Tuesday, February 12, 2013

The Commanders Speak

After I posted my recap of the 1859 campaign a fellow gamer/mentor Peter G.(Blunders on the Danube) asked me to see if the two commanders would post what they thought about the campaign.  I thought that was a great idea.  Here are their comments on the campaign.

James the Austrian Commander:

I had a lot of fun with this campaign despite losing. I think that once we got past most of the learning curve it ran very well. The whole process will be familiar to anyone that has played Piquet rules. I especially liked the way battles and battlefields are generated. It is card driven and very fair to all players.
I can think of only one thing that I would improve upon. I would make counters for my own map to help me keep track of the current location of all my armies.

Garland the Italian Commander and Winner of the Campaign:
Where to start? In forty years of gaming I've taken part in a lot of campaigns that have fallen apart due to bad rules, judging, attitudes, and more. For the most part we stayed away from these and had a very entertaining campaign. The time we took to learn and become familiar with the rules was well worth the time. Having a campaign move separate from the battle night let us stay away from getting to hectic due to time constraints. The time it takes to set up at first seems daunting. With practice it became part of the fun of the game. The different layers to the set up give the battle meaning.That's not the proper word but i think it's close enough. Do I have strength advantage? Can I set up on my opponents flank? Will he take units away from me? Am I Bennigson at Freidland or Jackson in the Valley?
The flow of the game system itself is both nerve racking and fun. As Victor has already stated we use domino's after the initiative roll to determine initiative points. In our last battle this allowed James, outnumbered 2 to 1, to dictate where the main fight was to be on the table. In the you move I move systems this would have been almost impossible. The varying formations in the system allowed James and I to have two different tactical doctrines in the beginning. I was in open order most of the games trusting to the rifled musket, and it worked well this time. Next time will most likely be different.
Where to end? Now. Thanx, Garland


  1. It sounds like it was most successful. I have had campaign experiences similar to the ones Garland describes, and would love take chance to play in an extended game such as this.

  2. Thanks for having the commanders post about the experience; I think that really helps one have more insight into the experience from the player's standpoint. Now we just need to convince Brent to update ToW for Field of Battle!