With this My Favorite Wargame Cards Series, I hope to take a look at a specific card from the various wargames that I have played and share how it is used in the game. I am not a strategist and frankly I am not that good at games but I do understand how things should work and be used in games. With that being said, here is the next entry in this series.
#73: Russian Leader Tsar Alexander I from Congress of Vienna from GMT Games
Congress of Vienna from GMT Games is a diplomatic card driven wargame based on Churchill and is the 4th game in the Great Statesmen Series. The game is set during the years of 1813-1814 and sees players take on the role of the main characters of the struggle between the Napoleonic Empire and the coalition of Russia, Austria, and Great Britain with their Prussian, Spanish, Portuguese, and Swedish allies. Congress of Vienna has two different but related phases including the conference table where players first debate over the control of issues germane to the factions and the period of the war and second these issues are then used on the battlefield to recruit units, attack and take overall command of battles. The players will be playing cards from their hands to “debate” over the various issues that were placed on the table, which include all types of things such as Military Operations, Recruitment, who will lead the combined Coalition forces (Generalissimo), Future of French Government, British Financial Aid, Liberalism vs. Absolutism, Austrian Neutrality and several other issues, and then later the players will use their accumulated Resources gained from the issues to enact action on the Military Map and do things like mobilize troops, place Military Support Markers and the ultimately to conduct warfare.
The game relies on cards and cards can be used to negotiate, i.e. move an issue to your National Track. Cards can provide a particular issue with positive and negative DRM’s depending on which nation plays them and can also be traded with another player during the Diplomacy Phase. Certain cards are better than others for debating an issue moved by another player; and finally, if they are saved for the War Phase, staff cards can be used to modify dice rolling in battles. These are very versatile cards and the players will have to learn them and their benefits in order to be effective at the game.
In this entry, we are going to take a look at the Russian Leader Tsar Alexander I card. The fist thing that you may notice about this Leader Card is that is that it has no benefit for military operations, meaning that Tsar Alexander is watching the war from the sidelines and not directly involved like Napoleon, but does have a potential negative effect if used on certain Issues. But his power lies in the ability to utilize his 7 value to influence issues significantly on the Negotiating table. Particularly, Tsar Alexander I is an ardent believer in the philosophy of Absolutism and wants to retain his crown as the leader of Russia. This concept is played out in the game between the great powers of the time, including Russia and Austria for Absolutism, and the more democratic players including Britain and France for Liberalism. On the board appears this Liberalism/Absolutism Track, which provides the players an opportunity to debate over the Liberalism/Absolutism Issue and gain various advantages and Victory Points from the track. On this Liberalism/Absolutism Track, Europe’s post-war governing philosophy is fought over. This is a double track in green and red with a common At Start area for the use of 2 pawns. Tracks for Liberalism (red: Britain/France) and Absolutism (green: Russia/Austria) each have four boxes and an assigned total Victory Point amount. In order to score the VP from this track though, the player scoring must have their philosophical leaning portion of the track occupying a space at least 1 box ahead of their opponent. Also, if they want to score the maximum Victory Points listed at the top, they have to occupy the top box and their opponent cannot occupy theirs. For the Russia player, this should be a huge part of their strategy as 5VP is nothing to sneeze at in this game. But, in order to do that they will most likely have to try to go first and use Tsar Alexander and his 7 value to try and move that Issue up the track to end under their control. If an Issue every reaches a Track’s Seat, meaning the 7th space, or more after any declared debate is calculated in, then that Issue is considered to be secured and can no longer be moved through negotiation during future rounds. This reminds me a bit of the way that I always plan to use Joseph Stalin in Churchill, to go first and then bring the hammer down on the A-Bomb Research Issue. Getting control of this Absolutism/Liberalism Issue at least 4 times is very important for the Russian player and they will need to utilize this ability as much as possible. But remember that there is a penalty called the “Meddling Tsar” Rule where if Tsar Alexander is used for the negotiation of the British Financial Aid, Liberalism/Absolutism or the Generalissimo Issues, it will inflict a -2 DRM on all battles involving 1 or more Russian units during the upcoming War Phase. This is quite a cost and the player should carefully consider if and when they use the ability throughout the game. If the turn is expected to contain little to no combat for Russian units, then it is safe to use but if France is being aggressive and pushing on Poland and Prussia you might want to consider not going after the Liberalism/Absolutism Issue this turn and instead focus on Recruitment and Military Operation Issues.
The other part of this ability is that if Tsar Alexander I is used to move the Liberalism/Absolutism Issue then Napoleon cannot be used to Debate that movement. I would say that this is not an issue though as typically the France player will be using Napoleon on the battlefield for his DRM abilities.
I also like the historical and personality connection between this card and the game. At the top of the card you will notice that if you use Tsar Alexander I to negotiate the Peace Congress, Future Government of France, Bavaria or Poland Issues, that you will gain a -2 on his value bringing it from a 7 down to a 5. I think that this ability really highlights the philosophy and view of the Tsar regarding the time. He doesn’t believe that France should get to continue to exist as a main player in the power structure of the time and definitely doesn’t want to see France become more democratic. But, he also has a feeling that Bavaria and Poland are Russian vassals and should not be allowed to be turned to any other side’s allegiance. If he has to be used in this manner to defend or negotiate these issues I feel like the -2 Value penalty really shows that leaning in his thinking and probably causes him to be more brunt and less diplomatic thereby losing some of his influence in the court of opinion. Ultimately, Tsar Alexander I thought that monarchy is a noble and viable alternative to the crude and materialistic mob mentality of republicanism and the abilities of his Leader Card definitely cement that view.
After playing now a few times, I am here to say that Congress of Vienna is probably my favorite game in the Great Statesmen Series. I believe that this game has matured the system and made it something that is more than where it started. Congress of Vienna is very much more like a true wargame and was extremely interesting. We are still learning and need to keep playing this one but I did enjoy what it was that we were doing.
Alexander I, nicknamed “the Blessed”, was Emperor of Russia from 1801, the first King of Congress Poland from 1815, and the Grand Duke of Finland from 1809 to his death in 1825. He ruled Russia during the chaotic period of the Napoleonic Wars.
The eldest son of Emperor Paul I and Sophie Dorothea of Württemberg, Alexander succeeded to the throne after his father was murdered. As prince and during the early years of his reign, he often used liberal rhetoric but continued Russia’s absolutist policies in practice. In the first years of his reign, he initiated some minor social reforms and in 1803–04 major liberal educational reforms, such as building more universities. Alexander appointed Mikhail Speransky, the son of a village priest, as one of his closest advisors. The over-centralized Collegium ministries were abolished and replaced by the Committee of Ministers, State Council, and Supreme Court to improve the legal system. Plans were made, but never consummated, to set up a parliament and sign a constitution. In contrast to his westernizing predecessors such as Peter the Great, Alexander was a Russian nationalist and Slavophile who wanted Russia to develop on the basis of Russian rather than European culture.
In foreign policy, he changed Russia’s position towards France four times between 1804 and 1812, shifting among neutrality, opposition, and alliance. In 1805 he joined Britain in the War of the Third Coalition against Napoleon, but after suffering massive defeats at the battles of Austerlitz and Friedland, he switched sides and formed an alliance with Napoleon in the Treaty of Tilsit and joined Napoleon’s Continental System. He fought a small-scale naval war against Britain between 1807 and 1812 and took Finland from Sweden in 1809 after Sweden’s refusal to join the Continental System. Alexander and Napoleon hardly agreed, especially regarding Poland, and the alliance collapsed by 1810. Alexander’s greatest triumph came in 1812 when Napoleon’s invasion of Russia descended into a catastrophe for the French. As part of the winning coalition against Napoleon, he gained territory in Poland. He formed the Holy Alliance to suppress the revolutionary movements in Europe, which he saw as immoral threats to legitimate Christian monarchs.
During the second half of his reign, Alexander became increasingly arbitrary, reactionary, and fearful of plots against him; as a result, he ended many of the reforms he had made earlier on in his reign. He purged schools of foreign teachers, as education became more religiously driven as well as politically conservative. Speransky was replaced as advisor with the strict artillery inspector Aleksey Arakcheyev, who oversaw the creation of military settlements. Alexander died of typhus in December 1825 while on a trip to southern Russia. He left no legitimate children, as his two daughters died in childhood. Neither of his brothers wanted to become emperor. After a period of great confusion (that presaged the failed Decembrist revolt of liberal army officers in the weeks after his death), he was succeeded by his younger brother, Nicholas I.
We have done 2 videos on this game including the following RAW Video after out 1st play at Buckeye Game Fest in May 2025:
We then did the following full Review Video after our 2nd play at WBC last July:
In the next entry in this series, we will take a look at Open Borders from 2024: An American Insurgency from Compass Games.
An Impossible War: The First Carlist War in the North, 1834-1838 from Bellica Third Generation is a block wargame that recreates the First Carlist War in the North of Spain which was a civil war between the Carlists who supported the succession of the late king’s brother Carlos de Borbón and the progressive and centralist supporters of the regent Maria Christina acting for Isabella II of Spain who were referred to as the Liberals. The game uses blocks representing units but also includes counters and uses cards. I was able to play the game about a month or so ago with Francisco Ronco who owns the publishing company Bellica Third Generation and very much enjoyed the game and how it represented this interesting struggle.
In this series of Action Points, we will first take a look at the Game Map, discussing the point-to-point movement configuration, the various spaces and the delineation of the Carlist versus the Liberal Zones, as well as explain the use of the Rest of Spain smaller map, examine the units available to both sides and cover the importance of Supply, take a look at the Carlist Uprising Phase and what it means for the game, take a look at the activation system and the use of Action Point Markers, and cover some examples of Battle, focusing on the tactical aspect of combat with the use of the Battlefield Board, as well as an example of a Siege.
Main Game Map
There is a Main Game Map, which is commonly referred to as the Northern Map, shows the northernmost tier of Spain along the coast of the Cantabrian Sea including Navarre, the Basque Provinces and part of Cantabria, Burgos and La Rioja, and a small secondary Game Map that reflects the regions of the rest of the country, where Carlist uprisings break out and the expeditions sent from the North may operate.
The Main Game Map contains various elements including named settlements, such as Towns and Cities, and also identify key Carlist Refuges and has a clear demarcation of Carlist and Liberal territory. There are locations identified by the name of a settlement or area, which can be of greater or lesser importance and size. There are four types of spaces including Cities, Main Towns, Carlist Refuges and Other Spaces.
Cities
Cities are represented on the Game Map by an octagonal shape and the name of the city is capitalized. If the City is Liberal it will be colored turquoise and if it leans Carlist it is colored red. There are five Cities on the Game Map including Bilbao, San Sebastián, Vitoria, Pamplona, and Logroño. All of them have a permanent Fortress as well as an Intrinsic Garrison marker indicating the controlling side. Also, the Bilbao space has a Port, identified by the anchor symbol, because it is connected to the Cantabrian Sea via the River Nervión. If the Carlist player is besieging Bilbao, or controls or is besieging either of the two spaces located next to the river (Portugalete or Guecho), the Port of Bilbao is cancelled for the purposes of naval transport and supply.
Supply is also determined based on 2 things, a Region and then each of the Cities within that Region. A Region can supply up to 6 Liberal Infantry and Cavalry units. But, a Region does not supply any Carlist units, which must obtain supply from a Supply Train or Knapsack in the Region. Without a Supply Train or a Knapsack, in order for Carlist units to get supply they then must attempt to forage. Each space can supply a certain number of units, depending on whether the space is located in the Carlist or Liberal Zone, the type of space, and the side the units belong to. We will cover this a bit more in Action Point 2 when we discuss units.
A player will gain +3 VP’s for capturing a City during the game. These are the most important ways to score in the game and protecting them is vital to either side. It is also important to keep in mind that if the Carlist player ever gains control of 2 Cities at the same time that were initially held by the Liberal player, that player will immediately gain an automatic victory.
Connecting the various Cities and Towns are the Roads. Units can move along these roads and there are 2 types of Roads including Main Roads and Secondary Roads. The Main Roads are indicated by a continuous thick black line while Secondary Roads are indicated by dashed brown lines. The cost of moving along a Main Road is 1 Movement Point and along a Secondary Road is 2 Movement Points. I found it very important to properly plan out your movements to maximize the distance that you can gain with a single action. These roads are somewhat of a spiderweb connecting points and you can reach all points eventually but finding the best and most efficient route is important. Studying the Game Map and the layout of the roads is key to playing the game well as you can block off the use of certain Main Roads and force your opponent ot move much slower on Secondary Roads frustrating their plans and efforts.
Main Towns
Main Towns are generally populated areas that have some political, economic or strategic importance and are identified on the board with a hexagonal shape that is of a similar size and proportion as the Cities. Also, the name of the town will be capitalized the same as the Cities. If the Main Town is Liberal it will be colored turquoise and if it leans Carlist it is colored red.
A player will gain +1 VP for capturing a Main Town that was held by the other side. These are not as valuable as the Cities but there are more of these on the Game Map than the Cities with 13 Main Towns as compared to only 5 Cities. Prioriting their capture and control is important for many purposes such as Supply, movement and being able to avoid interceptions and
Carlist Refuge
There are 2 Carlist Refuges identified on the Game Map including Améscoas and Baztán. These are spaces where the Carlists are particularly favored by geography and local popular support. Neither player may construct fortresses in these spaces. These Refuges are identified with a square with an X at the top and a dashed brown line.
Carlist Zones and Liberal Zones
The Carlist Zones take up a considerable portion of the Game Map which is denoted with a red shaded background and a dotted red line. All locations within it are considered to be in the Carlist Zone, while all locations outside of it are considered to be in the Liberal Zone. Also, spaces adjacent to the Carlist Zone are spaces belonging to the Liberal Zone, but that are connected via a road to any space within the Carlist Zone.
The Carlist units in the game are tied to specific localities—Navarre, the Basque Provinces, or “Castilians”—rather than a standard, monolithic national army and are numerically outnumbered by the Liberals. As such, they have a clear need to be nimble and move around the board causing difficulties. One of the ways the Carlist player scores Victory Points through the increase in Prestige is by is controlling at least 4 spaces with at least 4 units. If there are at least four Liberal infantry or Cavalry units in the same space in the Carlist Zone 1 is subtracted from the sum of besieged Cities and active Expedition.
Essentially, the zone embodies the “Impossible War” by forcing the Carlist player to maximize localized, high-quality forces in their home territory against a numerically superior foe. The Carlist player increases their Prestige by besieging cities and launching expeditions. They also benefit from the growing Carlist uprising in the rest of Spain. The Liberal player will be busy countering Carlist Prestige, putting down uprisings, and hunting down expeditions. They have the advantage that, in the long run, war fatigue will affect the enemy.
The terrain is simple with each space containing rough or open terrain, depending on the relief of its area. Much of the northern geography was rugged, which played an important role in favor of Carlism, as it mitigated three of the advantages of government troops: their superiority in numbers, cavalry, and artillery.
The spaces at the western, southern, and eastern ends of the map have connections to regions on the map of the rest of Spain, which can be used to move from one map to another.
Finally, the Game Map includes various game tables (Year, Turn, Initiative, Victory Points, Carlist Prestige, etc.), as well as a lot of information about commonly used rules, so players don’t need to consult the rulebook that often.
Rest of Spain Smaller Map
The map of the Regions of Spain is smaller and simpler. It consists of nine large regions that cover large territories. This map’s purpose is to record the spread of the Carlist uprisings, to enable Carlist expeditions to operate and for the Liberal player to hunt them down. We will take a closer look at the Carlist Uprising Phase in a later post but I wanted to show you the map so you understand its layout.
I very much enjoyed An Impossible War, even though I played just a few turns of a smaller scenario with Francisco Ronco. He was a master at the game, as obviously as the publisher and a playtester he is intimately familiar with the rules and strategies, and I learned a lot from him about how the game should be played. I am looking forward to future plays as the game is just very good and has some interesting aspects that create a very tense and interesting game of maneuver and strategy. The Game Map is very well done, from an aesthetic perspective as well as functionally, and the board makes playing the game easier.
In Action Point 2, we will examine the units available to both sides and cover the importance of Supply.
A few years ago, I played and very much enjoyed a cool little solitaire WWII card-driven game called Campaign: Fall Blau from Catastrophe Games and designer Martin Melbardis where the player attempted to breach the Soviet defenses on the East Front in the pivotal German summer campaign of 1942. The game system is very playable and simple, but has some strategic depth to it as the player has to make a lot of choices about what to go after, how to manage their scarce resources (fuel) and what generals to use to take advantage of their special abilities to amass enough VP to claim victory over the Soviet Union. They now have the counter punch of that game in a new entry in the series called Campaign: Operation Bagration and it is currently being offered on Kickstarter.
Grant: Welcome back to the blog Martin. What is your current game Campaign: Operation Bagration?
Martin: Thanks for having me back! Campaign: Operation Bagration is the long-awaited successor to my very first published game, Campaign: Fall Blau and tells the story of the Soviet offensive in 1944 to take back the occupied center of Russia gained by the Germans during Operation Barbarossa and is based on the successful Campaign: Fall Blau game system.
Grant: What was your design goal with the game?
Martin: My design goal for Campaign:Operation Bagration was to switch perspectives to the Soviet side using my tried-and-tested Campaign Game System. I wanted players to take command of the Soviets during one of the most devastating offensives of the war….Operation Bagration, which tore through German Army Group Center in 1944. From a design standpoint, I found it very rewarding to adapt new game mechanics and ideas to fit this pivotal WWII Campaign on the Eastern Front, while keeping the core of the system intact.
Grant:What are the hallmarks of this solitaire Campaign Series?
Martin: I’d say a minimalist approach to wargaming. Very streamlined, using only cards, dice, and cubes, with a 6–7 page rulebook. These are light solitaire wargames designed to be fast and furious with no extra fat or bloat, especially when compared to more traditional hex-and-counter wargames that can take hours to play.
Grant: As a follow up to Campaign: Fall Blau, what do you believe you have improved in the gaming experience?
Martin: While the system as a whole is more or less exactly the same as Fall Blau, I injected some new ideas into the experience to better reflect the historical realities of this campaign. The core game, such as defeating Campaign Cards, the Order system and how Generals work, will remain familiar to players of Fall Blau, but the feel is distinctly different.
Grant: What elements from Operation Bagration did you need to model in the design?
Martin: Operation Bagration was a completely different beast to tackle than Fall Blau. In addition to taking control of the Soviet army this time around, the mountainous regions of the Caucasus region have been replaced with the swamps of Belorussia and Poland. You’re also facing a much weaker and mostly static German Army Group Center, desperately trying to rebuild a frontline and stop the Soviet advance from swarming into their rear echelons. This is represented by the new “Rebuild Frontlines” rule, which replaces the old “Local Counter-Attacks” rule from Fall Blau. In Bagration, counter-attacks are now only triggered by Event Cards representing Panzer Divisions trying to blunt the Soviet offensive. In fact, the entire Event Deck has been changed to reflect the research I did on Operation Bagration with all sorts of cool ideas popping up on how to reflect the history, units and tactics of this Campaign.
Grant: As a solitaire game, what type of experience does the game create?
Martin: The game system prides itself on being fast, easy to learn but hard to master. It creates a very similar experience to Fall Blau such as tough decisions weighing the player down each turn on how to best use your limited Orders and finding the right balance between Attacking, Advancing, or stopping for Logistics to catch up.
Grant: What is the goal of the player?
Martin: The goal is to capture enough Campaign Cards before the game ends and earn enough Victory Points from those Campaign Cards to reach the victory or even the Brilliant Victory threshold.
Grant: How does the player go about choosing and managing their Generals?
Martin: Each game starts with the player choosing three Soviet Generals. All of these generals are historically accurate, with options such as Bagramyan, Konev, Rokossovsky, and a few others. Each General has the generic “Hero of the Soviet Union” special ability plus one unique ability. Additionally, each General leads a certain type of army: either a Tank army or a regular Infantry army. Tank armies have fewer manpower cubes but benefit from added mobility, which helps them bring more Campaign Cards to the frontline when using the Advance Order. Infantry armies, on the other hand, have more “meat” and thus more manpower cubes to absorb losses. Each General also has a set number of cubes representing their starting strength in manpower and available forces. Managing your Generals comes down to picking a balanced mixture and using each general’s individual strengths (number of cubes and abilities) to maximum effect.
Grant: What unique abilities do the different Generals possess?
Martin: As mentioned, each General has the “Hero of the Soviet Union” special ability, which allows you to discard a red cube to re-roll a single die. This represents the Soviet ability to historically take massive casualties and still push on. On top of that, each General also has a unique ability reflecting their historical traits. For example, General Bagramyan is an offensive-minded General, while Rokossovsky was known to always plan two steps ahead and this is represented by his ability to draw extra cards from the Event Deck.
Grant: What type of events does the Event Deck contain?
Martin: In addition to the Campaign Cards, the Event Deck is really where the historical aspects of the Bagration Campaign really come to life. I made sure to only include Soviet and German units and tactics that were instrumental to the Bagration campaign. The Event Deck contains mostly cards that help you during the game, such as attached Soviet units like the 3rd Guards Cavalry Corps, which can help you exploit the flanks of the German frontline by removing adjacent defenses, or the 4th Tank Army, which grants extra attack dice when attacking a Campaign Card. These cards not only add flavor to the game but also a strong sense of historical flavor.
Grant: What are the different type of German effects included in the Event Deck?
Martin: The Event Deck also contains cards that hurt the player, such as German Panzer divisions that trigger a counter-attack when drawn, or German reinforcement cards that add additional German cubes to active Campaign Cards on the frontlines. In addition, things like German bombers or bad weather can and will slow your progress.
Grant: What Actions/Orders are available to the player?
Martin: There are three available Orders each turn, and you may perform one per General. The Advance Order (costs 1 supply) brings unlocked Campaign Cards to the frontline. Once a card is on the frontline, an Attack Order (also costs supplies) can be used to attack and remove any cubes (representing German formations or defenses) on that card in order to capture it and gain the VP listed on the card. Finally, the Logistics Order adds supplies and reinforces a General with a cube to replace losses.
Grant: How do they manage their Supplies? How can they obtain additional fuel?
Martin: As mentioned, each Advance and Attack Order costs supplies, and the Logistics Order replenishes supplies as well as lost manpower cubes from attacking. Finding the right balance and knowing when to rest using a Logistics Order instead of Attacking or Advancing is very important. However, resting too long will slow your progress, as the clock is always counting down. A General who uses the Logistics Order adds two supplies to your shared supply pool and adds a single manpower cube to their card.
Grant: How do they manage to defeat the various Campaign Cards?
Martin: After using the Advance Order to bring an unlocked Campaign Card to the frontline in front of a General’s Card, that Campaign Card then immediately deploys a number of grey cubes (listed on the card) onto itself. The card is now available to be attacked using the Attack Order. When you attack, you pay supplies then calculate the number of cubes on the attacking General’s Card and roll that many dice. You need rolls of 4+ to remove a single white (defense) or grey (German units) cube from the Campaign Card. Some Campaign Cards such as fortress cities (Festerplatz) or swamps reduce the attack dice by -1. Rolls of 1–2 result in your General losing a manpower cube (red cube). Once all German cubes are removed from the Campaign Card, it is considered captured and removed from the frontline, and you gain the Victory Points listed on the card. Capturing Campaign Cards also unlocks additional Campaign Cards.
Grant: How do the German forces fight back?
Martin: This time around, the Germans are much more static than in Fall Blau, which better reflects the historical situation in 1944. While you may still lose manpower cubes through bad rolls on Attack Orders, counter-attacks are now only triggered through Event Cards. A Panzer Division drawn as an event will immediately counter-attack by deploying to the frontline and attacking the General directly in front of it. There’s also the Operation Doppelkopf Event Card, which is placed near the end of the Event Deck during setup and represents a large German offensive action late in Operation Bagration, designed to blunt Soviet momentum.
Grant: What strategy should the player use to do well?
Martin: Pick a good, balanced mixture of Generals and learn when to attack versus when to build up supplies and manpower through the Logistics Order. Using Generals with Tank Army abilities to bring multiple Campaign Cards to the frontlines helps a lot but too many Tank Generals will lower your overall manpower total. Also, optimize your use of Event Cards to either prioritize Attacks or to regain manpower cubes. Overall, calculated risk management is the single most important factor in the game.
Grant: What different options are built in to make the game more of a challenge?
Martin: The game is already pretty challenging, but we are also currently planning on developing a Hard-Mode for the Kickstarter that adds 4–5 additional very difficult Event Cards to the deck for those players who love challenges or are even simply masochists.
Grant: What are you most pleased about with the design?
Martin: I’m pleased with the way I’ve adapted the old Fall Blau Game System to incorporate new game mechanics and Events to reflect the different historical aspects of Bagrations’ unique Campaign. Such things such as the German’s use of blocking detachments to try to stop the Soviet steamroller with whatever they could (represented by the rebuilding the frontline mechanic), and the use of Festerplatze or Fortress cities in Belorussia to hold at all cost. Added to this is the liberal use of Soviet tactics such as mine sweeping tanks, the massive God of War bombardment to signal the start of Bagration, Maskirovka deception techniques and American lend-lease trucks to help the Offensive are all well-represented in the game through the Event Deck.
Grant: What has been the response of playtesters?
Martin: Early on, I got some great and positive responses from playtesters when I initially designed the game. Later, I handed off playtesting and development to Catastrophe Games, who further developed the game and ran additional playtests. I’ve heard good things from them as well.
Grant: What other historical campaigns might the series delve into?
Martin: Next up, I am planning to adapt the series to either the North African or the Pacific Theaters in WWII. I also strangely find that representing the Japanese early-war successes against the Allies in the Philippines, Hong Kong, Indonesia and Singapore a very interesting twist and is a subject rarely touched upon in wargaming. This could also be a good option in the future but who really knows where my creativity can take me?
Grant: What other designs are you currently working on?
Martin: As always, I am continuing to design lighter Print & Play wargames with my own independent company, Solo Wargame. I usually release a new wargame every two months or so on Kickstarter and want to continue that trend with a WWII wargame about commanding a Soviet battalion during the Battle of Stalingrad in 1942. I also plan to release a new version of my continuing series on WW2 Roll & Write games, this time focusing on the Torch landings in North Africa in 1942–43 with new ideas about convoy interdiction, diplomacy with the Vichy government and eventually pushing the Germans all the way to Tunisia. Like most other creatives, I honestly have way too many ideas and too little time!
Thanks so much once again for having me on!
If you are interested in learning more about the Campaign Series and how it works, you can watch my preview video for the Campaign: Fall Blau Kickstarter from 2022 at the following link:
The Battle of Champion Hill game is called The Road to Vicksburg and uses the Blue & Gray System. It was included in Strategy & Tactics Magazine Issue #103.
The May 16, 1863 Battle of Champion Hill was the largest, bloodiest, and most significant action of Grant’s Vicksburg Campaign. 32,000 advancing Union soldiers met 23,000 Confederates in a fierce struggle for a vital crossroads roughly halfway between Vicksburg and Jackson, Mississippi. The field was dominated by bald Champion Hill, from which Confederate artillery opened fire on the Union army at 9:45 A.M. The first Federal assault on the hill drove the Southerners back with bayonets and clubbed muskets. As the Union soldiers tried to reform and consolidate their gains, they were swept away by a counterattack led by John Bowen’s Missourians and Arkansans. Ulysses S. Grant ordered more men towards the hill and Bowen’s Confederates were themselves driven off, compelling a general retreat. Southern Brig. Gen. Lloyd Tilghman was killed while directing a desperate rearguard action that enabled most of the Confederate army to escape towards Vicksburg. The decisive Union victory at Champion Hill was instrumental in forcing the Confederates out of the open field and into a doomed position inside the walls of Vicksburg.
Operation Dragoon: The 2nd D-Day Solitaire Travel Game is a fast-playing corps and division-level operational solitaire game of the Operation Dragoon campaign from the initial invasion that hit the beaches on August 15th to the conclusion of the decisive Battle of Montelimar on August 29th.
As the Allies of the US VI Corps, French II Corps, and US/British/Canadian 1st Airborne Task Force advance, a column of German units of the Nineteenth Army, led by the powerful 11th Panzer Division, is marching up the Rhone River valley to escape envelopment and destruction at Montelimar.
The Allied player, aided by air support and bands of French Forces of the Interior (FFI), must eliminate as many German divisions as possible while ensuring the critical ports of Marseilles and Toulon are quickly seized.
Drop Zone: Southern France is a company-level wargame covering the Allied airborne assault that spearheaded Operation Dragoon, which was the invasion of Southern France or the Second D-Day on August 15, 1944. The history behind this operation is really very interesting as early on the morning of D-Day, the allied First Airborne Task Force (1st ABTF) parachuted a dozen miles behind the Riviera landing beaches to seize key towns and road junctions, to prevent the German occupation forces from counter-attacking the amphibious landing, and to facilitate the advance of Allied forces. The 4:00 AM parachute drop was badly scattered due to an unexpected dense fog bank that blanketed the battlefield. Drop Zone: Southern France covers the first two days of this airborne operation in six game turns, when the American and British paratroopers and glider-men fought surrounded and alone, supported only by French resistance bands. This game is very good and is just a solid wargame.
I very much enjoy Card Driven Games (CDGs’) and I think that many players also generally like them for many reasons including their strategic depth and replayability, as well as the tough choices players face each turn with the management of their hand of cards. However, this depth can come with some drawbacks and in this edition of The Love/Hate Relationship, I want to share what I love and hate about the CDG mechanic. Some of the first wargames that I experienced were Card Driven Games! Due to this fact, and because I really enjoy the mechanic, CDG’s hold a special place in my heart. So what is a Card Driven Game? It is more than just a game having cards or using cards. The CDG attempts to focus the players’ actions, and what they can ultimately do in the game, on the cards in their hand. Typically, performing some form of an action will use a single card and these cards will often be multi-purpose. This means they can be used for an action or to take the printed event on the card to do an action that typically either is more powerful but somewhat circumstantial. The medium also allows for historical events to be implemented in the game and allows various rules overhead or special instructions to be printed on the cards making the game a bit easier to play. Cards are simply fantastic and I have played many CDG’s. In fact, my first wargame was Twilight Struggle (yes I see it as a wargame!) followed by classics such as Wilderness War, Empire of the Sun, Washington’s War and others.
Love
The main focus of the Card Driven Game mechanic, and probably the aspect that I most love about it, is the constant, agonizing choices about how best to use your hand of cards. Do I use a card for its powerful unique event or for its Operation Points? You simply never have enough resources to do everything you want, forcing you to prioritize the use of your cards and the actions you take but also to force a decision upon you about when or if to take calculated risks. This makes every turn feel like a high-stakes puzzle and each time I draw a new set of cards to start a round, and as I thumb through them, formulating my strategy, I get either a sinking feeling in my stomach or a sudden burst of excitement. CDG’s are generally praised for their strategic depth and replayability, which stems from the tough choices players are faced with each turn and that will change from game to game as the cards come out differently.
Also, unlike generic strategy games, CDG’s use cards to inject real-world flavor and historical events into the gameplay. Typically, in order to add these bits of chrome from history would require additional rules, exceptions or a whole new process being being added to the game. This tends to bog a game down and makes the almost unplayable. But, with CDG’s, each card represents a specific historical event that provides in-game benefits or difficulty for the players based on that history. These cards create a narrative as you play, where the sequence of cards can tell a unique or alternate version of history every time the game hits the table. This variety in outcomes and the way history in the game unfolds is one of my favorite parts!
There also is a real Fog of War aspect to CDG’s that I love as I just don’t know what type of hand my opponent has drawn. As players keep their hands hidden in the game, you and your opponent will be uncertain about the specific events and strategies available to the player based on their card draws. This really fosters a dynamic, back and forth, reactive gameplay that adds to the tense feeling of these games. I very much enjoy this aspect of the unknown and the process of trying to deduce what your opponent is trying to do based upon their card plays. When you are playing these CDG’s, you will have to think quickly and efficiently as a turn usually lasts 5-7 card plays and you will not have time to dawdle or you may find that you are in a real pickle.
But I think that my favorite part of CDG’s is the planning of a turn and how best to use your hand of cards. As you first start to examine your hand of newly drawn cards each round, you should first ask yourself “What do I need to accomplish this turn? and “What would I like to accomplish this turn?”. Then simply peruse your cards identifying those that can help you in both of those identified goals. I like to then look at the opponent Event cards in my hand and determine which ones don’t have their conditions to set off the Event met on the board at the moment. If the condition could possibly change, I prioritize that card to play first as I don’t want that Event to go off for my opponent. I also then make sure I don’t have any of my events that have conditions that could change as well and I will prioritize those to play next, after I have culled the negative opponent events. To hemp with this process, I literally line the cards up in my hand according to an approved play order, from right to left, so that I don’t get distracted or sidetracked. If there is anything that can happen in this game, you will get distracted by what the other player is doing and sometimes quickly react without thinking, ruining your carefully laid plan. This approach has kept me organized, on task and most importantly in a position where I am able to minimize the negative damage from my opponent’s Events while simultaneously maximizing my own benefit.
Hate
Now that you see what I love about these CDG’s, let’s take a look at what I hate. Hate is such a strong word for me but there are many things that I don’t like about the mechanic.
As with any new game or system, there is a learning curve with CDG’s. To play a CDG effectively, players often need to be familiar with and generally know all of the cards in the deck to be able to plan long-term strategies and mitigate potential risks and traps. This can be daunting for new or casual players of a CDG as the true strategy of the game will not be revealed for the first few plays but is something that needs to be developed through experience with the deck over several plays. An example of this is the Fidel Card found in Twilight Struggle. As I have played Twilight Struggle as the USA player, I have had to keep in the back of my mind the fact that this Fidel card is in the deck as it allows the Russian player to remove all US Influenced and directly place Influence into Cuba. Too much commitment in the early part of the game can be a waste of resources as it can all be removed with the play of this card and you must keep that in mind. Any card that allows for the placement of Influence into an area you cannot is worth its weight in gold.
Probably my most hated part with CDG’s is the “luck of the draw”. When you are dealing with a card based game where a deck is shuffled and randomized, you are bound to run into a bad hand now and again. While part of the fun with this mechanic is the concept of trying to do the best you can with the cards you are dealt, a bad opening hand or a streak of poor draws can sometimes feel game-breaking or frustrating, diminishing the sense of strategy and skill that the genre holds important. Nothing worse than looking at your hand and you have 2 – 1 OPs value cards, 2 – 2 Ops value cards and each event is that of your opponent. Just not a good way to start a turn.
The final thing that I dislike is that the mechanic does sometimes lead to a less realistic simulation and even a totally ahistorical outcome or timeline of events. To some wargamers, abstraction provided by cards lessens the game’s simulation value compared to more detailed and traditional systems, such as hex and counter games. The feeling of being unable to perform basic actions without a specific card can break immersion.
In summary, I personally love the CDG mechanic. It is a great method of design to ensure that you are injecting the history of the situation into the game while also creating a very stimulating and interesting play experience. What do you love and hate about CDG’s?
La Der des Ders – The War to End War from Hexasim is a 1-2 player slightly abstracted strategic level look at World War I. The game allows the players to relive the First World War at a strategic level, with each player controlling one of the 2 sides either the Entente, consisting of France, England, Russia, Serbia and other minor nations or the Central Powers including Germany, Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire and a few minors. La Der des Ders can also be played solo, with a dedicated solitaire bot called “Athena” who utilizes special Cornflower Cards to make decisions about what technologies to invest in, where to undertake offensives and how to utilize limited resources and reinforcements. Each turn, players gain an amount of Resource Points dependent on what nations are in the war, which they can allocate to different areas to guide their overall strategy. Victory is achieved by launching offensives that drain the morale of enemy nations, forcing them out of the conflict through collapse.
In Action Point 1, we looked at the Game Board, discussing the Collapse Tracks, Trade Tracks, Russian Revolution Track and Naval Control Table and other various on-board tables and offensive spaces. In Action Point 2, we covered the Technology Phase and the Technology Tree and Technological Improvement Boards. In Action Point 3, we examined the Event Cards and how they inject the historical narrative into the gameplay and also alter the conditions of the game. In Action Point 4, we walked through an example of an Offensive and took a look at the combat procedure. In Action Point 5, we reviewed the Victory Conditions. In this Action Point, which is the final entry in the series, we will give an overview of the “Athena” solitaire bot and how it works.
Athena
La Der des Ders – The War to End War is designed as a 2-player game but it does have a dedicated solitaire bot called Athena that can be used to simulate an opponent to play against. This Athena bot, named after the Greek goddess of strategy, can be used to play as either the Entente or as the Central Powers and is focused on the use of special cards referred to as Cornflower Cards. There are 12 of these Cornflower Cards and these are used to determine the various actions taken by the Athena bot during their turn. A solitaire play uses the usual rules for the 2-player game, with just a few exceptions.
The Cornflower Cards are multi-use cards that are divided into 3 different sections to be used at different points of the Sequence of Play in a solitaire game. They are drawn and referred to during the Technology Development Phase, the Reinforcement Phase and the Offensive Phase. Let’s take a look at the anatomy of these cards. In the above picture, you will notice that there are 3 main categories listed at the top of the card including Technologies at the top, Reinforcements in the middle and Offensives on the bottom of the card. During the appropriate phase, the player will draw 1 Cornflower Card for the Athena AI.
If it is the Technology Development Phase, the player will refer to the top of the card where there are listed the 6 different technologies that can be pursued. Under each of these categories will show the number of Resource Points that will be spent by Athena in order to attempt to unlock a new level in each of the technologies. If there is an X in that space, that means that Athena will not attempt to gain a level of that technology during this phase. If there is a 2 listed, this means that 2 RP will be spent and the roll for the technology will gain a +1 DRM. Keep in mind though, that if the technology shown is not available yet because the year it is available has not yet arrived, then the bot will not spend a resource to attempt that technology. If Athena doesn’t have enough Resource Points to make all the attempts shown on the card, she will spend as much as possible to attempt these technologies. Athena never re-rolls the die for these attempts by discarding a Technological Research Cube for previous failed attempts. One of the differences for Athena during this step is that if a success is earned in unlocking a level of technology, she will get to advance all cylinders of the corresponding technology in all sectors under Athena’s control. This means all of the countries of the alliance as well as the active minors. These technological improvements cost no Resource Points.
If it is the Reinforcement Phase, Athena will attempt to reinforce sectors that have suffered losses in previous turns according to the following priority order:
The sector which suffered the most losses or in other words the sector whose cube is furthest from its maximum;
The sector with the second most losses and then the sectors in the following order, ignoring the sectors already covered above:
When you have chosen what sector is to receive reinforcements based upon the priority described, the player will draw as many Cornflower Cards as there are spaces separating the Sector Cube from the space with the red value. After drawing the cards, the player will count the instances of cards that have the name of that sector shown on them. If you look at the 3 cards shown above, if doing reinforcements for Germany they would move their Sector Cube up only 1 space on the Collapse Track as once Germany is listed in the middle of the card under Reinforcements. Very simple. Athena will also have to spend the required Resource Points from their total to actually move the Sector Cube up and if they cannot afford all of the reinforcements shown by the cards, they will move and pay for what they can afford. This phase ends when Athena no longer has enough Resource Points, or when all the sectors have been able to try to obtain reinforcements.
Finally, if it is the Offensive Phase, each side launches an offensive in turn starting with the side that has the initiative. When it is Athena’s turn to attack, the player will draw one Cornflower Card and refer to the bottom portion of the card, which will indicate the sector Athena is attacking. The sector to be attacked will be the one on the left of the card if Athena is playing the Entente, and the one on the right if she is playing as the Central Powers. The sector indicated on the card must always be attacked by the sector that has the best chance of inflicting damage. This usually means the sector with the highest current Operational Value and that has not yet launched an Offensive this turn. In the event of a tie, preference should be given to the sector least likely to be able to attack elsewhere during a later card draw in the turn. The size of the Offensive will be equal to the current Operational Value of the attacking sector only if the number of Resource Points Athena has remaining will allow for it. Otherwise the Offensive is reduced to the number of remaining RP. Once Athena’s Resource Points have been spent, the dice rolled and any losses applied, the player will then take their own turn to launch an Offensive or decide to pass. Then Athena will draw a new Cornflower Card to determine their next Offensive. If there are ever 3 Cornflower Cards drawn by Athena without having the ability to attack because of sector availability or Offensives by adjacent sectors have already been taken, the Offensive Phase will come to an end.
That is all there is to the Cornflower Cards and the Athena bot. It is a really well designed system that removes most of the work by the player when playing solitaire. There will be times when you have to make a decision, as described above with Offensives, but these decisions are easy and the hard work is done by the simple flipping of a card.
I do want to point out one final thing. The sequence of play differs slightly from the 2-player game as it rearranges when the Athena bot does a few of the steps during the Spend Resource Points Phase as shown below. The human player will start by doing their Reinforcements first followed by their Technology investment. Athena will then go and do their Technology investment first followed by Reinforcements. Both players will then move into the Offensive Phase and the player with initiative as shown on the turn track will take the first Offensive of the turn.
The Athena bot works very well as a playable solitaire experience for La Der Des Ders. The Cornflower Cards are a stroke of genius and really are easy to use, which makes playing the game a much better experience. I found that the bot actually holds its own in the game, even though they are not in total control of their own actions like a human player would be. The changes also made in the Sequence of Play as well as to the way Technology Investments work more than make up for the lack of true intelligence by the system and will definitely give the player a run for their money. I have played the game about 5 times solitaire, both as the Entente and as the Central Powers, and have won just 2 out of 5 tries. But the experience was easy, enjoyable and pretty seamless. The game really is a great example of a slightly abstracted strategic level look at World War I and I would wholeheartedly recommend this game to anyone who has an interest in The Great War.
I shot a playthrough video for the solitaire system and you can watch that at the following link (beware as I did make a few errors but I have found errors make viewers understand the rules of the game better):
I also did a video review and you can watch that at the following link:
Thank you for allowing me to share this game with you through this series of posts over the past several months. I have very much enjoyed doing these and I hope that you find them helpful.
With this My Favorite Wargame Cards Series, I hope to take a look at a specific card from the various wargames that I have played and share how it is used in the game. I am not a strategist and frankly I am not that good at games but I do understand how things should work and be used in games. With that being said, here is the next entry in this series.
#72: Commodus from The Wars of Marcus Aurelius: Rome 170-180CE from Hollandspiele
TheWars of Marcus Aurelius: Rome 170-180CE is a solitaire only game that uses cards similarly to a CDG to simulate the strategic level struggle of the Romans led by Marcus Aurelius to stave off the invasions of Germanic tribes and Sarmatian raiders as they encroach on Roman territory across the Danube River. That’s the history. And it is really well integrated. The game play is very fun, strategic, with lots of decision points about what to do and what cards to use, and it is really challenging.
In the game, the Roman player has a deck of Roman Cards that can be used for the printed events for various effects or that can be discarded to take any number of actions such as attack a Barbarian army or Off-Map Conflict enemy, advance the marker on the Imperium Track, add two Level 1 Forts to any eligible map spaces, flip one Level 1 Fort to a Level 2 Fort among several other actions. Sometimes the printed events in the game are just more powerful than discarding a card for just 1 action so you have to pay attention to this economy and make sure you get the most out of your cards. Now, keep in mind, sometimes discarding a good card whose ability is not right for the current situation you find yourself in is part of the game but you have to use these cards wisely to do well in the game.
The game uses two separate decks of cards including the Barbarian Deck (Green) and The Roman Deck (Red). Both of the decks are made up of 50 cards each but each have very different purposes. The Barbarian Deck is used to determine the actions of the invading Germanic tribes as well as events that effect the war effort including mutinies, plague and the will of the people. While the Roman Deck provides the resources and events that are used by the Roman player to mount a defense against the invasions and to fight back each of the different barbarian tribes. There are unique cards called Late War Cards in the deck that will be held out until the start of the 175CE turn at which time they will be mixed in with the cards to form a new Late War Deck. There are also special cards that are marked with an asterisk that if played for the event will be discarded from the game to form what is called a History Pile.
In this entry, we will focus on the Roman Card Commodus, which provides some opportunity to shore up your failing Imperium Points or even cancel an ongoing Mutiny of your troops on the board. In my first 5 or 6 plays of the game, the most common way that I lost was by allowing the Imperium Point Track to reach zero, which results in Marcus Aurelius being usurped and the player immediately losing the game. I was confounded and very frustrated about why I couldn’t prevent this from happening! I could see the end coming but struggled with keeping that Track above water. There are a few cards included in the Roman Deck that provide increases to the Imperium Track and I highly recommend you take these type of events when they come into your hand rather than discarding these cards to take another action, that might seem important at the time, but in the end these events are just too efficient to pass on. Commodus will provide you an option. This option is taking the +2 IP or another type of action such as ending a Mutiny (very important as it usually takes you discarding a card and losing an IP) or drawing two cards to add to your hand (imagine if you can only draw that Local Guides card you have been looking for or the Ambush that you need to take on the Quadi in their Home space). It becomes a choice of “either/or” and I am here to tell you the only reason the “or option” is provided is to lure you away from the real prize in that of gaining the +2 IP. Please listen to my advice and take the +2 IP. You will thank me in the end! Remember, that the concept of Imperium Points (IP) represent the Emperor’s overall political authority and stability in Rome. If the IP track ever reaches zero, the player immediately loses due to usurpation. Points are lost from specific card events, barbarian surges, and certain combat results, requiring players to prioritize special events to gain them back
Commodus was Roman emperor from 177 to 192AD, first serving as nominal co-emperor under his father Marcus Aurelius and then ruling alone from 180AD. Commodus’s sole reign is commonly thought to mark the end of the Pax Romana, a golden age of peace and prosperity in the history of the Roman Empire.
Commodus accompanied his father during the Marcomannic Wars in 172AD and on a tour of the Eastern provinces in 176AD. The following year, he became the youngest emperor and consul up to that point, at the age of 16. His solo reign saw less military conflict than that of Marcus Aurelius, but internal intrigues and conspiracies abounded, goading Commodus to an increasingly dictatorial style of leadership. This culminated in his creating a deific personality cult, including his performances as a gladiator in the Colosseum. Throughout his reign, Commodus entrusted the management of daily routine affairs to his palace chamberlain and praetorian prefects, namely Saoterus, Perennis, and Cleander. Roman soldiers and the general populace generally liked Commodus during his reign, largely because he was popular with the masses and focused on lavish spending rather than costly foreign wars. He was adored for presenting himself as a masculine, gladiatorial Hercules, though the Senate despised him
Commodus was assassinated by the wrestler Narcissus in 192AD, ending the Nerva–Antonine dynasty. He was succeeded by Pertinax, the first claimant in the tumultuous Year of the Five Emperors.
I shot a playthrough video for the game and you can watch that at the following link:
I also followed that up with a full video review sharing my thoughts:
A few years ago, I came across a new designer named Wolfgang Klein (no relation to Alexander Klein) and his new company Assault Games. They create fantastic tactical level wargames and we have played several fo them and also got a chance to meet both Wolfgang and his friend and partner Erich Rankl. They are currently working on a new edition of their first game called Assault – Red Horizon ’41: Revised Edition and they readying it for a Gamefound campaign yet this spring. I reached out to Wolfgang to get some information about the revisions and changes to the game and he was more than willing to provide a lot of great information.
Wolfgang: Over the past 5 years, Red Horizon ’41 has evolved significantly through continuous development, community feedback, and extensive gameplay experience. What began with Rulebook 1.0 has gradually been refined into a much more mature and developed system. The new revised edition incorporates years of player feedback, integrates content from various expansions, and improves clarity, balance, and presentation across the entire game.
Over the past 5 years, RH41 has developed considerably, both in terms of the Assault System rules and its graphical presentation. In particular, with Sicily ’43 – Gela Beachhead (Rulebook version 2.0) and its expansion Primosole Bridge, we feel that we gained valuable experience that directly influenced the design of this revised edition and that will assist us in future volumes as well to improve the player experience and simulation value of the game.
Most of all, however, we are grateful for the intensive exchange we have had with our Assault fans over many years. We have remained very active in our forums on BoardGameGeek, and it is there that we have gathered, discussed, and evaluated a huge amount of positive and constructive feedback. With all the great ideas and contributions from our players, we have continued refining the rules step by step.
As far as version 2.5 is concerned, the door for feedback will remain open until the end of the upcoming Gamefound campaign.
In concrete terms, rules have been refined, adjusted, expanded, or removed. All texts have been revised to make them easier and more efficient to read. We have also made a clear step forward in wording and terminology. However, we have not changed the core gameplay mechanics. So players familiar with version 1.0 should still find it easy to get back into the system.
Wolfgang: The upcoming version is referred to as a Revised Edition of Assault: Red Horizon ’41. It is not simply a reprint, but a comprehensive refinement of the system.
Major changes to the game and the Assault System include the following:
A box inlay designed for the safe storage of all game components
Overall, the revised edition reflects everything we have learned about the system from our players and through continual play on our end since the original release. I do believe that the system will continue to evolve as other rule clarifications or needed changes come to light.
Wolfgang: After the original edition sold out, interest in the game continued to grow. At the same time, years of development, playtesting, and community feedback had accumulated.
In addition, RH41 is something like the core game for the Eastern Front within the Assault System. Our plan is to design an entire series of modules focused on the Eastern Front, and Red Horizon ’41 is the natural foundation for that planned series.
This created the perfect opportunity to bring the game back in a fully refined and improved edition rather than simply reprinting the original version.
Wolfgang: I would describe it as a very special journey. We have now been working in cooperation with Sound of Drums for 3 years.
What makes this collaboration different from the traditional designer–publisher model is that we at Assault Games work with Sound of Drums on equal footing while maintaining our own independence.
The goal of this cooperation was to free ourselves from the typical publishing tasks such as production, logistics, and distribution, so that we could focus more fully on developing the Assault System and expanding into future opportunites. In many respects, this has worked very well. In other areas, there are still things that can be improved.
Sound of Drums, and Uwe Walentin in particular, has worked very hard to keep our backs free for designing by carrying the responsibility for taking care of the worldwide distribution network, logistics, and shipping. From my point of view, that works very well. Uwe is also a highly knowledgeable and perceptive figure when it comes to wargame design, and he has become an important advisor for us. His experience in the games industry helps us do things the right way — and focus on the right things.
One area of the cooperation where we have made major progress is in the structuring and preparation of our print files. I would especially like to thank Marc von Martial (Art Director at Sound of Drums) on this point. Thanks to his templates, we are now able to turn our designs into print-ready files in a much shorter time. That has been a tremendous help for Sicily 43, Primosole Bridge, and now also RH41 Revised Edition.
In the end, I would say that our journey is not over yet. Sound of Drums, like us, is still a young company, so there are new challenges every day. But as the saying goes: “Everything will be fine at the end of the road. If it is not fine yet, then the road is not over.”
Wolfgang: We started the Assault System a long time ago as a new tactical game system, and from the very beginning it was clear that both the rules and the content would continue to evolve over time. Other systems refer to their rulebooks as “Living Rules,” and that is very much how we see the Assault System rules and the game as a whole.
At the same time, it is important to us that we do not do this alone. We want to actively involve our player base in the further development of the system so that it can become the best game system possible. Standing still is simply not an option for us.
Many of the changes were driven by years of gameplay feedback from the community and by our own experience with the system. Over time, we identified:
areas where rules could be streamlined
components that could be improved or added
visual elements that could be made clearer
The goal was always to improve clarity, usability, and gameplay flow without changing the core identity of the system.
Wolfgang: The most visible aspect of the game’s development is undoubtedly the graphical redesign and the addition of new visual features. Michael Grillenberger, supported by Marc from Martial, once again did outstanding work, just as they did on Sicily ’43 and Primosole Bridge. I would like to thank them both once again for that work.
The map artwork in particular will immediately catch the eye. We have raised it to the same high standard seen in Sicily ’43 and Primosole Bridge, which creates an even greater sense of immersion.
Overall, the graphic design has been significantly refined compared to the first edition. Maps, symbols, counters, and other visual elements have been redesigned to improve readability and consistency. Vehicle artwork has also been updated, and the game’s entire visual language has been unified to create a stronger overall identity.
Wolfgang: The visual style supports the core philosophy of the system: clarity, immersion, and functionality.
The artwork strikes a balance between historical authenticity and tabletop readability, which is essential in a tactical wargame where players need to process information quickly. In that sense, the artwork helps reduce the players’ workload so they can focus fully on the game and on the tactical situation on the battlefield.
Wolfgang: One major improvement is the integration of visual symbols directly onto the maps. Last year, we conducted a survey among our players because it was important for us to understand what they thought about the idea of including symbols on the map boards. The result was extremely close.
Many players were concerned that such symbols might reduce immersion. Because we take those concerns seriously, we decided on a more subtle compromise. Elevation levels and some terrain rules are now represented with discreet graphical indicators, allowing players to understand the battlefield layout more quickly without constantly consulting the rulebook.
That, in turn, makes things much easier for the players.
Wolfgang: Quite simply, these changes make the Assault System much more accessible and easier to play. The need to search for information is reduced, and the overall handling of the game becomes smoother.
In particular, readability, gameplay flow, and ease of learning have all improved. Players can now interpret terrain and elevation at a glance, which speeds up play and reduces rule lookups.
Wolfgang: The vehicle illustrations have been updated and refined, providing clearer identification and a more consistent visual style across all units. I think Michael also worked on them simply because he really enjoyed doing so.
These changes enhance both the historical feel and the table presence of the game.
Wolfgang: The revised edition introduces several new terrain types:
Wheat and crop fields
Steep slopes
Covered trails
These elements are closely tied to the historical landscape of the Eastern Front, particularly the region around Białystok in the summer of 1941. Large expanses of wheat and crop fields dominated the countryside and often influenced visibility and movement for advancing troops. During the opening phase of Operation Barbarossa, German and Soviet forces frequently fought across agricultural land where tall grain could provide concealment but also limit observation.
Steep slopes and covered trails reflect the natural terrain features of the area, which included rolling ground, wooded ridges, and narrow rural tracks. Such features often shaped the movement of infantry and vehicles, creating opportunities for ambushes or concealed manoeuvres.
Including these terrain types allows the game to better represent the tactical realities soldiers faced during the early battles around Białystok, while also expanding the range of strategic options available to players.
Wolfgang: The system now includes additional fortifications and obstacle elements, allowing players to represent defensive battlefield preparations more realistically. These counters reflect the kinds of improvised and field-built defenses commonly used by Soviet forces in the border regions during the first days of Operation Barbarossa.
In June 1941, Soviet units attempted to delay the rapid German advance by establishing temporary defensive lines, often using field entrenchments, tank barricades, and hastily constructed obstacles. Barricaded roads and reinforced firing positions were typical features in defensive positions around key crossroads and villages. Although many of these defences were incomplete because of the speed of the German attack, they nevertheless influenced the course of local engagements.
By incorporating such fortifications and obstacles, the game is able to reflect the defensive measures historically present on the battlefield. These new counters expand the tactical possibilities in scenarios and campaigns, while also helping to recreate the atmosphere of the chaotic and desperate fighting that characterised the opening days of the campaign around Białystok.
Wolfgang: The revised edition features an improved box design, including:
A box inlay designed for sleeved cards
A transparent lid for better organisation and visibility of components
These changes were made to improve both storage and usability for players. Many players prefer to sleeve their cards to protect them during repeated play, particularly in games with frequent handling such as card-driven tactical systems. The redesigned inlay ensures that sleeved cards fit comfortably inside the box without bending or compressing them, allowing players to keep their components protected while still maintaining a compact storage solution.
The transparent lid also helps players organise and identify the different components more easily. Counters, cards, and markers can be seen at a glance, which speeds up setup and makes it easier to keep the game organised during play. For a system that may include multiple scenarios and campaign elements, quick access to components is especially useful.
Overall, the improved box design reflects feedback from players of the original edition. By making the storage solution more practical and user-friendly, the new edition aims to make preparation, transport, and long-term storage of the game more convenient.
Wolfgang: The rules have evolved from Rulebook 1.0 to version 2.5, and possibly eventually to 3.0.
Key changes include:
Integrated expansion content
Clarified rules
Streamlined mechanics
Improved structure and organisation
Since the release of the original rulebook, the system has gradually developed through playtesting, player feedback, and the addition of expansion material. Earlier supplements introduced new mechanics and scenario elements that are now fully integrated into the core rules, allowing players to access the complete system without needing to consult multiple documents.
Another important goal of the revision was to clarify rules that had previously caused questions during play. Certain mechanics have been rewritten with clearer wording and additional examples, making it easier for players to understand how the system works in practice. This also reduces ambiguity during gameplay and allows players to focus more on tactical decision-making rather than rule interpretation.
The revised rulebook also streamlines several mechanics. While the core gameplay remains unchanged, some procedures have been simplified to maintain the fast-paced flow of the system. The intention was not to make the game less detailed, but rather to ensure that its mechanics remain intuitive and efficient during play.
Finally, the overall structure of the rulebook has been improved. Sections are now organized more logically, making it easier to locate specific rules during a game. Together, these changes reflect the natural evolution of the system and aim to provide both new and experienced players with a clearer and more accessible ruleset.
Over the years, extensive playtesting and feedback from players helped identify areas where the original rules could be improved. Ambiguities in certain mechanics were clarified, and procedures that occasionally slowed down gameplay were simplified. As a result, the revised rulebook presents the system in a more accessible and consistent way, allowing new players to learn the game more quickly while still preserving the depth that experienced players expect.
The streamlined mechanics also improve the overall flow of play. Turns progress more smoothly, and players can focus more on tactical decisions rather than consulting the rulebook. This is particularly important in a fast-moving tactical system set during the opening stages of Operation Barbarossa, where battlefield situations changed rapidly and decisions had to be made under pressure.
In addition, the revisions helped refine the balance of the system. Through years of scenario testing and community feedback, certain interactions between units, terrain, and combat mechanics were adjusted to ensure that engagements feel both challenging and historically plausible. Together, these improvements create a more polished and engaging gameplay experience while remaining faithful to the original design of the system.
As mentioned before, feedback on Rulebook version 2.5 will remain open until the end of that campaign.
Our goal is to use this period to gather final community input, complete the last refinements, and move the project into production in the best possible shape. A more precise release timeline will be shared as soon as the campaign and production planning are finalised.
Wolfgang: Well, I think Assault Games might become a never-ending story. We will keep working on it as long as we continue to enjoy it—and that could still take a very long time.
Joking aside, we are very active when it comes to new ideas. I actually talked about some of this in our most recent SITREP (a bit of self-promotion here):
We have started publishing a development roadmap so that everyone can see what we are currently working on and what might be coming in the future. Of course, the roadmap only shows the official topics we want to share publicly—and yes, there are also a few unofficial ideas we are exploring behind the scenes.
To give you a small glimpse of what might be ahead, you can already see a draft cover for our upcoming Normandy journey. And that’s not all—there are several other things in development.
Thank you so much for your time in answering our questions Wolfgang and I look forward to future games from Assault Games and Sound of Drums.
In Aces & Armor from PKB Games players take the role of a general (United States, Russia or Germany) in this complex (but easy to learn) strategy game. In addition to attack strength and armor of your troops, their tactical setup, combat experience, damage and terrain have a decisive influence on the outcome of the battle. Since each unit brings its own strengths, you must cleverly assemble your army to win the victory over your opponents. The game can be played either cooperatively or competitively and has a dedicated solitaire mode. The game uses detailed miniatures with many different unit types and has a high re-playability due to the variable start setup. The combat system is involved and a bit complex and depends on type of unit, combat damage, experience, strategic formation, terrain and armor (known from highly rated game Trench Club).
The American Civil War was the bloodiest conflict and a defining event in the history of the United States. The tragedy of the conflict was amplified by the fact the battles were brutally fought with Napoleonic tactics while using new and more lethal weaponry. As a result, over the course of nearly four full years of war, roughly 700,000 Americans were wounded or killed in battle along with another 400,000 soldiers dying from disease.
Blue & Gray Deluxe Edition consists of the original eight games from the SPI Blue & Gray I & II Quadrigames. The battles depicted are among the most important of the American Civil War: Shiloh, Antietam, Fredericksburg, Chancellorsville (Hooker & Lee), Gettysburg (Cemetery Hill), Chickamauga, Chattanooga, and The Battle of the Wilderness.
The game mechanics used in this series are based on the well-received Borodino/Napoleon at Waterloo system. Terrain is a significant factor, with everything from rolling farmland to untracked wilderness represented. Battles will often see a back-and-forth struggle for control of critical terrain. Rules for night turns are also provided. A standard set of rules are used, common to all eight games, while each game also has its own set of exclusive rules, historical set-ups, and player and design notes—all from the original SPI games.
Blue & Gray Deluxe Edition features new artwork, double-sided mounted game boards, enlarged counters, player aid cards, numerous optional rules gleaned from other game editions, and new variant counters and markers for use with several variants from Moves and Strategy & Tactics magazines. Reintroduce yourself to these classic games from SPI’s golden era and refight some of the best-known battles of the American Civil War which decided the fate of a nation at war with itself.
Continuing along in this series devoted to the best looking boards found in the wargaming world where I will highlight the art and layout of a different board in a wargame that we have played to show you the various talents of the artists and graphic designers involved. In my humble opinion, a well designed and attractive board can make all the difference in the world to me enjoying a wargame. Don’t get me wrong, the game has to be good, but if it’s also good looking it always is a better experience. A board can draw me in. Can make me feel that I’m there. Can set the stage for the thematic immersion that we all crave. And I have found many of these type of boards and I want to make sure that I share them with you.
In this entry in the series, we will be taking a look at the fantastic looking board for Phantom Fury: Iraq, November 9, 2004 The Second Battle for Fallujah 2nd Edition from Nuts! Publishing. Now you might be looking at the board and thinking that is is just a jumbled mess of various colored squares and blocks but there is some hidden and obscured beauty in these squares but also a lot of great photo realistic depictions of city blocks, streets and dark alleys that were present in the city of Fallujah during this pivotal battle of the Iraq War in 2004. Nicolas Roblin is an emerging artist who has five or six game boards to his credit to date and we have played and really enjoyed then including This War Without an Enemy (2020) from Nuts! Publishing, 300: Earth and Water from Nuts! Publishing (2018), Saladin (2022) from Shakos and Border States (2022) from Shakos. But he also is starting to branch out more and has done the board for the very interesting solitaire wargame called Phantom Fury: Iraq, November 9, 2004 The Second Battle for Fallujah 2nd Edition. I would say that he has a very easy style that is focused on showing key locations in a light that emphasizes their importance to the historical story that the game designer is attempting to tell. What I mean by that will be evident as we take a look at the board for Phantom Fury, but one thing I would point out is the focus on the boundaries of the various districts inside the city. He gives these areas a very interesting treatment as well as a focus on the aesthetic elements of the setting. When you look at the board, you get the feeling that you are inside the city itself with a look at small buildings, walls, streets and even key locations such as the mosque.
Phantom Fury 2nd Edition is a solitaire wargame that simulates at a tactical level the operations carried out by United States Marines (USMC) to secure the town of Fallujah, Iraq in November 2004 and to attempt to suppress all armed resistance by the insurgents. The game focuses specifically on the fighting carried out by the 3rd Battalion, 1st Marines on the morning of the 9th of November 2004, in the district of Jolan in the north-west portion of the town. The player will control the USMC forces and the game system manages the actions of the insurgents. The Marines will have to move block by block and house by house clearing out resistance all while trying to minimize casualties and trying not to allow insurgents to infiltrate their lines and reappear in the rear to wreak havoc. This is very much easier said than done though as the first priority is to identify suspected insurgents as the Marines enter new areas that are enemy controlled.
The board for the game measures 22″ x 34″ and represents a part of the Jolan District of the city of Fallujah, divided into 61 Zones of about 50 x 50 meters and into Street Sections of equivalent size. The Zones are marked on the map by dotted lines or continuous lines and are identified by a number in a black or white circle in the Control Box. A target symbol in a Zone indicates that there is a Line of Fire between that Zone and the Zones whose numbers are printed below the symbol. The Target Zones are considered to be Neighboring a particular Zone for the purpose of Fire Combat only.
As you look at the Zones shown below from the upper left hand corner of the board, you will see that various boxes are printed in each of these Zones. These represent buildings and these buildings are multi-storied so they start at the bottom with the red entry areas, that have a nice little door shaped icon in the bottom right hand corner of the box, and then you see stylistic arrows that point up and down at the bottom of each of the above stories. There are also arrows that go to the right and left which mean they enter an adjacent building. At the top of the Zones you will see a black box, that has a neat little roof peak symbol in the upper right hand corner of the box, that represents the roof of the building. These are areas of entry from one building to the next and if used by the Marines or the Insurgents, will grant them a bonus DRM in combat. I remember when I first set eyes on the board, I was a bit discombobulated and confused but once I get into the rules I quickly realized that this graphical depiction of the stories and the means of ingress/egress was a stroke of genius and worked really well to quickly be able to identify what you are entering.
Certain Zones are considered to be Fortified and this means that they are tougher to break into. Some of the zones, such as Zone 26 (Mosque) identified by a red box around the area is a Fortified Zone by default. No unit may carry out movement called Flooding in a Fortified Zone. The Mosque area is a really interesting graphical representation as the background, as is the case with all of the areas, has the overhead satellite images of the Mosque shown on the board. In the game, this area cannot be entered by Marines but can be searched and entered by Iraqi Intervention Force (IIF) troops. I think that the red box really highlights this entry prohibition and is a key reminder to the player of the need for them to bring on the IIF troops although they might want to get more Marines on the board.
The IIF Troops holding box at the bottom of the board. There are 3 units stored here that can be brought onto the board at a later time. Notice the nice flag to the right and the id of the counter to the left using NATO symbols.
Each Zone on the board consists of several Locations in the form of boxes, which are used mostly to regulate movement. There are 5 types of Locations identified on the board including Open Ground, Courtyard, 1st Story with one of 3 notations including either l, 1′ or 1″), 2nd Story (2 and 2′) and Rooftop. Each Location is marked with one of these letters including OG, C, 1 or 2 and is a really well done part of the board which clearly identifies the type of Location. Locations are used for the placement of Suspect markers and certain Zones may have several Locations of the same type or no Locations at all of a particular type. Upon first glance, you might think that the color of the Suspect Markers, which are all tan with various shaded areas of brown and white, is a wrong choice and doesn’t necessarily work well visually with the sandy, tan colored board. But, because the Suspect Markers cover up the small boxes when placed, they still retain the thick brown outline on the outer edge of the board and these act as a visual highlighting of the unit. To me, this is a fantastic graphical design choice to highlight these important boxes and Zones as all of the action and most of the player’s focus will be on these areas as they move around the board block by block.
As in the case of these games, the on-board player aids and tracks need to be large, clear and have the pertinent information that the player will need to play the game. This is very well done on the board as they have created a circular Turn Track and Victory Point Track that are large and in the upper right hand corner of the board. This positioning really keeps the time deadline at the forefront of the players mind as they have to clear and control all 61 Zones for a victory. I say control but players must also eliminate resistance there as well and prevent the Suspect Markers from popping up in areas where they are adjacent to that have already been cleared and controlled.
One of the other really interesting parts of the game that causes a lot of tough decisions is the use of the military assets located on the bottom left hand side of the board. Here are tracked the player’s available Hornet Strikes, Super Cobra Support and UAV’s. All of these provide various benefits including DRM’s and direct attacks against fortified blocks to try to eliminate Suspect Markers without Marines having to put their life on the line in those areas.
I think that the graphic design for this board is truly excellent. I am not sure that it is beautiful but how it was done and how it works together is a stroke of genius and really took some thought and understanding of the game and its systems to be able to put together. These choices were reinforced with the color accents, use of lines and borders as well as with color choices for the most important Zones. Just a very well done and aesthetically pleasing package put together by Nicolas Roblin.
This game is just so very good and I love the decisions that the player has to make about how they go about clearing the areas with limited resources and under a time limit. Just a very good game design that shows how difficult this task was that was asked of the Marines.
If you are interested, I shot a short RAW video on the game during my first play and you can watch that at the following link:
We also did an unboxing video showing off the components and you can watch at the following:
If you are interested in Phantom Fury: Iraq, November 9, 2004 The Second Battle for Fallujah 2nd Edition, you can order a copy for 50.00 € ($58.37 in US Dollars) from the Nuts! Publishing website at the following link: https://www.nutspublishing.com/eshop/our-games/phantom-fury-v2-en
The next board that we will take a look at in the series is Almost a Miracle!: The Revolutionary War in the North in Against the Odds Magazine #51 from LPS, Inc.
Here are links to the previous entries in the series:
La Der des Ders – The War to End War from Hexasim is a 1-2 player slightly abstracted strategic level look at World War I. The game allows the players to relive the First World War at a strategic level, with each player controlling one of the 2 sides either the Entente, consisting of France, England, Russia, Serbia and other minor nations or the Central Powers including Germany, Austria-Hungary, the Ottoman Empire and a few minors. La Der des Ders can also be played solo, with a dedicated solitaire bot called “Athena” who utilizes special Cornflower Cards to make decisions about what technologies to invest in, where to undertake offensives and how to utilize limited resources and reinforcements. Each turn, players gain an amount of Resource Points dependent on what nations are in the war, which they can allocate to different areas to guide their overall strategy. Victory is achieved by launching offensives that drain the morale of enemy nations, forcing them out of the conflict through collapse.
In Action Point 1, we looked at the Game Board, discussing the Collapse Tracks, Trade Tracks, Russian Revolution Track and Naval Control Table and other various on-board tables and offensive spaces. In Action Point 2, we covered the Technology Phase and the Technology Tree and Technological Improvement Boards. In Action Point 3, we examined the Event Cards and how they inject the historical narrative into the gameplay and also alter the conditions of the game. In Action Point 4, we walked through an example of an Offensive and took a look at the combat procedure. In this Action Point, we will simply review the Victory Conditions.
Victory Conditions
In La Der des Ders, there are a few ways to trigger the concept of Sudden Death, which leads to the game concluding and a victor being declared, or to win the game through armistice being signed and then through the accumulation of Prestige Points. Let’s first take a look at what I think is the most common way for the game to come to an end, Sudden Death.
Sudden Death
The game will end immediately in the event of Sudden Death and this Sudden Death can be triggered in three ways. First, if France surrenders, the Central Powers will immediately win the game, second if Germany surrenders, the Entente will immediately win the game and finally if any one side achieves 6 Victory Points then that side immediately wins the game. Really pretty simple. If countries other than France or Germany surrender, such as Austria-Hungary, Russia or the Ottoman Empire, the game will continue although the Production Value of the surrendered country will no longer be included in the sides Resource Points.
Now there is a remote possibility that both sides could trigger Sudden Death at the same time through an attack. Remember, that if the attacker rolls a 1 on their Attack Dice, it will result a Counter Attack and 1 loss on their Collapse Track and if this would cause them to have to surrender as well as inflicting enough hits on their target to reach the end of their Collapse Track, both will Surrender and then neither side will win. But also, this could possibly occur with the play of the Spanish Flu Event, which causes losses to all powers. This is a rare possibility but it can happen.
One of the things that I very much like about this game is the concept of Collapse and the fatigue and weariness of war. World War I drug on for 4 long years and particularly on the Western Front very little ground was actually gained. During the early years of the war in 1915–1916, these advances were measured in mere feet, while later in the war during the campaigns of 1918, particularly in the case of the Hundred Days Offensive, which began on August 8, 1918, the Allies achieved deep, lasting breakthroughs, pushing the Germans back to their original 1914 lines. But the war was a meat grinder, plain and simple, and attacks were made sometimes to keep the war going because High Command demanded action and not necessarily to gain any ground or obtain any key objectives. Resources dwindled, troops dried up as men were shattered, maimed and demoralized to the point of being unable to stand a watch or fight, and nation’s desire for the war to continue faded. I think that at points, one breakthrough or catastrophic loss could have ended the war and this is very well reflected in La Der des Ders as if you are too low on your own Collapse Track and decide to attack because you believe you can finish your opponent you always have a chance of catastrophe and losses of your own while on the offensive.
Armistice
Aside from the Sudden Death ending, the game can end in 2 ways including at the end of the turn during which the Peace Negotiations card was drawn, or at the end of turn 14. In both of these cases, the side with the most Prestige Points is declared the winner. If there is a tie, the Central Powers will win the game.
So what are Prestige Points? Prestige Points are a concept that takes into account the standing of each of the combatant nations on both sides, using the location of the Sector cube on their Collapse Track as a base, and then uses a simple mathematical formula to determine the overall standing and condition of the nations morale, production and will to fight. One of the most important parts of this calculation though is that it only takes into account nations that have not collapsed and surrendered. If a nation has been forced to surrender because their Collapse Track reached the end, they will not count toward the Prestige Points of their allied side.
Each player will calculate their total Prestige Points very simply by paying attention to several numbers such as the Operational Value and Prestige Value. For each country still At War during the Armistice, the player multiplies the sector’s current Operational Value (OV), which is shown by the location of the Sector cube on the Collapse Track, by its Prestige Value (PV), which is the value printed on the left side of the Collapse Track. The various nations’ Prestige Values are Germany 5, France 4, Austria-Hungary 3, Ottoman Empire 3, Italy 3, Middle East 3 and all other Sectors 1.
Let’s take a look at a quick example of how to calculate Germany’s Prestige Points. If Germany is still At War and their Collapse Track is showing an Operational Value of 2, then we will multiply their Prestige Value shown on the far left of the Collapse Track of 5 x the Operational Value of 2 resulting in a total of 10 Prestige Points. The players then add the number of Victory Points (VP) indicated by the location of their marker on the Victory Point Track. You might be wondering Where do Victory Points come from? Victory Points are specifically earned from forcing countries to surrender and the side that caused the surrender will earn a number of Victory Points as shown in the rules. For the Entente, their values are Russia 3 VP, Italy, Middle East and Romania 2 VP and Serbia, Africa and Greece 1 VP. For the Central Powers, their values are Austria-Hungary 3 VP, the Ottoman Empire and Bulgaria 2 VP and the German Colonies 1 VP.
I very much like the concept of only calculating the value for those countries who have not Collapsed and who are still in the war. We all know that it is easier to negotiate a peace that is favorable to your side when you are still a threat and if too many nations of either side have collapsed then their Prestige Points will reflect this as those countries won’t contribute to the final value. And I also like the simplicity of the scoring system. If certain key countries like France and Germany surrender, then that equates to a victory for the side causing the surrender and if the game continues to grind on through the final turn, then there is this calculation that is really pretty simple and gives importance to each goal with a different value that can be earned. Just a solid method for determining victory that makes sense and fits with the historical aspect of the outcome of the Great War.
In Action Point 6, which is the conclusion to this series, we will give an overview of the “Athena” solitaire bot and show how it works for solitaire play.
April is one of my favorite months due to Easter and the warming of the weather. And this month we got a good amount of newly baked wargames, still warm some of them because they are so new, for you to choose from. This month for the Wargame Watch I was able to find 28 games (including the 7 games from our sponsor VUCA Simulations). Interestingly though this was a cooler month for crowdfunding as I only found 4 different campaigns, which did contain a total of 6 games as one was a triple feature, featured on Kickstarter or Gamefound.
This month again we have a sponsor for the Wargame Watch in VUCA Simulations. VUCA Simulations is a newer German publisher that is really crushing it with their graphics and production. Their games are also very good and we have really enjoyed several of their titles including Donnerschlag: Escape from Stalingrad, Traces of War and most recently New Cold War.
But I also want to point your attention to their In Development Section of their website to show you all of the great projects that they are currently working on. Here there are 7 different games listed with pictures of the beautiful covers and a description of the game itself. These titles include Thirty Years of Misery designed by Brian Asklev, Pacific Fleet designed Hiroyuki Inose, The Far Seas designed by Martin Anderson, In Fours to Heaven designed by Grzegorz Kuryłowicz, Gateway to Falaise designed by Andrew Glenn, 1916 – Prelude to Blitzkrieg designed by Paul Hederer and Saint-Lô – The Capital of Ruins designed by Clemm.
VUCA is really doing a great job with their games and we recently played one of their newest games in Imperial Elegy: The Road to the Great War 1850-1920 and it was a sublime experience. We only played 1 full hand with a full table of 6 players, but very much enjoyed what it was that we were trying to do and the production is just fantastic. Can’t wait to get this one back to the table soon!
But now onto the games for April!
Pre-Order
1. Company of Heroes – Desert Warfare Expansion + Reprint from Bad Crow Games Currently on Gamefound
Glitz. Bits. Content. Miniatures. If these things appeal to you and you like a tactical wargame experience then this is your chance. The well regarded Company of Heroes System has a Gamefound campaign for a new expansion called Company of Heroes – Desert Warfare Expansion and they are also offering the base game 2nd Edition as an add-on as you need it to play.
From the game page, we read the following:
The Company of Heroes – Desert Warfare Expansion + Reprint on Gamefound brings the Deutsches Afrika Corps (DAK) to the 2nd Edition board game, featuring high-mobility, mechanized, and elite units. This expansion enhances solo/co-op play with improved AI, offering a fast-paced, tactical tabletop experience with armored, hit-and-run tactics. The Deutsches Africa Corps adds specialized, agile desert combat forces with a focus on armored vehicles, Italian alliance units, and fast, bold maneuvers. The expansion includes a sophisticated AI for solo or cooperative play, featuring an AI commander, HQ board, action deck, and target selection priority cards. The AI is described as aggressive, frequently seizing objectives. The expansion includes new maps, units, and components to expand the core game experience. The campaign also offers a reprint of the 2nd Edition core box, required to play, featuring streamlined rules and high-quality components.
I am going to be honest here. I played the 2nd Edition. We enjoyed it but it wasn’t necessarily as amazing as I thought it would be. I mean the systems are interesting but it feels more Euro game like than wargame like and it is also extremely expensive. Now it is gorgeous and the miniatures, terrain and maps are very well done but I am not sure that this game lives up to the hype. Just my humble opinion.
As of April 1st, the Gamefound campaign has funded and raised $948,465 toward its $100,000 funding goal with 1,928 backers. The campaign will conclude on Thursday, April 16, 2026 at 12:00am EST.
2. T-34 Leader: The World War II Ground Combat Solitaire Strategy Board Game from Dan Verssen Games Currently on Kickstarter
A good solitaire game is always very much welcome on my table. I usually start these entries about solitaire gaming by saying I am not a solitaire gamer. Well, after playing the Leader Series from DVG for the first time about 8 years ago, that statement no longer applies. I used to really only play solitaire games when I had no other choice or available opponents. But, when I put these games on the table, my whole opinion has changed. The Leader Series is a solitaire gaming system that recreates modern combat, including ground combat, air warfare and even submarine warfare and sees the player creating, managing and outfitting a group of soldiers/boats/planes over the course of a variable length campaign. Some of the games offer individual combat systems that are included in the overall game and each handles their theater with specific rules and equipment used historically. Originally, all of the games were designed by Dan Verssen but more recently other designers have been taking up the reigns of the series. Such is the case with their newest offering in the series T-34 Leader designed by Vincent Cooper.
From the game page, we read the following:
You are the commander of a Soviet army combat group in World War II. You will take command in the hardest fought campaigns from Operation Barbarossa (1941) to the Battle of Berlin (1945).
Each of your Campaigns involve both operational and tactical decisions. At the start of a Campaign, you select the Units and Commanders to make up your force. During each Week of the Campaign, you decide which Enemy Battalions to attack, which of your forces to allocate, and then resolve each Battle using the Tactical Battlefield. Your Commanders gain Experience with every Battle, but they also suffer Stress. Each Week you must decide how hard to push your men to achieve Victory. T-34 Leader is a great game for both experienced strategy gamers, as well as new players. Each Campaign takes around 30 minutes to set-up, and each Battle can be resolved in 15 to 30 minutes.
T-34 Leader has been designed from the ground up as a Solitaire wargame. It is not an adaptation of a 2-player wargame and the rules have been specifically designed for the solo player. As a Solitaire wargame, you can play whenever you have time, at your own pace. T-34 Leader is the latest Tank Leader game from DVG, following Tiger Leader and Sherman Leader.
With that look, I will let you know that I very much love Sherman Leader and the ground combat for me is where it is at and I would think that T-34 Leader will be more of the same but on the East Front. I have played Sherman Leader the most in the series, using both short and long campaigns, and really enjoy its systems, the structure of the AI and the management of your units and Commanders. Really engaging and enjoyable experience of ground combat in World War II.
Here is a link to my video review for Sherman Leader that you can view at the following link:
As of April 1st, the Kickstarter campaign has funded and raised $38,484 toward its $30,000 funding goal with 148 backers. The campaign will conclude on Tuesday, April 7, 2026 at 3:02pm EDT.
3. Chalice of Poison: The Iran-Iraq War, 1980-1988 from GMT Games
We met Akar Bharadvaj while attending SDHistCon in 2023 and played his award winning design Tyranny of Blood: India’s Caste System Under British Colonialism, 1750-1947 and very much enjoyed the experience and talking with him about game design. Since that time, he has been working on another designer called Chalice of Poison: The Iran-Iraq War, 1980-1988 from GMT Games, which was recently announced on their P500. Chalice of Poison is the first volume in a new series that models complex conflicts not only as clashes between adversaries in the air, land, and sea, but also as political struggles within the regimes and military forces fighting it.
From the game page, we read the following:
In 1980, Saddam Hussein’s Iraq invaded Iran, hubristically expecting to achieve a quick victory in a few weeks. Instead, the war became a brutal slog that lasted eight years. During the war, both countries had to choose between political and military objectives, balancing between the power of their military forces and the stability of their regimes. In Chalice of Poison you will play as the heads of two very different authoritarian regimes that have structured their militaries to be excellent at forestalling internal threats…but less effective at fighting foreign adversaries. Can you reform your military so that it’s effective enough to win the war, without accidentally creating a force that threatens your power?
A unique game on the Iran-Iraq War, the longest conventional war of the 20th century, and a historically important conflict underexplored in tabletop gaming.
Designed by Zenobia Award-winning designer Akar Bharadvaj, and inspired by Dr. Caitlin Talmadge’s academic research on the fundamental weakness of so-called “strong-man” authoritarian regimes.
Simple mechanics create a tense, dynamic, and meaningful decision space with an exciting narrative, capturing the dilemmas faced by regimes faced with both internal and external threats.
A two-player game that also plays well with four players on competing teams.
Includes two solitaire modes: A simple-to-operate “Al-Jazari” bot that offers a challenging non-player opponent. A more complex “Kissinger mode”—inspired by Mark Herman’s Peloponnesian War—in which the solitaire player represents both sides in the conflict. This mode abstractly models the international community, which cynically supported both sides in the conflict, ensuring a lengthy war in which neither country could win a decisive victory.
“At its most interesting, Chalice of Poison simulates warfare as a social battle as much as one involving tanks and bullets…This might sound complicated, but Bharadvaj presents these fluctuating power levels with refreshing clarity…Even at this early stage it’s an impressive and ambitious plaything. And its critique is unexpectedly timely, highlighting how strongman governments weaken their nations in the name of strengthening their regimes.” ~ Dan “Space-Biff” Thurot
4. Pericles: The Peloponnesian Wars 460-400 BC 2nd Printing from GMT Games
We are admitted Mark Herman fanboys! I am not ashamed of that statement as he is a very good designer and such an interesting person. He has designed a series of games called The Great Statesman Series and there are such fantastic mechanics at play that create a very interesting non-traditional wargame feeling such as Churchill. The 2nd game in the series is called Pericles, unlike Churchill, pits 2 sides, the Athenians and the Spartans against one another. The real game-changer is that each side is made up of two factions. As such it plays best with 4 players, each working to not only have their side win, but to have their faction within that side end with the most honor, and thus be victorious overall. The good news for most of us, is that there’s bots for solitaire, or 3 player games and there’s a fascinating 2 player variant, where each player plays a faction on each side. GMT just put a 2nd Printing up on their P500 and I am so very glad that this game will get some more attention as it is a really great game.
From the game page, we read the following:
Pericles is a ‘sandbox’ (unscripted) wargame that covers the ENTIRE period of conflict described in Thucydides classic history on the Peloponnesian wars. Pericles is a 4-player game, where two teams of Athenian and Spartan factions fight for Hegemony in 5th Century Greece. Each team of two represents a faction vying for control of their City States, strategy, and honor. Athens sees the Aristocrats debate issues with their opposing Demagogues, while in Sparta House Agiad and House Eurypontid contend for royal dominance.
Pericles uses elements from the Golden Geek best Wargame of 2015, Churchill, to simulate war as the extension of politics by other means. In the War portion of the game, it is US versus THEM (Athens versus Sparta), where each team implements their collective strategy to dominate Theaters of War, build economic strength, and fight battles to win Honor. In the respective Political assemblies, it is ME versus YOU (faction versus faction), where the battle for government control has to be balanced by your common interests in a series of wars that must be won, or all is lost.
Pericles uses an Issue Queue preplanning mechanic that the play testers have described as ‘insanely fun’. After your Political assembly has debated and won issues, these issues (military, league, diplomatic, oracle) are secretly placed on the military map in one of the twenty Theaters of war. If you or your opponents place a second issue into a Theater, it creates a queue of issues. Once all issues are placed, they are revealed and resolved one at a time. The order of issues in the queues and the order in which they are resolved across all Theaters tells YOUR story of the Peloponnesian wars.
Strategy in Pericles unfolds in how you create combinations of issues to achieve the historical narrative. Do you want to conduct a Periclean raiding strategy? Then you would play two military issues into a Theater to first move forces into position, then raid. Do you want to build a base in the enemy homeland (historically Pylos or Decelea)? Then you would conduct a military expedition, followed by a league issue. Do you want to raise an opponent’s ally in rebellion? Then you would deploy a diplomatic mission, and sow treachery for immediate or future advantage. It is in the placement, order, and resolution of the issues that the game allows you to explore and experience the broad range of historical situations without a script.
What would a game of Hoplites and Triremes be without a battle mechanic? Battle in Pericles is based on armies and fleets being led by the classic generals of yore, represented as Strategos tokens. During the Political assembly, each faction uses historical personalities to acquire Strategos tokens. Use the Spartan general Brasidas and gain four Strategos tokens, while Epitadas only generates one. Strategos tokens can be thought of as military capital that is spent in the war to lead and move forces. If you send forces to a Theater with enemy forces, a land or naval battle will occur. All players then secretly commit Strategos to the battle. Then, the commanding general of the military expedition and their teammate reveal their Strategos commitment and move wooden land and naval units to the battle. Now the defensive commitment of Strategos is revealed, each side then reveals a random battle card value, and the winner is decided. The winner of the battle now has the option to fight a subsequent naval or land battle. The outcome of these tactical decisions determines if any fortified bases are destroyed by assault or siege. Then the next issue is resolved. Winning battles awards and reduces honor.
Here is a link to our video review that was created when we were younger, had more hair and were not very polished in any part of what we were doing:
5. Silver Bayonet: The First Team in Vietnam, 1965 – 25th Anniversary Edition 2nd Printing from GMT Games
We have had a great experience playing Silver Bayonet a few times over the years and I am glad that it is now getting a 2nd Printing of the 25th Anniversary Edition. Silver Bayonet: The First Team in Vietnam, 1965 – 25th Anniversary Edition is a revamping of their first ever game released all the way back in 1990.
From the game page, we read the following:
Silver Bayonet recreates the pivotal November 1965 battle between a full North Vietnamese Army Division and the US 1st Air Cavalry Division in the Ia Drang Valley. NVA expertise in lure and ambush tactics resulted in significant US casualties. US mobility and the ability to bring massive amounts of firepower to bear quickly virtually destroyed the attacking NVA division and forced a change in NVA tactics.
This re-issue of GMT Games’ 1990 CSR Award winning title that started it all keeps the original operational system, but streamlines to it to include innovative combat resolution integrating maneuver combat, close assault, artillery bombardment, and support from gunships and air sorties.
Increased accessibility to primary and secondary source material has made it possible to make changes to more accurately represent both sides’ unique capabilities without significantly altering or breaking the base game system. The major changes involve patrols, ambushes, landing zones, and the 1st Cav Brigade HQ, while minor changes tweak movement, combat, and coordination game mechanics to showcase radically different strengths and weaknesses the FWA and NVA force brought to the battles in the Ia Drang Valley.
6. I, Napoleon 2nd Edition Update Kit from GMT Games
As you probably know, normally Ted Raicer designs hard core hex and counter wargames such as The Dark Valley: East Front Campaign, 1941-45, The Dark Sands: War in North Africa, 1940-42 and The Dark Summer: Normandy, 1944. These games are fantastic experiences that are true wargames. But, he also has an eclectic side to him and has designed one of the classic card driven games on the subject of World War I in Paths of Glory. So when I heard that he had designed an interesting looking card based historical role-playing game the first thought that came to my mind was “How is he going to accomplish this feat?” Last year, I played I, Napoleon and did enjoy what it was doing even though it felt like it fell a bit short of its ultimate claim. But there is more of the game now and they are doing this Update Kit in case those who want to the updated cards don’t wish to order the Limits of Glory Expansion.
From the game page, we read the following:
For our customers who own the 1st Printing of I, Napoleon and want to upgrade to the 2nd Printing without purchasing the Limits of Glory Expansion, we’re providing an Update Kit.
This Kit includes:
60 Updated Cards
2 Divider Cards (1 New, 1 Adjusted)
Rulebook
Playbook
8.5″x11″ Player Aid
Sticker Sheet (4 stickers to update the Game Board)
NOTE: The Limits of Glory Expansion includes the updated Cards, Divider Cards and Sticker Sheet, as well as a Rulebook, Playbook and Player Aid that can be used with both the expansion and base game.
7. Paper Wars Magazine Issue #116: Roma Invicta: The Roman Republic 400-50BC from Compass Games
Wargame magazines can be a bit hit and miss with their games. But, Paper Wars seems to really pick some great topics and systems to highlight in their pack-in games and this month there is a new pre-order for a game called Roma Invicta: The Roman Republic, 400-50 BC designed by Paul Kallia who did Roma Victrix: Campaigns of the Roman World from Compass Games.
From the game page, we read the following:
Roma Invicta: The Roman Republic & the Western Mediterranean by Paul Kallio is a 2-player, scenario-based design depicting several historic conflicts that occurred in and around the Roman Republic between 400 and 50 BC. This is a systemic brother design to Paul Kallio’s Roma Victrix boxed game. Each game turn represents one year. Infantry unit types include legions, heavy infantry, auxiliaries, and barbarians, and represent about 5,000 men each.
BONUS GAME MATERIAL: This issue will include two new scenarios for play with WWII Campaigns: 1940, 1941, and 1942. For 1941, we have Festung Stalingrad. It covers the German counteroffensive to try to save the Sixth Army trapped in Stalingrad in December 1942. For 1940, we have the Operation Matador variant scenario by David Meyler.
Article highlights include previews of Rise to Glory and Iberian Tide, a work-in-progress report on Island Infernos, a Bitter Woods AAR, an alternate start scenario for Desert Tide, and a new optional fuel dump rule for The Last Gamble.
8. Limits of Glory: Campaigns VI & VII – Jersey New Jersey and A Strong War: The Conflict for North America 1755-60 from Form Square Games Coming to Gamefound April 7th
A few years ago, we became acquainted with Andrew Rourke through his Coalitions design from PHALANX that went on to a successful crowdfunding campaign and has recently been delivered. He has since been a busy guy with starting his own publishing company called Form Square Games and also publishing the first 5 designs in a new series called Limits of Glory that will take a look at the campaigns of Napoleon and other contemporary conflicts. In Campaign I, which is called Bonaparte’s Eastern Empire, the game is focused on the campaign of the French in Egypt between 1798 and 1801. Campaigns II, III and IV was Maida 1806 and Santa Maura & Capri. Campaign V was Donning the Sacred Heart which covers the Vendee Civil War and just recently fulfilled as I have my copy sitting on my gaming table awaiting and unboxing video.
And now, recently, he has announced came out about the next entry in the series which is a two-fer with Campaigns VI and VII called Jersey New Jersey and is set during the American Revolutionary War but also a 2nd game called A Strong War set during the French & Indian War. I think that these games are well timed with this year being the 250th Anniversary of the signing of the Declaration of Independence and I look forward to playing and exploring both of these games. I have also reached out to Andrew to see about him as well as the design duo of Mark Kwasny and John Kwasny for A Strong War doing another interview to give us a look inside the design and get more information for you to digest before the campaign kicks off on April 7th. But at this point the games look great and I love the art and the covers are very eye catching for sure!
From the game page, we read the following:
For the 2 games in the Limits of Glory Series:
Two exciting games in one box, Jersey covers the little known 1781 invasion by the French of the Island of Jersey as part of the American Revolutionary War. The game examines the impact of luck on events and challenges the skill of players to use their commanders to influence these events.
New Jersey covers the famous crossing of the Delaware and the battles of Trenton and Princeton using the same Limits of Glory System to test players ability to mitigate what luck throws at them by the skillful use of commanders and troop positioning.
Limits of Glory represents military campaigns at the highest command level, players take the role of theater commander and must manage their resources of men, material and skill to emerge victorious.
And for the other game in the offering called A Strong War: The Conflict for North America 1755-60:
The title, A Strong War, refers to the type of war the Abenaki Nation threatened to unleash on the land-grabbing British in 1753. The sparks of war, ignited in 1754 near Fort Duquesne by an obscure colonel of Virginia militia, George Washington, spread quickly; soon, flames engulfed the entire globe as England and France vied for control of empire. Over the next 5 years, Regular regiments from the French and British armies, American and French-Canadian provincial units, and Native warriors all fought in a chaotic and violent series of campaigns and frontier raids that culminated in the British conquest of French Canada and the defeat of the Native Nations (most of which had sided with the French).
A Strong War brings this war to life in a simple, fast-playing game. The map (covering the region stretching from Louisbourg to Alexandria, and from New York to Lake Erie) uses point-to-point connections to highlight the key locations that were targeted during the war. Using wooden cubes to represent the different types of forces used (French and British Regulars, British Colonials, French-Canadian Marines, French Bush Rangers, and Native American warriors), each player has only a few pieces (maximum 13 for the British and 10 for the French) to use each turn (one turn = one year, so there are 6 turns/years total).
The heart of the game is the unique combat system where players can deploy forces to a chosen battle and then commit them one by one; or they can call off the battle if it goes badly and save some of those forces for use later in the year. The types of forces committed also play a critical role in combat – the British want to mass their Regulars but the French want to bring in a mixed force to take advantage of the different skill sets each provides. Thus, tension is created in trying to decide if/when (or where) it is best to commit one’s forces: do you avoid combat completely; do you call off a combat that is going badly; or, do you go all in and commit your entire force? But if you lose a battle, initiative then swings to your opponent who may then launch an offensive. Each player has several paths to victory, leading to a “different” game each time, and forcing players to choose between different strategies each turn. Finally, it is a quick game, taking just a couple of minutes to set up, and usually taking less than an hour to play to completion. The game also plays well solitaire, though there is no dedicated solitaire system.
9. Campaign: Operation Bagration from Catastrophe Games Currently on Kickstarter
A few years ago, I played and very much enjoyed a cool little solitaire WWII card-driven game called Campaign: Fall Blau from Catastrophe Games and designer Martin Melbardis where the player attempted to breach the Soviet defenses on the East Front in the pivotal German summer campaign of 1942. The game system is very playable and simple, but has some strategic depth to it as the player has to make a lot of choices about what to go after, how to manage their scarce resources (fuel) and what generals to use to take advantage of their special abilities to amass enough VP to claim victory over the Soviet Union. They now have the counter punch of that game in a new entry in the series called Campaign: Operation Bagration and it is currently being offered on Kickstarter.
From the game page, we read the following:
Campaign: Operation Bagration is the follow-up to Campaign: Fall Blau, the acclaimed solo experience of trying to seize Stalingrad and the prized oil fields beyond. In this game the shoe is on the other foot, as you will be pushing the Red Army to retake the center of the occupied Soviet Union, setting up the capture of Berlin. Stalin is expecting fast results though, so once again you will be racing against the clock trying to achieve enough objectives before your supplies (and Stalin’s patience) runs out.
Campaign: Operation Bagration is a solitaire wargame that takes place during WWII and puts the player in charge of the Soviet summer offensive of 1944 against Army Group Center, code named operation Bagration. Pick your three generals and use your resources wisely in order to obtain your campaign’s objectives.
One month turns. Decide which card (objective) to go after, each with a unique set of Soviet defenses. Manage supplies required for each offensive, or choose to take an operational pause. Receive random event cards that are mostly beneficial but a few are Soviet counterattacks that can throw a serious monkey-wrench into your plans. Play continues until fall begins, and you must report to Stalin with your success or failure.
In order to meet Stalin’s expectations you need to be relentless, while carefully marshalling your troops and material. Drive too hard, and the Germans will crush one of your wings, and your push will stall out. But if you move too slow you know you will be summoned to a special meeting with Stalin, and that is a grim fate.
As of April 1st, the Kickstarter campaign has funded and raised $1,138 toward its $500 funding goal with 14 backers. The campaign will conclude on Monday, April 20, 2026 at 8:51pm EDT.
New Release
1. VaeVictis Magazine Issue #185 Game Edition: Storm on the Ménez Hom 1944 from VaeVictis
VaeVictis is a very fine wargame magazine and they always have very interesting looking pack-in games on various subjects. This month, they have featured a scenario involving the 1944 attack on the Ménez-Hom peak on the Crozon peninsula in a game called Storm on the Ménez Hom 1944. But there is more as the magazine features articles on various wargames including Hubris from GMT Games, La Der des Ders from Hexasim, Thunder on the Mississippi from Multi-Man Publishing, Italia 1917-1918 from Nuts! Publishing, New Cold War from VUCA Simulations, Werwolf from Legion Wargames and many more.
From the game page, we read the following:
During the siege of Brest, the coastal batteries on the Crozon peninsula, on the southern shore of the harbor, were hindering the advance of the US Army. It was therefore crucial to silence them. To achieve this, the barrier closing off the peninsula had to be breached: the Ménez-Hom peak, rising to 330 meters. This mission was entrusted to the FFI-FTP battalions of central Finistère. It took three weeks, from August 12th to September 1st, 1944, and the reinforcement of a US cavalry brigade to finally defeat the German, Russian, and Caucasian defenders.
2. The Coming Storm II: Quadrigames of the Fourth Coalition: October 1806-June 1807 from Operational Studies Group
Large Napoleonic wargames are always interesting. Operational Studies Group does some big games on the subject and their newest offering is called The Coming Storm II: Quadrigames of the Fourth Coalition: October 1806-June 1807 and deals with four different battles including Jena-Auerstadt, Pultusk/Golymin, Eylau and Friedland.
From the game page, we read the following:
These four games explore the major battles of 1806–07, where the French Army encountered two different opponents with different capabilities, from the leadership-challenged Prussians in Saxony to the chaotic battle conditions in winter against the Russians. Based on OSG’s Special Studies, which provide a turn-by-turn narrative of the four battles. Each game shows the approach to the battlefield on the day before battle. The Jena-Auerstadt game has both battlefields on one map and allows both sides to redeploy before battle.
We are offering a new edition, with new maps—not too much different in detail—but rendered in Charles Kibler’s naturalistic style. TCS2 will be updated to use the Universal Deck and latest series rules (deck not included). With few exceptions, the counters will be identical to the first edition.
This is a very popular series of games amongst Grognards and I have heard many people recommend these titles to both of us. We have yet to take the plunge and get one but one day we will…one day!
If you are interested in The Coming Storm II: Quadrigames of the Fourth Coalition: October 1806-June 1807, you can order a copy for $140.00 from the Operational Studies Group website at the following link: https://napoleongames.com/products/the-coming-storm-ii
3. The Maid Ascendant: The Siege of Orleans, October 1428-May 1429 from High Flying Dice Games
Paul Rohrbaugh and his company High Flying Dice Games is a designer I love to follow. He is always doing games on smaller or lesser known conflicts and I just find his work to be superb and really draws me in. Recently I saw where he was releasing a game on the Siege of Orleans and I do like siege games! The game is called The Maid Ascendant and really looks pretty interesting and is definitely a unique subject for a game.
From the game page, we read the following:
The Maid Ascendant is an introductory level wargame on the siege of Orleans. The siege marked the debut of Joan of Arc as a military commander, and a campaign that would see the English eventually evicted from France and the end of the Hundred Years War.
“Begone, or I will make you go!” – Jeanne d’Arc’s command to English and Burgundian troops besieging Orleans.
If you are interested in The Maid Ascendant: The Siege of Orleans, October 1428-May 1429, you can order a copy for $16.95 from the High Flying Dice Games website at the following link: https://www.hfdgames.com/maid.html
4. Mr. Lincoln’s War from Compass Games
You can’t have enough good American Civil War games and Compass Games has been working to bring out a new edition of a classic called Mr. Lincoln’s War designed by Mark McLaughlin.
From the game page, we read the following:
Mr. Lincoln’s War is a historical game which captures the epic struggle of the American Civil War. From their first major battle at Bull Run in 1861, through the campaigns of Vicksburg, Gettysburg and Atlanta and until the final days at Appomattox in 1865, the armies of the Union and the Confederacy raged across America wreaking havoc and bloodshed on a scale never before or since witnessed in the New World.
This box set is organized into two sub-games, “Army of the Tennessee,” which deals with the war in the western theater, and “Army of the Potomac,” which deals with the war in Virginia. Each has four short scenarios that recreate the maneuvers and battles of Shiloh, Gettysburg, Atlanta, and other monumental Civil War contests. Campaign games enabling the players to fight the war in the West or East are provided with each sub-game. They may be combined to play the Mr. Lincoln’s War grand campaign that simulates the entire Civil War, on both fronts.
5. Volume II Civil War Heritage Series Army of the Potomac: Campaigns of 1862 and 1864 from GMT Games
Several years ago, Mark Herman designed a very unique and simple American Civil War game called Gettysburg that appeared in C3i Magazine #32. That game became the basis for his Civil War Heritage Series with the first volume being Rebel Fury that focused on five battles from the Chancellorsville and Chickamauga Campaigns. He has long mentioned working on the follow-up to that game and we finally are getting it with Army of the Potomac.
From the game page, we read the following:
Army of the Potomac: Campaigns of 1862 and 1864 is the second volume in the Civil War HeritageSeries and the follow-up game to the innovative and acclaimed Rebel Fury. Army of the Potomac uses the same core rules as Rebel Fury, so players familiar with Rebel Fury will be able to jump right into the action. Each battle in Army of the Potomac is quick-set-up, quick-playing, and deeply interactive. The density of counters in each scenario is low, allowing you to see and experience the big picture of the battle.
Army of the Potomac covers the battles of Spotsylvania II, North Anna River, Cold Harbor, and the entire Seven Days battle (McClellan vs. Lee), including the prelude Seven Pines (McClellan vs. Johnson) when Johnson’s wounding brought Lee into the command of the Army of Northern Virginia. Each battle places you, the player, in the role of the Army Commander (Grant, McClellan, Lee, Johnson). You maneuver your army to find the enemy’s flanks, concentrate your forces for an attack, and determine where to commit your artillery assets.
I think that one of the most interesting parts is that this new game can be played with Rebel Fury as also included are two bonus scenarios to allow owners of Rebel Fury to fight Spotsylvania II and begin the Campaign scenario from Wilderness to Cold Harbor using their original Rebel Fury map.
Last summer, while attending WBC in late July, we sat down with Mark Herman and did an interview/overview of Army of the Potomac and you can watch that video at the following link:
6. Baltic Empires: The Northern Wars of 1558-1721 from GMT Games
This one is very much anticipated by me and I feel like I have been waiting in it forever since its announcement in 2022. Baltic Empires is a grand looking game that focuses on the conflicts between the states of the Baltic region during the early modern era. The wait is now over as they game is set to ship on April 17th.
From the game page, we read the following:
Baltic Empires is an approachable 2-5 player strategy game about conflicts between the states of the Baltic region during the early modern era, a transformative period of religious conflict, large scale warfare, and constant struggles for power. Players will have to develop their economy, strengthen their administration, secure trade hubs, and finally build armies to become the dominant power of the Baltics. Denmark-Norway, Sweden, Russia, Poland-Lithuania, and Prussia will fight for hegemony, using variable victory conditions that reflect their respective historical objectives.
During the 16th & 17th centuries, religious conflicts between Protestants and Catholics swept Europe, vast colonies were established by the maritime powers, and a series of wars were fought against Louis XIV’s Kingdom of France to maintain the balance of power, eventually culminating in the War of Spanish Succession. While this history might be familiar to many, the related conflicts around the Baltic Sea that took place during these centuries are less well-known.
Where did the French, English, and Dutch acquire the materials they needed to build and maintain their vast navies that won them their colonial empires? Where did they acquire the food they needed to feed their sailors and growing populations? Where did the Swedish juggernaut that suddenly emerged and changed the course of the Thirty Years War come from, and why didn’t its great power status last? How did the Russian and Prussian Empires that became so powerful in later periods first emerge on the European stage? The Baltic region was crucial to the history of Europe, and the conflict for influence over the Baltic Sea was closely intertwined with the balance of power in Western Europe. The outcome of the wars and societal transformation in the Baltic region, from the collapse of the Teutonic Order in Livonia in 1558 to the end of the Great Northern War in 1721, shaped European and world history up until the present day.
Baltic Empires presents these less well-known conflicts in a fun and accessible format, while also doing justice to the fascinating history of the Baltic Sea region during this period. The game features 5 asymmetric factions with different strengths, forces, and historical objectives, along with the capacity to develop their states by investing in economic infrastructure and recruiting key historical characters that offer unique game effects. The game also includes several scenarios for variable player counts and durations, offering additional flexibility and replayability.
7. Three Days of Gettysburg Deluxe Edition from GMT Games
A very popular series featuring one of the most gamed battles of the American Civil War! Quite the combination. And to add to that, a Deluxe Edition treatment with new counters, some new rules, new and updated maps and lots of scenarios. This is a great value for any gamer who wants to game one of the most iconic battles of the American Civil War.
From the game page, we read the following:
GMT Games and the GBACW design team are proud to announce Three Days of Gettysburg Deluxe Edition, the ultimate edition of the definitive game on the Battle of Gettysburg. First published in 1995, 3DoG has stood the test of time as one of the most popular games of the Great Battles of the American Civil WarSeries.
This series is one of the hobby’s longest-lived design concepts, springing from the legendary regimental level Gettysburg game—Terrible Swift Sword (SPI)—designed by Richard Berg in 1976. Under GMT, the rules system has remained stable but has shown remarkable flexibility to allow each game to smoothly incorporate additional rules to reflect the historical battles. The series relies on interactive chit-pull mechanics to simulate the often-chaotic nature of the 19th Century battlefield at the regimental level.
Three Days of Gettysburg Deluxe Edition will include ten plus scenarios. They range from small Skirmisher contests on half sized maps to the ultimate Gettysburg experience on four full full-sized maps depicting the entire battle, including the East Cavalry Battlefield! Other scenarios will depict both the first and second day of the struggle. Experienced players will be able to play many of the scenarios in one sitting. The 3DoG Deluxe Edition will include many exclusive rules to represent the special situations at Gettysburg, including new Skirmisher rules. However, many of the rules are optional, allowing players to decide for themselves what level of complexity they want.
New components and exclusive rules include new cavalry counters, CSA dismounted cavalry counters, corrected artillery types, two types of skirmisher units, artillery sections for some scenarios (Calef’s battery on the first day!), and artillery overshoot. The new maps continue to use Mark Simonitch’s beautiful artwork but include stonewalls, the Devil’s Den, and sloping hexes to better represent the unique terrain at Gettysburg. The large rock formations are represented differently from earlier editions, and artillery will find moving up the slopes of Little Round Top as difficult in the game as it was in the battle.
And just take a look at this big beautiful map of the game….by the talented Mark Simonitch!
8. Dreams of Empire Expansion Kit – Seeds of Empire: The Wars of South & Central India, 1730’s-1750’s from Red Sash Games
Red Sash Games have a reputation for very large, very long playing games that are focused on interesting historical events. This month, they announced their newest offering with their printing partner Blue Panther and it is an expansion to their Seeds of Empire game focused on the wars in South & Central India during the 1730’s through the 1750’s. The game is called Dreams of Empire Expansion Kit – Seeds of Empire: The Wars of South & Central India, 1730’s-1750’s and really looks to be pretty interesting.
From the game page, we read the following:
Seeds of Empire is the second in a series of operational war games covering conflict in India during the 18th Century, using Red Sash Games’ LaceWars rules. SOE extends the environment of Dreams of Empire to include the whole of Central India (the Deccan) and extends the timeline into the 1750s to cover the Second Carnatic War.
The expansion includes several new Powers, divides the Marathas into Clans, and adds Factions for the two — not one, but two — major succession crises simultaneously taking place in the Deccan and Carnatic. This is the period when John Company, the British East India Company, finally got involved in the geopolitics of the Subcontinent. It was the highwater mark of the French presence, and a watershed for the Maratha Confederacy, while for the Mughal Empire it was a period of steep decline.
Seeds of Empire offers eight unique scenarios:
The Second Carnatic War: this scenario uses only the original map set (most of the action took place in a very confined area). Featuring the return of Chanda Sahib and Governor Dupleix, with Bussy-Castelneau, Clive of India, Stringer Lawrence (Father of the Indian Army), and above all, Mohammad Ali Khan.
“Early Start”: An ‘early start’ variant of the same scenario in which Chanda Sahib has the opportunity to slay Anwar ud-Din (or vice versa). Historically the death of Anwar kicked off the Second Carnatic War.
“Capture of Devikotta”: An even earlier start that allows the players to simulate the EIC‘s capture of Devikotta from Tanjore under the guise of restoring the Raja.
“French in the Deccan”: A ‘French in the Deccan’ scenario using only the new maps, focusing on the war for control of the Viceroyalty of the Deccan and the activities of the various Maratha clans.
“Deccan + Dreams of Empire”: A 1740s Deccan sandbox scenario matching the timeline of the original DOE Campaign Game, showing what the Marathas were getting up to.
“Full Territory”: A Campaign Game for the Second Carnatic War that combines the maps.
“Both Carnatic Wars”: A Campaign Game for the 1740s combining the original DOE Campaign with the 1740s Deccan scenario. This scenario can be extended to create a Grand Campaign covering the period of both Carnatic Wars.
“Malabar War”: A small scenario set in Malabar, showcasing the continued expansion of Travancore against Cochin and its allies.
Like Dreams of Empire, Seeds of Empire assigns the various Powers to the players as and when they Activate. However, the Second Carnatic War also creates semi- permanent Alliances, with the French on one side and the British on the other, though only acting as ‘auxiliaries’ to the great Indian lords.
To help the players cope with the material, the original rules, scenarios, charts, and (some) displays have been duplicated, with the new material from Seeds of Empire inserted into the relevant places. The expansion also includes errata and small fixes to the game system.
This is not a complete game and will requires ownership of Dreams of Empire to play.
If you are interested in Dreams of Empire Expansion Kit – Seeds of Empire: The Wars of South & Central India, 1730’s-1750’s, you can order a copy for $240.00 from the Blue Panther website at the following link: https://www.bluepantherllc.com/products/seeds-of-empire
9. Ace of Aces: Powerhouse SeriesDeluxe Edition from Mr. B Games
A classic reborn is how I would classify the next offering on this list. With very unique mechanics trying to provide the experience of dueling it out with an enemy biplane over the fields of World War I, Ace of Aces is now making a comeback with the Powerhouse Series rebirth all the way from 1981.
From the game page, we read the following:
Ace of Aces: Powerhouse is an exciting game of World War 1 aerial dogfighting. Each player is the pilot of a fighter plane in the skies over France trying to shoot down their opponent. The players each have a book that shows the position of their opponent, and what maneuvers they can perform to line up their machine guns on their target. Through an innovative matrix system, the players can fly through the sky and attempt to drive away their enemy. Each game takes 15-20 minutes to complete!
The mechanic used in this series is a very cool little flip book called a Dogfighting Book that has various pictures representing the maneuvers of your plan and the enemies. These flip books are nicely crafted and there is one for both the German Fokker DVII and the British SPAD XIII.
10. Commander: Romans v Dacians – A Solitaire Wargame from Mike Lambo
Over the past several years, print and play solitaire wargames have gained a lot of traction in our hobby. A solitaire wargame that is very affordable at $10-$15 and can be purchased and downloaded online. What is not to like? And the name of Mike Lambo has been tied to a lot these games as he has designed 20+ of these titles and has built quite the rabid and loyal fanbase. His newest game is called Commander: Romans v Dacians – A Solitaire Wargame and can be downloaded from Wargame Vault.
From the game page, we read the following:
In the rugged hills and forests of ancient Dacia (today located in the European country of Romania) Rome fights a war unlike any it has faced before. The legions advance into a land of ridges, valleys and fierce tribal resistance, where every skirmish can turn the tide of battle. You command a small Roman force consisting of legionaries, praetorian guard, cavalry, archers, and spearmen, tasked with holding the line, breaking the enemy, or seizing vital ground before the Dacian horde overwhelms you. Opposing you are the warriors of King Decebalus – swift, unpredictable, ferocious and deadly. Cavalry smash into formations with startling power, warriors surge forward in wild charges, swordsmen hold the line with grim resolve, and archers and falxmen harass and surprise from the rear. Each battle unfolds differently as both armies are drawn at random, events disrupt your plans, and reinforcements arrive to mix things up.
This is a tense solo wargame of tactical decision making and battlefield chaos. Every turn demands adaptation and every clash counts. No two battles will ever play the same, and victory is never guaranteed until it is achieved.
In the game, the Player will be commanding the units of the Roman Empire as they battle a seemingly endless stream of fierce Dacian fighters.
This game is a solitaire wargame. You play the game, and the enemy is controlled by the game (or ‘AI’). You will need three standard six-sided dice to play. It is recommended that the counters provided on the final page of the game are used to play this game (especially for the units). Simply stick them to card and cut them out. A video demonstrating how generally to do this can be found on the Mike Lambo Games YouTube channel.
As usual, thanks so much for reading along and sticking with me this month as I navigated through the many websites and game pages looking for new and interesting games to share.
Finally, thanks once again to this month’s sponsor VUCA Simulations!
With this My Favorite Wargame Cards Series, I hope to take a look at a specific card from the various wargames that I have played and share how it is used in the game. I am not a strategist and frankly I am not that good at games but I do understand how things should work and be used in games. With that being said, here is the next entry in this series.
#71: The Wartburg from Here I Stand: Wars of the Reformation, 1517-1555 from GMT Games
Here I Stand: Wars of the Reformation 1517-1555 is an experience packaged in a game that attempts to boldly cover the political and religious conflicts of early 16th Century Europe. The game focuses on the struggle of religious reformers such as Martin Luther, John Calvin and Ulrich Zwingli as they battle the Papacy for changes in their views of God and religion. But it is more than just the Holy War as it deals with the other European countries involved in the affairs of the time including France, England, the mighty Hapsburg Empire and the Ottoman Empire in the east. They all played a role in the process of the Reformation and the design brilliantly weaves this all together into an interesting and engaging experience. The game also covers other plot lines and events of the period, including wars, marriages and ascendancies to thrones, using a unique Card Driven Game (CDG) system that models both the political and religious conflicts of the period.
Today, I want to take a look at a very interesting Response card in The Wartburg. Response cards in Here I Stand are event cards that can be played out of turn to interrupt the actions of an opponent or provide immediate reactions to specific game events. Response cards are often used to negate, mitigate, or enhance events and combats, and they may be played during an opponent’s impulse, provided the text allows for this asynchronous timing. These cards also tend to have specific pre-requisites that must be met in order to play the card and The Wartburg states that the card is “only playable by Protestants, and Luther must be alive”. The card itself allows the Protestant player to cancel the play of a card as an event but cannot cancel a Mandatory Event. The card however can cancel the play of the Papal Bull or Leipzig Debate Papal Home Cards, which is probably the way that the card will mostly be used. The card will not only cancel the play of the event but will also end the impulse of the player playing the card. This can be very powerful and when played at the right time can be a game saver for the Protestant player.
For example, in our most recent play at Buckeye Game Fest, I was playing as the Protestants and Bill Simoni as the Papacy. After the forming of the Schmalkaldic League and the Protestants changing into a military power, the focus of the other players turned toward me as I was doing well and near victory. They all then decided to declare war on the Protestants and began to advance upon and attack my fortified Electorates to take away VP I had earned by having both religious and political control in 5 of the 6 as the League was formed. As we came into turn 5, I was at 24 VP and ultimately came up shy of a victory by 1 point at the time. I had been able to take over the entirety of England and change every space and also get about 5-6 spaces in France, but now the Papal Bull came to play and Bill fought me back and forth with him taking over 3-4 spaces followed by me reclaiming 3-4 spaces. It was a beautiful game of back and forth and I used every tool at my disposal to fight him including The Wartburg card to stop the untimely excommunication of Zwingli before he could attempt to embarrass him in a debate. That card play at that very time saved me or most likely he would have used Eck who is his best debater against Zwingli who is just average and I would have lost leading to him being burnt at the stake giving him VP or by allowing him to turn over a few of my hard fought converted spaces back to Catholicism.
The only problem with this card is that it commits Luther so he will be unavailable to be chosen directly to debate during the rest of the turn. But this was a small price to pay at that time and ultimately led to me being able to hold on through the end of Turn 6 where I won a Protestant victory on the tie breaker with England.
Martin Luther stayed at Wartburg Castle from May 1521 to March 1522 under the alias “Junker Jörg” (Knight George) to hide from papal and imperial authorities. During these 300 days of protective custody, he translated the New Testament into German in just 11 weeks, wrote numerous theological works, and grappled with spiritual turmoil. His greatest accomplishment at Wartburg Castle was his translating of the New Testament from Koine Greek into German, which laid the foundation for a unified German language and made the Bible accessible to ordinary people. He also wrote numerous works, including Against Latomus and several tracts. He began his attack on monastic vows during this time, arguing they were contrary to faith. Luther used his time in exile for intense study and writing, referring to his stay as his “Patmos”, referring to the Apostle John’s exile to the Island of Patmos in 95AD. While here though he also experienced significant psychological distress and temptation. According to legend, he threw his inkwell at the devil during a confrontation, leaving a stain on the wall. His exile was organized by Frederick the Wise after the Diet of Worms and the stay was designed to keep Luther safe from those looking for him, ensuring the survival of his reform movement.
Last month, as I was trolling the internet, I came across a new solitaire game from the guys over at War Diary Publications called Battle of the Bismarck Sea designed by Allyn Vannoy. Battle of the Bismarck Sea is a solitaire wargame that uses individual ships and flights/squadrons of aircraft. The Player assumes the role of General George Kenney, Commander of the 5th U.S. Army Air Force, with the mission of intercepting the Japanese effort to reinforce its ground forces on the island of New Guinea. I am always into a good Pacific Theater of Operations game and I reached out to Allyn to get some inside information about the design.
Grant: Allyn welcome to our blog. First off please tell us a little about yourself. What are your hobbies? What’s your day job?
Allyn: I’m retired, having worked 18 years for Intel as a program manager. Presently, I work for a minor league baseball team in the summer, an affiliate of the Arizona Diamond Backs, and volunteer two days a week at the Evergreen Aviation and Space Museum in McMinnville, Oregon, both in the Archives and giving tours of Howard Hughes’ Spruce Goose; I also write (freelance) for a number of military history and gaming magazines.
Grant: What motivated you to break into game design? What have you enjoyed most about the experience thus far?
Allyn: During Covid, I started getting back into gaming, having become interested in Avalon Hill games in the 60’s and as an early subscriber to S&T Magazine. I enjoy the challenge of trying to turn history into a game—a teaching tool—in the process I learn more and hopefully, understand more.
Grant: What is your new game Battle of the Bismarck Sea about?
Allyn: The Battle of the Bismarck Sea, 1943, was the 5th Air Force’s attempt to interrupt the Japanese effort to reinforce its ground forces on the island of New Guinea. The Player must utilize the limited resources available and determine their application over the 10-week period that operations are conducted. The results of these efforts will be borne out in the effectiveness of air operations.
Grant: What games gave you used for inspiration for your design?
Allyn: I hadn’t seen anything like this design; I wanted to make something new and hopefully unique.
Grant: What is important to model or include in a game about the Air Naval combat in the Pacific during WWII?
Allyn: The most important thing to understand is how to organize and implement an air strike force to accomplish the mission given.
Grant: What type of research did you do to get the historical details correct? What one must read source would you recommend?
Allyn: I tried to locate good and detailed sources:
Arbon, J. and Christensen, Chris. The Bismarck Sea Ran Red; Walsworth Press, Marceline, MO, 1979.
Birdsall, Steve. Flying Buccaneers: The Illustrated Story of Kenney’s Fifth Air Force; Doubleday, NY, 1977.
Henebry, John P. The Grim Reapers at Work in the Pacific Theater: The Third Attack Group of the U.S. Fifth Air Force; Pictorial Histories Publishing Company, Missoula, MT, 2002.
Jablonski, Edward. Outraged Skies; Doubleday and Co., Inc., Garden City, NY. 1971.
McAulay, Lex. Battle of the Bismarck Sea; St. Martin’s Press, NY, 1991.
Recommendation: McAulay’s book, Battle of the Bismarck Sea.
Grant: What challenges did the subject cause for the design? How have you overcome them?
Allyn: The design initially focused just on the single action that occurred on March 2-4, 1943, but there was a larger struggle that began in January 1943—that Allied commanders realized they needed to adapt and change their forces and tactics if they were to meet the challenge they faced. Once the design was expanded to a 10-week time frame it became more complex, but also more interesting. This also required more research into the changes that took place within the 5th Air Force.
Grant: What is the scale of the game?
Allyn: Unit scale: single ships and flights (3-10 planes) of aircraft.
Time scale: 10 Command/Support turns, each of one week; 13 Operational turns, over a two day period.
Ground units represent 200-300 personnel.
Grant: What are the different units that the player has control over?
Allyn: The Japanese units include transport ships, destroyers, ground units (presenting the troops and equipment carried on the transports), and fighter aircraft. These are controlled by the Bot. The player controls the Allied units: a mix of aircraft—reconnaissance, heavy bombers, medium bombers, and fighters, and also PT boats.
Grant: What does the concept of Endurance mean for the player? What does this model from the 1943 campaign?
Allyn: Endurance is the amount of time that aircraft can remain airborne. This models the range of aircraft from their bases to the target area. In the initial design, a series of range arcs were used for the individual aircraft types. It was quickly realized this would make for a very complex game. To address playability, aircraft range was changed to consolidate to a single arc (a line on the map) for medium bombers and P-38 fighters, and set Operational turns to 3-hour periods.
Grant: What decisions do they have to make about their assets use and management over the campaign?
Allyn: The game is conducted in two parts: a Command/Support Sequence and an Operational Turn Sequence.
The Command/Support Sequence is a one week period that allows the Allies to receive resource points and reinforcements, then decide how to apply the resource points—rebuilding units, modifying tactics, and determining how to find a convoy at sea.
The Operational Turn Sequence is a two day period where the convoy is moving along convoy routes as the Allies attempt to identify it and then determine the organization of strike forces in an effort to sink it and prevent Japanese forces from reaching Lae, New Guinea.
Grant: As a solitaire wargame how does the Bot behave? What are its priorities and decision points?
Allyn: The Convoy, when dispatched from Rabaul, advances towards its destination (Lae), with random events impacting its progress. The rules introduce the Fog of War that the player must overcome in order to first find the Convoy and then disrupt and attempt to destroy it.
As for decision points, there are several. How are resource points to be spent? When and how to go after a convoy? What assets to use in a given sortie?
Grant: What type of an experience does the Bot create?
Allyn: Designing a solitaire versus a 2-player game presents a whole different set of challenges. Can you design a Bot that will maintain the player’s interest and also challenge them? It should create variety; i.e., when and where will a convoy attempt to make a run; as well as a certain level of anxiety as certain elements are unknown until they can be revealed.
Grant: What are Resource Points and what do they represent?
Allyn: Resource points are the player’s currency and represent personnel, equipment (aircraft), and training.
Grant: What are Resource Points used for?
Allyn: The Resource Points are used by the player to improve tactics, provide replacements for losses, strengthen forces with personnel and equipment, and to launch air attacks. They are the real currency of the game and the player has to use them wisely to do well.
Grant: What is the layout of the board?
Allyn: The board includes the map (the area between New Britain and New Guinea); the turns tracks (for both Command/Support and Operational Turns); the Convoy Display (for air-sea combat); displays for the ships (transports and destroyers) and for tracking victory points and resource points.
Grant: How does combat work?
Allyn: Combat is based on the attack strength of the units for air combat, air-to-surface, and surface combat. The result of a die roll is compared to a unit’s combat strength, and if it’s equal to less than that number (combat strength), a hit is made on the opposing force.
Grant: How are bombers and fighters used in combat?
Allyn: Bombers are used to try and sink the ships of the Convoy. Heavy bombers operate separately from medium bombers, as they drop their bomb loads from altitude, with limited chance of success, while medium bombers engage Japanese ships at low altitude (mast-high approach). Fighters are used to engage the Combat Air Patrol aircraft that the Japanese dispatched to provide air cover for the Convoy.
Grant: How is victory obtained in the game?
Allyn: Victory is based on the number of Japanese troops that fail to reach Lae—by sinking the ships and their cargo of personnel and equipment, they are removed from participation in combat operations on New Guinea.
Grant: What do you feel the game models well?
Allyn: The fog of war; the challenge to figure out how to build and prepare the needed forces, and then how to employ them to accomplish the mission (sink the enemy shipping).
Grant: What has been the experience of your playtesters?
Allyn: Comments led to a major change in design—moving from a single mission to a 10-week campaign and all the elements associated with that larger picture/time frame.
Grant: What are you most pleased about with the design?
Allyn: That it offers two layers to the player experience – organizing and building forces, then utilizing them to execute missions.
Grant: What other designs are you contemplating or already working on?
Allyn: Operation Tidal Wave, the USAAF Ninth Air Force strike on Ploesti, Romania, August 1, 1943.
On August 7, 1539 the last resistance of the Spanish garrison of the Albanian village of Castelnuovo (Novi for the Turks) ceased. After 22 days of open trench and more than a month of combats, skirmishes, assaults and bombardments, the last Spanish defenders fulfilled the destiny they promised themselves when they rejected the offers of surrender that, according to the rules of war, Jareidin Barbarossa, admiral of the Ottoman fleet and general in chief of the operation, had made to them. The city and its fortifications, rather meager and outdated, had been taken by the forces of the Holy League in October 1538, so as not to close the campaign with the bad taste of the naval defeat at Preveza. Fourteen companies of Spanish infantry under the command of D. Francisco Sarmiento de Mendoza y Manuel, some 3,500 soldiers, were garrisoned there for the winter. The following summer brought a tide of 54,000 Turks and a fleet of 200 sails before its walls. After Venice’s defection from the League, there was no possibility of naval relief and the Spanish command authorized capitulation, however Sarmiento and his men decided to respond to Barbarossa’s offer with the phrase “Come whenever you want”, which sealed their fate.
In Castelnuovo 1539, two sides face each other in a desperate battle: the town and its fortifications will eventually yield to Turkish power, but the question is, at what cost? In Castelnuovo we will manage our army with wooden pieces in vertical with sticker, where we will not be able to see the type of unit of the opponent. The board is divided into areas and we will have other types of units such as cannon batteries, walls, bastions, trenches, etc. The confrontations will be made by rolling 6-sided dice and a deck of cards for each side, allowing us to play them to give orders, improve the fighting, dig trenches and special events.
Drop Zone: Southern France is a company-level wargame covering the Allied airborne assault that spearheaded Operation Dragoon, which was the invasion of Southern France or the Second D-Day on August 15, 1944. The history behind this operation is really very interesting as early on the morning of D-Day, the allied First Airborne Task Force (1st ABTF) parachuted a dozen miles behind the Riviera landing beaches to seize key towns and road junctions, to prevent the German occupation forces from counter-attacking the amphibious landing, and to facilitate the advance of Allied forces. The 4:00 AM parachute drop was badly scattered due to an unexpected dense fog bank that blanketed the battlefield. Drop Zone: Southern France covers the first two days of this airborne operation in six game turns, when the American and British paratroopers and glider-men fought surrounded and alone, supported only by French resistance bands. This game is very good and is just a solid wargame.
Crisis: 1914 is a game of international brinkmanship – if you back down too soon, you lose. If you back down too late you lose. But you have hawks and doves in your cabinet and in your government, and out of these conflicting views you must somehow formulate a coherent response to the crisis to win the day and prevent war.
There are 3 interrelated concepts at the heart of Crisis: 1914: Prestige, Tension, and Diplomatic Pressure (DP). Diplomatic Pressure (DP) is how you score Prestige. Tension is how you lose. Every card has a DP value. You apply DP by playing cards. The player with the most Diplomatic Pressure at the end of a turn earns Prestige points. There are other ways of scoring Prestige points too, but this is the most important one. Prestige is how you win. The player with the most Prestige at the end of the game is the winner.
While this game is not necessarily a wargame, but more of a war themed Euro game with a bit of negotiation and tension as you build your tableau of cards, we had a great time with it and really feel that the game is a bit under the radar of folks and should be one of those games that is played at conventions as it seats up to 5 players and is really quite good.