RFCM

Now I've got a strong urge to play PBI again!  Always enjoy those rules!

Say, besides the 1980s obscure musical Berlin reference in the subject line...those buildings seem rather Physical Graffiti. 

Not a bad idea Leslie, with the caveat that my level of knowledge in the theatre is virtually non existent.  I have a few books, with a few chapters on the specifics; that's about it.

I do have a comment or suggestion though.  I just noticed the new 15 Mill - and downloaded it and read it immediately of course - and saw that once more Pierre wrote a wonderful article on a SB Macedonia campaign.  Besides wishing I had all the armies needed (and of the ones I had, wishing they were as well painted), I was interested to be reminded that there are a couple of extra army lists that he wrote that were included in earlier issues.

Just a thought, but why not have a little pinned section at the top of the SB section here, that include all the completely non official but better than nothing Square Bashing army lists in one place?  There's an absolutely wonderful resource for Painting Guides, perhaps something similar for army lists?

I was indeed referring to the Balkan and First World Wars.  I should have been clearer.

I suppose the Early WW1 Russian list might do in a pinch, although after doing a little bit of reading on them, it seems foreign military observers noted an appalling lack of equipment, training and leadership.  Their officers corps (grossly top heavy in the numbers of generals) seemed remarkably incompetent.  When one general, hard pressed, asked for reinforcements, otherwise for permission to fall back, he was promptly relieved of command.  A more bellicose replacement was sent out, who immediately visited the front, only to be shot and severely wounded a few minutes later.  He later died of infection in hospital.  The division retreated.

The French sent a highly esteemed General to help with strategy, and the Romanians listened to and followed his advice, although it was mostly bad.  Another foreign military observer sneered that the Romanians, despite having many observers of their own embedded in the various combatants armies from 1914 onwards, seemed to have learned nothing of "modern war" and used outdated tactics to send their men to be slaughtered.  Apparently this observer conveniently forgot that the rest of Europe did same for the 1904 Russo-Japanese war.

Yet, the Germans commented several times that despite the Romanians' poor showing, that they took remarkably few prisoners.  The Romanians fought bravely enough, and sadly would die rather than surrender.  They did have the misfortune of facing two of WW1's most capable Generals - Falkenhayn and Mackenson, as well as getting very little Russian or Western Allied support from Salonika as was promised before they declared war on the Central powers.   Their timing was also exquisitely poor in that they waited until the Brusilov offensive and the Somme Offensives were pretty much over, so that the Germans and Austrians could move reinforcements to the Romanian front.  Despite that, they did have some successes, especially later in 1917.

I think a Russian list, with poorer command, no professional units, fewer machine guns, no aircraft or A/C and less capable artillery assets would be more appropriate.  One military advisor commented on their poor ability to entrench decently, so perhaps lowering the "hasty defences" asset would also be applicable.  Perhaps, to reflect their bravery as shown by the lack of prisoners taken by their enemies, a higher "hold the line" asset?  Not sure about that.

They do have their attractions - they fought Germans, Austrians, Turks and Bulgarians in WW1.  Both the Austrians and Romanians used river gunboats, which would be fun to use on the table.  And even though most of their country was overrun quite rapidly, they didn't surrender, and the Allies managed to supply more equipment to them. The Romanians did have some offensive successes later, and quite honestly it was only the 1917 Russian Revolution that drove them to capitulate.  Even then, Romania reentered the war on November 10, 1918 - yes, the day before Germany surrendered.   But given this was in the Balkans, things were of course extremely messy and confused, and Romania then promptly fought the Romanian-Hungarian War until 1919.  Soviet Russia promised support to the Hungarian Soviet Republic, but was a trifle busy fighting Whites and Poles so they never fought Romania directly at this time, although they did instruct the Odessa Soviet Republic and the Moldavian Autonomous Soviet Socialist Republic to invade Romania.  Romania fought off both incursions and won the war, seizing much territory.

There seems to an omission in the Armies Book.  Romanians!  Has anyone ever done any list(s) for that country?    Thanks!

For my WW1 Russians, I have an individual officer based on a round stand.  If the unit is professional, I put him at the back, on the basis that the troops are professional or veteran enough to know what they have to without someone needing to show them.  As well, if he's a veteran, then obviously he is aware of the officer casualty rates amongst those officers who lead charges, and doesn't wish to deprive Mother Russia of his highly trained self.

For reservists, the officer is put at the front of the unit.  "Follow me", he cries, not realizing what the modern Maxim can do to those that run towards them.

Regulars have no marker.

I originally thought about Martin's great way of showing troop types in "Civil War Battles" - ie might is right, having the command stand at the right side - but SB doesn't quite work the same.  And I'm far too lazy to paint up whole command stands like Leman! 

As an aside, for my French Napoleonic army my regulars have regular command stands, with officers on foot, veterans have officers on horseback and my Marie-Louise's or newly drafted young recruits are in greatcoats.  But I don't use rules for that period where the composition of the army can change like in Square Bashing, so my laziness factor doesn't come in to play!