Many DTP games are small in size and aim, designed to be no more than (as the Victorians would say) they should be. Victory in Vietnam on the other hand is a massive game cunningly disguised as a DTP game. With lots of play value and historical interest it manages to be atmospheric yet of interest to both sides. (I mention this because so often being the VC/NVA means being Mr Punch-Bag). Yet you get this great game for only $9 from Micro-Games Co-Op - it's simply too poptastic for words pop-pickers!
Victory in Vietnam is not a short game, with over forty turns the full game will take some time. It does however have some scenarios though these are not in the short DTP mould. If you can set it up and leave it in position I think you will find it a game in which it is well worth investing your time. The game is set at quite a high scale. Most combat units are regiments (guerrillas) or divisions, and its two hexes from Saigon to the Parrot's Beak (fifty miles per hex). Its purpose is to allow you to examine the war at the strategic level and in this it succeeds. The result is a mixture of political and military elements that remind me of the work of Joe Miranda.
The A3 map is done plainly but very effectively so that the geography of the area leaps off the page. Terrain features are woods, jungle, hills, marshes and rivers, with towns, cities, ports and airbases adding to the fun. I found this an excellent map to read and play upon although its hexes could have done with being a bit bigger.
The counters are simple, colourful and atmospheric. Plain NATO symbols decorate the land units with naval units have an elevation and aircraft a plan view. There are lots of colour schemes and only the ROK and Marine Corps can get a bit difficult to differentiate. The range of units is wide: ARVN forces, American Army, USAF, Marine Corps, USN, Royal Lao Army, Cambodian Army, ROKs, Philippines Army, Thais, Aussies, NVA, Khmer Rouge, Pathet Lao, Chinese and Soviet units. The types run through firebases, guerrillas, airmobile to B52s operating out of Guam.
In shades of old GDW and AH games you set the counters out on sheets which quickly give you a view of some structures. The Communists start with forces in North and South Vietnam and small Khmer Rouge and Pathet Lao forces, but with a heap of available units to build in every country except Cambodia (which requires US intervention to start the Khmer Rouge recruiting). Further forces appear throughout the game (mostly NVA main force divisions and supply). However, US actions can cause Chines and Soviet intervention or merely aid from these two countries. This aid is mostly just extra troops (weapons) from the PRC but the Soviets provide armour and artillery as well as SAMs, MiGs and the Air Defence net to guard the North.
The US sheet starts with a few ARVN units and some US naval, air and Special Force supports. Fresh forces are available each Spring Turn but these are mostly just ARVN unless the US commits to the ground war. Once this commitment occurs the range of available units is very great (but the political cost means one is cautious about committing them). For example upon commitment the US gets three carrier groups, the equivalent of four divisions, plus aircraft, choppers and ROK and ANZAC troops. As the game progresses the range of units grows still further (at least another 12 divisional equivalents plus more airforce units than one can base). One can even go for full mobilisation and land five further divisions (two armoured plus National Guard units). Political effects will eventually force the US to switch to Vietnamisation that provides the ARVN with some elite units but nothing compared to the units withdrawn. Indeed the game almost cruelly tantalises the US player with great power only to take it from him.
Modern Warfare's Paraphernalia
If you like modern warfare's paraphernalia (helicopters, patrol-boats, F111s, Wild weasels, etc) you have it here but without a battery of factors. Yet the game is so constructed to give marvellous unit differentiation without these. Air-mobile units can jump about not only in normal movement but also in reaction. Marine units can land, with Marine air support and then be lifted by Marine Chinooks ("Semper Fi" indeed). ARVN units are too weak for much attacking and slow to react, but they can hold terrain especially when backed by air power.
The game offers eight CRTs: Bombardment (artillery, air and naval fire either preceding land combat or strategic in use), Land, Air, Detection (for US guerrilla or special forces looking for VC), Search and Destroy (used by divisions on sweeps), Operation Phoenix (post-Tet dirty-tricks), Pacification (Special Forces) and Raids (everything from freeing POWs to blowing up US jets and terrorising the populace). Once again a very Miranda view of warfare far removed from simple land CRTs.
Also in Joe's style are the Victory Conditions. Bruce Costello has given (as we have seen) the US great power and (as we shall see) the VC/NVA the advantages of being hidden but the Victory points are what conditions and drives those powers. It is these that stop the game being angst ridden or a gung-ho fantasy. It is worth looking at them in detail. The VPs operate on the basis of negative scores being in favour of the Communists.
VC/NVA reinforcements are conditioned by availability (men and weapons) and by the status of Hanoi and Haiphong (mining Haiphong is a wise course). But US involvement has a VP affect too in certain cases. It costs nothing to bring on USN CV units or air units, though there is an annual charge for deploying more than 2 CVs (presumably affecting USN force levels elsewhere). US units do cost VPs to bring into play, and cost further VPs if you lose them. Having your airmobile division destroyed (which means damaged they can come back next turn) can be expensive, it cost you 1 VP to get them in, you lose 2 VPs when they are lost and a further 1 VP to bring them back in. That's equivalent to the best terrorist efforts of the VC for 6 months. Armoured divisions cost more than even the equipment heavy air-mobile units and though they are effective in clear terrain this is not often where the Communists are to be found. For the cost of a US leg division you can bring on two Allied units (who cares if you lose a few ROKs or Aussies?) but only one or two a turn. This neatly handles the problems of build up in the ARVN and with the allies. [At least that is how I assume you read the rules].
There are VPs for a number of "public" events. The Communists score points every turn that they hold a Vietnamese town (the goal of their Tet offensive), port or airbase and for successful terror raids. If they can get into Hue or Saigon they really hit big VPs. An intense US bombing campaign costs 2 VPs a turn so one wants to make this intensive and effective. There is an annual charge each year after the Tet Offensive for not having started Vietnamisation. The mining of Haiphong costs a mere 2 VPs (I seem to remember more of a fuss than that indicates - this is a no-brainer policy), but then so does a coup in Cambodia or bombing NVA air or SAM sites. Bombing Hanoi/Haiphong costs 3 VPs as does US commitment to the ground war from Spring 1965 onwards (10 VPs before then - ouch!). Moving US land forces into North Vietnam costs 5 VPs (and can cause Soviet or PRC intervention). Entering Laos is a much easier solution to cutting the Ho Chi Minh Trail. Moving to full mobilisation is also expensive (as are the armoured units it brings) this is probably a bridge too far.
The real meat of VPs though is in the kill/occupy conditions. The Communists score points for maintaining a strong presence in South Vietnam. If there are 6 of fewer units the US starts to gain VPs. One receives three VC units a turn until the Tet Offensive but this is unlikely to be enough to survive terror losses or the depredations of the US sweeps. One must therefore keep moving NVA divisions into Vietnam (and then splitting them up into pairs of VC units). Accordingly a real difficulty is caused if the US push into North Vietnam or Laos (and of course hit the railway bridges south of Haiphong). The advantages of Tet are many but its disadvantage is that VC recruits reduce to two a turn. The US also gets 2 VPs a turn for killing at least 5 Communist units. This can result in turns where the US is improving by 7 VPs a turn (28 a year) which will pay for five CVs to beat the crap out of Hanoi. Once Vietnamisation starts the US gets VPs as it withdraws units.
Political funnies include the use of nukes (which can end the game in World War 3 causing a US loss), negotiations, splitting China and Russia, occupying Hanoi or Haiphong, Communist invasions of Thailand and Chinese/Soviet intervention (though at the cost of a possible World War 3).
Essence of the Game
The essence of the game is that the US can deploy enough units to smash the communists but the investment will have a formidable cost. Even if killing 5 units a turn in a mostly subdued South Vietnam (5 VPs) one will face the -3VPs for not starting Vietnamisation. Moving outside South Vietnam can stir up the Khmer Rouge although Laos is both cheaper and more useful if one firms up the DMZ. Entering North Vietnam can work although it will unravel if the PRC commit. If one is going to bomb North Vietnam it should be done with full power and then stopped. Although the temptation to escalate the war is there so, too, are the disadvantages of such a course.
The sequence of play has four Phases: Strategic activity, First Player Phase, Second Player Phase, and End of Turn Phase.
The Strategic Phase opens with the commando phase where players may each perform two commando raids. In addition US forces may deploy "Pacify" and "Search and Destroy" chits on certain units to get the chance of damaging enemy units. There is then a Strategic Bombing sub-phase followed by the arrival of available units.
Commando raids require Special Forces or guerrillas. Raid missions include destroying bridges (which will slow, for example, the flow of NVA units by rail to the border), air bases (only those in South Vietnam) and NVA supply units (assuming you know where they are). In addition US forces may try Reconnaissance to detect the otherwise hidden VC/NVA (very useful before strategic bombing) and once a game they can try to do a Rambo and try to free POWs. The Communists stock-in-trade is the terror raid that eliminates the raiding VC units but at a handy 1 VP per success is a vital part of the VC repertoire.
Pacification and Search & Destroy operations affect only guerrillas, and do so at the end of the turn accordingly VC units may move to avoid major sweeps. However, the range of the operations (five hexes and three hexes) respectively makes it possible to bracket much of the country within the chit limit.
The First Player in the main game (there are scenarios on the NVA Cambodian campaign and the fight with the Chinese) is the Communist. This permits him to recover from any strategic bombardment and move his troops before the US gets a chance to belt him. Each player phase has the same structure: Movement - Reaction Movement (by the other player) - Combat - Disruption Removal. There are lots of possibilities for using strategic (called administrative) movement that doubles or triples movement allowances and a lack of ZOCs (plus the helicopters) makes for a free-wheeling game. The only sure defence is a line of units and here the moving force can use overrun attacks to breach the line. Because reaction movement follows your movement unless you have pinned an enemy he can avoid combat. This makes the overrun attack the most common one in the game. This works well considering the nature of the war with stand-up fights being few in number.
The Reaction movement phase is not the only piece of interactivity. Adjacent detected units may be bombarded during movement. This mostly means one must be very careful in moving NVA armoured and artillery regiments which can be detected by moving adjacent (and rightly so). Infantry units do not suffer from this problem and these sneak up to and around the US/ARVN units who wonder if this is six NVA divisions or six weak VC regiments. It gives a real feel for being trapped in an unfriendly jungle.
Overruns do not permit pre-combat bombardment, though you may use close support and are made with a malus (excellent French word). In addition, hidden units (that is to say, most Communist units) may attempt a pre-combat ambush attack (I assume without the horrid close support) with big bonuses. The result is that overrunning can be a rather unsettling experience (and, once again, rightly so). But most of the time you will crush small VC units beneath your boots and careful positioning on the frontiers will allow you to spot income divisions.
Amphibious invasions also occur in the movement phase and are seen as a bloodier version of overrun. The NVA have some PT boats in the north with can intervene in invasions if you decide to do that Red River Rock. Paratroops can drop on to the map and airmobile units move at 1 MP per hex, so much better than slogging it out in the jungle. As noted above there are extra helicopter units so that one can make 2 divisions and an ARVN brigade airmobile. This is a fearsome machine for munching through VC/NVA positions.
Having moved your forces into position the other player gets his Combat Reaction Phase. This is available to supplied non-disrupted units. The Communists can use most units except artillery. The US most units except non-elite ARVN, Cambodian and Lao formations. The arrival during Vietnamisation of ARVN Marines, Paras, Air-mobile and Ranger formations is thus very important to the RSVN. Most units simply move one hex, enough perhaps to get them out of harm's way. In the case of the Communists one can see what the US is sending in but the US must take a guess as to whether those three counters represent VC regiments or NVA divisions. Para units may be dropped in this phase (rather as the French did in their war against the Viet Minh) but the real change to warfare is the four hex airmobile reaction that can take an airmobile division from the coast to the Central Highlands. Although Reaction is often used to avoid combat it can also be used to reinforce combat, say moving the Air Cavalry into Pleiku just before an attack goes in. A defence of one suddenly becomes ten! Given the possibilities to avoid or alter combat it is hardly surprising that attackers elect to take the ambush risk and go with an overrun.
Various Combat Types
The various combat types all use different CRTs to factor in what is important. Bombardment (which precedes land combat) uses the bombardment strength of a unit plus 1d10 plus modifiers. A hidden unit in the mountains will take 5 points off the score - equivalent to a major B52 strike. However in land combat the hidden status has no effect (other than permitting an ambush). Each is full of flavour and easy to understand and use. Bombardment like close support is limited to two air units, a naval unit (in range) and two attack copters. This can be a fierce addition (I believe 19 is the max using the New Jersey, both B52s and the best choppers) but the US side needs a lot of air support to do its work so one seldom sees such a Doomsday Defence. [To put it in context a US Marine division has 9 firepower and the best NVA division has 7. Since the CRT is differential you can see how even a three NVA division assault might melt].
US, Allied and ARVN elite units in a town, city or firebase may elect for a siege. This stops the use of overrunning or forced retreat. This obliges the Communists to consider real combat if they want to take population centres (which they do from the VP point-of-view).
As befits the period the use of technology is very important for the US. Facing a numerous and determined enemy who operates in hidden mode and strikes at will the US needs to be able to swiftly "equalise" combats. The most important tool here is air power. Each air unit is identified by type (adding a nice touch for those of us who made these planes in Airfix kit form). It also allows for some neat characterising. A4s are better at bombing that air-combat, F104C's are the opposite. Major bombers have an air-combat rating but only on the defence. This means one will attack the North with B52s, F111s, Corsairs and the bigger Phantoms. Wild Weasels units are available to help with the SAMs. The Communists field MiG17s, 19s and 21s though their best air combat factor is two compared to an F4J's three. They also have SAMs and a most effective air defence infrastructure that permits the aggregation of defenders. You do not bomb the North casually. The rules provide for a less detailed simulation of the air defences if you prefer. The major consideration for US player is where they can base their air armada. VC units can attempt to destroy air units in bases in Vietnam so the Guam bases (for B52s) and Thailand are used for the best units. Extra air base capacity becomes available in Thailand in Spring 1967. Otherwise one uses carrier air wings or uses the six airbases in Vietnam. This can mean you will need to retire ineffective air units as better ones arrive.
Reinforcements are an important part of the game. The NVA recruit four divisions and two supply units a turn, with Chinese aid they can produce an extra unit. These units arrive in the Hanoi- Haiphong area. Capture or destruction of the area will stop this arrival (though at some risk) and disruption from air bombardment will reduce reinforcements. The best way to defeat NVA divisions is to stop them ever appearing. The air war in North Vietnam is therefore a matter of some importance if you can mass enough aircraft to avoid stunting your land ops. I reckon you need all carriers for this. Soviet aid (one unit a turn usually high-tech items) arrives at Haiphong, if this is mined the rate of arrival halves. Chinese Aid appears on the border on a railway hex. The Viet Cong recruit three units a turn (these are placed in South Vietnam) with the Khmer Rouge and Pathet Lao managing one each. The VC may elect to reserve one unit a turn and then bring them all on for the Tet Offensive! After Tet the VC fall back to only two units, but equally the political pressure is on the US at that stage.
The major limits on Allies and ARVN units are the one or two unit arrival limitation a turn. But Allied (and US land units) also need port facilities that can prevent sudden major increases of deployment. Marine and Air-mobile units can arrive without port facilities. The Cambodian and Lao Royal armies recruit two units a turn though neither have much depth.
Supply is rarely a problem for the US except for ARVN non-elites. The Communists never suffer from problems. Their supply units are used to increase attacking unit's strength by one. (This can be useful where the typical close support total is three or four). The Ho Chi Minh Trail exists in that most NVA and supply units move south through Laos and Cambodia using administrative movement so as to choose where in South Vietnam they intervene. This prevents the Mekong Delta becoming an area where even the ARVN can operate without too much worry against VC units.
Hidden units are a vital part of the Communist strategy. Unless detected by Special Forces the Communists usually appear only when in combat. They return to hidden at the end of their turn so the US can have a chance to use Strategic Bombardment against such units.
Naval operations are also very important. The major use is the five carrier groups with more aircraft on them then the NVA ever has! Apart from a PT attack (or Backfires if Russia intervenes) they sit splendidly offshore. New Jersey and the Support Group may shell or support coastal combat/units but only adjacent to their placement hex. There are riverine units to support and detect in the delta.
The NVA PT boats have a range of 5 and may intervene in landings or naval movements within range, they do suffer from US close support though. Their major effect will usually be to make sure the US attacks in strength. They cannot stop commando raids into North Vietnam (though the modifiers may include this effect). Finally the Communists can move supply into South Vietnam by sea up to ten hexes. Careful placing of naval units may however pull this back dramatically. In the early game it can be a most useful tactic.
The subroutines of Victory in Vietnam are simple and strong. They could be applied with equal validity to the French war in Indochina or used in (for example) the Algerian War. On to them Bruce Costello has grafted further politico-military features. The optional rules cover many of these. Free fire zones may be erected which give a modifier but which may cause VP losses if it all gets unpleasant. Agent Orange can be applied to increase detection attempts (and very realistically there is no down side at that stage). Tactical and strategic nuclear weapons are available if you want to test some of the choices considered. Since a tactical nuke has a bombardment value of 7 some may be tempted by it, though there is a one-time VP penalty after which the other may respond. The US has five nukes a turn and the Soviets provide only one so some may go for this. Only strategic nuclear weapons give city-busting capabilities and the risk to Saigon is considerable. Both give rise to a risk of World War 3.
The optional air war system (as mentioned) includes a much more detailed coverage of the North Vietnamese air defence system. If the US cares to suffer a VP loss they can intensify the campaign (doubling the sortie rate). The NVA air forces can attack outside North Vietnam but with much less certainty than the US. Since replacement aircraft require Soviet Aid this is unlikely to happen often. The Soviets do get chemical warfare and the US gets Operation Phoenix that kills VC units more effectively than the pacification campaigns.
The Political events cover some interesting stuff. There is an internal negotiation game that I have not tried which can lead to cease-fires and game end. Vietnamisation is neatly summarised. The rules for Laotian neutrality and a Cambodian coup make the former less of a quicksand than the latter. The Tet Offensive gives a chance for the NVA/VC to suddenly deliver a lot of force that not only gives hope of big VP harvest (especially in election year) but also moves the agenda towards American withdrawal. It does this irrespective of the result, assuming the Press will be negative. There are full rules for Soviet and Chinese aid, all of which can escalate to intervention if the US enters North Vietnam. Nixon can pop up to split China from Russia. The US can declare war or full mobilisation if you want to test the Hawkish policies. Thailand's involvement is covered in case the Communists invade this "aircraft carrier". The US can also issue nuclear threats and the Communist can try for a Korean crisis to pull out resources.
The political events are very mature - no gung-ho nonsense and no hippy whining either.
There are five scenarios: the one-turn invasion of Cambodia by the NVA in 1978; the one-turn Chinese invasion of 1979; the one-phase Operation Linebacker II (just the air war); the 40+ campaign game of the US in Vietnam; and. A shorter version that is available on the Internet on Westmoreland's war which goes up to Tet in 1968.
So how does it play?
As you will have spotted though the interior systems are not complex or numerous (50 miles and divisional units keep things close) it has a lot of turns and a lot to consider. Because this game skilfully matches the military to the political it requires clear thought and a good appreciation of the risks. Though the US forces are very powerful they are not there forever, and they can be dislocated. In my games as Communist one spends most of the time simply milling around trying to place big units in front of the US major units. Occasionally though (especially if the air units have used strategic bombing) one can risk major attacks by a number of divisions plus supply. If these can capture towns, airbases or the great prizes of Hue or Saigon the political value is considerable. If they can destroy a US division, or munch up lots of ARVN "garrison" divisions this will also improve matters. One has to be careful though. Just as the US risk an ambush as they push into the blue so a major NVA commitment can be met by massed airpower and reacting forces.
The game's problems are it is a little spare in text and explanation, but Bruce discusses this below so I will leave it to him.
Most of you should be able to play the Westmoreland's War scenario that runs up to Tet in a long session. Anything else will require continuing set-up time. I think Bruce Costello has achieved an optimum detail level to retain balance between the military and the political. He has also left the Communists with something to do (unlike so many games where techno-heavy US teams have all the fun). When one considers the whole range of this game comes in a $9 DTP game one can only be amazed. This is a very fine game on a very fine chassis. I hope it is applied to other campaigns and it has my unreserved recommendation.
Back to Perfidious Albion #102 Table of Contents
Back to Perfidious Albion List of Issues
Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List
© Copyright 2001 by Charles and Teresa Vasey.
This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web.
Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com