Review of 'The Red Effect' Trilogy by Harvey Black

Over the last couple of weeks I've read all three of Harvey Black's books about a Soviet led invasion of West Germany in 1984, titled in sequence: 'The Red Effect; 'The Black Effect' and 'The Blue Effect'.

Readers will remember that back in the late seventies and early eighties there was a number of novels and so called 'future histories' that purported to cover this very subject: Hackett's 'Third World War' books; Coyles's 'Team Yankee'; and Ralph Peters's Red Army, to name but three. None of these works have entered the canon of great literature, but then I doubt that was ever their authors' ambition. Some were written as military-techo thrillers and at least one, Hackett's, with the aim of influencing public opinion.

What they all had in common though was that they were writing about the future, a future that has since passed, mercifully without the war they described breaking out. Of course, one of the protagonists in that war collapsed at the end of the 1980s, an event that was entirely unpredicted by the western intelligence and foreign policy community. This is a nice irony given the narrative that most of these books spell out.

Harvey Black's novels are an altogether different proposition in that he is writing about a past that never happened from the perspective of today. As such, Black has the benefit of his experience as a former British Army intelligence officer, serving in the British military mission in West Berlin, and also that of hindsight.

His books are self published, probably because such an esoteric subject (in 2014) won't find a ready mass market. This is no shame, after all, one of the advantages of e-books is that works that perhaps wouldn't see the light of day for purely commercial reasons do get published, and Black as gone a step further and published his books in hard copy. 

The disadvantages of this approach, even when done through a company that specialises in so called 'vanity publishing' , are however painfully evident. The books are riddled with errors that are simply screaming out for a professional editor and proof reader to correct. For example, characters and institutions are introduced more than once in consecutive chapters using virtually the same phrasing. There are many more, too many to list.

Secondly, this is not great literature. It barely even qualifies as airport lounge bestseller literature. Characterisation is week and one dimensional, the plot is thin and the descriptions of events repetitive and cliched.

The underlying fault with these books, one that they share with their cousins in  the 'future history' canon, is that they are not about World War Three - rather they are  about World War Two, or even the early days of World War One, fought with 1980's weapons. The future historians had a excuse in this regard, although not much of one, as the events they purported to describe lay ahead of the time they were writing in. The tendency for military bureaucracies to prepare for the last war and why they do so is well known. Black however, has no such excuse.

We now know that if fighting had to broken out in central Europe in the period in question it was much more likely to have been politically and militarily far messier than these books, and their 'future history' predecessors, describe. 

That said, there is much in Black's work that is useful to the wargamer, and that was the reason that I kept reading. Read together with Google Maps, it's possible to follow the action on the ground right down to platoon level. The reader can work out the order of battle in various encounters and zoom in and examine the ground over which these are fought. The books are replete with battalion and company level engagements involving mainly British and Soviet forces, together with a few more that feature the U.S. and West Germans.

So, if you're bent on playing out 'Cold War Gone Hot' scenarios featuring what was arguably least likely to happen in the event of direct NATO-Warsaw Pact hostilities in the 1980s, you could do worse than get hold of Black's books.

Otherwise I wouldn't bother. You won't be missing anything.

A Hill West of Stanley/Puerto Argentina

The battlefield looking east. This represents a gentle upwards slope from this angle with the Argentines dug in around the rocky peaks in the background

This weekend we played a Force on Force scenario I'd written up.

A platoon of British Paras assaults an Argentine hilltop position. The Argentines were a platoon HQ, a squad of conscripts (TQ: D6 Morale: D6 supported by a couple of sustained fire machine gun teams, and a recoiless rifle team with another squad off-table in reserve. They had night vision goggles, and weapons pits and slit trenches that provided + 3 Defence Dice.

The Paras had a Platoon HQ, including a D12 morale platoon sergeant, and two sections with the option to take a third section in reserve or start with either two sustained fire GPMGs or two MILAN teams on table. No night vision goggles but TQ was D8 and morale D10. There was also three salvos of light artillery and two of medium mortars zeroed in on the Argentine positions for a pre-assault stonk just before zero (which was at 0200 local time, 2300 ZULU).

Paras hook left and go straight up the middle

This is only the second game we've played with these rules and whilst the concepts and basic mechanics are excellent we're finding the layout of the rules terrible. No wonder there are all those questions and player aids on the various forums. We'll persist but I think many must be giving up - it speaks volumes that there is a wiki index on line. Given the resources of the publisher this really isn't good enough.

Anyway the Argies lost badly: six KIA, seven wounded and seven POW. The Paras had three guys lightly wounded.

The artillery did the damage, as well as my misreading the rules - which severely downgraded the protection the defenders received from their field works.

I'll tweak the scenario for a re-run before posting. Perhaps give the Argies the option of mines or write up some Fog of War cards for the Falklands - we didn't use the ones in the book for this game.

Thanks to Chris and Jeff (especially Jeff, who was commanding the defenders) for their patience and good natured sportsmanship.

Fight at St Johns Parva September 1643

For this little battle I decided to do something slightly different. Readers who play English Civil War games will be aware that the Royalist armies often had a greater proportion of cavalry than their opponents. Phil Barker goes as far as to say that in some cases their forces were often cavalry supported by commanded shot. Parliamentary armies, at least until the formation of the New Model, tended to have a better balance of horse and foot but, with certain notable exceptions (Haselrig's 'Lobsters' and the Eastern Association horse being two),  their cavalry was often of an inferior quality.

Our campaign has arrived at a point in late 1643 where the main field armies of both sides are engaged in the manoeuvrings that culminated in the First Battle of Newbury. Much of the Royalist cavalry and the best of the infantry from Borsetshire are serving with the King. Felpersham, the Royalist stronghold and county town is looking vulnerable - there aren't enough troops to man its extensive fortifications and earthworks.

Parliamentarians in the county have mounted a scratch offensive to try and seize Felpersham by coup de main, and their little army marched on the town from the north west, moving quickly without baggage or heavy artillery. Sir Charles Moncrief, acting Royalist commander, sensed the danger and responded quickly. He marched out of Felpersham, also without baggage and heavy guns, with a force comprising local militia and what mounted troops he could muster.

The Royalist Army was therefore an unusual one - a mere 400 horse and 200 dragoons but supported by nearly 3000 foot - in other words a reversal of the usual proportions of foot and horse. The foot suffered from a shortage of muskets. such that the ratio of shot to pike was 1:1.

Parliament by contrast fielded 1100 horse, mainly 'trotters' trained to caracole, and fewer infantry than their opponents but with twice as many shot as pike. 

The battle that followed was remarkable for the Royalists' lack of ability to force a decision - their usual offensive arm was weak and accordingly what followed was, to paraphrase a later general of the horse and musket era a 'long hard pounding'.

Full AAR to follow

Borsetshire September 1643

We left the war in Borsetshire in stalemate in late May 1643, with the Royalist forces based in Felpersham, and their Parliamentary opponents controlling Borchester, the other major town in the county.

The drawn battle of Ashby Street had, as predicted, proved a strategic setback for the Roundheads, as their scheme to invest Felpersham by occupying the villages around the city had been thwarted.

During the early summer there was little fighting, aside from the odd skirmish as opposing patrols of dragoons or cavalry encountered one another in the villages between the two major settlements.

In June 1643 the Royalist commander in the county, the Earl of Grantham, received orders from Prince Rupert to muster all the Royalist cavalry and best of the infantry in Borsetshire and to join the King's offensive that culminated in the storming of Bristol the following month.


A Parliamentary Dragoon prepares his carbine whilst in the background pikemen prepare to fight

The garrison of Felpersham was thus reduced to largely local militia, whose terms of service meant they would not leave the county. Sensing an opportunity whilst the King's main field army pursued the Earl of Essex after the relief of Gloucester, the Borsetshire Parliamentarians decided to march on Felpersham once more.

The harvest was in and the Roundheads were on the march as the local Royalist commander, Sir Charles Moncrief, weighed up his options. His problem was that were not enough troops to man the fortified villages and earthworks that protected Felpersham without the absent regiments that were fighting with the King. He did know however, the direction of the Roundhead thrust, thanks to intelligence from his scouts.

Accordingly, in mid September of 1643 Moncrief led his men to meet the Roundhead advance. The subsequent battle was fought near the village of St Johns Parva.

A game of DBR is scheduled for this evening

Battlefield Visits: One - Naseby

I've not been posting as frequently in recent weeks because I spent the end of June and all of July visiting Britain and Europe. Part of this was work related but I did manage to take four and a half weeks' holiday and indulge myself cycling in France as well as visiting friends and relatives in Britain.

I also contrived to visit four places of English Civil War significance: York, Marston Moor, Chester and Naseby. I'll try and cover these visits in my next few posts.

Like all battlefields (to a greater or lesser extent), Naseby is only interesting if the visitor has a reasonably good understanding of what happened there. This is assisted by some good interpretation material (much of it culled from Osprey publications) that is positioned at key points. This means that an ordinary looking hedgerow assumes much greater importance in the eyes of the visitor. When you know you're looking at Sulby hedges, and in your mind's eye at least you can see Colonel Okey and his dragoons lined up and shooting at the Royalist cavalry, it stops being just another hedgerow.

Above: one of the interpretation boards around the battlefield.

Above: Sulby Hedges looking from behind the New Model Army Dragoons' position

Above: The battlefield looking from the centre of  New Model Army's position at the beginning of the battle- the Royalists were drawn up on the rise behind the hedges in the distance

The battlefield is compact and can be easily traversed by car or bicycle in an afternoon using the network of country lanes in the area. The interpretation sites are invaluable in orientating the visitor and are a big help if you or your companions' knowledge of what happened is sketchy. They were certainly useful for me in explaining it all to my mother as the illustrations on the boards go some way to bringing the scene to life.

My single greatest insight from this visit came from justt how undulating the ground was directly to the rear of the centre of the Royalist's initial position i.e. where the King's infantry made its last stand. With the smoke and confusion of battle, the restricted lines of sight as a consequence of the undulations would have considerably added to the 'friction' that the opposing commanders had to contend with. No surprises if low PIP dice were rolled... 

Once Upon a Time in the East...

Yesterday, a murderous little battle was fought in a remote Siberian village east of Tobolsk. The remnants of Admiral Kolchak's 1st Army was retreating to the line of the river Ishim and in a series of desperate encounters in freezing sleet the 3rd Red Army tried to stop them.



A company of CheKa managed to hold the nameless village in the face of the ferocious White assault but not before their commander was butchered by White Cadets. The losses inflicted on the Whites were crippling, one company of militia that ran at the first sound of gunfire was caught in the open by Red artillery and scarcely a man survived. White cavalry outflanked the Bolshevik's main position but were in turn surprised by a company of Red conscripts that stumbled on them in the half light. Horses proved no match for machine guns...

Great fun was had by all and thanks to Jeff for coming over to play a literal 'pick up' game using my homebrew RCW rules,"Komrade Commissar!',  based on AK-47 Reloaded. The bad weather reduced visibility and shooting to 8 inches which made things very bloody - no sooner had your enemy got into sight than the fighting was hand to hand...

I didn't take any pictures but it was good to get back into gaming after a little break occasioned by a trip overseas.

Battle of Ashby Street May 1643 AAR

The idea was to play out an encounter battle as described in the narrative leading up to the game. We used the following modification to the standard DBR deployment rules on a 4" x 3" table with 300 point armies.

No elements are deployed on table.

No ambushes.

Invader enters from anywhere on long table edge on first bound (all baggage is classed as (I) and mobile). PIPs must be used to maximise entry of elements onto the table i.e. no second march moves until all elements are deployed

Defender enters from anywhere on opposite long table edge on subsequent bound (all baggage is classed as (I) and mobile). PIPs must be used to maximise entry of elements onto the table i.e. no second march moves until all elements are deployed

If PIPs do not permit whole of army to enter on first bound, PIPs in subsequent bounds must be used to enable elements to enter table until whole army is on table. Elements not arriving in the first bound are assumed to be straggling and do not arrive until their command is allocated a PIP die score of 6, when they must do so or be lost.

n.b. Artillery (O) and (S) without teams cannot deploy and are discarded although they count towards command and army total ME for purposes of break points.

My long suffering regular opponent Keith had some misgivings about this scheme, as he argued it would encourage ahistorical formations marching on the table. I didn't think this would be too much of an issue as even with a PIP die of 1, any command marching on good going could deploy in at least two groups, using the command's general's 'free' PIP...

At it happened I think we were both correct and all the deployment did was negate the advantage of the 4" x 3" table, that is we ended up fluffing around before closing with one another.

Here are the armies as deployed after a bound each. Apologies for the poor photo. The Roundheads are deployed in the background, very sensibly choosing to position two regiments of foote on the hill and anchoring their left flank on the enclosures by lining the hedges with dragoons and placing what artillery had managed to stay with Edward Dighurst's little army during the approach march across the road. The Royalist army is largely mounted, with only 8 elements of commanded shot not on horseback. They've deployed in a conventional style with the cavalry on the wings and the shot in the centre. A couple of elements of dragoons have entered the enclosed fields in the lower right of the photo.



In the above picture the Royalist shot have advanced to the foot of the slope and, having subjected the Roundhead infantry to withering volleys of musketry, have drawn their enemy off the hill. Unfortunately for the King's men, the Roundheads have also trotted forward their pistoleers who are caracoling in front of the Royalist musketeers. The Royalists have brought up a couple of troops of horse to try and bolster their infantry.

It wasn't long before the Royalist centre broke, but the Roundheads had taken a pounding on their right flank and it too broke. The Royalist army, its morale on the verge of breaking, had no hope of victory. It did have a slim chance of seizing something from the defeat though as one of the peculiarities of DBR is the so called 'revenge bound' i.e. a command breaks when it has lost one third of it's 'morale equivalents' at the start of any of its bounds or the end of the game (my emphasis).

And so it was that a final desperate charge by a company of dragoons and two troops of cavaliers took the Roundhead guns and got amongst their baggage train. The result was both armies broke simultaneously and streamed from the field.

The fight had been bloody but the overall casualties were light as neither side rode down their fleeing enemy for the simple reason they were pre-occupied with their own flight!

Tactically it was a drawn battle, but the destruction of the Roundhead guns meant their strategic purpose was defeated. Without heavy ordnance their was little hope of a successful investment of  Felpersham...

And so, as spring 1643 gave way to summer in Borsetshire, matters seemed to be at something of an impasse.

That is, until the Earl of Grantham received a messenger frorm Oxford who had ridden on the orders of none other than Prince Rupert...