This weekend’s English Civil War (ECW) game is based on the Battle of Marston Moor fought on 2 July 1644 near the village of Long Marston in Yorkshire. Here are some details:
- The Parliamentarian army was 28,000 strong, while the Royalist army was 18,000 strong.
- The Parliamentarians were led by Lord Fairfax and the Earl of Manchester, while the Royalists were led by Prince Rupert and the Marquess of Newcastle.
- The Parliamentarians won the battle which led to the capture of York by the Parliamentarians.
A close up on the Parliamentarian forces looking from Long Marston. The village of Tockwith can be seen in the background. |
Marston Moor is a big battle so the game is going to be very much themed on the battle. I am also using pretty much using all my available units for this game. My primary inspiration for this game is based on the scenario from the book “With Pike and Musket”, but I also had a look at a couple of other books in my collection for ideas.
“With Pike and Musket” is the primary inspiration for this game. |
The tabletop set up has an open area with a few hedgerows. The prominent terrain feature is a ditch across the Royalist army's front. Though crossable, it is treated as difficult terrain, impeding movement and any units crossing it will not be able to move and shoot. Defenders in a melee gain bonuses when holding their ground.
The tabletop setup with the ditch running across the front of the Royalist forces. |
The ditch is an important terrain feature. |
The plans…
The Royalist planned to defend the position and were not expecting to engage in battle until the following day. However, the Parliamentarian plan was to launch a surprise attack on the Royalists at around 7pm, which would give them a good few hours of daylight for the battle.
A view of the deployment. |
Order of Battle…
The orders of battle for the armies is partially based on numbers and the ratio of forces, particularly cavalry on the flanks. Parliament’s cavalry appears to have been pretty much split evenly between both flanks and their infantry in the centre.
Parliamentarians
Parliament Right Flank
- 2 x Cavalry units in two lines.
- 1 x Commanded Shot detachment (I used dragoons to represent them).
Parliament Centre
- 4 x Infantry units in two lines.
- 1 x Artillery piece.
Parliament Left Flank
- 2 x Cavalry units
- 1 x Commanded Shot detachment (I used dragoons to represent them).
Their commander has one staff officer.
Royalists
Royalist Right Flank
- 3 x Cavalry units in two lines.
- 1 x Commanded Shot detachment (I used dragoons to represent them).
Royalist Centre
- 2 x Infantry units in one lines.
- 1 x Artillery piece.
Royalist Left Flank
- 1 x Cavalry unit
- 3 x Commanded Shot detachment (I used dragoons to represent them).
Their commander has three staff officers.
This is where having only a few units can create problems. The Royalist right flank had a stronger cavalry force than its left flank, but not by a 3:1 ratio. I wanted to make it stronger, so I chose to place 3 cavalry units on the right. Parliament had twice as many infantry units, so the Royalists had half as many infantry units. However, as a game, this could prove too one-sided, so I opted to have an additional 2 commanded shot supporting their left flank.
The Royalist commander has 3 staff officers to the Parliamentarian’s 1 staff officer. This reflects the better trained Royalist forces.
A view from the Parliamentarian side |
A view from the Royalist side |
Starting the game…
To reflect the surprise Parliamentarian attack, the Royalist command will subtract 1 from all their movement orders for the first 2 game turns. See the D3 ECW Rules here, they were updated last week and a few amendments made yesterday to clarify rules and correct typos (thank you for feedback).
As with the previous game I will be using the solo decision cards to direct both armies. The ditch will be considered a game objective which will influence the Royalist army stance.
That's a lot of 'Right Flanks'! ;o)
ReplyDeleteI think making the Royalist right (the first one) stronger than the Parlimentarian left when it was actually weaker will give them a chance but I still reckon they'll lose.
For fine tuning of relative strengths you could always add or subtract from the number of hits some units take before being destroyed.
Thanks, I have tidied that up. I was a bit trigger happy with the copy and paste.
DeleteThis looks very interesting. A dozen units per side is a larger game than typically seen on your table.
ReplyDeleteYes, the game is bigger than I expected.
DeleteI look forward to reading your report Peter, Marston Moor has long been an ECW battle I would like to recreate, as it is my belief it was THE most decisive battle, and a turning point in the war, a bit like El Alamein was for the British in WWII. Not to be TOO parochial, but I should point out, one of the three commanders was William Baillie and the main reason parliament outnumbered the Royalists was the presence of a Scottish army, which doubled the size of the force arrayed against Prince Rupert!
ReplyDeleteAgree, it was certainly a decisive battle as the loss meant the Royalists could not retain control of the north of England. On the tabletop I only have one Scottish unit with some very old MiniFigs gifted to me when I was a young lad.
DeleteA fine looking game and one that takes me back to a Marston Moor board game we used to play at Uni, a real trip down memory lane.
ReplyDeleteIt is fun getting almost all my figures onto the tabletop.
DeleteLooks amazing and I await your report with anticipation.
ReplyDeleteThank you. I am looking forward to the game.
DeleteThat looks a good set-up. Looks the part.
ReplyDeleteThe ECW has such colourful armies, it so enjoyable getting the armies out and on to the tabletop.
DeleteThanks for the orbat Peter
ReplyDeleteThe Pike and Musket book is a goldmine for ECW
I'll try Naesby next
Pete
The With Pike and Musket is one of my favourite wargaming books.
DeleteVery much looking forward to the battle, Peter. Lovely set up, and ECW is a long time favourite of mine.
ReplyDeleteAny comment on the Asquith and Wise book? Worth exploring?
The book is a collection of wargaming articles on each of the battles. Being articles their approach is not always consistent, particularly the diagrams, but all provide a background, order of battle, and a suggested wargaming approach. There are 13 battles and some suggestions for a list of smaller period battles. All good stuff for scenario development. Additionally, there are some old school rules by Terry Wise that come with supporting explanation. A useful book, and I am glad to have it in my collection.
DeleteThanks for that. I’ll go hunting the book, with my expectations suitably set when it arrives. Sometimes the ‘collated articles’ books can throw up some hidden gems. (Like ‘Simple Campaigning’, John Graham-Leigh).
Delete