Osprey Games, the UK publisher of tabletop titles including the critically acclaimed Undaunted series, is shutting down its board and card games operation to refocus on wargames and RPGs.

A statement from the company said Osprey’s owner, the multinational book giant Bloomsbury Publishing, had made the “difficult decision” to sell the board and card game line as part of a “strategic refocusing” on book publishing, adding that the move was “not a decision taken lightly”.

The company said it would not commission any new board or card games, but would continue to release, sell and license upcoming games according to its existing schedules while Bloomsbury hunts for a new owner for its board games.

BoardGameWire understands from two sources that Bloomsbury hopes to find a buyer willing take on the existing board and card game team in addition to its catalogue of titles, but the firm is yet to publicly comment on the sale process.

Osprey Games was launched in 2015 as part of Bloomsbury arm Osprey Publishing, which had a decades-long history of creating military and historical information and reference books before beginning to publish wargaming rulebooks in 2008.

The gaming arm’s early successes included Peer Sylvester’s The King is Dead and The Lost Expedition, as well as popular titles such as Hal Duncan and Ruth Veevers’ design Cryptid and the second edition of Martin Wallace’s London.

Those releases were followed by the high-profile success of the Undaunted series of deckbuilding wargames from David Thompson and Trevor Benjamin and the Imperium games from Nigel Buckle and Dávid Turczi.

Osprey also gained a reputation for taking chances on a range of titles with intriguing mechanisms and designs, such as Sylvester’s area control and trick-taking hybrid Brian Boru, highly asymmetric area control title Crescent Moon, card-based strategic wargame Battalion: War of the Ancients and small-box, quick-playing conflict title General Orders: World War II.

Speaking to BoardGameWire, Sylvester said the sale news had come as “a bit of a bombshell”, adding that he wasn’t aware of any problems at Osprey which pointed to a possible sale.

He said, “I dont think the decision has anything to do with how the games have sold. From what I see, there are some strong titles, like The King is Dead (which is still selling well), Undaunted, and apparently also Lost Expedition. So it’s a decision made from the parent-parent-company at Bloomsbury.

“Working with Osprey was perhaps the defining moment of my ‘career’ as a game designer. First: they always had great developers there, which was fun to work with. Brian Boru wouldn’t be as good as it (hopefully) is without the team at Osprey.

“Also, Lost Expedition was turned into a hit partly because of the great idea to hire [comics creator and illustrator] Garen Ewing. So they elevated my games, but they also published them in the first place, which helped me getting a name and contact in the industry.

“I really don’t know if I would continue working on games as much as I did, if I wouldn’t have worked with them. So I owe them a lot.

“The news of the potential sale therefore makes me quite sad. I just hope the team keeps being around in some form, so I can keep working with them.”

David Thompson, the co-designer of the Undaunted series and fellow Osprey titles War Story: Occupied France, Line of Fire: Burnt Moon and the General Orders games, told BoardGameWire, “I’ve worked with Osprey for the last 14 years. Over that time, they’ve grown to be like a family to me.

“It was over a decade ago that Duncan Molloy, then the lead of the Osprey Games board game division, took a chance on a fledgling designer and signed what would eventually go on to be Undaunted: Normandy. Over the next decade I had the opportunity to collaborate with Duncan, Filip Hartelius, Anthony Howgego, Jordan Wheeler, Rhys Ap Gwyn, and Luke Evison on the editorial staff.

“Each and every one of them are incredibly talented people, and it was through their shepherding that games like the Undaunted series, General Orders, and War Stories: Occupied France came to be. And I would be remiss if I did not mention Emily Neat, Pete Ward, Benji Corless, Benjamin Thorne, and George Barker from the marketing staff and Gareth Clarke for his graphic design.

“Amazing people, each and every one. Over the years I’ve partnered with about 15 board game publishers, but the folks at Osprey will always hold a special, unique place in my heart.” 

Fellow board game designer Ellie Dix, whose tapestry-themed worker placement design Threaded could prove one of the last published by Osprey Games, said she also did not know what had provoked the decision.

Dix told BoardGameWire, “I’ve loved working with Osprey. They’ve been absolutely brilliant. Honestly a dream to work with. They’ve taken so much care with Threaded and done such a great job to bring it to life. I’m very sad about the decision to sell.”

The news comes a month after Bloomsbury, which has a stock market valuation of almost £500m, announced it was “streamlining its structure for further growth”, which included a reorganisation of the company’s editorial divisions and the loss of about 55 jobs.

That restructuring follows Bloomsbury’s sales doubling from £185m to £361m over the last five financial years, with profits more than doubling to £48.8m in the same time.

No mention of Osprey was made in the restructuring announcement, or in Bloomsbury’s interim results announced in October last year, which revealed revenues of £160m and profits of £24m in the six months to August 2025.

Osprey Games’ slate of releases for 2026 is currently set to include Undaunted 2200: Revolution, Crab Rage and two Warriors of Athena titles, while the company will be at UK Games Expo later this month demoing Threaded, Flip Pick Towers and Rattlesnake.

The post Undaunted publisher Osprey’s board game operation to be sold off by owner Bloomsbury Publishing first appeared on .

One of my favorite wars to game is that of the Vietnam War. Part of that is because I was born in the early 1970’s and heard a lot about this war for the rest of that decade and throughout my teenage years. I remember watching the short lived television series Tour of Duty. I also read the graphic novel series The ‘Nam from Marvel Comics. But, my interest really grew after watching movies such as Apocalypse Now and Platoon. I always asked myself, how are you expected to fight a war where you don’t know who the enemy is? But also part of the attraction for me is that the war in anything but conventional. The combatants were diametrically different, the powerful and well funded United States of America and their technology and special forces versus the Viet Cong, a rag tag group of insurgents, and the mighty North Vietnamese Army funded and supported by the Chinese. This war also was set amongst the backdrop of social upheaval and cultural change at home with anti-war protests, freedom for all being sung as a marching song and desegregation and civil rights taking center stage. We have played plenty of games set in this conflict and I want to share my Best 3 Games with…Vietnam!

3. Hearts & Minds: Vietnam 1965-1975 from Worthington Publishing

We really enjoy Card Driven Games and try to play as many of them as we possibly can get our hands on. Also, as I said in the intro, we also enjoy Vietnam wargames. So, when we had a chance to play a CDG on the Vietnam War, it was a no brainer! I got this game for Christmas about 6 years ago and it was a used copy of the 1st Edition published by Worthington Publishing. There is a 2nd Edition out there but I really don’t know what the differences are. Since that time, there also is a new 3rd Edition from Compass Games and it looks really good. But that is neither here nor there.

In Hearts and Minds: Vietnam 1965-1975, players will play as either the US/ARVN forces (with some units from NATO as well as ROK) against the Communist forces which include NVA regulars and VC hidden units. The game has multiple scenarios and covers the entirety of the Vietnam War from 1965 all the way through 1975 as the U.S. forces left and only the ARVN remained to attempt to stem the red tide coming down into South Vietnam.

Players have a hand of 5 cards each round from which they will play 4 that provide Resource Points to perform various actions including activating units to move up to their movement allowance, attacking enemy units, doing bombing missions, pacifying areas or forcing a political change. Each faction has their own deck, the Communist deck is red, the Allies is blue and then there are black cards that are neutral. Players will make their decks from their color and mix in half of the black cards. These cards represent the meat of the game and are the vehicle to make the game progress. The Resource Points are spent to perform the actions mentioned above and also can be used to buy the printed event on the card just played. Sometimes this event will have lasting effects for the entire game, such as the Commando Hunt card that allows Bomber missions to target Laotian border provinces and also allows more than 1 bomber to bomb any given province, or will have a one time effect such as Junction City, that allow you to spend more than one saved Resource Point in a given turn as long as all Battle and Political Control Change actions take place in Zone III. These cards are well done and the game boils down to the efficient use of the hand that you are dealt. Sometimes, you will be given cards with high RP’s of 4 or 5, which will allow you to make a lot of progress with various actions including moving forces, battling the opposition and making political changes. But, there will be times when your draws are not great and you have a hand full of low value RP cards but they might have interesting and very useful events that you must take advantage of. In essence, you have to play the cards you are dealt and make the best go of things. This can be both fun and frustrating but always keeps things interesting and requires that you plan and execute on that plan.

Battle is pretty simple as well as all the counters are pretty much the same for both sides. Each counter has an untried side and a veteran side (with either a 1-6 or 2-6 for ARVN and US troops or a 1-4 or 2-4 for NVA and typically a 1-1 for VC units) and then there are support units such as mortars, artillery, tanks and helicopter gunships. When a players units are located in a province with enemy units, a contested area is created where the players can fight by buying a battle round for the cost of 1 RP. If the battle doesn’t conclude, another battle round can be purchased with an additional RP until the player no longer has RP’s. Units in a province simply total up their battle factors (located in the bottom left corner of the counters), roll a die and consult their specific faction’s Battle Table. The results are the damage that must be applied and fire is considered simultaneous. The results include a specific number of units that must be eliminated but also sometimes has a capital R that means the player must either lose one unit or pay a saved RP. The blue table is slightly better than the red table, but not by much.

The really neat part about the battles is that units can evade before the battle starts with a roll, which becomes more difficult in certain terrain types and also has negative results for even attempting, such as the loss of a unit. This part can be very frustrating for the Allied player as he has finally corned the wily NVA and VC and they then slip right through his fingers with a favorable roll.

How does the game end? Well, players will be fighting each other for control of provinces and for casualties that will affect the will of the fighting powers and adjust the Political Will Track. This track factors in how each side feels about the war and their attitude to continued hostilities. Each scenario has a set level for an immediate victory, which frankly will never happen, and an end scenario number, which is more reachable. The Political Will Track really sums up the game for me and the feelings that many had about the Vietnam War. It seemed that escalation of bombing, more U.S. Troops on the ground and bloodshed didn’t equate to a victory. But simply meant the fighting would linger until one side or the other eventually would give in.

I recommend this game wholeheartedly for anyone that likes CDG’s and for anyone that is interested in a holistic approach and treatment of the Vietnam War. My only negative about this game is that it appears to be very hard for the Communists to win. That is probably an assessment after only one play as we both really didn’t know what we were doing but it is a concern of mine that I would like to see in future plays. It just felt very difficult to do anything that was meaningful with the resources they have and they are also outclassed in combat so that is a concern as battle is a big part of the game. Still a very solid representation of the Vietnam War and frankly a very interesting design by John Poniske.

2. Fire in the Lake: Insurgency in Vietnam from GMT Games

The COIN Series uses cards in a very different way from other CDG’s. These cards are not necessarily the driver of the action but more assistive to the actions of the players by setting eligibility and also providing powerful events. The Event Cards are more often than not, very powerful. They either give you a continuing bonus on future Operations and Special Activities (as in the case of the volumes that include the various Capabilities) or allow you to take Operations and Special Activities more times that round than you would normally have been able to had you not chosen the Event and more often than not, at no cost! Also, because of the power of the cards and their ties to one or more factions, you can take the Event which allows you a huge advantage, only to see that very powerful Event reversed with the next Event or with a regular Operation. This is very frustrating but is one of the major reasons that I love the card-assisted element of the COIN Series.

Fire in the Lake from GMT Games just really sums up the the Vietnam War experience to me and Volko’s magnum opus is Fire in the Lake, without a doubt, as it attempts to answer the question of who the enemy is and does a fantastic job. Fire in the Lake: Insurgency in Vietnam is Volume IV of the COIN Series and teams up two amazing designers in Volko and Mark Herman. The game is an asymmetric treatment of the Vietnam War and pits four players against each other, as even allies want to win the war, but win it in their way. The US Player has control of lots of powerful forces that can utilize Air Lift, Assaults and Sweeps to drive the insurgent guerilla forces of the Viet Cong and NVA back into the jungles but the VC and NVA have tools at their disposal to evade these heavy handed tactics such as tunneled bases, the terrain itself including jungles, rivers and mountains, and the Ho Chi Minh Trail. The US Player must also watch his own back as his ally, the ARVN, is more interested in patronage and lining their pockets with US dollars than necessarily winning the war through brute force. This game design takes into account all of the difficulties with this quagmire of a war and time, and through the cards used to assist the game moving forward, inserts key events such as drug use, protests at home, booby traps and the Tet Offensive.

If you haven’t played Fire in the Lake, please do yourself a favor, and do so. It is an exquisite experience that will test you on so many levels and leave you exhausted at the end of the effort while yearning for more. But, don’t go into it thinking it will be easy as it will not be and is sure to have you pulling your hair out as you attempt to win this war. Great theme. Great game play. High quality components and a well thought out design. To get a little more insight into why this game is so great, please read my article on Why I find the COIN Series to be Fantastic! I use several examples of the game play from Fire in the Lake to prove my point.

1. Silver Bayonet: The First Team in Vietnam, 1965 from GMT Games

I own and have read the book We Were Soldiers Once..and Young by Lt. Gen. Hal Moore and was fascinated by the story he told of his brave soldiers who fought the first major battle of the Vietnam War. How they went into the Ia Drang Valley and ran into nearly 2,500 NVA regulars who were spoiling for a fight and who outnumbered them 2.5/1 and how that fight lasted 5 days from November 14th through November 18th. I was also amazed at the new tactics used by the 7th Cavalry in using helicopters to jump from landing zone to landing zone to remain maneuverable enough to fight a conventional war that we were comfortable with against a non-conventional enemy in the Viet Cong and the North Vietnamese Army who didn’t want to fight our way. When the new 25th Anniversary Edition of Silver Bayonet was announced I was excited to experience this war and was glad when my friend Alexander P500’ed the game and we got a chance to play it.

So, this isn’t some monster game that covers the whole of the Vietnam conflict, but covers the entirety of the Silver Bayonet campaign. The initial landings of the 1st Cavalry Division are just 1 of 11 or 12 scenarios/campaign games included in the box. It covers 4 days and uses a handful of units in brutal close assaults.

Something that I was pleasantly surprised about was that a good number of the scenarios can be played solitaire because most of them don’t involve using the hidden aspects of the game (NVA hidden movement, US secret helicopter basing and staging, etc.). The complexity of the rules, and sub rules, as well as all of the different phases means that the game is very cerebral. There’s a lot to consider, and units/combats might not function in ways that you’re used to in other games. With one stack attacking another you are very unlikely to wipe the other player out. The CRT just isn’t built for that. If you use maneuver combat then the NVA will flee to the hills and then just come back at you. However, NVA assaulting American troops is also deadly, because in assaults the defender inflicts hits first. We found ourselves often in bloody stalemates, with the Americans just barely hanging on for dear life. The US had access to big artillery pieces as well as many points of airstrikes, which learned through hard experience need to be stacked all together in precision strikes in order to do any kind of damage. All of these things lead to just a fascinating, and in my opinion, extremely accurate representation of the type of combat, fought on the jungled hills of South Vietnam. This game felt real and as we played we could really begin to get into the narrative of the situation and even in some small manner, feel the same frustration and disappointment that the US must have felt in fighting an un-fightable enemy! For that alone, I am extremely impressed and cannot wait to play more and just explore the depth that the rest of the scenarios have to offer.

If you can’t tell, I love this game. It’s deep, rich, and flavorful, just like a good curry. There’s volume in the box, so much stuff to play with. The components are unbelievably good value. Something that didn’t feel too great was the importance of the coordination rolls. The NVA would have handed the US their ass early on day 3 if they hadn’t utterly failed this coordination roll. In failing, they were unable to attack with their best stacks that had been meticulously moved into position for the final assault to take LZ X-Ray. And while I understand what it represents, which is is great, but it seemed very ‘swingy’, because it happened on several of my activations during our plays. Coordinating the amount of NVA troops commanded in the jungles whilst being bombarded day and night isn’t an easy thing to do, but that it boiled down to a single d10 roll felt like a little bit of a let down. I might be house ruling a 2d6 method to make that roll less randomly distributed. I also get that over the course of a full campaign those kind of things would have evened themselves out, but in a short scenario like that it kind of felt like bad luck. That being said: It’s still a good model for the command situation, so there is that. Just maybe find a way to be less random?

Well, those are my 3 favorite games focused on the Vietnam War. I have played several others but feel that these 3 best demonstrate what it is like to be in an unwinnable and unmanageable situation that quickly spirals out of your control. What are your favorite Vietnam War games?

As an added bonus, here are links to a few Vietnam related posts that I did during the pandemic on the Music of the Vietnam War:

The Music of the Vietnam War – Playlist Suggestion for Wargames Part 1 – 1964-1969

The Music of the Vietnam War – Playlist Suggestion for Wargames Part 2 – 1970-1975

Post Publishing Edit: I was asked why Purple Haze from PHALANX didn’t make the list and here was my response:

Oh no. It was amazing. We absolutely love the theme and the feel of that game. Fantastic representation of the Vietnam War. Warfighter Vietnam from DVG is also very good.

A few other smaller games I have played and liked on the subject was Fortunate Sons from High Flying Dice Games, Long Cruel Woman from High Flying Dice Games and Dien Ben Phu from Legion Wargames (although not the US war in Vietnam but a great game). Just only wanted to spotlight 3.

-Grant