Historical period wargames, such as those fought by our club, should reflect not only the National Differences of the opposing or allied troops, but also the experience of the individual wargamer. Because of existing circumstances it is virtually impossible to complete a Napoleonic game in one night. Therefore a multi-night game tends to be the rule. Yet unfortunately, those in command are seldom in full attendance all of the evenings of battle. This results in a very mixed use and messed-up command system and makes game playability somewhat difficult. People are juggled around from command to command just to make the evenings event, at the very least, playable. Strategy goes out the window and usually the next game-night finds re- inforcements arriving to enable the miniature armies to continue the action. This in turn tends to develops only games of a slug-fest type. The over-all game objectives are seldom achieved because somewhere along the line in various changes of command those elements needed for a breakthrough have been needlessly and carelessly wasted in an attempt to achieve a relatively local success. Battles and campaigns were won or lost mostly by the actions or inactions of the subordinate generals and officers. If an incompetent general foolishly ordered his infantry into LINE to receive cavalry, no one would bail him out of his situation (The Duke of Orange at the Battle of Waterloo). But whom we translate this same action to a wargame situation, it changes. Perhaps non- existent reserves are brought forth to compensate for the mistake. Case in point: When two battalions of British line were virtually destroyed in the last game, it was felt that the attacking force needed re-inforcements to keep going. While re- inforcements had been written into the game, but not for an additional five turns, the outcome of the game was, I feel, unjustly influenced. The Franco-Westphalian forces were in fact penalized by their strategy and denied the fruits of their victory. The results of the conflict would have certainly taken on a totally different course had the Franco-Westphalian forces been allowed to strike through the pass and into the rear of the Coalition forces. It should be pointed out that during this particular game, the above mentioned British troops served under two different players while their original orders (in theory) came from two different Commander-in-Chiefs. Confusion reigned, resulting in the destruction of two excellent battalions of British line. To avoid this type of gaming situation from happening too often members should make more of an effort to either be at the games, or at the very least, call the host to inform them that they can not attend. At the same time, verbal orders to the host concerning one's troops will enable the game to continue more smoothly without you being present. Or, perhaps a better way would be to write orders for the first move of the next game night before we leave with perhaps some provisional orders in case of a breakthrough, so that another player can continue the movement. Much time is currently wasted in conferences before a game. We should attempt to set a time limit, and them stick to it. Waiting a half an hour to write orders, assign troops to players and discuss strategy, cuts down on playing time. General and troops arriving at a combat situation seldom have time to carefully and thoroughly study the entire plan of battle. Communications during the week between players on a team would eliminate much of this wasted time. The night is too short to waste time. We come to play, to game, to have fun. Let's do just that. Back to Empire, Eagles, & Lions Table of Contents Vol. 1 No. 18 Back to EEL List of Issues Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 1977 by Emperor's Headquarters 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