Chattanooga

Chattanooga is a detailed wargame of the namesake battle on the regimental level. It was the issue game in Command Magazine No. 43 in 1997, following right on the heels of the similar Hell Before Night game of issue No. 42.

Using a variation on the game system first seen in Fateful Lightning, Chattanooga is heavily weighted towards morale effects, rather than factor counting or numbers. Units are rated for “Intensity” which measures its willingness to enter into close combat, and “Morale” which measures staying power.

In addition to the standard historical scenario, there are two other scenarios. One assumes that Bragg had followed up his success at Chickamauga and pressed the pursuit harder. This results in a low-counter-density scenario that makes a good introduction to the entire game system. The second scenario covers a smaller preliminary night battle on 28 October.

The battlefield is very open, with some prodigious slopes restricting maneuver in some key spots.The game system is unusual, and is a departure from the usual XTR/Command style. While a “mini-monster” the game does not use standard wargame mechanics and instead uses an uncommon and rather intricate game system, by Command standards. Every hex represents about 176 yards, units are regiments of infantry and artillery batteries. The game uses the universal color scheme of Civil War games, blue for the federals and gray for the confederates. Units show iconic representations of the soldiers on each side, in a variety of poses and uniforms. Unlike Fateful Lightning, however, which depicted each unit in its correct uniform, Chattanooga does not. Turns represent two hours during daylight, plus an overnight turn. Each turn comprise player “couplets,” which might be considered turns in most other games. How many couplets make up a turn varies. After each couplet a die is rolled. Depending on the result play proceeds to another couplet with the same side going first, or to another couplet with the player order reversed or the end of the turn.

Combat is handled in an unusual way. Ranged fire combat is possible, but tends to be indecisive and long ranged shots are hard to set up because of the amount of woods. Surprisingly, firing units can suffer adverse results when they shoot. The number of firing factors is added up and a 10-sided die rolled. Results tend to be disruptions and morale checks. Much of the combat will consist of assaults. Assault combat is resolved by selecting a column on the CRT based on the attacking units’ intensity and then rolling a 10-sided die. Both intensity and the die roll can be affected by a number of modifiers. I found this system rather burdensome and even arduous, because it meant a large number of repetitive calculations. There are likely to be dozens of combats in each player couplet, each one involving adding up modifiers, which will generally tend to be very similar.

The games includes a number of other unusual subsystems, such as "extra strength" which is used to recreate units from the dead pile. Units can also be recreated without using extra strength, but risk being permanently eliminated at a victory point cost. The game does appear to be a reasonable simulation, but its level of detail and the work required of each player will restrict its appeal to hard-core gamers with a particular interest in the topic.

Recommendations

(Conditional Yes) For Wargamers: A large and detailed replication of the Battle of Chattanooga for Civil War and tactical game buffs. It’s of limited interest to others.

(No) For Collectors: Nothing special.

(No) For Euro gamers: A very hard-core hex-and-counter wargame.

Perfidious Albion review

Every so often a wargame design heads down the wrong road from the start, resulting in a game that doesn’t quite work. Perfidious Albion is one of those games. While not ‘broken’ in the normal meaning of the word, it’s also not quite 'right.'

The game is one of XTR’s signature ‘Alternative History’ wargames, exploring a what-if situation, in this case, an invasion of Britain by Napoleon. When done well, this kind of game can provide insight into the consequences of human choice in historical affairs and provide a tool for evaluating debate over those choices.Did the allies make a mistake by not invading Europe in 1943? Second Front Now, for example, suggests that an invasion might have succeeded, but with a significant risk of disastrous failure. Even when not tied closely to a historical what-if, alternative history games can provide unusual game situations, such as the four-army, three-river melee in Hoorah.

Unfortunately, Perfidious Albion doesn’t manage either. It isn’t set in 1805, when Napoleon actually had an army ready for an invasion of Britain, but in 1814, based on a fanciful alternative history involving Robert Fulton, steamboats and a successful Russian campaign by Napoleon. So it provides little insight into the actual historical what-ifs. Yet it also fails to deliver an interesting game situation, ending up being a fairly conventional invasion of Britain game that feels more like it’s set in 1914 than 1814.

The game includes stacking rules that essentially limit stacking to two corps per 5-mile hex. This creates a more 20th-century style battle of opposing lines instead of the Napoleonic practice of moving dispersed and then concentrating for battle. Turns are a week, which creates multi-week battles, as opposed to the actual Napoleonic experience where many battles were fought in a single day and only a notable few lasted up to three days (Borodino, Leipzig). Fairly restrictive supply rules tie the armies to the road net, despite the fact that southern England was easily rich enough to support armies living off the land, as was Napoleon’s common practice.

The end result is a game that simply does not ‘feel’ Napoleonic at all. Instead it feels more like an early 20th Century wargame, complete with the move/fight or fight/move turn sequence seen in a number of other XTR wargames and an odds-based CRT.

Altogether one of the most disappointing XTR designs.

Recommendations

(No) For wargamers. It does not successfully convey the illusion of Napoleonic warfare nor provide a convincing ‘what-if.’

(No) For collectors.

(No) For eurogamers. Just a typical fiddly wargame from that perspective.

Hell Before Night, a review

Hell Before Night is a detailed wargame of the Battle of Shiloh on the regimental level. It was one of two issue games in Command Magazine No. 42 in 1997. The other game was Blitzkrieg '40.

Using a variation on the game system first seen in Fateful Lightning, Hell Before Night is heavily weighted towards morale effects, rather than factor counting or numbers.

Units are rated for “Intensity” which measures its willingness to enter into close combat, and “Morale” which measures staying power. Compared to the other games using the same system, unit morales tend to be lower, which befits the green armies involved on both sides.

There are few surprises in the general game situation, and anyone familiar with the historical battle or any of the other games on the battle know what to expect. The entire Confederate Army starts either on the map or will enter shortly, while the Federal forces are lined up near their camps, attempting to slow down the rebel onslaught. The Rebels will spend the first half of the game driving towards Pittsburgh Landing. Its capture will end the game in an immediate and decisive victory. If night falls before they get there, a whole new army of Union troops arrives overnight to launch a counter attack the next morning. The battlefield is wooded and constricted, so there is little scope for maneuver. It’s an all-out, straight-up slugging match.

The game system is unusual, and is a departure from the usual XTR/Command style. While a “mini-monster” the game does not use standard wargame mechanics and instead uses an uncommon and rather intricate game system, by Command standards.

Every hex represents about 176 yards, units are regiments of infantry and artillery batteries. The game uses the universal color scheme of Civil War games, blue for the federals and gray for the confederates. The Union Army of the Ohio, which arrives on the second day is in green, instead of blue. Units show iconic representations of the soldiers on each side, in a variety of poses and uniforms. Unlike Fateful Lightning, however, which depicted each unit in its correct uniform, Hell Before Night does not purport to show actual attire but merely generic blue and gray.

Turns represent two hours during daylight, plus an overnight turn. Each turn is comprised of player “couplets,” which might be considered turns in most other games. How many couplets make up a turn varies. After each couplet a die is rolled. Depending on the result play proceeds to another couplet with the same side going first, or to another couplet with the player order reversed or the end of the turn.

Combat is handled in an unusual way. Ranged fire combat is possible, but tends to be indecisive and long-ranged shots are hard to set up because of the amount of woods. Surprisingly, firing units can suffer adverse results when they shoot. The number of firing factors is added up and a 10-sided die rolled. Results tend to be disruptions and morale checks.

Much of the combat will consist of assaults, however, because the Rebels really need to press ahead at all costs. Assault combat is resolved by selecting a column on the CRT based on the attacking units’ intensity and then rolling a 10-sided die. Both intensity and the die roll can be affected by a number of modifiers. I found this system rather burdensome and even arduous, because it meant a large number of repetitive calculations. There are likely to be dozens of combats in each player couplet, each one involving adding up modifiers, which will generally tend to be very similar.

The games includes a number of other unusual subsystems, such as "extra strength" which is used to recreate units from the dead pile. Units can also be recreated without using extra strength, but risk being permanently eliminated at a victory point cost.

If Pittsburgh Landing holds, then victory is decided by comparing victory points, which are accumulated by killing enemy leaders, capturing units or units that are permanently eliminated when rolling to return to the map without using extra strength.The game does appear to be a reasonable simulation, but its level of detail and the work required of each player will restrict its appeal to hard-core gamers with a particular interest in the topic.

Recommendations

(Conditional Yes) For Wargamers: A large and detailed replication of the Battle of Shiloh for Civil War and tactical game buffs. It’s of limited interest to others.

(No) For Collectors: Nothing special.

(No) For Euro gamers: A very hard-core hex-and-counter wargame

Blitzkrieg 1940 review

Blitzkrieg 1940 is a hard-core hex-and-counter wargame of the campaign that doomed France in 1940, with a second scenario considering what might have happened if the French had attacked Germany in 1939 while the panzers were away in Poland. It was one of two issue games in Command Magazine No. 42 in 1997. The other game was Hell Before Night.

The game uses turns representing two days, hexes representing seven miles and unit counters representing divisions and some smaller units.

In general, the game is fairly typical of XTR World War II operational-level wargames, with standard wargame attack-defense-movement factor unit counters, zones of control, an odds-based numeric step loss combat results table and players turns comprising two player turn “couplets,” which means the actual number of player turns is about double the number of the player turn track.

Systemically, there are two notable rules.

The first of these is the variable order of the movement and combat phases. During a player turn couplet the active player can choose to either move and then attack or attack and then move. The Germans get a one-columns odds shift in their favor if they choose to attack first, then move, on the theory that their usual technique involved hasty attacks, so taking extra time benefits them. The Allies, on the other hand, suffer an odds shift penalty if they move, and then attack, on the theory that their more ponderous command style usually needed to set up attacks deliberately and they were at a disadvantage in mobile operations. This simple variation in turn sequence goes a long way towards capturing the difference between the two armies without extensive special command control rules.

The second notable design technique is “volatile” units. The defending side’s units in each scenario (Germans in 1939, Allies in 1940) have variable combat strengths that are determined each time the unit is involved in combat. For example, a typical French Infantry division in 1940 has factors of +3-+5-6. When it attacks it rolls a die and adds the attack factor as a modifier to the result, so the final attack value will range from 4-9. Likewise, when defending +5 is added to the die roll, resulting in a defense strength between 6-11. This provides an effect similar to the “Untried Units” rules in other wargames, except here the value can vary from battle to battle. The modifier can be a negative number. For example, a Dutch static brigade with a combat value of -2 would subtract 2 from the die roll, to a minimum of 1, so it’s value in attack or defense will range from 1-4.

This provides an antidote to “factor counting” and captures the greenness of the armies involved, at a considerable cost in “wristage,” as the designer admits. An attack by three fully-stacked hexes of French units against a German-occupied hex will needs 13 die rolls to resolve!

This is an extreme case, however, as neither side will have the luxury of organizing very many such massive battles.

In the 1939 scenario the French have seven turns to drive through the Siegfried Line to the Ruhr area. If they succeed in getting a unit within a “Ruhr Endangered Area” they win, otherwise they lose. In this scenario it’s the Germans, in grey. who have most of the “volatile” units, with 34 “0-+3-6 infantry divisions on the defense. (A volatile factor of ‘0’ means there is no addition or subtraction from the die roll, so this units have attack factors of 1-6.) The sole “mobile” reserve is the 0-+2-10 76th truck-mobile Infantry Division. Eight more volatile infantry divisions make up a strategic reserve. All these units have just one step. On the fourth turn the Germans get two experienced two-step, non-volatile 8-10-6/4-5-6 infantry divisions transferred from the Polish front.

The French (in red-on-white) have 47 non-volatile divisions available for their offensive (The British have not arrived, the Belgians and Dutch are assumed to stand aside). Handicapping the French are a very inefficient peacetime deployment at start and the fact that all their units have just one step. Except at the very highest odds the attacker will usually lose at least a step or two in every attack, making the French army powerful, but brittle in the extreme. In addition, the terrain on the Germans side of the border is heavily fortified, filled with rough terrain and cities and cut by numerous rivers. Between the various movement and combat penalties, the French will find the going very tough, especially considering the limited time they have.In the 1940 campaign, of course, it’s the Germans who are on the attack. Their white-on-black Panzer divisions have four steps, and their field grey infantry two steps each.

On the other side, the yellow, red and dark blue French units all have just one step, as well as volatile combat factors. The BEF, in tan counters, has volatile factors but two-step divisions, giving them more staying power.

Various special rules account for the German “Sickle Cut” operation through the Ardennes, airborne Coups de Main, Allied capitulations and other facets of the campaign. The Germans win by achieving victory points for forcing capitulations, breaching the Maginot line “destroying: the BEF or causing “severe” RAF pilot losses. They lose victory points if the Allies control any German cities (hah!) or cause “severe” losses to the German forces. Whether the criteria in within the quotation marks above have been met is determined by rolling a die and comparing the result to a table of losses. The game is 10 turns long. The amount of luck involved in all this may bother some players. By the way, the historical result was a game victory for the Allies! The designer explains that the Allies did go on to win the war, so the German player has to do better than the historical result in order to win.

Recommendations

(Yes) For Wargamers: A reasonable simulation of a difficult-to-simulate situation. The conventional wisdom is that the French had very little chance of winning this campaign because of deeply rooted flaws in their military doctrine, so the challenge is creating an interesting situation for the player of the doomed side. In this the game succeeds.

(No) For Collectors: Nothing special.

(No) For Euro gamers: A hard-core hex-and-counter wargame. The volatile unit mechanic, in particular, will not have any appeal.

Wave of Terror, The Battle of the Bulge

The issue game in Command Magazine No. 41 was Wave of Terror: The Battle of the Bulge, another of the “mini-monsters” that XTR published in its wargame magazine in the mid-90s.

With two maps and 720 counters it is a big game. Like most monster games the game system is kept pretty basic, with the usual combat factor-movement factor NAT)-style unit symbol ½-inch wargame counters. The SS are in black, Luftwaffe in blue and German Army in light grey, while the Americans are in their standard XTR olive and the British are tan. The map scale is 1.5 miles per hex and covers pretty much the same ground as every other Battle of the Bulge wargame since the first. As one would expect, the map is covered with small villages, dense woods, rivers and altogether is a busy terrain study. As always with a Beth Queman production, the map is functional, although, as is often the case with one of her maps, not particularly attractive.

(Shown clockwise from upper left are the US 26th Infantry Division, the US 4th Armored Division, the German 9th Panzer Division and the 246th Volksgrenadier Division)

Each of the 17 turns is a day, with two “player couplets” each. The only unique action in the game turn is the weather determination, so the play sequence could have just as easily be organized as one player couplet per turn with weather checked every other turn. Players could consider this to be a 34-turn game, which may give a better understanding of its scope. Despite the relatively straightforward rules (15-page rulebook, moderate complexity) the large number of turns and units means this game will take a long time to play, probably at least one whole weekend day.

The most notable aspect of the player turn couplets is the player’s ability to choose whether to move and then fight, or fight and then move. Moving first allows the attacker to get an attack off before the defender can react, but limits the ability to exploit successes. Attacking first gets a favorable odds modifier and allows a full movement phase to exploit any breakthroughs. On the other hand, the attacks have to be set up the player couplet before, which gives the defender a chance to spoil the attack or retreat away from it.Combat is odds-based, with attacking voluntary. As in nearly all XTR games, the CRT provides numeric results for attacker and defender which are taken as step losses. There are no retreats and no zones of control.

Most of the time the player will wish he could move and then attack in some parts of the battlefield, while doing the opposite in other sectors, but he must choose, creating an interesting game tension and some choices.

The general course of play will be no surprise to anyone with even a passing familiarity with the historical event. The Germans attack a thin line of American units with overwhelming force. They pour through the gaps while the Americans rush reinforcements to the battlefield. The difficult terrain, limited road net and heroic defense by small packets of U.S. troops begins to throw the Germans off their timetable. Small delays add up to big ones. The American front line slowly stiffens while the forward progress of the Germans slows. Finally the German offensive grind to a halt, and the Americans start limited counter attacks until the game ends on Jan. 1. Historically the fighting went on for a couple more weeks as the Allies pushed the bulge back, but nearly every Battle of the Bulge game does stop right around Jan. 1 because the latter phase of the battle is not very interesting to game.

As usual in this sort of game, the fun is in the detailed battling within the overall script. The big strategic decisions have been made and there is very little scope for either side to make big departures from the historical event. The German player, for example, can win a decisive victory by getting a single unit across the Meuse River. The singular nature of this victory condition hints at how unlikely it is.

The Allies have sudden death victory opportunities if the Germans are driven completely back to the start line or fail to hold St. Vith at game end, also unlikely outcomes. (These victory conditions are designed to prevent the German player from simply sitting behind his Westwall fortifications and skipping an offensive altogether.)

Most matches will come down to points, which are scored for capturing cities, eliminating enemy steps and a few game events.

Recommendations

(Yes) For Wargamers: Absolutely. The Battle of the Bulge is a classic game situation and if you have the time to play this, you’ll find it a very satisfying wargame.

(No) For Collectors: No special collectibility.

(No) For Euro gamers: Way too much wargame for you.

Review: Buena Vista

The Battle of Buena Vista was one of two wargames in Command No. 40 (The other was Moscow Burning). With only 8 pages of rules one might expect this to be one of the simpler XTR offerings, even simplistic. But instead players will find themselves playing a surprisingly intricate and detailed wargame.

The map is an attractive Beth Queman production, Each hex represents 100 yards of ground.

Unit counters are gray for the Americans and white for the Mexicans, with full color icons depicting the soldiers from each side. Units are rated for morale and shock combat value. Fire combat effectiveness is determined by unit type and the range from a chart printed on the map.

Leaders are rated for morale and shock combat, but also have a fire combat rating. Some Mexican units are double-sized counters which have some difficulty maneuvering on the map but have four steps (using two counters) instead of the one- and two-step 1/2-inch counters.

Each game turn starts with an activation phase. Units then move and fight on the Saltillo Track, which represents an off-map area behind the American lines which saw some significant activity during the battle. Players then go through three "impulses" where units belonging to activated leaders from each side can move, shoot or shock attack. In each of the three impulses the Americans act, then the Mexicans. Finally the turn ends with an administrative phase.Each turn represents an hour of fighting. There are a maximum of 12 turns.

The number of leaders each side can activate is determined by die rolls. The Mexican player rolls a die and adds two for Gen. Santa Ana's leadership rating (unless he is wounded) and that's the number of leaders he can activate. With a good die, therefore, it's possible the Mexican player will be able to activate all 8 leaders in a turn.The procedure is different for the Americans. The army commander, Gen. Taylor, can activate three leaders per turn, although they may not be his first three choices! The US player points to a leader and rolls a die. On a 1-5 he activates, on a 6 he fails. He keeps going until he succeeds with three leaders. Taylor's second-in-command, Gen. Wool, can activate one leader under the same rules, except he only succeeds on a 1-4 roll. Wool and Taylor can also automatically activate units stacked with them with no die roll.

The U.S. force has a dozen formation leaders. Each U.S. formation leader typically commands two pieces. The Mexican formation leaders command 2-6 units each.

Both armies have some units, such as artillery batteries, that are exempt from command control.

Both sides have some interesting historical units, such as the Texas Rangers in Taylor's army and the U.S. deserter-manned San Patrico unit.

Firing is resolved by cross indexing the type of unit, the range and a die roll with results given as step losses and retreats. Shock combat is resolved on a different chart using the differential between the shock combat values of each unit. Both types of combat are modified by the terrain.

And what terrain it is, too. Buena Vista was fought over some of the most difficult terrain ever for a black powder army. While the Mexicans vastly outnumber the Yankees, they have to attack across some of the most restrictive and difficult terrain you'll ever see in a wargame. Large parts of the battlefield are slope hexes, which stop units when they enter. An impassible stream runs down the middle west side of the battlefield, crossable only at a few fords. The one usable ford near the Mexicans has to be "discovered" by them first. The battlefield is further divided by gullies, impassible cliffs and more slopes, with a few small trails here and there. The entire effect is reminiscent of Thermopolae, except the Americans have a lot more than 300 Spartans.

So the Mexicans have to struggle over hill and dale, trying to stay out of their own way with their cumbersome double-sized units while under fire from the Americans. Those Americans shoot better and often have better morale, too.

The only real advantage the Mexicans have is numbers.

Victory is assessed through victory points, which are awarded on a victory point track per step loss. Every time the step losses pass "4" and "9" a random event roll is made. Random events can result in the death or wounding of a leader, step losses, getting to move an opposing unit and other effects. The two totals are compared and the higher wins.The game ends after turn 12 unless ended sooner by the arrival of rain. Rain can arrive as a random event on any turn (which could be a problem, as it's possible the game could end as soon as the first "4" casualties are suffered by one side (a 1/18 chance, too, which is not insignificant). If not ended earlier by random event the rains can arrive at the beginnings of turns 10, 11 or 12 with die rolls of 1-2, 1-3 or 1-4 respectively. Altogether players should not expect the game to go the whole 12 turns.

For a game with relatively few rules, wargamers get a battle depicted in considerable detail. The game will take a full evening to complete unless the rains come early.

Recommendations:

(Conditional Yes) for Wargamers if interested in the period. Others may find it a little too much detail for what is essentially a frontal assault on a formidable position.

(No) for Collectors: Nothing out of the ordinary.

(No) for Eurogamers: Way too much detail work, despite the brevity of the rules.

Review: Moscow Burning

Moscow Burning is one of two wargames in Command Magazine No. 40 of November, 1996 (The other was Buena Vista).

A game of low-complexity by wargame standards, Moscow Burning portrays the first 30 days of a potential Russian Civil War in the mid-1990s. As Putin has consolidated control recently, the possibility of this sort of outcome has receded a bit, but there was a time when it seemed Russia might fall into an internal armed conflict of the sort shown here.

Units are roughly brigade-sized (although some are called "divisions." Each turn represents three days and each hex is 20 miles. The map covers the Russian heartland from St. Petersburg to Volgograd.

The game system is straightforward IGO-HUGO with the usual XTR odd-based numeric result step-loss combat result table.The interest here is the fluid situation, as the "Reds" and "Whites" struggle to control the cities of Russia.

The game set-up is part of the game here, as players dice to see which side each of the on-map city hexes will support, which a 50 percent chance of being either Red or White. City control is depicted by militia units of the appropriate color.

There are just four basic types of units in the game.

The weakest are the militia units, which are just a single step, although it has to be the last step in a hex lost. These can range from 1-6 in combat value, the value determined by die roll at the instant of combat. This makes every city battle somewhat unpredictable. If the militia is eliminated, control of the city changes to the other side and the militia immediately reappears in the other color. Militia units never move and cannot attack.

Next are the Army/Interior Ministry heavy divisions. These have a combat value of six and movement value of four with two steps. These arrive by random event with their exact arrival hex determined by a random chit pull. They take on the loyalty of whatever the color the militia in that city at the moment. A total of 33 are potentially available. Like the militia these come in red and white versions. Their low movement allowance and scattered arrival make them useful, but not key, units in a player's order of battle.

There are three Elite ground units that start on the map. These units have combat values of six and movement allowances of four, but SIX steps, with the combat value decreasing by one per step lost. These units will play an important role in the fighting around Moscow.

Finally there are 13 elite airmobile units that can move 10, while also having six steps/combat factors. The elite units, as every other kind of unit, have a 50 percent chance of going either way. These 13 units, with their high movement allowances and staying power, are the key units in the game.

Spicing things up are random events determined by chit draw. As noted above, heavy divisions enter via random events. Other possible random events include Ukrainian intervention, nuclear explosions, a deadly plague, pogroms and miraculous events such as flying saucers or Elvis sightings! Oh yeah, and the Czar can return.

Winning is determined by having the most victory points after 10 turns. While every city hex on the map has some value, the 10 hexes of Moscow alone are worth almost as much as the rest of the map put together and the game will revolve around who controls Moscow in the end.

This game can easily be played in an evening.

Recommendations;

(Yes) for Wargamers: An interesting military situation calling for flexibility and quick thinking, although perhaps too light for many tastes

(No) for collectors: Nothing special

(Maybe) for Eurogamers: While a hex-and-counter wargame, it's not an especially fiddly one and the situation is different from the usual.

Review: Stirke North

Command No. 39 may have been the best gaming value for a single issue of any wargame magazine with three (or four, depending how you count them) full-scale wargames included.
Besides Hoorah!, a "what-if Civil War game (reviewed elsewhere), the magazine included Strike North!, which could be considered two or three full-scale wargames on its own. While there was just one map, there were two sets of rules, three sets of counters and five very different scenarios included, covering historical and what-if campaigns in Scandinavia in World War II at 20 miles per hex.

Although sharing the map scale, and some rule sections (basically they didn't repeat the basic 'common-sense' rules such as how to read the Combat Results Table twice), the 1940 and 1943 scenarios use different game systems. looking at the 1940 system first (although it's second in the rule book) we find the 10 pages of rules describing a low- to medium-complexity wargame reminiscent of the Budapest '45 system, but with enough significant differences to be considered new. Like Budapest'45, there is a one-for-one relationship between steps and combat strength. A unit with 4 combat factors as four steps. one with a combat factor of 10 has 10 steps, etc. But the combat value is not tracked on a roster. Instead the combat value is printed on the counter and the counter is flipped or a new counter is substituted when the value changes. Preserving the "fog of war" are FOW counters bearing national flags which are kept on top of the units. The FOW counters do double duty by tracking when a unit has performed an action. As each unit moves or fights the counter is flipped to the "done" side. Twice a turn the counters are flipped back. There's a flippin lot of flippin in the game!

Every turn represents two days. Each side alternates moving units one at a time in the movement phase and in the combat phase each side alternates resolving battles. The base movement allowance is just "1" which will take some getting used to for many players. A road bonus can add a movement factor but the only way to cover large distances is rail or sea movement, both of which are restricted to certain units at certain times.

The combat results table is of the usual XTR numeric step-loss variety.

There are two scenarios. The first is the historical invasion of Norway in 1940, the second is a "what-if" examining what might have happened if the Swedes had intervened on Norway's behalf. Both games revolve around capturing cities and towns and eliminating units in 15 turns. In the historical scenario the Germans have the initiative and have to capture more than they start with. The German forces are much stronger than the Allies and the situation is largely a delaying action for the Allies, although there is some scope for sharp counterattacks and raids against unwary Germans. With the Swedes in play the initiative switches to the Allies and the burden of attack is on them, to drive the Germans back before the Spring campaign in France overshadows things.

The 1943 rules switch to weekly turns with mostly one- and two-step units in the standard attack-defense-movement factor arrangement. Those standard units are used as described in a standard set of XTR wargame rules that are 18 pages long. There won't be any surprises for veteran wargamers in those rules, which are solidly "moderate complexity."

The 1943 game has three scenarios. The first one looks at a planned German campaign to conquer Sweden, which would have gone forward had the Kursk offensive gone well. As the chances of Kursk going well were rather small, this can't be considered a particularly likely "what if," but the Germans DID draw up plans for it.In this scenario, only, the German divisions have up to five steps. Their aim to to drive through Swedish lines and capture key locations. As the Germans capture victory point locations the Swedes become more likely to surrender. The exact surrender point is determined by a die roll. Putting pressure on the Germans, they only have five game turns to do it. The strict time limit and nature of the victory conditions provides a strong hint as to the chances the Swedes can stop the Germans.

The second scenario looks at what would have happened if the Allies decided against a landing in Sicily and headed north instead (which was one of Churchill's ideas). It's hard to say whether or not this was a good idea. Hitler feared a Norway landing and kept strong forces there until the end of the war. A success there would have liberated a suffering allied country and given the Allies great bases for the strategic bombing campaign, as well as a secure route for aid to Russia. On the other hand, the historical choice did knock an Axis power out of the war and, perhaps most importantly, opened up the Med for sea traffic, adding the equivalent of HUNDREDS of ships to the Allied shipping capacity because of shortened routes.

In any case, whether or not it was a good strategy, Strike North lets players see if it was a doable task. The Allied OB will be familiar to anyone who has played an Italian campaign game. There's a lot of flexibility as to landing sites as the Norwegian coast is very long. The Allies can ensure they will get ashore. After that, it turns into a tight contest as they try to expand the beachhead against powerful resistance and win in 9 turns. Victory is based on capturing locations and sinking German ships (which make an appearance here, conducting "sorties" against Allied shipping, resolved with die rolls). The game system includes rules for all the factors one would expect: Supply, amphibious raids, weather, paradrops, air support, etc.) The game also uses an XTR-style numeric result CRT, although a different one from the 1940 game.

The third scenario is essentially the same, except the Swedes jump in on the fun. The victory conditions are the same, just a little more demanding. Between them all, the scenarios of Strike North provide a tremendous variety of possible games.

Recommendations:

(Yes) for Wargamers: By all means

(Maybe) for Collectors: It IS a pretty ambitious game.

(No) for Eurogamers: Still and hex-and-counter affair with all sorts of special rules to account for historical realities.

Hoorah! review

Hoorah! Six Bridges: The Battle of Pittsburgh, 1 October, 1863 is a hex-and-counter wargame portraying a fictional battle for Pittsburgh during the American Civil War. A sequel to XTR’s Wahoo! Game, Hoorah assumes Lee won a substantial victory at Gettysburg and then followed up with a successful assault on Washington, D.C. Rather than ending the war, however, these battles widened it into a world war as Britain and France intervene on behalf of the Confederacy while Prussia and Russia come in on the Union side. In this new, wider, war, Lee decides to sever the east-west rail links of the United States by capturing Pittsburgh, in conjunction with a British Army from Canada. Meanwhile, Grant, leading the twice-defeated Army of the Potomac, tries to hold onto the city until help arrives in the form of Gen. Sherman and his western army and the river gunboat flotilla.

It was the issue game in issue No. 39 of Command Magazine in 1996. Also in that issue was Strike North, reviewed elsewhere. The one scenario covers the day-long battle with each turn representing 45 minutes and each hex about 400 yards. The Beth Queman map depicts the city of Pittsburgh, and the junction of the Allegheny and Monongahela rivers into the Ohio River. Units are brigades of infantry and cavalry, battalions of guns and single gunboats. The 15-page rulebook describes a game of moderate complexity by wargame standards with fairly standard Civil War brigade-level rules for combat and movement. All federal unit have one step and are therefore eliminated with a loss, while the British (well-trained) and Confederates (win streak) have two steps. The second step has one less combat and movement factor. This is the only thing I might have done differently. While the Army of the Potomac (defeated so many times, including Chancellorsville, Gettysburg and Washington in this timeline) deserves a fragile morale, I would have given the troops from the U.S. Army of the Tennessee (also unbeaten to this point) two steps as well. If players agree they can have a house rule to that effect. The Army of the Tennessee only has 11 brigades, so this will not change the game enormously.

The game uses a chit-pull corps activation mechanic, where all the units of a corps can move and fight together when their chit is pulled from a cup. The defending Union Army of the Potomac comprises six corps (I, II, VI, XI, XII and Cavalry) while the attacking Confederates are organized into three infantry corps and Stuart’s cavalry.

Compared to the historical units the Army of the Potomac is missing units lost in the first two battles or detached. The most significant missing formation is the Union Artillery Reserve, lost at Gettysburg. The rebel Army of North Virginia is stronger in artillery than the historical force, mostly equipped with guns and ammunition captured from that Artillery Reserve.

Coming in as reinforcements are the two-corps strong British Expeditionary Force, the three-corps strong U.S. Army of Tennessee and the 10-ship U.S.N. gunboat flotilla.

Finally, a series of (presumably hastily-constructed) Union forts and batteries surround the city.

The game revolves around the six bridges around Pittsburgh. At the end of 12 turns (nine hours) the Confederate player rolls a die. If he rolls less than or equal to the number of bridges he controls, he wins. Otherwise the Federals win a game victory. (The fact that there’s a battle at Pittsburgh at all can only be regarded as a dire strategic situation from the federal point of view!

While these sort of alternate history games are not for everyone -- and the situation admittedly far-fetched -- it does give the players a chance to explore a very unusual and challenging situation that is arguably more realistic in many ways than a more standard historical treatment.

For example, no matter how well done, every Gettysburg game is faced with the fact that both players have far more situational awareness than the actual commanders. Historically the actual confederate commander, Gen. Robert E. Lee, did not know exactly what he was facing, especially on the first day. He hoped he was catching part of the Union army unsupported and believed he had a chance to inflict a serious defeat on at least two corps. But the player Lee knows that he is facing the whole federal army and even has a list of what roads they are taking and when they will arrive.

So Hoorah provides players a chance to test their generalship in an unprecedented battle situation, where they have only a general idea of what COULD happen and do not have the guidance of what DID happen to help.

Besides the inherent chaos of the chit-pull mechanic the game adds a highly variable reinforcement rule and a combat results table with way more than the usual variability.

Dealing the CRT first, we note that it uses a two-die roll summed result instead of the typical D6 chart. With 11 different possible results ranging from 1/36 to 1/6-chance of occurring no combat is a sure thing except at the most extreme odds. Even a 1-5 attack has some fluke chance of carrying a position while even a 5-1 attack could be repulsed!

Meanwhile, both sides will be anxiously awaiting the reinforcements. Each group (BEF, river flotilla, Army of Tennessee and, optionally, Stuart’s horsemen) arrives on a die roll of a “1.” Over the course of a 12-turn game, all should arrive, but there is no guarantee when. A force that arrives on the first turn is rather more helpful than one that arrives on turn 11 or 12, for example. And there is no guarantee that they will arrive at all. We’ve all been unlucky enough to roll a die 12 times and NOT roll the “1” we need.

If a force does arrive, where it arrives is subject to further randomization. The BEF and Army of the Tennessee each have six arrival zones, with an unequal chance of arriving at each one. In MOST games both armies will arrive West of the Allegheny, across the river from Pittsburgh, leading to a big battle outside Allegheny City. But, sometimes, the BEF will show up from the East, behind the CSA line. And sometimes Sherman will appear south of the Monongahela. If detached on a “sweep” at the beginning of the game, Stuart’s six cavalry brigades could also show up either north or south of the city. Only the gunboats, necessarily restricted to the river, have only one entry zone.

The whole situation is extremely fluid. It has the potential to be very unbalanced (For example, flotilla and Army of Tennessee never arrive, BEF and horsemen arrive early on both flanks of the city, leading to the Army of the Potomac being surrounded and overwhelmed and all six bridges captured for an automatic victory) but real battles are seldom “fair.” The game is best looked at as a test of generalship (and even character) although not necessarily a fair test of skill. Unlike many unbalanced wargames, here switching sides and playing again will not be any help. (Now playing the Rebels, our unlucky former federal player from the first example sees with horror the flotilla and Army of Tennessee arrive early and bolster his foe’s line to stall the attack. Meanwhile the BEF arrives late and behind the Rebel line, which is already too crowded with units and that damn Stuart never does show up, leading to none of the bridges being captured and no chance of victory!). No, the relative generalship will have to be settled in the time-honored historical fashion, with arguments and recriminations afterwards!

The game takes about 20 minutes to set up and can be played in one sitting.

Recommendations

(Yes) For Wargamers: A very different challenge from the usual.

(No) For Collectors: No remarkable collectibility.

(No) For Euro gamers: A hex-and-counter wargames with intricate and detailed rules.

The Great War in the Near East review

The issue game in Command Magazine No. 37, The Great War in the Near East, is an add-on module for The Great War in Europe, which appeared in Command No. 33. It’s also playable as a standalone game. Like the parent game, the core standard wargame supply, movement and combat rules take up only five pages of the 20-page rule book. The balance of the rules describe the special rules needed to account for the special conditions of the Great War’s secondary fronts in the Caucasus, Palestine and Iraq.

Also like the parent game, the draw of chits provides the main engine for the game’s events. Unlike the earlier game, however, where players had some input into the pace of chit events because they paid resource points for them, in this game chit draws are automatic. Resource Points are so rare that players would never spend them on chits.

The map is compatible with the Great War in Europe. The Caucasus and Iraq maps are considered “East” maps and use the same 20-22.5-mile hexes as the parent Game’s Eastern Front. Palestine, on the other hand, is a “West” map, and uses the 9.5-mile hexes and double movement allowances of the French and Italian fronts in TGWIE. Unlike the parent game, where most units were divisions, this game also has many brigades and even some battalion- and company-sized units.

Fittingly for a secondary front, events in this game are driven in large measure by factors outside the player’s control. On each front, both players try to make do with minimal resources in supply and troops and make some headway. The game system ensures that the game follows history closely, and it is not easy to make dramatic departures from the historical script. Each front has only the most tenuous connection to the others. Even the Ottomans, who are the common belligerent on all three fronts, will find it hard to redeploy forces to take advantage of his interior lines.

The Allied objective is the force the surrender of Turkey by capturing “surrender towns.” During victory check turns the allies add the number of captured towns to a die roll, if it is 11 or more, the Allies win. The Central Powers win by avoiding a loss, except if the Army of Islam chit is drawn, in which case they must also capture the Russian city of Baku.

The Central Powers can optionally take six German shocktroop divisions in 1918. If they succumb to that temptation, they have to capture three Allied Victory hexes to win.

As a standalone game it takes about 20 minutes to set up and can be played in a long sitting. While there are potentially more than 50 turns, many will go by with little or no activity.

When combined with the parent game there is not too much of an addition in playing time for the same reason, although the combined game will certainly work best for team play, if for no other reason than coping with the mental adjustments needed to play, essentially, SIX simultaneous wargames!

There’s some minor overlap in the orders of battle, the duplicate units are marked with an “X” and set aside. The chit pool is also adjusted. There are some chits from each component game that are not used and several new ones specifically for the combined game that are added. Units from TGWINE are identified with a diagonal slash. Units used only in the combined game have the slash in red.

Recommendations

(Yes) For Wargamers: Primarily if one has The Great War in Europe. As a standalone game TGWINE is probably only for players with a special interest in one of the component campaigns.

(No) For Collectors: Nothing remarkable.

(No) For Euro gamers: No, no, no.

Game review: The Moscow Option

The Moscow Option: Guderian's Gambit is one of two wargames in Command No. 37 (The other is Mukden).

It could be considered Proud Monster meets Budapest'45, because it marries a strategic option and the untried Soviet units from the first game with the combat/movement and unit roster system of the latter.

As a Budapest system game Moscow Option includes zones of control, a unit roster to track German step losses and 5/8-inch unit counters. The German player-turn starts with a mechanized movement phase, then goes to a combat phase and a general movement phase. The Soviets move and then fight.

But the game situation is drawn from an option in Proud Monster, where the Germans dedicate their supply network to supporting a spearhead of mobile units ( 9 Panzer divisions, six motorized divisions and three smaller units) lunging towards Moscow in an all-out bid to capture the Soviet capital and win the war. The 16 German infantry divisions plodding behind the armored spearheads can help hold ground, but have no attack factors at all.

The Soviet forces are all 1-step attack-defense-movement factor units identical in function to the Proud Monster Soviets. All start on their untried side, with values unknown to either player. When they enter combat for the first time their values are revealed. Being one-step units in the very attritional Budapest combat system, however, most Soviet units won't be around for long. The Soviets begin with 39 Rifle divisions, 5 cavalry divisions and 11 tank divisions. Another 28 Rifle divisions, 7 cavalry divisions, one tank division and 14 tank brigades come as reinforcements.

The German has 14 turns to capture a Moscow hex. Once he's in possession of one or more hexes he rolls two dice and compares the result to chart. The earlier he captures the hex(es) and the more hexes he holds the better his chances. For example, if he captures all three hexes by turn 6 he wins on any roll. If he just manages to squeak into one hex on turn 14 he'll need boxcars to win. The Germans win automatically by clearing the map of Soviet troops. The Soviets can win by avoiding a German win or by capturing Smolensk (which starts behind German lines).

Every turn the German will be making difficult choices. Although the German is strong enough to do anything he wants, there simply aren't enough units to do everything he needs to do. A typical Panzer division starts the game with 13 combat factors/steps. For the Soviet player, losses will be high, but he'll have a chance to attack as well as defend (the tank brigades, in particular, are not very useful defensively. While their attack factors range from 1-4, all have a defense of just 1.) Unlike the situation historically, when the Soviets had a chance to build a series of fortified belts before Moscow, in this scenario, set in August, it's up to the troops alone to hold out.

One notable rule prevents the "edge-of-the-world" flaw so common in wargames. Along the north east and south sides of the map is a "gold row" of hexes that only the Soviets can use. This prevents the German from unrealistically using the map edge to anchor his flanks. German zones of control do not extend into the gold row, so the Soviets always have an open flank available. This rule therefore encourages the German to keep his troops close to the Smolensk to Moscow highway that runs through the center of the map and is his supply line.

The map is by Beth Queman and is functional, if not overly attractive. The hexes are oversized, 7/8-inch across. The Soviet player doesn't have much in the way of helpful terrain. Part of one river covers a part of his front, while an expanse of woods in the center of the map is better than nothing. But for the most part, the terrain favors the German attackers.

The game scale is nine miles per hex, one day per turn. Most units are divisions and brigades. The 14 pages of rules describe a game of moderate complexity by wargame standards. Set up will take about 15 minutes and the game is playable in one sitting.

Recommendations:

(Yes) for Wargamers: Nice, solid wargame covering an interesting "what-if."

(No) for Collectors: No special collectibility

(No) for Eurogamers: A hex-and-counter wargame with rosters, so not your cup of tea.

Game review: Mukden

Mukden is one of two games in Command No. 37 (the other is The Moscow Option). The game is an operational level portrayal of the battle that was the climax of the land portion of the Russo-Japanese war. Unlike the naval portion of the war, the Japanese were unable to score a knockout blow, although they tended to win the battles.

This game uses a variation on the system first seen in Budapest '45. The salient features of this system is tracking losses on a unit roster and designer manipulation of the turn sequence to make a point about the relative quality of the contending armies. Typically in this game system every combat factor is a step and can be lost individually. The Japanese follow this pattern, but the Russian units are eliminated before they get down to their last combat factor. This puts them at a considerable disadvantage in the game's attritional combat system, where both sides tend to lose steps in every combat.

The turn sequence is unusual, in that both sides move before either has its combat phase. In addition, the Russian army group is divided into three numbered armies, each with its own movement phase. Simulating the command problems suffered in the historical event, when each army moves is determined by a die roll, making it difficult to plan. Adding an additional wrinkle, the Japanese units get to move in between each of the Russian movement phases, making it very hard for the Russians to maneuver safely in the presence of their enemies.

Combat is a multi-step process. The Japanese start with a bombardment phase (only they have some supporting artillery units) followed by a Russian defensive fire phase by the units being attacked. The effectiveness of bombardment and defensive fire depend on the number of firing factors, modified by terrain. From 0-3 steps can be lost by the attacker. The final step is a "melee" combat that is odds based, and also modified by terrain. The Japanese (but not the Russians) can also benefit by surrounding the defending units during this combat. In Melee both sides usually suffer step losses and the defender may be forced to retreat.The Russian combat phase is the same, except they don't have any bombarding artillery.

The general course of play is a steady pushing back of the Russian line by the Japanese. While the Japanese don't have a significant advantage in combat factors, they do have many more steps, and can therefore better afford the step losses. The Russians, handicapped by their command problems, will find it very hard to attack and unprofitable when they manage to set one up.

The Japanese can win by either capturing Mukden, getting a supplied unit into the Russian "withdrawal trigger line" (the historical result) which is located north of Mukden or by eliminating 78 steps of Russian troops (which is 50 percent of their army). The Russians win by avoiding the Japanese victory condition or by eliminating 115 steps of Japanese troops (out of 214 steps). A draw is only possible if both sides exceed their loss levels in the same turn.

Physically the game map is one of the better Beth Queman efforts, with pleasing graphics and functionality. The unit counters are large 5/8-inch style with NATO-style unit symbols and unit designations. The reverse side shows the general unit type (and Army for the Russians). As usual in this system, unit rosters are kept secret from the enemy player and the unit counters are kept face down unless in combat. The Japanese are the standard XTR white on red color scheme. The Russians are color coded by Army (1st Army blue, 2nd Army yellow and 3rd Army green). Several units start the game in the "General Reserve" and are colored grey. Each can be assigned to any of the three armies and has a new counter in the appropriate color to use once it is assigned. Assignments cannot be changed once made.

Turns represent 2-3 days, each hex is three miles and units are brigades and divisions.

The game lasts 8 turns. Set up should take about 15 minutes and the game is easily playable in one sitting.

Recommendations:

(Yes) for Wargamers: An interesting game best played as a match so both sides get to attack.

(no) for Collectors: Nothing special

(no) for Eurogamers: Not too bad for a wargame, but the roster loss system is not the kind of game mechanic you'd like.

Game review: SS Panzer

SS Panzer: Bloodbath at Kursk is the issue game in Command Magazine No. 36. It's tactical in scope, with every unit representing a company of Germans or a battalion of Russian, except for some platoons of Tiger Tanks, battling over 500-meter hexes. Each of the four game turns represents an hour.

Players shouldn't be fooled by the mere four-turn game length into thinking this is a quick game, however, as there are a lot of units. And the rules, although only eight pages long, describe a fairly intricate game system. And finally, this is a unit activation chit draw system, so both players are involved throughout the game turn and when a formation is activated there are a lot of different decisions to be made.

This is a unique game system. Every combat interaction between units has the potential for several die rolls. Generally speaking, whether it is anti-infantry or anti-tank fire, units are rolling for hits. The number of dice a unit fire depends on its circumstances. It can range from 1 to 3, but the base number is two. Likewise, the number needed to hit varies and can be modified, but a die roll of "1" is always a hit and that will often be the number sought.

The Soviet order of battle comprises five tank/mechanized corps and one airborne division, while the Germans have three SS Panzergrenadier divisions (although at this stage of the war they are really panzer divisions in strength and equipment.)

While, as usual in XTR games, there are sudden death victory conditions in case of overwhelming success, the battle will generally revolve around fights across the breadth and depth of the map for victory hexes marked with red stars for the Soviets and SS runes for the Nazis. If the Soviets capture 7 of their 10 objectives they win, the Germans need 13 of their 18 objectives. Any other result is a draw, which was the historical outcome.

Air strikes and artillery bombardments are also triggered by chit pulls, creating a very fluid game flow, as is usual in chit pull systems.

Both sides have to try to play very efficiently, as each unit counter will only get to move or initiate combat four times throughout the game.

Physically the game is attractive, with 320 large 5/8-inch counters and 106 1/2-inch marker and an attractive and functional map by Beth Queman. Vehicle units are shown with icons while non-vehicle units use NATO-style unit symbols.

While the game rules are short at just 8 pages, the game system is unfamiliar and will require close study of the rules, especially the first time. Despite the brevity of the rules I would describe this as a moderate complexity wargame.

It will take about 30 minutes to set the game up, and playing the whole four-hour fight will take just about that period of time.

Recommendations:

(Yes) for Wargamers: An interesting depiction of a key battle. Lots of tanks, lots of die rolls.

(No) for Collectors: No special collectibility

(No) for Eurogamers: Too intricate a game system to appeal to the tastes of most euro-style players.

Game review: Balkan Hell

There have been dozens of games about the Battle of the Bulge, the Battle of Gettysburg and the African Campaign -- but there's only been one Balkan Hell.

One of the more bizarre game topics ever covered in a professionally published wargame, Balkan Hell, one of two issue games in Command Magazine No. 35 (the other was Mason-Dixon) depicts a what-if campaign in 1995 IF the peace talks that ended the fighting had not taken place. For such an obscure topic the game has a very detailed order of battle for the various Balkan "armies" involved. One can only assume designer Ty Bomba had worked up an OB expecting the fighting to go on and decided to go ahead with the design anyway.

What you get is actually a pretty substantial game, with more than 300 5/8-inch counters, depicting five different armies. One one side are the Bosnian Muslim in green, Croat Bosnians in grey and Croatia in black. The other side sees the Bosnian Serbs in red and the "Yugoslavs" (really Serbs) in white.The 11-page rulebook describes a hex-and-counter wargame of low- to medium-complexity using standard attack-defense-movement factor units with regular wargame mechanics. The main twist is the turn sequence.

The Muslim/Croat side moves and then attacks, while the Serb/Yugoslav attack and then move. This provides the Croats with more offensive flexibility. However, as a further wrinkle, the Serb/Yugoslav side has a mechanized movement phase inserted between the Croat/Bosnian movement and combat phases. This allows them to reinforce points under attack and/or move mechanized units into position to join combats in the subsequent Serb/Yugo combat phase.

The one scenario is fairly open ended, as both sides are somewhat intermixed and will have opportunities to attack and defend. Victory is determined by how many victory points the Bosnia/Croat side has at game end. The game ends on turns 7, 8 or 9, depending on a die roll.Most victory points come from occupying cities and towns. Sarajevo is worth 15, other cities are worth 5 and the various towns are worth 1 point each. The Bosnians start in control of 91 VPs and need 121 or more to win. The Serbs win if the VP total is 115 or less, while a score of 116-120 is a draw.

The Bosnians can also score points for eliminating Serb artillery units, breaking the seige of Sarajevo and opening Highway 73.The Bosnian/Croat side also has a sudden death victory condition of controlling all the cities and towns in Croatia plus everything west of (Croatian President) "Tudjman's Line."Combat is resolved on the usual XTR step-loss/retreat CRT.Marring the game is a map graphics mistake that makes it hard to play. The green hatching used to depict "roadless" hexsides (which are impassible to mechanized units) is too subtle to stand out compared to the green used to depict the hill hexes (where all the roadless hexsides are, naturally). Except under very bright lights these hexsides are indistinct from normal viewing distances and players may need to use a marker to darken them.

Recommendations:

(Yes) for Wargamers: An unusual topic, with interesting strategic problems for both sides.

(Yes) for Collectors: The only game on the topic, and likely to remain so.

(No) for Eurogamers: Way too obscure a topic to bother with for a game what is otherwise an unabashed classic hex-and-counter wargame.

Game review: Mason-Dixon

Mason-Dixon is an unusual what-if hex-and-counter wargame that assumes the Confederacy won the Civil War in 1863. The game background postulates that the two countries remain hostile and fight three more wars in 1917, 1940 and 1990, using technology comparable to actual history's World War I, World War II and Gulf War.

In a departure for XTR, the game does not use some variation of its standard wargame mechanics, but introduces a unique design. The game designer, Chris Perello, said he felt this was necessary because of the immense distances involved. Perello points out that the campaign area consists of more territory than the Eastern Front of the World Wars without anything like the unit density seen in Europe. This creates a situation more mobile than seen in each war (although the 1917 scenario is less mobile than 1940 or 1990).

Every month is divided into three player turns, each with a movement and combat phase. So far, so ordinary, but there are many unusual touches in those movement and combat phases which make for a very different game.

For example, one unique rule is entitled "Positional Advantage," which allows victorious attacking units to enter the defender's hex and acquire a positional advantage counter. In their next turn the defenders can leave or must counterattack. If the attacking units are still in the hex with a positional advantage marker on their next movement phase that positional advantage is converted into a "pocket" and the defenders are considered surrounded.

Another other unique rule is combat. While using an odds-based CRT, the combat resolution system is very different from the usual Command approach. First off, the number of dice rolled by the attacker varies from 1-3 depending on the amount of preparation and support. The fewer the dice, the better for the attacker. Many of the better results can only be achieved if the attacker is using one of two dice. The number of dice depends on things such as supply and artillery support.

The combat results are also different, especially the various kinds of exchanges (AX: Attacker Exchange; HX: Half Exchange; EX: Exchange; LX: Low Exchange and SX: Super Exchange -- all of which together probably set some record for the number of different kinds of exchanges in a wargame.) Besides the five different kinds of exchanges there are six other possible results, including No Effect.The exchange resolution system proved to be hard for many players to wrap their heads around, because counter intuitively, many times one side or the other might not actually lose anything. The key thing is to recognize that a force has to lose the most it can under the result, but never more than the result requires. So, for example, if two weak (2-factor) units defending in a hex suffer a LX (Low Exchange) they are both eliminated ("the defender loses one step from each participating unit") but if the attacking force was a pair of 5-factor attackers, they would have no loss. )"the attacker must lose steps whole total strength is less than or equal to half the defender's combat strength") Because both attackers are 5s they could not lose a step without it being MORE than half the defender's loss -- so the attacker loses nothing! If, on the other hand, the attackers had consisted of two 4-factor units and a 2-factor unit, then the attacker would have lost the 2-factor piece. Some players can have trouble believing what the rules say because it's so different from usual wargame practices. Basically the effect of the rule is to protect stronger units from exchanges they would suffer under more typical systems.

The heart of the game is the three different scenarios. Units are different for all three scenarios, although one annoying aspect is that many units are backprinted with units from different scenarios, sometimes even units from the other side! This makes it just about impossible to rationally sort the pieces. This will increase set-up time.

How long the game goes depends on the scenario, The 1995 scenario lasts 15 or 16 turns (every turn represents 2-days in the 1990s only). The 1917 and 1940 scenarios last until the "economy" of one side or the other is reduced to zero. The economy, which supplies resource points to mobilize new units and replaced eliminated ones, is recorded on a track. Losing cities costs points as does the passage of time. On die roll of a 1-4 one point is lost on the track to do war weariness. This is one rule I would recommend changing, as the effect is to shorten the game to the point where it's not possible to mobilize most of each army. The experience of the 20th Century was that war weariness in a major war does not set in for several years. In the First World War the French and Russians fought on until 1917 until mutiny and revolution occurred. The Germans didn't lose heart until 1918. In World War II only the Italians surrendered short of conquest. I think the game is more interesting if you don't start the war weariness loss until the second year of fighting, at least. The game includes such an interesting order of battle, most players are going to want the chance to play with most of it. In addition, the fronts are so vast that both sides will need some time for their strategies to mature.

Recommendations:

(Yes) for Wargamers: An interesting game in both topic and strategic possibilities. Even jaded wargamers will find this a fresh experience.

(Yes) for Collectors: Unique

(No, no) for Eurogamers: Too complicated, really.

Rommel at Gazala review

This is the issue game in Command Magazine No. 34 (which also included the Death & Destruction expansion for Proud Monster).

Dwarfed by the D&D expansion, Rommel at Gazala would be easy to miss, with less than 100 5/8-inch counters.

The game uses the system that debuted in Budapest '45, which uses unit rosters to track step losses. Compared to other step-loss games, the units here have a large number of steps, often 20 or more. The rosters list the attack and defense factors of the unit. Movement allowances are determined by unit type. The only information on the counter itself, aside from from its nationality color and NATO unit symbol, is the unit's historical ID. The unit rosters and step losses are less work in Rommel than they were in Budapest because of the extremely low unit density. There are just a dozen Axis units, and less than two dozen Allied ones. Axis units are divisions, except for two Italian regiments and one German brigade. Allied units are brigades.

With so few units the placement of each one becomes critical. As in Budapest '45, when units are not in combat they are kept face down. In Rommel, because there are so few units, this limited intelligence will have little effect, especially for the British. The lion's share of the Axis offensive power is contained in the three German mobile divisions, which the Allied player should have no problem tracking from memory (the rules prohibit taking notes) There's a little more scope for deception on the Allied side, although most brigades have comparable factors. The Axis can detach a recon battalion from each German mobile division to help cover more ground, but these one- or two-step units are very fragile and cannot be replaced if eliminated.

As in Budapest '45 the turn sequence is asymmetric. After a mutual supply check phase the Axis move their mechanized units. They conduct a combat phase and then all Axis units can move and clear mines.The British player turn consists of a combat phase followed by the movement/mine clearing phase, so just as the Soviets were in the earlier game the British are forced to set up their attacks the turn before executing them.

The map is based on the terrain analysis of the Moments in History wargame Triumphant Fox. Each hex is 3.5 kilometers, every turn is a day. The small unit scale for a divisional-level game is responsible for the inclusion of a zone of control rule, which is most unusual for XTR games. Units are forced to stop by enemy ZOCs and cannot move through them. They may, however, leave an enemy ZOC and combat is not required. Combat is odds based with step losses, as is usual in XTR games. Besides ZOCs there are very extensive minefields on the map, which also channel movement. Both sides can clear enemy minefield hexes during their general movement phases.

The winner is determined by victory points, with every eliminated step worth 1 VP, except for eliminated Italians, who net the British 2 VPs each. Should the German be so careless as to allow the British into hex 1200 (the coast road leading off to the West) they'll be giving up 50 VP.

The primary Axis objective is to capture Tobruk, which is worth a variable number of victory points, depending on the turn. The longer it takes the Germans to capture the port, the fewer VPs it's worth. On May 27, Turn 1 (an impossibility) it's worth 130 points. By June 21, Turn 26, it's worth 0 VP. If sufficiently ahead on points the British can declare a withdrawal, conceding Tobruk as of that turn, but escaping with all supplied forces and denying the Germans those VPs. As both sides keep their exact losses a secret, the British cannot slice this too closely or they could just cost themselves the game.

Set up time is minimal, with just a couple dozen pieces. The game is easily playable in a single session and fast movers can probably complete a two-game match in an evening.

Recommendations:

(Yes) for Wargamers: Especially for players who want to try out the Budapest'45 system.

(No) for collectors: Nothing notable here.

(Conditional no) for Eurogamers. If you're interested in checking out a hex-and-counter wargame this is meaty enough to be a good representative while the low unit density helps keep it manageable.

Death and Destruction module review

Death & Destruction is not a standalone wargame but an expansion module for Proud Monster, Ty Bomba's magnus opus divisional level Barbarossa game. D&D covers the next two years of the war, until the Spring of 1944.As a module, no fundamental changes are made to the game system and the 15-page rule book is all special rules to account for order of battle changes and other developments as the war moves out of its initial phases.

The counters include various later war reinforcements for both sides, although the Soviets naturally benefit the most as new, more powerful units appear such as more than 100 Guards units, mechanized corps, tank corps and sundry other good stuff to allow the Soviet side some fun kicking German panzers around after having been manhandled in 1941.

The largest group of German counters actually represents a decline in quality as all the infantry divisions go through a universal downgrade in 1943.

For Germans tempted by the allure of Caucasus oil there is an expansion Map C which is added if the Germans head in that direction.

The expansion also includes two turn record cards. a German Replacement Army roster and a card with other charts and tables related to the expanded game such as a guards conversion table and even a "Game Turn to Remember List." With as many as 68 turns of play possible, it's easy to see how that might be handy.

With this expansion, PM/D&D become a true "monster game." While with just two maps it's not physically the biggest Eastern Front wargame, but it may be one of the more playable. As an expansion, D&D does add some set-up time. If one plays the whole campaign it can obviously be a very long game, taking up more than 60 hours of playing time.

The game will not necessarily go the distance however. On certain specified turns the Germans check to see how many victory points (awarded for geographic objectives) they have. If it's within a certain range the game goes on, if it falls outside of it one side or the other loses.

UNLESS, of course, the players want to go on (which given the investment they have made in time and effort, would be tempting). In that case the winning side gets "forgiveness points" they can use later to score later.

The Germans also have an opportunity twice to bring the game to an early end by launching go-for-broke efforts for victory. One of these occurs in the Proud Monster portion and is discussed there. But in 1943 the Germans can declare "Manstein's Gambit." This gives them extra units but requires a victory on points by the time the weather turns bad that year, or the Soviets win.
One unusual rule in D&D is "mechanized upgrades" otherwise called "stuffers." These are counters representing extra steps that can be added to mechanized units. The unit's combat values are unaffected, but it can lose the extra steps before taking actual step reductions. This adds considerable staying power to the units so blessed.

Recommendations:

(Yes) for Wargamers: If you have Proud Monster

(Yes) for Collectors: Only if you have Proud Monster

(No) for Eurogamers: Why would you have Proud Monster?

Budapest '45 review

Budapest '45 introduced a new game system to readers of Command Magazine, one that would become XTR's alternative standard system to the classic system used in most of its 20th Century designs. While Budapest '45 still uses the attack-defense factor-movement factor system to quantify units, these values don't appear on the counters. Instead movement factors are based on unit type and appear in the rules, while the attack and defense values are tracked on a roster sheet. The Zone of Control makes a comeback to XTR in these designs, which feaure a lower unit density than usual for the scale. For example, in Budapest 45 the hex scale is only 2.5 miles per hex, which generally means regiments and battalions in most wargames, but in this game most units are divisions.

Each turn represents two days, except for the first turn, which is one day.
Most units have a half-dozen or more steps, which gives them more staying power than most games. Eliminating a unit typically takes several turns of fighting.

The components are crisp and functional. The Beth Queman map looks good and has no terrain ambiguities. The counters are the 5/8-inch size favored by XTR. Here they contain just the unit type and size using NATO-style symbols and a historical designation in large print.

On the Soviet side the non-mechanized units are red, mechanized units yellow and Romanian allies light red. On the Axis side most non-mechanized German troops are field gray and German mech are black. The single Hungarian mechanized unit is green, while the non-mechanized Hungarians are blue. In besieged Budapest all the Axis garrsion units are grey.

The turn sequence is asymetric. The Soviet movement phase follows their combat phase, which means they have to set up all their attacks the turn before. This is little handicap in the city fighting where neither side has room to move around, but is a major handicap in the mobile fighting elsewhere.

The Germans, on the other hand, move and then attack, with a mechanized movement phase following the combat phase. This makes the Germans nimble indeed. Their major problem is too few units to do everything that needs to be done.

The German Panzer divisions can detach their recon battalions to help hold some ground, but this just mitigates the unit shortage a little, it doesn't solve it.

The game situtaion is interesting and unusual. Some 20 Soviet units surround 8 Axis inside the city. Meanwhile another two dozen Soviet units try to hold off a Panzer Army trying to break the siege before the city falls. This provides that satisfying wargame situation where both players get to attack and defend.

As usual in XTR games, various "chrome" rules are used to impart the historical factors affecting the battle. Three times the Germans get to benefit from a "surprise" turn with enhanced attacks. The Soviets have two artillery units which will help them blast into the city. The Germans also have some "heavy support units" (an engineer brigade and two Tiger tank battalions) to add power to their spearpoints.

The Germans win by breaking through to the city, the Soviets win by capturing all of it by turn 14. If neither side reaches their sudden death goal, then the game result is adjudicated on victory points at the end of turn 14. Both sides get VPs for eliminating enemy steps or putting them out of supply at game end. The Soviets can score points by exiting the west map edge, while the Germans can score points if they manage to hold onto some part of Pest (the city hexes east of the Danube river).

The game takes about 20 minutes to set up and will take a full evening to play, on average.

Recommendations:

(Yes) for Wargamers: Interesting design covering an interesting battle.

(No) for Collectors: Nothing special

(No) for Eurogamers: Constantly referring to a unit roster is not the kind of game mechanic you'll have patience for.