28mm skirmish level rules?

[Tim Haslam]

Funnily enough, a few years ago I had the full set of Warhammer Historical WWI books, but sold them all!! Doh 

Has anybody released an unofficial Bolt Action set that covers WWI?

[Ewan]

http://www.gajominis.com/blog/scenarios/bolt_action_ww1.pdf

[katie]

There's an interesting looking (haven't tried it yet) set of mods for "The Men Who Would Be Kings" called "Foch".

Uses less figures than WH:GW and seems to have much less fiddly melee.

[Tim Haslam]

Thanks chaps,

I’ll look into those links.
Undecided which way to go, WWI or Korean War, sort of expanding outwards from my WWII gaming?

[aphillathehun]

Chain of Command adaptation for WW1 is pretty fun.

[huevans]

I would be interested in WW1 skirmish for about 20 figures per side. So probably half-sections, rather than individual figures.

My idea is some small scale raiding along the German and Belgian coast. Royal Marines and Tars destroying small installations and Reichsmarine and Reichsarmee defending. Like a micro version of the Zeebrugge raid.

It's the only way I can think of to get around endless trench raiding scenarios.

I would need small boat and motor launch rules as well. One of my scenario ideas was mounting my raiding force in a dirigible for inland raiding.

[Pan Marek]

The guys from Blood&Plunder released a WWI set just as the pandemic hit.  Its called Blood&Valour, and the mechanics are supposedly to be similar.
But given when it was released, I haven't seen many reviews yet.

[monk2002uk]

There is no need for any major mods to WW2 Bolt Action. The basic mechanics are fine, even for the earliest phase of the war. Despite what is often written, fire and manoeuvre were used down to squad/section levels in August 1914. The only changes relate to the availability of weapons, depending on the phase of the war. With vehicles, there are some specific stats needed to cover the likes of the tanks. What period and theatre of the war are you most interested in?

Robert

[Tim Haslam]

Not really sure on period, it’s more a case of what figures I fancy painting!
So for example if Copplestone had some WWI figures I’d probably look into them?
Other ranges mentioned above, possibly ‘tickle my fancy’ too 

(Lol, a very old phrase!)

[NurgleHH]

We used Triumph&Tragedy for WW1. I works well.

An alternative is Fistful of lead: Big Battles and Fistful of lead by Wiley Games. FFoL:BB is for small units and FFoL is for small games up to 10 Soldiers

[huevans]

There is no need for any major mods to WW2 Bolt Action. The basic mechanics are fine, even for the earliest phase of the war. Despite what is often written, fire and manoeuvre were used down to squad/section levels in August 1914. The only changes relate to the availability of weapons, depending on the phase of the war. With vehicles, there are some specific stats needed to cover the likes of the tanks. What period and theatre of the war are you most interested in?

Robert

Can you recommend a book or website that covers this, Monk?

[monk2002uk]

There isn't a single book (at the moment) but there are numerous examples spread throughout the literature. Let me find these quotes, many of which I have published online. An excellent pre-war book in English is "Company Training" by General Haking. This book was first published in 1913. You can still pick up second-hand copies. It is a very detailed description of how infantry companies should be trained. Lots of information, particularly around how scouts were to be used. Fire and manoeuvre features very heavily throughout. Haking covered a range of scenarios, including frontal assaults, advance and rear guards, defending trenches, river crossings, and so forth.

An example from Haking's book, bearing in mind that this was published before the war:

"This brings us to one of the main principles of the encounter engagement, which is that every company should constantly press forward and thus maintain the offensive and throw the enemy on the defensive..."

So far this is consistent with the level that one normally reads about, ie the company is the focus. Haking goes on to elaborate in more detail:

"The ground is not likely to favour either side, except that it will favour the side that knows best how to use it. It is probable that the direction of the advance will be more difficult to maintain... and consequently company commanders must be prepared to withdraw sections from their firing line when they find that their companies are being squeezed out of the fight, and push forward sections when gaps occur. It is essential that a strong firing line should be deployed and maintained from the first, because every effort must be made to obtain superiority of fire as soon as possible, that being the only means of continuing the attack and throwing the enemy definitely on the defensive. The company, therefore, from the first would deploy two or perhaps three sections in the firing line and retain the remainder ready to reinforce at any moment; because if both sides are advancing against each other the engagement will develop very rapidly, and superiority of fire may depend upon the immediate arrival of reinforcements."

Robert

[monk2002uk]

Picking up on Haking's comments, you can see similar reflected in the various Regulations that were published by all sides before the war. Here is an extract from the British Musketry Regulations 1909 version. Musketry was the term given to collective rifle firing by groups of men (the term had other meanings as well). Basic training started with individual markmanship. Once men were competent in using the rifle individually then tactical training took place in groups, starting with sections.

The Musketry Regulations placed great emphasis on NCOs achieving competence in fire direction. The generic term was 'fire unit commanders', which did not distinguish between officers and NCOs for the purpose of describing who might control a group of men.

With respect to company training, the regulations noted:

"[Only] when all the fire unit commanders have shown proficiency in fire direction and control, [will] companies be trained to fire collectively against firing lines at effective ranges."

There is a whole section in the regulations devoted to "Tactical schemes. Section and half-company exercises". These exercises took place before company training:

"Schemes... will be designed to illustrate the various situations which may be expected on active service. They should test the proficiency of leaders [including section leaders] in making fire effective on first opening and in regulating the volume of fire in accordance with the situation.

Mutual support and combined action should be frequently practised..."

Robert

[monk2002uk]

This example comes from a book translated from French as 'In the Fire of the Furnace', which was authored by 'A Sergeant in the French Army'. Here the author is describing the first attack by his unit, as part of the Battle of the Frontiers in August 1914. The unit fought near Mangiennes, not far from Longwy. In preparation for the attack:

"...the captain said only a few words. He was nothing of an orator. I was afraid for a moment that his speech might end in gibbering. He recovered himself and concluded. And the men seemed moved by it.

The company formed up again, by platoons, in columns of four. I considered my companions, one by one, with passionate curiosity. Once having left the wood, we reached the little hill-top... In spite of having been told that the modern battlefield is empty, I had never imagined anything so desert-like as this. Not a man to be seen in these fields which sloped gently downwards: it was abandoned territory.

Down below us, yonder, there rose a puff of smoke, then another nearer; a third; all in a line. They might have been bonfires lit by an invisible hand. The noise of the sharp reports reached us. We had stopped, silent and non-plussed. The captain galloped along the line.

'To fifty paces - Extend!'

We had taken up an extended order and went on marching, but with rather broken ranks. Our 'connecting file' [I think this is a mistranslation of serre-file - an officer who followed behind an advance] rushed up.

'Blob formation!'

[The unit then came under artillery fire and went to ground. When the fire subsided...] we raised ourselves up on our knees. Some aeroplanes were circling over us. Taubes, of course!

'Up you get!'

The neighbouring section had started off again. We advanced rapidly. Our serre-file came towards us at the double.

'By sections!'

Henriot repeated:

'Dreher, Guillaumin, by sections!'

We looked at each other, then I exclaimed:

'Come along, the 2nd [Section] with me!'

We covered a good bit of ground, two or three broad undulations. The bursts of firing grew less frequent. We advanced in rushes, for longer distances but not so fast. We felt comparatively safe."

Robert

[monk2002uk]

There is a longer German account here, also from the Battle of the Frontiers in August 1914:

Link

The whole article is worth reading but the specific points of interest relate to the advance in bounds by platoons and then sections mentioned towards the end.

Robert