Interview with Javier Romero Designer of Caporetto: The Italian Front 1917–18 in Strategy & Tactics Magazine #337 from Decision Games

Grant: What historical period does Caporetto cover?

Javier: Caporetto: the Italian Front, 1917-18, covers the last year of the Italian WWI front, from October 1917 (beginning of the Caporetto offensive) until the armistice in November 1918. Although the game title is self evident, people tend to simply say “Caporetto” which could be a bit misleading (the game not only covers the Caporetto Campaign, but the last year of the war).

Grant: What was your inspiration for this game? Why did you feel drawn to the subject?

Javier: Well, as you might know from my other designs, I am generally drawn by “off the beaten path” subjects and the WWI campaign in Italy has not attracted much attention. There are games on the Caporetto campaign, yes, but no games on the last year of WWI on the Italian front. I thought it could be interesting a game depicting the whole period, from the all out Central Powers offensive to stabilization and Allied counteroffensive, with challenges and opportunities for both sides. My first thought was to design a game on the Caporetto offensive, but in the end I decided to cover the entire front, including obscure operations such as the Monte Grappa Battle or the June 1918 offensives along the Piave. Plus, I had in my bucket list designing a game on the Austro-Hungarian Army (a pet interest of mine). The game includes, apart from Italians and Austro-Hungarians, Czech volunteers fighting for the Allies, British and French expeditionary forces.

Grant: What was your design goal with the game?

Javier: The game requires both players to handle two fragile armies at the end of their tether, the Italian and the Austro-Hungarian, with British, French and German forces providing support. It also requires players to attack and defend, and to know when to keep attacking and when to stop. One of the things you can only see with a whole operational game (as opposed to a single battle or campaign) is the ebb and flow of the operations. Players must decide when to launch one more attack and when to stop, thinking in the long term, not in taking one more objective to win. This is what I wanted to design in Caporetto: Italy 1917-18.

Grant: What type of research did you do to get the details correct? What one must read source would you recommend?

Javier: There are plenty of sources, including the official histories of both the Austria-Hungary and the Italian armies, which can be consulted online. There are books in English, of course, although these tend to focus, as would be expected, on the British Expeditionary Force. As a general introduction to the topic, the book by Gianni Pieropan Storia della Grande Guerra sul Fronte Italiano is an excellent source.

Grant: What from the Italian Front of World War I was most important to model?

Javier: Attrition and Morale. And, of course, the artillery and infiltration tactics used during the last year of the war, plus mountain warfare-most of the Italian campaign was fought over high mountain and alpine terrain (the Austro-Hungarians even built a fortification inside a glacier). As I commented earlier, we are dealing with two armies on the verge of collapse after three years of static warfare and hundreds of thousands of casualties. The new infiltration tactics, although not revolutionary in itself, made the most of the technology available in 1917-18.

Grant: How does the process of design change for a magazine wargame vs. a larger boxed game?

Javier: There isn’t much change, really. Only physical limits, i.e., whether you’re planning to design a one map, 1 counter, 10 pages of rules game, or a four map, multiple counter game with a 50 page rulebook. But this applies to both boxed and magazine games. Of course, a magazine game will rarely include more than one map, so this is the only real limit.

Grant: What is the scale of the game? How did you design the game around that scale?

Javier: 10 km/hex, divisions and brigades. Monthly turns. I think this scale is the proper one for this campaign, being the division the basic unit of maneuver of the 20^th century operational campaigns. It is a scale small enough to show the grand tactical effects of infiltration tactics (a key feature of the design-more on this later) without having to resort to a monster wargame.

Grant: What different unit types does each side have access to?

Javier: Most of them, of course, are infantry-this is World War I. There are a few cavalry units and air and artillery support markers. Air and artillery is handled by HQ markers.

Grant: What is the anatomy of the counters?

Javier: The counters, designed by José R. Faura, are clear and functional. The anatomy of the counters is attack-defense-movement, unit type, steps. Most units are divisions with a few Brigades thrown in and Army HQ’s. Army HQ’s play a key role to manage artillery and air assets.

Grant: What is the general Sequence of Play? What type of experience did you want the Sequence of Play to invoke?

Javier: The Sequence of Play is first combat phase, infiltration, second combat phase, movement. The first is pretty standard-units attack static positions. After that, infiltration capable units (certain German and Austro-Hungarian units at the beginning of the game, followed by certain Allied units later on) can perform infiltration movement, moving across enemy ZOC’s. Then, units (including infiltration and non infiltration-capable units) can launch a second combat phase, followed by movement. Unlike other games, here the sequence is combat-movement, not movement-combat. A well executed attack, therefore, can collapse large parts of the enemy front and force the withdrawal of the entire line, as happened in October 1917, and (again) in October 1918.

Grant: What different random events are involved in the Random Events Phase?

Javier: Random Events are something that I used a lot in my designs because they can simulate plenty of factors (military and non military, from the 1918 influenza pandemic to events elsewhere). Famine among the Austro-Hungarian units is also handled via Random Events-these are non combat related factors that further undermine the A-H morale.

Grant: What is the purpose of Morale? How does it affect the game?

Javer: There is a general Morale Track for both Austro-Hungarian and Italian forces. Suffering a given number of step losses in a single turn decreases the combat morale of a given army, which in turn undermines their performance. The Italian morale, for instance, collapsed during and immediately after the Caporetto disaster, and the Italian High Command had to implement a number of morale boosting measures. Operational Pauses (no more than 2 attacks in a single turn) can improve current morale.

Grant: What is the Morale Table?

Javier: When the morale of an army goes below a certain point, that player cannot perform retreat after combat (trading step losses for hexes withdrawn) and instead must roll on the Morale Table to decide if the retreat is implemented or not. That player must roll on the Morale Table and apply results: normal retreat, surrender (No retreat after combat. All losses are absorbed by the defenders) or Panic (the defender absorb all step losses AND retreats one step. Roll one die. On a die roll of 1-3, add one extra step loss).

Grant: What area does the map cover?

Javier: The map covers northeastern Italy and the southern reaches of the Austro-Hungarian Empire, from modern day Slovenia and Trieste to the Lake Garda area and the Adige river. A fine effort (again) by Joe Youst.

Grant: What strategic pinch points does the terrain create?

Javier: According to developer Steven Levan, “The most obvious pinch point is the gap in the mountains/rough terrain between Gorizia and the coast – it’s the shortest and easiest route, from a terrain perspective, via which the Central Powers can approach several Allied VP hexes, including Venezia/Venice. Unfortunately for the Allies, this is precisely where the heaviest and most effective Central Powers formation – Army Group Archduke Eugen, containing the German 14th Army – will strike, so the Italian units defending this area (2nd Army and part of 3rd Army) are usually destroyed by the end of the second turn, if not by the end of the first. The location of the VP hexes, in conjunction with the terrain, also tends to focus Central Powers offensive action to the Julian Alps around Caporetto and Tolmino – fewer mountain hexes to struggle through before breaking onto the Venetian Plain at Udine, plus it’s Army Group Archduke Eugen again with some very capable units. The other pinch point lies between Trento and Monte Grappa – again, there’s fewer mountain hexes for both sides to deal with in approaching VP hexes, but the relative weakness of both Allied and Central Powers forces in this area tends to turn this into something of a sideshow….unless the Allies are forced to pull units off to deal with a looming catastrophe in their rear resulting from a German/Austrian breakthrough at Gorizia. Activity in the Dolomites tends to have no value other than to tie down opposing forces and prevent their use elsewhere”.

Grant: How does combat work?

Javier: Combat uses an odds-based CRT. Players determine who will attack against a given hex, and provide air and artillery support. HQ-supported units receive more air and artillery support (non HQ supported units cannot use more than 1 artillery or air marker). In this game, artillery is the king of the battlefield, so everything is oriented to improve their effectiveness, from controlling dominant features to achieve air superiority-this is the late WWI, so air superiority allows improved recon over the trenches and therefore a more precise bombardment. Artillery conquers, infantry occupies, and this is where infiltration tactics can achieve operational results. On the first and second turns there are special rules covering the effects of improved “hurricane” bombardment tactics (Bruchmüller’s “Fire waltz”), combining gas and high explosive to devastating effect.

Grant: What is the makeup of the Combat Results Table? What unique odds are represented and why?

Javier: As could be expected in a WWI game, it is rather bloody-both sides are guaranteed to inflict and suffer losses. Die roll modifiers (generated by troop quality, artillery support, and current morale) are equally important, for results range from 0 to 9. The ideal result is the Defender Eliminated (“E”) result, which clears the entire enemy hex. Again, army morale is important, for attacks against units with low morale get a +1 die roll modifier, whereas attacking with your own morale is at -2 or lower get a -1 odds shift.

Grant: What is the purpose of the Casualty Track?

Javier: To keep track of casualties suffered in a given turn, which in turn can increase the current Morale Track. If, during a turn, the step loss marker reaches 8 or more, that player loses 1 Morale Level Point. If it is 12 or higher, it loses 2 Morale Level Points.

Grant: How do Replacements and Withdrawals work?

Javier: There is a fixed schedule of replacements and withdrawals. However, certain events can change that. Event Kaiserschlacht (the German offensive in the West) can be successful (forcing the withdrawal of almost all British and French forces) or less successful (more British and French forces remain). The Allied player can declare a general mobilization or two to cover losses (they receive extra Italian replacements in exchange for Victory Points). This adds a degree of chaos to the game.

Grant: What is the purpose of Infiltration? What does this represent from history?

Javier: Infiltration represents the tactics developed during the second half of WWI to overcome the stalemate of the trenches. Since command and control was effectively broken once across the No Man’s Land, the Germans empowered junior officers to take decisions on the spot, outflank points of resistance, and keep advancing to reach the enemy rearguard area, thus collapsing the enemy defense. By 1917, mortars, light machineguns, flamethrowers and hand grenades provided the average infantry platoon with a more powerful firepower than their 1914 counterparts. Not a revolution, but an optimal use of the technology of the era, even though assault units suffered massive casualties. But at least broke the trench stalemate.

Grant: How do Headquarters work?

Javier: Headquarters represent the command and logistic resources needed to control a large number of artillery and air units, among other assets. Units within range of an HQ can receive support from a given number of artillery markers. HQ’s can be either in support or move mode-if in support mode, they can provide support. If in move mode, they can move, but cannot provide support. This represents operational pauses following major advances.

Grant: How are Artillery, Air and Naval Support handled?

Javier: Artillery and naval support markers are attached on attack or defense. They can add or decrease odds shifts to the attack. However, players must roll for each artillery marker to determine if it adds or detracts an odds shift. This die roll is modified by a number of factors, like air recon, or dominant terrain (firing against enemy units adjacent to a friendly controlled dominant hex is more effective). Air units can be used either to provide support, or for recon missions, which enhance the fire of your own artillery.

Grant: How do players win the game?

Javier: Players add up Victory Points (VP’s) at the end of the game by conquering geographical objectives. For the Allied player, declaring general mobilizations can decrease the number of VP’s, so it is important for the Central Powers player to inflict enough casualties to force them to declare a general mobilization.

Grant: What type of an experience does the game create?

Javier: It is an experience where both players must know when and what they can and cannot do with their respective forces, and think tactically as well as strategically-where to use their tactical advantages to achieve maximum results on the strategic, long term levels.

Grant: What are you most pleased about with the design?

Javier: I think that the game produces historical results without being too scripted-players need to master the system to reproduce historical results, both on attack and defense. The Caporetto disaster is not automatic-depending on player’s decisions, it can happen again, or not.

Grant: What has been the response of playtesters?

Javier: Playtester response to Caporetto was universally positive, with testers giving the game high marks for its balance, playability, and historical accuracy. Two aspects which produced numerous comments were the extreme casualty levels produced by the Combat Results Table, and the very high probability that a large portion of Italian forces, 2nd Army in particular, will simply disappear on the first two game turns; however, comments on both of these points were, again, very positive as they accurately depicted the historical realities of 1917-1918. Despite the extremely high Allied losses early in the game, all testers agreed that the game achieved a balance through the middle and late turns, and victory conditions for both sides were very reasonable and attainable. The Random Events Table was another source of numerous positive comments given the interesting effects (albeit sometimes unwanted by one side or the other) on game play. In sum, testers greatly enjoyed their experiences with this game.

Grant: What other designs are you working on?

Javier: I am currently working on another game on Italy, and also on the last year of a campaign: Forgotten Front, Italy 1944-45 for Decision Games. Game covers the Italian campaign after the fall of Rome, from operation Olive in August 1944 to the end of the war in May 1945. The game allows players to explore what could have happened had the Allies reached the Alps in the fall of 1944 instead of the Spring of 1945. With the Western Allies near Slovenia and Trieste in late 1944, things could unravel very quickly. What would Churchill do in that case? Of course, by 1944 he was the junior partner and he could no nothing without US assistance (see what happened in the Dodecanese in September 1943) but it is still an interesting possibility to explore.

A second game I am working on is Aragón 1938, a systemic brother of Santander 37, published by SNAFU and Bonsai Games of Japan, which in turn is an evolution of the game C.T.V., published by the Italian magazine Parabellum back in 2018. Aragón 1938 covers the Nationalist offensive of the spring of 1938, one of the few mobile (and successful) offensive maneuvers of the war, complete with motorized exploitation and various other interesting elements. It’s all there: from the Italian Expeditionary Corps to the International Brigades to the Legion Condor. Basically, the general course of the game is similar to Santander (Nationalist offensive, Republican defense) but this time the Republicans receive plentiful reinforcements from other fronts with which to launch a successful counterattack or two. A more balanced situation, with plenty of challenges for both sides.

Thanks for your time Javier in answering our questions. I am very interested in this one and appreciate your approach, especially with dealing with the more controversial and difficult portions of the conflict.

If you are interested in Caporetto: the Italian Front, 1917-18 from Strategy & Tactics Magazine #337, you can order a copy for $49.99 from the Strategy & Tactics Press website at the following link: https://shop.strategyandtacticspress.com/ProductDetails.asp?ProductCode=ST337

-Grant