP18 Nov 2015 5:34 p.m. PST

Please say more. You can't say enough about this to bore me. :-)

Is a full writeup going to be published anywhere?

I'd love to see the campaign rules and map(s).

- Ix

Ponder Supporting Member of TMP19 Nov 2015 5:57 a.m. PST

Howdy,

Don't know what else to say at the moment.

In regard to final publishing, see above – Scenario No. 6 in A Storm in the Valley 1862 (working title).

You can find an old draft in the files section of the V&B yahoo group.

Ponder on,


JAS

Ponder Supporting Member of TMP19 Nov 2015 7:38 a.m. PST
Ponder Supporting Member of TMP19 Nov 2015 8:33 a.m. PST

Howdy,

Additional tidbits:

During playtesting, the map PDF was printed on large sized paper and laminated. Dry-erase markers were then used to mark the movement of units.

During playtesting of the campaign, table top battlefields were typically about 6 feet on a side, varying based on the table available. However, in several instances, a 6x12 foot table was used to represent concurrent battles in two adjacent campaign map areas, or the approach of reinforcements. Aerial images found online were used as a guide for laying out battlefield terrain.

A division on division fight is generally a losing fight for the Confederates. Confederate players must attempt to mass against isolated Union forces.

During playtesting, campaign players furnished their orders to the referee each campaign turn. When battles occurred the referee farmed out (providing direction for the game (i.e., maps, roster sheets, and campaign player's orders) the battles to available game-masters. The table-top players received information from their game master, but had no other knowledge of the campaign. Similarly, the campaign players had little influence on the tactical battle.

Ponder on,


JAS

GoodOldRebel20 Nov 2015 9:55 a.m. PST

Could very well be an interesting diversion from my usual western pursuits!

Sorry - only verified members can post on the forums.