In Gene’s last article, he said:

“We’re now using Charlie’s most recent map version to create a Vassal Module so we can test the scenarios on the new map. We’ll tell you more about that process, as well as about a couple of new scenarios we’re adding, in our next InsideGMT post about the project.”

The most recent article discussed the scenarios, so now, not only am I going to give you an update on the status of the game, but I’ll also describe the changes to the game which we’re making to enhance gameplay, i.e., sharpening the bayonet.

Update

First, though, let’s talk about where we are. Gene and I both REALLY wanted to be able to release the game in the October-November timeframe since it’s the “official” 50th anniversary of the battles in the Ia Drang. Gene gave you an account of the painstakingly detailed map work he did to produce the most accurate depiction of the battle area we could. Unfortunately, that process took time, and, coupled with some other things, I called an audible to push back the delivery date so we could get some good solid testing in on the new scenarios, victory conditions, and new sub-systems and rules tweaks (more on that below).

That said, testing has been going pretty well. The game will still be divided into two kinds of scenarios: Standard and Campaign. The Standard scenarios are generally quick and easy to play. The smaller Campaign scenarios take a bit more time to play, and the Grand Campaign will take the longest as it covers the entire 39 day time span. (My last article on Silver Bayonet covered the scenarios in more depth.)

To accomplish this testing, we’ve been fortunate to have a VASSAL module, by Jesse Escobedo, which was created pretty much the instant Charlie Kibler was done with the first map proof. This is an excellent method of testing for at least three primary reasons:

1. It allows for a wide range of testers. (We have guys in Brazil who are testing the game!)
2. It allows for easy “setup” and restarting scenarios when rules change.
3. When we start putting the real counters into the module, we catch counter errors.

That said, at some point a physical copy of the game needs to be created to ensure that it actually works when you’re pushing counters around (which is my preferred method of actually playing a game). I created such a copy, and it’s been used extensively. It was recently used at the GMT Weekend at the Warehouse to playtest one of the Campaign scenarios. There was also a second copy at the warehouse made by a another team of testers.

Of course, the nice thing about this, also, is that when we do release the game, the VASSAL module will be ready as well!

The long and the short of it is that we’re busy testing the game to ensure that the scenarios are still playable, that the rules still work, and that the new sub-systems haven’t broken the game we all love. And on that note…

What’s New

Let’s talk about what will be changing in the game and why. After Gene and I talked about redoing the game, my first order of business was to head over to the CSW Forums and BGG discusssions on the game and review every single comment on the game. In addition, I reviewed any known errata, and I solicited opinions from guys I knew who had played the game. For the most part, the game system was sound, and everything we love about the original will remain: Assault and Maneuver Combat, Bombardment, Helicopters, Observation, Hidden Movement, etc. However, the one overarching theme I kept hearing was that the game lacked the feel of what people thought a Vietnam game should be. In other words, the US didn’t feel like the US and the NVA didn’t feel like the NVA. So, the changes I’ve introduced have primarily been to correct any errata as well as produce that more asymmetrical feel that gamers expect. What you’ll see below is a non-exhaustive list of those changes.

There are at least four significant changes to the rules: Patrols, Ambushes, Landing Zones, and the Brigade HQ.

Patrols

The original rules had players putting patrol markers on US/ARVN units to model beating the bush for the enemy. That’s been changed to explicitly model the units whose primary purpose was patrolling versus the standard practice any unit would have. That is, every unit is “patrolling” the six hexes around it. The primary purpose, though, of Project DELTA and the Special Forces-led and -trained Montagnard CIDG (Civilian Irregular Defense Groups) involved patrol and reconnaissance to report on VC/NVA movements and, sometimes, interdict them. In addition, when the 1st Cav arrived, part of the new airmobile doctine involved using scouts, the 1/9 (1st battalion, 9th regiment), to find the enemy and follow up with airmobile units to fix and destroy him. This activity for those units is now modeled through the use of patrol markers which aren’t, necessarily, placed on units, but just on the map. They observe Hidden Movement markers, and, depending on the results and the map situation, the US/ARVN can reinforce them. It makes for an interesting cat and mouse game.

Ambushes

One of the overriding realities of Vietnam was the fear of ambush. Both sides practiced the tactic, but for the NVA/VC, in particular, this was bread-and-butter. The “lure and ambush” was Standard Operating Procedure (SOP) for the NVA/VC, and it had been since the French were involved. So, this needed to be worked into the rules. This particular rule has undergone several revisions. The first iteration was flat-out unworkable. The second iteration, while it worked, was a process-heavy and convoluted sequence which, while it produced good results, slowed gameplay to a crawl. Over a few revisions, we’ve come to a light-weight set of rules with a simple procedure which nicely captures the ability to ambush on one side and the fear of it on the other. If the NVA/VC are hidden, the opportunity for ambush exists (if you’re using ground movement), so the US/ARVN spends a lot of time using their observation assets (helicopters, patrols) to clear paths.

Landing Zones

In the original game, there are Landing Zones (LZs) printed on the map capable of landing large forces. In addition, you could land in other hexes with a single company. The reality is that there were areas all over the map which were capable of handling larger LZs. In addition, there were very few places a small LZ couldn’t be found and/or created. In fact, the capture of the NVA hospital as recounted in the campaign, was conducted primarily from an LZ in which a SINGLE helicopter could land/take-off (which, by the way, made it tough for the troopers on the ground…). The new rules take this into account by covering two types of LZs: Operational LZs and Field Expedient LZs. Operational LZs are represented by counters which are named for some of the historical LZs used in the campaign. Players can place these in most types of terrains. These LZs can land up to four stacking points in a turn. The Field Expedient LZs, on the other hand, while more flexible in terms of where they can be found, are limited in the number of troops which can be landed. The flexibility provided more accurately reflects the terrain as well as capturing the mobility advantage the airmobile troopers enjoyed.

Brigade HQ

During the operation, the 1st Cav concluded that they needed to create what we would, today, call a Forward Operating Base (FOB). Their helicopters were spending far too much time shuttling back and forth from the division HQ in An Khe. Historically, they moved the currently operating brigade’s HQ to the Catecka Tea Plantation, and built a small helictoper base. Interestingly, this FOB was entirely supplied from the air, including ALL of the fuel for the helicopters, since the roads were untrustrworthy (see Ambush above). In the game, this is represented by the Brigade HQ counter which, if placed on the map, can provide advantages to the US player in terms of better recovery chances after flying multiple missions. On the downside, if the Brigade HQ is overrun (as the VC attempted to do the night of 12 Nov 1965), the US/ARVN could lose the game.

Miscellaneous

Along with the above, some small tweaks have been made to the rules. Here is a non-exhaustive list:

• Terrain Defense Values (TDV) have been modified to reflect the new terrain as well as changing some of the original types.
• Combat Effects have been altered to provide a better feel for the terrain in terms of how it affects attackers including the inability of the US/ARVN to use artillery or air in certain hexes.
• Zone of Control (ZOC) rules have been changed to reflect certain capabilities of the combatants. For instance, NVA/VC, DELTA, and CIDG units can “slide” through ZOCs instead of having to stop.
• Combat Refusal eligibility has changed, and it’s now easier for the NVA/VC to conduct Combat Refusal as they subtract the TDV of the hex as a die roll modifier (DRM).
• HQ coordination has been added which can affect how well attacks are conducted. The US doesn’t need to roll for coordination unless the attacks involve units from more than one battalion.
• Bombardment has been changed a bit to allow some Fatigue results.
• Two leaders have been introduced: Lt. Col. Moore and Lt. Col. Truong with some special abilities.
• Landing adjacent to known enemy units is considered a “Hot LZ” and can cause units to Fatigue.

Recap

We’ve approached this 25th Anniversary Edition with several goals which can be boiled down to bringing the components and gameplay forward to today’s standards. In addition, my goal was to make changes as necessary to more accurately represent both side’s unique capabilities without altering or breaking the base game system. Hopefully, we’re well on our way to achieving that.

Author: Mitchell Land