I've gotten a lot of response to the idea of company-based units--all of it favorable, too, which is always a shock. As there were also a number of questions, I'd like to clarify what we're talking about here. We never thought of ourselves as the originators of the concept. It goes back to the dim days of 1 to 10 scale (and cheap figures). The old Frappe rules document this quite well, along with the idea that a unit should be historically accurate. To make a twenty-year-long story short, we evolved rules in the fashion of a Cold Wars race between playability and historically accurate information, based on a hell of a lot of archival study by such devoted researchers as the lovable editor and others too numerous to list. So, by the '90s, we ended up with three types of rules. The old big rule sets had evolved into some nice RPG skirmish systems--although Column , Line and Slaughter refuses to die the good dinosaur's death--the Division- to Corps-sized battle (where we stand), and the Armageddon/Corps+ battle. I've always had a problem with the last category of simulation. It can be done with miniatures, but how much different is it from an Avalon Hill board game? Indeed, we need to be aware of the tendency to "wanton abstractions" in all types of rules. What we did was to base our rules on what a company/squadron of troops can do in a given amount of time, and the size of said units. Now as a lot of these operations can be very time-consuming, we used the variable time concept, which is that many things --if isolated--are on their own time, although they catch up with the main events of the "battle" eventually. Now as your journey into the Twilight Zone of rules continues...we EE&Lers had a nice discussion concerning "turns"--this was very Byzantine and High Church in style. The Editor insisted on the word "segment," which is an 8-minute part of time during which many types of movements may be done by most units(without getting out of control). Perfidious Bill said, "It's still a turn." Now actually (I say, skipping over forty minutes of talk), it's both. Our editor wanted to drop all the baggage that the term "turn" carries, while Bill said that people are familiar with the term "turn." You want to fight this debate out? Once we got past that, we found that real units always required deployment room, which most rules never required. Deployment room was equal to the distance that a column of companies (any country) took to swing left or right into line. This space was almost never violated by any battalion commander by more than a few yards if possible. EE&L gamers were the first (to my knowledge) to devise the idea of "deployment templates" to be used between columns to keep them apart. This really makes a difference as the size of battalions was a "national" difference. None of this is really complex, you just have to alter your view. But it's enabled us to re-create the most "realistic" situations--at least the battles feel like a reading of existing battle reports of the era--with lots of the kind of ebb and flow that is always there in real battle accounts. I know I always need those extra two battalions that are never in reserve. Secret Snitches My secret snitches tell me that you 25mm people may find a whole new range of 25mm figures coming soon at the expense of "15s." Not much else new or reported--signs of a recovering economy? I think I'll flock all my Blue Board and work on that 1/2 ton of unpainted figures that make the rafters groan in the dark night with their plaintive ghostly horrific voices crying: "You got me, paint meeeee." Whoooo, scary, huh? How about the Stephen King novel, "THE UNPAINTED FIGURES THAT WOULDN'T LET YOU DIE?" Other items of note: We did see MUSKET FIRE:BORDINO--it's $25 from Design, Inc., 105 Tena Marie Circle, Lodi, WI 53555, This is one of the explosion of Napoleonic games to come out recently. I like it, but the graphics fall short compared to some of the other systems. I had a hard time figuring out the differences between the French cavalry--the Hussars look like Krusty the Clown. The other criticisms would be the lack of unit integerity--you can send anyone anyplace at any time--and I must admit that the sounds of battle were rather dull considering what can be done today. Even the decade-old Universal Military Simulator had much better sound effects--a few words in French or Russian would have enhanced the game a lot. This scenario gives you the chance to play either side, the computer or another player, and even lets you switch sides; and it adds the hypothetical French flanking attack. Nonetheless, it's very easy for the French to lose--and fast. The only chance they have is to unrealistically pour cavalry through the woods on the right flank. Once the French lose, the game does allow you to continue playing into a bloodbath that really was Borodino. In this case the biggest problem is that you can too easily micro-manage the units. There is mention of an Editor--but I haven't played around with that yet to see what it does. I do find objectional the fact that you only get one game scenario on the disk. There really should be at least two separate battles per disk--especially considering the amount of material they can jam onto a disk these days. These complaints aside, I still recommend this game. There was a lot of thought and effort put in to achieve what they did, and from my own experience when I did some work on a shareware game years ago--I assure you it isn't easy--they did a good job. it could have been better, but did they ask us? No. Still, it's worth taking a look at this scenario, but I'd have to see the other battle disks demoed before I'd lay out the moola for them. Hey, the French allies should have different uniforms, too. That would be easy, just a color switch--but how crabby can I get? Next issue we will help you to equip yourself with paints, brushes, buildings, and some of the best of prebuilt terrain out there. I know of stuff that will make your family and credit cards cry for mercy. Till then--your Merry Monarch. Back to Empire, Eagles, & Lions Table of Contents Vol. 3 No. 2 Back to EEL List of Issues Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 1997 by Jean Lochet 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