Name: Dennis A. Spors

Genius: Co-developer and principal designer La Bataille series of Napoleonic Wargames.

Bio: Martial Enterprises, Co-designer - La Bataille de la Moscova (1976)
Marshal Enterprises, Owner/Designer with Monte Mattson -

La Bataille d' Auerstadt (1978)
La Bataille de Preussiche-Eylau (1979)
La Bataille d' Austerlitz (1980)
La Bataille de Deutsch Wagram (1981)
La Bataille d' Espagnol Talevera (1982)

La Bataille de les Quatra Bras (1991)
La Bataille de Ligny (1991)

Amega Games - Translator/Adviser - La Bataille Games in German
Developed but as yet unpublished - Luetzen 1813, Dresden 1813 and Leipzig 1813
Empire Games - Napoleonic Miniatures - Strategic Rules

Current Job: Manager of Estimating Services for Albert Kahn Associates (Architects \ Engineers) I calculate the conceptual cost of large ($300 million or larger) individual manufacturing projects. I developed the total facility budgets for BMW in South Carolina and Mercedes-Benz in Alabama for example.

Education: B. A. Mathematics - Governors State, M. S. Industrial Technology - Eastern Michigan University.

What was the inspiration for La Bataille de la Moscova?

In the early 1970's I belonged to a wargamming club at the University of California, San Diego. We played every Thursday and one Saturday per month ( I was single!). After several years we began to make our own simulations for the Saturday Tournaments. At the time most games (AH, and SPI) were two player affairs. We needed something special that a whole group could play, that is teams of players. Larry Groves and I had enjoyed battling away at Borodino by SPI. To expand the format to regimental and battalion and therefore create more commands we started by using GDW'S Torgau as our model.

The Torgau game system was very disjointed but ahead of its time because of the detail it provided. After about 1000 hours of playtesting and refinement we had the Moscova prototype. Additional refinement by myself, Monte Mattson and others brought about new titles from Marshal Enterprises and Clash of Arms.

What made it such a cutting edge game at the time?

In those ancient times Avalon Hill and SPI had developed and published many fine WWII games. Unfortunately when they went into other historical conflicts they just couldn't shake the WWII mentality. Even their lexicon betrayed them. Every simulation was just a version of Panzerblitz. I am sure the unbending philosophies and styles had something to do with mass marketing appeal. GDW made the best effort of breaking out of this mold.

We were looking for something much more detailed and truly Napoleonic. The Grenadiers a Cheval were not just another name for a King Tiger Battalion 501. This meant breaking out of the total "Panzer" mentality. We set about to re-invent game systems, counters, maps, rules styles etc. Many of these items did not exist and we therefore created them. Even the departure from Martial to Marshal expressed Monte and my desire to create the new to simulate the old. A French Revolution of the existing Gaming World.

Remember when all counters were pink or blue? In 1978 (before computer graphics) we were told that counters in regimental detail could not be printed. Six colors on one small cardboard counter was not possible. I guess Monte Mattson (Marshal Bernadotte) proved them all wrong!

At the time of the release of Auerstadt by Marshal Enterprises Monte and I were soundly attached by the hobby notables (As Rousseau said the "men of letters"). Our games were busy and unplayable. Our tiring rhetoric was juvenile at best. "This was not the way games were supposed to be designed". Certainly they were not for everyone.

The true battle between the simulations of the Revolution "M.E." and the "ancient regime" SPI came down to a comparison between our Eylau And the SPI's Wellington's Victory. Never were two historical recreations more different.

NAW was released by the clerics of SPI and perported to be the definitive Napoleonic simulation. After playing for awhile I expected to break down the Imperial staff into skirmishers. Unfortunately the system was not applicable to other battles. Even those fought around the same time such as Quatre Bras and Ligny just didn't work. We made copies of the various battles and the results were pretty bizarre.

The La Bataille system however has been adapted to battles large (Leipzig) and small (the storming of the Bastille- the Swiss Guards know the story and their morale is low). It has provided an historic way to move and fight with Spaniards, Russians, Austrians, Prussians, English and French. This system has held up well for over twenty years and remains fresh. (I hope Jim Dunnigan is still out there and reads this).

If anything, the latest generation of rules are a little to close to NAW for my tastes.

In creating La Bataille, how did your design philosophy evolve? Did something trigger the proverbial light bulb to light up over your head during design and testing?

The design development process was very slow and very difficult. Much like the Committee of Public Safety during the Revolution, our group had many divergent ideas and personalities. Design ideas were trashed, revised and trashed again. A truly unrealistic game result could preclude another group presentation for some time. ("The tree of Liberty must be watered with the blood of Tyrants").

Like the committee that provided a shave from the "national blade" to those who worked against the Republic, it was not easy to maintain a position on the design group. From such a process the glory of the system was born. Evolving from mob to Republic and finally the Empire!

Literally thousands of hours were consumed in playtesting. Many prototypes have been made and tested which are still in boxes. Monte Mattson made maps which could not fit into a two car garage. Each of the people listed in the game credits was decisive in that simulation. Michael Neylan, Jeff Stacer and Jim Soto most notably. Marshal Enterprises treated our assistants fairly. Many companies did not.

What was the greatest success of the design?

As a group we were able to break through the artificial boundaries of the game industry of that time. Marshal Enterprises created something special which was not limited by a 20th Century view point or Anglo-Saxon prejudices. The La Bataille games I have witnessed over the years demonstrated how the ideas of organization and elan could prove decisive. The breaking of the opponents' will and not a die-roll, defined the moment.

These games dramatically illustrate the advantage of coordinating combined arms. The really excellent players can think in three dimensions (Infantry, Artillery and Cavalry) several turns ahead. This is especially important when you consider the twenty minute real time movement limitation. I consider this to be the most subtle yet greatest command control rule. The only thing to track is the clock. There is no way to make the perfect move for one corps in 20 minutes.

If any one disagrees, I am at your service on the field of honor. I see people cry about their opponents releasing the Imperial Guard into combat on the initial turns and requesting rules to stop it. As your opponent I want you to commit your guard first. Using your best troops first is of the highest folly. Once committed it will be chewed up in a few hours. What are you going to have at 5:00 PM? Without a reserve your opponent can maneuver against you at will!

The La Bataille system is a subtle blend of many designs and national preferences. Each nationality is distinctive and tactical possibilities are endless. The next time you play, look at the following:

1. Prussian Infantry Tactics (M. Mattson/Neal Spangler)
2. British Infantry Tactics (Michael Neylan /D. Spors)
3. Russian Artillery (Jeff Stacer)
4. 3600 man column (Neal Spangler)
5. Russian Infantry Tactics (Larry Groves)
6. Cavalry and Horse Battery Tactics (D. Spors)

Most notable flaw?

1. As a small company working out of my garage, we made execution errors. We always worked to improve and if you line up each game side by side, you will see the positive transition.

2. Another concept I was working on was the grand tactical integration of maneuver. In most cases our games work well when the armies are largely on the field and packed into a confined space (Eylau and Moscova), In Wagram we attempted to simulate another important aspect, movement. This was tried in many different ways and the published version is acceptable. The off-board movement of units was crucial for the as yet unpublished games of Luetzin, Dresden and Leipzig. We worked on this idea with Empire Games and Kip Trexel. Using Empire's rules we played 1813. Most of the time we maneuvered and about once a month we fought a battle or perhaps two at once. The results were very interesting in that many obvious errors were made but at the time it appeared the motivations had been correct.

3. We never had the resources to package the games in boxes. Yes, these were the days of the big plastic zip lock bag! Clash of Arms has done a much better job of packaging.

What were some other influences on your design/development for the series?

1. Immersion into the period. I read everything by Rousseau and much of Voltaire. I read a great deal on the revolution. I studied men's and ladies' fashions of the period. I became well acquanted with classical music from 1750-1821. I reviewed original historical military sources in English, French and German. As a result of linking this knowledge together, the concepts of Marshal Enterprises have many dimensions and shades.

2. Playtesting of new and competitor's Napoleonic Games was constant. We would load five people into my van, drive from San Diego to L.A. or San Francisco to contest another group. The games would last 24 - 30 hours. Decisive moves usually commenced around hour 20. Since our opponents would go all out to beat the designers, we saw just about every rule interpretation and strategy imaginable.

3. For a break we played simulations from many companies. Franco - Prussian War, WWI and Seven Years War are my favorite subjects. I am particularly fond of WWI. Verdun by The Conflict Game Company is still my favorite war game of all time. Each of these provided interesting solutions to simulation challenges. I once played Europa by GDW for 18 straight months.

How long did Moskova take from inspiration to final boxed product? Did you get faster as you continued with the series?

Moskova took over three years to complete. Monte Mattson and I were not ready to run a company at that time so Larry Groves published the product largely by himself. After he declined to continue, based I think on his financial loses, Monte, Jim Soto and I created a new company.

If you place Moskova and Eylau side by side you will see mostly the same game system but everything else has a most different perspective. Each Marshal Enterprises game title required about a year to complete although several prototypes were being worked on at any given time. By the Eylau game, Monte and I were directing every aspect, and we had numerous people who offered what time they had available. We produced only 2,000 copies of each title and sold them all. Unfortunately I no longer have a copy of Austerliz and would very much like to acquire one. Can you help me?

Do you play computer games?

When I moved to Detroit in 1985 I was a little burned out on games of any kind. I tried play opponents through local hobby shops but it didn't work out that well. Also as you progress in life your dynamic changes.

When I lived in Austria in 1990-1992 I started playing flight simulators and an occasional football game on the computer. I tried some WWII games but they were just old games in a new electronic format. Based on content the computer wargames were vastly inferior to what had been available in cardboard 10 years earlier.

I then played Market Garden by Three Sixty. I pounded the Allies through most of the battle. As I was about to finish off the 101 Airborne a computer glitch appeared. I called the company but they had been purchased. The new owners sent me an update but it completely wiped out my existing game. 40 hours gone. I have not played this game since.

One game I found very interesting is Field of Glory by Micropose. This is the Waterloo campaign which a friend lent to me. Tactically the computer logic of the battle is interesting and with a high end computer, graphically pleasing. I have played all of the scenarios many times and enjoyed them. To improve I suggest linking the battles so troops can be moved from one battle to another into a campaign. Also the intelligence of the computer is patterned after a Prussian General and can be easily out maneuvered. Generally this game has a lot to offer and there are no fatal errors to the program.

There are many new releases which look very promising. I have been asked to review Borodino by Talonsoft. Does my computer have enough memory for all of those losses? This review will be featured in MagWeb in the future.

What type of system do you have?

I am a gamer first and a computer user second. With today's games however you need power and memory. I have a Pentium 133 with 32 Mb of internal memory. So far this system can play a game or handle a 125 page spread sheet.

What piece of hardware, real or imaginary, would you add to it?

I am less interested in playing the computer than playing other people through the computer. I am excited about the online things that are being done. I like the interaction between people, whether team members or opponents. If I design something in the future it will feature strategic movement and teams linked electronically. I still like to look at an opponent's facial expressions, particularly the eyes which are the mirror of the soul.

In general do you think boardgames make the leap to computer screens effectively? Why or why not?

So far I have been largely disappointed with computer wargames. I don't see the advantage to the player of showing a two dimensional board on a computer screen. Instead of development from boardgames many computer games are like Panzerblitz. With the calculation and graphic capabilities of today's computers this is just not acceptable. The Fields of Glory game is a good step in the right direction. Maybe other companies will follow and those are the creative people we should support.

How would you like to see La Bataille presented on a computer screen, if at all?

Not just as it is, but supported to a three dimensional simulation. The computer's power can provide many additions a paper copy cannot. I want to hear the battle and results. I want to go from strategic control to eye level of advancing with the Young Guard. I want to play with and against people around the world even if they don't speak English. The computer is the best hope of bringing back the big game. Perhaps this new game by Talonsoft will take us to the next step?

If you were going to be represented on a computer screen by an icon, what would it be?

Regimental Colonel of the Empress' Dragoons

Computer games are becoming an extension of Hollywood--games based on movies or movie characters. Do you believe the Hollywoodized games to be better, worse, or about equal to ones created from original material? Why?

I enjoy movies like Sense and Sensibility, Pride and Prejudice and Immortal Beloved. The computer games I seek create the same problems, possibilities and experiences as Archduke Charles faced on the Danube in 1809. I have seen many business simulations and this same intellectual depth must be incorporated into computer gaming.

They say everyone needs a hobby. How do you decompress outside of game designing/playing?

I am a huge fan of Formula One and I race 1/10th scale electric F-1 cars. I have learned a lot about electronics and I like the competition. I am in a league where we race on different surfaces every three weeks. Between my work and family, idle time is not one of my luxuries. I do enjoy driving my 1976 911s Porsche Targa in the summer.

God help me but I have ordered some information on Napoleonic re-enactment.

Where do you go on vacations?

We typically go to Europe. My wife has family in Strasbourg and my relatives now live around Hamburg. I also travel on business looking at factories in Eastern Europe. We recently went to Northern Virginia and enjoyed it very much. I do not know much about the Civil War but it appears to be badly lead. I enjoyed being called a "Northern Aggressor" at most historic sight tours. Hey, just because Custer was from Monroe, Michigan the Southern Independents shouldn't single me out.

Any future game designs?

Because of the power available in today's computers to process large amounts of information and connect to other computers, we have reached a new era. Much like on-line leagues and flight simulators, we could play simulations with incredible detail.

My current idea is to have a computer Seven Years War game. Sides log on. Every side has different victory conditions. We play our strategic moves real time. When conflicts occur, a battle appointment is made by the sides and played grand tactically on the correct terrain. Smaller conflicts would be resolved by the computer. Some events would be random to simulate the unpredictability of history. Logistics would play a vital role as armies melt away during the campaign season (Remember 1812 by SPI?).

In this conflict the armies and battles are typically small and there is a lot of marching. Computers lend themselves to campaign games.

How about an e-mail message which details that Prague has just fallen to Friedrich?

If not bound by time or space, where would you go...and why?

I basically am able to live many of my fantasies in one way or another. I road raced motorcycles professionally in my twenties, was a semi-pro head football coach and won a championship, lived in Austria for two years, have a good education, teach part time at a University and go to the opera. I would like to go back in time and see my family members in the 18th century. They spent most of their time commanding the Pomeranian Regiments and guarding Sans Succi.

Excluding your own creations, what three games (of any type) would you take with you to the proverbial desert island?

Verdun, 1805 by SPI and The Terror(?) a role playing game of the French Revolution. (Take that Danton!)

Do you have a favorite poster or cartoon hanging by your desk? What is it and what makes it your favorite?

At home, a framed picture of von Seydlitz, a statue of Friedrich with whippets purchased in Postdam and a picture of my son Marshall.

At work, a picture of the Red Oktober Tractor Factory at Stalingrad. This was designed and built by the company I work for in the 1930's. An autographed picture of von Hindenburg.

An epitaph on my Tombstone?

Tombstone? A burning boat pushed out into the river is the way to Valhalla. Hopefully people will remember me for fairness and how I helped them reach their potential. Maybe someone will come across one of our games and appreciate the effort. They may even recognize what I was trying to say. All of these games are my vehicle for personal expression.

What question did we leave out that you would like to answer?

My Turn! - Misunderstandings about Marshall Enterprises

Rumor: We ripped off Larry Groves (Martial Enterprises).

This was actually in a game review and the author never contacted us. Larry was a close friend and we worked together. He gave us his mailing list and called it quits.

Rumor: We went bankrupt and sold-out.

Marshall Enterprises still exists. We sold the copyrights and other materials to Clash of Arms. This was brought about by my moving to Detroit, and Monte and I were a little burned out. We knew Clash of Arms would maintain the quality and support our customers.

Rumor: We worked with GDW on Moscova and other titles.

No. We thought about buying back Moscova. We had a lot of difficulty trying to work with GDW.

Rumor: Monte Mattson and Dennis Spors are some odd Frenchmen trying to publish games in an English speaking world.

We are odd but otherwise harmless.

Any last omniscient thoughts for MagWeb members?

I appreciate this opportunity to address each of you. It fills my heart with pride to know you enjoy what we created. The right type of wargames are a tremendous form of relaxation and interaction. Marshal Enterprises and now Clash of Arms games are also excellent training tool in learning organization, leadership, and accomplishing objectives. Although Monte and I live 3000 mile apart, we still communicate about once a week and often we relate our real life business problems to game situations we solved.

I also believe our original motto "Games as Grand as the Age they portray " continues to be true after almost twenty years.