State of Play: 300: Earth and Water

 

 

Another week, another short game crammed into seemingly ever-tightening window of opportunity. Early this week, T and I carved out an hour-something of evening to try out 300: Earth and Water (Nuts! Publishing, 2018). This isn’t a new game but It was new to us; I’ve only had it a couple of weeks, and while I was keen to try it out, other games arriving around the same time tool precedence like Saigon 75 (Nuts! Publishing, 2023), of which you can find a brief session write-up here).

I’ve felt like my time isn’t my own of late. There are a number of reasons for that – one of which I should be posting about soon – but this isn’t helped by my gaming buddy, T’s variable availability. So, against this backdrop, we got together to do something I have always made a point of not doing; we sat down to play a game the rules of which I hadn’t quite finished reading, let alone absorbing. Thankfully, 300 is a very easy game to pick up and to teach. The rules are clear (not always a given they’ve been translated from another language), with good examples, and the concepts are familiar enough from broader gaming experience to present no real hurdles to play.

Opening set-up, but incorrect orientation. the long sides should face each player.
Also, the cards (right) tend to get lost in the table-cloth pattern. 3 out of 10 for
presentation (the photo, not the game, which is really quite nice).

300: Earth and Water is an asymmetrical game, built around the theme of the contentious relationship between the Persian Empire and the uppity Greek city-states. The game plays out over five rounds. Each round represents an opportunity for the Persians to stage an expedition into Greece to conquer new territories. In each round, the two sides gather their resources (in the form of resource points, the currency the players use to purchase both their land and naval forces and the means with which to order them), then comes a series of card plays. Players take turns playing a card from their had (each has a maximum of six), which they can use for the event on the card or as an action to move armies or fleets. A player can pass one round, then play a card the next, but when both players pass, the round ends. I the scoring stage of the round, each player counts the number of cities they control; these numbers are compared, the player with the higher number winning the difference between the two numbers in points, which are recorded on a pendulum track. The first player to eight points, or whichever has pints at the end of the fifth round, is the winner.

Ephesos falls (well, for one round - I took it back in the next round). If T had taken
Abydos instead, he could have destroyed the Pontoon Bridge (bottom centre), and
given me a headache.

Everything about this game is elegantly simple, except for the actual play, which presents both sides with compellingly difficult choices at every stage. The game requires planning in the face of limited knowledge of the enemy’s plans. The Persian side always spends their resource points first, of which they have twelve. After seeing how the Persian player has outfitted himself for the coming campaign, the Greek player can spend his six points accordingly. Fleets cost two points for the Persians and one for the Greeks, while armies and cards cost one point each for both sides. Being a learning game we each bought a mixture of military resources and cards with every turn, T tending to match the number of cards with which I – as  the Persians – had furnished myself.

Sometimes things don’t go as planned; Twice, and in consecutive rounds, I drew a card with the event, “Sudden Death of the Great King”, which takes effect on drawing. The event declares the Persian ruler has died, and the campaign for that round has been cancelled, with no points awarded to either side for that round.

I managed to build the ponton bridge across the Hellespont early in the game, which meant the Persians weren’t restricted to ship-borne movement to take ground. The Greeks, while weaker, weren’t without teeth – a naval invasion and successful combat taking one of the major Persian city of Ephesos saw early gains in points, but a slow and steady onslaught by land saw the Persians claw back a slim lead to finish the game on two points.

The board at correct orientation, at the close of the game (a close-run thing).

This is a small package, with a roughly 11” by 17” mounted board and some wooden markers, cards and dice, all fitting into a digest-sized box with a magnetic closure, but 300: Earth and Water offers a lot of game. It’s very much on the strategy-puzzle end of the spectrum, which won’t appeal to everyone, but for a short game, it’s intellectually challenging and a very satisfying experience. It's only been one game, but I can see where I made early mistakes as the Persians, and I’m look forward to trying the game as the Greeks.

300: Earth and Water is also available to play for free on Rally the Troops, if you’d like to try it out before parting with your hard-earned, but with Christmas coming up, this would also make a nice little stocking stuffer that you probably won’t resent having to play with a junior recipient (and it would be a little more personal than an Apple Music voucher).

 

 

Stripped Down for Parts: Norman Conquests: Men of Iron Volume V

   

 

Norman Conquests: Conflicts of the Normans and their Successors,1053-1265 is the fifth volume in the Men of Iron series (which the less charitable call GBoH-lite). I’m a completist at heart, so of course, having the Men of Iron Tri-Pack (GMT Games, 2020) and the fourth volume, Arquebus: Men of Iron Volume IV – The Battles for Northern Italy1495-1544 (GMT Games, 2017 – currently on P500 for a reprint, but you can find my unboxing here)

GMT has recently made a significant change to the presentation of their more traditional style wargames, eschewing the martial minimalist style of Rodger B. McGowan for more elaborate commissioned paintings (usually) fitting well with the game’s subject. We’ve seen this in the last couple of Mark Simonitch’s WWII operational games, such as Salerno ’43 (GMT Games, 2022), North Africa ’41 (GMT Games, 2023), and the second edition of France ’40 (GMT Games, 2024). The particularly evocative cover illustration for Norman Conquests is by digital artist Kurt Miller, originally named The Duke of Normandy. Miller has previously provided cover illustrations for Ancient Civilizations of theInner Sea (GMT Games, 2019), and A Time for Trumpets (GMT Games, 2020). Miller does some truly amazing work, running the gamut from military art, through dinosaurs, historical scenes, to some whacky Star Wars crossover stuff that I’m sure has an audience. You can check out his work via this link. I particularly like his technical illustrations of WWII fighter planes… but we’re here to talk about Norman Conquests, so let’s get back to it.

Back of the box.

The box-back offers a glimpse into what lays in store for the purchaser, with a sample of the counters (shown to actual size), brief series and historical introductions, and a list of the battles included in the game. Norman Conquests is recommended for ages 14 and up and is strictly classed as a two-player game (I’ll come back to this later). The unit size is roughly 250 men to a counter, the hexes are roughly 100 yards across (this is amended to 110 yards, or about 100m, in the rulebook), and, like all Men of Iron, no regular game turns. The complexity is rated as 4 out of 9, which I’d agree with, and solitaire suitability is ranked at 7 out of 9 (personally I’d put it at an 8, but the game is probably best played by two players).

While the battles represented in Norman Conquests all took place inside of a 210-year period, this is possibly the most geographically far-reaching of the sets, cast from the green and pleasant fields of England to Apulia, Italy. There are seven represented in all, and I think it makes for a good survey of Norman – shall we say – participation in various national political discourses of the time The box back details each battle by name, date and location (in chronological order), seven battles in all.

The MoI Series Rulebook (left) and Norman Conquests Battle Book.

As with previous volumes in the Men of Iron series, Norman Conquests comes with two separate booklets, a Men of Iron rulebook and a Battle Book exclusive to this game, covering all the scenarios, and offering a short Example of Play at the end.. While the Series rules are standard across the games, the rulebook gets some attention with each new volume, adding any new unit types and rules particular to the situations covered in the new game.

Rulebook - sample spread.

The rulebook comes in at 28 pages, but the essential rules make up 20 of those. The rulebook covers both the three games that make up the Tri-Pack and Norman Conquests, so there are a number of rules exceptions of clarifications that don't necessarily apply to Norman Conquests, so you could probably ignore about another two pages of text in that. The next three pages are allocated to Special Rules, but only about a column of these are pertinent to the game at hand. There is also a useful Index, a list of changes to the other three games from the Tri-Pack, and on the back cover, e really useful Extended Sequence of Play that I'd recommend photocopying and laminating a couple of copies, so you're not wearing out the rulebook.

The rules for Men of Iron have benefitted from close attention and lots of feedback over the years. The current rules are very easy to digest (that is to say, I don’t think I’ve hit any snags with them), and let you get to the counter-pushing stage quickly. Now would be a good point to mention that the whole Men of Iron series is eminently playable solo, with no hidden movement, clear goals for each side, but with enough tactical flexibility to prevent railroading, and a brilliant continuation/initiative-seizure mechanic (instead of distinct game turns) that keeps an element of surprise in the mix.

Battle Book - sample spread.

One of the things I love about the Men of Iron games is the set-up instructions (to be fair, this is probably a carryover from the series, an obvious influence on Men of Iron). With both text instructions and a colour-coded map, setting up a game is as easy as they can make it without someone coming to your door and setting it up for you. Some battles feature well-defined placement of troops, while others have areas marked out in which to set up a given battle.*

Each scenario gets its own historical background notes, clear set-up map as well as written instructions (for those who prefer to do things the hard way), and some even feature scenario variation notes for those who think every game should be fair and balanced going into it.

PAC - front and back.

The Player Aid Cards are a bi-fold design with all the charts and tables you should need for the game handily located on the front and back of the closed card. The front of the card features the Battle Matrix for Norman Conquests, which essentially breaks down the effectiveness of all the weapons systems used in the game against all the other weapons systems (in terms of DRMs for Shock and Charge attacks). The back panel offers the Combat Results Tables for various means of attack, as well as the tables for defensive actions against attacks like a mounted charge or a shock push by foot soldiers. 

PAC - inside the fold (Terrain Effects Charts).

Inside the PAC are the Terrain Charts specific to each scenario map. These can vary in number; Tinchebrai has a map devoid of features, while Hastings and Evesham each have five different terrain types described, along with their relative movement costs. There are also considerations (one extra movement allowance cost) relating to units exiting or withdrawing from a hex with adjacency to an enemy unit of units. This information is replicated un the maps as well, so if you like – and have the spare table real estate – you can have your PAC splayed out next to you with both more useful sides on full display. I’m a flipper, so I tend to use the PAC folded, which can double as a fan when things get tense at the table.

Flight Point Track and General Track (and the quarter-sized counter sheet).

The game includes an 8 ½” by 11” Flight Point Track card. This is where you’ll track the battle’s progress, i.e. how many Flight Points you and the other guy have each accrued in the game. Flight Points are the currency of the game. When you take losses – both troops and leaders – you’ll register these on the Flight Point Track. These points can accrue quickly; the loss of a regular fighting unit – spear- and pikemen, archers, axemen, etc. – will put two points to your tally, while a Men-at-Arms unit or commander will increase the level by three, and you really don’t want to lose your king (five Flight Points right there). Play tends to be asymmetric, so one side will have a higher threshold for their flight points, but once one side hits their threshold, the other team claims victory. And thanks for coming.

The card also features a General Track. After going through the rules of the Men of Iron Tri-Pack (GMT Games, 2020), my first Men of Iron game(s), I couldn’t find a single reference to this General Track. I thought I was missing something obvious, but I couldn’t find the answer. So, I went to the oracle (Boardgamegeek.com), thinking that If I’d had a problem with this, somebody else probably had as well. Sure enough, somebody had asked the question, and somebody had provided the answer. The General Track is where you can keep track of the phasing side’s successive activations, which you need to track for dice-roll modifiers when your opponent tries to seize the initiative.

Two full counter sheets. Not a lot of counters for seven battles. Just sayin'.

The counters for Norman Conquest represent a break from tradition for the series. While the earlier games featured half-inch counters, these are a forgiving 9/16” and much easier to identify and interpret on the board (for these old eyes at least). The counters also look nice.  I’ve always liked the Men of Iron counter layout; the use of a coloured banner stripe to mark out the various battles’ allegiances is extremely helpful, and the on-board assisting markers (for game states like Charge, Shock, and Out of Command) are clear and unambiguous.

There are only two full sheets of counters for the game, along with a generously margined quarter-sheet, mostly markers and a few units. Compared to some in the series, none of the battles represented in Norman Conquests are particularly large; the biggest scenarios see only around thirty unit-counters to a side.

Civitate and Fuldord battle maps.

Stamford Bridge and Tinchebrai battle maps. The centre fold allows you to have
 just a single half-map exposed during play (not always a option in other games).

The game comes with three map sheets, and two of these are back-printed to make up the seven battles. The largest battle area maps – Hastings, Lewes, and Evesham – cover most of a single side of a standard 22” by 34’ paper map, while the four small battles are printed two to a side on the obverse faces of the double-sided maps. This means to play the smaller map games, there is not need to fold out the entire map; everything for these scenarios fits on one half of the page, on the outside face of the bi-folded mapsheet.

Hastings Battle map.

Lewes battle map.

If the maps seem a little spare, somewhat light on terrain features, that would be because battles were usually fought in an open area where whoever showed up first might gain some topographical advantage. Like Harold choosing the high ground of hill to make his stand (spoiler alert: it didn’t help, historically).

Evesham battle map.

As with most GMT games, Norman Conquests comes with a roll of zip-loc baggies in which to store your counters, enough to keep all the battles in their own bags and to divvy up the markers into sensible groupings. Also included area pair of ten-sided dice – one white and one red, and a filler insert to keep everything from moving around and getting corner-bruised during shipping.

Inside the box.

The box itself is the sturdy two-inch deep, heavy grey cardstock item that seems to be standard for all GMT games these days. I was going to say they could have got away with a 1½” box, but you always need to add a half to accommodate the dice, so two inches it is.

And that covers all the parts of Norman Conquests. I’m very keen to get this to the table. I know I say that a lot and I’m thin on evidence of following through, but in this case, I can see a way forward. Several of the scenarios should be small enough in terms of the size and number of the battles on each side to be able to set up and play on a weeknight. I’ve been emboldened to try this after watching Matt White’s AAR of a solo game of Civitate on his YouTube channel, Matt White Wargames. Matt’s a designer and wargame artist as well as a player/reviewer, so if you aren’t already, you should subscribe to his channel.

Lastly, I bought this in the recent GMT Fall Sale, along with three other games. I apologise to my regulars for being so tardy bringing these to be blog. I’m hoping to work through the other games, soon. If all goes to plan, an unboxing of Banish All Their Fears (GMT Games, 2024) should be next, hopefully inside of a fortnight. In the meantime, go play something.

 

* Battle in this sense is used to indicate all the forces under the command of and loyal to an individual leader. It’s an unusual word in that from its earliest recorded usage, it had multiple meanings, operating as both a noun and a verb, with the meaning implied by context in which it was used. From Middle-English, it could be used to describe a fortified tower, a contingent of troops under a leader (such as Offa’s battle), military exercises (training at arms), a contest of arms (the action of martial pursuit, at either the personal level, like a duel or single combat, or troop level, the activity of doing battle), or even to describe a fight between animals (such as cock- or dog-fighting).

State of Play: Saigon 75

 

I’ve been falling behind on my posts, and there are reasons for that, but rather than go into the tawdry details, I’ll just teel you quickly about a game we played late last week. The game is Saigon 75 (Nuts! Publishing, 2023), a recent acquisition (bought on sale with Espana 1936 (Devir, 2007) to save on shipping – you can find an unboxing of that one here). I had every intention of doing an unboxing of Saigon 75 before putting up any other content, but such was not to be (that would have made for a short post anyway – there isn’t all that much to the game, components-wise).

Initial set-up, post Hallowe'en visitations.

Saigon 75 is a game covering the last roughly two years of the “American War” in South Vietnam. One player plays the ARVN, and the other the NVA. I refer to the sides as the two competing armies because very little in the way of politics is reflected in the game. It really is a clash of iron and blood, and each side tries to use what they have to hand to pummel the opposing side into submission. Except that the South Vietnamese player is pummelling with one hand tied behind their back.

The first thing you need to know about Saigon 75 is that if you’re playing the ARVN, you will almost certainly loose. Odds are stacked in the enemy’s favour, and he doesn’t have t be a master tactician to bring about your demise. This is built into the game; the NVA dice offer more hits (two strikes, two retreats and two blank faces, compared to the ARVN one hit, two retreats and three blank sides), their potential activations increase with the passing of time, and your South Vietnamese troops will begin to desert their posts if the North make too many territorial gains. The designers, Jean-Philippe Barcus and Pascal Toupy, warn prospective players of this in the introductory comments of the game. It’s the first in a series called the UP! (or Under Pressure!) series. It’s designed to be a quick-playing game that will allow a second game in an evening (so the players can change sides and each experience a win). The next game in the series will be Vendée 93 and will be published by Fellowship of Simulations. A Kickstarter campaign is planned for this one, so watch this space for news of the launch.

The Thin Yellow Line.

But let’s get back to The NVA player has two kinds of units, tall, division-level red cylinders (NVA) and shorter black cylinders (Viet Cong). If an NVA division takes a hit, it is replaced by a half-height brigade cylinder. The ARVN player starts with some resources on the board, mostly regular South Vietnamese infantry divisions (tall, yellow cylinders, some motorised brigades, and a few US forces (marines, rangers). But it’s not enough to cover everywhere, and the North Vietnamese can attack from anywhere along the country’s land border, with anything from superior to overwhelming force.

Some early South Vietnamese casualties. They weren't the last.

This isn’t a review, so I don’t want to get lost in the tall grass here, but here’s a quick precis of the game’s workings. The game is played over eight seasons/turns (if the South can hold out that long). In a turn the NVA plays a card from their hand of three, then rolls a die to see how many activations they get for that turn (result plus a set number, depending on the season) deploy or move its units, engages in combat, and when everything else is completed, check the status of the provinces. Any provinces held solely by North Vietnamese forces get a red star marker. This is a Quyết Thẩng (local militia) marker, representing the control the North Vietnamese have in that province. This becomes more important at the close of the South Vietnamese phase.

The ARVN player’s turn follows the same mode as the NVA, except after checking for province control, the ARVN player may have to roll on the desertion table. This is a killer, and it’s what ultimately cost me the game. If the NVA control five or more South Vietnamese provinces – represented by the Quyết Thẩng stars, the ARVN player has to roll a die, and remove the result’s value worth of troops form the board, in a preferential order to mitigate the immediate pain. This happens every turn thereafter.

"I hear Switzerland is nice this time of year."

So, just to recap, the North Vietnamese have more troops available, and they’re more effective in combat. They can go places you can’t – back across the border into Laos or Cambodia – and can engage you from anywhere along said border. And the better they do, the worse it gets for you. Nobody said the job was going to be easy.

T took Saigon province (the primary victory condition) at the end of turn six, after a bad roll on the desertion table saw the last of my remaining ARVN troops pull up stumps.  Could feel the downdraft from the helicopter on the roof of the US embassy on the back of my neck, the defeat was that visceral (it turned out to be the air-conditioner). Victory as the South Vietnamese is possible, but the pressure builds unrelentingly, and each misstep or unlucky roll makes the job ever so much harder. Good thing I like a challenge.

 

 

Stripped Down for Parts: España 1936

 

 

The Spanish Civil War was a crucial conflict in the lead-up to the Second World War, fought between the democratic-leaning Republicans and the fascist-orientated Nationalists. With the First World war still a raw wound in many countries, most governments stood back to see where things would land (some did take sides; the Soviets assisted the farther Left elements of the Republicana, while the German and Italian fascist governments provided both materiel and personnel for the right-wing Nacional. Eventually the Nationalists would emerge victorious, but not before providing a test bed for the Luftwaffe’s best thinking in ariel bombing and ground support, which held them in good stead during the invasions of Poland and France.

That about covers my understanding of the Spanish Civil War. I’ve read Orwell and Hemingway, and I’ve seen Picasso’s monumental Guernica up close, but in truth, I know only the barest facts about the conflict. I suspect this will change, though, as I start to dive into España 1936, Second Edition (Devir, 2024)

España 1936 is a card-driven, high-level simulation of the entire Spanish Civil War, designed by Antonio Catalán. So far as I can ascertain, this is publisher Devir’s only straight-up wargame. Devir began as a small company out of Brazil, publishing overseas comic books in Portuguese and Spanish. Now based on Barcelona, the company also publishes games (mostly what I think of as family games). España 1936 is obviously close to the hearts of people at Devir, because this is the game’s seconds edition, with reworked art and an expansion, La Armada, built into the game (which I gather was only previously released of the Spanish version of the game). The original version was released in 2007, with this edition appearing in 2024.

The more flamboyant First Edition cover art.

The box cover features original art, but in the style of the propaganda posters of the era. This is something it shares with the original release, though I’d argue the new presentation is more suggestive of the seriousness of the game. The artist for the whole project was Joan Guardiet, a talented illustrator who has done a lot of work for Devir, among others, and the visual nods to the media of the era carry through the whole production.

Box-back.

The box back features teaser art of the board mid-play, a bilingual description of the game, and the usual icon guidance to let us know it’s strictly a two-player game, that it’s recommended for ages 14 and up, and that a full game is likely to take in the region of three hours.

Rulebooks in two languages.

The game comes with two rulebooks, one in Spanish and one in English. My understanding of the Spanish language is limited to a few dozen nouns, and most of those are food- or cooking-related, so I’m grateful for the inclusion of English rules. The rulebook is suggestive of a newspaper, and the whole booklet runs to 36 pages. The actual rules run to about twenty heavily (but usefully) illustrated pages. The rest of the book includes a short historical essay by Ramon Sarobe, six pages of advanced rules for incorporating the La Amrada expansion, a shorter duration España 1938 scenario, a timeline of the war and a page of designer’s notes.

Sample page from the rulebook. I don't know what the first edition was like, but this
seems to be quite through and well-written.

The rules are rather illustration-heavy, but in this case this is a good thing. A lot of information on the counters and via the cards is transmitted visually, and the rules provide instruction on how to decipher this information. For example, while there are only a couple of unit types in the base game, each side has no less than eight factions represented; the Republicans are supported by Basque, local Communist, Anarchist and Soviet forces, while the are backed by Italian and Carlist volunteers, the Condor Legion (German Luftwaffe “volunteers”), and the Army of Africa.

The new board design is a vast improvement on the first edition board.

The board is a relatively simple map of the Iberian Peninsula, measuring 21 ½" by 25 ½", with areas represented as paired-box positions, similar to the country representations on the Twilight Struggle (GMT Games, 2005) map, or the region control boxes in Struggle for Europe: 1939-1945 (Worthington Games, 2019). The colour scheme of the board is muted, with an earthy palette which will make the bold red and blue of the units really pop. 

The board also incorporates a turn track and Contested Territories tally (three tracks registering Nationalist and Republican holdings, plus the yellow “Contested” track. Three brightly coloured (and slightly oversized) painted wooden blocks are included in the inventory for use on this track.

Punchboards, bundled in a paper ribbon. One of those novel European things -
the cutaway corner at the to-right of the boards to facilitate lifting the boards out
with a fingertip so you don't have to upend the whole box. Well played, Devir.

Units in the game are abstracted to strength points, but there are also armoured and aircraft units available to both sides. These units are presented on roughly 1 ¼” square counters, cut from good, thick brown-core cardstock. These have a simple numerical value, and come in different weights. You can “make change” by swapping out in-play units, raising or lowering their overall value. Double-width markers denote overall control of a region by one or the other side, red for the Republicans, blue for the Nationalists. Half-sized Leader counters can offer an advantage when present with troops.

Mostly units here. The Republican pieces face left, while the Nationalists face right.
 The little circular markers are used to track information on the players' Tracking Boards.

Unit tokens with double width Area Control markers, half-height General tokens (down
the right-hand side of the boards), and the aforementioned Tracking Boards (bottom).

Each side has a little tracking board for keeping track of Replacement Points, Generals and aircraft resources. The other half of the board sports a detailed game sequence. These are printed in Spanish on the front and English on the back.

The Battle-board (left). Spanish side shown.

And a final, reduced-sized board offering more units.

Also included is a battle board, for playing out battles between the two sides over contested locations. Again, this is presented in both Spanish and English, and also provides visual guidance on the steps involved in preparation and participation in combat, like two concentric flowcharts.

Sealed card-decks as they come. Each sealed deck contains both sides cards
 for either 1936-37 or 1938-39 (showing the English language cards left,
and Spanish on the right).

Like the rules, the game comes with two complete sets of cards, two decks each, one in Spanish and the other in English. I can only guess that it was cheaper to do this than to produce two different versions. All in all, is adds maybe an extra half-pound to the weight of the box, but certainly makes the whole thing feel mor substantive.

The game is card driven, with the players beginning with a had f cards each turn and working through them. Each side has their own decks, a 1936-37 deck and a 1938-39 deck. I haven’t explored the options presented through the cards yet, so you’ll have to wait for an AAR for some worthwhile thoughts on that, but they are really beautifully presented and seem quite straightforward and easy to understand.

Division of components. The game coms with eight dice (four each - no need to share),
tracking blocks for the Contested Territories track on the map, logo stickers for the
markers, and enough resealable baggies to accommodate all the pieces that come
in the box. The dividers also keep the English and Spanish cards from fraternising.

The inside of the box is cleverly put together with a simple divider system (which, in my copy at least, did get a little banged up in transit), and is just one more example of the attention to detail and functionality that has gone into the product design of this game. This is the difference between a more broadly public facing company compared to the ones that focus solely or primarily on wargames. There are higher expectations among euro-gamers regarding component quality and the aesthetic design of games generally. We grognards have long got use to putting up with short shrift. España 1936 feels like very component in the game has been developed to execute its task brilliantly and left at that stage. Nothing unfinished, but nothing over-engineered either. An elegant sufficiency of design. 

As well as the four decks of cards, España 1936 comes with eight dice – four red and four blue, large wooden cubes for tracking the Contested Territories, and a tiny strip of stickers to bling-up the Contested Territories tracking blocks with appropriate symbols.

The whole presentation of España 1936 is understated and quite lovely. The going opinion of the game seems to be generally positive (a solid 7.3 average on BGG). Some might question its credentials as a wargame (there is always some voice of contention), but from the little I’ve seen of it so far, it does appear to be a serious consideration of a brutal, oddly romanticised conflict that stands out on a century of conflicts.

 

 

State of Play: New member of the A Fast Game team

 

Well, less a new employee, more a new strata of management. We've adopted a cat, and her name is Dharma.

"I was told there would be snacks."

Jess and I have been married for twenty-five years, and in that time, we've never owned a pet. But collectively we've cat-sat felines for family members for a total of roughly four of those years, usually six weeks to three months at a time, once for nearly six months.

I'm not quite sure how it happened, but we started talking about adopting a cat a couple of months ago. When Jess was looking at the local Animal Welfare League's website, Luna (as she went by then) jumped out, figuratively speaking. A stray for probably most of her life, the two-year-old was affectionate on her own terms, but had some issues, she didn't like other cats and she didn't like children. It was like it was meant to be. 

Dharma is a strong advocate of paper recycling.

It took a few days for Dharma to get used to her new surroundings, and a full week us to gain a measure of trust from her, and for her to become accustomed to getting regular, small-but-often meals (she'd lived on the streets for so long, fending for herself, that in the shelter she would make herself sick gorging her food too quickly). The adoption officially went through a couple of days ago with Dharma's registration transfer to us.

I haven't tabled a game since we've had her but she doesn't seem to be a physicist (a cat that pushes things of shelves to see if they break of bounce), so I'm holding out hope that she won't countermand my orders with troop movements of her own devising. I'll keep you apprised.

Already, Dharma is expressing some strong views on the subject of CRTs.

Review: Commands and Colors: Medieval

 

 

Commands and Colors: Medieval (GMT Games, 2019) seems to be regarded by some as the red-headed step-child of the Commands and Colors family. It was the only C&C version that met with open (and loud) hostility from some quarters when it first arrived on the scene. I want to say up front, I am not, and have never been, in that camp. 

Everyone has their own opinion of the Commands and Colors system, but nobody can deny it’s been popular (and I’d argue, ultimately good for the health of the wargaming hobby overall, but that’s a conversation for another post). Commands and Colors: Ancients (GMT Games, 2006) and Commands and Colors: Napoleonics (GMT Games, 2010) have sold out of their seventh and fifth printings respectively, and demand is still high.  C&C: Medieval is on its second printing, and at time of writing is still available from the publisher.

Set-up for the Petra Mountains Passes (Lazic War, 548 AD) scenario.

A number of years ago, before the publication of C&C: Medieval, there was a short note in GMT’s monthly newsletter penned by Richard Borg, C&C’s designer and godfather of system’s development into new subject areas, from Memoir ’44 (Days of Wonder, 2004) to Commands and Colors Tricorne: Highland Uprising (Compass Games, 2020). Here Mr Borg spent a paragraph of two on the projection for C&C: Medieval, which at the time, had either just been added to the P500 list or was added in the following month or so. At that time, Borg stated the intention of his development cohort was for C&C Medieval to cover the entire medieval period, from the dissolution of the Roman Empire to roughly the mid-fourteenth century, in broadly chronological order, beginning with the Eastern Roman Empire, and working up form there. The middle-ages cover a period of over a thousand years, beginning around 300AD (though some would argue for the Sack of Rome in 410 being a good marker) through to about 1500 and the birth of the Early Modern period.

There was some kickback about the choice of tackling the period chronologically, but since the game’s initial release five years ago, Commands and Colors: Medieval has received over 600 BGG ratings for an average of 8.2 out of 10 (I’m always wary of BGG numbers, but in terms of wargame-scale, 600 seems like a good sample size). For context, Command and Colors: Napoleonics rates and average 8.0 over nearly 3,300 ratings. With the impending release of C&C : Medieval's first Expansion set, The Crusades (GMT Games, ~2024 - at time of writing still available for pre-order on GMT''s P500 list), I thought this seemingly under-loved game deserved a second look.

A green and pleasant board. The vertical lines you can see are panel folds, not the
sector demarcation lines, which are dashed (each sector is roughly 4 hexes wide). 

 

Appearance

Command and Colors: Medieval has everything you’ve come to expect from a Commands and Colors game; lots of blocks (purple for the Late Romans/Byzantines and their allies, and a sandy colour for their enemies, usually Persian Sassanids in this the base set scenarios, but sometimes their hereto allies), sheets of stickers to go on the blocks, in this instance a combined Rules and Scenarios booklet, and some very nice laser printed dice (no more arduous placing of die-face stickers in the recesses of the old dice of Ancients and Napoleonics (we’d played so many games with my brother-in-law’s set of C&C: Napoleonics, I had to write to GMT and ask if they sold extra sticker sets to replace the faces of the then illegible dice (if you ever find yourself in the same situation, they usually do)). The blocks are of the same proportions used in other flavours of Commands and Colors, so nothing new to report there. The illustrations for the units on both sides are off the usual high-standard.

Unit types in C&C: Medieval. the purple are the Romans/Byzantines. while
the sand-coloured blocks are the enemies of the Romans/Byzantines.

The board is mounted, the background a grass-coloured green that sets off the block colours nicely, and presents the terrain tiles well. For those unfamiliar with the series, the board is essentially a featureless play area of indeterminate scale, superimposed with a hex-grid thirteen hexes wide and nine deep. The hexes are large as to accommodate a unit starting with four blocks (the blocks equate to hit points, and each successful hit against the unit will remove a block, but like C&C: Ancients and others, the unit operates at full strength until vanquished).

Geographical features, like forests, hills and rivers are represented by cardstock terrain tiles that ae placed on the board per the set-up map for that scenario (unlike most other Commands and Colors games, the scenarios for C&C: Medieval don’t appear in a separate booklet, but are incorporated into the rulebook. I like the illustrations on the terrain tiles as well. The tiles are produced on a good weight of cardstock (something that has varied from product to product in the Commands and Colors production queue but has definitely stabilised in the last six of seven years.

Reduced Sassanid medium cavalry holding the high ground. The hill rules are different
in C&C: Medieval, reflecting the evolved style of fighting and concentration on cavalry
as the primary offensive unit. No unit can roll more than two dice fighting up-
 or down-hill, or from hill to hill. 

The game also comes with two pairs of Player Aid Cards. Two present the units types and gives a rundown of their various strengths and limitations, particularly in relation to other units. The other two are duplicate cards presenting two sets of special orders that can be applied to a unit I some situations by spending an Inspired Leader token. I’ll go into a little more detail about these below.

All in all, the production on the game is very good, with an overall feel that manages to hark back to its sibling games from GMT, but also to carve out its own identity. If I could change one thing about the package, it would have been to keep the rules and scenarios in separate booklets, but that’s a fairly minor quibble.

Typical scenario set-up map, showing the positions of terrain tiles and both side's units.
A scenario will also offer a brief historical context for the battle, information for the
players (, i.e., hand size, who starts), and any additional rules peculiar to that
situation (such as fordable rivers or VP locations).

Play

If you’ve never played any Commands and Colors games before, here’s the Cliff’s Notes version. Commands and Colors: Medieval is a card-driven, tactical level wargame that uses blocks instead of counters to denote units of differing strengths and capabilities on a board divided into three sectors, Center and Left and Right Flank (relative to the player). Each side has a hand of cards with varying orders that can be played. The orders may allow the activation for movement and combat of one or more of units in a certain sector, or across sectors, or those close to a Leader, or anywhere on the board, so long as it matches the type (designated chape/colour).

Each unit can move and fight or just fight if adjacent to or in range of an enemy unit, If the target unit is adjacent, they’ll probably have a chance to fight back, which adds to the tension. The game is one by the side that accumulate the required number of victory points (marked in the game by the physical handing over of a Victory Banner chit to the opposing player); the scenario will specify the number of Banners required, but it’s usually between five and nine. This is handy if you have less time to devote to a game; you can choose a scenario with a lower banner-count. Banners are earned by vanquishing enemy units and leaders from the field, and sometimes meeting terrain or action objectives. First across the line wins.

From Top: Victory Banners (Sassanid in sand/ochre and Byzantine in
Purple/Gold). Bow markers for Cavalry (front and reverse). and an
Inspired Leadership token - in a scenario you'll start with two or more
of these and have a chance during the game to earn more
through card play.

The thing I’d heard people complain most about regarding the Commands and Colors system is how they can’t just do what they want when they want to do it like they can in other games (which leads me to ask what are these other games they’ve been playing that have no restrictions on a side’s actions), or they complain they never have the right cards for the strategy they want to pursue. To me, this is the game’s strength. Humans are predisposed to optimisation, achieving a goal with the least amount of effort. It’s what has led to most technological innovation. Sometimes people forget it’s the complications that make play so enjoyable. The card-order system in C&C games is meant to reflect the imperfect knowledge of the battlefield that any commander will have (fog of war), but it also there to provide complications to hinder the players efforts, forcing them to find ways to make do and to play, literally, the hand they’re dealt. Commands and Colors is often painted as a beginner’s game, or an entryway into the hobby, but I don’t think some folks give it enough credit as a proving ground for developing improvisational tactical skills in a dynamic, fluid environment.

If you’re familiar with Commands and Colors: Ancients, a lot of C&C Medieval will look and feel familiar. The same grades of Light, Medium, and Heavy troops and cavalry are present, with matching colour/shape markers to the earlier game, along with the white bordered Auxilia (light) and Warrior (medium) units. But there’s also another class on the block; the Super Heavy Cavalry (white bordered Red (Heavy) square marking). These function in much the same way as Heavy Cavalry, except they can ignore more melee (swords) damage than Heavy Cavalry, and in on a Cavalry Charge order, they roll with two extras dice instead of a single. They are still susceptible to Red Square rolls though, like any heavy unit; they are devastating, but mortal.

Inspired Action Reference Sheets. Just the edge you may need.

The main innovation to the game is the introduction of special orders for leaders. With the play of a Leadership order, the leader can give a special order or advantage in combat to a unit activated by the current order from a suite of options presented on the Inspired Action Army Reference Sheet (a double sided PAC, with Byzantine team orders on one side, with the Sassanid team’s set on the reverse’ not that some scenarios will require both players to use the Roman side, when the battle involves hereto allies of the crumbling empire), by spending an Inspired leadership token (the scenario notes will spell out how many of these each side begins with, and there are opportunities to gain more through card play during the game. The player is usually limited to spending just one in a given turn, but they can be spent to, say relocate a leader at the end of a players turn, or to add a die to a Close Combat or Battling Back roll. To be honest, I’m still getting used to this aspect of the game, and I don’t think I’ve ever made the best use I could of the Inspired Actions available in a single game yet. There’s always more to learn.

Bow markers. In the fifth century, apparently everybody wanted to be Legolas.

A game of C&C: Medieval will play out similarly to a C&C: Ancients game because the basic framework is so similar – the latter is the closest genetic match to the former. But it’s in no way a duplicate experience. There are different dynamics at play, such as the possibility of all cavalry on one side doubling as mounted archers; from around the Fifth Century, it was much more common for progressively heavier cavalry to carry bows as well as their melee arsenal into battle. Rather than duplicate forces (making the se both much heavier and more expensive), markers are included to define whether a cavalry unit is armed with bows or not. The scenario’s special rules will tell you if any cavalry units on either or both sides need to be treated thus. The cavalry bow capabilities are all treated the same – range of two hexes and two dice for stationary fire or a single die for moving, but I’ve played plenty of C&C games of all stripes when a single die could or has made a significant difference.

 

Appraisal

The full gamut of Medieval history (and arguably pre-Classical Ancient history) have been overshadowed in the wargamer public’s collective imagination by the sheer weight of games devoted to the much more sexy Classical antiquity (from Alexander through late Roman Imperialism), the same way the Napolenic wars tend to over-shadow the martial achievements of Marlborough, Gustav Adolph or Wallenstein. I studied mostly the Early Modern period at university, though I’ve tried to make up for that in my current reading. My point is this is all new to me. Each scenario or battle sequence (like the Lazic War, represented by five battles stretching over eight years) in C&C: Medieval is an education. Wargames in general tend to be the beginning of learning for me; I’ll play a game or a scenario, read the historical precis of the situation, get beaten (whether playing the historical losers or not), and go away to read at lease a Wikipedia page on the battle or its political and social context.

When two sides go to war (it can make for a diverting evening).

But exposure to history isn’t the only reason I enjoy C&C: Medieval. It’s also a lot of fun. This it has in common with all the Commands and Colors games I’ve played. I get it’s not for everyone, and that’s okay, neither is Country & Western music. The C&C family is planted firmly nearer the Play end of the Play/Simulation continuum, and it won’t scratch some folks’ itch for realism in a game. Play in any C&C game is swift and dynamic (well, once you’re accustomed to the way the cards, the units and the terrain interact, but it’s not a particularly steep learning curve either). Commands and Colors games tend to be both fast and good games, and there is an obvious need and desire for games like that in the wargaming space. Some scenarios seem weighted in favour of one or the other side, and that’s okay, as the historical situation depicted probably also tilted to one faction’s benefit. But the satisfaction of winning a game despite such hobbling is a sweet nectar form which to sup. As I’ve said in the past, if you really want balance, stick to chess.

Mid-way through the Petra Mountains Passes scenario. The Byzantines got the worst
of it that day (as evidenced by the purple pennants held by the Sassanids).

Commands and Colors: Medieval isn’t simply a different flavour of C&C, any more than any of the other iterations are. They all use a shared language, but each one is in a different dialect, And C&C Medieval is no exception. While the job is still to remove enemy units from the board (as with every other C&C game), subtle and not-so subtle differences make Medieval a different kind of challenge.