Previous Next

The Gallipoli campaign was something fine in theory which failed in practice. The same is true of this game, although I'm glad someone has looked at the First World War, which has a lot of variety in it.

By early 1915, there was deadlock on the Western Front, so a British amphibious landing was made on the Gallipoli peninusula, which guarded the capital of Germany's ally Turkey.

The idea was to force the Turks out of the war and open up a supply route through to Britain's ally Russia.

Unfortunately the Turks were far better fighters than anyone had expected, and ground conditions at Gallipoli were every bit as bad as anywhere on the Western Front.

Unfortunately whilst the real campaign taxed the abilities of even the best commanders the game has been made quite simply too easy for the British to win!

This is traceable to a king-sized historical blunder in the briefing booklet: "There was little artillery and this did not play a decisive part in the fighting". Um, exactly the opposite is true!

The Turks and Allies fought so hard over the incredibly rough and difficult terrain of the heights because it was these that provided artillery observation. With this condition gone, all the Allies have to do is come down off the plateau and outflank the Turks through the far easier plains to the south of ANZAC Cove.

Yes, you've got the idea. You put all your forces together into one massive pile, break through a Turkish unit, come down into the plains and steam-roller round into the rear and capture their supply dump, which is the basic victory condition.

Although CCS don't often put out bad wargames, I'm afraid this is a rare exception.