geek
The Hotness
Games|People|Company
Dominion - Stash Promo Card
Runewars
Dominion: Alchemy
Thunderstone
Dominion
Dungeon Lords
Alexander the Great
Agricola
Twilight Struggle
Murder at the Four Deuces
Stronghold
The Republic of Rome
Race for the Galaxy
Small World
Arkham Horror
Founding Fathers
Race for the Galaxy: The Brink of War
Through the Ages: A Story of Civilization
Vapor's Gambit
Battlestar Galactica
Chaos in the Old World
Le Havre
Last Night on Earth: The Zombie Game
Mystery Express
Puerto Rico
Endeavor
Power Grid
Vasco da Gama
Warhammer: Invasion
Descent: Journeys in the Dark
Space Hulk (3rd Edition)
Pandemic
Hansa Teutonica
Carson City
Campaign Manager 2008
War of the Ring
Livingstone
Cosmic Encounter
Stone Age
Le Havre: Le Grand Hameau
Tobago
Cosmic Encounter: Cosmic Incursion Expansion
Twilight Imperium 3rd Edition
Summoner Wars
War of the Ring Collector's Edition
Macao
Carcassonne
Dominion: Prosperity
Neuland
Steam
Rules | Subscriptions | Bookmarks | Search | Account | Moderators
Recommend
33
11 Posts
New Thread | Printer Friendly | Subscribe  sub options | Bookmark
Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Michael G
United States
Pembroke Pines
Florida
flag msg tools
Avatar
050607080910
mbmbmbmbmb
War and Peace » Forums » Reviews
War and Peace - Napoleonic War classic game from Avalon Hill
War and Peace

Overview:

The game War & Peace by Mark McLaughlin – according to BGG listings his first published game – is a multi-player strategic war game from the early 1980s. Mr McLaughlin is also the publisher of several other titles in the Napoleonic period, including The Napoleonic Wars, Wellington, and (on the P500 list) Kutusov. Aside from War and Peace, Napoleonic Wars, and Wellington, his only other game that I've played is Holy Roman Empire, another multi-player game – vastly underrated on BGG - which I enjoyed.

Components:

The functional unit counters, typical of the period, represent strengths of 5000 infantry, 5000 cavalry, or 6 ships. The art is very simple and anyone who has played a modern publication might dismiss the game just on this basis. The map board is divided into 4 individual pieces and many of the scenarios can be played on just one single small board. A hexagonal grid is printed on the map and it is common to reference each hex by a series of letters and numbers followed by the board number in parentheses. For example, Paris is CC9(2). Each is the same kind of simple, functional map that Avalon Hill is known for – in fact, it is very similar to the 3rd Reich map. Colors are bright and the map is pretty ugly for today's standards. There is at least one very well-known error on the board near Kiev. Aside from the counters and the board, there is a Campaign Game Card, a Player Aid Card, and the rules. There is a leader display on the player aid card, while the alliance chart, force pools, and prisoners are on the campaign game card.

Scenarios:

There are 10 Scenarios in War & Peace, including an introductory scenario (Austerlitz-1805), two mid-war scenarios Jena to Friedland and Wagram, two Spanish scenarios, one glorious War of Liberation scenario, one scenario depicting the French invasion of Russia, two final chapter scenarios, and finally a campaign game. Some of the scenarios are unbalanced and some are very nicely balanced, and some of the smaller-scale scenarios that can be played in a night are the best ones. The campaign game is something much more heroic. There are 120 month-long turns and the game badly needs six players. Player sides are: France (blue), Spain (yellow), Britain (red), Austria (white), Prussia (gray), and Russia (green). The markers for Fortresses and demoralization are black. Tactical matrix markers are white. They are discussed in the optional rules section below.

Turn Sequence:


French Turn

Attrition Phase
Alliance Phase
Reinforcement Phase
Movement Phase
Combat Phase

Non-French Turn
Attrition Phase
Alliance Phase
Reinforcement Phase
Movement Phase
Combat Phase

Advance Turn Marker


Attrition Phase

Attrition is a simple case of rolling on the attrition table and then applying that result to all the hexes where you have forces. There is a column for every strength value. There are DRMs that apply. You do not make a separate roll for each hex, but you do modify the roll depending on the status of the units in the hex (for example, all units in home country get a -1 DRM whereas unsupplied units get a +1 DRM. For example, if you have 11-15 strength points in a hex and roll a 3. For the hex in your home country (say France) it would be treated as a “2”, which means you would lose 1 SP, but the same units unsupplied in Prussia would be treated as a “4” and you would lose 2 and have to take a cavalry loss if there is one in the hex.

Alliance Phase

Diplomacy takes place in the alliance phase. This system is used to allow nations to ally with one another. When there are not enough players to fill out each of the seats in the campaign game, there are rules for automatically determining the outcome of alliances. I personally don't like this mechanism and know of a better one on the web (listed below). Alliances essentially allow you to acquire the use of another nation's forces. Each scenario has its own effects chart. For example, a roll in the Napoleon in Russia table can allow the French to gain Austrians, cause Prussian and Austrians to desert, force Napoleon to return to Paris to stop a coup d'etat, or postpone more rolls on the table until November 1812.

Reinforcement Phase

Production – There are reinforcements in every scenario, but production rules are only used in the campaign game. Essentially the number of production points you have is equal to the production cities that you control. You roll to find out whether you get zero, one production point or two production points in the reinforcement/replacement phase. Each type of unit has a different cost (2/ 1/ or 0.5) in production points.

Movement:

Leaders have a movement allowance of 10 MP, cavalry have a movement allowance of 4 MP, and infantry cannot move without a leader. Infantry units can be dropped off but not picked up during movement. There is also a rule where you can attempt to increase movement by 1, 2, or 3 MP using Forced March which can also lead to loss of forces. Overrun attacks can occur during movement. If you spend 1 extra MP and have 4:1 odds (5:1 odds on a mountain hex), you destroy all enemy units without loss. If you have 6:1 odds you can overrun without spending a movement point.

Supply:

Understanding the supply system is critical to playing the game well. Essentially, a supply chain of segments up to 3 hexes long are created. Each major city is a source of supply and any unit that is in supply that is the same color (you can't trace through allies) is a source of supply. A supply chain cannot be traced through enemy units, but a unit in a city that is also occupied by enemies is always in supply. Unsupplied units' combat strength is halved (round up) when attacking, they may not execute overruns, and there are adjustments to the attrition roll and the forced march roll.

Combats and Sieges:

The active player indicates which hexes he will attack before resolving any combat. If combat takes place in a non-city hex, it is automatically a field battle. A city-hex may have a field battle or a siege depending on the choice of the defending player. Once an attack is indicated at least one combat round must be fought. Between rounds the attacker may choose to bring up strength points from neighboring hexes to the fight (a 5 or greater with a leadership DRM is needed). That unit must be withdrawn from that combat first (you can withdraw after each round of combat). Thus, forces involved in a particular battle may change from round to round. To illustrate this consider that the French are being attacked by the British in EE7(2) and the Prussians are attacking the French in Lille EE6(2). In round 1, the British fight in EE7(2) and in round 2 the Prussians must fight in EE6(2), but in the next round, the British might withdraw some forces to Prussian-held FF6(2), which will then be available for Prussia in round 2 (assuming the 5 or greater roll succeeds). Round 2 consists of fights in both hexes EE6 and EE7, but now the Prussian siege in Lille is reinforced. This can go on for more rounds until one side is completely eliminated or the battle is broken off. If the attacker stops the fight, the defender (inactive player) can counterattack with the same method (note that in this case, the unsupplied forces of the counterattacking army are not halved). Forces that are adjacent to a battle can participate in the battle without moving to the battle hex. Being adjacent is enough.

Combat Resolution looks a little more complicated than it is. Essentially you total strength and the largest side divides its force by the smallest side. There are three odds ratios: 2:1 (and up), 3:2, and 1:1. There are rows for each of these in a CRT. After each round, the player with the strongest force rolls 2D6 applying modifiers for leader, morale, terrain effects, and (if using the optional rules) tactics. Then you find the resultant in the table. Above it will be two columns (like in the header of a table) and the left side applies to the larger force, the right side to the smaller force. As an example, suppose two armies clash, one led by Napoleon (leader rating 3) and one Bagration (leader rating 2). In the French army there are 20 forces and Bagration leads an army of 8. Odds then are 2:1 plus and there is a net 1 increase for Napoleon's tactical advantage. Suppose it takes place in a forest hex though, so there is a -1 adjustment as well. Two dice are rolled and the result is an 8. There is no net adjustment so the result for 8 is searched for in the 2:1 row. The result for the larger force is “1” and for the smaller force “D1”. This means that the smaller force is immediately demoralized. The Combat Loss chart is then consulted. Bagrations army of 8 in the D1 Row means 2 SP are lost, whereas Napoleon's 20 lose 2 as well.

Sieges work only slightly differently. In a major city, 6 forces may take refuge, whereas in a minor city 4 may withdraw to the relative safety. A city may be assaulted or besieged. If assaulted, units count as double (we actually triple them in our games). If besieged, a player puts a siege marker with a value of 1 the first combat phase and increases it each subsequent combat phase. The besieger may now roll and if the result is less than or equal to the marker the city falls and all units are lost. The value of siege points taken (which can never be greater than 5) is increased to the attrition roll of the besieged.

Naval Rules are skirmishes per sea zone. There is a separate chart to see what happens when fleets come together. Control of the seas is critical for transport in the campaign game.

Optional Rules: Play with the Tactical Matrix and each player can select a battlefield tactic which when combined gives a possibility of a positive (or negative) DRM to the combat roll. There are some other excellent optional rules, including a limited intelligence rule (where you don't check stack contents until a battle takes place). There are also a number of variants and FAQs on the net. This old game is loved by many players.


Rules:
The rules are your typical Avalon Hill jargon that reads very complicated for some, but to those who have seen it before, it seems pretty straight-forward. I haven't read the rules (11 pages plus 20+ pages of scenario stuff) in a long time before tonight and I'm actually surprised to see they are so clear, but like many complex games (especially older ones), there is much errata. To help you sort it out, also read over the War and Peace kit from Dear Valley available here:

http://www.dvgc.com/gamekits.html


Improvements: Use the diplomacy table from www.grognard.com if you are going to try the campaign game with fewer than 6 players.


Recommendation:
Definitely positive. I rank this game a 6 and I think that isn't very generous. I've had a lot of fun playing the game before and the fact that I've moved on to other games doesn't diminish the fact that this game was good in its time and there is still fun to be had.
Last edited on 2008-02-29 09:12:47 CST (Total Number of Edits: 1)
Adam Paschal
United States
Marshville
North Carolina
flag msg tools
patron0708
mbmbmbmbmb
It is probably my favorite grand strategy game on the subject.
Scott Muldoon (silentdibs)
United States
Astoria
New York
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
050607080910
mbmbmbmbmb
Yes, the scenarios for individual campaigns are excellent. The grand campaign scenario, meant to cover all the wars, is more of a tack-on. The system is best when representing one year at a time.
Dan Edwards
United States
Shoreline
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
patron070809
mbmbmbmbmb
Tried the campaign ages ago and it was flat as a can of Coke that had been left open for three days. It could well be that the shorter scenarios got more fizz in 'em.
Steve Herron
United States
Johnson City
Tennessee
flag msg tools
Avatar
patron070809
mbmbmbmbmb
It would be good game to be given a face lift and reprinted, I believe it was on Mr. Bean's list of Avalon Hill games you would like to see reprinted.
Martin Siebel
Germany
Gelnhausen
flag msg tools
mbmb
Hey, that one was my first war game, still have a soft spot for this one. Thanks for the great review, good to see that someone spends so much attention to this elderly gem.
Nikos Nikolaou
Greece

flag msg tools
One of my favorites also. The grand campaign needs a free.. week to play to completion. Although its age shows (something true for me also!) I get a great feeling when I play this game. Some AH games convey great amounts of 'theme' and this is one of them.
Jamie Pollock
Scotland
Edinburgh
flag msg tools
Avatar
patron09
mbmbmbmb
Nice review.

I still own this game, but I would be the first to admit that War and Peace is really in need of a facelift, and this is mainly from a rules perspective. The basic rules and scenarios are simple and straightforward, and these remain W&P's main strength. If for a minute you're thinking about progressing up to the more appealing Grand Campaign, this is where the rules and clarity start to fall apart at the seams; and it's a shame too, since of all the scenarios, the GC is the one that offers the players the greatest scope to decide their own fate by breaking away from the heavily scripted and (after a while) slightly mundane shorter scenarios. Part of the fun of any wargame should be being able to choose your own strategies, compare them against Napoleon's, and hopefully getting that great sense of achievement when one of your strategies pays off. This is where the GC excels, but in the same instance it succeeds, it almost immediately fails. Suffering from incomplete and ambiguous rules, complicated scenario machinations, and perhaps a feeling of being tagged on at the end, the GC strangles itself to the point of no return.

And here's why:

1. The naval rules. These are incomplete, badly explained, and generally unintuitive. Fortunately there is a couple of documents on the web which partly help to alleviate some of the ambiguities, but most of the GCs I've tried, failed to see completion because of the naval rules, or lack thereof. What compounds this even more is the fact that the naval side of the GC is just so damn important. Without it and the omnipresent threat from the English, the game quickly becomes lopsided in favour of the French player.

For instance, it was never made clear whether it was possible for players to use naval transports to land their units directly into unoccupied (i.e. uncontrolled) enemy port hexes, thereby taking immediate control. A small detail, but an extremely critical one! Major French cities give victory points and points toward faction diplomacy should they be captured, and much of the English player's strategy will revolve around this to prevent the French from forcing all the non-player factions pro-French. If it is possible, the French have to be wary of English landings at all times. If it isn't, then the French can essentially leave all their ports empty without fear or reprisal. If the English land in an hex adjacent to a French port, the French player just places reinforcements in the adjoining port hex.

In a similar vein, there's no indication as to whether assaults are possible direct from transports? If they aren't, how do non-Russian players ever conquer Stockholm?

All of these are just so important.

2. Sieges and Assaults. This is the next weakest area of the GC. The rules are generally speaking ok, except what happens to your force when initiating an assault or a siege. Does it move on to the city hex or not (related to assaulting from the sea)? Rules suggest that assault does not, and siege does. However, it's possible for a force to move between besieging and assaulting and there's no mention of how this is actually achieved - does the force move off the city for instance, then back on if the siege is reinitiated? Does this count as movement? Again there are some player made documents on the web which try to resolve these issues, but there is a definite large hole left by the official rules.

A facelift and a re-write of some of the main failings of the GC, and W&P would be back in business. As it is, unless you plan on just tinkering with the small scenarios which can be fun (if a little scripted), the GC which should have been the game's jewel is just not worth the headache it will inevitably cause.

My 4 cents. :)
Last edited on 2008-07-18 08:11:40 CST (Total Number of Edits: 1)
Scott Muldoon (silentdibs)
United States
Astoria
New York
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
050607080910
mbmbmbmbmb
Jambo wrote:
As it is, unless you plan on just tinkering with the small scenarios which can be fun (if a little scripted), the GC which should have been the game's jewel is just not worth the headache it will inevitably cause.


I understand the obsession with the grand campaign, but the literature of the time (I'm thinking of the Fire & Movement issue on W&P, specifically) makes it very clear the campaign was designed as an afterthought, and that W&P was designed for and revolves around the individual yearly campaigns. This is why the diplomacy and naval rules are so crap - they are not integral to the system.
John Gant
United States
Wakefield
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Hmmmm...

Jambo wrote:
it was never made clear whether it was possible for players to use naval transports to land their units directly into unoccupied (i.e. uncontrolled) enemy port hexes, thereby taking immediate control. A small detail, but an extremely critical one!


Let's use legalese to look at this problem. We will build precedents and see if the question is answered in the universe of the statements built by the rules. The following paragraphs quote from the 2nd Edition of the rules:

2. Naval Movement part b. defines what a coastal hex is. This is defined as: "Any hex which is partially covered by the blue sea color is considered a coastal hex. If such a hex contains a city, the hex is also considered a port hex."

Furthermore, part e. states: "A naval unit must expend two movement points to enter a non-port coastal hex." This implies a port city is also a coastal hex. That assertion is stated explicitly in 2b, above.

3. Naval Transport part b. states: "A naval unit may embark or disembark cargo or army units in any coastal hex it occupies during the Naval Phase".

I see nothing in the rules to prevent a player from doing what you asked. It seems two scenarios are very likely:

1. The port is occupied. The phasing player drops off units in an adjacent coastal hex. During the Combat Phase the phasing player attacks the port city.
2. The port is unoccupied. The phasing player drops off units directly in to the port city and takes control of it.

Anyone see a flaw in the logic above?

--JokerRulez
Michael G
United States
Pembroke Pines
Florida
flag msg tools
Avatar
050607080910
mbmbmbmbmb
No flaw at all and that's exactly how you should play.
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | DMCA | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
BoardGameGeek and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.