You could better ask me what wargames I don't like since I practically like them all! I started gaming with Napoleonic wargames using lead miniatures, although I immediately moved on to the Napoleonic strategic board gamessuch as"War & Peace" and "Empires in Arms". I also took my first steps with the Avalon Hill Game Company’sASL, but realized I preferred being either a general in chief or emperor, rather than a commander or a colonel. Best to be the “Big Dog”, eh? Thus, "Third Reich", "The Russian Campaign", "Vietnam War"... and many othergames of vast scope gave me many pleasant moments, passionate discussions, and resulted in greatly improvingmy ability to interpret rulebooks...
However, the moment I truly changed my perspective of wargames was when I discovered. through "Hannibal" the joys of Card Driven Games (CDG). This mechanic made them more agile, faster, and of enormously wide scope . Furthermore, as the movement and combat of piecesis limited to a few units (only activated ones),the waiting time between one player's move and the next is enormously shorter. It eliminates the desperate time of watching your opponent move, combat, and act while you're sitting idly by. There are also CDG’s which allow various actions during an opponent’s play: such as the decision to intercept, retreat, or play Response Cards.
I also find it enormously easy to depict how events are included in a game and the player stresscreated through handling a hand of cards. This includesdeciding the order of play of cards and how to best play a multi-purpose card. Now CDGs account for almost 90% of my game collection:"Paths of Glory" (and its sequels), "Crusade & Revolution", "For the People", "Barbarossa to Berlin", "Twilight Struggle", "Unhappy King Charles", “Wellington”... as well as other games, such as "Virgin Queen" or "Here I Stand"that have historical settings which interest me.Although I like these two last games a lot, their biggest drawback is that being multiplayer, at least with these two designs, sometimesdead waiting times come out between your turns while the other players “do their things”.
Approximately six years ago I discovered GMT’s"Churchill" and I began playing with much pleasure and gusto. I loved how designer Mark Herman’s game mechanics of the subject’s economic and political aspects were resolved in a multiplayer game where these variables have a decisive role. This is enhanced by the players being allies;yetcompetingwhile fighting against a common foe.
I have also taken up Napoleonic battles with "Command & Colors Napoleonic"; a game that allows, in less than an hour,playing an interesting historical battle which hearkens back to myminiature’s enjoyments during the beginning of my involvement with this hobby. Now, I'm starting a dive into COIN games: but I'm still a neophyte and have only played "Gandhi" and "Fire in the Lake". I find COIN games have very, very interesting mechanics.
Finally, and although you ask me about wargames; I want to add that I really also like Eurogames. I play these with my nephews and beginners new to our hobby. That is, they serve as a means to initiate them into board games, to learn and enjoy what Eurogame mechanics could apply to theirfuture wargame experiences. If you can't fight your enemy, join him! Thus, "Catan", “The Pillars of the Earth”, many games based on "Civilization", "Puerto Rico"... and many more reside in my library. We usually play as a family during the holidays and Christmas. Furthermore, the EurogameSpirit has greatly influenced my perceptions of wargames. For I now prefer that in any game I designgame mechanic simplicity prevails over complexity (even at the price of making something a little less historically accurate), that at most theyare played in two afternoons, contain an interesting, fun to observe narrative, and that the game action be very dynamic, that is, without having to wait bored for the other players to take their turns.
I like history and how it can be portrayed by wargames.There are some historical conflicts that I don’t believe have been well enough addressed and modeled by wargames. Therefore, I thought to contribute by putting in my two cents for our hobby with a first design. In the case, ofCongress of Vienna; this game’s seed was inspired by my reading the excellent book “Napoleonic Wars 1803-1815” by David Gates while also compulsively and repeatedly playing GMT’s “Churchill”. I immediately thought the basic mechanics of “Churchill” went like a bolt of applicability to the Napoleonic conflict where diplomacy was even more important than during WW2. That was the “aha moment” which inspired my creative spirit and brought Congress of Vienna to its initial pointof design concept!
Of course,getting the flash of a brilliant idea is one thing and it is quite another putting that idea into practice… an actual Congress of Vienna game prototype. In my case, the first person who encouraged me to start this project was David Gómez Relloso, an excellent friend with unlimited generosity who is also designer of the fantastic game"Crusade & Revolution" (about the Spanish Civil War). He greatly encouraged me, corrected the CoVgame in its beginnings, and warned me of the difficulties and the time it would take to see it published.
I listened to him in everything, savefor the time and effort I would need to dedicate to designing the game. Was he ever right! The reality has been that I have dedicated much more time than I initially anticipated and more than twice as much time as David advised me. Fortunately, this experience has been a labor of love and I don’t regret the time spent in bringing Congress of Vienna to its current point.
The second, and most important thing I learned about designing and publishing a game is that you can't do it alone! I've fortunately encountered throughout CoV’s long time of development a multitude of people who selflessly helped me and have contributed to the game. This is an important point should any reader have the bug to create a game of their own.
First, a group of playtesters led by Nathan Geiser in Seattle, improved the cards, andEnglish language rules and polished away some flaws of the first prototypes. This allowed me to contact Fred Schachter, who had collaborated with GMT on numerous games, and who is now the Assistant Designer and Editor of the game. Next to join the team was Dick Sauer,the game developer, who lives in Arizona. Dickcoordinatedthe relationship with the always seemingly distant GMT (it's in California and I reside in Spain!). At last, numerous playtesters (including Eurogamers) located in Spain and overseas (throughout the USA, France, Luxembourg, Czech Republic, UK...) who have collectively played Congress of Vienna for thousands of hours! These efforts balanced the conditions of victory, tested absurd strategies, corrected tricky strategies which could have “broken the game”, and above all analyzed possible destructive strategies againstCoV’shistorical spirit.Finally, they made suggestions which improved components and removed complex and unpleasant rules. Among these play tester contributors, I want to especially highlight two: the first is David Schoellhamer, who created a solitaire game mechanism that is great and fun to play and Chris Leary who assisted Fred by revising rules through removing duplications and giving them greater uniformity. It is a luxury that the rules publisher is an accomplished player of the game!But the list of people who have helped me and left their mark on the game is huge, so in the playbook we will place adeserved list of acknowledgementsbecause without their aid this game surely wouldn't exist today! For more regarding the origin of Congress of Vienna;
CongressofViennaDesigner’s Notes
(Part 1 of 2) | Inside GMT blog and to learn more of Fred Schachter’s background see: Fred Schachter | BoardGameDesigner |
BoardGameGeek .
The Congress
of Vienna Game Board. Here we show an overview of the
exquisitely attractive work done by the very talented Terry Leeds, the graphic
designer that GMT assigned to our game. I had already enjoyed his excellent
design skills in "Imperial Struggle". On the left is astylized
map of Europe where the War Phase takes place and on the right are the four National
Tracks and other important spaces to show the deployment of diplomatic,
political, and military affairs, a place for discarding cardsas well as a
reserve for resources and other markers....
3-Can you talk about the game’s mechanics?
The System created by Mark Herman for “Churchill” works remarkably well with itsDiplomacy Phaseserving as core of game. This iswhenissues are chosen, negotiated, and debated. Then there’s a Phase of Government and finally a Phase ofWar. Even if you study this fine game’s mechanics; you notice it can be improved in small details and this is what we’ve done with Congress of Vienna (CoV).
First, we made the game for four players (instead of "Churchill"’s three) and more importantly no "bot" isimplemented for the common enemy! Here, Napoleonic Imperial France, nemesis of The Allied Coalition, is just another player! However, to prevent the three Allied players (The Major Powers of Austria, Russia, and Britain) from uniting relentlessly and consistently against France, we endowed Francewith some very interesting national advantages in addition to the intrinsic competition between the Allied players to reach final victory… for in Congress of Viennathere not a “team win” for the Allies… only a single Major Power can emerge the winner!
During a turn’s Initial Phase cards that initiate the turn have more exaggerated effects than in "Churchill" sinceCoV has more issues placed into play to negotiate upon the game’s negotiation table.There are also more cards being placed into the players’ hands. Then, the Initial Environment Table’s dice rolls decide the effort that US militia units realizefor the War of 1812as well as abstractly represent the maritime war between France and Britainthis turn. Furthermore, the Initial Phase also determines which player receivesanadditional game card (chosen from among those of his own nation… e.g.,it’s nice if you’re Britain to get Wellington or Russia to get the Blucher card)
 | ||
Example of an
Initial Situation Card and the CoV Initial Environment Table. Both configure each turn of the game, can addcards
to a player’s hand, place certain issues into play, and adjust military
resources and units. You can choose a different Initial Situation Card starting
each turn from three decks: Historical, Pro-French, or Pro-Allied. Like any self-respecting CDG, game cards must be interesting, with different uses that make a player doubt how to best use them. For“Congress of Vienna”, we prepared a set of cards with numerous modifiers and possible uses (better to negotiate, debate, or later used for battle). This means that there are no truly bad cards;for there’s always some player who can take best advantage of it for a particular circumstance. For example, the British card "Fernando VII King of Spain and Indies" is perhaps one of the worst appearing cards in the game; but when used for some specific issues it can improve markedly. Even considering the treacherous nature of this character, it can significantly harm the French player by preventing receipt vital VP from Spain when it is still controlled by France. |
 |
Some examples of playing
cards. The crossed swords symbol that appears below the
value of the card indicates that these cards can be saved during the Diplomacy Phase
and used in the War Phase to effect dice rolling in battles. Also, the
modifiers to the card’s basic value for some issues is indicated by the color-codedlabels
that exist in the central part of the card. The four capital letters located
within white (Austria), red (Britain), blue (France), and green (Russia)
squares are only referenced during solitaire play The DiplomacyPhase of June 1813 (turn 3).The Kaiser Franz I card has just been played and is atop the Discard pile. Some issues are already on the national tracks. But the Liberalism issue (which is flipped to Absolutism side when Austria or Russia takes it to their track) is still on the NegotiationTable. At the center,the Negotiation Table, the Armistice in Central Europe issue is placed, this is a key issue since it triggers events that lead Austria to war. Upon the national tracks are two Military Operations (Russian and British), Recruitment, influence in minor European countries (e.g.,Poland), and on the Austrian track aBritishFinancial Aidmarker (the fuel that finances the war!) Finally, the game has other issues concerningthe European policies of the time such as the advancement of Absolutism/Liberalism (which will prevail?), convening a Congress of Peace to end the war in a negotiated form, what type of Government France will have once the war is over, and finally the domination of the seas and colonies of Great Britain (called in the game "Pax Britannica"). If you have counted the issues previously mentioned, you will notice number 31 not 30: that’s because the issue of "Pax Britannica" is always available to Britain without a marker. Getting to advance in each of the track’s boxes has one or more prerequisite(s). Furthermore, if Britain has a surplus of resources and/or fleets, they can be applied for die roll modifiersin assuring gain of a“Pax Britannica” VP benefit.  Three key
political CoVinfluencers are located around the fournational tracks. In the
upper left, theFuture Government of Franceis shown, here
the Allies and Napoleon will discuss the future form of government and borders of France once Peace comes. In the
upper right, the paired Absolutism and Liberalismtracksare where the
MajorPowers decide the future dominant political philosophy which will guide relations
between the states of Europe. On the lower side,is the record track of "Pax
Britannica”; an exclusive issue to Britain; but if the rest of
the players let her gain dominance in colonies and sea trade, her VP harvest
can make her virtual winner of the game. Finally, during the War Phase , battles are resolved. Theseconsider the number of military units, military cards used, type of terrain, homeland, guerrillas. etc. to which a dice roll is added. It is a completely different mechanismfrom "Churchill" which is more complex and unpredictable. This is whensaved military cards from the Diplomacy Phase and military support markers acquired during the Government Phase have major influence. Battle victories allow attackers to conquer territories (with their VP and additional cards) and bring the Allied armies closer to Paris,the key objective of the game. A victory also grants VP when it is a major battle. However, defeat produces the opposite effects! The way to calculate casualties is very simple and a track is printed on the board (DRM Battle Track) for tabulation purposes. This was a success devised by a clever Eurogamer who tested the game for almost a year  The DRM Battle Track. Blue is
France and red is the Coalition’s track.
Each allows recording DRMs that influence a battle for each side
(military units, battle cards, military support markers, terrain ...). The
lower and upperrows of thistable indicateensuing military unitlosses to the opposing
side. Very simple, but very
effective! In the War Phase many VPs can be obtained when the opposing armies advance and retreat to occupy or lose key territories. Also, when a major victory is achieved, a VP is received (and the defeated side loses one!). These major battle effects are doubled when Napoleon is commanding his "Grande Armée" since we consider governments and public opinion of this age were very impressed by such news. A major battle happens when both sides have many troops fighting on that front: at least four military units each. As CoV is a game at the level of grand strategy, military units are represented generically by cubes, each cube being about 20,000 men. Also, and unlike "Churchill", we chose to represent the cumulative VP of each player in a track that wraps around the board (a very Eurogame feature) and that always allows to know the position of the players, and thus facilitate diplomatic negotiation and military efforts to calculate the winner of the game. At the end of each turn, if the game does not end with a Sudden Death Victory , VP are awarded for some historically based political aspects.These contribute to balance the game andcan help the players competing for these issues with influence through this end-of-turn adjustment. For example, if Napoleon survives without giving up (abdicating) at the end of the game, the French player can receive a significant amount of VP that can decide the winner in a close-fought game (in this case France). Different factions work very differently! This is something of a truism:but is the truth. We created a system of Victory Points (VPs) awards and intrinsic capabilities for each Major Power that encourages players to behave like their historical counterparts. These design aspects(game strategies, weaknesses and strengths, and possibilities in the use of each nation's cards)are explained in different articles GMT has within its Blog.Should you be interested, here is the link for the "Congress of Vienna" GMT page:GMT Games - CongressofVienna. I will briefly explain what we have done for each Major Power: First, we have Austria, which is at peace practically between one half and one thirdthe length of a ten turn Campaign Game.Diplomatic issues are of fundamental importance to her. In general, Austrian cards are very good at diplomacy (and even more so at debates due to a special +1 value bonus); but except for Schwarzenberg, the Austrian Player’s military cards are of poor value relative to the other Major Powers.So only with very close cooperationwith Russian and Prussian military leaders does Austria have any chance of defeating the "Grande Armée" in Central Europe. When focusing on other than amilitary approach; issues such as a Congress of Peace, assuring an Austrian Generalissimo of the Allied armies, advancing Absolutism (Holy Alliance) in Europe, or a Future Government of France of Napoleon's son controlled by the Austrian governmentcan grant Austria many VPs.This path canensure victory against the rest of the other allied Major Powers. |
The Russia player, Tsar Alexander I, controls Prussia, and Sweden, as well asRussia. It is, therefore, a power of enormous military weight, but a giant with feet of clay for its limited finances. Not only must the Russian player lead the Allied armies to final victory in Paris, for that will give him many VPs, but not enough! Therefore, he will have to get more resources to implement his strategy mainly through wise use of cards, getting British Financial Aidissues,andoperating in tandem with Austria to assure thatAbsolutismand not Liberalism reigns supreme in Europe. Furthermore, some Minor Countries such asPoland, Saxony and Hanover must be controlled by Russia to increase the potential harvest of VP and be the winner of the game. Maybe 200 years later diplomatic and political issues still look quite similar!
The team of Russian and Prussian generals is impressive: Blucher, Barclay, Benningsen and Kutuzov (until he dies from his ailments), only Bernadotte is pitiful, able to do very well as happened historically atDennewitz, or regrettably incompetent as happened at Leipzig; we have captured this mercurial behaviorin Bernadotte’s CoV card.
Britain: The British player manages Britain, Spain and Portugal. It faces challenges on many fronts, both military and diplomatic. Among the first priorities ismilitarily advancing in Spain to expel the French from there, then try to reach Paris like the rest of its Major Power Allies, carrying out minor landings in Europe to ensure control of Naples and Holland, while diverting reinforcements to allocate into the War of 1812 against the stubborn Americans, in the game handled by an opportunistic France!
In the political and diplomatic sphere,Britainmuststrive to bring the issue of Liberalism and Democracy to most of Europe, put the weak Louis XVIII Bourbon as king of France, judiciously allocate resources for Austria and Russia to help them defeat the Corsican Ogre, and above all achieve dominance in maritime trade and colonies through the issue of “Pax Britannica“. Hiscard characters (military, diplomatic and financial) areexcellent, and the mighty Duke of Wellington has a capital role.
France: Finally, and unlike "Churchill", the Allies’ enemy is not a "bot" but a human player. We have been able to do this because although Napoleon was hated and detested by Europe’sMajor PowersduringCongress of Vienna’s timeframe; at first it was not planned to completely eliminate his French Empire as was done with the Axis powers during the Second World War. Infact, by this phase of the Napoleonic Wars (1813-1814) there were numerous attempts to reach a negotiated peace by keeping Napoleon as ruler of France. The French player controls France and the United States in their fight against Britain.
At the beginning of the game (end of February 1813) Napoleon controls virtually all of Europe, but his once unbeatable army has been virtually destroyed in the snows of Russia. France's main objective is to rebuild its army and pressure its satellites (Denmark, Bavaria, Italy, Saxony...) to contribute their quota of soldiers against the Coalition’s forces. The quality of most French cards both military and political is dazzling (Davout, Soult, Murat, Berthier, Eugene, Caulaincourt, Fouche...); their resources are much greater than Russia’s and superior to Britain’s; but theirenemies’strengths multiply and the battle fronts span from Portugal to Poland andEast Prussia.
It is the French player who has more alternatives of action and different strategies to ponder than his opponents: Try for an early decisive victory in Northern or Central Europe that destroys a Prussian-Russian army before Austria enters the war?Seek a policy of containment in Germany and diplomatic efforts to keep Austria neutral, to become the champion of theLiberalismissue in Europe, defend Spain and prevent the British from controlling it? If things don't go as well as the French player was hopingfor at the game’sbeginning; he will have to decide what diplomatic as well as military levers to use for Napoleon to achieve surviving as France’s ruler and maintaining Allied armies at bay away from Paris or if forced to defend Paris make it a tough nut to crack by keeping the"Grande Armée" as strong as possible. On many occasions Napoleon's survival implies an agonizingly achieved French victory in terms of VPs!
A prototype play
test game Congress of Vienna during a convention in Spain. A very
young player of Britain contemplates his cards to decide which one to play. The
rest players expectantly watch and await his choice.
5-Scenarios and/or length of the game?
We tried to offer scenarios that adapt to virtually all circumstances: historical preferences, situational interests, time availability, as well as number of players.All playing time references are between players who’ve achieved some experience with Congress of Vienna’s system and don’t take up too much time with “diplomatic” negotiations, “table talk”, between them. Although if players enjoy “table talk”… this is certainly a game for it!
● The Spring campaign of 1813:This can be a Game System Introduction or Short Scenario. It is played until the Armistice Issue is in force, which is normally between 2-3 turns. It has an estimated playing time of 1½-2 hours. Diplomacy for this scenario is not complex and military operations not excessively massive. This is an ideal way to get acquainted with the game’s mechanics and concepts.
● Clash of Armies -The Summer & Fall Struggle of 1813: (four turns with a five-turn option) This has an estimated playing time of 2.5-3.5 hours and provides a more pressure-filled concentrated action gaming experience.This scenario begins with turn 5 and it recreates the titanic struggle of War in Germany Scenariowith half the number of a Campaign Game’s turns. Although the Armisticeissue is in effect, really there is no prospect of peace! British pressure (subsidies and diplomatic counterparts) and a hegemonic Russia should push Austria to break its initial neutrality and join the Allies.
● The War in Germany 1813-Tournament: (eight turns), with an estimated playing time of 3-5 hours; the heart of this game covers the struggle from its beginning (March-April 1813) to November-December 1813, which is the epic period of the major battles in Central Europe combined with Wellington’s brilliant Spanish campaign which culminates with his army’s entrance into France itself (including the Battle of Vitoria and the famousBidassoa river crossing). It is a game in which military aspects take great relevance and for which the behavior and entry of Austria into the war is usually decisive. This is a 3–5-hour affair that almost always delivers a tight, exciting, fun, and competitive game. Most of CoV’s playtesting, to confirm game mechanics’ effectiveness, was done using this scenario.
● The Campaign of France 1814: (three turns), with an estimated playing time of 1.5-2 hours (again, with experienced players). This covers the end of the war, including France’s desperate attempts to preserve its empire and for Napoleon to remain on his throne, comprising the CoV Campaign Game’s last three turns. Try it if you have limited time to play and want the game’s diplomatic aspects to prevail over its military ones.Historically, during this period, many agreements and disagreements between the Allies occurred and Napoleon, through diplomatic efforts mainly sponsored by Metternich. Perhaps your gaming experience will generate a different than historical result? Our “grognard” play testers particularly enjoyed this scenario when played with CoV’s full array of Optional Historical Rules… one of which is a Congress of Peace variant which can have a game end, not with a military victory, but through a negotiated peace settlement!
● Full Campaign Game: (ten turnswith an option of an additional turnfor May 1814) This has an estimated playing time of 5-7 hours, possibly 8-9 hours with inexperienced players or those who enjoy “talking up diplomacy”.This is a potentially ten turn long game, although the play testers often found that the war (and the game) can end with turn eight or nine. If you want to experience the entire spectrum of situations and conundrums Congress of Vienna offers, THIS is the scenario for you.
● Two-player Scenarios:One of the two players controls France and a single Allied player, seated on the British chair, runs all three Allied Major Powers.The rules are likeCoV’sstandard 4-player ruleswith needed minor changes. These rules were designed and developed to make for a balanced game as well as keep both players “historically honest”. This may make the game somewhat daunting for a beginner player to learn. It can be challenging handling three Allied Powers. Consequently, you should first acquire a good understanding and command of the game’s mechanics prior to attempting this Two Player Scenario… but oh the fun to be had!
● Solitaire Scenarios:We present three different solo-scenarios; for the first, the human plays the three Allied powers, and a French Bot is designed to substitute for the French player in any of the shorter scenarios or Full Campaign. The second option is the opposite: a human French player plays France,and anAllied Bot isprovided to substitute for the Allied powers. Finally, in a non-competitive solo play, a player can explorea CoVexperience to ‘tell a story’ of the struggle’stwo sides. France and Allies are playing and the human makes all decisions for both sides. It can be quite entertaining.
However, to solve the challenge about how to make the Diplomatic Phase exciting, simple and fast to play, we began to carry out a deep review of other comparable games. We discovered the "CDG Solo System" by Stuka Joe & Ken Kuhn. What a revelation! We thought we found the Sorcerer's Stone to solve our Diplomacy Phase conundrum, the key to understanding the fast and effective procedure for the Diplomacy Phase for CoV’ssolo games! We modified the original Stuka Joe design to includeLeader’s card(s) and saving Military cards for the War Phase.
● Optional rules: In any wargame there are always such rules;created during development of agame. We did not want to include these rules in the Standard Game to preserve making learning it easier, shorten playing time, and reduce the numberof rules (studying, remembering, and applying them when needed).
If players want to add a bit of complexity to the game, with more flavor and historicalcontent, and you don't mind extending the duration of play; you may use some or allCoV’s offered optional rules. Of course, as previously mentioned, hardcore wargame Grognards of our playtest team would only play, and have a blast doing so, using most of these Optional Rules. Why stint, eh?Because if you play with Eurogamers accustomed to games which are not too complex, these optional rules can cause some difficulty, lengthen the game’s playing time, and therefore decrease their enthusiasm for CoV.Each optional rule is rated per perceptions of the Congress of Vienna play test team as to be Pro Allied, Pro French, or Situational.
The “Clash of
Armies” scenario setup in Central Europe (August 1813). The blocks of
armies are located on battle fronts A and B. Military units are in their boxes
near each battlefront. Each cube represents approximately 20-25,000 men. Note the big influx of Allied strength which
occurs should Austria enter the war!
6-Do you have another game/project in mind?
Although GMT published "Wellington", which Fred collaborated on its as game developer;that fine game only refers to the period of 1812-1814.It does not consider the struggle’s initial years and the intermediate period of the conflict (i.e., from 1808 to 1811). These would include:“2 de Mayo”, Baylen, Talavera, Bussaco, the entry of Napoleon in Spain, Albuera, Fuentes de Oñoro, the sieges of Zaragoza, Gerona, and Cádiz... These were not included in “Wellington” since they occurred before 1812, which is a shame to my modest unforgiving impressions!
Of course, the excellent "A Tomb for an Empire" exists… but playing that game’s entire campaign takes too much time... at least for many of us. So, my game is based on the classic CDG mechanic used for "Paths of Glory", "Caesar vs Gauls" and "Crusade & Revolution" whichare extraordinary and fine models to emulate. The design approachI’m using also provides opportunity to include thekey political events that occurred during the war’s long and tumultuoushistory(e.g., the 1809 Austrian Campaign, Napoleon’s Invasion of Russia, the War of 1812 between England and USA,the independence of Spanish America, the Spanish “Cortes”meeting, key changes in the British Government...).
In a more rudimentary state of design, I have a project for gaming the Thirty Years' War, at the level of grand strategy and where the economic, religious, national will, and diplomatic aspects have equal importance to the military. I want its mechanicsto be likeCongress of Vienna.At this point, I’m unsure if it will be for 4 or 5 players andhave 3 yearsfor each turn.
For this reason, the game’sDiplomatic Phase and those of Government and Warmust be modified from CoV’s. Furthermore, thisgame’s cost of production will be higher than CoVbecause I want it to have many character and event cards (they must cover 30 years after all!) and among those famous personages we’d have Gustavus Adolphus of Sweden, Richelieu, Louis XIII of France, Queen Anne of Austria, Emperors Ferdinand II and III, Count- Duke of Olivares, Tilly, Turenne, prince Condé, Wallenstein, Spinola, Philip IV of Spain, van Bergh, Oxenstierna, Torstenson, Maurice of Nassau, Cardinal Infante...even the Three Musketeers and captain Alatriste. What a colorful and exciting pallet they bring to this prospective design!
Still in my design dream hazes I have an idea to do a game about the Reconquista of Iberia from the end of the eighth century until the conquest of Granada in 1492. This would be more Eurogame than wargame; a very free and agile game where we synthesize seven hundred years of history and legends, and through which young people can know and experience a decisive, influential part of the history of Spain and Portugal, now that they have removed it from teaching in many of my country’s schools.
If you liked the interview and want to support the blog, visit my Patreon.
The four Leaders of Congress of Vienna: Whom will you be when playing this
upcoming new and exciting GMT game?
No hay comentarios:
Publicar un comentario