Joe and I started in the wargaming trade, back at SPI, about the same time in the mid seventies. He and I were the last two members of what has been called the “Old Guard” R&D staff. I have worked with him these many years and watched him gain a well deserved reputation as one of the top designers in the field, so it was with great interest that I broke open the shrink wrap and plunged into Joe’s latest addition to his ongoing, and highly successful, operational Civil War series, Stonewall in the Valley. The first three volumes have been covered elsewhere and voluminously, and you are all, no doubt, aware of the graphic marvels this series features. The game covers Stonewall Jackson’s famous 1862 Shenandoah Valley campaign, a campaign that gave Jackson a place in the pantheon of famous generals and has been studied extensively by all serious military historians. The game system is a modified version of Joe’s Korea system, which he also used for Omaha Beach and this series’ forerunner, Lee vs. Grant. The system gives the player much control of how hard he can push his troops when maneuvering them across the theater. This critical element of Civil War operations is elegantly captured by the game’s mechanics; it also allows the players to experience the relative maneuver potential of the two sides, where the Southern marching advantage is well illustrated. This ability to elegantly simulate the ebb and flow of the valley campaign is the design’s greatest strength. The Sequence of Play is straightforward and offers some subtle player decisions that add interest to competitive play. The decision to activate a leader early in the turn to move a whole division could leave you vulnerable to your opponent, late in the turn, who has more forces to move and you cannot react without exhausting your units. Hence, the order and amount of forces moved, in relation to your opponent, can significantly effect play. As I always like games where what I do directly impacts play, I reacted very favorably to this dimension of the design. The combat system is relatively simple, but it is the area of the series that has garnered the most criticism. I think the CRT gives too much credit for having an advantage in force ratio. Most of my research seems to indicate that Civil War battles, because of the advantage defensive tactics had over the offense, were fairly insensitive to the relative force ratios, except in the absolute number of casualties experienced. This doesn’t seem to be a problem the way combat usually unfolds since most battles are at less than 3-1 odds. But the ability to mass three units on one to give a local advantage doesn’t seem to feel like the endless “bloody lane” type encounters where an outnumbered defender inflicted disproportionate losses on the attacker. For example, if three Union units of strength 4 assault a Confederate unit of the same strength they would gain a +2 modifier which would neutralize the Confederate units tactical advantage. Throw in a partial flank modifier and the Union could inflict 50% casualties while taking none in return. However, the overall probability is that the two sides would take around the same number of casualties, but, still, it raises a few questions. With this type of CRT it would seem that a Fredericksburg type battle would be hard to experience. One thing that Stonewall does obviate, mostly because of its focus on smaller “armies”, is the series’ infamous inability to allow players to mass their armies for one huge battle. It appears that Joe Bo was so fearful of gamers doing this as the sole raison d’ętre for playing that he rendered the chances for doing so mathematically smaller than the proverbial pinhead. With Stonewall, however, that issue fades into the background, as the armies themselves are rarely larger than a corps, and far smaller than those seen in previous volumes. The other “gray area” is one that continues to mystify all us wargamers: how to properly reflect the real utility of cavalry in the Civil War. Joe has chosen to simulate their skirmishing and raiding capabilities in this series, but its main role as an intelligence gathering, sensor screen continues to elude us. This is most interesting - and frustrating - in a series that emphasizes the maneuver aspects of operational warfare, where information gathering was one of the key elements. Still, I like this series. The scenarios move along quickly, providing good insight into the maneuver options the two sides had. And the historical information in the maps is absolutely breathtaking. Several years ago, when I was toiling mightily under Pharaoh Dottesses, as Vizier of Victory, I was approached by our estimable editor with the idea of doing the entire ACW as a quasi-”Europa” series. I thought this was a viable enough idea to have some initial work started, although, amidst a Greek Chorus of hisses and boos, mixed with many cries of “what are you nuts?”, the project was eventually abandoned. The past few years have shown that maybe we weren’t so crazy after all, because, I, like many of you out there, I look forward to the day when I can find a building big enough to allow me to play out the entire Eastern theater of operations using the Joe Bo system. You bring the table; I’ll bring the dice. CAPSULE COMMENTS: Graphic Presentation: Excellent, Charlie Kibler’s maps are breathtaking. Playability: The system is quickly learned and the game unfolds quickly. Replayability: Fair for the smaller scenarios, where the initial set up naturally limits the options for both players. The larger scenarios offer a much grander scope and extensive replay value. Creativity: Good, with some minor holes. Historicity: Well researched with excellent cartography. I believe the latter is a major historical contribution in this area. Wristage: Nothing unusual. Comparison: Stands alone as the only Civil War series at this scale. Overall: Recommended highly for those interested in either the Civil War and/or operational maneuver warfare. A must for those of you who already own the first three volumes. from Avalon Hill Three, 22" x 32" unmounted maps; 520 die cut counters; Rules Booklet; two chart & table cards; one ammunition pad, one force display; counter storage tray;. TAHGC, 4517 Harford Rd., Baltimore, MD 21214. $30 Back to Berg's Review of Games Vol. II # 18 Table of Contents Back to Berg's Review of Games List of Issues Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 1994 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