Norman Conquests: Conflicts of the Normans and their Successors,1053-1265 is the fifth volume in the Men of Iron series
(which the less charitable call GBoH-lite). I’m a completist at heart,
so of course, having the Men of Iron Tri-Pack (GMT Games, 2020) and the fourth
volume, Arquebus: Men of Iron Volume IV – The Battles for Northern Italy1495-1544 (GMT Games, 2017 – currently on P500 for a reprint, but you can find
my unboxing here)
GMT has
recently made a significant change to the presentation of their more
traditional style wargames, eschewing the martial minimalist style of Rodger B.
McGowan for more elaborate commissioned paintings (usually) fitting well with
the game’s subject. We’ve seen this in the last couple of Mark Simonitch’s WWII
operational games, such as Salerno ’43 (GMT Games, 2022), North Africa ’41 (GMT Games, 2023), and the second edition of France ’40
(GMT Games, 2024). The particularly evocative cover illustration for Norman Conquests
is by digital artist Kurt Miller, originally named The Duke of Normandy. Miller
has previously provided cover illustrations for Ancient Civilizations of theInner Sea (GMT Games, 2019), and A Time for Trumpets (GMT Games, 2020).
Miller does some truly amazing work, running the gamut from military art,
through dinosaurs, historical scenes, to some whacky Star Wars crossover
stuff that I’m sure has an audience. You can check out his work via this link. I particularly like his technical illustrations of WWII fighter
planes… but we’re here to talk about Norman Conquests, so let’s get back to it.
 |
| Back of the box. |
The box-back offers a glimpse into what lays in store for the purchaser, with a sample of the counters (shown to actual size), brief series and historical introductions, and a list of the battles included in the game. Norman Conquests is recommended for ages 14 and up and is strictly classed as a two-player game (I’ll come back to this later). The unit size is roughly 250 men to a counter, the hexes are roughly 100 yards across (this is amended to 110 yards, or about 100m, in the rulebook), and, like all Men of Iron, no regular game turns. The complexity is rated as 4 out of 9, which I’d agree with, and solitaire suitability is ranked at 7 out of 9 (personally I’d put it at an 8, but the game is probably best played by two players).
While
the battles represented in Norman Conquests all took place inside of a 210-year
period, this is possibly the most geographically far-reaching of the sets, cast
from the green and pleasant fields of England to Apulia, Italy. There are seven
represented in all, and I think it makes for a good survey of Norman – shall we
say – participation in various national political discourses of the time The box
back details each battle by name, date and location (in chronological order),
seven battles in all.
 |
| The MoI Series Rulebook (left) and Norman Conquests Battle Book. |
As with
previous volumes in the Men of Iron series, Norman Conquests comes with two
separate booklets, a Men of Iron rulebook and a Battle Book exclusive to this
game, covering all the scenarios, and offering a short Example of Play at the
end.. While the Series rules are standard across the games, the rulebook gets
some attention with each new volume, adding any new unit types and rules
particular to the situations covered in the new game.
 |
| Rulebook - sample spread. |
The rulebook comes in at 28 pages, but the essential rules make up 20 of those. The rulebook covers both the three games that make up the Tri-Pack and Norman Conquests, so there are a number of rules exceptions of clarifications that don't necessarily apply to Norman Conquests, so you could probably ignore about another two pages of text in that. The next three pages are allocated to Special Rules, but only about a column of these are pertinent to the game at hand. There is also a useful Index, a list of changes to the other three games from the Tri-Pack, and on the back cover, e really useful Extended Sequence of Play that I'd recommend photocopying and laminating a couple of copies, so you're not wearing out the rulebook.
The rules
for Men of Iron have benefitted from close attention and lots of feedback over
the years. The current rules are very easy to digest (that is to say, I don’t
think I’ve hit any snags with them), and let you get to the counter-pushing
stage quickly. Now would be a good point to mention that the whole Men of Iron
series is eminently playable solo, with no hidden movement, clear goals for
each side, but with enough tactical flexibility to prevent railroading, and a brilliant
continuation/initiative-seizure mechanic (instead of distinct game turns) that
keeps an element of surprise in the mix.
 |
| Battle Book - sample spread. |
One of
the things I love about the Men of Iron games is the set-up instructions (to be
fair, this is probably a carryover from the series, an obvious influence on Men of Iron). With both text instructions and a
colour-coded map, setting up a game is as easy as they can make it without
someone coming to your door and setting it up for you. Some battles feature
well-defined placement of troops, while others have areas marked out in which
to set up a given battle.*
Each scenario
gets its own historical background notes, clear set-up map as well as written
instructions (for those who prefer to do things the hard way), and some even
feature scenario variation notes for those who think every game should be fair
and balanced going into it.
 |
| PAC - front and back. |
The Player Aid Cards are a bi-fold design with all the charts and tables you should need for the game handily located on the front and back of the closed card. The front of the card features the Battle Matrix for Norman Conquests, which essentially breaks down the effectiveness of all the weapons systems used in the game against all the other weapons systems (in terms of DRMs for Shock and Charge attacks). The back panel offers the Combat Results Tables for various means of attack, as well as the tables for defensive actions against attacks like a mounted charge or a shock push by foot soldiers.
 |
| PAC - inside the fold (Terrain Effects Charts). |
Inside the PAC are the Terrain Charts specific to each scenario map. These can vary in number; Tinchebrai has a map devoid of features, while Hastings and Evesham each have five different terrain types described, along with their relative movement costs. There are also considerations (one extra movement allowance cost) relating to units exiting or withdrawing from a hex with adjacency to an enemy unit of units. This information is replicated un the maps as well, so if you like – and have the spare table real estate – you can have your PAC splayed out next to you with both more useful sides on full display. I’m a flipper, so I tend to use the PAC folded, which can double as a fan when things get tense at the table.
 |
| Flight Point Track and General Track (and the quarter-sized counter sheet). |
The game includes an 8 ½” by 11” Flight Point Track card. This is where you’ll track the battle’s progress, i.e. how many Flight Points you and the other guy have each accrued in the game. Flight Points are the currency of the game. When you take losses – both troops and leaders – you’ll register these on the Flight Point Track. These points can accrue quickly; the loss of a regular fighting unit – spear- and pikemen, archers, axemen, etc. – will put two points to your tally, while a Men-at-Arms unit or commander will increase the level by three, and you really don’t want to lose your king (five Flight Points right there). Play tends to be asymmetric, so one side will have a higher threshold for their flight points, but once one side hits their threshold, the other team claims victory. And thanks for coming.
The card
also features a General Track. After going through the rules of the Men of Iron
Tri-Pack (GMT Games, 2020), my first Men of Iron game(s), I couldn’t find a
single reference to this General Track. I thought I was missing something
obvious, but I couldn’t find the answer. So, I went to the oracle (Boardgamegeek.com),
thinking that If I’d had a problem with this, somebody else probably had as well.
Sure enough, somebody had asked the question, and somebody had provided the answer.
The General Track is where you can keep track of the phasing side’s successive
activations, which you need to track for dice-roll modifiers when your opponent
tries to seize the initiative.
 |
| Two full counter sheets. Not a lot of counters for seven battles. Just sayin'. |
The counters for Norman Conquest represent a break from tradition for the series. While the earlier games featured half-inch counters, these are a forgiving 9/16” and much easier to identify and interpret on the board (for these old eyes at least). The counters also look nice. I’ve always liked the Men of Iron counter layout; the use of a coloured banner stripe to mark out the various battles’ allegiances is extremely helpful, and the on-board assisting markers (for game states like Charge, Shock, and Out of Command) are clear and unambiguous.
There are only two full sheets of counters for the game, along with a generously margined quarter-sheet, mostly markers and a few units. Compared to some in the series, none of the battles represented in Norman Conquests are particularly large; the biggest scenarios see only around thirty unit-counters to a side.
 |
| Civitate and Fuldord battle maps. |
 |
| Stamford Bridge and Tinchebrai battle maps. The centre fold allows you to have just a single half-map exposed during play (not always a option in other games). |
The
game comes with three map sheets, and two of these are back-printed to make up
the seven battles. The largest battle area maps – Hastings, Lewes, and Evesham –
cover most of a single side of a standard 22” by 34’ paper map, while the four
small battles are printed two to a side on the obverse faces of the double-sided
maps. This means to play the smaller map games, there is not need to fold out
the entire map; everything for these scenarios fits on one half of the page, on
the outside face of the bi-folded mapsheet.
 |
| Hastings Battle map. |
 |
| Lewes battle map. |
If the maps seem a little spare, somewhat light on terrain features, that would be because battles were usually fought in an open area where whoever showed up first might gain some topographical advantage. Like Harold choosing the high ground of hill to make his stand (spoiler alert: it didn’t help, historically).
 |
| Evesham battle map. |
As with most GMT games, Norman Conquests comes with a roll of zip-loc baggies in which to store your counters, enough to keep all the battles in their own bags and to divvy up the markers into sensible groupings. Also included area pair of ten-sided dice – one white and one red, and a filler insert to keep everything from moving around and getting corner-bruised during shipping.
 |
| Inside the box. |
The box
itself is the sturdy two-inch deep, heavy grey cardstock item that seems to be
standard for all GMT games these days. I was going to say they could have got
away with a 1½” box, but you always need to add a half to accommodate the dice,
so two inches it is.
And
that covers all the parts of Norman Conquests. I’m very keen to get this to the
table. I know I say that a lot and I’m thin on evidence of following through,
but in this case, I can see a way forward. Several of the scenarios should be
small enough in terms of the size and number of the battles on each side to be
able to set up and play on a weeknight. I’ve been emboldened to try this after
watching Matt White’s AAR of a solo game of Civitate on his YouTube channel,
Matt White Wargames. Matt’s a designer and wargame artist as well as a
player/reviewer, so if you aren’t already, you should subscribe to his channel.
Lastly,
I bought this in the recent GMT Fall Sale, along with three other games. I apologise
to my regulars for being so tardy bringing these to be blog. I’m hoping to work
through the other games, soon. If all goes to plan, an unboxing of Banish All Their Fears (GMT Games, 2024) should be next, hopefully inside of a
fortnight. In the meantime, go play something.
* Battle in this sense is used to indicate all the forces under
the command of and loyal to an individual leader. It’s an unusual word in that
from its earliest recorded usage, it had multiple meanings, operating as both a
noun and a verb, with the meaning implied by context in which it was used. From
Middle-English, it could be used to describe a fortified tower, a contingent of
troops under a leader (such as Offa’s battle), military exercises (training at
arms), a contest of arms (the action of martial pursuit, at either the personal
level, like a duel or single combat, or troop level, the activity of doing
battle), or even to describe a fight between animals (such as cock- or
dog-fighting).
