Must be something in the air. Game publishers can't seem to count from one to ten in a coherent, acceptable fashion. First there was the GBACW series, with its boxes proclaiming such as "Volume 13 in the series", only to have us find that the numbering was being done at the whim of the designer. {Ed Note: The idea was to get you to go out and buy 12 other games in the series, whether they existed or not.] Now comes Clash of Arms, which has presented us with Lee Takes Command … volume II in COA's "Civil War Series". Lee, however, is not the second publication in the series. It was preceded by volume V, Mississippi Fortress and volume VIII, Marching Through Georgia. As if to add weight to the randomness, released along with Lee is volume VII, Autumn of Glory (Chattanooga/Chickamauga). Maybe we need something along the lines of the Mozartian Koechel numbering system, or at least opus numbers (a musical numbering system with about just as much clarity as the gaming industry shows). Whatever, this Millman-Martin inspired, area-movement operational system has been around for some time, and it appears to have a goodly number of adherents, as witnessed by the fact that CoA keeps putting them out. Graphically, each of the installments has been stunning; the maps are everything you would expect from the masters at COA. The counters might be considered a little overdone, but that applies to virtually all of CoA's counterwork … and they are nice. To wrap up a nice package, the boxcovers are very distinctive and colorful, although there have been some complaints that they are too busy to be effective. The Civil War Series uses a standard rules booklet (now in its 2nd edition) with an exclusive rules booklet - including extensive historical commentary - for each campaign/volume in question. Considering that the games are pitched at a "mid-level complexity" audience, there is lots to read here, even if it is nicely arranged and quite presentable. The system's underlying hook is its simulation of the fog of war through the use of inverted/dummy counters, and this is probably the game's are of greatest success. It's only obvious drawback is that it reduces solitaire play to below the levels of anything other than curiosity. The sequence of play follows the time-honored Igo-Hugo method with the following phases: Communications, movement & combat … and the first two are where the system works best. Movement works very well, indeed. The map is divided into areas, each area representing a significant terrain feature. Infantry moves one area per turn and cavalry can move two. In addition to their speed, cavalry is important in both intelligence gathering & screening. Trying to figure out if that is a pile of mostly dummy counters or an actual column of infantry produces a level of play tension not often found in other games. Unfortunately, where movement works combat does not. Combat takes place between units in the same area and is resolved on the dreaded Off-Map Battle Board, which is divided into ersatz Left, Center, Right Wings or line positions and a Reserve. Personally, I have never understood the cachet of such a mechanic, but, if you do - and this will be the deciding "if" - the whole process will be less of a chore for you than it was for me. Combat occurs in rounds using combat orders, as designated by chits. Two Combat Intensity Charts are used sequentially with the end result being that you gotta do a lot to get any results, and that's even before you set up on the battle board and go through its hoops. Basically, the combat system is a case of that old Shakespearean "… lot of sound and fury, signifying nothing." It is far more tediously complicated than it needs to be, especially given the fairly smooth and facile way in which the game's other mechanics work. It's as if every time you watched your TV you had to enter a series of codes and push a bunch of buttons just to change the channel … the ease and accessibility of one system is just totally out of synch with the remainder of the mechanisms. It just doesn't make much sense, it isn't fun, and it certainly isn't very elegant. Ironically, I found all of this disturbing because I had really enjoyed playing volume VIII, Marching Through Georgia, probably because that was a campaign where the fun of movement and trying to fake the enemy out of position far exceeded the few battles that did occur. Lee Takes Command is, thus, a real let down, perhaps because it is far more combat oriented … always a danger in a system in which movement and position is the basic fun factor in the game. However, even more disturbing were the number of glaring historical problems the game presented. To start with, we have the initial deployments for the Army of the Potomac. Cooke's cavalry brigade sets up on the Pamunky at the White House; in reality he was in the vicinity of Cold Harbor. Porters V Corp was entrenched behind Beaver Dam Creek; he is not so here… nor is entrenching even allowed! Porter also had only detachments at Mechanicsville and the Meadow Bridge, not the whole II/V Division, and the river obstructions on the James are in the wrong place. Individually these might be considered little nit-picky items, but you ain't read nothin', yet. Historically, despite what the little gremlins inside McClellan's head were telling him, the Army of the Potomac outnumbered the Army of the Northern Virginia. But, voilà!, with the stroke of the designers' pen, McClellan's nightmare has come true; Lee and his vast rebel host DO outnumber him! McClellan's infantry strength points total 84,000 men (this does not include artillery and cavalry), a little short according to the numbers in "Battle & Leaders". Magically, though, Lee has 95,200 infantry, and from there it gets worse. As the Confederate player you can reorganize your army, somehow enlarging whole divisions to even more frightening status. Awesome … and we haven't even come to the McClellan rules yet! Come to think of it, maybe Pinkerton gave McClellan a copy of this game, scaring the military bejeezus out of him. Designers Gary and Victor were actually pretty nice about the McClellanization of the Union player. Movement is done by corp activation per turn (a die roll), and combat necessitates that McClellan must be in or adjacent to the area were it is conducted. I've seen much worse … and this is certainly giving our Little Mac Manqué the benefit of many doubts. What would scare Our Hero even more would be if he were to get a glimpse of the game's representation of the defenses in and around Richmond and Petersburg, which might as well be in the Maginot Line they are so unattackable. It's hard to determine whether this is simply a misreading of the information available or a determination in the designers' minds to make sure the Union player doesn't start launching any ahistorical attacks. The Confederates, too, had their command control problems during this campaign, mainly in the form of a somewhat slow-to-react Stonewall Jackson, who wasn't quite up to his valley reputation. In the Peninsula campaign he was very tardy in arriving at a number of the initial engagements. To simulate this, the designers have hampered the Confederates' ability to attack on the battle board, which is truly placing the emPHAsis on the wrong sylLAble. Jackson's problem was not in joining combat, it was in getting there in the first place. It would seem more appropriate hamper Jackson's ability to enter an area occupied by Union forces. Once Jackson got to where he was wanted he fought admirably. [Ed. I add in here a brief note on the companion game, issued at the same time, Autumn of Glory, which I only looked at on a very superficial level. Therefore, this comment must be taken in the light of such a breezy once over. I did notice that the game greatly restricts the avenues of approach across the Tennessee available to Rosecrans eliminating any possibilities of the Union Player crossing farther up or down river than actually occurred. Again, just mentioned en passant.. ] My last problem concerns the victory conditions. In the aborted campaign, McClellan was forced to abandon the White House and relocate to Harrison's landing. He did not want to do this, and, in doing so, he was forced to destroy large quantities of supplies when he was being cut off from his base. In a truly "through-a-glass-darkly" stroke, the game actually awards the Union player victory points for relocating his base! My feeling is that, like with much of the above, the designers simply do not trust the players. They want to make sure the head of that gaming pariah, Alternate History, doesn't stick it's neck out any further than narrow necessity requires. Too bad, because that's why many of play these things … to see what could have happened, "if". We already know what "did" happen, something the designers appear to be intent on drilling into our minds. If there hadn't been so many off-the-mark, no-you-can't-do-this, but-you-sure-better-do-this type of design decisions I could have overlooked the overwrought combat system and immersed myself in a rather nifty operation game. As it stands though, the designers appear to have bought McClellan's line and applied it like a straight-jacket to a potentially unruly player. CAPSULE COMMENTS: Graphic Presentation: Generally excellent, although some of the counters are a little garish. Playability: Pretty good, but marred by an overly - and unnecessarily - complex combat system. Replayability: If you're a Rebelphile this is a keeper Creativity: High, perhaps too much so. Historicity: Misguided, except for the map. Comparisons: Pretty much the only area movement representation around, but one that suffers in comparison to what you can do with the likes of Stonewall Jackson's Way, et al. Overall: If you like the system, none of our negative comments will deter you. But the nagging feeling is that Lee needed more work before it was released. from Clash of Arms Games One 34"x22" map; Battleboard; 240 counters; Standard Rules Book, Exclusive Rules Book; Game Charts and Displays. Boxed. Clash of Arms, The Byrne Bldg, Lincoln & Morgan, Phoenixville PA 19460. $26. Back to Berg's Review of Games Vol. II # 11 Table of Contents Back to Berg's Review of Games List of Issues Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 1993 by Richard Berg This article appears in MagWeb.com (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other articles from military history and related magazines are available at http://www.magweb.com