Italian Wars Project wearing the steel that's bright and true

[Atheling]

Nice mate.  Have you got any close ups of the game? If not maybe next time you and John get together?

[Doom Beard 78]

I left my camera at home  ( I had so much to lug on the bus as it was)
Spanish in two weeks time.  I am  tidying up the Jinetes for that game . Going to try for some mass firepower

finished the last of my Steel Fist Gendarmes , I have a set of Eureka Gendarmes which needs some repair work. Once they are finished I shall have 7x12 Gendarmes units.  One of the only issues I have with Furioso is the element basing  somehow 3 figures on a  base is not the same as a big block of 12 Gendarmes formed 6x2 or even a block of 16 formed 8x2. But other than Hail Caesar it seems that the element is the established bedrock of rules design

[Atheling]

I left my camera at home  ( I had so much to lug on the bus as it was)

Fair point- I've been there!

Spanish in two weeks time.  I am  tidying up the Jinetes for that game . Going to try for some mass firepower

It would be very rude not to with the Spanish post Seminara

finished the last of my Steel Fist Gendarmes , I have a set of Eureka Gendarmes which needs some repair work. Once they are finished I shall have 7x12 Gendarmes units.  One of the only issues I have with Furioso is the element basing  somehow 3 figures on a  base is not the same as a big block of 12 Gendarmes formed 6x2 or even a block of 16 formed 8x2. But other than Hail Caesar it seems that the element is the established bedrock of rules design

I have found that with so many very good rules systems- MEG is a good example- I took one look at the basing conventions and thought that units just were not going to look like massed units of belligerents!

[Doom Beard 78]

I suspect that its the legacy of WRG basing and the need to cater for people who are uising a basing standard from 40 years .

[Atheling]

I suspect that its the legacy of WRG basing and the need to cater for people who are uising a basing standard from 40 years .

True. It is kind of odd that the size of the units were not "updated" as the same time as the rules etc.

[Doom Beard 78]

I finished off my last Gendarme, the musician shown below.

Work is begining on the general  tarting up of my long dormant Italian wars figures , despite a long period in which they did nothing some of them seem to be showing some battle damage .

So here we have the finished Jinetes. An odd mix of Eureka Mounted Conquistadors, Old Glory and a TAG figure. The Old Glory and Eureka ones in thier plate harness and polished breastplates look a bit off for my tastes but I can't face getting in some more suitable ones from TAG.  Finally the task of TLC on a unit of 64 Landsknects ( 1 unit of 8 stands in Furioso) I do have another 24 Landskects which need to be based up , this will allow me to field a 12 unit block ( 96 figures)

[Atheling]

Nive mate, nice 

[Friends of General Haig]

Two very nice units.  Got to love a big pike block like that 

[Doom Beard 78]

I'm now working on another 14 pike plus some guys with bug two handed swords to get that pike block up to 96.

I discovered that I have another 2 unpainted TAG Jinetes plus 2 additional light cavalry  and some heart shaped shields so I should have 18 Jinetes.  I was hoping to have this ready for my game on Friday evening and I have booked some annual leave next week so hopefully all will be ready. 

[olicana]

I don't believe that I've missed this thread up to now. I'm loving the ambition that your showing for this much neglected period.

Great stuff, keep going.

[Doom Beard 78]

thanks Olicana high praise indded. I have to say that I have found your blog very inspiring over the years

Tonight I met up for my second game of Furioso; Spanish v French 250 points . The French comprised
1 unit of Estradiots
1 unit of Gendarmes
2 units of bandes noires
1 cannon
1 unit of Swiss

I had 3 units of Spanish pike , 5 units of Spanish shot, 3 units of jintes and 1 unit of Italian men at arms

We played for about 2 1/2 hours until time at which point we simply ran out of time. Neither of us were close to achieving a breakthrough ; whilst some of this was due to learning the rules, it did feel very slow.
 My plan had been to create over lapping fire corridors to blaze away with and to wear down the pike. However, at long range the shooting proved ineffective and even at short range it accomplished nothing.  The problem I had was that I had too many units for the size of the table ( 6x4). The 4 stands of men at arms formed in a single rank ( as mandated by the rules) Are really unwieldy and hard to manoeuvre given that they occupy a 32cm frontage

In combat the swiss drove back the landsknects in a slow and bloody combat , on the right gendarmes charged into pike in a combat which eventually saw the gendarmes worn down and disordered, while on the left a unit of jintes and estadiots fought each other to a bloody  stand off.  My Jintes charged into the artillery but failed to scare off the crew

Some comments

1) Gendarmes seem to suffer little ill effects versus pike.  A stand of Gendarmes has 4 attacks which rises to 5 on the charge, a stand of pikemem has 3 attacks per stand but can claim 3 supports for a total of 6 attacks . In the combats we played out 4 stands of gendarmes charge into the pike they get 10 dice as 2 stands can get into combat the other 2 stands contribute 2 overlaps for 12 dice , the pike men get 2 stands and then get 6 supports for 12 dice , so the combat is even Stevens. Both sides need 5+ on a D6 to score a hit - assuming average dice both sides get 4 hits and require a save on a 5+ to cancel out a hit. The Gendarmes have extra heavy armour which gives them an additional 3 dice to cancel hits, however as they are charging pikes they get a -1 to their save dice for a total of 6 dice, they roll average and negate 2 hits causing them to suffer 2 wounds, the pike get a bonus +1 dice to save as they are armoured, the roll 5d6 and save 1 hit, they lose 4 hits and a stand. 

I wonder if I am missing something here but the pikemen seem a little ineffective at resisting cavalry. As the game progressed my opponent's bad dice on the morale system meant that whilst he suffered no real damage from the pikes his unit eventually whittled itself away over the course of 5 combats

We are planning a third game but so far I find myself underwhelmed by these rules, Sadly it seems that there is paucity of decent 25mm rules for the early renaissance

[Atheling]

Superb looking game and I am (obviously) green with envy George- still it's great to see the pics of the game despite my predicament.

Do you think you might be able to find some "fixes" for Furioso? To fill in some of the gaps in the rules? Or is it too early to tell?

As an aside, it doesn't sound like the author has taken into consideration the firepower generated by (inititially by Gonzalo de Córdoba, but carried on throughout the various wars in Italy). Maybe there's a way of having something close to "close order" arquebusiers?

[Doom Beard 78]

The Spanish arqubusiers are formed and can put out 8 dice of shooting at short range with 4 dice at long range ( 10/20" ) FWIW I think that the shooting ranges are about right and that reducing the effectiveness of long range right is also correct.  Spanish arqubsuiers can re-roll "1"

I think its an interesting challenge as you don't want the game dominated by long gunlines but at the same time the arqubsuiers need to able to do something. 

I'm going to suggest the following fixes


1) cavalry charging pike should lose their charge bonus
2) if cavalry are forced to withdraw , the pike should not be able to pursue, if combats are drawn the cavalry should  be able to withdraw their full move away from the pike . At present cavalry can withdraw if after fighting 2 rounds of combat no wounds are caused. I assume that wounds means unsaved hits

I read the errata and was interested to see the resolution of a query I had, which relates to the way initiative works. If a unit has been charged and fights in another unit's activation what does it do in its own activation, the answer is that can activate and fight.

Finally I saw the Italian Wars supplement and wondered if this had stat lines for skirmish screens it did not.  I really wonder if these rules were playtested or even had someone proofread them

 

[Atheling]

1) cavalry charging pike should lose their charge bonus

Agreed, that should be a given really.

2) if cavalry are forced to withdraw , the pike should not be able to pursue, if combats are drawn the cavalry should  be able to withdraw their full move away from the pike . At present cavalry can withdraw if after fighting 2 rounds of combat no wounds are caused. I assume that wounds means unsaved hits

Yep, another given.

I read the errata and was interested to see the resolution of a query I had, which relates to the way initiative works. If a unit has been charged and fights in another unit's activation what does it do in its own activation, the answer is that can activate and fight.

 

Finally I saw the Italian Wars supplement and wondered if this had stat lines for skirmish screens it did not.  I really wonder if these rules were playtested or even had someone proofread them

I really can't comment. Maybe Ken akak Yarkshire Gamer can shed some light?

[Doom Beard 78]

clarifying my point about activation it means that a unit can fight more than once. However, if the unit has already than it only does so with 1 dice. 

I must say I find it amusing that people are looking to Ken as the oracle on these rules rather than the rules writer or publisher.  Ken said that he does not use points and has not even looked at the army lists so I assume that he has invented his own stats for the units.  I am slowly working through the last of my landskects, sadly I have knackered my brushes and will need to head out to teh art shop for supplies.