Notes and Ideas on
Wargaming the Spanish Civil War

Introduction

These notes are based on my reading of Antony Beevor's book "The Battle for Spain". Now, I don't expect to embark on this as a wargaming project, but it's just that while I'm reading the book it makes sense to record my thoughts, from a wargaming perspective.

What makes the Spanish Civil War (SCW) special is the fact that it was at least in part a militia war. Militia are that low class of fighters that are relatively ineffective compared to professionals and hardly used in most wargaming armies. Mostly they are just a nuisance. But here they are the majority type. So wargaming the SCW forces us to game with Militia, which will have its own unique challenges.

The Protagonists

Interestingly, the two sides are highly polarised and delineated between the 'Fascists' or Nationalists and the 'Reds' or Republicans, yet there are in fact many, many different factions, all with different and unique ideologies. Politically, the factions are very complicated.

The foreign components complicate the picture further. Arguably the best fighting men on both sides were not even Spanish. On the Nationalist side you have the Foreign Legion and the Moroccans, and the Condor Legion, on the Republican side you have the International Brigades.

Furthermore, all the serious hardware like tanks and airplanes were supplied by foreign allies who also provided instructors and supervisors.

Even basic commodities like rifles came in many flavours from different foreign sources (with different ammunitions!).

Themes

I have to say from all my reading of military history, I don't recall coming across so much military incompetence as in Spain, so that will definitely be one of the central themes of any SCW rules. That is not to say that the fighters were not brave nor intelligent, but just militarily-speaking very primitive or inefficient.

The main themes I identify as follows:

• military incompetence & ill-equipped, untrained militias
• political & ideological complexity
• brutal civil war / inflamed passions
• foreign contingents & foreign advisors
• propoganda & morale war
• heroic valour and fighting for a just cause (so-called "romance")
• difference in leadership between the unified Nationalist command and the fragmented, in-fighting Republican command
• differences in tactics and in the understanding and application of new technologies

All of these themes need to be represented in a SCW wargame.

Initial Ideas

These notes are just my initial thoughts:

A game would best be played with a single Nationalist commander on one side (representing the better unity of purpose and unity of command under Franco) and multiple commanders on the Republican side (representing the numerous factions). Republican objectives should reflect the differences between the factions, so for example while fighting together there would always be a suspicion that the Communists were undermining the position of the Anarchists, or vice versa.

The Republicans could only counter their technical inefficiency with high morale, so morale must play a large part.

I also imagine Republican 'advisors' playing a part, generally improving the effectiveness of the militia.

I would take a WWI ruleset as the basis for SCW rules. This was the last major conflict. Some changes will need to be made to accommodate technical advances in things like aircraft, but on the whole and given the low quality of soldiers, WWI is a closer analogy than WWII. Tanks were still primitive and nothing like as effective as in the hands of the Germans in the Second World War.

The key military hardware was rifles, machine guns and artillery, but the key determining factor (as always) was training, discipline and morale.

Interestingly, this was a case where high morale did not determine victory, all that it led to was more bloodshed. There are many cases of the Republicans losing huge casualties because of bad tactics.

The poor quality of military hardware and the unreliability of troop units must be a significant factor. For example, if you are on the Republican side waiting for air support, there is a good chance it won't arrive, and if it does there is a chance that it will drop its bombload on you not the enemy. The only consolation is that it probably won't be that effective.

Like most (if not all) wars, consideration should also be given to the change of quality in troops as the war progresses.

Some Questions

One key question when wargaming the war is this: what role do the players take? I mean this not just in terms of command level, but also in terms of knowledge and hindsight and control, and whether they are militarily or politically focussed.

For example, in the real war the Republicans did not make effective use of their tanks. They did not concentrate them and they did not push forward in the style of Blitzkrieg, allowing second line infantry units to mop up behind them.

This was partly through military ignorance, partly (according to Beevor) through fear of following the doctrine of the Russian tank tactician who was discredited and purged by the Stalinist regime.

So the question is, should the armchair generals be allowed to do so? Do you want to fight a game where you can ask "what if?"

Likewise, the communists who were directing the set-piece offensives were motivated by propoganda objectives rather than military objectives. Should that be reflected in the objectives and victory conditions for the armchair generals?

Although one is tempted to say that wargame generals should be constrained just like the real generals, you then have to ask "what is the point?" How satisfying will it be to play a game where you know through a combination of hindsight and military study that you are doomed to fail, due to reasons out of your control?

But I say congratulations, welcome to the real world! If you want a fair and balanced game, play Warhammer 40,000, don't play historical wargames.

I do note however that most historical wargamers appear not to take into account many of the real-life battle factors. They tend to concentrate on technical factors and ignore all others. For example, I recently read an account of a SCW re-enactment where troops were graded normal or elite. Now I really don't see any units on either side that could ever be classified as elite (with the possible exception of the Condor Legion airforce). The Nationalist 'regulares' may have been elite relative to their opponents, but they are elite only in relative terms.

Troop Classifications

I would take a first stab at troop classifications as follows:

Nationalists ("fascists")

Republicans ("reds")

Morale

Finally, I think we have to be careful with morale. Troops could sometimes be of high morale but also fragile. For example, there are a number of cases of novice troops of high morale who would nonetheless run at the first sign of determined enemy. I think the rules have to differentiate carefully between morale, training and experience, and also differentiate circumstances between defence and attack.