I’m about half way through Alessandro Barbero’s book “The Battle: A New History of Waterloo.” It is a very readable book that is hard to put down. I can’t wait to play Waterloo again, the Pub Battles coverage is very accurate, and it will be fun playing it again with Napoleon’s plan. His plan was, as always, let’s attack and be prepared to strike wherever opportunity presents itself. He had no idea of Wellington’s defenses because they were all on reverse slopes. He did have the Grand Battery deploy in the center and shelled there, expecting a breakthrough, which d’Erlon’s Corps could exploit. Although Reille had the bigger Corps at the start of the campaign, after Ligny it was smaller than d’Erlon’s fresh I corps. If one was going to be a purist, a block would be switched from II Corps to I Corps, but that’s a small matter.
The cool thing about Pub Battles is that you can read the history of a battle and try out the General’s plans and such. With most detailed combat focused games you get too buried in the minutia to really try out the big picture plans. Plus, with most games it takes many hours of play to get through a battle. Typically, a quicker playing game sacrifices authenticity; Pub Battles focuses on real command concerns, and delivers the goods.
“This is by far the most relevant and realistic board game in existence in my humble opinion.”-Spencer A.
Serious wargamers often overlook Supremacy. It’s just a beer & pretzels game, right? RISK with Nukes.
It works well at that but under the hood is a very sophisticated political, economic and military model of simulation! There is a lot more going on in this game than meets the eye.
What causes conflict and tension on the international stage? How do nations manage or mismanage it? How to wars start? How do you contain them and resolve them? These are some of the key questions that Supremacy raises.
Some games claim to model the war in Ukraine but they are missing one key element: No Nukes. If a nuclear exchange is not possible in the game, then it’s not a good model. That would be like playing Poker with no money. It misses the point.
Here is some other recent feedback we’ve gotten:
“Minors and Fortuna are a lot of fun. We just played for the first time yesterday. The minors have a mind of their own. A bit like having a NPC/CPU conducting independent actions. As Russia, I’ve had to work with my adversaries (US) in order to eradicate a pandemic in Angola with an ‘expeditionary force’ and take turns across the globe!“
When I first tried Pub Battles, I played it like any other wargame with ZoC’s and units frozen in place once contacted by the enemy.
Using Alter Rolls to move first became the order of the day. (Successful Alter Rolls allow a player to jump ahead or delay when they move.) When Andrew and I were playing Brandywine, we would frequently roll for every command. We thought moving first was so critical.
It became a dice-off every turn. We both kind of concluded the system didn’t really work. I went back and reread the rules several times trying to make them fit with my preconceived notions. We were playing it all wrong. After exchanging a few e-mails with the company, I finally “got it.”
That was when I became obsessed with this system. The subtlety of choosing whether to move first or last; and understanding the ramifications is incredibly complex. Which is better? It depends on the situation and what you are trying to do. I was hooked.
I didn’t get the point of adding Baggage Trains at first. Now I love them. It pulls together strategic concerns, C&C, logistics and victory, all in one simple little rule. It’s brilliant.
As simple as the rule seems, it is bewildering to new players. This feels in line with the Pub Battles system. Simple rules, very complex decisions.
We’ve played two games already, and that was it. We want to play more. I’ve written out a lot!
Initial thoughts/experience:
Game 1: We set up, each with a sloop. Because my wife and I are wargamers at heart, we just hacked at each other. Get in close and try to shoot the other. We did take a little cargo each just for good measure, but we love to blast each other. It didn’t take long for damage to occur – that’s where the mechanic of crew application really shines. You don’t know what your opponent will do. And you see so many things you need to do, but you can only do so much. Eventually my wife won; I was taking too much water.
Game 2: We ended up using the next ship on the list, it was a hand of 7, but I forget which vessel type it was. We liked having a bigger hand. Bigger hand means more options. I think your game will be even better with the larger ships. I have some thoughts in the constructive criticism part in regards to how to manage larger vessels. We wanted a bigger hand, so we took 7 this time, and I think that ship was faster so we used the faster transparencies. I know we used the other movement gauges, not the sloop ones, because we figured those were the “fast ship” movement gauges. This game was far more interesting. We equipped ourselves to fight much better this time. I had more crew and guns, she had more crew and guns. A lot of tense fighting. Lots of surprising maneuvers. She actually first outmaneuvered me, and was able to get to my table edge. She could’ve gone off and won that way, but decided it was more fun to hunt prey. She turned around and came back to hunt me. We had a lot of really good maneuvering, getting into range, moving out of range/LOS, etc. It was a lot of cool weaving. We were able to break away to fix our ships. Eventually we came back and she got a raking shot on me. That made me toast. Took on too much water. I was able to shoot back before sinking, and I got her sails and rudder. I was sinking from water, and she was directionless at the end. I sunk and she won, but it was close. Had I been in a better positioning, I could’ve come around to sink her before I went down. It was a fun game.
Final thoughts/suggestions:
Positives:
1.) It is FUN. I was a bit skeptical at first. I read the rulebook a couple of times, and it seemed simple. Almost too simple. Can something so simple provide such good entertainment? The answer was yes! The simplicity was what made it so conducive for enjoyment. The first thing I wanted to say was that this was a fun game, and really, that matters most. If people aren’t having fun, then what’s the point? I think because of its simplicity and how fun it is, it will be extremely accessible to many people. I think you’ll pull in wargamers for sure, but I think the wider board game community will be attracted to it as well. People who like Pirate stuff will like it. Even Eurogamers can like this. It’s so accessible and so fun, no matter who you are or what you like. I found it to be really fun. My wife and I laughed while playing. That’s a definite good sign. Very fun.
2.) It is simple! I had very few questions about how to play. That is an amazing feat of this game; we’ve talked before how so many age of sail games are painfully bogged down by complex rules. This, on the other hand, was pretty self explanatory. I think graphics showing different things in the rulebook will help. I did have to google “raking shot” because I didn’t know what that was (I really don’t know much about naval combat). The first game got going pretty quick. By the end of it, we restarted immediately for the second because we knew more of what we were doing. Simple is good. But what’s even better is that your game is simple, but certainly it is not overly simplistic. It is not boring. You never know what your opponent will do. Perhaps the simultaneous movement is the mechanic that will keep this game fresh over and over. Maneuvering matters. Making those decisions matter. Do you run away and fix the ship? Or do you persist in fighting? Decisions, decisions… simple, accessible, easy to learn, yet lots of room for exploring and trying new things.
3.) It is fast paced. Quick enough to get sunk and set up for a rematch. Oh, how much I wish games were more like this, where there’s time to do a rematch. So much more fun when you can be a little carefree and take risks, knowing you can set right back up and try again! You’re not getting bogged down by anything whatsoever. It’s smooth. It flows. You move and you fight. Great things happen for you. Difficult things happen for you. Game ends. Restart!
4.) The combat is brutal – in a good way. I like having problems to fix on board. It was a bit much for my wife at first – most wargames aren’t like this, where there are internal issues as well as external threats. But I think she really came around to it quite a bit. She liked the game a lot and I did too. There’s tensions. Most of the decision making is knowing how to apply your crew; though simple, it’s a huge decision in the game. It affects everything. Absolutely everything. I really like that. Decisions are more fun with greater weight to them. I like how having more manned guns gives you bonuses. I like how combat results affect your plans. What makes a great wargame for me is if you have to react. Reacting to situations is so much fun to me. I love the chaos. So many times, I had things planned out only to lose my rudder for a turn which junked up all my plans! Delightful! I like that in a wargame! That’s real strategy and thinking, learning to adjust your plans while keeping track of the enemy!
5.) Movement is awesome. Your templates rock. I love them. My wife loved them. I don’t have more to say, it just is awesome. Setting up your little blocks and then going for it. I just love it. Took maybe one or two moves and we started getting it down super fast. We made some wrong moves; that was fun! Realizing that movement is in relation to your ship’s facing. I just loved it. Fast, smooth, it was really good.
Constructive Criticisms/Ideas for consideration:
1.) Real quick idea – Are all ships just fast or slow? Do they use the same transparencies for movement? Like, all slow ships use the slow ship one and visa versa for fast ships? Because if there’s not a difference between movement abilities of ships that are the same in terms of speed, then you ought to make a “fast” movement gauge and a “slow” movement gauge, instead of one for each type of ship. That is, unless you plan on doing special/differing movement patterns for each. You could also potentially color code the lines depending on what ship – maybe all fast ships can use the black lines of movement, but only Frigates use blue lines, and Schooners use red lines. I don’t know. Just thinking out loud. That was a practical thing. We just used the Schooner movement gauge for our second game, since it was a faster ship. But maybe they’ll all be different.
2.) Although I understand not having any misses in the deck, I might still think just a few would spice up the game a little. It’s not that I don’t want combat to be brutal, it’s that I want the strategy and tactics that are born out of a lucky incident. What if you had just a couple of miss cards in the deck? Not a lot. Like two maybe. I kept thinking, especially at the end of the second game, if I had just one miss card pulled, that would’ve given me opportunities I wouldn’t have had otherwise. Not that I minded being sunk in the end, I’m not saying that. But it’s totally awesome when that attack to finish you off didn’t in fact finish you off, and you make a little comeback! (Only to be sunk next turn!) I don’t know; that’s up to you. I like what you did. I just wonder if that would give an interesting situation tactically. It’s something to test rather than to necessarily put in the game quite yet. You could even call it a misfire, instead of a miss. Maybe it was something on the firing end that just didn’t go so well. Who knows?
3.) This is really the main and only big piece of constructive criticism we had: does it have to be cards? (I know, that’s a big question, but stick with me a bit!) We found ourselves really running out of space to handle all the water cards and fire cards and other damage cards along while checking what ship cards you have left. It just felt like a lot. I can’t imagine playing it with a ship of 14 cards – that would get nuts! The amount of damage coming your way from a 14 card ship would give you so many cards!
On one hand, I see the way the mechanics interact and I do think it has to be cards. It’s the only way it really works. On the other hand, I just have to think there could there be a way to have a dry erase ship damage chart. Where you can check boxes off as water comes pouring in, or check boxes as fire spreads. I like the cards for knowing what damage you get even, it’s just the keeping track of how much water and fire is spreading is a little much with cards.
That was our only thought, and both my wife and myself thought there could be a way with some sort of damage chart that would help keep track of that. It would free you up quite a bit more, and probably be even faster than pulling cards, setting them down, putting them back when things get fixed; etc. Just check a box or erase it.
I don’t know if that would work or not, but I think it would be especially helpful for the larger ships. I hate to suggest that, because your art guy just did a beautiful job on the cards, and let me even say that the cards work – I just wonder if there would come a point with the larger ships that the cards would feel like a lot. When your sending frigates at each other, or when you’re playing an 10 person game with a number of big ships, etc.
We did play it with laying cards out on the table. So it wasn’t really secret. I’m sure you could shuffle through your damage cards in your hand secretly just fine, but I personally like seeing all the cards out before me anyway, so I’m not forgetting to patch up a water that really needs it. (Or forgetting to put another water in my hand, if it’s still leaking!) That’s where a damage chart might work better for the way I think. And maybe that’s just my preferences too, wanting a checkbox thing going on somehow to stay better organized. Anyway, the new artwork that just came in looks amazing! So I hate to even suggest this when that looks that great. But it was a thought we had.
And really that was the only main thought we had. Which is awesome. Because that’s only a matter of practicality, not a matter of mechanics and balance. Mechanics and balance are definitely exactly where they should be for this game.
You have a good game. I’m very impressed by its elegant simplicity and depth.
And to reply to your email, yes, your art guy knocked it out of the park lol. I love it!
Pirates! the Devil & the Deep, is cool; I’m awful about names, so I doubt I’d come up with anything else, but if I do, I’ll let you know.
I’ve read through the blog. My first thought is I really really really like how much is kept secret – that creates a really cool tension. Not only are movements secret but what is on your ship can be secret, too, and I think that’s really brilliant. How many guns? How many crew? How many cargo? Etc. That’s brilliant. The blog really helped me see how much secret information there is. The less my opponent knows about me, the better. And really puts you into that brain space of thinking, “What do I do in this situation?” It really makes you watch everything the opponent does like a hawk. Could their maneuver mean this? Why are they going that way? Etc. I love that. A lot of games let people see everything. They’re fun, but it is cool to have games where you don’t know and have to guess.
I also like the customization at the beginning. I like picking how much cargo and how many guns and how many crew. That’s really fun, because you start to develop your own strategies. Preferred methods. Etc.
The card system seems interesting – that the type of damage is randomly drawn from the deck. I’m very curious to play that and see how it feels. I think that’s a good way of speeding up the process. And I think it totally pushes the players to imagine themselves on board the ship. Oh no, the hull’s been breached!!! But there’s a fire, captain!!! The speediness of the combat helps to give you the chaos too, forcing you to think faster. Thinking out loud: could the cards be too punishing? What if someone takes a bunch of hull shots right away and loses what matters most? All their cargo gone? Or all crew? And to counter that thought: is there really such a thing as being too punishing? This is war after all! I guess that’s like real battle, especially at sea! Naval combat is brutal and impartial to all. One well placed shot is enough to sink. So perhaps the card system isn’t too brutal, perhaps we need to understand that naval war is brutal! And maybe you get sunk quick, but the game is speedy enough to set it up again and have another go!
Are there ever any misses in the deck to give the one being hit that brief sigh of relief? (Only to get a fire with the next card lol.) Especially at long range, at least in the movies, you always see the cannon balls plunk into the water. Of course, I don’t know a whole lot about historical actual age of sail battles, I just love the Master & Commander movie lol. I do know, when a ship gets broadsides on you, that’s a guarantee of something hitting you, I’d think. But I don’t know.
All that to say, I’m excited to try it. I can already tell that this game has the fluidity a lot of people long for in an age of sail game. Better to play and get an understanding before saying much more about the mechanics – I don’t know the intricacies of them yet until I play! And I’m looking forward to it.
I like the idea of negotiations when you get into a certain range. You can even do stuff like giving cargo over to a pirate to evade being boarded or captured. If the pirate player is really mean, they may still try to fight after stealing goods lol. Negotiations make things interesting and gives the players that moment of direct interaction while still maintaining secrecy. Maybe the pirate thinks the Dauntless has more cargo than they are saying they have and in negotiations is demanding more. That can be fun. A little bluffing here and there.
What does this have to do with wargaming? I’m not sure but I like it. If I like it, there is a good chance that you
will too!
I got a new flag pole to put on the front of our house. What flag to hang? Well, it’s got to be something cool from
history right?!
This company has a great selection. I ended up getting 3 different revolutionary flags. They are all awesome. Great quality.
I got the red mahogany pole with brass. I love the classic look. Works great for us here but get something stronger if you have any winds that kick up where you are.
This company has great customer service too. I had an issue with my order –my own
stupidity. They were easy to get in
touch with, they helped me fix it right away.
No problem at all. Great people
to work with.
Am I getting paid to talk them up? Nope, not at all. I just love their products and they are good
people to work with.
Of course there are about 3 more flags I want to get from
them now…. Yep, here we go.
This is a comparison evaluation of two war games based upon the battle of Marengo, that took place on 14 June 1800, near an Italian town of the same name. The Austrians under General Melas managed to surprise Napoleon (Napoleon under the impression that they were withdrawing). The attack resulted in French forces being driven back initially, and it looked like a solid victory for Melas. But the arrival of Desaix, with his reinforcements, the French turned the battle around.
Simmons Games, “Bonaparte at Marengo”, was published in 2005, and the second game on the battle is by Pub Battles, called “Pub Battles Marengo”. I personally owned one of the games and Pub Battles graciously provided a copy of their game for the review. I will describe each in comparison based on the map boards, playing pieces, and rules of play.
Map Boards
Simmons: This version has a map board, printed and mounted, that is broken down by areas called “locales”, where the sides of the locale are referred to as “approaches”. Each approach is marked with NATO symbols representing cavalry infantry and artillery to identify penalties for attacking across that approach.
Simmons
There are two other symbols as well, representing cavalry obstruction or impassible approaches. Each locale has a limit on the number of units that can occupy that locale. The battlefield has been simplified by only including the parts of the battlefield that directly impacted the fight. So, the western edge begins with the river crossing point that Melas used, having a bridge and a pontoon bridge alongside. The map is not completely to “scale” as some towns have been given a greater size, or buildings of nearby farms and villages are consolidated into one “town” (probably for the sake of simplifying the features and clarifying the terrain).
Pub Battles: The map used here is the actual antique map of the battlefield, void of “areas” or “hexes”; you are literally plotting your moves on the original period map as a general would do on the table of a handy house or tavern. I was provided the paper version of the map which I laminated at FedEx for about $20 (it already had a small tear, so I wanted to protect it).
Pub Battles
The map has been only partially colorized, with major woods represented in green. Mostly everything else is black outlines on brown tinged paper. Aesthetically, it is very appealing, giving you the feeling of participating in the planning of historical troop movements, but I found it often difficult to figure out what I was looking at as the game’s terrain chart is part of the system rules (bought separately), is generic to the system, and doesn’t have pictures to provide examples. Players should probably go over the map together prior to starting and make sure they concur on their interpretations of the features.
Reading the terrain is sometimes difficult.
Playing Pieces
Simmons: The playing pieces are 1 1/2 by 1/4-inch rectangular blocks that represent infantry, cavalry, and artillery formations. They are generic, only representing strength points, which are printed on the color blocks. No leaders are represented like they are in later Simmons’ games; leadership is abstracted by allowing each side to move three formations per turn. I find the lack of unit or lead identification takes away from the presentation of the game.
Simmons units with strength points.
Pub Battles: The unit pieces are 1 7/8 by 3/8-inch rectangular blocks with printed labels applied that have the names of the commanders and symbols representing the type of unit and whether it is “elite”. I like the representation of the units by commander name’s that were involved in the battle, but the strengths of the units (all are “3-step”) generalizes their unit size in the battle. This does make sense if you are looking at this to be simple and fast paced, without complexity.
Pub Battles with symbols for artillery and elite.
The other pieces are small cubes represent major leaders of the formations represented in the battle on both sides, with corresponding cylindrical pieces used for a “chit pull” from a cup to determine which formation moves first. The game has a wooden rectangular measuring stick for movement and artillery fire. You apply stickers on one side for cavalry movement and the other side for infantry movement; stickers divide the segments of movement in thirds. A little confusion as to where to apply the sticker as my game copy came with three different scales which required contacting the company to determine which was correct.
Rules
Simmons: The rules for Simmons Marengo are nine pages of smaller print and detailed (read complex). Understanding the sequence and application of the combat system requires several read-throughs of the rules. There are examples with pictograms to ease understanding, but it isn’t a simple task to grasp. The game is diceless, so combat effects rely solely on type and strength of a unit, its position, opposition, and if there is defensive artillery. Plan on reading the rules several times to play and to read again before the next time you play.
Pub Battles: The rules here are simple, easy to understand and follow with only nine pages with large print and illustrations. The rules for the specific battle are only two pages, but lacks information specific to the terrain on this map. The difficulty once again is the map in determining where you can move, how far, and what you are actually sitting on. Without a terrain guide, players have to examine the map and agree what the terrain symbols actually represent. While I enjoy simplicity in the rules, I feel more could’ve been added to clarify terrain and movement. It could stand to have a snapshot of a section of the map to give examples of the terrain and play.
Game Sequence
Simmons: The game has 16 turns, broken down into hours. The turn sequence is:
Resolve artillery bombardments,
Conduct assaults,
Movement, and
Declare bombardments.
Any units that are in an approach can declare an “assault” on the adjacent enemy controlled approach. Movement is either moving one locale across a bordering approach, or by road movement. This is also when they can conduct maneuver attacks; the moving player can declare a maneuver attack across an approach. The defender can choose to move a unit from the “reserve” (center of the locale) and move it into that approach to block the maneuver, or they must retreat from the locale. The game is as much maneuver as it is combat. As you will read later, combat in the approaches seems almost discouraged.
Pub Battles: There are only 8 turns, approximately representing 1.5 hour increments. First turn is all Austrian (as they surprised the French), so the only chit pulls are them, with the French chits set to one side. Because of terrain movement restrictions, this really only amounts to getting them across the bridges and into positions opposing the initial French ones. After that it is a series of random chit pulls till both side’s formations have moved. Then all fights due to contact are resolved. Very easy to follow and execute. It becomes interesting when situations develop like a formation that was spent and forced to retreat is re-engaged before it has its turn, which prevents “rallying” and forces the unit to withdrawal or to spin about and be subject to assault while “spent”.
Movement
Simmons: Movement is pretty straight forward and even implementing a realistic staggered road movement where three pieces can use the same road, but must stop short of the preceding unit’s locale, i.e. first moves three locales, second moves two, and the last only one (strung out in column). Non-road movement is one locale at a time. Movement within a locale to an approach in a locale counts as a move as well. There is no racing across the map in this game. Cavalry can move straight into an approach by “continuation” and can make a maneuver attack if moving by road and attacking through an approach crossed by the road.
Pub Battles: Movement is measured with the stick and difficult terrain like rivers, streams, marsh, and woods reduce your movement by 1/3. So, you can easily be brought up short by the stream/marsh directly in front of the river crossing at the start. I greatly appreciate the “oblique movement” rule that allows units to shift their forward movement 45 degrees from center as they move, while maintaining the same facing. This makes it a lot easier to move and position without a lot of measuring. Changing your unit’s facing is free once, but then costs 1/3 movement. Additionally, you cannot end your move in the “firing arc” of an enemy unit (1/3-foot movement out the front of the block and 45 degrees of either end of the block) unless you close to contact and fight. This makes for a lot of maneuver, as you can often fall just short of contact. No template for a firing arc is provided, but it was fairly easy to make one out of cardstock.
Pub Battles Firing Arc
Once you’ve played through a practice game, it is fairly fast-paced for movement. What is unique about this system is that despite movement sequence being determined by formation “chit pull”, no combat takes place until all formations have moved (with the exception of artillery bombardment, which takes place during movement instead of moving the guns). This results in a swirl of maneuver and counter-maneuver, where each player must decide whether to move into contact or flank, knowing that it may change if the opposing formation hasn’t moved yet.
Combat
Simmons: This is where Simmons Marengo gets complicated. As discussed before, the game is dice-less and relies on strength, unit type, and position to determine the results. Assaults are declared by units in an approach against enemy units in the opposite approach and this happens before movement. Each approach has symbols of units to show there is a penalty for attacking across it, representing a reduction in attack strength of one. There is an infantry symbol in every approach on the map, indicating that there is always a reduction for infantry, which makes no sense, as many of the approaches are clear, flat, terrain. This guarantees that almost any attack on a “narrow” approach will end in a win for the defender, so the game is initially attrition and maneuver, until units start losing strength. Some of the approaches are wide (two units) allowing for two “lead” units in the assault, which could actually allow a first try win by the attacker if they plan it right. What I do like about this is the chess like approach of no dice or luck. What the game tests is your ability to plan your assaults, maneuvers, and bombardments, to try to gain the advantage. A first game between two new players will almost inevitably end up in an argument and review of the rules.
Pub Battles: Combat is simple: units in contact fight. But as pointed out under movement, it is easy to end up with a fight where flankers have become flanked. Combat is resolved in order of the forces with the best command ratings, but since Austrian forces are “3”, French forces “4” and Napoleon is “5”, that will always be French first, making the need for assigning command ratings rather pointless in this battle, as the Austrians are never “first”. You roll three 6-sided dice for combat, with 1-3 missing, and 4-6 causing a hit. So, each roll can be three misses, three hits, or somewhere in between. Combat results are recorded by using the block itself to track; a unit starts as “fresh”, one hit flips the block to name up (spent), second hit causes a retreat of 1/3 foot move and face the rear, third hit removes the unit from the battle (the unit has “shattered”). This combat results system is simple, but full of luck. In my game I played against a friend, 4-5 poor rolls in a row against his better high rolls and I had two French formations essentially out of the fight, since once a formation has lost half its units, it is “ineffective” and can no longer “rally” (return from “spent” to “fresh”).
A “spent” unit can return to “fresh” by not moving one turn, flipping to “fresh” and it may change facing. Two of the French formations only have two units, and the rest aren’t much larger, so it doesn’t take long for the French to be in trouble. The Austrians have a couple small formations, but the main formation under Melas is huge and is not likely to become ineffective. A rule that didn’t make much sense to us in play was that any infantry unit occupying buildings is automatically “spent” and cannot return to “fresh” while in the buildings. While this grants the unit the benefit of having no flanks, I would think that no one would want to use this as it only takes one hit to force them to retreat and two to destroy it, so there is no real Pub Battles firing arc benefit in the game for occupying towns/chateaus unless your infantry unit is spent already and cannot rally (i.e. ineffective). Using the Hugomount and La Haye Saint as examples, this seems ahistorical, as towns and villages were frequently used as anchors for battle lines, because they were not easy to take. In our game, we agreed to a house rule that any attack on the unit was also -1 on the die rolls to make it more realistic and appealing to defend towns.
Victory Conditions
Simmons: Morale is handled as a point count of combat losses for the whole army. First army to reach “0” and the other side wins, providing they didn’t reach zero at the same time. As the units are generic with no leaders represented, there is no effect of morale represented below army level, except that one-strength units cannot “lead” in attack or defense.
Pub Battles: The side that has lost more than 50% of its units (not counting artillery) loses. If neither side lose more than 50%, then there isn’t a winner. Once again, in my opinion, this favors the Austrian player as they have plenty of units. Our game did run out almost to the last turn before he managed to pick off the last block of the French to win. The game becomes a contest for the French player not to lose, rather than trying to win. Maybe when I have more games under my belt, I’ll see the game as less favorable to the Austrians.
Conclusion
Simmons: The game has a relatively complex combat system requiring a thorough understanding of the rules and its nuances. I quite enjoy playing a game that is not subject to the whims of a dice roll, but it does have its issues, such as the automatic infantry penalty that precludes a win by an attack in an assault. The game could stand to have the rules updated to match improvements made in the later game “Napoleon’s Triumph” (Battle of Austerlitz) in regards to formations, leaders, and battle resolution. It is no longer in print at the moment, so a copy of the game online goes for about $80-150 each, sometimes higher.
Pub Battles: I found the game against my friend to be exciting and enjoyable, as well as frustrating, as you are only a few bad rolls away from being routed from the field, due to the 50/50 combat results, as anyone who’s played Risk knows. The combat modifiers for “elite” units, flanking, and terrain does off-set this luck factor somewhat. I would definitely play this again, with the understanding that it can be swift and subject to the random chance of the roll. The basic rules set starts at $36.24, and the Marengo game itself is $73.25 for the basic (paper map and game pieces) and up to $129.95 for the canvas map and pieces. I consider this a bit pricey, but comparable to the current price of the Simmons game, and it is definitely enjoyable to play. And as they mention on the website, once you have the basic rules set, you can design your own battles as long as you can find and print a copy of an old battle map and wooden blocks. This is definitely a “pub” game; fast and furious and more “playable” than Simmons’ Marengo, but sometimes fickle in the results; much luck involved. So, if you get a copy, enjoy, but have a thick skin when you opponent regales the bar with the battle highlights as you buy the pints.
Editorial Comments:
The wooden measuring sticks are sold separately and do not come with the game.
A common mistake by new players is to fight every combat round possible. This amplifies the luck factor. Staying for additional rounds is optional. Experienced players can easily mitigate most of this by carefully deciding and planning when to press the fight and when to fall back.
As it turns out, this is exactly what the rules call for. Buildings provide cover which give the attacker a -1 penalty. Chateaus like Hugomount and La Haye Saint are even tougher to take as they do not cause defenders to become spent by entering.
There are probably over a hundred board games on the Battle of Gettysburg, so why another. Well that is exactly the point.
The game we will be looking at is an adaptation, or a descendant, of the original Kriegspiel. The game information will have to come second to perhaps fulfillment of a long time dream.
This is a picture of a ‘light pull chain’ defending a valley, and in the mid 1960’s to me it was state of the art for wargaming. I collected every one I could to add to my growing army of them. As you can see, with the bed covers formed just so, you can create any terrain you want. You can also form your army units (chains) in any shape possible. They can also represent any army from ancient times to the 20th century. They can be armed with firearms or sword and shield; it does not matter. Why, you ask, am I bringing this up? Because I have been looking for a game that reminds me of wargaming with my chains, and I think I finally have one in Pub Battles: Gettysburg. To be more exact, I think all of the Pub Battles games will do. So, on to the game.
The Pub Battle games all have a few things in common. First, they are relatively easy with only about four pages of rules. Second, they do a good job of showing how units had to march and fight historically. Third, they are beautiful beyond compare. The maps are all period ones that have been enhanced by Command Post Games to be easier for players to use. The map not only looks good, it actually feels good. You wouldn’t be surprised to see it come out of a museum case. It is rolled up when you receive it, however it flattens right out without adjusting or counter-folding by the player. The map is more of a time machine than just a wargaming map. It allows your mind to wander when playing so you actually believe that you have Hood, Hancock, and Meade around the table with you. The counters, while really only wooden rectangles, have the same effect. Once they are on the map it feels like von Moltke is in a chair nearby looking on approvingly.
This is what comes in the game tube:
Pub Battles Rulebook Pub Battles Gettysburg Rulebook Six small die and one large (all six sided) 24″x24″ Paper map (you can order a canvas map, and per Command Post Games one is being used in a museum exhibit) Six small Light Chain Pulls (coincidence?) to be used to calculate Rates of March. You can also get wooden ones. Black and Gray rectangular, and square blocks Myriad of stickers for the above
I will post this write up from Command Post Games:
Units realistically sprawl out in road column, resulting in delays, snaking and traffic snarls.
Baggage Trains add to the traffic and congestion problems. They have to be protected but also need to be kept close to the action to properly supply the troops.
Realistic, chaotic move sequence. Your troops don’t move when you want them to. You don’t know when exactly when your troops or the enemy will move. As the commander, you can only try to speed them up or slow them down. If that fails, you have to react quickly with contingency planning.
Chaotic move sequence also results in massive re-playability. You will never see a game open and develop the same way twice. However the timing works out, you must adapt to the situation at hand.
Realistic Fog of War: blocks hide exact unit strength and type. You can also hide your reserves off board. This forces players to realistically screen and probe. You can never be certain as to how close you are to breaking the enemy. Are they out of reserves or can they still reinforce their line? Where are they strong? Are they massing for a counter attack?
The detailed narrative generated by the tense game play makes for great solitaire games.
Combat and movement models are based on accurate, military, combat data from the period: Kriegsspiel.
Optional rules for multiplayer team play.
Optional written orders are both fun, easy to implement and very realistic. These are great to use with multiplayer teams. They also greatly enhance solitaire games.
Sophisticated and deep strategy. There are tons of decisions to make every turn. Every one of them must be weighed against possible advantages / disadvantages to you and the enemy. Players must consider how the timing of moves will impact other commands and the enemy.
The game looks to be easy, but that is deceptive. The addition of the different optional rules make it both deeper and more historical. Please one favor though, rules lawyers do not apply. This is a game where you and your opponent will need to be gentlemen and come to agreements over movement and the battles. The one thing about this game is that it will get crowded with pieces in different places. On a Gettysburg map that is going to be the ‘fish hook’. The rules are very clear, but because of the compression effects on the units it sometimes gets a little hazy as to exact unit placement. When that happens, it can either be a rules fight fest or a friendly compromise on the issues that may arise. Remember that its forbearer Kriegspiel did have umpires.
There are probably over a hundred board games on the Battle of Gettysburg, so why another. Well that is exactly the point. It has never had the Command Point Games treatment. So, even an old jaded campaigner will look at the battle through fresh eyes. The game is simple, but in its own way it brings to life the problems of command in that era. The price point for the game is not cheap. However, were you to be able to hold the components in your own hands and feel the quality, you would immediately understand. There are a lot of stickers that need to be applied, so keep that in mind. They are also harder to apply correctly on the rectangles than when you are putting stickers on a block game. Someone who is a stickler (sorry) for having things just so will need extra time and more patience than usual with setting up this game.
Gettysburg allows you to play all three days as separate games, or a campaign with night turns. You also get three what-if scenarios. First, Jackson was not killed at Chancellorsville. Second, Jackson was wounded at Chancellorsville, but arrives in time for the battle. Third, J.E.B. Stuart is present at the opening of the festivities. Victory conditions are cut and dried. A Player receives one Victory Point for every enemy piece destroyed. The player with the most points wins. There are a few Gettysburg only rules. These are:
Treat all creeks as Streams. All Cavalry are dragoons: they roll only 2 dice. Both Confederate and Federal HQs have a rating of 3.
This is the sequence of play:
1. Place all Command Chits in a cup. 2. Pull a Command Chit randomly from the cup. 3. Move pieces from that Command 4. Repeat Steps 2 & 3 until cup is empty. 5. Resolve Combat between all enemy pieces in contact. 6. Start a new Turn.
So, how does it play? It is a lot of fun, and strangely very deep, in a very historical way. With the game being a chit pull one, you will never know what to expect to be able to do or what your opponent can do. The main rule to keep in mind is listed in bold “Move where the majority of the piece can fit”. The piece is in one type of terrain: the type under the ” majority of the piece”. HQ pieces move first and then you determine command ranges There is an optional rule where Baggage Trains can be added. These really add to the historical flavor especially in their uncanny ability to clog roads. The designers suggest that after you get the rules down to add ‘Optional Hidden Reserves’ to the mix. For example, the pieces of a corps if in reserve would be hidden in their HQ unit. As long as the HQ unit is not spotted by the enemy they can lay in wait like a rattler waiting to pounce. To find an entire corps pop up over a ridge that seemed safe is extremely disconcerting. There are also rules on multi-player with special rules dealing with teams that try to cheat, so beware. Thank you Command Post Games for allowing me to review this almost hidden gem of a game.
We have 2 Brandywine games. A Kriegsspiel version and a Pub Battles version. Which one is better? How do they compare? This post was prompted by a great question:
I have been looking at your Brandywine games in detail: The Kriegsspiel and Pub Battles version. Both games look fantastic. Pub Battles seems a bit pricey.
What would you recommend between these two?
Manuel
Great question. It depends what you are looking for. I’ll try to summarize the advantages here:
Fast Play time. You can setup and knock out a game in less than 1 hour.
Small Map size. Easily fits on a small table. Easy to transport and play at a bar, park or restaurant.
Because the map is smaller scale, the area to the Colonial left is expanded. This game allows the British the option to flank from either side. In this way, I think it allows for a truer command feel by the Colonials. They have no idea where the British will attack from. A true sense of surprise.
Canvas Map option. The ‘pricey’ version comes with the canvas maps. That’s what real maps from the period were made from. They are amazing quality, durable and water resistant. -Great for spilling drinks. Note that this is an option. You can get the regular paper map for only $62.66 right now. The Kriegsspiel sets all come with paper maps.
Standard 2 player format. No Umpires needed. You can play with up to 6 players.
This is the better option if you are new to the hobby or looking for a game to teach new recruits.
True Kriegsspiel Rules. Fully compatible with the original Reisswitz, Prussian Kriegsspiel. You can play this with multiplayer teams and umpires etc.
Pub Battles Rules option. We ship this with Pub Battles rules. Alternatively, this converts the game into a full blown, detailed, traditional, 2 player wargame. Check out the Review tab here for a player report on how this works.
Smaller scale. This matches true Kriegsspiel scale but the map it huge! It does give you more detail and finer control as far as being able to form your lines along tree lines and slopes. Also more detail in actual contact and types of combat.
This is the better option if you have time, space and are looking for a more detailed, standard type wargame.
What does Telestrations have to do with wargames and military leadership? Everything. Telestrations IS Kriegsspiel.
We often laugh after playing Kriegsspiel. What did you think was happening? What was really happening? What did you tell them to do? What did they actually do? Why? These differences are often hysterical!!! Well, I guess we laugh so we don’t cry.
Real leadership and real command is about communication. Writing orders. Getting your team to work together. How often does this break down? I have 2 words: Murphy’s Law.
Remember the Chinese Telephone game we played as kids? Everybody gets in a line. Then you whisper a sentence in the first person’s ear. They quietly pass it down the line. When you get to the end, the result is completely different right?
Telestrations is Kriegsspiel without the maps and musket warfare. It is Pictionary and Chinese Telephone rolled together into a fun, easy party game.
How does it work? You pull a card with a word on it. You have to draw a picture of that word. You pass your picture to the next person. They have to guess what the word was. Here is an example starting with the word: Recliner
Hysterical! If you don’t have it, get it!!! This is one of the best games ever made. Everyone can play it. I recommend the big 12 player party version. Everyone will want to play. This is a classic.
Caution: Do not play this if you have broken or cracked ribs. You are going to be laughing a lot during this game!
