My Top 10 Boardgames Published in 2024

     

Here's a look at my 10 favorite games published in 2024.

(Or else made available in North America so late in 2023 that there was no way to really play them before the calendar flipped.)

#10

RED DUST REBELLION

I've just scratched the surface here, but I already like (a lot!) what I see. Yes, this is another COIN game from GMT—volume 12, if you can believe that—but this one being fictitious makes possible a host of things we haven't seen elsewhere. From truly asymmetric factions (The Church of the Reclaimer is a blast—and a brain twister—to play) to semi-random storms that'll hit your forces hard unless they head for cover, this is a brave new world for the COIN series.

#9

JEKYLL & HYDE VS SCOTLAND YARD

Before The Crew, nobody thought a co-operative trick-taking game was possible; nowadays, it seems there's a new one every other month. Jekyll & Hyde vs Scotland Yard is a two-player game to boot, and a damn clever one, where players try to manipulate the number of tricks they win so that Jekyll/Hyde makes it home before the police can catch him. Rotating trump suits and the occasional potion will keep players on their toes—almost as much as the title character.

(You can read my flash review here.)

#8

ALTERED

I thought I had weaned myself off collectable card games back in the day, and this year I tried two new games that confirmed those feelings: Star Wars Unlimited (yawn) and Lorcana (visually superb but mechanically generic). Then I gaveI Altered a shot and ended up purchasing two booster boxes. It runs on very innovative gameplay, killer visuals, and nothing short of a revolutionary publishing plan. I'm very much looking forward to what's on the horizon.

#7

DUCTH RESISTANCE: ORANGE SHALL OVERCOME!

Orange is a solo/co-op game of resistance in the Netherlands during World War II. Several scenarios require players to dodge German checkpoints, smuggle supplies (even people!) into dangerous locations, and resort to violence when there's no other way. An impressive system and overall package, and from a first-time designer, no less.

#6

SKYRISE

A cutthroat bidding game about building a city in the sky, with simple rules that pave the way for tense and rewarding gameplay. I played the game this was based on—Metropolys—once, years ago; I never felt the need to play it again. But Skyrise elevates (ha!) the action and makes everything shine.

And while there's no denying the deluxe version is seriously overproduced, it does look great on the table.

(You can read my flash review here.)

#5

WOLFPACK
I tried a few submarine games over the years, but they were either too convoluted or else too much "on rails" with few player decisions and an experience that felt more like watching the game happen around me.

Wolfpack hits the sweet spot: Despite the game's XX pages of (generously illustrated) rules, it's easy to get into a routine of going out on patrols, spotting juicy merchant ships, arming and firing torpedoes... and also evading escorts, dealing with crew injuries, putting out sub fires, fending off flooding and performing a dance of death with depth charges on a daily basis.

What's not to like?

#4

NORMAN CONQUESTS
Not only did this fifth volume in the Men of Iron series convince me to take the plunge, but I enjoyed it so much that I promptly tracked down the four first volumes and am eagerly awaiting #6. The game offers tactical medieval battles with just the right amount of chrome to give you something satisfying to bite into while never overstaying its welcome. 

Just make sure you leave your units room to retreat. You'll thank me later.

#3

OXONO

One of those abstract two-player games with minimal components, a cerebral look, and that ubiquitous "place four pieces in a row" victory condition, Oxono almost looks like a toy. Until you play (and lose) your first game, that is. Players move an X and an O totem, both acting as poles around which you can play a corresponding piece (X or O) in your color. It's those pieces you're trying to align, in any colors. So you win if you put the fourth X in a row/column of Xs, or the fourth O in a row/column of Os, no matter who placed the first three. You can't imagine how challenging—and addictive—that is until you've tried it.

#2

BOMB BUSTERS

This is one of those rare cooperative games where the alpha player problem (running everyone like puppets in an otherwise solo game) cannot happen, because the whole thing revolves around secret information everyone is trying to deduce from the occasional clues put up by their partners. Your bomb squad needs to defuse bomb after bomb by cutting pairs of like-numbered wires: one facing one of your friends (and whose value you're not always sure of) and one facing you. 
And whatever you do, DONT' CUT THE RED WIRE!

(You can read my flash review here.)

#1

DOWNFALL

Last year's #1 entry (Mr. President) began thusly: "The most complex and longest game on the list..." And I'm forced to recognize that it's also the case this year. I might have to seek treatment.
Downfall is kind of a monster game that eats up an entire table (or two) and whose short scenario lasts six hours. Hey, playing the last act of WWII ain't a walk in the park! But the game flows so wonderfully and without any downtime that I find myself transfixed, for however long the whole thing takes.

It is a stunning design that I can't wait to play again.

(You can read my review here.)

* * *

DISAPPOINTMENTS
I define disappointments as games I expected a lot from, and which failed to deliver. Here are the "top" three from 2024.

I rarely post negative reviews of games on this blog (life's too short!) but my feelings were so negative in the case of Heat's first expansion that I couldn't do otherwise. (So here it is.) I wasn't disappointed: I was thoroughly pissed off.

In short, I thought they did everything completely wrong, making Heavy Rain the worst expansion I've come across in 30 years of boardgaming. It almost deserves an award just for that.

This one is kind of a mild disappointment, in that I expected great things from this narrative game, and in the end only got "things" that were more often than not on the right side of fun without really making me feel like I'd need to replay the campaign, or get my hands on eventual sequels. Fun enough to borrow from a friend and try once, I guess, but that's pretty much it.

I think it's the first time a game from GMT ends up in this section of my yearly Top 10, and it breaks my heart. I had high hopes for I, Napoleon, but the decision space ended up being way too narrow for my taste. And I really wish there were just one or two lines of historical text at the bottom of each card, so that I could at least learn new things if I'm not actively choosing stuff.

A pity.

* * *

STRAGGLERS
Let's end on a high note with three games that would have made my Top 10 had I encountered them back in the year when they were published.

Scout is the second trick-taking game on the list this year, and deservedly so. It's a clever, twisted and fun little bundle of joy—you should see that diminutive box—you can carry anywhere, that plays great with any number of players (including two!) and that will surprise and entertain anyone you ensnare with it.

Two abstract games on the same list might be a first, but I won't shy away from my admiration of this as-clever-as-it-is simple (and elegant) little game. Move a piece according to the pattern highlighted on one of your three cards, then give that card to your opponent. THAT'S IT. And since there are oodles of different cards (did I mention expansions?), no two games are ever alike.

Mandala is one of those games that feels so classic, so elemental, that you can't help but think the design already existed as a traditional thing played by generations past. Right? Nope: made up by two guys a few years ago.

But no matter how (not) old the game is, it's a splendid example of a simple system yielding remarkable depth. 

# # #

Flash Review — Jekyll & Hyde vs Scotland Yard

Players: 2

Age: 10+
Playtime: 20 min
Complexity: 4/10

Jekyll & Hyde vs Scotland Yard, in addition to being a mouthful, is a co-operative trick-taking game that unfolds over 10 brief chapters: you can either link those together to form a campaign, or tackle them individually, in any order you wish.

Each round sees the play of eight tricks, with each trick comprising three cards: one from each player and one from the City deck. You know the drill: follow suit if you can, otherwise anything goes. The first color to hit the table becomes the most powerful suit for that round, while the second color to make an appearance becomes the second most powerful suit—leaving third place for the game’s remaining color.

Each trick is won by whoever (including the City) plays the highest card in the most powerful suit, and those cards remains in full view for future reference. Clever use of potion cards allows players to manipulate the relative strengths of all three suits, exchange a card with the City deck, or even steal a trick previously won by the City.

When eight tricks have been played (and won), the round is scored: the Jekyll/Hyde pawn moves forward one step on the board for each trick taken by the player who won the fewest tricks, plus one step for each 8-card found in the tricks of each player. But be careful: every 1, 2, or 3 also found in those tricks will move the Scotland Yard pawn forward one step.
Play a second round, and then you and your buddy succeed if Jekyll/Hyde made it home before the police caught up with him.

But it’s not enough to avoid losing. Each chapter presents different ways for players to earn points: win a trick by playing an 8, win the final trick, etc. Tally your score for the whole campaign, and then try to do better.

The game is simple, fast, devilishly clever and addictive.
You should be playing it right now, instead of reading this!

Most easily forgotten rule: Turn order is indicated on the Character token, and moves either clockwise or counterclockwise.



# # #

Flash Review — War Story: Occupied France

Players: 1-6 (but see below)

Works well with just 2: Yes but… 

Age: 14+ 

Playtime: 45-60 min 

Complexity: 4/10

As agents of the SOE (Special Operations Executive) at the height of WWII, your job is to infiltrate German-occupied France and link up with the resistance movement there, in order to carry out a string of missions from which there is likely no coming back.

War Story: Occupied France is essentially a solo game that you can play with friends: there are four agents in play at all times, but none of them is assigned to any given player. It’s just a pool or resources that you—and your eventual partners—can use as needed.
It’s also very much built like a choose-your-own-adventure novel, with numbered paragraphs to read, decisions that send you to further paragraphs, and so on. I would go so far as to say that it’s not quite a game: it really is more of an interactive novel, with some light game elements peppered throughout. (If you want an actual hybrid of interactive story & boardgame, This War of Mine delivers in spades.)

But is this interactive story any fun? Yes.
The game runs on very simple rules, making it possible to crack the box open and start playing right there and then; it also comes with three scenarios that throw you deep into occupied France and force you to make difficult decisions from the get-go. You can play each scenario individually or link them up in a three-part campaign. Best of all, each scenario is replayable, despite the absence of randomness anywhere in the system.

I would however dock War Story: Occupied France quite a few points because of the sheer number of errors in this first edition of the game. You’ll frustratingly have to spend a while correcting the various paragraphs (and cards…) highlighted in the FAQ before you get going. And we’re not just talking typos (although they do exist: just ask the unfortunate Domonique you’ll encounter in the game): these are wrong paragraph numbers, erroneous instructions, as well as missing icons and various indications. It’s unacceptable; especially from Osprey, a publisher that should know better.

Also, I can’t for the life of me figure out why—much less how—you’d play this with more than two players. Remember, it’s an interactive story: there’s not much to do, even for one person playing this solo. So if a buddy wants to enjoy the ride with you, fine. More than that, and they’ll start asking themselves what they’re doing there.
But SIX players? That’s insanity.

Most easily forgotten rule: You can only spend special tokens when the current paragraph shows the chevrons icon.



# # #

Flash Review — Bomb Busters

Players: 2-5

Works well with just 2: Yes!
Age: 10+
Playtime: 30 min
Complexity: 4/10

Bomb Busters requires a team of players to work together to defuse one bomb after the other (after the other). Sure, you’ve got cool gadgets to help you along the way and more than one trick up your sleeve—assuming you’ve got any arms left—but will you manage to keep your cool long enough to avoid triggering that damn thing?

The game is all about cutting (the right) wires, which are represented by narrow cardboard tiles that each show a number between 1 and 12, with four copies of every number. Each player gets a stand where those tiles—distributed at random—are stood up in ascending order, with the wire values facing the owner of the stand. So you know what your wires are, but nothing else. Using a clever system of very limited clues, you may eventually deduce some information about a few of the wires held by your teammates.
Now since wires must be cut in pairs, if you want to cut, say, your 5 wire, you must first cut a 5 wire on someone else’s stand. So when you think you’re sure (...), you point to a specific wire, say “I’m cutting this 5 wire!” with as much confidence as you can muster, and hold your breath. If you’re right, your teammate lays down that wire tile face up in front of their stand (and the position of that revealed tile in your friend’s spread hopefully feeds you with further information you can use) and you do the same with your like-numbered wire.
And if you’re wrong? Boom.
(Okay, each mission allows for a handful of mistakes before everyone gets blown to pieces. That counter goes down fast: don’t get too comfy.)

Oh you thought that was all? That’s so cute.

There are also yellow wires, each numbered as a .1; so you get a 1.1, a 2.1 and so on all the way to 12.1, with a few of them thrown into the mix before tile randomization. The trick here is that yellow wires must also be cut in pairs, meaning you must point to a tile on someone else’s stand, say “I’m cutting this yellow wire!” and hope to God you’re right, so that you can also cut a yellow wire on your own stand.
Red wires? Of course we’ve got red wires, each numbered as a .5: 1.5, 2.5, etc. Those you CANNOT cut at all. And there are no oopsies when you cut whatever circuit was keeping the bomb from embracing entropy.

Each mission consumes at most 30 minutes of your time (sometimes way less, trust me) and the box comes with a whopping 66 increasingly difficult missions for your exploding pleasure.
Plus there's a very nifty twist that makes the game work like a charm with just two players.

If this doesn’t win the Spiel des Jahres for 2025, I’ll eat my bomb suit helmet.

Most easily forgotten rule: If one player has all four copies of a numbered wire on their stand (say, all four 2s), they can do a “solo cut” and reveal them all at once. Same thing if anyone holds the two remaining wires of any one number.

# # #

Flash Review — Skyrise

Players: 2-4

Works well with just 2: Yes!
Age: 14+
Playtime: 30-90 min
Complexity: 4.5/10

Skyrise is an auction game where three different factors are always at play: currency (what you’re bidding), building (what you’ll put on the board if you win) and location (where you’ll build if you win.)
And wouldn’t you know it? Turns out that in this case, all three of these things are one and the same.

The game is played on a modular board: the more players partake, the larger the playing surface becomes. Each space shows one color and houses a token assigned to it at random. Each player is issued a series of buildings in three sizes, with each building sporting a number on its bottom. One player places a bid, putting a building (upside-down so the number is visible) on a space they want to occupy. The next player can outbid by placing a building with a higher number on an adjacent space, and so on until everyone passes. Then the highest-numbered building gets built on the space where that winning bid was placed, and a new auction starts. When you build a building, you grab the token from that space and add it to your collection; it contributes to the points you’ll score, in one way or another.

The goal here is to accumulate the most points over two scoring rounds—one mid-game and the other at the very end—according to secret and open objectives, plus domination over sections of the board, depending on who’s got the most tall buildings here and there.

The whole thing is over in about 30 minutes, the game looks fantastic (even in its basic wooden-buildings retail edition) and it’s refreshingly different from whatever else you stock your shelves with. (Except maybe Metropolys, the original game Skyrise reimagined.)

Most easily forgotten rule: You can always start a new auction next to a building already on the board or on the central island.

# # #

Expansion review — Heat: Heavy Rain

(I posted this review—a rare negative review when it comes to what I usually use this space for—on Boardgamegeek.com back in May 2024, and for some reason I completely forgot to publish it here. 

Better late than never, I suppose. Especially since this has been my most controversial game review so far.)

Let me preface this by saying Heat is one of my favorite racing games. It was also my #1 game in 2022. I preordered the expansion the minute it was announced.

And yet, after Heavy Rain, I will not buy another expansion for this amazing game.
The reason is simple: I think it's one of the worst expansions I've encountered in over three decades of boardgaming. (And no, I'm not even talking about the price, which I'll admit is surprisingly steep.)

Now this is no snarky review: I'm not writing this while angry, nor do I have an ax to grind with anyone. I'm just writing this as a consumer, a player of games, and one who's disappointed.
I really wanted this to be good.

So what are we getting in the box?

1. TRACKS
We all expected two more tracks, and two more (fun) tracks we got. So far, so good.

2. FLOODED SPACES
For some reason, it was decided that flooding would not be backwards compatible with the previous four tracks. Which I could maybe understand if it were some complex new game mechanic. But no: it's a super simple thing where you have to pay an extra heat when you shift down on a flooded space. (So simple a thing, in fact, that when I explain what the big blue spaces do on the Japan track, players always voice some disappointment. "That's it?")

This strange design decision comes with several equally strange wrinkles:

• It's only present on one of the two new tracks. (Mexico's dry as a bone, which I guess makes thematic sense.)
• You'll never be able to play on the Japan track without it—it's printed on the board itself, which robs the whole system of some (expected) variety.
• If flooded spaces make an appearance on future tracks, it'll also mean those tracks can only be played with flooded spaces.
• You'll also never see flooded spaces on any of the four base-game tracks.

This last point is particularly painful, because there are a number of ways in which flooded spaces could have worked on the four original tracks—as well as all of the future ones—with many other players pointing out the obvious "weather tile" solution. (You could even have, say, three different flooding tiles, indicating different numbers of flooded spaces before and after the corner line.)

3. CHICANES
Another very small change from the base game, chicanes are simply two corners that are closer together.
It makes sense for this not to appear on every track in the game, just as it’s logical for long straightaways not to feature on each track. Chicanes do exist on both of the new tracks, so that’s fun.

4. AGGRESSIVE LEGENDS
This rule allows Legends (the "bots") to cross both corners of a Chicane in one move, which gives cars on autopilot some welcome teeth. To avail itself of this option, a Legend needs to start its move on a space marked with a chevron, and those are depicted on both the Japan and the Mexico tracks.
It’s also possible to use that rule on the Great Britain track, and the expansion provides little chevron markers you can put over the relevant spaces.
I wish.
The reality is this: Players are invited to draw chevrons on their Great Britain track.
I’m not one of those boargamers who would never take a Sharpie to their game and implement alterations. (In fact, I did just that to number the spaces on my Grand Prix, Thunder Alley and Apocalypse Road tracks so we could race against each other remotely at the height of the pandemic.) But it’s the first time I run into an expansion suggesting that I modify some material in the base game without giving me what I need to do so, and asks me, instead, to just draw something on one of the original boards.
I was very much not impressed by this.
(Sure, they could also not have said anything about Chicanes on the Great Britain track, but it would have meant one more expansion element that’s impossible to use on the base tracks.)

5. SUPER COOL
Some cards sport a new symbol that lets you take a heat card from your discard pile (instead of your hand) and put it back in your engine.
This is a really fun concept, but it’s only deployed on advanced upgrade cards and sponsorship cards. I wish they’d decided to add a basic upgrade with super cool for each car, which would have given even the basic rules a fresh feel. As it stand—and if you, like me, tend to always play Heat with new players and opt for the basic rules—you won’t partake in much of that super cool fun.

6. NEW CAR + MATERIAL
The base game shipped with six cars, with room in its insert for two more. This was surprising to me, because the core of racing games—what we’re all here for—lies in negotiating a track full of opposing vehicles. The venerable Formula D could accommodate 10 players right out of the gate, and apart from Flamme Rouge (from one of the same designers), I can’t remember any racing game that added more vehicles/players as time went on.

The argument could be made that both Flamme Rouge and Heat require “more stuff” (i.e. a deck of cards and a player dashboard) than just a vehicle for each new player, and being prudent with a lower price point so you can gauge interest in your base game before you invest in more material for more players does hold water here.
But once you have a smash hit on your hands, why hold back on the number of cars in your follow-up product? We’re even told this time around that the game was designed and tested with 12 cars, but we’re still just getting one more. (The new tracks reflect that intent with 12 starting spaces, when the four base-game tracks only displayed eight.)

7. CHAMPIONSHIP
We get four new event cards, which we can never have too many of. More championship options is always a good thing.

Other comments, in no particular order:

No update to the Legends deck
I’ve read discussions of production considerations (there are only so many card slots on a print sheet and so on) and I guess that’s a valid argument from a strictly monetary point of view. But the fact remains that if you want to play with seven cars on the track (and why wouldn’t you?) then one of the human players must play orange—because the Legends deck, as printed in the base game, doesn’t take orange into account.

Sure, you can say that whenever green comes up on a Legends card it really means orange, but that’s an unnecessary mental layer I would not expect a game that’s sold oodles of copies to burden me with in an expansion. And if it was too expensive to reprint the Legends deck for just one additional car… then why not a) add more cars in one go, or b) reprint the Legends deck right now to accommodate all 12 cars and be done with it?
No room on the cards? There’s a ton of different formats out there ripe for the picking, but the simplest idea (to steal from the most recent edition of Formula D) would have been to make all 12 cars into six pairs of cars: two yellows (one with a black stripe), two reds (one with a black stripe), and so on. Not only would you be opening the way for a “racing stable” variation in the future, but you’d also be making sure that your original Legends deck will work no matter what: the yellow number moves both yellow cars, the red number moves both red cars, etc.
Right now, racers are wondering how many new cars will need to be in the game (i.e. how many expansion boxes later) before we get an updated Legends deck. Not a great feeling.

Very little content for the basic rules
I’ve mentioned it earlier in this review: Almost every time I get Heat to the table, we have a handful of new players around the track, and it just makes sense to use the basic rules with those people. (And it’s also true for most of the Heat owners around me.) So no garage options, no championships, no sponsorships… (Thought we tend to add Legends and weather as soon as we hit race #2.) This means that most of the time, for us, the expansion comes down to one more car and two more tracks. It’s pretty thin.
As I’ve previously highlighted, nothing in here is backwards compatible – not even the Legends deck – so nothing in the expansion will affect the way you race on the four original tracks if you don’t use the advanced rules. Well, there is a seventh car, and you can always draw those chevrons on your Great Britain track. But it’s not much.

Overall quantity of content
This is debatable, and I won’t get into the whole pricing knife fight. (But yes, I was taken aback at the box’s contents after paying for it.) Even if you consider every item in the expansion, it’s not very much. But beyond that, my main gripe here is that it’s a feeble expansion that probably won’t really change the way you play Heat. My consumer perception—and I don’t seem to be alone in this—is that you’re getting two new tracks and one new car, plus some other bits, most of which are weirdly integrated and not backwards compatible.

For a system where we’re told everything was thought of long in advance, Heavy Rain sure doesn’t feel like it. There are too many instances that make you go, “Well, if they knew they were going in this direction, why did they print it like that?” and furrow your brow about the future (“So I guess all future tracks will either be permanently flooded, or never?”) I mean, what about strong winds or night conditions—are things like that also going to appear on selected tracks only?

As such, I cannot recommend Heavy Rain to my boardgaming friends. It just doesn’t feel like an expansion worthy of that name. Even at half the price, I would still say that Heavy Rain doesn’t feel like an expansion for our beloved Heat.

It just feels like a couple of new tracks.

Components flash review — For the People, 25th Anniversary

Players: 2
Age: 14+
Playtime: 360 min
Complexity: 9.5/10

This American Civil War classic—long considered the final table-top word on the conflict—has been around since 1998, and has seen many a reprint in the intervening decades. I joined the party back in 2015 with GMT’s third edition, but it’s already been 10 years and I haven’t played the game nearly enough in all that time.
So why not pick up the musket once more with a new version of For the People hot off the press for its 25th anniversary?

GMT gave the game a visual overhaul by commissioning a new cover from Donal Hegarty, as well as a new (mounted) map from Terry Leeds. The game also ships in a thicker, 3-inch box which allows the neat freaks out there to sleeve their cards and stow their counters in trays while still enjoying the subtle bliss that comes with a wargame box that closes just right. (You can also order just the new box and map, should you be so inclined.)

The new cover depicts Lincoln before a tattered American flag, in a sombre departure from the original GMT artwork. And while there’s no question that the 25th anniversary edition proposes a modern, war–is-hell kind of vibe, I still have a soft spot in my heart for the old-school appeal of its predecessor.

 

I quite like the new box (and I’ll never say no to more storage) but I’m perplexed at the decision to depict only one side in that conflict. Gone is Jefferson Davis, indeed any allusion to Confederate forces. When I spied Ulysses S. Grant on one of the lateral panels of the new box, I assumed Robert E. Lee was waiting for me on the other side. Nope: turns out it’s Sherman, another Union general.

None of this detracts from the appeal of the new package, mind you; I’m just curious as to the creative decisions behind the work.

I find the new map—now in earthy tones—more functional than the original, with modern trimmings, clearer reminders, and an overall palette that makes units on both sides really pop when strewn across the countryside.

Original map

New map

Units on both maps

Not sure what map you’d favor? Fret no more! The mounted eight-panel board has the original map printed on its sturdy back, for your ambivalent pleasure.

Of course, all known errata have been addressed, and the new version of the full game ships with an updated 2024 rulebook. Completionists might be dismayed at the absence of variant rules and components (published in various issues of C3i Magazine over the years) but they’re not at all necessary: the game itself packs a punch that’ll send you reeling for years, if not decades to come. (I own all of that—including three bonus reminder counters that I picked up at some point—and I have yet to bring that stuff into the game.)

Above all, I’m just happy to see For the People go at it for one more round, fighting for the high ground and a chance to win new wargamer hearts.

That’s what the hobby’s all about.

# # #

Wargame review — Downfall

Axis & Axis & Allies

Designers: Chad Jensen & John Butterfield
Player count: 2
Publisher: GMT Games

When my friend Chad Jensen passed away, he left behind several designs he never had time to complete. One of them was Downfall, a two-player strategic-level wargame that models the collapse of the German war machine in the last act of WWII. There was a lot of potential in that work-in-progress, so veteran designer John Butterfield took up the torch and, with the help of Chad’s widow Kai, completed the design for GMT Games to publish.
(No small feat, considering no rulebook existed: John and Kai reconstructed the game based on detailed prototype components and Kai’s memories of playing Downfall’s many incarnations with Chad.)

Now, if you play any mid- to late-WWII east front game, you’re either at the wheel of the Soviet juggernaut, or you’re handling a retreat of German forces—not the most exciting of propositions. (Which is why east front games often focus on the brutal stalemate of the front line, until it crumbles one way or another. The drive back to Berlin by Soviet forces is like watching an hourglass inexorably counting down time.)
And if you play a similar game covering the western theater of operations, sooner or later—after explosive situations like the Normandy landings—you’ll find yourself either driving the Allied bulldozer, or handling a retreat of German forces. Again, not the thrill of a lifetime for the German player.

What the designers are proposing here is a framework where one player handles the Allies and the Germans fighting the Soviets, while the other player joins in as the Soviets and the Germans fighting the Allies.
While that basic conceit is not exactly new, the game’s many inspired design decisions coalesce into an exciting tug of war between east and west, with a disintegrating Third Reich caught in the middle. 

And the campaign game is underway!

Downfall’s main engine is the initiative track that runs halfway around the huge game map, and which determines who plays next. Each faction (Western, Soviet, and both German groups) is represented there by an initiative marker, with whoever’s currently last on the track getting a go. That faction selects an available order (more on that in a moment) and pays the cost of said order—in initiative points—by moving their marker forward along the track, to the tune of one space per point. Then it’s the turn of the faction that’s now in last place on the initiative track, and so on.

Available orders fluctuate from turn to turn, as markers are drawn at random and laid out on the action track. Whenever a faction picks a marker, they pay the associated cost—which is not the same for all factions—execute the selected order, then slide down the remaining orders (towards space #1) and draw a new order marker at random to fill out the row. The cost of an order (in initiative points) increases by 1 for each eligible marker the active faction skipped over, starting with space #1; so if you really want that Reinforcement order now but it stands behind a handful of other markers in your color, you better be prepared to pay for it—and subsequently wait a while before that faction gets to play again.

All of the order markers will show up on the action track before the end of the game year, but in exactly what order remains to be seen. Maybe your orders to embark for Calais or to march on Moscow will have to wait, and you will need to do the best with what you have in the meantime.
And this is one design quirk (of many!) that will delight some wargamers—myself included—while irking others, depending on whether you think such a mechanic models the vagaries of war or else just feels “too gamey” for something like a wargame.

Orders—once you do get to play them—allow you to move units, conduct attacks on neighboring hexes, bring much needed reinforcements into play, engage in strategic warfare, and generally make life difficult for the other guy. (There’s a nasty little order that, as the Germans, you can use to make the other Germans—the ones facing your main faction—waste precious initiative points. Played at just the right time, that order tastes like honey.)

I want to point out that “moving a unit” is not dictated by an individual piece’s movement allowance (as is traditionally done) but rather by the order marker itself. For instance, one of them will allow Western units to each spend 4 movement points, whether they be mighty armored units glinting in the North African sun, or mud-stained grunts suffering the elements in the Caucasus.

Combat is resolved using a table that compiles step advantage (I’m attacking with 7 steps worth of units while you defend with 4 steps, so I’ll roll on the +3 column), and die-roll modifier advantage (my planes and a card I played grant me a +5, but the weather and your fortress throw a -4 into the mix, and so I’ll end up adding 1 to my roll), with results expressed in hits that must be distributed amongst attacking and defending units.

Those hits are absorbed by rotating a unit so that its top edge displays fewer steps (pips), and in some instances by retreating one or more hexes away from the location where combat took place. You can also decide (or be forced!) to flip one of your armored units back to infantry, which has left more than a few scars on my already troubled soul.

The progression of weather (and, ultimately, game years) works in a fashion similar to initiative markers, with a dice roll moving the weather marker along the initiative track each time a faction begins their turn with the weather marker behind of flush with them. (The 2d6 roll is capped at wherever the leading marker stands on the initiative track, so true runaway weather cannot take place; although beware of sudden bursts, for they do happen.) When the weather marker crosses into a new “weather zone” on the initiative track, fair can turn to mud or mud to snow, which creates logistical problems in strategic locations.

Once the weather marker reaches the end of the track and loops back to the start, a new game turn begins! All used order markers are returned to the mix, new cards are added to their respective decks, possible reinforcements make an appearance and, naturally, the weather wheel gets another crank.

Event cards throw in some uncertainty that will affect the ebb and flow of the entire campaign. Events are present in three places: face up on top of the draw pile (the upcoming event, not yet active), face up as the current event, and face up on top of the discard pile—each showing an actual event, along with variable numbers of card, airplane and die icons. Together, these three face-up event cards determine how many aircraft each faction can deploy to the map (hoping their range will be sufficient to positively affect critical battles) as well as bonus dice-roll modifiers and the influx of action cards.
For their part, action cards allow factions to surprise their opponents with extra steps or modifiers in combat, plus a host of assorted effects that move units in special ways, provide free combat opportunities, cancel a card play (or a dice roll!), allocate reinforcements, launch paratroopers…

The main goal of the game is to score victory points, normally accomplished through the capture of strategic objectives on the map. At game end, after a set number of turns, whoever has the most points wins—Western or Soviet. (Germany cannot win.) It can’t hurt to take Berlin, mind you, since that achievement, worth 1 VP, also doubles as the first tiebreaker. (The second tiebreaker grants victory to the player who holds the most action cards; and yes, one of my games ended with my being the lucky beneficiary of this rule, which my partner and I learned together while digging through the rulebook, looking for salvation.)

WAR PRODUCTION

Downfall comes in a slim and sturdy box that’s deep enough to accommodate a counter tray and all of the game’s 110 cards in sleeves. That’s with the two paper maps that make up the game board, and which you’ll be fine with if you have enough yardage of Plexiglass at your disposal, or if you resort to sticking the two halves together. (Post-Its on the back side can work surprisingly well.)
Should you be so inclined, you can purchase a pair of mounted maps that come with their own 3-inch box. They’ll take some time to lie flat, but once they do, you’ll be cooking with gas.

The rest of the equipment is pretty straightforward: a myriad of counters (with beautiful rounded corners), useful player aid cards, handy setup cards, a rulebook and a handful of six-siders.

It’s all the game needs to blow you away.

RULES OF ENGAGEMENT

The rulebook clocks in at 40 pages, with plenty of illustrated examples throughout. It’s a pleasant document to read and acts as an effective learning tool—even away from the map—but stumbles a bit when it comes to looking up specific topics in the heat of battle. Some pieces of information are not found where you think they should be (such as the initiative cost for the Re-seed order) but it mostly comes down to a fledgling index that’s missing some key terms like “reinforcements.”

Nevertheless, it’s a very good rulebook you’ll rapidly find yourself using less and less, thanks to rules that have been streamlined like a bullet train. The game presents very few special cases, shifting to a different system instead of trying to stick round exceptions into square holes. It simplifies all it can without losing its grip on the essence of each situation, like the way terrain costs are handled: moving into clear terrain costs 1 movement point, while everything else costs 2, for all units. Sure, weather will play havoc with swamps and mountains, and you’ll bless rail lines when you can use them, but you’ll take one look at the terrain chart and be done with it.
Naval and aerial rules have also been boiled down to essentials, which doesn’t mean they have a marginal impact on the business at hand. On the contrary, they influence everything under the sun, and in different ways as the game soldiers forward (as they should). But those rules don’t get bogged down in minutiae and as a result fade into the background after a few turns.

For all those details you fear you might forget (What happens exactly when a new turn begins? How does mud weather meddle with combat again?), the game’s various player aid materials have your back. I hardly ever look at the rulebook anymore, except perhaps to look up an obscure tie breaker when the game is insanely tight.

FUN FACTOR

The only point that makes people shriek when I tell them about Downfall is the length of the game. Fair enough: 12 hours for the campaign game is a far cry from the two-hour Combat Commander sessions most Jensen fans will be accustomed to. (Hell, even the “short” game in Downfall, the Overlord scenario, will require at least six hours of your time.)
But the key thing here is not to confuse long with slow.

No matter which of the three scenarios you decide to tackle, you’ll never experience downtime. At all. Even when your “main” faction has relatively few things to do—like the Western faction at the start of the campaign game—you’ll still have your hands full trying to contain the opponent’s attack using your allotment of German forces. You’ll keep an eye on the cycling events that’ll impact many of your endeavors, trying to put in place the conditions that will trigger the replacement of card A with card B in the stack (the surrender of Italy, for instance) and keep History moving forward. You’ll track your opponent’s expenditure of initiative points, because that’ll determine when’s the next time they get to act. And you’ll watch that weather forecast like a hawk, lest unforeseen snow derail the crucial counterattack you spent your last few moves setting into motion.

My most recent game, an Overlord confrontation, lasted seven hours (which, considering my opponent had never played the game before, was surprisingly fast). When all was said and done, we both felt like we’d been sitting at the gaming table for two and a half hours—three on the outside. The game is that fascinating. And if Life hadn’t decided that we had other matters to attend to, we might have set up the damn thing anew and started again right there and then.

PARTING SHOTS

As much as there is to love in Downfall, my biggest infatuation lies in the uncertainty that permeates most systems. The game goes beyond dice-based combat resolution (a wargame staple) to ensure that while you may elaborate meticulous plans, you can’t know for certain how or when things will start to unfold.
I’ve already talked about order counters, and how all orders for each faction will eventually land on the action track but still keep details that pertain to timing and quantities shrouded in relative mystery. Likewise, weather likes to keep to itself: you know what the weather will turn to when it does change, but can’t be sure of when that will be. (Educated guesses are your best friends here.)
Reinforcements are not handed down with each new game year: they move into a holding pattern from which only one event—High Command—will free them. But when, exactly, will that event pop up? You’ll see it one turn early (when it’s revealed, face up, on top of the event draw pile), but that’s all the advance warning you’ll get.
The same can be said of every single event in the game, or indeed of the event trigger itself, which comes into play when a faction’s initiative counter reaches its own event space on the initiative track. So while you exert some measure of control over the timing of events, the balance is left in the hands of your opponent. Also, all events come from a single deck, which makes it difficult to know whether the event you're about to reveal will help you or not. (But remember, you have until the next event trigger until this newly revealed event becomes active.)

Still, is the game length a deterrent? It could be, but not if you can spare a long day to get through a scenario, or if you have access to an out-of-the-way table where the game can idle like the engine of a T-34 running low on diesel, between sessions sprinkled over a couple of weeks.

I myself am not a fan of long-winded, overly heavy wargames. I often see guys playing one such game at some convention, where they spend the morning setting everything up and, upon being asked where things stand at the end of Day 1, reply something along the lines of “Oh, we’re just getting started, you know, our units haven’t met on the battlefield yet.” Rest assured this is definitely not the way Downfall unspools. Every scenario—yes, even the campaign one—launches both players right into the action and never slows down. Remember that Overlord game I mentioned above? The conclusion to our game day (at the tail end of a seven-hour stretch) was so electrifying that we played our last few turns standing up.

Everything in the game moves like a well oiled clock, with systems engaging each other the way precision-made cogs mesh together. The game flow is so engrossing that at some point I mentally took a step back just to watch the machine in action, and I couldn’t help but break into a smile.

In point of fact, I’m still smiling.

 

# # #

 

 

A Year of Boardgaming, 2023 Edition

 

One more year to look at in the rearview mirror, and kind of a change in how I see boardgaming—in that I decided to include online plays going forward. 

Why the change, when I was pigheadedly against it in my previous yearly reports? The pandemic made me realize there were friends out there with whom I'd only get to play boardgames online (essentially on Board Game Arena). And I thought that, when all was said and done, those interactions should count.

Of course, I also happened to be playing online boardgames with players I did see in person on a regular basis, what with someone launching a game of, say, Great Western Trail and each of us playing a turn or two each day. (Only to launch another one as a matter of fact, when that first game wrapped up, and so on.)

The net result was an uptick in games played, but I knew I was looking at an artificial inflation: I hadn't spent all of that time sitting down face-to-face with family and friends to push cubes around and slap cards on the table.

So I decided to do the only thing I could: split the main stats in two categories.

GAMES

I played 145 different titles (up from 127 in 2022) for a total of 602 plays (better than the previous 380, although a third of the 602 plays were online). I spent 588 hours playing boardgames in 2023, versus 430 hours in 2022, which is quite an improvement, virtual or otherwise: that's 24.5 full days devoted to boardgaming bliss.

Out of those 145 titles, 68 were new to me (slightly up from 62 in 2022), and I ended up playing 15% of my collection (against 17% last year).

Here are the 10 physical games I played the most in 2023:

1. Heat: Pedal to the Metal (27 plays)

F1 racing in its most distilled form, and an absolute thrill. The first expansion (More tracks! More cars!) is coming out in February, and it'll be a great birthday present to myself.

2. Friday (26 plays)

One of the few Friedemann Friese games I truly enjoy, Friday is always good for a fun, short time battling the elements and trying to survive just one more year. Twice I've given away my own copy now: time to order a third one!

3. Arkham Horror: The Card Game (21 plays)

The last two campaigns published for this delicious nightmare were of dubious quality, and so I went back to explore the early volumes anew. I'll still give the next cycle a shot, but if it's as bad as its two predecessors, I'll stop buying new material for the game and just replay what I already own.

4. Combat Commander: Europe (20 plays)

I can't stay away from this tactical take on WWII for long, and it always shows in these end-of-year reckonings. In 2024 I'll have an exciting reason to spend even more time on this gem of a game—more on that soon.

5. Qawale (20 plays)

Despite my undying love of abstract games, they rarely make an appearance in here. Qawale broke the mold in 2023, and for good reason: it's quick, very clever, and offers the most refreshing twist on the old "four in a row" trope since GIPF.

6. Attack Sub (14 plays)

Fast and furious game of Cold War submarine warfare, to which we've made a couple of tweaks to lift it out of its '90s origins and bring it (a little more) into the 21st century. Great closer after a long evening.

7. Sky Team (12 plays)

Considering this brilliant cooperative game—about landing a passenger plane at airports around the world—unfolds in just 15 minutes, it's a real shame I didn't play more of it last year. I promise to do better in 2024.

8. Wing Leader (11 plays)

Still working our way through WWII using this astounding aircraft warfare system, playing scenarios in chronological order; we're coming up on April 1941, with Operation Retribution in Belgrade. All of our aircraft are now equipped with radios, at last!

9. Charioteer (11 plays)

A Roman-themed racing game that's always a blast, and for which I've put together a set of solo rules. Never again play without a full complement of chariots on the track!

10. The Search for Planet X (11 plays)

I really enjoy deduction games but it took me a while to discover this one. Scan the skies and determine where everything is! Great, original stuff.

And these are the 10 virtual boardgames I played the most in 2023.

(These games are here mainly because they're easy to play through online means, so I'll just stick to a dry list.)

1. Memoir '44 (43 plays)

2. Great Western Trail (25 plays)

3. Applejack (24 plays)

4. Qawale (15 plays) 

5. Sky Team (14 plays)

6. Patchwork (10 plays)

7. Viticulture (7 plays)

8. Heat: Pedal to the Metal (7 plays) 

9. P.I. (6 plays)

10. Azul (5 plays)

PEOPLE

During 2023, I explored the boardgaming world alongside 51 different players, up from 28 the year before. Much better! But also, not all in person; win some, lose some.

Here are the 10 people with whom I played the most face-to-face last year:

1. Jean-Luc S. (140 plays)

2. Suzie D. (88 plays)

3. François P. (39 plays)

4. Héloïse K.L. (25 plays)

5. Gustavo R.A. (21 plays)

6. Serge R. (15 plays)

7. Ophélie K.L. (8 plays)

8. Robert L. (6 plays)

9. William L. (6 plays)

10. Dominick L. (6 plays) 

Here are ALL the people with whom I played the most online last year:

1. Fil M. (76 plays)

2. François P. (65 plays)

3. Jean-Luc S. (53 plays)

4. Héloïse K.L. (12 plays)

5. Gustavo R.A. (9 plays)

6. Béatrice V.K. (7 plays)

7. Angelo W. (1 play)

8. Niko S. (1 play)

The GF lost her crown in 2023, and by a wide margin. Will she try to win it back in 2024? We (really meaning *I*) can only hope.

All four kids are on the list(s) again, including Béatrice who's overseas. Hell, even my dad is making an appearance this time around! I'm a lucky man.

LOCATIONS

The number of different places where I played boardgames rose to 17, from a mere 11 in 2022—almost back to pre-pandemic numbers. 

43% of my gaming was done at home (compared to 60% in 2022), 32% online, while the rest was scattered all over the neighborhood.

OTHER MUSINGS & RAMBLINGS

My H-index went up, from 8 to 11. Not a mammoth improvement, but I'll take it.

(In this context, my H-index is the number (h) of games which I've played a number (h) of times. So 11 means there are 11 games that I played 11 times each in 2023.)

My self-imposed challenges didn't go great, but I still managed to accomplish the following two:

• Play 5 games 20 times each (the 5x20 challenge)
• Log in 90 wargame plays (I'm jacking this one up to 100 for 2024)

These three ended up in the gutter, though:

• Alphabet challenge (play one game for each letter of the alphabet—so Attack Sub for A, Black Fleet for B, and so on)
  I didn't make any effort to complete it but rather watched if "the thing would happen." It didn't, and I'll be happy to drop this particular challenge going forward.
• Log in 50 abstract game sessions
  I racked up 48 of them and I could just have thrown in two quick things, such as the aforementioned Qawale. I'm an idiot.
• 12 x 1 Named Games Challenge
  This is where you basically list 12 games that you would like to play in the coming year and, well, you try to get there. I failed. (Only 7 out of 12.)

My very first game of 2023 was a play of the short-but-tense Twilight Struggle: Red Sea with the GF, and I closed out the year with a fun play of No Thanks! that involved my dad. No complaints here.

Out of the games I was looking forward to in 2023, Oranienburger Kanal, Atiwa and Great Western Trail: New Zealand all ended up on my Top 10 list. I never did try Undaunted: Battle of Britain and I don't feel any urgent need to do so: I'm not getting great feedback from friends and acquaintances. 

Still no trace of Dutch Resistance; perhaps 2024 will finally make that one a reality. Skyrise is also supposed to show up this year, and that'll be a fun one to dive into. And dare we hope for I, Napoleon? 

But enough of maybes.

GMT's Downfall is already set up in the war room and should see some action before long, with The Plum Island Horror not far behind. I'm also very keen on trying my hand at Evacuation by Vladimir Suchy, whose Messina 1347 left quite an impression on me. Next fall will also give us MATRX GIPF, the conclusion to the seminal GIPF Project—and let me tell you that designer Kris Burm didn't keep the easiest one for last.

What are you waiting for? Get boardgaming!

 

# # #