Behemoth - Campaign Thread

[keyth]

Isn't there still a battle at Scarborough between Turenne's army in defense of the town against the attack from Waldorf? Presumably Deadtorious has occupied Reading

Yep.

[Waldorf]

I did wonder about that. Just awaiting instructions.

[turenne]

i also

[keyth]

Waldorf should set up the challenge, Attack, 1200 points each side (damaged armies round down, so turenne is 1100 + 100 for fortification).

[Waldorf]

No prob, can do this evening.

I've never set up an Attack scenario before - is there a special way to do it to ensure the correct side is attacking?

[rbodleyscott]

No prob, can do this evening.

I've never set up an Attack scenario before - is there a special way to do it to ensure the correct side is attacking?

"Attack" means the challenger is attacking, which I think is what you need for this scenario.

("Defend" means the challenger is defending)

[keyth]

No prob, can do this evening.

I've never set up an Attack scenario before - is there a special way to do it to ensure the correct side is attacking?

You are the Behemoth guinea pig for this It would be really useful if both you and turenne could give feedback about how you think the game played out.

Thanks.

[keyth]

One for Richard:

Are there any plans afoot to use blocks of less than 100 when manually setting force sizes?

Thanks.

[rbodleyscott]

One for Richard:

Are there any plans afoot to use blocks of less than 100 when manually setting force sizes?

Sadly not. Steps of 100 is hard-coded in the engine.

[Waldorf]

Thanks folks.

Assume we go for the "user picks" option as well when it comes to army composition as per Great Rebellion?

Is an "Attack" an assault of fortifications?

[rbodleyscott]

Is an "Attack" an assault of fortifications?

Yes

[Waldorf]

How terrifically exciting!

[Waldorf]

Game created. Fiddled around with the custom settings until I got 1200 vs 1200 on a 32x32 grid.

Comment "Scarborough for Turenne"
Password "donkeybotherer"

[awesum4]

Keyth,

another question about game mechanisms. If we have an army that has taken losses and we choose not to rebuild it in this recruitment phase, can we later build it to its original strength by simple reinforcement or would we have to "refit while remaining stationary for a move" to do so?

Thanks,

Andre

[Waldorf]

Scarborough is underway.

[keyth]

Keyth,

another question about game mechanisms. If we have an army that has taken losses and we choose not to rebuild it in this recruitment phase, can we later build it to its original strength by simple reinforcement or would we have to "refit while remaining stationary for a move" to do so?

Thanks,

Andre

Good question. In the manager spreadsheet on the 'Armies' tab, there are three columns that deal with this: Establishment, Nominal and Current. Establishment is the army's PV when created, Nominal is its modified PV (so with additions from refit or subtractions from splitting) and Current is Nominal less casualties. A simple reinforcement can be used in any turn to bring an army up to its Nominal value. Refit is only needed when changing the maximum size.

[keyth]

Army creation and reinforcement limits

Manpower and supply are deliberately kept fairly abstract, for reasons of admin if nothing else! However, I really don't like the idea of a 3600 point army appearing in the back of beyond, or a cut-off arsenal producing gargantuan armies every turn. To this end, I am suggesting the following additions to the rules:

The maximum size of a newly created army is 1200 points.
The maximum incremental increase when refitting is 300 points, 600 in Winter.

[Waldorf]

Parliament have taken Scarborough 53/25.

Tonight we shall feast on the flesh of donkeys!

Well played Turenne - the first time I have ever played an Attack scenario against a real person. Turns out marching around the fortifications is a wise move!

[Waldorf]

You are the Behemoth guinea pig for this It would be really useful if both you and turenne could give feedback about how you think the game played out.

Thanks.

Well I think it was a tense battle that I could easily have lost if I'd mounted a frontal assault on the fortifications. I played a "rehearsal" skirmish against the AI though and that taught me that the best deployment was cavalry in my centre so it could assist either flank and a flanking march to attack the fortifications from the side. Some early victories against the Royalist foot and dragoons that had ventured beyond the walls put us on 6% up, and there it stayed for absolutely *ages* as I cagily sidled around the fortifications carefully staying out of musket range. Meanwhile my medium guns on a distant hill were able to soften up the defenders.

If my central cavalry had been charged during this phase the outcome would have been very different, but Turenne had his cavalry on his flanks so he needed to spend a couple of turns re-deploying to meet my unorthodox formation. I was still shit scared that my Cavalry would be pummeled by the cavaliers in the centre, but I suspect that Turenne held his horse back until my infantry was well committed to the flanks in case they whipped around to catch his cavalry in a crossfire. There was an almighty sequence of turns when I was 0/21, but immediately after I lost 25% in a single turn to be only 25/39. Fortunately at this point the Royalist infantry caved.

I thought it was a balanced battle and had Turenne been at full strength with the 100 he had lost in his prior engagement I would have been unlikely to secure the result I did.

[keyth]

Thanks for the detailed report. I will tally up the scores later (sat at airport at the moment) and also try to get the rules up to date and published by close of play today (GMT) so that planning and scheming can get underway for the next turn.