This is one of the games to come from Vae Victis in a while. It uses a system very reminiscent of the Millman and Martin Clash of Farms ACW system (see Mississippi Fortress) but with point-to-point rather than Area combat. Without the vile spawn of the hex nazis (not that I would wish to take sides of course) the graphic qualities of the nos voisins francaises (er... have I got the gender right?) are allowed to run riot. The map is splendid (each of the movement boxes conveying its information swiftly), the counters excellent and the game aids amongst the best I have seen. The rules are workable and the game provides two scenario, a shorty and a longie (as George Hamilton would have it). Anyone can play this game, everyone will enjoy it save those determined to stick to mainline pap. Even we Chaotics can enjoy it with its hidden units and decoys. Although it was my impression that this meant the owner was confused rather than the opponent. The game had the most vital ingredients of a real historical game. Firstly, it made one think about the real campaign. Secondly both sides felt the game was biased against them. Map The map runs from Harpers Ferry up through the Valley and across to Westminster and York reaching the Susquehanna River and Harrisburg. The mountains and rivers, with subsidiary ranges of rougher terrain show up admirably. Movement is not long in comparison to the distances so plotting your course to deal with your targets and the enemy's moves is very important. The campaign is itself odd, first the Army of North Virginia moves on heading north, followed (further to the East) by the outdistanced Army of the Potomac. You do not necessarily move towards each other in this game. To add to the fun small cavalry and infantry forces are deep in the US rear meaning that no where is safe. The units are divisions/corps of infantry, artillery and cavalry. The Confederates have a more developed Leader system with Corps commanders beneath Lee down to the divisions. Hooker and Meade just correspond directly with their corps (apart from Pleasanton commanding the cavalry). Each unit is rated for quality (the CSA tend to be better) and artillery. Unit strength is recorded on the roster. This means that many US units are strong in numbers and artillery but low in quality, with the reverse for the CSA. To add to the fun the USA get more points for killing CSA troops than vice versa. This can give an element of attrition to the exercise, but as VPs are also awarded for victories you cannot simple emulate the good Commander Cockroach. Combat is quite complex necessitating a scratch-pad, but it is also not that frequent. By comparison to the Bobby Lee system I am much happier with this one. Play begins with both sides selecting a tactic. The Attacker can choose from General Assault, Limited Assault and Skirmish; and the Defender, Hold, Retire in Order or Retreat. Each of these interacts to give the number of rounds of combat, the level of losses and the effectiveness of artillery. The depths of belligerence (Skirmish meets Retreat) suffers quarter loss rates and only one round of combat, and both sides will count their artillery at face value. Turn that round to a full blooded General Assault on a defending army in good terrain (like at Gettysburg) and we are in for doubled losses and two rounds of combat giving a maximum loss of three Union corps (oops). In such a battle the Attacker would double his artillery and the Defender treble it. Into the equation go Leader and Troop quality, position, flanking etc, and further die modifiers from chosen tactics. However, before you think this is some sort of mad blooDBAth there is a key rule and the ever present risk of the refusal of battle. Meeting Where the two armies meet under their commanders then the choice of the tactic belongs to the gamer. However, where formations out of range of the commander run into the enemy things are different. Where the unit (Defender or Attacker) does not have a line of communication to its Leader, for example a Union Corps out on a limb, it can only select Skirmish, Retreat in Order or Retire. In short, faced with responsibility no-one will risk anything and at best we will have a bickering of outposts whilst a messenger summons the Commander. However, where a stack has a line of communication to its Leader, but not then on to the C-in-C (basically a Confederate Corps or Union Cavalry Corps), it may not choose General Assault or Hold. This means any attack will be limited (the First Day at Gettysberg) and the defender will be retreating in some form. You can swiftly see how good independent commanders like Jackson and Sheridan might be simulated by "bending" these rules. Formations activate and move on the basis of scarce Resource Points (which tend to favour the CSA). Out-of-supply units cost more to move (so you can see a handy-dandy Napoleonic model here) and there is nothing worse than having your Leader positioning jiggered by events. It is almost worth a battle to inflict this on your enemy. Even when you keep things trim a few bad die rolls (supply, weather, lost orders) can leave you with a mountain to climb (fortunately your opponent is probably just as incompetent). Interception Into this mixture (which is very like The King's War so easy for me) comes interception and the usual tricks of getting your opponent to cross a river so you can zap him. Positioning is as important in La Campagne as in The King's War or Sam Grant/Bobby Lee. Indeed the whole system is designed for the operational gamer. Those of you who enjoy building up a position and them pouncing are going to really like this game. However, all in not one dimensional the tactical content is pretty good, it really is a good idea to achieve converging attacks (you can flank) and to try to encircle the opposing army by cutting its retreat routes. All of this handled by a combat system that seems to have all the right elements but which remains sufficiently bloody and unpredictable to mean you think twice before combat commences. Hidden Movement Given the hidden movement system Gareth and I spent most of the time completely in the blind about what we were doing in terms of skilled strategies. We knew what our opponents were up to we just could not find our own units. And of course Gettysburg is not a campaign either of us know a great deal about. At the vital moment units were just out of range to march to the sound of the guns or arrive without crossing that damned river. Naturally, at least one brilliant manoeuvre was stopped by bad weather (grrrrh!). Was the result right? I do not know enough to comment, but to the extent it was not I suspect the system could have been fiddled with until it worked. This game really is exceptional quality and I heartily recommend it to everyone. I would particularly like to hear from those who are keen Gettysberg men, were, for example, the Victory Conditions such as support the historical strategies? Back to Perfidious Albion #95 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