Etienne Michot

The Wargame Library Speaker Series continues with Etienne Michot, author of Unterseeboot, as well as Ducks in the Pond, D-Day Solitaire, and more. To learn more about his games, check his profile at Board Game Geek.

What inspired you to enter the BGG solo design contest?

We are talking 2016.  A fellow designer by the name of Pete Belli was putting out his "One-Minute" wargame series at the time — One-Minute Bulge, One-Minute Waterloo, One-Minute Little Bighorn, etc.  These were my inspiration.  The contest was my motivation and avenue to get it done.  I wanted to design a short, fun, realistic, solitaire, dice-mechanic wargame.  One of my interests is submarine warfare; in particular, German WWII U-Boots.  I thought that would be the perfect subject for the design.  The idea pre-dates the contest, but the actual design began with the contest.

there are a handful of games on the subject but it isn't widely covered. how much historical reading did you do ahead of time?

I have pretty much all of the submarine war films on DVD in my collection.  Das Boot was a direct inspiration.  I also have a few dozen books on mainly WWII submarine warfare and biographies.  I was reading "Teddy Suhren: Ace of Aces" biography at the time which led me to picking up more books on the subject.  An excellent book, by the way.  So, I had a solid background on the subject beforehand, and it was an easy transition to game design.  Then the research began in earnest.  Pete (Belli) actually sent me a small manual entitled <U-Boat: Commander's Handbook> for helping him review his One-Minute games, which turned out to confirm much of my research design.  As far as other submarine games, I had not played any, or any serious submarine designs.   I was completely unfamiliar with what others had done.   Unterseeboot was a ground up design without any borrowing from previous designs.  Laughing now, I have yet to play The Hunters. 

What are a few of the most important challenges you felt a U-boat captain should face? Is there a mechanic you wanted to represent but ultimately cut during playtesting?

The advantages of a U-Boat captain were stealth and surprise.  The disadvantages were being out-gunned and out-maneuvered by the convoy destroyers.   It was the perfect asymmetrical warfare.  The sea and its depth were simultaneously the Kapitan's savior and coffin.   He could sneak in and get off a torpedo or two before the tables were turned.  

He had seconds to dive and prepare for being depth-charged.  He could only descend so far before risking implosion.  His oxygen reserves were limited.  More so, he could stay down only so long before needing to surface to recharge the boat's batteries, as Mike Haught emphasized during the 2020 revamping of the game.   On the surface, the U-Boat commander risked aircraft strafing/bombing and ship gunfire/ramming.  It was risk versus reward, but the risk could prove fatal.  Survival was the key.   I wanted all of these concepts in the game, but I did not want a complicated simulation.  

There are many other features I could have included, and may include in a future published expansion perhaps, such as Ultra, torpedo duds, range of Allied aircraft, commander's experience, etc.  Depending on the war year, the percentage of success and survival changed radically.  Whereas important, these features fell outside the parameters I had set for the design, so they were left out (for now).  

What are some of the biggest mistakes you think designers can make when creating solo-first systems?

Good question.  BOTs that follow a strict regimental guidelines using charts and schematics often serve to unnecessarily complicate a game.  When it becomes so meticulous to become monotonous, then it ceases to be enjoyable.  I believe the COIN series has sometimes been criticized as such.  It then simply becomes easier for the solitaire player to play the opponent's side to the best of his/her ability two-handed or four-handed, or whatever.   Randomness on the part of the BOT, through card draw or dice roll, for example, does a fine job of simulating an opponent's action and keeping the human solo player guessing.  With Unterseeboot, it was easy.  The tactics of the enemy aircraft and destroyers dictated what would occur if the U-boat commander did so and so.  There was no need for anything complicated.   Keep it realistic, but keep it simple and fun.

Could you share a few of your favorite solo wargames? Did any influence your design?

There are some very good designs out there.  I have many favorites, I guess.  I enjoy playing lots of different games rather than the same game over and over again with few exceptions.  As I had stated earlier, Belli was an inspiration, but I was not directly influenced by any of the designs below, many of which were published later.   The thing about me, if I like a game that does not have a solitaire mode, I will most likely create one.   That is how the published Solitaire Variant to John Poniske's Plains Indian Wars came about.

So, it may be easier to name the designers and perhaps one of their designs, although find a good solitaire designer and you will find a good design.  Top of my head . . .

Pete Belli, One-Minute Waterloo

Mike Lambo, Long-Range Recon Patrol

Mike Wylie, On to Moscow Solitaire

Gregory Smith, Zepplin Raider

David Thompson, Pavlov's House

Joseph Miranda, Rogers' Rangers

Mike Heiman, 1972: The Lost Phantom

Michael Rinella, Stalingrad: Advance to the Volga

Martin Melbardis, War in the Pacific

John Welch, Levee en Masse