Strategic level American Civil War on a postcard. The map of the Confederacy is divided into areas. The U.S player must strangle the Confederacy and reduce their will to continue fighting. Players use a standard deck of playing cards to activate armies (three Confederate and up to six Union) for movement and combat. Units can fight enemy armies in the same area. Combat is done by rolling 1D6, adding combat strength (for the Union) or Resistance Level (for the Confederates) and comparing results. Highest result wins. Losses are taken in retreats or in step losses. There are up to eight turns, each of which is six months. The key mechanic is the Confederate Resistance Level (CRL). As Union armies occupy areas, the CRL falls. If the CRL falls to zero before the end of turn 8, the Union player wins, otherwise the Confederate player wins.
Morgan’s A’ Comin’ is the fourth game in the Pocket Battle Games Series from LPS, Inc.
Rebel raider John H. Morgan defies orders, crossing the Ohio River in the summer of 1863 to bring war to the Yankees! All across the Midwest his incursion results in numerous alarms, property damage, and Union fears that he will link up with Robert E. Lee. While the raid succeeds in diverting a small Union army away from Bragg, the fierce pace and determined Union resistance wears the invaders away to little more than a small band, all being captured in the end. Could Morgan have tipped the balance on not one, but two fronts?
During the summer of 2019, we were introduced to Maurice Suckling and his very interesting design Freeman’s Farm 1777 from Worthington Publishing and really enjoyed the mechanics and how they all came together to create an interactive and interesting look at the Battle of Saratoga during the American Revolution. I was very impressed with Maurice and his appraoch to design and we have followed him every since and played many of his great designs. including Hidden Strike: American Revolution, Chancellorsville 1863 and 1565 Siege of Malta and Crisis: 1914. In this entry in the Best 3 Games with…Series I wanted to highlight the games of Maurice Suckling and share those that I have had the best experience with.
3. Freeman’s Farm 1777 from Worthington Publishing
Freeman’s Farm 1777 is the first in the Battle Formations Series from Worthington Publishing that are designed for both solitaire and two players. The focus of the system is on the individual formations that appeared on the battlefield and places the players in the role of overall commander to make decisions about which formations to activate and how to use those formations to position themselves to attack the enemy. The key to these decisions is the morale of those formations as each command utilizes one of their levels of morale and if pushed too far, through attacking or being attacked, the formation will be forced to take a morale test to see if it will break.
There are a couple of things that I really liked about this one as I felt it told the story of the style of fighting of the time and incorporated some elements that were very important. This series has centered the focus on formations and how they can interact with each other on the battlefield. It simply looks at how the relative positioning of the formations opens up opportunities for attack or provides advantages or disadvantages to one side or the other. If you are above an enemy formation on high ground or have a superior firing angle on a formation in battle, shouldn’t you gain an advantage? And furthermore, if you are relatively inexperienced green forces and are facing the smoking gun barrels of your enemy’s cannons, don’t you think that your attempts to return fire will be less effective than if firing with hardened troops from cover? This spatial element is a major inclusion in the design and really feels right and makes your choices as commander that much more difficult as you decide how to activate your troops to take advantage of the situation. I really have enjoyed this spatial relationship during my plays of the game and think that the approach is very novel.
The other element that I really enjoyed was the concept of morale. The design has the player controlling several different Formation Cards that represent their troops on the battlefield and each has their own set of actions they are able to take. The key for these Formation Cards is that each time they are activated through the play of the corresponding Activation Card they have to pay for this activation. The payment comes in the form of paying 1 point of Morale from the Morale Track by moving the cube marker down one space. The formation may also lose Morale as they attack and are attacked throughout the game. The moment that a formation’s morale reaches 5 on the Morale Track they have to conduct a Morale Test to see if they will break and leave the field. This Morale Test is conducted by rolling a single d6 with any modifiers from Tactics Cards that the player controls and then comparing that result to the current Morale of the formation (i.e. where the Morale marker is currently on the Morale Track). If the die roll is higher than the marker location, the formation has failed the test and becomes broken. If the roll is equal to or less than the marker location, the formation passes the test and remains on the battlefield. Each successive reduction in the Morale of that formation will trigger another test which will be harder and harder to pass as the number decreases. Soldiers spend their strength and will to fight in each skirmish and as they are pushed more and more, and in the face of losses and exhaustion, reach a point where their will to fight is gone and they break. I like how the design dealt with this issue and it feels right.
The game uses wooden cubes, disks and sticks to mark formations on the board and it looks like those pictures in text books showing the location of troops during these historical battles. This was a nice thematic touch for me and helped me to get into the mind set of a Revolutionary War battle.
I wrote a series of Action Point posts covering the various aspects of the game. You can read those at the following links:
Action Point 1 – Game board that represents the locations and roles of both sides’ formations as well as their relative positions on the battlefield.
Action Point 2 – Formation Cards and how the Activation Cards are used to command and how Morale Tests work.
Action Point 3 – Momentum Cubes and how they are used to purchase the all important Tactics Cards.
Action Point 4 – Examples of combat and discuss the way the dice are used.
Here is a look at our video review of the game:
2. Chancellorsville 1863 from Worthington Publishing
While the next game on this list uses the same system, this entry in the series is definitely improved and matured and I very much liked the blind movement aspect which was added. Chancellorsville 1863 covers the Battle of Chancellorsville during the American Civil War using a similar system to Freeman’s Farm1777.
At the start of the game some units on each side are visible, which is mostly because they are adjacent (units adjacent to enemy units are always visible on the main map.) Other units are hidden, placed on spaces on their respective mini map hidden behind a screen, in one of a variety of spaces. The mini map is a smaller representation of the main map, with the same movement arrows and nexus points but with the same scale for ‘spaces’ so the same blocks fit on both maps. Each side has their own mini map. If units move into a space on the mini map that is adjacent to a space occupied by a unit on the main map, that unit becomes visible and is transferred to the main map.
There are also some spaces found deep inside the enemy’s lines of communication and moving onto those spaces on the mini map compels an immediate transfer to the main map. In addition, there are some spaces where the lead Union units are visible. This represents Jeb Stuart’s cavalry tracking the Union advance on the Confederate left. This added aspect really makes the game and creates a sense of tension for the players as they simply don’t know where all of the enemy units are located and have to play for those units coming up on their rear even as they are engaged in major battles along the front lines.
Activations are also slightly different from the Freeman’s Farm game as each side only has 15 activations per game but each activation card identifies at least 2 commanders to activate and move. This is very necessary because the Union side has more units to move, and farther to move them to put pressure on objective locations. This has been balanced with the addition of fortifications that allow the defender to set one die per combat at the number desired. This makes for some very interesting decisions about whether to attack or not and how. I have really enjoyed this one as the system is obviously evolving and introducing new elements. I am glad that the designer has decided to take the system to the next level as there are lots of opportunities and applications to various battles for the system.
Crisis: 1914 is a game of international brinkmanship meaning if you back down too soon, you lose. If you back down too late you lose. But you have hawks and doves in your cabinet and in your government, and out of these conflicting views you must somehow formulate a coherent response to the crisis to win the day and prevent war. The game is played with players building a tableau of event cards that will score them a certain number of points, some building off of each of the type of cards played, with some of the cards increasing the Tension level of Europe at the time. If the Tension gets too high The Great War will break out and the player causing it by the play of a card will lose with the others winning based on their total Prestige Points. It sounds really simple, and the game is not overly complex, but there is a lot of strategy to how you play your cards, when you play them and how are you are willing to push your luck each round.
There are 3 concepts at the heart of Crisis: 1914 including Prestige, Tension and Diplomatic Pressure. Diplomatic Pressure is how you score Prestige and reflects the skill at which you play your cards to keep your faction moving ahead of the others while simultaneously balancing the level of Tension. Tension is how you lose. Every card has a DP value and you apply DP by playing cards. The player with the most Diplomatic Pressure at the end of a turn earns Prestige points. There are other ways of scoring Prestige points too, but this is the most important one. Prestige is how you win. The player with the most Prestige at the end of the game is the winner.
I have played this one 3 times now and and I cannot wait for the next opportunity to play. It is best with 5-players so make sure you get the right group and give yourselves a chance to really learn the game as each faction’s deck is completely asymmetrical and repeated plays will help you understand each faction’s strengths and strategies. While this game is not necessarily a wargame, but more of a war themed Euro game with a bit of negotiation and tension as you build your tableau of cards, we had a great time with it and really feel that the game is a bit under the radar of folks and should be one of those games that is played at conventions as it seats up to 5 players and is really quite good.
Here is a link to a RAW video we did after our 2nd play while attending Buckeye Game Fest in 2024:
There you have it. My Best 3 Games with…Designer Maurice Suckling! He has done so many good games and the narrative and historical immersion of all of them are top notch. He is definitely a designer to keep an eye on and I know that he has multiple games currently in design including Rebellion: Britannia from GMT Games, Peace 1905 from Fort Circle Games (we played a prototype of this one at SDHistCon a few years ago and it is top notch) and The Emperor’s Choice from Worthington Publishing (I played a short game of this at WBC and it is very good).
What are your favorite games from Maurice Suckling?
Continuing along in this series devoted to the best looking boards found in the wargaming world where I will highlight the art and layout of a different board in a wargame that we have played to show you the various talents of the artists and graphic designers involved. In my humble opinion, a well designed and attractive board can make all the difference in the world to me enjoying a wargame. Don’t get me wrong, the game has to be good, but if it’s also good looking it always is a better experience. A board can draw me in. Can make me feel that I’m there. Can set the stage for the thematic immersion that we all crave. And I have found many of these type of boards and I want to make sure that I share them with you.
In this entry in the series, we will be taking a look at the fantastic looking board for Great Campaigns of the American Civil War: Thunder On the Mississippi: Grant’s Vicksburg Campaign, April-July, 1863 from Multi-Man Publishing. The board is illustrated by the very talented Charlie Kibler whose work on the Great Campaigns of the American Civil War Series dates back to its creation in 1992. He has done a ton of great looking boards including The Battle for Normandy (2009) from GMT Games, The Day Was Ours: First Bull Run (2021) from Revolution Games, Border Reivers (2023) from GMT Games recently as well as a slew of Advanced Squad Leader boards stretching back through the years and a lot of series games for GMT Games such as Great Battles of the American Civil War and Great Battles of the American Revolution. We have already highlighted a few of his boards in the past like Storm Over Jerusalem from MMP and Battles of the American Revolution Volume II: Brandywine from GMT Games. He is very effective at creating great looking terrain and weaving in very nice details to highlight the main functions of the board and I very much like the simplicity and accurateness of his boards.
The board consists of 2 separate 22″x 32″ full-color map sheets that when combined create a large playing surface. The borders of the board include off-board information that is related to the geography and locations in and around Vicksburg. When I first saw this, I wasn’t really quite sure how to take it but after playing and also thinking about this decision, I really like how it was used to frame up or provide a significant visual contrast to the main game board. The brown coloring really contrasts well with the colorful terrain features and create a clear distinction for the players. I initially thought this was a poor decision and felt that it was a missed opportunity but it works really well.
Here is a closeup of this part of the board so you can get a good feel for what I am talking about.
I always like to look at the game title box/area of the board and find these to be really great insights into the mindset and approach of the artist. On the board for Thunder on the Mississippi, we see Charlie used a washed out period look map for the background of this area. The really interesting part is how it transitions from the non-colored portion of the board title box to the game board itself. There is no connection between the 2 and the elements found on the board are not carried over or connected to the period map. I would maybe have liked to see there be a connection for an immersive approach but I understand that this was not the purpose of the use of the period map.
In Thunder on the Mississippi, there are 2 new terrain features unique to the Vicksburg region introduced including loess hills and coastal bluffs. Loess has not been featured before in GCACW Series games. Each loess hex is depicted with many small tan dots superimposed on an olive base color. This stippling gives it a sandy feel and I think really works well as loess is a fine-grained, powdery soil, a wide belt of which runs on the east side of the Mississippi on a southwest – northeast axis. Because loess is highly susceptible to erosion, it is marked by sharp, irregular ravines, many of which were so overgrown with vegetation as to be nearly impassable to military units.
In the game, loess hexes are identical to woods hexes in terms of Movement Point costs and MP penalties to enter a friendly-occupied hex. Also, loess hexsides untraversed by roads or railroads exert a restricted ZOC the same as woods hexsides similarly untraversed. I think that the type of terrain, and what it does to the units that enter, really mimics the soft soil type as it is always hard to run in sand. I very much like the color used as well and it serves to set this specific terrain type apart from the rest of the board. Here is a look at the western portion of the West Map that is up against the Mississippi River.
The other new terrain feature is that of coastal bluffs, which has also not been featured before in the series. Each coastal bluff hexside has a downhill side in which the light brown bluff line-pattern is uneven and an uphill side in which the bluff line-pattern is smooth. I know that it might be a bit hard to see in the below picture but the downhill side is found on the left side while the uphill side is on the right. Think of it this way…the uphill is simply a straight line border while the downhill side reflects the ravines from erosion and is made up of multi-length lines pointing out. I very much like this new terrain and also think that Charlie did a great job with the distinction even though it is a bit hard to distinguish from afar.
And that brings me to the portion of the board that I think is my favorite. Not because it is some revolutionary technique but because of the power and permanence that is offers the board, acting as an anchor and a framing of the action to be played out on it, and that is the Mississippi River itself. There is no real use of stylized marks or special features shown on the board but it is just a thick and dark blue line that meanders through the countryside. But the dark blue really gives a sense of size and scope and I very much feel that it is important to the board and what is to transpire on it.
I also very much like how Charlie decided to keep in the exact layout of the river and shows its many twists and turns and oxbows that are found along its length.
The board for Thunder on the Mississippi is really a visual masterpiece. It provides great transition from terrain type to terrain type, frames up the board itself very well and uses very smart and poignant color choices, including the loess terrain color and the dark blue of the Old Man, all to create a fantastic canvas upon which to play out this titanic struggle and key turning point of the American Civil War.
If you are interested, here is a link to our video review:
The next board that we will take a look at in the series is The Marianas Campaign: Volume One: Saipan – The Bloody Rock from Compass Games.
Here are links to the previous entries in the series:
With this My Favorite Wargame Cards Series, I hope to take a look at a specific card from the various wargames that I have played and share how it is used in the game. I am not a strategist and frankly I am not that good at games but I do understand how things should work and be used in games. With that being said, here is the next entry in this series.
#95: Flying Ace from The Republic’s Struggle: Battle for the Republic, Spain 1931-1939 from NAC Wargames
The Republic’s Struggle is a thematic Card Driven Game that tells the story of the historical events that took place in Spain after the resignation to the throne of King Alfonso XIII, and the proclamation of the II Spanish Republic in 1931. With the creation of the new regime, the struggle for power between the different social, political and ideological sectors increased, which gave rise to continuous changes of political power, alterations of public order, armed uprisings and violent acts, carried out by the numerous ideological factions of the moment; which culminated in 1936, in a failed military uprising. The failure of this coup d’état was the origin for the Spanish Civil War.
The Republic’s Struggle is based on Twilight Struggle from GMT Games and uses the same concepts of area control while adding in some actual combat with units represented on the board. During the game, the Republican player and the National player, will be able to recreate events of the period to increase their popularity in the localities by carrying out political propaganda, recruiting troops or militias, generating revolts or assaults, establishing diplomatic relations or carrying out bombardments. All this will be done by playing their hand of cards in an alternative way, either by using the events or by playing the action points or icons to perform any of the other actions available to the players.
As you probably know, the Spanish Civil War was a bloody and vicious affair. With the advent of air planes and advancement of other weapons technology there was no army that couldn’t be touched. In The Republic’s Struggle players can use their cards and Operation Points to perform an aerial bombing on enemy units that are found on the various fronts. The Bombardment Process is executed by spending the Operation Points (OP’s) of a card, provided the card features a special bomb icon in the upper left hand corner near the Op Points. If a card displays both a bomb icon and a combatant cube icon, you may only choose to execute one of the options and not both. These Bombings target combatants located in specific Fronts, which are represented by circular spaces where army cubes may be placed through card play. In order to perform an aerial bombing, the player must have control of n Air Base Location on the Front that they wish to attack. The attacking player will add the Operation Points of the card played and adds a D6 while the defender will also roll a D6 but will add in the Defense Value that was determined at the outset of the turn by the play of a card and +1 for each of their cubes in the Front. If they have played a card such as Flying Ace, they will get to add a +1 to this total and then results are compared and a winner is determined and losses are the difference between the Attack and Defense Value.
That is the real power in the Flying Ace card as this +1 can be a huge boon in these aerial bombings and allow them to put up a stiffer defense and hold onto more of their units on these Fronts. The game instructs players to utilize the Exclamation Point markers to remind themselves of these type of benefits as the player should place the played card in front of them with the marker to be able to remember the benefit later in that turn.
But the Flying Ace Card provides another smaller but important benefit as it allows the Nationalist player to place 1 Popularity Point in Tablada and León to continue to build their influence and control of these key regions for scoring purposes. And finally, another benefit is that the play of the Flying Ace Card will prevent the Republican player from being able to play their Soviet Fighters Card which has a similar benefit. The thinking here is that the first player to get this card out controls the skies and has air superiority.
Aerial bombing during the Spanish Civil War marked a dark turning point in military history, serving as a lethal testing ground for the aerial terror tactics later unleashed in World War II. An estimated 15,000 people died from air raids during the conflict, with the vast majority of victims being civilians targeted by Nationalist forces backed by Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy. One of these horrific events was that of the Bombing of Guernica on April 26, 1937. Carried out by Nazi Germany’s Condor Legion and Fascist Italy’s Aviazione Legionaria, this raid destroyed a massive portion of the Basque town and killed hundreds of civilians. It became the ultimate global symbol of the brutality of war, immortalized by Pablo Picasso’s famous painting Guernica.
The American Civil War was the bloodiest conflict and a defining event in the history of the United States. The tragedy of the conflict was amplified by the fact the battles were brutally fought with Napoleonic tactics while using new and more lethal weaponry. As a result, over the course of nearly four full years of war, roughly 700,000 Americans were wounded or killed in battle along with another 400,000 soldiers dying from disease.
Blue & Gray Deluxe Edition consists of the original eight games from the SPI Blue & Gray I & II Quadrigames. The battles depicted are among the most important of the American Civil War: Shiloh, Antietam, Fredericksburg, Chancellorsville (Hooker & Lee), Gettysburg (Cemetery Hill), Chickamauga, Chattanooga, and The Battle of the Wilderness.
The game mechanics used in this series are based on the well-received Borodino/Napoleon at Waterloo system. Terrain is a significant factor, with everything from rolling farmland to untracked wilderness represented. Battles will often see a back-and-forth struggle for control of critical terrain. Rules for night turns are also provided. A standard set of rules are used, common to all eight games, while each game also has its own set of exclusive rules, historical set-ups, and player and design notes—all from the original SPI games.
Blue & Gray Deluxe Edition features new artwork, double-sided mounted game boards, enlarged counters, player aid cards, numerous optional rules gleaned from other game editions, and new variant counters and markers for use with several variants from Moves and Strategy & Tactics magazines. Reintroduce yourself to these classic games from SPI’s golden era and refight some of the best-known battles of the American Civil War which decided the fate of a nation at war with itself.
The year is quickly fading as we are nearing the start of the 4th quarter of 2026. Man the year has just gone by so quickly and I still have so many great games awaiting us to give them the attention they deserve. But there are always new games and they are also equally deserving. This month, I was able to find 19 games to share (including 6 games from our sponsor). I was also able to find 3 games being offered on Crowdfunding through Kickstarter and Gamefound.
Again this month, we have a sponsor for the Wargame Watch post in Neva Game Press. This is Neva’s 3rd time sponsoring this post and they are very busy as they have a ton of new games upcoming. Neva Game Press 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!
Big Experiences, Small Footprint: New from Neva Game Press
At Neva Game Press, we believe great games don’t require massive boxes. Our ‘Hardcover Book’ box policy delivers premium components and deep, innovative mechanics in a shelf-friendly format—without compromising playability. We recently rebranded from Neva Wargames to Neva Game Press to reflect our expansion into thematic titles, though our commitment to wargaming remains stronger than ever.
End-of-Year Releases
We are closing 2026 on a high note with two major releases. After the rapid sell-out of Iwo Jima: Hell on Earth—the first volume of our Blind Valor Series—we are thrilled to bring it back as a Revised Edition, and we are grateful for the community’s support. We are also releasing an Iwo Jima: Hell on Earth Update Kit for owners of the original 1st Edition. Finally, we are launching our new tactical wargame, Peking: 55 Days of Fury—the first volume in our Breach Point Series.
Peking immerses 1–2 players in the 1900 Boxer Rebellion for a tense, 90-minute experience. Whether defending the International Legations or leading the attack, you’ll need to master our unique fog-of-war mechanic and hybrid system (featuring event cards and operation points split into two phases) to secure victory.
Our commitment to the community continues with an ambitious slate for 2027, featuring: Valls: Battle of the Goi Bridge, Spartacus: Rome under Threat, 1806: The Elbe Campaign and Reformation: Fire and Faith.
They recently announced their next Kickstarter project that would take their system to the Anglo-Boer War called The Great Anglo-Boer War: The Battle for South Africa 1899-1902. The game is currently on Kickstarter and appears to be a very important addition to the many games on the period.
From the game page, we read the following:
The Great Anglo-Boer War is a grand-strategic level game of the war between the British Empire and the Boer Republics in South Africa from 1899 to 1902. The Boers were armed like no other adversary the Empire had ever faced. By October 1899, war had become inevitable—and both sides were equipped for the first ‘modern’ conflict. Both sides had rifled breech-loading artillery, machine guns, bolt-action magazine rifles, trenches, barbed wire, and more.
The war started as a conventional contest but morphed into the first modern guerrilla war of the 20th century. In the end, the Empire overwhelmed the Boers, but by 1910 all of South Africa (including the contested republics of 1899) was granted self-government as a Crown Dominion, with Louis Botha as the Prime Minister. The Boers can be said to have lost the war but won the peace. A fascinating bit of history but an even more interesting study in military history.
The game places you in the position of the military commanders of both armies. Political events are largely beyond your control, but may influence what you are allowed to do. There are three scenarios – the Conventional War, the Guerrilla War, and the Grand Campaign Game. The full campaign is THE ULTIMATE BOER WAR EXPERIENCE – from the first desperate siege defenses of 1899 to the treaty of Vereeniging (or maybe not?) – and everything tactical and otherwise in between. Battles, blockhouses, farm-burnings, evasions, escapes, raids, concentration camps, sieges, drives, armoured trains, 1-pdr automatic “pom-poms”, surrenders, entrenchments, typhoid, barbed-wire, native spies, night marches, supply wagons and more. If it was part of the real Boer war – it is in the game. If you know about the war – this is the one you’ve been hoping someone would make, and if you are learning about it – this IS THE GAME for that. With a 44×34 map at 9 miles/hex scale, monthly game turns and an accurate order of battle, this is a game that truly does justice to the topic.
As of September 1st, the Kickstarter campaign has raised $7,389 toward its $12,900 funding goal with 86 backers. The campaign will conclude on Tuesday, October 20th at 1:38pm EDT.
2. Combat! Vietnam from Compass Games
This month we had another pretty big downloading of new pre-order games from Compass Games that I have affectionately referred to in the past as “Pre-Order Palooza”. This one was not their normal 6-10 new titles but there were 4 new games offered and they all looked very good. The first game that I am highlighting here is the next volume in the highly thought of Combat! Series of solitaire wargames. These games represent man to man combat where typically each of the counters on the board represent a single soldier. They have focused exclusively on World War II previously but now they have announced this new game set during the Vietnam War called Combat! Vietnam. I have yet to play any of the previous volumes in the series, even though I own 4 of them, but they are high on my want to play list and I am very much interested in this system because I love Tactical level games, very much enjoy man to man combat in games and also enjoy games that are set in during the Vietnam War.
From the game page, we read the following:
Combat! Vietnam is a stand-alone solitaire game of man-to-man combat in the Vietnam War, covering the years from 1965 to 1972. This game depicts the countless small actions that were fought during those years, with the player commanding a squad of American, Communist, or South Vietnamese soldiers. In the 11 scenarios, the fighting rages across the widely varied terrain of Vietnam, from dense jungles to city streets.
The comprehensive Random Scenario Generator (and Campaign Game) further expands your gaming possibilities. With this tool, players can generate a limitless supply of unique scenarios for Combat! Vietnam.
Combat! Vietnam also includes Armor rules, allowing the player to relive iconic scenes such as T-54 tanks charging south during the Easter Offensive or Marine Patton tanks battling through Hué.
3. Viking Dawn: A Game of Viking Exploration & Expansion 800-1040 A.D. from Compass Games
The 2nd game from Compass Games today is a good one. And I know that because I have played it. But, our friend Gregory M. Smith is a solitaire game designing genius and has done many of these solo, narrative driven style wargames that we have all enjoyed for hours on end while we have been unable to find an opponent or just because we want to play a game on our timeline. We have interviewed him many times for his games such as Zeppelin Raider, Interceptor Ace, The Hunted, Western Front Ace, Amerika Bomber, Defending America, American Tank Ace, British Tank Ace, Rebel Tide, Sinking Yamato and most recently for a magazine wargame called B-52D Linebacker II. But Greg is a versatile designer and also has done many great 2-player games as well. He always has something cooking in his game design kitchen and recently we spoke with him about his new design with Kevin McPartland called Viking Dawn: A Game of Viking Exploration & Expansion 800-1040 A.D. from Compass Games. I was able to play this 1-4 player game while at the World Boardgaming Championships last month and you can read about my experience at the following link: https://theplayersaid.com/2026/07/27/world-boardgaming-championships-2026-daily-debrief-series-day-3/
From the game page, we read the following:
Viking Dawn is a low-complexity strategic game, with rules for two, three, or four players, each controlling a faction of Vikings (Norse, Swede, Dane, and optionally Geat). Inspired by SPI’s game Conquistador! from the 1970’s, Viking Dawn has exploration, trade (both internal and external), and minor leaders. The game also contains rules for solitaire play with the Danes or Norse.
Faction descriptions:
Norse – closest to the New World, they have the additional advantage of two Explorers, Erik the Red and Leif Eriksson.
Danes – closest to the lucrative raiding and settlement targets of England, they also have the advantage of having several early leaders.
Swedes – although further from England, they are closest to several Russian settlement areas, and river portage routes to the east and Constantinople.
Geats – ostensibly the weakest faction, as they must pay tribute to the Swedes for protection, they have the best trading advantage in the game.
Players compete to raid lucrative settlements and explore the world with longships and warbands. Each faction has named historical leaders, who have an impact on combat and exploration. Players may trade with each other or nonplayer-controlled areas and establish settlements. Includes rules for settlements gaining independence, leader burials, and establishment of the Varangian Guard.
If you are interested in Viking Dawn: A Game of Viking Exploration & Expansion 800-1040 A.D., you can pre-order a copy for $54.00 from the Compass Games website at the following link: https://www.compassgames.com/product/viking-dawn-pay-later/
4. Tunnel Rats: The Vietnam War Underground from Compass Games
Game 3 in this month’s mini-Pre-Order Palooza from Compass Games is another very interesting looking game set during the Vietnam War called Tunnel Rats: The Vietnam War Underground. This game is a solitaire game, which I think makes a lot of sense historically and thematically and actually gets me very excited for the possibilities, and I very much look forward to seeing how this one works. I have great hope for this one. The designer is Lisa Smedman who has done several recent popular solo games including Trench Raid.
From the game page, we read the following:
Tunnel Rats is a single-player game set during the Vietnam War. You will control two American “tunnel rats” who have been tasked with exploring an underground tunnel complex created by the Viet Cong. This complex is made up of tiles representing tunnels and underground rooms in which the enemy may be lurking. In this claustrophobic environment, the tunnel rats need to be as quiet as possible to avoid alerting the enemy. Tense firefights and hand-to-hand combat feature a unique initiative system, and encounters are fast and furious.
With a procedurally generated map, nine tunnel rat characters to choose from, and a variety of weapon and equipment load-outs, each “run” will provide a new and dynamic challenge. Your team’s objective will vary, shifting the focus of play depending upon which lieutenant is in command of the team. Tunnel Rats also includes rules for campaign play, allowing surviving tunnel rats to gradually hone their skills over time – if they survive.
Be on your guard, as the tunnel rats never know what they will encounter down in “the black”. It might be a hidden punji stake pit, a Viet Cong command center filled with valuable documents, a venomous snake slithering along a tunnel, or a water trap they must swim through without drowning!
5. Against the Reich Deluxe Edition from Compass Games
Game 4 from the Compass Games mini Pre-Order Palooza is a classic hex and counter operational level wargame set in World War II called Against the Reich Deluxe Edition designed originally by Joseph Balkoski.
From the game page, we read the following:
In June of 1944, the world held its breath as land and naval forces of six Allied nations launched the largest amphibious assault ever attempted. The long-awaited second front, the Western Front, was finally open. The Allies had to force the unconditional surrender of Nazi Germany by crossing the great Rhine River into the Reich itself. Adolf Hitler was confident that the battered but undefeated Wehrmacht could hold two enormous fortified zones (the Atlantic and Westwalls) and repulse any attempt to cross into the German homeland. Against the Reich is the first game in years to cover the entire Western Front campaign. The players are in the positions of Eisenhower and Hitler, making the grand decisions that control the course of the campaign.
A Quick-Playing Simulation: Designer Joseph M. Balkoski, whose specialty is the Western Front, has provided an accurate, realistic simulation that plays like a game. With short and long campaign games, you can choose the length of the simulation.
Headquarters and Supplies are Realistically Linked: Players must decide where to concentrate their resources. Limited supplies make the placement of headquarters and depots a critical factor in the campaign.
Choice of Invasion Sites: The Allied player must decide where to invade – do you strike a lightly defended area and accept a long, grinding ground campaign, or strike close to the Rhine and risk quick destruction?
Historical Overview: Russel F. Weigley, author of Eisenhower’s Lieutenants, the definitive history of the Western Front, has analyzed the strategic options facing Eisenhower and Hitler – and the players.
Loaded with other Features: A short “Battle of the Bulge” scenario, Second Invasion, Flooding Holland, Port Repair, The Roer Dams, Rail Movement, Mediterranean Front Reinforcements, Amphibious and Airborne Assaults, and much more.
6. Enlightenment Empires: Power and Politics in Eastern Europe, 1725-1795 from GMT Games
One of my favorite parts about historical wargaming is that I get exposed to and am able to learn about some of the more obscure parts of our world’s history. Now you might be saying to me that the subject of power politics in Eastern Europe form 1725-1795 is not obscure and I think that you would be correct if I was from Eastern Europe. But as I am from the United States, this is not a period or locale that we learned much about in grade school. That being said, I am very much interested in this concept and history and am glad to see Brian Asklev taking another crack at a topic that focuses on some of the history from his neck of the woods. When Enlightenment Empires: Power and Politics in Eastern Europe, 1725-1795 was first announced a few weeks ago, I was immediately interested because I do love games where several nations have to compete economically, politically, diplomatically and through force of arms. I also recently played Brian’s Baltic Empires at WBC and very much enjoyed that game and this one appears to be in a similar style and uses the very interesting Dramatis Personae cards to inject historical characters with their abilities into the game play.
From the game page, we read the following:
Enlightenment Empires is an approachable 2-5 player strategy game about conflicts between the states of Central and Eastern Europe region during the Enlightenment era, a transformative period of political upheaval, large-scale warfare, and constant struggles for power. Players will have to develop their economy, decide their internal policies on the ideas of individual liberty and effective governance, secure trade deals and financial assistance within the context of the global rivalry between Britain and France, and finally build armies to become the dominant power of Central and Eastern Europe. Russia, Poland-Lithuania, Prussia, Austria, and the Ottoman Empire will fight for hegemony, using variable victory conditions that reflect their respective historical objectives.
Building on the solid foundation provided by Baltic Empires, highlights of Enlightenment Empires include:
Five new asymmetric factions with unique abilities and objectives, including a new “Constitution” objective reflecting the pinnacle of Enlightenment political ideals.
Another highly thematic deck of historical Dramatis Personae to constitute your royal court, now also including random events that can disrupt players’ plans…or present them with new opportunities.
A simplified, yet still deep and political, economic system that forces players to make tough decisions regarding their state’s internal policies (serfdom, noble privileges, and military spending) and its diplomatic relations to the superpowers of the period, England and France.
The same streamlined battle system based on custom dice per unit type, now modified by military reforms.
More detailed minor powers that players may form alliances with.
Variable player counts (from 2 to 5 players), with scenarios ranging from a tight duel to a tense multiplayer conflict replete with alliances and betrayals.
If there is a word that could define the whole of 18th century, it would be the Enlightenment. The philosophical thought that applied reason to all spheres of life guided the social and political developments of the 1700s, and intellectuals, scientists, politicians, and rulers alike acted either in support of it or against it. And while in Western Europe the republican ideals of enlightenment brought about the French Revolution, in Central and Eastern Europe enlightenment became a tool for state-building for the absolutist monarchs, including the Holy Roman Emperor and Archduke of Austria Joseph II, King Frederick II of Prussia, or Empress Catherine the Great of Russia. The mid-18th century period was formative for these powers, with Prussia and Russia continuing to struggle to establish their dominance in the region, while Austria and the Ottoman Empire fought to preserve their status, and the weakened state of Poland-Lithuania struggled to reform its constitution before meeting an unlucky demise. Three of the traditional “pentarchy“ of Great European Powers (namely, Russia, Prussia, and Austria) were Eastern powers that achieved this status during the 18th century. Their dominance in the region was forged by the work of bureaucrats and reformers, as much as by the soldiers and generals on the fields of the Seven Years‘ War.
Keep in mind that these type of games can sometimes be very complex and have lots of moving parts. And I am not saying that this doesn’t have them but Brian has said that the game is very approachable.
Enlightenment Empires presents these political and military conflicts in a fun and accessible format, while also doing justice to the fascinating history of the region during this period. The game features five asymmetric factions with different strengths, internal political conditions, military forces, and historical objectives, along with the capacity to develop their states by conducting reforms along (or against) Enlightenment ideals, investing in economic infrastructure, and recruiting key historical characters that offer unique game effects. The game also includes several scenarios for variable player counts and durations, offering additional flexibility and replayability.
7. The Last Hundred Yards Volume 6: The Forgotten Hell from GMT Games
If you didn’t know we really enjoyed The Last Hundred Yards as well as Volume 2: Airborne Over Europe. The system is extremely interesting for a tactical game and uses some novel elements in regards to how victory points are scored including a focus on time to complete missions as well as the casualties incurred. Really an excellent system with lots of crunch and potential! Now, even though there are a total of 5 other volumes that have been released, Mike Denson has forged ahead with the next entry in the series which gives us a look at the operations in New Guinea and the Northern Solomon Islands during WWII with The Last Hundred Yards Volume 6: The Forgotten Hell.
From the game page, we read the following:
The Last Hundred Yards: The Forgotten Hell is Volume 6 in The Last Hundred Yards Series. This game examines the Allied campaigns against Japan in 1942, focusing on U.S. operations on Guadalcanal and Australian fighting in Papua New Guinea.
In New Guinea, Australian militia and the Australian Imperial Force troops fought a brutal and desperate delaying campaign along the Kokoda Track from Port Moresby to Buna, Battling through jungle, mountains, rain, mud, hunger, disease, and exhaustion, they resisted repeated Japanese advances and flanking attacks. Their stubborn defense slowed the enemy, shielded Port Moresby, and eventually helped reverse the campaign. At Milne Bay, Australian forces pushed the Japanese back and shattered the belief that the Imperial Japanese Army was invincible.
On Guadalcanal, U.S. Marines and Army troops fought equally savage battles, destroying Ichiki’s force at Alligator Creek and later assaulting entrenched Japanese positions around Mount Austen. There, the enemy used caves, rocky ridges, and concealed strongpoints to prolong the struggle.
Together, these engagements reveal the intensity of jungle warfare in the Southwest Pacific, where endurance, small-unit leadership, and relentless attacks under terrible conditions shaped the early Allied offensive against Japan. These actions also showed how terrain, logistics, and morale could decide campaigns as surely as firepower across the battlefields of the Solomons and New Guinea alike.
8. Shenandoah: Jackson and Sheridan in the Valley, 1862 – 1864 (Stonewall in the Valley and Sheridan in the Shenandoah) from Multi-Man Publishing
A BIG and well respected American Civil War operational system is what Great Campaigns of the American Civil War (GCACW) is and the newest volume in the series is called Shenandoah: Jackson and Sheridan in the Valley, 1862 – 1864. One of the things that I very much appreciate about this system is the fact that they use some of the best art out there for their covers.
From the game page, we read the following:
Shenandoah: Jackson and Sheridan in the Valley, 1862 – 1864 is the latest design in the award-winning Great Campaigns of the American Civil War(GCACW) Series. It contains both a complete redesign of the Stonewall in the Valley (SIV) game covering Stonewall Jackson’s 1862 valley campaign and a completely new game module Sheridan in the Shenandoah that depicts Sheridan’s 1864 valley campaign. The game is designed by Joe Balkoski (the original GCACW Series creator) and Chris Withers. The original SIV game maps have been upgraded to contain the latest GCACW map features, with map design executed by artist Charlie Kibler—whose work on the series dates to its creation in 1992.
Shenandoah: Jackson and Sheridan in the Valley, 1862 – 1864 uses the latest version of the GCACW Standard Basic Game Rules, which also apply to all other games in the series, and these rules are now printed at an increased 11-point font size instead of 9-point. After more than a quarter-century of refinement, these rules are extremely well organized and relatively easy to learn, even for series newcomers. The Advanced Game rules cover situations specifically applicable to these unique campaigns such as “The Burning” that depicts the desolation of the valley by Union cavalry in 1864.
Stonewall in the Valley includes one new Basic Game scenario, the four original Basic Scenarios rebalanced, and the original Advanced Game campaign scenario extensively revised:
The Battle of Kernstown (March 23, 1862; 1 turn): Introductory scenario on the battle of Kernstown – ideal for beginners.
My Last Council of War (March 10 to March 23, 1862; 14 turns): Heavily outnumbered, Jackson moves south from Winchester thru Strasburg to Mt. Jackson. A Union force of three divisions follows to Strasburg while sending two divisions out of the Valley to reinforce McClellan. Jackson races back north and attacks the remaining Union division at Kernstown but loses the battle.
God Blessed Our Arms at McDowell (April 30 to May 11, 1862; 12 turns): Historically, Jackson moves west from Staunton and causes the Union force at McDowell to retreat north to Franklin. He briefly pursues them but then returns to the Valley. This scenario postulates what might have happened had Ewell’s division and Banks’ two divisions become involved in the McDowell campaign instead of holding fast in their camps in the south of the Valley.
Rebel Blitzkrieg (May 21 to June 2, 1862; 13 turns): Jackson and Ewell advance north on the Luray Pike and surprise the small Union force at Front Royal. A Union division entrenched at Strasburg to the west belatedly discovers it is in danger of being cut off and just beats Jackson north to Winchester. Jackson defeats the Union at the first battle of Winchester and pursues to Harpers Ferry. Meanwhile strong Union forces are moving in behind Jackson from both the east and the west. Jackson turns south, marching to Strasburg and then Mt. Jackson and barely avoids the trap.
Our Beautiful Valley Will be Cleansed (June 6 to June 11, 1862; 6 turns); Two Union columns, separated by the Shenandoah River, pursue Jackson south from Strasburg. Fremont’s force engages the Confederates at Harrisonburg and then two days later battles them at Cross Keys. Meanwhile Shields’ division advances into Jackson’s rear and almost captures his wagon train. Jackson turns his army from Fremont to Shields and defeats Shields in the battle of Port Republic causing both Union forces to pull back north.
Jackson’s Shenandoah Valley Campaign (March 7 to June 19, 1862; 105 turns): The entire Valley campaign is covered in this scenario. Both sides typically have forces moving all over all three maps in exciting maneuvers and with forces coming and going due to external events. The scenario plays quite fast due to lulls where sets of 5 turns are skipped. The original advanced rules have been simplified, and the scenario has been extensively playtested and re-balanced.
Sheridan in the Shenandoah includes twelve Basic Game scenarios and two Advanced Game campaign scenarios, all extensively playtested:
Second Winchester (June 13 to June 15, 1863; 3 turns): Ewell’s corps leads the Confederate army thru the Valley to invade Pennsylvania and routed the Union division at Winchester. The Rebels cut off the Union retreat and captured most of the Union division. The route was now clear for Lee’s invasion of the north.
The Battle of New Market (May 15, 1864; 1 turn): Introductory scenario on the battle of New Market – ideal for beginners.
Piedmont (June 4 to June 6, 1864; 3 turns): Picking up the after Sigel’s debacle at New Market, Union General David Hunter marches south from Winchester. With Breckinridge, Confederate hero of New Market, aiding Lee at Cold Harbor, defense of the Valley falls to a ragtag collection of troops that are rushed to the area under General W. E. “Grumble” Jones. The forces battle at Piedmont, Jones is killed, the Rebels are routed, and the Union captures Staunton.
In the Valley Again (July 23 to August 5, 1864; 14 turns): Early’s army moved back into the Valley in mid-July after retreating from the outskirts of Washington, D.C. On July 23, Confederate scouting revealed that Early was only opposed by Crook’s forces and not the VI and XIX corps, which had returned to D.C. Early attacked Crook at Kernstown and routed the Union forces which retreated across the Potomac. Confederate infantry destroyed the B&O RR at Martinsburg and threatened to invade north. Two Confederate cavalry brigades advanced north towards Chambersburg, burned it, and were chased by 2 Union cavalry divisions. Meanwhile, the VI and XIX corps had been recalled to the Valley, but then along with Crook’s force, moved east to protect against an assumed invasion again by the Confederates. The Union force soon countermarched back to Harpers Ferry and the Confederates retreated south.
Second Kernstown (July 24, 1864; 1 turn): A simple scenario covering the second battle of Kernstown – ideal for beginners.
Sheridan Takes Command (August 10 to August 14, 1864; 5 turns): Sheridan took command of all forces in the region on August 7th. His orders were “wherever the enemy goes let our troops go also”. The plan was to trap the Confederate infantry in the northern valley, but Early knew the danger and moved south just ahead of the Union. Both sides marched rapidly south until the Confederates setup a strong line at the Fisher’s Hill. Sheridan prepared to attack but halted his plans when a strong force under Anderson entered the Valley at Front Royal.
You Must Be Cautious (August 17 to August 21, 1864; 5 turns): With the Union infantry camped along Cedar Creek and the Confederates entrenched in a strong line at Fisher’s Hill just to the south, Sheridan learned of the approach of Kershaw’s division. This elicited a new directive from Grant warning Sheridan he “must be cautious and act on the defensive until movements … force them to detach” troops. Therefore, Sheridan conducted a night march to Winchester. From there the Union briefly defended at Berryville and then at Charlestown. The Confederates pursued and eventually tried to bring on a battle at Charlestown. However, Sheridan was cautious and followed the new defensive strategy and disengaged to retreat into a strong, compact line at Halltown, just in front of Harpers Ferry.
Third Winchester (September 19, 1864; 1 turn): This scenario depicting the third battle of Winchester is only one turn but still features lots of maneuver and combat.
From Winchester to Fisher’s Hill (September 19 to September 22, 1864; 4 turns): This scenario encompasses two significant battles in the valley campaign. The Union army attacked the Confederate defensive line just east of Winchester and eventually drove the Rebels back to Winchester. This final Confederate line collapsed, and they retreated south all the way to a formidable defensive position at Fisher’s Hill, just south of Strasburg. The Union pursued and then rolled the west flank of this line and routed the Confederates.
Early’s About Played Out (September 23 to September 26, 1864; 4 turns): After the battle of Fisher’s Hill the Confederates retreated south. The Union pursued with their entire army, but the action for the next few days was limited to cavalry and rear-guard skirmishes. The Confederates safely made it to Brown’s Gap, while the Union infantry stopped at Harrisonburg and Union cavalry started burning the countryside.
Tom’s Brook (October 9, 1864; 1 turn): This solitaire scenario is filled with cavalry action and is an excellent learning scenario for beginners.
The Battle of Cedar Creek (October 19, 1864; 1 turn): While this is only a 1-turn scenario it is filled with the action that took place in the battle of Cedar Creek. The Confederate player starts with a Night March and a Surprise Attack. The Union responds with a special “Sheridan’s Ride” action to enable counterattacks.
Sheridan Moves South (September 19 to October 20, 1864; 32 turns): This scenario spans the battles in the campaign from when Sheridan attacked the Confederates at Winchester, to when the Confederates were defeated at the battle of Cedar Creek. This campaign can be easily played in a weekend.
The Last Valley Campaign (July 21 to October 20, 1864; 92 turns): This scenario encompasses the entire campaign from when Early’s army returned to the Valley after his raid on Washington, to when he was defeated at the battle of Cedar Creek. There is maneuver and combat all over all three maps in this scenario. The action often starts with a Confederate offensive and advance to the Potomac. The Union then gets significant reinforcements to launch counteroffensives.
9. Okinawa: The Last Battle of WWII Reprint from Best with 1
I love a new and interesting way to tell the story of a key battle and I found a very interesting one called Okinawa: The Last Battle of WWII from Best with 1 earlier this year. This is a solitaire only game and for each game the player will draw four objectives from a possible 12 that you must survive and capture before time runs out. On your turn, the player will roll special dice and then spend those to take actions such as movement, attack and take special actions from different unit action cards that will be set up in a square from from 1 to 10. The numbers coincide with the dice of the attacking Japanese and as the player moves through the rondel they will be able to activate and use their different soldiers to attack the Japanese defenders or use their special abilities to gain tokens that can be used for rerolls or healing of wounds
I think that the best part of the game is the concept of resource management as you have to use the dice appropriately to move and fight and also to manage your troops as you can upgrade certain cards as you pass the midway point of the round as well as when special actions are granted via the special resource chits. Upgrading units is very important as this will unlock things like heavy weapons in the form of bazookas, a Sherman tank and planes to be able to take out the Japanese armor units defending the island. The game is about efficiency of movement and doing the most with what you have. The dice determine what you can and can’t do and movement is optional as you don’t have to move unless you feel it is advantageous. But remember, that you have to defeat the defenders and the various objectives to be able to advance to your final objective and sitting in one space too long is not advisable.
The different units have various functions including attack, such as the Rifleman, Machine Gun Team and Sniper but also have secondary functions to remove the fog of war, heal your damaged units or gain additional resources. The Japanese defenders are well hidden and also have various defenses such as pill boxes and caves that will require the player to defeat these before moving to attack the units located inside.
In the end the game is about defeating the Japanese defenders while doing so in a set amount of revolutions around the rondel setup. This can be as few as 2 times around or as many as 4 and knowing when to use your resources to reroll your dice, as you either didn’t get the run of consecutive numbers you were looking for or just need a specific number, you will run out of resources quickly and you must plan them out as best you can to win the game. This one is really fun and I have played it about a dozen times winning about 70% of the time. The game plays in about an hour and the action is fast and furious and you are immediately beset by the staunch Japanese defenders and must act quickly.
You do not have to buy the Hero Bound game but can order the game as an Add On.
10. Tank Clash: Eastern Front from Ameba Games
I love to highlight these little campaigns that I find on Kickstarter and this month there is a new company, or at least that I am not familiar with, called Ameba Games that is offering a small game called Tank Clash: Eastern Front. This games appears to be the 2nd game in the series with the 1st being called Tank Clash: Western Front.
From the game page, we read the following:
Tank Clash is back with new iconic World War 2 tanks!
The Red Army is spearheaded by the powerful Soviet armoured units like the T34, SU100 and IS2. Germany pins its hopes on the last of the panzer divisions to halt the Soviet advance. The Wehrmacht fields its fearsome tanks like the Stug III, Nashorn and Tiger II for the coming battle.
The stage is set for the largest clash of late-war heavy armour.
Tank Clash: Eastern Front is a standalone tactical tank warfare game for 2 players, designed for both newcomers and seasoned strategists. Easy to learn yet rich in tactical choices, it combines its signature checkers-style armour tracking system with dice rolling and hand management for intense skirmish battles.
Already own Tank Clash: Western Front?
Built with modularity in mind, Eastern Front is fully compatible with its predecessor. Combine both games to command 12 unique tank types across expansive battlefields with up to 4 players. Eastern Front’s new features – including new missions, battlefield tokens, event cards and enhanced gameplay elements can also be incorporated into Western Front for an even richer combat experience.
I know what you might be thinking, as the art is a bit cartoony, but I am going to give this one a chance. I think that any wargamer likes to use tanks and this one appears to be focused on these metal monsters and I am going to give it a go. Plus the components are really nice, including some very well made poker chips that are used on the board, and frankly the price of $40 is probably worth what you re getting.
As of September 1st, the Kickstarter campaign has funded and raised $9,054 toward its $3,928 funding goal with 108 backers. The campaign will conclude on Wednesday, September 16th at 9:00pm EDT.
New Release
1. A Hellish Fight: The Battle of Fort Sumter – 1863 from High Flying Dice Games
I love lesser gamed subjects. Or even sometimes games that have never seen the light of day and never touched certain subjects. It is always nice to play something unique and interesting while learning new parts of history. High Flying Dice Games does this exceptionally well as they have made their living on doing lesser (or even totally) unknow battles in their small format games. This month they have released a game that focuses on the 2nd siege of Fort Sumter in Charleston, South Carolina in 1863 called A Hellish Fight: The Battle of Fort Sumter – 1863. This one looks pretty interesting and appears to focus on the iron clad battles and bombardment of the ruins of the fort that were still held by the Confederates.
From the game page, we read the following:
Following the capture of Fort Wagner on September 7th, and the protracted bombardment of Fort Sumter by the Union navy’s ironclads as well as army land batteries, an assault to take the fort’s ruins was planned. Admiral Dahlgren and General Gilmore both felt that securing Fort Sumter’s capture would not only lead to Charleston’s surrender, but send a clear signal that the Confederacy’s days were numbered.
If you are interested in A Hellish Fight: The Battle of Fort Sumter – 1863, you can order a copy for $18.95 from the High Flying Dice Games website at the following link: https://www.hfdgames.com/sumter.html
2. Guadalcanal: The Battle for Henderson Field, Oct 23-26, 1942 from Dan Verssen Games
The Valiant Defense Series designed by David Thompson has been one of my favorite solitaire wargame series of the past nearly 10 years. Each of the volumes in the game address very specific situations and always have a very interesting take with fun mechanics, great art and fantastic production. The torch for the series though has been passed to a new designer in Vincent Cooper. He has designed Volume 5 Guadalcanal: The Battle for Henderson Field, Oct 23-26, 1942 and it has finally fulfilled off of Kickstarter.
From the game page, we read the following:
Take command of the valiant Marines of the 1st Marine Division, supported by Soldiers of the 164th Infantry Regiment, desperately defending Henderson Field against waves of Japanese troops. Guadalcanal: The Battle for Henderson Field is a solitaire and cooperative tactical wargame published by Dan Verssen Games (DVG) as Volume V in the Valiant Defense Series.
Here is a bit of a designer diary/commentary from the designer Vincent Cooper:
This all started about 3 1/2 years ago when I first played Pavlov’s House. I say played. I ‘played’ the game for about 10 minutes…and then I sat there in stunned disbelief at how a game could be sooooo good!!!!
By the time I finished there were two very clear ideas for games fully formed. I contacted DVG to see if there was any interest and they put me in touch with David Thompson. I didn’t hold much hope. There was no reason for him to trust his IP to me, a person he didn’t know.
But I gave it a try and David, it turns out, is one of the nicest people you can ever come into contact with. After some back and forth, the idea for Guadalcanal – The Battle for Henderson Field was born (not, in fact, one of the original ideas, but we’ll see what the future holds for them…).
The game has been through various stages of development and now stands ready to KS!! I will be giving more details in the future about the various variant play options, but have no fear: This will keep you scratching your head looking for the right decision for MONTHS!!
Art by the supremely talented Nils Johansson
Thank you to all the play testers, and in particular Glenn Saunders, Shane Freshwater and Martin Fenwick Charlesworth Much more to come from out design team in the near future!!!
A few years ago, Road to the Rhine designed by Frank Chadwick was announced and it is now ready to ship.
From the game page, we read the following:
In the cataclysmic battle of the Falaise Pocket, the Allied forces defeated the German army and drove them back across France in disorder. In the south of France, American and French troops of the 6th Army Group have stormed ashore and driven the remnants of the German 19th Army north toward the border.
Road to the Rhine covers the Allied pursuit of the German Army following the Normandy breakout through fierce fighting at the West Wall and bridging the Rhine River. The campaign game covers the period from September 1944 through April 1945, while separate shorter scenarios include Operation Market-Garden and the Battle of the Bulge. The game includes two battle games (one-turn scenarios), two longer scenarios, and one full campaign game. The game also includes extensive designer notes from original game designer Frank Chadwick and a historical play-through of the Bulge battle game.
Road to the Rhine is another classic by Game Designers’ Workshop, re-mastered by Compass Games. Originally designed by Frank Chadwick, this edition pays tribute to the classic by honoring the original game system while introducing many enhancements for gameplay purposes. In terms of presentation, we upgraded all components, including completely new full-color maps, new reinforcement and new unit displays, expanded turn and supply tracks, enhanced charts, a rulebook with incorporated errata, and larger counters.
This one does have two 22″x34″ maps but with only 2 countershafts so it is large in scope but not necessarily in scale as it appears to be fairly low counter density. One to keep an eye on though as it is designed by Frank Chadwick and is a remastering of the classis GDW release in 1979.
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 Neva Game Press!
The Rock of Chickamauga is the next game in the Black Swan Series and follows closely on the heels of A Most Fearful Sacrifice. Using the same proven game system, The Rock of Chickamauga covers the entire Battle of Chickamauga, fought from September 18th through the 20th, 1863 in northern Georgia. The Union Army of the Cumberland, under William Rosecrans, is driving south from Chattanooga, hoping to envelop and trap Braxton Bragg’s Confederate Army of Tennessee in its vise. But Bragg anticipates the maneuver, pulls back and then counterattacks the overextended Union forces. They meet along Chickamauga Creek, the “River of Death”, in an epic struggle.
This scenario-driven, two-player war-game utilizes the ACW operating system called the Black Swan System, which is closely related to the Blind Swords game system first introduced in the game The Devil’s To Pay!. This version of the system is specifically designed to handle larger-scale battles yet keep rules overhead low. players will trigger activations by Corps instead of by lower-level formations but they still have tactical decision-making choices by needing to determine which Divisions get activation priority. Players will use card draws rather than chit pulls.
With this My Favorite Wargame Cards Series, I hope to take a look at a specific card from the various wargames that I have played and share how it is used in the game. I am not a strategist and frankly I am not that good at games but I do understand how things should work and be used in games. With that being said, here is the next entry in this series.
#89: Frederick Douglas from For the People 25th Anniversary Edition from GMT Games
For the People is a strategic level Card-Driven wargame about the whole 4+ years of the American Civil War covering the conflict from Texas to Pennsylvania, from the firing on Fort Sumter to the end of the war at Appomattox Court House. Players take on the role of either President Abraham Lincoln or President Jefferson Davis and command armies, promote and relieve generals, conduct amphibious assaults, dispatch cavalry raids, and even battle incompetency and political intrigue among members of your own cabinet.
As a Card Driven Game, For the People includes a deck of strategy cards that are used for conducting campaigns and incorporating the many events and personalities of the war. The Confederate player can build ironclads, naval mines (torpedoes), submarines, conduct overseas purchases and work towards foreign intervention. The Union player can build up his naval blockade, his ironclad fleet, fight draft riots, secure the Border States and issue the Emancipation Proclamation. The cards are used in the classic sense of a CDG for either the Operations Points to fuel various actions or for the printed event. According to the designer Mark Herman, “The cards are designed to present the player with his political and operational options. The use of Strategy Cards as political instruments will slow the operational tempo of military operations. The converse is also true. Both sides spent the first year of the war, 1861, mobilizing and organizing their war efforts.
The game is extremely interesting and I recently had my first experience with it and very much enjoyed what it was that I was doing even though I really had little idea about my proper strategy for the Union and what it is that I should be focused on in the game.
The Frederick Douglas card from For the People really is a bit misnamed. While Frederick Douglas was a major influence for abolitionist activities as well as progressive thinking amongst the politicians of the North, the card really should have been named for the Negro soldiers who gave so much, their lives, their backs and their families, to volunteer and fight on the side of the Union during the American Civil War. The card’s text reads “Union receives five SP’s for raising freemen Negro troops. The SP’s can be placed in any single Union controlled space with an LOC in NJ, DE, PA or Washington, D.C. that does not contain Confederate SP’s or a fort”. This card gives a huge boost to the Union side especially if it comes up early in the game as Union SP’s on the board are spread out and defense of Washington is not as stout as it needs to be. In my recent play, I got this card in my opening hand and was able to place the 5 SP into Frederick, Maryland to add to the already existing 5 SP there. Along with the Army of the Potomac and its SP stationed in Washington, D.C. this effectively discouraged the CSA from invading the North and attempting to go for a capture of the capital. You will notice that the card is a 3 OP’s card, which is very valuable in and of itself, as most of the Union Generals at the start of the game, with the exception of Burnside, have a 3 Strategy Rating and require a 3 OP’s card to activate.
The issues of emancipation and military service were intertwined from the onset of the Civil War. News from Fort Sumter set off a rush by free black men to enlist in U.S. military units. They were turned away, however, because a Federal law dating from 1792 barred Negroes from bearing arms for the U.S. army (although they had served in the American Revolution and in the War of 1812). In Boston disappointed would-be volunteers met and passed a resolution requesting that the Government modify its laws to permit their enlistment.
The Lincoln administration wrestled with the idea of authorizing the recruitment of black troops, concerned that such a move would prompt the border states to secede. When Gen. John C. Frémont in Missouri and Gen. David Hunter in South Carolina issued proclamations that emancipated slaves in their military regions and permitted them to enlist, their superiors sternly revoked their orders. By mid-1862, however, the escalating number of former slaves, the declining number of white volunteers, and the increasingly pressing personnel needs of the Union Army pushed the Government into reconsidering the ban.
As a result, on July 17, 1862, Congress passed the Second Confiscation and Militia Act, freeing slaves who had masters in the Confederate Army. Two days later, slavery was abolished in the territories of the United States, and on July 22nd President Lincoln presented the preliminary draft of the Emancipation Proclamation to his Cabinet. After the Union Army turned back Lee’s first invasion of the North at Antietam, MD, and the Emancipation Proclamation was subsequently announced, black recruitment was pursued in earnest. Volunteers from South Carolina, Tennessee, and Massachusetts filled the first authorized black regiments. Recruitment was slow until black leaders such as Frederick Douglass encouraged black men to become soldiers to ensure eventual full citizenship. Volunteers began to respond, and in May 1863 the Government established the Bureau of Colored Troops to manage the burgeoning numbers of black soldiers.
By the end of the Civil War, roughly 179,000 black men (10% of the Union Army) served as soldiers in the U.S. Army and another 19,000 served in the Navy. Nearly 40,000 black soldiers died over the course of the war. Black soldiers served in artillery and infantry and performed all noncombat support functions that sustain an army, as well. Black carpenters, chaplains, cooks, guards, laborers, nurses, scouts, spies, steamboat pilots, surgeons, and teamsters also contributed to the war cause. There were nearly 80 black commissioned officers. Black women, who could not formally join the Army, nonetheless served as nurses, spies, and scouts, the most famous being Harriet Tubman, who scouted for the 2nd South Carolina Volunteers.
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 launched on Kickstarter. I reached out to one of the game’s designer David Thompson to see if he would be willing to share about the design and as always he was more than happy to oblige us.
Grant: David, welcome back to our blog. What is your new upcoming game Rebels Against Rebellion about?
Davind: Thanks for having me back! Rebels Against Rebellion is a card-driven war game for one or two players, set in Scott County, Tennessee, during the American Civil War. Tennessee’s own path to secession was messy. The state voted against a secession convention in February 1861, then reversed course and voted to join the Confederacy in June, following Fort Sumter. But East Tennessee never went along with it. And of all the counties in East Tennessee, none rejected secession more decisively than Scott County: 521 to 19. Later that year, the county court went so far as to pass a resolution declaring Scott County’s own independence from the state of Tennessee, calling itself the “Free and Independent State of Scott.” That’s the story we’re telling: Southern Loyalists trying to hold their ground against the Confederate army and their allied secessionist guerrillas, for the whole length of the war.
Grant: What should the title convey to the players?
David: I wanted the title to carry that irony right up front. Rebels Against Rebellion. The people of Scott County were, technically, rebelling against a rebellion by resisting the Confederacy in order to maintain their ties with the Union. History likes to flatten “Rebel” down to one side of the Civil War, but in Scott County that word cuts the other way too. I liked that the title does some of the historical educating on its own, before a player has even opened the box.
Grant: Why was this a subject you wanted to focus on?
David: It’s a story that doesn’t get told nearly enough. We hear a lot about the big battles and the big generals, but the internal fractures within the South (communities that stayed loyal to the Union under occupation, that organized home guards, that got raided by their own state’s army) that’s a different and much more personal kind of Civil War story. I’ve made a habit of chasing these under-told corners of history rather than the well-trodden ones, and Scott County is about as under-told as it gets. Once you learn about Julia Marcum defending her father’s house with an axe, or the Home Guard’s oath at the Huntsville courthouse, it’s hard not to want to build a game around it.
Grant: What are the unique features with the system used for the game?
David: The core of it is a deck that represents both your units and your locations. Playing a card from your hand isn’t just “move a piece,” it’s your people and your settlements acting together. Every location you control is physically a card sitting in your deck, hand, or discard pile, so controlling territory and building your deck are the same action. You don’t have a separate “buy phase” and “map phase.” When you improve control of a location or bolster in a new unit, you’re deck-building in exactly the same motion as you’re expanding on the board. I think that tight coupling between deckbuilding and area control is the thing that sets Rebels Against Rebellion apart.
Grant: What did you need to model regarding the American Civil War and the situation in Scott County, Tennessee?
David: Quite a lot, honestly. We needed the asymmetry between the two sides to feel true to what actually happened. The Loyalists start the game already holding six locations and 11 points, reflecting how entrenched they already were in the county by the time real fighting started, while the Confederates start with nothing on the board and have to earn their presence. We needed the food economy to reflect how much this was a war of resources and raiding: burned farms, stolen livestock, the constant question of how you feed yourself when supply lines are contested. We needed supply lines themselves to matter for Confederate regulars in a way they didn’t for local guerrillas, since regular units like the 43rd Alabama or Morgan’s Raiders came in from outside the county and depended on a route back to it, while home-grown units like the Home Guard didn’t need that at all. And we needed the map’s road, water, and path connections to reflect the real terrain. Scott County’s isolation and rugged geography is a huge part of why guerrilla warfare took hold there in the first place.
Grant: What is your design goal with the game?
David: We wanted a game that plays cleanly as a tight, two-player card-driven war game, and we wanted a player who knows absolutely nothing about Scott County going in to come away from a session with real curiosity about what actually happened there. Every named card, every location, every unit in the game is drawn from the historical record. If the mechanics are doing their job, “Capt. William Robbins” isn’t just a card with shield and gun icons on it. It’s a doorway into a real person’s story.
Grant: What other games did you use as inspiration?
David: The DNA is definitely there from our work on Undaunted, that idea of your deck representing your force on the board rather than being an abstract resource. But Rebels Against Rebellion pushes further into area control than Undaunted ever did, so we were also looking hard at how area-control and card-driven wargames handle territory scarcity and endgame tension. The most obvious influence comes from Martin Wallace’s A Few Acres of Snow, which serves as a the origin for the core concept of playing a location card as the source of movement. A lot of our actual influences, though, came out of the playtesting process itself.
Grant: What sources did you consult about the history?
David: We leaned heavily on the Scott County Historical Society throughout, especially David Jeffers, Alan Keeton, and James Cecil, who were enormously generous with their research and their archives. On the written side, Paul Roy’s Scott County in the Civil War was probably our single most important source. His overview chapter and his 148-page account of individual Scott County soldiers did a lot of heavy lifting for us. We also relied on Esther Sharp Sanderson’s County Scott and Its Mountain Folk and Scott County Gem of the Cumberlands, H. Clay Smith’s Dusty Bits of the Forgotten Past, Noel C. Fisher’s War at Every Door for the statistical picture of East Tennessee loyalism, Ben Garrett’s Enclave, decades of back issues of the Scott County Chronicle and the First National Bank Chronicle, and the Official Records of the Union and Confederate Armies for the military correspondence. Dr. Stuart Ellis-Gorman did our proofing and copyediting to help make sure we got the details right.
Grant: What did you learn from your trip to this area as part of your research?
David: Back in the fall of 2025 I went to Scott County to meet with folks from the Historical Society and access primary sources that were otherwise unavailable. This trip was absolutely critical to the design process. The men I met at the Historical Society had deep knowledge on the subject, so I conducted interviews with them. They also provided me some of the primary sources I had read about, but could not access without their help (mostly in the form of photocopied versions of printed documents from local authors). My trip to Scott County also gave me the opportunity to visit the area and experience the topography for myself.
Grant: What are the differences between the playable factions of the Confederates and the rebels?
David: Thematically, the Loyalists are defenders who start the game already dug in. They begin with six locations and a head start on the scoreboard, and their whole arc is about holding what’s theirs and expanding cautiously outward. The Confederates start with nothing on the board and have to fight for every location, but they’ve got the raw power to do it: bigger regular units, the ability to bring in outside firepower, provided they can maintain a supply line back to where those units are actually based.
Grant: How did you differentiate them in their mechanics?
David: A few ways. The Loyalists have much more extensive access to the Improve Control action, which allows them to place a second control marker into a location for an additional victory point and card benefit, while a couple of key Loyalist locations, Brimstone and Trammell’s, double as both a location and a unit card depending how you want to play them that turn. The Confederates, on the other hand, get access to harder-hitting regular army units, but those units can carry a supply line requirement, so playing them isn’t as simple as just having them in hand. You need an unbroken road connection back to their origin. It creates a real asymmetry: the Loyalists play a tighter, more efficient game, while the Confederates have more raw strength but have to work to unlock it.
Grant: How does the game use cards?
David: Cards do double duty as your units and your locations, and every card you play resolves a specific action before it goes to your discard pile. Food is the one shared resource, but everything else, from combat strength to your area-control footprint, lives directly on the cards moving through your deck.
Grant: Can you show us a few examples and explain their use?
David: Sure, take the Home Guard. It’s a Loyalist unit card linked to Huntsville, and if you upgrade it, you get an improved version with better combat value. Or take Chitwood’s, a basic location card: play it for its Take Food action to add to your supply, or play it to Move into an adjacent location, which is how you expand your territory or launch an attack. And then there’s Brimstone, which starts as a plain location card but can be improved into Capt. William Robbins. At that point it’s simultaneously the location and a combat unit, with its own attack value and shield icons, giving you flexibility about how you use it depending on what your turn needs.
Grant: How do the cards upgrade or power up?
David: There are two upgrade paths. Improve Control takes a basic location card, has you pay food, and swaps it for its improved version, which usually comes with better attributes and, for a couple of key locations, unlocks a linked unit. Improve Unit works the same way for unit cards directly. You pay the listed food cost, and the improved version replaces the original in your discard pile while the old card goes out of the game for good. Either way, you’re not adding new cards on top of old ones. You’re replacing weaker cards with stronger ones, so your deck gets more powerful without getting bigger and bloated.
Grant: How important is this to the design?
David: It’s central. Deck quality, not just deck size, is what wins you the game, and the choice of when to spend food on upgrading versus expanding onto the board versus bolstering in new units is the core tension every turn.
Grant: What is the layout of the board?
David: The board depicts Scott County and its surrounding area, with locations connected by roads, water, and paths. Each connection type governs how many cards you can commit to an attack moving along it, from one card on a path up to three on a road. Locations within Scott County proper are marked in brown; locations outside the county, like Somerset, Jacksborough or Jamestown, are marked in grey and generally serve as Confederate staging points and supply origins. Each location shows its star value, which doubles as its point value and its food cost to take control, along with any food production and, for locations that can be improved, their upgraded attributes.
Grant: What is the anatomy of the counters?
David: We use control markers rather than traditional counters. One per location per player, showing who currently holds it, with some locations (mostly limited to the Loyalists) able to carry a second marker once improved. The real “unit anatomy” lives on the cards themselves: name, faction affiliation, attack and defense attributes, a linked location, an improvement cost, and icons indicating whether the unit returns to its supply or is removed from the game entirely after a successful attack.
Grant: How are units activated?
David: You activate units by playing their card from your hand as part of a Move action or in response to an attack. There’s no separate “activation phase.” A unit card played in combat commits its attack or defense value to that fight; the same card, played on its own, might instead trigger a Bolster or Improve Unit action. Context and the icon panel on the card tell you what’s legal in the moment.
Grant: What is the general Sequence of Play?
David: Turns alternate, Confederates first. On your turn you play cards from your hand one at a time to take actions, resolving each fully, including paying food and playing any additional required cards, before moving to the next, and you can stop whenever you like. Once you’re done taking actions, you discard down as much as you want from what’s left in hand, then draw back up to a five-card hand, reshuffling your discard pile into a new deck if you run out.
Grant: What actions are available to players?
David: Take Food, Improve Control, Bolster, Improve Unit, and Move, which is also the action that triggers combat if you’re moving into a location your opponent controls.
Grant: How does combat work?
David: Once you move into a contested location, the attacker plays one required combat-eligible card face down, and the defender either matches with a card of their own (up to a maximum of two, since they can also commit the target location’s own card) or passes. This goes back and forth, both sides adding cards until they hit their limits or choose to stop, with the attacker’s ceiling set by the connection type they’re attacking along. Everyone reveals at once: the attacker totals their attack icons, the defender totals their defense (and any dual-purpose attack icons used defensively), and the defender wins all ties. Win as the attacker, and you strip your opponent’s control marker, shift points in your favor, and get the option to immediately take control as a follow-up action.
Grant: How is victory achieved?
David: You’re racing toward one of a few thresholds: reach 20 points while your opponent sits at 10 or fewer, or simply hold more points than your opponent once the game’s light-colored food tokens run dry and it tips into sudden death. The Confederates have a separate, blunter win condition too: if the Loyalists ever lose every control marker on the board, the Confederates win outright. And if the very last food token, one of the ten darker ones, gets taken, the game ends in a draw, so there’s a real, ticking clock underneath everything you do.
Grant: Who is the artist and how does their style assists in thematic immersion?
David: Kwanchai Moriya handled illustration and Jina Rueter handled graphic design, and I couldn’t be happier with how it came together. Kwanchai has this warm, painterly quality that makes Scott County’s mountains and creeks feel lived-in rather than just decorative. It goes a long way toward making cards like Capt. William Robbins or Julia Marcum feel like real people from a real place rather than generic Civil War stand-ins. Jina’s layout work keeps the cards (action icons, attributes, linked locations, improvement costs) legible at a glance, which matters enormously in a system where you’re constantly reading your hand.
Grant: What type of experience does the game create?
David: Tense and personal. Because the map is so tightly connected, and because food is always ticking down toward sudden death, every attack matters and every food token spent is a decision you feel. It plays fast for a war game, but it doesn’t feel light. The historical grounding and the asymmetry between a scrappy, entrenched Loyalist defense and a Confederate side that has to earn its foothold give it real dramatic shape.
Grant; What are you most pleased about with the design?
David: I’m just happy that we had such an amazing team come together to work on this game. Trevor and me from a design perspective, Kwanchai and Jina bringing the game together through their illustration and graphic design, with Denver at Flying Pig Games leading the way. It was a dream team for this project that I am so passionate about. Of all the games I’ve worked on recently, this is the game closest to my heart. I just want to spread the word about these amazing people who fought for what they believed in.
Grant: What other games are you currently working on?
David: It’s a busy stretch. Alongside Rebels Against Rebellion, I’ve got Night Witches coming, co-designed with Liz Davidson (Fort Circle Games); two expansions for Sniper Elite with Roger Tankersley (Rebellion Unplugged); Flintlock!, a Seven Years’ War and French & Indian War game built on Paolo Mori’s Blitzkrieg! System, also with Roger (Floodgate Games); For the Gods!, co-designed with Trevor and Brett J. Gilbert (Mighty Boards); Zheng He, co-designed with Geoff Engelstein (GMT); and Undaunted 2200: Revolution, co-designed with Trevor (Osprey Games). There are some others on the way, but those are further off…
Thanks as always for having me!
As always, thank you so much David for your time in answering our questions and for showing me the game about a year and a half ago. I very much look forward to playing the final product and wish you well with the Kickstarter campaign.
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:
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 was supposed to wake up at 6:50am this morning but due to the fact that I was so excited to get going I actually woke up at 5:15 and was unable to get back to sleep. So I just got up and got ready early and was able to leave my house at 7:15, which was about 45 minutes earlier than I expected. Ultimately this was a good thing as it allowed me to drive a bit more leisurely and stop to go to the restroom and get more soda to keep me going. I drove 5 1/2 hours to the Pittsburgh Airport to pick up my friend Mike Heckman who had flown in from St. Louis. His flight left about 20 minutes later than scheduled but they must have made up some time as they arrived only 10 minutes past his scheduled arrival time.
I’m ready to get going.
It’s a bit lonely driving by myself but I had some good tunes and the time went quickly. It was nice though to have Mike in the car to chat and that made the final 90 miles to Seven Springs fly by. We arrived at the resort at around 3:30 and got checked in and unloaded the car and were in the room getting organized pretty quickly. We then tried to decide what game to start the convention with and I had brought For the People from GMT Games so we made our choice and headed down to the main gaming area.
It took us about 30 minutes to setup and get the rules overview done and we jumped right into it with the campaign game.
I own the 25th Anniversary Edition which is absolutely gorgeous with beautiful cover art done by Donal Hagerty and a double sided mounted map board with the original on one side and a redesigned map by Terry Leeds on the other.
If you don’t know, For the People is a Strategic level Card-Driven board-wargame covering the whole 4+ years of the American Civil War. We played 5 full turns in about 4 hours which included dinner, talking with several people and chatting about our experience with the game.
My initial opinion is that there is a lot to like here but the game is fairly rules-heavy and complex. I didn’t find the players aid all that helpful and we just seemed to bounce off of the rules. I also found that the strategy is very challenging, as would be expected with my first play of the game, and I had a great deal of trouble getting the required 3 Ops cards to activate my generals. In fact, in 5 turns I was only able to activate about 5 times. I just kept drawing a lot of 1 and 2 Ops cards.
This truly felt like the Union generals, especially McClellan, were afraid to be aggressive and this element is demonstrated by this friction and lack of lower activation Generals. Burnsides and Pope were my only early Generals with a 2 and they were able to do a bit more until Pope was killed in battle (of course). Through the game and its mechanics, I can see why Lincoln would get frustrated with their lack of aggression and ultimately would make leadership changes. Is this a prime example of design for effect? I think it actually felt historically well done but from a playability perspective makes it tough. Would reserve points be a good addition to this like in games such as Labyrinth where you can play a 1 Ops card to then later add to a 2 Ops card to get to 3? Just a thought I had that kept rolling through my head. I liked what I was doing but I didn’t like it while I was doing it. Does that make sense?
I will also say that the CSA generals are comparably much, much better and typically activate on 2’s which makes it much easier to do anything with them. I think that I just had bad luck but once the CSA got Lee and the Army of Northern Virginia was created he was literally a demolition crew annihilating my Union armies. In fact outside of 3 victorious battles, I lost about 7-8 times and was really getting rocked. The only real saving grace for me was that I drew the Frederick Douglas card in my first hand that gave me 5 Strength points of troops to place out to protect Washington from attacks. Had that card not been drawn I think that Washington might have fallen.
I very much enjoy the political control markers and the initial battle for control of the Border States of Kentucky, West Virginia and Missouri. This was a nice part of the game and I can see the connection between other games from Mark Herman such as Washington’s War.
Overall I want to explore the game more. I have some issues but I think that a few more plays will change my opinion as I learn the strategy. Overall a good intro to the game and I am intrigued.
With this My Favorite Wargame Cards Series, I hope to take a look at a specific card from the various wargames that I have played and share how it is used in the game. I am not a strategist and frankly I am not that good at games but I do understand how things should work and be used in games. With that being said, here is the next entry in this series.
#87: Proletarian Revolution from The Republic’s Struggle: Battle for the Republic, Spain 1931-1939 from NAC Wargames
The Republic’s Struggle is a thematic Card Driven Game that tells the story of the historical events that took place in Spain after the resignation to the throne of King Alfonso XIII, and the proclamation of the II Spanish Republic in 1931. With the creation of the new regime, the struggle for power between the different social, political and ideological sectors increased, which gave rise to continuous changes of political power, alterations of public order, armed uprisings and violent acts, carried out by the numerous ideological factions of the moment; which culminated in 1936, in a failed military uprising. The failure of this coup d’état was the origin for the Spanish Civil War.
The Republic’s Struggle is based on Twilight Struggle from GMT Games and uses the same concepts of area control while adding in some actual combat with units represented on the board. During the game, the Republican player and the National player, will be able to recreate events of the period to increase their popularity in the localities by carrying out political propaganda, recruiting troops or militias, generating revolts or assaults, establishing diplomatic relations or carrying out bombardments. All this will be done by playing their hand of cards in an alternative way, either by using the events or by playing the action points or icons to perform any of the other actions available to the players.
One of the interesting parts of the design is that each player has what is referred to as a Special Card that is included in their hand from the start of the game and can be played during their turn. These cards don’t count towards the maximum number of cards that each player can have in their hand at the beginning of each turn. The 2 cards are Military Uprising, which is given to the Nationalist player and Proletarian Revolution, which is given to the Republican player. These cards are single-use event cards and can only be used during the first 4 turns of the game, or in other words during the period referred to as Phase 1 – The Republic. If, after this phase, these cards have not been played, they must be discarded and removed from the game. Both players can choose to use their Special Card in an Action round, instead of using one of the cards from their hand. These cards are played like the rest of the Operation Cards either using their Operations Value or applying the effects of the printed Event. Once played, the card will be removed from the game so it is use it or lose it.
Both cards are very powerful but have some fairly difficult criteria that must be met to fully realize the value of the printed Event. In the case of our featured card Proletarian Revolution, the top part of the card first gives the player the chance to downgrade the European Status Quo Track by 2 levels. The European Status Quo Track allows players to appeal to and in some ways manipulate the stance of the other European Nations regarding their view on the Spanish Civil War. It also is the determining factor in how Victory Points are awarded for the crucial Armed Actions aspect of the game. At the end of each turn, if the number of Armed Actions carried out by a player equals or exceeds the current level of the European Status Quo, that player will score 3 Victory Points. Also, as long as the European Status Quo Track is set on level 2, players cannot carryout any action using the Operations Points of cards played to advance in the Diplomatic Relations Track. So this is another tied result to the card as if the level is 1, no cards can be played to advance the Diplomatic Relations Track.
But, remember I said that to fully realize the effects of the card, the Republican player would need to control Barcelona, Madrid, Valencia and every Naval Base Location or every Air Base Location. If this is the case when the card is played, then the Republican player will earn an automatic victory. Frankly, this is next to impossible, but has a sliver of possibility depending on how diligent and attentive the Nationalist player is as well as the hand of cards that are drawn by the Republican player. If they draw certain other events, as well as have a hand full of higher Operations Point value cards, they can make a run at this but it is not necessarily recommended. The card also has a very useful secondary use as if the condition isn’t met, they will get to place out on the board 1 combatant cube, representing one of their combat units, and also remove all of the influence of the Nationalist player in the Catalonia and Valencia Regions. This literally means all of the Nationalist influence in these regions which each has several locations. In order for the card to be used in this manner though the Republican player will have had to previously play the Defense Committees card.
The proletarian revolution in the Spanish Civil War refers to the widespread social revolution that erupted in the summer of 1936. Triggered by the failed military coup of July 17, workers spontaneously armed themselves, taking control of factories, collectivizing agriculture, and establishing anti-fascist militias primarily in Catalonia, Aragon, and Andalusia. When General Francisco Franco and conservative military officers attempted to overthrow the democratically elected Second Spanish Republic, the working class retaliated by launching a massive wave of grassroots social reorganization. This proletarian movement aimed to permanently dismantle capitalist structures and the influence of the conservative elite and the Catholic Church.
In major industrial hubs like Barcelona, workers’ committees seized factories, transport networks, and public utilities, shifting control directly to the trade unions. In the countryside, particularly in the region of Aragon, peasants seized large agricultural estates. They abolished private property and reorganized land into self-sustaining collectives operating under libertarian socialist or communist principles. Instead of relying on a traditional military hierarchy, fighting forces were formed as democratic workers’ militias led by trade unions and political parties like the CNT (anarcho-syndicalist) and the POUM (Marxist).
The suppression of the revolutionary movement divided the Republican forces. Deprived of its radical grassroots momentum and lacking support from Western democracies, the Republican cause lost ground to Franco’s well-equipped Nationalist army (which was heavily backed by Nazi Germany and Fascist Italy). The Spanish Revolution was ultimately defeated in 1939, leading to the collapse of the Second Republic and the beginning of Franco’s 36-year dictatorship.
Here is a link to our full video review of the game:
In the next entry in this series, we will take a look at National American Woman Suffrage Association from Votes for Women from Fort Circle Games.
Recently, I saw a post on X from one of my favorite designers Mark Herman. If you have to ask who then maybe this post is not for you. But he is one of the best and most prolific designers out there with nearly 100 designs to his credit. Hands down one of the best…and an amazing guy too. In fact, some of his designs are among my favorite wargames including titles like Empire of the Sun, Churchill, Pericles, Fire in the Lake, Washington’s War, Fort Sumter, Rebel Fury and more. Mark knows wargames and he knows how to tell the story of the historical event. Just a master really. The post was Mark highlighting a written review found on Board Game Geek about his newest game in the Civil War Heritage Series called Volume II Army of the Potomac: Campaigns of 1862 & 1864.
I read the review he mentioned and it is very comprehensive and well done. But this post somewhat triggered me. Why I am not sure but it did. I am not mad about it. Not hurt. Not overly concerned. And when I say triggered a more appropriate word would be caused my thinking juices to be stirred up. But I wanted to share my thoughts and opinion on what a wargame review is but also what it is not because I believe that a lot of gamers have a very different opinion about these things than I do.
When Alexander and I get together to play a game with the intent of doing some sort of review and sharing our thoughts on the design it does take a bit of preparation and time. We have to read the rules, and believe me, this can take hours, to truly get a feel for the game, its processes and the flow. But also to get an understanding of what the designers thesis is about the conflict modeled. I think that designers create games that they agree with and believe in. Not necessarily that are 100% a true modeling of the event. Their bias is inserted into the design and there really is no way around that. And I am fine with it because I know that each story of history has 2 (or more) viewpoints and perspectives. We also have to prepare the counters, which includes clipping them, sorting them and then storing them in counter trays or baggies. We then have to set up the game, and with wargames, this can take an hour or more to make sure you have the correct units, place them in the proper hexes and then check to see if there are any errata with the setup that we will need to change. Sometimes setting up the game wears me out…but then we have to give it a play.
Also keep in mind that the majority of games that we play are big wargames. These games have multiple maps, hundreds if not thousands of counters and a ton of different scenario options to choose from. Typically, a campaign game might take dozens of hours with shorter scenarios taking 6-10 hours. These are not light games that can be played in 45-60 minutes. And because of that, the reality of playing a game multiple times just isn’t feasible. We have never posited ourselves as full and thorough multiple playthrough guys. We just don’t have the time to sink that much time and effort into 1 game. Keep in mind that we only get to play 30-40 new wargames annually, which is a lot but not necessarily a lot for someone that attempts to give a good review of a game. But we always play a game until we are comfortable with the rules, understand the flow and get into a majority of the aspects of the game so we can confidently and accurately discuss them.
So, first let’s take a look at what I think that a review is not necessarily.
What They Are Not!…
Full Exploration
First off, I don’t see a review, or at least our brand of reviews, as a total and full exploration of a game or the system. As I stated above, we play a game until we are comfortable with the rules, the mechanics, the thesis of the game and the general flow. This can mean that we play through an entire scenario or even sometimes the campaign but that is not necessarily the case. In fact, more often than not, that isn’t the case. We also play these wargames to see if we like the system. Liking the system is a very different thing from totally dissecting and examining the system for its flaws, strengths and proving or challenging its thesis. Our focus in reviews is generally pretty simple…sharing the feeling of the game, its accessibility, meaning the clarity of the rules, and then a focus on how the game plays. We don’t always cover every aspect or mechanic but try to give an overall feel for what the game is. This approach stems from our stated goal with the blog and YouTube Channel, which is to give an overall impression of the game and create an environment that makes the viewer or reader feel that they are at the table with us just discussing the game after playing.
This is a big one that we are asked about a ton with our reviews. Is the game balanced? Does each side have a real chance of winning the game? And other similar questions. The answer to this is that these games, referring to wargames, are generally a look at the history and how it played out. This means that if one side had more and better troops, they are generally going to win the game as they did historically. But a good and skilled designer, will look beyond the numbers and attempt to create some realistic and achievable victory conditions for both sides. Something that if happens, could change the course of future battles and the overall outcome of the war. There is nothing more that I dislike as much as sitting for 4 hours and getting my teeth knocked in because I really have no chance at meeting some objective to say that I won a game.
Skilled designers will attempt to create balanced wargame victory conditions by avoiding certain things, such as simple point-based kill mechanics or even reaching a particular geographically significant spot on a board. Instead, they use scenario-specific objectives and asymmetric victory conditions to ensure that each side has its own unique path to success. These rules force players to focus on historical strategy rather than just duking it out and seeing who can kill more units. But, when we play these wargames, we generally are not necessarily able to devote the time to gain a true understanding of and to uncover whether the victory conditions are balanced. We typically go off a gut feeling and observation of time and distance covered in a historical push to see if the game is reasonable to win by either side. I love Holland ’44 from GMT Games. It is one of my favorite wargames of all time and is a titanic struggle between the Allies trying to run up Hell’s Highway to reach and capture 3 bridges along the way and the German defenders who are trying to do just enough to stop their advance and hold at least 1 of the 3 bridges. I have played this game a few times and found that I have a real tough time as the Allies making the appropriate level of progress over historical results to even get to the final bridge located at Arnhem. But that doesn’t mean that the game is broken or that it is imbalanced, it means that the history is well represented here as historically the Allies failed to reach the “Bridge too Far” and had to turn back.
Expositions on Historicity
Finally, I don’t feel that reviews are about expositions of historicity. I am not a true historian. I know enough to understand the basic events of major wars such as World War I, World War II, etc. but not necessarily the full details of the battles, the maneuvers used and the outcomes. One thing that I know we are asked a lot is about the Orders of Battle (OOB’s) for these wargames. An OOB is simply the makeup of each sides troops, including their historical units, numbers of troops, type of troops and their quality generally represented with movement values, combat factors and defense factors as well as morale values. And my answer typically is that I don’t know. I ask these designers these type of questions in our Designer Interview Series but am not able to verify or check their math because I don’t have the experience or knowledge to do so. And with just a single play will be unable to comment on this aspect of the design. Remember, that wargames somewhat function as interactive experiments intended to bring history to life for key battles. History is interpretive and sometimes facts about the makeup of troops, the terrain involved or even the weather at the time of the battle is sketchy and tough to piece together. But most of these games are attempts at telling the story as accurately as possible. But, keep in mind, that a good historical simulation wargame, will attempt to challenge players with the real limits, rules, and stresses that those commanders faced. Wargames test historical ideas by turning narratives into active problems and allowing users to explore “what if” scenarios. But I cannot necessarily always comment on the plausibility of a design because I usually lack the expertise or intimate knowledge to do so.
Sometimes I know that ours will be the only review on a game. And that worries me.
I do not think that reviews are what other people believe they are. I see them as insight into a game and how it plays, what can be expected and how it feels to experience the game. Not a full and insight filled thesis paper on the historical plausibility and outcome. But I do believe that our brand of reviews is useful…at least in my humble opinion. But it sometimes does worry me that our review may be the only content out there on a particular game and I have a real fear of misrepresenting something and causing others to turn away from that game. That definitely worries me and I do make sure that I understand what it is that I am going to say about a game before I say it. But keep in mind that our reviews are our opinions and you may have a totally different take on the game. And that is fine as well because in the end your opinion is the one that matters and that will be used to make a purchase decision. Your wallet is yours to protect and I respect that.
What They Are!…
Sharings on Perspective
In the end, any review is an opinion and is something that the creator has taken the time to write down (or video) to share with others. It is about attempting to describe the experience of the game and how it plays. This does mean that each reviewer may see things differently. May focus on different aspects that spoke to them. May decide not to share each and every aspect of the game. But will focus on the experience! And then share that with us. I for one love that there are people out there that are willing and able to do these reviews. It is work and takes time. But in the end, the real treat for us as consumers of these reviews is that we get a bit of insight into the game and an understanding of what it is. This perspective is the most valuable element of a review and is worth its weight in gold. A lot of times, people consume reviews because they have already played a game, made their mind up about that game and what it is and are simply looking for someone to corroborate their feeling. They don’t really care what the person has to think and whether their stance is well reasoned and supported by evidence form the game itself. They are simply reading or watching to validate their own opinion. They want to hear their thoughts come out of someone else’s mouth.
Recently, during one of our Monthly Debrief videos, we discussed games that we disagree on. There are not many games that Alexander and I disagree on…but there are some. As a part of that discussion, we dove into our conflicting thoughts about the venerable tactical level wargame series Advanced Squad Leader. We disagree on this game. I like parts of it, and the overall experience, but Alexander does not. And that is fine. But one of our viewers told us to “put the game back on the shelf” and that listening to us was “cringe”. Well, I do agree that we are cringe but this comment proves my point. We didn’t agree with him and so we are not correct. And that is fine.
Windows into Mechanics
I think that one of the most important parts of any review though is a window into the mechanics. Does this mean a full and detailed description of each and every mechanic, how they work, why they were chosen by the designer and how they reflect history? No…absolutely not. But understanding the base mechanics of a game is critical to understanding whether the game is for you or not. If you happen to really like block wargames and are watching a review on a block wargame such as An Impossible War from Bellica 3rd Generation you would like to know how the block wargame mechanic works. If you like Chit-Pull Activation and you are consuming a review about a Chit-Pull Activation game such as with Blind Swords: Gettysburg: The First Day from Revolution Games, you want there to be some discussion about how the Chit-Pull works. A review should have at least a mention about the mechanics and what is good about their implementation.
Gauges on Complexity
Wargames are generally complex affairs. They have a lot of rules, exceptions to those rules, rules variants or optional rules and sometimes have ambiguity in their explanation of these rules. This last part is really a problem with a lot of games, wargames and other types, but a designer sometimes gets “nose blind” to their own game and takes into account a lot of assumptions about how their description and instructions for the game will be received. I like to make sure that those consuming our reviews understand how complex or difficult to learn the game rules are. I also like to focus on player aids and how they affect the learning process and play so that those who may purchase the game and attempt to give it a play can get an idea of what their learning commitment will be with the rules. And remember, complexity and rules depth doesn’t equate to a good game. If you ultimately cannot get the game played because of the learning curve or the poorly written rules, then a review will do you no good.
A Look at the Fun Factor
In the end, while I play games for many reasons, I am mainly playing a game because I want to enjoy myself. I want to have a good time with the game and its efforts to tell the story of the event and enjoy my time with my opponent. I want to be able to focus on the game and get into the strategy and not have to worry about the rules, the mechanics or the production. And a good review will provide an insight into this aspect of the game. It doesn’t take multiple plays to understand whether a game is right for you or whether it matches your tastes. You can typically see that in just a single play and that is the way we approach things. We have played a lot of games and know when a game is not for us. But, that is not always the case for others and their experience with wargames. And that is fine. But that is a key part of what a review should be.
There you have it…my thought’s on what a review is and what it is not. I know that many will not agree with these points and that is fine. These are my opinions and I have developed them over the past 40+ years of playing games and 10+ years of covering games as The Players’ Aid. What are your thoughts on what a review is? How do you think they best serve the wargaming community? What would you change about our reviews? I look forward to hearing your thoughts and opinions on this matter. Thank you.
A few years ago, while attending WBC, I had the chance to meet Wes Crawford who was demoing one of his new games called Engine Thieves: The Andrews Railroad Raid of 1862 from Compass Games. Wes is a great guy and this game is focused on a rarely, if ever, gamed historical subject in the 1862 Andrews Railroad Raid during the American Civil War. On April 12, 1862, the charismatic Union agent James Andrews and his band of raiders stole the train powered by the locomotive, “The General,” from under the noses of about 3,000 Confederate troops training at Big Shanty (Kennesaw), Georgia. Their risky mission was to cut telegraph wires, burn railroad bridges, and damage track between Atlanta and Chattanooga, thus severing communications, reinforcements, and supplies between the two cities. This was as Union General Mitchel advanced his forces upon Chattanooga with the aim of capturing it and splitting the Confederacy in two. The raiders needed to bluff their way through the Confederate railroad stations and even pass through Chattanooga to meet the advancing Union force in Bridgeport!
Engine Thieves covers this courageous Civil War raid. Play as the Union raiders in a solo game as you race against time, and the Confederate soldiers on your tail, to get to Bridgeport. With 2 players, one of you will play as the Confederates and try to stop your opponent from reaching Bridgeport or at least minimize their destructive sabotage. Follow the adventure and real path these raiders took on their daring ride north!
As the solo player in charge of Andrews and the Union raiders, you must accumulate at least 25 Victory Points by some combination of burning bridges, cutting telegraph wires, damaging track, bringing the stolen train to Bridgeport, and defeating Confederate units that get in your way, all while minimizing raider casualties. Reaching Bridgeport is a high priority since without that accomplishment, General Mitchel would likely call off his attack on Chattanooga. Mitchel might be otherwise unaware of the Raiders’ successes!
Back to the history and board games of New York City! Last time, we’ve looked at the city’s humble beginnings all the way to the destruction wrought on the city by the Revolutionary War. Today, we’ll cover the first century of New York City as a city in the United States – how it established its primacy in the country, how it was at the same time very attractive and a horrible place to live in, and how it took shape as a modern metropolis. As always, board games will guide us.
American Capital
When Britain had recognized American independence in 1783, the young country gave itself a constitution – the Articles of Confederation. The United States were organized on strictly confederative principles. New York City became the capital. The advocates of broad independence for the states and minimal federal government, however, lost ground over the next few years as the United States struggled to deal with the post-war challenges, chiefly the states’ tremendous debt. Thus, over ferocious public debate, a new constitution was adopted in 1787, and according to it, a strong chief magistrate elected – George Washington, the first president, who was inaugurated in 1789 at City Hall, New York.
One of the fiercest proponents of a strong federal government was New Yorker Alexander Hamilton who became the nation’s first secretary of the treasury. In this role, Hamilton advocated for further government centralization, especially in regards to financial and economic affairs, based on his experience in the commercial hub New York. Hamilton succeeded in having the federal government take over the remaining states’ debts, but his opponents – chiefly rural southerners – demanded a price: The federal capital would move away from New York. Philadelphia would fill the role temporarily, before a new capital to be constructed in a southern swamp would be ready – the future Washington, D.C.
Even though New York City ceased to be America’s capital, it was still the prime center of American capital. In 1792, the New York Stock Exchange was founded. Its location – Wall Street – is synonymous with finance until today. The city’s booming harbor also attracted more and more commerce. By 1804, New York City had overtaken Philadelphia as the largest city in the United States at around 70,000 inhabitants. As growth did not slow down, the city’s leadership embarked on a scheme which must have seemed megalomaniac at the time: In 1811, they adopted a development plan which laid a regular grid of avenues and perpendicular streets over Manhattan Island, encompassing areas large enough to house a million people at the contemporary population density. That was the blueprint for modern New York City.
New York’s growth, however, was not pre-ordained. It relied chiefly on the city’s status the nation’s premier port. Yet as the United States grew westward, New York lay farther and farther away from many of the new towns and states. Goods could only flow to or from the Great Lakes or the Great Plains by arduous land journeys – or down the Mississippi. New Orleans, located at the mouth of the great stream, seemed poised to take over New York’s role as America’s port. That’s when the governor of New York state, DeWitt Clinton, proposed an ambitious engineering scheme: Nature might not have connected New York City with the great inland waterways of America. But men could. The 350-mile Erie Canal, completed in 1825, connected the Hudson River with Lake Erie and thus allowed uninterrupted ship transport from New York all the way to the western frontier states.
Packet Row (Åse Berg/Henrik Berg, White Goblin Games) is set in the bustling port of New York in the 1840s. Players need to find the right combination of trade goods (so, supply), contracts (demand), and ships to grow rich as merchants. Money alone will not be enough for victory: The game embodies the ethos of the magnates of the 19th century, which held that wealth came with responsibility for the community. Thus, the money earned in Packet Row needs to be spent on projects which benefit the city (say, the university) for victory points.
When the Erie Canal was completed in 1825, 89% of New Yorkers had been born in the United States. By 1860 that number had fallen to less than half. Let’s take a look at this great social and political transformation.
Immigration, Death, and Politics
New York’s status as America’s port made it incredibly attractive for immigrants: Its booming trade hungered for willing workers, and even if immigrants had different dreams – say, farming on the wide prairie – they would probably arrive by ship in New York. In the mid-19th century, an astounding 70% of all European immigrants to the United States entered the country through New York. The absolute numbers are even more breath-taking: In the decade after the Great Famine, a million Irish alone arrived in New York, along with German, English, and Scottish immigrants.
Despite this massive population influx, New York City had only around 800,000 inhabitants by 1860. That was partly because many immigrants moved on further inland, but also because of the astonishing mortality: For example, during the year 1856, 4% of all adults and 20% of all children in New York City died. The cramped living quarters in which most immigrants found themselves and the inadequate medical infrastructure made New York a fertile breeding ground for all kinds of epidemics, while the high cost of living forced the immigrants into long working hours at often dangerous jobs.
Under these circumstances, it is no surprise that the immigrants turned to anyone who promised them a helping a hand. And as they were so many (and usually gained citizenship after two years of residence), courting them became a viable electoral strategy. Fernando Wood became the first New York mayor whose election had been largely achieved by his success with Irish-American and German-American voters. His recipe for success – mobilizing various immigrant communities – would be copied for decades by his successors in Tammany Hall, the local Democratic Party’s political machine which traded patronage for votes.
Tammany Hall (Doug Eckhart, Pandasaurus) is centered on this political strategy: The basic move which players take is to select one immigrant token (Irish, German, English, or – inspired by the later 19th century – Italian) and place it in one of the wards of New York. That gives the player both some influence with the respective immigrant community and some potential strength on the ground in that ward, come the next election. Whichever player wins most wards in an election round becomes mayor of New York and thus gets to dole out City Hall jobs to their allies.
Tammany’s success in the 1850s was based on organizing various disparate communities. The Civil War brought ruptures to this alliance: Mayor Wood called for New York City to secede from the Union and become a “free city” in order to maintain trade relations with the treasonous southern states. The majority of Tammany Democrats, however, were staunchly in favor of the Union, but less enthusiastic about the cause of abolitionism. Thus, many of the German immigrants (often veterans of the 1848/49 revolution) abandoned the party in favor of the Republicans, and the German-Irish voting bloc split (although it would remain firmly united in its opposition to the temperance movement).
The split caused a Republican-led fusion ticket to win the mayoral election of 1862. It would be a short break from Tammany rule, as the new mayor faced growing racial tensions: On July 13 1863, protests against the continued draft erupted in violence. For the next three days, a mob (mostly consisting of Irish-Americans from the Lower Manhattan slums) rampaged through the city, targeting Black neighborhoods. The Draft Riots would only be put down once regiments returning from Gettysburg reached the city. Many Black New Yorkers left the city afterward, so that they amounted to barely over one percent of New York City’s population in 1865.
Tammany rule was restored in the 1864 mayoral election… not that it mattered much who exactly the mayor was, as long as he was a loyal follower of the Tammany machine. The unbridled access to power allowed the Tammany leader William “Boss” Tweed to become one of the richest men in New York – and public money also lined the pockets of many public servants and private contractors (especially in the construction business). The most outrageous example of this corruption was the construction of the County Courthouse. Tweed himself bought a quarry to supply the marble for the project at egregious prices, and the subcontractors had a field day, too, billing amounts like $360,000 for one carpenter’s month of labor or $7,500 per individual thermometer. The Courthouse’s final cost ran up to $13 million – almost twice the price of the contemporary Alaska Purchase!
Tweed, however had cranked the levers one too many times. Even New York Democrats (at least those set aside by him) distanced themselves from him. A court found Tweed guilty of embezzlement and sentenced him to a year in prison. He escaped and made his way to Spain, but was discovered and extradited to the United States, where he would die in prison. Tammany would rule New York politics for almost another century due to the machine’s continued ability to organize new immigrants (Italians and Eastern European Jews in the late 19th and early 20th centuries), but the worst excesses of its corruption ended with Boss Tweed. Indeed, for a 20th century New Yorker, it would be almost impossible to imagine how political office could be mostly sought to enrich a few powerful individuals and their willing helpers.
The Dawn of the Modern Age
New York City in the mid-19th century was squalor and corruption, but it was also the place where the innovations of the modern metropolis first took shape. The explosive population growth and the crowded living conditions were countered with a massive park development – Central Park, until today New York’s finest place to breathe fresh air and surround yourself with the peace of grass and trees. Construction lasted from 1857 to 1876.
New technology also sprung from New York – literally and figuratively. When Thomas Edison looked for the first city in which to broadly distribute electricity, New York was the obvious choice. And the transformational impact of the railroad on America would not have been possible without the finance hub New York raising and directing the capital for the investments. So, all of you 18XX gamers, you can thank New York!
Finally, in 1886, New York City received its most iconic landmark: The people of France gifted the United States a large statue, symbolizing liberty, the chief value of the American Revolution. Once the Americans had succeeded at funding the pedestal for the statue – encouraged by campaigns of the New York newspapers – the Statue of Liberty was proudly displayed in New York harbor, welcoming newcomers and promising them a free life. In the words of Emma Lazarus, whose poem adorns the a plaque inside the pedestal of the statue:
Not like the brazen giant of Greek fame,
With conquering limbs astride from land to land;
Here at our sea-washed, sunset gates shall stand
A mighty woman with a torch, whose flame
Is the imprisoned lightning, and her name
Mother of Exiles. From her beacon-hand
Glows world-wide welcome; her mild eyes command
The air-bridged harbor that twin cities frame.
“Keep, ancient lands, your storied pomp!” cries she
In the years after the Statue of Liberty was erected, New York shape-shifted… upwards. The age of the skyscraper began, and nowhere more so than in Manhattan. But that’s a story for next time!
For a concise introduction, especially focused on local politics, see Lankevich, George J.: New York City. A Short History, New York University Press, New York City, NY/London 1998.
If you want a treatment which is both more in-depth and more journalistic (and lavishly illustrated) and don’t mind its history practically ending around 1970, see the book version of the 17-hour PBS documentary from 1999: Burns, Ric/Sanders, James/Ades, Lisa: New York. An Illustrated History, Knopf, New York City, NY 2001.
In Episode 2 der strategischen Stunde unterhalten wir uns über Cruel Necessity. Ein States of Siege Spiel, bei dem wir zwei unterschiedliche Versionen unter die Lupe nehmen.
Nine score and seven weeks ago, I have inaugurated a new irregular series on my blog assessing the merits of UK prime ministers (illustrated through the lens of a single board game each). The rating system seemed robust enough to apply it to other countries/leaders (at least if they are more or less democratic). Thus, we branched out to American presidents, German chancellors, and even a German president. Today’s subject is another US president – Abraham Lincoln, our first rated subject from the 19th century. And which game could be more appropriate for him than the first real political-military game of the American Civil War – For the People (Mark Herman, GMT Games)?
The Rating System
Some caveats ahead: The presidents will be rated by the knowledge of their time. If they or their contemporaries could not have known about the effects of something, I will not use my hindsight to mark it as a mistake of theirs. The assessment is focused on their conduct as president, but includes their life after holding the office (in which they will still be regarded in the public eye as (ex-)presidents).
Now, to the system itself: There are three policy field categories (foreign, domestic, and economic policy) and three more general ones (vision, pragmatism, integrity). A president can earn from one to five stars in each category (for a total sum of up to 30). In detail, the president is assessed as follows:
Foreign policy: Did the president increase US influence in the world and the security of Americans at home? Did the president wield US power responsibly and with positive results for the regions affected (the latter counting for a greater deal in times of US power being great)?
Domestic policy: Did the president increase the liberty of Americans to express themselves and to participate in the political process? Did the president promote domestic security and shape the framework for fair justice dealing with offenses?
Economic policy: Did the president facilitate the prosperity and economic security of Americans (including in the mid- and long-term)? Was the president’s economic policy based on mutual benefit of those involved or did it unduly burden one side?
Vision: Did the president have an idea of what the United States and the world (the latter counting for more in times of US influence being great) should look like beyond the immediate future? Did the president’s policies steer the United States (and, if applicable, the world) in this direction?
Pragmatism: Did the president succeed in seeing his policy through from inception to completion? How well did the president manage the support from Congress, society, the administration, the media (the latter counting for more in more recent years)?
Integrity: Did the president understand the office as a means to benefit himself, special interest groups, the entire country, or another community? Did the president respect the boundaries of the office?
Lincoln’s Life
Beginnings on the Frontier
Abraham Lincoln was born on February 12, 1809, as the son of Kentucky frontier farmers. The family moved around often during his childhood – first to Indiana, then Illinois. Lincoln received little formal education. He worked on his father’s farm and as a hired laborer from his youth on. However, he loved reading and yearned to escape physical labor by self-improvement – thus, he jumped at the chance to work as a store clerk (and later, store owner), postmaster, and, finally, taught himself law from books and passed the bar to practice as a lawyer.
Lincoln ran for the Illinois state legislature in 1832 and was narrowly defeated – as he proudly noted later, it was his only defeat in a popular election. Two years later, he was successful. During his eight years in the state house, Lincoln focused on supporting the infrastructural development of the state – railroads, canals, and the state bank to finance these projects.
The dominance of the Democratic Party in Illinois left little room for Whigs like Lincoln to be elected to national office. Lincoln thus waited until it was his turn in the Whig party candidate rotation to try for the US House of Representatives in 1846. Lincoln went to Washington where he attacked Democratic president James K. Polk’s war against Mexico. The Whig rotation meant that he could not run for re-election. Lincoln resumed his law practice and gloomily assumed his political career was over.
Lincoln vs. the Expansion of Slavery
The Mexican-American War ended in a resounding success for the United States – and in an expansion of slave-holding territory in the south which upended the Missouri Compromise of 1820. Instead of being bottled up in the south, slavery now seemed on the advance. The proponents of the “peculiar institution” saw their chance to export it to the territories, new states, and enforce their customs in the free states of the north as well. The possible expansion of slavery electrified its opponents as well, and the territories in the west – especially Kansas – soon became embroiled in a violent struggle over their status as slave-holding or free.
Lincoln was elected to the Illinois state legislature again in 1854, but declined to take his seat to stand for election to the US Senate (then elected by state legislatures). As he failed to obtain a majority, he struck a pact with anti-slavery Democrat Lyman Trumbull and had him elected on a cross-party coalition of Whigs and Trumbull’s small faction of anti-slavery Democrats. A political re-alignment was near.
When the new Republican Party formed, united in its opposition to slavery, Lincoln abandoned the sinking ship of the Whig Party. He stood again for election to the US Senate in 1858, this time against Democratic heavyweight Stephen A. Douglas who had made his fame as the evangelist of “popular sovereignty” – the position that the federal government should neither allow the expansion of slavery to the new states and territories nor ban it, and instead leave the decision to be decided in local referenda. Lincoln followed the immensely popular Douglas on his campaign trail and got him to stand in a series of debates against Lincoln. While Lincoln lost the Senate election once more, the debates elevated him to national standing as a moderate opponent of slavery with great intellectual and rhetorical capabilities.
Elected by the People
Lincoln’s moderate stance – he opposed the expansion of slavery, but did not call for its abolition in the slave states of the American South – was a liability in the new Republican Party if they just wanted to make a statement for their supporters. Yet when the dominant Democratic Party which had won six of the last eight presidential elections fractured over the question of slavery (Douglas’s platform of Popular Sovereignty gained a majority, but not the required two thirds of the delegates; the southern proponents of federal enforcement of slavery outside of the South bolted from the Democratic convention and nominated John C. Breckinridge as their own candidate), it became an asset – for the Republicans now played for victory. Lincoln was nominated as the Republican candidate, beating the party’s more radical heavyweights such as Governor Salmon P. Chase (Ohio) or Senator William H. Seward (New York). As the pro-slavery field fractured even further (John Bell ran as the candidate as the Constitutional Union Party which had the same views on slavery as the southern Democrats, but opposed their flirt with secession), the Republicans were suddenly the frontrunners. While Lincoln only won 40% of the popular vote in the election of November 6, 1860, he was ahead in all the populous free states of the north which gave him an easy victory in the electoral college (180 of 303 votes). John Bell had carried three states for 39 electoral votes with only 13% of the popular vote; Stephen Douglas only 12 electoral votes even though his 29% of the popular vote placed him second behind Lincoln. Yet he had been crushed in the north by Lincoln, and in the south by John Breckinridge who had only received 18% of the popular vote, but carried eleven slave-holding states in the south for 72 electoral votes.
Lincoln was only a moderate opponent of slavery, but that was still likely to mean that he would end the federal practice to enforce slavery in the new states and territories as well as the free states (as when fugitive slaves were returned from the free states to their erstwhile masters). That thought put southern slaveholders in a frenzy. South Carolina declared its secession from the United States on December 20, 1860. Six other states followed suit in the next weeks. The seven proclaimed a new country, the Confederate States of America, on February 4, 1861 – one month before Lincoln had even taken office.
Any attempts to save the Union before Lincoln’s accession failed. Lincoln himself made a conscious effort not to provoke the southerners, he was also fiercely aware that their position was that of a political minority, having just been soundly defeated by the electorate, and that he could not act “as if I repented for the crime of having been elected, and was anxious to apologize and beg forgiveness.” Constitutional Unionist Senator John C. Crittenden proposed to enshrine slavery in the US constitution to allay the fears of the slavers. These constitutional amendments could not gain a majority in Congress, as the Republicans were unwilling to use their electoral victory to enact their defeated opponent’s platform, and the southern Democrats were bent on secession.
Entering the White House, Lincoln found a mess. His predecessor James Buchanan, a pro-slavery Democrat, had done nothing to prevent secession or reign in the secessionists. Parts of his administration had even helped the secessionists before their terms in office ended. Lincoln himself dared not act to boldly to quash the secession as he (falsely) believed that the majority of southern whites supported the Union and would rise up against the secession. As that did not happen, the only committed Unionists in the South were representatives of federal institutions – most notably, the army. The secessionists seized army installations, where they could, and sieged them, where they couldn’t: The shots fired at Fort Sumter, a fort in the harbor of Charleston (South Carolina) which its commander refused to hand over to the secessionists, marked the beginning of armed insurrection to the United States – the American Civil War. Encouraged by the brazen action further south, four more states (including the all-important Virginia) joined the Confederacy.
Limited War to Save the Union
Lincoln now walked a dangerous tightrope. The secession could only be put down by military force, but he needed to apply it in a way which would not make the Union look the aggressor lest the slave states which were still in the Union (Missouri, Kentucky, and Maryland) seceded as well. Lincoln managed these border states with a deft hand. In Missouri, the local unionists and the US forces overcame the secessionists. Lincoln left Kentucky deliberately alone until a Confederate invasion swayed the state in favor of the Union (and US forces defended it against the Confederacy). Maryland, the most crucial of the three for its position (it provided the only connection of Washington, D.C., to the rest of the Union), was put under tight control by the US military. Lincoln dispensed with the writ of Habeas Corpus to allow for a more effective control of secessionists there.
With the border states secured, the Union needed to put down the Confederacy. That proved to be a daunting task: While the Confederacy was far inferior in terms of manpower and industrial production, it only needed to hold out long enough for the war to become so unpopular in the North that the Union would seek a negotiated end to it. The Union, on the other hand, had to force the Confederacy into surrender by destroying its armies and taking its territory. This asymmetry is reflected in the victory conditions of For the People: The Union player can only win (the campaign game) by dragging Confederate Strategic Will all the way down from 100 to 0. The Confederate player, on the other hand, has other avenues of victory: Having more than twice the Strategic Will of the Union player will do, as will lowering Union Strategic Will under 50 in fall of 1864 – when Lincoln would be up for re-election.
Lincoln was thus on a timer. The Union needed to win decisively, and soon. Yet the first offensive toward the Confederate capital Richmond (Virginia) was repelled. Lincoln consequently approved a massive expansion of the army, the naval blockade of the south, and a multi-pronged approach into the Confederacy (not only in the east, but also through Kentucky and along the Mississippi River) – preparations for a long war.
Lincoln studiously avoided any infractions against slavery in the early phase of the war (and when his generals, such as 1856 Republican presidential candidate John C. Frémont, overstepped their authority in that regard, sacked them). Yet as no southern Unionist movement arose to challenge the Confederacy, Lincoln’s belief in the unionist leanings of the white Southerners dwindled. By 1862, he had grown convinced that the still undecided war had broken out to serve a larger purpose – the end of slavery. Thus, he slowly racked up anti-slavery measures. Slaves taken from Confederate owners were treated as contraband of war, not to be returned. Slavery was abolished in D.C. (with the former slaveowners compensated), and banned in the territories. And by late 1862, Lincoln had changed his views on the relationship between slavery and the Union altogether: He no longer thought that respecting slavery would convince the South to re-join the Union, but that attacking slavery would weaken the Confederacy internally and sap its external sources of support and would thus help to end the war and restore the Union.
Total War: Emancipation and Union
A more sweeping statement on slavery was thus necessary. With one military disappointment after another (excepting Ulysses S. Grant’s victories in the west), it would look like an act of desperation, though. Lincoln needed a success. The marginal Union victory in the battle of Antietam (which repelled a Confederate offensive on Union territory) on September 17, 1862, was as good as it would get – and so Lincoln proclaimed that the insurgent states had until January 1, 1863, to re-join the Union. Otherwise, all slaves living in states in rebellion would be freed. Of course, that had no immediate effects – after all, the thus emancipated slaves were in territories under Confederate control – but it forced the Confederacy to increase the effort to keep their slaves from running, and it effectively precluded the European powers Britain and France (pro-Confederate from the point of view of their economies and power politics, but strictly anti-slavery) to recognize the Confederacy.
The Emancipation Proclamation is a crucial event in For the People as well (which sets the game apart from earlier Civil War games, which focused almost exclusively on the movement of armies and made at best cursory references to slavery). It is one of the very few mandatory events – if the conditions are met (a Union battle victory), it must be played for the event. While it lowers the Strategic Will of the Union (reflecting the unwillingness of many northerners to fight a war for the Black people of the South), it hurts the Confederacy much more – not only in terms of Strategic Will (a further penalty will be applied henceforth every round), but also by removing some military forces (which, presumably, either are kept back to guard plantations, or cannot be supplied anymore as the fleeing slaves shrink the southern economy).
Lincoln was also done with his earlier attempt at limited war in another respect: US forces in the crucial eastern theater had been commanded by General George B. McClellan since July 1861. McClellan had mishandled them at almost every opportunity, and even when he succeeded (such as Antietam), he squandered his advantage by failing to pursue. Even his political value to Lincoln – McClellan was a high-profile Democrat – could not save him now. Lincoln sacked him, continuing his search for a general who would act aggressively, deliver battle to the Confederacy, and victory to the Union – going in succession through Ambrose Burnside, Joe Hooker, and George G. Meade.
Sacking McClellan is something that a Union player at For the People might also want to do – while McClellan’s battle rating of 0-2 (offense/defense) is not too bad, his strategy rating of 3 means his forces can only be moved when spending a powerful 3-value card – bad for any US president who means to go on the offensive! Yet McClellan’s high political value (10) makes it painful for the player to relieve him of his command, as it will incur a steep Strategic Will penalty.
McClellan where loved to be most – in command of the Army of the Potomac, the Union’s main force on the eastern theater.
1863 would mark the turning point of the war. The Confederacy meant to undermine Union morale by another large-scale incursion into Union territory. On July 1, 1863, the Confederate and Union main armies clashed at Gettysburg. After three days of bloody battle, the Confederacy retreated. One day later, Grant took Vicksburg (Mississippi) and thus put the entire Mississippi River under Union control, cutting the Confederacy in half.
Yet the war remained unpopular in the North. Only two weeks after the victories of Gettysburg and Vicksburg, riots against the draft broke out in New York. Lincoln had the draft momentarily suspended and quietly resumed a month later.
With only one more year until the presidential election, time was running out for Lincoln. The Democratic Party of the North, always split between the supporters of the war to re-establish the Union and its opponents, adopted a pro-peace platform… and selected George McClellan, whose incompetence had done so much to prolong the war, as their candidate. Lincoln had no problem securing his nomination (his control of the Republican Party was by now complete) and left it to the convention to select his running mate. They opted for Andrew Johnson, a Democrat who supported the war.
If the Union did not win great victories in 1864, Lincoln’s chances for re-election were slim. Yet there were reasons to be optimistic: Lincoln had placed Grant in command of the eastern theater, whereas Grant’s former subordinate William T. Sherman now headed the forces in Tennessee, ready to invade Georgia. Grant slowly wore down the Confederate forces in Virginia which could not bear the attrition. In the meantime, Sherman had taken Atlanta – a psychologically invaluable success which shifted the electorate’s mood in Lincoln’s favor – and marched on Savannah. Lincoln was re-elected with 55% of the popular vote and 212 of 233 electoral votes.
Now the great tasks of restoring the Union and abolishing slavery had to be brought to conclusion. While Grant and Sherman kept advancing, Lincoln worked to turn emancipation from a wartime measure to a constitutional right: The 13th Amendment would end slavery in the United States. The amendment showed not only Lincoln’s acumen in dealing with Congress, but also how much the country had changed – Lincoln had lost the 1858 Senate election on a much more moderate position than what was now to become part of the US Constitution. In his second inaugural address, Lincoln interpreted the war as a punishment for the nation’s original sin of slavery, but expressed hope for the nation to move forward together.
The Confederacy collapsed under Grant’s and Sherman’s campaigns. Confederate General in Chief of the Armies, Robert E. Lee, surrendered on April 9, 1865, with other commanders following suit. The Reconstruction of the South with the eventual goal of its re-admission to the Union and the integration of the former slaves into American society were now Lincoln’s chief tasks. Yet before he could begin to deal with the requirements of peace, he was murdered by the Confederate sympathizer John Wilkes Booth on April 14, 1865.
The Rating
Foreign policy
Lincoln left foreign policy largely to Secretary of State William H. Seward, yet intervened where necessary (for example, when the seizure of British mail ship Trent which carried Confederate envoys threatened to spark a crisis or even British intervention, Lincoln calmed the storm by releasing the envoys). He successfully forestalled foreign recognitions of the Confederacy (except by fellow slave-state Brazil), let alone military intervention on behalf of the Confederacy.
Lincoln recognized slavery as the chief obstacle to liberty in the United States. First tentatively, then boldly did he abolish the practice, resulting in the freedom of four million people. While he has been attacked for his alleged infractions on individual freedoms (most notably the suspension of Habeas Corpus), Lincoln used these measures in moderation. That Lincoln never even considered postponing the 1864 election (which he full well knew could end both his presidency and his policies) because of the war is the strongest testament to Lincoln’s deep respect for the rule of law.
Lincoln regarded economic policy as the prerogative of Congress and did not interfere with it. His own economic policy was concerned with the organization and financing of the war effort, in which he was largely successful (even though it must be said that the economic basis of the Union was much stronger than that of the Confederacy).
Rating: 4 out of 5.
Vision
Lincoln’s vision of the United States was that of a country which was no longer “a house divided against itself.” While his own preference would have been to contain slavery and let it extinguish by itself in the South, the secession both enabled and required him to take firmer measures. Besides ending slavery, Lincoln laid the foundations during the Civil War for the United States to be a unified country, largely centrally administered, rather than a collection of individual states, and thus prepared the country’s 20th century predominance. Not least of all, Lincoln’s unmatched rhetorical prowess allowed him to interpret political events in memorable language which shapes American thinking until today.
Lincoln was a Washington outsider. Before his presidency, he had only spent two years in federal politics. Still, he quickly developed a productive working relationship with Congress and his cabinet – all the more remarkable as Lincoln’s Secretaries were not selected for their loyalty and subservience, but came from the heavyweights which had competed for the 1860 presidential nomination (including Secretary of the Treasure Chase and Secretary of State Seward). Lincoln’s legacy is remarkable as well: He established the nascent Republican Party as the dominant political force which would win twelve of the next 16 presidential elections.
Lincoln respected the boundaries of his office and did not attempt to extend his influence into areas which were thought to be Congress’s province. The goodwill he extended to people of the most diverse backgrounds and convictions is legendary. Lincoln placed himself at the service of the Union – a nation he came to understand as larger than before, including four million heretofore disenfranchised slaves.
Rating: 5 out of 5.
Overall
Abraham Lincoln faced challenges like no other American president. The secession and Civil War were both a struggle for survival of the United States against those who would not accept the democratic process and a moral crucible which would resolve the awkward question of slavery after 80 years of failed attempts to skirt it. Lincoln met these challenges head on and with resounding success. He jumps to the top of the ranking – and it’s not even close.
How would you rate Lincoln? Let me know in the comments!
Further Reading
For an accessible biography of Lincoln, see Gienapp, William E.: Abraham Lincoln and Civil War America. A Biography, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2002.
For a “biography of the mind” of Lincoln, situating him in the intellectual currents of his time, see Guelzo, Allen C.: Lincoln. A Very Short Introduction, Oxford University Press, Oxford 2009.
For an overview of how Civil War games treat the causes of the war, slavery, and emancipation, see Wallace, Alfred: The War in Cardboard and Ink. Fifty Years of Civil War Board Games, in: Kreiser Jr., Lawrence A./Allred, Randal: The Civil War in Popular Culture. Memory and Meaning, University Press of Kentucky, Lexington, KY 2014, pp. 175—89.
Anmelden
