ChrisBBB2  | 11 Nov 2025 8:41 a.m. PST |
Some players revel in fighting one-sided battles with rubbish armies that are doomed to be crushed. Others of us are less keen … you do need a certain masochistic streak to enjoy commanding the Spanish outside Valencia in 1811, during the Peninsular War. I've fought it as both sides and can confirm it's a lot of fun either way. What's your preference? Do you share a taste for being the underdog and taking a kicking? Do you think uneven scenarios where one side is bound to lose in "real-world" terms, whatever the scenario victory conditions say, are not worth playing? I'd love to hear others' thoughts on this. Meanwhile, the report of the game that prompted my musings is on the BBBBlog here:
link |
| Ruchel | 11 Nov 2025 11:10 a.m. PST |
The Spanish army 'outside Valencia' was not a 'rubbish army'. It was a good army. The blame should be put on its commanders. It is the typical contempt for (Napoleonic) Spanish armies based on old prejudices and lack of historical knowledge. The real problem regarding Spanish armies was their commanders. They stupidly wasted dozens of good Spanish units. At Sagunto and Valencia, Blake made many mistakes and his performance was poor. He led a good army to destruction. I recommend the excellent books by Jose Luis Arcon Dominguez. |
| ChrisBBB2 | 11 Nov 2025 11:52 a.m. PST |
You are right, Ruchel, it was not a rubbish army. I have looked at Dr Mark Smith's scenario again and I see I misrepresented it, so I apologise to you, to Mark, and to many brave and competent Spanish soldiers. Mark's a professional historian so I trust his characterisation of the Spanish army is fair:
"The Spanish were a mixed force including a few veteran troops and a mixture of trained units, recent recruits and a substantial force of civic militia and guerillas." As against the French:
"The French were a veteran force and include shock cavalry." |
 ColCampbell | 11 Nov 2025 12:45 p.m. PST |
I don't mind being the underdog if the victory conditions at least allow me a chance of pulling out a draw or even a minor victory. Since we use dice (for the most part) to adjudicate combat and morale, with good die rolling even a less than average army still has a chance. Jim |
 Extra Crispy  | 11 Nov 2025 2:12 p.m. PST |
It's all about scenario design. I have played Texans at the Alamo and it is one of my favorite gaming memories. |
| Korvessa | 11 Nov 2025 3:01 p.m. PST |
A lot depends on what you know and your attitude going in. |
| 79thPA | 11 Nov 2025 3:38 p.m. PST |
I'll take the Spanish every time. |
| ChrisBBB2 | 12 Nov 2025 3:55 a.m. PST |
Thanks for all the good points, guys. ColCampbell: yes, the right mix of luck and skill is important in most wargames (I'm not a fan of chess), and especially so for the kind of game we're talking about here. Extra Crispy: agreed. Indeed, the Alamo was in my mind as I wrote the post. Korvessa: do you mean, eg, if a gamemaster springs some evil surprise, rather than you knowing up front that the script says your army loses? 79thPA: you are not alone! |
| Red Jacket | 12 Nov 2025 9:38 a.m. PST |
Chris, you are a true gentleman. Your second post is a perfect example of how to address a posting controversy. Dear Editor should include that in the FAQ section under good posting manners or grace under fire. |
| Cacadoress | 12 Nov 2025 11:28 a.m. PST |
ChrisBBB2,
" you think uneven scenarios where one side is bound to lose in "real-world" terms, whatever the scenario victory conditions say, are not worth playing?" Well, you said it: easier victory conditions for the side with the worst troops or position is a mainstay of wargaming. |
| Cacadoress | 12 Nov 2025 11:36 a.m. PST |
Ruchel,
"It is the typical contempt for (Napoleonic) Spanish armies based on old prejudices and lack of historical knowledge." Ha! We just going to pretend now, are we? The Battle of Talavera, 27 – 28 July 1809 by Lynn Bryant
27 Jul 2017 — "Nearly 2,000 ran off on the evening of the 27th… (not 100 yards from where I was standing) who were neither attacked, nor threatened with an attack". as attested to by more than one witness. |
| ChrisBBB2 | 13 Nov 2025 5:11 a.m. PST |
Thanks, RJ, you're very kind. I write a blog post nearly every week so I guess I'm bound to get it wrong occasionally. To keep readers (and myself) interested, I make a conscious effort to entertain as well as inform. Evidently my light-hearted caricaturing erred too much in the former direction. I don't mind being corrected and was happy to put the record straight. Cacadoress: sure, it's a mainstay, but not every player enjoys it. It wasn't just some of the Spanish troops whose morale was fragile in our game on Monday – we had a mild player morale failure too! |
| Ruchel | 13 Nov 2025 7:26 a.m. PST |
The Battle of Talavera, 27 – 28 July 1809 by Lynn Bryant
27 Jul 2017 — "Nearly 2,000 ran off on the evening of the 27th… (not 100 yards from where I was standing) who were neither attacked, nor threatened with an attack". Primary Sources? (Please, not just British sources but Spanish and French ones too) as attested to by more than one witness. Yes, by British 'witnesses'. |
