Ludography

DEVELOPER

Great Battles of History:

Great Battles of Alexander Expanded Deluxe (P500 -2015)

Hoplite (2014)

Chariots of Fire (2010)

SPQR Deluxe (2008)

Chandragupta (2008)

Barbarian (2008)

RAN (2007)

Samurai 2nd Edition (2007)

Gergovia (2007)

C3I Simple GBoH Battle Manual (2006)

Mamluk (2006)

War Galley 2nd Edition (2006)

Caesar Conquest of Gaul 2nd Edition (2006)

Devil’s Horsemen (2004)

Alesia (2004)

Great Battles of Alexander Deluxe 4th Edition (2003)

Tyrant (2003)

Attila (2002)

Caesar in Alexandria (2001)

Simple GBoH (2000)

Cataphract (1999)

Ancient World:

Carthage (2005)

Rise of the Roman Republic (2003)

Non-Series Games:

Genesis (P500-2015)

 

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.

1. Ross Perot!

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.

How did you get started gaming?

On my twelfth birthday, my uncle bought me a game.  It was Gettysburg by Avalon Hill.  I opened up the box and thought what is this?  A bunch of cardboard pieces and a cardboard map?  I was used to games with wooden or plastic pieces.  The rules were almost impossible to understand.  It took me about three or four months to figure out how to play the game.  Eventually I did, and it was good fun.  As I moved into high school, a hobby store sold Avalon Hill games.  I bought several – 1914, Guadalcanal, Jutland – with my paper route money, all of which h I still have though I have lost my copy of Gettysburg.

I’ve been a history fan for as long as long as I can remember and grew up on the Classics Illustrated comic books.  The Iliad and The Odyssey, Julius Caesar I started my lifelong interest in the classical world hence the interest in the GMT GBoH and the Ancient World series.

Alan Ray

How did you get involved with GMT?

I started out in the late 1990’s as a play tester for War Galley (WG).  The game intrigued me since it was a very playable fleet style game on ancient naval warfare game.  There were some others published before such as Trireme but they required a lot of book keeping. The development process on WG was a little bit different in that there was not a developer per se.  Richard Berg sort of watched over things and the play testers ran things.  A number of the play testers fell off the table (no pun intended) during the play test process, but I stuck with it and did a lot of work in the production stage.  Shortly after WG’s publication, Gene Billingsly sent out a request for Developers for a couple of the game series GMT had in progress.  One was the Great Battles of History (GBoH) series, and I signed up for it.  My first game as a Developer was Cataphract, which included Justinian as a second complete game in the package.  Mark Herman did most of the design work on Cataphract while Rich Berg designed Justinian.

So what has it been like to work of Designer like Berg and Herman?

The majority of my work since Cataphract has been with Richard Berg.  For a given GBoH title, Mark generally contributes a scenario or two, while Richard tweaks the system and designs the balance of the scenarios. Mark is a genius and I really enjoy working with him.  Richard is an interesting fellow to say the least.  Prior to my involvement, Richard was for all practical purposes the developer of the series (Laelius to Mark’s Scipio as RHB once commented). So my learning experience was not unlike an apprentice to the master – and very demanding one at that.  He watched me like a hawk and spared me none of his acerbic criticism!  I have a thick skin so I ignored the tone and dealt with the content of the criticism.

After well over a dozen collaborations, I am on my own and often go toe to toe with the ‘master’, but always in a productive way. He still tends to monitor the initial phases of the development process closely then takes a “hands off” approach in the later stages. Richard knows his stuff and knows what he wants, but does listen to feedback and incorporates it into the final design.

I have also had the opportunity to work with another very talented designer, Stephen Welch, whose passion for India brought Chandragupta to the GBoH series. Stephen has a couple GBoH modules in the final design phase and another full game focused on India set in the 15^th-16^th centuries.

And of course, Dan Fournie, the scenario machine, who designed the highly successful Tyrant and Barbarian modules for the GBoH series. Dan has the gift to craft a realistic and plausible scenario out of extremely limited information (often just a couple sentences) from the ancient sources.

Do you have time to play any other games than what you are testing? 

I haven’t played a lot of games recently.  Even though I have retired, I can’t seem to find the time!  There was a group here in Detroit that I have been playing with on and off for 20 years, but we haven’t met in a few years so any “serious” war gaming is solitaire.  I have played Fire in the Lake, Iron and Oak, Flying Colors and Command & Colors Ancients within the last year or so.  I have accumulated hundreds of games over the years, and frequently browse through them, but few get to the table.   We do have a convention – Michicon- held in the Detroit area twice a year that I frequently attend.  The convention is geared toward family style and multi-player games that can be taught and played within a 4-6 hour window.  I have sponsored as GM (Gamer Master) several GMT games at this con including Dominant Species, Winds of Plunder, and Iron & Oak.

What’s on your game table now (or game boxes nearby?)

The priority item for now is finishing the development of Genesis.   This as a multi player game similar to Pax Romana in its mechanics yet it is an entirely different type of game.  This game has been a challenge for me.  We are finishing up the play testing which has taken a long time due to the length of the game and using PBEM via Vassal to do bulk the testing.  Production has begun with the counters in the hands of Mike Lemick and the map now nearly completed by Knut Grünitz, both under the watchful eye of Mark Simonitch.  There is still considerable work on to done on the Event cards and other components. The rules are in near final form and in the hands of an independent proof reader. As we move through the next few months, we will continue to test and refine until the documents and components are sent to the printers.

Let me a make a few comments on the development process. I spend about 75% of my time on a given game in the production cycle because that’s where I have learned, and all the other developers will eventually learn that the majority of mistakes are made generating the most annoying errata.

GBoH Alexander next edition now on P500

GMT has some very talented people involved in the graphics and layout portion of the production cycle, but they are first and foremost experts in their art.  Although most are gamers, they generally have limited knowledge about the game being produced.  The developer’s key role in this part of the process is to provide direction on the details while keeping tabs on all the interrelated components.  There is a great deal of attention to detail required to get one of these games out the door with as few problems as possible.   For example, all kinds of things can go wrong as you go through the layout process (i.e. creating the rule books and player aids) which is very extensive in one of these games.  The challenge is you have different people doing different things.  You have people doing counters and maps that have to work together; the color schemes have to blend and counters have to be the right size for the hex grid.  All of these little things, if not exactly right, will result in a less than refined product and generate a lot of nasty feedback from the players (i.e. customers) and that is unfortunate.  We have seen the good people at GMT step in several times to make things right.

And I have heard in play testing it is so beneficial to the process to get those play testers that really care about the game and will put in the time to not only play but also help edit the game.

Exactly. In Hoplite, Brendan Clark and couple of the play testers thoroughly proof read both rule books and the player aid cards.  The sheer number of items that were caught by them and then corrected was phenomenal. Yet, there is still some errata – very minor to be sure.

The play testers are critical throughout the process particularly those who provide detailed feedback. From a play testers perspective, providing such detail is a very time consuming proposition. Moreover, unless the testing occurred in a live setting with the developer present, there was no way monitor the play test. With the advent of Vassal, that has changed.  With the play testers spread around the globe, Vassal provides the means for me to keep an eye on what the play testers are doing at a detail level.

So you look at the logs?

Yes I look at the logs.  For Genesis I also played as well which I generally do not like to do. I prefer to keep an uninvolved perspective. But this one we needed a fifth player so I played – and almost won!  The logs allow you to see the style of play and see the “mistakes” in almost real time. The logs also provide the basis for the Extended Example of Play.

Do you have any problems getting and maintaining play testers?

Absolutely!  For a typical GBoH Series I need about four play testers that will stick it out. I try to start with a couple more since invariably some will not stay for the duration. Although it is an established system, there are always mechanics that need be refined.  Richard is never going to let the game sit.  He is going to change something.  And usually they are nice chrome rules that require extensive integration into the rest of the system.  Furthermore, not only do we have to test the standard game, but Simple GBoH as well. There is little or no crossover between the two systems (i.e. a player either plays one or the other), so at least one testers must be Simple GBoH savvy.

Given that GBoH is a relatively stable system, having more play testers adds little value.  That being said, getting even four play testers can be a challenge. I have been fortunate so far in that I have been able to recruit one or two experienced play testers who have worked with me in the past and have added the balance from new recruits. For me this is an ideal mix for GBoH.

Multi-player games magnify the problem. For Genesis, I have not been able to gather more than five play testers at any one time. Since this game accommodates up to five players, I would have preferred to have more. I don’t have the advantage of a local gaming group, which would provide a venue for face to face testing and a pool of play testers. Fortunately, Genesis can be played with fewer than the maximum number players and is easily played solitaire, so we were able to iron out most of the issues with the mechanics before we embarked on the 5 player marathon; it can be a long game in that format. That being said, my preference is to avoid developing another multi-player game!

 

That’s actually helped me a lot, a local group that is enthusiastic about the game and willing to help out however they can. 

That is exactly what is needed for a multi-player system such as COIN. In the COIN series, you have an advantage because you have an established system.  The key for you in developing Liberty or Death will be about victory conditions, playability, and making events work within the system.  With GBoH, the victory conditions are important but not critical.  Most of the battles were unbalanced historically and that just the way it is.  The leaders of the time rarely fought an even battle. They fought either when they had the odds on their side, or were forced to fight due to circumstances.  You can do little bit of balancing in the Victory Conditions based withdrawal levels and offer the more competitive players a “bidding for side” option, but you can’t fudge the history.  My primary focus for this series is on streamlining the games within the context of the designer’s intent to make them easier to play.

It sounds like the challenges in COIN are the solitaire component of the game.  I have never played the game with those flowcharts but I know that AI is hard to do and extremely hard to test.

The good news for me is that it has been done before and Volko and Mike are engaged.  The team that will do the heavy lifting on the Development and AI are engaged.  And I don’t have many counters to worry about – just wooden pieces.

Yes – that will be easier.  Volko was involved in the play test of War Galley. I think he even came up with the name.  He was an outstanding play tester.  After that, he did Wilderness War, which is a great game.

So after all this great experience in Development have you ever thought about designing your own game?

I have thought about and did some.  I designed (or redesigned if you prefer) the Raphia scenario that will appear with the reprint of the Great Battles of Alexander which will be released early in 2015.  I was working on a companion piece – the battle of Panion (somewhat of a rematch of Raphia that occurred about 17 years later) but didn’t have the time to finish it.

I have a couple of designs on the back burner, one of which is a redesign of the Men-at-Arms/PRESTAGS games published by SPI and S&T many years ago. In addition, to better OOB and modern mechanics, the game would use a square grid.  For tactical battles in the ancient and medieval period, the hex grid gives far more movement flexibility than the formations of those periods ever had.  Players can make easy flank attack etc.  You really need a square grid and some very stringent movement rules to reflect accurately how difficult it was to maneuver formations in battle. The generals had a hard enough just getting the troops lined up and faced in the right direction.  So I am a square grid fan at least for that period of history for grand tactical battle.  Once you get to the operational level, you need that hex grid otherwise you have screwy movement moving things around.

I would like to do a strategic game on the later Roman Empire somewhat akin to Imperium Romanum published by West End a number of years ago.  It was a poorly developed, but an outstanding game.  I like Miranda’s Ancient World Series and I would like to do something along those lines.  I have also thought about doing a civil war battle game but I am not quite sure what I would do that is different from what anyone else has done.  Designing is a different mindset – development comes easier for me.

What do you watch read, favorite movies etc?

I have a couple of other interests beyond gaming and history.  I am very interested in Science and Mathematics, particularly Astronomy and Physics.  I do a little bit of observing on my own – not as much as I used to.  Here in the suburbs the skies aren’t too clear.  I have spent studying stellar kinematics (how stars move about in the galaxy) and have developed differential equation type models to model it.

A Galaxy that likely looks very much like our own from the outside!

I am a fan of Fantasy and Science Fiction movies.  The Lord of the Rings Trilogy is probably my favorite movie.  Game of Thrones is a fantastic series – well acted.  With regards to GoT, forget reading the books, the series is better!

As for books, I tend to go in streaks on different subjects, picking through my library for books that I have had for years, but haven’t had time to read. My current focus is on battle narratives in the American Civil War. I recently finished Cozzens’s three volume set (the first two volumes I purchased 15+ years ago) on the major western theatre battles in 1863, and am in the process of working through Rhea’s four volume set on the 1864 Overland Campaign.  My reading style is such, that I read several books on various subjects at the same time. So it’s not unusual for me to move from fighting Spotsylvania Courthouse, to the evolution of red giant stars, to sp3 orbital alignments in alkanes, to the politics of Roman Republic in the 1^st century BC!