Three years ago, 3W released once of its few successful and glitch-free games, Battles of Army Group South, by Vance von Borries. The game was well received, and the "East Front Battles" series was under way. The series was to consist of 28 different games covering the entire Russian Front of WWII on a divisional/regimental level at 5 miles to the hex. (And you thought that “Europa” was the only example of overweening ambition?!) Flyers were even mailed announcing the future titles. The next title was to be Spires of the Kremlin but, before you could say Confounded Cambrian ConMan, Vance had removed his talents, and the game, over to Hanford, where Spires was quickly reborn as Typhoon. That might have been the end of that but it wasn't as the ever-clever Poulter found another designer, Joe Youst, and the capital to resurrect the project (but not, it appears, to pay his previous designers the royalties they had been patiently awaiting). Frankly, the whole enterprise seemed laughable - especially the Internet contretemps between Youst and von Borries over who had been “firstest with the mostest” - but the result eventually landed on my doorstep with a resounding thump … and thankfully not a thud. Spires is a big game, every bit as big as Typhoon. The scales of both games are the same as is the time frame (October through the Russian counterattack). However, the similarity between the two ends there. Given the game's history, I had really expected the whole thing to be just a thinly-disguised, "reverse engineered", slap-dash copy of von Borries' original work. Life is full of surprises, though, and often from the least-expected directions. Spires is definitely its own game. Joe Youst took the project seriously and eschewed the "me too" route to create a solid, workman-like recreation of the massive Typhoon operation. It's hard to describe a game this big and detailed. The best approach would be to first present where Youst’s design departs from von Borries' treatment of the battle. As stated above, the scales are the same. The first big difference is that Joe did not use the "differential" sequence of play von Borries created for Typhoon wherein the Germans go here and there, burn villages, turn Russian units into road kill and make it back to Smolensk in time for three rounds of beer and a hearty chorus of the "Horst Wessel Lied" while the Russians move their infantry, then their armor, totally miss the point, and then move one or two units half their factors back to where they started. Instead, the sequence is now identical for both sides, with the inactive player getting a reaction phase directed by HQ's. It is 1941 and the Russian HQ's do not have the same coordinating abilities as the Panzer boys but with intelligent play and timing, the Soviet player can actually get off some good moves. In that regard, I found von Borries' "differential" sequence of play somewhat artificial while Joe's command rules, while still acknowledging poorer Soviet coordination, do not put the force the Russian player to act like an idiot but rather allow him the chance to do the best he can with the sort of "officers" the Red Army had in '41. The air rules are also quite different. Air power is defined in "sectors" which generate varying air superiority and ground support values. First you fight for air superiority in a given sector (a distant cousin of the system used in Crisis: Korea and Next War). The results affect the dispatch abilities of those sectors during the upcoming turn. Roughly speaking, if you lose air superiority in a sector, it will be harder to use ground support assets later. All of this is then modified by range, supply and weather considerations. Several long pages are devoted to the air rules. However, for those of you who aren’t interested in that much detail, Youst has very wisely included "Beer and Pretzel" air rules which greatly streamline the procedure so you can get on with the ground action. Speaking of ground action, we're once again in a complex, highly-chromed situation. But then again, that's why you love Russian front games, isn't it? To run your ground battles, you have to be not only a general but a mental gymnast. Stacking limits (which also affect the size of your attacks) vary according to the type of terrain you're stacked in, the terrain into which you want to attack and by the nature of the units in the stack (armor, reasonably enough, stacks well in clear terrain and not so well in closed terrain). Strengths are modified by the terrain. You throw in air, artillery, supply, armor and AT effects, engineers, unit proficiency and weather and then you roll the dice. The combat results are expressed as "obligations" (losses or hexes retreated). Once again, how the obligations are fulfilled depends on the units involved, the presence of enemy ZOC's, and the terrain (cities create intense situations, huge stacks with a "double magnitude" battle using two die-rolls, and, of course, that many more loss results). There is even a "forgive and forget" rule which lets the attacker reduce his losses by likewise allowing the defender a loss reduction. An interesting twist is the "follow up attack" that allows the attacker to make one more attack out of the hex he just advanced into. If all of the above sounds like a lot of work, well, it is. I found it interesting and fun, though, and it is certainly no harder to master than the popular OCS series or Jack Radey’s legendary titles. The East Front was just made for this sort of intense unit interactions, and you get your money's worth of it in Spires. The other major difference between Spires and the competition is the liberal helping of scenarios, one of the game's real strong points. Joe has smartly broken down the campaign into four periods: the German attack, the Soviet defensive battles around Tula and Rzhev, the Rasputitsa confusion of November, and then the Russian counterattack. For each of these, he has included four scenarios, ranging from half-mappers, through one-mappers to campaigns starting in each of the respective periods. For the smaller scenarios, he has also slimmed down the air and supply rules into their "Beer and Pretzel" mode to get you into the fight faster. I found the range of these 16 scenarios quite varied as to balance and the types of actions. You can play Spires big or small, depending on time and space. On top of everything else Youst has put into this monster, there are also weather rules, replacements, fortification and demolition, personnel return rates, tank repair, German break-down units, STAVKA reserves and a descendant of the flaming anti-elephant pigs at Beneventum, a Moscow AT dog company (wait till you see the unit symbol!). These games we play can be like British sports cars: lots of fun if you can keep them tuned! The bigger and more detailed they are, the more bugs they can contain and this is just something that has to be lived with. Like the Tiger tank, Spires is big and powerful, with just a few teething problems. For one, a game this big could have used some training scenarios, à la Guderian's Blitzkrieg, that allow you to learn key rule groups one at a time, and the terrain effects chart can be overwhelming. There are 22 terrain types that get cross-referenced against movement point costs (differentiated for leg/motorized), stacking limits, ZOC effects, combat effects on the defender, attacker and on armor multiples, combat advances and retreats and finally, supply traces. While I respect the designer's intentions, some streamlining is definitely in order. The above criticisms aside, Spires of the Kremlin is a tour-de-force; it all hangs together and works rather well. True, it is not for everyone, but I don’t think gamers who have been playing the original Stalingrad for decades are going to make the leap here, quantum or no. And for East Front Battles" fans, the best news is that the entire series has been turned over to the capable John Vanore of Spearhead Games. Something for the Sons of the Don, and the Rebels of the Rasputitsa to look forward to. CAPSULE COMMENTS Graphic Presentation: No major problems, but nothing special. Playability: Fine, but only for the committed and historically-minded gamer. Playing time varies from a couple of hours for the small scenarios to something only a parrot could outlive. Replayability: I'll let you know in about 5 years! 16 scenarios don’t hurt. Historicity: Enough detail in this game to make it seem real but allow you to come up with a winning move. Creativity: My hat's off to Joe Youst for taking what might have been a "lame duck" game, and turning it into a solid, well-researched and accurate game. Wristage: Check your HMO benefits page. Comparisons: One-on-one with Typhoon, it depends what you like at this scale. Both are admirable; both, like Russia, are huge and endless. For those of you with far too much time on their hands, an interesting change of pace from the OCS/TCS games. Overall: Joe Youst's very own, original game, on the Moscow campaign creates its own “big wind”., from 3W GAMES Three 33” x 22” maps, 1060 counters, series rule book, game rule book, various charts and tables; boxed. 3W Games, 4210 North Wilburn, Fresno, CA. $40? Back to Berg's Review of Games Vol. II # 22 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