It's a good basic tactical primer, though there are flaws in the storyline that make no sense. The three main flaws are as follows...

The personalities of the characters shift depending on whether the reader makes choices that agree with what the author has deemed to be the best choice. If he makes choices that the author disagrees with, the platoon leader, (the reader's role,) is portrayed as a weak and indecisive leader, bullied by an overbearing and obstinate platoon sergeant who leads him down the wrong paths at every turn. On the other hand, if he chooses as the author thinks best, the platoon leader magically becomes strong and forceful in personality while the platoon sergeant becomes almost sycophantic in nature at times, confirming his decisions to be wise. I found these personality shifts to be distracting to the basic concept of the book, which is to examine the probable results of the various choices offered, and implying that the only leaders who make mistakes are weak willed and indecisive.

The second major flaw is that identical events, unrelated to the previous choices made and completely outside the platoon leaders ability to affect in any way, have different results depending on the reader's agreement with the author's preferred choices, with them being more detrimental if he has made choices the author has deemed to be inferior to others, and more beneficial if the reader has chosen what the author has deemed to be the best course of action. (I went through and tried every available path through the story line out of curiosity.)

In one example, if the reader chooses as the author has deemed unwise, the enemy makes a counterattack that never appears under nearly identical circumstances if the reader chooses in agreement with what the author thinks best.

These slant the book in favor of the authors viewpoint rather than letting the results themselves teach the reader what would or would not be the best choice in an impartial fashion. The end results of these choices are not always consistant either with one set of choices, for example, resulting in the platoon taking very heavy casualties, but the rest of the company's casualties being very light, and this being deemed inferior in the authors eyes to the platoon itself taking relatively light casualties, but the company as a whole taking -very- heavy casualties in far greater numbers than the platoons first example losses, though it is the job of the platoon to protect the flank of the company. This seems backwards to me, though in both scenarios, the platoon did ultimately accomplish it's mission.

A third flaw is that the choices given are not always clear as to what is being chosen. What may appear, when reviewing the choices, to be a decision to seek defensible ground will, every so often, turn into the platoon being ordered to try to defend in the open, and what may initially appear to be a decision to defend in the open that appears ill advised will occasionally end up having been a choice to find good, defensible terrain to occupy.

Even with what are, in my opinion, these flaws in the book, it is as I said, a good basic primer in small unit tactics on the modern battlefield, and an entertaining and informative read.


Good teaching tool, exciting adventure story, excellent game   January 11, 2002
 3 out of 3 found this review helpful

This is an above-average gamebook and war novel; it's not as polished or deft as a war novel by David Drake or Jerry Pournelle, but its writing style is better than many books written by serving officers such as Harold Coyle. Some books by active officers have good storylines that are hard to concentrate on because the inept style, esp. dialogue, grates on the ear. Not here - the prose is workmanlike and generally smooth.

The game situation is a Choose Your Own Adventure book based in modern warfare. While there is one best answer to every question (and you don't always have enough information to know what that will be in advance), there are several ways to win, and several levels of victory - you might accomplish the mission with few casualties, with many casualties, with near-complete casualties, or fail the mission altogether. The choices are exciting and nerve-wracking, because no matter what you choose, you can easily see how unexpected circumstance or plain bad luck could wreck your platoon. And luck is kept in its proper place - a laser-directed artillery barrage will reliably bust up an enemy column, but when a single tank is charging your position, inches make a difference and the dice will determine whether you as Lt. Bruce Davis live or die. Luck will definitely not save you from the fallout of a bad plan, nor completely derail a good plan, although it can turn an average plan into a failure.

As a teaching tool, its value lies in seeing the effects of your choices and being able to go back and start again. There are a few pages of general tactical advice, but they, like many Army tactics manuals, are so general as to be worthless. Indeed, the "lessons learned" sections appear to come verbatim out of Army manuals - as indeed they should, given the subject, but I would have preferred it if the author had rewritten them in plainer language and made some distinctions. For example, "mass" and "economy of force" are both important tactical concepts, but they're also antithetical. Some plain-English advice on when to concentrate and when to spread out would have been welcome.

Nor is this sour grapes - I actually made it through the first time to the optimum solution! Except for one important typo: there's a place where if you decide so-and-so, you are directed to section 88. That section has nothing to do with what you decided; it's part of a different decision chain altogether, although that was not immediately obvious to me. I don't know which section I was supposed to consult, but it sure wasn't 88. Copyediting in general has slipped across the book industry over the last decade - it's commonplace now to find, as in here, that the character "Piper" is called "Pipe" at one point, Lt. Bruce Davis is referred to as "Steve" Davis on the back cover, and so on. But when a misplaced digit sends you off into the ozone, it's almost as bad as transposing a range figure when calling in arty.


Required Reading   January 10, 2002
This is an excellent training book. It should be required reading for all platoon leaders, platoon sergeants and squad leaders. I gave it to my platoon leader and team leader. They also found it to be an excellent learning tool.
You and your men live or die based upon your own decisions. That's what I enjoyed most.

SSG Eric Hunt
A Co. 1/105th Inf


Imaginative design but not about leadership...   December 12, 2001
 6 out of 6 found this review helpful

...which is why I had purchased this book, that is, thinking it would have something to do with leadership. In this fictional, interactive account, a newly minted West Point Lt is given a rifle platoon and faces overwhelming odds against him. The reader makes choices throughout the book, usually about tactical decisions, which leads the reader down a "decision field," usually to the reader's own demise. This is imaginative. However, the basic principles of leadership are not discussed, other than working together, making sound and timely decisions, maintaining positive communications, and so forth.