To immediately jump to the Kickstarter page of the game go here:

Michal: Please tell us a little about yourself Ethan. What do you do for a living, what games do you play? Also, what is your role in the design and publication of the game?

Ethan: To start, I’m a new game designer. I’ve designed games for myself and family since I was a kid, but this is the first one I’m bringing to market. I do market research and consulting – mostly for industrial products – by day, so not all that related to game design.

Some of my favorite games right now are Israeli Air Force Leader by DVG and Set Sails for Glory by Berserker Games. I’m also playing through Andean Abyss (2 Player) right now and quite enjoying it. I also enjoy PC games, especially grand strategy. Regiments by Microprose is probably the PC game with the experience closest to what I’d like to achieve in Forward Defense ’85.

Michal: Now, as for the game, what inspired “Forward Defense ’85”?

Ethan: I’d always been interested in wargaming and thought miniature wargaming looked really cool. I live in a small town in the US, so I’d have to drive about a half hour to get to a store, then when I considered the time investment to play a multiple-hour game there, it just wasn’t feasible to do regularly having a full-time job and family. Forward Defense ’85 started as a way to play through a rule set similar to Flames of War with 3mm miniatures solo. Over the past 4 years, it’s evolved into a really compact solo experience.

Michal: What are the key components of the game?

Ethan: The key components are the campaign sheet, which uses just a few dice rolls to generate each mission, the map tiles which are randomly laid out to form the board, the platoon cards which track the stats of each individual platoon, and the counters which represent those platoons on the actual map.

Michal: Can you elaborate a little about the game mechanics?

Ethan: The game consists of multiple battles making up a campaign. It will ship with one campaign, but there will be opportunities to add more campaigns during the Kickstarter. Each battle is procedurally generated with dice rolls being affected by momentum (whether the player is winning or losing) and attrition on both sides. The player also has the opportunity to reinforce their forces or call in support between battles.

During the battle, the enemy setup is randomly generated and hidden from the player. Actions are carried out at the platoon level, with the player (NATO) having 3-5 platoons and the enemy (Soviet) having anywhere from 6-12 platoons. The AI has a simple list of priorities used when carrying out actions.

Combat is carried out with a roll to hit, and then a roll to destroy vehicles. Infantry are treated as an integrated part of their IFV platoons, not a separate unit.

Michal: How do players determine victory?

Ethan: As the game is simulating a rapid Soviet attack, victory is primarily determined by seizing/holding territory. An objective marker is placed on the map at the beginning of each battle to determine what needs to be held. Of course, completely destroying all of the units on one side or the other also results in victory.

Michal: Recently, solitaire games are getting a lot of traction. Still, it is rarity for tactical level wargames. How are you making sure that type of game will be suitable for solo play?

Ethan: I found that the subject matter I chose plays really well with solo play. The Soviets were known for massive numbers and imprecise tactical control that was dictated by orders higher up the chain – both of these work well against a smaller but more nimble player unit.

From the beginning of the battle, you can start to see how the enemy’s actions are going to take shape – you’re controlling them and you know how the AI behaves. The challenge lies in acting with lesser resources and coming up with a clever strategy to defeat them without having your own troops too badly depleted.

Keeping the AI simple to use was a key goal of mine from the start. In a solo game, if you try to make the enemy too clever it either gets gamey where you can identify specific tactics they use or burdensome where there are far too many tables and flow charts the player has to manage. I actually cut a system early on in development that would have the AI change its tactics. The system added more complexity and uncertainty (I want to avoid circumstances where the player has to wonder what the AI “should” do) without actually providing much meaningful variety in the battle.

The system I have now prioritizes seizing the objective above all else for the AI, with most units making a straight dash for it. There’s a little bit of nuance with how the AI deploys tanks and infantry and will engage some targets of opportunity, but the variety is provided by the terrain, the force composition, the objective placement, and the occasional battles where the player has to attack.

Michal: Now, as for “Forward Defense ’85” itself, what makes this game unique?

Ethan: I built the game around a few key ideas that I think are unique in combination:

  • Easy bookkeeping and quick playtime: I wanted a game that required minimal work on keeping track of units, status, variables, etc and was easy to get on the table. Setup for a battle takes about 10 minutes, and the battle itself takes about an hour or less once you know the system. Resolving rolls, progressing your units, and recording things after a battle takes less than 5 minutes.
  • Campaign design: I wanted each battle to be influenced by the ones that came before it and influence the ones that come after it. If you successfully push back a few attacks, you’re going to be more likely to be sent on a counter attack. If you destroy a ton of enemy units, you’re going to start seeing more second-rate Soviet units coming at you.
  • Doctrinal and tactical plausibility: The AI and setup of the units is inspired by actual Soviet and Russian doctrine. Though it’s only flavor, I did research the units assigned to that sector of the front (around the city of Hanover) and the equipment they had available.
  • Light RPG elements: Your units get better as the game goes on, but if you lose experienced units it makes a noticeable difference. Less experienced units miss more shots and break easier under pressure.

Michal: How are you going to publish the game and where the players interested in the project can get more information?

Ethan: I am self-publishing this game and will be offering a print-and-play option and a boxed option. The Kickstarter launches on April 2, 2024. I found a great US-based printer to work with who has experience in wargames and works well with small print runs, which has enabled me to have an achievable goal on Kickstarter. You can see the full campaign page here:

Or you can follow directly on Kickstarter here:

Michal: What are the future plans for you? Any new designs / games in preparation?

Ethan: Getting Forward Defense ’85 wrapped up is my main focus for now. In addition, I have a couple of ideas for different campaigns that could be expansions. I’d like to take this system to some other fronts in hypothetical WW3 that haven’t seen as much coverage in wargaming.

For other designs, I have a fairly long list of ideas and only a few I’ve started building out. The one that is farthest along is a mini-game on the Battle of Lexington & Concord from the British perspective. I’m also exploring some ideas with a mini-game on the US invasion of Grenada and the Battle of Lake Erie in 1814 – all solo games.

Michal: Thank you very much for interview Carlos, and good luck in your campaign!