Matrix Games Forums

ORIGINAL: Lieste
Rorke's drift on the other hand was wholly unremarkable, and one of many similar outpost defences throughout the British Empire. It was seized upon and made into history in order to have 'good news' for the papers at home.

I'm not sure I can agree that the defence was "wholly unremarkable". Essentially 140 men, held against nearly 4000. So many of those stationed at the Drift left before any action, because they anticipated another massacre. The defense was remarkable in how it was planned out, mealie bag perimeters and biscuit box retrenchment wall, bisecting the courtyard and providing a second line of defence.

The Zulu's were young and out to prove themselves, and I think they thought they would just roll over the Drift. They were wrong. Injured/wounded men were dragging themselves out of a burning building, whilst fighting. Something remarkable did take place there.

However, you are right that it was made more public BECAUSE of the debacle at Isandlwana. The defence at the drift was a symbol of Victorian spirit, stacked against the blunderings and mistakes made at Isandlwana. Many of the circumstances at the Little Sphinx were made with sound military reasons behind them, but their intel was wrong, their assumptions of the force they were dealing with was very much underestimated. 1300 men were lost at Isandlwana, so it was a catastrophe, but a mere 140 held their ground at the Drift. Chard and Bromhead, and all the other men there deserve credit. In my opinion.

Not sure how an action that received I think two VC's was unremarkable either. Yes propaganda comes into play but I've not heard of such stands against such odds and holding out before.

Agree. Don't know how anyone could say it was unremarkable.
Lord Chelmsford arrived the morning after fully expecting to find no survivors.
An outpost, an unfortified outpost even, was held by a company of men and junior officers. That was what was so remarkable.

Eleven VCs were awarded.
Would have been 12 but there was no system for recognition for killed soldiers to receive the award then.

ORIGINAL: ezz
Eleven VCs were awarded.
Would have been 12 but there was no system for recognition for killed soldiers to receive the award then.

Indeed, 11 VC's is the most ever awarded in any conflict involving the British Army. Two were posthumously awarded to the bearers of the colours from Isandlwana many years later.

Whether you think it was an over-reaction by the British Government to award so many to the men at the Drift, is another matter, perhaps it was done to attempt to mask the failings at Isandlwana? I personally think it was well deserved considering the command and heroics on display that day by these men. But then I am rather biased here.

A lot of misconceptions about the battle has been down to the 1960's film Zulu, but ultimately that film raised the national conciousness about this desperate last stand, and I think it cemented the stand in the mind of modern day Britains. It certainly had a massive impact on me as a child.

Even now, in modern times with totally different ethical and moral principles in play, it's a fantastic story of bravery, silhouetted by the national tragedy at Isandlwana that preceded it.

ORIGINAL: wodin
Yes propaganda comes into play but I've not heard of such stands against such odds and holding out before.

There are a number of stands against great odds around that time.

The Battle of Blood River comes instantly to my mind.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Battle_of_Blood_River

It was 400 Voortrekkers against 10,000+ Zulus.

Theres a stunning list of battles here, from 1801 through to 1900 (with many conflicts woven into the timeline) - a lot of the conflicts based around the Anglo-Zulu Wars are stuck in there, along with Crimea, American Civil War, and Napoleonics. A nice list to peruse, if you're interested in battles in the 1800's.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_ba ... %80%931900

Thanks Spelk. Oh by the way your blog has been mentioned and linked to by myself on my Facebook page.

My pre WW1 knowledge is very poor indeed. WW1 excellent, WW2 good but pre WW1 I have alot to learn.

ORIGINAL: wodin
Thanks Spelk. Oh by the way your blog has been mentioned and linked to by myself on my Facebook page.

Thanks.

My pre WW1 knowledge is very poor indeed. WW1 excellent, WW2 good but pre WW1 I have alot to learn.

It's a very interesting period of war for me, the age of muskets and early rifles. A time before armoured vehicular warfare. It's impressive to think of the Military discipline needed to stand lines of men in front of one another and to stay put through volley fire and cannonading. With the flourish of sabre and cavalry charges, against musket and bayonet. All exciting stuff

I thought it was fascinating that the rifle bores became dirty after every 20 shots, requiring them to clean their rifles during the fight.

Great AAR. Bought game and enjoying first round. Also board game Victoria Cross II covers the same battles well.

The Drift AAR - Part 5 is up!
http://sugarfreegamer.com/?p=24498

In a herculean effort by myself, I have written the final part to The Drift 1879 AAR - Part 6!
http://sugarfreegamer.com/?p=38414

That was really good.
Was it fun to play though?

In the Rorkes drift boardgame the firing is the dull part. Its attempting to get the wounded to treatment and out of harms way and keeping the supplies going + the hospital evacuation that are the exciting parts.

I enjoyed it, but then I'm besotted by the whole Anglo-Zulu War at the moment.

I think the enjoyment comes mainly from the manoeuvre of the men each round, so that they're in a position to hit the incoming waves without taking much fire back.

It does get quite tense when they're at your front, and they're dropping your men, that's when the firing itself becomes more interesting, because it's focussed on tactical considerations in a particular hotspot. For the most part, you're trying to thin them out, and disrupt/rout on the way in.

So I guess the excitement peaks and troughs at times. I was devastated to lose Bromhead so early on, and getting patients out of the hospital can be very frustrating, because there's just a roll that happens, and says 'Yay' or 'Nay'. That's it, till the next round. Mostly it's 'Nay'. You watch your men burn. And there's nothing you can do, apart from ask the question every round, and hope for the best.

Compared to the historical outcome, I thought I must have played the game really badly, since I only had 13 men left, and in reality only 13 men perished! However, when turn 110 ticked over, and the actual Victory screen come up, I can reveal, there was a jumping out of your chair incident followed by a triumphant shout of "YES!" The battering my men took, and we still held out seemed worth it at the time.

I'll try it again soon, see if I can place men differently, perhaps keep them closer to the inner perimeter, and pull them all into the redoubt when things start getting too much for them. I'm sure stationing (even injured) men in the Storehouse helped tip the end result into Victory - a few more turns and Chard would've been toast anyway.

Been dabbling a bit more in White Dog Games Day of the Spears II game playing out Isandlwana, that seems to be a much harder Victory to attain

Lovely AAR, while reading it I had the film in mind, the orders to fire and of course the song the Welsh sang in the beginning.

Thanks for the AAR, looking forward to a repeat or even just telling us how you fared with a different stratagy.

Mat