The Battle of Little Big Horn designed by Michael Taylor

[@mtaylor44]

Gilbert, Thanks for reviewing my game! It gives a person a very good overview of the game and how it plays. I would like to expand a bit on the combat and how to play the Indians. One of the tactics that many players seem to overlook or forget is the voluntary rout capability. Once an Indian unit is fired upon by the first US unit, the Indian player may declare a voluntary rout. This happens immediately, without opportunity fire, thus only 1 US unit will get a shot at the Indian unit. It then "scatters". Frustrating for the US player, but I feel this is realistic. Indian units are also easier to rally, so the Indian player can (should) do this often. They will scatter, but they will also return very quickly. In the next rulebook update I am allowing the Indian unit to scatter any time a US unit moves within 2 hexes (but cannot scatter if already routed). There are several reasons why I am updating this, both historical and for game play. So unless they come to you it is difficult to nail down a warrior unit unless it is surrounded or cornered in restricted terrain. Stacking is excellent for melee defense, but as you can see, if only one unit can fire at a target before it scatters, a stack doesn't help much in fire combat. And density may increase casualties or a bad morale result, as well as giving the Indian player more room to surround you.

[@deedubb118]

Michael Taylor I’m not familiar with game other than thru this review, but why is the movement the same whether the soldiers/braves are mounted or dismounted?

[@jeffcarter3461]

Michael Taylor hello Michael. I was wondering if you are planning on a digital version of the game. Thank you.

[@justRayEvansopinion]

I agree with your comments, and the movie, which I have seen. Being British I can't help thinking of the Battle of Isandlwana, which was fought on January 22nd 1879. Lord Chelmsford, split his forces, something akin to Custer. and the result was more or less the same. The British column of 1,800 was practically wiped out against roughly 20,000 Zulus. The movie isn't bad either...

[@richardstone3473]

Too add to our communication I will describe my inspiration. it was a wargame show. A 6mm Crimean War battle of the Alma. The players / demonstrators had a brilliantly presented 28mm scale Great Redoubt conflict to one side on a seperate table. They captured large and small scale together.

[@Jubilo1]

Enjoyable review as always and as you said, a beautiful game. However it does seem that there should be an "insubordination rule," a die roll perhaps, to illustrate Reno and Benteen's failure to obey orders and immediately join Custer. "Big village, bring packs !"

[@brucewarren3562]

This review convinced me to purchase the game. Thank you Gilbert, well done! Your video review should be on the BoardGameGeek page for this game!

[@donclark4685]

Very interesting video. Good job.

[@asgaard636]

Thank you for covering this one!

[@msundborg]

Is the morale check a 2d6?

[@XLEGION1]

According to the chart it is a 2d6.

[@richardstone3473]

Same as Rosebud game. I bought two copies. I use the counters from the second game off table and arrange them openly in their unit stack on table. I use a large mdf hex to put them on

[@XLEGION1]

Cool idea Richard. I have as a 'back burner' project my own Indian War tactical game.

[@richardstone3473]

@@XLEGION1 I will buy that as well! Ps My lady partner who has little knowledge of wargaming finds your presentations relaxing and informative.

[@dalerobinson8051]

The delay mechanism for the Sioux response sets this game apart. Like how the fords work, too. If you play it historically, I should think the element of surprise is largely lost--as it was for Custer.

[@tomknight1759]

Thanks Gilbert, that helps. And I just thought there seems to be an old game called "Jutland" I think. I have never played it.

[@XLEGION1]

I have already done a vide on "Jutland", it should be posted I will have to check.

[@cbclimber]

Evaluating the Little Big Horn after the fact is pretty idiot proof. Custer did what had been successful before at other Indian encampments. Remember, the PRIMARY mission of the campaign was getting the non combatants back to reservation, and to do that you had to envelop the village before the scatter. There is a small mountain of evidence that Reno/Benteen could have done much more than they did. Son of the Morning Star mini series is probably the best Hollywood has done on the subject. The top documentary is a multipart examination uploaded by KZbin user CusterApollo (excellent walk through of the whole thing from start to finish including time stamping the battle/maps/battlefield marker explanation).

[@kevinkosse7970]

What kind of tray(s) did you use that would fit in the box? Thank you

[@tomknight1759]

April 6th was the 100 anniversary of US entry into WW1, could you do a list of WW1 games for us. Seems not much there other than Paths of Glory

[@XLEGION1]

I don't have much in the way of WWI games. I do have the twin pack games from GMT about "Tannenburg" and the "West Front in 1914 - Gory's End"

[@WhatHoSnorkers]

Sadly the gore only got started in 1914!

[@scarecrow810]

As in the original game, it's odd that they left the movement rates for mounted and dismounted units the same. Someone at BGG wrote a review and pointed out that dismounted units pay twice the terrain costs, effectively halving their movement rate compared to being mounted. This seems it would be more intuitive to simply reduce the movement rate printed on the counter for dismounted units, rather than charge twice the terrain movement rate.

[@mtaylor44]

It was done that way because of things like movement mode and changing modes (mounted to dismounted or dismounted to mounted). A dismounted unit that moves 2 clear hexes expends 4MP, then mounts (1MP), has spent 5/6 of the turn. If the mounted side has 12MPs printed on the counter the unit could then move 7 more MPs. So while dismounted is consumed @83% of the turn moving, which means there should be only 17% of time left. With a printed rate of 12 the remain time suddenly jumps to 59% remaining and can move 3 times as far. Not realistic and rather gamey.

[@XLEGION1]

Thanks for the explanation Michael. I had always wondered about that myself.

[@josephcade6425]

Thanks for the review but I have been playing the game and you made a mistake on Morale Checks, you were rolling 1 D6 and it states next to the title roll 2 D6. I'm a bit surprised even the game designer didn't notice that :)

[@horrido666]

Troop! Not company. Thank you for the video.

[@vgovger4373]

Wait wait wait.....there was a hill named Reno and a guy named Reno? 15:40

[@georgecoventry8441]

The hill was named "Reno Hill" by the whites *after* the battle had occurred, since Reno's unit had taken refuge there. The same goes for some of the other famous locations on the map, which were named after the battle for Custer, Weir, Kehoe, etc...

[@DavidRamirez-ww5kv]

Another great review Gilbert. Custer is my father’s boyhood hero. I may get this game. I like the map and the counters too. Does the game include the Gatling guns that Custer choose not to bring to the battle because he believed they would slow him down?

[@tedschlabotnik8540]

It does, and 2nd CAV and Gibbons column of infantry for "What ifs"

[@perfidiousalbion5985]

Wow! Custer was out of his mind!

[@robertsander8509]

Is this available for purchase? How,where do I order from?

[@XLEGION1]

Legion Wargames, they have a website.

[@justRayEvansopinion]

One of the key questions to fathom at the start is does Custer wait until he has all his forces concentrated, thereby giving the Indians time to organise, or does Custer hit the village with what he has got while most Indians are still in the land of nod?

[@XLEGION1]

The literature on Little Big Horn is voluminous and that question has been asked time and time again. I think Reno got a bad deal though in the Custer literature. Didn't he do exactly what Custer ordered him to do? Attack the village from the south? He did, and had only 3 companies but was nearly over whelmed. If Custer got mangled with nearly five companies what was Reno expected to do? A speculative, but highly entertaining move mades some years ago is "The Court Martial of George Armstrong Custer". Well done and has a neat ending.

[@Eadbhard]

@@XLEGION1 The only bad deal Reno got was what he did to himself. Reno didn't attack the village, he halted and formed a skirmish line. More to it, he was not "nearly overwhelmed". From the time Reno and his men tried to charge the village, up until the time they retreated to the timber beside the river, Reno had lost only 3 - 4 men. Once in the timber, Reno's men found themselves in the best-protected position on the entire battlefield. In fact, the Sioux warriors couldn't even get to Reno's men, that's why they tried to burn the woods down. Unfortunately for the Sioux, the vegetation was too green and moist; it wouldn't catch fire. So what did Major Reno do? He gave the Indians a gift by making an insane retreat out of the timber! It was during that ill-advised retreat when Reno's battalion got "mauled", and it was only during that retreat did Reno's command nearly become "overwhelmed". For someone who devised a board game about the Battle of the Little Bighorn, you really don't know much about the battle, do you?

[@occc5943]

@@Eadbhard That's the interesting thing about history and discussion on it in general. We can sit in our living rooms over 100 years later and criticize commanders in the field who were fighting for their life and judge every decision. I wonder how effective you would have been had you been in Reno's position? I think anyone who reads about the Little Big Horn recognizes that Reno could have done very little agains the numbers he was dealing with.

[@Eadbhard]

@@occc5943 I base everything upon facts. The interesting thing about history are the facts we have. We can sit in our living rooms over a century later and criticize commanders because we know the facts. These facts come from viable first-hand sources: military records, personal diaries, and journals. The following are genuine facts we know about Major Reno's fight on the floor of the Little Bighorn Valley: 1) Major Marcus Reno was drunk during the battle. 2) Reno had suffered only 3 - 4 men killed in his initial attack. 3) Reno's battalion withdrew to one of the best-protected places of defense on the entire battlefield - the timber. 4) The Sioux tried to burn the woods down in an effort to get at the soldiers. 5) While in the protection of the timber Reno had zero men killed; when Reno led a retreat out of the timber, fifty of his men were killed, wounded, or missing. 6) The retreat Reno orchestrated was unorganized, not defended, chaotic and absolutely deadly. How effective would I have been in Reno's shoes? Well, how effective would anyone have been? A helluva lot more effective than Major Marcus Reno! Any experienced soldier or frontier Indian-fighter knows you don't turn your back and run from a horde of bellicose Indians, especially when you're in a position that offers you plenty of cover and concealment. The Sioux were trying to burn the woods, for gawd's sake. If you're in a area where the Indians need to burn the trees to get you out, you're in a pretty damn good position. Reno should have taken charge; he should have ordered his men to hunker down, and take cover behind trees, logs, stones, or embankments. When (if) the warriors began pouring into the woods, they would have been at a huge disadvantage, and they knew it (that's why they tried to burn the woods down). The Sioux were not willing to lose that many warriors. As for Reno and his men, all they had to do was hold out for as long as they could; after all, Custer was near, and so was Captain Benteen's battalion. You are incorrect. Anyone who reads all the facts about the Little Bighorn recognizes how Major Reno essentially lost the battle. His ill-advised decision to retreat out of the timber cost him nearly half his men, boosted the morale of the warriors ten-fold, and rendered his battalion impotent for the rest of the fight. What is more, now that Reno's command was no longer threatening the village from the south, all the warriors in the village were able to concentrate their efforts solely upon Custer's battalion.

[@patrickroy3380]

@@Eadbhard way to break it down factually especially how Reno lost few men initially but the drunkard obviously panicked . He then couldve defended the timber but once again panicked while leaving many troopers behind . I could go on but you nailed it again great job as I prefer facts over emotions or opinion. Garryowen

[@ernestmacmurray1716]

Thia is a tuff subject to game. I really respect the effort. However the victory point for destroyed units is well ....silly Custer had no intention of fighting a conventional battle. He was fully aware of what lay before him and he split his forces to create a distraction so he could slip in and take Hostages to use as human sheilds. Love him or hate him he had Balls. To understand what happen here one must take custers war recourd in account both Civil War and Indian war primarly the battle of Washita/Washita Massacre. Absolutly a amazing story .......As mention By Gilbert the joy of many games is the what if. Custers action here whould have more in common with a helcopter raid gone wrong than a battle.

[@XLEGION1]

"Gettysburg" and "Little Big Horn" are just about the most written battles in North American History. I've never been a 'Custer' fan and that includes his service in the American Civil War. I have ordered the "Little Big Horn" game from Command Post games and hope to do my own video look at it soon. Others have done video reviews on it an it is well worth looking at. In that version the author has done away with a 'grid system' entirely and has gone to a 'miniatures' type environment on a historical map.

[@indy_go_blue6048]

"That fateful day in history, the men from the 7th Cavalry went riding on; and from the rear a voice was heard, a brave young man with the trembling words heard loud and clear: 'What am I doing here?'"

[@richardstone3473]

I have the single. Charle Drake.

[@manuelkong10]

it looks like a fairly standard nothing innovative kind of game?