Kris Hall: Chris Janiec and PQ-17

This week I am interviewing Chris Janiec about his naval wargame PQ-17 which is on GMT Games pre-order list.  PQ-17 is not a card-driven wargame, but a block game which simulates the Allies efforts to supply the Soviet Union during World War II with convoys in artic waters, and the attempts of the German Navy to sink the Allied ships.

Kris: What drew you to the subject of arctic convoy warfare, as opposed to, say, the U-Boat war in general?

Chris: Originally I started out trying to devise a naval system that would be compatible with Columbia Game’s East Front system, with named capital ships and groups of smaller ships.  I soon realized that wasn’t practical, but that the nascent system might make a good stand-alone game with a more desirable level of detail.  I chose the arctic for the initial tests because of the lesser unit density in that theater, and stuck with it because it “stressed” the design the most with its distances and environment.

Actually, neither PQ-17 nor the system as a whole centers on convoy warfare per se.  This is a game of operational naval-air warfare, and while operations focus on objectives, protecting and interdicting convoys are only two of several potential objectives (though certainly the most common one in the arctic).  Transfer, strike (air or naval bombardment), and minelaying are other missions in the game.

Kris: In the game, the Allied player typically tries to speed convoys from the west to eastern Soviet ports.  The German player tries to intercept and attack the convoys.  But I’ve got a feeling a lot more is going on than what I’ve just mentioned.  Describe the situation facing each player. 

Chris: I’d hesitate to use the term “speed,” since the convoys’ rate of advance during most of the period covered was only 8 knots, but you’re fundamentally correct.  In most scenarios, the Allies are trying to pass a loaded convoy to North Russia, while more or less simultaneously returning a convoy of previous runs’ survivors to the west.

The Allied player must protect these convoys from a three-dimensional threat (air, surface, and submarine) with destroyers that can’t make it all the way to Russia without refueling, so has to work up a plan to do so (a little like the process of coordinating German raids in GMT’s The Burning Blue).  The Axis player has to decide whether to try and use his limited resources to attack the loaded convoy, the westbound convoy, or both, while coping with his own fuel restrictions.  And there’s a fair chance he will also be running a coastal convoy of his own to resupply the German army on the Murmansk front.

At the start of every operation, each player also secretly draws a Special Condition chit, which may add more resources or assign an additional mission.  Both players must beware the possibility of their greatest fear coming to pass: an Allied attack on Norway or a breakout into the Atlantic by German surface raiders.  Other additional missions which both players may have to devote resources to accomplish or counter include reinforcement of the Allied garrison on Spitzbergen, Axis minelaying along the Soviet coast, or raids on Spitzbergen or the Arctic Sea Route in the Kara Sea.

Players must always cope with the vagaries of the ice and weather conditions, which often make it difficult to locate and attack the enemy, refuel at sea, or even rendezvous with their own units, and may even damage ships directly.

Kris: The game features hidden movement (using blocks) and an all-important reconnaissance system as players grope to find the enemy.  Can you tell me a little about that aspect of the game?

Chris: The actual ship counters making up the forces are kept off-map on players’ Force Displays.  Each force is represented on the map by a single block, either a task force, a convoy, or a wolfpack.  Each force block has numbers 0 through 3 around the perimeter, corresponding to its Identification Level (ID – the accuracy of the enemy player’s information on that force’s position and composition).  There are also dummy forces for deception purposes.  Blocks stand on edge on the map until they are located, when dummies are removed and actual forces are tipped face-up and oriented to indicate their current ID.

Players have several means of locating enemy forces, including their own forces and several areas marked on the map in which a varying number of hexes may be searched depending on the scenario.  Most air reconnaissance is abstracted into these Air Radii and Sectors to decrease the counter density, but players also have a few reconnaissance-capable air units such as PBY Catalinas, Focke-Wulf 200 Kondors, and carrier-based torpedo bombers.  Random events such as HFDF (high-frequency direction-finding) or Ultra may also reveal selected enemy forces.

Note that dummies provide two levels of uncertainty in the game.  They allow for tactical “fog of war” (“is the convoy in this hex or that one?”), but clever players will also exploit the possibilities for strategic deception offered by the Special Conditions (“is that block a force preparing an air strike on Narvik or a dummy?”).

Kris: And what happens when forces make contact?  Tell us about the combat system.

Chris: Because this is an operational game, combat is fairly abstract and meant to be resolved relatively quickly.

Air units are either one or two steps (front and back), and roll one die per step in each combat segment.  Units exchange fire in air-to-air combat, after which flak fires, potentially resulting in Aborted (returned to base), Damaged (removed from the game with no VP award), or Destroyed air steps (removed from the game with VPs for medium and heavy bombers).  Surviving bombers then attack ships or airfields with bombs or torpedoes.

In submarine combat, one dice roll first determines the order in which the sub(s) and antisubmarine (ASW) forces attack.  ASW rolls may result in Destroyed, Damaged, or Held Down subs, the latter indicating those subs are prevented from attacking in that battle.  Subs roll one die for each Combat Strength factor (usually representing one sub in PQ-17) to see if their torpedoes hit.  The results of torpedo hits are rolled on a separate table, and may result in sinking the target outright or destroying a varying number of Combat Strength points on larger targets.

Surface combat is a little more complex and is resolved on a simple Battle Display.  In each round, players decide whether each ship unit will close for torpedo attacks, screen other friendly units, attempt to withdraw, or simply engage in a gunnery duel.  Ship units roll a number of dice equal to their Combat Strength for gunnery, referring to a table comparing the firing and target types to determine hits.  Each ship has its own torpedo factor, with torpedo attacks resolved in the same two-step process as for subs.  Other forces in the same hex may attempt to join the combat each round, but there are seldom more than three rounds or so.

Kris:  What are the cards in the game used for?

Chris: When a hex is searched, the searching player draws a card for each enemy block in the hex.  Cross-indexing the type of search (air, naval, or both) with the prevailing weather will indicate if that block is located and, if so, its new ID.  Because the searching player only shows the card if the search is successful, players need not reveal if a “searching” force is actually a dummy.

Kris: What is the complexity level of the game? 

Chris: I rate PQ-17 as 4 on GMT’s scale of 1-10.  It’s about the same as the intermediate version of Avalon Hill’s 1979 edition of Bismarck, but with simpler surface combat.

Kris: I understand that the game will come with several scenarios, and a campaign game.  How long will scenarios take to play?  How long for the campaign game? 

Chris: Each scenario is a single operation lasting up to 30 turns, but usually 20-50% less.  The smaller scenarios take 3 to 3.5 hours or so (less with experience), while the larger ones require an additional hour.

The campaign starts in March 1942, and the players decide in which month it will end (up to January 1943).  Each month has two Fortnights, each of which may have an operation.  But players bid to see who has the initiative each Fortnight, and if both bid “0,” no operation takes place.  So the players have a lot of control over how long the campaign lasts, theoretically anywhere from 1 to 22 operations (but really nowhere near the latter).

Kris: What can you tell us about the variety of scenarios?

Chris: All the major historical battles are presented, including PQ-17, the Battle of the Barents Sea, and the Battle of North Cape.  Most scenarios are set in 1942 and require the Allies to move one convoy each direction, although one scenario has no westbound convoy.  There is also a scenario in which each player tries to get a crippled cruiser back to repair facilities, and there is one “randomly-generated” scenario.

The arctic environment provides one main variable.  Scenarios in high summer when 24-hour daylight prevails play much differently from those in the dead of winter when the sun never rises in the Barents Sea.  The weather (based on actual historical data provided by the British, Norwegian, and Icelandic governments) also varies from month to month, and has a critical impact on players’ ability to locate and attack their foes.  And the seasonal movement of the polar ice pack changes the playing field, with much greater scope for maneuver in September than at its greatest extent in March.

The forces available to the players also change from one scenario to the next, particularly for the Axis.  Both players have much less to work with in PQ-6 (December 1941) than in the climactic battle for PQ-18 in September 1942.  Within each scenario. Special Conditions and random events may provide additional forces.  And other Special Conditions can dramatically change the focus of a scenario as already described.

Additional “bonus” scenarios have already been designed, at least one of which will not be a convoy scenario.  I’ve also done preliminary work on a scenario of the 1940 invasion of Norway that will require a half-sheet of additional ship counters.

Kris: What was the biggest difficulty you had designing the game?  What are you most proud of in the design?

Chris: The toughest design problem was streamlining the reconnaissance system into something smoothly playable.  I started with d20 die rolls and a list of over a dozen modifiers to try and account for all the relevant factors, and it was way too tedious.  The next step was separate tables for Allied and Axis rolls, but it still took too long to work through an average turn.  Using cards finally simplified the mechanics and accelerated play to the desired degree, and really makes the game “work.”

My favorite aspect, though, is the fuel mechanism.  I’ve pondered the issue of fuel consumption in operational naval games for a long time, and believe this system is the best compromise yet between playability and forcing players to deal with the consequences of limited endurance.  The key was recognizing that destroyer bunkerage was the real limiting factor in WWII, and that it was close enough to the same across all the classes in the theater to treat it simply.  So the game doesn’t track fuel for individual ships or units on a roster or with markers on their counters.  Instead, each convoy and task force block in the game has one “Fuel Warning” marker that is placed 12 turns (6 days) ahead on the turn track on its Force Display when that force leaves port or finishes refueling at sea.  Most of the time its marker won’t move, though moving at high speed, engaging in surface combat, or suffering an air attack cost one or more turns of fuel and shift the marker accordingly.  At the end of every turn, players check to see if the turn marker is in the same space as any Fuel Warning markers.  If so, those forces are Low Fuel and may no longer move at high speed, and their markers are shifted three spaces (36 hours) ahead on the turn track and flipped to their “Fuel Danger” sides.  If the turn marker ever gets to that point, those forces are at Critical Fuel, limited to slow speed and suffering penalties in combat.  Players can thus tell with a glance at their turn tracks the status of all their forces and when they’ll be in trouble, without any need for extra markers or bookkeeping. 

Kris:  When is GMT likely to publish PQ-17?

Chris: You’ll have to ask the principals at GMT that question, but I’m optimistic for the Summer 2008 convention season.  Hopefully some of your readers will like what they’ve read here enough to preorder, which will speed the process!

Kris:  PQ-17 is meant to be the first game in a series.  What future naval games would you like to work on?

Chris: I’ve already done a fair amount of research on the scenarios for the next stand-alone volume, which will be set in the Mediterranean.  Since the system was designed from the outset to apply to all theaters of WWII, very little will be required in the way of additional rules beyond what’s in PQ-17.

At least one other stand-alone game (on the Solomons) should follow, and scenario modules are a definite possibility.

Kris: Thanks for the interview.

You can find an even more grognard-friendly discussion of PQ-17 between Chris Janiec and Pete Gade on The Wargamer (www.wargamer.com).

Comments: