War of Resistance – Fate of Nanking

Had another War of Resistance (WOR) session with Tim over the weekend. Once again, it was the Fate of Nanking scenario, with Tim as the Japanese commander, and the Chinese committed to a forward defense of Shangai. This scenario starts with an abbreviated August I (1937) turn, and ends with the Jan II (1938) turn. By eschewing strong drink, and limiting our football viewing, we were able to play through the Dec II turn.

I had studied the logistics rules since our last session, and was much more comfortable allocating resource points and moving them from off map to where they could be used. Chinese engineers were kept busy building forts and repairing rail line hits. The limited rail net moved attack points to the theater headquarters, and strategic river movement was employed to augment the supply effort. As a result, I was able spend less time muddling through  logistics, and more time on operational challenges.

Tim provided plenty of challenges. He quickly exploited a gap in my river defenses, and established an amphibious beachhead threatening my left flank. As a result, I had to pull back forces dug-in in Shangai, abandon my factories (which can create resource points) and establish a main line of resistance (MLR) in the suburbs. This was an important early move, since the Chinese player’s mission is to delay and defend, and Tim’s landing probably cost me at least one turn.

Tim’s operational problems are to utilize naval transport to move troops from Japan to China, while juggling the problems of limited port capacity and possible damage to his landing craft used for ship to shore movement. Taking advantage of the clear weather, smooth seas, and experience gained in our last session, he rapidly built up his combat power and began a series of attacks supported by strong naval gunfire and aviation assets.

The Chinese Airforce attempted to thwart this naval movement and also shoot down Japanese ground support aircraft. Their efforts were futile, and almost every Chinese air unit was eliminated or aborted.

As the methodical Japanese moved west, they encountered successive defensive lines built by engineers augmented with civillian labor. This increased manpower allows the construction of a fort in one turn. With narrow avenues of advance, and four construction capable units, the Chinese forces enjoyed consistent -1 modifiers when attacked. The Chinese defenders were also aided by flooded rice fields, which halved Japanese attack strength. However, by October, the rice growing season had ended, and the impact of intensely cultivated terrain was much reduced.

Tim was able to consistently create high odds attacks, taking advantage of the inability of the Chinese to mass combat power in any single hex. This is a function of the low strength Chinese divisions, and lack of regimental or brigade troops to augment the combat power of the divisions within stacking rules. In addition, the Chinese player has only four (4) artillery units, which I used to support stacks of unsupported divisions, which otherwise would defend at half strength, rather than augment the stronger, supported, divisions.

This attritional combat took a heavy toll on the Chinese, who are unable to rebuild lost supported divisions during this scenario. I didn’t help matters by failing to feed the lower strength elminiated units back into the fighting.

By November, Tim had split my defense, and established a beachhead on the north side of the Yangtze.  He also destroyed my riverine supply capabilities along with their cargo in a devastating aerial attack.  As a result, many of the Chinese units were un-supplied for a turn which, fortunately, did not effect their defensive capabilities.   However, this slowed the Chinese withdrawal north of the Yangtze.  At this point, China’s greatest ally was time.  A patchwork defense in depth  continued to slow the Japanese advance.

The game came down to a final roll of the dice by Tim to activate his two headquarters during the reaction phase of the Dec II turn. Had he made these rolls (1 or 2, d6), he would have had a chance to break through my last ditch defense of Nanking. Fortunately for the Chinese, this didn’t happen.

We’ll never know what the outcome would have been if the game had been played for one more month to the scenario’s conclusion.  Our consensus is that it would have been a toss-up.

Here’s a series of photos to augment my narrative.  I’ll hold off on any analysis until Tim forwards his thoughts on the game.

Initial Japanese Landing by A Corps on Yangtze.
Initial Japanese Landing by A Corps on Yangtze.
Japanese Arrive and Move Into Contact
Japanese Reinforcements Arrive In Shangai and Move Into Contact
Japanese Breakthrough Center, Split Chinese Forces
Japanese Breakthrough Center, Split Chinese Forces
Japanese Penetration Sealed Off
Japanese Penetration Sealed Off
Effect of Naval Patrol Attack on Chinese Supply
Effect of Naval Patrol Attack on Chinese Supply
Situation At Game's End
Situation At Game’s End

Madagascar – A Glory Scenario

Finished up playing yesterday with mixed feelings.  This scenario is one of four published under the overall title of “War In The Outposts”.

It’s a great scenario if you want to “play” a physically manageable & comprehensive overview of this system.  The scenario has a low counter density, a small map so it can stay set up for a  long time, and a relatively short time frame beginning in May and ending in October (bi-monthly turns).  It involves just about every aspect of the Glory (and by extension, Europa) system.  The naval system, which many consider problematic, is featured, with an emphasis on amphibious landings, use of ports for general supply,  submarines (and midget submarines) and coastal defense.

On the other hand, it’s not much of a game.  Let’s call it “an operational study”.  Here’s a link to a brief overview of the campaign.  I’ve included it because it contains a good bibliography, as well as a link to a brief overview of South Africa’s part in WW2.  I can vouch for “England’s Last War Against France”.

The decisive victory conditions are stringent:  Take Diego Suarez in two turns, control Madagascar by October, do not lose a unit, and not expend more than one resource point.  Attaining the latter is especially difficult because it limits British player is limited to one attack with one regimental equivalent (RE) at full strength for the entire game.  Everything else is at half-strength, which makes losing a unit very possible and, perhaps, probable.  While the Allies have overwhelming naval and air strength for the first two turns in May, most of these assets are immediately diverted to other theaters.  From June through September, the British have to operate with minimal naval and air assets, with a carrier/battleship force arriving for the final month.

The opening two turns are devoted to taking Diego Suarez.  This area of operations is represented by a map insert at an expanded scale.  The British must negotiate restricted waters, deal with disorganization after their landings, and having only a few areas where they can bring overwhelming naval gunfire to bear.  A French defense in depth, sacrificing units for time, makes it difficult to control the area by the end of June.  British attacks typically take place at 3-1, with maybe a 4-1.  The combat results table (CRT) can be brutal, with an exchange result eliminating a British unit, or an attacker stopped result throwing the time track off.

Map Showing Insets, Vichy Set Up and Invasion of Diego Suarez

Map Showing Insets, Vichy Set Up and Invasion of Diego Suarez

After Diego Suarez is secured, the British slowly move through the island, attacking French units at low odds, after amphibious landings.  Overland travel is very slow.   The best approach is to isolate the main French units, reducing their strength so, once again, a 3-1 or 4-1 attack can take place.  This takes time, and outside of the process of figuring out how to work with zones of control for a mix of units and capabilities, not much fun……if you even think ZOCs can be fun – kinda.

All this kvetching aside, the scenario does simulate the historic campaign, and is a challenge to the player.  In that regard, you can’t complain.  Would I play it again, no.  Was it worth the time, yes.  A good rules overview, and a chance to use the color counters I downloaded from the Europa website (DO NOT go out and try to download now.  A nasty pop-up will appear) several years ago.

 

Thanksgiving Smorgasboard

Weather clear and very cold over the TGiving Holiday.  In between sno-blower failures, shoveling, applying salt, and scuttling between the firewood pile and the house, I messed around with too many games.

Too many?  Impossible!  Well, kinda.  Lost all types of focus, and when you throw in damn near 16 hours a day of quality football, I was a jack of all trades and a master of none.

The lineup included the usual suspects:  Heroes of Normandie, Red Actions!, and GBACW.  The latter was a bust.  Didn’t get Cedar Mountain started.  Semi-setup but not ready to go.  Played through Scenario 7 of HON a few times.  Real brain teaser and fun.  The Red Actions! game was the usual tactical setup, but as mentioned in an earlier post, included an armored car and cavalry.  Just for the hell of it (and because I just finished it), I threw in a truck mounted 47mm gun.  No revelations, but the game flowed smoothly.  Have to get started on some new scenarios along with the campaign game.

On Saturday, a wild ADDHD hair emerged and I set up an old Europa Magazine War In The Outposts scenario – Madagascar.  More on that in a separate post.

I had fun, it was a diversion, but no real sense of accomplishment.  Oh yes, I also absolutely butchered a log pillbox for Red Actions!  Ill-conceived and executed.

Limiting the plate to Madagascar and Cedar Mountain.  Oh, forgot, War of Resistance next weekend with Tim.

 

Wilson’s Creek – GBACW

Finished up Wilson’s Creek just before I left for the weekend.

Opted for the rules’ historical Union entry points and task organization.  The bulk of General Lyon’s Union army enters from the north, with General Siegel’s reinforced brigade attacking the encamped Confederates from the east.  Here’s a map of the historical battle.

The opening of the game is something.  As soon as Union units are sighted, each Confederate unit has to pass a morale check.  Since many of the Confederate regiments have a morale factor of two (2), and the roll must be equal to or lower in order to pass, things become rather chaotic.  Confederate leaders scurry about trying to  rally routed troops, and then get them moving towards the two Union threats.  The two senior Confederate leaders, McCulloch and Price, cannot cooperate.  So, I had Ben’s brigade, which had the better soldiers, take on the Union main body, and Price try to handle Siegel’s smaller force.

Meanwhile, the Union troops were moving slowly towards the Rebels.  The entire battlefield is covered in brush, which reduces trail movement to a single hex per movement point, and 1/2 movement point if off trail.  No lightning thrust here.  Surprisingly, a number of Confederate militia units on pickett duty survived their initial morale check, and did yeoman work delaying the Union main body.  On top of it, I failed to read and incorporate the special rule that gave the Union forces two (2) extra movement points per turn.  Slowly, and more slowly than they should have, the opposing sides were able to form battle lines and engage.

Siegel's Union Force Engages Confederates
Siegel’s Union Force Engages Confederates
Union Main Body Begins To Deploy As Rallied Confederates Converge To Form A Defensive Line
Union Main Body Begins To Deploy As Rallied Confederates Converge To Form A Defensive Line

The game became a series of firefights, with each side feeding in new troops as they arrived.  Lyon’s main body had moved in column, and took quite some time to fully deploy in the brush.  McCulloch had similar problems, and, given pressure from Lyon’s attempts to envelop, I added some of Price’s regiments to his left flank, even though they could not combine fire against Union targets.  Nonetheless, this was a bloody business, with three (3) brigade commanders killed.

I added to my rules transgressions by consistently misreading the CRT, using the less bloody artillery grapeshot results, rather than the small arms results.  Also, I misinterpreted the P/R result which does not allow the receiving unit to escape either a Pin or Rout through a favorable die roll.  The only mitigating factor was that these mistakes were effecting both sides, and not just one.

By game’s end, Siegel’s force was withdrawing, but not under any pressure from the battered Rebel units.   McCulloch’s brigade was grimly holding the Confederate right, while elements of Price’s forces were slowly giving way on the left.

Federal Main Body In Firefight
Federal Main Body In Firefight

To top it all off, my reading of the victory conditions was flawed.  The Confederates gained VIPs by cutting off Union units from their supply source.  As you can (maybe) see in the photo above, I had Confederate cavalry units poised to envelope Lyon’s left.  Had I done this, perhaps it would not have been a Union victory.

All these screwups aside, a good game, with plenty of tension and lots of replayability due to the variety of entrance hexes for the Union forces as well as the randomness of the Confederate response after sightings.

An alternative historical setup can be found over at the spi.net website.

I want to play a couple more games in this series.  So, once the Airstream unfreezes (temps in single digits here), I’ll get going on Cedar Mountain.

 

 

Tangled Up In Barbed

Now that I have a general grasp of Red Actions!, it’s time to work on game/period specific terrain and buildings to complement my old Geo Hex terrain system (here’s some  backstory on what happened to the company).

I’ve messed around with on-line research on Central Asian architecture, but just haven’t been ready to start working on structures.  So, I decided to focus on something that has a practical application to tactical situations; a trench system.  The challenge with this is GeoHex.  When you remove the tiles, you get a lower level of a little over 1/2 inch in depth.  Ugh…another design problem.

Seeking a path of least resistance, the decision was made to start work on the barbed wire entanglement placed in front of the trench.

Without going through all the bloody details, the entanglement has to be 36 inches long.  The longest available bass wood section is 24 inches by 3 inches.  So, two sections, with barely enough room for my troops.

I started by marking 3/4 inch (and later 1 inch) sections on wood dowels.  I drilled two holes in each section, intending that wire would be run through each hole.  The next step was to cut the dowel sections and mount them on the 24 inch base Beta.

DSC01222

As I was gluing in the second row of posts, I realized that I needed to make room for individual stands. What’s the use of something like this if your troops can’t “use” it?   I was able to create separate “sections” of the entanglement by placing posts at intervals connecting each lateral post line.  I then ran thin metal wire through the holes.  This was tedious and somewhat frustrating – especially when I missed a post and had to restring.  Many expletives later, it was time to prime, add ballast and talus, painting all of this with a basic coat of brown and splotches of green.

DSC01236

To finish things off, the posts and talus were dry brushed, and fine turf added.  Gunmetal was used to paint the wire.  Here’s a few shots of the finished product.

DSC01255DSC01256

DSC01254DSC01257

New challenge:  I have to complete the 12 inch section, and make it look like the 24 incher.  Good luck on that!  What’s that old saying…”Consistency is the Hobgoblin of Small Minds”

What Is It?

This weekend’s distractions were not limited to Heroes of Normandie (HoN).  My new Dirt Devil caused another problem.

I enjoy scratch building items.  Not that good at it, but I like doing it and find the cost of purchasing terrain and/buildings can be just too much.  After the winter holidays, I haunt stores look for drastically marked down buildings and trees that can be primed and repainted.  But, I’m always on the lookout for a piece of styrofoam, balsa, plastic, card, foam, etc. etc. etc. that might be used at some future date to build something.

Back  to the Dirt Devil.  While unpackaging it, I was intrigued by the two corrugated cardboard end caps.

DSC01227

The piece at the top had the general appearance of a castle or fort with a keep.  On further study, a part of the bottom piece looked like a fourth wall.  By cutting off the end of the second piece, and attaching it, the rough outline of this fortification(?) became clearer.

DSC01228

DSC01229

A decision had to be made; keep working with this or throw it away.  Oh…..why not?  Using left-over balsa bits and spackle, I built up the walls.

DSC01232

Then priming, and punching some holes in the towers to represent windows/firing positions.

DSC01235

Next step was an initial quick random spraying with dark brown, light brown and desert sand.  The corrugated cardboard really sucked up the paint.

DSC01239

The final steps were to figure out the dry brushing and flock the base.  The first few dry brush attempts seemed to be too dark.  So I lightened up the light sand shade even more, and wound up with something that was OK.  The flock with ballast, and dry  brushing the  small rocks was easier.

DSC01250

DSC01251DSC01252

You’ll notice the base curling up.  Used thin card.  Mistake.

After all this work, the question is “What is It”?  When started, I thought it might be a deteriorating desert citadel.  It also looks like a cheap Sci-Fi special effect from the ’50s, or a crude (and discarded) mockup of a set for “Dune“.   Too big for DBA, too small for a siege scenario, but maybe a nice item to PUB my Irregular Wars battlefields.

Dunno. Whatever happens it was an interesting little project and it’s finished.

Heroes of Normandie

Note:  Had to change the original title since the Spam Bots were on it.

Focus for the weekend was supposedly on Red Actions! and Wilson’s Creek. But I was sidetracked by Heroes of Normandie (HoN). Before I editorialize, here’s a couple of quality descriptions and positive reviews (Review #1, Review #2) of the components and system.

I really like this game.

First and foremost, it’s quick and fun. This is always a good combination for a game. A simulation it is not.

This is not Squad Leader (SL), much less Advanced Squad Leader (ASL). I’ve played both, the former more than the latter. I own all the SL games -after selling my first set many years ago – and many ASL games and expansions. I really enjoy reading Mark Pitcavage’s Desperation Morale ASL site. I love the variety of troop types and hundreds of scenarios that are out there. But playing the damn thing can be just too much. I’m reminded of an old quote about SPI’s Air War (and I will paraphrase)….”a decision that takes less than a second in an aircraft takes ten minutes in the game.” That’s not my idea of fun.

Second, the components are absolutely wonderful. Thick card, great graphics, high quality geomorphic boards and quality event cards. I’ll get back to this later, but this is really a miniatures game using cardboard.

Third, plenty of variations and DIY scenario possibilities. A number of realitively inexpensive expansions, along with supplemental games and terrain can be picked on Amazon or even E-Bay. Here’s a link to the publisher’s website.

Fourth, it has a good “feel” to it, which is an extremely important component for a wargame, with emphasis on “game”.

Everyone acknowledges this is not a game for hard core Grognards. I don’t particularly care for the heroes and some of the off-handed tongue-in-cheek scenario and rules narrative. But there is no reason to let this get in the way of a game with an excellent feel for the decisions making, ebb and flow, and uncertainity of small unit actions. And the units are small. Fireteams, individual tanks and guns, with the ability to equip troops with hand grenades, panzerfausts and other items.

Fifth, it’s realitively easy to learn. The rules have some gaps and ambiguities, but any gamer with a modicum of experience can work through that. Another reason for using “realitively” is that so much information is printed on the counters, maps and terrain overlays. Learning these symbols is the key to getting into this game. I spent a lot of time just working through the symbol summary page on the back of the rule book. The upside is there’s no need for charts. All you need is right in front of you on the game board.

I’ve never played Bolt Action or Chain of Command. I’ve never read a negative review about either of these miniatures rule sets. But, if I had to recommend an entry-level WW2 miniatures game, I’d recommend HoN. It’s inexpensive compared to starting out in WW2 miniatures, and you can start playing right away, with a gaming environment that is evocative of the best of minatures figures and terrain.

Highly recommended.

Mobile CP

Winterizing the Airstream is one of the Rites of Fall here at The Pine Cone Lodge. While filling the water lines with anti-freeze and cleaning the interior it dawned on me that this might be a great place to set up a game. Why not? It’s heated, hooked up to electrical, has plenty of lighting, a radio with Bluetooth, and even a fridge.

DSC01237

The banquette table is adequate for your standard 22×34 inch map, although room for rules, charts and other game aides is modest at best. One way around that is to put copies of what you need in a binder.

This is where I’ll be playing GBACW over the next few months while listening to music and football and, perhaps, having a beverage. Plus, it frees up the 5×5 table for Red Actions! or other mischief.  Not bad at all!

Stonewall: Battle of Kernstown – A Quick Review of GBACW – Mk 1

This is a quick review of Kernstown and the (almost) first iteration of the GBACW series.  While there were some minor changes moving forward through the next several games, the basic rules were used for at least five games.

Decisions: Plenty for both commanders.  For the Confederates, it’s where to attack and with what.   For the Union commander, how to react and with what.

History: Both commanders are faced with the same operational problems as their historical counterparts. Both commanders have to “do a lot” with very little.

Luck: The ammunition depletion roll is a real problem.  It severely hampered the Union brigade fighting Garnett just east of town.

Atmosphere: Really good, with lots of moving parts.  The Pin result while undergoing defensive fire can really upset your tactical plan.

Mastery:  Can’t quite answer this now.  Will have to wait until I play the next few games in the series.  I had to read the rules quite a few times before playing.

Tweaks: Right now I can’t think of any reason to tweak it.

Abstraction: Command and control (including rally) might be a little too easy and flexible.

Clarity: Good.

Comprehensive: An excellent introduction to grand tactical battle in the Civil War.

Speed: A little fiddly, especially with all the markers.  Playing one of the monster games would be something.

Scenarios: None for this game, but not really necessary given Confederate entrance and flanking possibilities.

Summary: Fun, and a challenge.  Once I got the hang of the turn sequence, it moved quickly, with lots of action.  One complaint I have is that the marker chits detract from the aesthetics of the game.  Small complaint.

Now Who's Who?
Now Who’s Who?  Final Dispositions.  Pritchard’s Hill In Center.  Garnett Bottom Right.  Jackson Upper Right.

Component quality is SPI early 80’s.  I’ve always liked their maps.  The counters……..mmmmmmm….let’s just say they are functional.

Stonewall: Battle of Kernstown

Played through my first game of Stonewall: Battle of Kernstown. As stated in my previous post, this 1978 game was the second game to use the Terrible Swift Sword system developed by Richard Berg. The first game was a monster game of the Battle of Gettysburg entitled, strangely enough, Terrible Swift Sword.

While the system rules have gone through a number of permutations, here is quick and dirty overview of the basic rules for the first several games published by Simulations Publications Inc. Each game comes with its own special rules.

Turn Phase Sequence: Initial Command, Movement, Defensive Fire, Offensive Fire, Retreat Before Melee, Melee, Ammunition Resupply, Rally, Final Command.

Movement: Consistent rates for each unit type. Cavalry has mounted/unmounted; Artillery, limbered/unlimbered, Infantry, line/column.

Facing: Used and critical. Limits firing arc, zone of control (ZOC) and rear three hexes allow opponents to fire in enfilade.

Stacking: Limited to 8 strength points, with maximum of two units. Only top unit can fire, or take incoming small arms fire. Both units take incoming artillery fire. Both units count for melee, and both units are pinned when that combat result occurs. If top unit routs, second unit must roll for rout.

Fire Combat: Units can only be fired on once, firing units combine strengths. Artillery fires separately and at half strength against infantry. Line of sight rules are common sense, but beat to death in the rule book. Combat Results Table (CRT) uses firing strength points. Result are loss of strength, pin, or roll for rout.

Zones of Control (ZOC): Infantry, dismounted cavalry and artillery ZOCs extend to three frontal hexsides. Mounted cavalry all six. Supply wagons, and leaders none. Effect withdrawl fire, retreat fire, block both supply and command radius paths.

Withdrawl Fire: Takes place when unit leaves (typically retires before melee) a ZOC. Retreat fire occurs when a unit retreats into a unit’s ZOC.

Ammunition Supply: When small arms units roll to fire, either one (1) or six (6) die roll (depending on game) results in ammunition depletion. Unit cannot fire for rest of game unless re-supplied by a supply wagon (if available). Artillery units have a limited amount of ammunition. Hits on artillery units by other artillery units can explode cassions, resulting in ammunition depletion. Artillery batteries can redistribute ammunition. Infantry/Cavalry cannot.

Melee: Attacking unit ends movement phase in enemy ZOC. Takes fire, then advances into hex in melee phase. Melee CRT uses differential in strength points between units.

Rout: Based on morale rating. Three hexes, reduced movement and combat capabilities.

Rally: By leaders that are within their command radius. An expenditure of one rally rating point.

Brigade Combat Effectiveness (BCE): Each unit has a designated effectiveness strength. If it falls below that designated strength, it’s combat capabilities are dramatically reduced. BCEs are presented as a playing aide in the individual game rules.

Leadership: Units organized by brigade, with designated brigade commander. Brigade commander has an effectivenss rating, or hexes through which he can control his brigade, and a rally rating, which is used to rally units. One rally point rating automatically rallies one unit that is within its effectiveness rating. Divisional commanders have same ratings, but their effectiveness extends to their subordinates.

The game’s scenario is an interesting one. Jackson’s force is outnumbered, and has the mission of moving north from the south edge of the map. His three brigades can enter anywhere along the south edge of the map, east of (inclusive) of the turnpike. Objectives (for victory points) are securing a series of hills north of Kernstown, and/or exiting the map with as many units as possible.

The four Union brigades, while superior in strength, are spread out. An understrength cavalry brigade and an infantry brigade guards the river fords east of Kernstown, one brigade holds Pritchard’s Hill, which commands the town and turnpike providing a direct and rapid route for south-north movement, with another brigade in reserve near the north edge of the map. Here’s a link describing the historical battle.

Of course, I had to try something completely different and, as always, when given the opportunity, attempt to disregard at least one of the Principles of War. In this case, my most aggregious error was ignoring the principle of Mass.

I split the Confederate forces in three. The cavalry brigade was tasked to force the fords to the east, and make a run for the northern map edge. Garnett’s Brigade’s mission was to support the cavalry brigade to its right, force the fords immediately east of town, and advance along the turnpike placing pressure on the Union forces there. The remaining two Rebel brigades, along with Jackson, swung west of Kernstown (not has far west as historically) to outflank the forces on Pritchard’s Hill, to engage and destroy the northernmost Union force. Hopefully, the strong Union force on Pritchard’s Hill could be bypassed, and inflict minimal damage on the bypassing Confederate forces.

It was a Dog Fight.

The Confederate cavalry brigade wore down its weaker opponent, forcing the ford and eventually destroying the Union cavalry brigade. As ordered, it moved to the north.

Garnett’s Brigade engaged in a slugfest with its Union opponents east of Kernstown, forcing the ford, pinning them, while taking long range fire casualties from Pritchard’s Hill. Two Union regiments had the misfortune of suffering ammunition depletion on their very first turn! Resupply did occur, but the supply wagon was captured by the marauding Confederate cavalry brigade. Despite these mishaps, the Union forces stopped Garnett’s advance, with both sides suffering heavy casualties.

Jackson’s two brigade flanking force engaged elements of the Union’s reserve brigade which had moved south to prevent a flanking attack on Pritchard’s Hill. As this fight developed, the advancing Confederate forces were attacked in the flank by units from Pritchard’s Hill, barely beating off these attackers during the melee phase.

After these attacks, which disordered but failed to stop Jackson, the Union forces continued to hold Pritchard’s Hill, with the now depleted Union reserve units beginning a slow withdrawl to their original position, under some pressure from a beat-up Confederate force.

I didn’t go to the effort of counting up victory points, but I’m pretty sure this was, at least, a Union tactical victory.

More thoughts on the game and system in my next post. Have to set up Wilson’s Creek!