the franco-prussian war - Strategy & Tactics

Footnotes is a collection of the many small bitsof information we receive from subscribers. Asyou will see, most of these comments are toosmall to be considered full length "articles."Yet many of these comments are good just asthey are. And they would either not be muchimproved by expansion or, quite often, theauthor hasn't the time or inclination toexpound at greater length. We hope you enjoyFootnotes.*Storing YourSPI Games and MagazinesIf you are like me, you value your SPI gamesand magazines and search for ways of storingthem neatly and conveniently. Like manyothers, I have found that the SPI StandardGame Boxes are not the answer. For one thing,they are too large, it's almost like carryingaround a tombstone. Secondly, even with thenew counter trays, which are admittedlymakeshift, it is blind luck if you manage toretain all the counters in a particular game.Finally, the price is unusually high, $7.50 beingthe minimum price you must pay to obtainthem (you do get six for this price, but what ifyou only want one?) Fortunately, for myself Ihave perfected an attractive (and inexpensive)means of storing my games and magazines.This I will now share with my gamingcolleagues.First, visit any reasonably well-stocked ,stationerystore. Ask for their "Duo-Tang PocketPortfolios." These are simply colored pasteboardfolders containing two large pockets.Purchase as many as you have games (theycome in a variety of colors which will enableyou to tell your games apart). They will run youfrom 10-20 cents each. Then buy some 4 518"by 6 314" No. 25 manila envelopes. They comewith a metal clasp and can be used to storeyour counters. Two per game should besufficient. I store two months worth of S&Tand MOVES per folder.Using my system you will be able to store ayears worth of MOVES and S&T's for arounda dollar not seven and a half. I'm not saying mymethod is perfect, but it's better than fair andcheap in the bargain. What more could theaverage wargamer ask for?- James M. DickeyA Geography LessonThis is about geography and its importancewith respect to conflict simulations. It isgenerally recognized that a CRT is used toreflect the prevailing methods of combat andcasualty infliction in a game. Combat factorsare used to give a reasonably accuraterepresentation of relative strengths of opposingforces. When combined in a game they willgive a fair representation of what would havehappened in a particular set of adversaries hadmet on the battlefield. To turn this game into asimulation, it is necessary to place these armieson a map board which gives an accuratepicture of the relevant and important geography.It should be obvious that any geographicalfeatures which can have an appreciableaffect on the movement or fighting ability of aunit must be represented. Geography doeshave a decisive effect on where and when abattle is fought.A mountain pass, a river, a railroad junction, ora combination of these or many othergeographical features will influence where anarmy will go, how fast it will get there, and itscombat effectiveness once it arrives. If thesefeatures are misrepresented on a game board,all of the effort expended on orders of battle,combat factors, etc., will result in a game,maybe even an interesting and "realistic"game, but it will not be an effort at simulationand will not result in such. Wars are fought todestroy the opposing army andlor conquerterritory. If the game accurately describes theopposing armies but not the geography, thejob is only half finished and it remains a game,not a simulation.It is true that the geography shown on acertain map board may be affected by theorganization of the armies and the seasons. Ifterrain features do not affect an army at aparticular time, they should not be present on amap board. However, if they can affect anarmy they must be shown. Another importantconsideration is that when a particular type ofterrain is adjudged relevant, it should beconsistently represented over the full mapboard. This is especially true of the road andrail networks.Roads and railroads have a decisive effect onthe operations of armies in modern war.Railroads are the primary source of long rangeoverland supply, and as such are extremelyimportant objectives to be attacked ordefended. The importance of roads since theintroduction of mechanization is obvious.Depending on scale, which roads to put on amap board is a crucial design decision. If theroad net is well developed, representation ofindividual roads may not be needed. However,if scale or limited road net require it, showingindividual roads is a necessity.The following are a few examples of poorjudgement in the use of geography in wargames.(A) NORMANDY is an example of how not toshow a road net in a war game. The roadspresented on this map are all treated as beingthe same, but were in fact of very differentwidths and construction. The Caen area isoverloaded with roads, while the same classroad in other areas seem to have disappearedin the bocage. The choice of which roads wereto be shown on the game board seems to havebeen dictated by an attempt at "balance," not"realism," much less simulation.(B) BREAKOUT & PURSUIT has a map boardwith a problem - in 1944 most of the forests,rivers and canals seem to have disappearedfrom France. These features presented problemsto both sides, but only a few show up onthe map. The board is untluttered, but it is agame board not a map board.(C) KURSKsystem eastern front games have areal problem with railroads. In many cases theyare fictional, and when they are nearlyaccurate, they are not in the same locationswhere two boards overlap. On the easternfront, railroads were prime objectives, and theiraccurate placement on map boards wouldseem to be a prime objective of gamedesigners now. The changing organizations ofthe armies and the seasons may hinder the useof the railroads, but will not move them 10, 20,50 kilometers are they are in these games. Theuse of fictional railroads in these claimed"situations" is strange and the reasonsunclear.These are but a few examples of notrecognizing the importance of geography. Anarmy's combat and movement ability, and thevictory conditions in a particular situation, arelargely affected by geography. It is true thatweather and army organizations will determinewhat geography is relevant and important. Notenough attention has been paid to this in thepast. Geography deserves more attention.Hopefully this letter may foster some change indesigners' and players' attitudes towards theimportance of geography. -Mark HamiltonThe Words Between the StatesMr. Canipe has written a letter in response toMr. Nofi's article entitled The GettysburgCampaign (SBT 381. The letter is representativeof a number of others. The letter ispresented unchanged. Mr. Nofi's rebuttalfollows.Really1 The caliber and standards of S&T aretoo high to have space wasted on suchjingoistic tripe as the moralizing sarcasm thatAlbert Nofi has wrapped in historical distortions.Such statements as, "But there was oneparticularly objectionable activity which theArmy of Northern Virginia indulged in. The'gallant' Confederate troops engaged in slavecatching. . .the troops were supposed toround up and ship South any fugitive slavesthey encountered. . .This activity, better thanany other, clearly illustrates the 'cause' of theSouth: something more nearly akin to that ofHitler's Germany than Mannerheim's Finland."Indeed, Mr. Nofi makes cynical commentabout "unofficial" looting by Southern troopsand leaves the derogatory connotation that thePennsylvania countryside was raped by acontemptible hoard of despicable bare-footConfederate soldiers. But despite the connotationof Mr. Nofi's historical fabrication, thedistorted picture depicted by him is mostsignificant because of what he did notsay.. .and it was this that probably had themost impact on undiscerning and indiscriminatereaders.For example: General Lee issued stern ordersagainst pillage and specified that suppliescould be seized only by commissary andquartermaster officers, who must pay foreverything taken; the invaders behaved withsuch remarkable restraint that some foreignmilitary observers were impressed enough towrite about the remarkable behavior; only asmall percentage of Southerners were slaveowners- in fact, three famous Confederategenerals (Robert E. Lee, Joseph E. Johnstonand A.P. Hill) found slavery so repulsive thatthey freed their slaves years before theAmerican Civil War; very few Southernerswere fighting to perpetuate slavery, rather theywere fighting for economic and politicalindependence of the South. With theexception of isolated cases, the ConfederateArmy, in general, did not loot, but insteadforaged for basic needs such as food andshoes. And it might be noted here that theConfederate soldier (always hungry) foragedfor food even within the C.S.A.