Panzerschreck - Minden Games

Panzerschreck
Issue 16
Spring 2014
Magazine of Wargame Variants — Solitaire Wargames
Destruction of Force Z
Salvo! 2nd ed.
This issue’s wargame is available separately. To purchase a copy
of DESTRUCTION OF FORCE Z (complete with illustrated 12page rule booklet, full color map, counter set, and Reference
Card), visit the Minden Games website, and order via Paypal.
(See page 10 for more details about the game.)
http://minden_games.homestead.com
2
Panzerschreck
Issue 16
Spring 2014
Opening Rounds . . . The Editor . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
4
Featured Variant: Axis & Allies 1941 . . . Bradley Shatner. . . . . . . .
6
Campaign Analysis: The Destruction of Force Z . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
8
Issue Game Description: Destruction of Force Z . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10
(Issue game available for purchase separately)
Mini-Sim PDF Game: Salvo! 2nd ed. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
Short Takes: Inchon (Simulations Canada), Oil War (SPI),
Ortona (Simulations Canada) . . . James Meldrum . . . . . . . . . . . . 12
Observation Post: Julius Caesar (Columbia) . . . Robert Smith . . .
Slouch Hats & Eggshells (Legion) . . . Gary Graber . . . . Fading
Glory (GMT) . . . Robert Smith . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
Solitaire Wargaming Theory and Retro’s Expanded Mission . . .
. . .William P. Driscoll . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . .
18
Synopsis of Games Published in Panzerschreck . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
Synopsis of Games Published in Panzer Digest . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25
Extra Ship Counters for Destruction of Force Z . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
Latest Minden Releases & PDF Games . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
_____________________________________________________________________________________________________________________________ ______
Panzerschreck #16, Spring 2014. Panzerschreck publishes articles and strategy
games for boardgamers. The magazine portion of Panzerschreck #16 is available as a
free download from the Minden Games website. Readers may print off a copy for their
own personal use, and may distribute it as long as it is not modified, is in its entirety, and
without charge. All rights reserved. Entire contents are copyright 2014 by Minden
Games. Panzerschreck #16’s issue game is Destruction of Force Z, available for purchase separately at the Minden Games website.
Publisher: Minden Games. Editor: Gary Graber. Contributors: James
Meldrum, Brad Shatner, Robert Smith, William Driscoll. Ordering Information: Game orders and Minden products may be ordered from the Minden
website, and purchased through Paypal.
© 2014 Minden Games
http://minden_games.homestead.com
Opening Rounds
by the Editor
It has been a long time since I wrote
this column for Panzerschreck. A lot of
water has gone under the bridge since
then, but I do not intend to focus my
thoughts on that. Rather, I want to draw
our attention to the present, and future.
This magazine has always focused on
wargame variants and small games that
are typically solitaire friendly. I want to
continue that emphasis. I have nothing
against variants to new games, but I grew
up with the Avalon Hill and SPI classics,
and those are the sort of games that still
turn my crank the most. So, no one
should be surprised if out-of-print titles
continue to receive attention in these
pages.
The biggest change is, of course, the
manner of delivery for the magazine. I’ve
decided to make the magazine-portion of
Panzerschreck available as a free download. The main issue game is available
for purchase separately. This accomplishes several goals. It reduces the price
of the issue. Exactly how much is open
to debate, but it is several dollars. And it
saves postage, especially for those outside
North America. Another advantage is
when I “publish” a pdf magazine issue, I
don’t need to resort to the printer. This
reduces upfront costs a great deal. I can
also use color on every page. The downside is that gamers do not get a printed
hardcopy of the magazine, but the upside
is they can print their own in color (or
view on screen) at no cost. In the past,
there was always a “split” in readership
between those who bought an issue just
for the game, and those who bought it for
the game and the magazine content. By
making these two things available separately, I am hoping that each contingent
will be happy. After all, the magazine
component and the game component are
both still available, albeit separately, and
at a reduced overall price.
My guess is that readership of the
magazine will grow, given the new distribution for the magazine. (And that is a
good thing.) This increased exposure
Send your name and email address
and ask to join the Minden Pals. It’s
free, and gives you access to special
discounts and bonuses that are only
available to Pals.
To join, simply send an email (with
“Minden Pals” in the subject line) to:
[email protected]
and we’ll add your name to the list.
4
should, in turn, increase sales of the issue
game, in the present case, Destruction of
Force Z. It is not 1998 anymore; onward
and upward should be our motto, in life,
and in wargaming. Exploring new ways of
marketing Minden products makes sense.
To answer a few obvious questions.
No, a revived Panzerschreck in this format does not mean anything negative
about Panzer Digest. Right now, the idea
is to have a downloadable magazine (the
former), and a hardcopy magazine (the
latter). No, I do not have any plans concerning frequency of issues. I would call
Panzerschreck #16 an experiment, in that
regard. If sales of this issue’s game justifies the approach, you can expect to see
more of the same format in the future.
We have a pretty good base of Minden
Pals and regular customers, and I am hoping that their response to the new format
will be positive. Nothing else to say,
really, except that we’ll find out how it
works and go from there.
There are two games included in this
issue. One is a Mini-Sim (Salvo! 2nd
ed.), which in the Panzerschreck tradition,
forms a part of the magazine, and must be
printed off. The main issue game is Destruction of Force Z. As it says in various
places within these pages, you need to
order this game separately. It is a design
that fits squarely within the established
Panzerschreck canon: small, playable,
historical, and solitaire. Game components
include thick, color card for map, counters, and Reference Card, to go along with
the illustrated rule booklet. I am confident that anyone who is familiar with the
Panzerschreck games of the past will recognize it as part of the family. There is
enough in this issue to tell you about the
campaign and the game itself, and I hope
you will give it a try and order yourself a
copy. (And, if you are not already a Minden Pal, why not sign up? It puts your
name on our Pals mailing list, and gives
you access to specials and discounts.)
Finally, a few words about the content
continued on page 34
5
Variants for
Axis & Allies 1941
by Brad Shatner
Axis & Allies 1941 is a new, introductory game in the Axis & Allies series. It is
designed to play in under two hours.
While it uses the familiar game system,
the game has a new map, fewer units, and
less income generated per turn. This
makes the game more accessible to rookie
players than standard A&A.
While not wanting to argue against the
game’s premise (a quick playing design
for beginners), here are a few variant rules
that we use for A&A 1941. They are
meant to enhance your gaming fun, without adding complexity or new rules.
Mix or match the rules as you want.
the US starts with 15 IPCs, the board says
17. We go with 17, which I believe is the
official ruling.
4. Starting Forces. I am aware of
discussions about play balance in the
game, and how adding pieces at the start
of the game can address this. We have
adopted the standard A&A 1941 set up,
with these additions. The new, additional
pieces may start in any area the owning
player wants as long as there is at least
one other piece of that country that starts
there already. In the case of the Soviet
Union, the new pieces may start in the
same or different areas.
Soviet Union: 3 additional infantry
Germany: 1 additional infantry
United Kingdom: 1 additional battleship.
Japan: 1 additional fighter
United States: 1 additional destroyer
_______________________
1. Game Pieces. We use pieces from
other A&A games to supplement those
found in A&A 1941, as sometimes pieces
run a little short. Simply borrow a few
infantry, tanks, etc. for each country and
keep them on hand. We also prefer the
classic chips used in A&A, instead of the
5. Additional Income. I know the
cardboard ones in the new game. It’s easy income in the new game is supposed to be
enough to do this, so why not?
low, but why not rev it up at least a little?
We suggest each country gets three extra
2. IPC Money. In the same way, we
IPCs per turn. To make it easy, just make
use IPC money from standard A&A, to
each nation’s capital worth three more
keep track of IPCs. (Use Monopoly
IPCs than the map says. So, Germany is
money if you have to.) It’s easier and
now worth 7 IPCs, Russia 6, etc. The
more fun to pay for pieces with money
original Axis to Allied ratio of IPCs at the
than keeping track on a chart!
start of the game is 21:36 in favor of the
3. USA Starting IPCs. The rules say Allies (Axis have 58% as many as the
6
Allies). Using this variant, the starting
ratio is 27:45 in their favor (Axis start with
60% of the Allied total). So not much difference. But more IPCs mean more pieces
in play. If increase of three IPCs is too high
(or low) for your taste, adjust accordingly.
number (or zero) divisible by
three (e.g. –3, 0, +3, +6, etc.).
Low bid plays the Axis, at the
stated bid. (If tied, roll off to
see who plays the Axis.) The
area “Germany” gets twothirds of any increase (or decrease), and the area “Japan”
one-third. For example, on a
winning bid of +3 in a game
using the original IPC starting values, the
“Germany” area is raised by 2, and is worth
6 IPCs, and the Japan area is raised by 1,
and is worth 5 IPCs. Or, a winning bid of
–3 means “Germany” is worth 2 IPCs, and
Japan 3 IPCs, and so on.
6. Bidding for Sides. If play balance
is your thing, one of the best ways to introduce it into the game is to bid for sides.
We suggest bidding on who will play the
Axis. This will work for two player or four
player games (two teams of two). What you
are bidding on is the starting IPC level of
the Axis side. In a normal game, this is 21,
e.g. Germany 12, Japan 9. (With variant #5
in play, this would be 27, with Germany 15
and Japan 12.) Each team secretly makes a
bid, which must be a positive or negative
7. Alternate Victory. To overcome
the “turtle” defense (where an almost defeated foe places almost all his pieces in his
capital and ignores everything else), play
that a country must control at least two
areas it started the game with (one being
the capital, the other being any area it
started the game with, whether IPC producing or not) or else it is defeated. This prevents Japan, for example, from simply holing up in Japan, it must hold Japan and at
least one other area noted on the map by
the “Rising Sun” symbol (like Iwo Jima), using variant #6, adjust accordingly.
or it is defeated. A country is still defeated
There you have it. Axis & Allies 1941
if it loses its capital.
is a simple but fun wargame well suited for
8. North Africa. In the game, North beginners. With these variant rules, you can
Africa is worth zero IPCs. With this vari- introduce just a little more sophistication
ant rule, it is worth 1 IPC. Historically this without increasing complexity. This is a
seems to make better sense. Germany now great game, well suited to such tinkering.
has an incentive to garrison the area. If Give them a try sometime.
Campaign Analysis:
The Destruction of Force Z
Defense of the Far East was always in the minds of the allies in the run up to the second world war. Singapore was the main British strongpoint port in the region, and was
the center of any proposed defense. It was hoped that, in the event of war with Japan,
US battleships based in the central pacific would assist the British.
With the start of the war in Europe in 1939, the British could not afford to send many
capital ships east. Churchill argued that sending two battleships and a carrier would provide enough of a naval presence to deter the Japanese. While it was not wise to divert
too many ships from the Atlantic theater, providing some support was prudent, if only to
demonstrate Britain’s solidarity with Australia and New Zealand.
In November, 1941, a squadron of warships sailed to the Far East. This force was
comprised of the modern battleship Prince of Wales, the World War I vintage battlecruiser Repulse, and four destroyers. The recently launched carrier Indomitable was
slated to sail with the group as well, but it ran aground off Jamaica in early November,
and the necessary repairs precluded it accompanying the others. The ships arrived in
Singapore on December 2nd, where they were designated Force Z.
On December 8 (local time) news arrived of the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, as
well as invasion of parts of Malaya, including Kota Bharu. Admiral Tom Phillips, recently named commander-in-chief of the naval forces in the Far East, made plans for
Force Z to sail into the South China Sea, to disrupt invasion plans, threaten communications, and perhaps deal with Japanese surface vessels.
Hampering the effectiveness of Force Z was the fact that the RAF (such as it existed
there) told Phillips they could not guarantee protection of his ships from the air. In hindsight, the admiral can be criticized for moving out without air support. But at the time,
with the Japanese on the move throughout the region, it would have been contrary to the
offensive-minded spirit of the Royal Navy to do nothing, especially since the RAF and
British army were actively engaged in fighting.
Force Z sailed out of Singapore into the South
China Sea in the early evening of December 8. The
commander, on board Prince of Wales, had ordered
strict radio silence for his squadron. The plan was to
reach north to the Gulf of Siam, undetected, and from
there possibly wreck havoc among enemy warships,
HMS Repulse
8
transports, and invasion sites. The immediate danger was, if sighted,
Force Z risked the wrath of land-based Japanese bombers located in
Indo-China. This danger was reckoned to be minimal.
Sailing initially went according to plan. They passed to the east of
the Anamba Islands, and then swung toward the north. Without its
knowledge, the British ships were sighted by submarines the afternoon
of December 9th. Later that day, Japanese scout planes sighted their
position as well, and Phillips, realizing this, decided it was too risky to
Admiral Tom Phillips
proceed toward Kota Bharu. From the most northern position
reached, about half-way up the Malayan peninsula, Force Z turned south under cover of
darkness the evening of the 9th, and made toward Kuantan, the rumored location of another invasion force. Radio silence was still maintained; Singapore knew nothing about
these changed plans.
The British ships arrived off Kuantan the morning of December 10, but found nothing. At mid-morning they were once again sighted, and land-based Japanese bombers
were dispatched. Still, radio silence was not broken, even though those on the ships
knew they had been sighted. The bombers arrived piecemeal, but in force, beginning a
little after 11 am. All told over 80 Nell bombers—about 50 armed with torpedoes, and
the rest with bombs—attacked the ships in several waves, over a two hour period. Curiously, no radio signals were sent out for the first 45 minutes of the attack. a critical mistake. By the time distress calls went out, around noon, it was too late. RAF fighters took
off and made for the British ships, but they did not arrive in time. Repulse slid under the
waves first, at 12:30, the result of five torpedo and one bomb hit. Prince of Wales lasted
about 45 minutes longer, finally sinking due to six torpedo and one bomb hit. RAF
fighters reached the area about 1:20pm, but both capital ships were gone, for the loss of
but 10 Japanese planes. Nearly 2,100 British officers and men survived (picked up by
friendly destroyers), out of a combined total of 2,900. The shock of the loss on British
morale was palpable.
Churchill received the news the next morning, London time. He later wrote, “In all the war, I never received
a more direct shock… The full horror of the news sank in
upon me. There were no British or American ships in the
Indian Ocean or the Pacific except the American survivors of Pearl Harbor…. Over all this vast expanse of waters Japan was supreme, and we everywhere were weak
and naked.” Force Z was no more; the British naval presence in the Far East had been shattered.
Prince of Wales, while abandoning ship.
Wargaming
on the ‘Net
Consimworld
www.consimworld.com
Web-Grognards
grognard.com
9
Description of Panzerschreck #16’s
Main Issue Wargame
Title: Destruction of Force Z: Royal Navy Disaster in the Far East, December 1941
Issue #: Panzerschreck #16 Designer: Gary Graber
# of Players: Solitaire Playing Time: 45-60 minutes
Description: This is a solitaire wargame that simulates the air and naval action off the
coast of Malaya in December 1941, between Japanese forces and Force Z of the Royal
Navy, based in Singapore. You (as the British) are faced with a difficult situation. Pearl
Harbor has just been attacked. The entire Malayan peninsula is under treat of invasion.
Your offensive options are few, but sailing and doing something to take the war to the enemy is better than doing nothing at all. Perhaps you can disrupt invasion sites? Intercept
enemy warships? Whatever you decide, it will be an uphill battle. Do you sail with radio
silence? Where should you sail? By what route? If your ships are found, they risk the
wrath of land-based Japanese bombers in Indo-China, made all the worse as the RAF has
warned they cannot guarantee protection of your ships.
Destruction of Force Z is a highly playable game standing squarely within the Panzerschreck tradition. Counters (which must be cut apart prior to play) represent individual
warships, and individual bombers and fighters. Besides regular rules, optional rules—
including having the aircraft carrier Indomitable sailing with Force Z—provide you with
everything you need to recreate the original campaign.
The game casts you in the role of Admiral Tom Phillips, commanding Force Z. Each
turn you must check for weather, send (or not send) radio messages, move your ships, and
deal with Japanese minefields, submarines, warships, and aircraft. The game system handles enemy movement. If your ships are sighted, they are subject to possible aerial attack
from individual torpedo and level bombers. Anything can happen, but the odds are stacked against you. Can you win an improbable victory, and avoid the destruction of Force Z?
To order, visit: minden_games.homestead.com
Destruction of Force Z
Royal Navy Disaster in the Far East, December 1941
What’s Included:
12-page illustrated rule booklet
Thick card color map,
set of 59 counters,
and Reference Card
10
This issue’s Mini-Sim: SALVO! 2nd ed.
Get a hard copy of Salvo! 2nd ed., free upon request with any
Minden Games order.
11
Short Takes
SIMCAN AT INCHON
Simulations Canada’s Inchon game was unique when it was published because it
was one of the very few games done on the Korean War before it was fashionable to
explore this conflict in any detail. Inchon was all the more unique because it dealt
with the single battle that turned the tide of the entire Korean conflict and sealed the
fate of the North Korean People’s Army (IMG). There are a number of factors that
affected the outcome of the UN landings at Inchon and this article will explore a few
of them. Unless otherwise mentioned, all rules from Inchon will be in effect unless
specifically mentioned.
The US 187th Airborne Infantry Regiment could have been used as an assault unit
during the Inchon landings and could have entered the battle (and game) via a parachute drop. This variant may be used in any of the scenarios in the game. In all cases,
the US airborne units are in supply for three game turns after they land. When this
variant rule is used, the US airborne units are not counted as part of the UN limit of 15
units arriving as reinforcements in a single game turn. The airborne unit may land in
any clear, rough, or airfield terrain hexes. No airborne unit may land in a hex containing an enemy unit and has no zone of control on the turn in which it lands. Airborne
units’ movement allowances are halved on the turn in which they land. On the following turn and all subsequent game turns airborne units may move and function normally.
When conducting airborne landings in Inchon, place each airborne unit in the desired terrain hex and roll a die for each airborne unit except the headquarters unit. On
roll of 6 the airborne unit is eliminated; units landing in rough terrain are eliminated
on a roll of 5 or 6. Any airborne units landing adjacent to an enemy AA unit are
eliminated on a roll of 4 - 6. Any other result is no effect.
As an alternative, any airborne unit landing in a hex already occupied by an enemy
unit must attack the enemy unit in the ensuing combat phase. Failure to eliminate the
enemy unit or cause it to retreat results in the elimination of the airborne unit at the
end of the combat phase.
Try playing Inchon by allowing the North Korean player to
have 100 points of indirect air support points to use anywhere
the map. This represents the replenishment of the North Korean Air Force with extra Russian and Chinese pilots and aircraft. Historically this was only a remote possibility since the
USAF destroyed the North Korean Air Force early in the conflict and held air superiority over South Korea for most of the
war. At the same time, it prevents the United Nations player
from having a super easy time of pushing the North Koreans
back.
James E. Meldrum
12
OIL WAR: SCENARIO FOUR
11.41 Historical Notes
This is a late 1970’s Iranian Hostage Crisis scenario for the SPI game Oil War. As a hypothetical result
of the United States’ hostage situation, the US conducts a
punitive campaign against Iran. Immediately after the hostages are released the US strikes back with a limited invasion and multiple air strikes.
11.42 Initial Deployment:
Arab/Iranian Player
In Iran: 2m, 4a, 1i, 2F5, 2F4, 1F14
US Player
In the Gulf of Oman: 1 US F4, 1 US A6, 1 US A7, (optional - 1F14)
In Germany: 3 US al, 2 US i, 1 US m, 1 US a, 6 US F4, 2 US F111
11.43 Special Rules:
1. The Iranian player is allowed to use one US F4 to represent Iranian F14 aircraft.
This unit is based at the airfield at Ahvaz. The Iranian F14 unit must always
base at Ahvaz.
2. The Iranian player receives reinforcements from the reinforcement track as in t h e
regular scenarios.
3. The Iranian player may not move any ground unit beyond his borders; if forced
to do so the units in question are eliminated immediately.
4. The US player may not use F111s on the first game turn. The US player receives
reinforcements from the reinforcement track used in scenarios one and two but he
may only use those reinforcements from turns two, three, and seven.
5. The US player receives ATPs as in scenario two.
6. The US player may base his units anywhere in Bahrain, Qatar, or in Dharan
(hex 1521 only).
7. The SAM sites in hexes 1521 and 1823 are assumed to belong to the US p l a y e r
and may be used by him according rule 7.5 of the regular game rules.
8. A port hex is assumed to exist in hex 1610 (Kharg Island) and belongs to the Iranian player.
9. The US player is the first player in this scenario.
Victory Conditions:
Victory is decided on the basis of which player holds the largest number of oil facility
and port hexes inside Iran; the player controlling the largest number wins. In order
the US player to win, he must fulfill the victory conditions just given, and in addition,
he must hold at least one port hex.
11.44 Notes:
This scenario was intended to be relevant to the situation that existed in Iran
in the late 1970s - early 1980s. The possibility of a conflict is a result only of speculation. This scenario is intended to have started before the Iran - Iraq War began.
The US player is given only the minimum of ATP’s available to simulate
airlift capacity and reaction time problems that confronted the US at that time. By
virtue of the map design, the scenario can’t take into account what is happening else13
where in the Middle East, southern Russia or the Indian Ocean. The US player is assumed to have basing privileges in Bahrain, Qatar, and Dhahran. James E. Meldrum
ORTONA
SimCan’s Ortona game depicts the obscure and bloody
battle fought along the northern coast of Italy as British and
Canadian forces advanced up the Italian boot during the Allied campaign in Italy during 1943. The variants presented
in this article are intended to highlight various factors that
could have altered the outcome of the Battle for Ortona. In
all cases, the rules for Ortona are in effect at all times unless
otherwise mentioned. All or just some of the variant material given here may be used in any of the scenarios included
in the regular game.
To further simulate the effects and difficulties of city fighting, try playing
Ortona without allowing zones of control to penetrate into any hex of the city. Units
defending in city hexes (only) may ignore all DR results.
A free deployment rule is an obvious choice for a variant in any Ortona scenario. Either one or both sides may place their initial units in a scenario on the map as
they please. Both side’s reinforcements appear at the same times and locations as in
the regular game. The only restriction is that Canadian units must all set up south of
the gully; German units set up on or anywhere north of the gully.
Try playing scenario 11.2 using either the German para units or the optional
German forces in place of those used in the historical scenario.
When playing with the German parachute units, place all of them in the gully
hexes so that all adjacent gully hexes are occupied by German para units or their
zones of control with no more than one unit per hex. Place the para artillery units in
hex 1206. The German player receives no additional reinforcements while the Canadian player receives only his turn two reinforcements.
When playing with the German optional units the Germans receive 5 x HQ,
1 x anti-tank (in hex 1105), 6 x heavy weapons, and 18 x infantry units deployed the
same as for the para variant. Of the remaining
27 optional units, the German player may receive 9 reinforcement units each on turns 2, 3,
and 4. The Canadian player continues to receive
his reinforcements normally.
Try playing scenario 11.3 but let the Canada’s Largest Adventure GamGermans deploy all para units freely, and allow ing and SciFi & Fantasy Bookstore
the Canadian player to receive all remaining
armored and mechanized infantry units as rein- Huge Selection of Wargames!
forcements on game turn one representing a
1835 10th Avenue S.W.
stronger Allied effort. As an alternative, the
Calgary,
AB T3C 0K2 Canada
German player may use any 30 optional units in
place of the paras but at least four of these must
be HQ units and one anti-tank unit must be in- www.sentrybox.com
cluded.
James E. Meldrum
SENTRY BOX
14
Observation Post
Reprinted from Panzer Digest #11
JULIUS CAESAR
Columbia Games
Designer: Justin Thompson
Reviewer: Robert G. Smith
The Roman Civil War between Caesar and
Pompey was a natural evolution from the turmoil that was an undercurrent through Roman
life the previous 75 years. It is my opinion that
in retrospect this conflict was unavoidable
considering the force of the personalities involved. Once Sulla was killed in the East
against Parthia, and Caesar’s daughter who
was Pompey’s wife died – the die was cast.
What Columbia Games’ Julius Caesar (JC)
nicely does is combine a mixture of strategic and operational play for the game. Despite its simplicity in terms of
mechanics, JC captured
enough of the flavor of the
period that I never thought I
wasn’t playing a game on the
Roman Civil war. The series
Rome nicely covers this period. Recommended readings
are Rubicon by Tom Holland
the Caesar series by Conn
Iggulden. Hand it to Columbia
Games for naming it Julius
Caesar – heck face it – it resonates better than the Roman Civil War in terms
of market strategy. Game length will run between 1—2.5 hours with 2 being the average
for this game of five turns.
COMPONENTS: The 33” x 17” map is
pleasant to look at – but it is a map with no
hexes and areas. Moving from city to city
primarily by roads and on occasion by amphibious or naval transport is how the game
moves. Control of cities is important – particularly cities with blue victory points in
them. There are 63 blocks in the game – 31
tan, 31 green and 1 blue for Cleopatra. There
are also 27 cards and 4 dice. What’s cool is
that as an added bonus on the map, Columbia
Games marks the location of the major battles
and by color coding tells you who won that
particular battle.
RULES: As a veteran Colombia Games
player I had no trouble quickly grasping the
game unlike with Athens & Sparta. Even if I
had been unexposed to their games before, the
rules were easy, made sense and I noticed
nothing that stood out as major issues. I do
wish the naval rules had some better examples
as I believe that is the weakest area in the
rules. Unlike in Athens & Sparta where the
rules used some terms interchangeably, everything in JC’s rules were tight in terms of clarity and simplicity. Victory is
determined at the end of each
year. If a player reaches the 10
point threshold, the game is
over. Scoring is based upon the
value of friendly cities and 1
victory point for each leader
killed. Should neither player
meet the end of year total, the
one with the highest victory
point at the end of 5 years
wins.
GAME PLAY: Once Caesar
committed to going over the
Rubicon (which nobody today
knows where it was) Pompey
needs to determine his strategy. The forces of
Pompey and the Senate are somewhat scattered, inviting defeat in detail. This is where
understanding the interplay of the simple mechanics is critical to your success. Now card
play drives the game. The first part of this is
the higher card will determine initiative for
that turn with ties going to Caesar (it’s good to
be Caesar). There are two types of Events
Cards – Command cards and the Gods cards.
The Gods cards convey special events such as
allowing you to attack first or causing a unit to
defect to your side. Command cards are used
to determine the ability to move or raise new
levees. The banner tells you how many moves
15
you have that turn and the circles on the staff
indicate the number of levees. The use of
levees allows you to either issue replacements
to existing legions or other units or build new
units. I like the simple nod to logistics. At the
end of the play of five cards there is a winter
turn. Winter supply is harsh, as you can only
supply a maximum of 3 blocks from a given
city, unless it has a blue city value which increases the limit up to that amount.
Let me return to the beginning game since
it presents a strategic dilemma for both players! Caesar has the opportunity to strike decisively early on except that his navy is on the
other side of Italy. Both sides are pretty balanced except for the distribution of forces. The
work horses of the game are the legions – most
of which are of the 3 strength point variety but
each side has several 4 point legions. Each
side has leaders, legions of course, auxilia,
equitatus (cavalry), ballistia and navis / warships/fleets. Units are rated by letter for initiative – A rated blocks fires first and so on down
the line. You need to pay attention to the road
network as major roads allow for the movement of up to 4 blocks but minor roads allow
but two. Most movement on land is done by
groups of blocks. You can move two cities on
a move if no combat is involved – if combat is
involved you can only move one. Figuring out
naval strategy is also important – and I think
the area where Columbia needed to devote just
a little more effort towards.
For those who have never played a block
game before, the combat rating is determined
by the numbers along the edge of the block
with the current rating on top. As the unit takes
hits, you rotate the block to reflect the lesser
combat value. Movement values are the same
for all units in the game and in this era that is
no real issue – and who is going to really debate and get bent out of shape about one legion’s rate of march vs. another? Combat is
simple – roll a number of dice equal to your
current combat value with hits generated by
dice equal to or less than the current combat
value of a given block.
Poor Pompey – the first year is not a good
one for him – even the first game turn can be
very rough. Historically Pompey did the
“Great Skedaddle” out of Rome to Bridinsini
and then sailed off to the Balkans to his
strength. So it seemed to have played in my
games – but I got to thinking…why not have
him go to his strength and go to New Carthage / Spain to begin with? Or have him preemptively strike Caesar? Proper play of the
Gods cards most of the time will set up the
first year within its historical context – but
after that I found play devolved in an interesting fashion with no set patterns. I found the
game very easy to play solitaire. What I did
with card play was examine both sides cards to
determine which card to discard. Then I shuffled their respective year’s cards and drew
them blindly. This randomness I found made
for a very interesting game against myself.
Reminder that unoccupied cities revert to neutrality – hence you need to leave units of some
type scattered about to protect your victory
point base.
CONCLUSIONS: Small. Simple to play
but with enough choices to not be total game
light – and who can resist a playable Roman
Civil War game? It is far deeper than it appears at first blush in terms of game play but
always fun. Put this one on your sweetie‘s list
of games you want this holiday season – you
won’t be disappointed.
16
Panzer Digest
Past winner of the Charles Roberts
Award, Panzer Digest is an irregularly published wargame magazine
from Minden Games.
Each contains wargame articles
and reviews, and a complete game
or games.
Visit the Minden website for information on the most current edition,
as well as back issues.
minden_games.homestead.com
SLOUCH HATS & EGGSHELLS
Legion Wargames
Designer: Vance von Borries
Reviewer: Gary Graber
Slouch Hats & Eggshells is a WWII simulation covering the campaign conducted in
French-occupied Syria and Lebanon by invading allied forces, June-July 1941. Here, British, Australians, and Free
French square off against
Vichy, French Colonials, and
German units. The design is an
updated version of von Borries’
Syria 1941 that was published
many years ago, updated in a
Quarterdeck edition, and now
brought up to speed to the current state of the art. It is a
“companion” game for Rommel’s War (RW), published by
L2, and may be linked up with
that design if you own it. Victory in SH&E turns on whether the Vichy
French surrender by the end of the game. If
they do, the allies win.
COMPONENTS: This was the first title I’d
ever seen from Legion, and I’m impressed
with the quality of the product Randy Lein has
given us. The 22” x 34” map, covering Syria,
Lebanon, Trans Jordan, and surrounding areas
at 10 miles/hex (and 10 days/turn), looks good
and is nicely done. The 184 .6” die-cut counters are typically battalion and regimental level;
they not only look excellent, but they easily
punch out. As 90% of the fighting units have
combat factors of 2 or less, maneuver oriented
players will no doubt have a field day. Large
event chits (20) are included, and inject historical chrome into the game. The 28 page
illustrated rule booklet is laid out nicely. I did
not have much trouble getting into the game.
There are two scenarios provided, the historical Operation Exporter (6 turns), and a hypothetical German intervention one (8 turns).
The sundry player aid charts are well thought
out, and helpful. Everything in the box
(including the box itself) is top notch. The
main thing that left me scratching my head
was the game’s odd name.
RULES: This is a fairly traditional “I go/
You go” design, containing nothing that a
wargaming veteran will find too hard to han-
dle. Some of the rules are a little too fiddly for
my tastes (let’s see, 29 separate phases in the
sequence of play each turn), but nothing serious. During play, sides scurry about for
“victory points” (holding key towns); well,
they are not actually VP, but points to be spent
to get drm on the Vichy Surrender Table,
which is the key to victory. There seemed to
be a lot of cross-referencing in
the rules to RW, which could
either be seen as a bonus, or a
hindrance to clarity.
CONCLUSIONS: I haven’t
seen Syria 1941, but have no
doubt everything about SH&E
(apart from its name) is an advance. Its physical quality and
off-beat topic will make it appreciated by WW2 gamers,
particularly von Borries fans.
FADING GLORY
GMT Games
Designer: Joe Miranda, Alan Emrich, Steve
Carey and Lance McMillan
Reviewer: Robert G. Smith
When we think of Napoleon we think of
Waterloo, Borodino, Wagram and of course
Austerlitz. Seldom does Salamanca come to
mind. I doubt if anyone ever ponders and day
dreams about a game on Smolensk. I am
thrilled somebody did a game on Smolensk for
I found this to be one of those great what-if
battles. I’ve always been slightly surprised
someone had not given that battle more attention. So it was with more than a little surprise
that I greeted the GMT/VPG boxed partnership of four mini games in Fading Glory. They
are actually VPG’s games given the full-blown
GMT treatment. We first saw this with Carl
Pardis’s No Retreat that conveyed very nicely
to a GMT upgrade component wise – particularly the map. Surprisingly the box had a decent heft to it. My guess is this will be a game
that comes off the shelf when you want to play
something but don’t have hours to get into an
OSG game.
COMPONENTS: In the box are two
mounted 17” x 22” mapboards. The boards lay
nicely and are very nice to look at without a
17
continued on page 33
Introduction
Discussions about solitaire wargaming
tend to follow one of two paths. In one direction, the discussion concentrates on games
designed specifically for solitaire play. Examples include games like Ambush, Raid on St.
Nazaire, Tokyo Express, and so on. In the
other direction, the commentary addresses
solitaire play of games designed for two or
more players, but the emphasis focuses on
devices for dictating the play of the “nonphasing” side. The assumption seems to be
that players cannot play both sides fairly on a
solo basis. As a result, additional rules must
instruct or limit how one side or the other
moves or fights. For example, some players
suggest the preparation of several detailed
battle plans for the “other” side from which the
solitaire gamer randomly selects a plan to follow.
The games designed specifically for solitaire play are too few and too limited to merit
further discussion here. As for solitaire play of
two-player games, the obsession with additional rules to guide the play of the “other”
side completely misses the point. In fact, the
addition of more rules to implement solitaire
play only makes play more difficult.
Most solo players can make the necessary
mental adjustment needed to play each side in
turn with fairness assuming that the game itself
does not depend upon such devices as hidden
units or simultaneous movement. The real
difficulties with solitaire wargaming have little
to do with the “fairness” issue. Instead, the
solitaire gamer faces other obstacles to solo
play related to the process of game play itself.
Cumulatively, these obstacles amount to a
complexity burden that overwhelms the solitaire player, bogs him down with trivia, and
wastes precious gaming time. In the end, the
player can master any two-player rules system
at the cost of sacrificing any enjoyment of a
game’s fun factor.
The best effort to address the fundamental
difficulties of solitaire wargaming in a sensible
manner is the Retro Variant produced by Minden for use in WWII tactical games. This
article will examine in more detail some common obstacles to solitaire play. It also will
identify some ways in which Retro helps the
solo gamer overcome those obstacles. Finally,
it ends with a call for an effort to “Retro-fit”
many more wargame systems to enhance the
solitaire gaming experience.
Obstacles to Solitaire Play
Wargame play has three parts: (1) thinking about what to do; (2) knowing how to do
it; (3) actually doing it. The first part amounts
to the strategy or tactics involved in the play of
the game. The second part requires knowledge
of the game’s rules. The third part involves
the mechanical or physical manipulation of
counters, charts, and dice in the actual play of
the game. Obstacles to solitaire play can arise
in any of these stages. The following list attempts to create a catalog of such obstacles.
(1) Interactive Turn Sequence
Recently, a trend has appeared which
wargames favor an interactive sequence of
play over the “Igo-Yougo” sequence of early
designs. The relatively new Advanced Tobruk
System and PanzerGrenadier System provide
two examples. The MMP/Gamers Tactical
Combat System (TCS) also uses an intensely
interactive system of fire and counterfire.
While the interactive feature of these game
systems enhances the tension of face-to-face
play, it adds a mental challenge for the solitaire player. In the rigid “Igo-Yougo” turn
sequence, a player generally must decide
whether or where to move and whether or
where to fight. In the interactive turn sequence, the solo player must assume the burden of figuring out the best order in which to
move and fight for both sides simultaneously.
This additional mental requirement complicates play tremendously. In the Igo-Yougo
18
system, the player can move the Germans, say,
and then walk around the table to study the
board from the Russian perspective. As a
game becomes more interactive, the solo
gamer will find himself racing back and forth
from one side of the table to the other as German, German, Russian, German, Russian,
Russian, German, and so on through a series of
short impulses. This rapid-fire shifting of
point of view breeds a kind of paralysis fatal to
the fun factor of these games for the solitary
player.
(2) Details and Exceptions in the Rules
All wargames represent abstract simulations of historical events. For example, the
quantification of the morale of all German first
line troops as “7” in ASL assigns a numerical
value to subjective feelings. Troop morale
results from any number of factors –
quality of recruits, food, water,
warm clothing, disease, leadership,
recent events – no wargame with
any pretense to playability could
account separately for all such factors. The simple assignment of a
standard morale value abstracts all
of these factors into one convenient
rating.
However, a trend exists in quality wargames to expand the level of
detail and to reduce to some degree
the level of abstraction. Of course, this process takes the form of new, and usually more,
rules. As a result, a kind of rules inflation has
made the task of the solitaire gamer much
more challenging.
The original Europa I – Drang Nach Osten
(DNO) appeared around 1973 with 19 pages of
rules to game the German invasion of the
USSR in 1941-42. Its successors in the Europa series of games and its cousin, the Great
War series, show how rules have multiplied.
Fire in the East, an updated version of DNO,
had 31 pages of rules. Scorched Earth continued WWII in Russia with 40 pages of rules.
Second Front took Europa to Normandy with
72 pages of rules. In a related series, the system went back to World War I. Over There,
the latest available title in this series, uses a
Europa-like system to model the West Front
and some secondary theaters of WWI in a
modest 192 pages of rules. It should be noted
that none of these counts include the pages
required for orders of battle. In the process,
the system has increased in realism at a tremendous cost in playability for the solo practitioner.
(3) Repetitive Motion Disorder – Or Addicted to Dice
A unit from Side A moves adjacent to a
unit from Side B. In the course of the rest of
Side A’s half of the turn plus Side B’s half of
the turn, it is possible for a total of 16 die or
dice rolls to occur just to resolve the various
fire combat, melee combat, and morale checks
for those two units. The game has about 50
units per side. With only 10 units on each side
in contact, a single turn could involve 160 rolls
of die or dice. These computations come from
a real (but out of print) game.
Certainly, one could argue that a
game with all that dicing has a design flaw whether it is played faceto-face or solitaire. However, at
least in face-to-face play the per
player dice-rolling burden amounts
to half of the solitaire total.
While this game represents an
extreme, other popular game systems have a high dicing requirement. Examples include the Advanced Tobruk System (3 rolls for
each tank-to-tank shot if a hit occurs), Tactical Combat System (unlimited defensive fire
and return fire), and Advanced Squad Leader
with its frequent morale checks, rolling to pick
up a weapon, rolling for fires, and rolling for
“battle hardening” among others.
(4) Time
The time factor in solitaire play involves
the additional time required in each step of the
gaming process – thinking about what to do,
checking the rules to see if a questionable
move is “legal,” and actually implementing the
mechanics of the game. Some of these aspects
of solitaire play are unavoidable. In a two
player game, Player A can think about his
move while Player B is moving. The solitaire
player cannot think about two things at once.
No way around this inefficiency of solitaire
play exists.
19
In other respects, the solitaire player’s
difficulties are derivative from rules complexity or inordinate amounts of dice rolling built
into the system. In a two-player game, one
player can consult the rules while another
player moves. The solitaire player loses this
efficiency in resolving questionable situations.
As a result, the effect of longer rules with
more details or exceptions not only taxes the
solitaire player’s memory and concentration,
but it also lengthens playing time. For a given
number of hours, the solitaire player gets to
spend less time enjoying the game and more
time checking the rules compared to the twoplayer game.
The cost of additional rules consultation
for the solitaire player is exacerbated by the
requirement that he must handle the mechanical tasks assigned to both sides. For example,
in a two-player game, while one player moves,
his opponent can sort and stack reinforcements
for entry on the up-coming turn. The solo
player loses this efficiency. As wargames
involve more detailed mechanics for tracking
different variables of play such as supplies,
morale, action points, initiative points, construction points, victory points, or whatever,
the impact of the double administrative burden
on the solitaire player grows. Similarly, the
game mechanics themselves can take a toll on
hey count rules of play only. Now, a direct
comparison of DNO with Over There implies a
ten-fold increase in rules. Since the two games
do not cover identical subjects such a comparison probably exaggerates rules inflation somewhat. However, the underlying principle remains unassailable. Wargames have become
more difficult to play because a player must
master many more rules to do so.
Other games fit the same model to some
extent. The La Battaille series of Napoleonic
games has increased the length and complexity
of rules for player, who must retain multiple
details to resolve a single move or combat.
Europa provides an example with its system
for defining armor attack bonuses in terms of
the fraction of armor units relative non-armor
units, but exclusive of certain neutral units.
With several attacking stacks of seven or eight
counters against a defending stack eight units
deep, the process of computing two different
fractions of armor/antitank factors and then
computing an attack and defense total wears a
player down. The substitution of a simple
counting of armor units net of antitank units
often would yield a similar result with significantly less mental effort.
The point is that a game mechanic of reasonable difficulty for two players to implement
can become much more imposing for the lone
player. Some of the inefficiency associated
with game mechanics is inherent in solitaire
play, but in many ways adjustments in the twoplayer rules can streamline solo game play so
that the solitaire gamer minimizes the efficiency of playing alone.
Retro’s Solitaire Friendly Approach
The Retro Variant for playing tactical
WWII games addresses a number of the issues
raised for the solitaire gamer in many game
systems.
(1) Retro eliminates most of the interactivity of the turn sequence by the use of the Hesitation mechanic. While the existence of some
defensive fire possibilities continue to exist
under Retro, the limitations on defensive fire
relieve the solitaire player from the necessity
to make many decisions as the defender even
as he plays the role of the moving player. In
terms of face-to-face play, the return to a sequence of play with a more Igo-Yougo structure would not necessarily look like progress.
As a solitaire friendly modification, it has
great merit.
(2) Without going into detail, Retro does
simplify the rules for tactical combat. How
much, or even which specific rules in a given
system, Retro simplifies is not exactly clear
because the Retro rules tend to adjust tactical
play in concept rather than through point-bypoint modifications. Nevertheless, the Retro
Variant reduces both in detail and in spirit the
volume of rules to which a solitaire gamer
must pay attention.
(3) By eliminating many morale check
dice rolls, Retro makes the game mechanics
more protective of the solitaire gamer’s wrists.
Risk of repetitive motion disorder recedes with
this variant.
(4) The reduction in rules complexity and
reduction in the amount of dice-rolling required to play WWII tactical games allows the
solitaire Retro gamer the opportunity to com-
20
pensate for the loss of some of the efficiencies
offered by two-player play. The variant saves
time and makes much larger scenarios a more
realistic prospect for solo gamers.
player to remember that the defender’s combat
value is 26 with a minus two modifier while
the first player sums the attacking units’ combat value and modifiers. (Could the solitaire
player simply write down the defender’s values? Sure. But even that takes additional
time…)
However, it is important to emphasize that
the process of restructuring many games for
maximum solitaire enjoyment requires more
than a couple of “house rules.” Instead, only a
more organized effort by which comprehensive adjustments retrofit a game for solitaire
play can make them both accessible and fun
for the solo gamer.
The wargames marketplace has an enormous variety of attractive games with the most
colorful components and the most detailed
orders of battle ever published in the hobby. It
is unfortunate that these improvements in quality sometimes come at the expense of the ability of solitaire players to enjoy them. Retro
shows the way out of this dilemma. Now what
is needed are more efforts by game designers
to follow this new way.
Need for More “Retro” – Fitting
Retro fails only to the extent that it does
not go far enough. It works with only a few
rough edges when applied to Squad Leader or
Advanced Squad Leader. With other tactical
games like the Advanced Tobruk System, Tactical Combat System, or PanzerGrenadier
System only significant adjustments will make
it work.
In a broader sense, as a philosophy of simplification for solitaire play, Retro has much
greater, but unfulfilled, potential. Tactical
combat in earlier historical periods could benefit from major simplification for solitaire play.
A reduction in the number of morale dice rolls
and less emphasis on facing effects are two
examples of adjustments by which more
streamlined play could occur. For example,
many game systems from the Napoleonic era
or earlier periods emphasize the importance of
facing and flank attacks. This emphasis re(From Panzerschreck #13)
quires careful attention to the placement of a
unit in a hex with consequences for rules about
facing, turning, stacking, and so on. In the
spirit of Retro, if a unit is attacked by one unit
from an adjacent hex, why not assume that the
RETRO 4th ed.
defender has its front to the attacker without This variant game system for WW2 squad
actually worrying about how the unit “faces” level tactical wargames allows you to transin the hex? Under such a simplification of form the host game into a clean, playable
facing, any unit attacked from different non- alternative, that emphasizes fun, historicity,
adjacent hexes could be assumed to be the and playability. Includes 36-page illustrated
victim of a flank attack This small change rule booklet, two Reference Cards, 70 uncould streamline play without the loss of an cut color counters, and several scenarios.
important tactical concept.
Available from Minden Games.
At the operational level, perhaps a similar
streamlining of Europa-type games could
make them more accessible to solitaire gaming. Simplification might take the form of
more abstract rules related to construction,
supply, and rail transportation. Such changes
would achieve a time-saving reduction in the
amount of administrative trivia on which the
solitaire gamer must spend time. As suggested
earlier, simpler combined arms combat modifiers could lessen the computational burden on
the player who must keep all of the computations in his head because there is no second
21
Synopsis of Games Published in Panzerschreck
This listing is provided to record all past games that have been published in Panzerschreck. Apart from the current edition, issues are no longer available. Some of
these designs have appeared in other editions. For instance, Cold Harbor (issue #3)
was reissued in updated Zip Edition format as Cold Harbor II, and Barbarossa Campaign (issue #3) was republished by Victory Point Games. The listing below only
refers to games published in Panzerschreck. All titles were designed by Gary Graber,
unless otherwise noted.
Game
Issue Period
Scale
# Players Theater
Reichstag: The Fall of Berlin
1
WW2
tactical
solitaire
land
The player (Russians) fights building to building in downtown Berlin and must “fly the
flag” over the Reichstag as quickly as possible.
Nuremberg: Trial of the Century
2
WW2
abstract
solitaire abstract
The player (prosecuting Allies) must convict Nazi war figures, balancing a fair trial with
keeping the Soviets happy with the number of convictions.
Barbarossa Campaign
3
WW2
strategic solitaire
land
The player (Axis) launches Operation Barbarossa in this strategic level game (quarterly
turns, army sized units) that emphasizes economics.
Cold Harbor
3
ACW
tactical
solitaire
land
Mini-Sim. The player (Union) makes a frontal assault against the Confederate positions in
the hope of achieving a breakthrough.
Battle of the Atlantic
4
WW2
operational solitaire
naval
The player (German) must try and sink enough tonnage each month to bring Britain to her
knees.
Berchtesgaden
4
WW2
operational 2-player
land
Hypothetical battle in 1945 pitting Axis and Allied units in combat around the rumored
“National Redoubt” in the Alps.
First Day of the Somme
5
WW1
operational solitaire
land
The player (British) must plan and execute the Big Push of 1916. After the whistle blows,
he must watch to see how his plans fare.
Dogger Bank
5
WW1
tactical
2-player
naval
Naval combat during the Great War between individual British and German battlecruisers
in the North Sea.
Commando Raid on Rommel
5
WW2
tactical
solitaire
land
Mini-Sim. The player (British) executes a commando raid on the coast of North Africa in
an attempt to eliminate the Desert Fox.
Fall of Constantinople
6
medieval operational solitaire
land
The player (Ottoman) makes a final desperate attempt to capture Constantinople from its
heroic Christian defenders, A.D. 1453.
Jellicoe vs. Scheer
6
WW1
tactical
2-player
naval
Expansion of the Dogger Bank game system to include all British vs. German naval engagements in the North Sea during World War I.
‘Nam Diary
6
modern
tactical
2-player
Mini-Sim. Jungle firefight between individual US and NVA soldiers.
22
land
Game
Issue Period
Scale
# Players Theater
Sacrifice in the East
7
WW2 operational 2-player
land
Germany tries to stave off defeat by the Soviets in the east, 1945. (James Meldrum)
Andersonville
7 ACW
card game multiplayer abstract
Abstract, strategy card game of survival and endurance, based on life in infamous Andersonville prison camp during the Civil War
1914: Opening Moves
7
WW1
strategic solitaire
land
Mini-Sim. The player (Germans) plans and executes the war in the West, with off-board
East Front strategy often the key to victory.
St. George’s Valour
8
WW1
tactical
solitaire land/sea
Battle of Zeebruge, April 1918. Simulates the daring British (the player) raid made on
German U-Boat pens. (Paul Rohrbaugh)
The Fall of Röhm
8
WW2
abstract
solitaire abstract
The player (the National Socialist Party) attempts to manipulate various factions and purge
the SA to insure Hitler’s succession of Hindenburg.
Göring’s War
8
WW2
tactical
2-player
air
Mini-Sim. Simple air-to-air combat game pitting lone British and German fighters against
each other in the Battle of Britain.
Battle for Bataan
9
WW2
operational 2-player
land
The 1942 Japanese assault on the American forces in the Philippines is depicted in this two
-player game. (James Meldrum)
Escape of the Goeben
9
WW1
tactical
2-player
naval
Expands the Jellicoe vs Scheer system to include the Mediterranean fleets of major allied
and Central Powers nations during the Great War.
Siege of Leningrad
9
WW2
abstract
solitaire abstract
Mini-Sim. (Logistical Module I) Playable alone or as a plug-in to existing east front
wargames. See if you can keep Leningrad from falling.
La Bataille de York, 1813
9
1812
tactical
solitaire
land
Mini-Sim. The player (British) tries to turn back the American invasion near York
(afterwards, Toronto) during the War of 1812.
Operation Typhoon
10 WW2
operational 2-player
land
Two player game (corps/army level, weekly turns) on the German drive on Moscow during
late 1941. (James Meldrum)
Sniper Attack
10
WW2
card game solitaire abstract
Simple solitaire card game of sniper action in World War II. (Reprinted in Panzerschreck
Anthology.)
Jellicoe/Goeben Supplement
10
WW1
tactical
2-player
naval
Expands the Jellicoe/Goeben game system to include the US, Japanese, and Russian Baltic
Fleets during the Great War, along with new optional rules. Ownership of Jellicoe vs Scheer or
Escape of the Goeben necessary.
Panzers in the Southeast
11
WW2
operational 2-player
land
Two-player game (corps/army level) pitting the Germans against the Soviets in southeast
Europe during the final months of World War II. (Pieter de Wilde)
QAR: Quick Armor Rules
11
WW2
tactical
2-player
land
Miniatures rules system covering the fighting in North Africa in early WW2. Supplied counters represent major British, German, and Italian tanks and guns.
23
Game
Issue
Period
Scale
# Players Theater
Sink the Tirpitz
11
WW2
operational solitaire
naval
Mini-Sim. The player (British) attempts to sink the famous German battleship in this simple solitaire game. game. (James Gordon)
Drive on Leningrad
12
WW2
operational 2-player
land
Two-player game (corps/army level, weekly turns) of the German drive on Leningrad
against the Russians, June-September, 1941.
Masada
12
ancient
tactical
solitaire
land
Mini-Sim. Simple solitaire game where you replay the famous Roman siege in Judea, A.D.
72-73. (Reprinted in Panzerschreck Anthology.)
Invasion
12
19th C.
abstract
2-player
land
Classic reprint Mini-Sim. Abstract two-player wargame involving the invasion of England
in the late 19th c. after the Royal Navy has been neutralized. (unknown)
Tsaritsyn
13
WW1
tactical
2-player
land
The Whites attack the Reds near Tsaritsyn (later, Stalingrad) in 1919 during the Russian
Civil War.
Assault on Cherbourg
13
WW2
operational 2-player
land
Simulates the American attack on Cherbourg, France in mid-June, 1944, after the Normandy invasion.
Graf Spee
13
WW2
tactical
2-player
naval
Mini-Sim. Tactical naval game pitting the German pocket battleship Graf Spee against
three Royal Navy cruisers in late 1939 off the coast of South America.
Race to the Vistula
14
WW2
operational 2-player
land
Simulates the Russian drive to the Vistula against the Germans in mid-1944 at corps/army
level. (Pieter de Wilde)
Brandy Station
14
ACW
tactical
2-player
land
Recreates the largest cavalry battle of the Civil War, June 1863. Brigade level, two-hourly
turns.
The Mighty Hood
14
WW2
tactical
2-player naval
Uses the Graf Spee game system to recreate the naval battle between the Hood and the
Bismarck, May 1941, along with additional ships and scenarios.
Mortain 1944
15
WW2
operational 2-player land
Simulates the German counter-offensive against the Americans in France, two months after
D-Day. Division level, daily turns.
Raid on Schweinfurt
15
WW2
operational solitaire
air
The player (US) plans and executes a massive B-17 bombing raid against the factories of
Schweinfurt in Germany, 1943.
Hippodrome
15
ancients
tactical
multi-player land
Multi-player ancient Roman chariot racing card game, which places the emphasis on racing strategy. (Neil Graber)
North Sea Campaign
15
WW1
strategic
2-player naval
Replay the entire campaign of the British vs. German dreadnought fleets in World War I,
using individual ships, with each turn representing six months.
Madagascar 1942
PA
WW2
operational solitaire
land
The player (British) must secure the northern part of the island from its Vichy defenders in
a race against the clock. (PA = Panzerschreck Anthology)
24
Game
Issue Period
Scale
# Players Theater
Destruction of Force Z
16
WW2 operational
solitaire
naval
Simulates Royal Navy Force Z (Prince of Wales & Repulse) sailing against Japanese aggression in the Far East, December, 1941.
Salvo! 2nd ed.
16
WW2
tactical
solitaire
naval
Mini-Sim. New edition of the Salvo! game, with different ships from Britain and Germany.
Analysis of Games Published in Panzerschreck
Issue games come complete with rules, map, units, and components. Except for issues #14
and #15 (which had die-cut counters), counters must be cut prior to play. Mini-Sim games have
components included in the pages of the magazine which must be photocopied and cut prior to
play.
Games by Period
World War II 25
World War I 9
Civil War 3
Ancient 2
Modern 1
Medieval 1
19th C. 1
Napoleonic 1
Games by Scale
Tactical 21
Operational 13
Abstract 5
Strategic 4
Games by Theater
Land 26
Naval 12
Abstract 3
Air 2
Games by Players
2-player 22
Solitaire 19
Multi-player 2
Synopsis of Games Published in Panzer Digest
Games appearing in Panzer Digest are similar in style to those in Panzerschreck.
The current (and some back issues) of Panzer Digest are still available for purchase.
Visit the Minden Games website for current information about prices and availability.
All games were designed by Gary Graber, unless otherwise noted.
Game
Issue
Period
Scale
# Players Theater
Falaise Pocket
1
WW2
operational 2-player
land
Summer 2007. Simulation of the Falaise Pocket in France, August 17-21, 1944.
Longstreet’s Disaster
1
ACW
tactical
solitaire
land
Summer 2007. Solitaire treatment of Pickett’s Charge at Gettysburg, July 3, 1863, with the
player handling the CSA forces.
Salvo!
1
WW2
tactical
solitaire
naval
Summer 2007. Solitaire, tactical WW2 naval system, with warships (BB, BC, CA, and CL)
from Britain and Germany.
Penal Battalion
1
WW2
abstract
solitaire
land
Summer 2007. Abstract game using standard deck of cards to simulate land mine clearing
in WW2.
Swordfish at Taranto
2
WW2
tactical
solitaire
air
Autumn 2007. Plan and execute (as the British) the daring air raid by individual Fairey
Swordfish bombers on the Italian fleet anchored at Taranto, 1940.
25
Game
Issue
Period
Scale
# Players Theater
Evacuation of Königsberg
2
WW2
operational
2-player land
Autumn 2007. East Prussia, spring 1945. The Germans trying to hold off the advancing
Soviet army, with victory determined by how many civilians can be evacuated to the west.
Field of Honour
2
medieval tactical
multi-player land
Autumn 2007. Two-player or multi-player strategy recreation of a medieval jousting tournament.
Napoleon in Italy
3
Napoleonic operational
2-player
land
Spring 2008. The Austrians and French tangle in northern Italy during Napoleon’s 1796
Italian campaign.
Stalingrad: The Leather Factory
3
WW2
tactical
solitaire
land
Spring 2008. Tactical game in Stalingrad suburbs, where the advancing Germans (the
player) try to wrest control of key parts of the city, during their drive to the Volga.
Dogger Bank II
NS
WWI
tactical
2-player naval
Autumn 2008 (NS = Naval Special). Updated version of game recreating the naval battle
of Dogger Bank (1915) using individually rated warships.
Courage Under Fire
4
modern tactical
2-player
land
Autumn 2008. Battalion-level Vietnam-era area movement, card driven game of the battle
of An Loc, April 1972. (Paul Rohrbaugh)
NavTac 1914
4
WWI
tactical
2-player
naval
Autumn 2008. Naval tactical (“NavTac”) treatment of Mediterranean theater of the Great
War, using individual ships from Britain, Germany, and Austria-Hungary.
Gladiators of Rome
4
ancients tactical
solitaire
land
Autumn 2008. Stage an ancient gladiatorial contest using several different types of individual fighters. (Bob Flood)
Thunder Gods: Kamikazes at Okinawa 5
WW2
tactical
2-player naval-air
Winter 2008-2009. Two-player, card driven game of Kamikaze attacks off Okinawa, April
1945. (Paul Rohrbaugh)
Breakout at St. Lo
5
WW2 operational
2-player land
Winter 2008-2009. Simulates the battle in France between Allied and German forces near
St. Lo, after the D-Day invasion.
Day of Infamy
6
WW2
tactical
2-player air-naval
Spring 2009. Card driven system recreates the Japanese attack on Pearl Harbor, December 7, 1941. (Paul Rohrbaugh)
1775: Invasion of Canada
6
AWI
strategic
2-player
land
Spring 2009. Simulates the American land campaign against British Canada, in the American War of Independence era.
Monitor vs. Merrimack
6
ACW
tactical
2-player naval
Spring 2009. Battle of Hampden Roads, March 1862, simulating the first ever naval battle
between the famous USA and CSA ironclads.
Coronel & Falklands
7
WWI
tactical
solitaire naval
Summer 2009. Solitaire game using the Salvo! game system to recreate these two early
World War I naval engagements, Germany vs. Britain.
Occupation of the Rhineland
7
WW2
abstract
solitaire abstract
Summer 2009. Germany has militarized the Rhineland in 1936, against the treaty.
The player (representing France) must remove them without plunging Europe into war.
26
Game
Issue
Period
Scale
# Players Theater
Remagen Bridgehead
7
WW2
tactical
solitaire
land
Summer 2009. The Americans (the player) cross the Ludendorff Bridge on the Rhine, and
into Germany, March 1945.
Poor Bloody Infantry
8
WWI
tactical
solitaire
land
Winter 2009-2010. Go “over the top” with a single platoon of individually named British
soldiers as the whistle blows, first day of the Somme offensive, July 1, 1916.
Eindekker
8
WWI
tactical
solitaire
air
Winter 2009-2010. Recreate the time of the “Fokker Scourge” on the western front, 1915,
with individual airplanes and pilots (the player representing the Germans). (Bob Flood)
Fall of the Philippines
9
WW2
strategic
solitaire land
Summer 2010. The allies (the player) defends the island against the Japanese invaders,
December 1941.
‘Nam ‘68
9
modern
tactical
2-player land
Summer 2010. Individually rated US and NVA soldiers engage in firefights in the jungles
of Vietnam, 1968.
Emden vs. Sydney
CS
WWI
tactical
2-player naval
Summer 2010 (CS = Convention Special). Replay the naval battle between Emden and
Sydney, November 1914, using a modified Fletcher Pratt system.
Eben Emael
10
WW2
tactical
solitaire
land
Summer 2012. Tactical, solitaire design of the surprise German (the player) glider assault
on the Belgian fort of Eben Emael, May 10, 1940.
Panzerschiff
10
WW2
tactical
2-player naval
Summer 2012. Simple game of World War 2 naval combat between famous battlewagons
of several countries, including Bismarck, Yamato, Iowa, Rodney, Dunkerque, Littorio, et al.
Faith, Hope & Charity
11
WW2
tactical
solitaire
air
Summer 2013. Tactical plane vs plane combat (British, Italian, German) over Malta, 1941,
using the Battle over Britain game system.
Covers of Panzer Digest issues #1-9, and Convention Special
27
Analysis of Games Published in Panzer Digest
Issue games come complete with rules, map, units, and components. Thick card, color
counters must be cut prior to play. Published 2007 to present.
Games by Scale
Tactical 21
Operational 4
Abstract 2
Strategic 2
Games by Theater
Land 16
Naval 8
Air 4
Abstract 1
Games by Players
2-player 14
Solitaire 14
Multi-player 1
Panzerschreck covers,
issue #6, 7, 9, 11, & 13
Games by Period
World War II 15
World War I 6
Civil War 2
Modern 2
Ancient 1
Napoleonic 1
Medieval 1
AWI 1
Combined Analysis of Games Published
in Panzerschreck & Panzer Digest
Issue games come complete with rules, map, units, and components. Except for Panzerschreck issues #14 and #15 (which had die-cut counters), counters must be cut prior to play.
Mini-Sim games have components included in the pages of the magazine which must be copied
and cut prior to play.
Games by Period
World War II 40
World War I 15
Civil War 5
Ancient 3
Modern 3
Napoleonic 2
Medieval 2
19th C. 1
AWI 1
Games by Scale
Tactical 42
Operational 17
Abstract 7
Strategic 6
Games by Theater
Land 42
Naval 20
Air 6
Abstract 4
Designers
Gary Graber 58
Bob Flood 2
Paul Rohrbaugh 4
Neil Graber 1
James Meldrum 3
James Gordon 1
Pieter de Wilde 2
28
Games by Players
2-player 36
Solitaire 33
Multi-player 3
Extra Ship Counters: Destruction of Force Z
back
front
You may use these optional, extra ship counters when playing Destruction
of Force Z. This adds counters for British destroyers, and the H.M.S. Indomitable, if that optional rule is being used. The optional rule for DD (as provided on the back of the small counter sheet, below), reads as follows.
“You may use these ship counters when resolving air attacks; leave regular
counters on the map. You may include these four Royal Navy DD with Force
Z (Electra, Express, Tenedos, & Vampire); two stay with Prince of Wales, and
two with Repulse, the entire game. DD cannot attack, be attacked, or generate
VP. DD get 1 AA roll each when British ships under air attack (with –1 drm
applied).”
These small, thick card counter sheets were made available to Minden Pals
members. You may contact us about availability if you are not a Pal.
29
What’s New
From Minden Games
Visit the Minden website for further details—and ordering information—on each
of these new wargame titles released within the last year.
Battle over Britain is a two-player (with solitaire option)
game of WW2 air combat. Realistically rated individual
planes go head to head in the skies over Britain, summer
1940. The game includes the planes made famous: British Spitfire I, Hurricane I, Defiant, and Gladiator versus
German Me-109E, Me-110, and Ju-87 (Stuka). Includes
optional rules, and “roleplay” options, whereby each pilot
and gunner can be named, and receive different flying/
firing ratings and characteristics. Includes 20-page rule
booklet, 16 plane counters, Dogfight Display, Reference
Card, single game and campaign game options. Fast,
furious, quick playing fun for tactical air combat fans.
Tally Ho!
NavTac: Mediterranean covers tactical WWI naval
combat, focusing on the early part of the war, in the Mediterranean, Adriatic, and Black Sea areas, using a modified “Fletcher Pratt” approach to play, with dice and tables substituted for range estimation. Includes 24-page
rule booklet with standard and advanced rules, 71 historical ship counters and data (British, German, French, Italian, Austrian, Russian, Turkish; CL, AC, B, BC, BB at
1/3000 scale), Reference Cards, Tactical Display, solitaire rules, and four scenarios, providing gamers the ability to craft many historical and hypothetical encounters.
Turns represent five minutes, and fire is calculated by
individual turret (main & secondary).
NavTac: Pacific is Expansion #1 to the NavTac series. It covers the early part of the Great War in the Pacific, specifically focusing on the exploits of Von Spee’s
Asiatic Squadron, culminating in the Battles of Coronel
and the Falklands. Includes 20-page booklet, counters
and ship data for 47 historical ships (German, British,
Australian, French, Dutch, Japanese; CL, AC, AMC, B,
BC at 1/3000 scale), Reference Cards, new optional
rules, five scenarios, and one campaign scenario (“Von
Spee’s Adventure”), including small campaign map. This
Expansion uses the standard NavTac game system.
You must own NavTac: Mediterranean (see above) or
NavTac: Standard (see below) to use this expansion.
30
Panzer Digest #11 (Summer 2013) is a 48-page
edition filled with game reviews, articles, and complete
issue game Faith, Hope & Charity: Air Battles over
Malta, 1940-41. This design uses the Battle over Britain game system, and includes full rules, dogfight display, set of color counters, Reference Card, and several scenarios, including two campaign games. It is a
two-player game, with solitaire option provided. Wargame reviews cover eighteen recent releases from
publishers such as GMT, Columbia, Victory Point, Decision, MMP, Legion, Academy, and others, and focus
on providing readers with the low down on the games.
Follow the fun by reading Panzer Digest!
NavTac: Standard contains the standard, optional,
and advanced rules of the NavTac game system. It is
provided for those who might already have their own
1/3000 scale naval miniatures, and simply want the
rules. It may also be used to play NavTac: Pacific (see
above). Includes illustrated 12-page rule booklet,
sheet of six 1/3000 ship counters to get you started,
and introductory scenarios.
Solitaire Module is a Battle over Britain expansion
providing more rules, more planes, and more solitaire
options for the Battle over Britain game system.
Planes included are the Polish P-11c, Dutch Fokker
D.XXI, British Blenheim and Spitfire, Italian MC-200,
and German He-111, Hs-123, and Me-110C. Besides
the enhanced solitaire rules provided, there are campaign scenarios for the Polish (September 1939) and
Dutch (May 1940) campaigns. You must own the
standard Battle over Britain rules (or Faith, Hope &
Charity) to use this expansion.
Published in 2012 and reprinted in 2013, the Panzer Digest Print & Play Special is a 64-page booklet
containing five complete “Print & Play” wargames, previously published by Minden: Poor Bloody Infantry
(WWI solitaire), Fall of Röhm (WW2 solitaire), Swordfish at Taranto (WW2 solitaire), Dreadnoughts & Battlecruisers Intro Rules (WWI two-player), and Monitor vs
Merrimac (ACW two-player). B&W game components
form part of the booklet, and players photocopy them to
assemble each game. Five games covering a variety of eras and systems, one low price.
31
PDF GAMES…
Print ‘em yourself, and save
An assortment of pdf games are available from Minden. We have found this option to be particularly of interest to some of our foreign customers, who can print the
file off on their own, and save. The way it works is, you place your order directly
from the Minden website, and we email you the game file, along with its password.
You can then print off a color copy of all rules and components. This option is provided for those gamers that enjoy the pdf format.
As you would expect, prices for pdf games are lower than physical games. Our
standard “postage charge” (which is a part of our Paypal set up) becomes, in effect, a
“handling charge” which, when added to the low set price of a file, offers you savings.
Since one flat rate is charged per order, gamers are encouraged to make larger orders,
and save more. All this is to say, the “price plus postage” equates to the “price” of a
file, which is below regular hardcopy prices, significantly below if two or more pdf
games are purchased at once. (PDF orders are usually filled within a day or two of
being received, although during high volume periods it can be longer.)
For more details, descriptions, and to place an order, visit the PDF Format page at
the Minden website: http://minden_games.homestead.com/pdf.html.
PDF Games Currently Available
Eindekker
Mighty Hood II
Battle of the River Plate
Panzer Digest Convention Special
Fall of Röhm
Jousting: Field of Honour
Poor Bloody Infantry
Evacuation of Königsberg
Panzer Digest Review Special
Great War Salvo! Promo Rules
Dispatches from the Front #1
(Dispatches is available as a free download… see main Minden webpage)
32
continued from page 17
doubt. They are pretty close to the Napoleonic
battlefields despite their game scale. I pulled out
one of my Napoleonic Atlases and ascertained
they were pretty darn close – so the map boards
got a go for accuracy. The counters are bright
and easy to read with big bold numbers, and
punched out without a single glitch. The 48 game
cards are divided into four groups of 12 per battle. The art work is nice on them and all the
events seem reasonable. Two Player Aid Cards
and a Full Color Rulebook & Playbook round
out the game components.
RULES: Easy to read, easy to understand
and easy to get started. Each game has its own
little game rules, but there are no strange conditions that seem to go against the grain of the
main rules. I found the rules here to either be
cleaner or they simply resonate better with me
than my first encounter with the
series ala VPG.
GAME PLAY: The one thing
that struck me half way into
playing my first game of
Smolensk was that each die roll
REALLY REALLY mattered
here. The low unit density
means battles matter so much
here – like Strike Force One on
steroids. Add in the uncertainty
and tension of the cards which
drive the game and you have
nail biting uncertainty the entire
game usually. In a game at this
scale it is easy for combat to become either random or not really synchronized with the game.
Instead I found here that good tactical game
play was properly rewarded. In Waterloo, like
the Allies, you withdraw and use a fighting withdrawal strategy until you can go over to the offensive. Salamanca is just a dirty, nasty little
game that is a great introductory game, as long
as the newbie isn’t given the French. However I
think Smolensk in the gem of the four games. It
would work nicely at the infantry school teaching young company commanders on how to fight
a battle against a foe that has the maneuver advantage. Moreover your abilities are taxed here
because you must defend two widely separated
objectives and your reinforcement arrival is
variable. In all, it’s a headache for the Russian
player – and is perhaps the best solitaire game of
the four. What surprised me though was
Borodino. How they managed to capture and
convey the lumbering and ponderous feel of that
battle at this scale is remarkable. It is a credit to
the rule design team that the separate rules for
each game work to enhance the feel of the separate battles.
The game is driven of course by cards – sort
of. What I found drove the game was the morale
system. The old SPI Napoleon at Waterloo – the
free version – had the morale chart that both
sides watched to see who would crack first. Here
morale is a multi-faceted weapon.
You of course try to break the enemy’s morale, for when it reaches zero the game is over.
You want to keep your morale healthy as you
can spend it for various actions. The two actions
you’ll most likely spend it on are adding +1 to a
battle or as a modifier to rally a unit. Routs are to
be feared on the CRT for they can cause your
carefully husbanded morale to vaporize.
You do need to pay attention to your scenario’s special
rules. I found the retreat rules
not too bad. I liked the emphasis
on the cavalry and the rules
reflect its battlefield importance
and its fluidity. Add to it the
drawing of the top card each
player turn, and you have a
more than adequate amount of
surprise factored in. Due to the
low counter density the game is
eminently manageable and allows you to focus on fighting
the battle and not the system or
stacks of units. I found it a hard choice on if I
wanted to have a lesser Napoleon on the board
and have another wing commander who gives
you more flexibility – or the monster Napoleon
unit. Interesting a game of this size would present such a dilemma in the Command and control sphere.
CONCLUSIONS: Fading Glory is much like
my wife Katie – short and sweet. It bears repeating but Fading Glory is a set of games I suspect
you’ll pull out and play more than you suspect.
It may be a little repetitive due to the limited
number of cards but I liked the fast sense of play.
That mitigated the smack deck and its effect on
play as far as I was concerned. Think of Fading
Glory as a more compact version of Command &
Colors and that’s no mean praise. I was not
thrilled with the VPG version of these games but
GMT’s version truly feels different. Now…how
would this translate over to American Civil War
or even WWI battles?!
33
continued from page 5
of this issue. I put it together rather
quickly. Most of the material is new, but
I did reach back for some previously published articles (which are so marked in
these pages), and have included them. A
side benefit of the pdf format is I am no
longer bound by the “four page multiple”
rule. With a printed magazine, you aim
for 24, or 28, or 32 pages, or whatever, as
long as it is a multiple of four. With this
format, it is no big deal if we have an odd
page number. That in itself saves a lot of
time when doing layout. The easier it is
to compile a new issue, the more likely it
is that it will see the light of day in a
timely manner.
As far as contributions, I will say to all
readers, if you would like to offer an article for publication, please do so. I prefer
“short” rather than “long” articles, variants, and/or game reviews. That approach
has been a hallmark of Panzerschreck in
the past, and I would prefer it to continue.
I cannot guarantee your effort will be
printed, but if you can string together interesting prose, and have a variant or
strategy article to contribute, I’d love to
see it. By the way, when submitting
something, I would prefer it in MS Word,
or Rich Text Format.
If you are brand new to Panzerschreck, I do hope that you get enjoyment
from the magazine, and try out the issue
game. If you’re a veteran, welcome back.
The synopsis of past issue games has been
included once again, as it helps place
“where we are now” in context of “where
we have been”. It should be mentioned,
however, that none of the back issues
(Panzerschreck #1-15, and Panzerschreck
Anthology) are available from us. “Will
you be reprinting back issues? Where can
I find a copy?” No, there are no plans to
reprint past issues. As for getting a copy
of older editions, try eBay or leads from
Boardgamegeek. That said, it is possible
that some of the games will be reprinted
in Zip Edition formats (as some have already been reprinted). I’d suggest regularly checking out the Minden website, to
see what is currently available. If you like
Panzerschreck/Panzer Digest designs, you
will no doubt enjoy our current line of Zip
Edition games as well. We usually have
over thirty assorted titles in stock, and
plan to add to that, but besides this general observation, I can’t say anything
about when/if a particular out-of-print
game you missed the first time around
will be available again.
Well, enough of this editorial. I do
hope you have fun with this edition of
Panzerschreck, and its games. Increasing
your fun and enjoyment of games has
always been the primary goal of the
magazine. Board wargaming is a great
hobby, and we hope that whenever the
magazine drops through your mail slot, er,
inbox, you’ll be able to set aside some
time for it and enjoy what it has to offer.
Gary Graber
February 2014
Publishers…
Advertising space is available.
Contact us for details.
34
Panzerschreck
Highlights of this 35-page edition of
PANZERSCHRECK #16
Opening Rounds
Featured Variant: Axis & Allies 1941
Issue Game: Destruction of Force Z
Mini-Sim: Salvo! 2nd ed.
Short Takes: Wargame Variants
Extra Ship Counters for Destruction of Force Z
Observation Post: Reviews
Panzerschreck: Synopsis of Games
Panzer Digest: Synopsis of Games
Minden Games: Latest Releases
Panzerschreck — Established 1998