Up Front facing a bad RNC check it appears

BoardgameGeek thread reports that some additional legal issues (not related to Up Front, itself) have cropped up that are putting the project at risk.

The thread is here but the gist of the situation is that someone who loaned money to Valley Games has sued for repayment and has gotten a judge to agree to attach the assets of Radiant games claiming that VG transferred its assets to Radiant merely to avoid having to legitimately repay him.

Naturally, as a legal matter it's pretty messy and there's no way for me to judge either the merits of the respective arguments or the likely outcome. It's bad news because I had gone ahead and pledged the Kickstarter ... and it will be disappointing to lose the money if it ends up not happening. I guess my existing copies of Up Front may retain their collector's value a bit longer.

I had to say, I did have my doubts as to whether I should do the UF Kickstarter because the legal issues were floating around out there. I finally decided to take the plunge because the Rewards were so good -- but  Kickstarter makes sure to emphasize that there are no guarantees.

I've backed three other KS projects. Two are with pretty well-established outfits -- Columbia Games and Steve Jackson Games and I'm not too worried about them coming through. The third is The Guns of Gettysburg which is from an outfit I have less familiarity with -- Mercury Games, but no storm clouds have been noted. In related news, Bowen Simmons health issues seem to have forced him to discontinue filling orders for Napoleon's Triumph, which is a pity. Hopefully he will get better soon. If I hadn't gotten laid off getting a  second copy of NT was on my to-do list. Hopefully there will still be  a chance to do that in the future.

Up Front reprint?

Valley Games says so.

If so, this very interesting and exciting news and a good example of never say never

There's no coroner to pronounce it, but it seems to me Up Front is well and truly "dead>"

This update from MMP seems to make it certain that there will never be a reprint of Up Front.

I don't know what the legal issues are about the ownership of the game that are causing the problem and it doesn't seem that we'll ever find out because those that know will not or cannot talk about it. But it seems clear that whatever they are, they are intractable, and therefore I see little prospect that they'll ever be solved. It seems unlikely that it involves someone saying "no" and most instead I suspect that they just can't figure out who can say "yes."

Given that MMP apparently sunk considerable resources into the project the fact that they're calling it off now is a major blow. It truly is a pity, because Up Front is a fine game and ground-breaking one. Being a card game means that it's especially subject to wear and tear. I'm glad I bought an extra set of cards back when Avalon Hill was still around because I was concerned about that.

Avalon Hill was a small company and there were a number of instances over the years when they got into some legal disputes over game rights and they never seemed to come out on the winning end even when they seemed to be in the right. I can't help but wonder if they simply couldn't afford the kind of legal help they needed. Intellectual property law is notoriously complicated and I think that Hasbro probably inherited a mess when they bough AH. They've seemed more than willing to license wargames to MMP and let the rights to other games revert to designers in other cases as is demonstrated by the fairly long list of former AH games that have reappeared elsewhere. I don't think Up Front is some especially valuable property from the standpoint of Hasbro. so it's probable that the rights in question are simply too scrambled to untangle.

So what is a wargame, anyway? War(card)games muddy the waters

Every few weeks there's a vigorous -- and sometimes vehement -- debate on Boardgame Geek about the proper definition of a "wargame." Or perhaps more on point, which games should be considered wargames and which ones should not.

There are lax definitions that would include almost anything that has a warlike theme and strict definitions that would exclude anything that doesn't include a rick of the player getting shell shock.

Most definitions are someplace in the middle, of course, but there;s still a wide range of legitimate difference of opinion over how "realistic" or "authentic" a game needs to be in order to be called a wargame. Most of the time the debate revolves around where to draw the line on a continuum of maneuver-oriented games that range from very simple military-themed games such as Stratego or Risk to highly detailed simulations such as Harpoon4 or Advanced Squad Leader. The line seems to be resting somewhere in the vicinity of Memoir '44 or Axis & Allies, which strike some people as too much game to be considered wargames and by others to be too much war not to be considered wargames.

Muddying the waters considerably are wargame-like card games such as Up Front or the Down In Flames series.

On the one hand they're clearly games geared to appeal to wargamers, with considerable detail, numerous intricate rules that reflect real-life considerations, manufactured by wargame publishers and marketed to wargamers. If wargames are "whatever wargamers play" then they certainly qualify as wargames.

On the other hand, as card games (and not card-drive wargames, which still revolve maneuvering on a board) they are necessarily highly abstract. The problems of hand management, deck management and the interactions between cards, players and rules are entertaining, but don't bear much resemblance to the actual activities and decisions of submarine commanders (Attack Sub), sergeants (Up Front), pilots (Down in Flames), generals (Lightning: D-Day) or admirals (Lightning" Midway). They are not simulations.

My inclination is to consider most of them as wargames, but I'll admit that I'm not sure I could come up with a hard and fast rule that would categorise them. I've posted a Geeklist on Boardgame Geek to solicit some opinions on the matter.

Real tactics vs. game tactics

One of the peculiar traits of tactical wargames is that they often feature excruiating detail and reward careful play and the intricate integration of units and procedures. An obvious example is Advanced Squad Leader, but even a much simpler game like Tide of Iron or Axis & Allies Miniatures will lead players to ponder fairly involved tactical combinations. It may be important exactly what order certain attacks are conducted or the precise path some unit takes.

All well and good, from a game play standpoint, although it strikes me as rather odd in other ways, especially the contrast with real-world tactics.

Actual battle tactics are usually kept extremely simple, for the very good reason that, paraphrasing v. Clausewitz, in war even simple things are very difficult. In the fear, confusion and fog of battle there's no room for intricate procedures or multi-step tactical evolutions. It's said that the US Army in World War II had just one tactic, the flanking attack. And it was good enough to work from squad level to army level and from Normany to across the Rhine.

I think many tactical wargames overemphasize these intricate maneuvers. It's one of the reasons that I think the classic card game Up Front! may be a more realistic tactical wargame than any hex-and-counter treatment. In Up Front! the maneuvering is very basic and even the intricate parts are heavily masked by the random elements introduced by card play.

There are some advantages to being older

It means that I have some hard-to-find but sought-after games simply because I was around when they first came out!

Probably the best example of that is the Holy Grail of wargames, Up Front! This card came has a well-deserved reputation for being an excellent game (although with tough rules) and it can be hard to come by in good condition without paying a lot. And it's becoming pretty likely that it will never again reappear, at least not in its current form. Even tougher to find are its expansions.

Another classic and beloved old Avalon Hill game that will never be reprinted in the same form is Dune. I also have the expansions for that game. This is one of the best multiplayer games out there, as well as one of the best realizations of a novel in game form.

In the case of Up Front!, the original artwork has been lost. So even though Multi-man Publishing has the rights (at last report) for a reprint, a new edition will require the same work as a new game. That project appears to have stalled however, so it seems likely that all the copies of Up Front that will ever be have are already out there.

For Dune there are plans for a reprint by Fantasy Flight Games, but it will have to be rethemed because FFG got the rights to the game system, but not the Dune license. Reportedly the theme will be set in FFG's Twilight Imperium universe. This may work just fine, but it will by definition NOT be Dune.

Ambush! is another system that I got in on the ground floor when it first came out. While copies of Ambush! are still available on eBay for reasonable prices, the expansions can be hard to find cheaply. This is a problem because, as a solitaire game, you need fresh missions for replayability.

I wasn't thinking about the long-term availability of those game system back in the day, but I do consider that now when making purchases. For example, I made certain to pick up an extra copy of Simmons Games' Bonaparte at Marengo because I suspected it would become a hard-to-find game. Simmons has since confirmed that there will be no reprint for that game.

The kind of game that's most likely to become rare are unusual designs from small publishers or those dependent on a license, as well as expansions. If you really like a game it seems worthwhile to make the effort to keep up with a series in near real time, because there is no guarantee you'll be able to get it later.

I'm a Stuart tank fan

I've been a fan of the Stuart tank ever since I was little.

I'll admit it's an odd choice. It's not a sexy tank like a Panther or King Tiger. It's not a real effective tank like a T-34 or Sherman. It's not a historically significant tank like an FT-17 or T-55. It's not even a really awful but colorful tank like an M13 or Type 93.

But it was the first tank I remember seeing myself, in the steel, as a child. There was one poised in the middle of a square near a shopping center my mother liked to frequent. It was a war memorial. There were a lot of those scattered about the New Bedford area in the years after the Second World War. Later I became aware of a couple Sherman tanks, a few 57mm anti-tank guns, a German PaK 40 ATG and some .30 cal machine guns, but the Stuart was first.

I asked my mom what it was and she told me it was a "World War I" tank. Later, when I was a little older and started reading I quickly discovered she was mistaken and it was a World War II tank. As a matter of fact, it was an M3A1 tank.

Folks interested in a detailed recounting of the Stuart's stats and service history can check it out here: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Stuart_tank

My reading revealed it was a tank that wasn't altogether successful, so I developed a little bit of an underdog's fondness for the little tank.

And darn if it didn't keep showing up. One of my favorite comics was The Haunted Tank, which featured the ghost of Jeb Stuart watching over the crew of an M3 Stuart tank as it battled through North Africa and Europe against the Nazis. The little haunted Stuart even took on an beat some Tiger I Tanks (with some ghostly help).

The tank also showed up in a memorable Twilight Zone episode about some National Guardsmen who end up going back in time to fight at The Little Big Horn (although without tank, unfortunately).

It's even Tank Girl's tank!

When I became a wargamer I started playing with Stuarts whenever I got the chance. They were usually pretty easy to have back in those days. Everybody wanted Panthers and Tigers anyway. Actually, if you wanted to play with any other kind of tank (T-34s, Shermans, Matildas, etc.) you'd probably get your chance. I remember seeing some pretty improbable arrays of King Tigers and Panthers on some miniatures battlefields.

Stuarts showed up occasionally in board wargames, too. They were actually pretty decent in Avalon Hill's Tobruk game. It was a good early 1942 tank, about equal to a Pz III or Crusader.
Still, by the time the U.S. troops got to use it against the Germans in late 1942 it was obsolete and therefore Stuarts in most wargames don't leave a very good impression. Their primary use and usefulness -- recon -- doesn't usually play a big role in board wargames so Stuarts tend to be under-represented.

The little tank gotten a more respect lately, I think. It's showed up three separate times in the Axis & Allies miniatures game (twice British and once U.S.), each time sporting the "All Guns Blazing" special ability allowing it an extra shot against soldiers. It's got high speed and decent stats for a 15-point piece making it a reasonable build selection.

Anytime it appears in a Pacific War setting it tends to be useful. It's at least as good as any of the Japanese tanks it's likely to face and its anti-infantry ability is actually better than a Sherman in some ways. In games as diverse as Echelons of Fury- Pacific, Up Front!, Matanikau and Advanced Squad Leader it can be a big help against Japanese troops. In ASL, especially, that 37mm canister round can be deadly.

It might not be powerful or sexy, but the Stuart still played an important role in America's fight against the Axis. It succored the British in the desert when they needed large numbers of a decent, reliable tank to hold back Rommel and aided the Soviets, too, when they needed quantity and reliability. Stuarts freed up Shermans from scouting and screening roles and provided the chassis for a lot of supporting vehicles such as howitzer carriers, recovery vehicles and recon scouts.

After the war it soldiered on in a lot of smaller, third-world armies where its simplicity, ruggedness and reliability were appreciated.

And it helped spark at least one little boy in Massachusetts to study history, serve in the military and discover a life-long hobby.

Up Front, Quarter-century retrospective

Up Front appeared 25 years ago in 1983.
It's one of the most innovative wargames ever done and has a large and devoted following.
It ranks very highly in both the general ratings on BoardgameGeek (43) and the wargame-specific (49) rankings.
But for such a well-respected and popular game, it's had surprisingly little impact on the wargame hobby as a whole.
It's still played quite a bit, especially for a 25-year-old wargame, (6 playes reported this month on BGG) which is a testimony to how satisfying a game experience it is. Still, it's also clearly game from a different era.
The style these days is for games that ruthlessly concentrate on the key elements of the design and keep extraneous elements to a minimum.
Now historical wargames have some limits in this regard, because real-life is not very tidy and it's hard to focus on just some elements of war without making the game too bland.
Like many 1980s wargames the essential game structure in Up Front is not overly complicated and it's not too hard to teach the basics of the game to someone. But like many wargames from its era the rules are pretty dense. This is because, typically for wargames, about 90 percent of the rules are devoted to parts of the game that come up less than 10 percent of the time.
Despite the 80s-style game approach there's a lot of support for a reprint, although chances for that ever happening seem to be slim. Multi-man Publishing holds the rights to the game from Hasbro, but there's been little progress reported for years on a planned reprint. A straight reprint is out of the question as it seems almost certain that none of the original artwork survives.
Given that new artwork will be required, it makes sense to update the game and streamline the rules. This is apparently where the rub comes in, because the design effort to do that seems to have hit a stone wall. There's no reports that anyone is currently working on the project now.
Yet the fact that Up Front is stalled wouldn't necessarily stop anyone else from doing an Up Front-style game on the same or a different topic. The game is copyrighted but the idea is not.
The are many hex-and-counter wargames but different publishers. card-driven wargames are appearing left and right. Even the long exclusivity that Columbia Games enjoyed with block games has come to an end as other publishers come up with their own variations on the idea.
But with the lone exception of the vaguely similar Attack Sub, no one has tried to do another card-wargame with a system like Up Front. The closest have been the Lightning series and the Down in Flames series, although I think they're still pretty far removed.
Given that Up Front doesn't seem to be coming back, perhaps someone will make the effort now.