Stake The Bunny,
Open the Box

Gettysburg
(American Civil War)

by Charles Vasey

from Avalanche Press

Advertised as being David Powell's Gettysburg this is firmly in the Avalanche family of games but with some validation by Mr Powell. I have only played one short game of the first day and these comments are from memory as I do not own the game.

The map is a neat area rendition of the battlefield. It has occasioned some negative comment from the Avalanche haters on the Internet who apparently think it dreadful. It certainly is not a Rich Barber Polly Pockets map (look there's old Mrs Gubbins in the garden) but I found it clear and effective, if you like Polly Pockets you might think twice.

The units are mostly divisions (long counters like in the Eylau game) with square counters for artillery, cavalry and commanders. You get step losses counters so no need to litter the map with loss markers. The corps designations are far too small for my eyesight, but the wee illos of men and flags otherwise work well. Each unit has a combat value (number of dice) and morale value (exceed it and suffer).

Combat is mostly six-to-hit, with modifiers to number of dice and hit values as required. There are a number of gamers who get very annoyed about six-to-hit. I am never completely sure why, it certainly can give wide ranges of results, but then so can combat. It can be unnerving to see a division shot to pieces by lucky rolling, but once again that's warfare. Perhaps it feels too unscientific, did the odds really amount to one in six (or one in three if attacking infantry and artillery)? My brief experience indicates the losses were about right, but also that you should be careful about when and where you attack. This is not some pansy-boy game with three levels of disorganisation. You mess up a division and that's it for the battle, there is no recovery. I suspect a degree of opposition (rather like those who hated Patton's Best) arises because gamers are often big jessies and do not want to mix it in quite the way six-to-hit does.

Attacking against infantry artillery makes it a five or six to hit which can be worrying, and you cannot move your artillery and fire it. So the "by-the-numbers" answer is to move up guns, shell him, then close for action. But time is tight and requires a bit of risk taking. When it goes wrong it all looks a bit awful. Though my opponent interestingly argued that the rate of my pushing him back was too quick (the game's fault) rather than recognising my manly risk-taking abilities. I ask you!

Like Clash of Giants Gettysburg is a hard fighting tactical/operational game about crossing ground and killing. I found it swift and bloody. I genuinely began to understand why those "stupid" ACW commanders occasionally took their time. The moment of assault into a ridge or into woods was one that engenders resignation rather than feelings of glory. There are plenty of good command considerations and I must confess at the end I did not feel anything was missing, yet little had been left in to slow me down or get in the way. No poncing around here, a Ritchie-Hook game - biff biff biff. Ever wondered why a lot of units snoozed through the Second Day? Play this game and you will wonder no longer. Dave Powell has commented that each division only has so many attacks in it, and the loss rate is pretty much historical. You may want to pace yourself however.

I am not a great ACW fan but I found this game (like Eylau) a really atmospheric piece of work. I could see the key features of what I had to do, even if occasionally I attacked rather too often (oddly enough my opponent and I had the sides right here). Even better the rules make it clear that the system will include some Continental battles (and you can see the battle cavalry rules already). I can see a Sadowa game already. By manipulating combat values (which are not linked directly to the number of loss steps) and morale ratings I can see a Crimean battle also (low value but tough Russians). Perhaps we can finally fight a game between the Prussians and the Army of North Virginia. I believe the next game is Chickamauga.

I am (of course) a sucker for games about killing, but I thoroughly recommend this game and look forward to its new versions. It is playable, it is historical, and it is very nasty, if its maps suited more folks and there was less animus towards Avalanche it would be one of the more popular games of the year. Give it a whirl unless you are of faint heart. I especially recommend it to those of you driven from ACW gaming by Glory, TBACW or other long games. Stick you hat on your sword and close for action (damn you!).

Stake The Bunny, Open the Box

Back to Perfidious Albion #103 Table of Contents
Back to Perfidious Albion List of Issues
Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List
© Copyright 2004 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