The designer gives us a close look at the shorter scenarios in Volume I of the Levy & Campaign Series, with advice for competitive play plus possible adjustments to even the odds in one of them. A detailed look at how the game works appears in five parts starting with Part 1 here.

---

Something that I am proud of in the design of Nevsky is that the system produces so many possible ways to go about things, yielding some devilish strategic and logistical puzzles. After two years of work on the game, I am still learning how to play it well. I hope and expect that you too will find much to explore on the path to winning play.

But there is an unfortunate side effect to any such depth, when coupled with historical simulation. Depth of play can make it difficult to ensure that every scenario is an equal contest between the two sides while also reproducing plausible historical results. History was not always balanced! While I tried to select and scope the six scenarios to provide a historical, fun, and fair contest in each case, as I have honed my skills in playing them post-printing, I must acknowledge that my success in that design challenge has been mixed.

Nevsky’s three longer scenarios (8, 8, or 16 turns, at about 30 minutes’ play per turn) appear robust. A bold stroke, blunder, or mutually accepted battle to the death by the sides can easily end the conflict early. But—given prudent play—there is enough time for either side to recover from lesser setbacks or any minor imbalances that there may be in the positions at start.

It is the three shorter scenarios (2, 4, and 5 turns, respectively) that become trickier. The historical situations at the start of each are not equal, and the short play time offers less cushion for skill or luck to even out the sides’ prospects.

So, I would like in this article to focus on these three shorter scenarios, shorter to longer (see the table below). Who is favored? What strategies are available to the weaker side? And could any of them use a fix? The background book that comes in the box offers excellent play hints from developer Wendell Albright and tester Peter Wagner. Elsewhere in InsideGMT, none other than Mark Herman offers his own thoughts on Nevsky strategy. Here, I will focus not on overall considerations but those that come more acutely to the fore in each scenario. Note that my views herein remain provisional, as I continue myself to learn optimal play even as GMT Games delivers it to you.

Pleskau – 1240

This shortest scenario introduces the game by covering just the first season of the conflict. The Teutons are intent on striking Pskov, while the Novgorodan Republic backs up its Pskovan ally. Bishop Hermann of Dorpat must marshal an army and press into hostile territory to accomplish what he can in a single summer.

In my experience so far, the Pleskau scenario is balanced given optimal play. The only hitch is that the historical situation faces the Teutons player with a steeper climb to optimal than it does the Russians.

The reason for this is that the game’s mechanics reflect the following facts. Medieval armies on the attack had to march and besiege or storm enemy strongholds, all the while feeding their troops. Ravage of enemy territory helped provide food but often not enough to make up for the ever longer distances to reliable sources of supply back home. Defending lords, meanwhile, could bide their time, commanding their people to stockpile provender or—if at their own seat—collecting taxes to build their war chest. Should it come to a fight, the defending army would enjoy the tactical advantage of choosing and perhaps readying the ground; in the game, defenders generally strike first, and more held event cards are usable for the defense than the offense. If the fight is at a stronghold, the defender would have the protection of not only the fortification’s walls but also its local garrison.

In 1240, the frontier force of Teutonic crusaders nevertheless succeeded in seizing the great city of Pskov in just one summer. They were able to do so because the Russians under their commander Gavrilo committed a fatal blunder: after losing their forward post of Izborsk, the Pskovans marched out of their city walls and took on the Teutonic army in the field and suffered a catastrophic defeat.

The Russian player in the Pleskau scenario may not be so accommodating! More likely, the Russians in the game will have Gavrilo prepare his defenses within the Pskov stronghold, will back his army away eastward and allow the city’s garrison to fend for itself, or will maneuver north or south of the main Teutonic army to strike back elsewhere, perhaps with reinforcement from Novgorod the Great.

When you play Pleskau as a teaching scenario, and if one player is more familiar with the game than the other, I recommend that the more confident player take the Teutons, who must deal with these challenges of a medieval offensive. In this article, because it is the Teutons who are in more need of advice, I will address Teutonic strategy (though corresponding considerations for the Russians should also become evident).

So, what is a Teutonic Bishop Hermann to do on his campaign against Pskov?

First, realize that Pskov can be a tough nut. In the full-length scenario, which starts with the same situation on summer’s eve, 1240, I have found that the Teutons can almost always take Pskov—but not until early Winter (after the end of the Pleskau short scenario). Teutonic conquest of Pskov is highly desirable in the long scenario, as a forward base for deeper incursions toward Novgorod and as a bulwark against the eventual Russian counter-campaign on Livonian land. But Hermann does not need it to win in the Pleskau mini-scenario.

Second, consider nevertheless that if you seek victories elsewhere than beneath Pskov’s walls, Gavrilo is likely to counter with his own invasion of Estonia or Livonia, with ample lands to ravage. Every locale that Gavrilo (or any other Russian lord who crosses the border) ravages will yield ½ victory point for the Russians. With Pskov itself worth only 2 VP, ravaging looms large as a strategic objective even in this shortest scenario of just two 40-day campaigns. A Teutonic drive on Pskov therefore is helpful even if the city does not fall the summer’s end, because that threat can serve to pin Gavrilo there. On the other hand, the longer Hermann’s army is occupied outside Pskov, the more freedom other Russian lords have to raid Teutonic territory elsewhere.

There is no sure resolution to this Teutonic dilemma of time and timber walls. But here are a few tips:

1. If you do aim for the capture of Pskov by summer’s end, seizure of Izborsk Fort first—by mid-summer—will help your odds. The small fortification at Izborsk is a much easier mark—Hermann should be able to take it in the first turn, by storm so as to sack it for loot and coin (rather than via surrender to siege, which includes terms the preclude sacking the place). Positioned at a conquered Izborsk during the scenario’s second levy, the Teutons will get another full muster before advancing on the fort’s mother city of Pskov. (The game allows levy only while on friendly ground, and a stronghold when taken becomes friendly to the conquerors.) For the ins and outs of besieging and conquering Izborsk, see the 5-part series of InsideGMT articles about Nevsky gameplay, especially Part 2 and Part 3. (Note: Some rules and cards changed subsequent to these articles.)
2. Realize that the Teutonic player need not reproduce Hermann’s historically rapid conquest of Pskov during the summer of 1240. If Gavrilo abandons Pskov garrison to its fate, then a shot at taking Pskov by siege or storm may be warranted. But if he stands there, the Teutons can find ample opportunities for victory points elsewhere. With Gavrilo tied to the defense of his city, the Russian countryside with be quite open to Teutonic ravage for ½ VP per locale. Other Russian forts besides Izborsk offer far easier marks for conquest than Pskov. And Russian trade routes along the Baltic shore are worth 1 VP each and can be reached by the Danes via sail. For the latter, consider acquiring the Cogs capability to double Danish ships and/or the Treaty of Stensby to give them an extra Command point.  
3. Note that the Pleskau scenario (alone) awards a victory point for every enemy lord removed from the map. Besieged lords must feed their troops every card that the enemy uses to advance the siege, but unlike the besiegers cannot add to their provender. Should Gavrilo stay within Pskov to defend it against siege, Teutonic conquest of Izborsk, for example, plus starving Gavrilo into disbanding will be enough to win the scenario—provided ravages and conquests elsewhere do not favor the Russians. A key to disbanding Gavrilo is to besiege him before he has adequately prepared for a siege by taxing coin and/or supplying provender—so move fast but keep an eye on Gavrilo’s mat before committing to a siege.
4. It is vital at least to account for and probably to guard against and even thwart Russian raids wherever the Teutons are not pressing their invasion. Keep a weather eye on Vladislav of Ladoga, who might depart his coastal vigil in the north and ravage Danish Estonia, particularly if the Danes have come south against Pskov. Consider keeping the Danes and their fleet ready at their seaport of Reval or at the border town of Narwia, while actually dedicating all Teutonic Command cards to Hermann and his army: just the threat of a Danish descent on Novgorod’s trade routes at the mouths of the Neva or Luga rivers can deter Vladislav from moving west.

Peipus – 1242

While the Pleskau scenario just discussed looks at the opening of the crusade on Novgorod, the second-shortest scenario, Peipus, covers the closing phase of the conflict. Peipus puts the offensive boot on the other foot: it is the Russians who must muster the superior force to beat the Teutonic defense before time runs out. As more can go awry when on the attack, the balance in this scenario appears to be the mirror opposite of the first.

The Russians have two 40-day turns of late winter in which to move on Hermann, with the Teuton-conquered Pskov as the nearest and most inviting target. Winter’s hours of daylight are short—each side has only 4 Command cards instead of 5 or 6 in other seasons. But the ground is frozen firm—sleds can be used anywhere to transport provender.

In the Peipus scenario, Aleksandr, unlike Hermann in the previous scenario, then has another two turns to follow up. But those final turns fall after the snow melts into mud—the rasputitsa. Ravaging the enemy’s land can feed raiding lords, and loot on the hoof can move, if slowly. But supplying sieges becomes very challenging indeed. Ships can bring provender to Novgorod from the Volga or to the Teutons across the Baltic Sea. Boats can move it to armies operating along rivers. But there is no possibility until the following summer of carrying provender across the muck of the trackways that connect the rivers’ headwaters. For Aleksandr, taking the offensive poses a dilemma not so much of time and timber as time and mire.

So, in the reverse of the Pleskau scenario discussed above, here it may be the Russian player who, if new to the game or the situation, is more in the need of advice. Here’s some:

1. As with the Teutons in 1240, consider targets other than Pskov. Ravage of the borderlands and even the conquest of a Teutonic castle that is undefended by Teutonic lord may be within reach before the winter thaws. Levying Raiders Capability cards to extend the ravaging reach of one or two of your lords can add a winning ingredient to such a plan.
2. If you do go after Pskov, try getting there and besieging it right away, to prevent its defender Yaroslav from building up too much coin or provender. Yaroslav can tax for coin and supply himself provender while in Pskov—but not if under siege! Then either advance your siege or just wait: Yaroslav will seek terms (disband due to his short service obligation) before the scenario’s end. Don’t storm Pskov prematurely—while Yaroslav’s men still man the walls—unless you are willing to take some hard casualties. See the earlier InsideGMT series of articles, especially Part 4 and Part 5, for a look at a Russian counterattack against and siege of a stronghold defended by a Teutonic lord, in this case Izborsk. (Note: Some rules and cards changed subsequent to these articles.)
3. Consider pressing past Pskov to retake the Izborsk fort first, before the mud isolates it. Then double back to operate along the Pskov-Peipus waterway once the trackways become swamped. Gather some provender to your army while you can during winter. Then don’t forget to levy boats, perhaps even before the rasputitsa hits and renders your sleds and carts useless.
4. In general, keep in mind that money can forgive logistical sins: each coin spent in effect cancel’s one lord’s inability to feed his troops after moving or fighting on a Command card. This scenario starts with three coin in the Novgorod veche box, which you can spend on any lords anywhere provided that they are not besieged—money bags being easier to carry across the mud than bales and barrels of food and fodder. Calculate and rely on Novgorod’s abundant coin to your campaign’s advantage. Invest in one or both Trade capabilities. (They yield coin each turn.) For Baltic Sea Trade, which kicks in only after the winter, that means ships and perhaps the Lodya card (allowing use of boats as ships) to prevent a Teutonic fleet from blocking the card’s effect. Preparing to take Ransom—a Capability card that yields coin when a besieged enemy lord is removed—works well in conjunction with a siege of Pskov with Yaroslav inside. However you come by it, spend Novgorod veche’s war chest to enable Aleksandr’s army to move fast and compensate for the mud.
5. Finally, be wary of any approach by Hermann’s main army toward your own. The Teutons can build a hammer-force that is capable of defeating Aleksandr even when the Russians stand on defense, particularly if the Teutonic player has an advantage in held battle event cards. Even if a full-on field battle is not your intent, your army will need fighting strength such as the Steppe Warriors to deter the enemy as you siege or raid.

Watland – 1241

This mid-length scenario depicts the continued and historically successful Teutonic drive into Novgorodan territory, occurring in between the Pleskau and Peipus scenarios discussed above. Pskov and its army under Gavrilo have fallen, while Novgorod has yet to accept any help from the militarily potent Grand Prince of Vladimir-Suzdal and his sons Aleksandr and Andrey. In my experience, the scenario tends to reproduce well what occurred next: the Teutons were able conquer the territory of Novgorod’s tributary Vodian pagans in the north, with its forts and Luga River trade route between Novgorod and the Baltic, and then ravage deep into Novgorodan Rus.

And that brings me to a weakness in the design of this particular scenario: through the to-and-fro of testing, development changes, and further testing, it escaped me that the Watland scenario provides too little opportunity for a Russian counter to this historical Teutonic advance to make it a fair game between equally capable players. Given even play, the Russian side after the previous summer’s disasters around Pskov appears too weak to rebound and push back in the time that the scenario provides. In all likelihood, just as Novgorod gathers its strength—perhaps via the call to arms and arrival of one or both of the Vladimir princes by the end of winter 1241—the rivers and trackways thaw in the rasputitsa, and any Novgorodan offensive stalls. It is essentially the same Russian dilemma of time and mire that we discussed above for the Peipus scenario, playing out a year earlier.

Had I detected this problem of play balance earlier, I would have addressed it by scoping it differently in order to both keep it true to history and produce good contest. Or, if not able to do so, I might have left this scenario out of the game entirely.

Well, Watland 1241 is in the game. Certainly, an easy solution for players would be to select instead from the other five scenarios in the box. But Watland does offer its own special interest: it is the only scenario to focus on the decision by the Russian player whether to accept help from the Vladimir princes Aleksandr and Andrey, and if so which to invite when. The Russian call to arms segment in Nevsky concerns mainly whether to add victory points for Novgorod’s nobles declining help from Vladimir or to spend VP to bring one or both of the hard-hitting princes on to the map. In this aspect, the campaign period featured in Watland offers the those most vivid portrayal of the shift in momentum from the Teutons to the Russians—that is, if it does shift! (The full-length 1240-1242 Crusade on Novgorod scenario includes these aspects too, but within a longer play time.)

Fortunately, there are ample options for small changes to produce a more balanced fight in Watland. My suggestions to any players interested in trying this scenario out would be to adopt one or more of the following balancing fixes, to their taste:

1. Start Andrey on the map at Novgorod, Aleksandr’s cylinder in box 5 on the Calendar (instead of box 7), and Andrey’s Service marker in box 9. This variant will play out what if the Novgorodans historically had already reconciled with the Grand Prince by New Year’s Day 1241 and accepted his initial offer of Prince Andrey (instead of rejecting Andrey until the Grand Prince finally returned Aleksandr to them that summer).
2. Extend the scenario’s length by 3 turns, playing to the end of the first campaign of the next winter, through box 11. This expanded scope to the scenario gives the Russian counterpunch the time that it needs and that it took historically. The Watland scenario then would encompass the historical reconquest by Aleksandr Nevsky of Koporye in the north, where the Teutonic crusaders had built their own stronghold to dominate their new pagan subjects.
3. As a handicap, add 4 Russian VP to the Veche box at start (to starting total of 5VP), so that the Teutonic player must reproduce a historically successful offensive to win the game. Alternatively, once players are more familiar with the game and the situation, a similar option is secretly to bid the number of Russian VP added, with higher bid taking the Teutons’ side, or assigning sides at random in the case of a tied bid.

Regardless of whether you decide to try any of the above modifications, here are a few strategic considerations for the hard-pressed Russians:

1. Domash should muster Vladislav, the Karelians, or both right away via Fealty rolls. The Russians start out heavily outnumbered and need more men in the field from the first campaign. As critically, they need to get those added Lords mustering more strength from the very next campaign on. Lords may use their Lordship rating to muster more troops, transport, and capabilities for themselves only if they start that Levy segment already on the map in a friendly locale. So get these lords out there on the first turn to be able to participate in the second Levy.
2. Try to get a Russian lord into a blocking position in the fort at Kaibolovo. Even outnumbered, he will stand a good chance of holding against a concerted Teutonic drive for the 3 VP of Luga-Kaibolovo-Koporye. A Stone Kremlin helps in that regard. Also, make whatever efforts to possible to block Teutonic ravages and wreak some raids of your own on their lands—unchecked, the Teutonic side can build up an insurmountable lead in black Ravaged markers. After the end of Winter, keep an eye on threats via Heinrich or Danes sailing along the Baltic coast to snap up Luga or Neva trade route.
3. As in the 1242 scenario, seek coin through Trade Capabilities and perhaps the Ransom card. Wealth can be your telling edge against the invaders.
4. Weigh carefully each Call to Arms opportunity, as Andrey, Aleksandr, and the victory points their absence can generate or their arrival will cost are precious to you. Barring a Teutonic Event draw in second turn of the scenario that is particularly unlucky for the Russians, the Russian player can get Andrey into the field with two winter campaigns left before rasputitsa, or can decline him and wait for Aleksandr for a 2 VP bonus, or alternatively can try to tough it out without either to add 4 Russian victory points.
5. Finally, if all else fails, goad (or Ambush, if available) the Teutons into a risky but likely decisive battle. A defeat can dissolve their army and win you the game no matter your board score. Battle in Nevsky is highly risky and decisive, typically a last resort. As the Russians are likely to remain behind in victory points, a strategy of seeking battle may offer them a way out of their box. Part 4 in the earlier articles walks through a small field battle. (Again, there have been slight changes to rules and cards since the article.)

My hope is that players exploring Nevsky will enjoy the package as much as I now am myself and with these notes will sidestep or contend with and forgive the imbalances that I have considered herein. I look forward to seeing any feedback on this first exploratory volume in the Levy & Campaign Series. Enjoy the game! – Volko

PS Thanks go to Mark Herman and Wendell Albright for their helpful comments on the original draft of this article. — vfr

---