UNDAUNTED: NORMANDY

from

OSPREY GAMES

This is a review I've been waiting to get to in a rather full schedule for several weeks.  Undaunted: Normandy has hit a perfect niche in my wargaming collection.  I've become a big fan of David Thompson's designs which have started to attract several companies' attention, as evidenced by the superb system introduced in DVG's Pavlov's House reviewed on the blog some time back.  This is a system perfectly designed for his follow up game, Castle Itter, soon to be released once again by DVG.  However, Undaunted: Normandy takes a very different path that does have a few similarities with one of his earlier designs, War Chest.

For me, all these designs belong to the school of "design for effect" - in other words, designs that capture the atmosphere in broad brush terms with effective and easily manageable rules.  This is certainly the case here with Undaunted: Normandy, a light tactical game of small squad engagements set in the early days of the Normandy landings of WWII.  Using a simple system built on a modified deck-building principle, the rules can be assimilated in very quick time.  For an experienced gamer the whole set of rules can be taken in more or less at a first read through, but the game is also admirably suited to the novice gamer who will benefit considerably from the programmed-learning type of presentation. 

Like many games at this level the terrain is supplied by a set of double-sided tiles of very good quality, thick cardstock that cover the standard range of landscapes.  Apart from the identifying number and letter used for locating the correct tiles for a given scenario, a single or double number presents the amount of cover provided by the terrain.  One aspect that has caused some discussion is that there are no issues of line of sight.  This certainly makes for ease of play and when you look at the tiles you can see why such rules simply would not work.

The units are an interesting combination of cards and counters.  The latter are circular and of a really satisfying size and solidity.  They are also what you will manoeuvre across the map, but each unit is also represented by a number of identical cards both in your current deck of cards and in a reserve display laid out in front of you.

This is one of the game's original mechanics that I'm particularly impressed by.   Typically a unit will consist of its counter and up to five cards.  In game turns you might like to consider these cards as the equivalent of the steps a counter might represent in a conventional hex & counter war game.  However, totally different from any war game I know, a number of these "steps" will be in your play deck according to the very clear presentation in the scenario set up and later more may be introduced by using one of the abilities of each player's leader cards, either the Platoon Sergeant or one of the Squad Leaders.

Another neat idea is that these latter figures do not appear as actual counters on the map.  Only your Combat units have the circular discs that move and fight for control on the map.  These are grouped into three squads [lettered A, B and C] consisting mainly of  basic riflemen, a couple of machine gunners, a mortar team, a sniper and a few scouts.  Apart from different fighting abilities,  units have a number of other differing abilities.  

The scouts, for example, play an especially important role as they are the only ones that can move into an as yet unexplored new tile.  In doing so, they place a scouting marker [a great binocular icon!] which then allows other units to then move onto the tile.  By contrast, only riflemen have the ability to place a control marker in a scouted tiles and so it goes on.

A range of many of your troops

This creates a hugely enjoyable situation and leads to many of the agonising choices that a player has each turn,  First of all, what units will you find in your four cards drawn from your deck at the beginning of a turn.  Each player will then have to choose one to play face down to determine who gains the initiative and plays out their hand first.  As each type of card has a number and the higher the number the more powerful the card, do you sacrifice a powerful card to get the initiative or risk your opponent going first?

Each turn you'll play all the cards in your current hand, making decisions with each card on whether to move or fire or take control of a tile.  Machine gunners also have the decision whether to fire to inflict a hit or suppress, while Mortars have first to target a tile as an action, before they can fire on it, though when they do fire they have the great advantage of potentially being able to hit every unit on the tile.

Both the Platoon Leader and the Squad leaders as mentioned have the Bolster ability to bring in more cards from your Supply into your play deck for a particular unit thus allowing the possibility of activating a counter more than once.

All this and more is very clearly laid out in the rule book in a very easy to understand set of rules, while the Scenario book helps the learning process, if played through in sequence, as scenario by scenario more and more of the different units and their functions and capabilities are introduced.  For an experienced gamer the first few scenarios may be a little too limited to make the best of experiences.

However, there are twelve Scenarios in total, based on historical situations which provide a good range of variety.  The mixture of taking control of a specified number of location points or pinning your opponent along with the varied set ups produce a mix of intriguing puzzles for how best to achieve your goal and use your men.

Here's one of the more unusual ones where both sides begin virtually in contact from the very start.  All scenarios can be played as stand alone ones or can be grouped into shorter or longer campaigns where you gain a point for every scenario won, but then total the number of casualties suffered in the course of the campaign and deduct a victory point from your score for every 10 casualties you lost.  Great idea!  

A typical page of Scenario details

All this is contained in a compact box, neatly compartmentalised, as you can see, but like so many useful inserts, the sections holding the cards would benefit from being just a little larger.  If you sleeve your cards, as I do, they simply don't fit in and the amount of usage and shuffling in this game will make sleeving a very worthwhile practice.  

This is a very small niggle set against what is in every other respect a very, very  good well presented and designed game that I think deserves to find a home in any war gamers' collection.  It is a first-rate game for introducing new players to the world of war games while giving more experienced gamers an exciting and rewarding dip into a light, fast, tactical bout of combat.  

I hope there will be expansion decks and scenarios that take us to other celebrated WWII battlefields on the Eastern Front or Pacific with more specialised units.   Personally I'd love to see a few paratroopers dropping from the skies.   While hopefully waiting for just that to happen, I expect the lure of the game to encourage many of us to have a go at creating a favourite episode or two of our own!

As always many thanks to the publishers, in this case Osprey Games for kindly providing the review copy.  As a celebrated publishing company of such a fantastic range of military books that's catered for so many years to my love of military history, it's great to see their development into this other major way to explore our military world.

The original Close Combat came out over 20 years ago, and was one of my very first introductions into the world of wargaming. Someone of great gaming taste downloaded and installed the demos for the original games onto a PC in my junior high computer lab. I later stumbled across them, was enthralled with the depiction of realistic tactical combat, and here I am writing reviews for a wargaming website twenty years later. Needless to say, Close Combat as a series has a secure foothold in my mind. Since that time, the license shifted to Matrix Games, where a few additional iterations of the game have been made over the years, but only now has the series made the significant step into the world of three dimensional graphics. Does Close Combat: The Bloody First capture the spirit of the old while boldly striking into new territory? Well..sometimes. 

The Bloody First follows the story of the Big Red One, the 1st Infantry Division of the US Army as it fights its way through World War II. The game features three campaigns, and a total of 11 operations spanning North Africa, Sicily, and finally Normandy. You'll lead your company of riflemen across open deserts, rough hills, and bocage country. The scope of the game is impressive and flexible. You can hop into any single battle you want, or play an operation spanning a handful of connected skirmishes, or go for a full campaign encompassing several operations. Then, of course, there is the grand campaign linking it all together into one very long venture. Each way of playing will lead you to approach the game a bit differently. Your troops aren't just faceless rifle squads and machine gun crews, as every single man has his own name and stats. Surviving battles will lead each soldier to gain experience, awards, and become better fighters. While playing the grand campaign, you would most certainly develop a few favored squads of veterans, units that you can rely on, but also don't want to lose so far into the war. If simply playing a one-off battle, you might put winning the fight far above keeping any particular units out of extreme danger. 

Regardless of how you choose to play, as commander of a rifle company, you begin each battle by choosing which of you squads to field. Usually you will only put a couple of platoons into any one battle, alongside some support assets, like tanks and engineers, from other units. I really enjoyed this freedom, since it lets you shape your tactics before the battle even begins. Your missions include a variety of offensive and defensive scenarios, in which you will fight the Axis over control of various points around a map. Rarely will you come even close to routing the enemy from the map entirely, it's usually enough to simply break their morale and take a couple of additional locations. Depending on the operation and how things go, you might fight again on the same map, with different starting positions based on how the previous battle turned out. There are some touches here like destroyed tanks remaining on the map from one skirmish to the next. Between battles you will be given options like advancing rapidly, waiting to regroup, or conducting a daring night attack. This gives a bit of say over the overall strategic picture, in addition to the tactical fights themselves.

Now let's get to the meat of the game, the tactical battles. As mentioned before, The Bloody First takes the big step into 3-D graphics, which is a radical shift from the previous Close Combat games, where the player was looking straight down on a battlefield populated by sprites and 2-D terrain. In those older games, it was difficult to see the contours of the terrain and just how tall a hill or ridge was. Here the 3-D engine is used to great effect to create realistic looking terrain, with plenty of bumps and low-spots for infantry to maneuver through. However, many of the maps feel very small and restrained. Often, after you hit go, your forces will almost immediately be in contact with the enemy, and the fighting will not cease until the scenario ends. Now, I know the name of the game is Close Combat, but we are going to need just a little room to maneuver! Some of the maps are larger, but even so something about the scale of the game leads to them still feeling cramped most of the time. This is really a game about quick battles at the smaller scale of things, and that is okay, but just know that is what you are getting.

In terms of the core gameplay, infantry vs infantry combat, I think the game does things quite well. When ordering your men about, little silhouettes appear to show you exactly where they can or can't take cover, making it very easy to see their exact destination. Combat occurs at a very realistic feeling pace. Set up a couple squads of riflemen a hundred yards from each other in good cover, and they will pop away at one another to little effect. Maybe one guy will get hit every few minutes. Catch that enemy rifle team in the flank with a machine gun, and they will immediately start taking casualties and be forced to flee. At close range the fighting gets bloody, as the little digital soldiers will start hurling grenades back and forth. The game is at its best when the scenario is focused on the infantry combat. Add any vehicles to the fray and suddenly things feel a bit off kilter, especially in the early campaigns where there is almost no way for your infantry to harm even a lowly armored scout car.

For me, the weakest area of the game has to be any time armored vehicles take to the field. On some of the smaller maps, and especially given the open desert terrain of North Africa, a single tank can control the entire battlefield, destroying infantry at will. If both sides have armor, things aren't much better. The tank on tank combat feels very random, with two stationary tanks sometimes spending several minutes repeatedly shooting at and missing each other, even at very short range. In all of the scenarios I played, it simply never felt very satisfying. The AI for vehicles also seems weaker than that of the infantry. In one scenario I played, one enemy tank charged straight into my starting area immediately after the scenario started. Not a great move. Their other tank sat at the back of the battlefield, never moving an inch. Not a great tactic either. The game could definitely use some work in this area.

The other area of the game I must be critical of is some of the graphics and sound. Sound effects wise, the gunshots and explosions all sound pretty decent, making for a noisy and realistic battlefield. However, when there isn't any shooting going on, the game is completely silent. Some ambient background noises would go a long way here. Maybe the wind blowing, distant explosions, that sort of thing. Add to that the lack of animation for trees/bushes/grass swaying in the wind, and a washed out color palette, and you get a very static feeling battlefield outside of active combat. My final gripe here is the voice lines for units. There just aren't very many, and you'll often hear the same one played multiple times in a row. 

Graphically, the game is a mixed bag. The environments look gorgeous, with a very natural flow to the terrain. This is where the game benefits the most from the switch to 3-D. These look like very real places, created with a careful attention to detail. The maps are strewn with little flavorful bits like farm carts and hay bales that can be used as cover.  The infantry models, on the other hand, aren't so great. I understand this is not a game made with stunning graphics in mind, but the infantry here have almost no detail to them, and have muddy textures to boot. You won't be able to see exactly what the models look like though, since the camera is very restrictive and won't let you tilt down very far, or zoom in too close. The vehicles look alright, but aren't anything to gawk at, and besides, you can't zoom in very close to get a good look at them anyway. The effects like explosions, tracers, and smoke all work well enough to create a lively battlefield, but again are just okay. I harp on the graphics only because the game falls, to some extent, into that same trap that so many series fell into back in the early 2000's when they transitioned from tried and true 2-D graphics into first attempts at 3-D graphics. The 3-D allows for some cool new things, but it's hard to deny that the previous 2-D entries in the series (e.g. Panthers in the Fog, Gateway to Caen) were, arguably, more aesthetically pleasing. 

Also, despite the modest graphics, the game tends to stutter a bit here and there, like the engine is struggling to run smoothly for no apparent reason. I expect this can be patched out soon enough.

Now, I've dinged the game for quite a few things, but this comes more from a place of love than anything else. As a fan of the series, I wanted the game to be a bit better than it is. That said, it does a lot of things well, and some things better than its peers. The game is very accessible, with a UI that makes it easy to get the information that you need. Units have colored arcs showing you at a glance what direction they are facing and their current posture, and red arcs that pop up to let you know they are taking fire from a general direction. Important events pop up in a list you can click on to jump immediately to the action. Giving orders can be done in two different ways, so you can do whichever feels natural to you. A very handy LOS tool lets you move the mouse around and dynamically visualize what can be seen from any particular point. The aforementioned soldier silhouettes show you exactly where your men will go when you give them an order, and can be drug around to line up exactly how you desire. The game should be easy to learn for beginners, and like riding a bike again for series veterans. 

The combat offers some great moments, like when a squad of riflemen breaks under an enemy attack, but then Private Johnson suddenly goes into "heroic" mode and stands his ground, single-handedly fending off an enemy assault. Your overall strategy and tactics do have a real effect on the outcome, as a passive approach will usually get muddled results, while carefully maneuvering your squads while suppressing key enemy positions will yield a decisive victory. These moments are satisfying, and left me feeling like a good commander who made a difference. Despite all of those moments, the game simply lacks a certain spark. There is a core here that does something right, but the game overall needs a bit more polish to really shine. 

Close Combat: The Bloody First may be the necessary learning step for a classic 2-D series as it transitions into the world of 3-D. Hopefully the game can be improved somewhat through patches, and I really look forward to seeing how the next iteration of the series shapes up. There is a market out there for people who want some realistic tactical combat, but don't want to spend hours wrestling with learning something like a Combat Mission or Graviteam Tactics game. Close Combat could very easily be that series.

Close Combat: The Bloody First is available directly from Matrix Games, as well as on Steam and GoG.

- Joe Beard

Hitler Strikes North

The 1940 invasion of Norway

by

Quarterdeck International

 I will start with a question - why Norway? The answer lies in this quote: "If the mines of Lapland had ceased working, the blast furnaces of the Ruhr would have shut down too" (Rolf Karlbom). You could also add in the much larger threat to British sea lanes if the Uboats etc. could use Norway's ports. The hard part of the operation is that you are literally bearding the English Lion, or in this case, megalodon to come and take a bite. Scapa Flow, the British Royal Navy's main base, is a hop, skip, and a jump away from Norway. Germany's Navy was small and completely untried. Their ships were mostly newer than the British ones, but their worth in combat was an unknown factor. Without there being a naval part to the Invasion of Norway, the German plan was doomed to failure. 

 We will look at the components first. The maps are well done and easy to read. They are composed of most of Norway, the Northern tip of Scotland and some of Denmark. The counters are 5/8" and are also easy to read, but relatively plain. They come However, for the purist, they come with the corners already rounded. So, you can put your clippers away. The Player Aid Cards are in black and white on hardstock paper. There are supposed to be seven of them (1,2,3,3A,4,5, and one sheet that has Contact/Evasion tables). The only problem was that my copy did not come with #2. There is a copy of this sheet on the game's BGG page (I will post a link). So I just printed out that one card. This is actually a Chinese/English version. The Chinese Player Aid Cards are actually in color and laminated, and there are three of them. The problem with them is that the printing on them is very small, to fit all of the information on three double-sided PACs. The rulebook is in black and white, but the rules are succinct and easy to follow.


 This is what comes with the game:

2 x 22 x 17 inch maps
6 Player aids
216 Die-cut playing pieces
24 page rule book

 The game is interesting, because the German player rolls the dice to see what his goals are for the actual game. The player checks the die roll against the German Goal Determination Table (this is on the missing #2 card). The German Player's goal is either to exit Raiders into the Atlantic or to invade Norway. Strangely the German Player can choose to invade Norway if he rolls for Raiding. The Allied Player is only shown what his opponent's goal was at the end of the game. 


 This is the sequence of play:

5.1 Introduction of any Reinforcements takes place for both sides. Airfields adjacent to captured cities become German. Detach any destroyers at this time. Bardufoss and/or Weather roll if appropriate (See 9.51 & 15.0).
5.2 Movement.
Players may attempt to evade and/or divide up forces being shadowed (see 6.44).
Shadowed forces move and declare where they stop at and shadowing forces proceed with them.

5.3 German Air Reconnaissance Phase (see 6.22).
5.4 Mutual Search Phase. At night, only surface warships may call out a hex. Any sighted forces now proceed to evaluate the contact and if combat will occur (See 6.4).
5.5 Combat takes place. Combat occurs in the following order:
Submarine combat.
Surface ship combat at sea, followed by any combat with Coast Defense Batteries (EXCEPTION: see 9.21).
All ships on each side are revealed to each side (see 8.21).
All Gunnery is allocated before rolling dice.
SPECIAL SHADOWING/CONTACT (see 8.3).
Salvo Chasing is declared before gunnery combat (see 8.26).
Shielding is declared (see 8.27).
Gunnery Combat takes place.
Torpedo attacks are allocated and then executed.
Air combat.
Paratroop drops are now resolved (only in daylight). Check to see if any ports/airfields fall.
Norwegian and Danish warships are retreated if appropriate (See 9.31).
5.8 Complete the turn and move the turn marker forward one box.

 One of the game's greatest strengths is the amount of what ifs that can be played out in the game. There are Optional Rules including: The Bismarck and the Graf Zeppelin among many others. Luck plays a large part in the game, or actually die rolls. If the Royal Navy catches you with its big gun ships, it is usually lights out. The German Player must rely on his speed to get him out of trouble. One thing I was not aware of was the lackluster performance of German torpedoes in this campaign. The Luftwaffe, which became a large threat to the Royal Navy in the Mediterranean, is not anywhere near as potent here. This is as it was historically so it fits right in. As you can see below, there is even a chance for the French Navy to get involved in the melee.

 The is the games second release. It was originally released in the 1980s. The original release was thought of highly by wargamers. It seemed to make an even larger splash when it was released in Japan. The game has had some large changes from the first edition. Many of these were added by the developer Jack Greene from co-writing a book called "Hitler Strikes North". The price of the game is worth it if only for this one paragraph from the designer Jack Greene: "These game rules are not to be picked apart by a rules lawyer. They are an attempt to use logic and historical understanding of the period and players should adopt the same attitude. Otherwise, play somebody else's game". This should be made a standard and stamped on the face of all game rulebooks.

 I was given this game to review and did not pick it. The Norway Campaign or the surface raiding campaign in WWII does not really interest me that much. Much to my surprise, the game actually grew on me and is a very good representation of the campaigns. I now know this because the game made me do a lot of reading and investigating into the campaigns themselves. Any game that can do that has already paid for itself in opening up closed minds. This one not only did that, but as a game plays very well. Because of time constraints I was only able to play it solo (you can play any game solo). Its nuances would make it work as a very good two player game. Thank you very much Quarterdeck International for allowing me to review it.

 I somehow missed an email from QI about the missing Player's Aid Card. They had let me know that it was MIA and had sent a replacement for me to print off. I just found the email after the review was posted. 

Here are links to QI and some of their games:

https://www.quarterdeckinternational.com/

https://www.quarterdeckinternational.com/store/hitler-strikes-north-game

https://www.quarterdeckinternational.com/store/togo-game

https://www.quarterdeckinternational.com/store/moravian-game

https://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/181547/pac-4



Robert

Spain in Arms

A Military History of The Spanish Civil War 1936-1939

by

E.R. Hooton

 Every once in a while you come across the exact book that you have been waiting to be written. This is one of those for me. Every book I have read on The Spanish Civil War has been, in reality, a political history of the war with the military history thrown in as a side note. This is a military history plain and simple. It does have the needed political history for someone who has not read about the war, but it does not get dragged down into the convoluted political history behind the war. The Spanish Civil War politically makes the French Revolution political gyrations seem incredibly simple in comparison. 

 This is a list of what is in each chapter:

Prologue
Chapter 1: Madrid Front February-March 1937
Chapter 2: The New Armies and weapons
Chapter 3: Northern Front April-October 1937
Chapter 4: Republican offensives July-October 1937
Chapter 5: The Nationalist Advance November 1937-October 1938

Chapter 6: The Last Battles; July 1938-February 1939

 The book does come with a few pictures of the major players and some troops etc. It also comes with maps, actually twenty of them, which should be standard fare in military history books. The maps are not as informative as I would like, but it does help the reader immensely in following the action. 

 I am forever indebted to the author and publisher for this book. In most books I have read about the war, I was finally forced to pick and choose what I would read after I reached the middle of some of those tomes. They weren't bad books, just not what I wanted to read on the conflict. This book cuts all of the fat and gristle away to give you only the juicy meat of the military history. We are always shown the German Condor Legion's assistance to the Nationalist cause. This book shows exactly how much larger the Italian contribution was to the nationalist victory. Thank you Casemate Publishers for the chance to review this excellent book.

Robert

Book: Spain in Arms: The Military History of the Spanish Civil War 1936-1939

Author: E.R. Hooton

Publisher: Casemate Publishers

THE MAGNATES

from

PHALANX GAMES

QUALITY QUALITY QUALITY

This may seem like it's becoming an obsession with me, but when games are so consistently well produced it's still got to be celebrated and The Magnates deserves being celebrated.

As Phalanx Games is a Polish company, it may come as no surprise that its theme derives from the complex history of Poland and Lithuania  and this is presented on a stunning mounted board depicting five Provinces that up to five players will struggle to gain area control of by having placed the most estates in them.

To achieve this each player will use an identical hand of thirteen cards. These large, Tarot-size cards depicting 12 noblemen and one noble lady are most gorgeously illustrated with their portraits and  a brief historical note on each personage.  In total, that's 65 individual historical portraits with information and below is an example of just one player's hand.

While the front of each set presents a splendid heraldic crest and motto.

In addition there are 25 Conflict cards depicting historical battles, which though contributing little written information, add strongly to the physical splendour of the components.

Finally, a deck of Privilege cards completes the array, with icons related to game play, more stylish illustrations and text explaining their specific effect when played.

Besides so much finery there is a range of other physical items depending on whether you have the first or second edition.  In the first edition all these are excellent wooden pieces, whether the few unique ones for special purposes ...

or each player's set of estate markers in their own colour.  In the second edition, the latter are replaced by the type of very colourful cardboard markers here displayed for use by the red player [typically my favourite choice].

Some strong opinions have been expressed by those who favour the simple wooden pieces, though I personally prefer these detailed artistic images of stately houses.  So, this is a game that appeals hugely to the eye in all its art work and is backed by an equally stunning rule book with page after page of rules minutely illustrated with pictorial examples of every step of the system.

Nor is it a system that is heavy on rules or over long to play.  In brief this is a game of area control largely governed by the cards gained through a series of blind auctions.

There are four Rounds of three basic Phases: the first Phase is the Senate  in which each player will in turn play three cards from their hand of 15 cards, one card each on three out of the four Senator cards shown in the picture below.

Each Senator card bestows an advantage and is won by the player playing the highest card.  The first card, and a very powerful card indeed of these Senator cards, is the Primate [a religious title] designated by the ecclesiastical mitre which gives the owner the ability to decide the winner of all tied bids throughout the rest of a Round.

In the second Phase [the Sejm], players play five of their Family cards to gain Privilege cards.  These speak for themselves as they give a variety, usually, of one off-bonuses that can be played in the course of the game, some immediate on receiving the card, some when the player chooses and some have special scoring abilities at the end of the game.  [Hint: these latter can be very important.]

Finally there is the Conflict Phase where five Conflict cards are randomly revealed according to set rules and placed in their appropriate positions on the board.  Each player uses their last five Family cards to secretly place one against each of the five Conflicts.  Once again all are revealed and the total of all the cards played against a Conflict card determines whether the players have won the battle.  This is vitally important, as if the players don't win three out of the five Conflicts, the game ends and everyone loses!

I know a few players who don't like this type of "spoiling" mechanic, but I feel it is absolutely essential to prevent players not just using high point cards in the first two Phases.  Besides it gives a definite frisson of tension during the Conflict and as always there are rewards for the player of the highest card in a victory and penalties for all players in a defeat plus an extra penalty for the player of the lowest numbered card.

As you can imagine, the basic mechanics are very, very simple: play all thirteen of your cards over the three Phases.  It is the game play and the interaction of player dynamics and personalities which make The Magnates such a success for me.

First of all judging which Senator and Privilege cards to play your stronger cards on is both an art and a gamble.  Success is never certain. A typical example is when it's discovered that all the players have thought a card is so valuable that [a] each player has gone for it or [b] they've all decided that they won't manage to win it and so have played lower value cards.

Secondly, the fact that the play of Privilege or Senator cards can often change card values whether to boost or weaken values, so that once again there is a high level of uncertainty to every decision.  Personally, I really rate this sort of challenge and uncertainty and love the sustained anticipation level of the game as the outcome of each card play is revealed, but I have found some who dismiss this element as too luck dependant.

Other players who I've found less enthusiastic  about the game are those who go overboard for what's been labelled "victory point salad" games i.e. games that have a multitude of varied means to gain victory points.  Not that I don't like that type of game, but The Magnates simply provides its enjoyment and excitement from different factors.

Two I've already outlined and the third is the one I mentioned at the start: that this is above all an area control game.  This builds up Round by Round with players vying for Dominance [having more Estates in a Province than all the other players ' Estates combined] or Advantage [having more Estates in a Province than any other individual player].  These bring in the basic victory points, but don't forget those Privilege cards too that may boost your tally and above all beware the power of the Primate card in deciding ties - it's a real double-edged sword.  It may bring you a temporary advantage or even allow you to grant it to another player, but you will also be stacking up potential "enemies" who may exact their justice on you when they too become the holder of the Primate card!

If you too enjoy a beautifully designed game with the features of the system that I've presented then I'd strongly recommend getting your hands on a copy of The Magnates and it's a big thanks to Phalanx for giving me the opportunity to review this edition. 

What happens when you take a developer known for their deep, yet utterly arcane historical strategy games, and link them with a publisher known for making wargaming accessible to the masses? You get Field of Glory Empires, a rich grand strategy title that carves out its own space in the genre. 

At a glance, one could quickly draw comparisons to the Total War or Paradox grand strategy games, but Empires sets itself apart with multiple mechanics that address some of the shortcomings of those series. One wholly unique feature of Empires is the way it integrates with a completely separate game, Field of Glory II, to allow you to play out the battles in that game. Though I must immediately point out that having Field of Glory II is by no means necessary to enjoy Empires. In fact, you probably won't want to command every battle personally, since that would add hours and hours to a campaign. However, if you already own Field of Glory II, and enjoy grand strategy games, it makes a whole lot of sense to get Empires. Suddenly, those fun tactical battles, the results of which were mostly inconsequential, take on significant weight. Now you are defending your capitol from an invading army, or fighting to claim a critical new province for your empire. Some may balk at the idea of needing two different games to get the "full" experience, but each can be had for much less than a typical $60 game, and both are worthwhile on their own, so I think it is reasonable enough.

Now, back to Empires itself. The basics of the grand strategy genre are mostly here. You begin the game by selecting one of dozens of different ancient tribes and civilizations. All your ancient favorites are here, from Rome and Carthage to the Greek city states and the "barbarian" tribes of Europe, and many more. The map spans all of Europe, North Africa, and stretches east to cover a portion of India. The standard campaign runs from 310 BCE to 190 CE. This is a lovely starting point just after the death of Alexander the Great and before the Punic Wars. Rome is on the rise, but many older civilizations are still lingering, their historical decline still a bit in the future. And that concept of rise and decline is a core theme of the game.

Unlike in many other similar games, simply painting the map your color will not lead to victory in Empires. As the Romans and many empires before and after them can attest, growing too large leads to many problems. In many cases, an empire that reaches a certain size will inevitably experience a rapid and sometimes total collapse. However, despite their complete collapse we still discuss and often think highly of the Romans today, almost 2000 years later. They left quite the legacy, didn't they? That is how victory is measure in Empires - how many "Legacy" points you are able to accumulate before the end of the game. Legacy points can be gained in many ways, and only lost in one or two ways. However, many of the ways you accumulate Legacy will also earn you "Decadence" points. This can be countered by focusing your resources on things that generate "Culture" points. Too much decadence leads to unrest, revolts, civil war. Countering those problems gets more difficult as your state grows larger and gets older. 

The Emerald Isle makes for a nice "Tutorial Island" to learn the basics.

It's a bit difficult for me to explain succinctly, but the long and short is this: Empires uses several core mechanics to capture a story that has played out so many times in history. Powerful states tend to rise out of obscurity, build themselves up to great heights, and then collapse more from internal rot than from outside aggression. I definitely recommend cracking open the player manual and reading through the relevant sections, as it's a bit obscure how it all works at first. The game does have in-game tutorials and a helpful glossary that will teach you everything else without much trouble. However, you will initially be at a loss as to the importance of progress/decline tokens, Culture-Decadence Ratios, Loyalty, and Legacy points if you don't at least skim through the manual. The manual also has a lengthy strategy guide section and designer's notes that explain the reasoning for the mechanics in the game, so it's well worth your time.

As an example, winning battles and raiding enemy provinces will sometimes net you slaves that you can distribute into your provinces. These slaves will naturally have a high level of unrest and always be a potential source of rebellion. Likewise, taking control of peoples who are ethnically different from you will lead to them being less than happy with their new rulers. The larger your population in a region, the greater their unrest will become as well. Much of this can be mitigated by building things like circuses and gladiator arenas, but these buildings grow your decadence score. As you slide from, let's say, a meritocratic republic built on duty and honor, into a bloated empire dependent on bread and circuses to keep people happy while slaves do all the work, the risk of revolt and civil war will grow despite your best efforts. It's a wonderful system that naturally responds to your actions and pushes your empire into the logical consequences.

As to the less abstract and more "day-to-day" mechanics of the game, any veteran grand strategy player will easily be able to hop in and get going with minimal fuss. The map is broken up into hundreds of provinces, and depending on who you are playing as, you will start with anywhere from one province to a couple dozen under your control. Within each province there is a population under your control. Population is represented by blocks of manpower that you can shift around to focus on food, infrastructure, money, or culture production. You can also construct buildings that will enhance production of those four resources. One interesting note in Empires is that you can only construct one building a time in a province, and you can only select what you want to build from an ever changing pool of options (one building per resource). If you don't like your current pool of options, you'll have to waste several turns rolling a new one. This creates an interesting strategic dilemma. I only have a very limited number of building slots in this province, and I really want to build XYZ, but it hasn't come up as an option yet. Do I spend several turns to see if it comes up next time, or do I go with Plan B right now? I'm not sure how historically accurate the concept is, but I found it refreshing to not use the same cookie cutter build order in every province like you would in other grand strategy games.

Each icon on the map indicates a special trade good in that province.

Many of the buildings require trade goods in order to function efficiently, or to give a bonus to their production. There are a ton of these trade goods, some examples being horses, iron, wine, fish, and many more. Some of these are available in certain provinces from the start, while others are produced by buildings. You can trade for these goods internally and with other states. Trade is another area where the game functions differently than you might expect. Unlike in say, Civilization, you don't make a direct agreement to import some good from another state and have it be available for your own use wherever. Rather, in Empires, trade goods are moved around in an organic way, with the buildings you construct creating a demand that can be met by any trade good containing province within range. If you control the source of the good, you'll make a little cash even when trading with yourself. If you have to import it from elsewhere you'll pay full price, and vice versa, you can make money by exporting your goods. This is all only indirectly under your control, and creates a neat living economy as demand for goods appears in regions depending on the buildings constructed there, and buildings are constructed depending on what goods are available.

The military side of things should be familiar enough to most strategy gamers. If you have ever played an AGEOD game before, you will immediately recognize the how all of this works, but be relieved to find that things are very simple this go around. Various unit types (skirmishers, infantry, and cavalry of all variety are available) are built in a region and then combined to create an army. Every unit has strengths and weaknesses, special perks like performing better in specific terrain, and each individual unit has an experience level that rises as they survive battles. On your turn you assign an army to move here and there, and give them a "stance" such as simply moving about, or immediately assaulting any forts they come across, or to go raiding neighboring provinces. Units don't actually move until you hit the end turn button, at which time ALL units from every state move at once. This means you could miss that enemy army you were targeting, or blunder into one you weren't aware of. 

When two armies meet, a battle commences. As I mentioned above, you can opt to take direct control if you own Field of Glory II, and play the battle out there. This is a mostly seamless process, as Empires closes, Field of Glory II opens, and you hit a button to import the battle. Then the reverse occurs and you are right back in Empires with the battle result. Otherwise, the battle plays out in Empires with no real direct input from you. Your input is in how you decide to compose your army, and where you send them to fight. Army composition is far more engaging than in something like Europa Universalis, as unit types are far more distinct, and your army will very much reflect the empire you have built. Most units require that you have access to particular trade goods or meet other requirements. Additionally, almost every province can produce some variety of unique unit, that is better than its standard counter-part and often has extra perks, but is also more expensive. I really liked this feature, as it gives historical flavor to an army raised in any particular region.

So that hits all the highlights, but don't be mistaken, there are plenty of additional nitty-gritty details that I didn't get into, but you can learn about as you play. I want to reiterate how genius the victory point system is in this game. Because your legacy points remain in place even if your once great empire collapses, it's entirely possible to win the game while NOT being the biggest blob of color on the map. You can play through the rise, the golden age, and then the decline and fall of an empire, and still win the game. A fall is not guaranteed, of course, but the mechanics of the game will push you further and further in that direction unless you prove yourself a very capable leader.

The deep and interesting designs of developer AGEOD have finally evolved into a game system that anyone can play (without an excessive amount of head scratching), and it is a great moment that bodes well for their future. Despite going up against some of the most popular grand strategy games out there, I think Field of Glory Empire really shines as a fresh take on the genre. The Culture and Decadence system fleshes out an idea that is usually relegated to a simple "happiness" score in other games, and makes it the core of the gameplay loop. This completely changes how you think about building and managing your empire, and makes the plausible scenario, that your empire eventually crumbles, still be a fun part of the game.  I give a strong recommendation to Field of Glory Empires, and it's a real no-brainer if you already own Field of Glory II, as both games benefit from combining the two. 

Field of Glory Empires can be purchased directly from Slitherine, as well as on Steam and GoG. 

(As of this writing it's 10% off, go grab it if you are interested!)


- Joe Beard

Panzer campaigns Japan '45

by

John Tiller Software

 It is fall of the year 1945 and the Allies (United States) are determined to invade Japan. This is an alternate universe where there has been no Atom Bomb, and Japan is still refusing to unconditionally surrender. The U.S. has designed a plan to invade Japan called 'Operation Downfall'. The first part of the plan is 'Operation Olympic', the invasion of the island of Kyushu. That the U.S. troops will face fanatical resistance is a tremendous understatement. Even women and children have been semi-trained to fling the invader back into the Sea. The U.S. certainly has the firepower to inflict tremendous casualties on the Japanese people, but does it have the resolve to face the amount of casualties that will be inflicted upon it? Panzer Campaign Japan 1945 gives you the chance to game the outcome of Operation Olympic.

 John Tiller Software has been dishing out meat and potatoes to wargamers for twenty years. Yes, some of their games are that old. It is also true that the very core of the game is still the same. I can hear the groans now. "Oh this makes my eyes bleed",
"A computer game is old in six months", "How do you expect us to play the same old thing". I not only expect you to play it, but also to like it. We play boardgames that make these games seem like whipper snappers. They have been continuously updated down through the years to make the games still great, and not just ones that are played for nostalgia. The latest round of updates have definitely brought the games visually and play wise right back at the center of computer wargaming.

 These are the features of the game from the horses mouth:

Game scale is 1 hex = 1 km, 1 turn = 2 hours, with battalion and company size units.

44 Scenarios covering all sizes and situations, including specialized versions for both head to head play and vs. the computer AI.

The master map covers most of the island of Kyushu (87,720 hexes) where Operation Olympic would have taken place.

The order of battle file covers all of the forces that would have taken part in the campaign.

Order-of-Battle and Scenario Editors which allow players to customize the game.

Sub-map feature allows the main map to be "chopped" up into smaller segments for custom scenario creation.

All new images for unit art on both sides, including guns and vehicles covering all of the forces of the Allied and Japanese armies involved in the operation.

Design notes which cover or include the production of the game, campaign notes, sources and a scenario list.

All new game graphics including terrain, in game counters and 2D & 3D units as well as the toolbar icons.

All new sounds.

Japan '45 provides multiple play options including play against the computer AI, Play by E-mail (PBEM), LAN Internet "live" play, and two player hot seat.

 These are the scenarios:

Panzer Campaigns: Japan '45 Operation Olympic covers the entire campaign to take southern Kyushu from November to December 1945: 

The landing on Tanega-Shima - 1 thru 3 November 1945

The Invasion Phase - 4 thru 6 November 1945

The Breakout Phase - 7 thru 10 Novemeber 1945

The Linkup Phase - 14 thru 17 November 1945

The Final Phase - 19 thru 24 November 1945

Japanese Counterattacks - Mid December 1945

The 44 scenarios range from small actions such as the 6-turn, second day fighting at Ariake Bay to the super-large 283 turn "Take Kyushu" scenario. The wide variety of scenario length and size will give the players a stiff challenge! Weather conditions range from normal to mud. The terrain on Kyushu can be as much of an obstacle to victory as the enemy forces. 

 The game is not for the faint of heart or for someone who is looking for a Panzer General fix. This is a game where you will study the map longer than a Chess board before you make your move. These games are for the gamer who is in it for the long haul. The game play is meant to show how difficult it would have actually been to successfully invade the Japanese Home Islands. Playing as the Allies, you have to have your crowbar and C4 handy. You are not going to break a thin crust and then sweep your tanks for miles like Patton. This is Iwo Jima and Okinawa on a grand scale. As the Japanese player you are not going to be able to push the Allies back to sea. The Allies' monumental advantage in firepower etc. won't allow it. You are going to have to tenaciously fight for every inch of your homeland. The Japanese player will have to accept losses that would make the Eastern Front seem like a walk in the park. That said, this is what makes the game great. We play these for exactly the reasons mentioned. The long scenario will try you as much as playing The Campaign for North Africa. The good thing is that your cat won't mess up the counters and your wife won't give you evil sideways glances because her dining room table has disappeared. John Tiller Software games give you the ability to have that monster set up 24-7 just waiting for you to devote some time to it. 

 Without all of the updates to the games, and the tedious (I mean strenuous) play testing, I might slam the game also. I actually was a play tester for one of the Civil War games, and it is no joke that I had a kid go through High School before it was done. I had to drop out because it seemed too much like a job. The largest improvement to the games for me is the AI becoming so much better and the scenarios being much more solitaire gaming friendly. The early games were not really meant for solitaire playing except just to learn the games rules etc. They are now so much better in that regard. I know sometimes the AI will make a dumb move. So will Bill, that guy you play games with on Saturday nights (and so do you!). You can play the game if you want against human opponents. However, you can also now have a great solo game experience. The other new part to all of the games is the addition of an easy to use and unbelievably complete editor for anything and everything. You don't even need to play the game. The person who is into minutiae can fiddle for years on any aspect of the game.

 I have probably spent too much time writing about/defending the whole series of games that John Tiller Software puts out. It is just that they span so many eras that any wargamer can find something they would like to play in their repetoire. Japan '45 is an acquired taste. Some people enjoy gaming the Pacific War land battles and others find them a bit boring. I just suppose it comes down to a matter of taste. I normally do not like to play 'what if' battles unless they are based on what very nearly did happen historically. Had the A Bomb fizzled out (it was a very real question at the time), this invasion would have taken place. The Allies had drawn up all of the plans for the campaign and we know the Japanese dispositions for the campaign as well. So in this case, we are not entering the realm of make believe. It is much like gaming Operation Sea Lion, except that this is a grueling slugfest without an end. 

 Old yes (so am I, and I bet you are also), hell these are ancient for computer games. Just fire up a simulation from 1999 and see how much it resembles Pong. Enjoyable, you bet. Let us just hope that John Tiller Software keeps cranking them out for the next twenty years.

 Not only did I misspell campaigns in the title, but I forgot to mention anything about Wargame Design Studio. WDS is the brains behind all of the newest updates including this game and the Panzer battles series, among others. 

Link to the games page:

www.johntillersoftware.com/PanzerCampaigns/Japan45.html

Link to Wargame Design Studio:
https://www.wargamedesignstudio.com/

These are links to other Tiller games I reviewed:

https://www.awargamersneedfulthings.co.uk/2019/04/campaign-eylau-friedland-by-john-tiller.html

https://www.awargamersneedfulthings.co.uk/2019/03/petersburg-by-wargame-design-studio-and.html

https://www.awargamersneedfulthings.co.uk/2018/12/panzer-battles-of-north-africa-1941-by.html

Robert