What follows is the first of many diary entries which I am making available as PDFs. This is a series of a dozen or more entries, written in an informal style, and covering a wide range of topics such as early design decisions, trials and tribulations, design goals and philosophies, game mechanics, "hidden layers" of depth, scale, unit types, special units, player strategies and tactics, game balance, compromises and abstractions in the game system, and much more.
This diary entry is currently available as a PDF from the GMT site: http://www.gmtgames.com/p-270-red-winter.aspx
Part 1 - Introduction and Design Goals
A desperate battle for territory and survival is about to be waged across a bleak and snowy landscape of forests, swamps, and frozen lakes.
The Winter War has all the makings of a great historical novel- an overwhelming attacker, a stalwart and determined underdog of a defender, and a stark, otherworldly setting. It struck me as odd that there should be so few games available on this interesting and unique conflict.
I began collecting materials for a Winter War game as far back as winter of 2004, although the seed had taken root many years earlier. I chose the battle for Tolvajärvi because it seemed this was a battle that might have gone either way. Morale was at least as important as tactics and firepower. If the Finnish defenses had broken mere hours earlier on the first day, the Soviet attack might have generated enough momentum to take the town. I was also struck by the back and forth fighting over Kotisaari Island. Neither side could afford to yield this seemingly insignificant chunk of forested land, lest their opponent use it to launch attacks against their rear areas.
Before starting to work on Red Winter, I carefully considered the wargames on my bookshelf. Which ones were my favorites, and why? I came to the conclusion that games I revisited the most were the ones that moved along at a brisk pace, kept both players engaged throughout, were well balanced, and featured a unique gaming situation. (For the record, I think I have achieved all of this with Red Winter- I hope others will enjoy it as well)
Company sized units, 90 minute game turns and 425 yards per hex turned out to be the perfect scale for Red Winter. While I enjoy many types of simulation games, I have always been most drawn to games using the "grand tactical" scale. Having played many Napoleonics games at such a scale, I saw no reason that it wouldn’t work well for smaller battles of the Winter War or WWII- battles with no more than, say, two divisions per side. I like this scale because it highlights differing unit capabilities and keeps the game firmly focused on maneuver, while avoiding the endless wristage of morale checks and opportunity fire. The hex scale yields ranges of 1 hex for rifles, 2 hexes for light machine guns, 3 hexes for heavy machine guns and Soviet T-26 tanks, 6 hexes for medium mortars, and 12 hexes for heavy mortars. Submachine guns and Molotov cocktails are figured into the rules for assaults (same hex combats).
Below: An early homemade version of Red Winter. The map terrain was done with magic markers.
I started to work on Red Winter in late 2005 with three main design goals in mind:
1. The game should highlight the similarities and differences between Soviet and Finnish rifle companies in December of 1939.
2. The system should be applicable to other WWII era battles at a similar scale.
3. Gameplay should be fast paced and interactive, with each player able to take his turn in about 5 minutes.
The final goal proved to be a rather big challenge. Key to achieving it was the development of individually simple mechanics for handling the unusual aspects of this battle, of which there are many: attrition from sub-zero weather conditions, fog, Finnish night raids, Soviet bonfires, the highly contested tourist hotel which doubled as a mini-fortress, tanks tethered to the road network, Finns on skis, the ad hoc Finnish provisional company, the many islands, and the frozen lakes themselves, just to name a few. I felt I needed to capture the unique flavor of these aspects while keeping the rules as simple as possible. And so the mechanics involved needed to be finely crafted and thoroughly play tested.
An example of the type of "simple but effective" mechanic I was going for can be seen in the game’s unit recovery system. Reduced infantry units may attempt to recover to full strength during their Action Phase in lieu of other actions. This requires rolling a "6" or higher on a single 6-sided die. Units gain a bonus to the die roll for maintaining their distance from enemy units. This provides a simple yet realistic incentive for players to withdraw their reduced units to the rear and move forward fresh troops. During the fourth and fifth (final) days of the battle, the Soviets receive a penalty to their recovery rolls, simulating a lack of replacement troops as well as sinking morale. The result, in game terms, is a gradual but noticeable shift in the number of full strength Soviet units on the map.
Night turns are governed by several simple rules which combine to give rise to many strategic possibilities. During each night turn (representing a 15 hour period of darkness) units have double their normal movement allowances. This means combat units can exploit gaps in the enemy’s front line, cross frozen lakes, or execute wide flanking maneuvers. However, such ambitions leave units susceptible to "sub-zero" attrition losses, simulating frostbite, desertion and poor morale from the extreme weather. Whether or not each stack (note: stack, not individual unit) receives a step loss is determined by a simple 50-50 die roll. The interaction of these two night rules means that ambitious players may push their luck and gain the upper hand during night turns, all while the sub-zero loss rules encourage players to huddle their units together into stacks in order to reduce losses. Soviet units can build bonfires to avoid sub-zero losses, but in doing so become choice targets for Finnish night raids. The end result is that the night rules nicely mirror the night actions of the actual battle, all while remaining simple and offering the players considerable freedom of strategy.
Above: The earliest printed counters. I made these myself using Photoshop. Nothing fancy, but they did the job.
Below: A sample of the latest Red Winter playtest counters by Michael Evans.
In order to keep the unit density low (one countersheet of 5/8 inch counters), I opted to combine certain units. Thus, Finnish MG counters represent multiple sections of guns. The Soviet mortar units represent both 82mm and 120mm components, receiving a favorable +2 DRM when within range of the 82mm component (6 hexes). The section of heavy machine guns inherent in each Soviet infantry company is "rolled up" into each company, as reflected by an increase in ranged firepower. Early decisions like these helped to keep the counter clutter down and make the game play fast and manageable.
The Turn Sequence for Red Winter looks like this:
I. Soviet Reset Phase
The Soviet player flips all his "Fired" artillery to their "Available" side.
II. Soviet Action Phase
Each unit may perform only one of the following actions: Move and/or assault, Attempt to recover to full strength (reduced infantry units only), Take a replacement step, if available, Dig in. The Soviet player also brings Reinforcements on to the map at this time.
III. Soviet Combat Phase
The Soviet player rolls for ranged attacks and conducts combats. The Finnish player may commit defensive support to combats.
IV. Finnish Player Turn
As above, except the Finnish player conducts the above operations.
V. Mutual Sub-Zero Loss Phase (night turns only)
At the conclusion of each night turn, both players roll on the Sub-Zero Loss Table (SZLT) to determine step reductions. Soviet player must roll for all stacks which are not under bonfires. Finns roll for all units under "skull" markers (units which conducted combats, assaults, or night raids). Then all skull and bonfire markers are removed.
Note that the player order can (and will) change during the course of the campaign game. When the Finnish player opts to change his operational stance (a onetime event), he effectively takes two turns in a row and becomes Player One.
Central to play is the Action Phase, wherein each unit may choose only one out of several possible actions. This makes for some very tense decisions for both players. It also conveniently moves the game along at a brisk pace.
Conflict in Red Winter comes in three flavors: Combats, Assaults, and Ranged Attacks.
Combat represents two-way firefights involving mostly rifles and LMGs. This type of conflict takes place voluntarily between adjacent units, and utilizes a bell curve CRT (2d6). Combat losses dictated by the CRT may be assigned as either retreat hexes or step reductions, with a few exceptions: No unit can retreat more hexes than its Movement Allowance minus two, the attacker must always take his first loss as a step reduction, and a defender which takes 3 or more losses must take the first as a step reduction. There is no need to remember these exceptions; "mandatory step reductions" are denoted in red on the CRT as a friendly reminder to players.
Machine guns, tanks, mortars and artillery can make ranged attacks at distances of 2 or more hexes. These types of weapons provide a "use it or lose it" benefit to combats against the targeted hex. Thus the attacker will need to follow up his artillery strikes during the very same Combat Phase in order to exploit their benefit, or the suppressed hex will return to normal. No markers or "resets" of any kind are necessary for this mechanic.
It is worth noting that infantry companies are also capable of ranged attacks at a range of 2 hexes due to the light machine guns inherent in such units. The Soviets really have the advantage in this arena- they outnumber the Finns 3 to 1 in automatic weapons!
Ranged attacks need not be used to support combats. They can also inflict step reductions on their targets, but are most effective when used as support. Ranged attacks are resolved using the Ranged Attack Table (RAT), which also utilizes a 2d6 bell curve. There are three possible results on the RAT: No effect, Suppressed, and Suppressed + step reduction. Each "Suppressed" result shifts the impending CRT combat by one odds column in favor of the side with the support. Both attacker and defender may assign ranged attacks to support the same combat. Calculating the outcome of a ranged attack is a simple affair; roll two dice, add the firing unit’s ranged attack strength, and add +1 per infantry company in the target hex. A handful of other DRMs occasionally apply, but those are the main ones. The "+1 per target infantry unit" is a simple rule which conveniently discourages wanton stacking of units. Pile too many in the same hex and your opponent’s artillery will pound you to dust!
Assaults are same hex combats which take place during movement. Assaults are resolved as normal combats using the very same CRT, but all attacker losses must be taken as step reductions. Finns gain a favorable column shift in assaults due to their Suomi submachine guns.
Now let’s consider the other main design goal for Red Winter- highlighting the similarities and differences between comparably sized Soviet and Finnish units. On the surface, these nations’ infantry companies appear very similar. Both consist of roughly 100 men. Both are armed primarily with rifles. Both have two steps and a combat strength of 5. The Finns’ movement allowance of 6 is only marginally better than the Soviets’ 5. However, appearances can be deceiving...
Since forest costs 2 movement points (MPs) to enter and suo (wetlands) costs 3 MPs, the Finns higher movement allows them to move up to the Soviets and still conduct an assault in most situations, whereas the Soviets will need to start adjacent to Finns to assault them. This means the Finns can often back up in time to avoid being assaulted, so long as they can avoid being outflanked. Finnish infantry are equipped with skis and pay only 1 MP to enter frozen lake hexes, while the Soviets pay 1.5. Thus a Soviet unit can cross only 3 lake hexes per turn while a Finn can cross 6, and Finns can cross 3 woods hexes to Soviets’ 2, or 2 suo hexes to the Soviets’ 1. So a rather small disparity in movement ratings results in a rather large impact on maneuver.
The Soviet infantry companies have a much stronger ranged attack rating than their Finnish equivalents, representing their 3:1 advantage in automatic weapons at Tolvajärvi. But what the Finns lack in LMGs, they make up for in Suomi submachine guns- excellent close range weapons which yield a beneficial column shift for the Finns in assaults. Thus we have two seemingly similar units with very different combat styles; the Soviet units will often achieve the best results by standing off at LMG and HMG range (2-3 hexes), while the Finns will attempt to close the gap with the enemy so as to exploit the advantages of their SMGs (0 hex range). The predominanly wooded terrain generally favors the Finns’ up-close fighting style, but when the Soviets can position their MGs and heavy weapons with line of sight across the frozen lakes, they can use them to great advantage.
I should briefly mention the lakes themselves, since much of the game’s personality comes from the frozen lakes. Both players will quickly develop a love/hate relationship with the lakes. Combat units can very often gain favorable positions by crossing these wide open spaces, but they do so at considerable risk. Units caught out on the ice make very inviting targets! This is especially true for the Soviets, who wear brown uniforms and stick out like sore thumbs against the snowy white backdrop.
Red Winter has been a labor of love, and I hope some of my enthusiasm has rubbed off on you, the reader. The research, development and design process has been an intense and immersive experience for the past four years of my life. I tried to create something that I myself would love to play, and in that regard I’ve succeeded. I think casual wargamers will enjoy the game’s simple systems and short scenarios, while grognards will appreciate the full 40 turn campaign and wealth of optional rules for greater realism. I also think gamers will want to revisit Red Winter again and again due to the game’s fast pace, abundance of scenarios, and many possible strategies.
I look forward to responding to your questions and comments. duckweedseattle@yahoo.com
Sincerely,
Mark Mokszycki (designer)
(End diary entry)
The PDF version of this entry is available here: http://www.gmtgames.com/p-270-red-winter.aspx
The game can also be preordered for $35 from the above site.
Next time:
In the next installment of Red Winter Design Diaries, we'll take a look at scale- time, unit and hex scales- and how they got to be what they are. We'll also look at some of the "hidden layers of depth" lurking beneath the surface of the rules. Stay tuned!
Posted Fri Nov 20, 2009 11:14 pm
