Spotlight on Games
>
1001 Nights of Military Gaming
- D -
- Dauntless
Tactical war game follow-on to
Air Force
includes the planes which fought in the Pacific theater during
World War II.
- Days of Decision
Multi-player war game on the era prior to World War II, beginning
at the German re-occupation of the Rheinland and continuing to the
outbreak of war. Playable as a setup system for the third of fourth
(and maybe fifth) edition of the complementary
World in Flames
or standalone. Players each hold a number
of cards which represent historical or might-have-been-taken
actions. These actions affect industrial production; ability to
play future actions; and minors, whose current attitude toward the
major powers is reflected by their position on a track. Players
use production to build up military forces. Smaller wars including
a possible Spanish Civil War are resolvable via an abstract combat
system. A fascinating idea, especially because many interested
in re-fighting World War II often fault Germany for starting the
war when it did, preferring for example a greater prior naval
or air build-up. The game mechanics are very well-conceived as
well and even show influence of the elegance of the German-style
games. Unfortunately the ideas did not go far enough to achieve
good realism. There should be more options available. Minors
should not shift between just Axis and Allies in a binary way,
but in fact between all major powers, especially since the Soviet
Union was not close at all with the Western Allies in this period.
And the abstract combat system needed much more development. This
was particularly evident in Japan-China conflicts where,
because all of a nation's military got lumped together, Japan
could in effect use its large navy to win a major land war in
China. Some skimping was done on physical components as well as
cards were printed on large sheets using both sides. The game
would have worked much better if each card had been printed
separately. This would permit players to immediately see which
was available for current play, which already played and which
not yet available. (It's worth it to make your own photocopies to
achieve this yourself.) Rules have a fair amount of errata/need
quite a bit of clarification.
[options summary]
[playback]
[rules notes]
[status chart]
[coup chart]
[Germany options]
[Commonwealth options]
[France options]
[Italy options]
[Japan options]
[Russia options]
[US/China options]
- Days of Decision II
A major remake addressing many problems. Instead of a track the
minor powers are on a large hex grid, as are the major powers
which may also decide to move between the regions of capitalism,
marxism, dictatorship or neutrality (the last of which seems a
rather dubious possibility). There are now an almost amazing
number of actions to consider and the previous three-hour
game has become much longer, leading some to name it "Months
of Decisions". Abstract combat has been improved. The issue
of the card production is completely changed now that many
options are made generic and thus re-usable. Now also designed
to be continuously playable even after the war breaks out.
Unfortunately, no longer has any victory conditions as now it
is required to resolve the game using World in Flames.
Must be considered an improvement to the first edition, but the
need to consider a very much wider set of options almost makes
it better as a play-by-email experience. It is now also more
difficult to reconstruct as history since many of the activities
are of the more minor sort (trade agreements, etc.) that do not
really register in the major writing about the period. Amidst
all this complication and genericization, some of the sense of
fun may be lost as it is more difficult to relate what happened
in story terms. Also, rules are problematic in many ways and
endlessly revised by errata. Box is identical to the first
edition, so let buyer beware.
[major power force sizes]
[minor power force sizes]
[minor power hostilities]
[pbem summary]
[pbem start conditions]
[production multiples]
[seas list]
[ships]
- Decline and Fall of the Roman Empire
Light war game in which the Romans, Huns, Goths and Vandals
wage war and conduct economics over Europe. Very nice, elegant
concept, but flawed due to near-perfect strategy for the Romans
and almost no chance for the Vandals. Interesting ideas include
the Huns having the best units, but are unable to stack them. Huns
increase strength via plunder while German tribes do so by
spreading out, but if four 1-point units stack up they become
worth 5. The Romans are playing a completely different game as
well, concentrating on city taxation and cutting costs. There
are even rules for their hiring barbarian mercenaries with the
chance of having them go traitor.
[chart]
[errata]
[strategy]
- Deep Space Navigator (Star Fighter)
Tactical outer space war game. Paper and pencil affair in which
drawing on a sheet of paper dotted with asteroids represents
all movement and firing. This is aided by a rather complicated
clear plastic template which handles movement, including course
changes, and firing of four different types of weapons (including
missiles which travel on their own). Feels a bit drab without
any components, but on the other hand is playable in strange
spaces such as planes, cars and trains; can be paused without
difficulty and provides a written history of the battle. May
still require some cooperation on behalf of the players as it
appears that a ship could spend all day hiding behind asteroids
and never be caught. Admittedly, the template
introduces a dexterity/"fiddle factor" level unacceptable to some.
Star Fighter is an unauthorized Italian knockoff which
changed the template and certain rules.
- Deflexion
Pure abstract for two with a gimmick: two built-in LASER
projectors. The model here is
Chess,
as players take turns moving a single piece.
What's new is that pieces contain
mirrors on at least some sides and capture is done by activating
the LASER which emits straight out from the owner's back row at
the rightmost column. Red LASER light is reflected in all cases at
90-degree angles, but should it end on the non-mirror side of a piece,
it is captured and removed. Should one's pharaoh piece – yes,
there is a slight ancient Egypt theme – the player has lost. All
of the pieces move in the same way, being able to travel one space
or make one rotation, except the very powerful "djed" pieces which
are all mirror and may swap positions with an adjacent, weaker,
opposing piece. At least in the beginning setup, playing
defensively is highly encouraged as one can migrate two of these
djeds right in front of the pharaoh in the back row and flank that
row with outward pointing mirrors to make an impregnable position.
It's hoped this is not so significant a problem in the advanced
setups. Components are fairly large and the gold ones are coolly
translucent. Actually the LASERs are not strictly necessary to play
and their fun doesn't last so very long, but this is the main
feature raising the game above the ordinary. Deducing where they
will shine is a learnable skill so this might work well as a
classroom novelty. Otherwise, fans of pure abstract capture games
will be the main audience and even for them there may not be enough here
to distract them from the games they already have.
Strategy: High; Theme: Low; Tactics: Medium; Evaluation: Low
- Diplomacy
1959 war game with very simple combat rules and few pieces is mostly
about negotiation and, via simultaneous written rules, betraying one's
agreements. While ostensibly set in World War I Europe, there is a great
deal of abstraction and could easily be set anywhere, as is attested by
the huge number of home-brewed variants. Although much ink has
been spilled on various strategies, e.g. the Lepanto Opening for
Italy and the Wicked Witches of the North and South (England and
Turkey respectively), still basically comes down to negotiation
and backstabbing. Not very satisfying in the endgame either as
most stalemate into a blocked situation. Incredible these days
to think that it was once a commonplace that players should sit
around for hours
doing nothing with absolutely no chance to win. These days,
should definitely be limited to play-by-email play only, if at all.
Machiavelli was a later version by Avalon Hill, transported
to Renaissance Italy and gimmicked up by sieges, assassins and
random events. Other published variants include Colonial
Diplomacy and to some extent, Africa 1880.
Is also the title of a limited edition precursor which appeared in 1958
(design by Allan Calhamer had begun in 1953) and had a different map
(more spaces in most of the countries, Switzerland a supply center
and other changes) and different rules (most notably, slower convoys).
[Calhamer profile]
- Dragonslayer
Not much strategy is available in this rather simple-playing
movie tie-in, and perhaps no one remembers the 1981 film anymore either,
even if it was of some fantasy cult-type interest. (Amazing to realize
that starring as the lead apparentice wizard was Peter MacNicol,
Ally McBeal's John Cage character.)
- Dschingis Bohn
"Genghis Bean" is an expansion kit for the original
Bohnanza.
It is similar to
Bohnaparte
in using cards to provide a map on which players use the
proceeds of their bean harvests to fund attacks, first on
neutral territories and eventually on each other. Conquered
cards provide special benefits. While quite similar to its
predecessor – there are fewer lands and fewer types
– it departs by offering what the English translation
calls "rider cards". Maybe "Mongol horde" might have been
more appropriate. When a player earns one of these cards, he
automatically has quite a high number for every attack he
attempts, except for those on forests and cities, and even if
this fails, can make the attack again using a card from either
his hand or the deck. The import is that this ends up becoming
a more aggressive and combative version. Which ends up
being better ends up a matter of personal taste. But best of
all may be to acquire both this and
Bohnaparte
which permits creation of a larger map and up to seven players.
Hanno Girke; Lookout Games; 2003; 3-5
Strategy: Medium; Theme: Medium; Tactics: High; Evaluation: Medium; Personal Rating: 7
- Duel in the Desert
Two-player magazine war game covers World War II battles in North
Africa. The map includes the area from Benghazi to Alexandria.
Turns represent one month of real time from Rommel's first
major offensive in May of 1941 up to the Torch landings in
November 1942. The game is "double blind" — both players have
their own secret copies of the map and know for sure only
the locations of their own units. As they move forward past
known regions they call out hex numbers to gradually grow the
known area and eventually run into forces of unknown size which
engage in combat. There is a tendency for both forces to stick
close to the coast, but it is always tempting to send a fast
strike force deep into the desert in an attempt to outflank and
possibly even roll up the enemy's rear. This could never work if
players shared a map, but becomes an interesting possibility
with this system. Rules are fairly easy without being too
introductory. Moves along fairly well — becoming accustomed to
the uncertainty of enemy locations being the chief difficulty
for new players.
- Dune [Avalon Hill]
Unusual multi-player war game based on the Frank Herbert novel
was designed for Avalon Hill by the Eon team which also
created
Cosmic Encounter.
The Eon style is evident in that
each side has very strongly defined individual powers and in three
cases special victory conditions. Event cards play a prominent role
and special combat wheels are used to secretly dial in strength levels.
The result is a game with plenty of flavor and chicanery,
but which sometimes runs a little longer and more repetitively
than one might want. Rules have some serious problems which most
groups have long ago addressed with proper house rules.
Two expansion kits,
Spice Harvest
and The Duel were later
published and all three were later combined in a French edition.
[variant]
[errata]
[chart]
[player aid card]
- Dune: Spice Harvest
Five-turn "prequel" to Dune creates a game something
like Junta during which players scheme to gain the
most advantageous starting position for the real contest. An
engrossing and amusing expansion, it is too bad that it cannot
be played as a game in its own right. As it is, it adds too much
time to the total game experience as well as being random enough
to frequently lead to a rather unbalanced starting setup.
- Dungeon Twister
Fantasy dungeon combat game for two. Each player enters from
opposite sides of a long, maze-like corridor formed of face down
room tiles, four characters, drafted from an identical set of
eight. Available are the traditional warrior, thief, cleric and
wizard, but also some unusual types like the wall walker. Sword,
wand, rope and treasure are just some of the items to be found,
but consistent with the German game paradigm, a player may only
pick up his own items. Of course, it's perfectly legal to make
them harder for the opponent to reach. One of the easiest ways to
do this is to rotate the entire room/tile. Each one has somewhere
in it a control space permitting the player with a character on
it to twist it by one turn, (providing the unfortunate title
which makes Americans, at least, think of the
party game).
Opposing characters often fight, the result depending on their
respective strengths, items and, in an oft-used mechanism, a
simultaneously played card. The main goal, however, is to escape
the dungeon on the other side, having acquired enough points,
whether from treasure, combat or combination. Not surprisingly
then, the main requisite skill is navigation, figuring out what
twists, jumps and rope uses will get your characters in the
ideal positions. As such one is mostly concerned with detailed
practicalities, though there is some need to guess what the
opponent is planning. The time for this tends to be very short,
however, since after the initial shock of meeting, moves become
fairly obvious. More novel mechanisms and strategic possibilities
were needed to raise this above the tactician, fantasy audience,
who should, however, be well pleased. Production is attractive,
characters being represented by stand up cardboard figures and
the dungeon suitably dark, though some of the illustrations take
getting used to from a communications design perspective.
Strategy: Low; Theme: High; Tactics: High; Evaluation: Low; Personal Rating: 5
- Dungeons and Dragons: Advanced Dungeons and Dragons
The distilled form of what is probably the most popular
role-playing game ever. Although this is the RPG, marketed by the
Dragon magazine, that really caught the imagination of the
public, it has always also had its detractors. Some supplements
such as Deities & Demigods were way over the top and
simply encouraged the plethora of unrealistic characters which
often plague the genre. Things like Armor Class working not to
reduce damage but to make a character harder to hit lead to
unrealities like a character being shot by a cannon a foot away
and not being hit. Of course, in D & D at the end of
the day everything is at the whim of the Dungeon Master and in
some sense the quality of the experience has more to do with the
people involved than anything else. If the DM is fair and has a
sense of story and the players are willing to forget themselves
and instead truly try to act the role of a medieval hero,
these rules are more than adequate for everyone to thoroughly
enjoy themselves. By now there must be hundreds of supplements
in existence. One not-much-remembered aspect of the role-playing
game revolution is that it created the dungeon master. A middle
ground which was not strictly-speaking a player, but also not the
publisher became an outlet for considerable personal creativity
which is unfortunately absent from other types of board games.
- Dungeons and Dragons: Basic Dungeons and Dragons
Later, introductory version is worthwhile for letting new players
understand the fundamental concepts. Players won't want to stay
with this long however as there is insufficient flavor and detail
for sustained play.
- Dwarven Dig
Game for up to four about dwarves mining for golden
treasure. Suppose you had just this information? If it were
a German game you would imagine smooth, simple mechanics and
strategic dilemmas inspiring creative thought. If it were
an American game, you would be sure of lots of meaningless
complexities and even though the topic doesn't require it,
inter-player combat. As you have guessed from the title, what
we have here is the latter. The basic storyline is similar to
Wiz War
in that all players are gunning for the same treasure, the winner
being the first to escape off the map. The contest begins by a
lengthy, complicated setup of the hexagonal tiles which seems
to serve no real purpose except to make progress as difficult
as possible. It would have been much better just to make every
tile difficult to traverse in every direction and just set them
up randomly. These tiles by the way are easily jostled and don't
lie flat – we have already had one playing ruined by a number
of them getting upset by a passing shirt sleeve. A plexiglas
sheet holding them all flat is a good idea despite the occasional
take-that card which involves a tile rotation. The tiles are also
small, often too full for the many mono-colored metal figures
(each player has four distinctive ones) plus cardboard counters
plus play information that they must hold. The characters (miner,
warrior, elder, engineer (artificer?)) are burrowing their way to
the central gold station. It's funny that they need to burrow by
the way as they already have a complete and detailed map of how
everything is laid out and where every other party is. Anyway, the
burrowing technique is to check the many possible rock thicknesses
of the two tiles involved – information only available on the
player aid card, only one of which is provided – and make a
single die to-hit roll. This works and the player further crowds
the tile with a breakthrough marker or fails and the player gets
a grit token, which appears to be pewter chunk left over from
miniatures casting. These grits are given virtually every time
a roll fails except when they're not and good luck remembering
which is which. Anyway, their use is to augment future die rolls
at the rate of one pip per grit, but disappointingly, are usable
only before a roll occurs. There is quite a lot determined by just
a few die rolls, including the possible death of your characters
and early elimination from this two-plus hour game. Apparently
in an attempt to address this, even more rolls have been added
so that if a character has just died, he can still make a luck
roll so that actually the death did not occur at all. It's as
if having taken the wrong road, the design repeats it some more
trying to get on the right track when it shouldn't have been in a
car in the first place. Anyway, the groups dig, try to deal with
menaces and play event cards containing icons that never seem to
mean much. Although there is an option to leave the elder behind
to collect grit, the best thing to do is just keep the group
together and forge ahead as a lone elder just gets targeted by
monster cards. All the groups tend to reach the center about the
same time, using someone else's digging work preferably. This
triggers the second half, a running game of "who's got the
football?" There seem to be a great many complexities around who
is holding the treasure, what causes it to be dropped and when
it can be moved – constant rule lookups are the norm. There are
also more thematic surprises as a dwarf can run right by an entire
group of hostile ones without being hindered in any way. It's
also strange that the first to get the treasure out wins, but why
this is any better than getting the second out remains unclear,
as is why the game should be played out to determine the second
anyway. But no player should be all that upset about losing as
often it comes down to turn order which is entirely determined
by die rolls and worse, only rewards the highest roller with
the rest going clockwise meaning that the second highest roller
might be going fourth. Other issues here are that reference
card is not well designed, being too busy to be easily used,
without providing all the information one really wants. There
are aspects of the game state which must be remembered by the
players, e.g. shockwaves. And there are ambiguities like what to
do if you run out of monsters. I suppose that this theme and bits
will be embraced by role-playing fans, but this has done nothing
to lift American games out of their small ghetto of violence and
randomness and will not help to expand the gaming market, curious
since its inventors run a gaming convention which seeks to do just
that. [Kenzer]
On to E - Main
Please forward any comments and additions for this site to
Rick Heli.