| Designer & Player Notes | A1

MINI SERIESMINI GAME PLAYERS’ NOTES, PART II

By Joseph Miranda

Commando

Congo Merc and Border War are both purpose-designed solitaire games. I went this route because they involved situations where one side had an immense edge on both the tactical and operational levels. Players are commanding forces in unconventional warfare environments, up against foes who, while capable of heavy combat, lack the ability to coordinate theater-level operations.

You win in the Commando games by doing two things: capturing Objective markers and moving the KIA (killed in action) Index in your favor. Each game has two types of Objective markers: real and massacre (Congo Merc), or mine-fields (Border War). They’re deployed face down via a Random Locations Table. That makes every game different, as your task force will be heading toward different points on the map.

Time—measured in operations (Ops)—is limited in these games; so you have to figure out where the real objectives are and then get a task force to them before the clock runs out. That’s where the “Intelligence” (Intel) cards come in. You get them by performing Ops, and sometimes by executing special instructions (such as “Blowing Up Stuff,” meaning that if your force has a sapper unit you get possession of the card, as your men presumably cracked a safe containing enemy intelligence documents, or other such things).

Intel cards can be also used for things such as making airfield-to-airfield moves or gaining a critical Op you might need. Sometimes you might need those things more than information on objectives.

You set up a scenario using Mission cards. They provide the Situation, Mission (objective), Execution (number of Ops), Logistics (recruit points), and Command & Signals (any leaders you get for free). Veterans will note that reflects the format of NATO standard operations orders. I did it that way to give the game more authenticity, as well as the fact the format actually does allow for efficient organization of information.

You use the recruit points to build your force. Some units have special

A2 | Designer & Player Notes |

MINI SERIES

Congo Merc Missions

Rescue Hostages! Receive an additional five RP at the start of each scenario (you gain additional resources).

Search and Destroy! For each combat in which your units are involved, roll one additional die per force (you gain combat proficiency).

Coup! Once per mission you may treat one unit in your force as if it had PSYOP capability (you gain political influence).

Race for the Wreckage! After you’ve set up OPFOR units during initial deployment, you may examine one unrevealed Objective marker (you gain intelligence information).

Border War Missions

Operation Reindeer! Receive an additional five RP at the start of each scenario (you gain additional resources).

Operation Protea! After you’ve set up OPFOR units during initial deployment, you may examine one unrevealed Objective marker (you gain intelligence information).

Operation Askari! For each combat in which your units are involved, roll one additional die per force (you gain combat proficiency).

Operations Modular-Hooper-Packer! Once per mission, you may treat one unit in your force as if it

abilities, such as reconnaissance, engineering, or PSYOP—the latter is especially useful because it allows you to discard a card without playing it and pick a replacement. That’s a way to get rid of a card with adverse effects, or to try for an Intel or other card for which you might have more need.

Air units are useful to bring in extra firepower and air-dropping supplies. The downside is that after each use you have to roll to see if the unit is withdrawn. I added in that provision because air units were otherwise shown to be too powerful in play testing. It also works to point up the intense logistical and scheduling demands of an air force, especially in an unconventional environment.

Another special unit type is para-troopers. They can make airborne moves to just about anywhere on the map, subject to a die roll that might cancel an operation or wreck the unit. The critical thing about airborne units isn’t getting them in, though, it’s getting them out. They generally have low movement factors, which means you have to plan to use an airfield move (requiring a spare Intel card) or call in a helicopter (which can be expensive in recruit points), to recover them and any Objective markers they might’ve captured.

Another thing to consider is the stacking limit is six units. Originally stacking was unlimited, but play testing showed it was too easy to build one large killer stack that could then shoot its way through any Opposition Force (OPFOR). With a limit on the number of units that can deploy in a single space, you have to carefully structure the composition of each task force you form. There’s always a tradeoff in terms of firepower versus speed as well as other special unit capabilities. It also means you may have several different task forces operating on the map, each going after different objectives using different tactics.

That gets back to the concept of “operations.” The Commando sub-series doesn’t use a fixed number of turns; rather, each time you move a task force you expend an Op. You can gain additional Ops for various actions, such as winning battles. You can also lose Ops for various other actions, such as losing battles. The tactical situation can therefore have an impact on the operational situation, representing gains

and losses in morale as well as initiative. That integrates several different factors into a single rule, which is something I like to do because it reduces complexity while also being realistic. You can’t lose too many units, or the KIA Index will overturn your chance of winning.

Another thing to be considered is certain scenarios require you to have a minimal level of OPFOR KIA. Yes, I know, that’s grim stuff, but many of these operations historically revolved around running up enemy body counts. It also brings an additional challenge: even if you’ve captured the requisite number of Objective markers, you still have to seek out and destroy enemy forces, which means running more task forces around the map, uncovering OPFOR cards and fighting and winning battles.

Here’s another design note: originally one of the outcomes of battles included advancing after combat (if you won) or retreating (if you lost). I dropped that because it simplified things to make all that a function of the gain or loss of Ops. It comes out to the same in the long run and, again, it smoothly integrates what otherwise would’ve been multiple procedures into a single rule.

Then there is the Campaign Game. That’s an advanced rule that allows you to play through all four missions to try and win the bigger war. Gaining a victory in an individual mission has a payoff in getting more recruit points for the next scenario. You have to consider how much farther you can push your force, trading short term goals for long term advantages. A real risk also comes from the fact that, if you lose too many units, it will cause the KIA Index to fall into the negative range, thereby automatically costing you the scenario. Remember, as a commando leader you have to win with minimal losses. That’s something that can be difficult, given that your losses will shift the index against you proportionately more than OPFOR losses will help you.

One more thing about the Commando sub-series. Originally, winning a mission gave you special abilities for the remainder of the game. I dropped that rule because it was simpler to show that aspect of things in terms of gains in recruit points, but if you want to try it, here’s the option:

| Designer & Player Notes | A3

had PSYOP capability (you gain political influence with UNITA).

Air War

A crucial decision is the employment of your short-range fighters. They can often be powerful when it comes to air combat, such as the Spitfires in Eagle Day, but since they can be in the air only every other turn, you have to figure the best time to strike at intruders. Similarly, they can be useful for escort under limited conditions, as with the Me-109s over southern England. Targets to the north will be beyond their reach, however; so it can be expensive to send bombers to strike them. That usually means the opening stage of the Luftwaffe campaign in this game will be directed against southern targets, such as London. The German player has to hope that will inflict enough attrition on the RAF to allow bombers to survive later on in the game.

Eagle Day gives the Germans extra victory points if they bomb all the targets in a particular “complex”—aircraft facto-ries or naval bases. The idea there is that, if the Luftwaffe has knocked out enough of those targets, it will cause a collapse of the overall British ability to manufacture aircraft or protect ocean-going shipping. That requires a focusing of effort, and shifts German strategy away from simply hitting targets of opportunity to a more “systems oriented approach” (as we would say in these modern times). It also means the British can approach their overall air defense strategy by preserving enough of each target type to frustrate that larger German objective.

In Cactus Air Force, the Japanese

have an edge insofar as their fighters are all long-range while only the US P-38 has that capability. That’s balanced out by the higher attrition rate among Japanese aircraft, and by the better American bombers. It’s also an illustration of the Allied “victory through airpower” doctrine, which held that unescorted bombers could be victorious against Japanese long- range fighter aviation.

Certain cards in Cactus Air Force will generate one-time targets, representing major naval actions (such as the Battle of the Santa Cruz Islands). Players need to keep sufficient air strength on hand to exploit those opportunities. Those battles can also favor the US side, since the target locations are generally closer to the American bases than they are to those of the Japanese.

A decision that has to be made in both games is when to employ “Wild Cards.” By playing them individually, players gain various advantages for a turn, such as additional die rolls when attacking. By playing all of them at one time, a player gains a permanent increase in command control. That translates to higher stacking and more cards being withdrawn, trading off tactical advantages for operational ones.

If a “Morale” card is drawn, and you have too many units in the eliminated box, you lose command control. That adds another dimension that’s not often seen in air war games. Pilot losses and fatigue can undermine the effectiveness of an air force as much as aircraft shot down. Get your units back into play by using the various cards that give you refits, or by not taking too many risks. Of course, if you play it too safe, you will probably won’t win—again, there’s a tradeoff and it shows how a simple system can still create complex player decisions.

In both Air War games the Allied side has the edge in refitting, owing to better logistics cards. One way the German player can counteract that in Eagle Day is by bombing British headquarters units, thereby undermining RAF command control and reducing the number of cards drawn. Of course, that will mean diverting bombers from other missions, and there are never enough to accomplish all missions. It also gets back to a point the Luftwaffe didn’t appreciate in the actual 1940 campaign: once you embark on a particular

strategy, keep with it until you win. As for Cactus Air Force, the Japanese

player is going to have to accept the higher American replacement rate over the long run. One strategy is to try to quickly run up so many US aircraft losses it overwhelms their logistics.

Now for some “what-ifs.” A major Luftwaffe shortfall in the Battle of Britain was the short range of their otherwise superlative Me-109 fighters. They could usually could spend only 20 minutes over England before having to fly home or risk crash landing as they ran out of fuel.

The RAF had similar difficulties, even though they were operating on the defensive. The limited ranges of their Spitfires and Hurricanes meant, by the time they took off, reached altitude and formed up, intruding German forma-tions had bombed their targets and were heading home. Fuel limits were one of the factors leading to the debate over “Squadrons Forward” versus “ Big Wing” tactics in the RAF high command.

Players can experiment with an optional rule allowing for drop tanks. That gives short-range units an addition-al turn in the air. They can take off on one turn, fly for a second, then land on the third. It means a little record keep-ing, but it can radically change the game.

A what-if for Cactus Air Force is the Allies not having control of Henderson Field. The assumption here is the Japanese initially stationed more troops on Guadalcanal and were able to inter-dict the field using the artillery of their units on the island. That will radically change the game, as the Allies will have to fly their missions from Espiritu Santu and Australia, thereby rendering most of their fighters incapable of effectively participating in the air campaign. To bal-ance that, there might be an assumption the Americans made greater use of car-rier airpower in the Solomons, thereby allowing a limited number of F4F, SBD and TBD units to fly from sea hexes, per-haps one die roll worth per turn. That’s stretching things a bit, but it does show the possibilities for using these games to examine various historical alternatives.

A4 | Designer & Player Notes |

MINI SERIES

Hurricanes, Defi ants and others. The Luftwaffe has Me-109s, Me-110s, He-111s, Ju-88s, Do-17s, Stukas, plus a coastal aircraft unit. The British also have several ground units, representing RAF Group HQ and anti-aircraft artillery (AAA) concentrations, plus some dum-mies. They may be deployed anywhere in Britain, and make for a game of cat and mouse with the Luftwaffe.

The Group HQ are especially valu-able, as they raise the RAF command control (C2) level each turn. C2 is vital because it determines the number of units a player can stack in a square, and also the number of Campaign Cards he can hold in his hand at one time. C2 is a critical part of air warfare, but one that’s not frequently simulated. The British C2 level is equal to one plus the number of intact Group HQ on the map. Since the Luftwaffe can destroy those HQ, hunting them down and protecting them is a vital part of strategy for the two players. In comparison, the German C2 level is fi xed at “three,” though play of certain cards can temporarily affect it.

Balancing out the potential loss of Group HQ is British radar, which allows the examination of Luftwaffestacks. That’s a considerable advantage, since the Germans can only look into RAF stacks during combat.

Air-to-air combat occurs when both sides have air units in the same square. You add up your air-to-air factors and fi re at the other guy. Results are “abort” (units return to base without completing their mission) or “kill” (unit shot down). Eliminated air units end up in the Refi t bin, which means they may be reorganized and brought

Design Notes Part II

Air Wars

I’ve been playing air campaign games going back to the publication of Lou Zocchi’s Battle of Britain in the late 1960s. I also did the upgrade of Luftwaffefor DG. The thing about air campaign games from the designer’s perspective is the complexity inherent in the fact aircraft range has to be accounted for. Until now that had inescapably led to bookkeeping; however, I’ve now come up with a to circumvent that.

But before I go into that, though, let’s look at the counters. Each unit represents an aircraft squadron, group or wing, depending on the game. The fi rst number is the air combat factor; the second number is the speed. The combat factor is the number of dice that unit rolls to attempt to shoot down enemy planes. The speed is the number of squares through which the unit can move in a single turn, with each turn representing one hour. The middle symbol—the bombs—is the value of the unit when attacking a ground target.

The way I handled range was to divide air units into two types: long-range and short-range. Long-range units can remain in the air an unlimited number of turns. The rationale for that is, given the tightly crafted scope of each game map, long-range units could fl y to any target on it, attack it, then turn around for home. Missions are fl own in “game days,” each composed of eight to 10 hours. If a long-range unit doesn’t reach its home base by the end of the day, it’s eliminated. Since air units are too valuable to risk on suicide missions, that kept overall daily operations within realistic bounds.

The way short-range aircraft function is they take off and engage in combat on one turn. By the end of the next turn, they must either have landed or are eliminated. That gives about two hours in the air, which is about right for the fi ghters included in the two games in the Air Wars sub-series. While some of those types of units had more endurance in theory, we’re talking here about combat

conditions in which fuel was rapidly expended by dogfi ghting or weaving to keep pace with the slower bombers.

Some cases are more anomalous, such as the Luftwaffe’s Me-110 fi ghter-destroyer. I made them long-range units simply to refl ect that doctrine. If you need a further rationale, that also represents relays of 110s taking off, escorting bomber formations, an then landing. While that may seem to be stretching things, it works in practice and the overall effect is historical.

The two games in the Air Warssub-series so far include Eagle Dayand Cactus Air Force. Eagle Day covers the critical period of the 1940 Battle of Britain. It has fi ve game days, each broken down into eight hours. The map covers southern Britain and northwest Europe, the latter hosting Luftwaffebases. There are several target types in Britain: airbases, aircraft factories and naval bases. Since the Germans were, in theory, preparing the way for Operation Sea Lion, attacking naval bases is a potentially critical mission. Bombing factories is a way to reduce the British refi t rate.

German bombers and their escorts fl y from their bases toward their targets. Units are free to attack targets as they wish; the German player doesn’t have to write them down ahead of time. That’s for simplicity, and it works. British interceptors can rise up and meet them, and air combat ensues. Then short-range aircraft land, but they can fl y again on a following turn. That means short-range aircraft can fl y several missions each game day.

RAF units include Spitfi res,

| Designer & Player Notes | A5

back upon play of certain Campaign Cards. After air-to-air combat, AAA fi re occurs if air units are over enemy anti-aircraft units. Then units with bomber capability attack ground targets.

The Campaign Cards provide various special tactics as well as orders from higher headquarters. Each player also has three “Wild Cards.” They can be played for their individual effect, or combined to increase the command control level by one. Players have to decide whether to use them for short-term advantage or long-term gain.

RAF cards include “Big Wing” and“Squadron Forward” among others. The former gives a one-day increase in stacking; the latter extends range by one square for a day. They represent the two major schools of air doctrine within Fighter Command. It’s a convenient way of introducing historically variable tactical elements into the situation. The Luftwaffe has cards such as “FuehrerDirective 17,” which enhances opera-tions for a turn, and “KG-100,” which activates a special pathfi nder unit that increases bomber effectiveness.

There are also “Morale” cards. Depending on how you’re doing, they can either cause a decrease in your command level or a free refi t. A particu-lar outcome is triggered by the number of units in then in dead pile, giving players a reason to keep losses low or at least refi t planes as quickly as possible. Morale is a critical part of air cam-paigns, but it’s also one that’s not often modeled in wargames. In Air Wars it can cause a turning point in overall play.

Cactus Air Force is one more foray for me into the South Pacifi c of 1942-43, after Solomons Campaign, Coral Sea Solitaire, South Pacifi c Campaign andPacifi c Battles: Guadalcanal. Cactus Air Force covers the air war over the Solomons, with the game titled after the codename for the Allied air group based at Henderson Field. The map stretches from the New Hebrides to Rabaul, centered on Guadalcanal. (Incidentally, I used squares instead of a hex grid for Air Wars because it gave the game maps the feel of plotting boards in aerial command posts.) The sites of several major naval battles are also on the map, and players can get points for bombing those locales when certain cards come up, representing their planes’ contribu-tion to winning those major sea actions.

Each turn represents one month of operations, broken down into 10 hour segments. That way each mission in the game represents the sum of several raids. As the game progresses, Henderson Field’s capacity to base units increases, so it becomes more valuable.

Another design issue was how to deal with the differences between Japanese and American tactics and equipment. Japanese pilots tended to be more aggressive, but their aircraft were more vulnerable to damage. The way I handled that was by giving their A6 Zeros a point more air combat strength than their actual fi repower warranted; but then I also gave Allied fi ghters a separate CRT with a higher chance of aborting Japanese air units when dogfi ghting.

Each side has advantages. Japanese fi ghters are all long-range. That represents their actual performance capabilities as well as doctrine. Allied fi ghters are mostly short-range, with the exception of the P-38s. On the other hand, Allied bombers are stronger than their Japanese counterparts.

I got a lot of the historic detail of the campaign into the Campaign Cards. For example, historically the Allies had a better logistical system in place by the end of the campaign. So their cards give them more aircraft refi ts, and over the long run that side will therefore have more planes fl ying. The Japanese, on the other hand, get a “Seishin” (“Spirit”) card that temporarily extends their range and attack strength. There’s also a special card for the “Night of the Battleships,” replicating the great Japanese naval bombardment of Henderson Field.

Both players get reinforcements generated by card play. That adds an element of uncertainty. Each player also has two “Wild Cards.” The Allied Wild cards are “Thach Weave” and“Air-Ground Coordination”; the Japanese are “Tainan Air Group” and “Night Bombing Tactics.” They can be played individually or combined to increase the command level by one.

By the way, I commend developer Eric Harvey for doing a superb job fi nding photographs that precisely match each of the cards. That goes a long way toward putting the play-ers in the cockpit, so to speak.

Commando

The Commando sub-series had its origins when I was watching the 1960s movie Tobruk. That fi lm presents a fi ctionalized version of the British SAS/LRDG raid on that North African port, a town well known to wargamers. The movie inspired me to come up with a system in which you could play the commander of special operations force on a daring raid behind enemy lines. The idea would be you would fi rst assemble a task force composed of different types of units, each of which could perform a special function, then move with that force across the map, encountering enemy forces generated by random card draws, reach a target objective, take a specifi ed action and, fi nally and most importantly, get back to base.

Then the original idea took a turn from North Africa to the Congo. That was because I already had all kinds of research materials on the 1964-65 Congo confl ict, especially the parts of it involving the mercenaries under Maj. Mike Hoare. In those days of the Cold War, Hoare and his men cut a swathe across the Congo, rescuing hostages and destroying the quasi-communist Simba rebellion. There was even an appear-ance by Che Guevara, who saw Central Africa as a vital new front for revolution. (He was soon disabused of that notion.) Among other things, I had picked up a copy of the US Army’s Leavenworth Papers study of the campaign, as well as a dog-eared copy of Hoare’s book on the affair. There were also interesting sidelights, such as interviewing a woman who, as a child, was a hostage until rescued by Belgian paratroopers.

For all those reasons, then, the fi rst game in the Commando sub-series is Congo Mercenary. It’s purpose-designed solitaire. The way it works is you begin by picking a Mission Card, which states your objectives, ranging from rescuing hostages to launching a coup. Each Mission card lists: “Situation,” “Mission Objective,” “Execution,” “Logistics” and “Command & Signal.” Veterans might recognize them as the section headers from the NATO standard operations

A6 | Designer & Player Notes |

MINI SERIES

format. That was intentional, as I wanted to fi t the game into contem-porary military practice and, anyway, it is a good way to organize things.

To win, you have to fi ght your way through Simba strongpoints, reach Objective markers, reveal them, and then return to base. Objective markers are placed face down at randomly located towns around the map (which covers the entire Congo). Some objec-tives are real, others represent massacre sites. Running into the latter can slow you down, so they are to be avoided.

Logistics give the player a limited number of Recruit Points (RP). RP can be used to build various types of units, from jeep-mounted commandoes to airstrikes. The player can also bring in Belgian paratroopers as well as CIA Cubans (who may run into Communist Cubans, including Che). Once you’ve got your task force together, you move across the map. You have a limited number of operations (from the “Execution” part of the Mission card).

In each operation you move one force. Upon completion of a move, the player picks an Event card. Events can generate Opposition Force (OPFOR) units. Combat is resolved via a system similar to that in the Ancient Warsand Hand of Destiny designs, though the player executes both sides’ fi re in a strict sequence. If you win a battle, you gain more operations; if you lose, you lose Ops. Since each scenario is a race against time, it’s vital that you win engagements, but there are other trad-eoffs. The overall order of battle allows you some hard-hitting combat units, but there are also weaker (though some-

times vital) specialized support units, such as sappers and supply columns, which can be useful in certain situations.

Some cards create special situations, such as “Blow Up Stuff for Intel!” If you have a sapper in your force, you get to keep the card and use it to reveal Objective markers, or make special air and water moves. (The idea is you’ve determined the location of airfi elds, or have sent in intelligence info to higher HQ and thereby gotten more support.) Other cards introduce things like “Friendlies,” “Covert CIA Aid,” and “East Block Intervention.”

There’s also the Campaign Game, in which you string together individual missions. If you seize a particular mis-sion’s objectives, you get additional resources next time around, but you will also be going up against stronger foes.

The second game in the series is also set in Africa: Border War. It covers the South African Defense Force (SADF) on the frontier of Southwest Africa, raiding against SWAPO bases in southern Angola in the 1980s. How did I end up there? Part of it was I’ve had a little experience as a tourist in that part of the world. I also had all kinds of research information on the shelf about that confl ict. That was in part from my design of Cold War Battles: Angola, which was already published in S&T, and also from my design of the upcoming Angola Campaign, which will appear in a future issue. The former dealt with the campaign for Cuito Cuanavale in 1987-88, involving some big armor engagements; the latter will cover all of Angola in those same years, showing the big picture. It was one of the biggest

confl icts of the Cold War, though it rarely made the headlines in the US.

Border War deals mainly with the unconventional warfare situation along the frontier, with the opportunity for armor action. The game uses the same solitaire system as Congo Mercenary,and the missions are based on actual operations: Askari, Reindeer, Protea and Modular-Hooper-Packer (getting us back to the big battle at Cuito Cuanavale).

Units represent companies and battalions, and the SADF has some heavy hitters including Oliphant tanks, airstrikes, Ratel IFV, and Recon Commandos. The OPFOR are no slouches either, with plenty of SWAPO guerrillas and Angolan and Cuban armor. The cards generate a range of encounters, from heavy combat to situ-ations in which having a special forces unit available can make the difference by tracking down crucial intel. As in the Congo, there’s a chance for covert CIA aid—those fellows get around.

One special feature of both Commando games is, if you win a fi refi ght, there’s the possibility of a leader rising spontaneously from the ranks. Leader units provide combat bonuses and are also useful when certain politically oriented cards are picked.

Another feature is the Killed in Action (KIA) Index. This is the relative number of enemy to friendly units eliminated, and it’s used in victory determination. It also comes in when a “Morale Check” card is picked. If you’re behind in that regard, you lose Ops. Again, that gets the non-material aspect of warfare into play via a simple mechanism.

Something I’ve gotten out of the experience of designing the Mini Games has been how to combine simple sub-systems such that they interact with each other to provide complex player choices.

These games now available for purchase

visit our store @ Shop.DecisionGames.com