Dear Don,

4500 people attended origins last weekand at least 90% had a good time.

0'80 will be on July 18-20 at the Univ. of Delaware, Newark, Del. (About 10 miles SW of Wilmington on I-95.)

John Desmond, Philadelphia, PA

East Coast again, eh? How they can call it a "national" convention is be- yond me! DSL

Dear Gentlemen:

In the May-June edition of CAMPAIGN (#91), in Thumbnail Analysis, WARLORD was listed with its old price of $14 even though it was advertised in #90 for $16.00. 1 believe you owe your readers and us a correction at least.

Sincerely, Robert Williams
Robert Williams Games Robbinsdale, MN

Sorry 'bout that. DSL

Dear Don,

Can you or your readers direct me to books and articles on the modeling and casting of micro-armor?

What tools and techniques are used by GHQ and C in C to model and cast microarmor?

As Lorrin Bird mintioned in Campasgn #91, your readers include "a sizable armor miniatures group".

Sincerely, Ken Moore Sheffield Lake, OH

Afraid I can't give you a bibliography, maybe our readers can. I do remember that Bob Bard once wrote a book on casting 54mm miniatures. The general technique would be the same. I don't recall the title but maybe you can find it through the author's name. Bard sold miniature mail order for years. I uzed to be a customer as a kid. The book was published circa 1956. DSL

Don,

In view of Gerry Thompson's very funny letter in CAMPAIGN #92 regarding my fit of letter writing, I'll only submit this one letter during June to allow room for the vast multitudes I crowded out of "Mail Call".

Anyhow, during June a group of local gamers got together and played out a CROSS OF IRON scenario on some local farmland using jeeps for tanks and one gamer per squad. Range was estimated using a range finder and COI hex length (40 meters), each side rolled the dice for fire results and the opposition's morale and then informed the "enemy" of the results.

While the results are not of particular importance (the Russians overran Malta Gardens, much to the amazement of the stunned residents), the influence of terrain on the battle was very interesting and brought up a few factors the "Miniatures" players may find important.

The terrain over which the armies fought was basically flat, surrounded by woods and intersected by a road junction that was adjoined by two farms. The defending Germans had to hold the road junction and were given two 75mm anti-tank guns (broken plows) to ward off 5 T34s (jeeps).

Later we analyzed the battle in-detail and compared the results to what a few popular wargame rules may have predicted. The first significant point is that the ground did not prevent track hits against any of the T34s, even at 500 meters range since the few folds in the earth (small rises) couldn't block off low projectiles. Had the Russians entered from the opposite quadrant the earth was sufficiently rolling to prevent hits against tank tracks and the lower hull area, especially if a low profile anti-tank gun were firing (in this case, target hits would be significantly decreased due to the smaller target area). After 1000 meters, while the entire tank was often visible and "hittable", large areas of terrain were screened by very tiny "rises" that were excellent lines of approach for tanks and prevented track hits.

Based on our study of the battlefield, for AFV purposes flat ground is unrealistic, and the ground should contain enough r,,~vafure to screen AFVs to some degree. Track hits in TRACTICS, ANGRIFF, TOBRUK and otner rules may be too common in view of the actual properties of terrain and its effect on anti-tank shells.

In a fashion quite similar to the situation for tanks, we found that very slight rises in the ground, some less than three feet high, were critial to the outcome of the infantry battle. These miniature hills not only provided significant cover against small arms (and HE to a small degree), but combined with tall grass and bushes were excellent areas for concealment and machine gun emplacements (especially when sited on "high ground" with a perfect view of the approaches). When these "high" points fell (and it should be emphasized that they were almost overlooked unless you were a warmonger trying to optimize the lethality of your light machine guns), the strongpoints were often screened off from advancing enemy forces who either crawled or kept low.

In fact, the importance of extremely slight irregularities in the terrain profile was so great that once its impact was noted the entire tactical strategy was based on utilizing the optimum avenues of approach. To a wargamer looking to set up an interesting scenario and terrain layout, it would seem that trees, bushes, mountains (in the literal sense), walls and buildings might be supplemented by realistic ground characteristics (furls, high grasses, ditches, etc.).

A following battle for the Malta Grand Union (after the jeeps were repaired, a difficult procedure when 75mm shells pierce the engine block) came to basically the same conclusion, battles are often decided by the smallest and most subtle things; a minor rise, a natural drainage path, the height of the vegetation, a picket fence, or how the neighbors pile their garbage.

While SQUAD LEADER no doubt assumed the existance of these microscopic "imperfections" but allowed each hex a share of them (thereby averaging their effect into the combat results), for 1:1 miniature battles (each figure represents one man) they are an interesting and occasionally vital feature for the trivia freak.

Although all of this may mean little in terms of what a wargamer should (or even can) put on the table, from a military point of view (small unit actions in particular) its fun to see what is really involved in being a squad leader setting up realistic tactics.

Lorrin Bird, Mechanicville, NY

For the record, this one letter for JUne was followed by four or five for July, but I think I'll save them as additions to some of Lorrin's articles I have in hand. DSL

Dear Don,

My 3 favorite types of books are Military History, Sword & Sorcery, and Science Fiction. My most detested types of games are Role- playing and Science Fiction. So I wonder why I even bothered to glance at "Star Web Part III", much less, why, once I started reading it, I couldn't put it down. It was very interesting and I wish I had my previous issues at hand, as I remember rating Part I and Part II as "0", and not reading them. It would make a great plot for a book or movie, or at least a slot in CAMPAIGN to conclusion. Bomba scores again with an excellent article on my type of games (WWII, Operational). The armor article was interesting and WETS was okay. This was a good issue! The letters page (gossip column) is always interesting, though I apparently missed one aimed at me in issue #91. I'm glad you printed Terry Alan Maney's letter, and share some of Patrick Lucas' feelings, in regards to this issue. FIRE AND MOVEMENT is still my favorite, but CAMPAIGN has moved up a notch.

Sincerely, Wally Williams Jr, Jay, FL

Goodfan Lowry:

Sorry not to see you at Origins; I was rather looking forward to meeting you in corpus but your reasons (explained in a past issue of CAMPAIGN) are valid.

Your objections to SWORDS & SORCERY are those of a fantasy fan. As Costikyan (or any other SF fan) would probably say, "Feh!" I got my money' worth from S&S - and "straight" stuff & parody are not necessarily incompatible. I find a little humor mixed with the practice of medicine helps my patients tolerate their illnesses & the cures required. One-sidedness is too damn grim.

I'd like to thank you for increasing the length & depth of the Thumbnail reviews. The Review of SNITS REVENGE "sold" the game to a couple of respiratory therapists ( I'm ordering one for 'em with this letter). On the other hand, the review of BISMARK convinced me that I'll be better contented if I stick with DREADNAUGHT.

Though not a miniatures fan, I thought "Modernizing Modern Armor Rules" was excellent, saying much that needs to be said about the way in which modern armor games (board & miniatures) handle the "force multipliers" of today's mechanized battlefield.

Thanks for another good issue.

Sincerely, Rich Bartucci D.O. Saddle Brook, NJ

Dear Don,

Some friends showed me issue 90 in which you printed my letter cancelling my subscription and, shall we say, criticizing some elements of wargaming. And now comes issue 91 where Mr. List expressed again so aptly my sentiments toward your magazine. Then comes the attack by Mr. Purman, but being a veteran wargamer I have learned to suffer and smile. One point was raised that I can not comprehend. How do you tell if a wargame is personal or impersonal? My God, I know these supergamers have elaborate criteria for determining playability, realism, and balance, for they speak of it quite long and loud. But now we casual gamers have another mystery to contend with . . . personal games . . . Furthermore, if he is right, and I am a genius someday, somewhere, somehow, I can figure out how one can Play KRIEGSPIEL at a wargame meeting or convention without risking banishment to Siberia.

Sincerely, Steven M. Apergis Burke, VA

Maybe you've been going to the wrong meetings and convention! I don't care for KRIEGSPIEL, but what the guys at the next table play is no concrrn of mine, and I don't recall ever being at a convention or meeting where anybody said "no KRIEGSPIEL allowed". Perhaps you're just being overly sensitive to what others think or say. Personally I play simpler games, too. Our group loves to play ACQUIRE, EMPEROR OF CHINA, NUCLEAR WAR and other simpte, multi-player games. I certainly think there is plenty of room for the "casual gamer" in the hobby. If you feel CAMPAIGN is not being the needs of such gamers, how about making some specific recommendations?

Having just read Paul Purman's letter in #91 I don't see how you can call it an "attack". The man has an opinion. He has a right to express it. If he disagrees with your opinion, that is not an "attack" - just as your disagreeing with him is not an attack on him. DSL

Dear Mr Lowry:

Yesterday I received the long-awaited CAMPAIGN #91, and its typical excellence has prompted this fan letter. I honestly believe that CAMPAIGN is the best wargaming magazine available today.

I am tempted to say that diversity is the magazine's greatest virtue ' yet variety alone would not be satisfying I can think of no other journal that provides its readers with a greater scope of features - history, strategy, review (the Big Three), plus miniatures, fantasy, design analyses, insider's reports, and eyewitness accounts of tournaments. Perhaps most amazing is that each issue contains articles from most of these categories! No other magazine packs so much into every issue - I find myself reading it several times just to be sure that I've seen everything; It seems that there's always something more to be found inside.

But, just as important as the volume of articles is their excellence. The articles have always been good, yet the quality of writing seems to be improving consistently, which is a mark of true greatness. The articles by Lorrin Bird strike me as being particularly well done. He always puts an astonishing amount of research into his work, yet is able to keep the articles interesting, rather than just dumping statistics and percentages upon his readers. In fact, I don't believe that I have ever read an article in your magazine that I thought was less than good.

Reviews, though, are a touchy subject for several reasons, so I'll treat them separately. When writing a game review, it seems (unfortunately) that the author can easily become car-. ried away, and picture himself as the Last Word on a game's value. (I bought a sample issue of FIRE AND MOVEMENT, and after reading a negative review of a game in there, I felt as though failing to produce a great game means to demand that the designer have his hands cut off - that sort of self- importance really wears thin in a big hurry.) But I am glad so say that, for the most part, CAMPAIGN is refreshingly objective. The reviews are honest, well-explained, and informative, especially "Impressions From the Prism". Mr. Jones does an excellent job in his reviews; I find it a great shame that the readers don't support his column simply because they have little or no interest in fantasy gameing, and thereby write Os on their Return Fire sheets. Personally, I try always to give credit for a good job, even if the subject matter is not of any particular interest, it would be nice if other readers would do so also. And there is one thing that Mr. Jones does in his reviews that almost no other reviewer ever even mentions - he comments on solitaire playability. Everybody knows that an awful lot of games are played solitaire yet a game's ability to be played by one's self is scarcely mentioned, and must often be quessed at thru the description of mechanics, which is of questionable accuracy: I play 100% solitaire; I'm too lazy and misanthropic to play FTF, so such evaluations are particularly important to me. It would take no effort to add a sentence on solitaire playability in reviews. (You especially could add much to the value of your "Thumbnail Analysis" column by doing this.)

And although you must be absolutely sick of hearing it, I would like to add a word about the so-called AntiSPI Crusade. I believe that anyone who thinks you outwardly condemning SPI is crazy. The criticisms that you have made in the past about SPI seem to be valid (although I must admit that I don't know much about their recent activities; S&T is a waste of money for me, and I quit buying their games years ago, when they started mass- production designs and began vomiting lousy games in swarms),

Finally, I must say that I wish the magazine were still titled "Panzerfaust". To me, there was something infinitely romantic in the old title, and I was (for some off reason) always enchanted by the 5 1/2" x 8 1/2" format. I know it's silly, but ...

In closing, let me say that I would be utterly lost without CAMPAIGN to keep me informd about wargaming. I guess that's mainly because you still keep the focus of the magazine an the most important factor of wargaming, which is neither games nor gaming, but the gamer.

Sincerely, Scott R. Lucado, Lombard, IL