So what do I mean by "coordinating instructions?" Well, to be honest, "Coordinating Instructions" are a term I borrowed from the US Army 5 paragraph Operations Order (OPORD) that fit nicely with our topic (developing a LFoD scenario - stay with me here!). Wikipedia (which heavily quotes the US Army's Field Manual 5-0 The Operations Process) shows the Coordinating Instructions for the upcoming operation as being correctly placed in Paragraph 3 (Execution), section h.
Operations Order Coordinating Instructions consist of the following:
h. Coordinating Instructions.
- (1) Time or condition when the plan or order becomes effective.
- (2) CCIR (Commander's Critical Information Requirements)
- (3) EEFI (Essential Elements of Friendly Information)
- (4) Risk Reduction Control Measures.
- (5) Rules of Engagement.
- (6) Environmental Considerations.
- (7) Force Protection.
While not all of the above categories are good for our purposes, certainly the time frame, EEFI, rules of engagement, and environmental considerations are key ingredients for writing a wargame scenario. (note I did not say write a "good" wargaming scenario). For me, the scenario considerations for the Hubbardton Scenario need to cover the following aspects of the battle:
- Turn Length
- Victory Conditions
- Reinforcements
- Starting Positions
Some of these are clearly easier than others for reasons I'll explain. Let's get into it.
Game Turn Length.
The turns in LFoD represent "20-30 minutes of real time." Easy enough. The battle itself started around 0630 hours and lasted until 0930 hours. That's 3 hours of engagement time which is 6 to 9 turns. I'm inclined to say 9 turns because 6 just doesn't sound long enough. So 9 turns representing 3 hours. Check. (That was easy.). Scenario turn length is 9 turns.
Victory Conditions
The British. This is not so easy. There are numerous historical records that aren't kind to BG Fraser, especially because he did not wait for Von Riedesel as the two had mutually planned the evening before. What was Fraser thinking? The loyalist scouts, and prisoners taken, identified that there were solid units of the Continentals on the road ahead waiting for the British, so what was Fraser wanting to accomplish by attacking with haste? Von Riedesel did not speak highly of Fraser in writing about the battle, and blamed the German casualties on his [Fraser's] fool-hardiness and haste to get into battle "for glory."
At Fraser's own death on the Saratoga battlefield a few months later, he lamented his own ambition.
This is all speculation, of course. Fraser had some of the best of the British Army in North America with him at the time. The these were highly motivated, spirited, and disciplined troops as well as picked officers. Morale was still running high. Since Fraser commanded an advanced guard whose job it was to maintain contact with the enemy's retreating forces, we can probably safely assume that Fraser needed to breakthrough the road to Castleton and maintain contact with St Clair's main force (this was his job from General Burgoyne). Fraser saw the campfires himself and the lead elements that made contact understood there to be Americans on the ridge to their east (present day Monument Hill) so he needed to deal with them to keep the road open. "Dealing with them" assumes he would need to break the American force.
That's a long way of saying the British objectives are:
1. Seal the road to Castleton (Capture the area around the Selleck Cabin where the road leads off-table)2. Capture the hill (where the Warner's rear-guard is mostly encamped).3. Break the American force.
It's an even tougher job to assign objectives to the American force. Warner, remember, is tasked with buying time for St Clair's forces to put distance between them and the British, hence saving "the Northern Department" of the Continental Army. His job is not to defeat the British, necessarily. Just to force them to deploy and fight, for a bit. Seems kind of wonky (but not impossible) for assigning a wargame scenario objective. Like any American force fighting an AWI battle, your other directive is simply to survive to fight another day. And so force preservation is important.
That's a long way of saying the American objectives are:
1. Hold the road exit to Castleton preventing the British from access to St Clair's force 6 miles away.2. Preserve the force. Pretty broad? Okay end the day with 2 of 3 fighting regiments intact and not routed.
These objectives leave the player with maximum flexibility to manage the battle as the commander sees fit, just like Fraser and Warner, who were operating with much autonomy on the day. With those objectives, maybe we can explore why certain actions occurred as they did.
So in translating this to a scenario, I'm going to attempt victory conditions for both sides, taking the historical objectives into account:
British Glorious Victory:
Secure all objectives under 9 turns, without use of any Hessians. (Fraser expressly requested British reinforcements from Burgoyne, and it was widely assumed (and Ketchum writes) that he did not care for working with his German allies). This will prove tough, but would give you just the glory needed for that next promotion.
British Tactical Victory:
Secure 2 of 3 objectives above.
Anything else and your "losses were in vain!" as Von Riedesel complained to his wife after the battle.
Major American Victory:
Hold the road to Castleton open for 8 turns and escape with all 3 regiments intact is a big feather in Warner's cap.
American Tactical Victory:
Escape with all 3 Regiments on turn 9 either up the Pittsford Ridge exit or down the Castleton Road is a tactical victory
If both sides both achieve their major or tactical objectives for victory, use stand losses to determine a winner. American stands are worth 1 point to the British. British stands are worth 1.5 points (General Burgoyne is going to need those men in a few months at Saratoga!).
Reinforcements
Pretty easy. The lead elements of Fraser's column, the 24th Foot with the lights behind them, engaged the pickets of the 2nd New Hampshire at Sucker Brook after coming off the saddle of Sargent Hill. The advanced pickets further up the road were driven back by the Loyalist and Indian Scouts, but to keep the table manageable, we'll start the action at Sucker Brook. This occurs at 0630 hours, the start of the game. Behind the 24th Foot, the Lights and Grenadiers are in March Column already on the table. The biggest question for this scenario to me is when should the Hessians arrive on the field?
The Vermont Historical Society paper referenced in our first post on the subject puts the Hessians arriving at 0845 hours. That would be turn 7 arriving along the military road to Fort Ticonderoga passing over the saddle atop Sargent Hill. If units are only moving 6" per turn or even 9" per turn Im not sure that's enough time for them to cross the distance, scale the draw next to Monument Hill and flank the 11th Massachusetts as happened historically. So while I'm content to put it at Turn 7 for now, that could be subject change! Hessians arrive on the military road in column on Turn 7.
Starting Positions
We've covered the British starting positions including their order of march in "reinforcements" above with the British elements mostly in column except for the loyalist scouts and 24th Foot who engaged the 2nd New Hampshire pickets at 0630 hours. Those units will start deployed. The 11th Mass, main body of the 2nd New Hampshire, and Warner's "Continentals" or "Green Mountain Boys" depending on your perspective, all start in march column along the Castleton road east of the open area atop "Monument Hill" with the 2nd New Hampshire the furthest unit north, immediately to the South on the road are the 11th Massachussets troops, then Warners Regiment, who were all making preparations to march south to Castleton when the British struck. Most troops are in column formation along the major roads depicted except the pickets who are engaging on turn 1.
I have to admit, this part of the scenario design has been fun and allowed me to flex a little bit of creativity. Next post will be centered around developing the map and play area for Hubbardton! After that, I'll post a final "product" that you'll be able to download to play the battle for yourself if you feel so inclined. If you do, be sure to give me feedback as I'd love to hear how it went for you! Perhaps I can convince Ken to put the battle on with his 28mm AWI troopers (even though I have custom units painted up just for this battle in 15mm. No reason we couldn't play it twice!).
So what else have we been working on? Well, for starters painting up more 15mm AWI troops to prep for when it's my turn to host a game with our group. I've also been playing around with some Seven Years War rules sets and even a slightly "home brewed" set on hexes that I've been testing.
Lots of excitement going on at the Sound Officers Call Tavern, so put on that tricorne, grab your musket, powder and ball and let's head out!
I like your work here. When completed, I may give your scenario a try.
ReplyDeleteThank you, Jonathan. I hope you do try it after it's been posted. I'll be looking for feedback. I think it will make for a very manageable and tense game with whatever rules are used.
DeleteVery nicely presented Steve. I do like (and appreciate) the insight into scenario construction - also interested to read that Live Free or Die might work with the larger scales, I had thought, probably because of the Little Wars TV Brandywine game that they were a 10mm styled ruleset.
ReplyDeleteThank you, Norm! I'm not sure I can produce a scenario that looks as good as the Little Wars team makes them, but I'll give it a try. For me, this is one of the most enjoyable aspects of the hobby - the historical context and the research.
DeleteI think the game would work good with bigger scales - you'd just need to tweak the proportions I think? You are correct, though, they are gearing it towards 10 and 15mm (based on 1x1" squares).
Stay tuned!
Well, I plan to test it with my single element BMUs and Field of Honor.
DeleteSuperb work Steve. Really enjoying the analysis here.
ReplyDeleteAlso loving the opord analysis. Though, I guess risk reduction would end up making the scenario fair - something I am never good at (just ask Sgt Steiner ;) )
(also love the fact that Riedesel sounded off to his Missues after the battle; 'yes dear,' she probably said, undoubtedly having something more important to do than listen to his crap :)) ...or Ja Mein Liebchen!' )
thanks Darren yeah it's amazing the things you find out about when you do research! Riedel complaining! I cant wait to play it!
DeleteThat's a very interesting post Steve and certainly a good basis on what to consider when constructing a historical (or non-historical for that matter) scenario. I love the research part of any project as even small bits of information can give one ideas on how to tweak a scenario, give some alternative options etc. Keep up the good work:)
ReplyDeleteMany thanks, Steve! I'm having alot of fun in writing this and I hope some of it has been useful. the small human elements of the commanders or the condition of the troops come out in the research and it's fun to try to put that into the wargame. it really puts things in a different perspective when you know some of the officers' or soldiers' personal feelings or thoughts in what they were doing and how they were doing them. maybe it makes the experience richer?
DeleteLike the others, I appreciate the setting out of your thinking and scenario development.
ReplyDeleteI plan to give it a go with Loose Files & American Scramble. Even though I haven’t got any Germans. Yet. Well they do arrive late don’t they 😉
interestingly enough, the Live Free or Die rules are actually based on LF&AS! i hope you have enjoyed the scenario development so far! stay tuned sir!
Delete