This engagement is pure
fiction yet one that I greatly enjoyed during our experimenting with the older DBA-HX
using 2.2. That was two years ago and since DBA-HX has
been upgraded with 3.0 I wanted to replay this “classic” battle using the same composition of forces.
The original game was
played on a 4’ x 4’ board with both sides deploying as per DBA 2.2 and this replay
made use of the 80 x 160 cm board which brought the deployment areas closer. The
Sudanese lost the first battle, perhaps with the newer version that could work to their advantage.
The original army lists
can be read at the following link. The reader will note some of the changes
made to troop types.
Anglo-Indian
command one, 3rd in command.
2 x Cavalry British
regiments
2 x Cavalry Sepoy
regiments.
2 x Skirmishers Combined
light coys.
command two, (CinC)
3 x Line Infantry British
regiments
6 x Line Infantry Presidency Sepoy regiments.
1 x Cavalry Presidency
Guard
2 x Heavy Artillery
command three, 2nd in command.
2 x Line Infantry European
regiments.
4 x Line Infantry Sepoy
regiments.
2 x Jaeger Nasiri
battalions.
1 x Horse Artillery
Total – 27 elements
Sudanese
command one, 2nd in command
8 x Cavalry
4 x Cameleers
command two, 4th in command.
8 x Horde (fast) levy
4 x Warrior Melee
weapons.
4 x Skirmishers musket
armed.
command three (CinC.)
8 x Horde (fast) levy
4 x Warrior Melee
weapons.
4 x Skirmishers
command four, 3rd in command.
12 x Warrior Hadendoa
tribesmen.
Total – 56 elements
Battle
This game followed the
standard method of terrain selection and placement as per DBA 3.0. Sudan, as
defender, rolled consistently to place 4 of the 5 pieces in the same quadrant and the Anglo-Indian player joyfully seized this gift and would anchor their
right wing among the hilly area and stretch the central command across the open
ground to end at the rough ground. The cavalry brigade would form behind as a
reserve.
Sudan adjusted its battle
plan and would fix the infidel’s main position with two commands of the
faithful while the Hadendoa and cavalry would encircle both flanks; the cavalry
on the open side on the right and the Hadendoa, through the hilly area on the
left.
Opening moves
A general advance by Sudan
was launched at the start of the battle. By turn three the turning moves were
progressing well while the centre two commands were making their way forward
despite the effective artillery barrage.
The British adjusted their
main battle line to counter the assault on the centre while the cavalry brigade
wheeled to the left preparing to charge the oncoming Sudan cavalry.
As allies, the Hadendoa
were not encountering too many problems despite their poor pip throws. Maneuvering in
compact formations a portion would occupy the Nasiri battalion now positioned
atop the hill while the remainder would skirt the position and take the British
in the flank.
At the opposite flank, the
Sudanese meet the British cavalry head on. In subsequent turns, the Sudanese
would steadily overlap the British and Sepoy regiments.
Middle game
The allocation of pip
scores meant the central command taking the highest score would progressively
apply pressure to the central British command. Despite having large number of
Horde, requiring an extra pip to move, contact with the British formations
would come soon.
In two turns, the Sudanese
main command stretched the British line to where dangerous gaps now appeared.
On the British right
flank, the reserve formed line to meet the Hadendoa moving across the valley
floor. The Horse battery unlimbered to the right of the line to add its weight.
Atop the hill, the Nasiri were fighting off twice their number.
By a miracle, the British
cavalry had endured the Sudanese onslaught for four turns with each side losing
an element.
The Sudanese central
command, feeding more troops into the struggle was widening the breach in the
British line. At the upper left, the third Sudanese command can be seen pretty
much in the same position as four turns ago. Recipient of the lowest pip score
meant the Hordes remained incapable of moving any further. Despite the low
score, the skirmishers attached to the command did move forward to engage the
British infantry.
End game
By turn eight, the battle
which had edge in favour for the British suddenly turned against them. In two
bounds, all the British and Sepoy cavalry were destroyed and on the left flank,
the Nasiri were wiped out to a man as well as the British reserve holding the
valley entrance. The two Anglo-Indian commands became demoralized and therefore game over. Sudan lost
15 elements (7 Horde) to the British 12.
Epilogue
The original game was
played in August of 2013 and though it did test some draft items for 3.0, there
were still many items from 2.2 that made the game longer to play out. This game
was finished in eight turns or just over an hour of actual time.
To the casual reader,
pitting 56 elements against 27 may seem excessive, but considering numbers recorded in such encounters the game still played well. A win for the British is not impossible as
this has already been proven. Keeping the artillery field of fire unobstructed is
crucial as even simple recoils will force the native opponent to expend more pips.
The Sudanese player used
the Horde to effectively screen his main fighting strength (warriors) from
enemy fire. Horde cost nothing, but the warriors do. If the Horde do manage to
contact the infantry, they will remain in contact as a “more than score” in
combat will have no effect on them. Horde does follow up enemy recoils including
mounted.
Cheers,
2 opmerkingen:
I did not realise DBA now extended to the 19th century. A fine action: open terrain, colourful troops, quick play. That the Sudanese scored the victory made a fine change from the more usual result!
Archduke Piccolo,
The Gunpowder Era variant, known as DBA-HX, was produced by the Humberside Club back in the 90's. The variant has been modified to accommodate each new version of DBA including the 3.0.
The revised version can be found at the Fanaticus Resource page.
Follow the link here: http://www.fanaticus.org/DBA/periodadaptations/index.html
Cheers,
Robert
Een reactie posten