Roger Taylor
By the way, the Scots won my first game of The Flowers of the Forest, and according to good form I applauded. Afterward, they went on a horrendous losing streak. Finally, I tried making the Scots Swiss-like. Besides allowing up to +4 for rear rank support, I raised all pike band morale numbers by 1 and had the pike units Stand only on a 10. They basically scared the English right flank off the field with pike fright and combat morale checks. Only a handful of English units were destroyed. Most Scots losses were from artillery! It was impressive.
CHV: And that is what a Swiss Pike attack must have looked like at Nancy or Muret, try increasing their movement speed as well.Then once the pike fright has gone through permit their halberds to come to the head of the column, thus giving the Swiss the best of both worlds.
Benedict Wilkins
As disposable time seems a rare commodity at present my gaming time tends to be devoted to miniatures rather than board games but not exclusively so. I am sorely tempted by Ring of Fire which sounds pretty good from the reports in PA. (CHV: Send me that sales commission now Blennemann). The only recent board gaming I have done (lf you can call it that) is Rise of the Luftwaffe from GMT, a card game (But not collectable - hurrah!). I find it thoroughly entertaining and I have even managed to convert gamers who normally turn their noses up at aeroplanes. In fact, I find it so good I am completely bemused by why I spent several years trying to get to grip with other plane games such as Air Superiority, Speed of Heat, Airforce etc.
Mustangs is pretty good though. If you like ROTL then 8th Airforce is well worth getting but for us Brits not as complete as I feel it should be, there are no cards for Typhoons & Tempests for example, and as far as I can see, no pilot counter for 'Johnnie' Johnson - how typical of a US company to 'miss out' the top scoring allied ace in the ETO (moan, moan, gripe). I suspect we are in line for some expansion kits (hmmm, perhaps this is turning into a collectable card game after all).
Your little section on figure gaming was interesting. I have toyed with card driven activation but the only time it is really worked was for an 18th century set of rules I put together in an idle moment. The cards did not activate units as such but rather sides.
The standard deck had 3 activation cards per side for infantry & cavalry, 2 mutual artillery activation cards, 2 resolve all close combat cards & 1 card which ended the turn (which prevented card counting!) When you got a card to activate infantry & cavalry you had to choose one action per brigade (2 to 4 units) which essentially was either fire, move or attempt to close to melee. This tended to make people deploy in lines with 1 brigade up, 1 back. There are a few other wrinkles but that is the basic system.
For Napoleonics I like big battles, so the brigade is the smallest unit on the table. On their turn players would attempt to activate formations (die roll, leadership & what not) with the result that some formations would do nothing, others make a vague attempt at doing something useful & some would fully activate. On their turn a player (or side) can attempt to activate any/all formations (although, depending on the army & who is in command this tends the more you attempt to activate the harder it gets).
The further from the enemy you are the more you can activate with a single die roll (and the more plusses you got) - so if you were out of artillery range you could activate a whole corps and expect to hurl it forward en masse, if 'in between' you activated by division, and if engaged in some sort of horrible sucking firefight or stalled attack you had to roll by individual brigade (& of course move one before you rolled for another). Therefore as you became engaged you progressively lost more & more control.
It also encouraged players to keep reserves for both attack & defence. There are some problems; why can a formation activate an entire corps in one attempt if l,500 yards from the enemy and only by division if 1,400 yards is one, another is that players in the heat of battle would often forget what status their formation was and roll on the wrong table etc. but overall it seemed to work (at least I liked it). However, I am now working on a system where the smallest unit on the table is a division to allow really big battles like Wagram to be played in a day.
One of the problems with card based systems that activate formations one at a time and from side to side is that they tend to prolong the playing time. This is OK for a small evening game with 2-3 players a side, but most of my rules tend to be geared towards the occasional weekend big game 8 - 12 players a side (on an 18' table). If everything is activated one at a time players tend to have to wait for up to 23 other players to take a turn which usually leads to slowness & boredom. The only practical way for this number of players is to have everyone going at once when it is their sides' turn.
Like the sound of A Day of Battle; Mars La Tour (although I do not know Bloodiest Day). I have been trying to get a workable set of rules (for miniatures - basic unit the brigade again) to cover the Franco-Prussian war for some years now, but most attempts have turned out to be less than satisfactory in one respect or another. In the quest for inspiration I recently placed a fairly large order with Gareth for some of his books on this war. It would all be so much simpler if someone else produced a good system that I could then adapt (borrow? rip off??). I live in hope!
ASL banned from PA? Double hurrah! CHV: Make that a triple hurrah!!
Manly Dave Fox
You seem to have taken a different editorial slant with PA 93, which has about as much FragilFox in it as it does CVASEY. That must mean it's the best issue yet! (CHV: Self-love while an estimable quality can be taken to extreme, though not in my case).
But then I found a rather poignant personal note in back, explaining that the pressure of work had forced you to cut back on the issue. I do sympathise. What gets me through long hours on the computer and all those interminable meetings ? Wargaming, that's what ! I can't tell you how many meetings I've gotten through by sketching maps on my notepad or thinking up a new way to turn my beastly opponent's flank. All true. Wargaming as job therapy has never been given its just due. (CHV: Personally I look forward to a bloody good rattle just after lunch)
I am more than a little surprised that SIMTAC's Napoleonic series has not gotten much coverage in these pages. [CHV: "Gotten", he's only gone and written "gotten" in my lurvely English magazine, I don't know give 'em a Peace treaty and they'll take a continent!] Perhaps the length of time needed keeps you at arm's length ? Being an American, I live in a sprawling mansion with oceans of space and eons of free time so I've played all three (Sagunto, Los Arapiles, and Alexandria) and find them a nice improvement over La Bataille, fixing many of that series' historical howlers and covering interesting but previously untouched battles.
On the downside, the command rules are absolutely ghastly and some of the combat morale modifiers really knock the bell curve out of whack. Nothing that a few house rules cannot fix, though.
Vae Victis continues to impress. I have stumbled through both Operation Apocalypse and Rocroi with my terrible French and found them both fun, quick games that still managed to convey a good feel of their subjects, even if I was probably playing them half-wrong. And I normally don't go for fun & quick, either. For comparative newcomers, they certainly put Command and S&T to shame.
I agree with Mike Siggins that something isn't quite right about Hannibal history-wise; any game that encourages Hannibal to avoid combat is badly missing the mark. He knew that he'd lose a war of attrition, and actively sought battle so that he could inflict a decisive, war-winning defeat on Rome. An impossible goal perhaps, but that was still his goal. But I really did enjoy playing it, particularly the event cards which are simply smashing. Like reading Flashman it may be fiction but it sure is quick fun (there are those words again).
Speaking of quick fun, Richard Berg is working on a set of fast-play rules for Alexander that keeps the original maps and counters but boils all of the detail down into a modified version of his TCT leader activation system (last seen in Dead Of Winter) and a simple, 1 die-roll combat resolution. No ZOC's, which allows all sorts of shocking behaviour, but it is quite fluid and better yet, plays in roughly 1/3 the time with 1/3 the die-rolls of the original. We tried 'em out with Gaugamela and they worked just fine. Perhaps after a long siege you have finally worn down Richard's defences, breached the walls, and stormed the donjon.
CHV: Now God be thanked and not our strength for't. We will know we have succeeded when the first Foppington appears in Great Battles of History.
J H White
Please give consideration to providing (at least upon their first mention in PA) the full name and producing company rather than just abbreviations. I am often at a loss to determine which game is under discussion for we now have no boardgame shop in Hull. There may be other subscribers with the same problem.
May I presume to recommend some more books of outstanding quality?
- 1. The Dutch Republic Jonathan Israel - superb work (massive) - a masterpiece of summarisation of Dutch life from 1477 to 1806 with fine analysis to match together with clear style. Israel is a true historian but a readable one. This is a book to re-read and refer to many times in the future.
2. A Genius for War - A Life of General George S Patton by Carlo d'Este. The author is well known for his previous books on W.W.II. Here he proves his ability as an outstanding biographer. Don't look here for the details of W.W.II but for Patton as a human being and what made him tick. D'Este is once again sharp, clear and oh so fair. What a writer!
3. The Forgotten Victor - Sir Richard O'Connor by John Baynes. This is a fine book on a fine man who succeeded while remaining a decent person and who is now virtually unknown. How often was he mentioned in all the 50th Anniversary celebrations? Also merits re-reading but should be twice as long.
4. Command on the Western Front (The Military Career of Sir Henry Rawlinson 1914-18) by Robin Prior and Trevor Wilson. This is the best book on W.W.I which I have read. The two authors have done a massive job of research and provided a clear picture of W.W.I problems and how the British were finally able to overcome them in 1918 with a consequent reduction in the number of killed and wounded despite less manpower. This is a book for every military library and will be used as a reference book for years. The only drawback is that it should be at least half as long again as its 421 pages to provide more details of the actual planning and control exercised by Rawlinson and his staff. The maps are clear for a change and add to one's understanding.
Craig Ambler:
Thank you for another excellent issue of Perfidious Albion. The content value was as high as ever, and as varied. I found the articles on Hannibal to be very interesting and seem to follow my own ideas. I actually met Steve Owen at Northern Militaire where we discussed Hannibal at some lengths, and exchanged views. A very pleasant chap! I think he agreed that the game was biased against Hannibal, but not as much as I think, for the views as noted in PA last issue.
It was interesting to see a review of Battleground: Waterloo. I own both the Gettysburg and Waterloo games and feel that both have the same major problem a very weak Artificial Intelligence. As the Confederates I managed to kill every Goddamyankee there was. Why? Because each Division/Corps came on one by one with no idea of co-ordination, so I just shot them up one by one.
At Waterloo as the Allied Army I had picnics in La Haye Sainte and Hougoumont and waited 'til tea for D'Erlon to attack. My Prussians advanced to Plancenoit and then proceed to hit the French in the rear. History I think not. Along with the others major failings Dave Fox mention it leaves me with the thought that they are not worth the full price, but I will wait for the reduced prices before buying the next in the series.
The games follow what in my mind is a common failing among computer programmers at the moment, namely, that they are making the games visually better but behind the front the bones are not very strong.
I have been playing Tsushima recently and a very good game it is. Very tense and to my slight knowledge realistic. I just wish I had purchase it earlier.
Soren Fisker
The games mentioned on your "Back Pages": Les Quatre-Bras and Mars-La-Tour sounds very interesting. I play in a small group of old men (between 30 and 40 years old) [Groom of the Scanner: both Charles and I fall into that category - who are you calling old, eh?] organised in "STS" (Strategic & Tactical Simulation-society of 23/10-91) - The date was chosen from the starting date of the British El-Alamein offensive. We are all married, have small children and full time jobs - which leaves us with very little time to play wargames. For some reason wargames are not made for guys like us.
If a game is supposed to take less than eight hours to play and has shorter rules than 20 pages then the game is usually without any balance - which means that one guy will have to sit and take all the punches from the other guy - and then finally win - because the other guy did not manage to wipe him out entirely.... I (we) like games where the (overall) defender still have enough power to strike back - and do some damage. I realise that History is to blame for some of the unbalanced games around. I mean, no sensible (winning) general would endanger his army without insuring some sort of superiority before going into battle. But I also think that the game-designers is to blame for some of it.
Ed Wimble from Clash of Arms recently asked for his customers opinion about your game Chariot Lords (among others). Thinking about my own wargaming group - which also needs good and simple multi-player games - I told him to print it immediately. I hope he will.
Manly Dave Fox (The Second)
What did you think of Rocroi 1643? I was quite disappointed, I'm afraid, finding it only inconclusive counter-pushing without any sort of feel for the period, or the battle. There is room for a Thirty Years' War battle system somewhere between the monstrous complexity of Lion Of The North and the lifeless abstraction of SPI/Decision's Thirty Years' Quad, but this weren't it.
This huge Clash of Arms project, Home Before The Leaves Fall, really depresses me. I used to work in publishing (textbook publishing, for the American branch of Longman) and I know that whenever we were developing a book, and to reach the proper profit ratios on the spreadsheets we had to raise the price to $95, it was time to cancel the book. I have this vision of this project taking on a life of its own, growing and expanding until Ed W. is forced to charge $1,000 a copy just to break even, but saying that he's invested too much time and money (and ego) to stop working on it. I just hope that it doesn't turn into COA's cement albatross.
All are in a dither of anticipation here, waiting for the release of computer Alexander. For Gene Billingsley it will be like giving birth to a 50-pound elephant. I will glom onto my free copy and I hope it's good, knowing that RHB will never be able to play it 'cuz he owns the wrong kind of computer. Serves him right, the bounder. I find the increase in the quality of computer wargaming in the past year very encouraging, as this seems to me to be the future (and the saviour) of the industry.
Gareth "Scanner" Simon
Charles has just lent me Geoffrey Wawro's The Austro-Prussian War (Cambridge University Press, 1996, 0-521-56059-4. I don't know the price, but if it's CUP it's probably expensive). (CHV: Correct, £40).
This claims to be the first history of the campaign to be based on primary sources since the beginning of the century, and the author, an American academic, visited all the battlefields while researching the book. It looks at the Italian campaign in depth as well as the Austrian one. It traces the development of the armies, their doctrines and technologies, and gives a good answer as to why Ross's Flintlock to Rifle ends with 1866.
There is quite a detailed account of Custozza. I have seen this battle dismissed by some writers as Italian marching columns blundering into the Austrians and having their entire army swept away in panic. You actually have both armies blundering into each other, hoping to turn each other's flank, without bothering to reconnoitre first.
The Austrians win eventually (the village of Custozza in the centre of the position is held by the Italians for about ten hours before they withdraw) as their reserve formations usually march to the sound of the guns, while the Italian reserves stand around waiting for orders [Note: I must dig out Della Rocca's Memoirs and see how he talks his way out of this] while their conscript troops are swept away in panic. Far from being a complete disaster, the Italians are back on the offensive in a matter of weeks and are pushing deep into Austrian territory, while the Austrian generals flounder about, not knowing what to do with their (temporary) success. Or, rather, knowing what they should do (exactly what Radetzky did in 1848/49) but not having the determination to do it.
The Austro-Prussian engagements in Bohemia are comprehensively described, their results foreshadowing Koniggratz. This loss of this battle by the Austrians, is traditionally blamed on the disobedience of some of the Austrian corps commanders moving out of position and launching uncoordinated counter-attacks. Wawro claims that they were behaving correctly according to their own doctrine, and had Benedeck allowed them to continue they could have rolled up the flank of the Prussian First army before the Second army had arrived to take the Austrians in flank.
However, I find it a bit difficult to accept that they could have successfully assaulted the Prussians, as Wawro had been demonstrating through all the earlier actions that Prussian infantry firepower was almost unassailable. Be that as it may, we know they were doomed if they didn't do it, so could the battle have gone any worse for them?. Well, yes. Moltke was unable to pursue the fleeing Austrians as his forces had become too disorganised during the battle and the approach to it. (The cavalry were all stuck at the back of the columns, for a start.) If the Austrians had counter-attacked the Prussian First army as the subordinates had wanted (and as Wawro seems to think they should), and had they failed (as their past performance as described by Wawro suggests to me they would), then the Prussian Second army would have arrived in their rear and cut them off completely from their "golden bridges" over the Elbe.
All that being said, it is still a very good book. I thought the lessons to be drawn about the effectiveness of infantry firepower could have been drawn equally well from the American Civil War (and wonder if Wawro's being an American has coloured his view of this), but Charles has pointed out that Prussian firepower is much more developed than American at this point.
CHV: The comparison between Bavarian losses (using muskets but avoiding storm columns) and Austrian losses is particularly interesting.
Paul Schulte
I would be interested in seeing a review of AH's Geronimo - it seems intriguing (is this the first game where opponents swap sides several times in the course of play) - but can it be worth £40.
CHV: Not in my view. I attempted the solitaire system but the rules are written so as to make this the exception to everything and really I could find more enjoyable things to do. The word from the multi-player folks (all my opponents made the sign of the Cross and ran) is that it is long, boring and not involving. The key must be whether it pulls you into the atmosphere of being on the frontier. For everyone I spoke to it did not. The view seemed to be that it did not involve them, and the fact that the Injuns were going to lose and were not a nation made for a fundamentally flawed production. However, it appealed to a lot of folks initially so it might have something there, but you are never going to find out. The side swapping is to be found in The Peloponnesian War also from TAHGC.
Back to Perfidious Albion #94 Table of Contents
Back to Perfidious Albion List of Issues
Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List
© Copyright 1997 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