Arrows in a CDG? How the Map of The Bell of Treason Outlines the Upcoming Crisis

The Bell of Treason: 1938 Munich Crisis in Czechoslovakia is the next installment in GMT Games’ informal ‘Final Crisis’ series. It is a successor to Mark Herman’s Fort Sumter, which depicts the secession crisis that culminated in the U.S. Civil War, and Fred Serval’s Red Flag Over Paris, which depicts the crisis following the formation of the Paris Commune to its defeat in the Bloody Week of May 1871. As such, The Bell of Treason shares many mechanics with both these games but adapts them to specifically portray different aspects of the Munich Crisis in 1938. During this crisis, British appeasement policy clashed with Czechoslovak readiness to fight Nazi Germany, while the Soviet Union encouraged Czechoslovakia but was seemingly unwilling to provide any concrete military or political support. One of the central game systems is an abstract map showing four dimensions in which the crisis developed. Each ‘Crisis Dimension’ consists of three spaces where arguments and ideals for and against appeasement clashed, with one of them being a ‘Pivotal’ space that has some additional leverage over the other two spaces. This basic system was already present in Fort Sumter, but Red Flag over Paris introduced the novel idea of adjacency between spaces, including some spaces connected by arrows representing unidirectional adjacency. The Bell of Treason reuses this latter system to model some key aspects of the Munich Crisis. Let’s take a look at each of the Dimensions in its historical context.

Congress of Vienna Standard Game After-Action-Report: “The Clash of Armies” Scenario (Turn 4 of 4 – Nov.-Dec. 1813)

Introduction by Congress of Vienna Assistant Designer & Editor – Fred Schachter: The third turn of this After-Action-Report (AAR) chronicled game was exciting and interesting with France continuing to meet its comeuppance, and not repeating its brilliant turn one Diplomacy Phase performance (winning seven Issues! Remarkable!) since the Allies are now coordinating against “The Corsican Ogre”. For that remarkable feat, see: Congress of Vienna Standard Game After-Action-Report: “The Clash of Armies” Scenario (Turn 1 of 4 – Aug. 1813) – Inside GMT blog 

For background regarding this forthcoming GMT P-500 game, for these articles presume some knowledge of Congress of Vienna’s game system, see: GMT Games – Congress of Vienna.

Our players are having a blast playing Frank’s latest CoV scenario creation. So, let’s conclude the game action of this Congress of Vienna “Clash of Armies” Standard Game contest as the massive struggle for Europe (and the War of 1812 in North America) continues… but first…

The Origins of 18 India

18 India‘s lineage is derived from Francis Tresham’s 1829 Mainline. The venerable Mr. Tresham created some novel mechanics for that game: all colors of track tiles being available without waiting for different phases, a draft of shares to be held in a player’s hand, “managed” companies (those operating without a director’s certificate in play), locations with variable revenue values, trading in trains, only having one opportunity to sell shares in a stock round, building yellow track very quickly, and having a discard stack of shares. 

The British Way: Palestine

Having provided a general overview of the whole multi-pack in our first InsideGMT article, the rest of this series will focus on providing an overview of each of the individual games, starting with the earliest conflict in the pack. The British Way: Palestine depicts the struggle between Jewish insurgent groups and British forces in Mandatory Palestine between August 1945 and September 1947. This period reflects the height of the Jewish insurgency, and the game ends prior to the breakout of the civil war between Jewish and Arab armed groups following the British decision to leave Palestine. This article will highlight some of the major mechanics and themes covered in The British Way: Palestine.

The Cards of Plum Island (or … How Can Such Mundane Components Contain So Much Evil?)

The Last Stand

My bad! Before I begin to describe the gory details of how the cards work in this game, something I forgot to mention in my last riveting update was the Last Stand option that player’s units can exercise in combat. So, among the thousands of in-person interviews we conducted in order to bring you this highly realistic simulation, we kept coming across the same stories about the amazing last-ditch stands that many groups of Plum Island’s finest pulled off during the three day siege. Incredible tales of struggles against impossible odds and seizing victory from the jaws of defeat. Sure, we quietly guffawed at these ludicrous claims and discounted them. They had to be just the wild rantings of some seriously damaged individuals who were putting a brave, but highly imaginative, face on humans getting their butts kicked by vicious lumps of deteriorating flesh. Yet there seemed to be the smallest (sub-atomic, to be honest) kernel of truth to these stories, so we had to include the possibility of these acts being pulled off in the game as well. Therefore, whenever a unit suffers its final Hit and would thus normally be eliminated, it will attempt a Last Stand. The owning player draws a Fate Number and if that number is less than or equal to the unit’s Bravery Rating, the unit will survive! Instead of being horribly devoured, it will instead retreat (actually, flee while screaming incoherently) to an adjacent area – just like a phoenix rising from the ashes! Better to run away and live to fight another day, as they say. So, there you have it – we’ve actually tilted the game-balance scales in favor of the players with this one, as unjustifiable as it is. But hey, at least no one can call me a devilish, heartless game designer now … well, not until you see what’s coming up in the next sections. Sorry …

Labyrinth: The Awakening – An Introduction (Part 1 of 2)

The first expansion of the Labyrinth series of games covers the five years from 2010 roughly through 2014, with the main events simulated being the Arab Spring and the period of Civil Wars that followed.  It introduces new concepts and game play, each of which is covered below. 

Labyrinth: The Awakening Strategy

The expansion of rules in The Awakening give both players many more long-term options and make the strategic calculations immensely more complex. The major differences are the introduction of awakening/reactions and civil wars. The game has so many options, there is no coherent way to discuss them all.  Instead, I will explain a few key concepts, and discuss a full game replay.

The British Way: Introduction to the Multi-Pack

The British Way covers four counterinsurgency campaigns between 1945 and 1959. In each of these campaigns, the British attempted to control their exit from empire while facing an insurgent opponent. This period of British counterinsurgency influenced subsequent counterinsurgency doctrine and campaigns by both the British and other countries. In future articles, I will cover background and mechanics on each of the individual games, but first I want to provide background on the argument being made in the multipack and explain what exactly a “COIN multi-pack” is. I specifically want to address what I see as the two major themes of The British Way.

The Struggle is Real: Reworked Mechanics and a New Solo System for The Weimar Republic

Much like the historical Weimar Republic, The Weimar Republic has seen its share of setbacks and crises. But unlike Germany’s first democracy, which was toppled both by the zeal of those sworn to destroy it and the incompetence of those sworn to defend it, the multiplayer political boardgame simulating that very collapse is moving forward with renewed hope.

Development of The Weimar Republic was struck hard by the Covid19 situation, mainly because live, face-to-face playtesting suffered so much. I had all sorts of live sessions planned for 2020, all of which had to be canceled of course, and as the pandemic dragged on the whole infrastructure for face-to-face gaming seemed to be in danger. At that point the game had seen its share of digtial testing already and I was not overly keen on moving focus back into the digital realm – even though the tools available these days make playing board games online both enjoyable and easy, it is hard to simulate the flow of an actual face-to-face session, especially for testing purposes. That flow is of course crucial to an asymmetric multiplayer game, which is perhaps why it took so long for the development team to discover certain tempo-related issues that had to be adressed before proceeding.

Congress of Vienna Standard Game After-Action-Report: “The Clash of Armies” Scenario (Turn 3 of 4 – Oct. 1813)

Introduction by Congress of Vienna Assistant Designer & Editor – Fred Schachter: The second turn of this After-Action-Report (AAR) chronicled game was exciting and interesting with France continuing to meet its comeuppance, and not repeating its brilliant turn one Diplomacy Phase performance (winning seven Issues! Remarkable!) since the Allies are now coordinating against “The Corsican Ogre”. For that remarkable feat, see: Congress of Vienna Standard Game After-Action-Report: “The Clash of Armies” Scenario (Turn 1 of 4 – Aug. 1813) – Inside GMT blog

Our players are having a blast playing Frank’s latest CoV scenario creation. So, let’s resume the game action of this Congress of Vienna “Clash of Armies” Standard Game contest as the massive struggle for Europe (and the War of 1812 in North America) continues… but first…