I had a great time teaching the game to Alan Emrich, while he was running a tournament of "Totaller Krieg." Unfortunately I wasn't around to explain the change in the Guard Exchange rule (it is considered a "no effect"). I had so much fun that I decided next year not to spend much time at the booth, and run some tournaments instead. I have asked the Columbus Area Gamers to help me reserve space for these events next year. Write to me and let me know which OSG games you'd like to see tournaments in, and I will follow the majority's wish. I met with John Burtt, editor of "Paper Wars," regarding his upcoming review of the game. He was kind enough to provide me with a rough draft of the review and asked for my comments. Some of my thoughts that grew out of his review follow: One of the great things about wargames is how, even though they have studied the campaigns, players DO make the historical mistakes. Someone at Origins told me their opponent did exactly what d'Erlon did, the only difference being the exact route the corps traversed going back and forth (they went through Charleroi). ... And because of vedettes and the confusion they cause, players certainly may hold up an attack to see what's moving into view, as occured at Ligny. French "Optimism" was not the reason for the delayed pursuit of the Prussians. It was exhaustion of the French cavalry, the darkness of night at the end of battle, a general tendency of the French to do poorly at pursuit (and Grouchy particularly), the fact that most of the Prussians retreated straight north through Mellery and Tilly (and these weren't discovered), bad staff work on the part of Soult (who failed to issue orders for the pursuit), and rain on the 17th, hampering the French ability to find the Prussians. I believe that a good game is a living system; when a thing stops changing, it's dead. The goal is a balance between a base of valid and proven rules, with evolving ideas on how to re-conceptualize things in ways that might be more interesting, quicker, or more accurate. Players want new challenges; evolutionary concepts. For Q&A on "Last Days" go to: Web Grognards Consider this game for your summer beach time. You can play the whole campaign in five hours! Several people at Origins told me they have played the campaign already five and ten times. Now available for just $36. LDGA WATERLOO SCENARIO SPECIAL RULE 21.25 Setting-up adjacent to the Enemy Ney and Napoleon set-up adjacent to the enemy at Waterloo. Because of the mud, and the delay in the troops still coming up the road from Quatre-Bras, they did not attack until 11:30 (afternoon turn). Units which set-up adjacent to the enemy are *not* required to attack. Treat them (at the owning player's option) as units which have just failed their Elan check. Remember that if the units in contact do attack during the morning turn, they will do so without their 15 SPs of artillery (due to mud). (Two things that could cause Napoleon to lose his Elan check were mud and late arrivals.) MORE LAST DAYS Q&A From: "Guy Ripoll" Subject: Last Days Questions I enjoy really this one with its amazing intrication between operational and tactical problems. My question is about Artillery engagements: 11.52 states that Bombardments are considered attack. 11.53 states that an enemy force may be the subject of a bombardment and an attack during the same combat phase. A) You have a point there: The statement "Bombardments are considered attacks," should be modified. 5.14: Do the Napoleon bonus apply to both Bombardment then subsequent regular attack, or just to the last one ? A) I can think of no reason why it should not apply to the bombardment, especially since Napoleon's early training was in the artillery and he paid special attention to the deployment of that arm. 11.1 & 11.46: If the Bombardment result vacates the enemy hex, may the friendly non Artillery force which was designated for a regular subsequent attack against this hex do any of the following: * be switched to attack any other adjacent hex? A) Yes, but it could then not do "b" below * advance in the hex vacated by the Bombardment alone? A) Yes, if it was designated to attack that hex. From: Ian Campbell Q) What does Collaert command? I assume the Dutch Belgian contingent of 1st Corps. He would need to be commanded by a higher ranking officer (Wellington or Orange) A) He commands the D/B cavalry! His counter should say "Cav" not "D/B." Q) In the Elan check. I read it as follows....you can include any adjacent units in the elan check (even ones that were already in ZOC), so long as all units included participate in the attack. I understand withholding low quality units from the check. What happens to an adjacent unit who you chose to include if the elan check fails. Does it retreat one hex? A) No, it stays put. Q) Chateaux rules conflict: 11.61 and 11.63 appear to be in conflict. The first states that when stacked in a chateaux only one unit gets the benefit. The second implies the benefit only applies when one unit is alone in the hex. If 11.61 rules, do you apply results separately using more than one odds column with one die roll? example. Two units in a chateaux are attacked. The total odds are 4-1. The roll is a (2). Do you apply the 4-1 (2) - DE to the unit outside and the 2-1 (2) DR2 (ignored) to the unit inside? What would happen with a (6) when you would get and EX and an Ar respectively? I would suggest...Chateaux only applies when a unit is alone. or allow the attacker to attack units outside separately? A) No, the units in the hex but "outside" the chateau suffer effects normally; thus they alone would retreat if a retreat result was obtained. You can find further Q&A posted on Back to OSG News July 1999 Table of Contents Back to OSG News List of Issues Back to Master Magazine List © Copyright 1999 by Operational Studies Group. 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