I love a different style and focus of wargame. A game that takes a look at an important but somewhat obscure or rarely addressed historical topic, such as espionage or intelligence, and creates a gaming experience tailored around the events to highlight and evoke the difficulties and tension that would have been present. In January 2026, GMT Games announced such a game in Checkpoint Charlie, which is a solo or cooperative game focused on SIS espionage missions in Berlin in the 1960’s designed by Russell Brown. We have posted an interview with Russel and it was very well received and he has now agreed to create a series of History Behind the Cards to highlight the events of the 1960’s Cold War struggle in West Germany but also to share aspects about the game play and how it models the history.
*Note: The cards highlighted in this series and their event text, as well as any pictures used showing any of the various components, are still in the design and development process and as such event effects and text might still change prior to final development and publication.Also the art and layout of the cards are only for playtest purposes at this point and the game will enter the art department as it nears publication.
History Behind the Cards – Checkpoint Charlie from GMT Games – Card #7: Ich Bin Ein Berliner
In the summer of 1963, the Berlin Wall had been in place for almost two years, the reality of a city split between east and west, between Soviet and Western influence, was impossible to deny. Politicians, military leaders, and the people living day-to-day in Berlin continued to argue about the lack of forceful response from the west, particularly the Americans, when the wall went up. Other than a modest buildup of US forces within and around the city, there had been precious little action to re-assure the people of Berlin that the west hadn’t abandoned them.
In June of that year, President Kennedy hoped to change that perception by personally visiting this western city in the center of Soviet-controlled East Germany. He received the reception and the reaction he was hoping for, driving through the city to crowds of cheering West Berliners, and giving his famous speech on the steps of the Rathhaus Shöneberg to a gathered crowd of over one hundred thousand. In a calculated risk, he referred to the city as West Berlin, officially acknowledging the split created by the wall. He introduced his “Fellow Americans” and at the mention of General Clay (Card #6), the crowd interrupted the speech for some heartfelt cheering for the man that saved their city during the Berlin Airlift. Kennedy’s famous line of solidarity, “Ich bin ein Berliner,” — I am a Berliner — came at the end of the speech and may have been a bit off-script.
So how would Kennedy’s speech affect a mission in Checkpoint Charlie? I’m going to answer that with a story.
I spend a lot of time at a wonderful coffee shop near my home, so much time that my iPhone has labeled the location as my “work.” The baristas there know me, and one day one of them asked me what I was working on. “Right now,” I said, I’m working on a board game about spies in Berlin in the 60’s.”
He laughed. “Have you met John?” He pointed to an older customer at one of the tables. “He was a spy in Berlin in the 60’s.” It was true.
Since then, I’ve had many conversations with John about his time in Berlin. He was Army Intelligence, keeping track of what was going on in the city. He was there when the wall went up. He interviewed the refugees that, for a time, still managed to find a way into West Berlin. And he was there during Kennedy’s speech.
I asked him about the speech and said that in the game it resulted in crowds (a Demonstrations marker) near Tempelhof. He shook his head. “Everywhere. Crowds everywhere. All over the city.”
I’m sorry to report that I’ve restrained the effects of this card and the speech for gameplay reasons, but I haven’t ignored John in every case. The Daily Military Train event (Card #9) exists solely because of his stories, and after removing the Refugees event (Card #13) from the game because I assumed the flow of refugees disappeared after the wall went up, I put it back in because John assured me that they were still coming – he had met and interviewed hundreds of them.
In the next article in this series, we will take a look at the ongoing propaganda efforts from both sides of the Berlin Wall with Loudspeaker Wars.
In my opinion, this game looks extremely interesting and I am very much excited to learn more about it. I am appreciative to Russell and his efforts to bring us these cards and to write these entries to share with our readers. I am also very glad that this topic is being covered in a game and look forward to playing this one day soon.
I love a different style and focus of wargame. A game that takes a look at an important but somewhat obscure or rarely addressed historical topic, such as espionage or intelligence, and creates a gaming experience tailored around the events to highlight and evoke the difficulties and tension that would have been present. In January 2026, GMT Games announced such a game in Checkpoint Charlie, which is a solo or cooperative game focused on SIS espionage missions in Berlin in the 1960’s designed by Russell Brown. We have posted an interview with Russel and it was very well received and he has now agreed to create a series of History Behind the Cards to highlight the events of the 1960’s Cold War struggle in West Germany but also to share aspects about the game play and how it models the history.
*Note: The cards highlighted in this series and their event text, as well as any pictures used showing any of the various components, are still in the design and development process and as such event effects and text might still change prior to final development and publication.Also the art and layout of the cards are only for playtest purposes at this point and the game will enter the art department as it nears publication.
History Behind the Cards – Checkpoint Charlie from GMT Games – Card #6: General Clay Steps In
US General Lucious D. Clay was appointed as military governor of the United States zone of Berlin from 1945 until 1949. He was best known, especially to the people of Berlin, as the person responsible for the Berlin Airlift, which fed and supplied the people of Berlin from the air when the Soviets cut off all access to the city for eleven months, from June 1948 to May 1949. Without the airlift, the west would have been left with two terrible options – allow West Berlin to be starved into submission and annexation, or invade East Germany to open a supply corridor, almost certainly starting an all-out war with the Soviets.
In the early 1960’s, US President Kennedy turned to the now retired General Clay and called on him to deal with serious issues that arose in Berlin, like the faceoff between tanks at Checkpoint Charlie (card #4). Clay understood Berlin and had the respect of its people, so Kennedy brought him along on his famous visit to the city, during which the president gave his “Ich bin ein Berliner” speech (card #7).
The General Clay Steps In card in Checkpoint Charlie represents the retired general being sent by Kennedy to resolve issues in West Berlin. Playing the card removes an event marker from the city and is the only way many of the event markers can be removed during a mission. It is especially useful for removing the Faceoff marker or a troublesome Stasi Stakeout.
In the next article in this series, we will take a look at Ich bin ein Berliner Speech by President John F. Kennedy.
In my opinion, this game looks extremely interesting and I am very much excited to learn more about it. I am appreciative to Russell and his efforts to bring us these cards and to write these entries to share with our readers. I am also very glad that this topic is being covered in a game and look forward to playing this one day soon.
I love a different style and focus of wargame. A game that takes a look at an important but somewhat obscure or rarely addressed historical topic, such as espionage or intelligence, and creates a gaming experience tailored around the events to highlight and evoke the difficulties and tension that would have been present. In January 2026, GMT Games announced such a game in Checkpoint Charlie, which is a solo or cooperative game focused on SIS espionage missions in Berlin in the 1960’s designed by Russell Brown. We have posted an interview with Russel and it was very well received and he has now agreed to create a series of History Behind the Cards to highlight the events of the 1960’s Cold War struggle in West Germany but also to share aspects about the game play and how it models the history.
*Note: The cards highlighted in this series and their event text, as well as any pictures used showing any of the various components, are still in the design and development process and as such event effects and text might still change prior to final development and publication.Also the art and layout of the cards are only for playtest purposes at this point and the game will enter the art department as it nears publication.
History Behind the Cards – Checkpoint Charlie from GMT Games – Card #5: Berlin Film Festival
Every summer since 1951, Berlin had hosted the international Berlin Film Festival (the Berlinale) and awarded the Golden Bear to the best film in each of five categories. Venues in both East and West Berlin were used for screening of films. As summer approached in 1962, Berlin found itself cut in two by the Berlin Wall amid growing tensions between East and West. It seemed there were any number of events that could trigger a war over the city. And yet, the Film Festival was held, entirely in West Berlin this time. The festival drew thousands of visitors to the city, including Hollywood stars like Jimmy Stewart and Tony Curtis. Screenings took place in venues throughout the city and, we can assume, brought a much-needed sense of normalcy and continuity to the residents of West Berlin and perhaps a sense of what was lost to those in the east.
The festival took place every year throughout the Cold War, and after reunification it once again began film screenings in the former East Berlin. The festival continues and this year the Golden Bear award for best film went to “Yellow Letters.”
The Berlin Film Festival card in Checkpoint Charlie assumes the Berlin Hilton is full up with visitors and cannot function as a Honey Trap. The card also assumes that the extra traffic in the city, including thousands of additional pedestrians trying to get a glimpse of celebrities, negates any Ongoing Card Effects that allow additional movement during the Movement step.
In the next article in this series, we will take a look General Clay Steps In as he is appointed by President Kennedy to resolve issues in West Berlin.
In my opinion, this game looks extremely interesting and I am very much excited to learn more about it. I am appreciative to Russell and his efforts to bring us these cards and to write these entries to share with our readers. I am also very glad that this topic is being covered in a game and look forward to playing this one day soon.
I think that every single wargamer knows the name Volko Ruhnke. He has designed several great series in the COIN Series, that has now stretched to a full 15 volumes, and then more recently Levy & Campaign Series, which has an astounding 5 released volumes with several others that are announced and about a dozen more in design. He can make a good game for sure! One of our first experiences in wargaming and the first Volko design we played was Wilderness War. He is now at it again with a new design in a continuing newer series called the Recon Series that uses hide and seek elements and hidden blocks to tell the story of the Allied intelligence efforts during World War I during the campaigns around Verdun in 1916. The game is called Drachen: Reconnaissance at Verdun, 1916 and looks to be very interesting and we reached out to Volko to get a look into the design.
Grant: Volko welcome back to the blog. What is your new upcoming game Drachen about?
Volko: Hi Grant & Alex! Thank you for this opportunity. I love what you guys do.
Drachen continues my new Recon Series, following on to the series’ recently released first volume, Coast Watchers. Volume II – Drachen – is about the struggle for reconnaissance information in a World War I trench battles, specifically, Verdun in 1916.
Grant: What does the title mean and why did you want to use it for this game?
Volko: “Drachen” means “kite” in German and is simply short for “Drachenballon” – kite balloon. The tethered observation balloons famous as targets for balloon-busting fighter aeroplane missions were really the queens of the battlefield in their ability to see what the enemy was up to and guide artillery fire onto enemy targets. They were in effect hydrogen filled kites in that they faced into the wind for stability. On a clear day, even a windy one, a spotter with binoculars in a kite balloon could provide information on enemy movements and positions up to 15 miles away. Tethered to the ground, unlike observer aeroplanes with either no radio or early transmitters only, balloons had instant and secure communications with friendly headquarters or batteries to coordinate fire.
Grant: This is Volume II in the Recon Series. Why does this subject fit your vision for the series?
Volko: I’m looking for the Series to visit settings in which secrets and their discovery really mattered to the outcome of a conflict. The advent of trench warfare on the Western Front was a remarkable moment in land battle because the age-old means of reconnaissance – the horseman – could no longer roam. For the first time, you would know nothing of the enemy beyond the next ridge unless you got up in the air. We gamers have tended to focus on ace-versus-ace duels in the sky. I wanted to explore what all the dogfighting was really about: winning the right to peer down upon your enemy.
Grant: How has your experience with series games assisted you in the development of this Recon Series?
Volko: OK, that’s a big question! I do try to learn, and I have developed some principles for series design:
1) Openness – Make room for other designers to take the series where you never imagined.
2) Complexity – Bigger is not always better. I wrote about this in depth in C3i Nr29.
3) Variety – Make it familiar, not samey. I wrote about that in C3i Nr30.
Regarding variety within a series, it helps to articulate a focus to guide selection of topics, what you keep the same, and what you vary for each setting.
For the COIN Series, that was the premise that counterinsurgency and other popular conflicts were multifactional, that factional relations were key.
For Levy & Campaign, it was that medieval warfare was equally complex as modern but in distinct ways, especially regarding command and logistics.
For the Recon Series, then, it is that secret information – which side protects it or discovers it better – can decide the outcome, at least for certain conflicts.
That said, for me, principle 1) above trumps the other two. Other designers certainly have taken COIN and Levy & Campaign to places beyond my original intent. I hope the same for the Recon Series.
Regarding “bigger is not better” for Drachen in particular, that meant being sure that Volume II did not just add subsystems like more ornaments on a Christmas tree. Rather, I try to drop something unneeded out for every new thing added in. For example, Drachen gets much deeper into resolution of combat than does Coast Watchers, but then Drachen has a much simpler resolution of who won the struggle: just most of 3 Objective cards fulfilled, rather than Volume I’s “victory point salad”.
To keep Drachen “familiar but not samey”, we keep not only the location blocks and open versus secret spotting but also two chit cups for resolution, for example. Where Coast Watchers has Delivery and Patrol cups, Drachen features Air and Group cups to resolve clashes in…well, you can guess where for each.
Grant: What did you need to make sure to model from aerial reconnaissance in WWI?
Volko: The key historical dynamics that I was able to find and felt were important to incorporate in the game include:
The main purpose of fighter aeroplane engagements as clearing the way for friendly observers and countering enemy observers.
The difference between just spotting something and being able to loiter long enough to cooperate with guns or take photos.
Which observation activity would be known to the enemy and which would be secret.
The importance of attrition in aircraft to observation dominance.
Grant: What sources did you consult to get the historical details correct? What one must-read source would you recommend?
Volko: I scarfed up all I could about Great War trench warfare in general, including the nature and use of observation balloons, how aeroplanes cooperated with artillery, the purposes of trench raids, and so on. Naturally, I particularly dug into how things worked in the Battle of Verdun, which was a great learning laboratory for both sides.
My two key secondary sources were The First Air Campaign by Eric and Jane Lawson, which discusses the evolution of air power in World War I and the special juncture that Verdun was in its development, and Alistaire Horne’s The Price of Glory, still for me the best of the several English-language works on the iconic battle.
Grant: What is your overall design goal and thesis with Drachen?
Volko: The design goal is to take apart how reconnaissance worked in trench battles, with the premise that winning the reconnaissance struggle set up the possibility of winning the kinetic part, the fire and assault.
Grant: Why do you feel that blocks and chit pull are the best ways to tell this story?
Volko: Blocks are an age-old but powerful way to manage secret information on the tabletop, without writing or referees. The Recon Series uses blocks in a new way: not as units that the opponent can see massing and moving across the map but as location information about which you start out seeing nothing and have to act to gain any knowledge of.
Chit pull gives me as designer an ability unparalleled by dice to subtly manipulate probabilities – and to give the players abilities to influence those probabilities – in a relatively simple and inexpensively produced way.
Grant: What other mediums did you consider or explore?
Volko: One question was whether to use “record” markers for players to log what they find. The Japanese player in Coast Watchers has such markers on the board as reminders of what is known of Allied blocks that have stood up hidden again.
In Drachen, there is even more to keep track of: various sizes and types of units and fortifications. And some of what players spot they do so secretly. So Drachen provides a record sheet reproducing the battlefield in miniature, but with room to take notes, plus screens to hide that record, if players want to use them. I considered providing record markers to place on the sheet, but the variety of items to spot mean that it would have been a mess, a big pile of counters to sort through – not worth it when a pencil works fine!
Grant: What different units are available to the players?
Volko: Here is a look at the blocks and counters, including the units represented. By the way, no real art exists yet – these are just my homemade prototypes.…
The standup blocks represent the guns, soldiers, fortifications, and depots that fight out the duels between gun batteries and the offensive’s barrage and assault. They build up hidden and are the targets for enemy observation missions. Positioning your hidden blocks will be critical both to make them harder to spot and to get the best use out of them in your plan for combat.
The counters represent those forces carrying out or supporting reconnaissance. They build up openly on the battlefield, except for anti-aircraft emplacements that may be AA sections or just harmless trucks. (Other counters here are markers that support various missions and actions.)
Grant: What is the role of Depots?
Volko: Depot blocks – if they survive unsuppressed – during the offensive resupply guns to fire again or fire at double strength. If the attacker exploits an advance, the depots refill and can again supply guns.
Grant: What are the All Quiet blocks and what do they represent from history?
Volko: “All Quiet” blocks (also nicknamed “trees”) represent just the usual presence of defenses at a side’s positions. So they do not mean empty, rather nothing special to see and shoot at. There are some troops garrisoning the line in what are probably battered trench works, perhaps some wire or field guns. If attacked, at least a few machineguns hidden there will answer.
Grant: What different air assets are available to players?
Volko: The workhouse in the air is the “Air Patrol” – either single or group, the latter more effective but uses up more airframes. Each player has a supply of Air Patrols at their aerodromes (on their mat) and sends them on specific fighter and observer missions or puts them into the Air Cup to add generally to the density of friendly aircraft prowling and protecting the skies over Verdun. Air Patrols suffer loss in action, so you can run out if you don’t manage the air battle carefully, potentially requiring you to recall counters from the cup or the map.
Of course we have balloons too, aloft over friendly positions behind the front line. Enemy balloon-busting fighter missions can destroy them or, more commonly, force them to lower. As noted above, these Drachen are highly effective observers, in the game reaching out to a distance of 4 positions, spotting secretly – you won’t know where your opponent’s balloons are looking unless they range guns in on your blocks – and unlike aeroplane observers automatically succeed in spotting their targets.
On the ground but protecting your balloons and blocks against enemy Air Patrols, you get antiaircraft emplacements – “AA Sections” or dummy “Trucks”. These will make any enemy air missions at or adjacent to them more dangerous. They also occasionally can cause a loss among your own nearby defensive air patrols, representing friendly fire.
The counters for Balloons and AA Emplacements are round to signify that these units can built up, adjusted, and used for free – whereas use of Air Patrols and trench raiders cost actions.
Grant: How are the serial assets used to perform recon? How does this work?
Volko: As reconnaissance and the efforts of fighters to stop it are the focus of the sim, most Air Missions as well as Trench Raids use an articulated chit-pull procedure accounting for a wide range of circumstances.
On the Air Missions table, you can see that we account for the presence of the enemy’s defensive Patrols and AA, how deep behind enemy lines you are flying, whether you are using an Air Group, and how many enemy chits you are likely to draw.
Various Asset cards, like “Boelke & Immelmann”, can further affect these results.
Grant: Why do you feel this is so important to the game?
Volko: Most trench warfare games either focus on the assault by infantry and perhaps tanks or cover the air duels going on overhead. But before those assaults and the barrages supporting them kick off, there would have been a critical period in which the sides were struggling to figure out what the enemy was up to and where they were massed. And that is when most of those aerial dogfights would be going on. Drachen pulls all that together to try to illuminate just HOW reconnaissance got done and would then set the course of a “big push”.
Grant: What is the layout of the game board and the purpose of the different shaped fortifications?
Volko: The game board shows the battlefield of Verdun. Area spaces, called “positions”, each hold a single block hiding the forces or fortifications there.
Terrain is either Lowland, Hill, or Fort – the latter effectively on hills too but tougher to crack. Hills and Forts enable guns on them to shoot a little farther, are harder to take by infantry assault, and often are the very targets that the attacker is assigned to seize.
A road and rail network spans the battlefield. Its effect is to limit where depots can be built up.
Land and Meuse River segments separate the positions. Little wooden stick pieces will mark the front along these segments. Positions group into sectors, such as “Left French”, to guide setup and solo play.
A final feature of the map positions is that some are observation posts. They function much like balloons but with far more limited reach, and they can be suppressed by artillery fire.
Grant: What is the general Sequence of Play?
Volko: In each of between 2 and 4 turns total, each side first builds up forces (blocks and counters). Buildup limits are most lenient on Turn I, so players generally need to set a plan of attack or defense then and just adjust positioning on later turns. On Turn II and thereafter, revealed (face up) blocks hide again (stand back up) unless suppressed by enemy fire or under loitering air surveillance. On Turn III and IV – if the attacker has not yet launched an offensive – the defender receives reinforcement in the form of an added block.
The main part of the turn follows buildup, “Reconnaissance” activity by Fighters then Observers. That includes mounting defensive “Barrier Patrols” and offensive “Jagd” against enemy Air Patrols plus Balloon Busting, then Aerial Observation, Trench Raids, and spotting by Balloons and OPs.
After that, the sides will exchange “Directed Fire” by their guns onto previously “Ranged” targets. Or, on Turn II or later, the attacker can instead launch the offensive that will resolve the game.
Grant: How is victory achieved?
Volko: After the offensive, or after Turn IV in the rare case that the attacker never launches one, Victory depends on who has fulfilled more of their 3 drawn Objective Cards.
Grant: What are the purpose of the Attacker & Defender Objective Cards?
Volko: The simulation premise of the Objective Cards is that reconnaissance is trying not only to discover where the enemy is but what they are up to – what matters to them? Will the attack go for a breakthrough, or are they just trying to pin our forces in place and divert our attention from some other part of the front? Or even less, are they for now just trying to grind down our forces and soften up our fortifications? Is the defender set to hold everything at all cost? Or do they just want to bloody us as we advance?
A second set of questions concerns how big an enemy buildup we are dealing with. The Objective Cards give players more robust forces to carry out the more ambitious task. So that too is an essential element of information that reconnaissance is trying to gauge – what are we up against?
The Objective Cards provide a neat and easy way to set out that secret information. Through recon successes, such as finding out how your enemy’s fortifications or troops are deployed, you can discern what your opponent’s cards may be. And if you invest in trench raiding, your raiders might reveal one or more enemy Objectives for certain.
Grant: What are the various hidden objectives?
Volko: Attacker and Defender each draw 3 cards from up to 9 Objective Cards, most of which are unique tasks hidden from the opponent. Each card not only sets out a task to be achieved but also provides added blocks to that side’s “Reserves” and specifies a number of blocks that the player can build up on the map on Turn I.
One twist is that you don’t have to use a card’s specified forces for that task: the blocks just add to your total available.
A second twist is that particularly successful trench raids can obtain “Plans” that reveal your opponent’s Objective Cards to you: potentially highly useful, as you win not only by achieving your own Objectives but by impeding your enemy’s.
Grant: What different types of these cards are there?
Volko: There is a separate set each for Attacker and Defender. In sets of 3, they go from least to most ambitious/robust, for the Attacker, “Preparation”, “Push”, “All-Out Attack”; for the Defender, “Retrenchment”, “Attrition”, “They Shall Not Pass”. Different scenarios then might limit some of these sets for one or the other side to reflect that stage in the longer Battle of Verdun.
As you can see by the examples, the cards are specific as to their tasks and forces. Generally, the Attacker is either destroy certain defenses, mount strong attacks, or take key positions. The Defender generally is to hold key positions or destroy substantial attacking forces.
Grant: How do players go about accomplishing these?
Volko: A key premise of the game is that reconnaissance success unlocked success of an offensive push. So in the game, you won’t earn VP or whatever for how you run your reconnaissance effort. Rather, knowing what your enemy has where – and “Ranging” those targets for accurate fire by your gun – will set up the combat success that you will need to fulfill more of your own Objectives.
But you will need to add to that skillful positioning of your forces and fortifications to make use of the information that you gather, and then the right decisions when and where to uncover your guns to fire or send your infantry waves into assaults and counter-assaults.
So the game is about reconnaissance but also how that feeds into running trench war combat.
Grant: What challenges does each side face in their objectives?
Volko: Since fulfilling your Objectives flows from how you handle the entire Sequence of Play, they really distill all the game’s challenges. But specific challenges to do with the cards include that the easier tasks come with skinnier forces to fight with, and that you start out unaware of what your opponents Objectives are. That latter can be critical, as even decent performance against the goals in front of you may not be enough to win if your opponent does even better at their secret tasks.
Grant: How do offensives work?
Volko: When the Attacker decides to launch the Offensive, both sides first get to recover some of their suppressed positions. Then each side’s guns, Attacker first, can “Barrage” to suppress enemy positions without needing Ranging by observers, just using more shells. Then each side can “Bombard” Ranged targets to Suppress them more efficiently or destroy them outright (as in the earlier “Directed Fire” phase).
Then players place “Wave” markers to commit where infantry Assaults and counterattacks will occur. For the Attacker, these will attempt to take the defender’s frontline positions. Those get resolved rather simply, including a draw from the Ground cup to give at least some chance for a weaker attack or defense to succeed.
If any such Assault does succeed in taking ground, the attacker may “Exploit” – meaning one more round of Artillery and Infantry combat, usually to try to seize a 2nd-Line position.
Grant: How many players is the game designed for? Is there a solitaire mode?
Volko: Drachen is a 2-player game. A larger number of players, divided into 2 teams, has worked well at the many demos that I have done.
There is a solitaire mode that enables a solo player to take the Attacking side in all the scenarios, whether German or French. It uses instructions and scenario setups found in the Playbook, a “Defenses” display to guide hidden block buildup, and a deck of 18 “Army HQ” Cards to help run Defender actions.
Grant: What opportunities for deception and signaling are there?
Volko: Great question! A point of the Recon Series is to feature not only secret information but both open and secret collection of that information – in part to enhance such opportunities for deceptive signals.
In Drachen, you will have plenty of secret information about which to mislead your opponent. And, critically, you will have potentially or automatically open information that you can transit selectively in order to mislead. Some ideas…in the game, you can:
Put a few Soldiers to get spotted where you do not intend to assault, or fortifications that suggest Objectives that you did not draw.
Range targets that you cannot actually or do not intend to Bombard.
Deploy air defenses in areas that are unimportant to you.
And so on. Circumstances and your imaginings are the only limits!
Grant: What do you feel the game models well?
Volko: I am quite pleased with how the flow of the game models trench warfare’s set-piece buildups, the contest for control of the skies, the danger and importance of busting balloons and launching trench raids, the tit-for-tat artillery duels, including the danger of firing and exposing your batteries too soon, and more. In short, Drachen plays out on the table my mental model of WWI trench battles.
Grant: What are you most pleased about with the design?
Volko: The biggest thrill for me is that the design has held the interest of a talented corps of testers for many moons and many plays – and that it seems to get universally positive reactions at con demos. Ted Raicer has done wonders to bring out the fascinating aspects of the Great War, but even now trench battles don’t get the spotlight among us wargamers that I feel they warrant. And Verdun does not even have British or Americans (outside some volunteer fliers). So I’m proud that Drachen is adding to our hobby’s examination of WWI’s Western Front in between the famous mobile phases of 1914 and 1918.
Grant: What other designs are you contemplating or already working on in this series?
Volko: I already have a playable prototype for Volume III, and it even has seen some playtests. I call it Masher and it is set in Vietnam. Perhaps a topic for another visit here!
Thanks again for this opportunity to talk about the Recon Series!
I think that this new series, and this game particularly, look really interesting and I am all in on the subject matter and the approach. Also, the game offers 8 main scenarios and a solo learning situation spanning German and French offensives within the titanic 10-month Battle of Verdun. I did just receive my copy of Volume I in the Recon Series called Coast Watchers but have not had a change to get it to the table as of yet. I will rectify that sooner rather than later.
If you are interested in Drachen: Reconnaissance at Verdun, 1916, you can pre-order a copy for $79.00 from the GMT Games website at the following link: https://www.gmtgames.com/p-1162-drachen.aspx
In November 2024, while attending the SDHistCon, we sat down with designer Sam London to play his upcoming game called Common Sense (it was originally called Absolved from All Allegiance), which was announced on GMT Games P500 last year. The game is an American Revolutionary War Strategic Level game that uses trick taking and is a struggle over the Will to Fight Track that measures the level of commitment by both sides to the fight. We recently reached out to Sam to get some more details to share about the design and he was very glad to oblige our request.
*Keep in mind that the design is still undergoing playtesting and development and that any details or component pictures shared in this interview are for prototype purposes and will definitely change prior to final publication as they enter the art department.
Grant: Sam welcome back to the blog. How are your other announced game projects coming along?
Sam: Thanks for having me back! Things are going well. I am hands off on Firefight Tactical at this point. All of the content art is complete and we are just working on things like rulebook layouts. I am very much looking forward to getting it out the door and into people’s hands. Microverse has most of the art complete. I am doing a few tweaks to the bot still to get it to a point I am happy with it, but in truth it is not tracking far behind Firefight Tactical. They both have been wonderful experiences from a development and production stand point and I cannot speak highly enough of the various teams I have worked with at GMT on these games.
Grant: How have you changed as a designer over the past few years?
Sam: This is an awesome question and I am grateful to be asked it as it forced me to do some introspection. To explain I will have to make some references to film making. As I have stated previously I have been designing games for a couple of decades at this point and only started trying to get my designs out there after Covid. The truth is that while this gave me lots of opportunities to refine my design chops, it was ultimately just me learning in a bubble. Coming into the hobby as a designer rather than a gamer, I fancied myself as a sort of auteur designer. For those not familiar with the term in the context of film making, this is an approach to creative endeavor where everything is made to conform precisely to one person’s specific vision. After getting to work with so many fantastic people, decidedly outside of my bubble, I have taken a bit of a 180. While I still own the ultimate vision, I now recognize that the odds that I understand the optimal route to get to that destination are unlikely, and that pretending I do will often result in an inferior game. This isn’t to say that I am going to incorporate every bit of feedback I receive into my designs. It does mean that I am more able to recognize weaknesses in my designs as conceived and solicit feedback from others to get around my blind spots.
Grant: What specific lessons have you learned about design?
Sam: The big one would be about systems pruning. Most people, myself included, understand academically that design complexity for complexity’s sake is not good. Putting that principle into practice, especially retroactively, is far more challenging. Every mechanism in the game has to serve the player’s enjoyment without making the cost of entry too daunting. This can often mean cutting mechanisms that I am particularly passionate about, but for which I am the sole audience (or close to it). This is especially difficult for me because I consider myself a systems designer, and I virtually always approach the mechanics of a design first.
Grant: What is your newest project Common Sense about?
Sam: Common Sense: An American Revolution, 1775-1783 is a card driven strategic level wargame covering the American Revolution. It attempts to offer a comprehensive view of the conflict, all the way from the battlefield to the halls of the Continental Congress and British Parliament.
Grant: Why was this a subject that drew your interest?
Sam: I always knew I would want to do an American Revolution game. The problem was that I needed a system that would fit my thesis of the conflict. A few years back I was working on a Barbarossa game and every step of the way I was thinking I would rather do that system in the American Revolution. The more passionate I became about that, the more I started to flesh out the system in ways that didn’t make sense for Barbarossa. Eventually that game ended up in the trash bin and Common Sense got my attention instead. I think the American Revolution is such a fascinating subject because it’s a real David and Goliath story. I of course am keenly aware that in reality it was more of David vs Goliath while Goliath is arm wrestling another giant while also trying to solve a Rubik’s cube, but there is still a lot of inherent heroic optimism to that history. Also, everyone loves a good underdog story.
Grant: What is your design goal with the game?
Sam: My design goal for the system was to see how much personality I could give to the belligerents without making their asymmetries require too much rules overhead. We have all played asymmetrical games where you feel like after you read your rulebook you need to read the other player’s rulebook to have a comprehensive understanding of the game. Here, while there are some mechanisms that are specific to each side, the asymmetry is more in terms of each player’s strategic concerns rather than their tools to execute upon them. All of these relate back to this unifying concept of “resolve” which is an abstraction that allows us to relate the varying strategic concerns into a single mechanism.
Grant: How did you focus on creating asymmetry on each side? What are some basic examples of these differences?
Sam: As noted above, I viewed each side in terms of what was unique about their concerns and what was unique about their tools to address them. For the British as an example, they are tremendously constrained by supply. It isn’t just a supply line (though it is that too), it’s a currency they spend to move and battle with units. Obviously historically supply was a concern for the Colonials as well, but it did not hamstring them to the same degree, so the Colonials don’t have to worry about it at all. What’s more, this opens up strategic opportunities for the Colonial player to attack the British in other areas to force the British player to split their limited resources. An example for the Colonial player is Attrition Combat. Each time the Colonials battle in a space they control on their turn, they have the option to resolve Attrition Combat, in which they cede control of that space to the British but as a result can resolve the battle without risking return fire. At the beginning of the game this must be used strategically and sparingly, but as certain key personalities in the Colonial Deck, from George Washington to Francis Marion enter play it becomes far more powerful.
Grant: How does the game use trick taking? Why was this a good choice for your vision of the game?
Sam: I am actually trying to get away from that term, as I think it causes people to think that Common Sense is a lighter game than it is. It invokes pithy card games rather than sweeping strategic affairs played out on a map. The final rulebook will likely make no reference to standard trick taking terms. I chose it as a core mechanism though for a variety of reasons. One I will cover in a future question, but the other reason is because I became very interested in the question of card balance. If I have a card driven game with a variety of card effects, and I want them to vary in their power, they have to be balanced in some way. The most common way this is handled in game design is to make them have a proportionate cost to play using some in-game currency. I was more interested in making the powerful cards more difficult to play. In fact, I wanted to take a step beyond that and say that not only are they more difficult to play, but they are never guaranteed. This gave me a simple way to inject far more personality into the cards and make some have a tangible weight to them when they manage to enter play. “Ha ha, I play King George. You’re in trouble now.” Trick taking was a natural fit for this as the rules overhead for it is comparatively light and the cards come with their own intrinsic value based on the ease with which they can be used to win tricks.
Grant: What is the makeup of the cards? Can you share a few examples with us and explain their use?
Sam: Each year players will begin their turn with a ten card hand. They can perform a strategic mulligan of up to 5 cards each year. This is not in case a player got a “bad hand” but rather so they can try to postpone getting cards that do not fit their strategic objectives at the start of the year. The year is then played out over a series of ten “clashes” in which the initiative player plays a card face up and then the other player does the same. The initiative player’s card sets the suit for the clash and the non-initiative player must follow the suit of that played card if able. Then the player who played the card with the higher initiative value (ties going to the non-initiative player) resolves their card.
In this example (all placeholder art at this point in the game’s development by the way), the Colonial player has initiative and plays the Artemis Ward card into the clash who is a 6 value of the Battle suit. The British player then plays Battle of Quebec into the clash which is a 7 value of the Battle suit. Battle of Quebec then resolves.
The British player immediately gains a supply (the orange wagon in the upper right corner). This is a special bonus effect present on some cards. The equivalent effect for the Colonials is to go up on the Continental Congress Track. They now have the option to cancel the resolution of the card to perform any one of their available actions. If they choose to continue to resolve the card they resolve its event first. Battle of Quebec’s event is of the type “special action,” which offers additional effects to the action on the card. In this case, if the Battle action is used to resolve a battle north of the Winter Line, the Colonial player must reroll all their successful hit dice once. The last piece is the yellow star under the Battle suit icon which indicates Battle has “advantage” over the Special suit. This means that if the non-initiative player does not have a card of the clash’s suit to play into the clash, any Battle card will always beat a Special card.
Grant: What different suits are included? What use does each have for players?
Sam: There are three common suits which are universals and one special suit which is player specific. The three common suits are March, Battle, and Recruit. March is used to move armies about the board, Battle is used to fight, and Recruit is used to get more units to fight with. There are asymmetries in how these resolve but the goals of their use are the same, which is why they are considered the common suits.
Grant: What is different about the Special Suit? How does it benefit players?
Sam: The Special suit is different for a couple of reasons. First all of the actions contained in the Special suit cards are unique to that player. The Colonial player can train their militia units into the Continental Army and negotiate with the French, eventually bringing in and performing actions with French pieces once they enter the conflict. The British player can recruit, move, fight, and raid with Native units and move and battle with the British navy. A lot of the flavor of the two sides are contained in the Special suit. The other thing that is different about the suit is that the Special suit allows you to resolve any combination of these actions. For example a Battle x 3 card allows you to resolve up to three Battle actions. A Colonial Special x 3 on the other hand will allow them to perform a mix of any 3 train and French actions which offers flexibility.
Grant: What is the purpose of the Resolve Track?
Sam: I mentioned the Resolve Track earlier when I was describing how most of the asymmetrical concerns of the players coalesce into a singular concept. The Resolve Track serves three purposes. Firstly, it is the game clock. While the game can end in the event that you completely resolve the year 1783, it will more commonly end when the British and Colonial Resolve markers cross. Each player’s Resolve marker starts on opposite ends of the track and moves towards the other end as they lose resolve. Once they cross, the year is completed and final scoring occurs.
Grant: How do players manipulate this track? What benefits or detriments does it provide to players?
Sam: This is where the other functions of the Resolve Track come in. The second purpose is that many of the points for determining final score and victory come from the Resolve Track. Finally, resolve has a tremendous impact on both sides’ ability to recruit new units, the Colonials in particular. This is another demonstration of the game’s asymmetries actually, as the Colonials are far more impacted by resolve loss both from a scoring perspective and a recruitment perspective than the British. In regards to how the track is manipulated, common track manipulations only cause a loss of resolve. There are several ways resolve is regained, but they are all due to specific card effects. The British primarily lose resolve by losing British Regulars in battle and by being overcommitted to the American conflict at the expense of their other global conflicts. They can also lose resolve by overusing Hessian mercenaries, who are good and reliable but cost money that parliament is loath to spend. The Colonials on the other hand will lose resolve mostly due to the British seizing control of colonies, Winter Attrition, and failure of the Continental Congress to offer a believable alternative as a governing power to the crown.
Grant: What is dynamic about the initiative system?
Sam: I said I would come back to this when I was describing why I went with trick taking as a core mechanism. Essentially, you are the active (initiative) player for as long as you continue to win subsequent clashes. For the duration the other player is what I would consider a “reactive” player. They still have choices to make of course, for example which card to play into clashes, whether to resolve combat as a siege or not in fortified spaces, how much supply to commit to a protracted battle, etc. The point however is that while by sheer odds you are guaranteed to eventually get your turns in, the duration of the runs of turns is strongly connected to the skill of the player and their familiarity with the game. This is very much a game where a player will become far better after repeated plays. The other cool thing about this is that the events on cards require skill and forethought to combo them together. You may have the thought that if cards A, B, and C resolve in order you will have all but won the game, only to lose the clash for card C and have to pivot. This dynamism does a lot to keep the game fresh and challenging rather than thinking “I have cards A, B, and C so I already know how I will play this out.”
Grant: What different unit types does each player have access to? How does each type benefit them?
Sam: Again pursuing asymmetry I wanted to give each unit type its own character. Each unit has a potency and a resilience but this is just the tip of the iceberg. Militia are able to pop up virtually anywhere and are able fire first in battles where they are the aggressor, but they are poorly trained and can’t leave where they are recruited unless they are picked up by an army. British navies can contribute to naval sieges and amphibious assaults while they are also required end points for British supply lines. French regulars are able to operate as a distinct force while also being able to launch coordinated actions with the Continental Army, offering them incredible command flexibility. British Field Artillery is powerful, but is unable to retreat quickly when the battle is lost, meaning it will be commandeered by the Colonials (and may exchange hands several times over the course of the war). There are also Continental Army, Native Warband, Hessian Mercenary, French Navy, Tory Loyalist, Colonial Artillery, and British Ranger units. Each has its own complement of traits to figure out how to employ them optimally.
Grant: How does combat work in the design?
Sam: As I have alluded to, there are a variety of special combat resolutions possible like Attrition Combat, Sieges, Naval Bombardment, Raids, and Surprise Attacks. I will just be describing the standard battle procedure here though. Each unit has a number of dice they grant during battles. The British player will have to pay a supply for each unit they want to activate to gain dice this way. Players then roll all their dice simultaneously. Dice come in three flavors, red, white, and blue (see what I did there?). Red dice hit on 3 or better, blue on 4 or better, and white on 5 or better. No matter the die color, a 6 counts as 2 hits. The other player then takes as many dice as they have incoming hits (at this point color doesn’t matter) and rolls them. For each 6 they roll, they discard the lowest die among their rolled dice. They then go from their lowest rolled die to their highest, assigning dice to their units if possible. Each unit has a limited range of dice values they can be assigned which represents their morale. For example, the British and French Regulars are a professional army and so they can only be assigned 1s and 2’s. The Colonial Militia and Tory Loyalists on the other hand can be assigned anything from a 1 to a 4. After all dice have been assigned or there are no more rolled dice that can be assigned to any units legally, all units with a die assigned to them are eliminated. Then, if the resolving card grants additional Battle actions, the initiative player can choose to either resolve another round of battle in this space, or not, potentially beginning to resolve another battle in a different space. If no further battle rounds will occur in the current space, the total number of casualties is compared. If one side took fewer casualties and did not control the space, they gain control of the space. Then, if the side that took more casualties lost at least as many units as half the size of their army (stack), they are forced to retreat from the space.
Grant: What is the British Commitment Check? How does it work?
Sam: The British player uniquely tracks the number of clashes they win each year on their own “British Perception” Track. At the end of the year, they add their current level on this track to the number of British Regular and Navy units outside of the American Colonies available to fight the French and the Spanish. If this total is less than 10, they lose 1 level of resolve for each point of shortfall. This means that if they have run the table the entire year, they are free to overcommit to the colonies, thematically because the optics are good back home. If however they have a rough year, they may have to hold some forces back to avoid the war being cut short by Parliament because opinions have turned against it.
Grant: What is the Continental Congress Level? How does it work?
Sam: On average, every card in the Colonial deck is one initiative value lower than every card in the British deck. However, every card in the Recruit suit grants the Colonial players levels on the Continental Congress Track. Levels can be spent from the track as cards are played to increase the initiative value of the played card. The problem is that at the end of the year, the Colonial player is expected to have an ever increasing level on the Continental Congress track or they will lose resolve equal to the shortfall. This obligation is an even bigger potential headache for the Colonial player as the Continental Congress isn’t just a track on the board, it’s also a piece on the map. If the Continental Congress is forced to relocate (retreat) because their current space falls into British control, the Continental Congress levels reset to 0. Done later in the war this can be devastating to the Colonial player. Even worse, if the Continental Congress would have to retreat, but it has no valid place to do so since it is surrounded by British Controlled spaces, the Congress surrenders and the Colonial player loses the game outright with no points counted.
Grant: I have seen where you describe the game as a sandbox. What does this mean and how does it benefit the design?
Sam: I think this can best be demonstrated by the card I showed earlier, Battle of Quebec. Now of course, the Battle of Quebec occurred when Richard Montgomery and Benedict Arnold attempted to siege Quebec City on December 31, 1775. The Colonials suffered heavy losses and were soundly defeated by the elements as well as the British. Nowhere in that card does it specify that the battle needs to occur on a specific date, or at a specific location, just that it must be north of the Winter Line for the event to have an effect. There have been plenty of times in playtests where the card has been resolved in 1775 in Canada, but also many times where it hasn’t. This approach enables me to inject historicity into the game without shackling the player to recreate historical decisions. I think many historical gamers want experiences where they can recreate history, but they are not obligated to do so. Roughly paraphrasing what Gene Billingsley said about the game, “all the events are there, all the major players, and the outcomes, even though potentially very different from history, are entirely conceivable.” Put differently, it’s like the game hands you a toy box filled with American Revolution action figures to play with as you will. There will of course be some players who will miss some rigidity holding them to a more strictly historical course. However, I think this sandbox approach offers an opportunity to sink your teeth into the history and better appreciate the moving parts by seeing the different ways they could have fit together.
Grant: What are some general strategies for both sides?
Sam: From a general strategy perspective things are very historical. The British want a quick war. The fastest way to do this is to take the more valuable northern colonies which will tank the Colonial resolve and secure most of the significant strategic locations. By doing this they can force the Continental Army to suffer brutal winters away from the cities and put enough pressure on the Continental Congress that their resolve rapidly drains and they are forced to surrender. The Colonials want the opposite. They just want to hold out long enough using delaying tactics to organize a proper army, get the French into the war, and retake whatever key fortified locations they ceded to the British in the early war so they can force the British to the bargaining table.
Grant: What is the layout of the board?
Sam: Again, this map is placeholder art. The game uses point to point movement, with some spaces representing precise fortified locations and some representing large tracts of land (even entire colonies in some cases). Spaces are grouped into colonies that each have an associated hit to Colonial resolve if they are lost. There is also a British “in Europe” area and a number of tracks tied to the various game mechanics.
Grant: Why did you feel point to point movement was best?
Sam: The only two contenders here were point to point vs area based movement. Given the level of abstraction the system uses, any sort of hexed based representation was never an option. I decided to go with point to point because the game’s focus is really on the narrative more than anything else. An area based map would have forced me to have the visual importance of areas be at least somewhat to scale by the size of the colony. Instead by doing point to point I can give a colony as many spaces and fortifications as are thematically appropriate for the importance of that colony in the actual conflict.
Grant: What type of an experience does the game create?
Sam: The game is punchy. It is very competitive and intentionally so. You are only able to achieve so much on a given turn, and at the end of each turn you have another clash and a chance for your opponent to seize the initiative. The elation when the other player plays a card out and you realize you can beat it and put out Benjamin Franklin when you thought you weren’t going to get a turn for at least 2 more clashes is fantastic. It also plays very quickly for a game of its weight. Most games between players who know how to play will be under 2 hours.
Grant; What are you most pleased about with the design?
Sam: I would say three things. First, because it’s top of mind as I just finished it, the solo play. I knew how I wanted the solo to feel, but I wasn’t quite sure how I was going to make it happen mechanically. I will be putting out some videos soon showing how it works, but suffice it to say for the moment that I am very pleased with it. Second, every game I design, I design to create stories at the table. If it always tells the same story it isn’t memorable. If there are never any surprises it isn’t memorable. Common Sense succeeds in both of these areas to a tremendous degree. Each time I catch up with a player I have played Common Sense with before they are able to remind me of our whole game by invoking strange or exciting moments from our game a year ago like it happened yesterday. Finally, when I design a new game I generally try to think about what aspects of it are specific to the topic and which could be modified slightly to make it work for other topics. I have my own plans for a Vietnam War version of this system that I am very excited about. What surprised me though was how many great designers have been inspired by the system and want to do their own designs with it. At the moment I am only at liberty to say that Ananda Gupta wants to do a French Revolution game with the system, which is such an incredible honor since Twilight Struggle is the primary inspiration for it.
Grant: What other designs are you working on?
Sam: I am always working on something. I have a non-historical game I am working on that has been picked up but I cannot talk about it yet. I have a train game that I may be able to talk about more publicly soon and an American Civil War game that I will be debuting at HistCon North. Oh, and I have a Sengoku Jidai wargamer’s party game that I am tooling around with. There are more, but that’s enough of a teaser. Thanks for the interview!
Thank you Sam for your thoughts on your game and for the effort you have obviously put into it. Having played the game while attending SDHistCon ta few years ago, I can say that we had a great time with the game, felt all of the aspects you discussed and very much enjoyed the way cards were played, how the initiative kept with the winner and the various frustrations of the asymmetry of each of the sides. I think that this one will be a winner and I look forward to playing it further in the future!
For a bit more information, we posted a quick video interview with Sam while at SDHistCon and you can view that at the following link:
I love a different style and focus of wargame. A game that takes a look at an important but somewhat obscure or rarely addressed historical topic, such as espionage or intelligence, and creates a gaming experience tailored around the events to highlight and evoke the difficulties and tension that would have been present. In January 2026, GMT Games announced such a game in Checkpoint Charlie, which is a solo or cooperative game focused on SIS espionage missions in Berlin in the 1960’s designed by Russell Brown. We have posted an interview with Russel and it was very well received and he has now agreed to create a series of History Behind the Cards to highlight the events of the 1960’s Cold War struggle in West Germany but also to share aspects about the game play and how it models the history.
*Note: The cards highlighted in this series and their event text, as well as any pictures used showing any of the various components, are still in the design and development process and as such event effects and text might still change prior to final development and publication.Also the art and layout of the cards are only for playtest purposes at this point and the game will enter the art department as it nears publication.
History Behind the Cards – Checkpoint Charlie from GMT Games – Card #4: Faceoff with the Soviets
On August 13th, 1961, in a dramatic move to stop the flow of millions of East Germans defecting to the West, East German police placed miles of barbed wire overnight, cutting off access between East and West Berlin and catching the western powers by surprise. It wasn’t clear what the response of the west would be, and whether it would ultimately lead to the war with the Soviets that many people felt was inevitable.
For days there seemed to be no reaction. West Berlin and Mayor Willie Brandt looked to U.S. President Kennedy to respond quickly and forcefully to the wall, but U.S. troops in Berlin made no move to intervene. Instead, on August 16th, Kennedy sent Vice President, Lyndon Johnson, and General Lucious Clay (more about him on card #6) to deal with the situation. At the same time, he ordered the U.S. 18th Infantry regiment in West Germany to cross East Germany on the autobahn to Berlin, along the access corridor established by the Potsdam Conference. The troops came equipped for battle and paraded through the streets of West Berlin with Johnson and General Clay. This showed U.S. support for Berlin, but did nothing to remove the wall, which quickly turned from barbed wire to concrete.
Over the next two months, disputes arose over the rights of French, British and U.S. troops to travel in the Soviet sector of Berlin, which were also established by the Potsdam Agreement. Tensions came to a head when a U.S. diplomat was stopped at Checkpoint Charlie while crossing into East Berlin. On October 27th, after heated exchanges, mostly between the Soviet Commandant and General Clay, Clay attempted to send another diplomatic mission through Checkpoint Charlie, this time accompanied by ten jeeps full of American soldiers, with ten U.S. tanks in reserve back in West Berlin. The crossing succeeded, but the Soviets responded by sending ten of their own tanks right up to the Checkpoint Charlie crossing. The U.S. tanks moved up to face them.
The standoff lasted nearly a full day, with the tanks and soldiers facing each other, ready for battle. Kennedy and Khrushchev managed to negotiate a resolution and the Soviet tanks pulled back slightly first (presumably because they had moved up to the border first), then the U.S. tanks pulled back. This gradual retreat alternated until the faceoff was at an end and traffic through the checkpoint resumed.
The Faceoff with the Soviets card in Checkpoint Charlie places a Faceoff marker in the Checkpoint Charlie location, which prevents any assets and KGB agents from entering this location during the Movement step of the turn (though some played card effects still allow this). This marker can only be removed by the General Clay Steps In event (card #6).
In the next article in this series, we will take a look at Berlin Film Festival and how its effect caused some issues with various locations operating as Honey Traps about the city.
In my opinion, this game looks extremely interesting and I am very much excited to learn more about it. I am appreciative to Russell and his efforts to bring us these cards and to write these entries to share with our readers. I am also very glad that this topic is being covered in a game and look forward to playing this one day soon.
As this month’s Wargame Watch posts on the blog, I will have just come back from attending the World Boardgaming Championships in Seven Springs, Pennsylvania where I was able to spend 5 1/2 days of fabulous gaming. I bring that up because this month I just didn’t have the time to do the deep dive that I normally do and only was able to find 27 games (including a new game from our sponsor Nuts! Publishing). I was also able to find 3 games to share being offered on Crowdfunding through Gamefound and Kickstarter.
This month we have a sponsor for the Wargame Watch feature in Nuts! Publishing. Founded in 2011, Nuts! Publishing is a French tabletop and board game publisher established by four wargaming and history enthusiasts. While initially famous strictly for historical and tactical wargames, the company has expanded its catalog to include cooperative, sci-fi, and family-friendly board games, while maintaining a strict selection process for those games they do publish. They are well known for developing popular original titles like Mini Rogue, Diluvium, and 300: Earth & Water, which is a part of their unique small format wargame series called Combat Rations that recently released the 3rd volume in the series called Guerre Eclair. The “Combat Ration” Series is a line of highly accessible, compact wargames designed to be played in about an hour including the 2 previous titles of 300: Earth & Water that delves into the Persian invasion of Greece in 492BC, and Port Arthur that retells the story of the 1905 Russo-Japanese War.
But, they also have a full line of more beefy traditional wargames including such titles as Urban Operations, Saigon 75, Stalingrad Roads, This War Without an Enemy, We Are Coming, Nineveh and Phantom Fury.
In addition to their own unique games, they also hold licenses to translate and distribute highly acclaimed international games for the French market, such as One Deck Dungeon, War of the Ring and the UndauntedSeries.
Their newest wargame release is called Guerre Eclair designed by Yasushi Nakaguro and is a part of the Combat Rations Series. Guerre Eclair is a remake of the 2019 game called The Rise of Blitzkrieg from Bonsai Games and is a card-driven game for 2 players lasting around 45 minutes. The setting is World War II in 1940 as the Germans unleashed their new Blitzkrieg tactic to invade France. The attacking Germans hide their intentions by choosing a conquest goal of either taking the Maginot Line, conquering Paris or controlling the ports at Dunkirk. Dice are rolled for combat and the highest 2 dice totals determine the outcome and if doubles are rolled losses to units will be inflicted. The French and British really cannot afford to lose many units as they don’t have a lot but neither can the Germans. The game is simple but fairly meaty with lots of decision points and we had a great time with it, as we have had with the other games appearing in the series.
Here is what Florent had to share on their upcoming slate of games:
In May, we released Guerre Eclair the third game in the CombatRations series and work on the next titles in the line is well underway (specifically Norway 40, followed by Bulge 20 – Yes, by Joe Miranda previously published by Victory Point Games). Urban Operations 2nd Edition is now available in stores worldwide. Please note that an upgrade kit is available on our website for owners of the 1st Edition.
Upcoming releases in early 2027 include The Coldest Winter, a card-driven game about the 1939–40 war between Finland and the Soviet Union (designed by Timo Pohja; art by Nils Johanssen), followed by Supremacy 2050, in which the world’s four major powers clash between 2020 and 2050 (designed by Pierre Razoux; art by Domhnall Hegarty).
Finally, we will launch two crowdfunding campaigns in 2027. The first will be for the second edition of Sword of Rome, covering the rise of Roman power in the 3rd and 4th centuries BC (designed by Wray Ferrell; art by Nicolas Roblin and Gabriel Pardon). The second will feature Nemto a cooperative sci-fi wargame (designed by Hermann Luttman; art by Nicolas Roblin and Christian Benavides).
Quite a variety of eras and gameplay styles!
Here is a link to an interview we did with one of the owners, designer and main bottle washer Florent Coupeau while attending Essen Spiel 2025:
Here also is an older video we did with Florent while attending SDHistCon 2024 where we discussed the excellent Combat Rations Series and Guerre Eclair (recently released) and the upcoming Norway 40:
1. Pacific Fleet: Rise & Fall of the Japanese Empire from VUCA Simulations
VUCA Simulations is a newer company on the scene the last several years (really since 2021) and they are coming out with some really great looking games. We have played several of their games and always have a great time with them. One of their newest pre-order offerings is called Pacific Fleet: Rise & Fall of the Japanese Empire designed by Hiroyuki Inose. I love a good Pacific Theater WWII game and this one looks pretty great.
From the game page, we read the following:
The Pacific War was unlike any other conflict of the Second World War. Vast oceans, isolated island chains, carrier task forces, long-range bombers, amphibious invasions, and industrial warfare all combined into one of history’s most complex military campaigns.
Pacific Fleet: Rise & Fall of the Japanese Empire places you in command of this global struggle. Lead the Imperial Japanese forces in their quest to establish dominance across Asia and the Pacific, or direct the Allied war effort as overwhelming industrial power gradually turns the tide. Every carrier strike, convoy, amphibious landing, and production decision shapes the course of the war.
This is not merely a naval game—it is a complete grand-strategic simulation where sea, air, and land warfare are seamlessly integrated into one operational system.
Fight from the opening attacks of December 1941 through the climactic campaigns that determined the fate of the Japanese Empire. Unlike many Pacific games that focus on individual battles, Pacific Fleet presents the entire theatre as one interconnected campaign where logistics, production, intelligence, and operational planning are equally important.
2. Modern Tactics: Afghanistan – British Forces Expansion from VUCA Simulations
We have played a lot of Old School Tactical from Flying Pig Games, which is designed by Shayne Logan. Shayne now has a design with VUCA Simulations that deals with modern warfare in Afghanistan called Modern Tactics: Afghanistan. That was announced on pre-order a while ago and has since been delivered but there is now an expansion of sorts to the game called Modern Tactics: Afghanistan – British Forces Expansion but it is being designed by another designer named Kenneth Tee of People Power from GMT Games fame.
From the game page, we read the following:
The war in Afghanistan was fought village by village, compound by compound, and patrol by patrol. Every operation demanded careful planning, disciplined infantry, close cooperation with allied forces, and constant vigilance against an elusive insurgency.
Modern Tactics: Afghanistan – British Forces Expansion places you in command of the British Army, Royal Marines, Special Air Service, and supporting Afghan forces during Operation Herrick. Experience thirteen new scenarios inspired by real operations fought throughout Helmand Province between 2001 and 2012, introducing new units, mechanics, and tactical challenges to the Modern Tactics system.
Whether conducting a night raid with the SAS, leading Gurkhas into hostile villages, defending isolated platoon houses, or escorting Afghan National Army units through dangerous territory, every mission presents unique tactical and operational decisions.
3. Thirty Years of Misery: The Thirty Years War 1618-1648 from VUCA Simulations
A couple of years ago, I came across a new designer named Brian Asklev and have done interviews with him covering Baltic Empires from GMT Games and 1812 – Napoleon’s Fateful March from VUCA Simulations. Brian is a pretty sharp designer and I very much like his approach to design as well as the choices in designs that he is doing. His new game is called Thirty Years of Misery: The Thirty Years War 1618-1648. The cover art is amazing, the topic looks great and the approach that he is taking seems to be very novel.
From the game page, we read the following:
Between 1618 and 1648, Europe was consumed by one of the longest and most destructive conflicts in its history. What began as a rebellion in Bohemia soon engulfed the Holy Roman Empire and drew nearly every major European power into a struggle over religion, dynastic ambition, and political supremacy. Millions perished as armies marched across Central Europe, cities were besieged, alliances shifted, and entire regions were devastated.
Thirty Years of Misery places you in command of the major powers that shaped this conflict. Lead the Imperial Habsburgs, the Catholic League, Sweden, or France as you fight to reshape Germany through military campaigns, religious influence, political maneuvering, and strategic diplomacy.
Victory requires more than battlefield success. You must secure electorates, protect your heartlands, influence the religious landscape of the Empire, and achieve your faction’s unique historical ambitions before peace is finally negotiated at Westphalia. Rather than recreating individual battles, Thirty Years of Misery captures the entire strategic conflict across three decades of war.
Every campaign combines:
Military operations
Religious conflict
Political objectives
Coalition warfare
Historical events
Dynamic diplomacy
Each round features a randomized turn order, ensuring that no two campaigns unfold the same way. Players must continually adapt to changing circumstances, unexpected interventions, and opportunities created by both allies and enemies.
4. Iwo Jima: Hell on Earth Revised Edition from Neva Game Press
Neva Game Press (formerly Neva Wargames) is a new publisher who appeared on the scene 2+ years ago. When I started seeing their posts on Twitter and Facebook, I was immediately impressed with their interesting topic choices for their upcoming games as well as the fact that they are trying to make small footprint wargames that pack a punch. And the art is also very appealing and brings an aesthetically pleasing and attractive look to their games! Their first release called Iwo Jima: Hell on Earth, which is a solitaire look at the amphibious invasion of the island of Iwo Jima in 1945 at the end of WWII, was both commercially and critically successful and has sold out and now they are bringing back a revised edition for pre-order.
From the game page, we read the following:
Iwo Jima: Hell on Earth is a hex & counter wargame based on this iconic battle. This challenging solitaire wargame puts you in command of US Marine Regiments as they battle entrenched Japanese Battalions during the iconic 36-day Operation Detachment. Each game turn represents approximately four days, condensing the intense conflict into nine turns of strategic decision-making.
In Iwo Jima: Hell on Earth, your mission as the commander of US forces is to conquer the island of Iwo Jima to secure its three airfields and the iconic Mount Suribachi. The game simulates the 36-day battle in nine turns, with each turn representing approximately four days.
Victory is determined at the end of Turn 9 by calculating your Victory Points. You earn VP’s by: Eliminating Japanese units, Capturing key objectives on time and Japanese surrender. You can lose VP’s if: You play too many Special Orders and/or you suffer too many US casualties. Your final VP score will give you an assessment of your performance, ranging from a “pen-pushing job” (1 or less to 5 VP) to an “incredible victory” (19-20 VP).
I think that a new company selling out their first release is probably pretty rare in our hobby but Neva did it and it is partly because a good solitaire game is always in demand and their focus on quality, in both game play and components, speaks to wargamers and word will spread fast once it is out. So what is different in this new Revised Edition?
Because we are heading back to the printers, we saw the perfect opportunity to integrate our community feedback directly into the game. The Revised Edition will feature:
Upgraded Map: A minor visual tweak where hill hex frames are slightly thicker, making them much easier to identify during intense gameplay.
Box Art Variant: A fresh, slight variation of the original box art (while keeping the classic spirit of the original design).
Fully Integrated Updates: All components from our Update Kit (detailed below) will come standard inside the box!
5. Rebels Against Rebellion from Flying Pig Games Currently on Kickstarter
About 18 months ago, while attending Buckeye Game Fest in Columbus, Ohio, we met up with David Thompson to get a quick look at a few of his newest upcoming games at the time including Line of Fire: Burnt Moon from Osprey Games and the very interesting American Civil War game with a twist called Rebels Against Rebellion from Flying Pig Games. I got to play Rebels Against Rebellion and very much enjoyed the game and what it was trying to convey about the lack of support for the secession of Tennessee from the Union as most of the residents of Scott County voted against breaking away during the American Civil War. The game pits the local groups against each other as the Free and Independent State of Scott fights against the local secessionist residents as violent confrontations between Loyalist and secessionist-aligned partisans and outlaws engaged in raids on farms, stealing livestock, and destroying property. Since that time, the game has progressed and has already launched on Kickstarter.
From the game page, we read the following:
Rebels Against Rebellion is a card-driven war game designed by award-winning designers, David Thompson and Trevor Benjamin. The cards in your deck represent the units and locations under your control. Each turn you will play cards to perform actions on the board and to add, remove, and improve the cards in your deck. The player who most successfully spreads their control across Scott County is the winner.
Tennessee’s role in the American Civil War and the Secession Crisis was marked by significant internal divisions between its eastern, middle, and western regions. In early 1861, when South Carolina became the first state to secede from the Union, Tennessee’s legislature resisted the idea. However, following the attack on Fort Sumter in April 1861, Tennessee was forced to readdress its position. On June 8, 1861, a state referendum resulted in a decisive vote to secede.
Despite this formal decision, Tennessee remained divided. In the eastern part of the state, loyalist sentiment was strong. East Tennessee had overwhelmingly voted against secession in the 1861 referendum, while West and Middle Tennessee overwhelmingly supported secession.
As tensions escalated, residents of East Tennessee found themselves forced to take sides, often leading to violent confrontations. Loyalist- and secessionist-aligned partisans and outlaws engaged in raids on farms, stealing livestock, and destroying property. The establishment of local militia groups known as the home guard sought to defend loyalists. These small militias acted in secret, launching surprise attacks on Confederate soldiers and secessionist raiders, but they also faced constant threats from the Confederate army and local secessionist groups.
Of the thirty-one counties in East Tennessee, none voted against succession by a higher margin than Scott County. With a vote of 521 to 19 in favor of rejecting secession, the county’s stance was clear. Local residents so opposed the Confederacy that later in 1861, the county court approved a protest resolution declaring the county’s secession from the State of Tennessee and the creation of a “Free and Independent State of Scott.”
This is the story of the Free and Independent State of Scott during the Civil War.
If you are interested, we did an interview video with David while attending Buckeye Game Fest in the spring of 2025 and you can watch that at the following link for more information on the game:
Because I know that many of you will be paying this one solitaire, Denver did an overview video of the solitaire mode and you can watch that at the following link:
As of August 1st, the Kickstarter campaign has funded and raised $24,531 toward $10,000 funding goal with 450 backers. The campaign will conclude on Tuesday, August 18th at 12:00pm EDT.
6. Lee’s War: The War in Virginia 1861-65 from Worthington Publishing Currently on Kickstarter
One of the subjects that Worthington Publishing does really well is the American Civil War. They have their Civil War Brigade Battle Series that we have enjoyed and they really have a way of making these ACW games playable yet integrating some of the most important historical aspects to keep them grounded in history. Their newest series is focused on the Strategic Level and is supposed to be a 3 volume series. The first entry in the series is called Lee’s War: The War in Virginia 1861-65 and is currently on Kickstarter.
From the game page, we read the following:
Lee’s War is Volume I in what I hope to be a 3 Volume set on the American Civil War. It is meant to show the difficulties each side faced during the war. There is no plan currently for a full war campaign scenario. Players are given scenarios based on the campaigns and complete years of the war. I hope you enjoy playing the short crisp 2 – 3-hour scenarios giving an intense game experience as well as a study in Civil War command.
If this game is successful then Volume II, tentatively titled Grant’s War will be the Western Theater along the Mississippi from 1861 to 1864. Volume III, titled Sherman’s War, will be the Western Theater and the battle for Eastern Tennessee and Georgia from 1861 to 1865.
The game is for 2 or more players but is highly solitaire friendly (one player playing both sides) due to the random nature of certain rules such as Dice Differential and combat die rolls.
Lee’s War is a strategic level hex and counter war game for 2 or more players of the entire American Civil War in Virginia from 1862 – 1865. Leadership is highlighted using counters representing the combat leaders of the war. The destruction of the opposing players forces are the main objectives of the game, followed by the occupation of key cities or rail lines. The political aspects of the war are not reflected in the game per say, however they are reflected in the Victory Conditions. The longer the south drug out the war, and the more Union casualties inflicted, the better the chance that Lincoln would lose the 1864 election, and a peace Candidate (probably McClellan) would end the war with southern independence.
Here is the current 14 scenario list:
First Manassas / Historic 4 turns or optional long game 8 turns (July 1 – August 31, 1861)
The Peninsula Campaign / 10 turns (April 1 – June 15, 1862)
The Peninsula Campaign Plus Seven Days 16 turns (April 1 – July 31, 1862)
Second Manassas / 7 turns (July 14 – August 31, 1862)
As of August 1st, the Kickstarter campaign has funded and raised $27,212 toward its $1,861 funding goal with 304 backers. The campaign will conclude on Saturday, August 15th at 4:00pm EDT.
7. Warfighter: The WWII Eastern FrontSpecial Forces Card Game from Dan Verssen Games Currently on Kickstarter
The Warfighter system from Dan Verssen Games is a card based game designed for 1 to 6 players. You can play solo or cooperatively against the AI to complete World War II squad-level combat missions. One of my favorite parts of the game is at the start of each mission, you will select one or more Player Soldiers, equip them with skills, weapons, and combat gear within the mission’s Resource limit. You then fight your way through hostile territory and engage enemy soldiers, as you attempt to reach and complete your mission objective. Every mission is a stand-alone game. You build your Soldiers, select your Gear, and then run your mission. Within 30 to 60 minutes you will have succeeded or failed. We simply love the system and prefer the WWII focused modules (we really hated Fantasy!) and are very excited to see that they are doing this WWII Eastern Front offering as I think that it will offer a new and interesting view of the history.
From the game page, we read the following:
Warfighter WWII Eastern Front recreates the brutal skirmishes fought across the vast Soviet battlefields of World War II, where Soviet Red Army and German forces clashed for shattered cities, strategic strongholds, and hard-won ground in some of the harshest climactic conditions of the war. You will face fierce resistance from enemy troops, but the battlefield itself, from deep snow and choking mud to bitter cold and broken terrain, can prove equally deadly.
Do you have what it takes to defend the Rodina and drive the invader from our soil?
Warfighter WWII Eastern Front is the latest title in the Warfighter WWII Series, which includes other core sets for the Europe, Pacific, Mediterranean and North Africa Theatres of Operation. The Eastern Front has been an area of interest which we have been discussing for a time, and we began research and design work in January 2025. Now, the game design is complete, and we are ready to present it for crowdfunding support.
A key part of the game is squad building and mission planning. You decide which soldiers go on the mission, and which skills, weapons and gear to equip them with, best suited for the objective you are attacking. You control their actions and resolve all combat against hostiles and events encountered, but do not take too long, as the timer is counting down!
As a solitaire wargame, the game’s hostile response system handles all the enemy decisions and actions which will oppose your squad and thwart your mission plans. You will have to respond to the unexpected events and hostile attacks, as well as challenging weather and terrain, to make it to the objective and complete the victory conditions. Glory for the Motherland! Slava Rodina!
Along with the Eastern Front Core Box, there are seven Expansions which will allow you to extend your gameplay to include more armed forces and battles. The expansions offered with the Eastern Front core box feature Penal Battalions, Airborne, Partisans, as well as the Soviet Winter, Soviet Winter Vehicles and the Raid on Peenemünde.
We have also created the Critical Hit Deck pack, a new type of expansion which introduces critical hits to Soldiers and Hostiles alike, to add some cinematic flair and drama to your stories. All expansions are designed to be playable with the core set, and they add new Soldiers, Missions and Objectives, Gear, Skills, Locations, Hostiles and Events to your gameplay.
As of August 1st, the Kickstarter campaign has raised $24,469 toward its $20,000 funding goal with 151 backers. The campaign will conclude on Monday, August 3rd at 3:00pm EDT.
8. Lee Moves North: Campaigns of Antietam and Gettysburg from GMT Games
Several years ago, Mark Herman designed a unique and simple American Civil War game called Gettysburg that appeared in C3i Magazine #32. That game became the basis for his new Civil War Heritage Series with the first volume being Rebel Fury that focused on five battles from the Chancellorsville and Chickamauga Campaigns and Volume II being Army of the Potomac. Mark has now advanced the series with the upcoming Volume III called Lee Moves North: Campaigns of Antietam and Gettysburg that was announced this past month by GMT Games.
From the game page, we read the following:
Lee Moves North is a standalone game that covers the Confederate invasions that led to the battles of Antietam and Gettysburg. Lee Moves North is the third volume in Mark Herman’s Civil War Heritage Series that began with the Charles S. Roberts Award winning Rebel Fury (Best American Civil Wargame of 2024).
Lee Moves North is a low-complexity, grand tactical simulation that won the James F. Dunnigan Award for Playability and Design. Its unique combat system generates a detailed narrative that perhaps for the first time allows you to fully experience the risk calculus of a Civil War Army General.
If you know how to play Rebel Fury or Army of the Potomac, you can play the one map battles of Antietam and Gettysburg right out of the box. The game comes with 13 scenarios, 7 of which are played on one map to include 4 DOG (the four days of Gettysburg) with the remainder using all or some number of its EIGHT grand tactical maps, plus a standalone Theater scenario. The thirteenth bonus scenario covers Jubal Early’s 1864 invasion that led to the battle of the Monocacy River.
Through Lee Moves North you will experience these famous battles in a way that you have not seen them before. The grand tactical level is about maneuver combinations prior to and during a battle but make no mistake you will also see the brutal nature of Civil War combat. As the general leading an army, you will have player agency over when, where, and how often to attack using the unique Rebel Fury combat system. Following the combat narratives that are in every book that you have ever read on the Civil War you will experience the frustration of seeing your assaults fail more often than they succeed yet the better general is the one whose plans turn this historical reality into victory.
While we have not yet played Army of the Potomac, we have very much enjoyed the system and its first volume Rebel Fury. Here is a look at our video review for Rebel Fury:
If you are interested in Lee Moves North: Campaigns of Antietam and Gettysburg, you can pre-order a copy for $82.00 from the GMT Games website at the following link: https://www.gmtgames.com/p-1253-lee-moves-north.aspx
9. Rowing to Hades: Fast Playing Naval Battles of the Ancient World from GMT Games
Ancients games are always a good time and if that game has naval units, including triremes, Greek fire ships and the like sign me up. This past month, GMT announced this new game from designer Jason Walonoski called Rowing to Hades:Fast Playing Naval Battles of the Ancient World. Jason is a newer designer with his first game called Epipolae: The Athenian Expedition in Sicily, 415-413 BCE, which is a part of the Levy & Campaign Ancients Series. I share that because he knows something about Ancients and I also think that he is a good designer with a good approach.
From the game page, we read the following:
Rowing to Hades is a squadron-level naval wargame set in the ancient era. The era of oars, not sails. Rams, not broadsides.
Inspired by classics such as War Galley (GMT), Trireme (Avalon Hill) and the Commands & Colors system, it will appeal to gamers who want to enjoy quick naval battles at a different scale and complexity level.
A single battle can be completed in 30-60 minutes. There are scenarios for the Greco-Persian and the Peloponnesian Wars as well as a campaign system to link multiple battles together in an afternoon.
A key design goal was to create a fun quick-playing game, not a simulation. Many details are abstracted, while maintaining historical flavor.
Combat is simple and quickly resolved. After all units have moved, they may Ram. If units have not moved, they may conduct Melee.
Attackers roll a base number of dice determined by the unit type (different types of units roll different numbers of dice for ramming and melee), with the number of dice increasing or decreasing for factors like attacking from the rear, using a special maneuver card, or the enemy formation (for example, line abreast, line ahead, or kyklos).
I am very much interested in this one. Tactical level naval combat is something that is very appealing and this one looks to be on the lighter side of the spectrum but offers enough depth that it should be a very interesting experience.
If you are interested in Rowing to Hades: Fast Playing Naval Battles of the Ancient World, you can pre-order a copy for $55.00 from the GMT Games website at the following link: https://www.gmtgames.com/p-1252-rowing-to-hades.aspx
10. Commands & Colors: Ancients 8th Printing from GMT Games
Commands & Colors: Ancients depicts warfare from approximately 3,000 BC to the opening of the Middle Ages in 400 AD, which is quite a spread across time encompassing different strategies, tactics and even technology. CC: Ancients uses the standard card activation system which identifies a number of units that can take actions in one of three areas on the board, including the Left, Center and Right. This card system is standard to the series and really keeps the game light and fun as you sometimes simply cannot control take the actions you need to in order to win the game.
One of the reasons that I like Ancients and how it implements the system is that the scale changes during each of the battles represented. This means that some of the scenarios will have an Infantry unit representing an entire legion of fighters, while in other scenarios a unit may just represent a few warriors. This flexibility makes the game really interesting and you have to learn how best to use each of your units in each of the settings. This really adds to the replayability factor as well because you are learning from each scenario.
The unit variety in this one is interesting as compared to other games in the series such as Battle Cry and Memoir ’44 as each of those volumes had just three types of different units. In Ancients though there are multiple different types or classes of Infantry. Units are rated according to their makeup and in some ways their tactics and are placed in three neat and tidy categories including Light, Medium and Heavy. In the ranks of the Light Infantry, there are the standard Light Infantry, Auxilia, Light Bow and Light Sling for example. In looking at the other types of units there are Cavalry, Chariots, War Machines, Leaders, and the best part Elephants. The game comes with very clear and well done player aids that outline the different abilities of each type of unit and help you with an understanding of their movement, combat dice and any special abilities.
The final best thing about the game is the number of different engagements portrayed and how each of them uses different units and will require you to think on your toes about how best to utilize your assets. The battles covered include Akragas, Crimissos River, Ticinus River, Lake Trasimenus, Cannae, Dertosa, Castulo, Baecula, Ilipa, and Zama. All in all, I find Ancients to be a simple yet fulfilling gateway to the series and would recommend it heartily to anyone interested in getting on board.
From the game page, we read the following:
Commands & Colors: Ancients allows you to re-fight epic battles of the ancient world. Here the focus is on the two rivals for power in the Western Mediterranean – Carthage and Rome. Will you, as Hannibal, triumph over larger Roman armies; or as Scipio Africanus, will you beat Hannibal with newer tactics of your own?
Units in both armies can only move and fight when ordered. The command playing cards supply those orders, providing an element of luck that creates a fog of war and presents players with both challenges and opportunities. You must maximize your opportunities by playing your command cards judiciously. How well you handle the diverse units, their weapons, and the terrain, will determine victory.
Commands & Colors: Ancients contains the battles of Akragas, Crimissos River, Ticinus River, Lake Trasimenus, Cannae, Dertosa, Castulo, Baecula, Ilipa, and Zama.
11. Commands & Colors: Napoleonics 6th Printing from GMT Games
I will be honest with you, when we first played Commands and Colors, I was really leaning toward Ancients as my favorite one. But that all changed once we got the grand daddy of them all on the table in Napoleonics. To me, I really enjoy the added layers of depth to this one. It has six expansions for a reason as they have tried to capture the intricacies of each nation and their unique abilities and fighting styles to make for very highly stylized game.
Of all the C&C games this one is on the richer end of the scale, especially as you add in the expansions. The little bits of chrome make the combats more tactical. You can put your infantry into square formation to counter cavalry charges, but that comes with it’s own sub set of limitations. Each nation has their own special ability, and then each of their units have their own characteristics. An example of which are the Spaniards’ Infantry being straight up not as good as others. They roll dice equal to their number of blocks -1 for example. Each faction has strengths and weaknesses which gives you a little more to think about. Again, nothing overwhelming, and nothing you can’t handle but Napoleonics just has that extra richness and detail that brings the game to life and makes each play feel different from the last.
There are a few new differences in this one. Leaders play a very important role on the battlefield. They don’t add to attack but keep units in formation and from breaking. You must try to keep the Leaders away from the front line because they can become casualties but you need them to keep order on the battlefield as they will allow units to ignore some symbols.
Another major difference is in how units do when they are reduced. In all previous versions of the C&C system, the number of remaining blocks in a unit was not factored into the strength of that unit’s attack. If they had three units left, they would still roll their maximum 2 dice. But now that has changed and I really like this one. The basic attack strength of a unit is equal to the number of its blocks.
The color and the pageantry of a Napoleonics battle is hard to ignore and this one has a lot of substance to the game that the other volumes don’t approach. I will play Napoleonics at any time and relish the chance to learn new strategies and try out new tactics with the multitude of different units found in each expansion.
In the end, Commands and Colors is a fantastic system that has a little bit of everything that will appeal to any wargamer’s taste. I recently played Tricorne and man was that a fascinating experience. We also played the new one from GMT from 2019 Medieval and enjoyed it, and actually really liked some of the new additions, but just were let down by the theme. If you haven’t tried C&C yet, what are you waiting for? Pick a historical period you like and give it a try. You won’t be disappointed!
From the game page, we read the following:
The Napoleonic historical period has always been one of our favorites and was actually the second historical game that we developed using the Commands & Colors system. The Wars of Napoleon rules at first glance may seem more complex than other Commands & Colors games, but if you are familiar with the game system, you are only a few short steps away from taking Command. Even if you have never played before, learning the fundamentals of the game system is straightforward and will be an enjoyable endeavor.
For the game group in Orlando, Wars of Napoleon is one of our favorites. There is a wealth of subtle and bold features that set it apart from other historical periods and it truly embraces the tactical doctrines of France and the various nations that fought against Napoleon.
The Napoleonic period showcases a unique balance between the roles of Infantry, Cavalry and Artillery on the battlefield.
In combat, a unit’s battle strength is directly tied to the number of blocks present in the unit. Therefore, as a unit suffers block loses its combat effectiveness is reduced.
An Infantry unit, by forming square, can reduce the effectiveness of the most gallant Cavalry charge.
Artillery in combined arms combat along with an Infantry or Cavalry melee attack can produce the most devastating results.
As with other Commands & Colors games, the battle dice resolve combat quickly and the Command cards provide a fog of war and will present players with new challenges and opportunities for victory.
When in Command, the battlefield tactics you will need to execute conform remarkably well to the historical advantages and limitations inherent to each Napoleonic Army. For example, as the French Commander you will want to maneuver your infantry units into a position to take advantage of their melee attack dice bonus. While a British Commander will want his line infantry to take up a defensive position and stand and volley fire with a dice bonus. The other major powers also have similar seemingly simple advantages that can impact a battle and will influence your Command style for that army.
The core Wars of Napoleon game will feature French, British and Portuguese troops, while the expansions will showcase one Coalition army that opposed Napoleon.
12. Pacific War: The Struggle Against Japan, 1941-1945 Deluxe Edition 2nd Printing from GMT Games
Both Alexander and I love Empire of the Sun and really enjoy Mark Herman designs. Now I know that Pacific War is not EotS but it definitely was a precursor and led to its design and development. Unfortunately, I did not play the original Pacific War as I was 12 years old and focused on other things (baseball, football) and other games (mainly Dungeons & Dragons and other role playing in my teens). So, this one interests me because it will be a new experience for me.
From the game page we read the following:
Pacific War is a Strategic wargame that takes you from the attack on Pearl Harbor to the climatic summer of 1945… from Australia to China… from Burma to Hawaii… from the defense of Wake Island through the invasion of Guadalcanal culminating in the desperate battles to defend the Japanese Home Islands.
Strategic wargame that covers the entirety of the Pacific Theater of World War II…pretty big game, both in scale and distance. For a game to cover the entire theater, it has to be deep and have various systems to cover all of the different types of actions. Here is an answer on this aspect frog the game page:
For the first time in a Pacific Theater game, size, subtlety, and ease of play has come together in a game of sharp action and historical accuracy. Players can become familiar with the layered Pacific War systems in the solitaire Engagement scenarios, then fight their way through increasingly panoramic Battle, Campaign, and Strategic two player and multi-player Scenarios. As they learn the game’s basic maneuver and combat systems, they will then layer on more advanced systems for Strategic bombing, submarine attacks on merchant shipping, search and detection, amphibious assaults, and extensive Operations driven by their command decisions.
As this game is a reprint and updating of a classic, the first thing I thought about was what has changed in the design? Mark answered this question very well in the game write up on the game page:
So, what will change in the new version? The structure and feel of the design will be unchanged, so if you played it in your youth, you already know how to play. That said, a devoted number of players have been playing this game for 35 years and I have incorporated the best of their feedback into this new and final edition for this title. I am going over each scenario and updating them with information that I did not have available back in 1985. For example, I now have several Japanese translations of their official records that were only published in the last few years. Toward this end, I am adding at least six new campaign and strategic scenarios, so you can experience the entire panorama of the war in a long afternoon .
The key question that I consider when buying a new game is will it hit the table? The owners and reviewers who created the game’s reputation were excited that Pacific War had a layered set of scenarios that incorporated fifteen-minute solitaire learning engagements, two hour battles (such as Coral Sea and Santa Cruz that were used in a decade of tournaments), two to eight hour Campaigns (such as Malaya, Guadalcanal and Breaking the Bismarck barrier), and of course the Strategic scenarios that cover the entire war from a single year to the entire war. Will you ever play the entire war? It’s unlikely (to date I have only done it three times). However, Pacific Waris an operational level game and the Campaign scenarios are the heart and soul of this game system. Most play in an afternoon to completion. So, will it hit the table? Only you can answer that question, but from a time and learning perspective this game will support any time commitment you wish to make, to include the 100+ hour Strategic Scenario.
No cards, as this one is not a Card Driven Game, and lots of counters with 9 counter sheets listed. This is going to be blast and I hope that we get around to playing this game so that I can get a view of the original work from one of my favorite designers.
1. Bohemian Rhapsody – Battles of Wimpen: May 6, 1622 and Hochst: June 20, 1622 from High Flying Dice Games
Paul Rohrbaugh and his company High Flying Dice Games is a designer I love to follow. He is always doing games on smaller or lesser known conflicts and I just find his work to be superb and really draws me in. Recently I saw where he was releasing a new series of games covering the Thirty Years War called Bohemian Rhapsody – Battles of Wimpen: May 6, 1622 and Hochst: June 20, 1622.
From the game page, we read the following:
Bohemian Rhapsody – Battles of Wimpen: May 6, 1622 and Hochst: June 20th, 1622 is a game with 2 battles and both battles were part of the so called “Bohemian Phase” of the Thirty Years War and were one the result of the other. The first took place when the Catholic forces of Tilly and Cordoba surprised the smaller force of George Fredrick of Baden who was trying to cross the river Neckar near Wimpfen. Even if the Protestant forces made their best in the battle, thanks to a favorable uphill position, theywere defeated.
A month and an half later, another part of the Protestant troops moving around the Rhineland, the part commanded by Christian of Brunswick, was stopped by the same catholic army under Tilly and Cordoba near Hochst, while trying to cross the river Main. The ensuing battle was a sort of a draw, as at least a part of the catholic army was able to join the other catholic force under Mansfeld, but at so high a cost in losses, that the Palatinate theatre of the war was de facto closed.
If you are interested in Bohemian Rhapsody – Battles of Wimpen: May 6, 1622 and Hochst: June 20, 1622, you can order a copy for $20.95 from the High Flying Dice Games website at the following link: https://www.hfdgames.com/bohemia.html
2. La Conqueste: The French and Indian War 1754-1763 from White Dog Games
I have really enjoyed my plays of several games designed by R. Ben Madison. He has a knack for including elements of the history into the gameplay while placing the events into the framework of his chosen system, which is usually the States of Siege Series…but not always. His newest offering called La Conqueste: The French and Indian War 1754-1763 from White Dog Games uses the States of Siege Series System and dives into the French & Indian War.
From the game page, we read the following:
Over 270 years ago, France controlled most of North America east of the Mississippi River. The British had colonized only along the Atlantic Coast and wanted to expand further west. Conflict between these two great powers in the New World was inevitable. The immediate issue in the new World was whether the upper Ohio River valley was to be a part of the British Empire, and therefore open for trade and settlement by English colonists, or part of New France. When, in 1754, war broke out between France and England in Europe, it quickly spread to the New World, where it was called the French and Indian War, and where two of the most famous generals in history fought one another: Wolfe and Montcalm.
In this exciting game of that titanic struggle in America designed by R. Ben Madison, you control the forces of New France against England and the British colonies as the epic nine-year long French and Indian War breaks out.
If you are interested in La Conqueste: The French and Indian War 1754-1763, you can order a copy for $60.00 from the White Dog Games website at the following link: https://www.whitedoggames.com/french-and-indian-war
3. Fortress of Oblivion: Iran in the Sasanian Era 224-651 AD from White Dog Games
Another new solitaire States of Siege Series offering this month from White Dog Games takes us to ancient Persia and Iran in the Sasanian Era covering the years of 224-651 AD. This one is also designed by R. Ben Madison and looks to be very interesting.
From the game page, we read the following:
Fortress of Oblivion is an exciting solitaire game by designer Ben Madison that puts the player in the role of the ancient Shahs of Iran during the Sasanian Era, 224-651 AD – or even later, if you survive! You will use the economic, military, and social resources of the Iranian Empire, called “Persia” in the west, to defend your realm against invading foreign armies from the west (Armenians and Romans, later called Byzantines), the east (China, Central Asian nomads, and the mighty empires and petty states of India), and marauding Himyarites and Ethiopians from the south, soon to be routed by your greatest foe: the giant Arab Caliphate!
If you are interested in Fortress of Oblivion: Iran in the Sasanian Era 224-651 AD, you can order a copy for $60.00 from the White Dog Games website at the following link: https://www.whitedoggames.com/fortressofoblivion
4. Santa Cruz 1797 Reprint from Bellica 3rd Generation
One well recieved wargame from 2017 was called Santa Cruz 1797 from Bellica 3rd Generation which was designed by Iván Cáceres. The game covers the British amphibious assault on the fortress at Santa Cruz de Tenerife in Spain and is a card driven siege game. Bellica 3rd Generation is now reprinting this game which has been out of stock pretty much everywhere with a new edition.
From the game page, we read the following:
Early morning on July 25, 1797…A squadron of His Britannic Majesty under the command of Lord Admiral Horatio Nelson set out to assault the fortifications of Santa Cruz de Tenerife. The fight would be desperate and the first light of day would find the
On this occasion, in addition, Nelson lost his right arm due to an impact from a cannon (“El Tigre”) that is still preserved in the Museum of the Castle of San Cristobal, in Tenerife.
Santa Cruz 1797 is a game for two players in which each player has a well-defined role: the British must storm the city and occupy its key points while defeating the Spanish military forces, the Spanish must wait to see where his opponent lands and then launch into a tenacious and aggressive defense to defeat him.
The game is a block wargame and works with a card engine that allows players to act on the opponent’s turn and creates a situation of unparalleled tension and uncertainty until the end of the game.
If you are interested in Santa Cruz 1797Reprint, you can purchase a copy for 50,00 € ($57.00 in US Dollars) from the Bellica 3rd Generation website at the following link: https://bellica3g.com/en/product/santa-cruz-1797/
5. Lone Panther from Mike Lambo
Over the past several years, print and play solitaire wargames have gained a lot of traction in our hobby. A solitaire wargame that is very affordable at $10-$15 and can be purchased and downloaded online. What is not to like? And the name of Mike Lambo has been tied to a lot these games as he has designed 20+ of these titles and has built quite the rabid and loyal fanbase. His newest game is called Lone Panther and can be downloaded from Wargame Vault. I do know that typically these games are sold on Amazon but I have not seen this offering make it there as of yet.
From the game page, we read the following:
The German front in the Italian Po Valley is collapsing. Months of retreat, shattered divisions, and dwindling fuel have left the once‑proud Panzerwaffe reduced to scattered pockets of armour fighting desperately to hold back the Allied advance. In this flat, misty landscape of farms and villages, marshland, narrow roads and orchards, tanks are no longer committed in massed formations. Instead, single vehicles are thrown forward to plug gaps, delay Allied spearheads, or hold a vital crossroads.
You command one such machine, a Panther Ausf. G, operating alone, cut off from its parent battalion and reliant on its crew. Allied forces push north with growing momentum. British armour probes ahead, infantry screens advance through the fields, and fighter‑bombers circle overhead searching for targets of opportunity.
In this final phase of the Italian campaign, a Lone Panther can still shape the battlefield – if its Commander keeps his nerve.
Whilst this game is not a ‘narrative driven’ game as such, with a little imagination it will provide memorable stories. Some events are randomly generated, but the Player always has at least some degree of control over the level of risk they wish to take and how vulnerable they leave their Tank to these Events.
This game is designed to be easy to learn and good fun to play.
This is a solitaire wargame. You play the game, and the enemy is controlled by the game (or the Artificial Intelligence or ‘AI’). You will need at least 7, but preferably 9, standard six-sided dice (not included). There are 10 very replayable missions included with full colour maps and clear instructions.
It is highly recommended that the counters provided on the final page of the game are used to play this game. Simply stick them to card and cut them out. A video demonstrating how generally to do this can be found on the Mike Lambo Games YouTube channel. The easiest way to make these counters is to print or copy them onto an A4 printer label, leave the ink to dry completely, then peel the back and stick to 1-2mm card. Alternatively, any standard paper glue will do such as PVA. You can also find ‘Instructional Playthrough’ videos on the Mike Lambo Games YouTube Channel to see how the game plays.
6. Great War Battles Volume 2: Tankschlacht: Cambrai, 1917 from Revolution Games
World War I is always an interesting war to game. We have played our fair share of WWI games and pretty much enjoyed them all. The Great War Battles Series from Revolution Games is a wargame system designed by Kerry Anderson that simulates World War I engagements at the brigade and regimental level and the newest offering in the series is called Tankschlacht: Cambrai 1917, which is now available for purchase.
The Battle of Cambrai was a massive British offensive on the Western Front in France during World War I and was fought between November 20 and December 7, 1917. The battle is legendary for marking the first large-scale, effective use of massed tanks in warfare.
From the game page, we read the following:
Tankschlacht is the second game in the Great War Battles Series; the first being Death of an Army: Ypres, 1914. Tankschlacht is a brigade/regimental simulation of the Battle of Cambrai, November 20 – December 3, 1917. A two player game where players assume the role of the German and Allied troops as they desperately fight for the valuable position in the line.
7. Blind Swords Series Volume 13Early Threatens Washington: The Battle of Monacacy Junction, July 9, 1864 from Revolution Games
Blind Swords is a series that most all wargamers have heard of and played at least a few games that use the system. We have played several of these games including Shiloh: The First Day and Gettysburg: The First Day in the series from Revolution Games. Recently, they announced a new title in the series called Early Threatens Washington: The Battle of Monacacy Junction, July 9, 1864 designed by Mike Wimple.
From the game page, we read the following:
The Confederate’s 1864 Maryland Campaign, led by Lieutenant General Jubal Early, was designed to draw Union forces away from the siege of Petersburg, Virginia and pose a possible threat to Washington. On the morning of July 9, 1864 Early was in Frederick Maryland, ready to cross the Monocacy River and drive toward a lightly defended Washington. Opposing him was Union General Lew Wallace. Wallace put together a hurried defense using any available troops who delayed the Confederate offensive towards Washington long enough that battle hardened forces from Grant’s Army were able to reach the city and bolster its defenses. These additional forces proved sufficient to repel the threat to the city. Thus, the ensuing Battle of Monocacy Junction has been referred to by many historians as “The battle that saved Washington”.
Early Threatens Washington includes one introductory and two full battle scenarios. The all-day full battle scenario allows players to try various strategies for clearing the Georgetown Pike. Do you try Early’s plan of forcing his way across the Wooden and Railroad bridges while feigning interest in the other crossings or some other, more clever method? The half-day full battle scenario allows players to play out Early’s plan as it actually unfolded, ignoring the morning actions, and focusing on the afternoon climax of the battle. Even though the Union is outnumbered by the Confederates, the situation is balanced and offers tough choices for both players. The thirteenth game in Revolution Games’ popular Blind Swords system, Early Threatens Washington provides an immersive experience of tactical American Civil War combat without a heavy rules load. The game can be enjoyed solitaire, two-player or multi-player.
If you are interested in Blind Swords Series Volume 13Early Threatens Washington: The Battle of Monacacy Junction, July 9, 1864, you can order a copy for $70.00 ($55.00 for a Ziploc edition) from the Revolution Games website at the following link: https://stores.revolutiongames.us/early-threatens-washington-boxed-edition/
8. Stalingrad: Advance to the Volga, 1942 from Revolution Games
I love a good solitaire wargame. And if that game covers the famous Battle of Stalingrad mores the better! A few years ago, they released the first volume in a new Solitaire Area Movement Series called Stalingrad: Advance to the Volga, 1942 designed by Mike Rinella. Mike has done a slew of area movements games, such as Patton’s Vanguard and Last Battle, Ie Shima, and his designs are always interesting and playable.
I have played this one quite a few times, and have also played the follow up version called Manila: The Savage Streets, and the AI and the overall design itself really worked well to create a very interesting and challenging game. In fact, after 4 or 5 plays, I have yet to taste victory. I really have enjoyed my experience with Stalingrad: Advance to the Volga, 1942 as the game is well put together, well thought out and frankly just works. They now have reprinted the game and you can get a copy now after the game was out of print for a year or so.
From the game page, we read the following:
There can be little question Stalingrad was one of the bloodiest and most decisive battles of the entire Second World War. The campaign by the German 6th Army to crush the Soviet 62nd Army and capture the city has been the subject of numerous two-player designs. It is a situation known to most gamers but is presented here in a new and exciting SOLITAIRE format, the first in a series of single-player area movement games by publisher Take Aim Designs. Stalingrad: Advance to the Volga, 1942 puts the player in charge of the attacking and far more mobile German side while the game system handles the defending and largely static Soviet side. No two games will ever be the same. Each turn presents new and unique challenges for the player in the form of random events, uncertain supply deliveries, and unknown Soviet area strengths and defensive strategies.
The primary game is a nine-turn campaign covering the first great German assault on the city during September 1942. The deeper German forces advance, from the city’s less developed periphery to its urban and industrial core, the greater Soviet resistance becomes. The number of German units bled white, effectively out of action, mounts. German determination to secure a rapid victory, represented as “morale” in the game, gradually decreases. The player wins by equaling or exceeding historical German gains and loses if they fail to do so, or if morale falls too low.
Also included is a five-turn “Factory District Scenario” representing the second great German effort in October 1942. The challenge is now even greater: the player must capture all of Stalingrad in order to release divisions in time to cover the German flanks outside the city against the coming Soviet winter offense, which was not far off. With a setup time of less than 15 minutes, low counter density, endless variability, and quick playing time, Stalingrad: Advance to the Volga, 1942 will appeal to every level of player, from the novice to the grognard.
9. Drive on Voronezh, June 28-July 27, 1942 from Legion Wargames
I love Legion Wargames. They are just a solid publisher and Randy Lein is such a great guy. Recently, they started shipping a new game designed by John Theissen called Drive on Voronezh, June 28-July 27, 1942 that deals with combat on the East Front of World War II.
From the game page, we read the following:
The Battle of Voronezh was fought on the Eastern Front of World War II, in and around the strategically important city of Voronezh on the Don river, 450 km (280 mi) south of Moscow, from 28 June-27 July 1942, as the opening move of the German summer offensive that year. The German attack in this sector bit into parts of the Soviet Briansk and Southwestern Fronts with German panzer corps leading the drive.The German assault was conducted by the element of the 4th Panzer Army′s forces of Army Group South under commanded by General Hermann Hoth, who was under strict instructions not to get bogged down in street-to-street fighting.
The armored units of the 4th Panzer Army partly captured Voronezh on 6 July by occupying the western river-bank suburbs, however German troops were subjected to a Red Army counter-attack. The 4th Panzer Army was to be followed by the Sixth Army, and when Voronezh was occupied the former was to wheel south-eastward and move down the right bank of the Don towards Stalingrad as part of Operation Blau. It took two days for infantry divisions from the Army Group South to reach Voronezh to hold the line and free the Panzer troops; Adolf Hitler later came to believe that these two days, when combined with other avoidable delays on the drive south, allowed Marshal Semyon Timoshenko to reinforce the forces in Stalingrad before the 4th Panzer Army could arrive to allow taking of Stalingrad.
Drive on Voronezh covers this opening move in the Fall Blau offensive. The scale of the game is nine miles per hex and two days per turn. The basic units in the game are divisions with special brigades for the Germans and brigades/corps for the Russians. The game uses a basic I Go – You Go system but also includes special event chits that allow players to augment certain combat and movement situations.
If you are interested in Drive on Voronezh, June 28-July 27, 1942, you can order a copy for $46.00 from the Legion Wargames website at the following link: https://www.legionwargames.com/legion_DOV.html
10. Bear Trap: The Soviet-Afghan War, 1979-1989 from GMT Games
A few years ago, GMT announced a very cool looking game designed by Paul Daniels covering the Soviet-Afghan War from 1979-1989 called Bear Trap. The game was described as a block wargame that used a similar system to what was used in the design for Sekigahara: The Unification of Japan.
From the game page, we read the following:
Bear Trap is a quick-playing, low-complexity 2-player block wargame covering the Soviet-Afghan War (1979-1989).
In the Soviet–Afghan war, Insurgent groups—including the mujahideen—fought a guerrilla war against the Soviet 40th Army and the Democratic Republic of Afghanistan (DRA) government. The game begins shortly after “Operation Storm-333” was executed at the end of 1979—in this coup, Hafizullah Amin (General Secretary of the People’s Democratic Party of Afghanistan) was killed, and Babrak Karmal, a Soviet loyalist, replaced him. By putting the Brezhnev Doctrine into practice, the Soviets sought to prop up the sympathetic local government and “solve the Russian Ice-lock Problem” while the Insurgents sought to expel the secularist government and foreign invaders.
Although the two sides in this conflict were fundamentally different in a variety of ways, they also faced some parallel challenges. For instance, they struggled to maintain loyalty. For the Soviets and the DRA, the DRA armed forces merely offered an opportunity for a paycheck, and there were cases where conscripts in the Soviet Army defected to the Mujahideen (e.g. Kazbek Hudalov). For the Insurgents, propaganda, threats, and promises to family drew would-be combatants away, as did injuries suffered from landmines and attacks on villages. Both sides also struggled to puncture the fog of war, not being able to secure reliable intel about force deployment and strength. And both faced various challenges around supply, communication, and coordination. Both sides needed to react to shifting strategies and developments over this decade long Cold War proxy war, where the landscape upon which it was fought presented many unique challenges.
Bear Trap is a spiritual successor to Sekigahara—building on the same core system. In both games, each player has their own deck of cards; players spend cards from their hand to activate areas or in combat to commit units to battle. This means fans of Sekigahara will find learning Bear Trap easy, but the feel and experience of the games are highly divergent. In addition to the difference in topics covered, other differences include:
In Bear Trap, forces are represented by blocks, stickered side hidden from the opponent, and the orientation of a block determines its disposition (i.e. the orientation of a block dictates whether it’s mobilized, fortified, disordered, poised to offer fire support to a battle initiated by friendly units, or ready to ambush enemy units). The orientation of a block also determines which battles it can join, whether card play is required to commit it to battle, and whether it can be moved or activated.
Bear Trap features an area-based map, rather than the point-to-point style found in Sekigahara.
The sequential combat system popularized in Sekigahara is utilized in Bear Trap, adapted to suit the setting. This includes the use of ‘loyalty challenges,’ making Bear Trap simulate the proneness of (for instance) Afghan forces to defect.
Bear Trap is, like Sekigahara, first and foremost a 2-player game—but Bear Trap includes a unique solo mode, built around a card assisted flowchart bot.
Bear Trap has fewer blocks than Sekigahara, and each player has fewer card types (‘suits’) in their decks.
Bear Trapintroduces ‘strategy’ cards—powerful event cards. Although it would be misleading to label Bear Trap a deck-building game, players will add 2 cards from a pool specific to their side each time they reshuffle their deck.
Bear Trap is not a “clone” of Sekigahara—they are very different games with differences in topic, feel, and mechanism, despite having an underlying shared game system. Bear Trap is also a more asymmetric game than Sekigahara. AlthoughBear Trap is a slight step up in complexity (relative to Sekigahara), the mechanics remain simple, and Bear Trap can be completed in 2-3 hours.
11. Fields of Despair: France 1914-1918 2nd Printing from GMT Games
Fields of Despair: France 1914-1918 is a medium weight 2 player hex-based strategic level block war game set on the Western Front of World War I. Players take control of either the Allies, including France, England, Belgium, the United States and an abstracted Russia or the mighty Central Powers fighting the war not only on land, but also at sea, and most importantly and probably one of the better and more interesting parts of the game, in the air all while having to focus on and make tough decisions about your economic and technological progression.
Fields of Despair uses a very unique and revolutionary block system designed to maintain the confusion and uncertainty of the Fog of War throughout the entire game. The reason that I consider this system revolutionary is that in most block games, the combat values of individual blocks usually range from one to four, so as you scan the battlefield and after a quick calculation in your head you can come up with a pretty good guesstimate of what force power is arrayed against you, while in FoD the combat value of blocks ranges from zero (dummy blocks) all the way to a maximum of twenty. This difference in value ranges alone has completely changed the block wargame and has created a very strategic game that can be quite deceptive and difficult to play well. The reason for this deception is that you can build up one block in a hex to 20 when in other block games this would require 4 or 5 blocks that have tipped your hand and help your opponent to gauge your strategy and react more effectively to counter that. But, this deception does have its limits as air reconnaissance, one of the best parts of the design, allows players to scout out the strength of units and remove that deception. But, you cannot simply scout with no opposition as your opponent can place their air units in that hex you are scouting to initiate aerial dogfights that will ruin your recon attempt.
Movement in the game is also very straightforward and simple and can be used as a deceptive tool as well in addition to the use of dummy blocks. Players are allowed to “make change” during the movement phase, which means a larger block can be broken apart into 2 separate blocks or can even be done in reverse by consolidating a few smaller blocks into a larger force. So after the movement phase, you will not be 100% confident in your enemy’s strength and will have to sometimes just throw your hesitancy out the window and attack. The Fog of War also isn’t lost after first contact with the enemy. Blocks remain hidden even when enemies occupy the same hex and stay hidden until one player decides to allocate an air squadron for reconnaissance or sends his men across no man’s land to attack.
I love that this game is so unique with the Strategic Reorganization element as well as the continuous battle for reconnaissance with the airplanes. I have played several block wargames and the way this is handled is very revolutionary and I am sure will be replicated in future block wargame designs. I also am very impressed with the tightness of the rules and how easy they were to understand and apply. For an ambitious wargame covering the entirety of the Western Front of World War I, a 24 page rule book was a shocker. But it is done very well and has very few rules problems.
If you are interested in Fields of Despair: France 1914-1918 2nd Printing, you can order a copy for $108.00 ($69.00 if you hurry and place your order before they ship in mid-August) from the GMT Games website at the following link: https://www.gmtgames.com/p-686-fields-of-despair-2nd-printing.aspx
12. Small Battles of the American Revolution Volume I: The Battle of Cowpens from GMT Games
While attending the World Boardgaming Championships 2 years ago, I was able to meet up with Dave Stiffler (acting as Developer on the project) and Bruno Sinigaglio who is the designer to get an early look at the upcoming debut release in the Small BoAR Series called The Battle of Cowpens.
I didn’t get any pictures because they didn’t have the components along to show but learned a lot about the design and how it changes the Battles of the American Revolution Series from GMT Games. First off, the scale is the major difference as it is 1/8th of the scale used in the normal series. This means 25 yard hexes and 2-3 men per counter. They also have included both rifle fire and musket fire which is a change as musket fire is simply an abstracted part of the close combat mechanic in BoAR. They also have added some new mechanics to account better for things like morale and being shaken or even shattered.
I have known about this game for a few months, actually nearly a year or so, but am very excited to see this one added to the P500 and hope that the reception is great and that the game does well because I would like to see more small battles covered in future volumes.
From the game page, we read the following:
Two critical battles were considered turning points in the American Revolutionary War: the Battle of Saratoga in New York and the Battle of Cowpens in South Carolina. The Battle of Cowpens was a catalyst to a series of events that led eventually to the surrender of the British at Yorktown. Small BoAR Volume I, The Battle of Cowpens, puts players directly into the milieu of this decisive contest.
The goal of the Small BoAR design concept is to include small yet critical battles that otherwise do not fit the scale of the historically simulating and highly successful Battles of the American Revolution (BoAR) system designed by Mark Miklos. This new system, aptly termed Small Battles of the American Revolution (Small BoAR), was designed by Bruno Sinigaglio working closely with Mark Miklos to preserve the continuity and popularity of the original Battles of the American Revolution game system.
Although extremely important to the history of the Revolutionary War, the Battle of Cowpens involved slightly over 1000 participants per side. In the Battles of the American Revolution system, which represents 100 men per strength point, this would equate to only ten or so combat factors per side. The scale for the battle of Cowpens, on the other hand, is 12 men per strength point, or one-eighth that of the BoAR system. The map scale is also correspondingly reduced to 25 yards per hex from the BoAR scale of 200 yards per hex. The time scale is approximately four minutes per turn as compared with one hour per turn in BoAR.
I think that one of the best parts of this new series, aside from the size and scope of the battles covered being smaller, is that they have not just rested on their laurels and reproduced the BoAR System but have added new mechanics and elements to better deal with these battles and to model the smaller scale battles.
Although Army Morale, the game-within-the-game in BoAR, is faithfully preserved in Small BoAR, and the Small BoAR sequence of play resembles that of BoAR and will look familiar to anyone who has played games in the original series, certain novel elements appropriate to the new scaling have been added. These include:
The ability to designate cavalry units in reserve
Artillery Fire conducted both offensively and defensively
Simultaneous ranged musket Fire as a complement to ranged rifle fire
A Cavalry Reserve Phase where units designated in Reserve may charge after the normal Close Combat Phase
And Opportunity Card Management
As mentioned earlier, I had the honor of sitting down with Bruno Sinigaglio and Dave Stiffler to discuss this new series and The Battle of Cowpens. Here is a link to that video interview:
If you are interested in Small Battles of the American Revolution Volume I: The Battle of Cowpens, you can order a copy for $75.00 ($48.00 if you hurry and place your order before they ship in mid-August) from the GMT Games website at the following link: https://www.gmtgames.com/p-1140-the-battle-of-cowpens.aspx
13. Twilight Struggle 20th Anniversary Hall of Fame Edition from GMT Games
As if you don’t know but Twilight Struggle is a 2-player game simulating the forty-five year ideological struggle known as the Cold War between the Soviet Union and the United States which can be played in 2-3 hours. The entire world is the stage on which these two countries “fight” to make the world safe for their own ideologies and way of life. The game starts right after the end of World War II in the midst of the ruins of Europe as the two new “superpowers” of the world squabble over what is left and ends in 1989, when only the United States remained standing.
I remember my first impressions of Twilight Struggle was that it needed some graphic design improvements and the game just didn’t grab me visually but that was all erased the first time we played as the topic and the mechanics just really spoke to me. This game was our gateway to the CDG mechanic and I still have a real soft spot in my heart for it. Well, this month I got my wish and this new edition of TS with upgraded art is now on the P500.
From the game page, we read the following comments and a bit about the history of Twilight Struggle on the new offering:
“Twilight Struggle is my all-time favorite game. It is a brilliant first design by the team of Jason Matthews and Ananda Gupta. It takes the card-driven genre of games like We The People, Hannibal: Rome vs. Carthage, and Wilderness War to its highest peak. Every game is different and the game gets better and better as you become more familiar with the individual cards. You are surprised as hidden combos are revealed game after game. Every turn is filled with tension as you try to figure out the best way to play the hand of cards you’ve been dealt. Gaming simply doesn’t get any better than this”. – Alan R. Moon
That quote from legendary designer Alan Moon, spoken not long after Twilight Struggle was released in 2005, helped sell out the game’s first print run and introduced thousands of gamers to Twilight Struggle. Fortunately, they mostly shared Alan’s opinion of the game and they told their friends. Soon, a groundswell of play and support for the game ran rampant across the gaming community as tens of thousands of players immersed themselves in the tense competition and compelling storytelling of Twilight Struggle. As a result, Twilight Struggle was the #1 ranked game on BGG for over five years, something no other game has achieved.
Soon there was a digital version of the game for Steam and tablets, introducing hundreds of thousands of additional gamers to GMT’s most commercially and critically successful all-time game and supporting a total of twelve sold-out versions of the boardgame. And over those years, the awards rolled in, reflecting the joy and challenge that Twilight Struggle brought to so many gamers: BGG Golden Geek Game of the Year, IGA Game of the Year, Charles Roberts Awards, and more.
Then, in the summer of 2024 at its Origins convention, GAMA (Game Manufacturers of America) bestowed on Twilight Struggle its most prestigious award, inducting Twilight Struggle into the GAMA Hall of Fame. Designers Ananda Gupta and Jason Matthews attended the awards ceremony and jointly accepted the honor on their behalf and for all of the Twilight Struggle team at GMT.
As we now approach the 20th anniversary of the game’s release, and in light of the recent Hall of Fame honor, we are thrilled to announce a new edition of our most successful game. We invite you to check out Twilight Struggle 20th Anniversary Hall of Fame Edition.
So what exactly is new and different about this edition:
Twilight Struggle 20th Anniversary Hall of Fame Edition adds even more beauty and play options to the original game. Here are some of the additions you’ll see in this new Edition:
A brand new game box by the incomparable Terry Leeds
A double sided map with a new Terry Leeds map on the front and the familiar Deluxe Edition Mark Simonitch map on the back
The Turn Zero and Alternative Space Race variants included.
A new alt-history scenario, “Red Sun Rising” with new cards.
A collection of promotional cards including the Kickstarter Promo Packs #1 and #2 and a selection of promo cards from foreign editions of Twilight Struggle
A background booklet including retrospective essays from the designers
We cannot think of a better way to commemorate the Cold War, this vital piece of world history, than with our freshest and richest version of Twilight Struggle to date.
Here is a comment from Gene Billingsley about this game offering:
We’re really proud of Jason and Ananda and what they and their brilliant game have meant to GMT over these past 20 years—and for all of the TS team that helped to make their design vision a reality. And we’re so honored and really happy that Twilight Struggle was inducted into the GAMA Hall of Fame at Origins this past summer. That is a rare honor. So, to celebrate both the 20th Anniversary of Twilight Struggle and it’s HoF induction, we are adding a new Twilight Struggle 20th Anniversary Hall of Fame Edition to our P500 list this month. As you can see from the artwork, this is a beautiful new edition, featuring a new box and mounted map from Terry Leeds (with the Mark Simonitch map on the back side) as well as all new card fronts (we’re keeping the backs standard so there’s no problem mixing in cards from other versions). It’s also chock-full of a lot of new or hard-to-find play value, with a new scenario and a variety of cards and other game add-ons all in one new package.
With the recent advances in art and production, I have often longed for GMT to retouch some of their best games and give them the art and components that they deserve. It looks like this might be the first step in that direction and I would argue there are other great games that deserve a similar treatment including Here I Stand, Labyrinth, Wilderness War and others.
14. Falling Crescent: The British Offensive: September-October 1918 from Compass Games
More WWI is never a bad thing. Particularly when that game focuses on a front that doesn’t get a lot of love in the wargaming world. But Falling Crescent is such a game that focuses on the British offensive against the Turks in Palestine in the fall of 2018.
From the game page, we read the following:
Falling Crescent is an operational-level game of the British offensive of September-October 1918 against the Turks in Palestine. One player controls the Turkish, German, and Bedouin forces, and the other, British, French, and Arab guerilla forces. A three-player version, commanding the Arabs separately is also included.
After lasting for centuries, the Ottoman Turks’ hold on Palestine is at risk. British forces and Arabs in revolt threaten to bring down the Ottomans and their Crescent flag. The game is one of skill, in which it is entirely possible to change the course of history. This game proves to be an interesting challenge as modifications to the design, such as strategic and operational cards, bring a new feel to the classic model also built-in!
In designing Falling Crescent, designer Roger Nord brought out the flavor of encirclement and surrender, of charging cavalry and elusive Arab guerillas. The Palestine campaign is one of history’s last great cavalry actions. In this fluid scene, local plans can often go astray unforeseen developments may hinder or even alter command plans. The players’ cards, new to this edition, add their part to the fortunes of war with reactive tactics and shifting events.
The game’s pace is swift, and we believe players will enjoy it as a World War I game devoid of attrition and stalemate. Especially in the use of cavalry and air, they will see a hint of things to come in 1939-1940, when a later war will no longer be fought with horses and canvas biplanes, but with treaded armor and screaming dive bombers.
I am very much looking forward to this one. Games on this subject and with this scale are pretty rare and the comment in the description about “one of history’s last great cavalry actions” definitely has my attention!
As usual, thanks so much for reading along and sticking with me this month as I navigated through the many websites and game pages looking for new and interesting games to share.
Finally, thanks once again to this month’s sponsor Nuts! Publishing!
I love a different style and focus of wargame. A game that takes a look at an important but somewhat obscure or rarely addressed historical topic, such as espionage or intelligence, and creates a gaming experience tailored around the events to highlight and evoke the difficulties and tension that would have been present. In January 2026, GMT Games announced such a game in Checkpoint Charlie, which is a solo or cooperative game focused on SIS espionage missions in Berlin in the 1960’s designed by Russell Brown. We have posted an interview with Russel and it was very well received and he has now agreed to create a series of History Behind the Cards to highlight the events of the 1960’s Cold War struggle in West Germany but also to share aspects about the game play and how it models the history.
*Note: The cards highlighted in this series and their event text, as well as any pictures used showing any of the various components, are still in the design and development process and as such event effects and text might still change prior to final development and publication.Also the art and layout of the cards are only for playtest purposes at this point and the game will enter the art department as it nears publication.
History Behind the Cards – Checkpoint Charlie from GMT Games – Card #3: Demonstrations
West Berlin, and West Germany as a whole, spawned a number of large, very active student demonstration organizations in the late 1960’s. These were generally in response to a perceived return to very traditional German authoritarian government, and specifically as a reaction to former members of the Nazi party, like Chancellor Kiesinger, serving in the Bonn government.
However, during the slightly earlier time period of Checkpoint Charlie (early 1962 to late 1963), demonstrations were not as organized. They were spontaneous and in response to specific events, like the Speigel Affair (Card #16) and President Kennedy’s Visit (Card #7). As with those later, more organized movements, they consisted primarily of young Germans, and the universities acted as catalysts and staging areas. Even during the period of this game, marches and demonstrations were common enough to warrant an event card.
As a side note, Chancellor Keisinger, who’s Nazi affiliation spawned some of those later protests, was replaced as Chancellor of West Germany in 1969 by Willie Brandt, who was mayor of West Berlin during the period of Checkpoint Charlie. Mayor Brandt has his own token in the game and plays a role in a few of the missions.
The Demonstrations Event Card places a special Demonstrations marker in one of the West Berlin locations on the map. Demonstrations could last for hours, or even days, so this marker generally remains on the City Map for the rest of the mission. East Berlin locations are not eligible because the Stasi secret police, along with the confinement imposed by the Berlin Wall, had effectively suppressed any open opposition in the East. In game terms, the Demonstrations marker provides some cover for assets, increasing their chances of passing both detection and compromise saves.
In the next article in this series, we will take a look at Faceoff with the Soviets when East German police placed barbed wire barriers to stop East Germans from defecting.
In my opinion, this game looks extremely interesting and I am very much excited to learn more about it. I am appreciative to Russell and his efforts to bring us these cards and to write these entries to share with our readers. I am also very glad that this topic is being covered in a game and look forward to playing this one day soon.
We met Akar Bharadvaj while attending SDHistCon in 2023 and played his award winning design Tyranny of Blood: India’s Caste System Under British Colonialism, 1750-1947 and very much enjoyed the experience and talking with him about game design. Since that time, he has been working on another designer called Chalice of Poison: The Iran-Iraq War, 1980-1988 from GMT Games, which was announced in March on their P500. Chalice of Poison is the first volume in a new series that models complex conflicts not only as clashes between adversaries in the air, land, and sea, but also as political struggles within the regimes and military forces fighting it. We reached out to Akar and he was more than willing to share.
*Keep in mind that the design is still undergoing playtesting and development and that any details or component pictures shared in this interview are for prototype purposes and will definitely change prior to final publication as they enter the art department.
Grant: Akar welcome to our blog. First off please tell us a little about yourself. What are your hobbies? What’s your day job?
Akar: Thanks, Alex and Grant! It’s great to be here. I live in sunny Arlington, Virginia, just across the river from our nation’s capital. Besides board games, I enjoy travel, museums, graphic design, bad movies, comedy shows, and nice meals. As for my day job, I work as professional wargame designer. I work on teams that make analytic games and tabletop exercises to help policymakers think through challenging issues related to international relations. That said, Chalice of Poison is solely a personal project, and does not reflect my day job or the views of my employer.
Grant: What motivated you to break into game design? What have you enjoyed most about the experience thus far?
Akar: I’ve always enjoyed board games since I was a kid, and have gotten into historical games in the last 15 years or so. I flirted with the idea of designing my own for years, but then I actually decided to design one in 2020 when I heard about the Zenobia Award, which is a competition and mentorship program for historical games on underrepresented topics. I was looking for a good project to distract me from the ongoing pandemic, so I entered the contest on a lark, not expecting it to go anywhere. But Zenobia did a great job of helping me walk gradually through the game design process, and before I knew it, I was hooked. When the award project finished, I learned that I had won first place. But more importantly, I had discovered a new passion.
My two favorite things about game design are the creative process and the people. I find the creative process immensely satisfying. I get to analyze systems, experiment, and iteratively solve problems and improve a process, and there’s few consequences to failing! If I find that a design doesn’t work, I can just move on to another one, and hopefully return at some point in the future. It’s a beautiful process, and one that actually feels a lot like playing a game.
I also love the people I’ve met through game design. I’ve made lots of designer friends through various cons, and it’s always a delight playing games with them, talking about game design, and just chatting. I always leave cons full of inspiration and ideas, and it’s largely due to all the great people in this field.
Grant: What was it like winning the 2021 Zenobia Award for Tyranny of Blood? Where does this game stand at the present time?
Akar: Winning the award was one of the greatest moments of my life. As I mentioned earlier, I started designing the game just to see what it was like, and I didn’t expect it to go anywhere. (If I knew there would eventually be interest, I would’ve designed a simpler game as my first one!) So, I was pleasantly surprised when I learned that I won, and was excited at how much interest it received.
For those who do not know, Tyranny of Blood is about changes to the Indian social structure under British colonialism, through the lens of the caste system. I designed a fully playable game during the Zenobia Award process, but like so many first designs, it had a bit of a “kitchen sink” approach, and had far too many layers placed on top of each other.
I realized that the game had lots of great elements, but it had some flaws at its core, and so I needed to redesign lots of it. The topic is a difficult one, both ethically and in terms of complexity, so I needed to get the game right to do justice to the subject matter and avoid creating something offensive. On top of all that, the rapid prototyping during the Zenobia process left me exhausted (in a good way). So, I decided to take a break from it, and work on other games in the meantime to improve my game design skills before I can return to Tyranny. Now that Chalice is in development, I can return to that project. That said, it’s been a while, so I need to read through my notes and remember all the nuances of the topic.
While attending SDHistCon in November 2023, we played Tyranny of Blood with Akar and had a great time. We shot the following video interview at the time and you can watch that at the following link:
Grant: What is your upcoming game Chalice of Poison about?
Akar: Chalice of Poison is about the Iran-Iraq War, which took place in the 1980’s. The game focuses on the interplay between external conflict and internal regime stability. You play as one of the two countries, and you are trying to improve your military effectiveness so that you can win the war, without making your military so effective that it becomes a threat to your own regime. Players can win the game if they capture certain objectives in the war, or they can lose if their regime collapses due to political challenges.
The actual combat resolution and prosecution of the war is only one part of the game; the other part is managing your regime and ensuring it does not fall to internal threats, whether that be generals who instigate a coup d’etat or dissident groups fighting against your government.
Grant: What should the name convey to players about the history of the Iran-Iraq War?
Akar: The phrase “chalice of poison” comes from a quote from Iran’s then-Supreme Leader Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini. When he signed the ceasefire agreement in 1988 that ended the war, without any major concessions despite all the bloodshed, he described it as “more deadly than drinking from a chalice of poison.”
Additionally, I found the evocative phrase to be an appropriate name for a game about accepting risk and making sacrifices to achieve objectives. The game is full of hard decisions that seem enticing at first, but end up doing internal damage.
On a lighter note, ever since Tyranny of Blood, I’ve been trying to give each of my designs a name that sounds like a heavy metal album.
“Taking this decision is more deadly than drinking from a chalice of poison.” ~ Ayatollah Khomeini, on accepting the ceasefire that ended the Iran-Iraq War
Grant: What is the new series called? What type of games might be included?
Akar: I haven’t been able to find that perfect name yet, despite coming up with a long list of ideas. So, the series doesn’t yet have a name. If anyone has an idea, I would love to hear them! Please sound off in the comments.
The system best models historical conflicts where major dynamic changes occurred within the halls of state power and the military command structure, rather than with territorial exchanges on the battlefield. So, future games in the series could model other conflicts where weak states fought each other while dealing with significant internal tensions. There are no shortage of those throughout history, from the modern Middle East to 1960’s Vietnam to Ancient Rome.
Grant: What games have you used as inspiration for your design?
Akar: I tend to prefer historical games that include strong political dynamics over straightforward wargames. So, a major point of inspiration has been the Great Statesmen Series, to include Congress of Vienna, Versailles 1919, and Churchill. Those games do an excellent job of demonstrating the interplay between peace negotiations and warfare, and it inspired a lot of the ideas I had about war being played in two phases, and how the two interact with each other. Instead of the connection between fighting war and negotiating peace, I focused on the connection between fighting war and improving military effectiveness. From a purely user experience perspective, I enjoy the tactile feel of placing cubes on cards that was in Versailles 1919, and the mechanic seemed to work well in this game.
Additionally, the war mechanics are loosely based on the States of Siege Series, though with a lot of complexity added. That system offers a simple push-pull model for combat, which I employed for a 2-player tug-of-war. I needed a fairly simple mechanism at the core, so that I could layer many other mechanics on top of it without overwhelming players.
Lastly, one of the solitaire modes is inspired by Mark Herman’s Peloponnesian War, a genius solitaire game where players face off against a bot, but if they begin to defeat the bot by too much, they then switch sides and have to fight against everything they set up in previous turns.
Grant: How have you used and followed the academic research of Dr. Caitlin Talmadge?
Akar: Dr. Talmadge’s 2015 book The Dictator’s Army explores the question of why some authoritarian regimes, especially so-called “strongman regimes,” are ironically so bad at fighting war. Her research delves deeply into 2 case studies: Iran versus Iraq, and North versus South Vietnam.
Her argument is that the factors that reduce the threat of coups also reduce military effectiveness at fighting adversaries. The ideal military promotes based on merit, trains troops robustly, incentivizes open and honest communication, and empowers junior officers to improvise within reason. Conversely, strongman regimes tend to do the opposite: promoting based on sycophancy, avoiding training, incentivizing lies and secrecy, and making all decisions through an inefficient centralized command structure. These traits help dictators feel more secure, but they make militaries less flexible to deal with changing circumstances.
This argument underpins the core argument of Chalice of Poison. The main thrust of the game is reforming your military to improve each of those four factors, but at a cost to your own political power.
Grant: What is important to model or include in a game about the Iran-Iraq War?
Akar; A game on the Iran-Iraq War needs to provide a very specific incentive structure, by which players feel the hubris of thinking a quick victory is possible, but also a deep sense of desperation when things go poorly. It also requires mechanics for dealing with internal stability within each country, and being able to affect stability in the adversary’s country. Lastly, such a game must afford players the latitude to take a wide variety of actions; the story of the Iran-Iraq War is two countries quickly falling into a stalemate, and then experimenting with a large number of strategies and unsavory steps to break the stalemate and achieve victory.
Grant: What challenges did you encounter in the design? How have you overcome them?
Akar: I had to design the game carefully to reflect some misperceptions that the actual historical figures had. We know now that the Iran-Iraq War was an enormous catastrophe for both countries, but the game had to give players some false hope that the game could end at any turn. As such, I had to implement a variable game length, with victory conditions that contract as the game progresses. I had to pace the game well so that players always feel like they’re on the verge of victory (or collapse), and I think the game is nearly there.
The early iterations for the game were very mathy, with a lot of dice roll modifiers and additions to provide bonuses for military reform. It wound up not being fun; either players would have their eyes glaze over due to the excessive math, or they would try to calculate every little decision and descend into analysis paralysis. Instead, I replaced all the bonuses with card play mechanisms, which thematically worked, because it gave players more flexibility to deal with bad situations. I replaced most of the math with a simple card color-matching system.
The game has a unique action costing system that requires players to push their luck, carefully budgeting their political power or else risk losing it all (and the game). I learned that most players instinctually spend their full action allotment, so if I give them 10 points, they want to spend 10 points! So, I had to add in some “brakes” to stop new players from losing the game immediately.
I had 2 additional in-game challenges that I needed to solve. One was how to depict the more unsavory aspects of the conflict, such as chemical weapons and human wave attacks, which were historical atrocities, but necessary to tell the story of this conflict. Typically, a game would have a penalty or cost for doing such things, but in the actual historical case, neither country actually suffered a penalty for these actions until well after the war. Additionally, I needed to balance the game a bit more, to give the losing side a chance. I quickly realized that both of these challenges could actually solve each other. I created a “Desperate Measures” mechanic that allows the losing side to catch up a bit, but at a moral cost.
Grant: What is the scale of the game? Force structure of units?
Akar: The game plays at the political and strategic level, so it is pretty abstract. It models the conflict along up to six fronts: the air, three or four different ground fronts, and the naval front. Each one has an abstracted military strength represented by zero to six wooden chevrons. Each side has one air force, one navy, and three different ground forces: the elite guard, the regular army, and the paramilitary. Each of these five forces has a commander in charge of it. That is as complex as the game’s force structure gets; it does not model more specific units or officer ranks.
Grant: What is each player’s overall goal in the game? What does this mean?
Akar: Each player is trying to win the war while preserving their regime.
Winning the war means capturing a certain amount of territory. Most spaces on the map contain stars representing the relative importance of that space. A player advances on the War Progress Track one space for each star captured. Additionally, the War Progress Track includes an Objective counter that starts at 10, but decreases as the game goes on, representing war-weariness and a reduction in expectations for what players define as “victory.” If a player’s War Progress meets or exceeds the current Objective, that player wins the war (and the game). Of note, a player can potentially win even with zero points, which reflects what happened in real life.
Preserving the regime means holding onto political power cubes within the Regime pool on the board. If the Regime pool has zero cubes in it, the player’s regime falls and that player loses. Cubes move out of the Regime pool when players reform their military, improve their commanders, face problems with dissidents, or fight against a coup d’etat. The fewer cubes in the Regime pool, the higher the risk of internal problems erupting.
Grant: How do players go about developing a professional army that values competence and skill?
Akar: Players start with a “coup-proof” military that is pretty ineffective at fighting, but they can expend political power, and thereby accepting risk to their regimes, to make reforms.
Grant: What actions are available to players to reform their military?
Akar: Players have four major actions they can take. They can coordinate to allow commanders to communicate openly with each other and their underlings, empower their forces in the field to make decisions for themselves, promote commanders based on competence instead of personal loyalty or family ties, and train existing commanders to be better at fighting. Each of these actions has four different levels; players can upgrade the actions to improve their effectiveness, but at a cost of political power.
Grant: What are the costs of this process? How do players manage these threats?
Akar: The costs of each action comes in political power cubes. Each action starts at level zero, which does not cost anything, but is not very useful. Players can make reforms, which essentially upgrades each of these actions one step at a time, up to level four. Upgrading to a higher level requires placing that number of cubes on that card. Actually taking actions usually has an additional cost in power cubes.
Players need to “push their luck” to best achieve reforms gradually. Doing too much too fast is a recipe for disaster. Players can spend a large number of cubes each turn, but they will not necessarily get them all back at the end of the turn. Reforming too quickly can threaten regime stability. To protect against these threats, players will need to go slow, keeping enough political power behind to stabilize their regimes, but inaction can also be risky if it means losing the war.
Grant: What is the Turn Sequence?
Akar: The game has up to 9 turns, each representing a year from 1980 to 1988. Each turn has 4 phases:
In the Planning Phase, players issue hidden orders for six fronts to carry out this turn.
In the Action Phase, players reform their militaries so that they can improve the likelihood that these orders are successful.
In the Battle Phase, players resolve orders, change territorial control, fight dissident groups, and learn lessons for future battles.
Finally, in the Unrest Phase, players face internal threats, to include popular outcry, dissident groups, and coup attempts.
Grant: How are hidden orders issued?
Akar: Each front has a space for an order tile, which players place face-down during the Planning Phase, so that they are secret from the other player. Each order tile has four options, which are chosen by how players rotate their tile:
Attack allows players to start a battle against the adversary, and to advance into their territory if they have a stronger force after the battle.
Defend allows players to fight against an attacker at an advantage, and to bring in a small amount of reinforcements, but does not permit advancement.
Subjugate (Air and Ground only) allows players to fight a battle against dissidents.
Attack Tankers (Navy only) allows players to threaten the adversary’s political power.
Regroup allows players to bring in a large amount of reinforcements, but not to fight in any battle that occurs.
Air and Naval forces have one order tiles each, but Ground forces have three different order tiles, representing the three different ground forces in the game: the Guard, Regular Army, and Paramilitary. The more elite the ground force, the earlier it gets to execute its order and deal damage, which gives it a slight advantage in combat.
Grant: How is combat handled?
Akar: Combat strength is a function of 3 different factors:
The Order tile, which represents orders from on high, determines whether a battle occurs, and if it does, which order the forces use to deal damage.
The Commander card, which represents high-level military leadership, determines the damage the front will do that turn. Each commander has a hit value for each of three battle suits: Fervor, Discipline, and Leadership.
The Battle card, which represents forces in the field, determines which suit on the Commander is used to deal hits on the opposing force. A new Battle card is drawn during each battle.
For each hit defined in the previous step, players remove one military strength, represented by wooden chevrons, from that front. If an attacking front is stronger than the opposing front, it may advance and capture enemy territory, for some bonuses.
In each battle where one side deals more damage than the other, the active Commander learns a lesson about how to fight, which changes his stats. Of note, not every lesson is a good one; some lessons can actually make the Commanders worse at fighting; for instance, if it makes them complacent or arrogant.
Grant: What elements of unrest confront the players? How do they handle these challenges?
Akar: Unrest comes in 3 forms, during the Unrest phase:
Public outcry occurs if a player does not attack in a given turn. This removes a political power cube from the game.
Dissidents represent groups that threaten the regime’s power. The strongest dissident group on the map each turn has a massive negative effect, the second strongest has a moderate penalty, and the other three have a slight penalty. If left unchecked, the dissident groups can cause major chaos, but any troops dedicated to fighting dissidents are necessarily not fighting the adversary, so balance is important.
Coup attempts may break out if a commander has more political support than the regime. Each commander has a number of cubes on the card, which corresponds to his risk to the regime and typically corresponds with his competence. If a commander (or a group of commanders allowed to coordinate) has more cubes than the regime, a coup attempt may break out, and then the player will have to fight battles against the rebellious commander(s).
Grant: How does the design use cards?
Akar: The game has 4 types of cards:
Action cards allow players to choose from among four different military changes each turn, as listed above. Players can “reform” or upgrade these actions to have more of an effect, at the cost of political power.
Personnel cards represent the major figures involved in the conflict. They are dual use cards:
When horizontal, they are Commander cards, meaning that the person on the card now Commands forces. These Commanders each have different strengths across three suits (discipline, fervor, and leadership), which dictate how much damage they do each turn.
When vertical, they are Battle cards, meaning that they are forces in the field who are actually fighting the enemy. Battle cards dictate which suit on the Commander deals damage in a given fight.
Dissident cards represent the negative penalties from the five dissident groups that are in the game. Each turn, during the Unrest phase, players draw one of these cards, which determines what effect they have. The strongest dissident group this turn has a major penalty, the second-strongest has a moderate penalty, and the other three groups have a small penalty.
Grant: What is the layout of the board? What do the point to point tracks represent?
Akar: The War Map is a point-to-point map, which was a necessary design choice because the terrain along the Iran-Iraq border only allows approaches through specific narrow corridors, to avoid marshes, mountains, and other rough terrain. Additionally, the amount of land that each side managed to capture in the war was miniscule, so having a map to scale made little sense.
The map has different squares representing ground territory and sea locations. Black squares are Iraqi-controlled at game start, and red ones are Iranian-controlled. Each space has icons: stars are Victory Points, representing strategically and symbolically important areas; circles are Economy, representing oil infrastructure and sea lanes, and hexagons show the presence of dissident groups.
Beyond the map is a series of tracks representing the current turn, the strength of each country’s economy, and the current war progress (i.e., the winning side’s victory points and current objective).
Additionally, each side of the board has an area to show each regime’s current political power and active military commanders.
Grant: How is victory achieved?
Akar: The most important spaces on the board have stars on them, which represent victory points. Every time a side captures a starred space, the War Progress counter advances that many spaces. (Of note: this value is zero-sum, so only the War Progress of the winning side is marked; if the winning side flips, the counter flips to show that the other side is winning.)
Additionally, an Objective counter, marked with a dove, represents the current victory condition. The game begins with the Iraqi side having maximalist objectives, but as the game progresses, each side is willing to scale down their goals and definition of “victory.” So, the Objective counter moves left each turn, and additionally moves due to player actions.
If the War Progress counter ever meets or exceeds the Objective marker at the end of the Battle Phase, the game ends and that side is the winner! Of note, a side can even win with zero victory points, which probably was the real-world historical outcome.
Additionally, if a side ever runs out of Political Power cubes from their pool at the end of the Unrest Phase, that regime collapses and loses the game. If the other side still has cubes, then they win the game! If both regimes collapse on the same turn, then both players lose and Henry Kissinger wins the game.
Grant: What do you feel the game models well?
Akar: The game does a great job of building tension, fostering an alternating sense of hubris and desperation, and encouraging experimentation through trying different combinations of actions until one comes out ahead. All of these factors were present in the actual history, so I am excited that the game design reflects these traits.
Grant: What are you most pleased about with the design?
Akar: I am pleased about the game’s originality. I don’t know of another game that shows the competing priorities of internal political stability and external military effectiveness quite in this way. I would be most excited if I (and eventually, other designers) could employ this system to explore other conflicts through history, or perhaps even outside of history.
Grant: What other designs are you contemplating or already working on?
Akar: As I mentioned earlier, I’m hoping to return to Tyranny of Blood, my game about the Indian caste system, and finally finish it. This one is the furthest along, but I have other games that I’m in the early stages of designing.
I’m hoping to adapt the Chalice of Poison system for a 3-4 game about the Vietnam War, tentatively called Riding the Tiger. My idea so far is to add some more asymmetry to the system. The South Vietnam player will likely play similarly to the two sides in Chalice, as an unstable strongman regime prone to coup attempts. The United States player will not face coup attempts, but will have to deal with popular support and an election every four turns. The North Vietnam player will have to manage its politburo, attempting to exert influence over the southern revolutionaries and balance between its Chinese and Soviet patrons (and their competing priorities for Vietnam).
I have another game concept, tentatively called Iron and Cardboard, about intra-alliance dynamics and competition among the Warsaw Pact nations as they rebuild from the destruction of WWII under Soviet domination.
Lastly, I have a concept called Pillars of Fire about competition and conflict among Iran, Iraq, and Saudi Arabia from 1979 to 1991. It will be asymmetrical, based on the 3 different systems of government (revolutionary theocracy, strongman dictatorship, and conservative monarchy), which will vie for dominance of the region. Chalice actually began as the military module of Pillars before it took on a life of its own, but I think the grand strategy of this rivalry is worth exploring in its own game.
I love a different style and focus of wargame. A game that takes a look at an important but somewhat obscure or rarely addressed historical topic, such as espionage or intelligence, and creates a gaming experience tailored around the events to highlight and evoke the difficulties and tension that would have been present. In January 2026, GMT Games announced such a game in Checkpoint Charlie, which is a solo or cooperative game focused on SIS espionage missions in Berlin in the 1960’s designed by Russell Brown. We have posted an interview with Russel and it was very well received and he has now agreed to create a series of History Behind the Cards to highlight the events of the 1960’s Cold War struggle in West Germany but also to share aspects about the game play and how it models the history.
*Note: The cards highlighted in this series and their event text, as well as any pictures used showing any of the various components, are still in the design and development process and as such event effects and text might still change prior to final development and publication.Also the art and layout of the cards are only for playtest purposes at this point and the game will enter the art department as it nears publication.
History Behind the Cards – Checkpoint Charlie from GMT Games – Card #2: Cuban Missile Crisis
In response to the US placing nuclear missiles in the UK and Turkey, within range of Moscow, and in an effort to protect Cuba and keep it within the Soviet sphere of influence, Khrushchev made a deal with Castro in July of 1961 to base Soviet nuclear missiles in Cuba, within range of most of the southeastern United States.
The US knew the Soviet Union was training and supplying Castro’s army and inserting specialists, and CIA assets in Cuba had seen Soviet surface-to-air missiles. This led to suspicion that the Soviets were intending to place ballistic missiles in Cuba.
The best US assets for confirming the presence of these missiles were high-altitude U-2 Spy plane flyovers. However, the loss of Francis Gary Powers’s U-2 over the Soviet Union to a SAM missile (Event Card #12 The Powers Abel Exchange) created reluctance, since the US now knew the Soviets had deployed similar SAM’s to Cuba. U-2 flights were finally authorized in October of 1962, and it was these photos that confirmed the presence of Soviet nuclear-capable missiles.
The status of Berlin, halfway around the world, played an important role in the Cuban Missile Crisis. From 1958 until the discovery of the missiles, the relationship between the US and the Soviets was dominated by the “Berlin Crisis,” which consisted of a series of military and diplomatic moves by Khrushchev to outmaneuver the Americans and annex West Berlin into East Germany. The Cuban Missile Crisis not only brought the conflict over Cuba to a head, but also brought new attention on the status of Berlin. The two became linked. A ground invasion of Cuba might result in a military annexation of West Berlin by the Soviets, and it was not out of the question for the Americans to concede to the Soviets in Berlin to get the missiles out of Cuba.
President Kennedy avoided direct military conflict and responded with backchannel diplomacy and a naval blockade of ships coming into Cuba. The crisis continued for two weeks, with US ground forces readied for an invasion, Soviet ships attempting to run the blockade, and the US strategic nuclear forces going to Defcon 2. The tensions eased when Khrushchev agreed to remove the missiles in exchange for an agreement that the US would never invade Cuba. In addition, Kennedy secretly agreed to remove US nuclear missiles from Turkey.
In Checkpoint Charlie, the Cuban Missile Crisis is assumed to have diverted Soviet attention from espionage activities in Berlin. This card not only removes surveillance from any location of the player’s choice; it also reduces the number of available surveillance pawns for the rest of the mission.
In the next article in this series, we will take a look at Demonstrations and what effect these student run organizations had on operations in West Berlin and West Germany.
In my opinion, this game looks extremely interesting and I am very much excited to learn more about it. I am appreciative to Russell and his efforts to bring us these cards and to write these entries to share with our readers. I am also very glad that this topic is being covered in a game and look forward to playing this one day soon.
It has been very hot lately….and the humidity is getting out of control here in our Area of Operations (Indianapolis, IN). It makes everything tougher but I still like it better than the negative temp spikes we experience in January and February and look forward to the rest of summer. In the wargaming world, there is also a lot of “heat” coming upon us in waves as this month for the Wargame Watch, I was able to find 30 games (including the single new game from our sponsor Bring it on Games). I was also able to find 9 games being offered on Crowdfunding through Gamefound and Kickstarter.
This month we have a sponsor for the Wargame Watch feature in a new publisher named Bring it on Games. Bring it on Games is owned by Adam Starkweather of Grand Tactical Series (GTS) and Company Scale System (CSS) fame. He has started this new company with several friends and compatriots as a “company run by gamers – not a company that publishes games”. I think that Adam is a great designer and he is now out on his own and is going to make the games that he wants to make.
On their website, they have said the following about their production schedule and plans for the near future:
We will only make two or three games every two years. Next up is ACSS: Utah: 10 Days in Normandy. But work has also started on Omaha, Market Garden, and Battleaxe for ACSS. But other games on different stuff using new systems has started too. Gettysburg, The War of the Atlantic, and other fun stuff. I just have to live to ninety to make everything I want to make.
While they are new and don’t have a published game to their credit as of yet, they appear to be working hard to build a brand that is solid and will hopefully be one that is a continual force in the wargaming hobby. Their current project that is up for pre-order is called Anzio: A Lost Opportunity and is a big, monster wargame. This game has a ton of maps (10 total) and a ton of counters (20 5/8th” Countersheets) as well as a ton of charts, tables and player aids. This is a MONSTER wargame…big, bad and beautiful…no doubt about it but it looks really good.
We have played several games designed by Adam Starkweather in his Company Scale System (CSS) published by Compass Games including Saipan: The Bloody Rock and The Enemy is at the Gates: The Batlte for Berlin. These games are really good solid chit draw systems that really puts some unknown in what groups of units can activate and even when they will activate. There are also events and if the chit cup runs dry before all of the units can activate due to the end round chit then you are just sore out of luck. You have to prepare for this inevitability and I love the concept of prioritizing your activations and making sure you activate what you absolutely have to before doing those units that would be beneficial to activate. The system is a highly accessible, streamlined approach to simulating tactical military operations while retaining strong decision-making depth. The CSS offers a “design-for-effect” combat system that effectively eliminates micro-management and makes the game a joy to play.
Anzio is the first game in a new series called the Advanced Company Scale System or ACSS. At this point, I am unsure what makes it advanced but will be working with the designer to get a better understanding of that in a designer interview for the blog.
In the mean time, you can download the rules and the scenario booklet from an online OneDrive and you can also get access to a Vassal module to try the game out. Here is the link to the OneDrive: OneDrive Link to Rules and Scenario Booklet
If you are interested in Advanced Company Scale System Game One:Anzio: A Lost Opportunity, you can pre-order a copy for $300.00 from the Bring It On Games website at the following link: https://bringitongames.com/shop/p/anzio-a-lost-opportunity
Pre-Order
1. OCSThe Hero City: The Battle of the Baltics, September 1943-April 1944 from Multi-Man Publishing
In late 2021, we posted an interview with Tony Birkett as designer and Chip Saltsman as developer covering his The Third Winter from Multi-Man Publishing, which covers the third winter on the Eastern Front during World War II and deals with German Army Group South as they retreat to the Dnieper River and then the Carpathian Mountains. This game is an entry in the Operational Combat Series and was followed up by his Crimea: Conquest & Liberation game that was promoted as a low-counter density, small OCS game. Since then, he has been hard at work on the next volume in the series called The Hero City: The Battle of the Baltics, September 1943-April 1944 that dives into the mid war battles in the Baltics between the Germans and the Russians.
From the game page, we read the following:
The Hero City depicts the desperate battles between late September 1943 and April 1944 in the Army Group North sector of the Russian front. Soviet priorities were to establish a rail connection into Leningrad, evict the Axis forces from the Leningrad Oblast, and force their way into the Baltic States. Well aware this hammer was about to fall, Army Group North prepared the Panther Line defensive belt along the borders of Estonia and Latvia. The Hero City covers the major engagements: the autumn attrition battles while the Soviets mass their forces, the fighting retreat as the Wehrmacht desperately tries to escape intact, and the crashing impact as Russian waves pound against the German Panther Line breakwater. In the north are the Finnish lines, which offer a completely different strategic opportunity, including a scenario for the Soviet Summer 1944 offensive into Karelia. The Axis forces managed—barely—to hold at the Panther line, but the situation could have spiraled into disaster. The campaign here laid the foundations for the drama during the summer of 1944, and many of the German units in The Hero City will end the war trapped in Courland.
The game area covers the Soviet Oblasts of Leningrad, Novgorod and Pskov, as well as Estonia, Latvia, and the northern part of Lithuania. The map extends north of Helsinki and Viipuri in Finland, south to Daugavpils and Tilsit, east to Valday and Volkhov and west to the Baltic Sea. The Hero City is fully playable with The Forgotten Battles, to create a combined massive gaming experience using campaign setups that start in September 1943 and January 1944.
The Soviet command and supply structure is modeled through Front HQ markers. Fronts are either in “Offensive” or “Regrouping” status, allowing for shifting axes of attack and the on/off nature of Soviet operational warfare during this time. Each Front has an assigned Air Force. The parallel fighting in Army Group Center is represented by a boundary marker that shifts as the war advances off map, and the Axis player must be careful to watch his off-map flanks.
The Hero City is a large-sized OCS game, with 1,400 combat units (five counter sheets) and a 44×66-inch map layout at a scale of 5-mile hex/3.5 days per turn. The full Campaign game is 63 turns long, and there are three campaign scenarios so players can start at different points in the action. Also included are several partial-map scenarios.
Special rules in this OCS game are carefully researched to model key aspects of this critical campaign:
Forces include German Wehrmacht, Luftwaffe and SS formations, as well as Soviet Guards, regular and Partisan units, plus Finnish, Estonian, Latvian, and Lithuanian units. The Prinz Eugen and German destroyers might put in an appearance.
Soviet Front HQ Markers which reflect their role in command and marshaling supply.
Soviet RVGK for coordinating strategic redeployment and rebuilding shattered mobile Corps.
Axis Army, Army Group and Kessel HQs, along with Kampfgruppe markers which portray Axis operational flexibility.
Random events similar to what are found in The Third Winter and The Forgotten Battles. The 26 possible events add historical flavor with minimal rules overhead, covering things like Guards Promotions, Fuel Shortages, Hitler’s intransigence, Soviet submarines Partisan Offensives, One-Turn Offensives, Battlefield Heroes, options for emergency reinforcements and unexpected Finnish offensives.
If you are interested in OCS The Hero City: The Battle of the Baltics, September 1943-April 1944, you can pre-order a copy for $90.00 from the Multi-Man Publishing website at the following link: https://mmpgamers.com/the-hero-city-p-468
2. Inferno in the Blue Grass: The Battle of Perryville, 8 October 1862 from Multi-Man Publishing
While attending Buckeye Game Fest this past March, we met with a fan of the channel named Leslie Jerome and had him introduce us to the Line of Battle Series with Volume 3 To Take Washington: Jubal Early’s Summer 1864 Campaign from Multi-Man Publishing. Line of Battle is a regimental-level American Civil War wargame system designed for fast-paced, non-stop action by eliminating excessive paperwork and combining fire phases with movement. I feel like this system is a highly playable classic ACW system with lots of very interesting mechanics including activation, order reception and relay, closing rolls, morale checks and close assault. In fact, I love how it creates a great narrative with some of the terminology and naming conventions such as the Blood Lust result for close assaults and the Cowardly Legs from broken units.
Recently, MMP put the next volume in the series up for pre-order called Inferno in the Blue Grass: The Battle of Perryville, 8 October 1862. I am very much anticipating this one and can’t wait to dive back into the series.
From the game page, we read the following:
Inferno in the Bluegrass brings The Gamer’s Line of Battle (LoB) Series into the Western Theater. The Battle of Perryville, the largest battle fought in Kentucky during the American Civil War, was the culminating engagement of the Heartland Campaign of 1862. This was the South’s attempt to invade the border state and garner support for its cause while simultaneously forcing Union armies in the west on the defensive. By October, the Army of the Ohio was on the move, poised to throw back the invaders. Bragg, confident that an initial Federal advance would focus elsewhere, was completely unaware that Don Carlos Buell was converging on his army in the small town of Perryville. As the sun rose on October 8th, 1862, neither army could have known that the coming engagement would ultimately determine the fate of Kentucky in the war.
The sheer scale of violence at Perryville factored heavily into the design, over 7,600 casualties were tallied – resulting in one of the larger casualties per hour rates of the war. Independent Command rule replicates Confederate commanders blurring the lines of command by fragmenting divisions into small, independent commands, creating confusion and limiting effectiveness. The Attack Commencement Chart limits the ability of the Confederate player to organize one massive assault. The Union, conversely, is hamstrung from the outset. The Union Alertness Table represents the phenomenon of an “acoustic shadow”, which caused Buell to be blissfully unaware of the overall tactical situation hours after the initial fighting had started. The map shows the parched land in meticulous detail, corroborated by the designer walking the battlefield to get a great feel of the ground.
This is Nick Roser’s first published design. His commitment and expertise on the battle shines through the design. Nick’s ancestor, Johann Christian Kurtz, fought in the battle, so his personal connection to Inferno in the Bluegrass is in his blood.
If you are interested in Inferno in the Blue Grass: The Battle of Perryville, 8 October 1862, you can pre-order a copy for $48.00 from the Multi-Man Publishing website at the following link: https://mmpgamers.com/inferno-in-the-bluegrass-p-467
3. Great Battles of the American Civil War: Battles for the Ozarks from GMT Games
This is one of those venerable series that we have not had the opportunity to play or experience. Great Battles of the American Civil War or GBACW (not to be confused with Great Campaigns of the American Civil War from Multi-Man Publishing) is a highly detailed, regimental-level wargame series originally created by Richard H. Berg. It is known for its interactive chit-pull mechanics that simulate the chaos, command difficulties and fatigue of 19th-century warfare. The newest volume in the series, which is Volume XI, was announced in late June and is called Battles of the Ozarks.
From the game page, we read the following:
The game presents five key battles that shifted the balance of power west of the Mississippi during the first two years of the war. Battles for the Ozarks concentrates on events on the Ozark Plateau of northern Arkansas and southwest Missouri and included are these battles from the first three campaigns of the war in the West. Each battle is portrayed in great detail allowing players to try alternate strategies.
Dead & Buried, The Battle of Wilson’s Creek, August 10, 1861 The first large battle west of the Mississippi. Federal General Nathaniel Lyon leads the Union forces in an attempt to bloody the nose of General Sterling Price’s Missouri State Guard and Ben McColluch’s Western Army that has arrived from Texas and Arkansas. Command the unusual forces that were arrayed in each army for this battle. As the Union, you’ll have Home Guard units, Regulars (including the famous 2nd Dragoons), and German American Missouri Volunteers from St. Louis. As Price and McCulloch, you’ll have everything from Missouri State Guard units armed with flintlocks and shotguns, to the South Kansas Texas Cavalry regiment and Arkansas State Militia.
Into The Night, The Battle of Dunagin’s Farm, February 17th, 1862 A lesser-known battle that occurred about a month before the much more famous battle of Pea Ridge. In north Arkansas along the Little Sugar Creek, the rear guard of McCulloch’s Army of the West, led by the capable Louis Hebert, tries to cover Sterling Price’s retreat from Springfield, Missouri. Hot on Price’s trail is Samuel Curtis’ Army of the Southwest. The advance cavalry of Curtis’ army collides with Hebert’s forces on farmer Dunagin’s field. What starts as a simple skirmish escalates into a full-blown fight that spills over into the evening, with both sides gradually feeding more troops into the battle.
Rush To Glory, The Battle of Pea Ridge, March 7th & 8th, 1862 Can you, as Earl Van Dorn, fall upon the rear and flank of the Federal army deployed north of the Little Sugar Creek before the more rested and organized enemy responds? Or can you, as General Samuel Curtis, repeat one of the few times in military history when an army reversed course, moved its supply train out of danger, and then engaged and defeated the enemy? A challenging battle for both sides; the Confederate army has been “Rushed to Glory” by Van Dorn in a snowstorm and is worn out, while the Union army is flanked by the CSA foe. The battle has a two-map and a three-map version (the largest presentation of the battle ever done).
Iron Men, The Battle of First Newtonia, September 30th, 1862 Probably the most unusual and desperate of all the battles included in Battles for the Ozarks. First Newtonia was fought before the Battle of Prairie Grove in Blunt’s campaign. The advance units of the two armies meet at the small hamlet of Newtonia in southwest Missouri. A CSA force comprised of the Indian Command, a brigade of Texas cavalry, and part of Jo Shelby’s Iron Brigade attempt to stop the forward movement of BG Fredrick Salomon’s 1st Kansas Division. With warriors of the First Nations on both sides, First Newtonia steps into new territory for GBACW. Also command part of the Western “Iron Brigade” in its first battle. One of the most desperate fought battles in the Trans-Mississippi.
Blunted Again, The Battle of Prairie Grove, December 7th, 1862 Take the role of the headstrong Union General James Blunt and see if you can move the CSA forces led by Thomas Hindman off the Fayetteville Road. As the Union commander, you will have superior artillery that can win the day. Or as the Confederate commander, you’ll hold the strong defensive position between the two Union wings along “The Bench”. You have the Napoleonic central position, and it is held by Joe Shelby’s Iron Brigade! Will it be enough?
Ready for a new experience in your War Between the States gaming? Battles for the Ozarks is the 11th installment in the award-winning Great Battles of the American Civil War Series. The game has rules that satisfy both experienced and new players, with a Simple Version that offers an easier, faster gaming experience. New optional rules are also introduced! New skirmish rules catch the ebb and flow of open order combat between the battle lines, and the Peoples of the First Nations make their first appearance in the GBACW Series. See how well these warriors fought at Prairie Grove or First Newtonia. New terrain types, such as Heavy and Light woods, are introduced, along with Rifle Pits and Entrenchments. With over twelve scenarios, including two on their own half maps, there is something for everyone.
4. Bataan! The Battle for the Philippines 1942 2nd Edition from Consim Games/GMT Games
Classic wargames always do well, either because of nostalgia and a longing for the past or because the game was really good. I don’t know which one this fits into but GMT Games announced a new 2nd Edition of a classic wargame called Bataan!. I say GMT Games but the game is actually published by Consim Games, as they have entered a new partnership with GMT as they have in the past to publish their own line of games.
From the game page, we read the following:
Bataan! 2nd Edition is the much-anticipated, updated grand-tactical-level treatment of WWII battles on the Bataan Peninsula in the Philippines, which took place from January through April 1942. Game designer and Charles S. Roberts Award recipient Vance von Borries has drawn on his game design experience to create a game engine capable of portraying the tense jungle fighting that took place on Bataan. While the system is based on his popular Roads to Leningrad game, the changes needed to simulate the fighting on Bataan make for a unique gaming experience. For history enthusiasts and wargamers, this is a nuanced, in-depth exploration of a specific, underrepresented aspect of WWII history. This all-new 2nd Edition does not simply address all official errata from the original edition, but also delivers new game components and a major game system update, with the rules rewritten to further advance this popular game system.
Gameplay is both tense and interactive, based on an alternating activation sequence in which both sides conduct operations. This second edition features streamlined game mechanics to improve and help speed gameplay, all based on player feedback. The game also captures air and naval operations, though the focus is on ground warfare and specialized unit capabilities.
Special rules model key historical facets of the campaign include: movement classes of units, artillery, air power, air missions, strategic movement, infiltration movement, disruption, contested hexes, unit formations, attack coordination, lead unit losses, efficiency and lead units, HQ units and capabilities, initiative and activation, hasty and deliberate activations, momentum, supply, fortifications, withdrawals, Japanese emergency supply, Campaign supply, general attrition, forage, naval operations, amphibious invasion, special situations and events, special units, Philippine Scouts, and more! Five scenarios are included. The three quick-playing opening scenarios require fewer rules to play. You can complete them in a single sitting, focusing on the core game system, and they include At the Pearly Gates: Layac (intro scenario), Abucay Line, and Mauban Line. These scenarios provide a clear and accessible entry point for players new to the system, allowing them to learn the core mechanics before tackling the full complexity of the campaign game. The two full campaign game scenarios add detail by introducing campaign supply, naval operations, amphibious invasions, special situations, and events. While intended for two players, the game is also suitable for solitaire play.
5. When Titans Clashed: The Eastern Front in WW2 from Consim Games/GMT Games
And the 2nd game offered on pre-order this past month in this new Consim Games/GMT Games partnership is called When Titans Clashed: The Eastern Front in WW2 designed by Michael Resch. This is a new game design but pays homage to the original Jedko Games edition of the classic The Russian Campaign designed by John Edwards. I know that we all very much enjoy a good romp on the Eastern Front of World War II and the tank clashes and and I am sure that this game will be a fantastic representation of the genre and give us hours and hours of hex and counter goodness.
From the game page, we read the following:
When Titans Clashed is a game covering the epic campaign fought in Eastern Europe during World War II. Game designer Michael Resch offers this tribute to the original 1974 Jedko Games edition of The Russian Campaign by John Edwards. This new design seeks to balance the classic game’s attractive aspects while introducing modern design concepts unheard of at that time. The map and counters use a vintage style to honor the 1974 Jedko edition, but beyond this, the designer presents a new, modernized design approach to the classic game.
Gameplay is fast-paced and intense for both sides, as the initiative can shift through significant maneuvers and battle outcomes. For both sides, each turn features a double-impulse sequence that rewards the player who, in a disciplined fashion, plans for the possibilities the double-impulse sequence can create. Such planning may enable battlefield gains to be solidified or, conversely, allow recovery from disaster along an expansive front. Players must also plan for reinforcements, replacements, and upgrades, as well as various strategic considerations and political events that will influence the campaign.
While the game system itself is relatively low in complexity, special rules help capture the campaign’s historical narrative. Political events include the Warsaw Uprising and the Romanian coup d’état. Special rules include Axis Ally Limitations, German Heavy Panzers, Air Power, Stalin, Fortified Areas, Coastal Army, Sea Invasion, Soviet artillery, partisans, workers, oilfields, and more! The game, while designed for two players, plays very well solitaire, and one can finish the full campaign in a single sitting.
6. Combat Commander Battle Pack Nr. 1: Paratroopers 4th Printing from GMT Games
I have played a ton of Combat Commander over the years, including from Combat Commander: Europe, Combat Commander: Mediterranean and Combat Commander: Pacific as well as several of the Battle Packs and absolutely love the narrative that the game creates. I love the cards and how they are used for combat, there are no dice in CC, activations and events. The system is just full of chaos and fun. This month they have announced the 4th Printings of a few of the classic Battle Packs including Battle Pack Nr. 1: Paratroopers, which allows players access to elite American/Russian/German troops with some nifty abilities that can really turn the tide of battle and boost the capabilities of your soldiers.
From the game page, we read the following:
Combat Commander: Battle Pack Nr. 1 – Paratroopers is the first of many themed scenario packs for use with the Combat CommanderSeries of games. The theme of this first Pack is focused on the exploits of American, German and even Russian Airborne forces. CC-Paratroopers features eleven new scenarios printed on cardstock, as well as four new maps.
The scenarios included in CC-Paratroopers are:
“Fields of Fire” and “Fields of Blood” set at Lanzerath, Germany, 16 December 1944 – both morning and afternoon attacks (using a new map #25)
“Turnbull Turns ’em” at Neuville-au-Plain, France, 6 June 1944 (using a new map #26)
“Carentan Causeway” at Carentan, France, 10 June 1944 (using a new map #27)
“No Ingouf Around” at Carentan, France, 11 June 1944 (using a new map #28)
“Operation Repulse” at Bastogne, Belgium, 27 December 1944
“Red Skies at Night” at Veliki Bukrin Bridgehead, Russia, 25 September 1943
“Blizzard Baptism” at Flamierge, Belgium, 4 January 1945
“Look Mom, No Tanks!” near Trois Ponts, Belgium, 24 December 1944
“We Go!” at St. Mere Eglise, France, 6 June 1944″Encircled at Hill 30″ at Caponnet, France, 8 June 1944
CC Battle Packs are NOT stand-alone games and will require ownership of one or more Combat Commander boxed games in order to be played. CC-Paratroopers requires ownership of Combat Commander: Europe or the Combat Commander: Europe/Med 20th Anniversary Edition.
Overall, this is a great expansion for the base game and all true Combat Commander fans should include this in their collection. The only concern or complaint that I had about the Battle Pack was that the American Forces colors on the scenario cards are almost all different. Some appear as Lime Green, others are Olive Drab and more yet are Forest Green! I don’t know if this is simply my copy’s problem or the entire run during the printing. Not a major issue and it definitely doesn’t change my opinion about this expansion. The scenarios are printed on thick card stock and are very durable and as usual the Situation Reports are some of my favorite parts as they set the tone for the scenario by giving historical analysis of the happenings. Great stuff that you simply must own!
7. Combat Commander Battle Pack Nr. 2: Stalingrad 4th Printing from GMT Games
They also have announced the 4th Printing of Battle Pack Nr. 2: Stalingrad and I know that this one has been out of print for a while now. I own a copy but have yet to get any of the scenarios played at this point.
From the game page, w read the following:
Combat Commander: Battle Pack Nr. 2 Stalingrad is the second themed collection of scenarios for use with the Combat CommanderSeries of games. The theme of this second Battle Pack shifts to the East Front in late 1942 as German and Soviet forces clash in and around the vaunted city of Stalingrad. CC–Stalingrad features eleven new scenarios printed on cardstock — one of which is a new style of multi-scenario Campaign Game — as well as eight new maps and dozens of new counters.
Numerous additional rules relevant to the dense urban fighting characteristic of the struggle for Stalingrad are also included:
Factories
Urban Snipers
Ongoing Melee
Rubble, Debris & Craters
Underground Sewer Movement
and the “Ampulomet” Molotov Launcher
The scenarios included in CC–Stalingrad are:
“Spartakovka Salient” set at Spartakovka, 23 August 1942
“Sea Devils” set at the Grain Elevator, 18 September 1942
“Dom 31”, behind the Barrikady, 27 October 1942
“Not One Step Back!” set at Dolgyi Gully, 1 October 1942
“Fortresses of Blood and Iron” set near the Volga River, 1 October 1942
“Into the Breach” set at the Barrikady’s Great Assembly Hall, 17 October 1942
“The Commissar’s House” as fought on 13 November 1942
“Shootout at Obliskaya” seeing the Rumanians fighting for Obliskaya Airfield, 1 December 1942
“Lyudnikov’s Island” near the Fuel Tank Area, 22 December 1942
“Stalingrad of the North” set at Veliki Luki, 14 January 1943
The “Stand and Die” multi-scenario Campaign Game recreating the battle for Mamayev Kurgan, late September 1942
NOTE: CC–Stalingrad is not a complete game and requires ownership of both Combat Commander: Europe and Combat Commander: Mediterranean OR the Combat Commander Europe/Med 20th Anniversary Edition to play.
Designed by John Foley and Chad Jensen with additional scenario designs in this second Pack courtesy of Mark Kalina, Bryan Collars, Kai Jensen, and Will Green.
8. Battle Line: Medieval-Themed Edition 2nd Printing from GMT Games
Following on in this reprint trend this month, Battle Line: Medieval is getting a 2nd Printing. This is one of those famous classic wargames designed by Reiner Knizia that is very well thought of but that is a smaller, card based game that is portable and very approachable.
From the game page, we read the following:
Now in its 12th GMT printing, designer Reiner Knizia’s Battle Line is our #2 all-time best-selling game! This new re-themed version of Battle Line is a two-player strategy card game built around the theme of Medieval warfare. This Medieval-themed version of Battle Line features 60 beautiful new cards by illustrator Roland MacDonald, as well as 10 full-color tactics “wildcards” that give players extra flexibility and choices and help make each new battle wildly different from the last.
Battle Line: Medieval takes about 30 minutes to play. To win, you must create powerful formations along your side of the line of battle that are superior to those of your enemy. Victory goes to the player who wins 5 of the 9 battle flags (an envelopment) or three adjacent flags (a breakthrough). Based on Reiner Knizia’s original design published in Germany as Shotten-Totten,Battle Line: Medieval enhances and expands that game system to give players even more tactical options and gut-wrenching decisions.
Battle Line: Medieval is a beautiful game that will delight competitive strategy game players and also serve as an great introductory game for new or young gamers.
9. Spearhead: Hell on Wheels – Tank Battles in Normandy from Matt White Currently on Kickstarter
Over the past several years, we have done interviews with Matt White, publicized his games and played a few of them as well and he always has something cooking. Recently, I came across his newest offering on Kickstarter called Spearhead: Hell on Wheels – Tank Battles in Normandy. This game is a solitaire or 2-player print and play tactical game that allows players to take command of US tanks in German occupied France.
From the game page, we read the following:
Welcome to Spearhead: Hell on Wheels – Tank Battles in Normandy” a brand new solitaire and co-op World War II print and play tactical wargame. In this game you are in command of a group of 3 US tanks in brutal and intense tank combat in enemy-occupied territory.
You must lead your tanks, through unforgiving terrain, finding and then engaging the enemy in fierce fire fights. You must defeat any encountered enemy tanks and forces, whilst meeting the objectives as you cross the map.
Keeping your tank crews alive and positioning your tanks whilst dealing with unexpected enemy positions is key to survival and success. This game is point-to-point based where you must place your tank orientation and can aim the turret separately. Being able to keep the front of the hull forward towards the enemy tanks whilst hopefully being able to fire on their flank is critical.
This is a standalone game in my series of WW2 print and play games. All of the digital PDF files are included (you simply print it out, provide yourself with a couple of regular six sided dice and a pencil).
The game is quick to setup and play, with a scenario taking around a hour to play and requires very little space.
As of July 1st, the Kickstarter campaign has funded and raised $2,485 toward its modest $171 funding goal with 88 backers. The campaign will conclude on Thursday, July 9th at 3:22pm EDT.
10. ’65: Squad Level Combat in the Jungles of Vietnam Strategy Guide from Flying Pig Games Currently on Kickstarter
Several years ago, Alexander and I played ’65 when it was originally released on Kickstarter. For a look at all the various bits and pieces in the box we made an unboxing video that shows all of the KS stretch goals as well that can be picked up, of which there were many! I’m always impressed by Mark Walker’s games because he packs so much in the box, and your hard earned cash can take you really far. The rules themselves are pretty light for a squad level tactical game, especially a Vietnam game with all of the potential complexities from that war. That made ’65 quite accessible and I’d recommend it for those looking to enter the tactical side of the hobby, as well as those who are looking for a game that is high on the fun side, and low on the dreary sense of impending doom when you lose side.
Recently, Flying Pig Games announced a new Strategy Guide Kickstarter campaign for the game and it looks like this is a very comprehensive booklet on the game and how to play it well.
From the game page, we read the following:
The ’65 Strategy Guide, launching on Kickstarter by Flying Pig Games, is a tactical handbook for the ’65: Squad Battles in the Jungles of Vietnam wargame. It features in-depth analyses of game mechanics, unit profiles, and faction-specific strategies, along with a detailed table of contents.
As of July 1st, the Kickstarter campaign has funded and raised $10,287 toward its $1,500 funding goal with 172 backers. The campaign will conclude on Thursday, July 9th at 12:00pm EDT.
11. Assault Red Horizon ’41 – Revised Edition from Assault Games / Sound of Drums Currently on Gamefound
A few years ago, I came across a new designer named Wolfgang Klein (no relation to Alexander Klein) and his new company Assault Games. They create fantastic tactical level wargames and we have played several of them and also got a chance to meet both Wolfgang and his friend and partner Erich Rankl last fall while attending Spiel Essen in Germany.
They have been working on a new edition of their first game called Assault – Red Horizon ’41: Revised Edition and they are ready now to take it to Gamefound.
From the game page, we read the following:
Assault – Red Horizon 41: Revised Edition marks the relaunch of the acclaimed tactical war game that immerses players in the dramatic early stages of Operation Barbarossa (June–October 1941). A clash of titans – the German Wehrmacht and the Soviet Red Army locked in a desperate struggle with infantry, artillery, and armored forces.
This new edition refines the system and significantly expands the experience, combining historical depth with playability, streamlined rules, and enhanced components.
The Revised Edition has optimised rules v2.5: Comprehensive revisions ensure smoother play, faster resolution, and greater clarity. The core mechanics remain familiar but have been refined for balance and accessibility. Find a draft version and changelog on our website here.
As well as expanded Game Material: New elements such as fortifications, obstacles, and minefields provide fresh tactical challenges. Tactical air support and off-board artillery support are now fully integrated into the ruleset, adding depth and variety to battlefield engagements.
Completely Redesigned Artwork: All visual elements have been thoroughly overhauled, delivering a sharper, more immersive presentation on both counters and maps. Additional we developed and upgraded the map boards with important symbols to aid the players during their actions.
As of July 1st, the Gamefound campaign has funded and raised €46,856 ($53,357 in US Dollars) toward its €15,000 ($17,119 in US Dollars) with 390 backers. The campaign will conclude on Monday, July 6th at 6:00pm EDT.
12. Imperial Elegy: The Imperial World at War 1850-1920Revised First Edition from VUCA Simulations
VUCA Simulations is a new company on the scene the last few years and they are coming out with some really great looking games. We have played several of their games and always have a great time with them. One of their newest offerings is called Imperial Elegy: The Imperial World at War 1850-1920 designed by Mike Lorino and they are doing a reprint of sorts and are calling it a Revised First Edition. This is a fantastic game that we have played twice now and looks at the time period covering 1850-1920 and the start of the Great War.
From the game page, we read the following:
Steam and steel redraw the map as telegrams outpace cavalry and dreadnoughts cast long shadows on distant straits. Imperial Elegy lets you steer a great power through seven decades of brinkmanship—industrial booms, colonial crises, and alliances that never sit still. Each turn spans a decade; the Great War may erupt…or be averted—depending on how you play your hand.
Your engine of statecraft is a hand of Action Cards. Spend them as command points to recruit, industrialize, move fleets and armies, influence minors, set war aims and build reach—or unleash their events to bend history at exactly the right moment. Control the pace by dominating flashpoints—the Low Countries, the Balkans, and global Power Projection—to draw more cards and roll your industry forward. At sea, ports and bases across linked naval boxes determine how far your influence can travel; chokepoints like the Suez Canal and the Dardanelles can open or close entire theaters.
Alliances breathe. Political shifts and crisis checks can flip blocs, sometimes twice in a single step. If the guns do speak, the game changes cadence: fixed wartime budgets, trenches, reserves and naval interceptions make every decision tighter—and every loss sting—until winter closes the campaign.
Victory wears many faces. If peace holds to the end, reveal National Goals and tally your triumphs. If the Great War crowns a side, alliance victory (with room for a canny neutral to slip through) decides the outcome. On rare occasions, sheer territorial conquest ends it early.
13. The Far Seas: German Cruiser Operations at the Onset of WWI from VUCA Simulations
Another new pre-order game from VUCA Simulations this month is The Far Seas: German Cruiser Operations at the Onset of WWI and I am always in for a naval focused wargame. I have not played that many and frankly not that many of the ones that I have played are that good but this one does look intriguing. I have also always been interested in the German efforts to solidify their place around the globe navally and with the founding of colonies in Africa and the South Pacific. So this one looks to fill that niche and looks to be really very interesting.
From the game page, we read the following:
At the outbreak of World War I, eight German cruisers were scattered across the globe—isolated, outnumbered, and cut off from home. What followed was a daring campaign of commerce raiding, evasion, and naval warfare that forced the British Empire to divert vast resources in pursuit.
The Far Seas puts you in command of this asymmetric naval struggle.
Take control of the German raiders or the Allied fleets in a tense operational-level game of hidden movement, search, and decisive engagements.
German player: Plan secretly, strike where the enemy is weak, raid merchant shipping, disrupt supply lines, and attempt the long journey home.
Allied player: Coordinate a superior fleet, protect trade routes, and hunt down elusive cruisers across the world’s oceans.
Every decision matters—overextend, and you risk destruction; hesitate, and the enemy slips away.
The system is built for fast turns, high tension, and meaningful choices:
Hidden movement and intelligence gaps create constant uncertainty
Elegant search and encounter mechanics lead to dynamic engagements
Combat resolves quickly but carries lasting consequences
Modular rules allow you to scale complexity to your preference
The core experience is accessible, yet layered with strategic depth for experienced players.
Beyond the core system, the game integrates historical realities that shaped naval warfare in 1914:
Coaling constraints force long-term planning
Convoy systems create high-risk, high-reward targets
Colonial operations add strategic pressure points
Special events introduce uncertainty and narrative moments
These elements enhance realism while preserving smooth gameplay.
If you are interested in The Far Seas: German Cruiser Operations at the Onset of WWI, you can pre-order a copy for $89.99 from the VUCA Simulations website at the following link: https://vucasimulations.com/products/the-far-seas
14. In Fours to Heaven: The Invasion of Poland 1939 from VUCA Simulations
Last year, while trolling the intervebs, I came upon the In Development section of the VUCA Simulations website and saw a very interesting looking operational level wargame on the German invasion of Poland in 1939 to kickoff World War II called In Fours to Heaven. The subject caught my eye, the title caught my eye and the cover caught my eye and I am very much interested in this one. I know that this campaign is seen as very one sided and that the outcome was predetermined as there was really no way for the Polish army to stand against the might of the German war machine but this one takes a look at the situation and makes it a gameable effort.
From the game page, we read the following:
In Fours to Heaven places you at the operational command level of the German invasion of Poland in 1939—a campaign often considered decided, yet far more complex, chaotic, and uncertain than history suggests.
Will you execute a lightning campaign—or struggle against friction, supply, and coordination breakdowns? Will you delay the inevitable—or collapse under pressure?
This is not a scripted retelling. It is a dynamic operational simulation of the Polish Campaign—driven by uncertainty, command limitations, and morale.
The German player must achieve rapid operational success before time, logistics, and resistance slow the advance.
The Polish player fights a desperate but intelligent campaign of delay, coordination, and survival—where morale becomes a decisive factor.
If you are interested in In Fours to Heaven: The Invasion of Poland 1939, you can pre-order a copy for $214.99 from the VUCA Simulations website at the following link: https://vucasimulations.com/products/in-fours-to-heaven
15. Sovereign: Shōgun from PHALANX Currently on Gamefound
Big, beautifully produced wargames is what PHALANX specializes in and they have a new offering on Gamefound called Sovereign: Shōgun that fits that bill.
From the game page, we read the following:
Sovereign: Shōgun is a competitive strategy game set in feudal Japan, where rival daimyos struggle for political dominance, military strength, and imperial legitimacy. Each player leads an asymmetric clan with unique advantages, competing to shape the future of the realm while a young heir sits at the center of shifting power.
On their turn, players select a single action using a River-style action track. Actions grow stronger the longer they remain unchosen, creating constant tension between acting early at lower strength or waiting for greater impact while risking that another player claims the opportunity first.
Core actions include Harvest to generate income from developed lands, Move to reposition armies, Develop to expand infrastructure and territories, Mastery to recruit and strengthen military forces, and Diplomacy to gain favor with temples and increase influence. Timing, positioning, and reading opponents are just as important as raw military strength.
The game ends when a player reaches the required threshold on either the Points or Glory track, or when a Harvest-related condition triggers the endgame. Victory belongs to the clan that best balances economic growth, military power, and political influence.
As of July 1st, the Gamefound campaign has funded and raised €222,770 ($253,662 in US Dollars) towards its €30,000 ($32,241 in US Dollars) funding goal with 930 backers. The campaign will conclude on Thursday, July 16th at 3:30pm EDT.
16. Russia ’41/Germany ’45 + Battle of the Bulge 1944Reprint from Worthington Publishing Currently on Kickstarter
From the game page, we read the following:
3 Hex and Counter wargames of 3 Classic Campaigns of World War II brought to life by designer Dan Fournie.
The 3 Games:
All 3 games in this series uses the same game play with modifications made on the campaigns. Each game has it’s own dynamic scenarios, and special rules modifications based on the historical situation.
All games may be played by 2 players but are very solitaire friendly by the player playing both sides to the best of their ability (there are varying resource points per turn making knowing what your opponent will receive difficult).
Further, Germany ’45 has 2, 3, and 4 player scenarios including the Western Allies attacking Russia to prevent communist domination of Europe!!!
Each side gets a set number of resource points to move and have combat, each move or combat costing a resource point. But you can do these in any order, so attack with an adjacent unit, create a hole, and then race through with another unit, which can then attack! Then move the initial unit that attacked to create the hole…the decisions are yours!
Breakthroughs will occur, having the right units in position to expoit your opportunities is critical.
Russia ’41
The game of the East Front from 1941 to 1945. As the German player you must push rapidly east trying to capture the key cities of Leningrad, Moscow and Stalingrad, not only fighting the Russian army but the winter as well. And as the Russian player you must withstand the German sledgehammer attacks as you trade ground for time, marshalling your forces for the counterattack that will drive the enemy backwards. 4 Scenarios starting and ending at different times of the conflict, plus a campaign from 1941 to 1945 all playable in 1 to 3 hours. Russia ended up winning but history did not have to end like this, can you do better?
Germany ’45
The game of the drive through Germany by the Western Allies and Russia in 1945. The game has scenarios for single front action (Germans vs Russians / Germans vs Western Allies) East and West Front Action, could the Western Allies have beaten Russia to Berlin? With 4 scenarios including a hypothetical scenario confrontation between the Western Allies against Russia as Churchill persuades Truman to prevent communist domination of Europe!
Designed by Dan Fournie this fast playing Bulge game will give you hours of game play. With fewer than 50 counters per side, and 8 pages of rules, you’ll be up and playing in 15 minutes, and finishing games in 2 hours or less.
As of July 1st, the Gamefound campaign has funded and raised $16,913 towards its $1,945 funding goal with 118 backers. The campaign will conclude on Saturday, July 11th at 4:00pm EDT.
17. Warriors of America from Compass Games Currently on Kickstarter
You had me at American Revolution and Adam Starkweather! I absolutely and supremely am interested in this offering, although I am not a fan of the title. Just doesn’t’ seem to fit with the history but that is a horse of a different color! It is actually named that as it uses a similar system to Warriors of God. Warriors of America is a new low complexity American Revolution hex and counter wargame. Not much information was shared but I do enjoy Adam Starkweather’s designs (favorite is Saipan – The Bloody Rock) and look forward to this one for sure!
From the game page, we read the following:
Warriors of America is a fast-playing game on the American War of Independence, inspired by the well-received game Warriors of God. It features the leaders, soldiers, fleets, and events that were pivotal in this war. The map is focused on the colonized coastal regions while reaching west to Indiana and north into Canada. Major events will shape each season and both sides will call on their allies; the French, Spanish, and Dutch rallying to the Americans, and Hessian mercenaries coming to the aid of the British. The American player must raise money and an army that, while less trained, is highly motivated to prevent the British player – commanding perhaps the greatest army in the world – from putting out a revolutionary fire that is about to change history.
As of July 1st, the Kickstarter campaign has funded and raised $4,457 towards its $2,500 funding goal with 46 backers. The campaign will conclude on Sunday, July 12th at 9:48am EDT.
18. Politik from Black Yeti Games Currently on Gamefound
I love a good geo-political game that focuses on nation building, conquest and economic growth and development. If that game is also a card based game more the better. And this month, I found a new game being offered on Gamefound called Politik from Black Yeti Games. Black Yeti is a new company and this is their first game so just be aware of that but what they are showing on the Gamefound page and on Boardgame Geek looks both interesting and encouraging. I am definitely interested in this one and am going to take the leap and back the game.
From the game page, we read the following:
Politik is a dynamic strategy game of military, political, and corporate control for 2–6 players. Representing any of 12 nations, players develop distinct identities during their struggle for global supremacy. They seize territories, orchestrate propaganda campaigns, and pilot companies to conquer markets. 500+ unique cards provide the landscapes, propaganda, companies, assets, and events for each nation to forge its path to power.
Following the Great Collapse, the world is fragmented but finding its way after decades of Imperial disinformation. Ascending from those ashes, pirate signals entangle the airwaves. Deserted broadcast stations spark back to life, trumpeting new anthems. With right and wrong blurred, a disoriented world yearns for truth. And one nation will decide it.
From the Gamefound page, we can see that the game is a tableau builder that uses multi-use cards that is focused on area control and action selection. If a game has all 4 of these things it definitely has my interest and I believe will appeal to wargamers.
As of July 1st, the Kickstarter campaign has raised $113,402 towards its $100,000 funding goal with 891 backers. The campaign will conclude on Wednesday, July 29th at 9:00pm EDT.
New Release
1. Rommel in Italy, 1943-1944: A Counter Factual Simulation from War Diary Publications
Recently I saw from War Diary Publications that they were printing one of Ty Bomba’s What If? style alternative history games called Rommel in Italy, 1943-1944: A Counter-Factual Simulation, which supposes Field Marshal Erwin Rommel had taken command of German forces in Northern Italy rather than being sent to help with the defense of France against the expected Allied invasion. The game is a bagged game and is very affordable.
From the game page, we read the following:
This new game from Ty Bomba supposes Field Marshal Rommel had taken command of German forces in Northern Italy rather than being sent to help with the defense of France against the expected Allied invasion.
Rommel in Italy is a fast-playing game of low-complexity, capable of being played to completion in an evening. The game includes a 23.5″ x 33″ mapsheet, 104 laser-cut counters, one Player Aid Card, and a 16-page rulebook. The game is presented in ziplock format.
2. Volume VI of the Warrior Kings Campaign Series: Alfred the Great: War of the Five Kings, 892 AD from High Flying Dice Games
Small format wargames on lesser gamed subjects are always welcome at my table. High Flying Dice Games seems to specialize in these type of games and this month have a very interesting looking game on Alfred the Great.
The game is called Volume VI of the Warrior Kings Campaign Series: Alfred the Great: War of the Five Kings, 892 AD.
From the game page, we read the following:
By 892 AD, Vikings had been in the Daneland areas of East Anglia, Mercia, and Northumbria for 27 years. These local warriors comprised a formidable army, and formed alliance with another Viking Army that pillaged Frankia and arrived on the shores of Britain in two divisions led by the legendary Hasten.
Alfred, who showed a mind that thought both strategically and tactically, not only reformed his Fyrd (local militia) but had also created the Burh system of defense in depth. The southern Welsh kingdoms, who for so long were a natural foe of the Saxons and who had battled vigorously with the Saxons of Mercia, had through strategic necessity and Alfred’s diplomatic entrees, become fi rm allies with Alfred in what could only be described as a diplomatic master class for this greatest of Saxon kings.
The Viking strength was in their professional and aggressive soldiery skills. Their weaknesses were often in the re-supply of their fighting men from overseas. However, with the local Viking Army drawn from the Daneland region of Britain this was changing the re-supply dynamic and creating new challenges for the Saxons and Welsh.
If you are interested in Volume VI of the Warrior Kings Campaign Series: Alfred the Great: War of the Five Kings, 892 AD, you can order a copy for $24.95 from the High Flying Dice Games website at the following link: https://www.hfdgames.com/5Kings.html
3. The Alamo: The Battle of the Alamo 1836 from Art of Wargames
Solitaires games are plentiful recently and another one that I found was The Alamo: The Battle of the Alamo 1836 from Art of Wargames. This one looks pretty interesting and has some really interesting mechanics to it. Plus, it is a solitaire game on one of the greatest stories of the growth of America.
From the game page, we read the following:
“Remember the Alamo!”
Dive into history and heroism with The Alamo 1836, a solitaire war game that lets you experience the last stand of the Texian Militia at the Alamo Mission. Relive the courages stand of 250 Texians led by Davy Crocket, James Bowie, and William Travis as they defend The Alamo against a professional Mexican Army numbering around three thousand soldiers.
On the morning of March 6th, 1836, the Mexican Army under General Santa Anna’s command began their final assault. Texian sharpshooters, including the legendary Davy Crockett, took their toll on the attacking force, picking off officers and disrupting formations. Hand-to-hand combat erupted as Mexican soldiers swarmed over the southern wall. The Texians, fighting for their lives and their fledgling republic, used muskets, knives, and even cannons loaded with scrap metal to repel the invaders.
The fighting was fierce and unrelenting. Though outnumbered and outgunned, the Texians fought with courage and doomed desperation. However, as the battle progressed, the tide turned. Mexican soldiers, in wave after wave, breached the Alamo’s defenses, pushing the Texians back into the interior of the compound.
The fighting devolved into a brutal close-quarters struggle, with every doorway and building a desperate battleground. By mid-morning, overwhelmed and surrounded, the last Texian defenders perished. Santa Anna, in a brutal display of power, ordered the execution of any survivors, including those who had surrendered. Can you hold onto The Alamo?
If you are interested in The Alamo: The Battle of the Alamo 1836, you can order a copy for $35.00 from the Blue Panther website at the following link: https://www.bluepantherllc.com/products/the-alamo
4. Rebel Tide: Rebel Tide: The U.S. Civil War, 1861-1865 from Compass Games
There is no secret that we really enjoy Gregory M. Smith designs and we also count him as a close friend so take that for what it is worth. He is a great designer and has put together some of our favorite narrative-driven solitaire wargames, such as Silent Victory, The Hunters and The Hunted, but also has done some great 2-player strategic level wargames on various historical periods such as Imperial Tide, covering WWI, and Pacific Tide, taking on the Pacific Theater of WWII. His new game in the Tide Series deals with the American Civil War and is called Rebel Tide.
From the game page, we read the following:
Rebel Tide: The U.S. Civil War, 1861-1865 is a two-player strategic level game that places you in command of either the USA (Union) or CSA (Confederacy) during the Civil War. Each turn consists of a year, during which multiple card plays occur. These give the players movement, combats, entrenchments, and other actions. At the end of each year, players must make critical decisions on which cards to re-buy in an attempt to win the war outright or to win by placing the other side in a disadvantageous position by 1865. Rebel Tide is based on the popular, action-packed Imperial Tide/Pacific Tidegame system by Gregory M. Smith, with many combat and strategic decisions to challenge players in just a single evening’s game.
The core of the game is the unique card re-buy system, in which players take their annual production (adjusted for blockades and blockade runners) and decide which cards they need for the upcoming year. Cards not only provide for reinforcements, but allow for movement, combat, and entrenchment. Which cards to rebuy is without question one of the key decisions the player must make to prepare for next year’s operations.
The game has infantry units for all of the major participants, cavalry, and artillery units. Naval operations are mainly abstracted, although the Confederate player must worry about Farragut invading a port from the sea. Besides the focus on card play, the game features a small footprint (one standard map) and also is designed to be played in just a single evening – estimated at 3 hours for experienced players to fight the entire war.
But don’t worry because the game is not just a reskin of the same system used in those other two games, although the system is really interesting, but instead attempts to create new mechanics and elements to tell the proper story of the struggle for the soul of the country in the 1860’s.
One new mechanic in Rebel Tide is the Political Track, which is an abstract measure of the support of England and/or France to the Confederacy. If this track reaches the maximum early in the war, it can trigger an early CSA victory.
Another new key mechanic in the game system is the addition of historical Leaders, who range in ability from excellent (5) to poor (2). Bad leaders may be “sacked” and removed from the game and randomly replaced by the expenditure of a movement action. Leaders are vital in advancing after combat and also can add strength to an attack’s total combat power.
While attending WBC a few summers ago, we had a chance to sit down with Gregory M. Smith to cover a few of his upcoming designs and Rebel Tide was included in that discussion. Here is a look at our video interview with Greg:
5. Warfighter War: The WWII Europe Strategic Combat Card Game from Dan Verssen Games
The Warfighter system from Dan Verssen Games is a card based game designed for 1 to 6 players. You can play solo or cooperatively against the AI to complete World War II squad-level combat missions set in the North Africa and Mediterranean Theatre of Operations. One of my favorite parts of the game is at the start of each mission, you will select one or more Player Soldiers, equip them with skills, weapons, and combat gear within the mission’s Resource limit. You then fight your way through hostile territory and engage enemy soldiers, as you attempt to reach and complete your mission objective. Every mission is a stand-alone game. You build your Soldiers, select your Gear, and then run your mission. Within 30 to 60 minutes you will have succeeded or failed. We simply love the system and prefer the WWII focused modules (we really hated Fantasy!) and are very excited to see this offering as I think that it will offer a new and expanded view of the history. Their newest expansion into the system takes it into the Strategic Warfare realm where you are looking at entire campaigns and the war as a whole in Warfighter War.
From the game page, we read the following:
Warfighter War takes the solitaire (also plays great in cooperative mode with one or more other players) Warfighter tactical design to the strategic level. In Warfighter tactical, a unit card is an individual soldier. In Warfighter War, a unit card is a brigade, regiment, battalion, or company. In tactical, each location is roughly 50 to 400 yards. In War, each location is roughly 10 to 50 miles.
In the tactical game, you fought way through streets, buildings, and other tactical locations. In War, you’ll command your forces as they capture cities, forests, and other strategic objectives.
The general rule framework of War is based on the Warfighter Tactical System that has been in print, and refined, over the past decade. If you know how to play Warfighter, you’ll be able to jump right in to War.
So, what makes War different? What does War do that is beyond the scope of tactical?
War adds Supplies to both your friendly units, as well as to the Hostile units. Supplies play a key role in the success of your mission. You must expend supplies from units to gain the special abilities noted on their cards. In some cases you must expend supplies for a unit to perform specified actions. For example, armor units must expend supplies to move, and artillery units must expend supplies to attack.
War also streamlines the rules used for both friendly and hostile forces. Both sides now use the same move and attack combat actions. This means that if a hostile force starts within range of a friendly unit, it will be able to attack twice.
War has two types of friendly units: Player Armies and Support Armies. Player Armies are similar to Player Soldiers in that they hold a hand of Action cards. Support Armies are similar to Squad Soldiers, and they do not hold Action cards.
In War, both friendly and hostile forces have their attack charts built into their cards, there is no need to equip weapons.
Instead of equipping weapons and other gear, your forces will instead attach support forces, such as infantry, artillery, armor, or engineering units to aid them in their mission.
War uses a much more interactive Sequence of Play. In tactical, all friendly soldiers act, and then all hostile soldiers act. In War, one friendly unit acts, then one hostile unit acts, and so on. This gives a better feel of two large forces maneuvering and engaging in combat.
War Missions also offer more flexibility. You can now run Missions with a large force attempting to overcome an Objective that is only a few Location cards deep, as well as a small force going against an Objective deep in enemy territory.
In addition, we streamlined the rules be removing Hand-to-Hand combat, since War takes place on a strategic level.
War also adds the important role of engineers to the game. Some locations and hostile units present engineering challenges. If your engineering units are able to overcome these obstacles, you will gain advantages, or not suffer penalties.
Hostile forces are made up of a wide variety of unit types, including infantry, armor, mechanized, artillery, scout, engineering, and more
While the core aspects of War are same as traditional tactical Warfighter, War adds many new elements that make for an entirely different experience!
The core provides all the materials you need to play the game. The core game includes US friendly forces, German hostile forces, and the Missions, Locations, and Objectives for resolving battles following the D-Day landings in June of 1944.
The campaign also offers 7 total expansion packs that can be purchased that typically include 56 cards including Player Armies, Hostile Armies and an assortment of Location, Attachment, Skill, and other cards.
I think that every single wargamer knows the name Volko Ruhnke. He has designed several great series including the COIN Series, that has now stretched to a full 15 volumes (not all designed by Volko), and then more recently the Levy & Campaign Series. He can make a good game for sure! One of our first experiences in wargaming and the first Volko design we played was Wilderness War. He is now at it again with a new design that uses hide and seek elements to tell the story of the Allied intelligence teams versus the Japanese in the Pacific during WWII. The game is called Coast Watchers: Allied Field Intelligence in the South Pacific, 1942-1943 and looks to be very interesting.
From the game page, we read the following:
Coast Watchers takes you into this struggle between Allied intelligence teams and Japanese hunters. Standup blocks hide coastwatching stations, guerrillas, refugees, and stranded Allied crew. The gameboard recesses hold the blocks snug. Facedown counters hide the buildup of Japanese forces, which the coastwatchers seek to observe and report to headquarters. Other counters show where Japanese patrols are searching for coastwatchers or go into and get drawn from a cup to run Japanese searches and Allied delivery missions.
Hidden information using blocks. I like this. Facedown counters that hide the number of Japanese units amassing. This is even better. Hidden information is a very good mechanic but it is difficult to make it good and I have every confidence that Volko will do just that.
Each side has Mission cards. Allied Missions assign side tasks to the coastwatchers. Japanese Missions lay out secret military objectives for victory points, including air and sea operations against which the coastwatchers are to warn Allied forces. By hunting coastwatchers while building up military readiness and guiding operations, the Japanese player seeks to slip through the enemy intelligence net. Players also draw Asset cards: special abilities to augment actions and perhaps add victory points.
The game will contain 15 standalone “Situations” or scenarios plus 4 campaigns to link all of these situations together. The Situations cover the early-1942 Japanese incursion into the South Pacific to the ultimate neutralization of their base at Rabaul by the end of 1943. This one just sounds very interesting and I look forward to doing some more research.
If you are interested in Coast Watchers, you an order a copy for $102.00 ($65.00 if you get your order in quickly before they start shipping at the beginning of July) from the GMT Games website at the following link: https://www.gmtgames.com/p-1102-coast-watchers.aspx
7. North Africa ’40: The 1940 Expansion to North Africa ’41 from GMT Games
I love a good North Africa wargame! To me, the reasons that I love it are several but the focus on supply and how difficult it was in this theater as well as the various elements of infrastructure used to perform that supply, such as shipping, ports, trucks, etc. are always good fun. I also love the scope and scale of the North African Theater. The front covered an area over 2,000 or so miles stretching from Morocco on the western coast of the Atlantic, through Algeria, Libya and onto Egypt. Names such as Tunis, Kasserine Pass, Tripoli, Benghazi, Tobruk, El Alamein, Malta (I realize not a part of Africa but an important cog in this theater) and Alexandria. There is something about this theater and the games we have played that we have absolutely loved.
Also, when you pair this interesting theater with a great system in the ’40X Series and a great designer in Mark Simonitch, you have a recipe for a really tasty treat!
Now comes an expansion to North Africa ’41 called North Africa ’40.
From the game page, we read the following:
The legend continues with North Africa ’40, the prequel expansion to North Africa ’41. This expansion covers September 1940 to December 1941. Scenarios cover both Operazione E (the Italian invasion of Egypt; 12 turns) and the Allied counter-offensive, Operation Compass (6 turns). Both scenarios can be extended through December 1941 for an Operazione E full campaign (32 turns) or an Operation Compass full campaign (26 turns).
Can you as the Allied commander bag the Italian 10th Army? Will you be ready for theater whiplash, the Middle East Command operational shift to Greece in February 1941? Will you be prepared for the entry of Rommel and the German panzers?
And the game is not just taking advantage of a very good system that has been well received. There is plenty that is new to the system to make the situation come to life. New rules cover all the significant aspects of the 1940 campaign in North Africa including General O’Connor, Italian Camps, Civilian Evacuees/Stragglers, Tank Reliability, Italian Saharan Forces, Libyan Tank Command, Sollum Port and Post-Operation Compass Refit.
We recently played and loved North Africa ’41 and you can check out our video review at the following link:
If you are interested in North Africa ’40: The 1940 Expansion to North Africa ’41, you can order a copy for $49.00 ($29.00 if you get your order in quickly before they start shipping in early July) from the GMT Games website at the following link: https://www.gmtgames.com/p-1106-north-africa-40.aspx
Be aware that North Africa ’40 is not a complete game and ownership of North Africa ’41 is required to play.
8. No Turning Back: The Battle of the Wilderness, 5-6 May, 1864 from Multi-Man Publishing
American Civil War is an up and coming gaming experience with us as Alexander has really been bitten by the bug because he has been reading various books on the subject (Shelby Foote’s The Civil War: A NarrativeSeries). I have always had interest in the conflict but just have not played all that many games in the setting. With this new offering called No Turning Back: The Battle of the Wilderness, 5-6 May, 1864 we are definitely more interested now than ever and very much looking forward to this!
From the game page, we read the following:
No Turning Back is the next game in The Gamers’ Line of Battle (LoB) Series covering the first epic confrontation between Grant and Lee, the Battle of the Wilderness in May 1864. The battle is a very misunderstood battle with the general narrative that both armies were stumbling to find each other in the thick woods. Units get lost and confusion reigns. While the precepts of this confused melee are generally true, there is much more to this battle that No Turning Back will showcase based on extensive design and research. There was maneuver at the operational level as both commanders prodded their forces forward to hit an open flank. Grant was seeking a general offensive to bring to bear the entire weight of his large army. Lee was not looking for a general engagement in the Wilderness, but had no choice when the shooting started and deftly engaged his outnumbered army. What is not often known is that both sides had multiple chances of obtaining victory only to be undone by the tide of fortune at the last minute. Do you have the dogged determination as Grant or Lee to snatch victory in the bloody thickets?
Game specific rules to handle the terrain that dictated how the forces fought include: WIlderness terrain type, command & communication difficulties, different trail types, and guides. Unique command situations are likewise represented in the game with Grant’s chain of command with Meade’s Army of the Potomac and Burnside’s independent corps, Hancock’s pseudo-wing command, Lt. Col. Sorrel’s ad hoc division, Ewell’s stoutness then passiveness on successive days, and A.P. Hill’s inability to get his men dug in which nearly spelt disaster for him. While cavalry action was minimal, the actions of two cavalry regiments, the 1st NC and 5th NY, proved pivotal and their exploits are captured in the rules.
The map is accurately rendered from a survey conducted immediately following the war that laid out the myriad of trails that led the armies astray. The Order of Battle is presented with accurate regimental strengths with contributions from a leading Civil War scholar. No Turning Back will show the Wilderness in incredible detail at the regimental scale.
If you are in interested in No Turning Back: The Battle of the Wilderness, 5-6 May, 1864, you can order a copy for $120.00 from the Multi-Man Publishing website at the following link: https://mmpgamers.com/no-turning-back-p-420
9. Fallschirmjaeger: The Airborne Assault on Fortress Holland May 10 to 14, 1940 from Multi-Man Publishing
I am a fan of any game that deals with airborne operations as these games are always unique and interesting. One of the volumes in the Standard Combat Series that has eluded us until recently is Fallschirmjaeger: The Airborne Assault on Fortress Holland May 10 to 14, 1940 as I got a second hand copy from our friends at Noble Knight Games. But, it appears that MMP knew this and has now released the game in a new edition.
From the game page, we read the following:
Fallschirmjaeger: The Airborne Assault on Fortress Holland May 10 to 14, 1940, simulates the German May, 1940 capture of Rotterdam and The Hague (Den Haag).
In the spring of 1940, the German military machine turned west to convert the Phoney War into a real one. Fresh from his victory in Poland, Hitler planned a blow that would knock France out of the war. Key to this plan was a knife-like attack through the Ardennes to the English Channel which would split the Allied forces moving north to block the expected replay of 1914 and the Maginot Line forces immobile in the south. To add to the trap, the Germans planned the first massive airborne operation of the war. This attack would capture the hinterland of Holland, pave the way for subordinate German Armored thrusts crossing the Maas, and to continue to lure the Allies northward.
Fallschirmjaeger covers this bait. The German player plops down an airborne invasion force with the goal of fighting off all-comers until relieved by advancing ground forces. The Dutch, all but abandoned by their French and British Allies, put up a fight for the record books. The German air bridge held on by its fingernail. While the main German drive was never in doubt, these scattered paratroopers had the fight of their lives against a small nation unwilling to succumb without giving the fight everything.
In the end, the Dutch government had to be evacuated along with the Dutch Gold Reserve, to form a government in exile. They would return after liberation.
The player must do all these things, or smash the German paratroopers before they are rescued by the Panzers, to win. Any German player thinking he’ll have an easy time, must be reminded his is not Nazi Germany’s main effort and that he must make-do on a shoestring.
If you are interested in Fallschirmjaeger: The Airborne Assault on Fortress Holland May 10 to 14, 1940, you can order a copy for $52.00 from the Multi-Man Publishing website at the following link: https://mmpgamers.com/fallschirmjaeger-p-419
As usual, thanks so much for reading along and sticking with me this month as I navigated through the many websites and game pages looking for new and interesting games to share.
Finally, thanks once again to this month’s sponsor Bring it on Games!
I love a different style and focus of wargame. A game that takes a look at an important but somewhat obscure or rarely addressed historical topic, such as espionage or intelligence, and creates a gaming experience tailored around the events to highlight and evoke the difficulties and tension that would have been present. In January 2026, GMT Games announced such a game in Checkpoint Charlie, which is a solo or cooperative game focused on SIS espionage missions in Berlin in the 1960’s designed by Russell Brown. We have posted an interview with Russel and it was very well received and he has now agreed to create a series of History Behind the Cards to highlight the events of the 1960’s Cold War struggle in West Germany but also to share aspects about the game play and how it models the history.
*Note: The cards highlighted in this series and their event text, as well as any pictures used showing any of the various components, are still in the design and development process and as such event effects and text might still change prior to final development and publication.Also the art and layout of the cards are only for playtest purposes at this point and the game will enter the art department as it nears publication.
History Behind the Cards – Checkpoint Charlie from GMT Games – Card #1: Cousins Operation
The British SIS wasn’t the only intelligence agency operating in Berlin in the 1960’s, not by a longshot. The Potsdam Agreement of 1945 had divided Germany into allied occupation zones, with West Berlin itself divided into British, French and American sectors for administration and military presence, but those boundaries in no way restricted the activities of intelligence organizations in the city. The US Central Intelligence Agency had the largest presence.
The remarkably close relationship between US and British intelligence was formalized in 1946 under the British-US Communications Intelligence Agreement (BRUSA). It became the UKUSA agreement in 1955, including Canada, New Zealand and Australia (the “Five Eyes”), and still stands today. The term “cousins” was used within the British and American intelligence communities to refer to their counterparts from the other agencies, in reference to their longstanding Special Relationship. There were notable examples of not just coordination, but cooperation among the agencies, like Operation Gold – a joint operation in the 1950’s to tunnel beneath the city and tap into the landline communication of the Soviet Army headquarters in Berlin.
This relationship was formalized in the rules of a much earlier version of Checkpoint Charlie, with a specific step in the turn sequence when SIS assets could call upon the CIA for assistance, though with increased risk of detection. However, even with liaison officers and daily intelligence briefings between the two agencies, it was impossible to inform the other service of every aspect of day-to-day activities, let alone coordinate at a task level, so I removed that interaction.
This card represents a CIA operation in one of the locations in the city that has come to the attention of the KGB and was unknown to SIS case officers. This card places a marker that makes it more difficult for SIS assets to operate in the location, as indicated by the negative detection save modifier, and also draws a KGB Agent closer to that location.
In the next article in this series, we will take a look at the Cuban Missile Crisis and how the status of Berlin, even though it is located halfway around the world, effected things on the world stage.
In my opinion, this game looks extremely interesting and I am very much excited to learn more about it. I am appreciative to Russell and his efforts to bring us these cards and to write these entries to share with our readers. I am also very glad that this topic is being covered in a game and look forward to playing this one day soon.
Anmelden
