by RockyMountainNavy, 15 September 2024
Are you a wargamer that prefers to play battles named after nearby cities or rivers? Do you know that you have that choice even when playing a wargame not set during the American Civil War? The Battle of Khalkhin Gol: July – August 1939 (Janko Nišavić, Vukašin Nišavić, Princeps Games, 2024) challenges players to play out the historical summer 1939 battle between the Soviet Union and Imperial Japan. Called the Nomonhan Incident after a nearby hamlet by the Japanese and Battle of Khalkhin Gol (literally “Khalkhin River” in the Mongolian language) by the Soviets, historians point to how this battle—and the Soviet victory—shaped World War II.
In the summer of 1939, Soviet and Japanese armies clashed on the Manchurian-Mongolian frontier in a little-known conflict with far-reaching consequences. No mere border clash, this undeclared war raged from May to September 1939 embroiling over 100,000 troops and 1,000 tanks and aircraft. Some 30,000-50,000 men were killed and wounded. In the climactic battle, August 20-31, 1939, the Japanese were crushed. This coincided precisely with the conclusion of the German-Soviet Nonaggression Pact (August 23, 1939) – the green light for Hitler’s invasion of Poland and the outbreak of World War II one week later. These events are connected. This conflict also influenced key decisions in Tokyo and Moscow in 1941 that shaped the conduct and ultimately the outcome of the war. (Goldman, Stuart D. “The Forgotten Soviet-Japanese War of 1939.” – The Diplomat, October 7, 2013.)
While players of The Battle of Khalkhin Gol may perhaps imagine the far-reaching consequences of their actions, the game itself has a more finite focus, that being to fight the climax of the dispute between July and August of 1939.
I am of a bit mixed opinion on The Battle of Khalkhin Gol. From a wargamer perspective the game is visually stunning with relatively clean game mechanisms. As a depiction of history, however, I have some concerns as the game raises questions in my mind as to choices made by the designers between historical accuracy and game balance.
Big box battling
Princeps Games is a wargame publisher from Serbia with, according to BoardGameGeek, five games to their credit. I was fortunate enough to back their latest release, The Battle of Khalkhin Gol: July – August 1939, though a late pledge on Kickstarter. This wargame will definitely stand out in your collection if for no other reason than the challenge that comes from finding shelf space for the 11” x 12” x 4”, eight-pound box.
Not that one should worry about shelf space because the game components of The Battle of Khalkhin Gol are of visually appealing and deservedly belong on your gaming table. The mounted mapboard has two sides; both depict the same battlefield but one uses more abstract graphics whereas the other is more artistic. The “euro-style” counters are thick with a nice finish and pre-rounded corners. The player aids are thick cardstock and the cards are neatly finished (though a bit thin which might call for sleeving—though finding sleeves for the odd sizes may be a bit challenging). Most impressive are the storage boxes found at the bottom of the game box. All the components of the game will fit inside the boxes; I admit, however, that I am not sure I will bag counters or just put then unsorted into the boxes. The overall number of counters for each side is not that great so maybe sorting at set up will not be an onerous time sink.
The 44-page rulebook for The Battle of Khalkhin Gol is approximately digest-size with glossy pages. The rules in the book are complete but could benefit from a more logical arrangement of the contents and maybe a bit more formatting to help distinguish sections.
Go go Gol
While admitting that no two wargamers ever see a game the same way, The Battle of Khalkhin Gol is likely to be viewed by many as a medium-low complexity game. The game engine has several interesting game mechanisms that are likely both familiar yet different.
Victory. The Battle of Khalkhin Gol is played out over eight rounds. The rules never specifically state so but the rounds are weekly starting at the beginning July and concluding at the end of August. There are three different ways to win as defined in rule 1. How to Win the Game:
-
- Victory Condition No.1: In order for the USSR to win, it must occupy 5 of the 9 checkpoints on the disputed territory (marked with a white flag) and hold them until the beginning of the next round, while also controlling at least 4 of its 6 checkpoints on Soviet territory. If this is not achieved by the end of the 8th round, the winner of the game is the player who controls Japan.
- Victory Condition No.2: If the Soviet player takes control of the Nomonhan and holds it until the beginning of their next round, the Soviet player wins the game.
- Victory Condition No.3: If the Japanese player takes control of the Tamsek-Bulak and holds it until the beginning of their next turn, the Japanese player wins the game. (Rulebook, p. 5)
Movement. One game mechanism in The Battle of Khalkhin Gol with a bit of a twist from the norm are the rules for movement. Since combat occurs during movement an attacking unit must have sufficient Movement Points (MP) to enter the hex being attacked; there is no “race across the board and end next to a unit before attacking.” If the attacking unit does not have MP to (notionally) enter the enemy occupied hex no attack is possible. This twist on usual movement rules also impacts Retreat results in combat where a unit “retreats” into the hex from which it attacked. Practically this means the attacker “retreats” to the adjacent hex it attacked from. A tad confusing at first but logical once the players grok the rules for movement and combat.
Units. There are five different types of units (Infantry, Artillery, Tank, Cavalry, and HQ) in The Battle of Khalkhin Gol and each has an Attack and Defense Value and Movement Allowance; artillery adds a range (all other units attack adjacent hexes the hex entered only). However, unlike many wargames, only units of the same type may stack together in a hex and then in a grouping of no more than five units. In the rules the limits on the number of units in a stack is called the “strength” of the unit (not to be confused with attack/defense strength which is defined int he combat rules). The somewhat atypical stacking rule for units is a key part of resolving combat which we will discuss below. Some units in The Battle of Khalkhin Gol are specially designated with an Asterisk as “General’s” units and have a special ability in that the lowest possible die roll is reflected by the Generals’ Skill rating. General’s Skill are found on the General’s Cards; at the beginning of the game players choose three Generals (an Artillery, Infantry, and Tank General) to use for the campaign.
Air Superiority. Perhaps the most complex game mechanism in The Battle of Khalkhin Gol are the rules for air combat. Air combat is in many ways a somewhat separate, modular game. The expansive rules (with several examples) take up roughly ten pages of the 44 page rule book. There are actually two different “Air Superiority Modules” in the game, Basic and Advanced. In the Basic module, players are given eight Air Tokens where one Token is used each round. The players decide if the Air Token that round will be used to modify a combat, reduce the enemy’s supply lines, reduce the movement of an enemy unit, or are “bluffs” since two of the Tokens are blank.
The Advanced air module for The Battle of Khalkhin Gol is a far more nuanced game. Players use the Air Base Strength Card to track the Air Base strength and capacity as well as the number of bombers or fighters. Anti-aircraft is also assigned to protecting air bases or supply lines. Each round starts with an Air Superiority Battle using fighters. After the battle for Air Superiority players then use bombers to attack or modify ground attacks or attack enemy air bases or supply lines. The entire Advanced module is admittedly a bit abstract but it allows the players to make key decisions as to the balance of fighters/bombers and priority of effort to supporting ground units, reducing the enemies air strength, or attacking enemy supply lines.
Unit Supply. Like in many wargames, Headquarters units in The Battle of Khalkhin Gol are used as supply points and have a finite range. Out of supply units suffer penalties in movement and combat.
Initial Game Setup. I like the map-based scenario setup guides at the back of The Battle of Khalkhin Gol rule book; while free-form setup is allowed the rules offer several pre-scripted deployment options that players can secretly choose.
Battle. Ground combat in The Battle of Khalkhin Gol is a bit different from many wargames. Recalling first that only units of the same type can occupy a given hex, when determining Attack or Defense Strength the value of the top unit is taken and added to the sum total of the number of units. For example, if a hex with a stack of three infantry with an Attack Value of 2 initiates combat, the Total Attack Value is 2 (infantry Attack Value) plus 3 (number of units in stack) for a total of 5. The Attacker to Defender values are converted to a ratio and a singe die is rolled. There are only a few Terrain Attack Modifiers and possibly Calendar modifiers to the die roll which is then converted to a final combat result.
Buried in the battle rules for The Battle of Khalkhin Gol is a very interesting game mechanism that I didn’t expect but find quite welcoming. Rule 6.3 Adjusting Luck allows players to choose one of three die types for playing the game. As the rule specifies:
-
- Use of standard D8 where the players have 12.5% chance to get any number from 1 to 8.
- Use of custom D20 with numbers 1 to 8. Here you will have 10% chance to get a 1, 2, 7 or 8, but 15% chance to get 3, 4, 5 or 6.
- Use of custom d20 with numbers 1 to 8, but in a way that you get 5% chance to get a 1 or 8, 10% chance to get 2 or 7, 15% chance to get 3 or 6 and 20% chance to get 4 or 5. (Rulebook, p. 27)
As the rule goes on to clarify, “In this way the strength ratio of the units will have more impact on the results of battle, as the players have less chance to completely fail (roll 1) or perform brilliantly (roll 8)” (Rulebook, p. 27).
Calendar. The Battle of Khalkhin Gol comes with 24 Calendar cards, one for each time period (round). At the start of the game one card for each round is randomly selected. Each round the Calendar card is revealed and its effects applied for that round. The Calendar cards are a nice “random events” element that help ensure no two games will ever play the same.
Reinforcements. On certain rounds of The Battle of Khalkhin Gol players can buy new units or replenish old. They do so by spending Political Points (PP) which won or lost based on control of Checkpoints. Interestingly, PP are represented in the game by currency. This game mechanism of PP as money gives The Battle of Khalkhin Gol a bit of a thematically 4X-game flavor.
Tactical Improvements. Political Points can also be spend on Tactical Improvements, which in The Battle for Khalkhin Gol are Espionage or Deception. The interesting game mechanism here is not what the Improvements do but in how they are acquired. Basically, a player invests in the Improvement with more investment resulting in a higher probability of success when used. The catch, however, is that Improvements are not available unless the player “cashes out” the Improvements which locks in the number of tokens available and their effective die roll. Thus, if a player wants lots of opportunities to play tokens with a higher degree of effectiveness, they need to invest more (and longer) to get the Improvement. This game mechanism sets up a nice conundrum for the players; invest more to get an better effect later or invest less to possibly get an effect sooner but likely with less effectiveness.
[I must admit that Tactical Improvements is one place in the rulebook that I was a bit unsure about the proper rule usage. The rules for Tactical Improvements are found in 10. TACTICAL IMPROVEMENTS. The rules very clearly are related to the use of Political Points and add great thematic flavor to the game. The history of the Battle of Khalkhin Gol includes several references to the use of deception, especially by Zhukov. Deception even gets a shout out as a Calendar card event. The Advanced rules for the Air Superiority Module (4.6.2.2. Advanced), however, clearly state, “Player Cards (Espionage and Deception) are discarded and they are not used in the game” (Rulebook, p. 11). I was sure this could not be; what possible reason could call for dropping Tactical Improvements simply for Advanced air combat? The answer finally came to me following a very careful rereading of the air rules that start on page 11 of the rulebook and realizing that the examples of play on page 18 (full page) and page 19 (partial page) are NOT a continuation of the rules but, in effect, text call-out boxes. This is hard to see when reading the rules given the use of the same font and no real distinguishing formatting. With that new understanding it is now clear that in the Advanced air game the player that wins air superiority has the choice to carry out one of three possible actions:
-
- Use the Bombers to attack the enemy’s supply lines (Available from Round 2!!!) (Rulebook, p. 16); success can lead to loss of Political Points.
- Use the Bombers to attack the enemy’s Air Base (Rulebook, p. 19); success reduces Air Base Strength.
- Gain +1 attack modifier and 1 Espionage or Deception (Available from Round 2!!!) (Rulebook, p. 20).
This is perhaps the most egregious example of poor rules formatting in the game. This is not to say the rules are poorly written but, like I said above, they could use a bit more attention to formatting to make them easier to understand.]
Solo Mode. The Solo Mode for The Battle of Khalkhin Gol allows players to play against either a Japanese or Soviet Bot. The Bots are far from any form of AI and instead are a list of priorities to guide the player in executing the Bot in play.
The Battle of Khalkhin Gol version of history
While playing The Battle of Khalkhin Gol I read Nomonhan, 1939: The Red Army’s Victory That Shaped World War II by Stuart D. Goldman (Naval Institute Press, 2012). Reading the book, however, raised a few questions, some of which I do not usually encounter in my Wargame to History research. Amongst the questions raised:
-
- Related to the order of battle, what was the balance of forces present at the start of the battle and how is this reflected in the wargame?
- Related to Sequence of Play, as compared to history who attacked first?
Order of Battle. In rule 5. INITIAL GAME SETUP of The Battle of Khalkhin Gol, the Starting Ratio of unit strength—both in number of units and combat power—for both Japan and the USSR are identical. History tells us the ratio of forces was generally similar but not identical. According to Goldman, the strength of the Imperial Japanese force that started the battle in early July 1939 was, “15,000 men, 120 guns, and 70 tanks” (Goldman, p. 112). Zhukov brought to the battle for the USSR, “12,500 men, 109 artillery and antitank guns, 186 tanks, 266 armored cars, and more than 100 aircraft” which included a “more than 6:1 Soviet advantage in armor” (Goldman, p. 106).
[Of note, while the rulebook for The Battle of Khalkhin Gol has four pre-made Soviet and four pre-made Japanese deployment options none are noted as the historical version. If the players want to play the “historical” version of events they must do their own research. For the purposes of my play through I chose the Japanese setup with Infantry General Komatusubara in the north and Tank General Yasuoka in the center (Rulebook, p. 42). The Soviet setup chosen placed Tank General Zhukov in the center (Rulebook, p. 38).]
By setting the Starting Ratio of Japan and the USSR in The Battle of Khalkhin Gol as quantitatively equal (including even armor) the game ignores not only the reality of the history but also qualitative factors. In their assessment of the first week of fighting, Goldman points out the intelligence errors of the Japanese Kwangtung Army going into the battle:
Their intelligence error was not merely quantitative, but qualitative as well. The Soviet forces not only were more numerous [as compared to pre-battle intelligence estimates] but were much more powerful than had been anticipated. The attacking Japanese forces actually enjoyed a slight numerical advantage as well as tactical surprise at the outset, but the Red Army fought tenaciously and the weight of Soviet firepower proved decisive. (Goldman, p. 121)
To be clear, there are no qualitative differences between the units of Japan and the USSR in The Battle of Khalkhin Gol. All Infantry units, Japan or USSR, have an Attack Value of 2 and a Defense Value of 3 with 14 Movement Points. All Artillery, Japanese or USSR, has an Attack Value of 4 and a Defense Value of 1 with 11 Movement Points and a range of 4 hexes. All Tank units have Attack = 4 and Defense =4 with 18 Movement Points. All Cavalry are Attack = 3, Defense = 2 and 20 Movement Points. All Headquarters defend with 6 Defense Value and possess 15 Movement Points with a command span of 6 hexes. There is absolutely no reflection of the different fighting spirit of the Japanese or Soviets, the different tanks, or the longer range Soviet artillery. The General’s cards certainly introduce some flavor but the game effects are marginal (only Asterisk General units gain the effect and only if supporting the appropriate Headquarters). For all practical purposes the Japanese and Soviet forces in The Battle of Khalkhin Gol are mirrors both quantitatively and qualitatively. Indeed, it appears the designers of The Battle of Khalkhin Gol chose to “perfectly balance” the players’ forces. While that design decision certainly promotes play it also lessens any historical educational value to be learned through game play.
Sequence of Play. The Sequence of Play in The Battle of Khalkhin Gol (called the Action Sequence in the rules) places the USSR turn first in every round. That literally means that the game in Round 1 starts with the Soviets actively kicking off with an offensive. The Battle of Khalkhin Gol, however, very clearly started with a Japanese attack (offense).
On the night of July 1, as Soviet reinforcements were being brought up, Komatsubara began the first phase of his attack. His 23rd Division, together with the Yasouka Detachment, converged on Fui Heights, just east of the Halha [Khalkhin] River, some eleven miles north of its confluence with the Holsten. (Goldman, p. 114)
This is not to say the Soviets were passively awaiting the Japanese onslaught. As Goldman relates:
In fact, Japanese air activity, particularly the big raid of June 27, had put the Soviets on the alert. Zhukov suspected that a Japanese ground attack might be forthcoming, although nothing as audacious as a large-scale crossing of the Halha River was foreseen. During the night of July 1, Zhukov moved his 11th Tank Brigade, 7th Mechanized Brigade, and 24th Mechanized Infantry Regiment (36th Division) from their staging area near Tamsag Bulak to a position just west of the Halhal River. (Goldman, pp. 112-113)
Granted, the Japanese offensive in early July (round 1) can be simulated by conducting the air superiority battle before the USSR player “passes” their turn. At best, one might allow the Soviet player to conduct their turn with limits that units cannot cross the river or otherwise attack. Those conditions could loosely simulate both the late June Japanese air raids and Soviet last-minute preparations. But that is not how the rules for The Battle of Khalkhin Gol are written. The designers, for whatever reason, chose to have the USSR turn first in each round including the start of the game. While ahistorical, I have to believe this is a conscious design decision made in the name of play balance.
[To be honest, I tried—really tried—to play the game using the rules as written. My first play I set the initial weather condition (Wind which reduces Bomber accuracy) and revealed the Calendar event (Round I, Event 3 which states, “General’s ability does not apply to the Japanese artillery.” Using the Advanced air module, in the Air Superiority Battle the Soviets won the First Player Token and also gained Air Superiority which reduceed the Japanese fighter strength by 1. Since this is round 1 the only possible Soviet bomber action is to attack the Japanese Air Base. The three defending anti-aircraft guns all missed. The final Air Strength ratio was Soviet 14 – Japanese 10. The combat result after die rolls was Soviet 8 – Japanese 2; the Japanese Air Base Strength dropped to 6/30. The ensuing Soviet attack was the exact reverse of the historical Japanese offensive and saw Zhukov crossing the Khalkhin below the Fui Heights and slicing through Komatsubara’s small infantry force before being bogged down fending off a flanking attack from Yasuoka’s armor. In the meantime, the unnamed Soviet Infantry General in the south dislodged the small defending force commanded by an equally unnamed Japanese Artillery General and rush a tank unit towards Nomonhan seeking an automatic victory. The Japanese were (barely) able to intercept the rushing Soviet tanks and made a heroic stand in front of Nomonhan. At the end of the game the Soviet player held five checkpoints on the Japanese side of the river though only four were “white flag” in the disputed territory which meant the Japanese player wins. While the game was certainly entertaining to play, the historian in me nonetheless felt cheated at not being able to replay the historical attack. Sigh…]
Balancing act
My questions about the wargame The Battle of Khalkhin Gol—as informed by my reading of Nomonhan, 1939—ultimately revolve around the question of game balance versus historical “accuracy.” The famous saying from British statistician George E. P. Box goes “All models are wrong, but some are useful.” I recognize that many design factors go into model development, and as a game important factors such as player engagement and playability compete with other factors like historical accuracy or theme. In the case of The Battle of Khalkhin Gol it is clear to me that the game clearly favors playability over historical accuracy. If the goal of the designers was to make a wargame that is fairly easy to learn and play, even at the expense of historical accuracy, they well-achieved that objective. The Battle of Khalkhin Gol is a very fun game to play that looks darn sharp on the gaming table.
If the designers of The Battle of Khalkhin Gol intended the game to be even a cursory study of the battle, well, I am less sanguine on the result. I am frankly a bit surprised where on the spectrum of balance and historical accuracy The Battle of Khalkhin Gol lands. It brings to mind another George E. P. Box quote, “Remember that all models are wrong; the practical question is how wrong do they have to be to not be useful.” The extreme difference between the order of battle and timeline of events makes it clear that The Battle of Khalkhin Gol has limited applicability to studying and learning any real military or political lessons from the battle. The Battle of Khalkhin Gol is a fun game model to play but not one that should be used for any degree of serious historical learning.
It’s a war game after all…
Regardless of my concerns over historical accuracy, The Battle of Khalkhin Gol is ultimately a very good war game. The components are beautiful, the rules are relatively easy to teach and use, and game play is fairly quick. The Battle of Khalkhin Gol makes for a very good candidate to play on family game nights or for casual play at a convention. If you want to study the Battle of Khalkhin Gol, however, this wargame has the barest of educational value beyond acknowledgement that there was a battle and what the terrain approximately looked like. It is clear to me through this Wargame to History exploration that there are good war games—like The Battle of Khalkhin Gol—on the market that are thematically historical without necessarily being educational. To be clear, I am not by any measure disappointed with my purchase of The Battle of Khalkhin Gol; I will unhesitatingly recommend the game to any wargamer or boardgamer that may be interested. Just be sure you are getting the game to play, not study!
Thank you for visiting The Armchair Dragoons and mounting up with the Regiment of Strategy Gaming.
You also can find our regiment’s social media on Mastodon, Facebook, Twitter, YouTube, and even Threads. (We have an Instagram page and it’s really just a placeholder & redirect to our articles.)
You can support The Armchair Dragoons through our Patreon, also, and find us at a variety of conventions and other events.
Feel free to talk back to us either in our discussion forum, or in the comments below.
