In our June Edition of Wargame Watch, we highlighted this really interesting looking upcoming card driven game on the global war in the Middle East called FITNA (which means Schism in Arabic) designed by Pierre Razoux and being published by Nuts! Publishing. Pierre has done another card driven game on conflict in the Middle East called Bloody Dawns: The Iran-Iraq War, 1980-1988 from High Flying Dice Games. I was immediately intrigued and reached out to Pierre to see if he was interested in doing one of our Designer Interviews on his new game. He was more than willing and has done a fantastic job in getting us information back quickly on the game.
Grant: Tell us a little about yourself Pierre. What games do you prefer to play? What do you do for a living?
Pierre: I am an historian, a former analyst and a think-tanker specialized in the Middle East, as well as an expert in contemporary conflicts and geopolitics and an academic professor teaching in various universities and supervising PhD students! I wrote a dozen books or so; with the last one – The Iran-Iraq War – being published by Harvard University Press and won the prize of the best book of the year 2016 awarded by the Society for Military History. Currently, I am Research Director for a French think-tank named IRSEM (Institute for Strategic Research); I lead researchers and I focus my own researches on the Middle East conflict. I deal on a daily basis with military people, diplomats and policy makers, explaining why FITNA is so much connected to the real world! I am also a gamer since I was a teenager, several decades ago! I belong to the generation of wargamers who grew up with Avalon Hill, SPI, GDW and Victory Games. I always enjoyed playing strategic wargames because I cherish strategic vision far more than the tactics to implement it. I look to put myself in the main leader’s frame of mind rather than being the general winning the battle… but losing the campaign! This is why I really enjoyed playing strategic wargames such as Third Reich and World in Flames or War and Peace (Avalon Hill) for the Napoleonic period. I love when you get few counters, forcing you to make tough decisions with a limited amount of military units, like the Italians and the British in Third Reich! You have a dozen options, but if you choose the bad one, you are dead! Nevertheless, I enjoy also the operational art of warfare, especially in the post-WW2 period. I am a great fan of the Third World War games (GDW) from the 1980s.
Grant: How did you get into game design?
Pierre: When I was a student, I designed several strategic wargames dealing with the Cold War period and an operational wargame on the Yom Kippur War, but they were not published, because I did not have the necessary network at the time. I just playtest them with friends; they were very supportive indeed and convinced me to continue. Then I stopped playing or designing games for 20 years, focusing on my job, my researches and my family, writing books and delivering lectures. I came back to wargame design 8 years ago, while I was drafting my book on the Iran-Iraq War. I was trying to think of what could be the best game system to simulate such a long and complex conflict. Of course it would have to be a wargame focusing on the strategic level, but with room for operational warfare as well as room for pedagogy. I was highly motivated because there was nothing serious and satisfying on the shelf.
Grant: What do you love about design? Conversely what challenges you?
Pierre: I love designing games dealing with post-WW2 balanced wars which played a key role in the evolution of geopolitics. Perhaps, because I am a teacher and a gamer, I want to find a good balance between fluidity, interest, realism and pedagogy to be sure that the players will understand what was really going on and what were the main challenges. Prospective being crucial for my job, I consider important to let room for the “what if?”
What challenges me in designing games is the need to balance realism, historical interest and fluidity. It is also two other constraints: defining a realistic combat results table and finding the best scale and map design. During past years, I was only thinking in terms of hexagons. Now, being more matured and experienced, I have no problem to choose other systems such as card driven games with zones or point to point maps. I am indeed a great fan of the point to point movement system when I design strategic wargames, because I think it remains the best compromise between realism, fluidity and strategic vision. When designing FITNA, one of my biggest challenges was to determine the correct order of battle for all players. My military expertise and my network helped me quite a lot to define the most accurate ORBATs possible.
Grant: What games have you previously designed?
Pierre: Let’s talk only about the games published…Five years ago, I designed October War 1973 for the video game company Wars & Battles. It was an electronic operational wargame (battalion level) for Ipad dealing with the Yom Kippur War (1973). The result was quite nice but the company sank because the Artificial Intelligence of the whole system was not powerful enough…But it was a fruitful experience, as all failures generally are! Then I began to design Bloody Dawns, my card driven game on the Iran-Iraq War. I initially chose Victory Point Games and their fantastic team. We had a year or so of fruitful interactions before they faced some difficulties forcing them to postpone wargame editing. Very gallantly, Alan Emrich suggested that I contact other game companies and I had a quick deal with Paul Rohrbaugh. This is why Bloody Dawns has been published by High Flying Dices Game. I have to say that I have no regret because HFDG and Paul did quite a fantastic job to edit the game. We got nice reviews and articles and everyone playing the game really enjoyed it!
Grant: What do you find compelling about the global war in the Middle East that led to your interest in designing a game around the region?
Pierre: The reason why I designed FITNA was to provide a wargame that was fun and easy to play as well as a pedagogical tool for everyone who wants to better understand the reality of the current conflicts running in the Middle East, particularly in terms of actors’ agendas and political objectives. The fact is that there is not a single good wargame on such a current topic. In the real world, and especially in the Middle East, goals aimed by local leaders are very different from classical victory objectives described in classic wargames. I had the expertise and experience to identify them. Another reason was to present the real balance of power between the regional actors, which is often far different from what is described in badly-informed media and by so-called “experts”. I was confronted so much with people who just do not understand the real game in the Middle East and who have a totally misconceived view on the region. The best compliment I received from FITNA’s test-players remains: “after playing your game for three hours, I will never again decipher the Middle East’s news in the same manner; now, I will be able to understand what really matters!” Lastly, I designed FITNA to allow players to test prospective conflicts in the region; for example, what if Iraq would attack Kuwait again? What if Israel would attack Syria, Hezbollah and Iran? What if Saudi Arabia and Iran would confront militarily in Iraq? What if the Kurds would unify to try to get their independence? What if ISIS would have overthrown the Iraqi or Syrian regime? What if Turkey would occupy a part of Iraq and a part of Syria? (it is already the case since I designed FITNA)…
Grant: How did you take care to include opportunities for players to learn something new about the issues?
Pierre: Well, all the 90 cards plus the 5 special jokers are present in the game precisely to allow the players to learn something new on the global war running in the Middle East! Because FITNA is a card driven wargame, cards are the motor of the game, but cards allow the players to understand what are the key issues and factors influencing the situation, as well as they allow them to learn about real and potential events which affect or could affect that unnamed war.
Grant: What is the background on the choice of the title? What does the Arabic word “FITNA” mean and what kind of nuance does it convey for the way the game plays?
Pierre: In Arabic, FITNA means “religious schism or division”. Basically, it describes the division which affects now the whole Arab and Muslim World, mainly in the Middle East. And it is not only between Sunni or Shia people, like many local politicians would like to convince us to hide their geopolitical agenda! It is not only either between Israel and the Arabs; or between Turks and Kurds. It is indeed far deeper than that and it affects the whole region. Everyone should understand that Sunni can ally with Shia countries when it is in their geopolitical interest (Shia Iran with Sunni Qatar and Oman). On the contrary, Sunni countries can divide between themselves like Turkey and Saudi Arabia, Turkey and Egypt or Saudi Arabia and Qatar. The Shia Houthis in Yemen used to be the best allies of the Saudis during the Yemeni Civil War a few decades ago! Finally, the FITNA name sounds goods and intrigues people who are curious of its significance… What more do you expect from a title?
Grant: Why did you feel a CDG was the best way to model the issues of the Middle East?
Pierre: Because I tried other systems before and I finally reached the conclusion that the card driven game was the best compromise between fluidity, rapidity and realism. Like in real life when you have limited resources, a CDG system forces the players to make tough choices and to take tough decisions. Should I focus more on generating events, accumulating logistics, launching offensives or supporting them with heavy military assets? This is particularly true in the Middle East where the planning capabilities of regional actors are limited (except for Israel) and where leaders have to make crucial decisions. They cannot do everything at the same time. They must prioritize their actions. It is exactly what my CDG system reproduces for players of FITNA. Look at Bashar al-Assad against the Syrian rebellion or the Iraqi Prime ministers against ISIS: they were never in a situation to use all their assets!
Grant: What elements of the situation in the Middle East were you insistent be included in the design? What challenges and opportunities did this present?
Pierre: Since the beginning, I wanted to design a simple game able to describe accurately the complexity of the region. I sincerely think that I succeeded with FITNA, mostly due to the CDG system and all the good advice given by the numerous testplayers! I wanted of course to include not only regular armies but forces from all the involved players including all sorts of armed militias, which became progressively key actors in the region. It was not so easy to accomplish though, because I had to find the good balance in terms of military effectiveness between regular troops and militias, as well as I needed to evaluate the real strength of regular units. Just as an example, look at the Saudi Army which is impressively equipped, but its brigades are really poor in terms of real capacity and fighting spirit. When you design a wargame, you cannot simply add the numbers of tanks, artillery and weapons to define the military strength of a unit! You need to take into account the human factor as well as the training, the doctrine, the motivation and the leadership.
Grant: I know the game is designed for 2-6 players. What factions are available for play? What type of experience does a full 6 player game create differently from a game with fewer players?
Pierre: When I designed FITNA, my concern was to create a game which could be played by a large number of players to simulate local rivalries within regional alliances. At the same time, I designed FITNA to be played by two players knowing that people have difficulties in finding other players. Here are the 8 countries that you can play according to the selected scenario: Iran, Iraq, Syria, Turkey, Israel, Saudi Arabia, Russia and the USA. Each of these countries controls certain militias. Kurdish Peshmerga fighters are usually activated through cards, but one scenario allows one player to play the Kurdish Alliance. Generally speaking, FITNA is designed for regular players as well as for groups of experts who want to test new strategies for the Middle East. Even if the game is fully exciting when it involves several players, every scenario has been designed to be played by 2 players, each of them controlling several countries or factions usually allied (for example Iran-Syria-Russia vs Saudi Arabia-Israel-USA). Of course, it is better, meaning more fun and more realistic, to involve as many players as possible to allow diplomacy and alliances, like in real life! Every player can punctually ally with anyone, as recent Middle East history has proved. Even corporations and small groups keen to experience a nice teambuilding activity can play FITNA with teams of 2-3 players representing each 1 country trying to achieve his objectives. And the challenge begins with defining a consolidated strategy within each camp. I did it many times when I playtested FITNA and the result was just fantastic!
Grant: Why did you decide to not include ISIS as s playable faction? How is their participation and interaction in the conflict handled? Why does this work well?
Pierre: When I began to think about a game depicting wars going on in the Middle East, I had in mind to simulate the fight against ISIS among many other conflicts. My publisher decided not to allow a single player to play ISIS because it would not be popular to say the least! Even if our game is realistic and cynical, we thought that it would be perhaps a step too far to consider ISIS as a “normal” player. So I wondered how I could simulate ISIS in a realistic way in the design. Then I had a bit of inspiration: activating ISIS through event cards and accordingly allowing every player to punctually take control of the Jihadists and manipulate them for one turn to fulfill his agenda, like in real life! It works very well because ISIS units appear on the map “face down”; no one knows the real strength of ISIS units up to the moment he commits them into a fight or when he is attacked by them. The fact that every player can take control of ISIS by playing one of the 4 event cards allowing him to do so maintains fog on ISIS strategy, again like in real life! After having playtested FITNA more than a hundred of times, I can insure you that it works very well and that it is quite realistic.
Grant: What are the force structures of the units? What is the scale of the game? Why did you make these design choices?
Pierre: Most of the military units represent brigades or divisions. Some represent regiments, especially for Special Forces and a few Turkish units represent Corps (a group of 4-5 brigades with the new Turkish Army Structure). Militias and ISIS units represent groups of a brigade’s size. Some Kurdish mobile units represent the equivalent of a light division. Turning to the scale of the game, each turn represents 2 months of real time and each box on the map a key province or crossroads. The 2 month turn system is ideal to simulate a modern war on a strategic level, allowing players enough time to launch repeated offensives against the same key target, as it happened recently for the retaking of cities like Mosul, Aleppo or Raqqa. The Middle East is not Europe or America where logistic systems are great, roads and railways large, logistics effective and C4I performant. If you look back over the past 12 years, you will notice that momentum follows a tempo of 2 months: 2 months to retake Tikrit and Faluja; 4 months to retake Aleppo and Raqqa; 6 months to retake Mosul.
Grant: What is the anatomy of the counters? Can you show us a few examples of the counters?
Pierre: I decided to take a classic approach to the counters. Every military unit gets 3 basic values: Attack – Defense – Movement. The movement allowance represents the number of contiguous boxes that a unit can move through during the regular movement phase. Basically, you can find armored, mechanized, infantry, airmobile, Special Forces and militia units. Assets, Naval ships and Airpower are represented through cards. But all militias are present on the map!
Grant: I noticed there are a lot of different units and types. How have you designed them to minimize confusion on each counters capabilities and special actions?
Pierre: The type of unit is shown with the silhouettes of combat vehicles or assault rifles. A small NATO symbol helps to quickly identify the unit, as well as a smart color code and small flags showing the nationality. I have to say that Thomas Pouchin from NUTS! publishing made really beautiful counters! Armored units have the ability to exploit breakthrough. Airmobile units can perform airmobile or air assault movements. Kurdish Garrisons do not move (except as a combat result if they are forced to withdraw) and ISIS units can only move by winning an offensive.
Grant: What are the differences between Asset and Event cards? What are Special Joker cards used for?
Pierre: Cards introduce fun, surprise and a strong pedagogical dimension, forcing the players to take tough decisions, ensuring, at the bottom line, that no two games will ever be similar. Asset cards are things like Artillery Strike, Close Air Support, Cruise Missiles, Combat Engineer, Leadership or IEDs allow players to support combat (offensive or/and defensive). Event cards allow several things: 1) generating a crucial event (a local revolt, an international strike following the use of chemical weapon, political and diplomatic events); 2) taking reinforcements or replacements; 3) Activating ISIS or Kurdish units. With 4 cards in the player’s hand, a prudent policy is to draw 2 Asset cards and 2 Event cards; then play one as an Event, one to gain OPs, and two as Assets to influence a battle or cancel any cards your opponent may play. Do not forget that if you spend your cards during your opponent’s turn, you will have fewer cards left for your own turn.
Special Joker cards introduce the classic deterrence dimension into the game. They represent the ballistic arsenal or massive air strike capacity of Israel, Iran, USA and Russia, acting as a “golden bullet” for each of these four countries. But once you have played your potentially devastating card, you lose it! And you become more vulnerable to your enemies, like in the real world! It is often better to keep it as a potential threat rather than using it effectively.
Grant: What is the International Tension rule and how do High Tension cards play off of it? What are the International Tension effects and how does this effect the game?
Pierre: The International Tension (IT) rule describes the ability of players to increase or appease the global tension between the USA, Russia and the regional actors of the Middle East. In most scenarios, the IT begins at level 1 or 2. When it reaches Level 5, new extra powerful cards (both assets and events) are added to the draw piles, reflecting the direct implication of Washington and Moscow. At Level 6, every player takes a free batch of reinforcements. Reaching Level 10 provokes an immediate intervention of US troops on the ground, followed by massive air strikes and new reinforcements in all camps (both allied and enemies). Obviously, just as in real life, certain players (like Israel or Saudi Arabia) will have interest to increase the tension to provoke a massive US intervention, when others (Russia, Iran, Turkey) will have interest to avoid it at any cost.
Grant: When a card containing an enemy faction event is played for Ops does the event get triggered? Why was this element not included in the design?
Pierre: I decided not to follow this popular choice in a CDG system to increase the uncertainty of events and the fog of war. All cards contain an Operational Points value (ranging from 4 to 8). When you use a card for Operational Points (OPs) and not for the Asset or Event described, such asset or event is not triggered. However, another player will be able to draw the card again and play it as an asset or an event. Please note that after having played certain events, cards are permanently removed from the game. I do not want to spoil my system and let the players discover it by themselves the vast range of FITNA’s events. Believe me, I tried both systems and I can assure you that mine works better for FITNA.
Grant: I like the Strategic Depots. How are these used by players? How do players stock these depots?
Pierre: Strategic Depots allow a player who does not want to sacrifice a card for OPs to get a free allowance of 2 OPs for the turn…which is very few indeed! There is no counter representing Depots; a player can use this rule every turn if he wishes, but in that case, he cannot spend cards for OPs and he becomes a lame duck! It is up to him.
Grant: What is the basic Sequence of Play? Why did you choose to have one player finish all their activations and actions in the Sequence before moving to the next player? Did you ever consider a simultaneous sequence?
Pierre: The basic Sequence of Play follows these steps: play events; take reinforcements or replacements, if you played the associated card during the event phase; check supply; plan your operations; move units; launch offensives; do strategic movements; complete your hand (4 cards maximum). Once again, I have tried several options, including simultaneous moves and fight. With two players, it can function well, but as soon as you get 3 or more players in the game, it becomes quickly an unmanageable mess! My goal is to provide a very fluid and operative game reflecting reality but being pleasant to play, and I can assure you that my system works very well even if I understand the frustration of some players who would have preferred a more interactive one. As I told you before, my ultimate goal is to provide a simple game allowing players to focus on STRATEGY and VICTORY OBJECTIVES, not on complex and messy processes. I always keep in mind what Alan Emrich told me once: keep it simple and fun to play! Do not forget it is a game, not a puzzle!
Grant: I like the Planning Step. How does this work and why did you feel this was a good element to include in the design? What type of strategy is required to properly plan?
Pierre: Because FITNA is intended to be played by many War College students, and because it remains a pedagogical tool for young strategists as well as for gamers, I decided to allow room for planning. At one stage of their turn, players have to think as J5 staff members (planning) before turning to J3 staff members (managing operations). Like in real wars, you need to plan in advance the logistics and the staff command structures you devote to movements and those devoted for launching offensives. This is what FITNA simulates very well. In this planning step, players must allocate a part of their OPs to movements and the rest to combat. Each OP spent for movement allows moving 2 units on the map. Each OP spent for combat allows launching 1 offensive. And when you have split your OPs allocation, you cannot change your mind. A wise strategy consists of spending half of your OPs for movement and the other half for combat. If you want to focus more on movement or combat, you can allocate one third to one and two third to the other.
Grant: How is Combat initiated? How is Combat handled? What is special about the CRT?
Pierre: Combat is voluntary, never mandatory. After allocating OPs for combat, the phasing player launches offensives. An offensive consists of a single stack (3 units maximum) occupying a single box attacking a contiguous box. The combat system is not based on a classic rapport of strength (1-2, 2-1, 3-1) but on a difference between the attacking and defending forces (-3, 0, +2). Then, after calculating the correct column on the Combat Results Table by taking account of the Box’s defense value, the defender declares any asset, followed by the attacker. Once the final column has been determined, the offensive player rolls a die. The CRT is quite bloody to represent losses during a 2 month turn.
Readers may note that several stacks of units cannot combine their force to attack a single target. However, a single stack can attack several times the same target during the same turn and the same target can be attacked more than once, to reflect repeated mass offensives. If you want to attack a target from different directions, you need to launch different offensives (spending OPs accordingly) and coordinate them carefully. But if you are victorious, you can continue and attack the following box with the same victorious stack. Players have a vested interest to build one or two strong stacks as iron fists able to breakthrough. This is exactly what happened in Syria and in Iraq during the past years.
Grant: Talk about the International Tension Track and how it is influenced? How do caveats tie into this design element?
Pierre: Playing certain Event cards influence the International Tension Track drastically . Once again, I will let the players discover them when they play the game. Like with Santa Claus, you need to preserve some element of surprise in your shopping list! But I can assure you that all these events are more than credible and some of them previously occurred, impacting the IT track (like the launching of cruise missiles to punish the Syrian regime for using chemical warfare, the dawning of Russian aircraft, Russian naval provocation or an unexpected Trump-Putin summit). Similarly, the first time that Iranian (not Hezbollah or militia) and Israeli ground units fight each other it increases the level of the IT. Same consequences when Saudi and Iranian troops fight together or when Russian or Iranian troops attack Turkish units in Iraq or in Syria (out of NATO area). Turning to caveats, let me unveil some of them: Russian troops cannot attack Turkish units within Turkey to avoid implementing NATO Article 5 Treaty which will turn FITNA into another wargame: WW3! For the same reasons, Turkey cannot attack Russian troops in Syria or in Turkey as long as it has not been attacked previously by Russian units. And US and Israeli units cannot confront directly Russian units. It’s sometimes good to get nukes!
Grant: What role do coups play in the game?
Pierre: Coups in Iraq and in Syria introduce more uncertainty into the game. Such coups are highly credible and would act as a game changer for the regional balance of power. I let the players discover the narrative of these coups when they buy FITNA. The consequences are similar: Elite Iraqi and Syrian units (identified by an “E” on the counters) remain loyal to the central government. For all other units, the player rolls a die. Three results are possible: the unit remains loyal; the unit disbands and disappears; the unit joins the rebellion and is replaced by another equivalent “Free Army” unit.
Grant: When and what actions cause US intervention in the region? Why is US approval required to play certain cards? What kind of dynamic interactions does this rule cause between players?
Pierre: As described previously, the US sends massive boots on the ground as soon as the IT Track reaches Level 10. But US troops intervene directly before that when any hostile player takes control of: 1) a box in Israel (not the occupied Golan Heights); 2) a box in Jordan; 3) a box in Kuwait; 4) or when someone attacks the US-Turkish base of Incirlik in Turkey. This rule introduces more uncertainty in the game and reflects very well the unpredictable behavior of the current US administration; more importantly, it forces players to think carefully about their strategy and to limit their ambitions. I have seen many times players, during the playtesting of the game, losing all their gains because they went a “bridge too far” and provoked an unexpected US intervention.
Grant: How do players win the game? How are Victory Points calculated?
Pierre: Players win the game by achieving a maximum of their victory conditions defined in each scenario. Like in the real world, this is not a zero-sum game! Several players can win if they play smartly and promote a sort of informal alliance between themselves, or all players can lose the game! It means that each player needs to carefully study his victory conditions to win the scenario. If a player becomes too powerful, he will probably face a de facto coalition of all other players against him, increasing the risks of losing the game in the end. Alternatively, players can agree to apply a more simple method to determine the victor. Each player adds the victory value of the controlled boxes in enemy territory: 4 Victory Points (VPs) for the two religious cities of Najaf and Karbala (in Iraq), 3 VPs for objectives (mostly main cities), 2 VPs for oilfields and 1 VP for all other boxes. The player getting at least 5 more VPs than his opponent wins the game.
Grant: What have been some changes that have come about through the playtest process? What still needs work?
Pierre: Thanks to the playtest process, I have introduced the International Tension rule, the caveats, the Strategic Depot rule, the planning, many cards, the number of cards in hand (4 instead of 5 as initially planned) and I have adapted several times the victory conditions and the sequence of play. After having tested FITNA more than a hundred times, NUTS! Publishing and I really think we have reached the good balance allowing us to launch the publishing process. This is why we now need gamers to trust us and order the game!
Grant: What are you most pleased about with the design?
Pierre: Without any hesitation, I would say that I am proud of the exceptional fluidity of the game (thanks to the CDG system) and the fact that FITNA really simulates what is going on today in the Middle East and probably tomorrow to! This is why many institutional experts, as well as French military planners and analysts, have used FITNA to test prospective strategies and options for their planning work. My ultimate pride would be to know that FITNA will become progressively what Gulf Strike (Victory Games) used to be for two decades!
Grant: What has been the response of playtesters? How do they feel about the time period now?
Pierre: All my playtesters have been enthusiastic indeed! Nearly a hundred of them have playtested the game at one stage or another over the past 18 months. Most of them are professional experts, including analysts, military planners and diplomats, and they found FITNA extremely useful to understand the reality of each actor’s agenda in the Middle East as well as the reality of the balance of powers in that explosive region. From a gamers perspective, they all enjoyed my system of play that they found really fluid, smooth and accurate at the same time, allowing players to focus on strategy.
Grant: What is next on your design list?
Pierre: First of all, and in accordance with the NUTS! Publishing team, I intend to create extension scenarios to FITNA covering the potential conflicts around the Straits of Ormuz, focusing for example on a war of succession in Oman implying all regional actors after the death of the current old Sultan, or another one depicting a direct confrontation between the US, Saudi Arabia and the UAE versus Iran. Then, I am preparing another new card driven wargame on the famous Yom Kippur War of October 1973, using the same system designed for Bloody Dawns and FITNA but adapted to the realities of that crucial war that I know very well because I wrote my PhD thesis on that topic, two decades ago. I played indeed virtually all wargames covering that specific Arab-Israeli War, which was by far the most balanced one, and I never found a game proposing a fair balance between tactics, operational art and strategy. This is why I decided to design it myself!
Thank you so much for your time with this interview Pierre. I can tell you that I am very interested in this game, as I love the CDG mechanic, but also love other designs on this region and topic, such as Labyrinth: The War on Terror, 2001 to ? from GMT Games. We have seen a lot of interest in the game since including it in our monthly Wargame Watch feature in June and I definitely want to get it to my table.
If you are interested in FITNA: The Global War in the Middle East, you can secure a copy for the pre-order price of approximately $42.50 at the following link: http://www.nutspublishing.com/eshop/fitna-en