Posted on

Silver Bayonet: The 25th Anniversary Edition

by

Founder, GMT Games

cover (1)Back in 1989, before the “G”, “M”, and “T” had even officially formed a company, I was working on my first “real” (as opposed to all the extremely amateur efforts that violated my game tables during the college and early-professional years. MAN, I kinda wish I’d kept the one on Brice’s Crossroads!) game design, an operational level game covering the campaigns of the newly arrived 1st Cavalry Division in Vietnam’s Central Highlands in late 1965. That game was Silver Bayonet, and it was the game that tested a system that my other two initial designs, Air Bridge to Victory and Operation Shoestring, were based on. We actually released all three together in late 3rd quarter, 1990, but Silver Bayonet, to me at least, was always “my first published game.”

Later this year, to mark our 25th year in business – no small feat in this industry – we’re going to release a complete remake of that original game, as a special 25th Anniversary Edition of Silver Bayonet. This edition will feature WAY better map and counters than what we published in 1990 (thank you Mark Simonitch and Charlie Kibler!), a few new units, and a complete rework of rules, while maintaining essentially the same (streamlined just a bit) operational system that appeared in the original. Rodger is doing special cover art for this edition as well, so this should be a pretty cool package, all in all.

The only reason I can really make a new design of this original game a reality is because my friend (and our webmaster) Mitch Land has agreed to help. As many of you know, Mitch has taken over the reigns of my original Crisis: Korea 1995 system and is now creating new games using that system in our “Next War” series. Recently he came to me and inquired about basically doing the same thing with my Operational Series – updating it and then taking it to new topics and eras. I replied that “I’ve been thinking about doing a 25th Anniversary Edition of Silver Bayonet, and this would really help me with the workload.” So, we agreed, the only difference being that I’m way more involved in the Silver Bayonet project – it’s still my baby, I guess – than I was with any of the Next War series update. So I have the original game out on my game table and am looking anew at the system, scenarios, as well as scaling issues for the reworked map (more below on map and counters). We have a May deadline to send the game to the printers (for a planned Fall release), so this is something that I’m working on daily. And Mitch is a huge help, getting the rules in shape for Mark and helping me identify areas we can tighten up in the system and scenarios.

Posted on

Next War: Taiwan Scenario – Invasion!

by

18.3.8 Invasion! – Operational Map Only Scenario

This scenario allows players to play the Advanced Game scenarios, but ignore any naval aspects. The scenario assumes that the PRC has been able to nullify the ROC Navy, secure the Inshore approaches to Taiwan, and begin to establish a beachhead on Taiwan.

Posted on

Next War: Korea Scenario – Regime Change

by

  16.2.7 Regime Change Scenario

Rather than facing a foe which is disintegrating in front of them as in the Collapse! Scenario, this scenario depicts a situation in which the U.S. and ROK have decided that enough is enough, and the regime in North Korea needs to be changed. To that end, they’ve decided to build-up and invade. The Commonwealth has opted out, but, with world tensions high, both China and Russia may step in to even the odds…

This scenario is intended for two players and uses only the North map. Use the new Series rules released with Next War: Taiwan and available via the Support Site. (This scenario is also available at that site as a PDF.)

Posted on

Hitler’s Reich: A Card Conquest System Game: Extended Example of Play (Part 2 of 2)

by

HitlerReichTAB_P500(RBM)Click here to read Part I of this article

Chapter Four.  Blitzkrieg & Second Success Action

Because the Axis won its first Action, it gains a Second Success Bonus Action.  The Axis choice to take the Production Center Bonus Event Action put that Success Action in jeopardy, as had the Axis failed in the Production Center Bonus Event his turn would have ended.  The Axis was successful, however, and thus play continues to its Success Bonus Action OR choose to immediately launch a Blitzkrieg Attack from newly captured Leningrad.

This is an important game decision, since by making an immediate Blitzkrieg Attack the Axis Player may continue using the Manstein, Stukas and Waffen SS Events.  Otherwise, those three Event cards would be “flipped over” and not available until the next Axis turn.

Leningrad-Novgorod-Moscow

Leningrad-Novgorod-Moscow

Posted on

Next War: Taiwan Examples of Play

by

The following examples are intended to assist with some of the trickier aspects of play in the recently released Next War: Taiwan.

Penghu Invasion Example

The following is an example of how to conduct an invasion of Penghu using the Advanced Game Series Rules. It is not, necessarily, the best way to go about it, but it is used as an illustration of the various methods of taking a hostile Penghu away from the Republic of China.

The example assumes that the PRC controls the Taiwan Straits Inshore Box. The example dispenses with all other non-essential steps, phases, and segments in the Sequence of Play and covers only the relevant portions of the Initiative Movement and Combat Segments.

At the beginning of an Initiative Turn, the PRC controls the Taiwan Straits Inshore Box, and both of the pesky ROC SAGs have been eliminated. The PRC determines that it will invade Penghu using the forces shown. For convenience, they are shown on the Naval Display, but they also simultaneously occupy the PRC Holding Box on the main operational map as well.

penghu1

Posted on

Adding the Replicators to Space Empires

by

Jim Krohn is the creator of our really cool 4X space game, Space Empires. In the expansions to SE, Jim has managed to give us a bunch of cool new additions and options without making the game unwieldy – a considerable design accomplishment. In this, Jim’s first article for InsideGMT, he takes us inside his newest expansion, Space Empires: Replicators, on the P500 list now and slated for release in 2Q or 3Q, 2015. Enjoy the article! – Gene

SE CoverSpace Empires: Replicators is the second expansion to Space Empires:4x.  As the designer, I wanted to share a little bit about the design philosophy for the expansion.  This expansion introduces a number of great things that add to the game play:

  • Large Terrain Tiles that replace the planets, asteroids, nebulae, etc. when they are revealed. This not only makes the board look cool, but reduces counter clutter and saves space in each hex.
  • A Resource Deck that adds another layer of both strategy and tactics to the game.
  • New Ships (like Battlecarriers)
  • New Terrain

The coolest thing, however, and the name sake of the expansion, is the addition of the Replicators.  Replicators are “Von Neumann” machines, a class of machines that can replicate themselves.  It introduces a possible 5th player to the game as well as adding another way to play it with just two players.  While the first expansion had empire advantages, which gave each player a special power, the Replicators are a different animal altogether that play completely differently from all the other players.  It is not just an empire with a special power, it is a new way of playing the game – they don’t have the same ships, they don’t have the same tech tree, and they require less book keeping.

Posted on

Interview with Developer Alan Ray

by

    Designer - Liberty or Death

    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.

    Posted on

    Perfect Openings: First Turn VC Strategy in Fire in the Lake

    by

    Welcome to the first Strategy Article we’ve published in InsideGMT! Unlike the majority of our articles, this one was not written by one of our designers or developers, but by one of our players. I want to thank Mark D. (the new owner of Grognard.com)  for creating such a well-conceived and well-written article that’s aimed at helping players new to Fire in the Lake. I’d also like to take this opportunity to invite any of the rest of you who would like to submit a strategy article on one of your favorite GMT games to please do so. My hope is that over time, we can create an excellent online resource of player-created strategy articles to help others as they sit down to learn and play our games. Enjoy the article!  – Gene

    Pic 1

    Overview

    Fire in the Lake: Insurgency in Vietnam, designed by veteran designers Mark Herman and Volko Ruhnke and published by GMT Games is a 1 to 4 Player game that simulates either a part of, or the entire, Vietnam War. It’s a game with many moving parts and many interrelated methods, procedures, and techniques. The interaction of four players with competing, and often conflicting objectives (even for nominal allies) often results in a bewildering array of potential outcomes.

    However, as in most games of skill or chance, there are fundamentals to which gamers should adhere, particularly new or inexperienced players. The player who gets the first move of the game should capitalize on this advantage. It can set the tone for the early portion of the game and, in Fire in the Lake, it’s the only move that can be planned with any certainty. After that very first move, the game can go off in a thousand different directions… but the first move can be carefully planned.

    You can choose a “shotgun approach”, attempting to inflict damage on both of your historical enemies while simultaneously assisting your ally, or you can opt for self-promotion and the bettering of your own position. You can also choose to focus your aggression against one particular enemy player whom you consider the most immediate threat, hoping to rock him back on his heels for the next turn or two. Or you can try to do a bit of all the above.

    Each player’s initial game situation is unique and demands a custom strategy that complements their peculiar capabilities. This article is geared towards inexperienced Fire in the Lake players who have a decent working knowledge of the game mechanics, but are still not “old pro’s”. It proposes a set of “perfect opening moves” for the Viet Cong, assuming the luck of the draw has granted them the very first move of the Short: 1965-1967 Scenario.

    Posted on

    Time of Crisis Design Diary #2

    by

    TimeCrisisTAB(RBM)The first question a lot of people ask about Time of Crisis is, “How does it compare to other deckbuilding games?”  This is something Wray and I thought about quite a bit throughout the development process.  When we first conceived of the base design for Time of Crisis, deckbuilding was still a new mechanic on the scene and we were clearly not the only ones who were intrigued by it.  Since that time, many new deckbuilding games have come into existence, many exploring new territory.  We knew we had to give Time of Crisis its own fingerprint, to make it distinctive in some way among games that utilize a similar mechanic.

    First, what exactly is a deckbuilding game?  We need to begin with the first real ancestor, Rio Grande’s Dominion.  There may have been games in the past that used a deckbuilding-like mechanic, but Dominion is the one that really gave it an TOC Pic 1identity and turned it into a genre.  I suggest that the essence of what makes a deckbuilding game, as seen originally in Dominion, can be captured in the diagram to the right.  The main “loop” of actions in the game is to draw new cards and play those cards, thereby generating points that can be used to purchase new cards, and repeat.  Some of the cards that you buy are worth victory points (VPs), the accumulation of which is necessary for winning the game.  To make the game interesting, most of the cards allow the players to perform special actions, which may modify or enhance virtually any element of the game.  Seeking ways to exploit combinations of these special actions is a big part of the game, but it doesn’t change the fundamental core of the game, which is to create an engine that can buy victory points more efficiently.  Note that all of the action in the game is entirely encompassed within the scope of the player’s deck of cards.  Every action is about simply moving cards, from supply to deck to hand and into play.

    Posted on

    A BECKONING VICTORY: THE BATTLE OF MARS-LA-TOUR 1870

    by

      Designer, At Any Cost and Hammerin' Sickles

      At Any Cost P500 Page

      “The tragedy is that, obsessed with avoiding defeat, he was blind to a beckoning victory.” – David Ascoli, author of A Day of Battle, referring to French Marshal Francois Bazaine

       

      Pic 1

      The Battle of Mars-la-Tour was fought on August 16th, 1870 and is considered to be one of the more remarkable battles of military history. Not only were the circumstances under which it was fought most singular, but its impact on the future of Europe was monumental. The importance of the engagement on that “day of battle” alone makes it ripe for study in the wargaming community, having had such a significant impact on the rise of the German Empire and the fall of Napoleon III’s Second French Empire. Yet, the very uniqueness and oddity of that “murderous day” make it almost impossible to simulate accurately on the game board. Such was the challenge that Fred Manzo and I decided to take on with the design of the Mars-La-Tour scenario for At Any Cost: Metz 1870. So how does At Any Cost attempt to accurately simulate such an odd and convoluted battle? Well, let me tell you ……

      The French army in the summer of 1870 was already in full retreat after its first series of engagements. A significant portion of the French Army of the Rhine was defeated at the Battle of Spicheren by parts of the Prussian First and Second Armies and being pursued, albeit loosely, to the fortress town of Metz. Without the possibility of any support, the French army huddled around the fort as it decided its next course of action. Emperor Napoleon III, pressured to return to Paris in order to deal with various defeatist political issues, turned over command of the Army of the Rhine to Marshal Achilles Bazaine. Not his first choice, Bazaine nonetheless reluctantly took the reins from Napoleon and received his final, somewhat contradictory, instructions – protect the army under all circumstances and get it to Verdun and Chalons to rejoin the Emperor to form a new army.

      These multiple and divergent goals are reflected in the game’s Victory Track mechanic. The French player must not only try to open his retreat route to Verdun by capturing key towns and map edge hexes, but he must do so without losing too many units or – even worse – being cut off from Metz. The Prussians don’t need to worry about casualties at all and simply strive to take important towns on the map that threaten the French army’s position and thwart its mission.