Monday, 15 November 2021

Battle for Fort Washington 1776

For our next virtual battle, tracking through the history of the American war of independence we have the battle for Fort Washington. 16th November 1776. One of the great joys of this project is learning more about the AWI especially about these smaller less well know battles. Once again I will only provide a shortened history if you are interested in more search the web. Anyway having fought the indecisive battle of White Plains the American forces were encamped on the heights at Fort Washington over looking the Hudson River. Suggestions were made to evacuate the fort but these went unheeded, general Howe perhaps remembering the outcome at Bunker Hill decided to go ‘full on’ to take the fort. The complex planned assault would take place from three directions with a fourth feint attack as well.

Despite being a smaller scale battle there is plenty of information and some useful maps. However, it is perhaps a difficult battle to gain a balanced scenario as the Americans were very significantly outnumbered and pretty much on the back foot.

A very nice period picture of the Battlefield from the north
There are several nice old maps of the battle and I suspect the full battle would make an interesting and larger battle given space and troops, you could even include elements for the British ships which were engaged in the battle
However, given my space and collection limitations I focussed our battle mainly around the Hessian assault under Knyphausen and the flank assault under Mathew/Howe. 
This converted into the battlefield above before the troops were set up. This would give an interesting battle for both sides, the Americans would be spread out and face the choice of pulling back to the fort to defend or picking off the advancing troops as they attempted to close. We decided that victory for the British/Hessian forces would be eliminating over 2/3 of the Americans or getting into the fort.
The Hessian forces prepare for the assault, here they are using Dyckmams Bridge but historically they were taken I believe over by boat.
Margret Corbin with her husband on the heights with Maryland and Virginia Riflemen
Gen Magaw in the Fort with Bucks County Militia
The Americans also have a number of small skirmish units amongst the defensive works and some Pennsylvania Volunteers on Laurel Hill. The only other scenario detail of real worth is the British contingent will only arrive on a random die roll, to represent them being delayed by the tide historically. As we have seen in previous battles attacking can be tough so the allies have about a 3 to 2 advantage in numbers. Would this be enough ?
The Hessian jägers immediately open up with a volley and cheer as the first rebel unit is forced to pull back
The rest of the Hessians fan out
A second volley from the jägers …hoorah 
The Maryland Riflemen look on with grim determination they may prove a tougher nut to crack
Hessian grenadiers are now pushing upto the first defence 
The rest of Knyphausen’s command is pushing up the valley towards the south
After turn three the British would roll to test for arrival and luckily they came in turn five, they immediately push their skirmishers forward who start to fire at the Pennsylvania Volunteers 
Battle now widespread and the allies are making good progress
Then suddenly the British have a dreadful turn, failing to activate and their assault on Laurel hill stalls allowing the rebels to bring up some additional defenders
The Maryland Riflemen have pushed forward feeling the moment has come to take the battle to the Germans
But still progress is being made even if the Germans are getting slowed down
Margret Corbin (you’ll have to google it) fires another blast, the American artillery on the ridge is very effective
A sense now the german attack is stalling but hopefully the British are now starting to get moving 
The light infantry blast away at short range
Finally the allied cannon is able to open up to some effect driving the Maryland regiment back
A glimpse of hope the British grenadiers easily push through the earthworks
The hessians now waiting for their moment to renew the assault
Driving the skirmishers back 
But Magaw has lined up his Regiment across the ditch and the grenadiers are exposed
The British combined light infantry somehow manages to fail to chase the American skirmishers away
The Americans have started to pull back and the allied gun falls quiet
The final nail in the British coffin, a tremendous first fire volley into the Grenadiers over the road/ditch. In one turn the British grenadiers are decimated 
We called the battle here, the allies just don’t have enough fire power to push forward the assault and the Americans have started pulling back to the main fort defences. The Americans win, which in this case means they have enough time to evacuate the bulk of their forces rather than surrender them which is what happened historically.

Once again a very fun battle, a couple of key turning points when the British stalled early on and then when the British grenadiers were wiped out. We discussed the balance of the scenario and came to the conclusion that on average the attacker needs a 2 to 1 ratio rather than the 3 to 2. It would be fun to play this one again with that extra balance ? Of course we won’t be implementing this balance until after Trenton ! I do think Fort Washington would make an excellent larger battle as long as the victory conditions for the Americans are achievable. Buying time to escape.

Thanks as always for taking the time to scroll through 👍

Matt


42 comments:

  1. Replies
    1. Yes, David, splendid battle and splendid result!

      Delete
    2. Thanks David damned rebels did it again !

      Delete
  2. Matt, this was great fun and the situation looked grim for the Rebels at the start. Beautiful table and troops. Your newly painted Hessians performed as new troops often do.

    Playing this out in a larger scale offers many possibilities. That is a good idea.

    Thanks for another great game!

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Jon 👍 I already have a horrible feeling about Trenton 😬

      Delete
  3. That's a wonderful looking game Matt, both terrain and figure wise. Nice to see these smaller actions making it onto the table but, as you say, the 'larger picture' would make for a nice game too.

    I reckon you could try using the naval support, naturally counting it as off board, to see if this would have helped the Anglo-German cause or not. If so, then maybe the 3:2 ration would be OK, but I reckon a 2:1 would be better.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. We had a great time and it was a fun battle and I am learning lots of new stuff about the AWI. So fo me it was all good……putting that to one side, I think the 2 to 1 balance is the way to but this needs to be balanced by quality as well. We have tended in these games for 3 to 2 but generally we have had the Americans with regular morale/leadership. I think this might be generous and the gap in morale between the two forces was actually larger than we have played it. This scenario could very easily balance by giving the Brits an additional two regiments, in fact historically they did have these. Could this completely overpower, it’s a possibility…..I just wish I had enough time to play through battles more often😢

      Delete
  4. Wonderfully done battle, beautiful troops over pleasing terrain that was visually effective. Doing asymmetrical scenarios can be very rewarding when they go this well.

    ReplyDelete
  5. Great looking battle with great looking figures and terrain, Matt. Love the variety of troops. Reminds me that I still need to paint up the Perry plastic AWI figs I have.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Dean yes you need to get them painted….only a week for you though !

      Delete
  6. Nice account and table. It is interesting to follow your thoughts on game balance for this rule set. It seems quite a complicated thing to get right, as I assume it is not just about numbers (as in 2-1) because the quuiality of good trained British troops (attacking) goes into that mix. So if the roles were reversed and the Americans went onto the attack, would they still need 2-1 for simiilar game advantage or would the troops quality difference require an even greater ratio favouring the attacker?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Norm see my response to Steve above as well, I completely agree the balance is a delicate thing between quality and quantity. We have generally played the majority of the Americans as regular and this is probably too good in comparison with the British. As we have seen in many of these battles the British come on in the same old style, historically the Americans frequently broke , regrouped and then gave the ground to the British. In our games they are able to hold the ground and in places push back, as we get more and more experience we nudge the dial slightly over to get more balance. At Trenton we can test the theory.

      Delete
  7. Gorgeous pics and excellent recap of the battle. I’m really enjoying these AWI posts. 😀

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Stew glad you enjoyed, if we are bringing a little more AWI history into the light then all the better 👍

      Delete
  8. Wonderful stuff Matt, loving the historical context and deployment, brilliant. Cheers Stu

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Stu as above glad you enjoyed…more to come at Trenton 👍

      Delete
  9. A lovely game Matt, and enjoyed Jonathan's AAR very much as well (including the friendly-fire incident).

    ReplyDelete
  10. Fantastic game as always Matt and hard result for the Allies to stomach - as I commented on Jons page, you really should have has access to naval gunfire support from the RN! On a more serous note (well, none of it is THAT serious but you know what I mean) do you think there is a problem with the rules in the fact that the attackers ALWAYS seem to be at a severe disadvantage? It will be interesting to see if you run a few games where the Americans are attacking, how they get on..?

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Apologies - I should have read all the preceding comments before repeating points already made by Steve and Norm, and answered by you! One thing I do agree with is that Americans, in general, should have lower/more brittle morale than British regulars (no doubt some of the Trans Atlantic cousins may dispute this!) Based on a book I have, written by an ex US professional officer, where he mentions a serious disadvantage the Americans had was a lack of bayonets (including ALL riflemen of course) my "house" rules gave the Brits a huge advantage in melee. Of course, you have to survive the advance to contact to gain that advantage!

      Delete
    2. Keith, my thoughts on your question are answered in my reply to your posing the question on my blog. I agree with your assessment on bayonet v non-bayonet.

      Delete
    3. No worries Keith thanks for taking the time to read and comment , as you say, one might not class any of this as ‘really’ important. However, i genuinely think the rules have the capacity to provide the exact balance that several have commented on. So for example your excellent example of bayonets is covered in the rule book suggesting this would be classing the troops as timid. As we have said several times skirmishers especially when given the good shot rule are quite powerful. So I don’t think it is the rules simply how you balance things. If the battle was both side attacking to capture the centre of the table then it would balance just on points. The challenge we have had is the early AWI battles are definitely focussed on the Americans in prepared positions. We haven’t quite got the balance right in our games but having played them all whilst the results have been one sided few of them have felt like that during play. As we move forward we will gradually tune up the balance for the side attacking to give them an average chance of victory….thinking about this it might be just in time for the rebels to be on the offensive 😢

      Delete
  11. Gorgeous looking game,lovely troops and terrain in spite of the result!
    Best Iain

    ReplyDelete
  12. Stirring stuff as usual Matt. I wouldn't dwell too much on balance, as long as the game is enjoyable for both parties that's what matters.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks Phil…..I’d just like those dastardly rebels to flee once in a while 😀

      Delete
  13. A lovely looking and sounding game indeed Matt..

    All the best. Aly

    ReplyDelete
  14. I read Jonathan's report as well. Excellent stuff.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Thanks John for taking the time to visit and comment 👍

      Delete
  15. Nice terrain and figure (as usual 😊).
    Balancing games is always interesting, many rule book scenarios seem to favour defenders and require some work, TMWWBK springs to mind straight away!

    ReplyDelete
  16. Great looking and sounding game Matt. A change to the history is always an interesting result.
    The period painting and maps are a treat too.
    Regards, James

    ReplyDelete