charles vasey - 01:20pm Dec 9, 1999 PST (#49 of 76) 
J'aime les femmes, c'est ma folie

LA BATAILLE DE FRIEDLAND Didier Rouy for Azure Wish 

The La Bataille series and its cousin from SIMTAC are complex systems
working in great detail aiming to achieve almost drill-book level
simulation at battalion/battery level. They provide something that
responds to the control-freak and detail obsession of gamers but at a
frightful cost in time and space. But if a job’s worth doing obsessively
then it is worth doing well. Neither game flinches from its own internal
logic. And for this they deserve respect. 

Rising up the tree of simplicity we reach the Berg proxy forces of Bey
and Brandsma, soon to be joined by Richard’s Triumph and Glory which hit
at the regimental/brigade level. Driven by LIMs with perpetually
rallying forces these game represent something rather more in the game
side of the equation than the historical. Especially the latter system
which is not exactly the product of an overwhelming desire to register
the unique features of Napoleonic warfare (judging from the speed of the
cookie cutter). But sniff though the purist might he is able at least
play these.

Astonishingly some folks believe these are the choices but there are two
systems whose approach is at regimental/brigade level and which place a
premium on playability. The GamesUSA series (with Eylau soon to join) is
pretty gamey (a mile of modifiers), but by lifting you to a level above
file-closer they provide a width of vision to replace the depth. Azure
Wish are in the same scale but they have a figure-gamers joy in
formations and detail and provide yet another set of qualities which you
might find fit your style if the above do not.

charles vasey - 01:20pm Dec 9, 1999 PST (#50 of 76) 
J'aime les femmes, c'est ma folie

The thing that most immediately gets criticised with Azure Wish is the
map. Let’s be honest folks its pretty poor, executed in rough crayon (or
so it appears to the untutored eye) the result is something you might
expect a child to achieve. This of course exercises many gamers
mightily; I must confess, despite its ugliness, it was very effective in
play. This may not excuse it, but it certainly removes it from the list
of things that need to concern me further. 

The rectangular counters are effective but not very pretty. The uniform
icons of the present wave of games are not present. Indeed the counters
bear a very spooky resemblance to those of the GamesUSA games. I say
this not to imply one copied the other but to give you a comparative.
The top half of the counter has a number of rectangular blocks to give a
feel of numbers. The bottom half has all the factors. Here we encounter
a strong point of Azure Wish it is pretty easy to grasp what your
various formations do. Each counter has a note of the Fire factor, the
Melee Multiplier, number of steps (counters) and movement. They may not
be very pretty but, once again, they work.

Let’s start with infantry. They can be in a number of formations.
General Order looks like a Column but is only found in woods, brush or
towns. It maximises melee strength and minimises fire. In line formation
(the topside of the counter) the unit faces a hex vertex. Firepower is
improved (three to five compared to one for a column) but melee
capability lacks the column modifier. The column involves flipping over
the counter and facing a hex edge. As the front hex(es) of each unit is
what the formation advances into there is a special free-turn rule for
the columns to overcome its innate disadvantage from having but one
front hex. The column moves much faster and most of you will want to
advance in column before deploying into line. Infantry in square is
achieved by adding a second, blank, rectangular counter to the back of
the line formation, hey presto a square. Disorganised infantry does
actually require a marker on the counter (the only case of this being
needed in this clever system). Finally skirmishers form like line but
with the counter on a hex-edge, thus covering two hexes. Skirmishers
cannot be used in woods (one uses general order there) and the main
advantage is to take fire out to two hexes. Only pukkha light units may
assume this formation.

charles vasey - 01:21pm Dec 9, 1999 PST (#51 of 76) 
J'aime les femmes, c'est ma folie

The cavalry usually gallop around in column formation, typically this
supplies a Melee Multiplier of 3 (light and dragoons) or 4
(cuirassiers). When the cavalry charge the counter is flipped into line
and the multiplier goes up to twice that. Cavalry units attacked can
counter-charge, that is go into charge mode themselves. A line of
poor-morale (and probably therefore training) cavalry are going to find
it hard to go into the counter-charge and are thus more likely to be
overwhelmed. The Melee value of a good infantry regiment in line can be
10 to 15, but that of a charging heavy cavalry unit is maybe 30-35. Of
course the infantry will fire first and this may disorganise the cavalry
but facing good morale cavalry is a tough proposition. Going into square
will halve the melee value of the cavalry, but of course may lead to
unpleasant casualties from artillery, and reduces the firepower of the
infantry (but increases the infantry morale). A cavalry charge is, as it
should be, a very exciting part of the battle.

Artillery uses three formations disorganised (the marker again),
limbered (column-like) and unlimbered (in line). A good battery of
Russian heavies will fire with the equivalent value of a regiment of
infantry. One does not tool around in front of Russian guns. The design
notes warn that you will loses a number of strength points every turn
from artillery and they are not kidding, make sure your assaulting
infantry are pre-positioned before they cross the field-of-fire. 

Each game turn is 30 minutes long (though in our view 45 to 60 minutes
would be closer to its feel). The turn opens with moving the cavalry
charges, other units then move, they take defensive fire, offensive
fire, Melee and Rally. The second player then repeats the sequence.
Nothing very exciting then, although the command rules can introduce a
few more jollies. 

charles vasey - 01:21pm Dec 9, 1999 PST (#52 of 76) 
J'aime les femmes, c'est ma folie

Leaders appear as jolly little round counters with a picture of Our Hero
and a Morale and Melee advantage. Being with a Leader means never having
to say you are sorry. There are also decoy counters, counters for
putting your units in reserve and Random events chits (in a recent game
we had; Hetman Karel Bollokovski “I’ve discovered a ford!”; le Comte Obi
wan Kenobi de Siggins “This is not the ford you are seeking”, Hetman
Karel Bollokovski “What ford?”). 

Stacking is strictly in terms of steps, ten of artillery and infantry
and seven of cavalry. This usually means a maximum of two units. The top
one only fires, but both units count for combat. Losses are used to
devour the top unit first. Losses are marked on rosters with a shaded
box when you should switch to the lower value counter for that regiment.
[And, yes you can have “ordre mixte”]. 

Movement is comparatively swift (a column can cross the board in four
turns) so you must position yourself with care, especially reserve
formations. The cavalry can withdraw from in front of infantry and does
so in movement (so avoiding being shot at) but only with a good morale
test. 

charles vasey - 01:21pm Dec 9, 1999 PST (#53 of 76) 
J'aime les femmes, c'est ma folie

Fire uses a simple strength-compared-to-dice chart that gives losses and
disorganisation tests. Firepower is reduced for artillery units at
longer ranges, and there are die modifiers for grapeshot (adjacent
artillery) and firing on squares. This means you can often throw a
series of d6s and read the results along the line. Minimising modifiers
makes for faster play. A grape-shotted Russian battery can blow away
entire cavalry regiments and combat levels on infantry regiments. Fire
is so powerful, as noted above, that one must aim to close, suffer one
volley, and attack in one turn. Standing around in range simply leads to
disorganisations. There are jolly opportunity fire rules for those of
you who insist on walking about adjacent to the enemy.

Is fire too strong? On the average I think not, one can easily see the
slaughter in front of the redoubts at Borodino being repeated. Where the
system goes wrong (if I may be so bold) is in the disorganisation result
that is a little too bloody. Disorganisation is triggered by fire or
melee (as well as such jollies as failing to get into square) and
results in the unit being not only weak, but susceptible to elimination
if disorganised again (which it will be given its weakness). Even worse
this status cannot be cured for two whole turns. Unless you have a
reserve line behind which to hide your disorganised units (but one that
does not itself run when collided into by disorganised forces) you are
at risk from marauding opponents. “Disorganisation” is a pretty good
simulation of rout, but the game does not provide a halfway house that
most might think of as being disorganised. This does, of course simplify
matters, but even I (arch-simplifier) find it a little too strong.

Melee as noted above uses multiples of strength to give losses, morale
tests or disorganisations. There are the usual concepts of flank and
rear attack. There is a very jolly protected flank rule whereby he
cannot flank you if in turn he exposes his flank or rear to your
carefully positioned chums. Given the intensity of close action I find
the lack of a disorganised status less questionable here, but once again
a combat will usually end with one side running away as fast as it can,
which feels much more correct.

charles vasey - 01:22pm Dec 9, 1999 PST (#54 of 76) 
J'aime les femmes, c'est ma folie

Charges are, as noted above, a very good way to boost your melee
strength. It is vital to counter-charge (if cavalry) or be in square (if
infantry) even if the infantry is massed with say 20 points of melee
value. However deciding whether to stay out of square within range of
enemy cavalry is ticklish. You need a morale test to get into square,
but if you fail you disorganise and that is tantamount to extreme death.
Le Comte de Siggins was of the view that the risk was too great. I
understand that the system does indicate that the best way to storm a
village is to charge it with cavalry (how very like Borodino) so perhaps
a few more modifiers may be needed.

Morale uses 2d6 against morale values (usually in the 8-9 range) don’t
forget (as we did) that an unmodified 2 is always a success and a 12 a
failure (even with commanders present). Rallying requires that you
survive two turns (thanks to other reserves) and pass a morale test. A
failed test obliges you to keep retreating. As losses mount the morale
of the whole army will be affected. Morale levels are reduced,
disorganised units are not eliminated but (even worse) straggle to the
rear triggering further disorganisation.

charles vasey - 01:22pm Dec 9, 1999 PST (#55 of 76) 
J'aime les femmes, c'est ma folie

The optional rules add another level of detail. 

Skirmishers now get the advantage of cover from enemy fire and may
withdraw before combat like cavalry (which should allow the tirailleurs
to gall their formed opponents). 

Artillery counter-battery fire is less effective than the normal variety
(having a less dense target) 

Unlimbered artillery which is disorganised no longer retreats and can be
overrun 

Light cavalry get benefits when attacking disorganised units 

Heavy cavalry get a melee modifier except against other heavies 

Cavalry cannot charge in successive turns 

Disorganised units hit a second time rout rather than vanish with faster
retreat, lower values and “contamination” of those who see this
distressing spectacle (much as when the Army is demoralised). 

charles vasey - 01:24pm Dec 9, 1999 PST (#56 of 76) 
J'aime les femmes, c'est ma folie

The Command Rules are presented in three levels (from which you may pick
your own favourites). The first is the usual “leader as bonus” method
that does not clutter up play. The second level requires units to be
with 6 hexes of the commander of their corps (although special
divisional commanders – Oudinot for example - may be able to bend this).
Leaders in turn must be within 10 hexes of the overall commander. The
third level involves the writing and transmission of orders with an even
more complex fourth version firmly in The Gamers territory.

The rules also permit deployment of units ahistorically by the play of
alternating commander counters on the strategic map, though within some
historical limits. There are time limits, decoys and reserves and even
an interactive game whereby corps activate alternatively within some
neat rules to handle armies with different numbers of corps. 

Finally, and worth adding, are the Random Events. These are drawn
throughout the game and may be used to “cheat”. You may, (as I mentioned
above) as the Russian player, discover a ford. The Intuition counter
allows you to temporarily halt enemy movement and change your counter’s
facing, formation and even move it slightly. There are thirty of these,
some are only useable with the advanced rules but there are plenty of
interesting possibilities that will be enjoyed by those who read
contemporary battle accounts of the period.

charles vasey - 01:24pm Dec 9, 1999 PST (#57 of 76) 
J'aime les femmes, c'est ma folie

What then can one say of the specific scenario? Friedland sees the
French massed with considerable numerical advantages against the
Russians pinned on the Alle River. If Ney and Lannes can jump on the
Russian left they can be driven into the river, although the Lifeguard
Corps may have something to say on the topic. This flank action involves
chasing Raevsky’s men out of the woods and then pinning and flanking
Markov. 

The Russian right wing led by Gortchakov has a nasty gun line and the
support of numerous cavalry formations. One may decide to finish it
after the left wing has been overwhelmed. In our case a mistimed attack
by Lannes was beaten off and Ney just about halted from flanking while
Gortchakov withstood an assault and used the cavalry to roll up the
wreckage of the French attack. 

The exclusive rules are contained on four pages including the set-up
(there are numerous number errors on the counters so check both sides).
The scenario notes include the rules for fords and the Russian pontoon
train. The Russian artillery is under supplied and must therefore keep
half its batteries limbered (although you can use damaged batteries for
this) as caisson reserves. There are special rules for the Russian wing
commanders (whizzo prang what?) and Oudinot (a division commander with
attitude) and Murat (who enters on an option). Demoralisation levels are
given (which encourage the Russians to hold Friedland and the French not
to commit the Guard).

charles vasey - 01:25pm Dec 9, 1999 PST (#58 of 76) 
J'aime les femmes, c'est ma folie

There are then a number of battle options that can be used at a cost to
the selecting side from a 4 point budget. For example, the French may
select to remove the Russian ford (2 points), Saint-Sulspice’s division
arrives (I assume 1 point) and Markov and Uvarov have a reduced
obedience roll - too much vodka! The Russian might respond with
Borozdin’s Corps appearing (2 points) and the French 1st Corps artillery
being delayed (2 points). 

Aside from the slaughter of the disorganisation I was very impressed
with this system. Its combat and fire systems are simple enough to make
play swift. Its formations are painless yet atmospheric. The range of
choice for the level of detail and complexity is most impressive. The
individual details of the battle full of flavour and redolent (if I may
abuse this word) of the enthusiasm and knowledge of the designers. This
is not La Bataille complexity, but it shares the same enthusiasm and
excitement. Even the awful map is of no moment in combat, where its
blocky colouring helps with play. If I could but modify the terrible
slaughter of the disorganisation – perhaps a rally attempt in the next
or same turn – this would be a very good system.

To compare it to its rival the Glory system may be of use. The combat
both systems use is of roughly similar complexity – both designers seek
not to overwhelm the player. Azure Wish have formations which Glory does
not, but at very little cost in complexity. Glory takes longer as it
seeks to add a chaotic element with the LIMs which many find very
satisfying. The rosters, brutal CRTs and tough disorganisation rules
makes Azure Wish a game for the stoical player who is prepared to accept
losses. The more nancy-boy of our brethren will prefer Glory where
nothing really nasty ever happens. You must choose between the constant
flow of rallied units in Glory and the considerable lack of rallied
units in Azure Wish. On to Eckmuhl!!