Leipzig campaign reflections

So with the Coalition breaking through to Leipzig that concludes the campaign after 3 months and 8 games (including warm-ups).  I thought I’d do a few reflections on the campaign to stimulate debate.

Games move quickly.

We played games of 20-30 units a side, with 2 – 4 players per side. The decisive nature of combat meant that in most cases it was clear who would win within 4-6 turns (3 hours). Certainly, in attack vs defence once one side is exhausted its pretty much over.

Russian infantry

They have interesting split stats with Training Inferior or possibly Regular and Motivation Superior or possibly Regular. They are old Regime and have a 1/3 chance of an Inept officer. This makes them tough but inflexible so very line-up opposite the target and go for it.

In steamroller mode they are hard to stop and have a good chance to recover hits. Pulled out of position they accumulate hits quickly (Inferior training) and if saddled with an Inept officer they are likely to not move that turn.     

Depth matters

Our best games were ones where there was enough depth to pull back damaged units and regenerate them. We achieved this when we used 20mm figures on a 4’ table and 28mm on a 5’ table. So for the best results in 28mm use a 5’ or deeper table.  

The attacker often wins.

We played through 5 campaign games and in most of those the forces were even. In all games the person who adopted the offensive won the game. Not what the maths would suggest as attacking means moving / firing and longer range artillery.

So why was it the case? My only theory is that its about mindset; on the attack you are thinking positively and looking for opportunities. When defending its easy to let things drift. I see this as a good thing as it says that tactics not maths are winning games!

So to next time

For the next campaign some things are probably consider:

• ·         We’ve tweaked the homebrew points system as we’ve gone but there is a little more to do on army-wide rules like Old Regime or Initiative pluses.
• ·         We need a way for a defender to respond somewhat to an attacker’s deployment. We could do more encounter games too,
• ·         It may be good to carry some damage from game to game but without making a single loss terminal. Maybe you start the game on 1 hit if you routed last time?
• ·         An overall troop allocation with Divisions built from that for more variety.