The period covered by Baltic Empires saw the Ottoman Empire at the absolute height of its power. The steppes of southern Ukraine and Russia were controlled by the Tatars of the Crimean Khanate, who were vassals of the Ottoman Empire, while the southern border of the Poland-Lithuania was inhabited by semi-independent Cossacks federations. Tartar raids to capture loot and slaves were a common problem along this border. Most of the time the Tatars served as a buffer between the Ottoman Empire and Poland-Lithuania. The Ottomans generally had no direct interest in this region, as their attention was primarily focused on the Habsburg and Polish lands to the south and west of the Baltic Empires map, but Polish and Russian reactions to Tatar raids at times forced the Ottomans to come to the aid of their vassals which resulted in large scale wars between Ottoman and Russian or Polish forces in the region.
Sultan Mehmed IV(1642-1693)
Mehmed came to the throne of the Ottoman Empire at the age of only 6 after his father was overthrown in a coup. He would become the longest reigning sultan in Ottoman history after Suleiman the Magnificent and was known by contemporaries to be a particularly pious ruler. In a Baltic context he is mostly known for his wars against Poland and Russia in the 1670s. The greatest of these was the War of the Holy League or Great Turkish War of 1683-99, which saw the legendary siege of Vienna in 1683 and the equally legendary relief of the city by allied forces led by the Polish king Sobieski with his winged hussars. Mehmed would be overthrown in 1687 by soldiers disenchanted with the course of that war.
Getting the Mehmed IV card into your court in Baltic Empires represent your Power securing an alliance with the Tatars and/or the Ottoman Empire. He thus represents not only himself but also the Ottoman Empire and other associated peoples more generally. By later discarding the card, you are calling on the Ottomans to intervene in the region with a major army. Placing three Independent units at once and allying with them all for one turn (as well as with any other units that might already be in the Ottoman & Tartar Lands) can be truly devastating for the unfortunate target. But once the blow has been struck the effect is over and the region might then be filled with Independent units that anyone can ally with, which can cause of lots of problems for both the Poles and the Russians. This card is obviously of major value for both the Russian and Polish players, but can be just as valuable for any power fighting against Russia and/or Poland as it allows them to devastate their enemies or at least force them to spend scarce resources to defend against Mehmed. Indeed historically the Swedes allied with the Tatars on several occasions and Charles XII even sought refuge in the Ottoman Empire after his disastrous defeat at Poltava in 1708.
As the card is lost when used it is worth considering the timing of its play, as there can be many circumstances where the continued threat of unleashing Mehmed can be at least as useful as actually using the card.
The Habsburgs and the Holy Roman Empire
Compared to the Maritime Powers and the Ottomans the interests of the Holy Roman Empire and the Habsburg dynasty that controlled them were mostly defensive in nature when it came to Baltic matters. The religious divide across Europe in general, and Germany in particular, caused by the Reformation just prior to the start of the game was however a cause for conflict, as the Catholic Habsburgs wanted to restore the true faith throughout the Holy Roman Empire (as well as centralizing Habsburg power in the process). These religious conflicts culminated in the Thirty Years War of 1618-1648, which became intertwined with Baltic affairs as first Denmark and then Sweden saw an opportunity to expand their realms into the wealthy German lands by intervening into the war on the Protestant side. As Sweden was simultaneously fighting a war with Poland, who was allied with their fellow-Catholic Habsburgs, and Prussia-Brandenburg was being steamrolled by the armies of both sides, Northern Germany had suddenly become the focal point for most Baltic rulers.
The period from the end of the Thirty Years War in 1648 to 1721 (the end of the period covered by Baltic Empires) saw Sweden entrenched as a major power in Europe with holdings in Germany, and with a firm alliance with France – the Habsburg’s main rivals. This situation naturally led to more Habsburg involvement in Baltic matters, such as when an Imperial contingent was sent to Denmark to fight against Sweden. In Baltic Empires the Independent provinces in Northern Germany are very attractive. They mostly start the game with their full complement of Cities and Workshops and several of them produce rare Goods or even, as is the case for Hamburg, contain one of the three super valuable Trade Centers. Compared to the similarly rich, but completely undefended, Independent provinces in the Livonian region (the modern day Baltic states) the provinces of Northern Germany are not easy pickings, however, as most of them start out with enough Fortresses and other Independent units to rival the starting strength of most of the player’s armies.
Emperor Leopold I(1640-1705)
Elected in 1658, Leopold became the longest ruling Habsburg emperor, and the first to understand that the Treaty of Westphalia in 1648 meant a marked decrease in importance of the role of Holy Roman Emperor. To compensate he sought to strengthen Habsburg authority within their own lands along absolutist lines. His reign saw many large wars against both France and the Ottomans, but in the Baltic context he is mainly known for the direct Imperial intervention against Sweden in the Northern War of 1655-60, which saw Imperial troops campaigning as far as Denmark as part of a Danish-Polish-Imperial coalition army. The infamous “Habsburg jaw” was most prominent in Leopold, and after his jaw was depicted unusually large on a 1670 silver coin, he was nicknamed “the Hogmouth”.
In Baltic Empires Emperor Leopold I represents the advantages of securing a firm alliance with the Habsburgs and their network of vassals and/or rulers within the Holy Roman Empire. You get to produce Independent units in Independent Provinces each Production Phase, an ability otherwise restricted to the Prussian player. You also get to ally with a unit in the Habsburg Lands for free during the War Phase, so by using the ability to place in the Habsburg Lands you in effect get a free unit you can throw after the other Powers each turn if they cause trouble for you. This is obviously very powerful if you are involved in securing Provinces for yourself in the area, but can also be used by Powers such as Russia, who are normally far removed from the Habsburg Lands, as constant attacks from the Habsburgs can be a great way of distracting other players who would otherwise cause trouble in your lands.
Albrecht von Wallenstein(1583-1634)
A Bohemian military entrepreneur, Wallenstein was Born into a poor Protestant noble family but converted to Catholicism in 1606 and married a rich widow. Wallenstein made an enormous fortune and a name for himself as a mercenary captain in the service of the emperor in the early part of the Thirty Years War, where he was awarded confiscated estates for his services. His massive armies were instrumental in first defeating the Danish, and then slowing the Swedish, during their interventions in the war. His meteoric rise to power and growing independence from the emperor would prove to be his undoing as he was assassinated in 1634 by army officials with the emperor’s approval.
Technically speaking Wallenstein didn’t intervene directly into Baltic affairs but only fought against Danish and Swedish intervention into German affairs. As this happened within the area covered by the map of Baltic Empires, he is however included in this article and the game. In the game, as in history, the coming of Wallenstein will pose great problems for whoever is trying to take control of the independent areas in Germany. The player who gets Wallenstein into their Court gets to place a total of five Independent units within the German lands (as defined by being adjacent to Hannover). As befits Wallenstein’s historical conquering army these units can be placed in any of these areas and not only in friendly or Independent-controlled areas, and can therefore really set back an opponent who has spent lots of effort and expense to carve out an empire in Germany. As in history Wallenstein only works for the Emperor (and himself) and not for the player who got him in their Court, so he won’t directly help the player gain a foothold in Germany. On the contrary, the second part of Wallenstein’s card text even specifies that no Protestant powers may ally with Independent units for the rest of the Round, as well as the next, so the arrival of Wallenstein often shuts down players’ ambitions in Germany for some time.
This is the third in a series of InsideGMT articles from Paul Hellyer about his board game Tsar, currently on GMT’s P500. You can view the previous article here.
As the new year arrived in 1917, Russia’s Tsarist regime teetered on the brink of collapse. Public opinion had turned against it, its army was struggling in the war, the economy was falling apart, and the capital of St. Petersburg faced a severe food shortage. In late February, hungry workers went on strike, demonstrated in the streets, and looted granaries. The regime had a short window of opportunity to reassert control, but this proved difficult. Its most loyal and capable troops were away at the front, as was the Tsar himself. The Tsar boarded a train and ordered troops to return to the capital, but they all found themselves stranded on blocked railway lines. Some officials in St. Petersburg tried to use the unreliable local garrisons to put down the disorder, but the soldiers instead murdered their officers and joined the revolutionaries. Left with few options, Nicholas II signed his abdication in a railway car.
Tsar turns the clock back to 1894 when Nicholas acceded to the throne. To give players a chance to set a different course, the game aims to capture all the factors that ultimately led to revolution: public support, army and navy morale, the regime’s political authority, agricultural and industrial production, infrastructure, and external factors like international trade, foreign relations, and war. As you play the game, you can change the inputs and watch the game engine respond. The end result might be a repeat of history, a stable constitutional monarchy, a fearsome police state, or a dysfunctional kleptocracy hanging by a thread.
In this article, we’ll take a closer look at these factors and discuss how they relate to the regime’s survival, starting with popular support. Tsar measures this in four key “Sectors”: Nobles, Bourgeoisie, Peasants, and Proletariat. One angle is the total level of support in all Sectors combined, which determines the number of Unrest Cards featuring incidents such as general strikes, demonstrations, insurrections, and assassinations. Another angle is the level of support in individual Sectors: different Sectors react differently to various events, with the Bourgeoisie and Proletariat Sectors tending to be more troublesome for the regime. Low support in the Bourgeoisie Sector triggers a recurring Dissidents Coded Card and trouble in any Sector can trigger economic production penalties. If support in any Sector falls to zero, players draw a Revolt Coded Card which can rapidly lead to revolution if left unchecked.
But as an autocrat, the Tsar doesn’t necessarily rely on public support. Depending on other factors, his regime might easily counter domestic opposition. One of these other factors is army and navy morale, which are also tracked on the game board. High morale gives the regime more options to suppress unrest, while low morale can itself become a threat to the regime—when morale reaches zero in the army or navy, a Mutiny Coded Card appears which can be even more dangerous than a civilian revolt. Another key factor in the military is the availability of “Elite Army Units” that always remain loyal. They’re based on historical regiments such as the Preobrazhensky Life Guards Regiment that drew their officers from the ruling class. Assuming resources and transport are available, these units can always be used to put down strikes, revolts, and mutinies. But with only three of these units, they can easily become overstretched. That’s especially true in wartime, when players are pressed to send the best units to the front, meaning they are not immediately available to respond to internal threats —creating the same situation that brought down the real-life regime in 1917.
The regime’s political authority is measured by the game board’s “Order Tracker,” shown on the left. It consists of two parts, Fear and Reverence. Order is defined as Fear or Reverence, whichever is higher. Fear refers to the government’s reputation for oppression and punishment, while Reverence depends on the Tsar’s mystique and cultural authority. The former is easier to manipulate, but actions that raise Fear tend to come with negative side effects. For instance, you can opt for capital punishment for the Tsar’s enemies, but this lowers popular support in the Bourgeoisie Sector, which may trigger a dissident movement and lead to a cycle of violence.
When Order is high, the regime has more options for responding to domestic unrest and maintaining military discipline. The highest levels of Order often allow the regime to silence its critics through surveillance and intimidation without the expenditure of any resources, whereas lower levels of Order may restrict the regime’s ability to issue orders and use force. But as with popular support, high levels of Order aren’t necessary to the regime’s survival. If you govern through popular consent, you won’t need the most oppressive options offered by the highest levels of Order. This lets players aim for different models of stability, emphasizing either Order or popular support. Having a coherent strategy is important: once you commit to political reforms that lower Order, you need to be vigilant about maintaining popular support; if you alienate the public through Fear, you need to be vigilant about maintaining Order. Avoiding extremes is also important: you need to maintain some minimum levels of popular support and Order, regardless of your strategy. High levels of public unrest will eventually exhaust the regime’s resources, while a total collapse of Order triggers Coded Card 8 (Revolution) and ends the game.
As in real life, the Russian economy affects the regime in many ways, and so the game leans heavily into resource management. The game board tracks five key economic factors: income for the treasury, grain production, industrial production, transport infrastructure, and international trade. The regime needs cash to pay troops, advance government programs, and keep the Tsar happy. Grain keeps the population fed and functions as Russia’s key export in this time period. Industrial production drives the development and maintenance of infrastructure and the military. A robust transport network is needed to move grain from the countryside to cities and ports, to move and supply troops, and keep the economy functioning. Finally, the regime can’t import or export unless it has willing trade partners and infrastructure such as ports and canals. Through trade, the regime typically earns cash through grain exports and (on occasion) pays to import industrial products. All these economic factors are connected and a failure in any one area will weaken the regime, either by angering the public, lowering army and navy morale, or limiting the regime’s scope of action.
Finally, the game tracks foreign relations, which affect trade levels, access to credit, the regime’s reputation, and the possibility of war. France was Russia’s main creditor in the late Tsarist period, and the game creates opportunities for loans and financial aid conditioned on relations with France. Relations with other countries can affect trade, Russia’s international objectives, and the possibility of armed conflict. The game captures the effects of soft power through state visits and reactions to Russian cultural exports; it also captures foreign reactions to Russia’s internal politics—for example, too much political oppression can trigger rebukes from Western nations, while performative amnesties can improve the regime’s public image abroad.
War is the most significant aspect of foreign relations. In real life, war was the catalyst for revolution, both in the incomplete Revolution of 1905 and the February Revolution of 1917. The story of Nicholas II could not be told without war. When war arrives, you’ll find that Tsar is not a traditional war game of tactics. War is treated at a macro level and we’re mainly concerned with the way it affects the regime’s stability. Outcomes mainly depend on the economic factors discussed above and the regime’s ability to maintain internal cohesion. The effects of war may include blockades, public unrest, economic stress, and faltering morale. For instance, drafting a large army reduces grain production, while at the same time increasing the cost of paying and supplying the soldiers. In short, war will present the regime with a stress test.
Notice how all these different factors are connected to each other. Nothing stands on its own. Popular support affects the economy, and the economy affects popular support. The regime’s troops need economic support, and the economy may need the intervention of troops. Healthy trade levels are needed to develop the economy, and a healthy economy is needed to develop the infrastructure for trade. So there are many feedback loops in the game, which can be either positive or negative. When things go badly, the game reaches a tipping point where revolution becomes inevitable.
Watching these feedback loops and forecasting the regime’s stability is an important part of gameplay, because victory conditions are radically different for games that end in revolution and games that end with the Final Scoring Card. If the regime survives to the end of an Era, players win according to their VP scores, based on their Faction’s policy objectives. Gold that they stole through corruption is deducted from their VP scores. But in multiplayer games, revolution ignores VP and awards victory to the player with the most gold. You’ll need to closely watch the game board for signs of collapse and consider what the other players are thinking: when everyone at the table loses faith in the regime’s survival, they’ll focus on hoarding gold through corruption, which accelerates the slide into revolution. In solitaire games, revolution means you lose—so your first goal is always to avoid revolution, which requires careful long-term planning and perhaps some desperate measures at the end.
As a final note, I’ll share some thoughts about the regime itself and its depiction in the game. In real-life terms, was the regime’s collapse in 1917 a good or bad outcome? My feeling is that the late Tsarist regime occupies a morally ambiguous space, comprised by its many atrocities and failings, and yet relatively benign compared to the Stalinist regime that followed. But whatever my views may be, I don’t try to convey them through the game. My aim as designer is to make a game that’s enjoyable to play, historically accurate, and thought provoking. I’m content to let players create their own narratives through the choices they make and form their own opinions about the regime’s place in history.
In the next InsideGMT article in this series, we’ll focus on the players’ factional objectives and scoring.
The historical power struggles occurring during the period covered by Baltic Empires (1558-1721) did not happen in a vacuum, but were of great importance to the interest to major powers on the edges of the map of Baltic Empires: England, France, the Netherlands, the Habsburg-controlled Holy Roman Empire, and the Ottoman Empire. Each of these powers were in their own way affected by affairs in the Baltic region, and in turn attempted to influence events there to their own advantage by various means. The scale of this ranged across the spectrum from minor trade deals to outright invasions and attempts at dictating foreign policy. The focus on this article is therefore on these foreign powers and how their interference and intervention in Baltic affairs are represented in the game.
The map of Baltic Empires has many areas that are uncontrolled by the playable powers at the start of the game. These are called Independents, and most can be conquered by the players. Along the edge of the map there are also some special areas that can never be entered or controlled by the players. These are the “Habsburg Lands”, the “Ottoman & Tatar Lands”, and in the North Sea, the “Maritime Powers” – an amalgamation of France, England and The Netherlands. Independent units start in these areas and more can be placed each round by the Prussian player (see my previous article on Prussia in Baltic Empires for an explanation on how and why). During their turn, players may spend thalers (the money resource of Baltic Empires) to ally with Independent units and control them during their turn. This simple mechanism in itself does a great job at representing the minor interventions in Baltic affairs, where rulers could secure outside assistance in their wars.
The Dramatis Personae (DP) mechanism, where players add a card to their Power Mat and gain the abilities of that card, adds another layer of showing the actions of admirals, rulers, and diplomats from these foreign powers that played a major role in the history of the Baltic region. In addition to the DP cards mentioned in this article, there are several other DP cards representing individuals from outside the Baltic region who were not representatives of these major powers, but rather of the major banking houses of Europe or simply individuals whose deeds as merchants, industrialists or military thinkers had a big impact on the events covered by the game.
The Maritime Powers(The Netherlands, England, and France)
The Sound Due was a source of immense wealth to the Danish kings, as the flow of trade between the Baltic ports and England and the Netherlands all had to pass through the narrow Danish-controlled waters. It was collected at Kronborg Castle in Elsinore (of Hamlet fame) and was from 1548 onwards based on the value of a ship´s cargo. In order to combat fraud, the local authorities there were authorized to buy a cargo at the declared price if they had a suspicion that it was deliberately set lower than the market value (the effect of the Sound Due in Baltic Empires, and how it generates thalers for Denmark is described in detail in my earlier article on Denmark-Norway). This toll was a source of immense irritation to the maritime powers who were heavily dependent on their Baltic trade for timber, flax, hemp, grain and various other goods to sustain their fleets and growing urban populations.
In Baltic Empires this trade with the Dutch and English is represented in the “Maritime Trade Phase”, where players may trade a number of their collected goods depending on their position on the Mercantile Hegemon Track, and in exchange draw an equal number of special Maritime Trade Goods. These are either rare Goods types not found on the map (and thus valuable for the players since you pay for things with sets of different Goods) or Thalers (which are even more valuable as they are wild-card goods and are the only resource you can use to pay upkeep and repay loans). Besides its economic importance, the Baltic region was an integral part of the European balance of power. As such the region was of interest to major powers such as France, whose very active policy of subsidies and alliances meant that several of the wars fought in the Baltic during the period covered by the game (1558-1721) were to a large degree proxy wars or parallel wars to those fought by Louis the XIV in western Europe.
Cornelis Tromp(1629-1691)
Tromp was a Dutch naval officer sent to Denmark during the Scanian War against Sweden (1675-79) to serve as an admiral in the Danish Navy. He performed well in this role and was instrumental in the victory in the battle of Öland in 1676. As an officer Tromp was infamous for his insubordination. He was a very aggressive commander who relished the fight, and as a result often had to change ships during battle, but he was nevertheless popular with his crews despite the danger he put them in. At home, without fighting to distract him, he had the reputation of being a heavy drinker, so much so that many inns at the time were named after him.
In Baltic Empires, the Tromp card represents an alliance with the Dutch, rewarding you with a special Leader unit. Leader units move and fight as normal units of their type (in this case a Ship of the Line), but with some benefits that either effect the unit or all friendly units with it, as detailed on the card. Tromp´s skill as a successful naval commander is represented by an ability which transforms one enemy “Probably Hit” result into a “Miss”, thus potentially reducing friendly losses when Tromp. This might seem counterintuitive considering Tromps record of daring and danger, but these exact qualities also ensured that naval battles would be decided far quicker and in a more decisive manner, which ensured overall lower losses than those seen in a protracted battle.
Another benefit to this Leader unit is that, for most Powers, the cost of a Ship of the Line unit is higher than the cost of a Dramatis Personae card, so if you were considering building ships anyway, the draw of a card that gives you an even more potent unit for a lower cost is often a welcome bonus.
A painting of the battle of Öland (1676), showing Dutch and Danish ships fighting against the Swedish navy
Coenraad van Beuningen(1622-1693)
Van Beuningen was the Dutch Republic’s most experienced diplomat, burgomaster of Amsterdam for many years, as well as the director of the Dutch East India Company. He keenly understood the importance for the Dutch Republic of not having a single power controlling the entrance to the critical Baltic region and is credited with saying that: “The keys of Öresund lay in a dock in Amsterdam”. Van Beuningen was a highly intelligent man with interests in art, theology and natural sciences, but also with a strong interest in mysticism, astrology, dream-interpretation, and supernatural wonders. The shock of losing his fortune through speculation in shares in 1688 made him bipolar, and he was locked up after writing letters to the ecclesiastical authorities about the coming apocalypse and painting Kabbalistic signs on his house. He died in poverty, leaving only a cape and two dressing gowns, a few pieces of furniture, and “a man’s portrait” by Rembrandt valued at seven guilders (three dollars).
In Baltic Empires, Coenrad van Beuningen directly reflects Dutch foreign policy and the goal of opening up the Sound to Dutch trade. This would happen by creating a situation where no single power held both shores of the Sound. By aligning your Power with the Dutch views on the Sound (in game terms, having van Beuningen in your Court) you are rewarded with beneficial trade deals and access to lots of capital. This is represented with the +2 modifier to the Mercantile Hegemon track, as well as increasing your Loan Limit. Should the situation in the Sound be resolved in favor of the Dutch you are rewarded even further with annual subsidies.
Van Beuningen can be useful to all players, as there is no requirement for your power to be actively part of events in the Sound, although he will likely appeal more to those powers who are already heavily committed to the affairs of the Sound: Denmark and Sweden. For the former, Beuningen is obviously mostly interesting if you fail to keep your control of Scania, in which case he helps cushioning the blow of losing the Sound Due Thalers and let you pursue other paths to victory – which is more or less exactly what happened in the Baltics after Sweden acquired control of Scania in 1658 and Dutch policies shifted from supporting Sweden to one of supporting Denmark defend their islands from the Swedes.
George Rooke (1650-1709)
Goerge Rooke was an English naval officer who saw extensive action against the Dutch, French, and Spanish during his long career. In the Baltic context he is mainly known for commanding the Anglo-Dutch Squadron that cooperated with the Swedish fleet in 1700. This squadron attacked Copenhagen and made it possible for King Charles XII to land and knock Denmark out of the Great Northern War (1700-21) in its opening phases. After the short Danish campaign Rooke would fight in the War of Spanish Succession (1701-14). Here he would capture the Spanish treasure fleet in the Battle of Vigo Bay in 1702 and command the Allied naval forces that captured Gibraltar in 1704, where a statue of him was raised in 2004.
The Baltic Empires version of George Rooke closely mirrors the historical Rooke. He is represented as a Ship of the Line Leader unit that gives you control over Independent units in the same sea area and must enter the game in the in the North or Norwegian Sea. Due to his entry restrictions Rooke will likely only be interesting for the Danish player, or for Powers that want to contest Denmark’s control of the seas. His benefits are highly situational, and if the North Sea is empty of Independent ships or if Denmark´s naval situation is too strong and secure he will likely be passed over for the other four cards available that round, or any other pressing concerns troubling the players at the time. But if the English offers of naval support come at a critical time and the conditions are right the questions of who gets George Rooke will cause lots of angst in the Production Phase, and will be one of the most talked about events after the game.
Thomas Roe(1581-1644)
Thomas Roe was an English diplomat whose voyages ranged from Central America to India, and who worked as ambassador to the Mughal Empire, the Ottoman Empire. and the Holy Roman Empire. During the Thirty Years War (1618-48) he brokered a peace between Sweden and Poland and strove to get Denmark and Sweden to join the Protestant anti-Habsburg coalition.
In Baltic Empires, Thomas Roe is shown more as an abstract representation of British diplomatic and economic pressure in general, and less as a representation of Roe’s personal achievements specifically. He allows the Power allied with Britain (represented by having Roe in your Court) to choose any one of the other powers in the game and effectively cripple their Maritime Trade Phase by limiting them to only trading a single Good. As a side benefit, he also increases your Power’s position on the Mercantile Track to represent increased trade with England. During a game the former is a hugely interesting power to wield as it can be used both to hurt enemies but also as a tool for diplomacy/blackmail, and it is my experience that Thomas Roe is a card that increases the intensity of the table talk.
King Louis XIV(1638-1715)
Louis XIV, the “Sun King”, was king of France from 1643 and his reign of 72 years is the longest recorded reign of any monarch in European history. Louis’s France was emblematic of absolutism as exemplified in the quote: “L’état, c’est moi”(“I am the state”). His revocation of the edict of Nantes in 1685 abolished the rights of the Protestant Huguenots and the resultant stream of Huguenot refugees to the Baltic region brought with them valuable technical skills. In the Baltic context he is mainly known for thoroughly intertwining Baltic power politics with the greater European power politics, as he sought to distract his Habsburg enemies by subsidizing the standing army of his ally Sweden.
No game on early modern power politics and war would be complete without Louis XIV! In Baltic Empires, the Louis XIV card reflects the massive impact on the Baltic scene of the Sun King’s many wars against his English, Dutch, and Habsburg rivals. His effects are two-fold, and one of only a handful of multi-category cards (Immediate and Permanent effects in this case). Upon getting Louis in your court the strong French armies will cause an abrupt diversion of Habsburg attention away from the Baltic and towards the borders with France, as represented by the removal of all independent units in the Habsburg Lands at that time. As with George Rooke above, the impact of this effect is largely situational. His other effect, representing the substantial subsidies Louis offered Sweden to maintain a large army at all times (so France’s German opponents would always have to watch their back), is a permanent effect. A -2 reduction of your Power’s upkeep costs is a significant boost, and especially so since upkeep costs can only be paid using ever scarce Thalers. Just as in history, an alliance with Louis XIV will allow your Power to maintain a far larger army without going bankrupt.
That’s all from the Netherlands, England, and France! In the second part of this article we will look at some personalities from the Ottoman Empire and the Holy Roman Empire who played an important role in Baltic affairs.
More of GMT’s Digital Offerings that allow you to “Play GMT Games Anytime, Anywhere.
As I noted in our first article, we have created, in cooperation with individual programmers and digital game platforms, numerous ways for customers to experience our boardgames on your digital devices. We’ve done this for one large, underlying reason: We want players to be able to engage with and experience the learning, fun, challenge, and historical insights of our boardgames with other players from around the world on digital platforms where they can play the games generally much more quickly than they can on their physical game tables.
Online Multi-player Games that enforce the boardgame rules but have no solo AI opponents. We’ll talk about these today.
Traditional VASSAL and TableTop Simulator Game Modules. We’ll feature these in our next installment of the series.
Free-to-Play Online Games
Today we’ll talk about all of the Free-to-Play Games that we have authorized to be published on Popular Online Platforms. First, a few notes about these games:
Most GMT Games on online free-to-play platforms look and play like the boardgame. You can play them multi-player with friends or multi-handed “hot seat” solo, but there is no AI built in, so there is no “against the computer” solo play.
A nice feature of Rally the Troops, one of the platforms listed below, especially if you want to familiarize yourself with gameplay before you play yourself, is that you can “Watch” a game in progress or “Review” a completed game.
All we ask for those of you who play our games online is that at least one of you who are playing owns the physical boardgame. That’s how it would be if you were meeting friends face to face to play – ONE of you would bring the game. But there’s no requirement that all players own the game to play online. We WANT you to use online free-to-play options to “try before you buy” our boardgames.
Here’s the list of games we have authorized that are currently available on free-to-play online platforms:
Rally the Troops.com
GMT Games Available to play for free on Rally the Troops as of April 21, 2025:
1989: Dawn of Freedom (2-player Card-driven game (CDG) set in Eastern Europe in 1989)
Andean Abyss (1-4 player COIN series game on the struggle for power in Columbia in the 1990s )
Nevsky (1-2-player Levy & Campaign series game about the clash between Latin Teutonic and Orthodox Russian powers along the Baltic frontier in the mid-13th-Century.)
Plantagenet (1-2-player Levy & Campaign series game of the War of the Roses)
Red Flag Over Paris (2-player Card-driven game on the Rise and Fall of the Paris Commune, 1871. )
Time of Crisis (1-4 player Strategy game of Ancient Rome)
Vijayanagara (1-3 player Irregular Conflict Series game of Medieval India, 1290-1398.
Washington’s War (Strategic 2-player CDG about the American Revolution.)
Wilderness War (Strategic 2-player CDG about the French & Indian Wars)
I hope this article and “all in one place” listing of games gives you insight into what’s available to you for our free-to-play digital games offerings. We want all of you to have plenty of options to find your favorite ways to “Play GMT Games Anytime, Anywhere.”
Next Time: VASSAL, TableTop Simulator Module, Cyberboard for almost all of our games, plus Solo Apps!
In William Shakespeare’s Richard III, the eponymous character is described as physically deformed and a psychopathic villain. Was this the truth or Tudor era propaganda?
Shakespeare has these lines in the play depicting Richard as deformed in body:
“To help thee curse this poisonous bunch-backed toad.”
“O, thou didst prophesy the time would come that I should wish for thee to help me curse that bottled spider, that foul bunch-backed toad!”
“Look how I am bewitched! Behold mine arm is like a blasted sapling withered up”
Old Bill is clearly saying that Richard is a hunchback, much like Quasimodo from the Victor Hugo novel, or the Disney movie, take your pick. And that one of Richard’s arms was withered and wasted. In 2012, archaeologists found and exhumed King Richard III from a car park (parking lot in America) in Leicester, England. The site was formerly part of Greyfriars Priory where the fallen King was buried after his death at Bosworth. An analysis of the skeleton showed that Richard had a severe case of Scoliosis, which at most would have caused one of his shoulders to lower than the other. There was no evidence of the “withered arm” mentioned in the play.
As far as Richard being a psychopathic villain that murdered his brother George, Duke of Clarence, his nephews (the infamous princes in the tower), among others. Richard had served his brother, Edward, well as the Duke of Gloucester, helping him win his crown and become King Edward IV. George was executed for treason and likely “deserved” it, for turning on both Edward and Richard several times. As for the princes, there is much debate about what became of them and who ordered what. The designer of Blood & Roses, Richard Berg, clearly believed that his namesake was a not responsible for their disappearance. There is some evidence that the bones found in the Tower of London were not those of the princes. Politics in England during this time period was a little rougher, to say the least, than it is today. More on par with Soviet Russia, where people suddenly disappeared and were erased from history.
Bosworth, one of the more important battles in English history, wherein, Henry Tudor, Earl of Richmond, defeated King Richard III and gained the English crown for the House of Tudor (political descendants of the House of Lancaster) as Henry VII.
Battle of Bosworth, as depicted by Philip James de Loutherbourg (1740–1812)
But more than that, Bosworth is interesting for two reasons:
• It is the only battle on English soil in which an English king was killed (if one starts counting from the reign of William I)
• It is a rather interesting situation, with each side waiting to see which way the political and tactical wind will blow, and two “Battles” of Stanley’s sitting athwart the field, like soccer fans, waiting to weigh in for whoever looks good.
Richard Berg was a Ricardian, meaning he was pro-Richard amidst all of the Tudorian propaganda out there, much of it thanks to Shakespeare (doing a spin job for the Tudors). Richard, for one, was a most stalwart and capable battlefield commander and fighter, and was unfairly smeared as a hunchback because of his scoliosis of the spine… and a pretty good king while he ruled.
Some of the historical text above was lifted from the Men of Iron Battle Book’s Historical Background for the Battle of Bosworth.
You can learn more or pre-order the Men of Iron Tri-Pack 2nd Printing here.
Note: All of the images depicting game components in this article show early concept or playtest art.
A Time to Plant.
It was 18(!!) years ago that Chad and I started talking about designing a Combat Commander: Vietnam game together. Of course, Chad was the master crafter of Combat Commander and knew the CC design a bazillion times better than I did, but he didn’t really know anything about Vietnam. I probably know more about that war/period than I know about any other in military history, and I love Combat Commander, so a co-design with Chad and myself seemed like a good fit. But we both were really busy with other projects, so we decided to work on CC: Vietnam in the margins, not caring if it took even a decade to get to our game tables in finished form.
So we went slowly but had a ton of great conversations as we crafted the project—and I learned even MORE about the genius of Chad Jensen when he sent me his master CC spreadsheets to adapt for CC: Vietnam. Wow. Over time, we honed the design document, unit spreadsheets, and scenario scope, and I finally put together a very ugly test CC: Vietnam map that we used to maneuver and “fight” our imaginary battles. Here you can see both that original map and Chad’s enormously better version of that map at right, which depicts mountainous jungle terrain that we envisioned as a base map for an “Assault on a US Fire Base” scenario, Marine defenses of a hilltop position, and US assaults (mini-Hamburger Hills) on dug in NVA/PLF forces.
Gene’s playtest map (left) vs. Chad’s playtest map (right). Yeah, I know… 😊
As most of you know, Chad’s design plate was continually busy during those years. There wasn’t a time I can remember when Chad didn’t have a couple games on our P500 list and a few more in his head. Here’s an ad we did back around 2015 that showed just a few of the Family Games that Chad had completed or in the works:
So Chad was busy. And starting around 2014, I got into serious development and testing on the game I’d wanted to do forever, Mr. President. So both of our design time for CC: Vietnam was minimal, but we kept honing the design document and both thought it was coming together and that we’d do it “someday.”
A Time to Weep.
Sadly, we were wrong. Even 5 ½ years later, I still have trouble thinking and talking about that incredibly heart-wrenching period of Chad’s sickness and passing. I lost a good friend, Kai lost the love of her life, and the gaming world lost an absolute rock star designer. So gaming-wise inside GMT, everything Chad-related just stopped while we all grieved his passing.
A Time to Build Up.
Probably a year later, allowing some time to pass and the hard edges of grief to soften a bit so we could get through a phone conversation without crying, Kai and I began to talk about finishing Chad’s unfinished or unpublished designs. And he had a bunch of them. Honestly, I didn’t think at that point that CC: Vietnam would be one of them because, frankly, I didn’t want to design it without Chad (and there was STILL Mr. President dominating my design time). And so we did other games instead—games that either Kai or I had a team in place or recruited to finish. Of all those games we talked about and have worked on, I’m especially happy that John Butterfield volunteered to finish Downfall with Kai. And it won the CSR Game of the Year last year! What a tribute to Chad, and to John, a forever friend to Chad and Kai.
In 2022, Kai and I began to seriously discuss the Combat Commander series and agreed to create an Anniversary Edition of the CC: Europe/CC: Med. games which was packaged as Chad originally intended, in one big box. And we had designers ask us about taking the CC game to other theatres and periods. But no movement for CC: Vietnam. Until there WAS!!!
A Time to Seek.
Two of our newer GMT designers whose work I’m really excited about are Non-Breaking Space (NB) and Stephen Rangazas. NB created Cross Bronx Expressway(nearing heading to the printer now) and Stephen designed The British Way. Both have other designs on P500 now and also on the design table. Well, in the fall of 2023, NB came to our Weekend at the Warehouse and showed a couple games to Jason, Kai, Rachel, Mike Bertucelli, and me. I liked his games, but more importantly, I liked HIM. After the weekend, we were all excited about working with NB—I heard several “he fits with us” comments (and he DOES!)—on various projects. And Stephen’s The British Way and The Guerrilla Generation demonstrated both his design skill and the depth of research that he puts into game design. I was particularly impressed with the way he engages with customers online: he communicates clearly and humbly and is open to feedback and other interpretations while being committed to making the best product that he can.
So, at that warehouse meeting, being really impressed with NB, I mentioned in passing that I’d really love to find a team to get the Combat Commander: Vietnam project moving forward. NB surprised us with “I need to make a phone call.” That call was to Stephen (they often work together in a design partnership). NB has since told me that it was Stephen’s background in Vietnam research that prompted the call. Stephen’s design of Sovereign of Discord, the expansion to our hit COIN game Fire in the Lake, already benefited from his depth of knowledge (and I would note here that your work has to be pretty impressive to get Mark and Volko to sign off on doing an expansion for one of their best-selling games!). After the call, NB told us something along the lines of “We’re interested, but it’s a divergence from the path we are on right now. So we need to take some time to think about it and discuss it in depth before we give you an answer.”
Fast forward to January of 2024. NB contacted me and Jason and let us know that he and Stephen were definitely interested in working on a Combat Commander: Vietnam game! We had an online meeting a week later where they walked us through a slide show of how they intended to move forward with the design, assuming we approved it. Here are a few of the slides from that meeting:
Stephen and NB’s scoping of the Factions that they proposed including in the game.NB and Stephen’s early overview of Faction Deck Force Composition and Timelines
It was a really good meeting. We had a lot of questions, and NB and Stephen answered them with skill, honesty, and transparency and were not shy to share what their research showed. I liked that when they hadn’t figured something out yet, they said so. It was clear to me that they had the chops to research, design, and deliver a new Combat Commander: Vietnam that aligned with Chad’s and my vision for the game but was not limited by it. I left that meeting IMPRESSED. And we gave them the go ahead to push forward into the “create the physical game” stage, which they proposed to have to show us by the Fall 2024 Weekend at the Warehouse.
A Time to Dance.
We didn’t hear much from Stephen and NB from January to September. We just left them alone, knowing that what they were creating was a huge task. Occasionally they’d have a question, but mostly they just worked away on their own, sculpting what we all hoped would become a masterpiece.
Then, just before the Weekend at the Warehouse, NB sent us the image below and told us he’d have the playtest kit ready for the Weekend. We were so excited!
At the Weekend, we were all really happy about where the design was and ready to move forward to getting it ready for P500. I was thinking it might be ready to go on the P500 list in a year. Then NB said, “Please give us a deadline. We work better that way.” So I said, “April 2025.” NB didn’t blink, so that was our target date.
Then, in January, Stephen and NB informed us that they had EIGHT maps (pictured below) they were now testing on and anticipated they’d double that within a month.
They also included a Map of Vietnam with a Scenario and Reference guide for all the planned Battles (below).
And then they COMPLETELY blew me away. They built a campaign system! WHAT??!!??
Campaign Scenario Generator (left) and the CC: V scenario it generated (right)
They then noted that they thought they’d be ready for a MARCH P500 addition instead of April. Looking at the quality and completeness of their work (I’ve shown just a fraction here), I had no problem giving them the March slot. So here we are, with Combat Commander: Vietnam hitting the P500 list with this week’s customer newsletter. I hope you’ll order yours now!
I hope this article gives you all some insight into how Combat Commander: Vietnam has come to exist. What a long journey this has been. I am HUGELY excited about what NB and Stephen have created and how they’ve taken Chad’s system and our vision and combined it with their own research and added so much that we probably wouldn’t ever have thought of. I still can’t believe we’re going to have a Campaign System for CC: Vietnam!!!!!!
I believe (and hope) that the Combat Commander community will be blown away by how cool this game is and by the amount of value they’re going to get in this big box of Combat Commander love. And I know Chad would be SO happy to see this game that we planted the seeds for finally come to fruition. As with everything in the Combat Commander world, every time I play this, I’ll be thinking of Chad. And I’ll always be thankful that NB and Stephen took up this challenge and have honored Chad with the care, attention to detail, and general awesomeness that they’ve created for us to enjoy as we play Combat Commander: Vietnam.
Many of you told us how much you appreciated us giving you a Buyer’s guide to our 2024 Fall Sale, so as we approach our Special Spring Sale that starts on Tuesday, April 1, Rachel and I have updated this Buyer’s Guide to try to give you some of that information to help out with your buying choices. We encourage you to use this information and the links below to build your sale carts on the GMT website between now and Tuesday when the sale begins. I hope you find this Buyer’s Guide useful.
Where Can You Find ALL the Eligible Sale Items?
We’re trying to make things a little easier for all of you this year, so can find all of the games you can buy in the sale in one department on the GMT Website. Just click Spring Sale 2025 (or choose it from the left side menu on any page in the “Browse by Series/Type” section except the front page on the GMT website) to see a list of every item that you can buy with the 40% off sale discount.
Which Games are Close to Going Out of Stock?
Here’s an alphabetical list of our lowest-stock games, with current quantities on hand for all games with less than 200 copies currently in stock:
NOTE: The following games have been “OUT OF STOCK” on our website for a while, but in our latest physical inventory, we’ve found some copies in the warehouse (quantities noted below). Good while stocks last:
Note that some of the games pictured may already be out of stock now (updated 4/1)
Which Games in the Sale have the highest retail prices?
Here’s a descending order list of our highest retail priced games, for those of you looking to optimize value. Price listed is BEFORE your 40% sale discount:
We hope you find this Buyer’s Guide useful and that you all get some 40% off games in the sale that will bring you many hours of enjoyment! – Gene & Rachel
Some weeks ago, an enterprising YouTuber, Andrew Choong, with his delightful British accent, posted several videos singing eloquent praise of GMT’s Rebel Raiders on the High Seas: a seminal game of the American Civil War at sea and the major rivers of North America by Mark McLaughlin (Mark and I enjoyably teamed together on several GMT games over the years).
First, readers should know that while Rebel Raiders on the High Seasis currently out of print and unavailable for purchase directly from GMT, the game remains available via the “after-market” and, most conveniently and importantly, can be electronically obtained for play via Vassal!
Yes, the talented Joel Toppen, who most recently assisted Mark and I by creating a wonderful Vassal Module for Ancient Civilizations of the Middle East, authored a fine Rebel Raiders on the High SeasVassal Module. Here’s the link to access it: Category:GMT Games – Vassal. Then there’s Joel’s detailed description of how the Module works: Rebel Raiders on the High Seas – Inside the Game.
Furthermore, Joel so enjoyed the game that he did this interesting and entertaining Review /Description /Retrospective After Action Report (of a December 1864 clutch Union win, “snatching victory from the jaws of defeat”, as Joel incredulously puts it) of playing the physical game: Rebel Raiders – Inside the Game
Ah, but if the preceding entices you, dear reader, here are links to what Andrew Choong more recently released via YouTube!
Thank you Andrew and Joel for these video creations which so well show-case the game as well as your respective articulate, enthusiastic presentation skills, skills that could hopefully rekindle the GMT family’s interest in Rebel Raiders on the High Seas!
Introduction by Congress of Vienna Assistant Designer/Editor, Fred Schachter – For those unaware, to familiarize this InsideGMT audience of what designer Frank Esparrago created with his fun and exciting Congress of Vienna game, available via GMT Games; InsideGMT has presented articles including a “Strategies for” series… (think of the old Avalon Hill General magazine’s “Perfect Plan” articles for that legendary company’s “classics”), “Game as History”: An Historical Introduction to the Congress of Vienna Period” as well as a four-part series entitled: “Meet the Statesmen of Congress of Vienna” and a host of other material such as game “After Action Reports”.
Use this link to access these articles: https://www.gmtgames.com/p-850-congress-of-vienna.aspx. This site includes a copy of the game’s full Rulebook as well as its shorter Quick Start Rules Summary. As to the Congress of Vienna Vassal Module, it can be found using this link: Category:GMT Games – Vassal. Isn’t it wonderful how many GMT games can be computer played using Vassal?
For Vassal is a wonderful way to game since it electronically duplicates all a game’s physical components, which in the case of Congress of Vienna, includes gameboard, dice, cards, various counters, pieces, rules and player aids to enable a four-player contest: one for each of the game’s Major Powers: France, Britain, Russia and Austria.
Without Vassal, the CoV Team’s efforts could not have been as comprehensive as they were. Those aforementioned InsideGMT articles could not have been as impactful. For that, an eternal debt of gratitude is owed to the very talented Joel Toppen, who back in 2020 created the initial foundational Congress of Vienna Vassal Module. Designer Frank Esparrago, in turn, built and modified it through numerous iterations to ultimately reflect the game’s final Terry Leeds’ published graphics. Through Vassal, CoV Play Testers could enjoy and contribute to the game from across the United States, Spain, United Kingdom, France, Luxembourg, the Czech Republic and Asia (Manila, Philippines and Shenzhen, China). Fun stuff!
We now present a “walk through “of how Congress of Vienna was converted into its latest electronic form, specifically VASSAL for the physically published game to enable four players, without geographic constraint, to have a grand time experiencing all this wonderful game has to offer.
Furthermore, readers may note that due to the wonderful support of those ordering and hopefully now enjoying Congress of Vienna, the game is currently “OUT OF STOCK” (thank you! thank you! thank you!). GMT will reintroduce CoV as a P500 Reprint offering within the next few months. You folks know how that system works, eh? For now, the game IS available to learn and play via Vassal. Have fun!
Here is Congress of Vienna Goes Electric 2025 Edition: starting with its “Game Set-Up” of course… so take it away Frank!
Note: If you would like to view any of the following screen illustrations (Figures) in a larger size, you can click on the image.
The first screen of CoV’s Vassal Module allows the choice of whether the game is to be conducted with players connected on-line or for an off-line contest by a single player or group using Vassal in lieu of the physical Congress of Vienna game. During CoV’s on-line play testing, one of the team would unlock the game and the other players would connect with it using the team’s established Skype guidelines!
The next two screens, Figures 1 and 2 shown below, are mandatory to get a game underway (that is, they always appear and must be properly responded to before commencing play). The first screen allows you to choose the desired CoV Scenario. The first option is the Full Campaign Game 1813-1814 (for a maximum of 10 turns). The other menu-offered scenarios are shorter, with less turns and different historical set-ups, etc. (see Figure 1).
Figure 1.- Congress of Vienna Vassal Scenario Selection Setup: The screen above allows choice of a scenario to play. Details concerning each scenario, such as its victory conditions and any special rules, are within the game’s Playbook Section 17. An “Add Your Scenario?” is a “Sandbox” option still under development for subsequent release. It is not shown within the above Figure 1. The CoV Team has this feature bookmarked as a pending “work-in-progress”.
Once this prompt is responded to, the following screen allows choosing sides (see Figure 2). It also facilitates selecting the option of a two or three player game. The final option is for playing Congress of Vienna solitaire (“Solo”), in which you manage all four Major Powers (per Playbook Sections 19-23). To fully experience the game’s solitaire offerings, you’ll need the large two-side printed Allied and French Bots which are included in the physical game.
Figure 2.- Congress of Vienna Vassal choosing side: This second screen of our CoV Module allows you to choose the number of players that will start the game. It is possible to play a game with a single player controlling two powers in a 3-players game, or a game with only two sides (e.g. the Allies of the Coalition against Napoleonic Imperial France). Finally, you can play a Solo game using either of the printed French or Allied Bots included with the physical Congress of Vienna game.
When Vassal remains open after a scenario and player(s) by their respective Major Powers are selected; the Module’s Main Window of the entire gameboard appears (see Figure 3)!
Figure 3.- Congress of Vienna Vassal Main Window: We used Terry Leeds’s beautiful, yet wonderfully functional, game board graphics, but had to adapt them to a computer screen. As Terry’s design is meant to be viewed from a four-player zenithal position when placed upon a gaming table, it was converted to a single-player front-facing image for a computer screen viewing. To accomplish this, we altered the direction of the Military Map’s facing by rotating it 90º. We also added an area, on the screen’s far right, for trading cards. This was needed since in games with physical boards and cards, cards are traded between players face down without passing them through the game board! A nice elegant solution, eh?
At this screen’s top are different buttons identifying CoV game components: two red and green buttons are located to its top left (surrounded with a dark blue rectangle). Both allow you to select an additional national card each turn to the player winning the Initial Environment Table’s turn start result (This is an achievement of creativity and Vassal programming virtuosity by the talented Joel Toppen! Bravo and thanks Joel!).
Thereafter, this button allows you to draw the Initial Event Card through which each turn begins and to its right is the Character & Event Card Deck (both surrounded by a red rectangle in Figure 3). This last button directs you to the main driver of this Vassal game. Immediately to the right of this button are four buttons that open the hand of cards for each Major Power Player (Austria, Britain, France, and Russia). Once a game is underway, these buttons can only be activated by the player who owns that Major Power. This requires privacy (except for a two/ three player contest or a Solo game). We put these four buttons inside an orange rectangle in Figure 3 above.
The Chart Folder buttoncontains different player aids such as Congress of Vienna’s Detailed Sequence of Play, Battle DRM, Campaign Game VP Chart, Rules, etc…. Further to the right are the two electronic dice (surrounded by a dark red rectangle) which keep the game “alive” and for which we never used for other Vassal games.
This is a true technological marvel it seems to us (although a player frustrated by bad luck can’t throw these dice out an open window or smash one with a hammer to teach the other[s] a lesson… yes, such reactions are within the actual experience of some CoV Team members: readers may have other bad die rolling stories to share)!
To their right are other less important buttons allowing receipt of optional Handicap Cards or to remove Characters who may die during a game (this surrounded by a light green rectangle). In between these are the buttons and charts that facilitate electronic play for 2-players (see the following Figure 4 below).
On the left side of the screen top is the Clean Button. This activates the Vassal screen’s clearing of game components at the end of each turn. It returns all markers and cards to their respective locations ready for use next turn. This is a clear, valuable, and appreciated advantage over physical face-to-face games as it eliminates potentially disastrous gameboard upset risk from pets and/or small children on the loose!
Finally, there’s the Help option located in the screen’s upper left corner (surrounded by a light green rectangle). This option opens a PDF file player aid (CoV Vassal Notes) which explains in detail the buttons and options of this Vassal Module for players through text and explanatory screen images. A new player is strongly encouraged to check out this PDF document once the Module is loaded, for it contains “How to” details beyond what this article encompasses.
The main window of the Congress of Vienna Vassal Module has components which do not fit on a screen without overly reducing their scale and legibility. Perhaps the most important feature is the Diplomacy Display (surrounded. by a red rectangle). This is where the game’s 30 Issue Markers (diplomatic, military, economic and political), intrinsic to the game’s Diplomacy and Government Phases; are located at the beginning of each turn if available for player selection by not being initially placed on a Major Power’s Track or the Negotiating Table.
Figure 4.- Congress of Vienna’s Vassal Handicap Cards & Dead Characters Window: You can see the Handicap cards deck on the left. In the screen’s center are discarded Handicap cards. Although optional, these cards allow you to add more variability to games and/or are used to achieve balance between players with less experience with the game versus one or more CoV knowledgeable opponents. It’s nice having this “balance the playing field” capability, eh? On the right is the last card permanently removed from the game. In this example, it is the aging Kutuzov who has just died at the end of turn 1 (through an unfortunate die roll of 2 which precipitated his early demise!).
At the bottom of Figure 3, flush left, there is a light brown Track (starting at 0 and ending at 80) to tabulate each Major Power’s VPs (indicated by a text box and light blue arrow). The Military Map (highlighted by a yellow rectangle) is where, during the War Phase, each army’s movement takes place and upon which battles are fought on the map’s different Fronts (A-G, including America’s War of 1812,depicted by a box rather than a Front of multiple spaces). The following Figure 7 features this map and explains some of its attributes. Congress of Vienna is certainly a game of diplomacy; but it is also a wargame!
On the bottom right of the Vassal screen is a vertical/horizontal scroll feature to block out the screen’s Diplomatic Section. This enables viewing, without distraction, solely the entire Military Map. This comes in handy when resolving the Congress of Vienna War Phase. Additionally, two adjacent horizontal Tracks (orange for the Allies and light blue for France) allow Major Powers to record Military unit losses (cubes) during a battle via the DRM Battle Tracks.
The screen’s right side is the Diplomacy Area (surrounded by a light blue rectangle). This is where the Diplomacy and Government Phases take place. There you’ll find the Negotiation Table, each Major Power’s National Track radiating from it, Diplomacy Round Tracker with the Turn Record and other game features. Also, each gameboard corner includes one of the four National Force Pools and other markers. Finally, the rightmost section of the Vassal screen contains the CardTrading Area where 2 players place cards to be traded between them during a Diplomacy Phase Round (this Card Trading Area does not exist on the physical board as players directly trade their cards without placing them on the board!).
We present in Figures 5 and6, two key windows within the main window. Figure 5 below shows the Initial Event Card Window (this opens by clicking the appropriate button). In that window you can see the front and back of these cards. On the upper left screen side, the magnifying glass icons allow you to enlarge or reduce the magnification of these cards per viewing preference. The Figure 5 screen’s label, outline, and arrow are red in color.
Figure 5.- Congress of Vienna Vassal’s Initial Event Cards Window: As an example, you can see how the menu’s “Execute” option is used to open Initial Situation card A-2 for May 1813. This card’s instructions referencing additional player cards, Issues, and other markers are appropriately and automatically placed with this instruction in the players’ hands and upon the gameboard. The preceding turn’s card A-1, for March-April 1813, is to the screen’s right.
In Figure 6, we show the Character & Event Game Cards Window. This window opens in the same manner as the previous one. Presented, as an example, are two cards: “Fouché” (#11) which is a CHARACTER CARD and a “Debating card” (#60) which is an Event card. Both are drawn from the same common deck for all players.
Figure 6.- Congress of Vienna’s Vassal Character & Event Game Cards Window: On the left is the Game Card Deck from which cards are drawn to constitute the players’ respective Card Hands. These cards are used and discarded during the Diplomacy and War Phases. This Draw Deck is to the left. In the middle are placed Debate Event card #60 as well as Character card #11, Fouche. Both are drawn from that deck as examples.
Returning to Figure 5, if you click an Initial Event Card’s “Execute” option (which opens through a right mouse button click), all the card’s instructions are automatically completed… as if accomplished by a player MANUALLY! Designated cards go into the players’ hands, Issues placed upon the appropriate National Tracks/ Negotiation Table, additional units and Resources placed in each Military Map capital space or in the correct National Resource Stacks. Neat, eh?
When you move the vertical and horizontal scroll and use the magnifying glass to expand the screen, you gain a complete single-screen view of the Military Map (see Figure 7). On this map are located the different Army Blocks that occupy their spaces. These spaces constitute Battle Fronts, also known as Tracks. These are identified by a capital letter from A to G. In the below image, Track C’s British Army of Portugal is portrayed by a red block (a red arrow whose tip is in the lower left corner of the screen). This British Army begins turn 1 of a Congress of Vienna Campaign Game in the space of Portugal.
Figure 7’s Military Map Features’ Examples: Military units (which are wooden cubes in the physical game are also simply referred to as “units”), belonging to the British Army of Portugal are indicated within the Army of PortugalBox through a red double arrow and rectangles at the screen’s lower left corner. This Box indicates this Army’s Campaign Game Turn 1 strength as four British (red), two Portuguese (dark red) and two Spanish (yellow) units: this is a respectable force of eight cubes representing approximately 160,000 soldiers! The number in the upper center of the Army Box is its maximum allowed size of ten units. Its adversary, Track C’s French Army of Spain, located in the Leon space, contains six.
Figure 7.- Congress of Vienna Vassal’s Main Military Map Window: The explanations of this figure’s contents are found in the preceding paragraphs. To avoid need to rotate the screen, which would have been unavoidable by fully duplicating the published Congress of Vienna gameboard, we had to rotate the Military Map 90º clockwise and horizontally place the two DRM Battle Tracks at the bottom of the screen. Note the DRM Battle Tracks’ two pawns, orange for the Allies and blue for France. These are placed in their respective “zero” spaces, poised for use in resolving a game’s next battle. This orientation altered Terry Leeds’ graphic design for physical game play functionality through enabling easier visual use of the Vassal Screen on a computer.
The BritishForce Pool portrays available British, Portuguese and Spanish units, as well as cylindrical British Fleets. It is located at the lower right corner of the Figure 7 screen (indicated by a light violet arrow, rectangle and text). Additionally, the British player’s markers, which include MilitarySupport, Resources, and Character Bonus Reminders, are displayed near this Force Pool Box. Furthermore, this Force Pool example contains an empty space where unbuilt Portuguese units are placed (as of turn 1, both are included in the Army of Portugal Box).
In Figure 8, we show an enlarged Window of the gameboard’s Diplomacy Area. At its center is the Negotiation Table (a square with rounded edges and yellow color border highlighting). This is where most Issues begin in CoV game and from which the negotiations and ensuing debates of a turn move them. This is the part of the board where, as a player, you will spend most of your time during the Diplomacy Phase’s negotiations and debates. It is also where, during the Government Phase, you’ll allocate your Resources on those Issues most vital to implementing your grand strategy for Congress of Vienna victory!
Figure 8.- Congress of Vienna Vassal Diplomacy Area’s Main Window: The explanation of this figure’s salient features is found in the paragraphs below. This image has been enlarged with Vassal’s magnifying glass function to show in greater detail the different elements of this key gameboard area.
At the upper mid-left of this Vassal screen image is the Turn Record Track (surrounded by an orange rectangle). This is where the Turn Marker is located. It is a black and orange marker with an hourglass symbol placed for a CoV Campaign Game’s first turn on its March-April 1813 space.
The Austrian National Track has been highlighted with a white rectangle in Figure 8. The nearby yellow pawn, which is a much larger gold pawn in the physical game, is used to designate the Major Power winner of an Initial Phase’s “Wager”. This pawn is subsequently shifted during a turn to designate its Diplomacy Phase winner. The winner goes last each Phase, so in this example, with the pawn by the Austrian Track, France would go first in clockwise order. The British Track is located beneath the Austrian Track.
Surrounded by colored rectangles are four important Record Tracks, each with a pawn to indicate its latest game status. On the right-side center of the Figure 8 is shown the Future Government of France Track, within has a dark blue pawn. This pawn is moved by its diplomatic Issue being won and financed with a Resource.
On the upper center of the image are the double Tracks (green and light red) of the Absolutism / Liberalism Record Tracks with their green and red pawns. A successful pawn movement, in addition to a Resource expenditure, requires a successful die roll result of 4 or more to trigger its Track space’s indicated VP effect(s). See Rulebook Section 12.4.5 for related details such as potential die roll result modifiers.
The Pax Britannica Track,with its red purple pawn at the bottom of screen, does not require a related Issue to be won for its pawn’s advancement, thereby winning Britain the entered space’s victory points. Instead, the pawn advances if the British player fulfills the next Track space’s prerequisite(s) and rolls a die result of 4 or more. That die roll may be modified per the Pax Britannica Track’s rule 12.4.11.
Finally, with Figure 9, we show a sample of the Allied side’s window used for Congress of Vienna’s Solitaire Game. Playbook Sections 19 through 23 describe the game’s solitaire play options. The Solitaire French side’s window is similar!
Figure 9.- Congress of Vienna Vassal’s Allied CDGSM (Card Driven Game Solitaire Method) Window: You can see the usual five cards in the standard CDGSM Playmat (A to E positions) at the top with four additional decks at screen’s the bottom. In this example, it includes the PUMC Deck (Potentially Usable Military Card) where only the #31 KUTUZOV card has been placed thus far. In the bottom row’s center is Draw Deck C with 17 cards remaining available and, to its right, is the Leader Deck, where the Coalition’s Leader Cards of Czar Alexander for Russia, Austria’s Metternich, and Britain’s Castlereagh are initially placed. Finally, in the bottom row’s upper right side, the Transitory Deck has the face up cards for placing as PUMC as face down in draw deck if not PUMC, just after the Wager.
Hopefully, the preceding encourages you to give Congress of Vienna’s Vassal Module a try with two, three, or a full roster of four players around a fun and friendly gaming table and/or versus its solitaire system.
Concluding Remarks by Congress of Vienna Assistant Designer/Editor, Fred Schachter – The preceding provides an overview, a “lay of the land” if you would, of how Congress of Vienna is electronically depicted using VASSAL. To reiterate, CoV’s Vassal Module may be downloaded via: Category:GMT Games – Vassal.
Others are here invited to provide CoV videos of their own regarding the game so we may all continue our Congress of Vienna journeys either directly or vicariously. Hopefully, CoV’s Vassal Module, as well as the physical game, facilitates such creativity.
Please feel free to pose questions and/or feedback via the space InsideGMT provides for this purpose at this article’s conclusion. Thanks for your interest!
As our play testing of “Infernal Machine” continues apace, it is interesting to see how our teaching scenarios can be tinkered with to make sure they are providing much-needed information on game play and hints on strategy, as well as have some fun with the game system.
Scenario Ten has the Player fill the shoes of the Inventor, the “Man with the Dream”, who wants to design, build and then sail an Underwater Marvel of the Industrial Revolution, something that the newspapers have called a “fishboat.”
In the original Scenario Ten, the Player is a citizen of the Confederacy, who sees his fishboat as the means to drive off the Union Navy from the mouth of the Mississippi River.
I decided to see if we could work the scenario in reverse, and have the Union Navy under Admiral David G. Farragut send a ‘fishboat’ of their own up the Mississippi River to blow a hole in the obstructions that the Rebels had built to block the Yankee fleet in front of two fortifications protecting the lower River: Forts Jackson & St. Philip.
Here is what happened:
This time we are on the USA side at start, with our Machine Shop located in Boston, MA.
(Our fishboat is to be constructed at said Machine Shop in Boston, then assigned and shipped to the US Navy’s West Gulf Squadron. They are currently anchored at the mouth of the Mississippi River known as Head of Passes, south of New Orleans. Once there, our fishboat will be ordered to conduct raids (via Towed Launch) on the Rebel defenses centered around “Big Muddy’s” forts “Jackson” & “Saint Philip.”
The Union Player’s time factor is the same as that of the Confederate’s.
Union Adm. Farragut wants to see if “this new-fangled fishboat thingie” can help by raiding ships, clearing obstructions, destroying wharves and generally raising hell near the two forts.
Failure means Farragut’s plan to take New Orleans will hit a snag.
This won’t do Union General Benjamin “Beast” Butler’s short-fuse temper any good either The first image (see below) is at the end of Summer 1861, with hull built and Magnetic Engine installed, and an Air Lock next up for inclusion. This looks promising, with 2nd Mechanic converting a Journeyman to (Oh joy!) Sam Eakins of “Alligator” fame! Investments made on both Spring & Summer were middling. Autumn 1861 will have action beginning on Contract to keep funds flowing. Yep, Autumn ’61 is looking very interesting.
As I was running a previous playtest, I surmised that, if the Union Admiralty was less sold on traditional sailing warship practices and kept up with the advances being made through nautical engineering, they could have gotten out of the fishboat starting gate at the same time as Horace Hunley, James McClintock & Baxter Watson did in New Orleans.
If so, then the best place in Yankee-dom for a civilian contractor wanting the most up-to-date technology, along with the mechanics and engineers to wield it would be Boston, Massachusetts.
There were the Sciences and Engineering Departments at Harvard University, and also to the newly-founded (1861) Massachusetts Institute of Technology just next door to Harvard in the Cambridge suburb.
MIT’s engineering wizards of the era were a marvelously rich source; the Inventor’s team would be up-to-date on all the latest technical advancements, and just might be able to get their educated hands on a real engineering marvel: British physicist & inventor Michael Faraday’s battery-powered Magnetic Engine.
The choice of an Air Lock as the fishboat’s primary weapons delivery system would be easy to obtain from any competent steamship chandlery down at Boston Harbor, and a reputable salvage operation would be a source for a salvage and demolition Diver with the proper credentials.
Two guidelines to follow when starting this scenario:
1) Get a good Investor to start with. Mine is French émigré Brutus de Villeroi, a wealthy ex-French aristocrat, who is a naval designer, engineer and a self-described “Natural Genius.”
(At least that is what he told the Immigration folks his occupation was upon his arrival in New York City.)
2) Make sure you are hiring a capable multi-Expertise gang of Mechanics. You will need at least 12 Expertise total between your Shop and your crew so you can install the Magnetic Engine as soon as possible.
My plan is to finish building and training by Winter, 1862.
The fishboat and team will then deploy to the Gulf in Spring of 1862 where training missions and final tinkering occurs.
This will leave the Summer of 1862 is the only season for any additional training, plus the all-important attack mission.
“Fish Boat” under construction at Boston, Summer 1861
One more thing: you’ve got to make sure of your money.
Once you’ve got that key Mechanism in hand, (Mine will be the Magnetic Engine), you are looking at adding the Prow and Stern, plus one or two Boat Sections, a Steering Linkage, Ballast Tank, Propeller and Hatch.
Autumn 1861 is coming up. To scare up some ready cash, I plan to shift some Journeymen over to Contract work at that time, plus make another run at the Investment Table.
Hey, if it was easy being an Inventor of Fishboats, everybody would be one!
So here’s Autumn, 1861 where the “Spectre” (cool name, huh?) is being fitted out in Boston, MA.
Of course, I hadn’t paid attention to the weather.
In game terms, Boston in Autumn is little different from Boston in Winter, the only difference is that you still have a relatively active Machine Shop that brings in $7. In Winter, that Shop income plummets to $3.
Autumn is also the season our Boston machine shop will “promote” a Journeyman to Mechanic. This got me Mechanic Lodner Philips who can, once per game, promote a Journeyman to Mechanic all on his own, which he will do in Winter of 1862.
Praise the Autumn 1861 “Fortunes of War” table.
I rolled a 7 and got another Investor (instead of a Black Cube), one Professor Eben Horsford, currently on sabbatical from MIT who is Investing his grant money in our little fishboat project here.
His initial stipend plus that of Prof. de Villeroi’s funded the purchase of two hatches, a set of keel weights, plus a propeller and its shroud.
Fingers crossed, I should have enough for a steering linkage plus a snorkel and maybe a ballast/level tank pair.
With Winter 1862 coming up, Horsford and de Villeroi should “invest” a total of $15 as their “Holiday Gift” to the shop to bolster that meager $3 shop intake for the season. Despite there being only one Action this season, it has been a productive one for Project Spectre.
(Incidentally, I decided to drop the one season transfer cost for moving the completed fishboat from Boston to Head of Passes. Per the American Enterprise Institute, travel by steamship in 1857 between New York & New Orleans took just six days, with Boston to New York adding a half day steaming time.)
Thus, I have Spring, 1862 to complete building “Spectre” and deploy her to Head of Passes in Louisiana, leaving one Training mission and one Attack mission for Summer, 1862.
This is a tight schedule.
Each season’s Fortunes of War/Event could easily mess things up.
“Spectre” shown in final stages of construction. Note Magnetic Engine and improved propeller.
Winter 1862 turn finds Mechanic Sam Eakins exercising his Special Ability to add a second Action for the season. He’s quite the motivator, that one!
True to form Brutus de Villeroi & Professor Eben Horsford together add their $15 yearly benefit.
While at Eakins’ party, Mechanic Lodner Phillips uses his Special Ability to convince de Villeroi’s wife Eulalie to replace a departing Journeyman, which results in Eulalie de Villeroi joining both the project and the crew!
Remember, these are Mechanics, not superstitious Sailors.
Being French, de Villeroi is very proficient with pistol and saber.
As is Eulalie!
Winter, 1862’s first Action is an Investment Check of $5
A dr of 8 yields not only a $10 return but adds Investor Augusta Price, who adds $40 more to the project’s treasury.
This allows the crew to use the remaining Action to complete the “Spectre’s” mechanism manifest by adding a ballast tank combination, snorkel, periscope and gearbox.
A cold February Saturday finds all hands present on the wharf at Boston Harbor as the “Spectre” is loaded onto the deck of the USS “Varuna.”
With Investors Horsford and Price waving goodbye, “Spectre” and crew set out for Head of Passes, Louisiana and warmer climes.
Spectre construction completed
[Caption: “Spectre’s” Gauges Board at the close of Winter 1862. The crew positions assigned by de Villeroi have him Steering, with Eakins & Lodner Phillips in reserve if needed.
Log entry:
Acting Master Samuel V. Eakins, USS “Spectre.”
17 February 1862 – Aboard U.S.S. “Varuna” – at Sea, off coast of Long Island, NY.
(At this point I will let excerpts from Master Eakins’ personal log book tell the story of the “Spectre” and her crew on their journey from Boston to the mouth of the Mississippi River.)
-X-
We left Boston Harbor this morning about 10 o’clock. All passengers affiliated with the “Spectre” were assigned bunk space in officer’s quarters and had their gear stowed. The “Spectre” itself is currently tied down atop the central hold access gratings, lashed fore and aft between fore and mainmasts to prevent pitching during rough seas.
Which we’ve had plenty of, as the ship’s captain, Commander Charles S. Boggs, is determined to set a record for the fastest passage between Boston and the Gulf. To that end, “Varuna” was bouncing off a heavy snow squall in Long Island Sound that forced Boggs to tack continuously across the wind, with only the foretop sails set to assist “Varuna’s” remarkably noisy steam engine.
I’ve offered Boggs our mechanical assistance to help speed “Varuna” along.
Boggs sniffed at me, stole a glance at “Spectre” gently rocking in her stays on the main deck, and spat a large brown stream of tobacco juice over the side. Apparently, Captain Boggs enjoys his tobacco in its natural state.
The storm is really kicking up a fuss, with winds in excess of 20 knots and seas of 10 to 15 feet and increasing the further south we go, which is bad news for my crew of landlubbers.
Most of them are seasick, as is Madame de Villeroi who is being ministered to by the ship’s surgeon and de Villeroi himself.
I’ve avoided the effects of “mal de mer” by placing a sliver of fresh-cut ginger root under my tongue.
The “Varuna’s” helmsman, a garrulous Irishman named Reagan says we should be sailing out of the storm by the time we reach Cape May off New Jersey,
” – an’ that be some-toyme ter-night, Lord willing yore worship, sorr.”
We will see.
Log entry 18 February 1862 – Aboard USS “Varuna” – at sea off Cape Hatteras, North Carolina.
It is late afternoon (“Six Bells of the Afternoon Watch.”)
We’ve sailed out of yesterday’s snow storm and into a steady rain that has soaked through just about everything on board “Varuna”.
Thankfully, we’ve not encountered the usual gales found here above the “Graveyard of the Atlantic,” but that may just be “Sailors Luck,” as the “Varuna’s” crew have it. Commander Boggs’ men are about as taciturn a gang of bluejackets as their skipper.
Though they are professional seamen, to a man they do have a sailor’s curiosity about “new-fangled equipment” and were very curious about “Jus’ whut be thet thang lashed down on th’ Main be, sorr?”
I’ve told my team to be friendly but not informative to the sailors about “Spectre.” The ship’s officers are another matter, and de Villeroi and I will be discussing where we are heading exactly, and when will we get there?
Before we left, the telegraph had brought news of Admiral Farragut’s West Gulf Squadron departing Pensacola for Head of Passes, which means he and the Squadron should be there by tomorrow afternoon.
The clock is ticking on our little venture.
Log entry, 19 February 1862 – USS “Varuna” – at Sea off St. Augustine, Florida.
We are making good time on our journey to Head of Passes. As we sailed past Flag Officer DuPont’s South Atlantic Blockade Squadron off Savannah, a US Navy cutter hailed us, then came along side “Varuna” and delivered the mail and a communique from Flag Officer DuPont, who wished us “…good luck in your endeavor, and death to the Rebels, every one!”
Commander Boggs read the communique to the ship’s crew, and to our crew as well. It got the usual response of sniffs, coughs and suppressed chuckling from the swabbies at the back of the gathering. Boggs glared back at those assembled but said nothing, then pulled his hat down in front and stalked off to his cabin.
Seems our crew of jolly tars have several among them “from Maryland,” which means they are Southern by birth; not necessarily “from Maryland” but still loyal to the Union, as far as that goes.
Serving on “Varuna” is Master’s Mate Henrik Schenderhans, a likeable Dutchman from Hoorn in Holland.
Henrik (he prefers this “familiarity” over my stumbling over his last name all the time) says that “Dis regionalz grumblin’ vill schtop!” as soon as “Varuna” joins Farragut on the Mississippi.
The meeting with Boggs’ officers over dinner last night was a frost.
None of them saw any advantage in sneaking up on the Rebels, blowing things up, then sneaking away again.
If sneaking means you get home with an undamaged fishboat and an uninjured crew, then I’ll have a double-helping of “Sneaking” and keep it coming, thank you very much.
Log entry, 20 February 1862 – USS “Varuna” – at Sea off Tampa, Florida.
We entered the Gulf of Mexico sometime last night, leaving cold, rainy and snowy weather behind for the balmy sun-soaked breezes of the Caribbean at about Six Bells in the Forenoon Watch (10:30 am).
Because of high winds in the Straits of Florida, we had to hug the coast, which brought us past Fort Jefferson to starboard. If there is any place more remote and forlorn than the Dry Tortugas islands, I don’t know of it.
God help the men who are building this monster way out here in the middle of the ocean, and it being all brick and masonry for the most part.
The February sun beating down was hot enough on board to have sailor and crew stripped to the waist for comfort.
Poor Eulalie, being a lady, could not partake, though she did strip down to her chemise and a skirt and sported a parasol while on deck.
We should be off Mobile, Alabama soon, perhaps by tomorrow.
The next day should find us at Head of Passes, where our work really begins.
Log entry, 21 February 1862 – USS “Varuna” – at Sea off Mobile, Alabama.
Early this morning at Six Bells in the Morning Watch (6:30 am), we joined the Navy’s West Gulf Squadron off Ship Island, Mississippi.
Commander Boggs went ashore to report.
The harbor master at Ship Island promptly told Commander Boggs to get back on “Varuna” and “report to Admiral Farragut at Head of Passes. Now, Commander!”
Boggs did just that, and has driven his crew like John Paul Jones with a wasp in his pants; telling his engineers and stokers to make all steam possible and the navigation officer to plot the fastest course to the mouth of the Mississippi, “Because I mean to beat Farragut there or know the reason why!”
de Villeroi and the rest of us are busy attending to “Spectre,” getting her ready for her debut tomorrow on “Big Muddy.”
Log entry, 22 February 1862 – Head of Passes, Louisiana.
This will have to be short, as we are casting off on our first training mission.
A while ago, Commander Boggs mustered the Spectre” crew on the aft deck and addressed us.
In his gruff manner, Boggs complimented us on our skills, our perseverance and our bravery, and said “that we could ship with him anytime we asked to.”
There’s been some argument between de Villeroi, Philips and myself over who will be at the helm of “Spectre”.
de Villeroi won the toss, darn his luck…
… and there’s Philips blowing his bosun’s whistle, which means we are about to get underway.
Faraday’s Engine has been tuned up, and that gearbox we got from Robert Stephenson has been quietly whirring away in its machine oil coating in anticipation of the trip we will be making.
I’ve also had a word with our Diver. Signor Stefano Rojas knows the Air Lock’s operation, both out and in.
We are as ready as we will ever be!
-End of excerpt-
-X-
Turn 5 – Spring 1862 –
After settling an argument on the merits of Union General Hunter’s emancipating the Carolina Sea Island slaves, (-$1 to the Pilot Town Tavern’s keeper for breakage) “Spectre’s” crew began its first training mission, sailing up the Mississippi past Tripod, then past Alligator Station and Northeast Point, then returned to Head of Passes, both “Spectre” and crew passing their first sea trial.
In the process they repaired a snag-clogged propeller shroud at send-off.
Next, “Spectre” passed Alligator Station while surfaced.
de Villeroi then ordered “Spectre” to be crash-dived thru Awash depth to Below Shallow on her first dive to show that the Ballast/Level system worked as he had designed it to. He then ordered “Spectre” back to the surface and sailed home to Head of Passes.
With a total of four black cubes against one red cube earned on this mission, “Spectre’s” success attracted a new Investor (per Rule Book p. 43), and Russell Sturgis joins the team, adding $15 to the treasury (that is now at $52).
Sturgis’ Special Ability is to bring another Investor on once per game.
On being informed by de Villeroi of the success of this first training mission, Admiral Farragut ordered another training mission forthwith.
“Spectre’s” second training mission had Northeast Point as its goal.
Almost from the start, equipment began to malfunction.
First, the Gearbox began acting up.
Next the Steering Linkage locked, but Eulalie de Villeroi was there with her toolbox and repaired it while dodging her husband’s feet at the helm.
At Alligator Station, a seal in the forward Ballast tank ruptured which submerged “Spectre” to Awash depth (and caused Lodner Philips to Panic), before Eulalie got that Malfunction repaired.
Entering Northeast Point, de Villeroi ordered a descent to Below Shallow. At that point the gearbox began to Malfunction again, this time dropping the Power Grade from “A” to “B”. de Villeroi immediately surfaced the boat, reversed course and headed back downriver to Head of Passes.
Arriving there, the “Spectre” got caught in a current drift and sprung a leak in an aft hull seam. Recovery was uneventful, with repairs being needed on the gearbox and an aft hull seam.
Back alongside USS “Varuna” that was now serving as tender for “Spectre,” de Villeroi and Eakins determined that the aft-section Leak was caused by an impact to the Shroud’s support framing that had cracked through into the lower propeller mount, and then carried along the lower hull seam for about a foot and a half. Fortunately, de Villeroi had requested that the “Varuna” be fitted with a forge and metalworking shop, whose machinists and shipwrights joined “Spectre’s” crew in lifting and positioning “Spectre” on “Varuna’s” main deck to repair the aft hull leak. As for the jammed gearbox, mechanic J.B. Morrell discovered that the clutch mechanism responsible for changing gear speed had broken a tooth in its cog, which caused the jam. Morrell and Lodner Philips got busy fashioning a new clutch gear for the mechanism.
Spring slowly changing to Summer found that repairs to “Spectre” had been completed satisfactorily.
An examination by de Villeroi, Eakins and the assembled mechanics declared the “Spectre” fit for duty.
As the “Varuna’s” launch carried de Villeroi and Eakins and their good news to USS “Hartford,” (Admiral Farragut’s flagship) the West Gulf Squadron’s mortar schooner fleet opened a thunderous barrage upon the Rebel forts ”Jackson” and “St. Philip.”
In the din, Eakins leaned over, tapped de Villeroi on the leg and pointed back towards “Varuna.”
de Villeroi turned just in time to see the “Spectre” being swung over “Varuna’s” starboard side and lowered into the Mississippi.
Turning to look back at Eakins, de Villeroi realized that “Spectre’s” and their time to act had just gotten significantly shorter.
Union Gauges sheet shows “Spectre” with 2 Training Levels at the start of her Attack mission. Note that Brutus de Villeroi and wife Eulalie occupy the steering helm under the forward hatch. The Faraday (Magnetic) Engine occupies the whole of the next tile aft, with the rest of the crew occupying the stern. Also note that the second successful training mission netted another Investor.
And so, to war.
“Spectre” departed the fleet anchorage to the cheers of the sailors on board USS “Varuna.”
de Villeroi, standing in the fore and aft hatches took the cheers, doffing his hat as “Spectre” passed under “Old Glory” on the stern of USS “Hartford.”
His hat tip was returned by both Admiral Farragut, Commander Boggs.
“Spectre” leaves Head of Passes heading up the Mississippi River.
Steering for the westernmost bank of the “Big Muddy,” de Villeroi ordered half speed on the Faraday Engine, to which Mechanic Lodner Philips complied. de Villeroi chose his course well, staying in the calmer shore current as “Spectre” passed the old semaphore “Tripod” on the eastern river bank. Alligator Station also proved to be a calm passage, the Faraday humming along as fresh air whistled through the open hatches. A solid blanket of clouds kept Ol’ Man Moon from an unwanted appearance, while the wind gusts tested de Villeroi’s steering ability. Northeast Point saw the first malfunction, being a ballast pump valve stuck open, diving the “Spectre” from Surface to Awash. Eulalie de Villeroi assisted Acting Master Sam Eakins in freeing up, replacing the defective ballast pump valve and then surfacing the “Spectre” once more. Rounding the bend just south of The Jump, Lodner Philips spotted some watch fires ahead, whereupon de Villeroi had Eakins crash dive the boat to Below Shallow to avoid detection.
“Spectre” passes The Jump.
de Villeroi kept the “Spectre’s” bow pointed into the river’s current as it slowly passed the old Salt Works factory.
At this point the Faraday Engine decided to kick up a fuss.
Though making a racket (and panicking Lodner Philips) it was still capable of forward motion at the current Easy pace, but needed fixing should de Villeroi need flank speed at any point in the journey.
With Lodner cowering behind the Leveling Tank it was up to J.B. Morrell and Eulalie de Villeroi teaming up to effect repairs.
After several tentative crackles and a whiff of ozone, the Faraday recovered its comfortable hum. As they approached Beaver Station, de Villeroi told the rest of the crew that “Spectre’s” mission was to blow a hole in the submerged river obstructions near the eastern shore of the river.
Raising the boat from Below Shallow to Awash enabled de Villeroi to use the periscope to confirm that “Spectre” had arrived in the right place.
de Villeroi ordered Eakins to dive the boat back to Below Shallow, and to get Diver Stefano Rojas ready for duty.
Diver Rojas prepares to disembark with his demolition charge.
Lugging his demolition torpedo, Diver Rojas exited “Spectre’s” Air Lock.
J.B. Morrell and Eulalie both kept an eye on the Faraday Engine at this crucial moment of the mission.
Rojas’ journey to his target was slowed by the inevitable silting up that the Mississippi had “dusted” the fascines and “dragon’s teeth.”
Diver Rojas plants the demolition charge on target
Uncovering a pre-existing Rebel-made passage through the line of Obstructions, Rojas placed the Large Charge on the left side base of the obstructions.
Upon detonation, the charge would widen the Rebel’s current passage, and the stronger river current would carry additional debris of the explosion downstream, making the breach even wider.
Once set, Diver Rojas carefully returned to the “Spectre’s” Air Lock and climbed inside, cycling the water-filled Air Lock and replacing it with air.
Rojas hooked the charge’s insulated electrical wires to a bank of Leyden Jar batteries, then climbed through the Air Lock access hatch and into the main cabin. At a nod from Rojas, Eakins threw a nearby switch.
A most satisfying “THUMP!” resulted, that was not only heard but felt through the hull. Success!
Image 9: (Tactical Board)[caption: The demolition charge destroys the Obstructions.]
The demolition charge destroys the Obstructions.
“Let’s get out of here,” bellowed Eakins, as de Villeroi executed a classic pirouette that reversed “Spectre’s” course heading to downstream and home.
Instead of skulking along in the shallows to avoid the worst of the Mississippi’s current, de Villeroi now swung “Spectre” into the main channel, letting Big Muddy take the strain of travel while the Faraday engine was recharging the Leyden Jars. Double the number of watch fires now burned on both banks of the Mississippi, while picket boats swarmed like angry hornets on the river’s surface.
But “Spectre” lived up to her name, ghosting along safe in the rivers depths.
As “Spectre” passed opposite Northeast Point, a mid-evening fog bank rolled in which further hampered Confederate pursuit –
Image 10: (Mission Board) [caption: “Spectre” passes Northeast Point as the Fog rolls in.]
“Spectre” passes Northeast Point as the Fog rolls in.
When “Spectre” arrived back at Head of Passes, the Faraday Engine conked out again just as “Spectre” pulled alongside USS “Varuna.”
As de Villeroi opened the forward hatch, a sailor on “Varuna’s” fo’csle hollered “How was yer huntin,’ boys?”
Standing in the aft hatch, Lodner Philips reached down, pulled a broom out and waved it energetically over his head: a “clean sweep!”
The “Varuna’s” crew erupted in cheers, and Commander Boggs ordering a signal gun fired to alert Admiral Farragut of “Spectre’s” safe arrival.
Sighing, de Villeroi pulled a cigar from his vest pocket.
Lighting it up, he took a long drag of Havana tobacco smoke and permitted himself a rare smile.
Looking down through the hatch he saw his wife Eulalie looking up at him.
Eulalie was smiling, too.
May, 1862.
Having visited the White House and been feted by President Lincoln and Washington society, the de Villeroi’s were taking the train back to their Machine Shop in Boston, Massachusetts.
The destruction of the Confederate river barriers below Forts Jackson & St. Philip allowed Farragut’s fleet to sail virtually unchecked past those two old piles of now-smoldering masonry.
The massive Confederate ironclad CSS “Louisiana” took a close-in pounding from the West Gulf Squadron and was last seen, adrift and on fire from stem to stern, floating downriver to the Gulf of Mexico, together with the wrecked remnants of the Rebel river fleet.
Upon a unanimous vote by the city council, New Orleans was declared an “Open City.” The councilmen then fled upriver to the state capital at Baton Rouge.
Union General Benjamin Butler and his soldiers were received by the now-leaderless Crescent City with something less than open arms.
Though there were still a number of firebrands calling for guerilla and urban warfare, most of the populace shrugged their collective shoulders and got on with life.
On de Villeroi’s recommendation, Acting Master Samuel Eakins was inducted into the US Navy and promoted to the rank of Lieutenant.
Lithograph image showing the Washington Navy Yard during the Civil War {source: history.navy.mil}
de Villeroi’s crew all returned to the Washington Navy Yard as contracted civilian Mechanics in the Navy’s newly-created Bureau for Underwater Research.
And they all lived (those that survived the war, at least) happily ever after.
