As I seem to be on a bit of an ACW kick at the moment I thought I'd have a look at Dominion of the Blue and Grey. I've got a ton of Dominion sets of rules which I haven't even looked at yet, but you have to start somewhere. Having read through the rules I picked the Chancellorsville scenario as it didn't have any cavalry (to keep things simple) and we'd played it fairly recently with Neil Thomas ACW.
Battlefield from the north. This scenario focusses on Lees attack in the north rather than including Fredericksberg too. So we have the Rapahannoc on the left (east), Chancellorsville itself nearest the camera (north) and around it The Wilderness.
Hookers Union army is nearest the camera and defending. They have three infantry units in the front line, the two on the left are 'elite' which gives a combat bonus, presumably to reflect their vastly superior numbers and the one on the right is a normal one. There are two more in reserve. I added a skirmisher base to the Elite units to remind me. irl Hooker outnumbered Lee about 2:1 so I should probably have put more bases out for the Union units. In later games I put the CSA on a shorter frontage instead.
Lee's army has two ordinary infantry units, then Stonewall Jacksons flanking force which is both Elite and Disciplined (Jacksons outflanking manouvre caught Hooker off guard). I added both a skirmisher base and a leader figure to remind me. In reserve are another infantry unit and some artillery. Guns are treated very differently in this set to the others and I'll cover that later.
Both armies also have a pair of leaders - in this set each side can have a General intervene twice during the game to modify a a dice roll by plus or minus one. I'll use the leader figures to remind me and take them off when they are used up. They also have a pair of wagons as each side can attempt to rally two units during the game. Unlike the other sets, rally succeeds on a 4+ but any special attributes are removed. You can only attempt to rally a unit once and units which failed their reliability roll cant be rallied. I rather like that, and I'll use to wagons to keep track of rally attempts and which units have been rallied.
Finally, unlike the other sets, armies are defeated if they only have TWO units remaining and the enemy has more, so they will break faster. Steven argues that in the ACW armies seemed very willing to break off the action to reorganise and fight again another day, possibly due to the space involved.
There is no preliminary bombardment in these rules, and it uses a dice driven sector activation like the Blitzkrieg set. 1-3 is left, centre, right and 4+ is attacker choose. The restriction here is that you cant choose a sector in which a battle has already been fought (to represent some of the C2 difficulties in the conflict). Lee rolls a 4 and chooses Jackson to attack as it is the only sector with a CSA advantage.
Like many of the other sets, units fight in sequence, artillery, the infantry etc. Infantry hit on 5+ but Jackson gets +1 for being elite and the Union are on -1 for Jackson being disciplined. So a 3:1 advantage to Jackson. Jackson duly routs the Union right, and unit moves up from reserve immediately. This happens at once before any rally attempts.
The Union also get to choose a sector to fight and pick the centre, they also use of their Generals to take -1 off the the CSA dice. This then becomes a very one sided fight.
The CSA centre is routed and their guns move up from reserve. Artillery are most effective if deployed from reserve with another infantry unit in reserve (support), which they are in this case. Steven argues that they were far more effective defensively than offensively. You can deploy artillery in the front line if you wish, but they are less effective, and unsupported artillery can be overrun very easily by infantry or cavalry. It is these nuances which add flavour to each set but equally mean you need to read them very carefully when switching rules.
Lee attacks on the right again. They have the biggest advantage here and just to make sure they send one of the Generals to help out.
And routs another Union infantry unit. Unless Hooker does something clever, the Union have lost at this point.
Hooker rallies one of his routed units (shown by the wagon) which moves up into the gap. Now I've just realised I should have done this at the end of the turn prior to victory determination. Oh well, put it down to learning the rules.
The dice decree another combat on the right (rolled a 3) and naturally Jackson is routed! irl he was killed in battle.
That isn't so great for Lee. He has to pull out his last reserve, which of course leaves the guns in the centre unsupported.
The Union also roll a 3 for activation so fighting continues on the right. but neither side gets a hit. They are both saving their Generals for last ditch rally attempts.
At the end of the turn, Lee tries to rebuild his infantry reserve by rallying both routed units. Both attempts fail, despite Lee's personal intervention (he rolled a 1!). These units are now permanently lost and no more rallies can be attempted.
On the next round the dice decree combat in the centre. This has the potential for catastrophe. The artillery needs a 5+ to hit and fires first, but if it misses, the Union infantry will destroy it on anything but a 1 (normally a 3+ but they were elite troops) as it is unsupported. If the guns were still supported they would need a 5 (plus 1) to destroy them.
Fortunate smiles upon the Confederacy and cannister from the Napoleons sends the Union into confusion and routs them. Is it game over?
No! Hooker manages to rally his other routed unit and it fills the gap in the centre. It must be those superior Union numbers. That is the last Union leader and wagon used up though.
The Union are forced to fight on the left, despite them having the advantage (being Elite troops), both sides miss.
Straight onto the next turn as there are no more rallies left. The CSA fight in the centre and both sides miss.
The Union roll a 2 and the fighting in the centre continues. This time the Confederate guns hit home and the Union infantry are routed. With no more reserves, Hooker packs up and heads for home. A very, very hard fought Confederate win and surprisingly close to real life.
That was a bit slow as I was getting used to it and I made one obvious mistake, but once again it is quite a different feel to the other period games. Having set it up I ran it for a few more iterations to get the hang of it more. It is difficult choosing when to commit your Generals, it adds a whole extra layer of decision making.
This run was a complete Confederate wipeout! Hooker has all his units left, although one did rally during the battle. Once again Lee failed to rally a single unit.
This one was more of a scrap. Jackson routed in the first exchange of fire and very rapidly the CSA were down to a single line with the Union completely unscathed.
Lee did actually manage to rally one of his units, which was able to support the guns on the right.
But it didn't last and the Confederate left collapsed.
And as the reserves moved up to plug the gap, the unsupported guns were overrun by the Union right. Another Union win.
This run was very bloody from the outset with the Confederate right and Union centre both being routed. Once again the CSA gunners ended up in the front line.
Lee managed to successfully use both rallies which kept the fight going, whereas the Union only managed one and soon the Union were outnumbered.
And finally the Union line collapsed.
In all I ran it half a dozen times with two Confederate and four Union wins, so pretty balanced, and I felt much more on top of it by the end. Like all these period specific sets, there are some very specific aspects to the unit characteristics and turn sequence which you need to get your head around, even if the basic mechanisms are similar. I found this one easier to get to grips with then the Blitzkrieg set, although I deliberately avoided cavalry as they have their own special rules depending on whether they are operating mounted or not. Helpfully the play example in the rules is Gettysburg, which uses both artillery and cavalry units, so gives an indication of how they are supposed to work.
That was good fun and I'm looking forward to fighting some more of these.



























Good to seeing you playing this, Martin. I had a very good look at this ruleset earlier this month, thinking to change it to defeated units become unreliable instead of being removed. But in the end concluded this change did not add anything to the game. I now suggest though using the normal Dominion rule of armies lose when reduced to one unit and not two as stated in these rules, and letting the Outflanking Attacks model armies being quick to retreat. Otherwise, as you say, games can be very short!
ReplyDeleteI thought it was really good and very enjoyable with plenty of period flavour. I really like the inclusion of Generals and rallying. My usual experience is that one and army is out flanked it loses, so routing at two left is fine, but I've played enough games now that sometimes the outflanked force can still pull it off, so I can try the standard rout point. I've just ordered three more Dominion sets, thanks for such a great concept.
DeleteI saw another blogger cover these rules last night, but they used blocks instead of figures, which made the set-up look a bit contrived and too representative and now I can't un-see that when looking at your opening positions.
ReplyDeleteIt might be (for me) a helpful device for say when playing a boardgame or campaign game and a contact crops up, then reverting to this as a sort of 'battle board' type affair to resolve those actions.
I can't quite bring myself to use counters to play these, the figures (and terrain and baggage etc) are what bring it alive for me. For a campaign type setting I'd want to track army compositions and and have unequal forces etc. I do have various campaign frameworks I could try out, but it feels like a lot of effort at present.
DeleteExcellent battle report. This gave me an idea for a hypothetical hybrid Dominion battle or campaign. Maximilien wins in Mexico and goes to war with the USA or perhaps the victorious CSA. One would use the rules and Mexican imperial list from dominion of the Spear and bayonet for the Mexicans and dominion of the blue and grey for the Americans...
ReplyDeleteMark -
DeleteSince the Confederate States were inclined to support the Archduke Maximilian's French-backed regime - for probably self-interested reasons (Ooo, goody: somewhere to export our cotton without having to run the blockade) - it is more likely they would have formed an alliance. The CSA might even have suggested that Mexico could have, say, California back. That would very possibly have brought in Imperial France on the CSA side.
That assumes, of course, and for the sake of the narrative, that the standard of CSA diplomacy underwent a considerable upgrade. It was not that the plenipotentiaries were incapable; more that they were never given the proper authority, or anything material, to bargain with.
Sometimes the seeds of defeat lie within the cause for which one fights.
Cheers,
Ion
That presents some interesting possibilities. Perhaps a Mexican invasion of a sparsely defended California coupled with a second corps marching north to support the confederacy. Maybe arriving in time to join Hood at Atlanta. Alternately, perhaps the Emperor Decides to launch an invasion to attempt to retake the territory lost during the Mexican American war. Hoping to capitalize on Union war weariness and political chaos following the assassination of President Lincoln..
DeleteYes, I do think these have a lot of possibilities for a simple area movement campaign. I plugged Dominion of the Spear into your Peloponnesian Wars campaign and it worked very well (subject of a future post!)
DeleteMartin -
ReplyDeleteA very interesting set of battles. Of course, irl the battle was Hooker's to lose. Imagine US Grant in command - he would never in this world have pulled back across the Rappahannock once having established a solid bridgehead, even were Jackson's/Stuart's counteroffensive more successful than it was.
I believe that he would have instructed Sedgwick also to hang on on the Confederate side of Scott's and Banks's fords. Lee's army was much too weak to shift them once they consolidated their positions. Even so tactically successful, Lee would have had to retreat, and the war might have been shortened by a year (although with Hooker staying in command, who knows?). Hooker allowed that he lost the battle because, momentarily, he forgot he was 'Fighting Joe' Hooker.
The problem with ACW battles, and one of the reasons, I think, that the CSA could never quite decisively ram home their successes, was that the armies - even the Army of the Potomac - were so flexible. You could kick an army in the guts and sink your boot up to the ankle, and the enemy would grunt, give back, and then invite you to have another go. Most of the time the Confederates had by then run out of steam. So had the Union, of course - tactically - but they had the numbers and resources to provide them with strategic stamina.
That was a war that the Confederacy was never going to win - not with its inept policy-making. The policy-making of the political leaders of most of the NATO countries today remind me very much of the Confederacy's approach to affairs - foreign and domestic. The leadership of my own country displays the same sorry standard...
Cheers,
Ion
I'm still amazed that Hooker managed to lose this one irl, but as my recent remote Chancellorsville game demonstrated, it is entirely possible for the Union to lose decisively!
DeleteACW battles seem to be inherently indecisive because as you say, they can just fallback and reform, there simply isn't the same critcal terran as in Europe. Grants campaign down the Mississippi took months/years to develop, but with the perimeter pierced, the CSA were doomed.
A very enjoyable read, I have a set or two of the Dominion rules but haven't played them yet but this post may provide the inspiration I need, your series of battles certainly gave them a good run out.
ReplyDeleteThanks,I'm glad you enjoyed it. I need to play a few more ACW games to really get a feel for them but there is always another distraction.
DeleteThe Dominion rules are an interesting concept but I still need to overcome my reluctance / reservation. Your RCW reports swayed me and I bought a set, along with the ECW version. I've just bought the Mexican Revolution set - the idea is to kickstart painting figures from those periods but in small numbers initially ( a bit like DBA)- the figures I already have, but sadly unpainted.
ReplyDeleteNeil
As I said to Norm, I find using figures helps it come alive for me. I've just bought three more, including the Vietnam set, for which I have no figures at all! Thinking of doing a small number in 6mm, as you say, it is a kickstart to do a bit of painting and be reasonably confident they will actually get used. I picked up the ECW set to see how it differs from the older pike and shot one.
DeleteA great report on what looked like a great little game.
ReplyDeleteThank you. I don't normally play the same scenario six times,but it was a good way to get the hang of the system.
Delete