from Avalanche Games Sometime ago GamesUSA produced two rather interesting area games (one on Borodino, the other on Friedland). The system (Eagles of the Empire) allowed one to play big battles comparatively simply but I found its combat rather weird. The games were very strong on the operational features of the battle you could, for example, try Davout's proposed flanking action in Borodino. GamesUSA has ceded to Avalanche Press but amazingly enough the design team have also made major differences to the system to make it simpler yet more accurate. It is pretty rare to find designers willing to cut out detail, but perhaps even rarer to find the thing works. Eylau is well worth purchasing and playing for anyone who does not demand too much micro-technical detail (for those gentlemen who demand this, we have excellent products from Clash of Arms and Simtac). Compared to the rather fiddly Triumph & Glory (multi-activations for most units and a disorder/rally/rout system that recirculates units) this is both a good game and good history. It is also not overly long, but an involving and brutal game. No nancy-boy Napoleon At Waterloo CRTs here. Let us to the field. The map (approximately A3 size) immediately demonstrates the system's ability to put a quart in a pint pot. Such economy gives hope for a Leipsic game that we can all play. The predominant colour is a grey-white, reflecting the cold terrain of Preussich-Eylau (watch the opening sequences of Le Colonel Chabert to get the feel). The map is split into 126 areas divided by grey borders. The borders seemed to give Gareth Simon some difficulty. Their colour does not impinge on viewing the map, though maybe it should be a little stronger for play. But those of you who have seen my Deathride map will know I favour bolder lines. The terrain is easily grasped, there are a number of frozen watercourses (which have no effect), a couple of ridges (garnished with forests for the Russians) and numerous small villages and towns. To the west the French must attack through some marshy ground in the area where Ney's VI Corps and Lestocq's Prussians arrive. Clear in application (though do check under your counters for missing villages) and atmospheric it is a nice clear (for me if not for Gareth) piece of work compared to the heavy pen of Rich Barber. The counters are rather like slightly calmer versions of La Bataille counters. You can see the Napoleon counter has his grey redingcote on, and Marshals have more braid and a sash. The cavalry have some very clever "differencing" without going back to the gauche colours of the Borodino and Friedland games. The counters are both clean and clear, and you really can tell a Prussian from a French unit. Avalanche Press need to institute just a little more finishing on the play aids and scenarios, but there are excellent errata/clarification lists on Web-Grognards. Each player gets a single sheet to organise his forces. This can take about 20 minutes (more if you are disorganised). Eylau is based on a simple premise: warfare kills people and degrades units. Each major infantry division has a double-length counter usually for four to six steps. This means it will have several counters and these you corral off-map on the charts. Infantry and cavalry come in normal size counters with only one or two steps. If you are a bit of sleepy head take the French Army as its organisation is simpler. The French have six corps. Four of these are infantry (though two Davout's IIIrd and Ney's Vth start off map). There is also Murat's Cavalry corps (with Lasalle's light division trapped out of command on the opposite flank). Finally the Imperial Guard that can (and I think should) be operated as two corps: the Cavalry under Bessieres, and the Foot under Lefebvre. Simple colour banding keeps the corps pretty clear. In addition to these corps are four unassigned cavalry divisions which you can attach as you desire to other corps. The three dragoon divisions (Klein, Grouchy and Milhaud) and the heavies of d'Hautpol are vital parts of the French offensive capability. The Russian sheet shows the ancien regime disorganisation that drives our US cousins to distraction and contempt. There are three wings (Right, Left and Centre) each of which has a number of infantry divisions (which can detach grenadiers), artillery and jaegers (very useful to absorb losses in a simple simulation of skirmish action), detachments (often multi-arm) and cavalry divisions with wing commanders. Finally, arriving in the afternoon is Lestocq with his Prussians arranged in an Advance and Rear Guard with Main body. There are three scenarios. For each of these each player has his own scenario-sheet. There are rules and set-up on one side, and a map-version of set-up upon the reverse. The first scenario (Opening Shots) covers the action of 7 February with very few counters but with so many exceptions to normal play that I recommend you solitaire The Battle scenario. Opening Shots is based on setting up the position for the second day so the French want to take Eylau, but not to take casualties. The Battle covers just 8 February with variable movement for Ney in much the same as that of Lestocq meaning you are in for some interesting battles. I am not certain of balance. It takes losses to batter that Russian line, especially if the terrain is used to reduce French cavalry effects. However, the view seems to be that the Russian has a hard task. The Two Days scenario allows you not only to use the "set up" possibilities inherent in the manoeuvring of 7 February but to select (secretly) one of three Russian victory targets. Russian Preservation aims to retreat the army and prevents any releases of artillery to the fighting line. Russian Defensive Battle is the historical choice with the same victory conditions as The Battle. These permit the appointment of one of de Tolly and Bragration to command a wing. In Russian Offensive Battle both are available (which should end the secrecy) as in the Artillery Reserve. There is a sheet of special rules with terrain effects on the reverse. Note that Slope is not marked but is the dramatic slope markings south-east of Eylau Church. The special rules cover the deadening effect of sudden snow squalls, special command considerations beyond the Series Rules and the combat effects of towns (which we always forget). The rules are a mere 12 pages, though an extra page or so might have alleviated a few problems. The Sequence of Play is Weather - Reinforcements - Command Status - Activation - Recovery. The major action occurring during activation. The first player deducts the score of 1d6 from his activation and can activate that number of formations. After they have activated the second player dices. This carries on until all activations are completed. You will notice that the bigger one's Initiative the more likely that a large chunk of one's army can activate together. This permits a programme of (say) Cavalry Charge, Bombardment and Assault that might not otherwise be available to a single formation. There are rules to permit (if I discern the purpose) a minimum activation of one formation at a time. Within Activation the sequence is Cavalry Charge - Artillery Attachment/Detachment - Bombardment - Movement and Assault. Command is hierarchical stuff. The Commander projects to Formation commander and from him to the units. Formations out of command range may test for initiative. Commander's range improves if at HQ with their faithful Chief-of-Staff. Units out of command may move, but will not voluntarily close with the enemy, and if assaulted will retire rather than stand. Leaders also help with combat either by adding combat value or by improving dice scores (artillery leaders: something about which the Russians know a lot). Rather neatly armies can have staff officers who rush to take command of units deprived of command. Stacking is a function of area type. Most areas can only contain one "long" infantry division counter, a few open areas can exceed this but mostly 15 strength points will be full stacking. To be put in context an infantry SP is about 1,400 men with cavalry SPs hovering around 500 men. An area in the upper quartile of stacking counts as Densely stacked and you do not want that to happen (especially not within range of a Russian battery). Facing is important for long units and consists of individual placement to designate front, flank and rear areas. In addition, long units can occupy more than one area using the Extended Line counters (very useful for holding a quiet section). Artillery can be attached to infantry, a process that slows down both units, prevents bombardment by the batteries, but permits it to join in an assault and to retreat. Most importantly it increases morale by one and can become very necessary towards the end of battles. Movement is the usual stuff. The use of areas means that movement rates are not large. Each unit counter has two factors (combat and morale). Morale being used to decide whether terrain is abandoned where losses are suffered. As the long divisions take losses their morale falls which can cause extreme fragility with attackers retreating at the same time as defenders. Cavalry charges are particularly important in the game. They can only occur on targets two areas from the charging units. This can mean that a carefully placed advance (or a protective screen of jaegers) can deny the cavalry an opportunity to shine. I am not certain of the reason for this rule, except perhaps to oblige some prep-time to be committed. The charge is declared and occurs before all other activity. Combat Combat in all its forms in Eylau is very simple. You throw one dice per (modified) strength point and you hit for each (modified) six you score. This can produce wide score ranges while remaining within the confines of the general rule that the bigger the volume of fire the greater the number of losses. Different kinds of terrain reduce the number of dice thrown by 25% to 75%. In charges the defenders get to fire first but they halve the SPs of defending infantry and artillery while doubling any cavalry present. This has two effects, unless on terrain that blunts charges, the choice method for forcing an infantry-gun line is cavalry, secondly that the doubling of defending cavalry acts as a counter-charge mechanism without a counter-charge. The losses from this exercise are removed from the charging cavalry (one SP per hit). The chargers now throw their doubled dice and losses are extracted. For cavalry charges where the majority of the cavalry are Guard, Heavy or Lancers one is added to the scores (hitting on 5 and 6). You will readily imagine the effect of a charge of cuirassiers! If the charge obliterates over half of the defenders a forced retreat occurs. Where this does not happen OR the chargers lose more SPs than the defenders then the chargers must withdraw out of charge range. As they go the remaining defenders (not artillery) fire again upon them. There are rules for Grand Charges and for pursuit which give a second charge potential. This rule has occasioned much discussion on the Internet. Its effect is almost Medieval Crusader in result. Markus Stumptner proposed an amendment (which I use in the following version) as follows. After initial fire throw a dice for the defenders; if the score is less than half their morale (as decided by Rule 11) then they have not flinched but the cavalry have. The charging cavalry do not double their factors for dice purposes, just throw a number of dice equal to the cavalry's factors. [I cannot remember if a score equal to the halved morale worked too]. We found this made cavalry charges a less certain tactic, especially against good formed infantry. I still find the rule rather toppy though and would (in these circumstances) halve the cavalry. Bombardment is the second combat opportunity in each separate activation phase. Line of sight is as ever open to confusing or not in equal measures. Most artillery ranges out to two areas, with heavies (possessed only by the Russians at Eylau) out to three. Once again one dice per factor, adjust for terrain, and a 6 hits. Other factors can modify the dice score but never by more than one (a 5 or 6 hits). These include enfilade fire, heavy artillery, Dense stacking, and an Artillery leader present. A five step infantry division under fire from a 6 factor Russian heavy battery could vanish under fire and will be lucky not to have been smashed up in two hours. One must close for action quickly (if the terrain permits) or bring along some cavalry or artillery to absorb the losses. Since bombardment occurs before movement you cannot drag your own guns up to the enemy line and blast it clear. Finally we move our forces and commit the Queen of Battles - the infantry - to action. Assault uses simultaneous damage unlike cavalry charges, and cavalry SPs are halved when counting out the dice. The "a 6 hits" principle can once again be modified to "5 or 6" for assaults involving Guards units, all-arms forces, or morale advantaged (double in this case) assaults. The damage bill having being calculated these can be reduced if one retreats (both sides may retreat). In order not to retreat (and therefore take more losses) the player must score less than or equal to his Morale. Cavalry faced by infantry and artillery always retreat. In terms of losses Assault is thus not particularly powerful, but it does tend to clear terrain. Assault can have other advantages. A cavalry versus cavalry battle is better conducted as an assault. Though both sides are halved (as befits the less conclusive actions) the defender does not fire first (as he does - doubled - in a cavalry charge). Assaults also tend to be better in bad terrain. Defenders in a wood will benefit from a 75% reduction in cavalry charge dice, 50% reduction for bombardment but only 25% from an assault. Retreats are not only important for the purpose of holding ground, but because artillery (other than horse artillery) cannot retreat and is eliminated. This makes assaults of vital moment to one side or the other, it also means losses are often taken from artillery which will be lost otherwise. The game is as ever brutal in the way it degrades forces. The Recovery Phase continues this degradation. Activated infantry formations adjacent to an enemy infantry division must dice to "recover". They need to beat their morale. In our game by mid-afternoon IV and VII Corps together with the Russian right were failing to recover most turns. This meant they could not be activated in the next turn. A dreadful calm descended on portions of the field. You can imagine the effect of the fresh Prussian and French VI Corps arriving in this bloody portion of the field! Success Eylau is in many ways a great success. Its refusal to be sucked into micro-tactics (individual unit formation for example) gives it the opportunity to grasp the important matters like off-map activity, command, and formation degradation. Its decision to settle on divisional combat allows a large battle to be played with ease. Yet it does both of these without losing key tactical factors, the different uses of the three arms of service, counter-charging, skirmish lines, fatigue are all there, but they are often there in the most subtle and undemanding fashion. This is elegant design, mes braves, of a most impressive kind. It is especially important that Eylau is not just a generic battle. The snow squalls, the frozen water courses, the arrival (sometimes unpredictable) of reinforcements, the command problems of the Russians all combine to feel very different from the Friedland game (with its Russian Attack followed by French Attack) or the World War One pounding of Borodino. Looking at the presentation of the battle against Digby Smith's book there are differences. He has Ney arriving at 19:15 hours an hour after the slowest arrival in Eylau, and his Lestocq arrives at 13:50, an hour earlier than the game. The artillery numbers seem to favour the French slightly, but the stronger Russian counters balance matters. The Order of Battle is always open to question, and I note a number of Grenadier units that you cannot separate from their divisions. The strength balance of 75,000 to 58,000 feels much as it should. Both sides seem to have lost about 20,000 men. Using a doubling methodology (each SP lost is half casualties, half slackers) that would indicate over half the SPs should be out of action. I found it closer to two thirds. Are the loss rates correct? I am bound to say I find them toppy. I suggested the hour-long turns were really 80 minutes long, but Markus has objected that this can make Davout "late" for his push on the Russian Left. The jury is out on the matter, but how nice to be able to finish a game to discuss the matter. Does Eylau give a balanced game? Here I momentarily wonder, but ultimately I find the game well worth continuing to play even if I find in the end it is that it does not. I am not certain one will see Russian attacks (as the real battle did) or that the balance between infantry and cavalry is correct. But the enthusiastic response encourages me to believe that as these matters emerge so gamers will join with designers in devising a solution. Already John Mundie (a Canadian gamer) has developed retrofitting for the new system for Borodino and Friedland. This is an unlooked-for pleasure for many of us, and a good example of hobby interactivity. To summarise for the vast majority of gamers who want the major features of Napoleonic warfare on a non-generic battle which is playable in a session this is an excellent game. Those who want more detail will find it of interest as an overview but will probably want to stick with La Bataille. Those who want something midway have Jours de Gloire and Triumph & Glory. Though in bang for buck I'm an advocate of Eagles of the Empire. Austerlitz is next! Gamers have been very excited to read that a new series on Ancient Warfare using a similar system is to be published with Carthaginian battles featuring in the first release. Back to Perfidious Albion #101 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