If you've been following various blogs over the past couple of months you may have seen a few of them referencing the Dominion series of games. Starting with Dominion Of The Spear (for ancients and medieval) then Pike & Shot (for ... well, guess) and then Spear & Bayonet (for 19th century colonial) these are ruthlessly simple rules for extremely quick games. Perfect for running battles in a small space or with limited figures (the rules point out that you can play just using pencil and paper) they also allow you to do such things as run a campaign in a few hours.
I bought Dominion of Pike & Shot simply because it seemed to be the one that had the least mentions on blogs.
The basic game is played on a grid (which can be implied; it's not that important). The grid has three sectors for each player - flank/centre/flank - plus a reserve area. Armies are built using points and will have between 3 and 6 units (with the author reckoning that 5 units is the 'sweet spot'). You deploy one unit in each sector with any remainder going in the reserve area. Then you're ready to go.
Troops are either mounted or foot and then either missile or melee. There's a separate class for artillery too. They can be further modified by the addition of armoured and/or elite traits. Each of the main four types has another type it's good against and another that gets a bonus against it. So, for example, missile foot is good against missile mounted but vulnerable to melee mounted.
The game starts with an artillery bombardment phase that can adjust the deployment, then develops into a series of combat rounds. A sector is selected and teh combat fought there. Missile troops get to fight first but melee troops have more chance of a hit. If the troops are of the same type then they fight simultaneously and can wipe each other out. Yes, there's not hits or retreats, A unit either escapes harm or is destroyed. It's brutal and quick. Units from the reserve replace losses. Once they run out a side may control a sector and can then use it to launch outflanking attacks.
It's a simple game and not that detailed, but it offers a few decisions as you play so isn't entirely a dice-rolling exercise.
For my first games I used my Great Northern War armies. They're out of period (the rules end in the 1660s), but I didn't think they were excessively so, and my ECW armies were down in the garage. I played a few games to get a feel, then decided to set up an historical battle.
So here's the 1709 Battle of Poltava pared down to the basics.
In the foreground are the Swedes - two units of elite melee cavalry and two units of elite melee foot. They have both of the foot in their battleline (right flank and centre) and one horse (left). The remaining horse are in reserve.
Beyond them are the Russians. All of their three foot are missile armed. One is armoured (the redoubts in the centre of the line). Another, in reserve, is elite, representing the Guards. Facing the Swedish left are dragoons (missile cavalry) and facing the Swedish right are other cavalry (melee cavalry).
(I added a small scenario specific rule that the Russian Guards had to be the last reserve unit committed)
The Swedish cavalry cut through them as well.
The victory was won entirely by one unit of Swedish cavalry that simply rode everything in front of it. The Russians couldn't catch a break; three of the four units the cavalry destroyed got to shoot before they were attacked, and missed every single time.
This is a fun set of rules. Not one that you'll drag out for regular gaming purposes, but worth holding in reserve for when you need a quick wargames fix, or if you need a quick method of running battles for campaigns. For the latter I feel some small random events (in keeping with the limited granularity of the game) would make things interesting.
Playing it for GNW didn't feel too awkward, but I understand that gunpowder-era sets are on their way so it will be interesting to see how it pans out in future.
I've only found one things that's not clear. It's possible for a unit to be attacking such that it needs a 1+ on a D6 to hit. I wasn't sure if an automatic hit was in the spirit of the game, so have assumed that a 1 is always a miss. But the rules as written don't mention that.
I believe the Great Northern War isn't quite 'out of period', as the armies involved still employed pike arms. In any case, Poltava would make a fine 'disguised scenario'. Now I'm starting to wonder why I didn't think of that!
ReplyDeleteCheers,
Ion
Good catch! As the rules stand, the unit needing a 1 or more to defeat the opposing unit should automatically succeed. When I was writing Dominion of the Spear I refined and refined it until I came up with the most historically accurate version that I could. But to my horror I found that it was boring to play as some units were unable to defeat other units, leading to stalemate too often. Then also as I read more and more historical battle reports the idea of Commanders manoeuvring their troops perfectly around the battlefield became more and more laughable. Chaos and confusion and the ridiculous happening seems far more accurate and realistic!
ReplyDeleteI (as you say) ruthlessly stripped the system and rebuilt it but this time with the added premise that any unit can defeat any other unit. In keeping with this, you are right, it would be more fitting if a 1 on the roll is always a failure. It should not happen too often as it requires an elite Melee unit attacking in an outflanking attack with also a unit type v unit type modifier advantage. I will look to add this in although playing it as written is not really a problem.
By the way, the other side of this where a unit requires rolling more than a 6 to defeat the opposing unit should never occur. I wrote all the rules in such a way that this should not come up. Hopefully I caught all possible cases where this might come up!
Somewhere down the line there may well be a set of rules covering Spanish Succession, Great Northern War, and the Ottomans. Perhaps Dominion of Marlborough and Peter the Great?
Look forward to a late 17th/early 18th century set!
DeleteI will probably go with having a 1 as an automatic miss. I like to have some uncertainty in combats. And, as you say, it's a very specific case in which you get a 1+ combat anyway.
One thing I am considering is that if an army has at least one artillery unit they get a +1 in the pre-battle bombardment (to represent the fact that there's a kind of artillery superiority). I've found artillery a little weak as a unit type and thought that this might help it. To be fair I'm trying games in eras where armoured troops aren't as common. The pre-battle bombardment doesn't destroy units so it shouldn't be too deadly a change.
I did look at a set for the Spanish Succession etc. a while ago but I was not sure how to model it so as to produce a fun game. Can I ask what features you would like this set to emphasize and what makes this period a fun period to game? I also struggled to see interesting different matchups between the different unit types. Really appreciate any comments on this!
DeleteThe armies for WSS are pretty homogeneous, missile infantry and melee horse, at the level represented by DotS anyway. The differences are more to do with efficiency eg all line infantry are 'missile' troops, but British and Dutch are probably elite. Fortifications, such as at Fontenoy make units armoured etc. What makes it fun is fighting Ramilles, Malplaquet, Blenheim etc
DeleteYes, Martin. I experience the same thing with the armies for Dominion of Frederick the Great. In the big battles we have Cavalry and Line Infantry as by far the main units (with elite and armoured attributes as well). Light Infantry in numbers are very rare. Artillery is present too of course. At a smaller scale , Cavalry can be divided in Heavy and Light. I am still playing with the modifiers to try to get Cavalry v Line Infantry more interesting. As I say in another post, having different modifiers for the attacker and for the defender is where I am currently looking. One has the overall Attacker and Defender but also for a particular combat which army chose that sector.
DeleteSteve
The Dominion series are a great way to quickly and easily determine the outcome of battles which is, IMHO, a very useful tool when fighting campaigns. Obviously you can use your own favourite miniature rules to fight out any campaign battles which are of particular interest but, for when you want a quick and easy battle result/outcome, Dominion is great.
ReplyDeletePlus, as they are “solo” you can tinker to your hearts content.
Cheers,
Geoff
I certainly feel some tinkering coming on. I've started looking at ECW armies and I'm not totally comfortable with how mixed pike & shot units work. The bonuses you get for certain troop types facing other types make them weirdly vulnerable/powerful in some circumstances in ways that don't feel quite right for the period.
DeleteYes, Artillery is balanced by being especially effective against "armoured" targets. Using the rules out of era probably requires some rebalancing. Please, please tinker away! Trying to get Renaissance era mixed pike and shot in various proportions accurately modelled is a real headache. And how they interact with the different troop types to try to capture the same feeling and results found in historical battles. If you are looking at this, what I do, especially for the 36 battles, is to look at how the opposing units/armies fared against each other, and then try to get the matchups to favour the historical outcomes. So unit types can vary from battle to battle (maybe rain or fog hindered firing etc.). So the modifiers and matchups should make more likely the historical result. Looking forward to what you come up with!
ReplyDeleteSteve
I came up with something - it's in the ECW post following this one :)
DeleteAs an aside, were the core machanisms of Dominion of teh Spear influenced by the breakdown of ancient and renaissance troop types in Carey's 'Warfare In the Ancient World'? He lumps everything into Heavy (melee) and Light (missile) troops that are then Foot or Mounted, and looks at how they interacted and dominated (or didn't) each other over time.
DeleteNo I have not read this book. Looks fascinating. Many years of playing WRG Ancients in the past probably had the biggest influence! Then more than two years working on the system. Reading battle reports for actual historical battles from whatever time period I am writing rules for is probably the biggest help for me now. Then I try to write the rules to model what I read in a way that also produces a fun little game.
DeleteI've also got Dominion of Pike and Shot too, but I haven't played it as much as DotS as I've been working on a participation game using DotS as the engine. I really like the bombardment and rally rules, and good suggestion on +1 to the bombardment for a side with artillery. Wrt the dice modifiers, it is probably easier just to say a 6 is always a hit and 1 is always a miss. I've got a DotPS review lined up for my blog, but it is still some way back in the queue.
ReplyDeleteI'm a big fan of a roll that always hits and one that always misses in a game. That said, as Steve The Author points out, it's not possible to be in a position where a 6 won't hit (in the Pike & Shot version anyway)
DeleteSolo wise, I believe have played nothing but Dominion of the Spear (the ancients one) since it was released. I must be up to at least 100 games. They are so fast. And fun. And very tinkerable. What more can I ask for :-)
ReplyDelete