[consim-l] Re: GALLIPOLI! From: John Best (jlbest@tuscola.net) Andrew Fairnie wondered about Gallipolli games, and Patrick Yip (I believe) and then Gordon Bliss searched the memory banks and remembered the old Paper Wars Games effort: > >I think PAPER WARS published a game called "Gallipoli" back in the 80's. > >It has 500 counters and 3 maps, covering both the land and sea operations. > and then Andrew raised these questions: > Can anyone tell of the games' playability etc,? > Does anyone have a second hand copy going for less? Well, I have my copy right here on the table beside me, but I think I'll hang onto it (given that it may be worth $100 now, it's doing a heck of a lot better than my stock portfolio at the moment. This is the first time in my life that I've ever found out that my wargames were maybe sound investments ;-) Anyway, as Patrick and Gordon pointed out it does have three maps and over 500 counters. The copyright is 1979; I bought it sometime in that time period at a store called the Boardwalk in Cincinnati Ohio, which at that time was *heavily* into wargames and historical miniatures. The designer is Rick Spence, who I think went on to work for other companies after Paper Wars Games folded up. PWG (not to be confused with Peoples War Games) also had a Singapore game called Doro Nawa (I'm sure this one also fetches big $$ on Ebay). On an old advertising flyer in the box, they also list some games that are usually listed as "Spence and Gable" games: Tannenburg (sic), Koniggratz, and the one that I've sometimes been questing for, Kaiserschlacht, 1918. The flyer quotes some laudatory comments about Kaiserschlacht by somebody named "Tyrone Bomba". The game has a kind of multiple personality feel about it. There are three maps, but one map is used exclusively for the naval operations in which the Allies sent quite a fleet of predreadnought battleships and vessels against the batteries lining the Dardanelles. I've never played that game, but it looks a lot like other sorts of standard naval games. That is, both sides have damage record sheets in which it looks like you have to check off damage boxes as your vessels get hit. Historically, I believe the Allies lost several predreads to mines in this operation, and eventually called it off without success. As Gordon pointed out, the map and counters are nothing much to look at, but I'd like to point out that the major ship counters are depicted with a sort of "profile shot" of the ship that looks like it might be an accurate rendition of the actual ship. Or at least, they don't all look the same. The scale on the two ground maps is 500 yards/hex; the time scale is 6 hours/turn (daylight), 12 at night. Most of the counters are battalions, but there are some smaller units depicted. The 30 page rulebook is basically double-column typewritten text (looks like IBM Courier font--I mean the *real* IBM Courier, as in the little ball that used to hop around inside the typewriter). The rulebook includes a fairly lengthy historical commentary, and some briefer, but nevertheless very thought provoking designer's notes. Regarding the appearance of the game, as previously stated, it's nothing much by today's standards, but it's not terrible to look at either. The British/Allies are done in bright red for the British and Commonwealth forces, with the French Allies (they are an option) shown in a very "Napleonic" blue. The Turks are depicted in a rather vivid medium green. The clear hexes on the map are white, with the surrounding sea hexes shown in the same deep blue. The elevations on the land maps are depicted in progressively darker shades of yellow, gold and brown. The sequence of play is not to difficult to describe: As the Allies you land your guys on the beach, you move inland, you barrage and you assault. Or you try to. The combat system is pretty standard too, with one twist. Each unit is rated for both "attack" and "defense" effectiveness. The British have some units with pretty high attack effectiveness, but not all of them are so well endowed. The Turks have relatively low attack effectiveness, but many of their units have the maximum defensive effectiveness. You can see how the land game would play out. Put the Turks in some trenches, and given them some terrain advantages, and you're really beating your head against the wall as the Allies. There's something else too. The barrage phase precedes the "combat" phase (which is sort of like the assault phase), and both occur after the movement phase. That's probably reasonable. But the rules stipulate that the only way you can advance after combat is if the defender gets a retreat result in the "combat" phase. So you can get your high attack effectiveness guys already to assault, put in a big whomping barrage, blow the defenders completely away, and then...just stare at the hex in the combat phase and watch Mustafa Kemel snicker as he puts some more Turkish cannon fodder back in the hex in his phase. If you try reducing the barrage, you run a pretty big risk of "missing" with the barrage and leaving the defenders untouched. Good luck assaulting them then. So the range of firing a big enough barrage to have good chance of doing some damage to the defenders but not too much damage is so "narrow" that the game really comes down to a lot of luck. If you get really lucky, some of your attacks will work, but most of them won't. And that makes the game *real hard* for the Allies. Basically, in my repeated plays of it over the years (no plays more recent than 1990 however), I have never, ever attained a single victory hex for the Allies by the end of any scenario I have played, using the historical forces. I guess that's accurate, but I don't know how much fun it is. Well, thanks for reading. John Best jlbest@tuscola.net