Kadesh is the first non-20th Century game in Command Magazine. It covers the epic clash of Ramessid Egypt with an expanding Hittite Empire. Its subtitle "Mobile Warfare in the Ancient Middle East" shows why the subject was selected -- yes chums the chariots feel like cruiser tanks. The reconstruction and article an the battle sees, to me, to depend on a number of unprovable assumptions based, ultimately on the evidence of wall decorations (but all too often on the vapourings of historians). However, as they are unprovable Gone Dickens' scenario has a chnam of being right.

I found KADESH physically impressive, its design concepts inelegant but functional, and its play value poor (but highly traditional) due to the vast number of dice rolls required. Indeed so dreary did we find the game that we redesigned It entirely and refought it in two hours total (still some work needed on our new design though). KADESH is worth examining by "tinkerers" and "readers" but players should reallise we are into 'buckets of dice' country.

The map shows the area around Kadesh with the various rivers. wadis and streams which cut up the map. The Egyptians are sitting in their camp unaware of Nemesis fast pursuing. There are two camp locations marked (evidence being what it is) and these are chosen randomly. The Egyptians are split up in march mode with the Amon-Ra and Chariot divisions in camp with the Re, Setekh, and Ptah divisions arriving from different directions (together with a Canaanite allied division). In the middle of this road network site Kadesh and the Hittite army divided into a heavy Chariot Division, a small Royal Chariot Division. a Hittite Infantry Division and Allied Infantry Division. The action opens with the panzers (sorry chariots) walloping the Re division in the flank during road march.

The subject is interesting because it involves a greater element of movement than to usually to be found in a liner--versus-line tactical battle. In addition the whole scenario is replete with opportunity (and is strangely reminiscent of the situation at Gettysburg). Overall an admirable choice to introduce non-ancient gamers to the subject.

That said the map seemed to be a little skewed with a need for Kadesh to be rather more central if the later parts of the battle were to be fought as portrayed in the article. One had a sneaky suspicion that the 'edge of the world' syndrome was being encountered.

The counters are excellent. The illustrations have been thieved from the WRG book on Armies of the Near East. I say thieved because I spotted no credit to the original artists. As I am due to discuss the use of these illustrations for a game of my own I thought this sharp practice. It does however mean some marvellous counters. The illos are done in full colour with a preponderant unit colour applied to shields etc so that you can identify divisions BUT not if you have trouble with colours or poor eyesight (especially under artificial light sources). If I have a complaint it is that the counters were too small to do justice to the Jewel-like work. However, nothing so helps a game than seeing what you are leading. One senses the measured tramp of the heavy infantry or the speed of the chariot. The counters of KADESH compared to the counters of MEN-AT-ARMS speak volumes for the differences between the two companies that produced those games. The counters of KADESH will encourage numerous sales and even when faced with its dolefully long structure you will find you can forgive quite a lot because of them.

The rules are not particularly difficult and are competently draughted. The designer has included a considerable amount of detail and it is this detail (multiplied by the number of counters) that gives the game its time and tedium problem. Indeed the design shows every sign of being a first design by a competent designer; Particularly in its love-affair with excessive and self-defeating detail. The developers really should have cut through this crap and simplified things. There is an acute want of judgment in this game but not (thank goodness) a want of enthusiasm or the desire to excel. But honestly boys, no set of figure games would require this many die rolls and no sensible historical commentary would envisage units having thirty or forty morale sub-groups. Why should a boardgame?

The counters show an illustration of the main component of the unit. There is also a combat factor, a missile factor, a movement factor and a morale factor (neatly shown as white on black an you can always pick it out quickly -- nice idea). There are also the add abbreviation so you can tell which peoples you are dealing with (although the background colour and Illo help here). There is a full range of light, medium, and heavy infantry plus archers. The chariots either came as Hittite heavy carts (single counter) or the Canamite/Egyptian lighter chariot with a separate unit of chariot runners. The Hittites tend to be a stolid hard-fighting bunch relying an the sward and the spear whereas the Egyptian appear rather too fly for their own good using the bow more. Achilles versus Paris again.

The games sequence is Hittite turn then Egyptian turn. Back turn has a Leadership Phase-Movement-Combat-Rallying. Leadership consists of checking to see if the Egyptian camp is alerted, whether Kuwatallish has arrived an the field, and the status of divisional leaders. The leaders have four modes Combat, March, Disrupted and Immobile. Each turn begins with the leaders in Immobile made. This does not prevent the division shifting a bit but it must stay within command of its supine leader so this is merely tidying up.

To get the Immobile Leader to Combat status either requires the relevant King be present to give Instructions OR you make the initiative die roll. The Hittite Chariot Division is clearly officered by British cavalry officers because it loves "going in" but the Hittite infantry are clearly levies who would really rather not march around an plains covered with chariots.

The Egyptians came over as regular units with better Initiative. The total thrust is that a big Hittite army with few units must take care not to got torn apart by smaller manueverable Egyptian armies. Leadership is a good simple system which to highly effective. Units still move by radio when they do get mobile but you see some of the limitations and the confusion. This mechanism is pitched at exactly the right level. The Egyptian leaders have super little standard counters but the poor old Hittites have to make do with paper crowns (shame).

Movement consists of shifting enormous numbers of counters around in amoebic formations. Despite the dearth of terrain, crossing the Orontes river will give you plenty of problems as the Hittite. Although the miraculous way all your units can use the same ford argues for an expertise than has been lost by London Underground. The chariots can perform 'pass-through" attacks as part of movement (a bit like overruns in tank games). Pass-through attacks cannot be made against famed troops; but other suckers are wide open. The opening attack of the chariots against the Re Division is likely to be such an attack. The chariots jump on the victims and each hex tests on the Charge Table which gives a number of jollies (morale checks improved, attacker strength increased etc). This may cause the target to lose effectiveness (below) and retreat one hex -- where it can be bashed in the Combat Phase. If it survives then you have combat (Odds Chart but plenty of columns) and the result is effectiveness lost and or morale tests. This gives a double attack capacity to chariots and (if I have read it properly) avoids the defensive missile fire you can encounter in normal combat.

Before I go an I should note that in our combat seven units were attacked. As they were in March Mode they all checked morale, (7 dice) then the Charge Table (14 dice) which led to a couple of further morale dice (16 dice). The net result was five combats left in situ, so we diced for then (21 dice) and got six morale tests (27 dice).

That is detail, but is it necessary? Why not test morale once per division (even if you modify by counter), yes this can cause sudden collapses but in a battle which had a number of sudden collapses Is that a problem? Fifteen dice rolls reduced to (say) four is a hell of a gain.

Units come in four status levels (which is two too many) and must be pushed all the way down before they go (and that is a lot of combat capacity). Famed units flip over to Shaken (with lower values), and then acquire Disrupt or Rout markers. Of course KADESH would not be KADESH without the chance to throw further buckets of dice and consult myriad modifiers to build units back up from low effectiveness -- what a stone-cold groove me man. (What is the historical evidence for this practice of rebuilding units most units which break are never seen again -- aside from reforming blown cavalry?) Stacking is (usually) banned which is one blessing, although if you must stack you all got confused and loss a status level.

Combat consists of bashing the adjacent units (and facing a pre- emptive hail of arrows). Unless I misread the rules the hail of arrows could be experienced each turn of combat as the arcers juggle with bows and swords (although I did not really grasp the rules due to extreme dice fatigue). Units can charge into combat but they lose effectiveness for doing so which makes it all a gamble (they get to check the Charge Table though). Combat losses consist of effectiveness loss and morale checks. Units thus fall apart over a number of turns by a Death of A Thousand Cuts. Sudden defeat is seldom experienced.

KADESH makes you work hard for your pleasures and like VICEROYS, one cannot say any idea is of itself wrong, only that, for as and numerous of my opponents. the total effect is as such fun as a traffic jam. What I do feel is that the ideas are handled in a wooden fashion with little innovation. Our redesigned version (and it took so an hour to redesign) based an my FLOWERS OF THE FOREST system used all the game counters, played in a further hour, and included all the ideas that Gene Dickens had sketched out in his game. Yes, it used less dice and therefore bad luck was more likely to got you but that's the way it goes. And the level of detail in KADESH is really beyond the ken of the respective kings which I take to be our level of simulation. Them are a number of gazers who play these dice-tests and affect to regard this as accurate but my advice to buy the gaze, marvel at the counters, but do not play it.

Of course you might object that I am criticising the game for not being done the way I would have designed it. There may be an element of this. If one feels one knows a better method one nay not give an alternative a fair shake. However, with half hour turns and eight hours to go I would have thought this style of gas produced an immoderately long playing-time for the decision content. There may be a therapeutic quality to playing games this way (like hoeing potatoes) but I must confess it eludes me. It is, however, very common in games on this period. HASTINGS 1066 goeth on forever. John Kemptan rightly criticised that game's playing time but his own design HAPPY VICTORY (on Naseby) was also a half marathon. Perhaps we are all blind on our own subjects.

But what if despite my gruesome warnings you want to play the game what would I recommend? Well certainly do single morale checks for divisions. That is, throw the dice cam and check all units individually against that score. Secondly I would rather you threw one dice per unit in combat and than compared it against an aggregate odds table. If that is too fast, how about either throwing one dice but using individual odds calculations or visa-versa. Thirdly, things would be much quicker if you dumped disruption and rout (or one of them) and reduced the number of combat status steps.

Well, well, what a dismal old Hector I am. I criticised KADESH, SIEGE OF JERUSELEM, KORSUN POCKET, COSSACKS ARE COMING and many other games because I am too damn lazy to play the game the way the designer intended? Yes...guilty as charged. I an sure same of you will find my comments inapplicable. I just have the feeling that playing this sort of sort is like getting a mortgage before deregulation.