This review first appeared in IPW, the newsletter for all discount games club members. Contact colin@allusedgames.demon.co.uk for details. Blood on the snow A review by Alan Sharif Blood on the Snow is a simulation of the battle of Suomussalmi, fought in 1939 during lhe Russo-Finnish War. Suomussalmi is a key crossroads in Finland by which the Soviets were hoping to cut the country in two. The ferocious defence put up by the Finns is well known and this battle provides the perfect example. Historically, a Soviet division was cut off, after which a second division, sent to rescue it, suffered the same fate. Both divisions were then annihilated, despite outnumbering their assailants. What this game strives to demonstrate is the difference between a slow, heavily armed invader and a mobile but lightly armed defender. This game uses the same system used in a previous Avalanche game, Macarthur’s Return. A few words on that particular game may be in order. Firstly, I did not particularly enjoy it. It featured a slow moving U.S. force against a more mobile Japanese, but there the similarity ends. The U.S. were so heavily armed that lapanese mobility was useful only in so far as the Japanese player could choose where on the map his units would ultimately go down to defeat. There were also that many units involved in the campaign game that I must admit I became too fatigued to play. However, shorter scenarios were provided and a lot of the fault was, I suspect, due to the historic situation rather than the game system. Blood on the Snow is smaller, more manageable and is not bogged down with complex supply rules, rules for naval units or amphibious landings. So just because you might not have enjoyed Macarthur's Return, don't automatically rule out this game. A game turn commences with the Initial segment. Weather is determined via a die roll, supply is checked and unavailable artillery is flipped to its available side. Artillery becomes unavailable for combat after it either fires or moves. It can be restored to combat readiness via a die roll but, failing that, is automatically restored at the start of the next game turn. Supply is traced by units to a headquarters (ten hexes for the Finns, seven for the Soviets) and then the HQ traces a path to a road or trail leading to a friendly map edge (12 hexes for the Finns but a mere three for the Soviets). Out of supply effects are more severe for the Soviets but centre on a reduction of combat and movement factors. Unsupplied artillery may not barrage or support combats. Weather determines how many impulses a game turn will comprise of. The worse the weather, the less impulses there are in a turn. The Impulse phase follows the Initial phase and concludes the game turn. The weather determines how many chits each player may place into an opaque container from a selection he has available. Each chit describes a different type of impulse and, whilst the number of chits chosen is out of a players hands, the type of impulses used are chosen freely by the player. The options are Attack, which speaks for itself; Full, which is both a movement and combat; Move, which also speaks for itself and Half which allows units to use half their movement allowance. Finally, there is Choice which, if drawn, allows the owning player to choose which type of impulse he wishes to take at that time. I say if drawn because a game turn always comprises of less impulses than the number of chits available. Also they are drawn at random so players never know who will be going next and what he'll be able to do. This means perfect game plans cannot be formed, that the game has high replay value and, contrary to what it says on the box, is highly playable solo. Beyond what I have covered already, the game is fairly simple. Movement is quite standard with units paying high movement costs unless they're ski-equipped Finns. Combat is based on odds and adjusted by terrain. Artillery can support combat in attack or defense within range or, alternatively, may barrage alone. Quite sensibly, the barrage is affected by terrain in the target hex and the number of units found there - the more the bloodier. Combat includes column shifts for armour which can be neutralised by having an anti-tank unit in the defending hex. Rules also exist for tank fright, anti-tank gun capture and retreat before combat. Engineers can build forts and roads, whilst the Finnish player can break units down into smaller components - useful for surrounding Soviets prior to combat for another combat shift. Combat results are retreats and step losses. Players may declare an assault to be a probe which halves losses to both sides but does not allow advance after combat. All in all, this is rather a good game on a fairly exotic topic. My only gripes would bc that the map is awful to look at and an apparent foul up between the Terrain Effects Chart and the rules. There is mention on the TEC that the attacker suffers extra losses when attacking over frozen lakes and rivers. This is not, however, mentioned in thc rules. I play the Attacker gets an extra step loss which seems to make sense. When played solo, the Fog of War rule has to be ignored, but this does not hamper play. Both sides have their own unique set of problems and are equally fun to play. Four scenarios are provided, with victory based on holding towns and exiting units for the Soviet. The player gets double victory points for exiting the otherwise useless motorised military brass band! Take my tip. If you fancy a change of pace from Panzer pushing, or a different location from the Ardennes, Gettysburg or Waterloo, you could do a lot worse than give this one a try.