Call it a compulsion, a labor of love, a mania for whatever, but each of us is driven to produce something regardless of its tangible benefits to ourselves. Mike Bennighof's compulsion appears to have been to design Blood & Iron - not to be confused with Command's Blood & Iron, or Rob Markham's Blood & Iron, although avoiding such confusion may be confusing in an of itself - a detailed study of the wars in Central Europe from 1859 to 1870 culminating in the unification of Germany in 1871. He has done his work well, even though he seems to be arguing with Pacific Rim throughout the project. If anything, Bennighof has shown tremendous scholarship. His maps are excruciatingly accurate, his order of battle represents 22 different armies (not counting four sets for the Austrians and two each for Prussia and Saxony), while his rules reflect a good grasp of strategic generalities and nation-specific detail. In fact, the depth of his work is why this game may never be popular. Players without a strong knowledge of the period will wonder what all the fuss is about and leave it quickly. Those who relish this fascinating period, however, will cherish the game. The main map covers Central Europe from the Meuse to Russia and from the Baltic to Tuscany with each hex representing 35 kilometers. The secondary map covers eastern France, with an inset of Denmark at a rather different scale of ten kilometers per hex. The colors are functional rather than eye-catching, but the incredible feat of cartography here is the depiction of all the small states and Prussian enclaves west of the Elbe. Unfortunately, all the dotted borders create a Frankenstein's monster covered not only with sutures but riddled with chicken pox. Even so, it's still impressive. The counters have the usual infantry/calvary/artillery symbols, representing units from brigades to armies, showing movement, combat and morale factors. There are also leader, headquarter and railroad markers. Naturally, with over 22 nationalities, the color-schemes get wild: Saxe-Meinigen is dark green with white lettering while Hesse-Kassel is dark green with grey. It all seems a plot by the Health Industry to keep all those rods and cones working at a feverish pitch. Given all of this, at first blush, the Order of Battle cards would appear to be saviors, with each unit shown for all six scenarios. However, accuracy again becomes a play-pain. One cannot simply place a generic 10-3 counter; it must be the exact unit. Moreover, the cards are printed using a very small font, and many of the squares are shaded grey. Set-up is best accomplished using a 3x magnifying glass. B&I's game mechanics are simple. The turn sequence is move/combat/rail movement, with the non-phasing player's rally coming after the phasing player's movement. Movement is straight forward, with clear hexes taking one movement point and mountain hexes absorbing all movement points for units other than mountain units. Rivers, though, are the first indication of a difference of opinion between designer and publisher, with Pacific Rim saying they are no impediment to movement while Bennighof insists that crossing a river hexside is a +1 affair. ZOC's are relatively fluid. Combat is an unusually bloodless affair, using two six-siders, with losses taken only after a unit has already been flipped for failing a morale check after an earlier battle. Results, after usual calculations of odds and application of die roll modifiers for terrain and leaders, are expressed in die roll modifiers to a morale roll. Disruptions cause a retreat of one hex (at least it does according to the errata received from Pacific Rim) and flipping to a reduced-strength side. Inability to retreat eliminates the unit. Corps which shatter are replaced by their constituent divisions which must undergo a separate morale roll. Corps broken down as a result of combat can only be reformed if the constituent divisions are stacked together at full strength, and then only after three turns. Disrupted units not adjacent to an enemy can be rallied by rolling their morale or less. This logical system is then marred by a "Fortunes of War" rule - whatever that means - which spells utter calamity for an attacker who rolls a natural 12 … wherein the designer and publisher are at each other's throats once again: Bennighof rejects this aberration, as should the player. Most of the "chrome" for combat is in the scenario specific rules. The two exceptions are for Austrian artillery, which gives a favorable die-roll modifier to their stack, and light cavalry, which can retreat before combat. Supply and command control play essential roles in B&I. To attack, rally, or move into enemy cities with intrinsic garrisons, units must trace a five-hex path to a friendly city, a supplied headquarters or, in the case of the Prussians, a supply unit. Such a short distance makes the occupation of enemy cities the key feature of any strategy. The attacking player is given some grace by the "fortress masking" rules. By leaving double the strength points of a defender on a fortress city, the attacking player may trace a supply line through the city while denying it as a base for the enemy. Headquarters are the key to command control. To have active ZOCs, a unit must be within two hexes of an HQ (three if Prussian). Also, attackers may have up to three rounds of combat if a headquarters is present. These concepts are simple but have overwhelming impacts on combat. The last element in command are leaders who can modify combat and morale rolls for the units they command. These commanders do not have the coordinating capabilities of a headquarters and reflect charisma rather than command. They are, in short, typical aristocratic sword-swingers. The general rules are brief and generally well-written, but, as you can see, questions have arisen. If breaking down a disrupted corps results in over-stacking, is retreat possibly or are there other negative results? Do railroad bridges negate rivers if the designer's modifier is used? What is the effect of disruption on the combat factor of intrinsic garrison? These are small points which can be resolved by players, but something authoritative would be nice. Considering the in-print bickering between Bennighof and publisher Tibbets, that is not likely to happen soon. While the rules may be fairly pedestrian, the scenarios, together with all their special detail and optional rules, are the jewels in B&I's diadem and highlight what amounts to the game's superb historical feel. The introductory scenario, a hypothetical one, postulates that Italy fought on alone after Prussia made peace with Austria in 1866, sort of a rerun of the 1859 scenario, below. By using their headquarters unit, the Austrians can create a steamroller which brushes aside the brittle, uncoordinated Italians in this six-turn game. The German-Danish War of 1864 is a fascinating but neglected piece of Euro-arcana, and Bennighof captures the unique features of this struggle very well. The Austrian and Prussians cannot cooperate as allies, have separate supply sources and lose if one gets 3 times more VPs than the other. The Danes have the advantages of a special fortification across most of the peninsula, free ferry movement up the Danish archipelago (the Allies must roll at each ferry for each unit), and having only to survive to win. Special rules include Swedish intervention and superior Swedish weaponry. A crafty Dane can win this ten-turn war. The Risorgimento of 1859, a major historical event almost totally ignored by non-European companies, covers the war against Austria by France, Piedmont and Tuscany which featured the massive battle of Solferino and resulted, eventually, in Italian unification. Although, in reality, the Austrians got pushed around the lot, this turns out to be the most balanced scenario …there are no Prussians. A conservative Austrian player can win a marginal victory by not invading areas restricted for the Allies and being opportunistic in Piedmont. All of the earlier scenarios, though, are warm-ups for the main, decisive events: The Seven Weeks War of 1866 and the Franco-Prussian War of 1870. The Seven Weeks War, which assured that Austria would not take part in German unification,uses the entire crazy-quilt map of Central Europe and, if France intervenes, the map of eastern France. The Prussian player controls his own troops which are spread in a semi-circle across the North, the Italians and, if he's lucky, the juggernaut from Luxembourg. The Austrian deploys his own troops and the troops of the myriad of minor German states, dooming him to two hours of set-up. The special and optional rules for this war take almost as much space as the basic rules. They include railroad capacity, the inefficiency of minor German armies, General Manteuffel, Luxembourg, the Austrian gold reserve, Bavarian efficiency, the "needle" gun, various unstable Austrian officers, Turkish intervention, French intervention and naval operations. Of these, the last two deserve explanation. If the Prussian gets 40 more VPs than the Austrians, the French players puts seven chits - four marked "No Response" and three marked "Intervene" - into a cup. If "Intervene" is drawn, troops are deployed against Prussia and another die is rolled to see if Napoleon III takes the field or if the French get a command structure. The naval rules revolve around amphibious operations between the Austrian and Italian navies in the Adriatic. The simple combat system almost assures Austrian success, which may cause Turkish intervention on the side of the Prussians. The War in Italy in 1866 scenario is just the southern part of the Seven Weeks War and is not all that interesting. And, after the variety of the Seven Weeks War, the Franco-Prussian War is almost anti-climatic. Contrary to the designers notes, the French cannot when alone against a competent Prussian; Austrian intervention is essential. Granted, simplification could have made B&I a better game. The map could have been simpler; the OoBs more generic. However, simplification wouldn't have made it a better product. Bennighof wanted to create a serious study of this period, and he has succeeded with comparatively few glitches and only some minor fisticuffs with the publisher. Pacific Rim deserves praise for putting out such a quality product, probably with the knowledge it would not be a commercial success. Blood & Iron is a serious simulation that demands much of its players. For those interested in such an approach, it is highly recommended. CAPSULE COMMENTS Graphic Presentation: Very detailed, almost too much so. Colors are pedestrian but workable. Playability: Set-up is a killer but actual play is smooth. Some rule could be clarified. Replayability: With all the scenarios and optional rules, this game could be played for a year and never repeat itself. Wristage: A lot. Creativity: Old concepts made new by historical perspective. Historicity: Bennighof should get fifty graduate credits for this. Comparisons: Much more in depth than the old game on the 1st Reich, whose title escapes me at the moment. Overall: Not for the casual gamer ,but a must for any serious student of the period. from PACIFIC RIM 1 34" x 11" map, 1 34 x 22" map; 600 counters; rules booklet; 4 double-sided OoB cards; 2 dice; P.O. Box 23651, Oakland, CA 94623; $35 Back to Berg's Review of Games Vol. II # 14 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