Saturday, April 19, 2014

Siege of Haengju Play-Test - Success!

Well even with multiple last minute player cancellations, the game still managed to go off with two players. Pat L. and fellow expat Hawaiian James (Kimo) showed up to give it a go. James is a former White Rock Gamer from Vancouver, B.C. He now lives a few miles away from me - he was an Infantry platoon leader in Vietnam and a member of the local chapter 407 of the Military Order of the Purple Heart. This was James' first time playing Hail Caesar, but got into the flow very quickly. Pat chose to run the besieging Japanese and James ran the defending Koreans. At the top of Turn 1, Pat ordered his three divisions to turn to their left with the objective of assaulting the flank of the defended position. His first division commander failed his command roll and basically bottle-necked the rest of his two divisions who had successful rolls.
Three Japanese divisions attempting to march to their left for an assault - the division on the far left failing to achieve this initial move stymieing the overall army maneuver.
The Koreans followed suit by attempting to shadow the Japanese's movements. James actually rolling a 12 for a Blunder with the first of his three division. He subsequently rolled a 1 on this D6 Blunder test and gained a casualty for one of his units in that division. This is a result from a simplified Blunder table for the game. Turn 2 had the Japanese deciding to move towards the defenders with some long range missile fire - not all of which were successful as the barricades provided covering saves.
Japanese at Turn 2 moving forward towards the defenders; having decided it wasn't worth the effort to attack the far right flank of the defenders. Pat changed his strategy a couple times in the game - from cautious to more, shall we say "Samurai-ish" as the game wore on
Turn 3 allowed the Japanese to move up closer, with not too much worries from the poor missile fire from the defending Koreans. Ming Chinese and Korean cavalry were allowed to attempt to enter the fray on the Korean's Turn 3, but failed their command roll to come on. In fact, they never were successful to enter the battle for the entire game of 6 Turns. This actually is historical as they never appeared at the actual battle.
Turn 4 with the Japanese moving ever so much closer
View from the rear of the overall Japanese army commander
By Turn 5, the some Japanese units were able to charge the outer barricades and defeat a unit of Korean defenders, thereby allowing them to move into the outer defense works. The Koreans did manage to destroy an Ashigaru unit or two in the process though. The Korean's Victory Condition was either to destroy 50% of the Japanese or keep them out of the upper level of the fortress.
A Samurai unit has entered the outer barricade area after defeating the defending unit in combat. An Ashigaru unit had been destroyed previously

Another view of the close combat going in inside of the Korean's outer defense work. This is historically accurate, as the Japanese did indeed manage to break into the outer defenses.
The top of Turn 6 had a Samurai unit enter the top tier of the defenses after wining their round of combat. The victory condition for the Japanese was to have one of their units reached the inner/topmost portion of the defensive position and retaining it at the end of Turn 6. This they did and the Japanese were declared victorious - unlike the historical battle which ended in severe casualties and defeat for them.

A unit of Samurai inside of the inner defense work at Turn 6 - retaining it until the end of the Turn and thereby achieving Victory for the Japanese.
Both James and Pat agreed it was a fun game and should work very well at the convention next month with little or no modification to the rules as is. The one thing that could've added a lot of friction would've been if the Ming and Korean cavalry were able to enter the game and cause some trouble to the attackers. It was suggested to leave them out of the game completely, but I plan to leave them, but maybe allow them to come at Turn 4 - contingent upon a successful command roll.

LATE ADDENDUM - here are copies of the rules used for this scenario, one each for the Japanese and Koreans:

30 comments:

  1. A victory for the Japanese! Nice write up mate, I think it would be a good idea to leave the Ming and Korean cavalry in the game, would have been very interesting to see. Excellent terrain and board, as always your figures look a treat. Very inspiring.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks for the comment, Nate. Yes, I think it is a very plausible "what if" - in fact, the Japanese wanted to be rid of these Korean remnants before any Ming reinforcements could arrive. Best, Dean

      Delete
  2. Well done, sounds like a very successful test run. Great to see a larger scale game in this period, and brought to a definite conclusion too. Cheers, Paul.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Paul. We were all very pleased with the game and outcome. It was also very good to play test to work out little things that wouldn't have been noticed until play-testing. One thing is I removed the requirement to have units take a Break Test on missile hits of "6" - just too fiddly when coupled with modifications for Shooting - i.e. -1's for long range and movement, etc.

      Delete
  3. Don't know much about this period, but this sounds great!

    ReplyDelete
  4. Great looking game Dean. Sounds like a fun and successful test run.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Yes, great looking game, Dean. By the way, you've just been Tango'd on TMP!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Oh no....I hardly go on TMP anymore - oh, well the post will be buried by another hundred Tango post in an hour :)

      Delete
  6. Great looking game Dean hail Caesar sounds like a nice ruleset. Look forward to seeing more game reports especially with such fantastic looking armies and terrain.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Simon - I modified the rules (which is encouraged by the author) to a very simplified version for use at a convention with players likely having little or no experience. Much like one of the players yesterday, James. Besides simplifying the Blunder table and Break Tests - both to only three results, I also removed the Disorder and Shaken rules. Very streamlined and quick resolutions. Best, Dean

      Delete
  7. Lovely to look at! I love the samurai heraldry and all the color.

    ReplyDelete
  8. Thank you all for your kind words and interest in the game! Dean

    ReplyDelete
  9. That looks a splendid set up Dean. It's always so nice to see a fledgling army being painted and then displayed so wonderfully. Looks like Hail Caesar is a great choice for this period. I'm glad the game you planned was a great success!
    Best wishes,
    Jason

    ReplyDelete
  10. Thank you, Jason. The collecting and painting efforts resulted well in this game.

    ReplyDelete
  11. Beauty in both the layout and figures. Although we have seen the heraldry individually, it is really cool to see the banners strewn about the battlefield. The color that banners add to the battlefield is striking. This will be a terrific looking game at Enfilade!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thank you, Jonathan. I hope the players have a good time with the scenario.

      Delete
  12. Sounds like a great game and it looks absolutely fabulous!

    I personally would allow the cavalry on a successful command roll. Thee things add a lot of flavour to games!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Burkhard. It's settled then about leaving the cavalry in as an option. Best, Dean

      Delete
  13. Dean did a great job modifying Hail Caesar and throwing some DBA in the mix to get a unique feel and quick gaming experience for the battle. I had lots of luck and James had some very bad command rolls! The game was well balanced and went all the way to the wire in turn 6. Thanks for hosting it Dean!

    ReplyDelete
  14. Wow... that´s ´totally cool!
    I´m so envy... ;-)

    ReplyDelete
  15. Beautiful eye candy, I regret never getting the Koreans for my Samurai forces.

    ReplyDelete
  16. Thanks, Gents! Fran - it's never too late :)! Best, Dean

    ReplyDelete
  17. Replies
    1. Thanks, Michael! This is actually the only time I've played Hail Caesar (albeit heavily modified) since the Trojan War game we played a few years ago. Best, Dean

      Delete
  18. Hey Dean. I posted some additional pictures that I took that might fill in some of the action. You can check them out on my blog at nwhistoricalwargames.wordpress.com

    Thanks again... It was an awesome game.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks, Pat. Those look great! I may have to invest in a new camera. The old Casio I have is about 8 years old and technologically inferior! Glad you had a great time. Dean

      Delete
  19. Are those the only changes you made? Smaller blunder table, no disorder, and no shaken, and no break test on "6" middle hits...anything else?
    Do you create any handouts for the con players?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. IT: I do indeed provide handouts to players; but I've found that most will usually want to just ask the GM (me). So, play sheet are very easy to read and grasp.Several more mods were made - not many, but I will post an addendum with the play sheets soon. Thanks again for your interest and comments! Dean

      Delete
  20. I'm sorry I was one of those last minute cancellations. Your figures and the game overall looks awesome! See you at Enfilade!

    ReplyDelete