Tag Archives: Death Valley

Posted on

Battles for the Shenandoah: Developer’s Notes for the Death Valley Expansion Pack

by

This coming August will mark the third anniversary of Death Valley’s publication. During the GMT Seminar at CSW-Expo 2019, six weeks or so before the game shipped to customers, I announced that designer Greg Laubach was working on a follow-up battle, Piedmont.

As time went on, those listening that evening might have wondered what had become of this mini-game on a single rather smallish Civil War battle.  The answer is that, just as Death Valley’s initial concept grew to encompass the Shenandoah’s big-name 1864 battles in addition to the 1862 battles, so the expansion pack grew to include McDowell, Second Winchester, and Cool Spring, yielding a total of nine scenarios or variants.

The expansion pack battles are not exactly household words, but interested readers can easily find accounts of them online.  Thus, this article will focus on the challenges each posed to the design and development process, detouring into history only as necessary for an understanding of those challenges.

Posted on

Fisher’s Hill: A Death Valley Narrative-Style AAR (Part 3)

by

Introduction

This is the third and last installment in my after-action report for “Fisher’s Hill”, one of Death Valley‘s 1864 battles. Like the preceding parts, it employs a “narrative” style designed to display the GBACW system’s level of detail. In all but the final section of the article I avoid game terminology. Nevertheless, the AAR relies solely on GBACW system mechanics, except for invented dialogue between historical figures. While often merely an embellishment, the dialogue at other times serves to indicate the rationale behind player decisions. Any unfamiliar-sounding accounts of unit actions may well reflect series rules changes for the 2019 edition.

For the sake of continuity, I follow the action in a given sector throughout a specific turn before turning to another sector, rather than risk the narrative being fragmented by the chit-draw activation mechanic.

This article covers the scenario’s 1800 and 1900 turns.

Posted on

Fisher’s Hill: A Death Valley Narrative-Style AAR (Part 2)

by

Introduction

This is the second in a three-part after-action report for “Fisher’s Hill”, one of Death Valley‘s 1864 battles. Like its predecessor, it employs a “narrative” style, avoiding game terminology but relying solely on GBACW system mechanics for its details, except for invented dialogue between historical figures. Where not entirely indulgent, the dialogue serves to indicate the rationale behind player decisions. Combat details which do not seem to square with the GBACW rules reflect rules changes in the new edition.

In this way I hope to demonstrate how rich a battle narrative GBACW is capable of conveying. For the sake of continuity, I tend to follow the action in a given sector throughout a specific turn before turning to another sector, rather than bouncing back and forth according to the activation chit draws.

This article covers the scenario’s 1700 turn. The third will cover 1800-1900.

Posted on

Fisher’s Hill: A Death Valley Narrative-Style AAR (Part 1)

by

As a counterpart to the after-action report for the Death Valley scenario, “Carroll Burns the Bridge”, which appeared several months ago in this blog, I now offer this first installment of an AAR for one of the game’s 1864 battles, Fisher’s Hill. This one, too, employs a “narrative” style. I believe the GBACW system is detailed enough to produce a narrative rivaling any I read in battle accounts, except, of course, for first-person accounts and anecdotes.

This AAR relies on GBACW system mechanics. I describe only what happens in the game, but generally avoid game terminology for the sake of the narrative. However, I do take plenty of artistic liberty with the historical personalities involved, even to the extent of supplying invented dialogue. Some of these fanciful interludes simulate nothing more than the kind of color commentary we might indulge in while playing face-to-face, but others serve to indicate the rationale behind  player decisions. 

Posted on

Carroll Burns the Bridge, Part 3: A Narrative-Style AAR for Death Valley’s Variant Cross Keys Scenario

by

This is the third installment in a three part series depicting a playtest for one of the Alt-History scenarios from Death Valley. Parts one and two can be found here and here. The action here starts with the 1400 turn; see my previous articles for the 0800-1000 and 1100-1300 turns.

Posted on

Carroll Burns the Bridge, Part 2: A Narrative-Style AAR for Death Valley’s Variant Cross Keys Scenario

by

Introduction

This is the second installment in a three part series depicting a playtest for one of the Alt-History scenarios from Death Valley. The action here starts with the 1100 turn; see my previous article (found here) for the 0800-1000 turns.

Posted on

Carroll Burns the Bridge: A Narrative-Style AAR for Death Valley’s Variant Cross Keys Scenario

by

Introduction

Wargamers often praise a rules system for the “narrative” it provides during play. I assume what they mean is, if we were to describe in detail the course of the game as we played it, the result would sound very much like a historical account. If so, I would agree that the “narrative” is one of the most satisfying aspects of our hobby.

Posted on

Lee’s Lieutenants in the Shenandoah: Death Valley’s Confederate Leaders

by

In a previous article we looked at northern leaders depicted in Death Valley, one for each battle in the box. This article does the same for the Confederates. True, the article’s title is a little inaccurate, as Lee was actually only an advisor to Jefferson Davis until late in Stonewall Jackson’s Shenandoah campaign. But “Davis’s Lieutenants…” seemed to lack a certain sparkle. May readers forgive me for taking the liberty.

Posted on

Lincoln’s Lieutenants in the Shenandoah: A Look at Union Leaders in Death Valley

by

Casual readers of Civil War history may come away thinking Abe Lincoln mismanaged the 1862 Shenandoah Valley campaign, but chose his commanders wisely in 1864. Actual battlefield performance in these campaigns, however, suggests a more nuanced assessment. In this article we’ll take a look at the northern leaders depicted in Death Valley, one for each battle in the box. A future article will do the same for Confederate leaders.

Posted on

Mounted Troops in Death Valley

by

Weapons and tactics tend to evolve over the course of longer wars. The American Civil War was no exception. The two years elapsing between the 1862 and 1864 Shenandoah Valley campaigns witnessed changes in both regards.

Death Valley‘s design seeks to reflect those changes. In previous articles, I described the way the game handles late war innovations in the infantry arm, including sharpshooters and “Open Order” tactics. This article focuses on the difference two years made for the Union and Confederate cavalry and other mounted troops confronting each other in the Shenandoah.