State of Play: Saigon 75

 

I’ve been falling behind on my posts, and there are reasons for that, but rather than go into the tawdry details, I’ll just teel you quickly about a game we played late last week. The game is Saigon 75 (Nuts! Publishing, 2023), a recent acquisition (bought on sale with Espana 1936 (Devir, 2007) to save on shipping – you can find an unboxing of that one here). I had every intention of doing an unboxing of Saigon 75 before putting up any other content, but such was not to be (that would have made for a short post anyway – there isn’t all that much to the game, components-wise).

Initial set-up, post Hallowe'en visitations.

Saigon 75 is a game covering the last roughly two years of the “American War” in South Vietnam. One player plays the ARVN, and the other the NVA. I refer to the sides as the two competing armies because very little in the way of politics is reflected in the game. It really is a clash of iron and blood, and each side tries to use what they have to hand to pummel the opposing side into submission. Except that the South Vietnamese player is pummelling with one hand tied behind their back.

The first thing you need to know about Saigon 75 is that if you’re playing the ARVN, you will almost certainly loose. Odds are stacked in the enemy’s favour, and he doesn’t have t be a master tactician to bring about your demise. This is built into the game; the NVA dice offer more hits (two strikes, two retreats and two blank faces, compared to the ARVN one hit, two retreats and three blank sides), their potential activations increase with the passing of time, and your South Vietnamese troops will begin to desert their posts if the North make too many territorial gains. The designers, Jean-Philippe Barcus and Pascal Toupy, warn prospective players of this in the introductory comments of the game. It’s the first in a series called the UP! (or Under Pressure!) series. It’s designed to be a quick-playing game that will allow a second game in an evening (so the players can change sides and each experience a win). The next game in the series will be Vendée 93 and will be published by Fellowship of Simulations. A Kickstarter campaign is planned for this one, so watch this space for news of the launch.

The Thin Yellow Line.

But let’s get back to The NVA player has two kinds of units, tall, division-level red cylinders (NVA) and shorter black cylinders (Viet Cong). If an NVA division takes a hit, it is replaced by a half-height brigade cylinder. The ARVN player starts with some resources on the board, mostly regular South Vietnamese infantry divisions (tall, yellow cylinders, some motorised brigades, and a few US forces (marines, rangers). But it’s not enough to cover everywhere, and the North Vietnamese can attack from anywhere along the country’s land border, with anything from superior to overwhelming force.

Some early South Vietnamese casualties. They weren't the last.

This isn’t a review, so I don’t want to get lost in the tall grass here, but here’s a quick precis of the game’s workings. The game is played over eight seasons/turns (if the South can hold out that long). In a turn the NVA plays a card from their hand of three, then rolls a die to see how many activations they get for that turn (result plus a set number, depending on the season) deploy or move its units, engages in combat, and when everything else is completed, check the status of the provinces. Any provinces held solely by North Vietnamese forces get a red star marker. This is a Quyết Thẩng (local militia) marker, representing the control the North Vietnamese have in that province. This becomes more important at the close of the South Vietnamese phase.

The ARVN player’s turn follows the same mode as the NVA, except after checking for province control, the ARVN player may have to roll on the desertion table. This is a killer, and it’s what ultimately cost me the game. If the NVA control five or more South Vietnamese provinces – represented by the Quyết Thẩng stars, the ARVN player has to roll a die, and remove the result’s value worth of troops form the board, in a preferential order to mitigate the immediate pain. This happens every turn thereafter.

"I hear Switzerland is nice this time of year."

So, just to recap, the North Vietnamese have more troops available, and they’re more effective in combat. They can go places you can’t – back across the border into Laos or Cambodia – and can engage you from anywhere along said border. And the better they do, the worse it gets for you. Nobody said the job was going to be easy.

T took Saigon province (the primary victory condition) at the end of turn six, after a bad roll on the desertion table saw the last of my remaining ARVN troops pull up stumps.  Could feel the downdraft from the helicopter on the roof of the US embassy on the back of my neck, the defeat was that visceral (it turned out to be the air-conditioner). Victory as the South Vietnamese is possible, but the pressure builds unrelentingly, and each misstep or unlucky roll makes the job ever so much harder. Good thing I like a challenge.

 

 

Stripped Down for Parts: España 1936

 

 

The Spanish Civil War was a crucial conflict in the lead-up to the Second World War, fought between the democratic-leaning Republicans and the fascist-orientated Nationalists. With the First World war still a raw wound in many countries, most governments stood back to see where things would land (some did take sides; the Soviets assisted the farther Left elements of the Republicana, while the German and Italian fascist governments provided both materiel and personnel for the right-wing Nacional. Eventually the Nationalists would emerge victorious, but not before providing a test bed for the Luftwaffe’s best thinking in ariel bombing and ground support, which held them in good stead during the invasions of Poland and France.

That about covers my understanding of the Spanish Civil War. I’ve read Orwell and Hemingway, and I’ve seen Picasso’s monumental Guernica up close, but in truth, I know only the barest facts about the conflict. I suspect this will change, though, as I start to dive into España 1936, Second Edition (Devir, 2024)

España 1936 is a card-driven, high-level simulation of the entire Spanish Civil War, designed by Antonio Catalán. So far as I can ascertain, this is publisher Devir’s only straight-up wargame. Devir began as a small company out of Brazil, publishing overseas comic books in Portuguese and Spanish. Now based on Barcelona, the company also publishes games (mostly what I think of as family games). España 1936 is obviously close to the hearts of people at Devir, because this is the game’s seconds edition, with reworked art and an expansion, La Armada, built into the game (which I gather was only previously released of the Spanish version of the game). The original version was released in 2007, with this edition appearing in 2024.

The more flamboyant First Edition cover art.

The box cover features original art, but in the style of the propaganda posters of the era. This is something it shares with the original release, though I’d argue the new presentation is more suggestive of the seriousness of the game. The artist for the whole project was Joan Guardiet, a talented illustrator who has done a lot of work for Devir, among others, and the visual nods to the media of the era carry through the whole production.

Box-back.

The box back features teaser art of the board mid-play, a bilingual description of the game, and the usual icon guidance to let us know it’s strictly a two-player game, that it’s recommended for ages 14 and up, and that a full game is likely to take in the region of three hours.

Rulebooks in two languages.

The game comes with two rulebooks, one in Spanish and one in English. My understanding of the Spanish language is limited to a few dozen nouns, and most of those are food- or cooking-related, so I’m grateful for the inclusion of English rules. The rulebook is suggestive of a newspaper, and the whole booklet runs to 36 pages. The actual rules run to about twenty heavily (but usefully) illustrated pages. The rest of the book includes a short historical essay by Ramon Sarobe, six pages of advanced rules for incorporating the La Amrada expansion, a shorter duration España 1938 scenario, a timeline of the war and a page of designer’s notes.

Sample page from the rulebook. I don't know what the first edition was like, but this
seems to be quite through and well-written.

The rules are rather illustration-heavy, but in this case this is a good thing. A lot of information on the counters and via the cards is transmitted visually, and the rules provide instruction on how to decipher this information. For example, while there are only a couple of unit types in the base game, each side has no less than eight factions represented; the Republicans are supported by Basque, local Communist, Anarchist and Soviet forces, while the are backed by Italian and Carlist volunteers, the Condor Legion (German Luftwaffe “volunteers”), and the Army of Africa.

The new board design is a vast improvement on the first edition board.

The board is a relatively simple map of the Iberian Peninsula, measuring 21 ½" by 25 ½", with areas represented as paired-box positions, similar to the country representations on the Twilight Struggle (GMT Games, 2005) map, or the region control boxes in Struggle for Europe: 1939-1945 (Worthington Games, 2019). The colour scheme of the board is muted, with an earthy palette which will make the bold red and blue of the units really pop. 

The board also incorporates a turn track and Contested Territories tally (three tracks registering Nationalist and Republican holdings, plus the yellow “Contested” track. Three brightly coloured (and slightly oversized) painted wooden blocks are included in the inventory for use on this track.

Punchboards, bundled in a paper ribbon. One of those novel European things -
the cutaway corner at the to-right of the boards to facilitate lifting the boards out
with a fingertip so you don't have to upend the whole box. Well played, Devir.

Units in the game are abstracted to strength points, but there are also armoured and aircraft units available to both sides. These units are presented on roughly 1 ¼” square counters, cut from good, thick brown-core cardstock. These have a simple numerical value, and come in different weights. You can “make change” by swapping out in-play units, raising or lowering their overall value. Double-width markers denote overall control of a region by one or the other side, red for the Republicans, blue for the Nationalists. Half-sized Leader counters can offer an advantage when present with troops.

Mostly units here. The Republican pieces face left, while the Nationalists face right.
 The little circular markers are used to track information on the players' Tracking Boards.

Unit tokens with double width Area Control markers, half-height General tokens (down
the right-hand side of the boards), and the aforementioned Tracking Boards (bottom).

Each side has a little tracking board for keeping track of Replacement Points, Generals and aircraft resources. The other half of the board sports a detailed game sequence. These are printed in Spanish on the front and English on the back.

The Battle-board (left). Spanish side shown.

And a final, reduced-sized board offering more units.

Also included is a battle board, for playing out battles between the two sides over contested locations. Again, this is presented in both Spanish and English, and also provides visual guidance on the steps involved in preparation and participation in combat, like two concentric flowcharts.

Sealed card-decks as they come. Each sealed deck contains both sides cards
 for either 1936-37 or 1938-39 (showing the English language cards left,
and Spanish on the right).

Like the rules, the game comes with two complete sets of cards, two decks each, one in Spanish and the other in English. I can only guess that it was cheaper to do this than to produce two different versions. All in all, is adds maybe an extra half-pound to the weight of the box, but certainly makes the whole thing feel mor substantive.

The game is card driven, with the players beginning with a had f cards each turn and working through them. Each side has their own decks, a 1936-37 deck and a 1938-39 deck. I haven’t explored the options presented through the cards yet, so you’ll have to wait for an AAR for some worthwhile thoughts on that, but they are really beautifully presented and seem quite straightforward and easy to understand.

Division of components. The game coms with eight dice (four each - no need to share),
tracking blocks for the Contested Territories track on the map, logo stickers for the
markers, and enough resealable baggies to accommodate all the pieces that come
in the box. The dividers also keep the English and Spanish cards from fraternising.

The inside of the box is cleverly put together with a simple divider system (which, in my copy at least, did get a little banged up in transit), and is just one more example of the attention to detail and functionality that has gone into the product design of this game. This is the difference between a more broadly public facing company compared to the ones that focus solely or primarily on wargames. There are higher expectations among euro-gamers regarding component quality and the aesthetic design of games generally. We grognards have long got use to putting up with short shrift. España 1936 feels like very component in the game has been developed to execute its task brilliantly and left at that stage. Nothing unfinished, but nothing over-engineered either. An elegant sufficiency of design. 

As well as the four decks of cards, España 1936 comes with eight dice – four red and four blue, large wooden cubes for tracking the Contested Territories, and a tiny strip of stickers to bling-up the Contested Territories tracking blocks with appropriate symbols.

The whole presentation of España 1936 is understated and quite lovely. The going opinion of the game seems to be generally positive (a solid 7.3 average on BGG). Some might question its credentials as a wargame (there is always some voice of contention), but from the little I’ve seen of it so far, it does appear to be a serious consideration of a brutal, oddly romanticised conflict that stands out on a century of conflicts.

 

 

State of Play: New member of the A Fast Game team

 

Well, less a new employee, more a new strata of management. We've adopted a cat, and her name is Dharma.

"I was told there would be snacks."

Jess and I have been married for twenty-five years, and in that time, we've never owned a pet. But collectively we've cat-sat felines for family members for a total of roughly four of those years, usually six weeks to three months at a time, once for nearly six months.

I'm not quite sure how it happened, but we started talking about adopting a cat a couple of months ago. When Jess was looking at the local Animal Welfare League's website, Luna (as she went by then) jumped out, figuratively speaking. A stray for probably most of her life, the two-year-old was affectionate on her own terms, but had some issues, she didn't like other cats and she didn't like children. It was like it was meant to be. 

Dharma is a strong advocate of paper recycling.

It took a few days for Dharma to get used to her new surroundings, and a full week us to gain a measure of trust from her, and for her to become accustomed to getting regular, small-but-often meals (she'd lived on the streets for so long, fending for herself, that in the shelter she would make herself sick gorging her food too quickly). The adoption officially went through a couple of days ago with Dharma's registration transfer to us.

I haven't tabled a game since we've had her but she doesn't seem to be a physicist (a cat that pushes things of shelves to see if they break of bounce), so I'm holding out hope that she won't countermand my orders with troop movements of her own devising. I'll keep you apprised.

Already, Dharma is expressing some strong views on the subject of CRTs.

Review: Commands and Colors: Medieval

 

 

Commands and Colors: Medieval (GMT Games, 2019) seems to be regarded by some as the red-headed step-child of the Commands and Colors family. It was the only C&C version that met with open (and loud) hostility from some quarters when it first arrived on the scene. I want to say up front, I am not, and have never been, in that camp. 

Everyone has their own opinion of the Commands and Colors system, but nobody can deny it’s been popular (and I’d argue, ultimately good for the health of the wargaming hobby overall, but that’s a conversation for another post). Commands and Colors: Ancients (GMT Games, 2006) and Commands and Colors: Napoleonics (GMT Games, 2010) have sold out of their seventh and fifth printings respectively, and demand is still high.  C&C: Medieval is on its second printing, and at time of writing is still available from the publisher.

Set-up for the Petra Mountains Passes (Lazic War, 548 AD) scenario.

A number of years ago, before the publication of C&C: Medieval, there was a short note in GMT’s monthly newsletter penned by Richard Borg, C&C’s designer and godfather of system’s development into new subject areas, from Memoir ’44 (Days of Wonder, 2004) to Commands and Colors Tricorne: Highland Uprising (Compass Games, 2020). Here Mr Borg spent a paragraph of two on the projection for C&C: Medieval, which at the time, had either just been added to the P500 list or was added in the following month or so. At that time, Borg stated the intention of his development cohort was for C&C Medieval to cover the entire medieval period, from the dissolution of the Roman Empire to roughly the mid-fourteenth century, in broadly chronological order, beginning with the Eastern Roman Empire, and working up form there. The middle-ages cover a period of over a thousand years, beginning around 300AD (though some would argue for the Sack of Rome in 410 being a good marker) through to about 1500 and the birth of the Early Modern period.

There was some kickback about the choice of tackling the period chronologically, but since the game’s initial release five years ago, Commands and Colors: Medieval has received over 600 BGG ratings for an average of 8.2 out of 10 (I’m always wary of BGG numbers, but in terms of wargame-scale, 600 seems like a good sample size). For context, Command and Colors: Napoleonics rates and average 8.0 over nearly 3,300 ratings. With the impending release of C&C : Medieval's first Expansion set, The Crusades (GMT Games, ~2024 - at time of writing still available for pre-order on GMT''s P500 list), I thought this seemingly under-loved game deserved a second look.

A green and pleasant board. The vertical lines you can see are panel folds, not the
sector demarcation lines, which are dashed (each sector is roughly 4 hexes wide). 

 

Appearance

Command and Colors: Medieval has everything you’ve come to expect from a Commands and Colors game; lots of blocks (purple for the Late Romans/Byzantines and their allies, and a sandy colour for their enemies, usually Persian Sassanids in this the base set scenarios, but sometimes their hereto allies), sheets of stickers to go on the blocks, in this instance a combined Rules and Scenarios booklet, and some very nice laser printed dice (no more arduous placing of die-face stickers in the recesses of the old dice of Ancients and Napoleonics (we’d played so many games with my brother-in-law’s set of C&C: Napoleonics, I had to write to GMT and ask if they sold extra sticker sets to replace the faces of the then illegible dice (if you ever find yourself in the same situation, they usually do)). The blocks are of the same proportions used in other flavours of Commands and Colors, so nothing new to report there. The illustrations for the units on both sides are off the usual high-standard.

Unit types in C&C: Medieval. the purple are the Romans/Byzantines. while
the sand-coloured blocks are the enemies of the Romans/Byzantines.

The board is mounted, the background a grass-coloured green that sets off the block colours nicely, and presents the terrain tiles well. For those unfamiliar with the series, the board is essentially a featureless play area of indeterminate scale, superimposed with a hex-grid thirteen hexes wide and nine deep. The hexes are large as to accommodate a unit starting with four blocks (the blocks equate to hit points, and each successful hit against the unit will remove a block, but like C&C: Ancients and others, the unit operates at full strength until vanquished).

Geographical features, like forests, hills and rivers are represented by cardstock terrain tiles that ae placed on the board per the set-up map for that scenario (unlike most other Commands and Colors games, the scenarios for C&C: Medieval don’t appear in a separate booklet, but are incorporated into the rulebook. I like the illustrations on the terrain tiles as well. The tiles are produced on a good weight of cardstock (something that has varied from product to product in the Commands and Colors production queue but has definitely stabilised in the last six of seven years.

Reduced Sassanid medium cavalry holding the high ground. The hill rules are different
in C&C: Medieval, reflecting the evolved style of fighting and concentration on cavalry
as the primary offensive unit. No unit can roll more than two dice fighting up-
 or down-hill, or from hill to hill. 

The game also comes with two pairs of Player Aid Cards. Two present the units types and gives a rundown of their various strengths and limitations, particularly in relation to other units. The other two are duplicate cards presenting two sets of special orders that can be applied to a unit I some situations by spending an Inspired Leader token. I’ll go into a little more detail about these below.

All in all, the production on the game is very good, with an overall feel that manages to hark back to its sibling games from GMT, but also to carve out its own identity. If I could change one thing about the package, it would have been to keep the rules and scenarios in separate booklets, but that’s a fairly minor quibble.

Typical scenario set-up map, showing the positions of terrain tiles and both side's units.
A scenario will also offer a brief historical context for the battle, information for the
players (, i.e., hand size, who starts), and any additional rules peculiar to that
situation (such as fordable rivers or VP locations).

Play

If you’ve never played any Commands and Colors games before, here’s the Cliff’s Notes version. Commands and Colors: Medieval is a card-driven, tactical level wargame that uses blocks instead of counters to denote units of differing strengths and capabilities on a board divided into three sectors, Center and Left and Right Flank (relative to the player). Each side has a hand of cards with varying orders that can be played. The orders may allow the activation for movement and combat of one or more of units in a certain sector, or across sectors, or those close to a Leader, or anywhere on the board, so long as it matches the type (designated chape/colour).

Each unit can move and fight or just fight if adjacent to or in range of an enemy unit, If the target unit is adjacent, they’ll probably have a chance to fight back, which adds to the tension. The game is one by the side that accumulate the required number of victory points (marked in the game by the physical handing over of a Victory Banner chit to the opposing player); the scenario will specify the number of Banners required, but it’s usually between five and nine. This is handy if you have less time to devote to a game; you can choose a scenario with a lower banner-count. Banners are earned by vanquishing enemy units and leaders from the field, and sometimes meeting terrain or action objectives. First across the line wins.

From Top: Victory Banners (Sassanid in sand/ochre and Byzantine in
Purple/Gold). Bow markers for Cavalry (front and reverse). and an
Inspired Leadership token - in a scenario you'll start with two or more
of these and have a chance during the game to earn more
through card play.

The thing I’d heard people complain most about regarding the Commands and Colors system is how they can’t just do what they want when they want to do it like they can in other games (which leads me to ask what are these other games they’ve been playing that have no restrictions on a side’s actions), or they complain they never have the right cards for the strategy they want to pursue. To me, this is the game’s strength. Humans are predisposed to optimisation, achieving a goal with the least amount of effort. It’s what has led to most technological innovation. Sometimes people forget it’s the complications that make play so enjoyable. The card-order system in C&C games is meant to reflect the imperfect knowledge of the battlefield that any commander will have (fog of war), but it also there to provide complications to hinder the players efforts, forcing them to find ways to make do and to play, literally, the hand they’re dealt. Commands and Colors is often painted as a beginner’s game, or an entryway into the hobby, but I don’t think some folks give it enough credit as a proving ground for developing improvisational tactical skills in a dynamic, fluid environment.

If you’re familiar with Commands and Colors: Ancients, a lot of C&C Medieval will look and feel familiar. The same grades of Light, Medium, and Heavy troops and cavalry are present, with matching colour/shape markers to the earlier game, along with the white bordered Auxilia (light) and Warrior (medium) units. But there’s also another class on the block; the Super Heavy Cavalry (white bordered Red (Heavy) square marking). These function in much the same way as Heavy Cavalry, except they can ignore more melee (swords) damage than Heavy Cavalry, and in on a Cavalry Charge order, they roll with two extras dice instead of a single. They are still susceptible to Red Square rolls though, like any heavy unit; they are devastating, but mortal.

Inspired Action Reference Sheets. Just the edge you may need.

The main innovation to the game is the introduction of special orders for leaders. With the play of a Leadership order, the leader can give a special order or advantage in combat to a unit activated by the current order from a suite of options presented on the Inspired Action Army Reference Sheet (a double sided PAC, with Byzantine team orders on one side, with the Sassanid team’s set on the reverse’ not that some scenarios will require both players to use the Roman side, when the battle involves hereto allies of the crumbling empire), by spending an Inspired leadership token (the scenario notes will spell out how many of these each side begins with, and there are opportunities to gain more through card play during the game. The player is usually limited to spending just one in a given turn, but they can be spent to, say relocate a leader at the end of a players turn, or to add a die to a Close Combat or Battling Back roll. To be honest, I’m still getting used to this aspect of the game, and I don’t think I’ve ever made the best use I could of the Inspired Actions available in a single game yet. There’s always more to learn.

Bow markers. In the fifth century, apparently everybody wanted to be Legolas.

A game of C&C: Medieval will play out similarly to a C&C: Ancients game because the basic framework is so similar – the latter is the closest genetic match to the former. But it’s in no way a duplicate experience. There are different dynamics at play, such as the possibility of all cavalry on one side doubling as mounted archers; from around the Fifth Century, it was much more common for progressively heavier cavalry to carry bows as well as their melee arsenal into battle. Rather than duplicate forces (making the se both much heavier and more expensive), markers are included to define whether a cavalry unit is armed with bows or not. The scenario’s special rules will tell you if any cavalry units on either or both sides need to be treated thus. The cavalry bow capabilities are all treated the same – range of two hexes and two dice for stationary fire or a single die for moving, but I’ve played plenty of C&C games of all stripes when a single die could or has made a significant difference.

 

Appraisal

The full gamut of Medieval history (and arguably pre-Classical Ancient history) have been overshadowed in the wargamer public’s collective imagination by the sheer weight of games devoted to the much more sexy Classical antiquity (from Alexander through late Roman Imperialism), the same way the Napolenic wars tend to over-shadow the martial achievements of Marlborough, Gustav Adolph or Wallenstein. I studied mostly the Early Modern period at university, though I’ve tried to make up for that in my current reading. My point is this is all new to me. Each scenario or battle sequence (like the Lazic War, represented by five battles stretching over eight years) in C&C: Medieval is an education. Wargames in general tend to be the beginning of learning for me; I’ll play a game or a scenario, read the historical precis of the situation, get beaten (whether playing the historical losers or not), and go away to read at lease a Wikipedia page on the battle or its political and social context.

When two sides go to war (it can make for a diverting evening).

But exposure to history isn’t the only reason I enjoy C&C: Medieval. It’s also a lot of fun. This it has in common with all the Commands and Colors games I’ve played. I get it’s not for everyone, and that’s okay, neither is Country & Western music. The C&C family is planted firmly nearer the Play end of the Play/Simulation continuum, and it won’t scratch some folks’ itch for realism in a game. Play in any C&C game is swift and dynamic (well, once you’re accustomed to the way the cards, the units and the terrain interact, but it’s not a particularly steep learning curve either). Commands and Colors games tend to be both fast and good games, and there is an obvious need and desire for games like that in the wargaming space. Some scenarios seem weighted in favour of one or the other side, and that’s okay, as the historical situation depicted probably also tilted to one faction’s benefit. But the satisfaction of winning a game despite such hobbling is a sweet nectar form which to sup. As I’ve said in the past, if you really want balance, stick to chess.

Mid-way through the Petra Mountains Passes scenario. The Byzantines got the worst
of it that day (as evidenced by the purple pennants held by the Sassanids).

Commands and Colors: Medieval isn’t simply a different flavour of C&C, any more than any of the other iterations are. They all use a shared language, but each one is in a different dialect, And C&C Medieval is no exception. While the job is still to remove enemy units from the board (as with every other C&C game), subtle and not-so subtle differences make Medieval a different kind of challenge.

 

 

 

Stripped Down for Parts: Flanks of Gettysburg: Little Round Top, Culp's Hill – July 1863

 

Flanks of Gettysburg: Little Round Top, Culp's Hill – July 1863 (Compass Games, 2024) is a company-level game that looks in closer detail at the action of July 2, 1863 during the battle of Gettysburg, when Lee sought to turn and roll up the extended flanks of the Union line of battle. These two actions, both relatively small in light of the overall battle, were nonetheless significant, and could arguably have led to a reversal of fortunes if even one attack had succeeded.

Flanks of Gettysburg is a John Poniske design, and represents an evolution in his company-scale exploration of American Civil War battles, proceeded by Fire on the Mountain: Battle of South Mountain September 14, 1862 (Legion Wargames, 2022)  Belmont: Grant's Baptism of Command, November 7th, 1861 (Compass Games, 2017 – featured in Paper Wars #87), neither of which I haven’t yet got to try out, and Ball’s Bluff (Legion Wargames, 2015), which was my first experience at tactical ACW wargaming.

As usual, apologies for the poor lighting. This photo doesn't do justice
to the box art.

The first thing that strikes you about the box is the cover art. The painting chosen to adorn the front to the Flanks of Gettysburg is The Famous Charge of the Twentieth Maine 2 July 1863, by acclaimed twentieth-century American military artist and illustrator, H. Charles McBarron Jr. It depicts the famous bayonet charge by the Union forces against the hard-fighting and by then exhausted Confederate soldiers of Hood’s division at Little Round Top. The painting (actually only a partial representation, but it does deliver the point) sits below a partial map of the town of Gettysburg from the period.

Box back. It's a nice, sturdy 2-inch box.

I like Compass Games' approach to their back-of-the-box information. This hasn't always been the case, but they have exhibited a much more standardised approach to this in the most recent seven or eight games I’ve bought. The details cover the technicalities of the game, rating the game’s complexity (Medium, in this case), Time Scale (one turn is around 30 minutes of game time), and Map Scale (30 yards to a hex), Unit Scale (40-50 men here), then goes into the playability factors, including Number of Players (1-2), Solitaire Suitability (High), Average duration (2-3 hours) and Recommended Age (I don’t think I’ve ever seen a wargame that didn’t suggest 14 or older).

The Rulebook for Flanks of Gettysburg is printed in full colour on a kind of half-gloss paper (not true matt finish, but not so shiny as to make it difficult to read). It technically runs to twenty pages, but the layout person has adopted the European convention of numbering from the page after the cover page. I used to work on corporate publications with a German layout and print-prep guy who always did this; it used to drive me nuts at first, but there are more worthy hills to die on*.

The Table of Contents offers the chapter numbers only, which is a tad disappointing – I personally prefer page numbers for finding a rule quickly – but I suppose it may be better to leave the page numbers off than to have references that don’t end up corresponding to the correct pages in the final publication.

Sample page from the rulebook.

On that point, I was watching the Compass Town Hall from October 3^rd, and I mentioned in the comments that Flanks was arriving that day, and Brittani-Pearl read my comment and mentioned live that I would want to download the current living rules before getting into it. Doing a quick and dirty comparison of the two documents, I can see why that could be a legitimate warning – some of the explanation have been tightened up and cross-referencing to other related rules is much more thorough, but I don’t think the rules as they stand would be unplayable. Anyone who has gamed for any length of time will have come across much more difficult-to-navigate rules-sets than this and and still managed to get a game going (insert the typical “Damn kids, get off my lawn” rant here).

I’ll just note one more thing here; the two games are essentially single scenario games. The scenario set-up details are chapters 4.0 and 5.0 of the rules (starting page 6), in a fourteen-chapter rules set (including chapters on Optional Rules and Designer Notes). This struck me as odd, but it actually makes a lot of sense, at least considering how I learn a new game. After giving the rules a once-over, I will tend to setup a game (usually the easiest scenario) and push some counters around with the rulebook open in front of me. The rules layout not only endorses this approach; it actively encourages it.

PAC (double-sided, left) and the Terrain Effects Chart and Unit legend (right).

The game comes with the following: one Player Aid Card (double sided), one combined Terrain Effects Chart and unit counter decoder, and two Set-Up Cards, one for the Union player and another for the CSA player. I’m a little disappointed with the inclusion of just one PAC to be shared between the players. It’s less impactful on me as I tend to do most of the rules-adjudication with most of my regular gaming partners, so it makes no odds.

The PAC is the only double-sided card in the package. The front incorporates an abbreviated Sequence of Play a breakdown of Firepower and its effects, a reminder about stacking (up to four Fire Points total) with examples, a reminder about Facing in the games (top counter-edge is the front and must face a hex-side square-on, either side is a flank, and the three rear hex-sides are rear and the unit cannot fire in those directions without first turning), an abbreviated table of Movement costs, and an action sequence for Melee combat. The reverse side offers instructions for Rallying unit, the uses of Officers, a breakdown of Victory Point values, and guidelines for Sharpshooter units, Headquarters chits, and for the Union player, the Engineer Warren piece, which I can’t wait to see in action.

The single Terrain Effects Chart is fine – in fact I’m surprised room wasn’t made on the map-sheets for a TEC, but that may become clearer when I actually get the game to the table The TEC also incorporates legends to explain all the details related on the various counters.

Set-up cards covering both games.

The Set-Up Cards do double duty for the two games. One end of the card serves for the Culp’s Hill scenario, while the other end serves for the Little Round Top action. At first glance, the cards can seem a little disorientating, but I think they will play well. The cards include details of when regimental chits are added to the draw cup through the course of the game. I'll come back to the draw cup and chits in a bit.

Culp's Hill map-board.

Now, to the maps. The two maps depicting the battlefields were prepared by the notable ACW cartographer and game designer, Rick Barber. Mr Barber, who passed away in 2021, knew Gettysburg well. He had rendered the landscape of the battle in map form for several games, including A Most Fearful Sacrifice (Flying Pig Games, 2022) and his own Summer Storm: The Battle of Gettysburg (Clash of Arms Games, 1998). These maps are hand-drawn, and remarkable documents in their own right.

Culp's Hill map (detail).Culp’s hill is the bigger battle of the two, with eighteen
regiments fielded across the two sides.

I’m a fan of Mr Barber’s work; he also created the map for Mr Poniske’s first company-level ACW game, Balls Bluff, and these two maps are works of art. It took me a little while to come around to his preference of colour palette, but I’ve come around to it. It highlights both sides’ counters on the board, and changes in elevation are clear without being too jarring. The starting points for regiment beginning on-board and the Objective hexes are also clearly represented on the map without being too distracting.

Little Round Top Map-board (apologies for the glare).

The maps are printed on a light card stock instead of the familiar heavy paper stock. I was a little concerned that they wouldn’t lay very flat out of the box, but they are really quite good, not needing any serious back-bending at the fold at all to get a workably flat surface, even without a plexi overlay. I believe Bill has said in a recent Town Hall that all of Compass’s unmounted gameboards would be printed on this material hereon in (leave me a note in the comments if I’ve got this wrong).

Little Round Top map (detail). The flags mark the set-up points for on-board-at-start
regiments, while the gold stars mark Victory Point locations.

The play here is a chit-pull system that lends itself well to solitaire play. Chits representing attendant regiments are placed in an opaque container (not included with the game – I use an oversized coffee mug with a rounded bottom, wide enough to get my whole hand into), and units are ordered in the sequence of their chit being drawn from the cup, when all the chits have been drawn, units ordered, and actions resolved, the round ends. The retrieved chits then go back into the draw container, along with the chits for any reinforcements appearing in the subsequent round, and the first chit for the next turn is drawn. A lot of games and game-systems use a chit-pull mechanic these days, but my introduction to this device came with Ball’s Bluff, so FoG already feels somewhat familiar.

Counter sheet 1.

Counter sheets 2 & 3.

The counters are 5/8” and both clear and attractive, prepared by another familiar artist, Bruce Yearian. The unit are identified by their colour (a lighter and a middling shade of blue for the Union and light grey and butternut for the CSA, to distinguish the two separate game sets), each with a coloured stripe under their company and regiment details to make it easier to identify their formations, while the leader sport little portraits. A nice addition is the visual historical note against some of the portraits denoting if that leader had been wounded or killed in the battle. 

Detail of Union counters, Little Round Top (pale blue, left), and Culp's Hill (darker blue,
right). Leaders and companies are marked by their matching coloured bands.

The counters are easy to read, with a single Force Points factor and a pip system for morale (most are two or three pips, with some at just one. The identifying colour band is replicated on the draw chits, making it easier to identify which troops are currently being ordered. All in all, a lot of thought has gone into making the game playable, so the functions of the play don't take away from the verisimilitude of the experience. 

The whole box and dice.

Lastly, Flanks of Gettysburg comes with enough dice to carry you through the game (eight in all, four white, four black). 

I’m a latecomer to tactical ACW games, but I haven’t yet met one I didn’t like, so I don’t think it will be long before Flanks of Gettysburg makes it to the table. Look out for a review in the next month or two (I have a bit of a back-log, but I can see this game sneaking to the front of the queue).

 

* I think this must have bugged somebody else at Compass as well because the Living Rules’ pagination begins with the cover page.