Et sans résultat! Wargame Ruleset Review

Dear Reader,


What is a wargame? To some, it is a game, a way to see friends, roll dice, and enjoy a fun competition. To some, it is a simulation, scientifically calculated in a detailed manner as possible. For others, it is a way to connect with a particular period of the past, carefully reproducing uniforms and weapons in miniature. All this to say, wargaming is not one thing, it is many things. It is as much art as science, and as the recent passing of my friend Dean William West has reminded, art can be lost if it is not passed on and remembered.

Today, we are going to examine a particular ruleset, David Enteness'  Et sans résultat!, published by The Wargaming Company, LLC. You can find this product at The Wargaming Company website, and the UK and EU at Magister Militum. David is  attempting to follow the Flames of War/Games Workshop model of wargaming in the Napoleonic Era, in order to make this era more accessible to younger gamers. We here at Kabinettskriege wish him all the success in the world in that regard.

ESR (Et sans résultat!) is a rather unique wargaming platform, as it eschews much of the tactical level simulated detail in order to place the player specifically at the level of the division, corps, and army commander. It is thus, as it claims on the front cover, a "highly playable, perspective based wargame." Before evaluating ESR too carefully, I want to discuss the format of the ruleset, and then move from there into critiques and praise.

150 yard quick reference guide

The image above is the 150-yard scale quick reference guide. It gives a breakdown of the turn, and also gives you an idea of the high quality production value which goes into ESR products. Each turn is broken down into the Command, Movement, Artillery & Skirmish, and Combat phases.

A French Commander mulls over his options

In the Command phase, players (representing generals) Activate Orders, Issue Orders, and perform Leader Actions. In many ways, this is the most important phase. On the first turn, players issue orders. These include Attack, Defend, Support, Move and Reserve orders. An Attack order will move a formation directly towards its target (usually a terrain piece) at full speed. A Defend order will keep a formation in place. A Support order will keep a formation behind or alongside another friendly formation. A Move order will move a formation (at variable speed, with some latitude) towards an objective, while a Reserve order will keep a formation in place, and enable it to quickly transition into another task.

Once these order have been issued, there are dice rolls to activate them on the following turn, and orders may be delayed a few turns. Leader Actions allow the player to personally intervene with a number of special actions, such as committing an artillery battery, creating a detachment, or taking personal command of a body of troops. All of these are achieved by a dice roll which is relatively easy at the beginning of the game, but becomes increasingly difficult as formations take damage (or Fatigue, to use the ESR specific term.)

ESR Troops on the March

The Movement phase is obviously when movement occurs, but also when formations ploy and deploy. During the phase, the steps are Order Conversions, Movement, Ploy and Deploy, and Fatigue Recovery. Order conversions allow certain types of troops to launch fast attacks. Deployment is a very critical part of the game, as all formations usually begin ployed, or in a column of march. It takes time and effort to deploy troops for battle, (as it did historically!) and a division can usually deploy about 3-4 battalions per turn, or twenty minutes.  Formations which are attacked while ployed suffer a severe disadvantage, and will usually retreat. Fatigue Recovery is when troops shed Fatigue and become more combat effective.

The Artillery & Skirmish is the first of two battle-related phases. The phase consists of  Artillery & Skirmishing, Leader Fate, and Assessments. In this phase, forrmations can bombard and skirmish with one another, attempting to inflict Fatigue (damage) and Assessments (morale checks) on the enemy. Factors such as the types of guns firing, weather, and intensity of the assault influence the Artillery phase, while the skirmish phase is impacted by whether or not your army possesses an effective skirmishing doctrine. This is also the phase of the game where "officer casualties" are resolved, during the Leader Fate segment.

An ESR Battle in full swing

During the Combat Phase, brigades and divisions battle one another for control of the field. Compared with many rulesets, combat is streamlined, consisting of numerous opposed 2d6 rolls with modifiers added. For example, if a battalion of Landwehr was opposed to the Middle Guard Infantry, the French would add 6 to their dice, and the Prussians would add 3 to theirs. This is also impacted by the quality of commanders. An exceptionally good division commander might allow you to add 3, an average one might allow you to add 1. The goal is to beat your enemy by greater than 4, allowing you to breakthrough further into his formation. After combat, the formations who took part perform an assessment, once again a 2d6 roll which can result in the formation taking Fatigue, retreating, or breaking in a rout.

I will close out this review with a bit of analysis, describing features which players may or may not enjoy regarding the game, and then evaluating it as a historian. This basic maneuver units are the battalion/regiment and squadron. Units of that size are represented on a single base, or stand. The ruleset is designed for fast play and large armies. If you want to wargame the Napoleonic Era on a large scale, seriously consider this ruleset. Battles of 20,000-30,000 men per side routinely take 3 hours. It is possible to game larger battles in a reasonable amount of time, something that is usually not offered by highly detailed, simulation-type wargames. It is quite possible to be charged by a division of French Cuirassier, and resolve their charge in real time.

The battlefield awaits!

In order to achieve this quick-play time, ESR dispenses with much tactical detail. Indeed, this is almost a wargame set at the operational level. Battalions fight, but do so in base contact. Hussar squadrons make take an enemy regiment in the flank, but receive no bonus for doing so, unless not just the squadron, but the whole maneuver element outflanks the enemy. In example: a Polish Uhlan Squadron charging a Russian infantry battalion on the flank would receive no bonus, while a French Cuirassier division charging a Russian infantry division on the flank would. There are absolutely tactical aspects to the game (deploying batteries, launching intense skirmish assaults) but focusing on them misses the point of the game. Your goal is not to destroy the three enemy regiments in your front, your goal is to push back the three enemy Corps in your front. I was initially rather horrified by this idea: after all, wrecking enemy battalions is one of the more enjoyable aspects of games such as Johnny Reb III, Final Argument of Kings, and Warfare in the Age of Reason. It isn't the goal in ESR, and ESR makes no bones about that fact.

As a historian, I find ESR to be a breath of fresh air. The ESR Campaign Guides come with selections for further reading, it would be interesting to see that included in future versions of the ruleset as well. It is clear that David has done a great deal of research into this era of history. ESR has carefully identified what it was possible (and not possible!) for commanders to do on Napoleonic battlefields. The game does what all wargames should try to do: present the player with the role of a commanding officer in that era. If you want to discover what it was like to be in the 21eme regiment d'infanterie de ligne, go be a reenactor, or even better, read the extensive literature on common soldiers which has grown up on the Napoleonic era. If you want to be faced with some of the choices which plagued Napoleonic commanders on the battlefield, try ESR.

If you enjoyed this post, or any of our other posts, please consider liking us on facebook,  or following us on twitter. Finally, we are dedicated to keeping Kabinettskriege ad-free. In order to assist with this, please consider supporting us via the donate button in the upper right-hand corner of the page. As always:

Thanks for Reading,

Alex Burns

Book Review: On Gladsmuir Shall the Battle Be!: The Battle of Prestonpans 1745 By Arran Johnston

Dear Reader,



Today, we are going to examine a book by Arran Johnston, describing the key battle of Prestonpans during the 1745 Jacobite uprising. In this detailed battle study published by Helion & Co's "From Reason to Revolution" series, Johnston argues that the Jacobite army won an astounding victory at Prestonpans. He also indicates that previous historians have undervalued the battle, placing it only as part of a narrative which leads to final Jacobite defeat at Culloden.  Johnston sums up this sentiment near the end of the book, stating, "Hindsight makes us blind, but in 1745, nothing was certain. In fact after the Battle of Prestonpans, after victory at Gladsmuir, nothing seemed impossible at all." [1] Thus, far from a simple campaign and battle narrative, Johnston presents a call for understanding contingency in history, one which many historians would do well to heed.

The book is roughly 220 pages, with copious maps and black and white illustrations of key figures. On Gladsmuir breaks down into eight chapters, with one describing the geographic setting, two giving background information on the Jacobite movement in Scotland, two describing the operational movements before the battle, and three on the battle and its aftermath. The heart of the book is absolutely the final three chapters, where Johnston treats the battle in fine detail. The book also contains two appendices, detailing forces at the battle, as well as a letter from British Colonel Witney describing how best to fight the Jacobite army.

Johnston writes well throughout the book, but chapters four and seven are especially strong. Chapter four, "The Race to the Capital" depicts the attempt by both the Jacobite and British forces to concentrate on Edinburgh, and suggests that popular support, and weather enabled the Jacobites to occupy the capital before Cope's army could arrive.[2] The chapter describing the actual fighting at Prestonpans, chapter seven, is especially strong. Johnston suggests that Jacobite fire wounded Lt. Colonel Shugborough Whitney, who commanded the 1st Squadron of Gardiner's Dragoons, at a pivotal moment in the battle.[3] With their officer wounded and temporarily unable to command, the Dragoons took flight, setting of a costly chain of retreats for the British. Johnston uses previously unseen sources to provide details on this part of the fight.

The book's bibliography is a bit small for a work of this size and detail, but Johnston has conducted archival research in both London and Edinburgh, and at the Derbyshire Records Office. With that said, the work contains many quotations, particularly block quotations of correspondence, which really allow the reader to place themselves in the historical narrative. This book will be of great interest to both military historians of Britain and military history enthusiasts. It has much new information to offer reenactors and wargamers of the '45, and the maps are particularly good.

Arran Johnston knows how to write in an interesting manner, and is an excellent storyteller. The book's title, On Gladsmuir Shall the Battle Be! actually comes from a medieval prophecy.The author has spent a lifetime researching this battle, and is able to weave the history of Scotland, military history, and the history of the '45 together in a book ostensibly about a single battle. I highly recommend this book.



Thanks for Reading,



Alex Burns



--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------

[1]Arran Johnston, On Gladsmuir Shall the Batlte Be!: The Battle of Presontonpans 1745, 212.
[2]Ibid, 95.
[3]Ibid, 164.

Sgt. Thomas Sullivan Describes the "Forage War" of 1777

Reenactors portray British Soldiers (not of the 49th Regiment)

Dear Reader

Sgt. Thomas Sullivan of the 49th Regiment of Foot served through much of the American War of Independence before 1778. For a man from the ranks, he leaves surprisingly detailed descriptions of combat. Except to improve clarity, I have left the original spelling and punctuation.  This entry is his description of skirmishing around Brunswick, New Jersey, in the opening days of 1777:

"January 4th [1777]....

Our Army's leaving Trenton and Princetown greatly animated the Enemy, so that they crowded from all Parts of the Country two our suburbs, and drove the Waldeckers from Elizabethown to Amboy, where the 4th Brigade [of] British lay. They made an attempt to surprise that Town twice but in Vain, in order to cut off the communication with Brunswick by land.

The 33d. and 42d Regiments with a Battalion of the 71st Regiment, and some Companies of Light Infantry were stationed at Bonumtown and Piscataway, to keep that communication open, for the River was frozen up, so that the Provisions could not be brought from Amboy to Brunswick by water, the most part of the winter.

January 21st. A Detachment of 100 British Grenadiers, 100 Light Infantry, 200 Hessian Grenadiers, and a Squadron of Light Dragoons, with 2 three pounders, under the command of Lieut. Colonel Abercrombie, went from Brunswick to Forrage, with all the waggons of the Army, about 9 miles from the town, towards the Bridge that was on the Rariton river above Hillsborough,. Major Dilkes with 100 British Grenadiers marched in the rear of the Forragers, and took post in the skirts of the wood on their left, having the river on the right.

There were about 4,000 of the Rebels that mustered out of the woods, that attacked the front of the Waggon line, and drove off 24 of the English Waggons with four horses each, before the Grenadiers could come up. Major Dilkes with his party engaged them with two field Pieces, and kept a continual fire up, untill they expended all their Ammunition, at the rate of 60 rounds per man. Then they retreated to the second Party of Grenadiers from whom they got more Ammunition.

During this interval, the Hessian Grenadiers with their two pieces of cannon attacked the enemy upon their flank, and kept them in continual Play, untill the British Grenadiers and Light Infantry joined them. The engagement began very hot, but with their united force & usual bravery they repulsed the Enemy, driving them across the Bridge which they defended for some time.

The Forragers threw their Forrage away mostly, and made the best of their way home. Our loss in that action did not exceed 12 men killed and wounded.

January 23rd. The 28th and 35th Battalions with a detachment of the Royal Highlanders, under the command of Lieut. Colonel Prescott, went to cover the Provision waggons, being near half-way between Brunswick and Amboy, where a large party of the Rebels advanced from the woods upon them, with three pieces of Cannon. The Highlanders being drawn up and advanced to them in front; on the other side the 28th Battalion advanced under a heavy fire from the Enemy, and engaged their Flanking Party, which they drove to their main body. The Highlanders observing that the Rebels wound not advance out of the wood, made a charge upon them, which was always a terror to the Rebels, and put them to an immediate rout. The Enemy could never endure to stand for any time to the Bayonet, but if the King's Troops kept at a distance, they stood firing with Musquetry long enough."[1]

If you enjoyed this post, or any of our other posts, please consider liking us on facebook,  or following us on twitter. Finally, we are dedicated to keeping Kabinettskriege ad-free. In order to assist with this, please consider supporting us via the donate button in the upper right-hand corner of the page. As always:

Thanks for Reading,

Alex Burns

--------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
[1] The original journal resides at the American Philosophical Society, and has been published and republished a number of times. The most recent priniting is From Redcoat to Rebel: The Thomas Sullivan Journal, edited by Joseph Lee Boyle.