Mansfield: Crisis in the Pine Barrens 8 April 1864 a game review

“We should be most gloriously flogged”- Brigadier General Albert L. Lee, Cavalry Division Commander, the Union Army of the Gulf, Mansfield Louisiana, April 8, 1864, replying to Major General Nathaniel P. Banks’ order for him to attack the massed Confederate Army of Western Louisiana

In this review I give what I think are the game’s good and bad points plus some ways I think it can be improved.

Decision Games Mansfield: Crisis in the Pine Barrens 8 April 1864 is part of Decision Games mini-folio series of games using the Musket & Saber Quick Play rules. It was originally published in 2015.

The game components are: a Ziploc bag which includes cardstock front and back game cover sheets, a countersheet with forty counters, a 11x17 inch map, a small plastic bag for counters when punched out, a copy of the Musket & Saber Quick Play mini game system rules and the Mansfield scenario exclusive rules.

Game Components

My copy purchased in February 2024 came with 2013 dated series rules and 2015 dated scenario rules. There are updated series rules published in 2021 available on the Decision Games website https://decisiongames.com/wpsite/e-rules/mini-series-e-rules/. I highly recommend downloading these rules and using them.

Two differentiated (different colored) six-sided dice not supplied with the game are needed for play.

Different Colored Dice

I’m going to start off with a pet peeve that is totally irrelevant to the play of the game but I think shows that a bit more attention to detail would have helped this game.

The Battle of Pleasant Hill

Illustration of the Battle of Pleasant Hill from Harper’s Weekly Vol. VIII No. 384 p. 297 used as the game cover illustration

While this is a dramatic drawing, it is wrong. It is not an illustration of the Battle of Mansfield. A bit more research and attention to detail could have come up with the illustration below.

The Battle of Mansfield

Illustration of the Battle of Mansfield from Frank Leslie’s Illustrated Newspaper Vol. XVIII No. 450 p. 121

While maybe not quite as dramatic as the Harper’s Weekly drawing, it has the virtue of being an illustration of the correct battle.

I know this is a very minor issue, but I think is emblematic of the main problem with the game i.e. lack of attention to detail and sloppy editing.

First the good points:

Price/Value: Overall I think the game is reasonably priced at sub $15 and the components are of good quality. You get good value for your money.

The Game Counters: They do a good job in identifying the two sides (Union – dark blue, Confederates – gray) and the unit types (infantry, leaders, artillery, and cavalry) are clearly shown. While some reviews of the game complain about how hard the counters are to remove from the countersheet and that they have chads and tags at the corners. I think this is total nitpicking. Just carefully use a hobby knife with a sharp blade to cut the counters off the frame and apart then clip the corners with nail clippers. There are only forty counters. It’s not like you bought World in Flames with 1400+ counters. You can do it and feel proud of your craftsmanship and the veteran grognard look of your game.

Game Counters

Additional counters are the Disrupted marker with a dismounted cavalry marker on the back. Not pictured is the game turn record marker.

The Map: Done by the prolific Joe Youst, it is colorful and functional. Different terrain types are clear and there is a terrain key on the map that corresponds with a terrain effects chart on the last page of the scenario rules sheet.

Game Map

The 2021 Series Rules Edition: While not perfect, this edition of the rules is a vast improvement over the 2013 rules edition provided with the game. Expanding from four pages to six, the rules generally provide more clarity and information than the previous rules edition. Some of the notable changes are:

The addition of a recovery phase between the movement phase and the combat phase is useful. Previously this was done at the end of the movement phase. Having a distinct recovery phase formalizes and lends structure to this game function.

The expansion of the rules on safe, unsafe, and no lines of retreat provides better clarity on this subject.

In my opinion, the greatest and best change is the revised combat procedure and Combat Results Table. To resolve combat two different colored six-sided dice are rolled. One die is identified as the combat die the other as the morale die. The combat die result is used on the correct combat differential column of the Combat Results Table to determine which side (Attacker or Defender) is affected. Also it determines the type of combat result (No Effect, Exchange, etc.) The morale die is used as a pass or fail morale check for the primary unit of the affected side. This is used to determine which column of the Combat Results to use. In general, if a primary unit passes its morale check it stands in place and takes a step loss. If it fails its morale check it disrupts or becomes ineffective and retreats. This does take a little getting used to, but I found it simple and flowing smoothly before the end of my first game.

Musket & Saber Quick Play Revised Combat Results Table, Combat Results (note If primary losing unit passes morale check and If primary losing unit fails morale check columns), and the Artillery Bombardment Results Table

Some have criticized the revised combat procedure as too complex for a mini-folio game. I do not think so and find it a nice piece of “chrome” that makes the game feel more realistic and that it “punches above its weight.”

Finally, the new leader check system is an improvement. Previously, if a 4 was rolled on the Combat Results Table then involved leaders rolled a six-sided die. If they rolled a 5 or 6, the leader was eliminated. Now, leaders that use their combat leadership factor to affect a combat roll two six-sided dice. If they roll of 2 or 12 they are eliminated.

Things that need improvement:

No examples of play: A picture is worth a thousand words could not be truer statement than for these rules. I know that including them would probably add to the cost of game but the series rules would benefit greatly if examples were included. Perhaps on the reverse of the front or back cover cards that are currently blank.

Scenario Setup: The convoluted two-step procedure rules for Confederate unit entry and Confederate commitment sabotages the game. Others have offered valid criticism that the scenario rules as written preclude any chance of a Confederate victory. I think including a historical scenario setup is needed. Merv Cross’ Alternative Setup and using 2021 Quick Play Rules forum thread on the games Board Game Geek page https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/187030/mansfield-crisis-pine-barrens-8-april-1864 points the way forward.

Historical Accuracy/Time Scale: Historically the Battle of Mansfield started at 4pm and lasted until approximately 7pm when it got dark. Three hours from start to finish. In game terms this equates to two (ninety minute) turns. Reducing turn length to 30 minutes and starting a historical scenario at 4pm for six turns would go a long way to fixing this problem. Some good playtesting to validate solutions is needed.

Map of the Battle of Mansfield (Sabine Crossroads) showing position of Union and Confederate forces at 4pm April 8, 1864

Source: The War of the Rebellion: a Compilation of the Official Records of the Union and Confederate armies; Series 1 – Volume 34 (Part I) page 227

Rules Editing: While the 2021 edition rules are a big improvement, sloppy editing lets them down. For example the 2021 rules introduces a Recovery phase and details it in section 11.4. But rules section 11.3 states, A unit may attempt to recover from disruption or ineffectiveness at the end of any friendly movement phase. This is just careless and rightly or wrongly gives the impression that the editor did not care. Additional examples of poor editing can readly be found. A good tightly edited series rules edition is needed.

Discussion:

The Designer Notes in the scenario exclusive rules states two game design problems.

First, one of scale, the map covers an area of 3 by 5 miles at 440 yards per hex. This is a large battle area necessitating an increase in hex scale from the usual 176-352 yards per hex in the Musket & Saber series games. I think the designers efficiently addressed this issue.

The second, more complex design problem, is the fact that General Banks did not know what he was up against until it was too late. Brigadier General Albert Lee, his cavalry division commander leading the advanced guard, had perceived that they were up against a large Confederate force hence his quote at the start of this review. General Banks did not understand the size of the Confederate force he was up against and wallowed in indecisiveness.

Major General Richard Taylor, the Confederate commander had carefully chosen his ground for battle and by mid-morning had his forces in position. He waited most of the day on orders from his commander Leutenant General Edmund Kirby Smith in Shreveport but eventually started his attack at 4pm to prevent Union forces from bringing up more reinforcements. I disagree with the designer’s choices to try and address this issue i.e. the two-stage Confederate unit entry process and Confederate Commitment rules. A more interesting solution would be presenting two setup scenarios with one being a historical setup like Merv Cross’ offering and the other a free setup scenario with both sides on the map within defined areas and rolling for initative on turn one to see which side goes first. Perhaps I will take my own advice and develop one and submit to the game page on Board Game Geek.

Conclusion:

Despite all of its issues I like this game. It is on a historical subject I am interested in. I admit to being biased on this since I live in Pineville Louisiana across the Red River from Alexandria, one of the important locations in the 1864 Red River Campaign that included the Battle of Mansfield as its key event. I believe with some well thought out tinkering it can be developed into a game that lives up to the mini-folio series motto of, Minutes to learn. Quick to play. Historically Accurate.

I like the 2021 edition of the Musket & Saber Quick Play rules. I think they strike the right balance between playability and complexity. I hope that Decision Games will continue to improve the mini-folio series of games and offer new titles. They are an affordable wargaming option for those with limited space/time.