As a new arrival to the frozen tundras of New Jersey from the sunnier climes of our nation's southlands, I recently had the pleasure of meeting some members of your organization. Prior to this, I had been an occasional correspondent with Tom DeVoe. During my visit, I had the opportunity to play a game using your rules system. I think that I did rather well considering my unfamiliarity with them. Perhaps at the risk of sounding like an interloper, I might make a few critical comments which, constructively taken, may improve some situations. First, the most interesting "problem" that I felt needed alteration was the morale system. I thought that the units seemed to be too "stiff". That is, they remained in action long after they would have broken. in the rules system which I authored and use, no unit will remain in action with over 66% casualties without attempting to pull out. Most line units become shakey at over 33% casualties, and will retreat at over 50%. The fact that your system only has either good morale or rout, creates problems because it will not recreate the situation where a unit will withdraw involuntarily, but remain in good order. The sight of units with 75% casualties advancing valiantly is improbable to say the least. In connection with this, I think that units recover from the effects of a rout too quickly. A unit which just routed out of action is exhausted, scattered, and disorganized. Time is needed to round up the men, reorganize command, and even look around for weapons to replace those undoubtably thrown away while running. In addition, the men need to be convinced that what happened to them was "not so bad", and that they ought to go back into action to help their comrades. Time is needed for this, and instead of a die roll which permits a 1/3 chance of recovery in only one turn, I suggest that routed units spend 3 turns reorganizing before returning to action. Another problem is that of skirmishing infantry. Although I agree that in many cases, the morale of skirmishers will be better than those in the line, this is not always so. In addition, skirmishers certainly did not possess "perfect" morale, they ran too. Otherwise how else would. one account for the numberless reports of "driving in the enemy's skirmishers?" If skirmishers were that courageous and effective, most battle accounts would consist of the skirmishers destroying line after line and battery after battery, far more often that actually occurred. I suggest that skirmishers be subject to morale. These are just some preliminary comments, which I hope will spur an interesting exchange of ideas. NOTE FROM THE EDITOR. Thank you for your comments. We agree with many of them and we should put them to good use. Please, Gentlemen of the club come up with rule change proposal to the take the above suggestions in consideration. Back to Empire, Eagles, & Lions Table of Contents Vol. 1 No. 24 Back to EEL List of Issues Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 1978 by Jean Lochet 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