Rinse and repeat with the after gaming sleeping and eating of breakfast. I was very tired this morning when the alarm went off at 7:30am. I knew I had a big day and hoped that I’d have the energy to do all that I had planned.
First up was a learning game of the brand new The Weimar Republic from GMT Games. The Weimar Republic is a Card Driven Game of political struggle in interwar Germanywhere 4 unique factions compete for dominance including the democratic Coalition, the Soviet-backed Communist Party, Hitler’s National Socialists and the far-right Radical Conservatives. The game covers the Interwar Years between 1919-1933 and represents all of the different fighting factions trying to gain control in Germany’s regions and major cities, to maneuver the political landscape of the Republic, and to dominate through a combination of propaganda, parliamentary elections, street violence, economic influence and ideological zeal. This situation sets itself up perfectly for a game to explore the various parties involved. I was able to get into a game with the Hoosier Herd gaming group from Bloomington, Indiana.
The game appears to be a COIN Series like game as each faction has their own unique abilities and powers but also win in their own way. The game also visually looks like a COIN game as it uses multi-colored wooden cubes to represent influence in the various districts of pre-WWII Germany.
A major focus of the game is the concept of Elections. Each Era has a number of Election Cards (based on the historical number of Elections) that are shuffled into the Event Card decks. When an Election Card is played, both a Regional and a General Election is held at the end of that round. Election scoring is based on players’ Dominance over spaces and Regions, with modifiers such as Middle Class Sympathies, Cadres, military Supremacy, etc. Regional Elections gives Parliamentary Control over the game’s Regions while a General Election can potentially end the game – if anyone but the Coalition wins a General Election, that player also immediately wins the game.
Players draw a hand of cards for each Era and use their AP to conduct Actions. You don’t chose between AP and Event as when you play an Event Card the Event always takes place, unless there are some requirements that aren’t met. You don’t need to play a card every turn – in fact you can’t, as there are fewer cards in a hand than turns in an Era and you may only play one Event Card per turn. However, you always have a basic 1 AP that may be used by itself or in combination with any Event Card played, so during some turns you will be using only that basic point. You can also pass which allows you to discard a card and draw a new one.
I very much like what I was doing but need to grok the rules so I know what I should be doing. We had a good time and I look forward to another play in the near future.
Next up I sat down with Greg Smith to play the upcoming Korean Tide from Compass Games. I took Greg to the woodshed with the Chinese and had a great time with the game. This one is a very good addition to the Tide Series and adds in some new tricks.
One of the things that I liked was the addition of new Divisional Displays which hold the strength points and assets of each division. The player will track the strength points as they are lost and gained but also will keep track of their reserves which is a new concept. Reserves can be used to force a reroll of your opponents dice during combat or to reroll your dice. The reserves are created by reducing the division’s strength points by 1. There are also tank counters that are attached to units, particularly the North Korean units at the start of the game which add a single strength point but also cause the defender to retreat after being attacked regardless of outcome. Both of these additions are very nice changes.
Greg and I played for the first 2 years of the war including 1950 and 1951 and I was able to break his units and destroy several American divisions. But the real thorn in Greg’s side was my 6th KPA unit who was dug in and just wouldn’t die. I was able to continually feed them reinforcements and their combat rolls were amazing inflicting 2-3 losses on the UN forces while taking no more than 1 loss. Such an interesting system and I very glad that I was able to play it.
Next up was a game of Baltic Empires from GMT Games. Baltic Empires covers the tumultuous period in the Baltic region from the collapse of the Teutonic Order in 1558 to the end of the Great Northern War in 1721. The game really focuses on representing both the mercantilist economic thinking of the time, the very limited resources at hand on the state/ruler level and the destructive nature of warfare and its effects on the local economy. When war occurs in spaces infrastructure can be destroyed and it is very expensive to keep replacing units that just die on the battlefield.
The game has 5 factions including Denmark-Norway, Sweden, Poland-Lithuania, Prussia-Brandenburg and Russia. Each power has 2 common victory conditions and 1 or 2 that are specific to that power. The shared victory conditions are either control of 2 custom houses or being the hegemon on all 3 tracks at the same time.
One of my favorite parts was that each turn, 5 Dramatis Personae Cards are randomly drawn from the deck and become available for purchase by the players in the Production phase. These cards have a wide variety of effects, but can be broadly divided into 4 types: those that have permanent effects, those that have one-time effects, those that affect victory conditions and those that provide a special leader unit.
These cards are excellent fun and really create somewhat of a race to purchase the best cards before others can acquire them.
I loved the game and was doing quite well with Sweden as I had captured Riga and Kurland in the Baltics and had built up quite the nice economic engine.
The economic system is simple, but manages to capture a lot of key elements of this period. Each province has between 0 and 3 resource icons and between 0 and 2 city icons. If a workshop marker is present on a resource icon the province produces 1 of that type of resource and if a city marker is present on a city icon the province produces 1 thaler (the currency of the game). There is one twist though, as provinces under noble control will contribute a maximum of 1 of the resources and 1 of the thalers produced in it to the central administration while the rest is discarded as it goes into the coffers of the local nobility. Only provinces where royal control has been imposed will contribute their full income to the player. In addition to this there are 3 trade center provinces on the map, and these generate extra income for their controlling player as they are able to tax the trade there. Just a great little game that I hope to explore further later.
My final game of the evening was a look at The Emperor’s Voice and The Emperor’s Choice coming to Kickstarter soon from Worthington Publishing. I was able to sit down with Wes Crawford to play his game The Emperor’s Voice which covers midnight until noon on August 15, 1945 when an attempted Army coup occurred against the Emperor of Japan in order to stop the surrender. The Emperor’s Choice is about the week leading up to the attempted coup, where the Imperial Cabinet debated over the issues concerning the ultimate decision by the Emperor to surrender. The two games may be joined together to create one longer legacy game that may be played in about two hours, although each may be played separately as a complete game, too.
I played The Emperor’s Voice as the Honor player who is trying to convince the Emperor to call off the surrender. The game is played with each player having a set type of action cards with things like move, plot, force commit, attack and persuade. Each of these actions is used to move into position to influence key figures and generals to sway them to your side with the draw of random chits and event cards to overcome your opponents total influence of the figures.
It’s all very tense and planning is key as you only have a few turns of 4-5 card plays to sway the generals, find the recording to destroy it, pressure the emperor and take out resistance against you. It all works well to create a very interesting and thematic game. I was able to win the game by convincing several of the key generals to my side and then successfully moved the emperor. I ended with 11 total cubes or VP’s to 5 for Wes.
I also played 1 round of The Emperors Choice where players are moving 1 of 6 issues up a track to their side to score VP’s and to gain special abilities from the won issues to assist in their next turn.
Both are great fun and will be coming to Kickstarter in the 4th quarter.
I had a great time today and got in a total of 5 games. I’m a bit beat and my mind is mush but I’m really looking forward to tomorrow as we have a full 6-player game of Imperial Elegy from VUCA Simulations planned and a look at an upcoming WWI aerial dogfight game called Above the Trenches from Flying Pig Games.
I was supposed to wake up at 6:50am this morning but due to the fact that I was so excited to get going I actually woke up at 5:15 and was unable to get back to sleep. So I just got up and got ready early and was able to leave my house at 7:15, which was about 45 minutes earlier than I expected. Ultimately this was a good thing as it allowed me to drive a bit more leisurely and stop to go to the restroom and get more soda to keep me going. I drove 5 1/2 hours to the Pittsburgh Airport to pick up my friend Mike Heckman who had flown in from St. Louis. His flight left about 20 minutes later than scheduled but they must have made up some time as they arrived only 10 minutes past his scheduled arrival time.
I’m ready to get going.
It’s a bit lonely driving by myself but I had some good tunes and the time went quickly. It was nice though to have Mike in the car to chat and that made the final 90 miles to Seven Springs fly by. We arrived at the resort at around 3:30 and got checked in and unloaded the car and were in the room getting organized pretty quickly. We then tried to decide what game to start the convention with and I had brought For the People from GMT Games so we made our choice and headed down to the main gaming area.
It took us about 30 minutes to setup and get the rules overview done and we jumped right into it with the campaign game.
I own the 25th Anniversary Edition which is absolutely gorgeous with beautiful cover art done by Donal Hagerty and a double sided mounted map board with the original on one side and a redesigned map by Terry Leeds on the other.
If you don’t know, For the People is a Strategic level Card-Driven board-wargame covering the whole 4+ years of the American Civil War. We played 5 full turns in about 4 hours which included dinner, talking with several people and chatting about our experience with the game.
My initial opinion is that there is a lot to like here but the game is fairly rules-heavy and complex. I didn’t find the players aid all that helpful and we just seemed to bounce off of the rules. I also found that the strategy is very challenging, as would be expected with my first play of the game, and I had a great deal of trouble getting the required 3 Ops cards to activate my generals. In fact, in 5 turns I was only able to activate about 5 times. I just kept drawing a lot of 1 and 2 Ops cards.
This truly felt like the Union generals, especially McClellan, were afraid to be aggressive and this element is demonstrated by this friction and lack of lower activation Generals. Burnsides and Pope were my only early Generals with a 2 and they were able to do a bit more until Pope was killed in battle (of course). Through the game and its mechanics, I can see why Lincoln would get frustrated with their lack of aggression and ultimately would make leadership changes. Is this a prime example of design for effect? I think it actually felt historically well done but from a playability perspective makes it tough. Would reserve points be a good addition to this like in games such as Labyrinth where you can play a 1 Ops card to then later add to a 2 Ops card to get to 3? Just a thought I had that kept rolling through my head. I liked what I was doing but I didn’t like it while I was doing it. Does that make sense?
I will also say that the CSA generals are comparably much, much better and typically activate on 2’s which makes it much easier to do anything with them. I think that I just had bad luck but once the CSA got Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia was created he was literally a demolition crew annihilating my Union armies. In fact outside of 3 victorious battles, I lost about 7-8 times and was really getting rocked. The only real saving grace for me was that I drew the Frederick Douglas card in my first hand that gave me 5 Strength points of troops to place out to protect Washington from attacks. Had that card not been drawn I think that Washington might have fallen.
I very much enjoy the political control markers and the initial battle for control of the Border States of Kentucky, West Virginia and Missouri. This was a nice part of the game and I can see the connection between other games from Mark Herman such as Washington’s War.
Overall I want to explore the game more. I have some issues but I think that a few more plays will change my opinion as I learn the strategy. Overall a good intro to the game and I am intrigued.
We have an ongoing video series on our YouTube Channel called From Cover to Cover where we read a book on a subject and then pair that with a discussion of the book while covering a few games also on the subject. In this 14th entry in the series, Alexander takes a look at The Napoleonic Wars: A Global History by Alexander Mikaberidze. He then discusses a few games on the subject including Congress of Vienna from GMT Games, Imperial Struggle from GMT Games, Alliance from Columbia Games, Commands & Colors: Napoleonics from GMT Games and The Napoleonic Wars from GMT Games. amongst many others
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.
#87: Proletarian Revolution from The Republic’s Struggle: Battle for the Republic, Spain 1931-1939 from NAC Wargames
The Republic’s Struggle is a thematic Card Driven Game that tells the story of the historical events that took place in Spain after the resignation to the throne of King Alfonso XIII, and the proclamation of the II Spanish Republic in 1931. With the creation of the new regime, the struggle for power between the different social, political and ideological sectors increased, which gave rise to continuous changes of political power, alterations of public order, armed uprisings and violent acts, carried out by the numerous ideological factions of the moment; which culminated in 1936, in a failed military uprising. The failure of this coup d’état was the origin for the Spanish Civil War.
The Republic’s Struggle is based on Twilight Struggle from GMT Games and uses the same concepts of area control while adding in some actual combat with units represented on the board. During the game, the Republican player and the National player, will be able to recreate events of the period to increase their popularity in the localities by carrying out political propaganda, recruiting troops or militias, generating revolts or assaults, establishing diplomatic relations or carrying out bombardments. All this will be done by playing their hand of cards in an alternative way, either by using the events or by playing the action points or icons to perform any of the other actions available to the players.
One of the interesting parts of the design is that each player has what is referred to as a Special Card that is included in their hand from the start of the game and can be played during their turn. These cards don’t count towards the maximum number of cards that each player can have in their hand at the beginning of each turn. The 2 cards are Military Uprising, which is given to the Nationalist player and Proletarian Revolution, which is given to the Republican player. These cards are single-use event cards and can only be used during the first 4 turns of the game, or in other words during the period referred to as Phase 1 – The Republic. If, after this phase, these cards have not been played, they must be discarded and removed from the game. Both players can choose to use their Special Card in an Action round, instead of using one of the cards from their hand. These cards are played like the rest of the Operation Cards either using their Operations Value or applying the effects of the printed Event. Once played, the card will be removed from the game so it is use it or lose it.
Both cards are very powerful but have some fairly difficult criteria that must be met to fully realize the value of the printed Event. In the case of our featured card Proletarian Revolution, the top part of the card first gives the player the chance to downgrade the European Status Quo Track by 2 levels. The European Status Quo Track allows players to appeal to and in some ways manipulate the stance of the other European Nations regarding their view on the Spanish Civil War. It also is the determining factor in how Victory Points are awarded for the crucial Armed Actions aspect of the game. At the end of each turn, if the number of Armed Actions carried out by a player equals or exceeds the current level of the European Status Quo, that player will score 3 Victory Points. Also, as long as the European Status Quo Track is set on level 2, players cannot carryout any action using the Operations Points of cards played to advance in the Diplomatic Relations Track. So this is another tied result to the card as if the level is 1, no cards can be played to advance the Diplomatic Relations Track.
But, remember I said that to fully realize the effects of the card, the Republican player would need to control Barcelona, Madrid, Valencia and every Naval Base Location or every Air Base Location. If this is the case when the card is played, then the Republican player will earn an automatic victory. Frankly, this is next to impossible, but has a sliver of possibility depending on how diligent and attentive the Nationalist player is as well as the hand of cards that are drawn by the Republican player. If they draw certain other events, as well as have a hand full of higher Operations Point value cards, they can make a run at this but it is not necessarily recommended. The card also has a very useful secondary use as if the condition isn’t met, they will get to place out on the board 1 combatant cube, representing one of their combat units, and also remove all of the influence of the Nationalist player in the Catalonia and Valencia Regions. This literally means all of the Nationalist influence in these regions which each has several locations. In order for the card to be used in this manner though the Republican player will have had to previously play the Defense Committees card.
The proletarian revolution in the Spanish Civil War refers to the widespread social revolution that erupted in the summer of 1936. Triggered by the failed military coup of July 17, workers spontaneously armed themselves, taking control of factories, collectivizing agriculture, and establishing anti-fascist militias primarily in Catalonia, Aragon, and Andalusia. When General Francisco Franco and conservative military officers attempted to overthrow the democratically elected Second Spanish Republic, the working class retaliated by launching a massive wave of grassroots social reorganization. This proletarian movement aimed to permanently dismantle capitalist structures and the influence of the conservative elite and the Catholic Church.
In major industrial hubs like Barcelona, workers’ committees seized factories, transport networks, and public utilities, shifting control directly to the trade unions. In the countryside, particularly in the region of Aragon, peasants seized large agricultural estates. They abolished private property and reorganized land into self-sustaining collectives operating under libertarian socialist or communist principles. Instead of relying on a traditional military hierarchy, fighting forces were formed as democratic workers’ militias led by trade unions and political parties like the CNT (anarcho-syndicalist) and the POUM (Marxist).
The suppression of the revolutionary movement divided the Republican forces. Deprived of its radical grassroots momentum and lacking support from Western democracies, the Republican cause lost ground to Franco’s well-equipped Nationalist army (which was heavily backed by Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy). The Spanish Revolution was ultimately defeated in 1939, leading to the collapse of the Second Republic and the beginning of Franco’s 36-year dictatorship.
Here is a link to our full video review of the game:
In the next entry in this series, we will take a look at National American Woman Suffrage Association from Votes for Women from Fort Circle Games.
At the beginning of 1793, after the execution of King Louis XVI, France was drawn into a war against a coalition of most European monarchies. On 24 February, the National Convention decreed the mass draft of 300,000 men to defend the eastern borders. Throughout the country, revolts broke out against this conscription, everywhere they were brutally repressed with success. However, an insurgent territory, called the “Vendée Militaire” resisted. Determined to engage in a trial of strength with the new revolutionary regime, the Vendéens gradually organized themselves until they formed a “Catholic and Royal Army”.
Vendée 93, a card driven two player wargame, takes you back to this particularly epic period in the French history, which pitted the young French Republic against the Royalist insurgents from March to October 1793.
“White” or “Blue”, choose your cause and take command of your troops! “White”: you will have to take the advantage quickly at the risk of seeing the Republican forces inexorably strengthen, forcing you into a sinister “Virée de Galerne”. “Blues”: time is on your side, resist the first assaults of the “brigands” to then be able to face the hell of the bocage in order to definitively extinguish the insurrection.
While attending Buckeye Game Fest in spring 2024, we met with a new designer named John Lapham. John had with him a new game called A More Perfect Union and we got a chance to play the game and chat about it with him. A More Perfect Union is a 2-player card driven game that simulates the public debate over the ratification of the Constitution that took place across the United States from 1787-1789. The game uses the same system as Twilight Struggle and 1960: The Making of the President but felt very fresh and unique to the situation. Catastrophe Games is planning a Kickstarter campaign in the near future and we reached out to John to see about getting some more insight into the design and he was more than willing to share.
Grant: John welcome to our blog. First off please tell us a little about yourself. What are your hobbies? What’s your day job?
John: Thanks so much for having me, Grant. My main hobbies will surprise no one – gaming and history. I also enjoy hiking, cooking, and theater. As for my day job, that is in the past. I’m retired now. Before that, I had jobs in both the legal and educational professions.
Grant: What motivated you to break into game design? What have you enjoyed most about the experience thus far?
John: I wanted a game on this topic and no one else seemed willing to oblige me—although Jason Matthews and Christian Leonhard came close with Founding Fathers. I enjoyed the beginning and end of the experience. I love historical research and pondering messy interpretive narratives and historical hypotheticals. So, I was not surprised by how much I enjoyed the front end of the design process. What surprised me was how much I enjoyed the collaboration that occurred near the end of the project, and the practical and artistic challenges of turning an idea into an actual, physical game. I had no experience with that process and enjoyed learning about it.
Grant: What is your upcoming game A More Perfect Union about?
John: A More Perfect Union is about the political struggle to ratify the U.S. Constitution in the thirteen states from 1787-1789. The game employs the popular card-driven mechanics of such well-known games as Twilight Struggle and 1960: The Making of the President.
Grant: Why was this a subject that drew your interest?
John: It was the subject of some of my earliest graduate school research in the late 1980’s (yeah, don’t ask, I’ve been around the block more than a few times). As a history educator, I was drawn to less well-known stories, involving people and events that popular and school histories have neglected. This is one such story, and it is an important one that has enduring relevance for understanding much of American history and our current turbulent moment.
Grant: What is your design goal with the game?
John: I had two main goals. I wanted the game to offer a window into the history of that moment and to spark interest in the topic. I also wanted it to be a fun, tense game that could be played in a couple hours but with enough complexity and variability to invite repeated plays.
Grant: What from the Constitutional Convention was most important to model?
John: Ok, that’s a hard one. I cannot give you just one. Several things were important to me.
First, I wanted the game to capture the intense war of words that occurred in the nationwide debate. America was on the leading edge of the first wave of mass media made possible by high literacy rates and the printing press. Americans of the period were highly literate, avid consumers of news, and intensely interested in politics. Ninety different newspapers and hundreds of presses across the country printed thousands of essays, letters, and pamphlets over the course of the debate.
Second, I wanted the game to capture the importance of political strategy in terms of grabbing and holding onto the initiative in the debate through the scheduling of the thirteen state conventions, as well as exploiting the momentum gained from successful outcomes in those conventions.
Third, I wanted to express the tension and uncertainty felt by the delegates during the actual conventions themselves. Delegates often went into these conventions uncertain of their outcomes.
Finally, and perhaps most importantly, I wanted players to come away with an understanding of the immense challenges faced by the new nation to come together and form a strong union that did not threaten the individual liberty that Americans prized at this time. It is in large part the work of the Anti-Federalists that delivered the country its Bill of Rights, a fact that is perhaps too often overlooked or forgotten by modern Americans.
Grant: What sources did you consult about the details of the history? What one must read source would you recommend?
John: Tremendous digital resources are available on the ratification debate thanks to the phenomenal work done by the Center for the Study of the American Constitution at the University of Wisconsin-Madison (https://csac.history.wisc.edu/). I encourage anyone interested in this topic to explore their website and the treasure trove of material available there.
For a more curated collection of primary source material, the Library of America has published an excellent two-volume collection of many of the most important essays, speeches, newspaper articles, pamphlets, and private letters, The Debate on the Constitution, which also includes a detailed chronology and biographical information on the participants in the debates.
For a single, narrative history of the entire series of events, the best choice is Pauline Maier’s Ratification: The People Debate the Constitution, 1787-1788, published in 2010. Reading that book was the last nudge that I needed to start designing the game.
Grant: What is the goal of the game? How do players go about trying to sway States to their way of thinking?
John: Fortunately for me as a designer, the main goal of the game was set out for me in the Constitution itself, which required nine states to ratify it to become binding on those states. Thus, the Federalists win the game immediately if nine states ratify the constitution without recommended amendments, and conversely the Anti-Federalists need five state conventions to reject the Constitution to win immediately. If enough states thread the needle of compromise and ratify the Constitution with recommended amendments, then victory is determined by the weight of the states on each side of the ledger.
The primary tools to convince voters in the states are direct campaign efforts, which involve the use of the campaign points in particular states, and the play of publication events. Publication events address one of three broad sets of issues that animated the debate – commerce, states rights, and individual rights. Each state in turn has a rating that reflects how important each of those sets of issues is to its voters. As a result, the effect of a publication will be more or less, depending on the state in which it appears.
Grant: What is the layout of the board?
John: The board includes several broad features – a map of the thirteen states with a state information and holding box for each state, turn and round tracks, a convention track, a state status track, and a table of information.
Grant: What information is contained in each State Box?
John: Each State Box has a number that reflects the maximum number of combined player cubes that can be present in the state, icons showing if either player starts with cubes in the state, numerical ratings for each of the publication issues, the convention value, and the momentum value of the state, and a spot for the state’s status marker, which shows if the state has scheduled or held its convention. Finally, the state boxes are color coded to show the section of the card deck in which the state’s convention card is seeded.
Grant: What are the 5 different words and corresponding values in these boxes mean? How are these elements connected to the cards?
John: The words “Commerce, States, and Individual” relate to the three publication issues and the numbers (0,1, or 2) next to them reflects the effect that a publication on that issue will have in the state – either adding or removing that number of player cubes in the state. The word “Convention” refers to the convention value of the state and the number next to that is the number of campaign points (CP) a player must expend either to call an early convention in the state or to attempt to take control of the State Status Marker through legislative maneuvering. The word “Momentum” refers to the campaign bonus a player will earn if they win the state’s convention.
The issues ratings connect directly to the publication event cards. The Convention ratings connect to the expenditure of CP gained from card play. The Momentum rating does not connect to the cards but instead relates to the outcome of the convention in the state.
Grant: What is the purpose of the State Factors Table and the State Issues Table?
John: This table summarizes in one place the information contained in the individual State Boxes, and it groups the states by their color codes to show players when they will draw the State Convention Cards over the course of the game.
Grant: What is the Back Room? What role does this play in the game?
John: Each player has a Back Room in which they can place a maximum of two cards. Cards in the Back Room are not part of a player’s hand, cannot be played during a player’s action round, and are not discarded at the end of the turn. Players can access the cards in their Back Room at three times – (1) during the card draw phase of each turn, when they can freely remove or add cards to the Back Room, (2) at the start of any convention, when they can remove, but not add, cards from their Back Room, and (3) during an action phase by playing a card for the sole purpose of adding or removing cards from their Back Room.
The Back Room plays two main roles in the game: (1) it provides a means by which players can hold onto powerful events that are not yet ripe to play – often convention events for conventions that will happen on a future turn, and (2) it provides a way to avoid playing a strong opponent’s event at an inopportune time.
Grant: How does the game use cards?
John: This a classic Card-Driven-Game. Each player is dealt a hand of cards each turn and plays one card each round either to spend the Campaign Points provided by the card or to implement an event described on the card.
Grant: What different types of cards are there? What is the purpose of these different types?
John: There are five different types of cards: State Convention Cards, Publication Events, Convention Events, Reaction Events, and General Events.
Each state in the game has a State Convention Card, which are mandatory events that must be played in the turn in which they are drawn. They grant the player cubes in the state and control of the State Legislature, and they schedule the state’s convention by placing the state’s status marker on the Convention Track.
Publication Events publish and distribute a publication addressing a particular issue in a particular state that and a few of its neighbors. Most of these events will specify the state in which they originate and the issue that they address. A few allow the player to pick the state and/or issue for the publication.
Convention Events can be played for their event only during a convention and will have some effect on the outcome of that convention.
Reaction Events are played in response to some other game effect.
General Events are a catch-all for any other type of event.
Grant: Can you share a few examples of cards and explain their use?
John: Sure, here is an example of a State Convention Card:
Each state has one of these cards and they all work the same way.
These cards trigger the scheduling of State Conventions.
They must be played on the same turn they are drawn and cannot be discarded or placed in a player’s Back Room.
They are seeded in a particular quarter of the draw deck at the start of the game, as indicated by the colored banner in the upper right corner of the card.
When played, you move the indicated state’s Status Marker from the map to Box 1 on the Convention Track and mark it with a cube of your color. This represents that you are in control of the state legislature and can spend CP to call an early convention in this state on a later turn. In addition, you may add or remove 2 cubes in the state.
Here is an example of a Publication Event:
These are the most involved events in the game but like the State Convention Cards they all work the same way. So, once you’ve done it a few times, it becomes straightforward.
The red star identifies this card as an Anti-Federalist Event.
The “3” in the star shows that this card is worth 3 CP.
The newspaper icon under the star shows that this card is a publication event, as do the words in the white banner running along the left side of the card.
When played for the event, publications are distributed in a number of states equal to the CP value of the card. In this case, that means 3 states. The first state the publication must be distributed in is the state identified by the postal code in the title of the card. In this case, it must be distributed in Virginia. In addition, the publication may be distributed in twoadditional states that are adjacent to Virginia for a total of 3 states.
The issue addressed by this publication is individual rights, which is indicated in text at the bottom of the card. The issue controls how many cubes the player will add or remove from each state based on that issue’s value (from 0-2) in each state. The individual rights value in Virginia, Pennsylvania, and North Carolina is 2, but it is only 1 in Maryland. That means that this publication with add or remove 2 cubes in Virginia, Pennsylvania or North Carolina, but will only add or remove only 1 cube in Maryland.
Grant: What happens if you play an opponent’s event? What type of thinking and strategy does this create?
John: Generally, the event triggers, although the player gets to decide whether the event happens before or after they use the card for campaign points. There are two ways to mitigate powerful opponent events. They can be played during the Initiative Phase of the turn to bid for initiative without triggering the event, although doing so often reduces the player’s chance of winning the initiative for the turn, which is costly in its own right. They can also be stored in the player’s Back Room for possible play on a future turn when the event might be less damaging. This too is costly as the Back Room can hold only two cards and those spaces can also be used to save your own events for a future turn when they will be more effective. Thematically, in both instances you are spending time and energy managing a potential problem rather than advancing your own agenda.
Grant: What is the general Sequence of Play?
John: Each turn has the following phases:
Card Draw – Slightly more involved than a standard CDG because each turn you can change the cards in your backroom, which is often a challenging decision.
Initiative Phase – This phase sets the initiative and the first player for the turn.
Action Phase – The heart of the game when players alternate playing cards from their hands.
Convention Phase – State Conventions are resolved or move closer to resolution.
Voter Apathy Phase – Some voters lose interest and players remove some cubes from the map.
Grant: What is a Convention and how does it work? What is the outcome of this process?
John: A Convention is when a state makes its final decision as to whether it will ratify the Constitution. Thematically, this is the moment that elected delegates meet, debate, and vote on the Constitution. To model the drama of these events, players have a final opportunity to play cards that can affect the outcome. After that, the player’s cube totals in the state are compared. If the Federalists have the most cubes, the state ratifies the Constitution. If the Antifederalists have the most, the state does not ratify. If the two factions have an equal number of cubes, the state ratifies with recommended amendments.
Grant: How does Campaigning work?
John: Each state has a set number of voters. This number puts a cap on the number of combined player cubes that may be placed in that state. Players can think of it this way: the voters in each state can have one of three states of mind – undecided, Federalist, or Antifederalist. At the start of the game, most voters are still undecided, which is reflected by the fact that only a few cubes are placed on the board during setup. Campaigning involves the expenditure of Campaign Points (CP) to persuade these votes to change their mind, represented by placing or removing cubes in the states. It costs 1 CP to place a cube in a state. It costs 2 CP to remove a cube from a state. If a state is already at its cube limit, the player will first have to spend points to remove an opponent’s cube before they can place their own cube. Thus, to replace an opponent’s cube with one of your own costs 3 CP. Cards range in CP from 1-4. So many cards will not grant the player enough CP to replace an opponent’s cube with one of their own.
Grant: How is victory achieved?
John: The Federalists gain an immediate victory if nine states ratify the Constitution without amendments. Conversely, the Antifederalists win if five states reject the Constitution. If neither player achieves these conditions before the end of the final turn of the game, at least one state has ratified the Constitution with recommended amendments. Victory at that point is determined by comparing the values of the states in each section of the State Status Track. Each state has a value that represents its political and economic importance – the larger the state the more it is worth. Each player gets full credit for each of the states in their column and the Antifederalists get partial credit (the Convention value) for each state that ratified with recommended amendments. Thematically, this represents a compromise situation, where the Constitution is ratified but with amendments. The stronger the opposition to the original Constitution, the more impactful those amendments will be. Strong amendments represent a partial victory for the Antifederalists. Historically, the Antifederalists efforts resulted in the adoption of the first ten amendments to the Constitution, including the Bill of Rights.
Grant: Which side has the tougher challenge to meet their goal?
John: The challenges faced by the two sides are different, but I hope they are roughly equal in difficulty.
Grant: What are some basic strategies the Federalist and the Anti-Federalist players?
John: The Federalists need to strive to win states quickly and build on that early momentum. They may need to consider making aggressive moves early in the game to take states off the board. They also must stay competitive is as many states as possible. They can only afford to lose four states, and the deck is stacked against them in two states – North Carolina and Rhode Island. The Antifederalist player has a wider range of strategic choices. They can focus on winning outright victory in one or two of the early states in an effort to reach the five states they need for an automatic victory, or they can build up their strength in several of the more valuable states that hold their conventions later in the game and improve their chances of winning the game on the basis of points at the end of the game. They cannot afford to compete with the Federalists in every state. They need to pick their battles carefully.
Grant: What type of an experience does the game create?
John: My hope is that it offers players challenging strategic and tactical decisions and creates dramatic moments of high tension where careful planning or bold action can alter the course of the game.
Grant: What are you most pleased about with the design?
John: Overall, I am pleased with the way it models the challenges and choices faced by the historical actors. With respect to the game play, I particularly like the Initiative, Back Room, and Convention mechanisms.
Grant: What other designs are you working on?
John: I’m working on a four-player game about the labor movement in Chicago, during the late 19th-century, and a solitaire game about the Civil War in which the player takes on the role of Lincoln and has to prosecute the war as commander-in-chief, while also navigating the challenges of domestic policy and political campaigning.
While attending Buckeye Game Fest in spring 2024, we met John Lapham and shot a video interview discussing the game and its mechanics:
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.
#85: Hydraulic Recoil from Imperial Elegy: The Road to the Great War 1850-1920 from VUCA Simulations
Imperial Elegy: The Road to the Great War 1850-1920 is a massive card driven game that blends diplomacy, warfare, and statecraft and feels a bit akin to games like Here I Stand and Virgin Queen from GMT Games, which are both grand scale sweeping epics that play multiplayers and take a day to play. Players play as 1 of 6 major powers in the game including Germany/Prussia, the United Kingdom, France, Austria-Hungary, Russia and the Ottoman Empire. The game is quite grand and ambitious as it covers 70 years near the end of the Victorian Era and the Progressive Ear and sees quite a lot of global change and competition between the great powers of the time. The game is a Card Driven Game and uses Action Cards as a type of currency to spend for their Command Points or the printed event to take actions such as recruiting armies and navies, industrialize, moving fleets and armies around the globe, influencing minor powers and establish colonies in Africa, India and the Pacific Ocean. The cards are all tied to the history of the period but the game can be played very much as a sandbox allowing players to explore strategies by trailblazing new horizons or following history.
As you might imagine, the game contains combat and wars of both unification and conquest as each of these empires attempt to grow and expand their borders and the game can end with the outbreak of the Great War. These combats are referred to as Land Battles or Sea Battles. Combat is a very well designed part of the game and involves lots of maneuvering of troops on the board to get into position to have a powerful 2 unit stack be the lead attack but also to be supported by adjacent armies providing strength in the land battle. Each nation has a limited number of armies and also has access to what are referred to as Elite Corps and Expeditionary Forces that can be used to supplement goals of conquest. These Elite Corps units are represented by circular counters and are placed atop an army counter they are attached to and provide a +1 Dice Roll Modifier in combat.
When the game hits the 1880’s, which is turn 4, the Hydraulic Recoil Mandatory Event Card will be added to the deck. When this card is drawn and played, the Mandatory Event will go off and become a permanent change to how combat works. First off, the asterisk and double asterisk printed on the Combat Results Table will now be in effect. The asterisks referenced are summarized as follows from the rules:
Only apply the * and ** portions of the combat results if the Hydraulic Recoil Mandatory Event has been played. *The victor may opt to inflict +1 loss to both sides. ** Both sides take +1 loss.
But other than just the additional losses and choices about how best to use them, there are other big changes that come as a result of the Hydraulic Recoil Mandatory Event. After its play, machine guns give non-rebel units a minimum die roll of a 3 in Land Battles (in other words, rolls of 1 or 2 are now 3’s). But also anytime an Elite Corps and its +1 DRM is used in a land battle, that unit will be eliminated. This automatic elimination cannot be taken as a loss inflicted by the CRT but is in addition to those losses. Big guns equipped with new hydraulic recoil mechanisms were, by far, the number one killer during the Great War, and machine guns made most pre-war tactics obsolete. Coupled together these two technologies made combat much more deadly and far less “swingy”. These mechanics are meant to model these technological shifts on a strategic level.
The hydraulic recoil mechanism in machine guns was pioneered by inventor Sir Hiram Stevens Maxim in the 1880’s. He developed it as part of his 1883 and 1884 patents for the world’s first fully automatic, recoil-operated machine gun called the Maxim gun. The Maxim gun has been called “the weapon most associated with imperial conquest” by historian Martin Gilbert and was heavily used by colonial powers during the “Scramble for Africa”. Afterwards, Maxim guns also saw extensive usage by different armies during the Russo-Japanese War, the First and Second World Wars, as well as in contemporary conflicts.
The Maxim gun featured one of the earliest recoil-operated firing systems in history. Energy from recoil acting on the breech block is used to eject each spent cartridge and insert the next one. Maxim’s earliest designs used a 360-degree rotating cam to reverse the movement of the block, but this was later simplified to a toggle lock. This made it vastly more efficient and less labor-intensive than previous manually operated rapid-firing guns, such as the manually cranked Mitrailleuse of 1851, the Gatling gun of 1861, the Gardner gun of 1874, or the Nordenfelt gun of 1873. The Maxim gun is water cooled, allowing it to sustain its rate of fire far longer than air-cooled guns. The extra weight and complexity this added, however, made it heavier and less flexible in use.
Trials demonstrated that the Maxim can fire 600 rounds per minute (equal to 60 riflemen at the time). Compared to modern machine guns, the Maxim is heavy, bulky, and awkward. A lone soldier can fire the weapon, but it was usually operated by a team of men, usually 4 to 6 in number. Apart from the gunner, other crew are needed to speed reload, spot targets, and carry and ready ammunition and water. Several men are needed to move or mount the heavy weapon.
The Maxim gun was greatly influential in the development of other machine guns, and it has multiple variants and derivatives, such as the Vickers, PM M1910 and MG 08. Some are still in service to the present-day, such as in the Russo-Ukrainian War.
Time of Wars: Eastern Europe 1590-1660 from Stratagemata is a multiplayer card driven game that is modeled after games like Here I Stand and Virgin Queen. Players take on the role of the head of superpowers in Eastern Europe including the Polish, the Lithuanian Commonwealth, the Tsardom of Russia, the Ottoman Empire, the Kingdom of Sweden and the Holy Roman Empire. Minor states are also present such as Denmark, Brandenburg, Moldova, Wallachia, Transylvania and Crimean Khanate.
The game covers the turn of the 16th and 17th centuries. The period was rich in famous characters (rulers and commanders) and critical events – for example the Time of Troubles in the Tsardom, the Thirty Years War in the Reich, Swedish “Deluge” in the Commonwealth. All these and much more are smoothly incorporated into gameplay.
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.
#84: Marconi Transmitter from The Hunt from Salt & Pepper Games
I have played several hidden movement games over the years and enjoyed them all. Some of these titles have included wargames such as They Come Unseen from Osprey Games, Sniper Elite: The Board Game from Rebellion Unplugged and Bomber Command from GMT Games as well as a few board games including Hunt for the Ring from Ares Games. The concept of moving cautiously, attempting to evade pursuers, all while trying to locate and acquire or destroy objectives makes for a very interesting gaming experience. These situations can make for some really tense games that cause your head to ache and your wits to be tested. But they rely on some bluffing as well. Trying to force your opponent to anticipate where they think you should be and then trying not to be there. A really great mechanic in board games but not always easy to pull off and make for a very playable and interesting game. In 2022, we played a new design from Matthias Cramer and Engin Kunter that took this hidden movement concept and put it into a historically based game about the struggle over control of the South Atlantic between the British Royal Navy and the German Kriegsmarine during the early years of World War II called The Hunt from Salt & Pepper Games.
The Hunt is a Card Driven Game where the German player has to attempt to stay hidden while trying to sink merchant shipping as the Royal Navy hunts for them throughout the South Atlantic. The players each have asymmetric actions to use to accomplish their missions and each has a tough time doing what they have to do. But, if they manage their cards wisely, using them as effectively as possible, they can successfully either evade their pursuer or catch their prey.
In today’s post, we will take a look at the very useful German card Marconi Transmitter. Marconi Transmitter is a 5 Ops card, which makes it a very important card in the German deck as it allows for the taking of 2-3 actions in a single turn, but for which there is an even more important use as a means of setting yourself up for that easy score to sink a merchant vessel. In the game, the British have multiple Task Forces that will search the South Atlantic for the Graf Spee attempting to find her, engage her and sink her to the bottom. As a Hidden Movement game, the German player has surprise on their side and must use tactics that manipulate and change things for the British player making their searches much more difficult and time consuming. The Marconi Transmitter allows the German player to move a British Task Force up to 3 hexes away and then to choose a Freight Ship and then place that ship back onto its starting location on the board. This card has the ability to clear the way of enemy ships searching for the Graf Spee but then follows that up with the relocation of an unsuspecting Freight Ship to place it within striking distance of the pocket battleship for an easy kill. I just love these kind of cards that manipulate things and provide means to change up the current situation.
Marconi transmitters were pioneering early radio devices developed by Guglielmo Marconi in the late 1890’s. Primarily consisting of spark-gap transmitters, they generated radio waves that allowed ships and continents to communicate via Morse code without wires, paving the way for modern broadcasting and other telecommunications. This advancement was used by the Allies to hunt for the Graf Spee in the South Atlantic and caused the German pocket battleship to change some of its operating procedures. The Admiral Graf Spee did not elude the Marconi radio transmitters through electronic jamming. Instead, her commanding captain, Hans Langsdorff, successfully evaded Allied interception by using strict radio silence and executing aggressive threats to ensure merchant vessels never broadcasted their distress calls.
When the Graf Spee intercepted a merchant ship, she used her speed and imposing silhouette to intercept before a signal could be sent. The standard British raider defense was to use their Marconi-equipped transmitters to call for help. However, as soon as a merchant ship began transmitting a warning, the Graf Spee would flash a signal demanding they cease transmission immediately, threatening to open fire with her devastating main armament. Outgunned and at the mercy of the German ship, the merchant crews complied, shutting off their wireless.
Because the Graf Spee traveled thousands of miles across the remote South Atlantic and Indian oceans, she remained unseen by simply avoiding the heavy shipping lanes. Captain Langsdorff further deceived Allied forces by utilizing visual camouflage. By attaching fake turrets and a dummy funnel, and flying false colors, he bypassed merchant shipping unmolested while maintaining strict radio silence to keep his location hidden.
Here is a link to our full video review of the game:
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.
#83: British Leader Wellington 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 British Leader Wellington card. The Wellington card is the most powerful British military asset available and the British player should work hard to make sure that they get the card either by luck of the draw or by attempting to trade cards with other players. The major benefit of the card is during the War Phase, as it provides multiple benefits that can make combat much easier for the British. The bottom part of the card gives a boost during combat by granting an impressive +4 DRM in battles or to make the French have a -5 DRM. This is a very important decision and will mainly come into play to ensure losses are greater for the French or to make sure that a battle can we won. The combat benefit can only be used in the Portugal or Mediterranean Fronts but that is fine as this is where a majority of the British military actions will occur. But even more important than the DRM’s is the re-roll of the combat dice for the British. The other part of the combat benefit shown on the card is that the British player will get to roll 2d6 twice and then select the highest result during battles, greatly mitigating their risks of rolling poorly. Just a very powerful card for battles and I would definitely recommend its use in this fashion.
But, the top part of the card is also very important, particularly in the early part of the game, as when the card is used to move a British Recruitment, Financial Aid or Military Op Issue at the negotiating table they will gain a 1 SP unit that can be placed in the future into Fronts. This extra unit recruitment allows the British to slowly build up their forces without having to solely focus on choosing Recruitment Issues. This gives them the opportunity to focus on other Issues which can be very beneficial and give them a more well rounded approach.
Field Marshal Arthur Wellesley, 1st Duke of Wellington was a British Army officer and statesman who was one of the leading military and political figures in Britain during the early 19th century, twice serving as Prime Minister. He was one of the British commanders who ended the Anglo-Mysore wars by defeating Tipu Sultan in 1799, and was among those generals who ended the Napoleonic Wars in a major Coalition victory when the Seventh Coalition defeated Napoleon at the Battle of Waterloo in 1815.
Wellesley was born into a Protestant Ascendancy family in Dublin, in the Kingdom of Ireland. He was commissioned as an ensign in the British Army in 1787, serving in Ireland as aide-de-camp to 2 successive lords lieutenant of Ireland. He was also elected as a member of Parliament in the Irish House of Commons. Rising to the rank of colonel by 1796, Wellesley served in the Flanders campaign before being sent to India, where he fought in the Fourth Anglo-Mysore War, ending the conflict with a victory at Seringapatam in 1799. He was appointed governor of Seringapatam and Mysore and, as a newly appointed major general, won a decisive victory over the Maratha Confederacy at the Battle of Assaye in 1803.
Rising to prominence as a general officer during the Peninsular War, Wellesley was promoted to field marshal after leading British-led forces to victory against a French army at the Battle of Vitoria in 1813. Following Napoleon’s first exile in 1814, he served as the British ambassador to France and was made Duke of Wellington. During the Hundred Days campaign in 1815, Wellington commanded another British-led army which, together with a Prussian army under Field Marshal Gebhard von Blücher defeated Napoleon at Waterloo.
After the end of his active military career, Wellington returned to politics, becoming a prominent member of the British Tory party. He served as prime minister from 1828 to 1830, as well as on an interim basis for a little less than a month in 1834. Wellington oversaw the passage of the Roman Catholic Relief Act 1829 and opposed the Reform Act 1832. He continued to be one of the leading figures in the House of Lords until his retirement in 1846 and remained Commander-in-Chief of the Forces until his death in 1852.
Portrait of the Duke of Wellington by Sir Thomas Lawrence, c. 1815–1816.
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:
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.
#82: Good Omens 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 our first Barbarian Card from the game, as almost all of these cards are really bad for the player, called Good Omens. The “Good” portion of the card’s name doesn’t refer to the Romans but is a benefit for the Barbarians. This card can undo the hard fought victories of Marcus Aurelius and his commanders as its effect is immediate and cannot be cancelled like a Barbarian Surge effect can be by discarding a card. The Good Omens Barbarian Card will immediately cause the player to flip all of the Barbarian armies to their Bold side. Well that doesn’t sound so bad you say? Well, remember that each of the Barbarian army counters is double sided with one side being their Bold side and the other their Demoralized side. On their Bold side, the army is at its strongest with its Combat Value being higher than on the Demoralized side. In our pictures, you can see that the Iazyges army counter has a 4 Combat Value on its Bold side while the Combat Value on the Demoralized side is 2 less at just 2 Combat Value. During combat, or even due to some of the events on the Roman Cards, if a Roman army defeats a Barbarian army, their counter will be flipped from their Bold side to their Demoralized side and they will also have to retreat backward 1 space. I know that the difference here is only 2 but that is in essence gaining a +2 to the Barbarians Combat Value and in a game where the differences between the 2 armies can be just 1 or 2 or even no difference at all, this makes a huge difference and can sometimes feel like you are having to climb a mountain to overcome these Barbarian foes.
Ancient peoples believed deeply in their gods and traditions and would watch for signs in the heavens or from other sources when making key decisions about many things including military campaigns. Good omens would be seen positively as they believed that their decision was favored by the gods and that they would have a good outcome. The Romans believed these things as well but unlike the highly structured Romans, who read omens by sacrificing animals or watching birds fly, barbarian armies like the Germans and Celts relied on signs from nature or even from dreams. These signs when seen would boost morale and gave tribes the psychological edge they needed to fight the powerful armies of the Romans. Germanic tribes believed sacred groves and rivers were portals to their gods and if they were fighting near these places they would take greater strength. Weather was also seen as a major sign and roaring winds, dark storms or rivers that suddenly flooded were viewed as the gods fighting on their side.
The most famous “omen” came from the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest in 9 AD, which occurred over 100 years before the events of the game. A fierce storm, combined with the clever planning of the Germanic leader Arminius, allowed Germanic tribes to completely trap and wipe out 3 Roman legions. The Romans viewed the loss of their legionary eagles and this devastating defeat as a terrible omen for their empire’s future.
Hermann (Arminius) at the Battle of the Teutoburg Forest in 9 AD by Peter Janssen.
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:
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.
#81: Baron von Steuben Trains the Continental Army from Washington’s War from GMT Games
Washington’s War is a war game, make no mistake about that. But, it is virtually impossible to win the game by focusing only on the field of battle. For that to happen, the Patriots need to completely drive the British forces out of the 13 colonies or the British need to wipe the American forces off the map. Both are extremely difficult and I would be surprised if any more than 1 out of 30 games ended in such a way. Rather, the ultimate goal of the game is to have political control of the colonies. If at the end of the game the Patriots control 7 colonies, while holding the British to control of less than 5, they win. If not, the British win. Simple as that. So, you can see that battle is not the main goal but control is. And more importantly political control.
I really like this about the design and feel that the real core of the American Revolution was the groundswell of patriotism and the desire to live free from the shackles of an overseas monarch who cared little for the American way of life. This desire led great men of the time to sacrifice themselves, their livelihood and their families to further the true cause of liberty and build a truly free and democratic nation where individual liberty and freedom was prioritized over anything else. And yes, I realize that this nation was not perfect, not without contradiction but the concept of liberty helped to form a country that would lead to the ultimate freedom of all people.
Washington’s War is a Card Driven Game, and as such, relies on cards to provide to players the actions needed to play the game. The cards contain OPS Points which can be used to drive various actions, including such things as activating leaders, who in turn will then move with forces to attack, and also contain written text in the form of events. These events can be played only by the side they are intended for and if drawn and played by the opposing side, they can only be thrown away while granting a few possible actions, such as placing or removing Political Control markers.
In today’s entry, I have chosen this card to showcase one of my favorite events from the history of the American Revolution. The card for today is called Baron von Steuben Trains the Continental Army and has a dual focus. It will add Combat Units or CU’s to go along with General Washington but most importantly changes the balance of the game for battles. The card text reads “May be played by the American player in any Strategy Phase. He immediately places two CU’s with George Washington. The British Regulars’ Advantage combat DRM is permanently lost”. Now don’t get me wrong, gaining a free injection of 2 CU’s worth of fighting forces is a nice bonus for the Patriots but the real benefit of the card is that it changes the game. At the start of the game, the British receive a +1 Dice Roll Modifier (DRM) in all battles until what is called the British Regulars’ Advantage is lost. The British Regulars’ Advantage will be lost immediately if the British lose 3 or more CU’s in a single battle and of course, the British may also lose the British Regulars’ Advantage as a result of the play of this card. I very much like this card and it is very important for the hopes of the rebellion. I have found that the +1 DRM is really difficult to overcome for the Patriots and I found that my hopes in combat at the beginning of the game are almost always a 50/50 proposition. But once this card is played, that changes and I feel like the Patriots can better go on the offensive and openly hunt down and attack the British with confidence.
I have always been impressed with the Patriot effort to bring in professional soldiers from Europe to assist them in training and leading the Continental forces. Names like Marquis de Lafayette (France), Baron von Steuben (Prussia), Casimir Pulaski (Poland), Tadeusz Kościuszko (Poland) and Baron de Kalb (Bavaria) to name just a few. These European Generals had experience and knowledge, which were commodities that the Patriots didn’t have a lot of.
Friedrich Wilhelm August Heinrich Ferdinand Fresher von Steuben was a Prussian-born army officer who played a leading role in the American Revolutionary War by reforming the Continental Army into a disciplined and professional fighting force. His contributions marked a significant improvement in the performance of Patriot troops and he is consequently regarded as one of the fathers of the United States Army.
Born into a military family, Steuben was exposed to war from an early age; at 14 years old, he observed his father directing Prussian engineers in the 1742 siege of Prague. At age 16 or 17, he enlisted in the Prussian Army, which was considered the most professional and disciplined in Europe. During his 17 years of military service, Steuben took part in several battles in the Seven Years’ War, rose to the rank of captain, and became aide-de-camp to King Frederick II of Prussia, who was renowned for his military prowess and strategy. Steuben’s career culminated in his attendance at Frederick’s elite school for young military officers, after which he was abruptly discharged from the army in 1763, allegedly by the machinations of a rival.
In 1775, as the American Revolution had begun, Steuben saw a reduction in his salary and sought some form of military work; unable to find employment in peacetime Europe, he joined the Patriot war effort through mutual French contacts with American diplomats, most notably ambassadors to France being Silas Deane and Benjamin Franklin. Due to his military exploits in Europe, and his willingness to serve the Americans without compensation, Steuben made a positive impression on both Congress and General George Washington, who appointed him as temporary Inspector General of the Continental Army.
Appalled by the state of Continental forces, Steuben took the lead in teaching soldiers the essentials of military drills, tactics, and discipline based on Prussian techniques. He wrote Regulations for the Order and Discipline of the Troops of the United States, which remained the army’s drill manual for decades, and continues to influence modern U.S. army manuals. Steuben also addressed widespread administrative waste and graft, helping save desperately needed supplies and funds. As these reforms began bearing fruit on the battlefield, in 1778, on Washington’s recommendation, Congress commissioned Steuben to the position of Inspector General with the rank of major general. He served the remainder of the war as Washington’s chief of staff and one of his most trusted advisors.
Baron von Steuben drilling American recruits at Valley Forge in 1778 by Edwin Austin Abbey.
According to Peter Stephen Du Ponceau, Steuben’s personal secretary and interpreter, “The Baron loved to speak of…his sansculottes (radical partisans, urban laborers, and common people of the lower classes during the French Revolution), as he called us. Thus the denomination was first invented in America…when, it could not be foreseen, that the name which honoured the followers of Washington would afterwards be assumed by the satellites of a Marat and a Robespierre”.
After the war, Steuben was made a U.S. citizen and granted a large estate in New York in reward for his service. In 1780, he was elected a member of the American Philosophical Society, a learned society that included many of the nation’s most prominent Founding Fathers.
Here is a link to our full video review of the game:
While attending Buckeye Game Fest this spring, we were gifted a copy of a newly published game called And the War Came: American Civil War 1861-1865 from Pinkerton Games, which is published by Blue Panther LLC and Steve Jones. The designer and owner of Pinkerton Games Larry Pinkerton had been their earlier but had to leave due to some other pressing business and we were unable to meet but were very grateful for the game. Upon returning home, I reached out to Larry to see if he would give us a bit of an inside look at the design and he was more than willing to discuss the game.
Grant: Larry welcome to our blog. First off please tell us a little about yourself. What are your hobbies? What’s your day job?
Larry: Grant and Alex, first, thanks for the opportunity to tell you about myself, and my game, And The War Came. I’m a lifelong resident of southwest Ohio, from the Dayton area. I’ve got three great adult kids, each working on their families and/or careers. I’m now retired from both my civilian job, and my almost 34 years as a traditional Ohio National Guard member-last duty assignment as an Air Defense Brigade Commander-so now more time for hobbies.
Now that And The War Came is finally done, I enjoy hanging with my kids, playing music, and traveling. I still do part time contract work in support of US Army training events, which I enjoy as well. And I hope to find more time for playing other wargames too!
Grant: What motivated you to break into game design? What have you enjoyed most about the experience thus far?
Larry: I’ve always been interested in the American Civil War, and many years ago it came to me that a block style game and a strategic level treatment of that war would make a great game-one that didn’t really seem to be available, at least for what I was looking for. I’ve really enjoyed developing the game, adopting, changing or dropping processes, seeking to get at the right balance of playability, workable mechanics and good history. It took a while, but I’m happy with the results.
Grant: What is your upcoming game And the War Came about?
Larry:And the War Came is a strategic level American Civil War game, focused on the southeastern United States. It started life as a block game, but when I decided to self-publish, I switched to rotatable counters due to cost. But play is similar-it’s area movement and card driven, so those familiar with Columbia style block games will recognize some of the mechanics.
Grant: What does the title mean in relation to the history of the American Civil War?
Larry: I bounced so many title ideas and finally settled on And The War Came, which is a sentence in Lincoln’s 2nd inaugural address (March 4, 1865). I felt that line summarized how the United States stumbled and staggered into civil war. And the wonderful Carte de Visite Collection images from the US Library of Congress I chose for the game box spotlight who the actual participants really were.
Grant: What games gave you inspiration for your design?
Larry: Columbia Game’s Hammer of the Scots and Victory Game’s The Civil War 1861-1865 were by far the strongest influences.
Grant: What is important to model or include in a game about the American Civil War?
Larry: Above all, I think it is leaders and leadership at the corps and army level. Any discussion of ACW campaigns seems to hit on the “what ifs” of senior leaders. There were simply so many generals I could have chosen to model in the game, but I finally settled on 22 Union and 19 Confederate leaders that did or could have risen to army or independent command. The formations on both sides were so similar, in my opinion it was the leadership that was truly decisive.
Grant: What challenges did you encounter in the design? How have you overcome them?
Larry: Wow, there were a lot; game flow, simple but historically accurate mechanics, relative strength and play balance, rail and naval capacity, re-playability, map scale-all had to be refined through trial and error, playtesting and compromise. And countless rulebook edits! Rules concepts I thought made perfect sense in my head and on the page drew several questions when reviewed by others. But I think it’s a pretty good final product.
Grant: What is the scale of the game? Force structure of units?
Larry: Regional area movement, and seasonal turns, representing three months. The map is bounded by eastern Kansas to eastern Texas on the western edge, New Jersey to northern Florida along the Atlantic Coast, lower Midwest on the northern edge, and Gulf of Mexico on the southern. Most states contain 4 to 10 areas-states with better road networks tend to have less areas. But there is more territory than units to control it. Fortress cities (i.e. Washington, D.C.), major railroads, navigable rivers, and mountains and swamp areas are also portrayed on the map. Rail and naval support capacity change each year.
Units represent infantry or cavalry corps, with a strength of from 1 to 4 divisions, or forts representing 1 to 4 installations. Unit count is: Union-33 Infantry counters, 10 Cavalry counters, 5 Fort counters, Confederate-26 Infantry counters, 8 Cavalry counters, 8 Fort counters.
Grant: What is the counter anatomy?
Larry: Very straightforward if familiar with Columbia style block wargames-a mechanic I have always admired for simple and clean fog of war, step reduction, and ranged or initiative combat. \Counters are square with strength point symbols (divisions) arrayed along each edge, plus movement and combat ratings. Infantry has a combat value of C2 with a move allowance of 1. Cavalry has a combat value of B1 with a move allowance of 3. Forts have a combat value of A1 with a move allowance of 0-they are stationary. There are also corps insignia (Union) or battle flags (Confederate) just to add historical flavor, and the branch insignia of the period for infantry, cavalry or forts. Ultimately, I chose to give similar units of both sides the same combat or movement ratings (since both Union and Confederate formations grew from the same organizational foundations and traditions), but those ratings can be modified by the leaders who command them, both at corps and army levels, and/or the battlefield terrain.
Grant: What does it mean the “game is We Go turn based”?
Larry: Most functions are conducted by both players at the same time. For example, in the Administration Step, both players recruit (buy) their new units/strength points, enter new or recovered from wounds generals, or administratively move/transfer generals already on the map to new assignments/commands. When both players are done, they go to the next step, (Operations), with Action Phases where each plays a card to determine who moves first, they complete their moves and then resolve any battles that result from movement. The Logistics Step and Victory check complete a turn.
Grant: What type of experience does this approach create?
Larry: It minimizes down time for one. Actions in the Administration Step, Operations Step, Logistics Step happen simultaneously. Only in the Operations Steps’ Action Phase (or depending on the season, phases) does movement happen sequentially. This limits the action/reaction dynamic to operations, where maneuver happens in small chunks due to the seasonal card play. Neither side is able to make big sweeping moves, while the other side can only watch-the mechanic enables campaigns like Gettysburg or Vicksburg, although they may not necessarily occur during the course of play.
Grant: How does the game use cards?
Larry: Cards list the number of “orders” you can issue to units in order to conduct movement or other actions. There are also cards with both events and orders where players must choose which to use. And most cards have a bonus action (improved combat, movement, or leader promotion) to spice things up. The season determines the number of cards each player receives that turn. The Winter season/turn, each player receives only one card-in the single Action Phase, each player compares their card to the other player’s to determine who moves first (initiative), then second, then resolve any combats. This makes for a short turn. In both Spring and Fall seasonal turns, players receive two cards each, then play their cards against each other in each of the two Actions Phases, conducting moves and combat. In the Summer seasonal turn, three cards are dealt to each player-thus there are three Action Phases that turn.
Grant: What type of cards are included? Can you share a few examples?
Larry: There are 30 cards in the common game deck (there are not separate unique decks for Union or Confederate players). The deck includes 22 orders cards, each card with a value of 1, 2, 3, 4 or 5 orders. The orders determine how many units (corps) or commands (see Leaders below) can be moved with that card-a card with only one order allows the movement of only one unit, etc. Orders can also be used to promote generals or repair rail roads, etc. Again, most, but not all of these 22 cards also have a bonus that improves movement, or combat for a unit, or gives a free general promotion.
There are also 8 cards that include a combination of orders and events such as blockade impacts, partisan activities, native uprisings, surprise attacks, diplomatic incidents, immigrant or native recruits, or spy activity-each event with favorable impacts for themselves, or negative impacts for the opposing player. I chose for the event cards to be generic in nature and usable for both sides, verses specific events (i.e. Trent Affair) scripted events. For these 8 cards, players have the option to play the event and still have two orders to move other units, or not play the event at all, and have all three orders for movement.
The entire deck is reshuffled at the start of a new year. Since each player only receives 8 cards in a four season/turn year, only 16 of the 30 cards are played each year-some cards may not get played during the entire war, while others may reappear several times.
Grant: How does combat work?
Larry: Again, similar to other Columbia style block games.
Paraphrased from the rulebook:
Units Fire or Retreat in a combat round. The sequence of combat is A class units fire/retreat first, before B class units, followed by C class units which fire/retreat last. If both sides units are the same class, the defender has the advantage, and fire/retreat before attacking units of the same class. A general’s initiative rating may change who has the first shot advantage. To Fire, roll as many dice as the unit’s current strength points (SP). A hit occurs for each die roll equal to, or less than the unit’s combat number rating. Hits on the enemy take effect as they happen, each hit immediately reducing the enemy unit strength point count by one. Say a 3 division (SP) infantry corps has a combat rating of C2-that corps rolls 3D6 dice and every “1” or “2” rolled is a hit, reducing enemy strength and effectiveness when returning fire. In a battle between a B1 cavalry unit and a C2 infantry unit, the B1 rolls first, but only scores a hit for each 1 rolled. The C2 rolls second and scores a hit for each 1 or 2 rolled. One round of combat is complete when each unit fires or retreats.
Some unit strength may be recovered at the end of combat if the unit is not destroyed-with this recovery rule I’m trying to account for after the battle return to duty wounded, stragglers, local prisoner exchanges, etc. I was aiming for about 20% casualty rates in combat.
Grant: How do Leaders work? How are they killed or wounded?
Larry: Leaders are used to command corps or armies (units under the command of a general are actually called “commands”, i.e. Sherman’s command). A leader imparts his initiative (A, B, or C class) and tactical ratings to the unit or units he commands. In Sherman’s case, he changes a C2 infantry corps under his command to a B2. A leader’s initiative and tactical ratings may change at different ranks. And I’ve added optional rules to randomize when leaders enter the game, and their ratings.
Leader counters also rotate-they all enter the game as a one star general. They may be promoted to two or three star rank. Grant and Sherman can even be promoted to four star (GEN) rank as they historically became army group commanders. A one star general (BG) controls one corps counter; a two star (MG) may command one or two corps.
The only way a leader can be promoted to three stars (LTG) rank is to take command of one of the 5 named armies: Potomac, Cumberland, and Tennessee for the Union; Northern Virginia and Tennessee for the Confederacy. Named armies may contain four or more corps, depending on the army. And only named armies may have subordinates of one or two star rank. If a three star army commander is relieved of command, there is a political cost, and the leader reverts to one or two star rank.
Leaders also represent staffs and logistics trains, so commanded units may engage in two rounds of combat, whereas corps without a commander may only initiate one round of combat-so even lower quality leaders can be beneficial since they allow you to fight an additional round. Most leaders also increase the movement allowance for infantry to 2 instead of the base 1.
And yes, leaders may be wounded, killed or captured. At the end of each combat which involved leaders, a leader casualty assessment is rolled-lower ranked leaders are more likely to be casualties. If assessed as a casualty, another D6 is rolled for severity of wound. Rolls of 1 through 5 indicate the leader is out for that many turns. A roll of 6 means the leader is killed. And if a commanded unit is destroyed but the leader is not killed or wounded, the leader is captured. Captured leaders may be exchanged as prisoners.
Grant: How does the design create fog of war and uncertainty?
Larry: The counter covers hide counter information until opposing units engage in combat. Of course, leader losses will occur, which adds to uncertainty. The cards also provide for a lot of variability in maneuver. And the strength replacement recruiting is a combination of fixed values for the year, plus a die roll for variable recruits each season. Recruitment strengths diminish for both sides over the course of the game. There’re several optional rules that address the Emancipation Proclamation, Drafts, Leader randomization, etc. to add historical flavor or variability to the game.
Grant: Who is the artist for the game?
Larry: I did the artwork…in MS PowerPoint. Whew, not the easiest thing to do! But I’m happy with the results. I used public domain art and was able to generate nice graphic quality with the tools available. And I found you can only go so far in development before you have to start addressing production concerns. And the War Came is definitely a game on a budget!
Grant: How is victory achieved?
Larry: Quite simply, players must accomplish more than their historical counterparts in the same period, for example the 1862 scenario, when the Border States, most of Tennessee and New Orleans were in Union hands by year’s end. So, victory usually means holding more territory, but there are also war weariness and political factors that contribute to, or detract from, victory. Examples are the midterm elections of 1862, Presidential elections of 1864, and weariness of the northern population.
Grant: What do you feel the game models well?
Larry: The overall ebb and flow of the conflict-using corps formations on a large area map just works well. And although there are abstracted naval and logistics rules that function well, I chose to focus on the senior commanders and Lincoln’s and Davis’s struggles to find effective military leadership for their troops at corps and army levels. And I think I’ve got the right level of political factors that contributed to the War’s outcome factored in. It’s hard for the CSA to win, but if the USA sits on it’s hands to build strength and perfect its leadership, the USA will lose. The USA must take the fight south early and often-and that’s a lot of territory to cover.
Grant: What are you most pleased about with the design?
Larry: There’s so many classic ACW titles out there that cover the entire scope of the war in great detail, and yet I think And the War Came fills a niche. For those familiar with board wargames, it’s not overly complex and it plays fairly quickly. I like the unknowns and fog of war, and think the re-playability is there. The historical framework is solid. I tried to not model for effect, so historical campaigns and outcomes are certainly possible, but not preordained. I wanted an interesting beer and pretzels game, one that both those familiar and unfamiliar with the ACW could enjoy. Again, I’m satisfied with the results.
Grant: What other designs are you contemplating or already working on?
Larry: I think if there’s another one in me, it’ll be a strategic treatment of the American Revolution-but to model that conflict will take some work, initially just to get the scope right, and factor in the interrelationship with the wider Anglo-French conflict.
Oh, and I must add a hearty thanks to Blue Panther Games, for their great production and distribution support! I just couldn’t nail down a publisher-but after consulting with Steve Jones (BPG) I realized I could partner with Blue Panther and do it myself! I would recommend them to any aspiring designer who’s interested in self-publishing.
If you are interested in And the War Came: American Civil War1861-1865 from Pinkerton Games, you can order a copy for $65.00 from the Blue Panther LLC website at the following link: https://www.bluepantherllc.com/products/and-the-war-came
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.
#80: Rome Offers Settlement from Barbarians at the Gates, The Decline and Fall of the Western Roman Empire 337 – 476 from Compass Games
Barbarians at the Gates, The Decline and Fall of the Western Roman Empire 337 – 476 from Compass Games is a Card Driven Game for two players set during the final hundred plus years of the Western Roman Empire as the Barbarian tribes in the north came down with a vengeance as they clashed with civilization and carved out their place amongst it. The time period covered in the game is from the death of Constantine the Great (337 AD) to the deposition of the last Western Roman Emperor by Odoacer in 476 AD. The Roman player will command the Roman Legions loyal to the failing central authority and those Germanic peoples who have settled peacefully inside the Roman Empire, while the Barbarian player leads Usurper Emperors, and controls the migrations of the Germanic peoples, who are the Barbarians at the Gates. This game is really quite good and feels very much like a wargame even though it is a Card Driven Game. There are lots of opportunities for troop movement, combat and maneuver. And I really liked that. The game is a Card Driven Game and the use of cards is all important and very well done. Each player has their own unique deck of cards that are used and these cards are sometimes removed from those decks when played for an event and also new cards will be added to the deck after each turn. The cards played during a player’s impulse which are not used for the Event are then used for their Operation Points value. These Operation Points can be used for many purposes including Activating a leader, Forced Marches, Raiding, Reinforcement, Migration and Successful Usurpation.
The real trick to the cards is to plan out how you are going to use them to your advantage but also how best to use them. Activating Leaders is very important as you can then move them to attack, defend, change control of areas and other actions. Activating a leader depends on their strategy rating (the lower the strategy rating, the better). When a leader activates from a card, they receive a number of Action Points which can be used for movement (1 over highway, 2 over rough or river connections, 3 over strait or for naval movement), continuation after battle (a kind of advance after combat), changing control over unfortified spaces and sieges of fortified spaces. But the cards also are very mean spirited. What do I mean by this? Well, in our first play, I was carefully using my cards to build up my armies to fend off the initial attacks of the Barbarian hordes. I also had begun to build somewhat of a super stack as well to attempt to foray into England and take on the Barbarians there. As I did this building up, I was unaware of the nasty nature of some of the cards. Some of the cards, both for the Barbarians and Romans, allow a play that will turn a single leader and their entire stack into either a Usurper or a Pacified Barbarian Settlement. Both are equally nasty and you have to keep in mind that you can have your best armies simply taken from you and turned to your enemy.
And this concept of taking your best armies away from you, either as the Roman player or the Barbarian player, is well demonstrated with the play of the Rome Offers Settlement card. This card literally allows the Romans to resettle a Barbarian Tribal Marker, along with any combat units with the marker to a Loyalist Provincial Capital. The play of this card at the right (or wrong) time can lead to serious issues on the front lines. Playing the Rome Offers Settlement card simulates foederati diplomacy, allowing the Roman player to integrate migratory tribes into the empire and to gain access to additional manpower to defend the frontier. The mechanical effects include that the selected Tribe will now be aligned with Rome and becomes allied to the Romans. This will lead to the Barbarian Control Marker being removed from the target tribe’s space on the Tribal Alignment Track. The real benefit is that the Roman armies don’t have to risk loss and time in fighting the Barbarians targeted but also provides somewhat of a defensive buffer as the settled tribes will serve as a guard on the frontier, protecting specific Roman provinces and providing a strategic military advantage against other hostile invaders. This card is very important and can be considered essential for the Roman player, as allying with these tribes limits barbarian raiding opportunities and provides crucial resources needed to survive later waves of invasions. Also the preservation of army strength gives an immediate benefit to other ongoing campaigns against other invading tribes. I love this card and the concept from history that it attempts to inject into the gameplay.
Foederati were peoples and cities bound by a treaty, known as foedus, with Ancient Rome. During the Roman Republic, the term identified the socii, but during the Roman Empire, it was used to describe foreign states, client kingdoms or barbarian tribes to which the empire provided benefits in exchange for military assistance. The term was also used, especially under the empire, for groups of barbarian mercenaries of various sizes who were typically allowed to settle within the empire.
The term foederati had its original usage and meaning extended by the Romans’ practice of subsidizing entire barbarian tribes such as the Franks, Vandals, Alans, Huns and the Visigoths, the last being the best known, in exchange for providing warriors to fight in the Roman armies. Alaric I began his career leading a band of Gothic foederati. At first, the Roman subsidy took the form of money or food, but as tax revenues dwindled in the 4th and the 5th centuries, the foederati were billeted on local landowners properties, which became identical to being allowed to settle on Roman territory. Large local landowners living in distant border provinces on extensive villas, which were largely self-sufficient, found their loyalties to the central authority, which were already conflicted by other developments, further compromised in such situations. As loyalties wavered and became more local, the empire then began to devolve into smaller territories and closer personal fealties.
A 20th-century depiction of Alaric parading through the streets of Athens after conquering the city in 395 AD.
Here is a look at our unboxing video:
We also did a video review and you can watch that at the following link:
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.
#77: Schmalkaldic League 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 Mandatory Event card that really shakes things up for the Protestant player in the Schmalkaldic League. This Mandatory Event basically transforms the Protestant player and changes their focus slightly as they now become somewhat of a military power. I use the term “military power” here lightly as they really are not that powerful and this event is really more of a wet blanket thrown onto their spiritual bonfire as they now will have to worry about gearing up for attacks from their neighbors to try and take away their victory points through wresting control of their Electorates from them, which grant extra Victory Points. The Schmalkaldic League Mandatory Event is only triggered when the Protestant has religious influence in 12+ spaces from Turn 2 on, or if not, then automatically by the end of Turn 4.
The Protestant player gaining the ability to create and command military units, including both regulars and mercenaries, is somewhat of a boon as you can now move your troops around the board gaining additional dice for Conversion attempts if those units are adjacent and also the electorates under Protestant religious control, specifically those marked as Protestant home spaces, instantly come under Protestant political control and grant 2 VP for each Electorate up to a maximum of 12 VP total if all 6 are under control. Talk about a turning point…albeit a turning point with some difficulties. The leaders granted to the Protestants are also not very good and do not gain extra dice during combat and frankly cannot command large armies. These leaders include John Frederick and Philip of Hesse.
John Frederick I of Saxony by Lucas Cranach the Younger.
Frankly, I try my best to hope and pray that the Schmalkaldic League card doesn’t come out during the first 4 turns and then will be triggered only during the Winter Phase of Turn 4. This gives the Protestant player some time to expand and attempt to get all of those important VP generating Electorates under their control to set themselves up nicely. But once it happens you will find that you are spending your scarce resources in the form of Command Points on things like recruiting units, moving those units and preparing for attacks. This takes away from your ability to focus solely on spreading the faith and can be a real drag on that effort. But, you take the good with the bad in this game and I have learned to deal with it over the years and turn it into something that benefits me.
The Schmalkaldic League was a military alliance of Lutheran principalities and cities within the Holy Roman Empire during the mid-16th century. It received its name from the German town of Schmalkalden, where the group was founded in 1531. Although created for religious motives soon after the start of the Reformation, its members later came to have the intention that the League would replace the Holy Roman Empire as their focus of political allegiance. While it was not the first alliance of its kind, unlike previous formations, such as the League of Torgau, the Schmalkaldic League had a substantial military to defend its political and religious interests.
The League’s members agreed to provide 10,000 infantry and 2,000 cavalry for their mutual protection. They rarely provoked the Holy Roman Emperor Charles V directly but confiscated church land, expelled bishops and Catholic princes and helped spread Lutheranism throughout northern Germany.
Martin Luther planned to present to the League the Smalcald Articles, a stricter Protestant confession, during a meeting in 1537. He attended the critical meeting in 1537 but spent most of his time suffering from kidney stones. The rulers and princes even met in the home at which Luther was staying. Though Luther was asked to prepare the articles of faith that came to be known as the Smalcald Articles, they were not formally adopted at the time of the meeting, but in 1580, they were included in the Book of Concord.
New Cold War: 1989-2019 is a Card-Driven Game based in the most important geopolitical events from 1989 to 2019. Players lead one of the four great powers (Russia, China, US, EU) in their fight for the new world order. Initially, the confrontation is between the red bloc, consisting of Russia and China and the blue bloc, comprising the United States and the European Union. However, each player must also prioritize their own strategy, as only one power can emerge victorious at the end of the game. Therefore, this game starts with cooperation between allied powers in the early stages but becomes entirely competitive as the moment of final victory approaches.
New Cold War utilizes a Card-Driven game mechanic. Players strive to attain victory by gaining international prestige, dominating the media and increasing their control of countries and different regions of the world. Other key factors to manage include military force and United Nations Security Council vetoes. Players’ strategies are determined by a series of hidden objectives they must pursue to achieve victory.
The game accommodates three or two-player versions and includes a solitaire mode through a system of bots.
Recently, while attending Buckeye Game Fest in Columbus, Ohio, we were able to coordinate a 6-player game of Imperial Elegy: The Road to the Great War 1850-1920 from VUCA Simulations. Imperial Elegy is a card driven game that blends diplomacy, warfare, and statecraft and feels a bit akin to games like Here I Stand and Virgin Queen from GMT Games. Grand scale sweeping epics that play multiplayers and take a day to play. Players play as 1 of 6 unique major powers in the game including Germany/Prussia, the United Kingdom, France, Austria-Hungary, Russia and the Ottoman Empire. In this First Impressions post, I want to share a very brief overview of the game and the experience that we had with it.
Imperial Elegy is a fantastically themed game that takes place over 7 turns, with each of the turns representing approximately a decade. If the Great War breaks out due to the World Tension Track reaching a certain level, the game can be extended by an additional 6 shorter turns. A turn in the game consists of player impulses that is driven by the play of action cards for their Command Points or for the printed events. Players will use CP and events to take actions like colonize, conduct diplomacy with minor nations, fight wars, as well as hinder their opponents by playing events that take away their actions or resources. A turn will end once all players have consecutively passed or when all players run out of cards.
The game is somewhat of a sandbox style game as you have so many options and choices about what to do during the course of the game. Obviously, your faction has some direction about what you should be doing but really it is up the player to spend their resources how they will to accomplish their ultimate goals and score Victory Points. I truly love that aspect about this game and as we played we saw that sandbox and the asymmetry between the various factions. Particularly at the start, each country has some specific goals that they have drawn from the National Goals Deck that are a source of Victory Points, in fact a major source of Victory Points, and players will need to prioritize these cards and decide which ones to attempt to go after from the start. With only 7 turns, they will have to make progress on these National Goals if they have any hope of actually achieving them.
I actually thought that the National Goals was a really great part of the design and really sets it apart from the other games that have been used for inspiration such as Here I Stand and Virgin Queen. I partly feel this because of the options for replayability but also it forces players to change and adjust their strategy throughout the game keeping things fresh and interesting. It also causes players to have to think outside of the box and sometimes do things that their nation might not have prioritized but has been given an opportunity that they must capitalize on in order to earn their victory. Every 2 turns the players will draw 3 of these secret National Goal Cards and decide to keep just 1 of them, so their strategy must change and evolve with the board state and conditions found in the game at that time. This very key element of the design seems truly simple but it really has the benefit of rewarding those players who are extremely flexible and who can adjust on the fly, take some chances, change the course of their general overall strategy and adapt. I say this because I do feel that sometimes in games like Here I Stand or Virgin Queen, the same strategies and series of actions will generally be taken by each of the factions with just a modicum of variation. As you can see in the picture below, these National Goals are pretty variable and include things like preventing the outbreak of The Great War, gaining colonies in various parts or regions of the board and a focus on various alliances and diplomatic conditions.
The other aspect that I very much enjoyed was the Flashpoints, which represent key regions of competition amongst the great powers of the period including Italy, the Suez Canal, the Balkans, Qing China and more. Dominating flashpoints is sometimes one of the conditions to achieve and complete some of the National Goals but also provide players with certain benefits, including gaining additional cards each turn or even DRM’s. The specific Flashpoint that I thought was very interesting was the Power Projection Flashpoint which is a projection of the total naval supremacy across the globe through control of ports and naval bases in the various seas and oceans. The only downside here though is that this is an added part of record keeping that players will need to keep a handle on. Not overly burdensome but something that maybe should have been better represented on the player boards or the board itself.
Each of the represented nations in the game have their own special player board that contains various tracks that keep various information readily available to the players. Here is a look at the German player board. I very much enjoyed that they have gone to a great deal of effort to make these player boards and also that they gave each of the nation’s Stability, which decides whether various actions like war can be taken or if there are various positive or negative modifiers, the available Manpower that will determine how many armies can be built, Industry that tells how many action pointed you will have to spend during war to maneuver units, attack and replace losses. The focus of the game is about the control of territories both in Europe as well as colonies abroad and there is an automatic victory if a certain target number is met, in the case of Germany 15.
Here is a quick look at the Russia player board for comparison’s sake as each faction is unique and has various starting levels and abilities. These are very well laid out and assist tremendously in playing the game.
As we played, I started to realize that the key focus of the overall world stability and things like the Domestic Stability Tracks, which are focused of both the internal and external pressures faced by the powers. I really very much liked this thematic inclusion as no one wants to start a major global conflagration and there are steps that players have to take to skirt the inevitable troubles that result in their own actions and how they are seen by the other players in the game. But in our limited play, I never really felt threatened by this concept. Either our group was super skilled at avoiding the inevitable increase in tension or due to our short play we didn’t really experience some of the events that would have tipped this over the edge. I think that we say small increases in our full turn play but nothing that seemed unmanageable and we actually had an event that lowered it so it never became an issue. The game is about spending your resources wisely, in the form of your cards and your aspects like Stability, and to use your cards to do the events that could increase tension didn’t seem to be in our best interest, at least not in the 1st decade of the game. But maybe that will come later.
Keep in mind here that we only played the first full turn and it took us about 90 minutes including an hour of setup and rules overview and discussion as only one of us at the table had player previously (John Lapham). But we very much enjoyed the experience and found lots to like. We have scheduled a full count play of the game in mid June and I will have more to report on at that time but suffice it to stay everyone at the table was impressed with the design and everyone had a good time with it.
Thank you so much for following along and I hope that I was able to show off Imperial Elegy a bit and give it the justice it deserves because it really is something and I look forward to playing more in the future.
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.
#76: Military Uprising from The Republic’s Struggle: Battle for the Republic, Spain 1931-1939 from NAC Wargames
The Republic’s Struggle is a thematic Card Driven Game that tells the story of the historical events that took place in Spain after the resignation to the throne of King Alfonso XIII, and the proclamation of the II Spanish Republic in 1931. With the creation of the new regime, the struggle for power between the different social, political and ideological sectors increased, which gave rise to continuous changes of political power, alterations of public order, armed uprisings and violent acts, carried out by the numerous ideological factions of the moment; which culminated in 1936, in a failed military uprising. The failure of this coup d’état was the origin for the Spanish Civil War.
The Republic’s Struggle is based on Twilight Struggle from GMT Games and uses the same concepts of area control while adding in some actual combat with units represented on the board. During the game, the Republican player and the National player, will be able to recreate events of the period to increase their popularity in the localities by carrying out political propaganda, recruiting troops or militias, generating revolts or assaults, establishing diplomatic relations or carrying out bombardments. All this will be done by playing their hand of cards in an alternative way, either by using the events or by playing the action points or icons to perform any of the other actions available to the players.
One of the interesting parts of the design is that each player has what is referred to as a Special Card that is included in their hand from the start of the game and can be played during their turn. These cards don’t count towards the maximum number of cards that each player can have in their hand at the beginning of each turn. The 2 cards are Military Uprising, which is given to Nationalist player and Proletarian Revolution, which is given to the Republican player. These cards are single-use event cards and can only be used during the first 4 turns of the game, or in other words during the period referred to as Phase 1 – The Republic. If, after this phase, these cards have not been played, they must be discarded and removed from the game. Both players can choose to use their Special Card in an Action round, instead of using one of the cards from their hand. These cards are played like the rest of the Operation Cards either using their Operations Value or applying the effects of the printed Event. Once played, the card will be removed from the game so it is use it or lose it.
Both cards are very powerful but have some fairly difficult criteria that must be met to fully realize the value of the printed Event. In the case of our featured card Military Uprising, the top part of the card first gives the player the chance to downgrade the European Status Quo Track by 2 levels. The European Status Quo Track allows players to appeal to and in some ways manipulate the stance of the other European Nations regarding their view on the Spanish Civil War. It also the determining factor in how Victory Points are awarded for the crucial Armed Actions aspect of the game. At the end of each turn, if the number of Armed Actions carried out by a player equals or exceeds the current level of the European Status Quo, that player will score 3 Victory Points. Also, as long as the European Status Quo Track is set on level 2, players cannot carryout any action using the Operations Points of cards played to advance in the Diplomatic Relations Track. So this is another tied result to the card as if the level is 1, no cards can be played to advance the Diplomatic Relations Track.
But, remember I said that to fully realize the effects of the card, the Nationalist player would need to control Barcelona, Madrid, Valencia and every Naval Base Location or every Air Base Location. If this is the case when the card is played, then the Nationalist player will earn an automatic victory. Frankly, this is next to impossible, but has a sliver of possibility depending on how diligent and attentive the Republican player is as well as the hand of cards that are drawn by the Nationalist player. If they draw certain other events, as well as have a hand full of higher Operations Point value cards, they can make a run at this but it is not necessarily recommended. The card also has a very useful secondary use as if the condition isn’t met, they will get to place out on the board 1 combatant cube, representing one of their combat units, and also remove all of the influence of the Republican player in Morocco and Galicia and gain 2VP. In order for the card to be used in this manner though the Nationalist player will have had to previously play the El Director card.
Either way this is a very good card and a shrewd Nationalist player can make some significant headway in their efforts to push the Republican out of power in Africa and northwest Spain as well as add combat strength to areas that they wish to conduct future Armed Operations.
In 1934 there was widespread labor conflict and a bloody uprising by miners in Asturias that was suppressed by troops led by General Francisco Franco. A succession of governmental crises culminated in the elections of February 16, 1936, which brought to power a Popular Front government supported by most of the parties of the left and opposed by the parties of the right and what remained of the center.
Spanish Civil War Republican troops manning a machine gun during the Spanish Civil War, 1937.
A well-planned military uprising began on July 17, 1936, in garrison towns throughout Spain. By July 21st, the rebels had achieved control in Spanish Morocco, the Canary Islands, and the Balearic Islands (except Minorca) and in the part of Spain north of the Guadarrama Mountains and the Ebro River, except for Asturias, Santander, and the Basque provinces along the north coast and the region of Catalonia in the northeast. The Republican forces had put down the uprising in other areas, except for some of the larger Andalusian cities, including Seville), Granada and Córdoba. The Nationalists and Republicans proceeded to organize their respective territories and to repress opposition or suspected opposition. Republican violence occurred primarily during the early stages of the war before the rule of law was restored, but the Nationalist violence was part of a conscious policy of terror. The matter of how many were killed remains highly contentious; however, it is generally believed that the toll of Nationalist violence was higher. In any event, the proliferation of executions, murders, and assassinations on both sides reflects the great passions that the Spanish Civil War unleashed.
Here is a link to our full video review of the game:
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.
#75: The Second Funnel from The Hunt from Salt & Pepper Games
I have played several hidden movement games over the years and enjoyed them all. Some of these titles have included wargames such as They Come Unseen from Osprey Games, Sniper Elite: The Board Game from Rebellion Unplugged and Bomber Command from GMT Games as well as a few board games including Hunt for the Ring from Ares Games. The concept of moving cautiously, attempting to evade pursuers, all while trying to locate and acquire or destroy objectives makes for a very interesting gaming experience. These situations can make for some really tense games that cause your head to ache and your wits to be tested. But they rely on some bluffing as well. Trying to force your opponent to anticipate where they think you should be and then trying not to be there. A really great mechanic in board games but not always easy to pull off and make for a very playable and interesting game. In 2022, we played a new design from Matthias Cramer and Engin Kunter that took this hidden movement concept and put it into a historically based game about the struggle over control of the South Atlantic between the British Royal Navy and the German Kriegsmarine during the early years of World War II called The Hunt from Salt & Pepper Games.
The Hunt is a Card Driven Game where the German player has to attempt to stay hidden while trying to sink merchant shipping as the Royal Navy hunts for them throughout the South Atlantic. The players each have asymmetric actions to use to accomplish their missions and each has a tough time doing what they have to do. But, if they manage their cards wisely, using them as effectively as possible, they can successfully either evade their pursuer or catch their prey.
In today’s post, we will take a look at the very useful The Second Funnel. The Second Funnel is a 5 Ops card, which makes it a very important card in the German deck as it allows for the taking of 2-3 actions in a single turn, but for which there is an even more important use as an interrupt to foil a successful British Search by playing it as a Reaction. If the British player ever searches for the Admiral Graf Spee, and The Second Funnel is played as a reaction, the British successful Search will be treated as unsuccessful and the German player will get to move the Graf Spee 1 space away from the space where the Search action was taken. This movement can be into any adjacent space so could be used to also reposition the Graf Spee into a space where a Freighter is located. Such a tasty surprise card for the German player! I know that when I play as the British, I have to always keep in the back of my mind that this card exists and that my efforts might be futile. But, as the British, I would rather that the German play this as the event. These Reaction cards are one of the elements that makes this game so good.
Picture of the Graf Spee taken in 1939 shows the second funnel mounted behind the aircraft catapult at the rear of the ship.
The “second funnel” on the Admiral Graf Spee was a fake structure installed by the crew in late November 1939, during its 1939 Atlantic raid, to alter the ship’s silhouette and disguise its true identity. The dummy funnel, along with a fake gun turret on the bridge, was constructed behind the aircraft catapult to make the German “pocket battleship” look more like a different ship, specifically a British or French warship, to Allied merchant ships. By appearing as a different vessel, the Graf Spee hoped to create confusion and avoid immediate detection and engagement by Allied naval forces while it targeted merchant shipping. The disguise was removed before the Battle of the River Plate in December 1939, so it would not interfere with the ship’s combat operations. The ship’s crew, under the leadership of Captain Hans Langsdorff, often undertook such modifications during its patrol in the southern Atlantic to maintain the surprise of their commerce-raiding mission.
Here is a link to our full video review of the game:
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.
#74: Open Borders from 2040: An American Insurgency from Compass Games
2040: An American Insurgency is a card driven game that attempts to simulate a near future US civil war in the 21st century. In this 2-player game that plays in less than 3 hours, the blue team is the Federals representing agents of the government in Washington. The red team are the Rebels including militia groups trying to seize control of states, highways, and cities. The conflict spreads across the entire continental US, from Miami to Seattle and from Los Angeles to New York.
This game is not perfect and it has some issues and the graphics are not that great frankly. As I played the game, I actually felt like it was a pretty decent game, with some very interesting mechanics covering an interesting topic. I know it isn’t perfect and in some ways the designer was so careful not to offend anyone in the game that he really didn’t get to say anything about the situation and its causes, and the game somewhat suffers from that. But it was interesting and I believe that we are about the only ones who played the game.
In this post, I will be taking a look at a Neutral Card called Open Borders. Remember, that each event is either friendly, enemy, or neutral. Friendly events help you; enemy events help your enemy while Neutral events can help either player. Gray cards such as Open Borders have no identifying side’s markings in the bottom right corner and when you play a Neutral Card, you may choose to do the Ops or the Event. Open Borders is a very good Neutral Card because it is a 3 Ops card and can be used to take various standard operations, such as raising troops, fundraising and attacking. The card also is identified as a Momentum Card, which means that if played as the event, the effect will persist until a time specified in the text of the Event or, if none, until the end of the game. With Open Borders, the spaces of Mexico and Canada become playable areas on the board. These areas typically become a way for the Rebels to build and develop bases from which they recruit fresh insurgent units and then cross over the Open Borders to attack those States that border these areas eroding their Order and creating chaos and Revolt. The Open Borders Card allows this but also allows the Federal player to respond by crossing over the border and attempting to squash these recruiting centers.
The other effects of the Event provides both sides with a bonus when they take certain actions such as Tax for the Federals and Recruit for the Rebels. When the card has been played and is in effect, the Federal Tax Action will provide an additional $4 worth of income from the action. This is an effect of open borders and the unrestricted use of free trade and cross border commerce creating new jobs, providing additional sources of income and employing workers who ultimately pay income taxes on those improved wages. The Rebel Recruit Action will gain an additional Militia unit per space where taken. This reflects the stoking of anger at home as illegals and other bad actors are able to pour across the borders unfettered. I very much like this card for its game effect but also for the questions and concerns that it raises in this debate. Such an interesting economic spin on this issue through the game and I think is a very well done part of the design.
The concept of open borders highlights a fundamental tension between national security, economic openness, and civil liberties. Post-9/11, critics argue that porous or “open” borders allow terrorists to exploit security gaps, while proponents of open borders emphasize that excessive restrictions hurt economic freedom and that security should be managed through intelligence rather than isolation. The biggest concern regarding open borders is that unvetted, irregular migration through porous borders can be exploited by extremists to enter countries and perform acts of terrorism, sedition or general mayhem. To manage the tension between security and economic openness, many nations have turned to the concept of biometric borders. This involves using risk profiling and digital identity such as fingerprints and facial recognition to separate “civilized” business travelers from “illegitimate” and bad actors. This use of these high tech instruments in surveillance, data tracking and technology to distinguish between legitimate travel and potential threats has raised more concerns with civil liberty and privacy. This debate often pits “secure borders” against “open doors,” with officials grappling with protecting citizens without sacrificing the democratic principles of open societies. In one of the most famous quotes from history about privacy, Benjamin Franklin stated “Those who would give up essential liberty, to purchase a little temporary safety, deserve neither liberty nor safety“. Where do you land on this issue of Open Borders?
Here is a link to our unboxing video showing the components:
Anmelden
