on G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T.: Bits, bobs and Wrap up

This is the last entry in my week long (OK, it may have run a little longer than planned) G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. review.

There's a few last things I wanted to touch on:

1. People debate adding a stop card to the activation deck - I swear it comes up every few months. 

The authors don't do that in their games and I believe they've even written against it in replies on the Yahoo! group (but don't hold me to that).  No matter, nothing is stopping you from doing it. 

In a solo game, I think it's especially worthwhile. They can be particularly fun with a turn limit as a victory condition. Some of the turns will race by and you'll find yourself scrambling.

Head to head and I can see why it might be annoying if your card hasn't come up yet and I'd avoid them in that situation.

2. G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T is in the old school vein I think. They don't contain rules for every eventuality. The umpire or the players need to decide things on the fly sometimes. In the words of the greats, when in doubt, let the dice decide. This to me is how rules should be. I don't want to be hamstrung by the rules. And I certainly don't want to feel like I need a lawyer to understand them.

3. Although the author's wrote the rules for 10 figure units and 4 figure vehicle crews, you're not limited to those if you think it through and you own a couple of polyhedral dice. Or just as good, you can keep your computer handy and roll using rolz.org or an app on your smart phone if you have one.

Examples: 

• 20 figure native units - use the d20 for morale, don't divide
• For native units I also like using 20 figures but still using the d20 divided by 2 or a d10, as it means they can take a lot of damage before they falter.
• Use a d10 for morale for 10 figure units instead (I've never really noticed any difference)
• 12 figure battalions - use a d12 for morale, don't divide.
• 6 figure cavalry squadrons - use a d12 and divide or use a d6
• 5 figure crews - use d20, divide by 4 or a d10 divided by 2.
• 4 figure crews - use a d4 or a d8 divided by 2 or a d12 divided by 3 or a d20 divided by 5.

You get the idea.

4. There is an active community centered around this game and if there's something you're thinking about trying, someone probably has already done it or can help you do it. Visit the Yahoo! group and the TMP forum both for Victorian Science Fiction and the G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T specific group.

The lists aren't nearly as active as say, THW's list, but certainly more active than many that I'm on.

***************

I recommend these rules highly - clearly or I wouldn't have spent a week talking about them - I have a lot of fun whenever I use them.

That said, I suggest skipping the compendium unless you have money to burn and just get the basic G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T rules (disclaimer: I've never seen the compendium. I just can't stomach the price).

You can play a few games and then decide if Battles by G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T is needed or not or if the compendium is worth the investment.

G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. is available in print (several wargame shops sell it or just search for it on Amazon) or as a PDF from WargameVault.

 

I hope those of you who've been thinking about G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. have found something helpful here. If you're still not decided either way, I suggest joining the Yahoo! group and checking out the group on TMP and tracking down some battle reports.

on G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T.: Another Objection - Too Generic

This was to be my last post where I wrapped this all up, but it seems I'm in a rambling mood and so that one will come later today or tomorrow. 

One common complaint leveled against G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. is that it's too generic. My first thought was perhaps they mean that there is no setting, no detailed vehicles already laid out, etc. But that didn't sit right with me. After all, the authors are more than clear that this is intended to be your vision of VSF, not theirs.

So what might "too generic" mean?

I have no trouble acknowledging that the rules are, minus the vehicle rules, generic. After all, if they were not, how are so many people using the rules for eras and genres never intended by the authors and doing so with so little modification?

I think when "generic" is bandied about as an ugly word, what it means is that people want more crunch. They want more accounted for than just a Shoot and Scuffle score. Maybe they want greater granularity in their weapon choices with more variety, and detailed hit locations. Maybe they mean that the only distinguishing thing about a figure is how it looks, not how it plays.

I can agree with that - how the figure is used in game is dependent on the players playing in the spirit of what's being represented. Is it WWII or 1889? No thing in the rules will make this obvious.

This particular complaint is , I think , easily rectified.

For the colonial era, for example, troop formations aren't accounted for - a group of extras for any era might appear on the board in the same "not too regular" mass, but the players can choose to arrange them in column, line or square if that fits their conception.More importantly, using skills (of your own creation or those normally used for main characters) as well as you own bonuses and penalties, allows you to differentiate troops even within the same army.

Your light infantry might always count as in cover, while your guard might get a morale bonus. 

More than anything, my guess is, those who complain about the rules being generic, probably want a simulation and G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. is, in my opinion, unabashedly a set of rules for a game. It doesn't matter what an extra represents. It doesn't matter if an extra and a main character are not the same scale of figures to real people. It's a game, not a simulation even if you're playing out a historical encounter and even if it gives a historical result. The name says it all "Glorious Adventures in the Victorian Era Loosely Involving Generally Historical Times." 

I'm not denying that the rules are generic to a point, but I contest the claim that this should be a reason to dismiss this particular rules set.

on G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. and the Solo Wargamer

G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. comes up fairly often as a game suitable for solo play so I won't belabor the point.

I just want to note the reasons why I believe it does:

1. Turn Sequence - G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. uses an activation deck to randomize who is going next. Each unit (vehicle crew, infantry, cavalry, artillery) and unattached main character gets 1 card in the deck, heroes and units lead by heroes get 2. Thus the non-player side may get a run of cards and trounce your troops and there's nothing you can do to stop it.

1b. Each unit can only do ONE thing on their card: move, shoot, charge or reload. This obviously is the case for multiple players as well. However, I think it goes a long way towards making the solo game interesting. Waiting for the card you want to come around can be brutal! Watch as your plans crumble before your eyes!

2. The morale results - see the last post. As a solo player I like when the rules take things out of my hands. When the King's Regiment scatters across the table, I swear under my breath and send the officers running after the men. It's an added challenge. Combined with the uncertainty of when they'll activate next, it forces the question, "How am I going to recover from this?"

3. The main characters - It seems to me solo players more so than those who game with others, tend to emphasize the narrative aspect of their games and the exploits of individual characters in particular. Having characters on the table makes it that much easier to tell a story - at least for me. Sure, you can add character figs to any rule set, but having them a part of the rules as written encourages the creation of stories - without having to fiddle with the rules.

Now, Soldier's Companion might do this better as it's a wargame written to accompany an RPG, and every TSATF write-up I've ever read includes at least a commander as a character, so this isn't unique to G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T.

3b. Saving rolls - This is by no means uniquely advantageous to solo play, but it does support story telling. Saving rolls add something of a pulp feel to the game - brave men and women who keep fighting long after others would have quit the field. Or perhaps it just represents that they are individuals while the extras are some nebulous quantity. Or maybe it's just that Lady Luck smiles on them. In any case, it's a small thing but being able to tell a continuing story about the same characters is something I find makes my games more enjoyable.

Next up: The wrap up including what's "wrong" and any other bits I meant to mention but didn't.

On G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T.: the Much Maligned Morale Mechanism

Morale in G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T seems to be a love it or hate it kind of thing.

I fall into the "love it" camp, so you can expect this portion of my G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T extravaganza to be biased in that direction.

Let's look at how it works first:

As in many other games, you test for morale when a unit loses a figure, when the army commander (if there is one) is killed, when a unit receives or wants to charge, and when a vehicle is hit (I always forget this one).

With respect to lost figures, the unit checks their morale at the start of their next activation, whereas the charge related tests occur at the time of the charge.

So far, nothing unusual right?

Except, where in Soldier's Companion, for example, and I imagine TSATF as well, the whole unit receives the same effect when morale is failed (they become frenzied, disordered, etc.), in G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T each figure in the unit can react differently. 

Yes, you read that right.

The reaction is determined by a roll of a d20 on the Morale Failure Results Chart. There are eight possible results, and, I can't stress this enough, each figure tests individually. 

You can guess why people don't like this.

If your unit of 9 remaining figures is forced to test morale and fail their roll (unlikely might I add), you have to make 9 more rolls to figure out what happens! That eats up a lot of time. As a result, a lot of people just apply one result to the whole unit (which, I believe Battles by G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T does as written) to move things along.

But I play solo, so I'm less than sympathetic to that complaint. Plus, to my mind, it's not nearly as entertaining.

The chaos that results from rolling individually, in my opinion, more than makes up for the time.

First it means that the unit leader, unattached army leader, or unattached main character is going to have to move around the table and round up the members of the unit that remain if you want to involve them in the battle at all (the result of the failed check does not carry over to the next activation). So, your army commander can be of some use other than just giving bonuses and your leader characters have something to do that makes them seem, well, leader-ly.

Second, when you lose control of your unit and some start firing away, and even better, some charge the enemy no matter how insane that is, it can bring about some unexpected results to say the least.

Remember when I mentioned the T. Rex vs. a unit of French Foreign Legion?

In one encounter, the beast tore up the unit as you'd expect. The officers wisely had ordered the troops to fall back and regroup. The mighty T. Rex set to charge again. This time, the legion failed their morale check and while the officers went scurrying over the ridge and off the table, one of the extras charged into hand to hand combat! Unlikely? Sure. Hilarious? I thought so. That game was almost 5 years ago and I still remember it clearly and I still laugh about it.

To me that's worth a 30 seconds of rolling dice.

Next up: G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T and the Solo Wargamer

On G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T.: Vehicles and Gadgets

One of the beauties of G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T.  is that the authors don't confine you to their view of Victorian Science Fiction. There is no fluff whatsoever included in the rules.

Of course, some people like fluff - witness expensive rulebooks laden with fluff sold by GW and Privateer Press for example. And I admit, it can be nice to leave this part of gaming to someone else. World building can be exhausting!

You really don't need that much info though to stage a game. You do need to consider what level of technology you want in the game though.

So, maybe you want :

• Only land vehicles. 
• Only what was available historically.
• Vehicles that can fly. 
• Vehicles to be in the early stages of development and more than a bit temperamental 
• Technology to be well established and reliable. 
• Technology that is prolific.
• Advanced technology limited to the imperial powers.
• Advanced technology limited to the invaders of Earth.
• To buy a few Warmachine warjack minis but don't want to invest in the rules and building a particular army, so a set of rules that can handle steam powered robots would be handy.

No problem. G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. has you covered.

Seriously.

Whether you want to fly around the world in 80 days, investigate the fauna 20,000 leagues under the sea or well, I can't think of any book titles obviously about steam power, the table for vehicle generation has you covered for speed values with respect to Steam, Sail or Swim power.

Vehicles and conveyances can be made more or less reliable simply by playing with the Start and Sustain values. Eliminate them entirely if you think the technology is perfectly reliable. That said, even the most modern of automobile engines run into trouble now and again, so maybe assigning a very low value to Start (and Sustain) is more realistic (that said, realism is hardly the hallmark of G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T.). 

Never underestimate the immersive effect of the hatred one develops for a piece of hardware that won't start. It's quite amazing, given that, in my case at least, they are made of cast-off materials cobbled together roughly.

To represent armor, G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. vehicles have Save values. So maybe that steam powered robot (Ok, its not a vehicle but it has vehicle like characteristics) has incredibly thick armor (and a high Save) but the mechanical rats of Dr. Nym have poor armor with a consequently low Save.

Although the rules cover randomly generating your vehicles characteristics, assigning them on a WYSIWYG basis makes more sense, at least for weapons. I prefer to be able to look at a model and know what it has, rather than referring to a vehicle sheet. I also game under the unsupported belief that walking vehicles pivot poorly (as the technology is in its infancy), while vehicles with treads pivot easily (45 vs 90 degrees respectively) and so I assign this as well.

A similar have-it-your-way approach applies to fantastic weapons by the way - although there is no reliability or save factor. This is easily added though if such things are important o you. G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. doesn't break easily under the weight of house rules, in my experience at least. 

So you can add "Reliability" to your Magnetic-Hydro-blaster, to be tested each time you use it, and if you fail, figure out what awful things might happen - be sure to include everything from the likely to the hilariously improbable. G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. truly let's you realize your vision of an alternate past.

Up next: the much maligned, but terrifically fun in my opinion, G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. approach to failed morale checks

On G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T.: Figure Counts

One of the first things I look at when considering a rule set is the intended scale of the armies and more importantly, how many figures am I going to need.

Figures in G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. are organized into 10-figure units. Usually this consists of 8 extras and 2 main characters, but you can mix it up as you wish. Heroes, a special archetype of main character, are typically not in a unit and instead are independent figures.

Main characters, heroes and otherwise, are just that - the important personalities your game is going to revolve around. Think of them as the stars of your narrative. It is these main characters that drive some of the more amusing G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. AARs around the Internet. They are an obvious hook for a campaign diary as well.

As for the extras, well, "extras" is a euphemism for "cannon fodder."

While the heroes and other main characters are clearly 1:1, it's not so cut and dried for the extras.

Read ten G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T.battle reports and you'll probably find ten different treatments of the same 10-figure units. When I first began using the rules, I called them squads or sometimes platoons, but treated them as 1:1 regardless.

The benefit of 1:1 is that all the figures can become characters in the narrative. Albeit, characters that die quickly.

Most recently, I've been treating 10 figures = 1 company, or around 1:20-1:30. At this scale, the extras function as the nameless, hapless, rabble they were meant to be.

Indeed, there is nothing in the rules that gives any hint as to what the intended scale is, if anything. So, feel free to call them whatever you prefer: squad, battalion, brigade, etc You could even mount extras with multi-figs per base to get the right look at the larger game scales (but just treat each base as a figure for combat and morale).

The often recommended starting force in G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T.is one 10-figure unit, one hero (a unit of one special figure) and one vehicle per side. Anyone can paint 11 figures and build a vehicle (or just use another 10-figure unit or single hero or a cavalry unit if you’re not into the vehicles). If you're a solo gamer, that's just 24 figures and two vehicles.

Heck, the vehicles are optional. As are the heroes. Until my Helvetica campaign this year, I never fielded vehicles, artillery or heroes.

For the longest time I had only 23 Foreign Legion and 30 lizard men and some toy plastic dinosaurs and this was sufficient for me to fight many enjoyable encounters in the Venusian rain forests and lost world islands. I now have another 20 lizard men painted up and 24 Prussians in the mix, plus some sad, but functional vehicles, but they were all added over 4 or so years. Their absence never hindered my fun.

As someone who didn’t enjoy painting much until recently, the modest figure requirement for good fun was a huge plus.

Some of my favorite outings involved only one T. Rex vs. one unit of French Foreign Legion. 

Doesn't sound like fun? 

Then you've never seen a single extra charging a T. Rex to engage it in hand-to-hand combat. Vive La Legion!

next up: The Heart of G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. : Vehicles, Contraptions and Crazy Science Oh my!

On G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. : The First of Several Posts in Which I Review the Game

The other day, Chris from Just Another Wargames Blog, left this comment:

You've been using G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. for this campaign, so I assume you like it. So, sell me on it. What do you like about it? How does it compare to Sword and the Flame? Do you use the compendium or GASLIGHT battles?

I replied that I'd post a review.

But then I realized, while writing said review that it was way too much for a single post. I'm already at 3 physical pages and I've not said all I'd like to. Now, to be sure, I'll edit the hell out of it to make it more succinct, and I could probably even write one in under 100 words that would suffice for 99% of the people considering G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. 

But hey, why have a blog if you can't ramble about a rule set?

So, over the course of this week, I'll be posting my thoughts on G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. I'll discuss the original rules (I don't own Battles By or the Compendium) with some reference to The Sword and the Flame (as I don't own this, any comparison will be based on what I found online) and Soldier's Companion (which I have and which I have heard is similar to TSATF) per Chris's request.

Look for the first post later today!

A Rear Guard Action by G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. : Campaign week 9

Riesling, soundly defeated in their attempt to capture the Sauvignon-Blanc capital, withdrew towards Fort Sinn (the former S-B stronghold by the name of Candide). Major Heidegger, taking over for the fallen Dietrich, ordered 6th and 7th Kompanies to delay any Sauvignon-Blanc advance at the Hills of Cordon Bleu to allow the remainder of the force to reach the fort safely and prepare the defenses. [4 turns plus 1d6 additional turns]

For his part, Colonel Duchamp was in no rush to send his sorely depleted army chasing after Riesling. His success had come largely as the result of the fortress and fortifications in the capital. Still he needed a more comfortable buffer and could not allow Riesling to regroup and attack the capital yet again. With only 5 more weeks of good campaigning before the onset of the rainy season on Helvetica, he was sure if he could hold off Riesling until then, he'd be able to regroup and make a big push when the weather turned favorable again.

[Forces were determined by randomly drawn cards]

Duchamp ordered his steam walker crew to advance and harass the Riesling army with its artillery. The walker would be followed by reinforcements as soon as they could resupply [ a roll of 6 on 1d6 any turn after 4]. Their objective was to drive Riesling back up into the mountains [either force one or more Riesling units to rout or by destroying one or more of them].

The forces size each other up.

Major Heidegger is confident in his abilities, but he is modest about it.

The walker under command of Sgt. Deneuve seizes the initiative and opens fire on Riesling's 7th Kompanie.

The shell explodes among the ranks. 

Chaos ensues! Hauptmann Carnap and a schutze charge towards the walker!

Major Hegel regains control of his company and  by sheer force of will, manages to regroup them.

Even as they regroup, Deneuve manages to send another barrage towards 7th K.

On Riesling's left, Major Kant and Hauptmann Leibnitz lead 6th Kompanie to higher ground.

Deneuve orders his gunner to fire again and again they miss (the walker also started up the previous turn)

The walker advancing after firing before reloading and firing again. And missing. Again.

Duchamp has sent 2e Companie to reinforce the walker.

On the Riesling right, Major Hegel and Hauptmann Carnap storm the hill.

Major Bardot, formerly Colonel Baudrillard's 2nd, orders 2e Companie to advance.

2e Companie forms line.

On the other side of the table, 6th Kompanie forms a line, the black flag of anarchy waving over them.

On the right, 7th Kompanie defiantly waves the Riesling flag (a single ant in a field of wheat) at the walker.

The thin blue and white line advances.

The situation at the end of turn 10.

Heidegger has fulfilled his duty and both Riesling companies fall back in good order.

A Trouncing by G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T. on Helvetica

Finally, as promised,Day 2 of the battle at Port Guillaume Le Roy:

Bolstered by newly arrived artillery, the Riesling left prepared to advance towards the woods to their front, intent on bombarding the Sauvignon-Blanc fortress:

On Sauvignon-Blanc's left, Guillaume Le Roy provided protection for 1er Guam. The town itself was protected by the Sauvignon-Blanc steam walker and 1er Companie.

From his vantage point in the town, Colonel Duchamp surveyed his forces:

As Oberst Dietrich ordered his troops to advance, shots from 1er Companie rang out and drew first blood from Riesling's 13th Kompanie:

At the end of turn 1, Sauvignon-Blanc lizard skirmishers of 3e Guam had left the protection of the fort as 2e Companie advanced to occupy it, while the Riesling right  (6th K.and 7th K.) advanced towards the woods:

In spite of taking damage the previous turn, 13th K. pressed forward, along with the artillery and 12th K.. Again shots rang out from 1er Companie and an isolated Dietrich was killed by what can only be called a lucky shot:

Morale markers ended up on all units as a result of the army commander's death. Fortunately, Riesling resolve permeates all ranks.

As turn 2 ended, Riesling's forces had reached the woods on both sides:

1er Companie had reached the fort:

1er Guam swung out of Guillaume Le Roy to their left:

On the Riesling right, Sauvignon-Blanc left, both sides moved into position for a fire fight. Ominously, the cannon armed steam walker finally started:

Riesling sent its left most unit, 12th K., to storm the fort only to be met by fire from those elements of 2e Companie already inside:

On turn 4, all hell broke lose.

Withering gun fire from 1er Companie in Guillaume Le Roy and the Walkers devastating artillery barrage took out half of 7th K. Having sensed the futility of this frontal assault, 6th K. fell back in cover and out of range:

On the left, Riesling artillery proved completely ineffective, 12th K. failed their morale test and scattered to the wind (you just have to love G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T.'s morale mechanism), and Sauvignon-Blanc's 3e G. charged home. The ensuing melee is best described as sheer chaos - the death toll high on both sides:

The melee and carnage continued into the next turn (Turn 5):

.

Although some elements of 12th K. rallied, on the right, things went from bad to worse for Riesling as 7th K. broke:

At this point, with Dietrich dead, Major Heidegger ordered the remaining Riesling forces to fall back and regroup.

A cheer went up from the Sauvignon-Blanc troops.

An unquestionably clear victory for Sauvignon-Blanc!

Has the tide of the campaign changed or is this too little, too late? Stay tuned.

******

I'll share my thoughts on the game in another post, but I would like to point out that I was soundly thrashed by a set of solo Non-player General Rules called "Solo DBA." I still can't figure out where I found them but I believe they might be from the Solo DBA Development Yahoo! Group. They do indicate that they are based on "De Bellis Solitarius" by Chad La Mons.

Battle at Port Guillaume Le Roy, Day 2: The Setup

To my surprise, I had time last night to set up and play out the 2nd day of the Battle at Port Guillaume Le Roy (part of my ongoing imagi-nations campaign).

Sauvignon-Blanc would have to defend their capital on Helvetica once more against the Riesling steam-roller.

I did my best to set up the table identical to last time as far as terrain and scenery, but troops would differ. I rolled for losses recovered for both sides,and as the victor, Riesling received a reinforcement unit: a medium gun with 4 crew. The gun was chosen, rather than returning all units to full strength due to the loss of the steam tractor - see here and here).

 As the loser, Sauvignon-Blanc had the morale of one of its units reduced, while Riseling enjoyed an increase of morale for one unit. Both sides consolidated their under strength native units to form 2 full strength units. Riesling had 4 remaining natives - a half company - I decided they would be assigned as a guard to the army leader, Oberst Dietrich, and then promptly forgot them when I set up the armies.

The weather held - but I decided that I would use a simple up/down modifier generated by rolling 1 green die (up) and 1 red die (down), adding them together to yield values from -5 inches to the base movement rate up to +5 inches to account for patches of soggy ground and very very dry ground (most rolls fell between -2 and +2 inches). I ruled that I would have to issue my order to a unit before the roll, whereas for the Non Player General, I would roll first before evaluating the available options.

For the supply roll, I ruled a -1 adjustment as neither side would have time to truly resupply. Supplies for Sauvignon-Blanc, as could be expected for a force fighting in and around its capital was adequately supplied, but Riesling supply lines, stretched thin as it was, could not meet the needs of the troops on the front. A unit was chosen to suffer a morale penalty.

Once again, I played Riesling and the Solo DBA rules (I think they're a later re-edit of these) guided Sauvignon-Blanc.

Speaking of, I rolled for Colonel Duchamp's disposition this battle and got "Aggressive." This was counter to how I would have imagined,but I remained committed to play it as I rolled it.

I laid out my force as desired but using blinds - 1 card for each unit, plus 1/2 as many blanks.   In this way, my troops might not be where I wanted them to be. Per the solo DBA rules, I rolled for the placement of cards for Suavignon-Blanc (1 card per unit and 1/2 as many blanks -1).  When all were set, I flipped them over and placed troops on the table.

Here's how the table looked prior to the first turn:

Dawn looms over Guillaume Le Roy as the two sides prepare for battle.

Campaign Week 8: Battle at Port Guillaume Le Roy

Here's the set up once again - Sauvignon-Blanc is at the top of the picture, Riesling at the bottom (North and South respectively).

I decided to go with the distribution of my force as rolled and attack in force on my right, while sending a diversionary force to my left. My primary goal was not to capture either objective but to force morale checks for Duchamp's poorly rated native units to drive them from the field. If I captured either the fort or the town, that would be gravy.

Duchamp's plan was not pre-determined but was generated using a Solo DBA engine that I managed to find somewhere on the web. The rules (guidelines really) state to roll each bound for the Non-player General (NPG) to determine their battle plan for that bound. Since I don't know what constitutes a bound in DBA, I decided I'd roll for each unit card.

In any case, the Solo DBA engine provided what i would consider a reasonable result overall. It does require player interpretation -the engine provides a list of possible actions in order of priority, but the player has to evaluate the possibility of implementing a particular action on the NPG's half.

Here is the general movement taken by the troops on both sides:

My obsession with arrows continues!

Because of the rain, neither side made much progress in the first 3 turns, although I did send the steam tractor up to position itself to lay down fire on the Sauvingon-Blanc forces gathering in and around the town.

Unfortunatey it was a gamble that I lost - on turn 4 the Sauvignon-Blanc walker activated first and fired scoring a hit which knocked the treads off the steam tractor. Since it couldn't move, it couldn't pivot to bring it's rear-facing cannon to bear. I ruled that the 2 of the four crew could fire out of each window with their rifles and while they would score a hit or two later, the cannon was out of the game as it pointed back towards my own baseline.

At the same time, the Riesling hero, Herr Lowenbraugh met his maker in close combat.

The disabled steam tractor in the foreground. Her crew bravely stayed aboard to offer rifle fire whenever a target presented itself.

Things tooked grim - without the tractor's cannon, assaulting 2e Companie which had taken up a fortified position in the town, would be difficult and expose the Riesling 6th Kompanie to fire from both 2e Companie and the walker's cannon.

G.A.S.L.I.G.H.T.'s close combat rules make it possible for both sides to lose a figure, so units can evaporate pretty quickly. Close combat turned out to be the game changer.

In the center, as a result of close combat, a forced morale check sent members of 3e Goum scattering - including several regulars which went off the table.

Remnants of a Sauvignon-Blanc Guam scatter as they fail their morale test.

The scrum on the left was a violent affair:

Monsieur Jones (Hero) is felled in hand to hand despite his impressive Scuffle value (15):

The 1er Goum was utterly destroyed in the melee:

1er Companie looks on - they can hear the sounds of battle in the woods, but their rifle fire can not penetrate  into the tangled trees.

The center is cleared - 2e Goum also evaporated - and the right flank, composed of  Riesling's  native 13th Kompanie, advances under fire:

At the end of turn 6 the game was over according to my victory conditions - Sauvignon-Blanc had lost all three native units and their hero, to Riesling's loss of their hero and immobilization of the steam tractor.

While I had won, I wasn't sure this should be the case - after all, Sauvignon-Blanc still had their leader, and both 1er Companie, which had taken one hit from the rifle armed crew in the disabled tractor) in the fort and 2e Companie, plus the walker in good defensive positions in the town.. If the battle had continued they would have fared well and it would have been Riesling that would have had to quit the field (a continuation of the game as a "what if" confirmed this).

Still, the more I thought it over, the more I felt like, while Sauvignon-Blanc could recover some of their losses using the campaign rules and maybe press on to another battle they would undoubtedly be outnumbered. Riesling had lost only their hero while all of the units were at least half strength or more - and perhaps more problematic, Duchamp would have to maintain order among a lizard folk populace angry over the use of their own as shields for the imperials in their battle for land which according to the lizard folk way of thinking, doesn't belong to them anyway - it would become a two front war.

So where does that leave me?

And more importantly, where does it leave Dietrich?

I see a couple of possibilities. In no particular order:

• End the campaign - Duchamp surrenders rather than risk his troops further.
• Suavignon-Blanc lost the day, but night has fallen and the battle can continue in the morning - both sides get to test for the return of 1/2 of their losses.
• Declare that Dietrich orders Riesling to quit the field to draw out Duchamp's army into a field battle where they will not have protection of the stone walls of the fort or town. There may or may not be a lizard folk uprising for Duchamp to deal with.
• Riesling has managed to bring up several artillery crews for the sake of conducting a siege on both the fort and the town (using siege rules from an issue of Lone Warrior). This could spill into a small naval battle (mind you, I have no miniatures for this) to blockade the port.
• Riesling wins, but now they have to deal with the angry lizard folk in the former Sauvignon-Blanc controlled region.
• Dietrich withdraws to draw out Duchamp. Meanwhile a naval blockade/siege begins on the town.

I may leave this to the roll of a die, but if anyone has any suggestions on how they would handle it, I'm open to ideas.