One 22"x17" map, 240 counters, charts, Rules Book. Ziplocked $29. I'm pretty much indifferent to the Eastern Front in WWII. Give me North Africa, Italy, or the Western Front, and I'm much happier. I even prefer island-hopping in the Pacific. There's nothing that really excites me about Barbarossa and its aftermath. I just find that there's a certain sameness to the Eastern Front, and it bores me. Then why on earth did I want to review Turning the Tables, Moments in History's (MiH) new game on the "Axis Defeat of the Soviet Spring '42 Offensive?" Two words: company (and) designer. You see, of my 8 or so Eastern Front games, 3 now are from MiH. While Eastwall was somewhat of a disappointment, Ring of Fire is one of those fun games I keep on returning to. I also really enjoy the twists that Dirk Blennemann puts into his games. The uncertainty in his Piercing the Reich keeps mc interested and coming back to Aachen. I guessed that this game would be fun, and there would be enough interesting innovations in it to keep me happy, even if it is an Eastern Front game. The rulebook is well formatted, well-written and thorough. Threc scenarios are included, a 2 turn historical one, the 8 turn campaign, and a 3 turn 'what-if." A nice touch here is the addition of a copy of the counter sheet on the back cover. The historical commentary is "short and sweet," giving a nice overview of the battle. This was quite helpful to me, as I don't know much about the Eastern Front. One conspicuous omission is the lack of a bibliography. MiH boldly contends that this game is based on new research just recently made available (thanks, Boris!), but doesn't list the sources used. While I don't dispute their claims, I know that such a bibliography would be helpful to many. The counters are, well, "functional." While I like this in maps, I prefer my counters to have some "oomph." Soviet units are reddish, Germans are gray, and Axis allies (Rumanian, Hungarian, and Croatian) vary. Each combat unit has a black band across the bonom of the unit, highlighting the unit's combat strength, tactical rating, and movement allowance. Soviet Guards have a yellow band. Other information on the counters include unit type, setup hex (or reinforcement turn), historical designation, unit size (battalion all the way up to corps), lack of ZOCs (brigades only, but some corps counters are mistakenly identified as "no-ZOC"), and Soviet tank brigade bonus (again, some errata here, as all Soviet units marked as having a tank bonus are really brigades, though some are designated as corps! ). Although the counters are nothing special, they get across the info you need to play the game. Since there are movement benefits for keeping these units together, a colored unit box would have been easier to read than tiny numbers. Nothing fatal, it's just that a few little tweaks here and there would have made the units much more pleasing. There are also various markers to facilitate play, and 40 combat chits (20 per side). The combat chits list the turns they're in play from, and, sometimes this information differs from the reinforcement schedule in the rulebook. Go with the info on the chits, they're correct! The 4 cardstock play aids give you all the information you need to play the game, and they're nicely laid out. No flipping through the rulebook, you can find what you need on the player cards. Two of the cards are identical, one for each player, and back printed. These are for combat, terrain effects, attrition rolls, etc. The sequence of play is found here, and this quickly becomes intuitive. One chart lists all the effects of the combat chits (this chart is repfoduced in the rulebook if you both need to see it simultaneously), and the last keeps record of the turns, segments, and various points each side needs to classify and track. A-1 job here. Finally, we turn to the Joe Youst map: it's small and utilitarian. I admit to being a fan of function (Mark Simonitch, come home!) over "artistry" when it comes to maps, and this one is unquestionably functional. not overdone. I would have liked to see reinforcement hexes marked, and the different design for the Dnepr and Donets Rivers makes one think the Dnepr should be much harder to cross, though in this game, a ever's a river. The one thing on the map that immediately jumped out at me was the placement of the terrain key. It takes up 24 hexes (6 x 4 area) in the area between the Dnepr and Poltava, two possible Soviet objectives. During my first game, a Soviet armored spearhead ran right into this key, as the Germans were effectively using it as their westem flank. This really bugged me. Whining So, I did what we all do in 1998; I whined about it on the Internet. I also e-mailed Dirk Blennemann about it, detailing my concerns, and quickly heard back from Dirk. Very nicely, he told me, 'A great part of the area covered by the Terrain Key was a very special kind of swamp (the local population called it "Dead Area"). Running major military operations in this area was out of question. Instead of introducing an additional terrain type and a set of special rules, I decided to ignore this swamp by placing the Terrain Key here." Placates me! Knowing that there is pretty much impassable terrain there, makes me play the game better. The Gemmans should be able to use that region for a flank, if the Soviets let him! Head for the open ground, young comrade! Each turn starts with an administrative phase (which is skipped on the initial turns of all scenarios). At this time, reinforcements are brought in. Combat chits are added or taken away from the two armies, units are marked out of supply (a simple trace to board edges), previously out of supply units regain supply or take possible attrition losses, and C3I points are added to your respective side. C3I points? Yup, you get a set number of these each turn to spend on operations. You see, you cannot do everything you want each tum! Bravo! Basically, each operations segment has you spending 1-3 C3I points. The more you spend, the better. There aren't many turns when you can spend 3 per segment, because you don't receive an inexhaustible supply. Heart of the Game And now we move onto the heart of the game, the Player/operations segments etc. Each side has 3 player segments per tum, beginning with a Soviet segment, and altemating back and forth, until each side has had chances to do harm to the enemy. While this is an "Igo-Hugo" system broken into essentially six impulses, recall that only some units can move and anack during your turn. This makes the game more fluid, and you'll never have the entire front moving each segment. Turns go rather quickly so you're not twiddling your thumbs while your opponent moves. During your player segments, you decide two maners that will help or hinder you The first is, will your units move then attack, or will they attack first ther move? This is a gaming tactic that has successfully been used in game' such as XTR's Wave of Terror. In military terms, the question you ask yourself is, "should my units maneuver and then attack, or do they attack and then breakout?" Whatever choice you make holds for all your formations throughout that segment. In my expenence, the Soviets will almost always move/attack, until they have to try and break out of a potential pocket closing around them. The Axis will generally do the same. This is an interesting mechanic, and one I like, though the choice here is usually quite clear (and it's usually move/attack). C3I That choice having been made, now you must decide how many C3I Points to use (from 1-3 per segment), and then roll on the applicable column or the Activity Chart. The results here will tell you how many units may move this segment, and how many attacks you may initiate. Units that you want to move will just sit there, and attacks you want to undertake will never materialize. You have to plan well, and maximize your efforts each turn. While it would be nice to spend 3 C3I points each segment, your supply of these is limited. Another inhibiting factor is that you need to spend at least 1 per segment, so if you start a turn with 4 points, you can't spend 3 on your first player segment (that would only leave you with one to spend over two more player segments, and this is strictly forbidden). At the beginning of each subsequent turn, you receive more C3I points, and the distribution of these begins to favor the Axis after the first few turns. A very nice way of modeling an offensive -- you have a lot of points, you can open it up, but when the points begin to dry up, there's no choice but to defend! Though it's possible to save C3I points from turn to turn (if you don't "use it," you certainly won't "lose it"), you will realistically need to spend what you have. Both sides can save a point here or there in the mid-game, but you'll never save many. In addition, a nice way that differences are underscored between the two armies, is that Axis units that belong to the same division may spend I movement point and move all (usually 3) units of the same division, if these units start stacked together, and move together. Finally, each side gets to make one strategic move each segment (save for the Axis during their first player segment on Turn 1, since they were caught off guard), in which a unit can be moved anywhere on the map, provided all hexes entered are friendly controlled, and this unit never enters an enemy ZOC. If you'll remember, you can choose the order (move/attack or attack/move) of your operations. Let's assume you've chosen move/attack, and you're ready to pummel those enemy units you're now next to. The Activity Chart has given you 4 attacks this turn (you wanted 7, too bad...). You smugly point to a lone Rumanian division in the open, opposed by a Soviet tank corps and 2 Soviet cavalry corps, smile devilishly, and roll for the attack. However. before we find out the results, or even know what odds column to roll on. we find another "twist" that makes this game fun: combat chits. Each unit, in addition to its combat and movement values, has a tactical value. Our poor Rumanian from above is saddled with a "2," while the Soviet corps all have "3's." What this does, is it lets each side blindly pick a number of combat chits equal to the best tactical ratmg of any unit in the battle. In this example, the Axis player picks two chits, while the Sovie player picks three. These chits can be put in five main categories: 1) commies (no effect), 2) arms, 3) additional losses (to one or both sides), 4: halving or doubling of unit strengths, and 5) reduction in combat losses (to one or both sides). After chits are drawn, the side with tactical superiority (higher tactical rating) gets to play 3 chits, while the other side plays just I chit. If tactical ratings are eclual, both sides get to play 2 chits. You're never forced to play these chits, and, in some cases, you can't play then unless certain conditions apply to the battle. What Dirk Blennemann has done here, is add a real panache to combat, without increasing complexity. Getting back to our example, the Rumanians will only be able to play I chit, and chances are it won't be a very "good" one. Later in the game, when the Germans are on the attack, many of their battles led by motorized divisions will see them drawing 6 chits, letting them pick and choose 3 real "good" ones (those Stukas with their +/-5 arms seem to show up often to support the panzers!). Chit play often becomes a game within a game." The Axis will almost always have tactical superiority in battles, with some exceptions. As Blennemann comments, "Most amazing was the lack of skill of the Soviet forces." Yes, I see that in the chits! 1 out of every 18 combat dierolls and, possible allow a player to do something he normally would not be able to do. For instance, it's very disconcerting to get a random event that allows the defender to move away from the key attack you've planned, or, even worse, reinforce the hex with a panzer division! Another nice touch that keeps both sides on their toes. The final phase of the Turn, is the victory check. Each side gains points for eliminating enemy steps, and the Soviets gain points for territonal objectives. A Soviet victory occurs if the VPs fall past the greater side of the range, while VPs past the lesser side result in an Axis victory. If there's no victory, the next turn begins. These VP spreads force the Soviets to attack early, and likewise force the Axis to counterattack later one. Another nice mechanic. Thus, the Soviets need to anack early. They can try four main strategies: 1) kill as many weak Axis units as possible, 2) head west, and threaten either the Dnepr crossings or Poltava, 3) smash toward Kharkov from the east and the south simultaneously, or 4) attempt to reduce the Gemman bridgehead across the Donets. These strategies can be used together (#1 and #2 usually go right together!), but none is foolproof. In my expenences, most Soviet victories will come in the first two turns, or at the end of the game as they ride out the Gemian counterattack. Many people I've spoken to, however, seem to feel that the game heavily favors the Gemmans, especially if an early Soviet victory is not obtained, although I don't see this as too much of a problem. Even so, the Axis side is both more 'fun," and more forgiving to play. Blennemann has said that more games using this system are planned for the future, including games that can link to the TT map. I'll look forward to those, because I like TT. It's relatively small, fairly quick playing, and gives both sides attack and defend opportunities. The game shows the strengths and weakness of both armies, without a plethora of rules to overburden you. And this from a guy who's usually bored fighting over "Mother Russia!" Now where did that "PAK Front" chit go? CAPSULE COMMENTS Graphic Presentation: Nice and functional. Playability: Excellent. Accessible with nice twists. Replayability: For the main scenario, quite high. Wristage: Low. Creativity: Dirk Blennemann shines here. Historicity: Appears fine, but could have used a bibliography Comparisons: COA's Prelude to Disaster is for those who go for complexity, some say while sacrificing fun. SPI had an old Panzergruppe Guderian clone on this battle. It is more fun, and less costly. Overall: For those who like to have fun and learn a little on the side. Back to Berg's Review of Games Vol. 2 #28 Table of Contents Back to Berg's Review of Games List of Issues Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 1998 by Richard Berg This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com