· S&T #70 The Crusades
· S&T #71 Cassino
· S&T #72 Armada
· S&T #73 Panzer Battles
· S&T #74 Ney vs Wellington
· S&T #75 Napoleon's Art of War
· S&T #76 China War
· S&T #77 Paratroop
· S&T #78 Patton's 3rd Army
· S&T #79 Berlin '85
#70 The Crusades
------------
"Dud, though one of the few games on the subject." DM
"Only played once, but found it interesting. The attrition (supply)
rules could really do you in. OK." TES
"I really liked this one. Colorful and offbeat, with lots of Berg
random events." DAV
"C+" JG
"Excellent, multi-player, Berg's random events, good flavor, A-" KB
"Lots of folks liked it, as I recall, hex scale was just a little
too big for my tastes. Decent game and all, neither a gem nor a dud
for me." JB
#71 Cassino
-----------
"Gem, loved the detailed map, quasi-tactical flavor, really captured
this battle." DM
"Always liked it. I didn't like the fact that armor was bound to
the roads. A few well placed roadblocks and the Allied armor was
effectively out of the game. Good." TES
"Perhaps it was the situation, but I didn't enjoy it. The Allies
can't seem to go anywhere." DAV
"Never got into this Something about platoons with movement values
of 120. I did have fun making the map into a home-grown SL
scenario." DM
"B" JG
"Never fancied it, big movement allowances!, C-" KB
"Didn't this game have a bunch of Maori units? It's gotten some
slams; in general, I think we're suspicious of something that's too
different, and here the high movement allowances put people off. I
gave it a try and found it to be an interesting puzzle. So, I'll say
gem." JB
I remember this a somewhat of a drag to play because of LOS checks.
Hex-by-hex opportunity fire was a major part of game play, and late
in the game such fire would come from the upper slopes to the town
or lower slopes. Monte Cassino's elevation relief was well modeled
by the map, so it was usually not intuitive whether a given shot was
blocked (a ridge near the road leading up cast some especially tricky
blind zones) and SPI's infamous LOS grid had to be consulted
repeatedly." DSB
#72 Armada
----------
"Gem, I know the S&T version was horribly flawed, but the 2nd ed.
Rules make this a great game: a fascinating strategic look at the
time of the Armada -- I've played it dozens of times -- both sides
have lotsa’ interesting options." DM
"1st edition - a DOG! Keep Away! 2nd edition with extensive
errata - 'seemed OK, but never got to play it." TES
"An errata extravaganza. I'm told there's a good game in there
somewhere, but I never found it. This was a game I had been looking
forward to, unfortunately." DAV
"B-" JG
"1st Edition - V Poor, 2nd Edition - V Good, B" KB
"To the best of my knowledge, I never got a hold of the revised
rules, and I'll venture to say it's unplayable without them.
Stupid-looking "bow-tie" units. In its magazine incarnation, it's
a dud." JB
"Memory fuzzy, but seem to remember a few hours of fun. OK." TES
"Call me sick, but I liked this. Platoon sized units with individual
steps. Combat results based on number of vehicles firing, their
accuracy, crew quality, range, penetration, defenders armor/facing,
and defenders terrain. If they had made this into a WWII MechWar2,
I would have grabbed this." DM
"C" JG
"Didn't appeal, looked boring, D" KB
"Tac. armor--don't like. Never punched it. For me, a dud." JB
#74 Ney vs Wellington
---------------------
"Gem, I know I've read of others' problems with this game, facing
and all, but boy, do I still have fun with it." DM
"Excellent adaptation of the Wellington's Victory system to a smaller
battle (Les Quatre Bras). Gem." TES
"The era is not my cup of tea, but this is one of the best S&T games
ever." DAV
"B+" JG
"Uses Wellington's Victory system but manageable, B+" KB
"Lot's of folks like it. I had it out again some time in the last
couple of years--same result--the cardinal sin for any wargame--it
bores me. I'm in the minority with my Dud vote." JB
"Well designed to be a smaller alternative to Wellington’s Victory.
But it seemed to me the payoff was in how much the player enjoyed
the details of which battalion was in what formation, who was
disordered after passing through woods, where skirmishers should be
used, etc. As for the battle itself, a lack of time and adverse
terrain (a forest on one flank and a pond on the other) meant that
Ney had no alternative to just busting straight up the middle." DSB
#75 Napoleon's Art of War
-------------------------
"Gem, simple." DM
"Somehow, I remember this as a suped-up Nappy at Waterloo. OK." TES
"The era is not my cup of tea, and this isn't one of the best
S&T games ever. Beyond that I can't comment." DAV
"B" JG
"Napoleon at Waterloo with added vitamins, C+" KB
"Consensus is a NaW on steroids--some cute chrome makes winners out
of these two. I wrote an article on the Eylau game for Moves--took
it up just one more notch in complexity. I'll gemify both of
them." JB
"Not my era but I still enjoyed playing both sub-games. Unlike
earlier folios these had enough chrome to make game play
distinctive." DSB
#76 China War
-------------
"Semi-gem, I loved this game if only for the map and its scope.
Came out just as China was attacking Vietnam as I recall." DM
"I played these but have no strong memory of them, which is itself
an evaluation." DAV
"B-" JG
"Interesting subject matter but didn't try it, C" KB
"Hex scale is too big for me to enjoy. Dud." JB
"Magnificent map, dull game. Only the China vs. USSR scenario was
worthwhile, but a fatal flaw was that the PanzerGruppe Guderian CRT
was used unchanged. The step losses called for by this CRT were
way less than the number of steps involved in a typical battle. So,
a titanic struggle between tall stacks of attackers and defenders
with a barrel-full of tactical nuclear points usually ended up as
one step loss to both sides." DSB
#77 Paratroop
-------------
"Semi-dud, the anniversary issue. Eben Emael is unplayable without
some key errata. Liked Crete with the split maps. Red Devils
(Arnhem) not much of a game)" DM
"Eben Emael was worth one playing after I received the necessary
errata. Crete was OK. I didn't like Red Devils." TES
"I liked it, mostly because I'm into paratroop games, but he's
probably correct that the scale left something to be desired in Red
Devils. Seem to recall there was a CRT or something missing from
Eben Emael (so you couldn't figure out how to attack the forts), but
this minor piece of errata was widely published since then." RW
"I played these but have no strong memory of them, which is itself
an evaluation." DAV
"C" JG
"Lightweight, C" KB
"Three count 'em three games in one magazine. We know about Eben
Emael. Red Devils was OK. The Crete game was just the old S&T
Crete game with a little better graphics treatment. As I stated
before on this list--it's a nice little Crete game. I'll say gem
to that one. The others are neither gems nor duds." JB
"The Three Bears approach to game design: papa bear (Red Devils),
mama bear (Crete), and baby bear (Eben Emael). For me, none was
"just right." DSB
"I picked this up in the boxed version on a whim, to see what SPI
games were like. I really liked it, especially the Eben Emael
scenario. I had a hard time conceptualizing Crete with its split
map, and for some reason Red Devils was a bit of a disappointment
for reasons I can't recall, but overall I have fond memories of
this collection, perhaps because I associate it with my early
experiences with SPI." DLF
#78 Patton's 3rd Army
---------------------
"Dud, an attempt to recapture the glory of the Cobra game. But
essentially a stalemated situation. Patton runs outta gas in bad
weather." DM
"Agreed. [with DM]" RW
"I played these but have no strong memory of them, which is itself an
evaluation." DAV
"B" JG
"I have always liked the system, untried units etc., B" KB
"The use of variable strength chits failed to spice up a boring
situation. The 3rd Army had insufficient superiority to carry on
an offensive, the weather was usually bad, and the Germans benefited
disproportionately from extensive fortified lines. In particular,
fortifications negated the "must-attack" ZOC requirement, so the
Germans could pinch off any penetration of a fortified line by simply
making contact in a fortified hex and forcing the Americans to
attack them in the following turn." DSB
#79 Berlin '85
--------------
"Gem, outstanding chrome in a quasi-tactical level city fight. Can
the Allies turn West Berlin into Stalingrad-redux?" DM
"Easy to learn and fun. Try the scenarios that give the NATO forces
some offensive options. Gem." TES
"Also agree [with DM]. Interesting rules galore (you get to say
something like "They shall not pass" when you lose a die roll and
get to roll again, but you had better win this time or else!) Neat
treatment of supplies (petrol, etc.) Seem to recall unknown strengths
(or was it only for Police?) which always intrigues me." RW
"Very nice game. Continues to be popular, if the auctions are
anything to judge by." DAV
"B-" JG
"Defend Berlin against the hordes, C+" KB
"Yeah, like some of the other posters, I found myself liking this,
but unlike them, I don't know why. It's not the kind of thing I
would generally like. Ultimately, I don't have it in either extreme
category, but I admit there was something about it that sort of
tickled my fancy. Might even come back to it someday (oh yeah, I
wrote that--sure baby, I'll be back.)" JB
"Magnificent map, but game play was spoiled by some sort of
surrender table that could produce quirky results. Thanks to
this table one of my games lasted exactly one game turn!" DSB
