Sunday, March 16, 2008

My Plans are "in flux" --

Sorry I haven't posted sooner . . . I've been down with kidney "gravel" again . . . today is the first day in a while that I've felt like I'm half-human again.

Anyway I'm sad to say that my plans for April 6th have changed. A Net friend from back in eastern Canada had been planning to fly out to Vancouver Island and come up the coast for a game. Unfortunately "real life" intervened and he's had to postpone the trip.

What I HAD planned on doing was a re-fight of the Grant's "Mollwitz" battle from "The War Game". I'd use my "Tricorne Wars" rules of course (and smaller units than the Grant's did). But since Ross won't be here, I've put that on hold too.

What I'm currently thinking about is trying a playtest of Clarence Harrison's "Victory Without Quarter" rules for the English Civil War. They read like they would be a lot of fun.

Of course I don't have any ECW figures . . . but in one of my boxes somewhere I have a bunch of Renaissance figures that won't be too horribly out of period . . . well, okay, England didn't have any landsnects but at least they are pike and shot. The cavalry is a little farther afield, but perhaps a mix of my GNW figures and the Renaissance knights will work out.

I really don't know much about the ECW period. I've never gamed it, but Clarence's photos and rules make it sound quite appealing.

I've started my research with what little I have in my library. That didn't take long . . . hmmm, it looks like I'll have to order some books from "On Military Matters" or . . . and, of course, I'm also searching the Net

And the best "background" site I've found so far is "British Civil Wars, Commonwealth adn Protectorate, 1638-60". Sure, all of you who grew up in the UK know all of this . . . but I'm a product of the US educational system . . . which means that the rest of the world was sadly more-or-less ignored.

Anyway the ECW sounds like it could be a very interesting project . . . for research, certainly . . . and for the table top . . . well I'll have to see about that.

-- Jeff


MurdocK said...

Interesting that you are aiming to an earlier period Jeff, as I was looking to 'game out' a little encounter from the Mieczyslaw history, possibly on the 6th (from the 1650's = go figure).

We shall have to chat again, but likely after the coming week as it will be very very busy...sigh.

old-tidders said...


hope you enjoy your playtest of the ECW rules.

My second favourite wargame period is ECW, I use 40mm figs - see

ECW armies could also be used, with a change of flags, for the 30years war.

Bookwize you could look at the ECW section on

If you want some more info on ECW uniform books etc then E-mail me (I think you have my E-mail address ?)

-- Allan

abdul666 said...

Best wishes of course, but... 'Dispersion: the bane of so many wargamers'...

Hope you'll be in perfect health soon,

Fitz-Badger said...

This is another period that has long held some fascination for me, but it's fairly low on my list of "projects I would like to do".

Here's hoping you feel fully human soon!

Steve-the-Wargamer said...

Jeff - bravo - that period is right up there for me, and if I hadn't decided that my next project was going to be the American Civil War, it would have been the English Civil War.. in fact I even hjave a small ECW Covenanter army in 1/300 somewhere...

The web site you give is a regular for me when I'm researching battles/campaigns before visitng them - you should also visit the Battlefields Trust site, there write-ups on the English Civil War battles are well worth reading... they are at:

..I look forward to hearing more...!

A J said...

My group plays ECW games fairly regularly. It's quite an experience, and a lot of fun. Even in these days the period still draws partizan viewpoints. Players often express a strong preference for one side or the other.

Andy Mitchell said...

Fingers crossed that the Mollwitz refight is only postponed a short while. Battles like this - where we are all familiar with the basic premise - are always interesting to me. Will you stick to the original OOBs or adjust them according to your own preferences? How do you view the relative strengths of the two sides? What tactical options did you consider on the day? How did your choice of rules affect all this? etc. etc.

Bluebear Jeff said...


I certainly don't plan on dropping this . . . but will delay it hoping that Ross will be able to get out here this summer.

Some changes are obvious. My table is 8'x5' (not 9'x7') and our units are smaller. We have 24-man battalions (not 53-man); and 12-horse mounted units.

I do plan on having the same number of battalions and mounted units, but would be a little more balanced with the artillery.

My plan is to have Saxe-Bearstein take the "Prussian" positions; and Stagonia, the "Austrian".

I also planned to allow each side to come up with their own battle plan . . . after all, that's what the Grants did (and the choices were different than what was done historically.

The movement rates for "Tricorne Wars" are a bit less than for "The War Game", so all-in-all I think that things should work out fairly well.

I hope that this answers your questions.

-- Jeff

Anonymous said...

The ECW's a fascinating period, especially to those of us here in the UK, of course; nothing quite like being able to see the places and battlefields where it all happened! Lots of interesting personalities too and the power of the cavalry makes the games often fairly fast moving. And yes, we do still tend to feel strongly partisan feelings for one side or the other!

George Gush's little Airfix book on the period is useful and has a delightful account of an imaginary game, which inspired me to buy hundreds of 15mm figures 20-odd years ago. (Sadly they are all still unpainted!) This is the book:

One of my favourite military histories is Peter Young and Richard Holmes' "The English Civil War; A Military History... 1642-1651" which, although a bit dated now, is still a very good read.

I could ramble on but I'll stop there! Hope you have a good game.