Great Battles of Alexander Expanded Deluxe (P500 -2015)
Chariots of Fire (2010)
SPQR Deluxe (2008)
Samurai 2nd Edition (2007)
C3I Simple GBoH Battle Manual (2006)
War Galley 2nd Edition (2006)
Caesar Conquest of Gaul 2nd Edition (2006)
Devil’s Horsemen (2004)
Great Battles of Alexander Deluxe 4th Edition (2003)
Caesar in Alexandria (2001)
Simple GBoH (2000)
Rise of the Roman Republic (2003)
Tell me a little about yourself?
I was born and raised in the Detroit Metropolitan area. I have lived here all my life and went to college at Oakland University where I graduated in 1974. Most of my career was spent either working for General Motors and then its Information Technology (IT) subsidiary EDS in 1985 in both technical and leadership roles.
Yes, I met him in 1985 during the transition period in 1985. He was a very dynamic guy, unlike many of the GM executives. I had worked for GM for almost 14 years when he came along and it was an entirely different experience. I continued as a Program Manager when HP bought EDS in 2008 and retired from there in 2012.
Welcome to the first Strategy Article we’ve published in InsideGMT! Unlike the majority of our articles, this one was not written by one of our designers or developers, but by one of our players. I want to thank Mark D. (the new owner of Grognard.com) for creating such a well-conceived and well-written article that’s aimed at helping players new to Fire in the Lake. I’d also like to take this opportunity to invite any of the rest of you who would like to submit a strategy article on one of your favorite GMT games to please do so. My hope is that over time, we can create an excellent online resource of player-created strategy articles to help others as they sit down to learn and play our games. Enjoy the article! – Gene
Fire in the Lake: Insurgency in Vietnam, designed by veteran designers Mark Herman and Volko Ruhnke and published by GMT Games is a 1 to 4 Player game that simulates either a part of, or the entire, Vietnam War. It’s a game with many moving parts and many interrelated methods, procedures, and techniques. The interaction of four players with competing, and often conflicting objectives (even for nominal allies) often results in a bewildering array of potential outcomes.
However, as in most games of skill or chance, there are fundamentals to which gamers should adhere, particularly new or inexperienced players. The player who gets the first move of the game should capitalize on this advantage. It can set the tone for the early portion of the game and, in Fire in the Lake, it’s the only move that can be planned with any certainty. After that very first move, the game can go off in a thousand different directions… but the first move can be carefully planned.
You can choose a “shotgun approach”, attempting to inflict damage on both of your historical enemies while simultaneously assisting your ally, or you can opt for self-promotion and the bettering of your own position. You can also choose to focus your aggression against one particular enemy player whom you consider the most immediate threat, hoping to rock him back on his heels for the next turn or two. Or you can try to do a bit of all the above.
Each player’s initial game situation is unique and demands a custom strategy that complements their peculiar capabilities. This article is geared towards inexperienced Fire in the Lake players who have a decent working knowledge of the game mechanics, but are still not “old pro’s”. It proposes a set of “perfect opening moves” for the Viet Cong, assuming the luck of the draw has granted them the very first move of the Short: 1965-1967 Scenario.
The first question a lot of people ask about Time of Crisis is, “How does it compare to other deckbuilding games?” This is something Wray and I thought about quite a bit throughout the development process. When we first conceived of the base design for Time of Crisis, deckbuilding was still a new mechanic on the scene and we were clearly not the only ones who were intrigued by it. Since that time, many new deckbuilding games have come into existence, many exploring new territory. We knew we had to give Time of Crisis its own fingerprint, to make it distinctive in some way among games that utilize a similar mechanic.
First, what exactly is a deckbuilding game? We need to begin with the first real ancestor, Rio Grande’s Dominion. There may have been games in the past that used a deckbuilding-like mechanic, but Dominion is the one that really gave it an identity and turned it into a genre. I suggest that the essence of what makes a deckbuilding game, as seen originally in Dominion, can be captured in the diagram to the right. The main “loop” of actions in the game is to draw new cards and play those cards, thereby generating points that can be used to purchase new cards, and repeat. Some of the cards that you buy are worth victory points (VPs), the accumulation of which is necessary for winning the game. To make the game interesting, most of the cards allow the players to perform special actions, which may modify or enhance virtually any element of the game. Seeking ways to exploit combinations of these special actions is a big part of the game, but it doesn’t change the fundamental core of the game, which is to create an engine that can buy victory points more efficiently. Note that all of the action in the game is entirely encompassed within the scope of the player’s deck of cards. Every action is about simply moving cards, from supply to deck to hand and into play.
“The tragedy is that, obsessed with avoiding defeat, he was blind to a beckoning victory.” – David Ascoli, author of A Day of Battle, referring to French Marshal Francois Bazaine
The Battle of Mars-la-Tour was fought on August 16th, 1870 and is considered to be one of the more remarkable battles of military history. Not only were the circumstances under which it was fought most singular, but its impact on the future of Europe was monumental. The importance of the engagement on that “day of battle” alone makes it ripe for study in the wargaming community, having had such a significant impact on the rise of the German Empire and the fall of Napoleon III’s Second French Empire. Yet, the very uniqueness and oddity of that “murderous day” make it almost impossible to simulate accurately on the game board. Such was the challenge that Fred Manzo and I decided to take on with the design of the Mars-La-Tour scenario for At Any Cost: Metz 1870. So how does At Any Cost attempt to accurately simulate such an odd and convoluted battle? Well, let me tell you ……
The French army in the summer of 1870 was already in full retreat after its first series of engagements. A significant portion of the French Army of the Rhine was defeated at the Battle of Spicheren by parts of the Prussian First and Second Armies and being pursued, albeit loosely, to the fortress town of Metz. Without the possibility of any support, the French army huddled around the fort as it decided its next course of action. Emperor Napoleon III, pressured to return to Paris in order to deal with various defeatist political issues, turned over command of the Army of the Rhine to Marshal Achilles Bazaine. Not his first choice, Bazaine nonetheless reluctantly took the reins from Napoleon and received his final, somewhat contradictory, instructions – protect the army under all circumstances and get it to Verdun and Chalons to rejoin the Emperor to form a new army.
These multiple and divergent goals are reflected in the game’s Victory Track mechanic. The French player must not only try to open his retreat route to Verdun by capturing key towns and map edge hexes, but he must do so without losing too many units or – even worse – being cut off from Metz. The Prussians don’t need to worry about casualties at all and simply strive to take important towns on the map that threaten the French army’s position and thwart its mission.
For background, please reference the previous After Action Report of a play test of this exciting game: which is built on the game system pioneered by Mark McLauglin’s The Napoleonic Wars and refined with his GMT Wellington and Kutuzov designs.
Whenever Greg, I, or one of our fine play-testers teach 7YW:FG to individuals, at a club meeting, or in a convention setting, we’ve found explaining the game to those already familiar with The Napoleonic Wars (TNW) system, cross-referencing their existing rules knowledge by explaining the differences, the deltas, between TNW and 7YW:FG a great way to speed their achieving appreciation of how to play 7YW:FG. By doing this, we spend less time explaining the rules and more time actually having the fun of playing the game.
This article is based on the “Hand Out” we use to review with gamers the changes between TNW and 7YW:FG. We hope it provides another level of appreciation of this fine Greg Ticer design offering.
Volume VI of the COIN series will bring a number of changes to the system to apply the realities of combat, politics and economics in the eighteenth century. Each leader has a specific Brilliant Stroke card with capabilities that can be used by trumping an event card in play. The mechanism allows each player, once per game, to utilize their current leader to deliver an earth shattering blow to the enemy. Additionally there is a hierarchy of Brilliant Stroke cards so one side can trump another sides Brilliant Stroke. In the end it is a threat that each player possesses and a threat to each player’s strategy.
Where did the term Brilliant Stroke come from?There are a number of references to the concept of a Brilliant Stroke in the writing of the time.
With the arrival of General Howe and his armada of ships and men near New York City in 1776 Washington called a council of his Generals to discuss a response.He later wrote to the Continental Congress to communicate the results of the council.In reference to the enemy they faced Washington wrote: “…it is now extremely obvious from their movements, from our intelligence, and from every other circumstance, that, having their whole army upon Long Island, except about four thousand men who remain on Staten Island, they mean to enclose us in this island by taking post in our rear, while their ships effectually secure the front; and thus, by cutting off our communication with the country, oblige us to fight them on their own terms, or surrender at discretion; or, if that shall be deemed more advisable, by a brilliant stroke endeavor to cut this army to pieces, and secure the possession of arms and stores which they well know our inability to replace.
After leaving New York, Washington wrote John Hancock and discussed the plan to “…wait for an opportunity when a brilliant stroke could be made with any probability of success” Certainly Washington’s successful attacks at Trenton and Princeton that followed were “Brilliant Strokes”.
The Marquis de Lafayette proposed to Washington a “brilliant stroke: to rouse the people of France.”
General Charles Lee planned (and wrote about) but never attempted a “brilliant stroke’ into New York from New Jersey.Perhaps the most professional soldier in the Patriot army Charles Lee was an extraordinarily controversial figure.He and his guards were captured by British Colonel Banastre Tarleton at White’s Tavern in Basking Ridge, New Jersey.His time in British custody including plans he made for the British is controversial and documented by his own writings.After being released through an officer swap he showed poorly at the Battle of Monmouth.Washington dressed Lee down in front of the troops, Lee publicly expressed disrespect to the Commander-in-Chief and was arrested and later court-martialed.After Lee appealed unsuccessfully to the Continental Congress to overturn the court-martial’s verdict he resorted to written and verbal attacks on Washington – not a popular move.
After reading about the concept of the “Brilliant Stroke” it was easy to apply the label to the larger impact of leadership in the game.Leaders also influence other aspects of the game like battle and each leader has special capabilities but the Brilliant Strokes will each change the momentum and potentially the outcome of the game.What will your Brilliant Stroke be?
We wanted you all to get the update on where we are with both the Digital Version and new Collector’s Edition of Twilight Struggle, which were funded by our successful Kickstarter Campaign this past summer. So here’s a copy of the update that went out today to Kickstarter backers. Enjoy!
It’s been a while since we’ve given you a proper update. So, in today’s update, we’ll do our best to give you a comprehensive look at where we stand with both the digital and physical rewards. I hope you’ll see that although we’ve been quiet of late, there has been a LOT of work going on in the background.
First off, here’s an update on the digital side from Programmer Randy Stevenson at Playdek:
Digital Version Update
Where We Came From
When we started the Twilight Struggle: Digital Edition project, Playdek had just made the decision to adopt a new graphics engine to take our products to the next level both visually and functionally. Our core existing technology behind all our games was about to get a facelift. The challenge was to separate our existing UI code from the game rules, AI & network code in a way that allowed our programmers to continue iterating on familiar technology while opening up a new playground of creativity for our artists to work in. As a result, the presentation of our games would get a huge boost in quality.
So, we went to work! Laying the groundwork for the new architecture — our existing game engine coupled to a spiffy new graphics engine — took some time to accomplish, but we did it. Progress during this period of development was ‘under the hood’ and not particularly visual. It took some time, but it has finally reached a stable and functional state.
Meanwhile, Gary Weis (Playdek’s CTO) crafted the game rules code for Twilight Struggle. This is usually the first step we take because the other major components of the program (AI and UI, particularly) benefit most from a solid and faithful rules implementation. As board gamers ourselves, we appreciate the importance of getting the rules right, and it is no easy task. In the ‘real world’ there can be numerous rules conflicts that we don’t ever need to think about unless they actually come up during a game. Even then, we can always check for a ruling on The Geek, or just improvise a ruling that seems fair and continue with the game. Not so in the digital realm! Every course of action, no matter how improbable, needs to be handled correctly.
During rules development, we have a barebones Windows client that allows us to play through the game and exercise the rules engine so we can find and fix bugs. This is the game in its first playable form, completely untouched by any artist.
Where We Are Now
Gary and I have been playing lunchtime games of Twilight Struggle using our game rules code for the past couple of months. Our goal has been to test out as many combinations of card play as we can, looking for bugs in the rules code. Sometimes the game would outright crash on us. Other times, we’d notice problems with certain cards not functioning correctly or bugs in the scoring sequence.
Gary also implemented Volko Ruhnke’s Late War Scenario (from page 12 of the Deluxe Edition rules), specifically so we could get better test coverage on the late war cards. Playing this scenario as the Soviets is brutal. The US must score 20+ points in order to win, and you are just trying to minimize the damage as much as possible. Preventing US dominance in any region when it is scored is often difficult for the Soviets in this scenario. By the time we returned to playing normal games, I’d lost all confidence in my ability to spread Soviet influence throughout the world. (Don’t worry, it’s back now. Ask Gary.)
We started out both playing on Gary’s Windows client. The interface is functional, but it can be unforgiving. Once, I entered the command to perform a coup only to realize I’d forgotten Cuban Missile Crisis was in play. Another time I performed a coup using ABM Treaty but I’d forgotten to play the card for its event — I’d used it for ops at DEFCON 2. Whoops! Too bad, there was no way to back out & no warnings given. Of course, our finished game client will do all the right things you’d want in situations like these. It’ll warn you when you’re about to cause Thermonuclear War. It’ll let you undo your actions during your turn, as long as you didn’t reveal any new information.
During all this play testing, I’d been working on the ‘real’ client, the program that will become our final shipping product. Right now, it is functional and runs on 3 platforms: MacOS, iOS and WindowsPC. I’ve been using it in my daily Cold War battles with Gary for the past 2 weeks. It doesn’t look much better than Gary’s Windows client, but it is the chassis upon which we will build our final UI. It currently allows asynchronous network play, hotseat play, and play against a rudimentary AI. Take a look:
I can tell already that playing Twilight Struggle this way will be a joy to fans of the game. I always used to lose track of what action round it was, but not anymore. The days of searching for a 5 influence marker, or improvising a second 8 marker (with a 5 next to a 3) are over! Now I can look in the discard pile without my opponent knowing instantly that I’ve got SALT Negotiations in my hand, and it’s easy to see what cards have been removed from the game. I can easily go back and review the sequence of events all the way to the beginning of the game. And finally, no more time spent setting up & putting away the game.
It is very important to point out the following: To date, not a single piece of art drawn by an actual artist has been put into the game. But that’s about to change…
Where We Are Going
As of today, we are finally ready for art staff to join us working on Twilight Struggle: Digital Edition. One of our artists, Ron Bourbeau, is already testing out some visual concepts. In a matter of weeks, the user interface should see massive improvements. We will soon be iterating the design of the user interface to make the product as slick as it can be. There are some things that probably won’t change too much, like placing & removing influence from a country by simply tapping/clicking on it. Other things will need to be explored a little more: What’s the best way to display log information? What’s the best process for indicating whether cards are played for Event or Ops? Opponent’s Event first, or Ops first? Ops used to Place Influence, perform a Coup or attempt Realignment? Right now the interface for these decisions is a series of functional but boring buttons. By the time we are done we will have settled on a process that is as simple and intuitive as we can make it.
Right now, I’m working toward our next major milestone: getting the UI functionality to a point where we can release a beta version to backers for online play. It will be good to get feedback from beta testers as we work to refine our interface. Getting test coverage on more card combinations and game states will also help us track down whatever bugs remain. Nothing beats playtesting to really whip your game into shape, so I am looking forward to getting the game into testers’ hands.
While UI work proceeds, Gary and I will also be working on improving the AI, which is still in the early stages of development. It has a long way to go before it can give us a challenge, but it will get there. Additionally, we still need to add the Chinese Civil War variant (does anybody use this?) and What If? Expansion to the rules code, as well as the ability to load more scenarios beyond the Basic and Late War scenarios. There’s still plenty of work to be done!
– Randy Stevenson, Programmer, Playdek
Physical Version Update
That’s exciting news from Playdek! I can’t wait to try it out! As I mentioned in an earlier post, I plan to be at the Playdek offices next Monday, Nov. 17, to take a look at the program and meet with various team members. NDA allowing, I’ll update you guys on that visit when I get home.
Now for physical reward news from the GMT side of things. Here’s our status as of today:
$15 Off Coupon Code: We have everything ready to go to send out the Coupon Codes on Monday, November 17. We’re going to send these out using the same process we use for our monthly GMT customer email updates, so look for an email on the 17th from firstname.lastname@example.org. The e-mail will be a short note from us that will include your $15 off coupon code, that you’ll be able to use at checkout for any in-stock (not P500) order from the GMT website (www.gmtgames.com) between now and June 30, 2015. Note that these codes are one-time use codes, but they are NOT tied to an individual account on our website. So if you’d like to give them to a friend or as gifts as some of you mentioned during the campaign, that will work just fine. But each code can only be used once.
Game Expansions (2 x Promo Packs + “What If?”): Ananda and Jason turned in the final versions of all the expansions about a month ago. Our artists are currently finalizing graphics and layout in preparation for sending them off to the printers.One thing we hadn’t thought about, which Mark Simonitch caught as we were doing the prep work on these, is that we’re going to need to do the cards for these expansions in two versions – one to match the 60K+ copies of the game that already exist, and one specific to match the Collector’s edition. So we’ll print enough “new versions” to match the # of Collector’s Editions we print, and send the new version to anyone who’s getting a CE.
Game Fulfillment (TS Deluxe Edition or 1989): We are going to ship these in March when we ship the Expansions and the Collector’s Edition. We looked at maybe shipping them sooner, but it creates a mess, tracking-wise, for our office folks, and it also wrecks the shipping budget to ship multiple times. So look for these in March with the rest of the goodies.
Collector’s Edition: We’re making progress on the Collector’s Edition, with an eye toward a March release. Tony tells me that all the files will be in to the printer by the end of November. Here’s a component-by-component listing of present status on the major new components, with more details where we have them:
Game Box. This will be the wooden, hinged box, that’s 4” deep, with ½” thick box sides, and elements of the TS logo stamped in the box top. Specs already in to the printer and ready to go along with the rest of our order at month end.
Game Cards. The card art is finished and they are ready to go to the printer. (See Sample Below.)
Map. You may remember that we decided to give you guys a double-sided mounted map for the CE. One side is the standard map from our Deluxe Edition, so of course the art for that is ready to go. The flip side features all new artwork from Chechu Nieto, the map artist for our COIN series games. Mark Simonitch tells me he’ll have the map from Chechu by this weekend. We may give you a sneak peek before we release – or maybe we’ll just surprise you, we’ll see!
Counters. All of the game’s influence markers are going to be die stamped wooden pieces. The rest of the informational markers will remain as cardboard counters. These, too, are already in to the printers in bid form – we just have to deliver the counter art for the markers around month end.
Miniatures and Dice. We’re still on track to deliver five metal miniatures and two 18mm custom-molded plastic TS-themed dice.
The Rules and Player Aids, Fabric Bag, and Certificate of Authenticity will all still be in the final CE product – just not a lot extra to say about those here.
Here’s that sample of the game cards I mentioned above. Hope you like them!
So, as you can see, we’re well along in the creation process, on both digital and physical products. We’ll update you guys again as we have more information. Thanks for all your support!
Enjoy the games!
Come join us on April 23-26th, 2015, for our 29th GMT Weekend at the Warehouse! We’ll spend the better part of 3 1/2 days, often long into the night, playing your favorite GMT (and non-GMT, if you’d prefer) games. This is mostly an open gaming event, although there are a couple of tournaments this time.
Gaming starts around 8 each morning and goes until Mike Lam and the Down in Flames Aces event players collapse from exhaustion in the wee hours of the morning.
Quite a few GMT Designers and Developers attend these weekends. We’ll be updating this list often between now and the event, but for now the tentative list of Designer/Developer attendees and events looks like this:
Gene Billingsley and John Welch will be here to teach and demo Mr. President.
As usual, Mike Lam will be running the Down in Flames Aces Event, including the two-player team tournament on Saturday.
Ken Tee will be demoing Iron Butterfly, an upcoming COIN series title.
Harold Buchanan will be demoing his COIN series game, Liberty or Death
Registration is $30, which we don’t charge until the week of the Weekend. We’re limited to about 100 attendees for this event, so if you’d like to attend, please contact the office ladies via online chat from the GMT website or at 800-523-6111 to reserve your spot.
There are several hotels within a few miles of our offices. The closest one, The Sequoia Inn, blocks rooms for our attendees at special rates. The hotel reservations # is 559-582-0339. Tell them you want the “GMT Group” rate.
We look forward to seeing you in Hanford in October!
April 23, 2015—April 26, 2015
8:00 a.m to late night, ending around noon Sunday
GMT Weekend at the Warehouse - April 23-26, 2015
GMT Games Offices and Warehouse 800-523-6111
13704 Hanford-Armona Rd, Suite B-1 Hanford, CA 93230
During October 2014’s GMT “Weekend at the Warehouse,” I had the pleasure of teaching many of this wonderful event’s attendees how to play Hitler’s Reich. The games were invariably entertaining, fun to observe, and players’ responses, both during and after the event, to this marvelous Mark McLaughlin design gratifying to experience.
Prior InsideGMT articles hopefully provide insights as to the cards of Hitler’s Reich and my gaming buddies, The Rockland Guys, inaugural experience with the game. That article includes an image of Mark’s not so aesthetic, but completely functional, hand-drawn play-test map.
With those articles and an image of the Hitler’s Reich play-test map before you; the ensuing “Extended Example of Play” should provide another layer of understanding of the kind of gaming fun the game offers. There are cross-references to the game’s Rule Book Sections within the article.
Be warned: as with Mark’s other GMT designs, there is “luck with the dice and luck with cards” inherent to Hitler’s Reich… but that’s what makes this game, and our hobby, so much fun, eh?
This extended example of play is an Axis Player Turn after a not particularly effective “Operation Barbarossa” (7.8) resolution. It is now 1942 with a fresh Axis deck. The Axis Player reconstituted his roster of “Schwerpunckt” (German word for a concentration of military power at the spearhead of an attack) Event Cards and is ready to give the conquest of Russia another go.
Before GMT had announced Gallic Waras an upcoming COIN Seriesvolume, a couple images of our prototype posted on GMT’s Instagram site spawned a Boardgamegeek threadcontending that application of the COIN Series system to ancient Roman warfare was an unwise and awkward mismatch – a square peg in a round hole. I was a bit amazed that a few cropped snapshots could generate such an impassioned discussion. Andrew’s reaction to the thread was simply “well, we are changing the COIN mechanics, of course.”
Thus, at first whiff, we faced the question of how the COIN Series would transition from modern to ancient. How indeed are we changing the mechanics? There is a lot to say to that, so to help us best address that question on InsideGMT, Gene back in August called for your questions. Since then, Andrew and I have been busy supporting playtest of the game. But now, finally, we have a chance to answer. Part I below begins with the larger questions you raised about the change in era and player roles, incentives, and capabilities. Part II later will delve into more details of individual mechanics and aspects of war in ancient Gaul. – Volko Ruhnke
Why the huge change in time period?
Andrew: It’s a combination of me being personally interested in the subject, and our thinking that it would be an intriguing change of topic, after four volumes that all take place within a few decades of each other, to go back a couple millennia. Gaul seemed like a good setting for the system, and a good system for the setting (as we will elaborate on below).
Volko: Also, by showing how the core system fits a topic so far back from modern insurgency, we wanted by example to open the door to other designers to look across the span of all ages of history for topics that they feel the COIN Series mechanics might give new expression. And that is happening!
The choice of Gaul, as opposed to any other ancient campaign, for me was simply an irresistible co-design opportunity that presented itself (as it has been with each of my other COIN Series co-designs). Andrew had just read a translation of Caesar’s Commentaries and was redesigning to his liking the setup for the River Sabis battle from Commands and Colors: Ancients – Rome & the Barbarians. We played the new setup and reworked it a few times, aiming for results as faithful to Caesar’s description as we could get them. Andrew’s attention to the project told me that he had a focused interest in the topic, and we had done a lot of design work together for ourselves at home before. So I knew that we could pull off a fresh co-design about the Gallic War. With that, our conversations about the scope, roles, and victory objectives for a new COIN volume began….