by Mike Bennighof (S&T187) Joe Miranda's Wars of the Imperial Age series has so far visited the Franco-Prussian, Russo-Turkish and the Austro-Prussian campaigns of the Seven Weeks War. Mike Bennighof's game using the same system covers three Italian campaigns; Radetzky in 1848, the Franco-Austrian War of 1859 that sheered off Lombardy, and the 1866 campaign from the Seven Weeks War with the loss of Venezia. The system can be described as simple, unwristy and containing a reasonable degree of chaos. As such it presents campaigns which American readers (and indeed many European readers) might find hard to source from their book-store with an acceptable view of many of the issues of the campaign. Logistics, movement and combat are all simple, no vast calculations here but in each case subject to those elements of chaos that identify this as a historical wargame rather than a chess-style combat. Finally there are a host of special rules and Political Events that can snatch defeat from the jaws of victory. The Wars of the Imperial Age series games can be played by anyone, but the Perfect Planners may find them too fraught with difficulty to truly enjoy. [Most gamers will find Risorgimento hard to enjoy as published with missing tables and rather poor final drafting, off to the Internet with you to find the errata]. Let's start with the visuals. A Joe Youst map takes us from the French Alps in the west over to the Julian Alps in the east and from the Brenner south into Tuscany. Towns and cities are marked only where important, and logistically it is fortresses and railways that matter. The major feature of the map (in all three scenarios) is thus the Quadrilateral fortresses of Venezia. To the south of these lies the Po that slices horizontally across the map. The main fighting takes place in pretty open terrain in Lombardy, with rougher terrain and rivers providing some defensive opportunities. South of the Po are numerous duchies and states whose loyalties change during the games and between scenarios. In the west is the kingdom of Piedmont-Sardinia hungrily looking at Lombardy and the Venezia. I am not sure how accurate the rail-net is, but those of you with better sources can amend it. The counters are the standard Wars of the Imperial Age series issue. Clearly marked units of cavalry, infantry and artillery with Army HQs. Units are rated as Elite (for example, kaiserjaegers), Professional (good line troops, the major category), Reserve (trained but inexperienced troops, the sort of second line units called up during a war) and Irregulars (Italian students etc.). They also have units' strengths and movement speeds. The Italian tend to fight in divisions (corps structures carrying a political appointment problem which ACW players will understand), the Austrians in infantry corps and cavalry divisions, and the French in big corps. This game also includes Italian irregulars (for the 1848 rising) minor state forces (Papal, Tuscan, Modenese, and Neapolitan), and the red-shirted Garibaldini to add a bit of flavour. It is flavoursome but business-like, it will not ravish the eye but it will appeal to those of you who like the period - it carries clear signs of the pleasures to come. The sequence is Mobilisation, Reorganisation, Movement, Combat, Rally, Logistics and Politics. The important features of this sequence are that reorganisation (essentially which units are in Armies and which are not) precedes both movement and combat, usually leaving something adrift - see the importance of Armies discussed later. Rally will permit you to rescue your own units from the consequences of your own foolishness but leave your opponent playing his whole turn with demoralised troops. Finally, Logistics comes after movement and combat that gives you a chance to battle through to your supplies. Mobilisation involves a dice-roll (modified by National Will - a sort of morale zeitgeist). It generates extra combat factors that can be used to build up damaged units. [A combat factor is probably about 4,000 men]. Each mobilisation point will produce 2 CF for Reserve or Irregular units, but just one of the Elite or Professional combat factors. The rate at which these are applied is limited so one turn (three days) will not allow you to rebuild a corps and fill it with troops, though in truth the replacements look pretty swift to me. Logically there is a problem here in that troops appearing with formations in Lombardy were probably in depots already, in which case the level of National Will at the time of receipt is entirely immaterial, as these fellows had joined up sometime before. The rules state reinforcements may be placed in friendly fortification hexes, I think it means this only for Italian units and the "may" for Austrian and French should be "must" be placed in their national holding areas. This can be very important in the early scenarios where trains are lacking and units must march in from either the Tyrol or Istria. Rather oddly, reinforcements can be received immediately on the map and there is no detailed arrival chart (so, for example, the French divisions that landed at Genoa in 1859 simply appear on the Alps with Napoleon III). The Austrians in 1859 are potentially very numerous but the arrival of units from Austria costs a loss of National Will (presumably the jolly Viennese begin to wonder if all is not as it should be). This will not, however, stop you sending on at least one decent-sized army, the French army is very big indeed. In the 1866 scenario, the unpopularity of the war is reflected in the Italian suffering loss of National Will from draft dodging unless his use of the mobilisation strength points is passed to Garibaldini units, who are Right and Romantic (not to mention Red). Key Driver One of the key drivers in Risorgimento is the use of Armies. This is as in Peter Perla's unpublished game on the same topic for Moments in History. Armies are, quite simply, Dead Good. Without an Army your corps attacks separately and gets defended against separately. Without an Army each unit moves independently and stands a good chance of finding half of the units doing something unexpected (see movement below). Without an Army you do not benefit from the activities of the staff officers attached to headquarters. With an Army though all sins are forgiven, units march skilfully and attack in perfect order. It is true that if the Army is large (more than seven units) it will catch a -1 on the March Table as the baggage wagons get in each other's way. But that aside the way to success is not more units but more Armies (by which I mean the command apparatus of an Army). An exception to this might be on defence where you might like to spread out, but be aware that the result is probably dead defender if you try this. Each hex is about 7 miles across (I would guess) and in that space you can congregate any number of units. Let us assume you prefer not to incur the losses to March speed and restrict yourself to seven corps, that is probably 120,000 to 130,000 men, all handled with the seamless ease of a single unit of a mere 18,000. Since Solferino was fought over pretty much one hex it is very clear that those sorts of numbers could exist in a hex, although only closed up, but I believe analysis of the movement density of (say) Austrian corps in Bohemia in 1866 will suggest things are too easy. In addition, it is likely that Armies could and did act over more than one hex, so that the cluster of units may be a better model than the Marching Square of this game. At Risorgimento's scale this is perhaps less noticeable than in Peter's game. Armies have staff ratings and these are a vital way of reflecting the different skill levels. Each rating earns you an operations chit that can do all sorts of good things. Think of these as the embodiment of organisational skill in the HQ. A good staff can do more to articulate and support their units than a poor staff, take a gander at the British campaigns along the Tugela for an example of how not to organise things. Most armies in the game have a rating of 1. There are a few exceptions; Garibaldi gets 2 probably from enthusiasm rather than organisational ability, as does Archduke Albrecht (who had a very good chief-of-staff). The real star though is Old Man Radetsky who has three. This can mean he has his supply, movement and combat lined up where lesser armies are finding doing up their shoe laces a severe challenge. Not surprisingly he is a hard act to follow (or stop for that matter). The staff activities are numerous. The expenditure of a chit can do one of: improve your March Table scores making planning vastly easier; improve your Technical superiority die roll, a vital element in combat; allow two siege attempts a turn on one fortification prevent the same when the Army is in the fortress; examine other stacks (when using the fog of war option - which really can mess things up) create screen units (effectively running a good scouting operation) create supply wagons (organise logistics) allow the HQ to use rail-lines for supply In each case these vital activities allow one to avoid some of the more rigorous effects of the rules. But, you would really prefer to be doing several a turn. Now while Radetsky can march with certainty, use his Tactical Superiority on the attack and still have a chit in reserve in case he is attacked, lesser mortals have to choose to do less. Does one spend the chit ensuring you get to the battle field, only to lose the Tactical Superiority, or do you risk not marching (or even worse retreating) by keeping the chit for the battle. On these small decisions can the individual flavour of each game depend, and they provide a good reason for the strong replayability of this game. Movement is mostly old-fashioned foot slogging but with some rail movement. Interestingly some my figure-gaming sources show a less developed net in 1859 than the map does, and I am never sure who owns the Lombard rail-lines in 1859 (I give them to the Austrians). Since the game covers eighteen years the capacity and range of the railroads increases. They continue to be most useful as a conduit for new troops. Marching an army in from Istria or the Tyrol will certainly demonstrate the advantages of the railway. What makes the game good fun (and often strangely historical) is that movement is never automatic. You dice for each unit (or Army if controlling a number of units) after modification for staff operations. If you use an operations chit things will be OK, but if you fail to do so "stuff" may happen. Railway passengers may simply not move at all (shades of the World War One Austrian deployment that was slower than marching speed). Other units may halt, retreat or make an impetuous advance. In the Bohemian campaign game (Austro-Prussian War) in one spectacular turn the small Prussian unit pushing out of Saxony took it into their heads to attack Clam-Gallas and the Saxons, and Benedek's Army decided to withdraw to Koniggratz just as I was about to fall on it! Placing your forces in close proximity to the enemy carries the risk that they will do things you cannot predict. A few rogue die-rolls and then one's neatly planned campaign begins to resemble reality. Without this tactic the game would be reduced both as history and as a game (because it is otherwise too simple). I often wonder why the Wars of the Imperial Age system has not been applied to ACW campaigns. Combat Combat is both interesting and dangerous. There is no CRT. Instead the attackers and defenders count up their forces (remembering non-Army units cannot combine) and test for Tactical Superiority. This is a simple dice versus dice together with any staff operations. In the event of a draw the defender has Superiority. The Player with Tactical Superiority gets to "fire first". Because losses are immediately applied this can be vital. Tactical Superiority simulates, very simply the sorts of events that are going on inside a hex and away from Army HQ, a vital ridge, a surprise attack, a dislocating move from a subordinate. Armies with more than one staff rating can afford to conduct themselves skilfully and always be in position for attack or defence in a way denied to the more shambolic organisations. Many are the times I have saved the staff operation for a battle that never occurred because the March miscarried without staff time. Having established who goes first a chit is drawn, the losses applied and the other player then responds by drawing another chit. The chits have a lot of information on them and a number of uses. They could of course have been put on a CRT, but to no great advantage. Firstly, each chit gives the losses the drawing player's forces have inflicted. These are dealt with as percentages of the drawing player's forces, so an Austrian army at Solferino with maybe 20 SPs would inflict 10 losses if it drew a 50% chit. The percentages range from zero to 50, with 25% being the average. Frankly this looks too much for strict losses on the field and must be regarded as including stragglers and similar losses. In any case the losses in Risorgimento are very damaging and you should avoid combat in poor positions. Certain types of terrain reduce the losses, for example if the force suffering the 50% losses had been in a fortress the losses are reduced by taking 20% off the chit number (thus a 30% loss). The chits also provide for demoralisation. This is dealt with by using the Training Class of the units. So an E class demoralisation will affect all units (Elite being the highest status), but an I class demoralisation will only affect irregulars. There are two demoralisations for each class (two of the ten chits do not carry demoralisation effects), so that Irregulars will risk demoralisation in 80% of battles, but Elites only in 20%. The number of SPs demoralised is equal to the inflicting force's SPs. The "50 E" chit in a big battle can thus cause the entire force to be demoralised and halved in numbers. Equally the "zero" chit will inflict no losses. This is not, I repeat, a game for Perfect Planners. The chits also contain a number of special effects that add to atmosphere. Six chits have such results, four of which refer to siege operations. There are two "bombardment" results which take a fortress down a strength point (a big Quadrilateral fortress can be 10 points in strength), an "Honours of War" which yields the fortress, and a "Counterbattery" result which demoralises the siege guns (a popular choice with fortresses defending against me). Three chits have a "Cavalry demoralised" result which demoralises the drawing player's cavalry (he has clearly been engaged in foolish charges and counter-charges) and a single "Cavalry Charge" chit which allows the drawing player to demoralises one enemy unit per cavalry formation. This result is on the Best Attacking Chit In The World (Ever) which inflicts 50% losses and demoralises all Training Classes. If I read the rules correctly you can bombard a fortress (providing you move up your siege train which has a movement factor of 4, against that of most infantry - 6) and hope to get a B or H result (30% chance of success) or you can launch an assault. The 20% deduction means that you have a 50% chance of inflicting losses, so the likelihood is that where time is of the essence (like it usually is) one does both, but always assault. There are siege rules that permit the sort of blockade that took Metz and Paris. After the combat comes the bad news; the loser's size determines how important a battle was. 16 or more SPs (four Austrian Corps) gives a decisive victory, 5 to 15 a tactical victory and less than that a skirmish. The levels of victory gives the number of National Will points received by the winner (and deducted by the loser). A couple of major defeats and your Will can collapse ending the game. This may require a bit of glory hunting as you attack another stack on the other side desperately seeking victory. Demoralisation is likely to have affected both sides (a sensible feature in what was a very bloody period for combat). It can be recovered from in the Rally Phase and in my experience rarely endures except for those without Army HQs (who can use their own Training Class to rally poorer troops) and for Irregulars. However, if you are caught demoralised further demoralisation causes surrender. Given the high loss levels one can do without losing a lot of POWs. As usual with Joe Miranda games you can operate face down using screens and reconnaissance operations. This can finish of many players who can find the game difficult enough to follow, and even without large stacks one can still launch a massed attack on a single corps, expecting the main army. Early on most players will play face-up. Political Chits Political chits are also very much part of Joe Miranda's armoury. These are drawn one a turn alternating between players. This means that fewer events are needed, as the Austrian can be trusted not to play those chits favouring the Italian. There are events for each scenario. The 1848 events are very much orientated on the politics of the peninsula, together with a bit of Viennese revolutionary fervour. So the Pope switches back and forth, Garibaldi appears and the Neapolitans come and go, there is even a rather neat event for Radetzky raising the peasants to fight the liberal nobility - just like Spain in the Napoleonic Wars. One should read La Chartreuse de Parme before playing this game. 1859 sees something more like power politics appearing. The rulers of Tuscany and Modena may join the two sides (as may the Pope). Pro-Sardinian elements in Lombardy can rally to the flag. The Italian army may be inspired by Il Re galantuomo as Victor-Emanuele plays the role of the 19th century Henri IV (in this case at the court of Mars rather than that of Venus). Both sides can also suffer from an "On to Havana" chit which obliges them to execute Impetuous Advances - movements towards the nearest enemy unit (which as you will imagine should jigger things neatly, but very historically). [I should notice that these chits, designed to ruin your carefully laid plans have saved my bacon before today.] 1866 sees a wider world appearing in the chits. Events in Bohemia may effect the arrival of reinforcements (and the National Will). A rising of anti-Sardinian peasants in the Mezzogiorno can require Italian troops to suppress it if the National Will is to be maintained. Victor continues to charm with his personal bravery. One of my favourites is "Leadership Vacuum" where the two Italian Army HQs convert "No March" results into "Fall Back", thus both retreating! The Italian fleet can attempt a re-run of Lissa, and, if it succeeds, land its forces on the Austrian coast (for example cutting the rail-lines at Pola). Finally the Serbs and Turks stir it up for their own interests. The general effect of the Political Chits (like the cards in We The People) is to painlessly add a lot of the stranger effects than the less detailed movement and combat system permit. All of this exciting activity combines in the central mechanism of victory - The National Will. Here victory and defeat (including those off the map), and the costs of the war effort combine to give an absolute measure of morale. Once National Will starts to ebb recruitment becomes more difficult, and once morale collapses the game is over. This is not a game to let the other player win the first battle, a couple of major defeats and (irrespective of what you think is the position) out you jolly well go. The Advanced Rules cover the hidden movement rules (with screens of cavalry and reconnaissance), logistics, entrenchments, overwhelming attacks, meeting engagements and sieges. Logistics are (in my view) a necessity if the campaign is to feel right. Lines of communication to supply sources must not exceed 3 movement points. You will swiftly identify the problem of campaigning in the mountains. However a railway line will allow a LOC to be run back indefinitely so it is vital to keep one's rail-net intact. Supply sources are friendly supply wagons (collected by your staff, but with low movement allowances), off-map areas and fortifications. The game is very good at making you look at the your supply net. Failure to supply a unit will cause it to have to forage. Units with over 5 strength points will be out of supply (10% losses if demoralised, or demoralised if in good order) half of the time. Smaller units only one sixth of the time. So if supply is tight you can risk sending a single division of Kaiserjagers into the hills, but not three corps of infantry. Entrenchments permit you to see if Wagner's view about the lessons of the ACW could apply. The three scenario groups provide a lot of playing opportunities in what is an inherently replayable system. The 1866 scenarios cover firstly the Custozza Campaign where La Mamora's men were defeated in detail while Cialdini had to cross the Po. Geoffrey Wawro's view of this battle is that neither side covered itself with glory, but in the game Archduke Albert is a tough act to beat, clearly an Impetuous Advance! The second scenario is the Liberation of Venetia covering the activities after the defeat at Sadowa. Effectively one corps of Austrians faces the Italians. The third scenario covers the whole campaign and the fourth covers the possibility of Italy not making peace at the same time as Prussia (so six plus Austrian corps are available). The 1848 scenarios are wild affairs with Radetzky facing numerous enemies and a collapsing political situation. Once again there are four scenarios. The Five Days of Milan sees revolt breaking out throughout Lombardy held by Radetzky with two corps (two others are in the east). Meanwhile five divisions of Piedmont-Sardinia (under Charles-Albert of Savoy), and seven and half divisions of "exotics" are ready for the attack. Some of the Italians may switch sides (or just go home) but Radetzky cannot afford to lose too many troops in chasing off these forces using interior lines. The second scenario - The Pope's Divisions - covers Radetzky's offensive against the Papal forces. The third scenario covers First Custozza and the re-occupation of Milano. The fourth scenario covers the full war (a mere thirty-two turns). The 1859 scenarios are three in number. The first scenario covers the period when Gyulai lost Lombardy (though with the size of the French army you might forgive him this). The second scenario covers Kaiser Franz Josef's offensive which ended at Solferino, and finally a 24 turn full campaign. Risorgimento has a number of problems arising from its refusal to succumb to being overly detailed, but then it wins interest and range from being shorter. I found the three day turn worked for operational activities (although it implies fully staffed marching with no halts) but strategically it seemed a bit short. I had the distinct feeling that neither side could have kept this up for long. The game is full of random events and your "luck" can be very important, but at no stage can one say that your role is that much more difficult than your historical counterpart. Indeed, I find these games a valuable exercise in understanding campaigns. I very much hope that the upcoming Crimean War game uses this system, although it will be interesting to see what turn-length they elect to use. Back to Perfidious Albion #98 Table of Contents Back to Perfidious Albion List of Issues Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 1999 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