David Cann - 08:59pm Mar 8, 1999 PST (#513 of 513) PBeM Victory in Normandy + PBeM S&T Franco-Prussian War Got to play around a bit with the new S&T Crimea. It seems like an amalgamation of the Balkans '41/1st Arab-Israeli War system and the Wars of the Imperial Ages system. Supply is key as would be expected for this simulation. Every turn the Allies (French, British, Turks, Sardinians, and Allies) get 5-10 supply points per turn. The challenge is to get those supply points to your units in the field. Every turn you only get 5-10 command points, where each command point allows you to move one force, or attack with one force, etc. Therefore it's rather difficult to keep a long line of defense because it would require a large number of command points each turn to supply them all. Combat is handled through 3 different CRTs: Skirmish, Assault, or Manuever. Which combat table is used depends upon the tactical ratings of the leaders in the combat as well as the number of cavalry units present. I played about a dozen turns over the weekend. The Allies were able to hammer the Russians and pin them into Sevastopol early. More importantly, the Allies were able to block off Sevastopol from being reinforced from mainland Russia. Most of the game was spent delaying the Russian relief forces and using any spare command points to work on reducing the Sevastopol forces. I found that Cavalry units spread out over the Russian reinforcement entry area really slowed their advance (Cav units have a 2 hex ZOC with +2 MP to enter and +2 MP to exit a ZOC). Added to that, by using the Turks and Allies as speed bumps for the Russian reinforcements I was able to break into Sevastopol after about 10 turns. I definitely could have used a better early game strategy for the Russians as they never had a chance. Overall, it's an interesting system. A couple of rules inconsistencies I found, e.g.: 7.61 A player may NOT break down divisions in order to extract losses inflicted by combat. 12.112 Divisions may be broken down into brigades to extract losses. The map is nice (Joe Youst), the counters are especially bland with little period flavor and a few minor errata (Beth Queman), and apart from a few dodgy parts the rules seem pretty well put together. The historical article was excellent as are the other articles that I'm currently reading.