When it comes to the genre of historical simulation games, I’m about as wet behind the ears as you can get. I know virtually nothing about this entire world of gaming, yet I have always had a passing interest in trying one of these games out but never really had the time to do so. When I finally decided to a few weeks back I was shocked at the brevity of this genre, just the sheer volume of games made simply choosing one a major research project. Ultimately I settled on a solo game so that I could pursue what I expected to be a very complex gaming experience at my own pace. My choice was based on both recommendations by some of the community leaders promoting these games as well as my own passing interest in World War II aviation.

Overview

Final Score:  (4 out of 5 Stars)

B-17 Flying Fortress Leader by DVG games is a game that is part of a series of “Leader” gamers. It’s not exactly a system, but a kind of core concept. The basic principle behind these solo games is that you are a commander, in the case of B-17 Flying Fortress Leader in charge of a division of Bombers flying missions over Germany between 1942-1944. Other leader games have similar concepts in other historical periods and in some cases not even in aviation, for example there is one about modern tanks and another featuring submarines. Some of these games have tactical components, others like B-17 focus more on the strategic and planning part of the story.

As the commander of this division of bombers you are tasked with successfully running the air war over Germany. You manage resources, purchasing planes, outfitting them, hiring on special pilots, planning, running intelligence operations and executing bombing missions. There are many other auxiliary things to deal with as part of the war at large as well which can affect your efforts, like other war fronts, various historical events, even the weather itself can impact your efforts.

One interesting aspect of the game is that it’s effectively a game of preparation and planning. Once you give a mission a go, the mission executes based on your plans but you have very minimal tactical control over your bomber squadrons, they have their assigned tasks and go off to execute your plans. Their success or failure is dependent on two things, primarily on your planning which mitigates but does not eliminate the other part, lady luck.

These campaigns are part of a larger campaign where you manage these resources both in the short term for individual missions, but also in the long run over the course of the war.

This only leaves us with the question, is the game itself any good? Lets find out.

Components

Score: (3.5 out of 5 Stars)
Tilt:

Pros:  Good Quality Components, sturdy, made to last and beautifully illustrated adding to the theme of the game.

Cons: Despite the good quality the cost of the game is so extreme that it’s hard to justify it for what you get in the box.

I was not really sure what to expect when it came to component quality for a game like this, in fact I wasn’t even sure if it was appropriate for me to judge it based on today’s modern standards. These historical simulation games seem to me at least to focus a great deal more on gameplay and visceral simulation experiences rather than visual candy, but I was actually pleasantly surprised regardless.

The gameboard is very spacious, beautifully illustrated and very thematic giving you the feel of a commander sitting in a command tent planning out missions. It’s sturdy and made to last with a nice gloss finish.

The chit components where also considerably better quality then I had imagined they would be, also gloss finished, clearly labeled, easy to handle and just the right size. Somehow I expected them to be cheap cardboard cutouts, but they were effectively the same quality of tokens you would get with any other modern quality game.

The cards I felt were a bit flimsy, it’s clear that their dark colors will eventually cause edge ware that would come out white, but they are stiff, glossy and very nicely illustrated supporting the theme very well.

The rulebook itself got quite a few complaints in other reviews and I was apprehensive about it in particularly as I was anticipating a highly complex simulation game which would very clearly require very good instruction, but apparently I got the second edition of the game where those problems, including all the misprinted cards are already corrected. Quite contrary to what I read online about the rulebook I felt it was incredibly well done and usable at the table in a step by step fashion allowing me to learn the game as I went along. In fact I would say it is one of the nicest, well constructed and clear rulebooks I have read in quite some time, I found little to complain about it and looking at some of the components I can only imagine there is a big difference between the first and second printing. I suppose an index would be nice, but because of how it was laid out, things were very easy to find anyway. I love the fact that they didn’t try to make the rulebook part of the theme of the game, it’s printed on white glossy paper with large easy to read fonts and lots of pictures to use as reference. Please for the love of god developers take note, you don’t need to make the rulebook part of the game design, make it easy to read and use like this instead!

All and all I felt the components where excellent but still I have to complain to some degree here. This game cost over 900 Swedish crowns which is roughly 100 American bucks, I have paid for Miniature Game Starter kids for less than that with some of the best and most high quality components in the history of gaming. I was half expecting this game to have a solid gold d10 given its cost. I understand that small companies who sell fewer games have to charge more for their design efforts, its in part why I didn’t mind shelling out the money but damn, for what you pay, this game should have 30 highly detailed miniatures in it. I would not normally reduce a component score on price, but this was such an extreme in my opinion that I had to shave some points off it. I definitely think cost will be a major point of contention when considering a purchase of this game and the developer might have shot himself in the foot as its likely he would sell more copies if the game was cheaper.

Theme

Score: (5 out of 5 Stars)
Tilt:

Pros:  Captures the theme of being a World War II strategic commander with perfection, outstanding atmosphere and mechanically connected theme.

Cons: There are some, but not worth mentioning. 

I think when it comes to a solo game about a historical period like World War II and a subject like flying bombing missions over Germany, ensuring that this theme comes across through the mechanics and art is absolutely vital. In fact, I felt strongly that this was going to be one of the most important elements of this review.

Thankfully B-17 Flying Fortress Leader does not disappoint, It’s a game about you being a strategic commander of World War II squadrons and it delivers on that promise.

There are a lot of contributors to creating this visceral experience and while certainly the layout and art of the gameboard, cards and various components certainly delivers on the look of this theme, where this theme really bursts out is in the details of the mechanics and decisions linked to the subject matter.

I was really worried as I opened the box that I would be overwhelmed by an endless stream of strategic choices that would make a lot of assumptions about the type of gamer I was. I know this was a kind of “fear” I had that may not have been entirely rational but I was so happy to see that not only where the choices easy to understand, you could right away get a sense of what impact they would have on the game and how that tied into the theme of being a strategic commander.

You chose your bomber groups, picked special pilots to fly your missions, outfitted their loadouts, picked their targets, chose their flight path and sent them on their way. These choices are important and have great impact on how the mission will play out, but they weren’t overwhelmed by a lot of complicated, task oriented activities. They were just great, simple to understand options which you had to consider for the mission and larger strategic plans.

What you discover after running a couple of weeks worth of missions is the impact of those earlier choices on the campaign at large and this is really where the theme comes through because while you are thinking about the current missions, you really have to think about the campaign as well. Your choices have benefits but they can also have consequences and I found it especially interesting how their was this feeling of a high power, those ranked above you, that could bring those consequences. For example if your campaign was going really well but the war on other fronts goes poorly, you could suddenly discover that some of your squadrons get reassigned to other fronts where they are more needed.

The reverse could also happen, which meant that while you had your job to do, your commanders had there’s. It was amazing to see how the game responded to my success and failures over the course of my campaign.

Some of the auxiliary stuff, though I call it that, actually plays important roles in the game is also chalked full of flavor. For example if a German commander appears that brings U-Boats with him, you will have a whole different series of problems to contend with then a German Commander that brings special technologies with them. Event cards can turn what appears to be a easy routine mission into a disaster. The feeling of rolling for the German response is also this great unknown, it’s sort of like your planning your mission but you don’t fully know exactly what the Germans will do.

I realize a lot of this stuff is decided with dice, which one might say means the game is random and to a degree its true, but thematically these events and reactions the game comes up with, though driven by the cast of a die create a believable setting, a sense of time and place.

The way you feel sitting in front of that strategic map is uncanny and though you can’t control many of the events, you kind of have to plan for the unexpected and this is really part of how the game plays out and I imagine probably how it felt to the actual strategic commanders in World War II.

Does it all make simulation sense? No. Yes there are definitely a few places where clearly a mechanic is just a mechanic for the sake of balance and playability. These abstractions however don’t really detract from the experience, in fact they are such minor things I hardly see any point in naming them or docking the theme score for them, though I might consider it when discussing mechanics. I hadn’t even noticed them until I read a few other reviews that pointed them out and kind of went.. aha.. yea I suppose it’s true but who cares!

From the stand point of theme, this game just nails it, though I would definitely recommend using some of the optional rules like weather, recon missions and veteran bandits because it adds even more atmosphere to an already atmosphere rich game without really doing much to make it more complex. Recon missions I in particular I felt really fit the game and seemed like it should just be a standard part of the game. I was actually surprised that this was left as an optional rule as it adds so much to the theme.

Absolutely fabulously executed theme’s, captures the intended experience with perfection in my humble, albeit inexperienced opinion.

Gameplay

Score:
Tilt:

Pros: Well orchestrated mechanics with high level of connection to the theme and lots of player choices that both work into the short and long term strategies make this game a blast to play.

Cons: Some missed opportunities, a bit lackluster event cards and a relatively docile enemy can be a bit of a let down. 

When evaluating a historic simulation game, I have to admit that I’m a bit out of my element and so I really just decided to evaluate the game on the same basic premise and methodology that I do any other game. This may or may not be fair to the publisher, but to me, a game is a game, so I suppose I don’t really see why one would get a different treatment over the other, historic simulation or not.

It’s really because the theme is so strong in B-17 Flying Fortress Leader, that the mechanics become a bit of a chore to evaluate, in part because mechanically there is a lot of high level of abstractions that are driven by a single cast of a die, yet can potentially have great impact on the game.

For example the combat mechanic of rolling a d10 for each bomb you drop with some minor modifications is a very simplistic mechanic. There really is not much more to it than luck, you either roll well and do well or you don’t. On the surface I would not consider this a particularly inventive or immersive mechanic, but in the scope of the theme and everything that came before, that is exactly what the mechanic should be. The important events are all those things that lead up to that final moment when you drop the bombs. If you have planned well the odds are in your favor, but the idea here is that its war, you have sent your boys on the mission and there is no guarantees and this mechanic really brings this uncertainty to a conclusion quickly so you can get back to the fun stuff of planning your campaign. It breaks up the anticipation of the result so it feels great, but it’s not a focus of the game, hence handled quickly and efficiently.

Which is exactly how most of the mechanics in the game feel. There are numerous examples of moments being resolved in a simple way and efficient way of a single die cast, because what your really doing, where the bulk of the fun and strategy of the game is working on the plan around the results from these mitigatable but often random outcomes.

In general the activities of building your plan and strategy take shape in a wide range of ways. Chief among them is the managing of your precious SO (Special Operation) points. These are used to get new bomber or escort groups, hiring on special pilots, outfitting your loadouts for the missions, purchasing recon assets, sometimes upgrading or replacing bomber groups and more. There are a number of ways these SO points can be affected both positively and negatively via different events in your campaign, so you will often make strategic strikes against targets that might impact your SO point production or pursue missions that earn you extra points. Suffice to say being low on SO points can limit your options and having a lot can allow you to create havoc for the Germans.

Other important decision are driven by the strategic situation on the map. There are sorties and mission sites all over the place and you will be planning your targets and routes on that map. Some weeks you might choose to strike deep into enemy territory so that you get an opportunity to take out bandits and that hidden airfield, other times you might go for doing lots of damage to several targets at once to try and soften up the enemy for more decisive strikes later in the month. Time pressure can be a big factor, so there is considerable precision required to your choices of targets and how you approach them. If using the weather and Intel options which I highly recommend you do, those can allow you to create advantages or cause problems in what feels like a very authentic way.

Often your decisions can be forced, perhaps you took a bad beating this month and in the last week of the month your bomber squadrons are in bad shape, so you hold back a bit, while other times still you have to take big risks to take out targets that can cause devastating problems in the next month if you don’t. You also always have the pressure of trying to complete your mission and win the campaign, getting those victory points and completing your victory objectives should of course always be first and foremost on your mind, but this requires long term planning to manage successfully.

There are also external factors that impact decisions. There are other war fronts that can affect your resources in your air war with Germany. Event cards in particular can really impact a specific mission, while the other war fronts can create sudden shifts in strategies for the Germans that can surprise you.

In the course of play there are a lot of moving, dynamic parts that will cause you to make constant adjustments to your strategy and of course its always about doing the most damage against your targets while taking the fewest casualties possible.

Gameplay in B-17 Flying Fortress Leader is a constantly shifting and adapting thing. I find that early in a campaign you tend to think in terms of “what are my best odds”, but as the campaign gets going there is far more that drives your decisions and your options, forcing you to take greater and greater risks. The crux of the game is really many mini decisions that are lead you to the success or failure of the campaign and because the game is thematic, the experience is that much more engrossing. You can really lose yourself in this game as your imagination runs wild.

It’s a game that feels great and I will often say that a game mechanic doesn’t have to be good, it just needs to feel right and I think that is what B-17 really does here. I’m no game designer and my minimal experience with these historical simulation games leaves me with little to compare it to, but if through gameplay and theme there goal was to make me feel like a World War II strategic commander in charge of a fleet of B-17 bombers, they have wildly exceeded my expectations. I really was expecting this game to leave such an excellent impression on me.

There are a few chinks in the armor of course and I would be remiss not to mention them, but I think I would qualify these as minor quirks, rather than real mechanical problems.

One thing is that it feels like when planes got destroyed that there should be more drawbacks and consequences for the particular bomber group. There is the whole Shaken mechanic, where if a group takes enough damage they become less effective, but as you lose planes there is no impact on the quality of the unit long term. It feels to me like Bomber groups should level up and level down, so that there is a thematic sense of veteran pilots getting killed and new rookie pilots joining the team. It’s kind of a missed opportunity to add yet another layer of theme to the games gameplay and it’s one of the first house rules I added to the game.

What I did here is simply make it that anytime you lose 16 planes in a single group over any amount of time (16 is the starting strength of a unit) your bomber group is reduced one level down in experience. The effect is that over time, your bomber groups that do well rise in experience but eventually they will take a hit down as pilots are killed in action. It feels right and thematic but the impact on difficulty is minimal, it’s just one of things that just feels right.

I also felt there should have been more event cards. Really, its a minor thing but on a typical 3-4 week month where you run typically 2 missions per week (at least you try) you are effectively drawing 4 event cards per week. That means in a 4 week month you could draw 16 cards, that’s actually almost all of them as the deck is quite thin. I also felt that too often the event cards, in particular on return trip had a no effect, effect. Meaning nothing would happen as a result of drawing the card. I think more thought should have been put into ensuring that drawing event cards was always a stressful and eventful thing but rarely is the impact of these cards really significant. This is a bummer because when it is significant, when the impact of the card is really felt, the game really shines. These event cards really help to tell a story of the game, but they come out feeling a bit weak.

Now this last part I’m not really a hundred percent sure about, but so far I have not found the game to be particularly difficult, at least not to the point where I think I will “lose” the war. I might not get as many victory points as I want or fail to meet the objective of the campaign, but I definitely feel like at least to this point, I’m totally dominating the Germans. The occasional disastrous mission aside, I’m usually coming out ahead. Now the caveat is that I have only done a couple of campaigns, the early years one so I don’t really know at this point if the games difficulty ramps up, I’m definitely far from done playing this one, but I’m hopeful that the Germans are going to put up more of a fight as I work my way through the campaigns.

Replay ability And Longevity

Score:
Tilt:

Pros:  Very dynamic campaign setup, lots of campaigns to run and even a couple of mini games all contribute to this games longevity.

Cons: There is a definitive routine to the playing this game, a process that may become monotonous after a while.

B-17 Flying Fortress Leader is one of those games that you set up on a table and play over several sessions. Some of these campaigns are really long, there are several campaigns included and because the setup is dynamic as well as there being many dynamically changing circumstances, each time you play any of these campaigns, they will be very different.

The end result is a game with a considerable amount of Longevity, I’ve been at it now for several weeks and I have barely scratched the surface, yet I’m still drawn to it like a moth to a flame.

There is kind of a routine to the game however and I think eventually even with all of the dynamics this game will peter out at some point, get shelved for a while and after collecting some dust you might get the itch to bring it back. In fact I fully expect that to happen because even though the game is very dynamic and certainly has lots of replayability, its fairly robust and lengthy game.

There are also several other mini games included in this package, none of which I have had a chance to try yet so I can’t speak to their quality, but I definitely see some potential in there. One scenario for example has you flying missions with a single plan in a more tactically detailed way. This is really an entirely separate game included in this one which definitely adds to its longevity assuming.

B-17 Flying Fortress Leader certainly earns its stripes in this department, maybe even standing out a bit, I would call it a pass+.

Conclusion

B-17 Flying Fortress Leader has definitely exceeded my expectations and has made for a great first foray into the world of historical simulation games for an amature like me. It’s greatest strength is the execution of the theme which comes through wonderfully giving you the experience of being a World War II strategic commander of the British Royal Air Force. It has also peeked my interest in other “Leader” series game which is I would imagine exactly what the designer and publisher would want.

It’s a very expensive game and I think of all the detractors here that is going to be the biggest hurdle for a potential commander. Coming in at around 100 dollars US, this game competes for your money with some of the best and most expensive games on the market, ones notably with extremely high production values and as a board gaming fan I can only say that in that field, B-17 Flying Fortress Leader is a tough call.

Still I think for board gamers looking for a great solo experience, B-17 really is a fantastic choice. It has it in all the places it really counts and aside from the high cost of entry, it definitely gets a recommendation from Gamersdungeon for anyone looking to break into the Historic Simulations genre of games. For me personally this has been one of the best games I have played this year, grant it, its early 2020, but hey, for the moment its true.