Got GD'42 today

I was there at the beginning.

20 years ago I bought Bloody 110, the first game in the second series of games by The Gamers, which was predicated on presenting players with series based on standardized rules so they could spend time playing and not wading through rule books. They were not completely successful, as most games from The Gamers were pretty heavy. And the Tactical Combat Series, TCS, was no exception. Make no mistake about it, TCS is a full-blown grognard hex-and-counter wargame system, which puts authenticity first. It luxuriates in charts, die roll modifiers and intricate procedures.

What it doesn't so, however, is bury itself in abstractions. While detailed and intricate, the game system is surprisingly intuitive. At 125 yards per hex, 20 minutes per turn and with platoon-scale troop units and individual tanks it's obviously very tactical. But at its heart it's not a game about lieutenants and captains, but a game about majors and colonels. Although games in the series cover everything from actions by company-sized commands (Semper Fi) to corps-sized commands (Black Wednesday), it's at the regimental level that most action takes place, with battalion as the main maneuver element.

It's also been a remarkable stable set of rules Bloody 110, which came out in 1989 was follwed a year later by Objective Schmidt and Omaha and a Second Edition of the rules, which simplified some of the more excruciating procedures, including the artillery fire system. I'm an artilleryman, and I still found the round-by-round tracking of fire missions in the first edition tedious. Optional "Miller Tables" started a process that resulted in much more sensible artillery rules later on. In 1993 a third edition of the rules, styled 3.0, appeared in Matanikau and GD'40 which further simplified things.

GD' 40 also inaugurated an interesting experiment, where the game system would attempt to follow one famous unit, the German army's GrossDeutchland, throughout the war with a game from each year it fought.

Finally, in 1994, the rules stabilized with version 3.1, which introduced battalion-level morale, and the final version of the artillery rules. Oddly, this 1994 game, Hunters From the Sky, which included the 3.1 version of the rules, didn't use most of that rule book because that game, uniquely in the series, didn't use the command rules. Now, while it's certainly possible not to use the command rules, it seems rather pointless to. They really form the heart of the game system.

Relying on written plans, inspired by actual military maneuver graphics and procedures, the command system is an important part of the system's authenticity. Older tactical combat games such as PanzerBlitz suffered from the problem of too much happening. Even Squad Leader and the later ASL suffer from this flaw. The typical game of PanzerBlitz or ASL depicts an hour or so of fighting and moving, but at far too accelerated a rate. Real battles can last hours, due to fear, confusion, coordination, etc. and all the other friction of war. TCS battles, in contrast, unfold at a much more realistic pace.

With the 3.1 rules the system reached a stable state that would last for 15 years, over nine more games and even through the sale of The Gamers to Multiman Publishing in 2000.

An important part of the system's longevity was system designer and guru Dean Essig's insistence that no game ever be made obsolete by later editions. All updated rules were backwards compatible. This no doubt constrained design choices somewhat, but it was a real reward for those who stuck with the system. So often early adopters of game systems end up finding their early support "rewarded" by having their initial games being made obsolete by newer versions.

This policy, however, apparently helped insure that the 4.0 rules were a long time coming. TCS was always an infantry- and artillery-centric system, which is no surprise, given that Essig was formerly an infantry officer who commanded a mortar platoon before a tragic training accident caused his military career to end. It worked best for infantry-dominated fights, but had some problems in games that included a large amount of armor on both sides. While some other changes were made in 4.0, it was the perceived need to fix the armor interaction that drove the development of 4.0. But the rules also had to remain compatible with all earlier versions, which meant no new markers or new values for counters.

How successful 4.0 is in this regard, I can't say yet, but given that it's been playtested for about a decade I think the chances are good.

GD '42 introduces a new graphic style for both counters and map, compared to all earlier versions. As it's only the third new TCS game since MMP took the line over it's a welcome addition and provides hope that the system will continue. It's possible the pace of TCS releases may pick up now that 4.0 is out, because I believe several other TCS titles that feature armored fights were on hold until the problem was solved. The game before GD '42 was Bloody Ridge in 2005, which didn't have any armor.

I'm hoping we nee more TCS soon. I've been anticipating Arracourt for a long time.

GD 42 on the way

Multi-man Publishing has removed GD '42 from its preorder page and an email from the company tells me that its charging and shipping now.

GD '42 is part of the Tactical Combat Series originated by The Gamers. It includes the long-awaited 4th edition of the rules. The BGG entry summarizes changes in the 4th ed. as follows:

Vehicle impulses increase operational tempo for tanks

Introduction of spotting ranges

Streamlined assault rules

Combined Area and Point Fire table

Introduction of morale for vehicles

Enhance combined arms effects

Artillery subsystem improved.

I've been a fan of TCS since the beginning, finding that it seems to be less 'gamey' and more authentic than many tactical systems. The game rewards using historical tactics. The one important weakness of all previous versions was in the armor rules, which didn't capture the dueling nature of tank vs. tank battles. Often TCS battles didn't feature much armor, or the armor was mostly on one side or the other, but when both sides had tanks the games were a little off.

These rules have been in gestation for years so they should work well. I'm hoping that their appearance will finally bust open a log jam on TCS games. I've particularly wanted to see a TCS treatment of Arracourt.

GD '42 continues a sub-series within the series, games telling the story of the elite German army formation GrossDeutchland, which started the war as a regiment and ended it as a panzercorps. Previous games in the series so far are GD '40 and GD '41.

Stay tuned.

Very bad move, MMP

This "interesting" news from MMP, taken from a BGG Geeklist on the P500 staus for April.

In other news, and perhaps best put under the heading NOOOO!, MMP staff (SCS/OCS designer Dean Essig I believe) posted that the company would not support (or even allow others to make) electronic versions of its games. Needless to say, the CSW forums filled with even more ... "witty banter" then usual. And rightfully so, it's one thing in this reporter's humble opinion to not create online modules for games, quite another to exercise your right to restrict others from creating them.

My initial reaction to this is negative and I'll explain why. I'm a big fan of several systems published by MMP, namely TCS, GCACW and ASL. What they all have in common is that they are A) very 'grognardy' B) expensive and C) time-consuming to play . What all these features add up to are an extensive collection of games that have a real hard time hitting the game table anyway. So creating a barrier to online play doesn't seem very customer-friendly to me. While I may very well keep buying these lines (TCS and GCACW anyway, I've already bailed on ASL) I definitely will think twice before buying into any other systems.

Now, if this proprietary system turns out to be very easy to use (like Hexwar.com) AND not too expensive (don't make me buy the damn game twice!) then I might be mollified. On the other hand, I may very well just say to heck with it and spend my money elsewhere on games I'll get to play more.

There's no doubt MMP is within their legal rights here. But if they don't impart sufficient added value then they may just kill off the customer base. Some of their games are pretty popular (ASL, OCS, SCS, GCACW) by wargame standards but none of them are wildly popular by any other measure and they can ill-afford to turn off dedicated players.

On the other hand, if they offer a very good product, then they may have something there. VASSEL and Cyberboard are very good for what they do, but their strength is also their weakness. They are generic enough to have the flexibility to handle most any game, but that also means they can't focus on providing a hassle-free game experience. I find that VASSEL and Cyberboard games take a significant time commitment, although not an unreasonable one. But I find it worthwhile to subscribe to the Hexwar game service because it's easy to play a lot. And I do that even though I'm not otherwise a big fan of the games they offer (mostly old SPI quads)

Bottom line is that I'm skeptical, but could be convinced. If, on the other hand, it starts to smell like just a way to wring a few more bucks out of players without offering them anything they can't get elsewhere for less then I'm outta there.

TCS: Bloody Ridge

Bloody Ridge comprehensive review

Tactical Combat Series No. 14

Published: 2005

Designer: Michael S. Smith

TCS Overview

Repeated from earlier reviews. If already familiar with TCS skip this part.

Now published by Multi-Man Publishing, the TCS is one of The Gamers founding lines of series wargames that use a common set of standard rules to allow players to explore many different battles without having to learn a new set of rules every time.

In TCS the ground scale is 125 meters per hex, time is 20 minutes per daylight turn and units are platoons of troops, weapons sections and individual vehicles, so it’s about halfway between the ASL/Squad Leader squad-based systems and the traditional PanzerBlitz/First Battle platoon-oriented systems typically seen in tactical 20th Century wargames. Unlike most of its peers, TCS games always depict specific historical incidents on the actual terrain. There are no “geomorphic” representative maps or generic counters.

Distinctively, the TCS system is much less concerned with the characteristics of the hardware used than the typical tactical wargame. Offensively, units either fire area-effect weapons such as small arms and high explosives or with weapons with a point effect such as anti-tank guns. Similarly, they are either area targets such as soldiers or point targets such as a vehicle, or occasionally both. If armed, the unit has a range and if made up of troops a morale rating. If it’s a vehicle or gun it has a defense rating based on its armor.

Platoons have five “steps” while weapons units have one or two. Vehicles represent individual machines and are either hit (mission kill) or not.

As one would expect there are rules covering special conditions, tactics and needs such as smoke, fortifications and various terrain effects, but the basic structure is very straightforward and, compared to other tactical wargames, uncomplicated. This aspect of the game is deliberately kept simple.The real heart of the game system is the command control rules, which mimics the kind of staff planning that goes into conducting actual military operations at this scale. Players actually draw up their battle plans in schematic form on “op sheets” specifying exactly how they plan to conduct their attack or defense using specific units in specific ways. Once the plan is drawn up it waits while sufficient “weighted turns” accumulate in order to put it into effect. How much time passes will depend on factors such the complexity of the plan, how many different units are involved, the nature of the mission and the overall quality of the unit’s staff work and a die roll. A simple movement plan involving no contact with the enemy by a single company under a highly trained staff might take just a turn or two before coming into effect. On the other hand, a complex, multi-battalion deliberate assault by a poorly-staffed army like the Soviets may never actually happen.

This is a fascinating and unique system that creates a very different pacing from what’s usually seen. Long stretches of time tend to pass with relatively little going on interspersed with periods of intense action. It much more closely resembles the pacing of actual military operations than most tactical wargames.

On the other hand, this is also the system’s biggest weakness. It is wholly unsuited for competitive playing styles. It relies absolutely on the players making good faith effort to act within the spirit of the rules. It relies on them faithfully executing plans that no longer make tactical sense because ground facts have changed since the plan was drawn up. It requires players who will not attempt to wring every possible “legal” advantage the rules might allow but instead try act as the real-life commanders would have. It’s pointless for players whose first consideration is winning to play this. This is a game system for people interested in the journey, NOT the destination.It can be played solitaire fairly easily by drawing up alternative plans for both sides and then dicing among those for the actual plans being used.

Series designer Dean Essig firmly insisted that no game in the series would be made obsolete by any rules changes. All updates to the system are required to be backwards compatible and therefore every game (Except the modern Force Eagle's war) can (and should) be played with the latest edition of the rules, currently 3.1.

Bloody Ridge specifics:

Tactical Combat Series Rules version 3.1

12th-14th September, 1942, Henderson Field, Guadalcanal

One small map

Unit symbols: Weapons and troops are all are full color icons. There are no AFV

Opposing Sides:

U.S.: Elements First Marine Division
Japan: Elements 124th Infantry Regt.

Total number of battalion equivalents (the usual op sheet size) in play: Up to about 9 or so.

Playing time: Up to about 4 hours, according to the box.

Bloody Ridge is small for a TCS game, with a very narrow focus on the fighting for a small, if critical terrain feature -- a ridge overlooking Henderson Field on Guadalcanal. While involving just a few battalions on both sides, it was probably the critical moment in the campaign, as it was the closest that the Japanese ever got to actually capturing the airfield.

The single most dominant feature on the map is the thick jungle that covers most of it. Because jungle costs 3 movement points per hex to enter the Japanese will find they don't have a lot of time to putz around. Their infantry platoons will generally move just two hexes per turn. Here and there a trail exists and the open ridge allows faster, although more vulnerable movement. For the most part it's slogging through jungle, though. And that slog will quickly leave the Japanese support weapons behind, as the machine gun teams. mortar teams and infantry guns can all move just one hex per turn.

The Japanese don't have a lot of supporting weapons in any case, and no real artillery. A cruiser and three destroyers make a brief appearance at the beginning of the battle with a quick barrage, but otherwise its bullets, bayonet sand grenades doing the work. The Japanese are quality troops with morale of "2" for the most part, which would normally be enough to give them a big edge. And they have some special rules increasing their effectiveness in close combat as well. But they're up against U.S, Marines, who have their own special rules giving similar advantages. And the heart of the Marine defense is held by the elite Marine Raider Battalion, with help from the Parachute Battalion. They have morale levels of "1." The Marines also have the benefit of standing on the defense, so they can use their supporting arms more easily, including a few batteries of artillery and some air support, too.

The Japanese labor under a further disadvantage with the poor command prep level of "6." This means implementing any changes to plans will be a long and uncertain affair and makes op sheets with reserves or alternative routes nearly useless. In contrast the Marines generally have comamnd prep level of "4" which designates about average competence. Committing reserves or executing an alternative route is about a 50/50 shot with that rating. The Raider battalion has a command prep rating of "1" which is excellent and means that unit will be very flexible and can use reserves profusely.

All this shapes up as a close-range and bloody fight, hence the name "Bloody Ridge."

There are just four scenarios. The first is an 11-turn depiction of the attack the Japanese planned to carry out on the 12th, but failed to happen because of delays getting through the jungle. This has the weakest Marine defense, so it provides the best chance for Japanese victory. The second scenario extends that assault into the daylight hours.

The second scenario covers the actual fight, over 37 turns, on the 13th and 14th, while the final scenario is an 83-turn campaign game covering all three days.

Bloody Ridge is, by TCS standards, small and makes a good intro to the system. Its available from MMP.

TCS: Screaming Eagles in Holland

Screaming Eagles in Holland comprehensive review
Tactical Combat Series No. 13

Published: 2002

Designer: Nigel Roberts and Bob Runnicles

TCS Overview

Repeated from earlier reviews. If already familiar with TCS skip this part.

Now published by Multi-Man Publishing, the TCS is one of The Gamers founding lines of series wargames that use a common set of standard rules to allow players to explore many different battles without having to learn a new set of rules every time.

In TCS the ground scale is 125 meters per hex, time is 20 minutes per daylight turn and units are platoons of troops, weapons sections and individual vehicles, so it’s about halfway between the ASL/Squad Leader squad-based systems and the traditional PanzerBlitz/First Battle platoon-oriented systems typically seen in tactical 20th Century wargames. Unlike most of its peers, TCS games always depict specific historical incidents on the actual terrain. There are no “geomorphic” representative maps or generic counters.

Distinctively, the TCS system is much less concerned with the characteristics of the hardware used than the typical tactical wargame. Offensively, units either fire area-effect weapons such as small arms and high explosives or with weapons with a point effect such as anti-tank guns. Similarly, they are either area targets such as soldiers or point targets such as a vehicle, or occasionally both. If armed, the unit has a range and if made up of troops a morale rating. If it’s a vehicle or gun it has a defense rating based on its armor.Platoons have five “steps” while weapons units have one or two. Vehicles represent individual machines and are either hit (mission kill) or not.

As one would expect there are rules covering special conditions, tactics and needs such as smoke, fortifications and various terrain effects, but the basic structure is very straightforward and, compared to other tactical wargames, uncomplicated. This aspect of the game is deliberately kept simple.

The real heart of the game system is the command control rules, which mimics the kind of staff planning that goes into conducting actual military operations at this scale. Players actually draw up their battle plans in schematic form on “op sheets” specifying exactly how they plan to conduct their attack or defense using specific units in specific ways. Once the plan is drawn up it waits while sufficient “weighted turns” accumulate in order to put it into effect. How much time passes will depend on factors such the complexity of the plan, how many different units are involved, the nature of the mission and the overall quality of the unit’s staff work and a die roll. A simple movement plan involving no contact with the enemy by a single company under a highly trained staff might take just a turn or two before coming into effect. On the other hand, a complex, multi-battalion deliberate assault by a poorly-staffed army like the Soviets may never actually happen.

This is a fascinating and unique system that creates a very different pacing from what’s usually seen. Long stretches of time tend to pass with relatively little going on interspersed with periods of intense action. It much more closely resembles the pacing of actual military operations than most tactical wargames.

On the other hand, this is also the system’s biggest weakness. It is wholly unsuited for competitive playing styles. It relies absolutely on the players making good faith effort to act within the spirit of the rules. It relies on them faithfully executing plans that no longer make tactical sense because ground facts have changed since the plan was drawn up. It requires players who will not attempt to wring every possible “legal” advantage the rules might allow but instead try act as the real-life commanders would have. It’s pointless for players whose first consideration is winning to play this. This is a game system for people interested in the journey, NOT the destination.

It can be played solitaire fairly easily by drawing up alternative plans for both sides and then dicing among those for the actual plans being used.

Series designer Dean Essig firmly insisted that no game in the series would be made obsolete by any rules changes. All updates to the system are required to be backwards compatible and therefore every game (Except the modern Force Eagle's war) can (and should) be played with the latest edition of the rules, currently 3.1.

Screaming Eagles in Holland specifics:

Tactical Combat Series Rules version 3.1

22nd-23rd Sept., 1944, Veghel, Holland
Two full-sized maps
Unit symbols: AFV, weapons and troops are all are full color icons.

Opposing Sides:
Allied: 101st Airborne Division (partial) and elements of the British XXX Coprs
German: KG Walther (elements 107th Pz Bde, 1st Bn-16th VG Regt., SS KG Frundsberg, 1st Bn-21st FJ) KG Huber (1035 Regt., KG Von der Heydte)
Total number of battalion equivalents (the usual op sheet size) in play: Up to about 19 or so.
Playing time: Up to about 20 hours, according to the box.

The first TCS game published under MMP's logo after The Gamers was sold, Screaming Eagles in Holland provided some evidence that the series would continue after publication of new games became sparse in the new century. In the first 8 years of the system there were 11 titles published. In the last 10 years only three (or four if GD '42 appears soon).

Screaming Eagles in Holland is a pretty straightforward TCS game, with a good mix of all arms and quality troops for the most part on both sides. The Allies have elite paratroops, Sherman tanks and a decent amount of artillery, although a little lighter in size than they're used to (mostly 75mm Pack Howitzers). The Germans also have paratroopers, as well as SS infantry, some regular infantry, '88s', assault guns, Panthers and Panzer IVs. The Allies have a chance for some air support, as do the Germans as a variant, so just about every aspect of the rules comes into play.

The Allies have an edge in command quality, with command prep ratings of 2 or 3, compared to the 3 or 4 of the Germans. In addition the Germans are limited to just seven implemented op sheets (3 for KG Huber and 4 for KG Walther) and the two KG cannot coordinate in any way, representing the problems the Germans had historically in sequencing their attacks. The two German groups were attacking from opposite directions and had no communication with each other. They weren't even in the same corps! The best way to play this game is with at least two German players who are not allowed to communicate with each other.

As so often with TCS games, many of the special rules have to do with terrain considerations peculiar to a specific battlefield. In this case, the dominant characteristic of the area around Veghel was its extreme flatness and wet ground. In an extreme contrast for those who have played Leros, Hunters From the Sky or Semper Fi!, there's just one contour line on the entire map! One small 20 meter-high knoll is the only significant high ground.

In order to prevent unrealistic long-range fire, lines of sight between 0 elevation hexes are caped at a maximum of 10 hexes because in reality there existed numerous small LOS obstructions such as bushes that aren't big enough to rate a terrain symbol but did limit visibility.

Still, some long-range spotting is available, making artilelry and mortars useful. Beside the knoll and many buildings, the countryside is also dotted with windmills and church steeples, which make good observer perches.

The flat ground is waterlogged in many places, restricting cross-country mobility on much of the map, especially for vehicles. This limits the effectiveness of the armor units on both sides considerably, but probably hurts the Germans more because their tanks are better than the Allied armor while much of their infantry is inferior to the U.S. airborne troops.

One interesting side note is that one of the units in the U.S. OB is Co. E, 2nd Bn, 506th Parachute Infantry, which was the topic of the famous book and television miniseries Band of Brothers. The fighting in Holland is in Chapter 8 of the book and Part 5 of the miniseries.

There are just four scenarios in the game, which is about half the usual number. The first is a 77-turn campaign covering the entire battle over two maps. The second concentrates on the second day's fighting on both maps, and so it amounts to a shorter campaign game. The last two are shorter (10-13 turn) one-map fights suitable for an evening's play.

TCS: A Frozen Hell

A Frozen Hell comprehensive review

Tactical Combat Series No. 12

Published: 2000Designer: Al Wambold

TCS Overview

Repeated from earlier reviews. If already familiar with TCS skip this part.

Now published by Multi-Man Publishing, the TCS is one of The Gamers founding lines of series wargames that use a common set of standard rules to allow players to explore many different battles without having to learn a new set of rules every time.

In TCS the ground scale is 125 meters per hex, time is 20 minutes per daylight turn and units are platoons of troops, weapons sections and individual vehicles, so it’s about halfway between the ASL/Squad Leader squad-based systems and the traditional PanzerBlitz/First Battle platoon-oriented systems typically seen in tactical 20th Century wargames. Unlike most of its peers, TCS games always depict specific historical incidents on the actual terrain. There are no “geomorphic” representative maps or generic counters.

Distinctively, the TCS system is much less concerned with the characteristics of the hardware used than the typical tactical wargame. Offensively, units either fire area-effect weapons such as small arms and high explosives or with weapons with a point effect such as anti-tank guns. Similarly, they are either area targets such as soldiers or point targets such as a vehicle, or occasionally both. If armed, the unit has a range and if made up of troops a morale rating. If it’s a vehicle or gun it has a defense rating based on its armor.
Platoons have five “steps” while weapons units have one or two. Vehicles represent individual machines and are either hit (mission kill) or not.

As one would expect there are rules covering special conditions, tactics and needs such as smoke, fortifications and various terrain effects, but the basic structure is very straightforward and, compared to other tactical wargames, uncomplicated. This aspect of the game is deliberately kept simple.

The real heart of the game system is the command control rules, which mimics the kind of staff planning that goes into conducting actual military operations at this scale. Players actually draw up their battle plans in schematic form on “op sheets” specifying exactly how they plan to conduct their attack or defense using specific units in specific ways. Once the plan is drawn up it waits while sufficient “weighted turns” accumulate in order to put it into effect. How much time passes will depend on factors such the complexity of the plan, how many different units are involved, the nature of the mission and the overall quality of the unit’s staff work and a die roll. A simple movement plan involving no contact with the enemy by a single company under a highly trained staff might take just a turn or two before coming into effect. On the other hand, a complex, multi-battalion deliberate assault by a poorly-staffed army like the Soviets may never actually happen.

This is a fascinating and unique system that creates a very different pacing from what’s usually seen. Long stretches of time tend to pass with relatively little going on interspersed with periods of intense action. It much more closely resembles the pacing of actual military operations than most tactical wargames.
On the other hand, this is also the system’s biggest weakness. It is wholly unsuited for competitive playing styles. It relies absolutely on the players making good faith effort to act within the spirit of the rules. It relies on them faithfully executing plans that no longer make tactical sense because ground facts have changed since the plan was drawn up. It requires players who will not attempt to wring every possible “legal” advantage the rules might allow but instead try act as the real-life commanders would have. It’s pointless for players whose first consideration is winning to play this. This is a game system for people interested in the journey, NOT the destination.

It can be played solitaire fairly easily by drawing up alternative plans for both sides and then dicing among those for the actual plans being used.

Series designer Dean Essig firmly insisted that no game in the series would be made obsolete by any rules changes. All updates to the system are required to be backwards compatible and therefore every game (Except the modern Force Eagle's war) can (and should) be played with the latest edition of the rules, currently 3.1.


A Frozen Hell specifics:

Tactical Combat Series Rules version 3.1

8th-12th Dec. 1939, Finland
Two full-sized maps
Unit symbols: AFV, weapons and troops are all are full color icons.

Opposing Sides:
Finland: Task Force Pajari, 16th Infantry regiment and several independent battalions
Russian: 139th Infantry Division

Total number of battalion equivalents (the usual op sheet size) in play: Up to about 17 or so.Playing time: Up to about 30 hours, according to the box.

Chronologically the earliest TCS game, A Frozen Hell was the last one published by The Gamers before Dean Essig sold the line to MMP.

The first 11 TCS games appeared in just 8 years, but dissatisfaction over the state of the armor rules prompted delays in a number of proposed titles while playtesters, game designers and series designer Essig debated aspects of what would eventually be known as the 4.x rules set. This ended up taking more than a decade to work out and as of this writing the new rules have still not been officially published.

In the meantime, some projects that didn't involve a lot of armor, especially tank-on-tank, went forward. Among them was A Frozen Hell, which is an unusual TCS title in many respects.

For one thing, it's the only game to abandon the 20-minute daylight, 1-hour nighttime turn length that had used so far. Instead both day and night turns are 30 minutes long. Because, however, the fighting took place in the far north during the dead of winter, the majority of turns are night turns. Most of the remaining turns are twilight or dawn/dusk turns. As a matter of fact there are only 10 full daylight turns per day! What's more, even during those daylight turns there's a significant chance for reduced visibility due to fog, mist or snow. Oh yeah, and the fighting took place under a new moon, to the nighttime visibility is just 1 hex, instead of the usual 2. And most of the map is covered in dense forest and swamp.

What all this means is that the fighting takes on a particularly intimate character, with ranged fire, and especially long-range supporting weapons such as machine guns and mortars playing a much reduced role. There's one battalion of Russian tanks available, but they play a very minor role because of the extremely restrictive terrain and the fact they're not very powerful tanks anyway(more of the ubiquitous T-26).

The Russians have considerably more supporting weapons than the Finns, but it doesn't do them much good given the terrain and weather, so the battle ends up being nearly a pure infantry brawl. The Finns have a significant edge in morale, while the Russians have a small edge in numbers. The Russians do, however, start off more concentrated and are particularly well-led, having a command prep number of 3, which is just slightly worse than the Finnish command prep of 2. The Russians are limited to just three implemented op sheets and no more than three battalions per op sheet, but they're well-advised to keep their troops together in any case.
Special rules cover things such as ski troops (almost all the Finns) artillery fire knocking down trees and knocking holes in the ice, Finnish raids, the talented Finn leader Lt. Col. Pajari and hungry Russians looting Finnish field kitchens.

The Russians have more and bigger guns, but will have a hard time using them effectively. The FO rule seen before in Black Wednesday and GD '41 makes an appearance, although the FOs aren't the usual supermen and can be targeted normally. In many scenarios the Russian guns are forced into direct fire mode anyway.

Two rules of particular note are ambushes and Russian bonfires. Because of the extremely limited visibility that characterized the fighting, defending units won't always get to fire their usual "overwatch" fires and sometimes will even be taken by surprise by the moving units in a special kind of assault combat termed "ambushes" in the rules. Various factors affect the chance of this happening such as the existence of illumination, the types of op sheets involved, weather and similar considerations.

One special factor hindering the Russians are "bonfires." Ill-equipped for the very harsh conditions, the Russians often warmed themselves overnight using bonfires, with rather obvious tactical disadvantages. Russian units not assigned to an op sheet when night falls light a bonfire in their hex, which makes them especially vulnerable to raiding Finns.

As is usual TCS practice, there are a number of scenarios (eight) breaking the fight into discrete portions suitable for playing when space or time limits apply as well as a grand (in this case 99-turn) scenario that depicts the entire battle.

TCS A Raging Storm

A Raging Storm comprehensive review

Tactical Combat Series No. 11

Published: 1997

Designer: Nigel Roberts and Bob Runnicles

TCS Overview

Repeated from earlier reviews. If already familiar with TCS skip this part.
Now published by Multi-Man Publishing, the TCS is one of The Gamers founding lines of series wargames that use a common set of standard rules to allow players to explore many different battles without having to learn a new set of rules every time.
In TCS the ground scale is 125 meters per hex, time is 20 minutes per daylight turn and units are platoons of troops, weapons sections and individual vehicles, so it’s about halfway between the ASL/Squad Leader squad-based systems and the traditional PanzerBlitz/First Battle platoon-oriented systems typically seen in tactical 20th Century wargames. Unlike most of its peers, TCS games always depict specific historical incidents on the actual terrain. There are no “geomorphic” representative maps or generic counters.Distinctively, the TCS system is much less concerned with the characteristics of the hardware used than the typical tactical wargame. Offensively, units either fire area-effect weapons such as small arms and high explosives or with weapons with a point effect such as anti-tank guns. Similarly, they are either area targets such as soldiers or point targets such as a vehicle, or occasionally both. If armed, the unit has a range and if made up of troops a morale rating. If it’s a vehicle or gun it has a defense rating based on its armor.
Platoons have five “steps” while weapons units have one or two. Vehicles represent individual machines and are either hit (mission kill) or not.
As one would expect there are rules covering special conditions, tactics and needs such as smoke, fortifications and various terrain effects, but the basic structure is very straightforward and, compared to other tactical wargames, uncomplicated. This aspect of the game is deliberately kept simple.
The real heart of the game system is the command control rules, which mimics the kind of staff planning that goes into conducting actual military operations at this scale. Players actually draw up their battle plans in schematic form on “op sheets” specifying exactly how they plan to conduct their attack or defense using specific units in specific ways. Once the plan is drawn up it waits while sufficient “weighted turns” accumulate in order to put it into effect. How much time passes will depend on factors such the complexity of the plan, how many different units are involved, the nature of the mission and the overall quality of the unit’s staff work and a die roll. A simple movement plan involving no contact with the enemy by a single company under a highly trained staff might take just a turn or two before coming into effect. On the other hand, a complex, multi-battalion deliberate assault by a poorly-staffed army like the Soviets may never actually happen.
This is a fascinating and unique system that creates a very different pacing from what’s usually seen. Long stretches of time tend to pass with relatively little going on interspersed with periods of intense action. It much more closely resembles the pacing of actual military operations than most tactical wargames.
On the other hand, this is also the system’s biggest weakness. It is wholly unsuited for competitive playing styles. It relies absolutely on the players making good faith effort to act within the spirit of the rules. It relies on them faithfully executing plans that no longer make tactical sense because ground facts have changed since the plan was drawn up. It requires players who will not attempt to wring every possible “legal” advantage the rules might allow but instead try act as the real-life commanders would have. It’s pointless for players whose first consideration is winning to play this. This is a game system for people interested in the journey, NOT the destination.
It can be played solitaire fairly easily by drawing up alternative plans for both sides and then dicing among those for the actual plans being used.
Series designer Dean Essig firmly insisted that no game in the series would be made obsolete by any rules changes. All updates to the system are required to be backwards compatible and therefore every game (Except the modern Force Eagle's war) can (and should) be played with the latest edition of the rules, currently 3.1.

Semper Fi! specifics:

Tactical Combat Series Rules version 3.1

3rd-4th February, 1944, Anzio beachhead, Italy
Two full-sized maps
Unit symbols: AFV, weapons and troops are all are full color icons.

Opposing Sides:
Commonwealth: Elements of the 1st Infantry Division
German: Kampfgruppe Graser (elements of four divisions); KG Pfeiffer (elements of two divisions)
Total number of battalion equivalents (the usual op sheet size) in play: Up to about 25 or so.Playing time: Up to about 50 hours.

A Raging Storm is an intense, large-scale knock-down, drag-out divisional-scale fight.
In a break from the usual TCS pattern this game starts with the 44-turn campaign game and then lists five scenarios detailing various parts of the fight.

Many of the special rules have to do with terrain and map notes. Vehicles are restricted to the road net due to the soggy terrain, which not only limits their avenues of advance but also increases their vulnerability to overwatch fire. So, while there's a good amount of armor available for both sides, it's much less effective than normal.

The Germans have a "Main Line of Resistance" that the British can't cross, basically giving them a safe haven for organizing their offensive. Meanwhile the British are generally limited to "Battalion Defense Areas," a concept first seen in Hunters From The Sky. In this game, however, the BDAs are printed on the map.

BDAs are a mixed blessing. On the one hand, they're pretty restrictive. The Germans know exactly where they are and the British are forced into defending more or less in the historical positions. On the other hand, BDAs are more flexible than the usual prepared or hasty defense op sheets would be. British units within their BDA can move and fight freely, which lets them conduct a more active defense than usual.

While the Germans have some rules helping them out, such as an initial infiltration move, they do not have their usual edge in quality. In fact, on average the British troops have a slight edge in morale.

Both sides have plenty of guns and the British also have plentiful ammunition as well.
Overall, this will be a bloody, intense battle over the course of a single day. It's a feast for TCS fans, but probably not a good place to start for newer players.

TCS: Semper Fi! review

Semper Fi! comprehensive review

Tactical Combat Series No. 10

Published: 1997

Designer: Lee Forester

TCS Overview

Repeated from earlier reviews. If already familiar with TCS skip this part.

Now published by Multi-Man Publishing, the TCS is one of The Gamers founding lines of series wargames that use a common set of standard rules to allow players to explore many different battles without having to learn a new set of rules every time.

In TCS the ground scale is 125 meters per hex, time is 20 minutes per daylight turn and units are platoons of troops, weapons sections and individual vehicles, so it’s about halfway between the ASL/Squad Leader squad-based systems and the traditional PanzerBlitz/First Battle platoon-oriented systems typically seen in tactical 20th Century wargames. Unlike most of its peers, TCS games always depict specific historical incidents on the actual terrain. There are no “geomorphic” representative maps or generic counters.Distinctively, the TCS system is much less concerned with the characteristics of the hardware used than the typical tactical wargame. Offensively, units either fire area-effect weapons such as small arms and high explosives or with weapons with a point effect such as anti-tank guns. Similarly, they are either area targets such as soldiers or point targets such as a vehicle, or occasionally both. If armed, the unit has a range and if made up of troops a morale rating. If it’s a vehicle or gun it has a defense rating based on its armor.

Platoons have five “steps” while weapons units have one or two. Vehicles represent individual machines and are either hit (mission kill) or not.

As one would expect there are rules covering special conditions, tactics and needs such as smoke, fortifications and various terrain effects, but the basic structure is very straightforward and, compared to other tactical wargames, uncomplicated. This aspect of the game is deliberately kept simple.

The real heart of the game system is the command control rules, which mimics the kind of staff planning that goes into conducting actual military operations at this scale. Players actually draw up their battle plans in schematic form on “op sheets” specifying exactly how they plan to conduct their attack or defense using specific units in specific ways. Once the plan is drawn up it waits while sufficient “weighted turns” accumulate in order to put it into effect. How much time passes will depend on factors such the complexity of the plan, how many different units are involved, the nature of the mission and the overall quality of the unit’s staff work and a die roll. A simple movement plan involving no contact with the enemy by a single company under a highly trained staff might take just a turn or two before coming into effect. On the other hand, a complex, multi-battalion deliberate assault by a poorly-staffed army like the Soviets may never actually happen.

This is a fascinating and unique system that creates a very different pacing from what’s usually seen. Long stretches of time tend to pass with relatively little going on interspersed with periods of intense action. It much more closely resembles the pacing of actual military operations than most tactical wargames.

On the other hand, this is also the system’s biggest weakness. It is wholly unsuited for competitive playing styles. It relies absolutely on the players making good faith effort to act within the spirit of the rules. It relies on them faithfully executing plans that no longer make tactical sense because ground facts have changed since the plan was drawn up. It requires players who will not attempt to wring every possible “legal” advantage the rules might allow but instead try act as the real-life commanders would have. It’s pointless for players whose first consideration is winning to play this. This is a game system for people interested in the journey, NOT the destination.

It can be played solitaire fairly easily by drawing up alternative plans for both sides and then dicing among those for the actual plans being used.

Series designer Dean Essig firmly insisted that no game in the series would be made obsolete by any rules changes. All updates to the system are required to be backwards compatible and therefore every game (Except the modern Force Eagle's war) can (and should) be played with the latest edition of the rules, currently 3.1.


Semper Fi! specifics:

Tactical Combat Series Rules version 3.1

17th-18th Aug., 1950; 18th-20th Nov., 1950; 28th Nov.- 1st Dec. 1950 Korea
Four small maps
Unit symbols: AFV, weapons and troops are all are full color icons.

Opposing Sides:United States: Elements of the 1st Provisional Marine Brigade and elements of the 1st Marine Division
Communist: Elements of the 4th and 6th Divisions, North Korean People's Army and elements of the 58th, 59th and 80th Divisions of the Chinese Volunteer Army.
Total number of battalion equivalents (the usual op sheet size) in play: From less than 1 to up to about 15 or so.
Playing time: From one hour for the smallest to about 20 hours.

In the earliest TCS games there were usually a half-dozen "training" scenarios that depicted small company/battalion-sized firefights that allowed the players to learn aspects of the game system before they tackled the full-blown regular scenarios, but that handy tool was abandoned as the series went on. Most of the games did make sure to include one or two smaller scenarios among their number, but for the most part the trend was towards larger and more involved battles.

Semper Fi! was apparently conceived as a way to introduce new players to the TCS system by concentrating on smaller fights. In some cases one or both sides have just a company or battalion's worth of troops and even the largest scenario would be no more than medium sized in the typical system game.

Unlike other games in the series, Semper Fi! does not depict one continuous action, but instead a series of separate battles, so there's no overall campaign game. Some of the battles were, however, linked and there is a chance for a mini-campaign game linking some scenarios.

Semper Fi! is the only TCS game to date (aside from Force Eagles War, which is considered part of a separate series) to take place outside World War II and related conflicts, but tactically the Korean War was very much a World War II-era conflict. Nearly all the weapons and tactics were the same as World War II and nearly every leader above the company level in both armies would have had extensive World War II experience.

Despite this, Semper Fi! does include more than the usual number of special rules.

The game continues listing the Infantry guns and ATGs as "Special B" targets that are usually area targets for most fire. Weapons units use the integral "nominal" trucks that have become the defacto system standard. On-Map artillery is modified somewhat and a new streamlined "assault combat routine is introduced.

There are special rules to take account of Korea-specific conditions such as Heat Exhaustion in one battle, the dedicated Marine air support in a couple of battles and the special morale characteristics of U.S. Marines in all the battles.

A number of smaller, specialized infantry units such as bazooka teams and headquarters squads appear.

The Communists, in contrast, have few special rules. Both North Korean and Chinese units have a morale benefit for night combat and a disadvantage in anti-tank combat. Communist mortars are off map and restricted in the amount of fire support they can provide due to ammo shortages and counter battery fire.
Chinese units "benefit" from political officers who can cancel a suppressed result at the cost of a step.

The Communists do benefit from a rule providing a special status of "hidden" available to units at set up that do not move. Distinct from the usual spotting rules, "hidden" units cannot be attacked until they get revealed by firing, moving or being adjacent to U.S. units. This rule is critical to the Communists to allow them to survive the U.S. firepower advantage. It prevents the Marines from simply sitting back and picking off Communist units with Corsairs or artillery barrages at leisure.

All the scenarios are short enough that players will probably only have a chance to execute their initial op sheet, although there's some chance the Marines might have a chance to draw up and implement a new op sheet occasionally.

Two scenarios take place on the Changallon Valley Map, a 20 by 27-hex battlefield of steep hills overlooking a very soggy rice-paddy filled valley. In the first scenario, which doesn't use the command rules, a few platoons of North Korean infantry ambush a Marine column with two infantry companies, battalion headquarters troops, a recon section in jeeps and a platoon of tanks with artillery and air support. In the second scenario one of the Marine companies fends off a night attack by a company of North Koreans. This scenario does use op sheets, but there will be just one per side and with just five turns no opportunity for a change.

Three scenarios take place on the 16 by 18-hex No-Name Ridge map, with features a rice-paddy encircled ridge with a few nearby hills. The first scenario covers a morning attack on the ridge, held by a reinforced battalion of North Korean infantry, by an understrength battalion of Marines. The second scenario continues the action with an afternoon attack by a second battalion of Marines while the third scenario covers the whole day's fighting. This third scenario provides the only opportunity for any tank-on-tank action in Semper Fi!, with a platoon of M-26 Pershing tanks possibly engaging some T-34/85s and/or Su-76s.

Three more scenarios cover the saga of Fox Company, 2nd Battalion, 7th Marines as it defends "Fox Hill" on the 16 by 18-hex Fox Hill map. The first scenario depicts the first night's fighting, as Fox Company faced a two-company attack by Chicoms. Variants add more Chinese, change the weather or add artillery support. This is my favorite scenario in the game system for teaching because there are many tools available for adjusting the play balance. For example, the game can be played with up to two whole battalions of Chinese attacking during a snow storm to provide a real challenge for an experienced U.S. player against a novice. On the other hand, the veteran Chinese player can try to take the hill with just the original two companies of infantry while giving the novice U.S. a battery of 105 mm howitzers in support. The second scenario depicts the second night's attack on the weakened Fox Company, which does, however, have artillery support. Like the first night's attack the Chinese historically didn't come in full strength, with just two companies. A variant adds the balance of that battalion for a greater challenge. The third scenario links both night's attacks, while adding the possibility of a third night. This makes a nice little campaign game, playable in an evening.

The Hagaru map is the setting for the final five scenarios. At 30 by 35 hexes, this is the largest battlefield and the OB is also, by far, the most extensive. The scenarios cover several nights of fighting around the airfield at Hagaru. The terrain is mostly flat, snow-covered open ground, except for a steep hill overlooking the airfield and the flattened town of Hagaru. Each historical night's fighting is covered, as well as one hypothetical. The U.S. forces are an eclectic mix of Marine combat and support troops, Army units and even some British commandos. Although not depicted explicitly, many of the "American" units include large numbers of Korean draftees as well. In contrast to the hodge-podge of U.N. troops, the Chinese forces are numerous and homogeneous. Depending on the scenario, the Chinese attack with one to three regiments of infantry, each having 30 platoons of infantry, nine "weapons" (light mortar) sections and nine machine guns sections. The only support they have are some off-board mortar fire and, occasionally, a few infantry guns.

The scenarios on the Hagaru map are fairly big, but each covers just a single night's worth of fighting. As night turns are an hour each, instead of the usual 20 minutes and winter nights are long, they end up being no more than 11 turns long, so even these scenarios are relatively small by TCS standards and can probably be played to completion in an evening.

Compared to most games in the series, Semper Fi! had an unusual amount of errata, some of which definitely affects play and players should be sure to download it.

Semper Fi! is one of my favorites in the system. Getting together for one of the larger games can be difficult and usually they require multiple sitting to complete so someone needs to have the space to leave the game set up. Semper Fi1 scenarios, on the other hand, can always be played in a single evening, especially if players take the time to draw up their op sheets before hand.

TCS GD '41 review

GD '41 comprehensive review
Tactical Combat Series No. 9
Published: 1996
Designer: Wig Graves

TCS Overview
Repeated from earlier reviews. If already familiar with TCS skip this part.

Now published by Multi-Man Publishing, the TCS is one of The Gamers founding lines of series wargames that use a common set of standard rules to allow players to explore many different battles without having to learn a new set of rules every time.

In TCS the ground scale is 125 meters per hex, time is 20 minutes per daylight turn and units are platoons of troops, weapons sections and individual vehicles, so it’s about halfway between the ASL/Squad Leader squad-based systems and the traditional PanzerBlitz/First Battle platoon-oriented systems typically seen in tactical 20th Century wargames. Unlike most of its peers, TCS games always depict specific historical incidents on the actual terrain. There are no “geomorphic” representative maps or generic counters.

Distinctively, the TCS system is much less concerned with the characteristics of the hardware used than the typical tactical wargame. Offensively, units either fire area-effect weapons such as small arms and high explosives or with weapons with a point effect such as anti-tank guns. Similarly, they are either area targets such as soldiers or point targets such as a vehicle, or occasionally both. If armed, the unit has a range and if made up of troops a morale rating. If it’s a vehicle or gun it has a defense rating based on its armor.Platoons have five “steps” while weapons units have one or two. Vehicles represent individual machines and are either hit (mission kill) or not.As one would expect there are rules covering special conditions, tactics and needs such as smoke, fortifications and various terrain effects, but the basic structure is very straightforward and, compared to other tactical wargames, uncomplicated. This aspect of the game is deliberately kept simple.

The real heart of the game system is the command control rules, which mimics the kind of staff planning that goes into conducting actual military operations at this scale. Players actually draw up their battle plans in schematic form on “op sheets” specifying exactly how they plan to conduct their attack or defense using specific units in specific ways. Once the plan is drawn up it waits while sufficient “weighted turns” accumulate in order to put it into effect. How much time passes will depend on factors such the complexity of the plan, how many different units are involved, the nature of the mission and the overall quality of the unit’s staff work and a die roll. A simple movement plan involving no contact with the enemy by a single company under a highly trained staff might take just a turn or two before coming into effect. On the other hand, a complex, multi-battalion deliberate assault by a poorly-staffed army like the Soviets may never actually happen.

This is a fascinating and unique system that creates a very different pacing from what’s usually seen. Long stretches of time tend to pass with relatively little going on interspersed with periods of intense action. It much more closely resembles the pacing of actual military operations than most tactical wargames.

On the other hand, this is also the system’s biggest weakness. It is wholly unsuited for competitive playing styles. It relies absolutely on the players making good faith effort to act within the spirit of the rules. It relies on them faithfully executing plans that no longer make tactical sense because ground facts have changed since the plan was drawn up. It requires players who will not attempt to wring every possible “legal” advantage the rules might allow but instead try act as the real-life commanders would have. It’s pointless for players whose first consideration is winning to play this. This is a game system for people interested in the journey, NOT the destination.

It can be played solitaire fairly easily by drawing up alternative plans for both sides and then dicing among those for the actual plans being used.

Series designer Dean Essig firmly insisted that no game in the series would be made obsolete by any rules changes. All updates to the system are required to be backwards compatible and therefore every game (Except the modern Force Eagle's war) can (and should) be played with the latest edition of the rules, currently 3.1.

GD '41 specifics:
Tactical Combat Series Rules version 3.1

22nd-25th October, 1941. South of Tula, Russia
Two full-sized maps
Unit symbols: AFV, weapons and troops are all are full color icons.

Opposing Sides:
Russia: 6th Guards Rifle Division, part, 4th and 11th tank Brigades, 1st Bn, 201st Parachute Brigade
German: Grossdeutschland Motorized Infantry Regiment, elements of 3rd and 4th Panzer Divisions
Total number of battalion equivalents (the usual op sheet size) in play: Up to about 20 or so. Playing time: Up to 40 hours, according to the box.

GD '41 continues the TCS saga of the Grossdeutschland Regiment that started in GD '40. The goal is to depict one battle from each year of the war from the perspective of this elite German army unit.

GD '41 may be the epitome of what the TCS system should cover, a combined arms battle with a good mix of armor, infantry and artillery between two roughly equal forces with some real choices between strategies.

This iteration of the TCS system has very few special rules, the standard 3.1 rules being sufficient to cover most eventualities.

Most of the special rules cover peculiarities of the Russian forces, including "encouraging" commissars, battalion-sized artillery shoots, physical forward observers, restrictions on tank fires, "bunching up" and limits on the number of op sheets available. Most of these rules already appeared in the earlier Black Wednesday game.

Heavy weapons are transported using inherent trucks, wagons or halftracks in a rule becoming standard fare in TCS. Also making an appearance are two new "standard rules" refining infantry guns ability to fire at point targets in some situations and making infantry and ATG "special B" targets that are usually affected by fire as area targets except in certain circumstances.

The five scenarios follow the by-now well-established TCS routine of breaking the historical battle up into discrete phases by location or time in order to accommodate players with time or space limits as well as an overall campaign. There's also a "prequel" scenario that covers the fighting before the Grossdeutschland Regiment appeared, which mostly provides a chance for the Russians to have some fun blunting a too-hasty German attack.

As usual, the Russian side is probably the more challenging to play. The Russian player is limited to just one implemented op sheet per brigade/regiment which means that he doesn't have a lot of flexibility and his five formations (4th Gd. Regt., 10th Gd. Regt., 1-201st Para, 4th Tank and 11th Tank) can't cooperate on the battlefield. In addition, the tank brigades are committed piecemeal by die roll. On the other hand, the burden of attack is on the Germans, the Russians are well-fortified and their tanks are as good as the German ones or better.

The Germans do have an important firepower advantage with more and more flexible guns and plentiful air support. The German advantage in command should give them a sufficient edge.

As usual with TCS, players who are looking for a balanced or "fair" fight are likely to find the game wanting, but for players interested in the dynamics of World War II battlefield tactics GD '41 is another good choice.

TCS Leros

Leros comprehensive review

Tactical Combat Series No. 8

Published: 1995
Designer: David Friedrichs

TCS Overview

Repeated from earlier reviews. If already familiar with TCS skip this part.
Now published by Multi-Man Publishing, the TCS is one of The Gamers founding lines of series wargames that use a common set of standard rules to allow players to explore many different battles without having to learn a new set of rules every time.

In TCS the ground scale is 125 meters per hex, time is 20 minutes per daylight turn and units are platoons of troops, weapons sections and individual vehicles, so it’s about halfway between the ASL/Squad Leader squad-based systems and the traditional PanzerBlitz/First Battle platoon-oriented systems typically seen in tactical 20th Century wargames. Unlike most of its peers, TCS games always depict specific historical incidents on the actual terrain. There are no “geomorphic” representative maps or generic counters.Distinctively, the TCS system is much less concerned with the characteristics of the hardware used than the typical tactical wargame. Offensively, units either fire area-effect weapons such as small arms and high explosives or with weapons with a point effect such as anti-tank guns. Similarly, they are either area targets such as soldiers or point targets such as a vehicle, or occasionally both. If armed, the unit has a range and if made up of troops a morale rating. If it’s a vehicle or gun it has a defense rating based on its armor.

Platoons have five “steps” while weapons units have one or two. Vehicles represent individual machines and are either hit (mission kill) or not.

As one would expect there are rules covering special conditions, tactics and needs such as smoke, fortifications and various terrain effects, but the basic structure is very straightforward and, compared to other tactical wargames, uncomplicated. This aspect of the game is deliberately kept simple.

The real heart of the game system is the command control rules, which mimics the kind of staff planning that goes into conducting actual military operations at this scale. Players actually draw up their battle plans in schematic form on “op sheets” specifying exactly how they plan to conduct their attack or defense using specific units in specific ways. Once the plan is drawn up it waits while sufficient “weighted turns” accumulate in order to put it into effect. How much time passes will depend on factors such the complexity of the plan, how many different units are involved, the nature of the mission and the overall quality of the unit’s staff work and a die roll. A simple movement plan involving no contact with the enemy by a single company under a highly trained staff might take just a turn or two before coming into effect. On the other hand, a complex, multi-battalion deliberate assault by a poorly-staffed army like the Soviets may never actually happen.

This is a fascinating and unique system that creates a very different pacing from what’s usually seen. Long stretches of time tend to pass with relatively little going on interspersed with periods of intense action. It much more closely resembles the pacing of actual military operations than most tactical wargames.

On the other hand, this is also the system’s biggest weakness. It is wholly unsuited for competitive playing styles. It relies absolutely on the players making good faith effort to act within the spirit of the rules. It relies on them faithfully executing plans that no longer make tactical sense because ground facts have changed since the plan was drawn up. It requires players who will not attempt to wring every possible “legal” advantage the rules might allow but instead try act as the real-life commanders would have. It’s pointless for players whose first consideration is winning to play this. This is a game system for people interested in the journey, NOT the destination.

It can be played solitaire fairly easily by drawing up alternative plans for both sides and then dicing among those for the actual plans being used.

Series designer Dean Essig firmly insisted that no game in the series would be made obsolete by any rules changes. All updates to the system are required to be backwards compatible and therefore every game (Except the modern Force Eagle's war) can (and should) be played with the latest edition of the rules, currently 3.1.

Leros specifics:

Tactical Combat Series Rules version 3.1
12th-17th, 1943, the island of Leros, Greece
Three full-sized maps
Unit symbols: AFV, weapons and troops are all are full color icons.
Opposing Sides:
Commonwealth: 234th Infantry Brigade, reinforced; Italian coastal artillery
German: Kampfgruppe Mueller with elements from the 22d Air Landing Division, Brandenburg Division, 1st Bn, 2nd Parachute Regt., 2nd Bn 22nd LW Field Regt. and 3rd Bn, 440th Infantry Regt.
Total number of battalion equivalents (the usual op sheet size) in play: Up to about 8 or so.
Playing time: Up to 120 hours, according to the box

The Tactical Combat Series seemed to have an affinity for invasion games in its earlier days. Even Matanikau featured a scenario with Marines coming ashore in Higgins boats. In Omaha the invaders came by sea, in Hunters From the Sky the invaders came by air. And in Leros, they come by both.

Leros uses the same airlanding system as Hunters and its own naval transport and landing system, although it has similarities to Omaha. Most of the game's special rules revolve around getting to the island, although a few also deal with a few minor aspects of the island battle.

Leros presents an interesting situation because the invaders do not have a significant numerical advantage over the defenders, nor a huge edge in quality.

The main things the Germans do have going for them is the sheer size of the island and their uncontested air supremacy.

The island, while small in an absolute sense (just a few miles from end to end) is still relatively large for a defending force that only amounts to three battalions at start. The Germans can land literally anywhere, although some beaches are clearly better than others. A few places are too well covered by Italian coastal guns to be practical, but Germans willing to brave some losses have more options than the British defenders can cover.

The classic solution to the British problem would be a mobile defense, but this is where the second German advantage comes in. Every turn there will be German aircraft overhead, making movement around the island very difficult for the British.

Historically the battle was very hard-fought and evenly balanced, but ended in a British defeat that Winston Churchill thought very humiliating so late in the war.

As was becoming the typical TCS pattern, the game provides multiple scenarios depicting various parts of the battle limited by area or time as well as a campaign game that can use any of the three-map scenarios as a starting point. While the forces involved are not large by TCS standards, the number of turns can be heroic, up to 275, so this is still a pretty big game when played as a campaign. There is one small, one-map, 4-turn scenario involving about a dozen German company-sized units against about 8 companies worth of British that is the best bet for an evening's play.

A few minor variants add some additional Allied forces such as a high-quality company of Greek commandos and a low-quality battalion of Italian garrison troops. There's even a chance for some British air support if the British player is feeling too persecuted by the Luftwaffe.

The British command wasn't very effective and this is reflected with a rather below-average prep rating of 5 and a restriction of no more than 6 implemented op sheets, which is a very unusual restriction for a non-Russian army in TCS. They also don't get the usual staff modifier.

On very important errata clarifies that Italian coastal guns only get to fire at one beach zone per turn. The published rule directly contradicts itself within six sentences, which is an embarrassing oversight. Still, it's worth noting that the amount of errata in the TCS line is generally fairly limited by wargame standards and rarely critical.

There's probably no TCS game where vehicles play a smaller role than in Leros. Even in Matanikau, which was set in the jungles of Guadalcanal, there were some tanks and half-tracks. In Leros the only "fighting" vehicles are some unarmored flak halftracks the Germans can lug to the island. And some of the heavy weapons on both sides have integral "nominal trucks" to move them around. That's it.

Both sides have a lot of different ways to approach the battle and it's unlikely players will exhaust all the possibilities, so this game has high replayability.