Introduction by Congress of Vienna (CoV)’s Assistant Designer & Editor, Fred Schachter: December 2020 marks the one year anniversary of Congress of Vienna becoming a GMT P-500 listed game and we once again thank all who’ve placed much appreciated orders for CoV. What a year it has been; not only for us all due to the Pandemic, but for our beloved gaming hobby and the development of CoV.
This monthly update is a retrospective by designer Frank Esparrago, a reminiscence going back to the game’s earliest features. Its particular focus is on the developmental progress of Congress of Vienna since it made its debut as a prospective GMT game during July 2019’s CSW Expo in Tempe, AZ… ah for those wonderful seemingly halcyon days when we could physically gather for a good old traditional gaming convention! Hopefully, those days shall soon return.
In conjunction with this article’s InsideGMT publication, the latest files of sample cards and counters are shared. These replace those posted with CoV’s P-500 listing. For those, and a host of related Congress of Vienna material, which should provide useful and hopefully entertaining background for this article, kindly reference: GMT Games – Congress of Vienna
With that, take it away Frank!
I am terribly happy to be able to write this piece to all you loyal InsideGMT readers of our Congress of Vienna work in detail (sorry, for being excessively long, but I don’t want to miss this fine opportunity to explain our team’s fine Congress of Vienna game work this year and a half of development and playtesting!) I hope readers can appreciate all the dedication, interest, and enthusiasm those involved with this game have brought to a labor of love. When I look back, I continue to be amazed at the intimate, fruitful and intense relationship that Fred, Dick and I developed, as well as with many of our European and North American play testers. The team is very proud of the game as it is today and I believe everyone is very happy with the different contributions they made and are continuing to make as we continue play testing until the happy day we’re advised the game is ready to commence its GMT production planning.
I’m going to be wordy in the following update because I don’t want readers to get a partial view of Congress of Vienna’s latest status. Although it will surely be somewhat biased because when we have dedicated so many hours to design, develop, test, and make various modifications, … we feel the game becomes part of us, as one of our children and children are usually loved above and despite their flaws.
I will seek to explain the modifications we made to CoV: a process commenced in Tempe (AZ) during the game’s GMT debut in July 2019. Others subsequently emerged to improve game mechanics and make them more fun. In many cases, after a conducting extensive playtesting, rules were eliminated because we saw they did not work as originally conceived. Now, I am going to try to explain each of these changes. These are listed as follows:
Congress of Vienna’s Rulebook
Both Assistant Designer & Editor Fred and Developer Dick improved CoV’s Rules and Cards’ English wording; but we are further revising the rules through the good efforts of Rules Writer Chris Clarke so they are more concise and understandable, with minimum risk of misinterpretation. All bugs found to date have been fixed.
Also, relatively recently, we decided to transfer the game’s more complex rules: e.g., those that require more playing time and mostly address Congress of Vienna’s military aspects of the Napoleonic period into a new rulebook chapter provisionally entitled “Adding Wargamer Flavor“. Right now, it is placed at the end of the Rulebook (Chapter 15); but we have no firm opinion as to whether it should be placed in the Rulebook or moved into the Playbook with the game’s other optional rules.
War Phase
1) Cavalry (wooden cylinders) and Infantry (cubes) units, a vestige of unit differentiation from the originally designed game, have been eliminated. Now there are only military units (cubes). Wow did this simplify related rules!
2) Commander-in-Chief cards, their rules, and markers have been removed. Now battle DRMs (Die Roll Modifiers) are included on the cards themselves with no associated rules for this now discarded concept. The Initiative mechanic and its related time-consuming calculus is gone.
3) We made the Denmark / Norway Box part of the Wargame Flavor Rules. It’s now an off -limits space for the Standard Game which simplifies military operations during the War Phase as well as interactions with track B.
4) We standardized and simplified the placement of military unit reinforcements and replacement of military units as well as Military Operation and Military Support markers.
5) We simplified DRM battle bonuses for terrain, being in one’s homeland, guerillas …
6) The Withdrawal from battle option has been remarkably simplified (and sped up). Its major effect is on VP scoring and to reduce potential battle losses because military operations and battles continue in the same pattern as Standard Game battles.
7) We removed the French King Joseph Satellite unit… it was a colorful bit of historical trivia; but an unnecessary complication to the game.
8) There are no longer double entry tables to calculate combat results (see the above “older design” Figure); now, in the middle of the map board, a double track is used to register cumulative battle DRM while also indicating losses
9) Combat cards could add DRM to their own roll or decrease DRM to the opponent’s. This was suggested by our team’s Eurogamers; to be able to graduate the losses in battle and be able to have an army left to fight the next turn. See the “old” Davout card vs. its latest rendition to the right.
10) We simplified each turn’s battles. Now only one battle is allowed per front (track) per turn. This greatly simplified the rules and dramatically speeds up game play.
11) Joint Operations or Flanking battles between parallel fronts (e.g. Portugal track C and the Mediterranean track D along with Central Europe track A and Northern Europe track B) have been eliminated. This deleted associated rules, decreased playing time, and simplified the handling of some cards that could be used on parallel fronts.
12) The advance between parallel fronts (Portugal / Mediterranean and Central / Northern Europe) has been simplified. Now, as an Allied player, you only need to gain control of a “key to advance” space to attack on a parallel front (e.g. capture Saxony to enable an Allied attack on Hanover). This greatly simplifies the game’s mechanics with associated rules becoming cleaner and shorter.
13) The War of 1812 has been made more difficult to achieve total victory by either side. Furthermore, a facet lacking from the original game has been added: the Americans (controlled by the French player) can win the War and obtain the Canada Annexed Issue
14) The taking of replacements has been sent to the Government Phase (before it was during the War Phase). We have also utilized the same procedure for reinforcements from Minor Countries and Recruitment Issues. Likewise, the movement of reinforcements to different armies is automatic with practically no special rules (except for secondary countries such as Sweden, Spain and Portugal for historical reasons!).
15) The War Phase is now reduced to placing Military Operation markers, military support markers, Strategic Movement (2 pieces for player) and the resolution of battles.
16) We now have neutral battle cards (4) which add more historical rigor, yet complexity to the game. These “slightly help” the player who is losing the war of 1812. In this way, we better simulate military operations in enemy territory and provide a means for balancing the game. But, in the last revision of game, we decided to place these four cards as an optional rule (now, it is placed in the “Wargamer Flavor” rules, Chapter 15). However, most of our play testers recommend, for different reasons, that they should be kept in the Standard Game so that game remains balanced and battles can be more intense and varied. I am considering their most cogent arguments… the below cards may well be returned into the Standard Game.
17) Some game aspects that produced battle anomalies (armies without units, retreat without a place to retreat to, mountains…) have been systematically analyzed and previous doubts dispelled. Now the rulebook is identical our play testings’ “oral traditions”.
Diplomacy Phase
We changed practically nothing from this game mechanic firmly anchored to its Churchill ancestry: only the following aspects were modified after considerable playtesting:
1) The Russian National Advantage has been slightly changed to allow more opportunities for the Russian player against the superior National Advantages of Britain, France or Austria.
2) The French player now has two opportunities each turn to initiate debates, called “Pre-emptive Debate”: these offer some protection against overly coordinated Allied players.
3) We now initially give 10 cards to each player (this is the minimum Hand draw to which are added cards for key map spaces which provide cards). During CSW 2019 in Arizona we gave a base draw of nine cards to each player. This increase makes the Diplomacy Phase a bit more hectic, with more debates. It also makes it easier to save cards for the War Phase. This was a demand from numerous play testers who were obviously… right!
For by increasing to 10 the basic number of hand cards; the probability of obtaining the “top” card stars such as Blücher, Soult, Wellington, etc. are slightly better than the odds that existed in Cosimworld Expo 2019. There are now times those “stars” automatically appear in their owners’ hands as additional cards (from Initial Situation Cards) during many turns’ set-up
Government Phase
1) We made its actions simultaneous instead of sequential. Although we advise only advanced experienced players do this once they know and are fully comfortable with Congress of Vienna’s mechanics. This is a Eurogamer favored feature that speeds play and decreases the waiting time of players while their opponents make decisions and resolve Issues on their tracks, units…
2) We changed the Standard Game’s Congress of Peace so it is not a means to end the game. That simplified that section of the rulebook a lot (it really simplified it very much!). It is now a standard Issue; but it works well to potentially balance the game very quickly by penalizing the player who is winning and/or who has won that turn’s Diplomacy Phase.
The historical importance of Austria with this Issue has been increased with some additional VPs for the Austrian player when playing his Metternich Leader card for the Congress of Peace Issue. However, the optional full and complex procedure for a Congress of Peace capable of ending a game and determining its winner has been placed in the optional “Wargamer Flavor” rules!
We have play testers who take great delight in the Wargame Flavor Congress of Peace and won’t play its Standard Game version. They enjoy its sometimes seemingly difficult to formulize method to determine a victor. Rod, one of our UK Team members, who is a professional programmer, wrote a program to help him decide whether to call a Congress when he was playing Britain (his program advised the odds were against him, so on the war went!) Fun!
Don’t get the impression a computer is needed for this game mechanic! There are gamers who just enjoy confronting a good challenging puzzle and Congress of Vienna provides some most interesting ones! Our UK programmer play tester observed: This last CoV game “is one of the best gaming experiences of my life (even if no face-to-face and I came in last)!
3) The Future Government of France: This track may seem more complicated to understand at first glance. But we changed the table’s presentation to players slightly during this latest phase of play testing. Furthermore, the results of this Issue are immediate in terms of VPs rather than requiring players to await a game’s end. This was a general demand from our Euro gamers that has been quickly accepted by our Grognard play testers!
4) The Peace of Ghent Issue has been changed to Treaty of Ghent (British “negotiated victory”) / Canada Annexed (US victory) on its reverse side. Both players can receive many VPs and extra cards if they win this Issue when the appropriate conditions are achieved. These conditions are political as well as from what military units and fleets achieve in the Military map’s War of 1812 Box!
5) Sweden at War Issue is now autonomous. In earlier designs it was linked to the Austria at War Issue as a pre-requisite. Now, it is more interesting for Russia during the early game, and the Russian player has a harder time deciding which Issues to choose from (for Sweden at War provides the Swede Army of 3 units for his Northern Army)! We also changed the marker. The little circled number in the upper right corner of some Issues, e.g. “2nd” for Sweden at War, indicates that Issue’s priority for Resource funding during the Government Phase.
6) Military Operations & Generalissimo Issues: possible placement difficulties in certain circumstances and spaces for placement have been simplified. The Generalissimo DRM have a reminder by a new marker (Back/Front sides)
7) Minor Country procedures have been simplified and systematized: there are now no historical exceptions, and they are resolved in typical Eurogamer style matter! These Issues’ impact is deeply tested in terms of VP and military units possibly received. We slightly improved their markers’ graphics! For example, Saxony and Hanover were historically Prussian issues; and in the first versions of game, we put Prussia’s flag on the marker. However, we have now placed the Russian flag, for the Russian player, to facilitate the game for players lacking detailed knowledge of 19th century European history. The same with Norway, a Swedish Issue during 1813! However, the Russian flag appears on the marker so as not to distract the players in their diplomatic negotiations.
End of Turn & Checking VP Phase
We improved, systematized, tested and simplified the end of the turn and end of game procedure. A Standard Game’s end can be triggered by the Allied conquest of Paris (forcing the Surrender/Abdication of Napoleon), Napoleon’s Early Triumph by France accumulating 80 or more VP, or the end of turn 10 which results in a victory adjudication. If playing the Wargame Flavor rule, a successful Congress of Peace can also result in a game’s ending.
Mapboard
The latest iteration, November 2020’s (now posted on GMT’s site for the game) is based on numerous playtest sessions. We are in version 64 (in Arizona I recall we presented the 25th iteration and Dick still has the physical copy of that board!) We included many suggestions from different types of players (Eurogamers, Grognard wargamers, young, experienced, novice gamers, Spanish or American… etc.). Board areas have been added for placing a Discard deck and a Card Trade Area. The location of the Military Map is now like Churchill and the boxes of different armies are better placed to facilitate battles in an orderly sequence with a quick means to assess the power of opposing armies. Numerous rule hints and reminders have been added into/near key spaces to minimize need to reference the rulebook.
Some VP spaces have had their values slightly adjusted for better game balance. For example: Castile, Bavaria and Saxony! Along with map space VPs, players can reap VP from other sources… Britain for Pax Britannica, all players for The Future Government of France and the Absolutism / Liberalism Issues. A Campaign Game’s closing situation can see Major Powers’ VP markers in close proximity to one another, in a kind of “Conga Line”, with determining a victor involving a close nail-biting finale… but everyone having a grand time navigating this war and diplomatic arena in seeking victory!
Fred made us modify a large part of the map’s symbols to adapt them for people who suffer from being color blind (can’t differentiate colors)!
Character & Event Cards
During this last year we changed the design of the cards from those initially introduced (we believe to the better). To the game’s original 60 cards 6 new ones were added. Now we have 66 cards plus the 4 original leader cards. Major card modifications include:
1) Colored labels (light background) to more easily indicate to the players which cards receive bonuses or penalties for their diplomatic use. These are color-coded by Major Power, blue: France, green: Russia, red: Britain, and white: Austria. Fields with white letters on a dark grey background convey information applicable to all Major Powers or those specifically listed.
Below are examples from the latest CoV cards with their original iterations beneath them.
2) Where needed, we identified Major Powers card effects by name or with two national letters (RU, BR, AU and FR) or an N for Neutral. This helps players who have trouble differentiating colors being able to use cards without relying on color coding.
3) In the case of Gentz, which was originally a very bland card, we added some complexity, so it is more disputed during the Diplomacy Phase when it is drawn by a player other than Austria.
4) Likewise, a dark background color coding for battle DRM has been carried out (which is different from military cards’ previous light background). This shows cards’ possible use in battle. Defensive / Offensive battle card modifiers have been removed. This simplified the rulebook and in the War Phase in general. Below are a couple of 2019 Military card examples with their 2020 renditions to their right.
5) Oblique dark red banners in the upper right corner indicate military cards useful for battle. This makes it easier to sort those cards within a player’s hand.
6) The different Issue modifiers of all cards have been extensively revised to achieve historic flavor, as well as be more interesting and competitive during the Diplomacy Phase. Certain cards are better for given Issues than others… just as historical characters were for the interests they negotiated over.
7) We changed the color of neutral cards to dark gray (from dark pink) for better instant recognition purposes. In addition, this is in accordance with the color code labeling previously described. This change has been a welcome improvement for Battle Event cards. Below, see the old versus new Talleyrand cards as an example.
8) New cards (6) are mainly diplomatic (4) and only 2 are military (French); but these cards have numerous diplomatic modifiers that make them more interesting to use in diplomacy rather than the War Phase. A few include the possibility that if it is used in battle that personage can be killed in action.
9) We have changed the Savary card to Berthier. This new card gives more game interaction and alternatives (mainly for the French player during the War Phase). So, we are simulating Berthier’s overwhelming “role” as Napoleon’s brilliant Chief of Staff.
10) We added to most card bottoms, to facilitate use of Bots and for CoV’s Solitaire Game, A, B, C, D lettered coding. The best cards are A and the worst D. We have done this for each of the players and they are necessary for the BOTs to work in a faster way. More to come regarding this game feature with future updates and/or InsideGMT articles.
Below are new cards introduced into CoV which were not present during its 2019 debut:
11) We increased the number of cards that, although they are for a certain player’s Major Power, have modifiers for other nations (both positive and negative). This makes their use much less predictable and the game more competitive.
On the negative side, we found that with so many modifiers it takes more time for novice players to choose the right card to play or debate. Consequently, game play has slowed down a bit (there’s danger of “paralysis by analysis”). But take heart readers, experienced players learn which cards are best for certain purposes and do not take an overly thoughtful period to time to make decisions! More card “Before” (2019) and “After” (2020) examples are below…
12) We increased certain cards’ abilities to generate additional resource markers and/or military units by appropriate card use. This makes playing cards more interesting during diplomacy. In addition, indirectly, this contributes to balance the game when a player is losing and receives much needed “help” after suffering a lot of casualties in battles! We have found both Recruitment Issues and British Financial Aid to be relatively less important now as we have these new sources for military units and additional resource markers.
There are 30 cards for the 10 game turns. We conducted a thorough review of them. Above are examples of their modifications since Cosimworld 2019.
1) We eliminated some erroneous, ambiguous or complicated instructions through many playtest games.
2) We created three sets A, B and C. The first one called “historical”; B pro Allied; and C pro French. The associated color coding is: A gray, B red and C blue. At Consimworld we only had one deck A for the Historical Situation. The play testers enjoy this Congress of Vienna “sandbox” feature which allows potential balancing or entering a new random element into each turn’s set-up.
3) Some Initial Situation Cards place one or more additional character cards into a player’s hand. This is in addition to the player’s normal card draw. In this way, the rest of the turn’s action (diplomatic or battle) becomes more competitive and exciting since there are more cards to negotiate and debate Issues. Furthermore, having assured possession of an excellent military commander such as Wellington, without needing “luck of the draw” or a willing card trade partner, was a welcome addition to the game.
4) A short historical introduction for each player has been placed in italics.
Scenarios
Although we continue the intent of providing CoV’s four original scenarios, through the creativity of ace CoV play tester Jon Carter we added small micro scenarios to teach how to perform the Diplomatic Phase, Government Phase and/or the War Phase.
The scenarios have been tested and surprisingly we have experienced that the final scenario: The Campaign of France 1814 (three turns) is highly competitive, intense, fun, and a kind of thrill ride with a very acceptable duration of between 2-2 1/2 hours. We reduced the particular victory conditions and additional VP awards from first designs to make them the closest thing to the full 10 turn game experience. In particular, the Transatlantic play test team (Jon, Lee, Rod, and Sandy) have made excellent contributions to the gaming excitement now in place through the Wargame Flavor Congress of Peace rules. We are enjoying continued testing of these shorter scenarios to be able to more precisely adjust VPs and game balance.
There is also a non-Bot two-player version pitting a French player against an Allied player controlling Russia, Britain, and Austria. This has been well-received by play testers. Readers, more on this with future updates/articles.
It should be noted some gamers play slowly and deliberately (even after achieving an understanding of CoV’s rules and cards). They delight in negotiation banter and comment on rules, game balance, cards, luck with dice, etc. Experienced players can occasionally fall victim to this (understandable… that’s a fun aspect of play never begrudged during our play test sessions and you should see some of our play testers’ facial expressions on ZOOM or SKYPE during a game, with associated colorful “grousing”, when a bad dice roll is experienced!).
However, we have reached an average duration of 30 minutes per turn with four experienced players who have learned which cards are best for given situations (similar to experts playing a game of Twilight Struggle). With such veteran CoV players, the Full Campaign game length is approximately 5 hours (not counting game preparation which is relatively fast) … but as is said in many a commercial: “your experience may vary.”
Bots
We remain in full testing mode. However, we have fairly advanced rules for 2-players that works reasonably well. In the same way we developed a game for three players: a player can direct Russia and Austria with a very small change in the rules. Individual bots are being powerfully analyzed, tested, and improved by Jim Gutt and his team. Testing to date shows that a game using our Bots is faster and easier to play than we have experienced with Churchill‘s Bots.
The starting point were the Bots presented at Cosimworld 2019, based on Churchill‘s scheme. However, CoV’s Bot complexity is higher because although the normal play for an Allied player is to fight primarily against France; during the final stages of tuhe game, the “real” opponent can change to another Allied player. The design of the French Bot is completely new.
Playbook
We are building on the numerous and extensive articles published by different play testers coordinated by Fred and myself within InsideGMT. Specifically, for the following Playbook chapters: Historical Introduction, Designers Notes, Card Manifest, Detailed Sequence of Play Example, and Players Major Power Strategies. It is practically finished in the absence of updating some figures/illustrations.
Vassal Module
Vassal has been a basic tool for playtesting since it allows us to play games with the Pandemic and also with play testers located in widely scattered parts of the world. In fact, developing Congress of Vienna would have been impossible without this tool. It is completely updated and is based on a first design made by the very talented Joel Toppen (three years ago) to which we adapted the evolution of different components and rules. Now, we are using version 32.
We continue to recruit play testers. If you’re interesting in joining us, place a note as a response to this article and one of the CoV Team will get back to you. The Congress of Vienna Module’s use is easy for anyone experienced using Vassal. Just a few small comments regarding it as background:
1) There are many aids to place the game’s military units, Issue markers, military support and resources with the right click bottom of one’s mouse.
2) The choice of specific cards for each player is somewhat complex when indicated by the Initial Situation Card or when a player has been designated for an effect by the Initial Environment Table (included in the Chart bottom!). In the green screen bottom, you choose the nation that will select a specific card; 2) Click on the red button (adjacent to the green one) to show a sub-deck with the national event or game cards; 3) In this subdeck click on the right mouse button and choose the appropriate card; 4) you place it in your hand; 5) Reshuffle the sub-deck to integrate it into the main deck of game cards!
3) There is a button called OPT where you have the optional battle cards that can be added N-6, N-7, N-8 and N-9.
One last nasty surprise about our Vassal version 32. It does not work properly on Vassal 3.4. # engine (I tried the 3.4.11 Vassal engine, but it continues to work incorrectly!). However, it works fine in 3.3.2. In the most modern version of Vassal, the mechanism for choosing some specific game cards that players should receive at the beginning of each turn (Initial Situation Card or Environment Table!) does not work without a bit of tweaking. Of course, it can be done laboriously in version 3.4. # But it is hard work against the computer! I’m sorry but my programming skills in Vassal are very limited… however, the team is surmounting these difficulties! We are playing many a fun and exciting CoV play test game using Vassal!
Summary of the Rules
We already created this document. It was shown to players during Cosimworld 2019 and received favorable feedback. But now the rules that Summary was based on, in many respects, are outdated. We will rewrite this “Quick Learn Game Summary” when Congress of Vienna’s final rules are in hand. We believe this summary will comprise 2-4 pages (depending on font size), perhaps presented on a single large cardstock sheet.
Conclusions
We believe the game has the Diplomacy-Government Phases balanced against the War Phase. Perhaps between 1/3-1/4 of a game’s duration are its War Phases and 2/3-3/4 is the Diplomatic & Government Phases.
The Major Powers (France, Russia, Britain, and Austria) respective 4 National Advantages are successful and very interesting for the players. The mechanic of Trading cards; having many possibilities for debate and saving cards for War Phase battles works very well. These allow very varied games and a fun time whether a player is winning or losing.
Eurogamers generally like the Diplomatic Phase more, although they do not dislike the War Phase (historical accuracy/simulation value is of little interest to them) and the Grognards undoubtedly find the War Phase very competitive, intriguing, exciting, and well simulated for a Napoleonic strategic level game.
So far, most games end with players separated 2-5 VPs at the end of the game (that “Conga Line” earlier mentioned). Only in a minority of games does France get an Early Triumph or does one player stand out a lot from the rest and win overwhelmingly during the later game turns.
The game can play usually fast, although slightly slower than Churchill because there are more debates (due to more cards being in each hand and also four players rather than three players engaged). The Congress of Vienna War Phase is slower because its battles cause a lot of anticipation and, again as in Churchill, the players hold their breath when they wait for a battle’s dice roll results. Although the DRM by cards and terrain can make the result less uncertain and less extreme than in Churchill.
Thanks for your patience dear readers to get here. I hope my explanations regarding Congress of Vienna’s journey since its Dec. 2019 GMT P-500 announcement has been relatively interesting and that you can appropriately better appreciate the game. Comments and/or questions would be appreciated and could help us greatly!
Previous Article: The Battle & Diplomacy Cards of Congress of Vienna
Please note: I reserve the right to delete comments that are offensive or off-topic.