Designed by Ted Raicer for GMT
Hobby know-it-alls are often fond of pronouncing on which topic is saleable and which is not. These pronouncements usually hold good until a designer with some enthusiasm and clarity of vision goes into print. Ted Raicer has done this with World War One. One can argue with much of his design (his particular proclivity for generating games in which attacking causes more casualties than it suffers is one particularly risible feature) but not the medium which delivers to previously unpersuaded gamers the issues of the war. They read the book, they play the game, they find the two aligned. They also find very good games. This is worthy of more than passing comment because in a hobby where history is thought to be the opponent of playability (which for the poor designer it may well be) in Ted's games the two are in flagrante delicto most of the time.
Add to this evangelical quality the use of a system that has been shown to add liberal dollops of gaming and history - the We the People system of the Duke of Ragusa - and you would be, as many of you by know, getting somewhere. This marriage a la mode has given rise to the hearty offspring of Paths of Glory surely the major success of 1999.
Let's start with the bits. The map is, quite simply, a mess. Not aesthetically or even because of its habit of misspelling everything (and we'll overlook the damage to the Dutch coastline, the bastards were neutral so rats to them). No the problem arises because it uses a point-to-point system in which some very strange things happen. You can go from Brussels to Ostend and Brussels to Cambrai, but not Ostend to Cambrai. You cannot go from Paris to Le Mans (despite there being a major rail-line there - one I have used many times). If you are Pescara and want to get to Rome you walk al the way round the Appenines, but don't worry about crossing the Greek mountains - stacks of roads in that highly developed nation! Lodz has six entry routes and Prague two (none of which connect to Silesia). The result can become particularly noticeable in Russia.
Now none of this need be fatal, though in an exhibition game the designer moved between two unconnected points which rather makes my (connected) point. Clearly the map has been fudged (though let us not forget all maps are fudged to a degree) and in some areas received scant consideration. The latter are the areas where major campaigns did not occur, though knowing gamers this is not a wise economy. Pay particular attention to the map when playing and you should not come unstuck but really it should have been better.
The counters are two sized, big ones for armies, small ones for corps. The different application of corps and armies is one of the areas where the experienced player will triumph (and this is a game where experience is a vital component of victory). The counters are not very exciting, simple NATO symbols in blocky colour. Not "eye-candy" but strong and businesslike.
The cards in the game are a different matter from the counters. Lots of them with nice illustrations and clear text. The illos are only black and white, but this is a war seen in black and white, and I found them very atmospheric. There are even a couple of errors to keep us happy!
The cards come in three sets: Mobilisation, Limited War and Total War. The number of cards in each category increases with each category. Mobilisation (basically the armies and doctrine of August 1914) tends to have lots of recruitment cards and few exciting features. Total War is awash for technological and tactical changes. The feel of each pack, like the periods of the war they represent, is very different. This excellent characterisation is one of the game's finest features. There are also sufficient cards to mean one is always in a lather to draw more cards, and in quandary as to which to play. All excellent in game terms, and usually (but not always) in historical terms.
Each card can do a number of things (but only one at a time).
- It can be used to activate forces
- It can be used to strategically deploy forces (I think of this as railway planning)
- It can be used to generate replacement points, and
- It has a main theme - reinforcement, an event, a combat effect, and many others.
Immediately Ted Raicer is putting the gamer on the spot. Is he going to move and fight? If so he may require to re-deploy reserves, and he will certainly need replacements. But you have only six rounds of card play a turn and seven cards (with perhaps 30 options). Watch the little buggers squirm, and note how often folks conclude they made the wrong choice (when naughty Ted has rigged it so there is no right choice).
The German mobilisation cards (as the Allies) have three varieties of Activation/Strategic redeployment. The higher cards (4/4 in value) often include major alternatives (reinforcements for example). The five weakest cards include three Combat Cards: Severe Weather (the Carpathian front) Von Francois (the 1st Corps commander) and Wireless Intercepts (Tannenberg). Combat cards can be used to improve die rolls and if you win can be retained (and how terrible to ones morale is the sight of the unstoppable flammenwerfer). We then have two low-grade events: Landwehr (the appearance of those reserve formations as replacements) and OberOst (Hindenburg arrives to launch the East Front). The latter of these, if played as an Event, causes the War Status to increase by one, and it is war status that accesses the different card packs.
In the five mid-value cards Germany has one reinforcement, and four "operational issues": Entrench, Race to the Sea (opening the Channel ports to envelopment), Sud Army (mixed stacking out east) and Guns of August (the destruction of Liege and Schlieffen Plan all in one). The last of these contributes two to War Status. The four big value cards offer as events the Reichstag Truce (the arrangement between Kaiser and the Reichstag) which gives VPs and War Status, Falkenhayn (who removes slow Moltke and ups the War Status by 2) and two reinforcement cards. So if you forgo major offensives you may access 3 War Status, minor offensive only 1, and Mummy Bear Offensives two. Replacement points rise in value the higher the card. You will rapidly have grasped the strains Ted has built into this system.
The Allied mobilisation pack has the same spread of Activation points (though the replacements are higher in total which imbalance is as it should be). Its minor cards have one reinforcement card (two Russian corps!), and four combat cards: General Plehve and Field Marshal Putnik, Severe weather and a withdrawal card for dodging those German offensives. The middle-level cards contain three reinforcement cards (four armies in total), the Entrench card and Moltke (which slows down activity in France and Belgium until Falkenhayn replaces him. You will note so far the absence of war Status points. The four biggest cards offer the Allies the chance of improving war Status but at the cost of taking his eye off the ball.
There are War Status points on every card (six in total) more than enough to get the Allies to Limited War, but can one afford to use them for this? Blockade (which leaches away VPs) is a vital card (though you may consider it worth using for RPs if you are not going to go to Limited War as it will cycle back through your hand.). There are two British reinforcement cards. Unbelievably two British armies can join the BEF in France in September 1914 (one may even be available in August but I forget the special rules).
Finally if Guns of August is played one may respond with Rape of Belgium that takes off a VP and boosts the War Status. By his careful asymmetry Ted Raicer has built much historical detail into the game in a way that permits you effortlessly to fall into your role.
To have expended so much time on 28 cards may seem profligate. It is a taster of what the game has. Because you may choose to fight, march, reinforce or replace you may not reach Limited War status immediately, and will therefore recycle the same Mobilisation cards. Limited War adds 20 new cards to those you have from mobilisation. [Limited War is reached separately by the two sides and requires a War Status of 4. For the Central Powers it produces Turkish entry]. Two of these are 5/5 values as the tempo of the war builds up. These cards carry impressive replacements or may across both sides bring in Italy, Romania, Bulgaria, and the industrial skill of Walter Rathenau (7 war Status points in total). It is worth halting here to consider an interesting argument as to balance. It has been concluded by many gamers that Italy can be subjected to sudden and swift defeat if the Central Powers can devote time to the effort. Italian RPs are not common (no low value card provides them), their armies start at half-strength and their warlike capacity is not good. Yet their country holds many Victory Cities.
To defeat any proto-Caporettos the Ally can withhold playing Italy (and use it to mine 10 replacement points). But if Italy is still unplayed by the time the Allies reach Total War there is a victory point cost to the Allies. The simple answer is to never get to Total War. But does this not result in poor play opportunities? Not according to some veteran players (hereinafter referred to as Tom Kassel). A Limited War only strategy with non-Italian entry is going to keep the recruits flowing in and prevent access to those Italian cities.
Of course the Italian weakness is vehemently denied, and then claimed as open to counter-ploys by the Raicer Faithful, but I have seen enough good players who are of the view that Italy is less than stellar to agree with them. The non-entry of Romania carries no negatives and is once again rich in recruits so I must confess I never use this for a neutral entry either. In addition to the above if the combined War Status hits a certain level an Armistice occurs, to win as the Allies keeping this from happening is important - no Total War war status cards is a big help.
The 4/4 cards include Zeppelins, the High Seas Fleet and a special Operation Gerricht attack. In addition there is the Tsar Takes Command a card that moves Russia towards Revolution once a certain number of victory cities are taken. For the Allies we have Yudenich and the Caucasus Army (of the only two Armies native to the Middle East at Limited War status), Salonika, Landships (which prepares the ground for Royal Tank Corps at Total War status - but is worth 9 RPs) and the MEF Army for Gallipoli. The 3/4 cards involve a lot of reinforcing (2 British, 2 Russian, 1 Italian, 1 French, 2 German, 2 Austro-Hungarian armies and the Senussi of Libya). The Germans also have Kemal as a Combat Card and a War in Africa card. The latter rather weedily takes a corps or a VP (at the Allies choice!).
The Allies round out matters with the Lusitania (starting troubles with America) and a Great retreat card for the Gorlice-Tarnow retreat. The 2/2 cards have lots of Combat Cards (Liman von Sanders, Fortified Machine Guns, Alpenkorps, Flamethrowers, Chlorine Gas, Hurricane Barrage, Phosgene Gas and Air Superiority, with the greater part available to the Germans - surely nonsense they were not that far ahead in technology). Mata Hari, von Mackensen, the Grand Fleet and Spies appear (together with a Russian Army and the Aussies and Canucks). The Grand Fleet card is there to cancel the High Seas Fleet, and very neatly is a lower cost car - a luxury fleet indeed.
If Total War is reached most of the 5/5 cards are part of the narrative. We have the Zimmermann Telegram and "Over There" to bring in the US (but at a war cost which may cause an Armistice), and Fall of the Tsar and Russian Revolution to deal with the collapse of the Russians. In addition there is the French Army of the Orient and the Hindenburg Ludendorf card that unlocks a lot of other operations. The 4/4s bring in American troops, launch the Brusilov Offensive, build the Sinai pipeline, create Allenby's Army, start convoys, create the Royal Tank Corps (nasty French tanks in the photo though!) and create a General Foch card for a massed allied response if certain German offensives have occurred. The Germand launch the Peace Offewnsive, Operations Michel and Blucher, The French mutiny, Lloyd George interferes, Brest Litovsk is signed (if you have all the other events assembled) and there are German and Turkish reinforcements (including a full Turkish army). The 3/4s have more German Combat Cards (Air superiority, Von Below and Von Hutier) the Yilderim Army and German 14th Army. The Allies can summon US and British armies as well as the Arabs and the Portuguese, and Greece can join together with the Kerensky Offensive. The small cards include some more Combat Cards (Mine Attack, Mustard Gas and "They Shall Not Pass"), minor reinforcements, U-Boats and the strategic bombing offensive, Hoffmann appears and Wilson lists his points.
If it appears odd to discuss the cards before the system it must be realised that the cards are why one plays the game. Although its base system is ingenious it is the constant choice from the cards that generates much of the game's pace.
The Sequence of Play opens with dicing for Mandated Offensives. Failure to undertake these causes VP losses. The aim to encourage the, seemingly, foolish attacks of the period is vitiated by the fact that this attack can be carried out by a corps rather than an army.
With the Offensives marked one enters the Action Phase where the Players use their seven cards to play six alternating actions, Central Powers first. As mentioned above each card can be used for one purpose only. There are limits to reinforcements (one per Nation per turn), and to Strategic Redeployment and Replacement Points (not in two phases in a row). With the full horror of the movement and combat behind you one removes out of supply units, checks Sieges, adjusts War status, uses RPs, and draws Strategy Cards. The sequence is simple (though not without thought) so as to keep your mind on the card play.
Activating units is beautifully simple (well it has its complex edges for cunning gamers) with the number of Activation points being the number of attacks or moves. You cannot move AND attack in the same activation, though the same Army could attack/move six times a turn in successive activations (and if Richard Martin is in command it will). Attacks with two or three nationalities require special rules and multi-nation stacks can cost more.
Strategic Redeployment is expensive (it takes a 4 card to move an army) but it can be useful for overseas movement and speed. Most of the time one marches to the Front.
Trenches are handled with two levels. Apart from a few "strong position" markers these true trench can only appear when the Entrench card is played by one player (the effect applies to both). From that point each Army can dig trenches by scoring its Loss Factor (see below) or less (50% success for Germans, 33% for Russians). This dicey quality neatly simulates the resistance to hindsight, and predictably angers gamers who throw sixes. Trench levels can be one or two, and they tend to devour retreats and reduce attacking strength while enhancing the defence. A German Army facing a Russian Army will score a 5 Loss Number versus 4 suffered (on scores of 6). Put the Russian in a Level One trench and both sides are now on 4 Loss Number, if you can get this to Level 2 and the original situation will inverts with the Russian inflicting a 5 Loss Number. Of course digging Russian trenches is a slow business and positioning them even worse. However their use on The Western Front is vital to releasing German armies for the East.
Combat is short and sharp. A stack of Corps only fires on a weaker CRT than one with Armies (even if also involving corps). You look at your strength and dice against it. The result is Loss Number that are applied against your opponent's unit's Loss Factor. A German Army suffering 5 Loss Number loses one step as its Loss Factor is 3 (and the extra two points are forgotten) but the Russian Army in the Trench suffering 4 Loss Number with a Loss Factor of 2 is going to lose to lose both steps (2x2=4). The result of this small shift in Loss Factors can be devastating, and the "2 Loss Factor" armies have a severe problem, the only solution to which is lots of RPs. The difference in Loss Number is also a retreat distance unless terrain intervenes to help you. Trenches help here and it is vital if you are to prevent breakthroughs to get trenches and terrain integrated. Once again this is very difficult on the East Front due to size and the difficulty of entrenching.
One very clever rule allows you to attack without the usual simultaneous losses. This occurs where a flanking position (attacks from two areas) is available and a die roll is made, but if the die-rolls fails then you are in big trouble (you get flanked).
The rest of the rules are lean and easy. It is what you do with them that counts but I must pause to mention the supply units. If you get surrounded by controlled areas (and a mere corps can create these) then you are DEAD. No retreats, no panics, just completely and utterly dead. A stupid rule? Certainly, defended by its proponents on the grounds of simplicity and by observing that you should not have allowed yourself to get into the position. Simplicity I can grasp but the latter is pure tosh. The punishment for poor play should be historical, otherwise why not substitute hacking off the gamer's hand? Fortunately simplicity provides the solution - depleted such units, only eliminate them if already depleted. What can one say of Paths of Glory in play?
It is pure hell, each activation a matter of cramming a quart into a pint pot. The player with experience finds it no easier he simply knows the most effective policies. One may begin to suspect some techniques are ineffective and to question whether the play of cards is taking the game to a historical conclusion. But in all honesty what can one expect, this sort of system requires constant re-tuning as the interaction of cards, dice and gamers receives the massive playtest that is commercial release.
The present thinking is that the Allies have the edge, but to the gamer starting out on the game you will have got far more than your money's worth long before you reach a conclusion. Paths of Glory is a long game if you want to play it completely, but it can also be played on e-mail using the ACTS system. Ian Drury raises a number of points below, but I am sure he would join me in welcoming Ted Raicer to the PA marshalate with the title of Duke of Tarento. This is a fine game and has much of history in it, if you design a better one you may be proud of yourself.
Back to Perfidious Albion #100 Table of Contents
Back to Perfidious Albion List of Issues
Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List
© Copyright 2000 by Charles and Teresa Vasey.
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