|
Selecta84 posted:I've met some new players who are much more into wargames (one of them is heavily into "World in Flames" and has written official scenarios and stuff) then my other group so no bots necessary. But I might try them cause I really liked our playthrough. But the feeling in the Meeting Segment won't be the same :-( Cool. Wanting more is about the best recommendation there is. Did the end "feel" right with the 2nd ed scoring? Maybe its been overhyped but the wet fart ending it originally had is offputting.
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2019 10:48
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 08:40 |
|
|
Sleekly posted:Cool. Wanting more is about the best recommendation there is. I would say that it felt right. Without the dice it feels more earned if you can pull it off. But as I said I was so far off that winning was off the table for me anyways but I think I will do much better next time now that I got the gist off it.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2019 11:18
|
|
|
Its sounding good! Thanks
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2019 11:21
|
|
|
Sleekly posted:Its sounding good! Thanks No problem. I printed out a bot scenario called "Never Surrender" from BGG which is the Player as Churchill vs the other two in the tournament scenario. I never really checked out the normal flow charts but the scenario has its own. They seem to be easy enough to follow.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2019 13:33
|
|
|
Selecta84 posted:Has anyone played the "successor" Pericles? It being a 2v2 sounds intriguing. I've owned it for years but have never played against other humans yet. My friend swears it's superior to Churchill because there's more decision-making outside of the debate phase. That map makes it so much more opaque to new players, though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 25, 2019 22:57
|
|
|
CaptainRightful posted:I've owned it for years but have never played against other humans yet. My friend swears it's superior to Churchill because there's more decision-making outside of the debate phase. That map makes it so much more opaque to new players, though. I've only played it the once, but it was a scrappy learning game where we were all new to it. I enjoyed it, but God its a bear to learn. There's one paragraph in the rulebook that I must have tried to parse about 15 times. It was trying to explain the movement restrictions when hitting other units and I just couldn't make head nor tale of it. Finally something clicked and I realised it was just a pinning rule. Herman sure loves using 6 paragraphs when one will do. I really should try it again soon because I definitely enjoyed it, and think I preferred it to Churchill.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 00:05
|
|
|
I'm another person with Pericles who has never got to play it against another person. Those rules, certainly aren't doing it any favors.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 01:29
|
|
|
We sort of played it that one time but 2p seems pointless.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 02:55
|
|
|
cenotaph posted:We sort of played it that one time but 2p seems pointless. ehhh, yeah but playing a single round with pre-scripted bots doesn't really count. It does somewhat hammer home the complexity of the game though. I've played more complete rounds against bots, but they leave a lot to be desired.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 04:06
|
|
|
Just from the tutorial it felt like it would be completely anemic without the full tension of the team dynamics.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 05:26
|
|
|
CaptainRightful posted:I've owned it for years but have never played against other humans yet. My friend swears it's superior to Churchill because there's more decision-making outside of the debate phase. That map makes it so much more opaque to new players, though. Thanks. I think I will wait before getting this game and see if my non wargame group might enjoy Churchill.
|
|
#
?
Jun 26, 2019 07:27
|
|
|
I'm considering jumping into the OCS series, would it be foolish to grab up some cheap and unpunched older versions of OCS titles that are floating around Ebay? I'm seeing tempting auctions for stuff like Enemy at the Gates, Guderian's Blitzkrieg I and Tunisia I. How playable would they be if I just used the newest series rulebook with the old games? If that's a terrible idea, I'm guessing Tunisia II or Smolensk or Korea would be more reasonable for a newbie compared to Blitzkrieg Legend or Beyond the Rhine? Beyond the Rhine looks really cool though.
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2019 17:02
|
|
|
The problem with some of the older versions is that they aren’t necessarily balanced around the newer rules and they have a bunch of chrome that was smoothed out in the newer version. Honestly I would suggest just grabbing Tunisia II it’s the best entry into the system
|
|
#
?
Jun 27, 2019 23:45
|
|
|
Is Guns of Gettysburg at all solo suitable? Thinking I might wanna playb n VASSAL for the 4th
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 02:29
|
|
|
thorsilver posted:I'm considering jumping into the OCS series, would it be foolish to grab up some cheap and unpunched older versions of OCS titles that are floating around Ebay? I'm seeing tempting auctions for stuff like Enemy at the Gates, Guderian's Blitzkrieg I and Tunisia I. How playable would they be if I just used the newest series rulebook with the old games? Tunisia II is probably the best introductory OCS. I prefer it to the two actual introductory OCSs (which, in any case are now both out of print) - Reluctant Enemies and Sicily II, because it very much feels like a meeting engagement as the forces slowly build up on both sides. Sicily II is horrible as your first OCS title becuase it literally dumps you into the most rules-intensive section with the amphibious landings, a niche part of the rules that you will barely use (used in Korea, and to a msall extent, in BTR and Case Blue), but it's a good second title post-tunisia. RE is a bit of a weird beast - I'm not a fan, but other people swear by it as a first OCS game. Moving on from Tunisia, RE, Sicily II and Korea are all good - though as noted, RE and Sicily II are both out of stock. Korea is a bit like Tunisia in that it starts small and you gradually get more and more units and rules thrown in. Smolensk is less good becuase it throws you in the deep end with high counter density + the Soviet army at this poitn is super unwieldy with AR 1s and 2s being fairly common. BTR may work, using Queen and/or Nordwind as learning scenarios - both are small enough and don't have that many special rules - I'd probably lean towards Nordwind becuase it's a bit more mobile and interesting while Queen is literally a big grindy slugfest. Definitely wouldn't play the campaign game though, until you've got a bit more under your belt. The Blitzkrieg Legend has aboslutely no place in a beginner buylist. There are tiny scenarios (Arras and Holland) and there is the full campaign, with ridiculous unit densities. Fun game, but avoid as an early purchase. Regarding other, older games that are currently OOP GB I does not work with the current OCS rules, period. GBII has a 2001 printing which works withe the current rules, so may be worth considering if you can find it for cheap enough. It's practically the same as GBII's 2011 iteration. It has some fairly decent small-medium scenarios but again, the cmapaign is probably not feasible. Hube's Pocket is being re-done as Third winter, which should be ready in the next cople of years, so not worth buying EatG is probably vaguely playable but has been completely redone as Case Blue Case Blue also has some small-medium leranign sceanrios, but the campaign is even more unwieldy than GBII. It also commands a large premium. Tunisia I is virtually identical to Tunisia II other than a few unit/map changes. But there's no point buying it when Tunisia II is readily avaliable/cheap DAK and DAK2 and Burma both work well under the current ruleset, and are both excellent games and very different to all other games and well worth purchasing. DAK1/2 in particualr has some nice newbie-friendly scenarios. You will almost certainly never finish DAK - but there are plenty of intermediate starting points for DAK with 3-4 month long scenarios rather than the full thing. Sicily I has a bit too much chrome to recommend it. Balitc Gap has pretty ridiculous unit densities so would not recommend it to a beginner. I think Hungarian Rhapsody, when it comes out, will slot in nicely as a middle-weight ame that would be suitable for intermediate play. It kind of occupies a nice niche middle-weight game with both sides being approxiamtely equal and not starting with a meeting engagement like in Tunisia, Korea etc. If avaliability was not an issue, I'd recommend doing OCS in this order: 1. Tunisia 2. Korea 3. Sicily II 4. Smolensk 5. Burma 6. DAK 7. The Blitzkrieg Legend/Baltic Gap 8. Some of the really big ones like Beyond the Rhine/Guderian's Bltizkrieg/Case Blue/Third Witner when it comes out.
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 03:50
|
|
|
tomdidiot posted:In general, you want a game where you can see the long-term efefcts of the sysetem: i.e. a full campaign. 4-5 turn mini scenarios can help teach you how to move the pieces around, but you really need a smallish campaign. That's great advice, thank you! Tunisia II sounds ideal -- digestible intro scenarios but also a meaty enough campaign to give me a real taste of the OCS system. Will pick this up for sure. Gonna chop up your post here to respond to other bits: quote:RE is a bit of a weird beast - I'm not a fan, but other people swear by it as a first OCS game. Hmm, sounds like some interesting choices to be made for a second OCS outing. Korea sounds the most sensible choice, but BTR is really tempting me. I guess I should see whether I like Tunisia II first... ahh who am I kidding, I'll end up buying at least three of these drat things  quote:Regarding other, older games that are currently OOP This is really helpful too, thanks! The one of the old ones that was tempting me most was Enemy at the Gates, mainly because some CSW and BGG chat from the designers said it's playable with the new rules with a simple tweak or two, and that it covers some Stalingrad stuff that didn't make it to Case Blue. Also Case Blue is preposterously expensive. I may still impulse-buy EatG if it crops up again at a cheap price on the strength of the theme; call me boring but I do love me some Stalingrad. And I may be bad at budgeting but I really can't justify £400 for Case Blue! quote:If avaliability was not an issue, I'd recommend doing OCS in this order: Yeah, from the sounds of it I'll definitely start with Tunisia II, then probably Korea, then at some point I'll break down and get BTR. Now the big follow-up question: anyone fancy teaching a newbie some OCS via Vassal sometime?
|
|
#
?
Jul 2, 2019 22:58
|
|
|
Hell, if you're in the UK - I'm in Cambridge and would be up for driving for OCS games.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 00:07
|
|
|
tomdidiot posted:Hell, if you're in the UK - I'm in Cambridge and would be up for driving for OCS games. I am, although I'm in Glasgow so it's a long haul! PM me if you want to arrange something
thorsilver fucked around with this message at 03:08 on Jul 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 02:08
|
|
|
 Played the new GMT COIN Gandhi: The Decolonization of British India, 1917 – 1947 a couple of days ago and on first impressions I think it's a really strong entry into the series. Unfortunately I only got a 3-player game in (I played two Non-Violent or NV sides--and had to win with both) but nevertheless the game held up. I set up the main game (i.e. the long one) and its playtime was...well it was a new game for all of us and one player is kind of slow on his turns.... This might have been the first COIN I played where every campaign/propaganda/win-check card was drawn. As the last campaign card was drawing near everyone was close to winning, but ultimately when the card was sprung the NV sides (me!) won and auto-victory tie-breaker against the Revolutionary side. The non-violent factions have an interesting play style and aren't merely an violent insurgent faction by a different name. While their forces flip face-up and face-down like guerrillas, activating them isn't an expenditure to do things like how attacks are for Revolutionaries and other games' insurgent factions--instead active NV is an opportunity cost to be in Protest spots. NV actions are driven by placing Protest markers in areas to actually accomplish things, but those markers are limited by a track that represents the Raj's restraint against the NV--less Restraint more Protest markers available. However, the cost of Raj's actions are cheaper at low Restraint, so there's this paradoxical system where the easier it is for Raj to do things so it is for the NV factions. The NV don't even use resources: the amount of locations they can perform operations at are dictated by either Restraint or Unity (depending on if the faction is Congress or Muslim League respectively). Revolutionaries get interesting in that they're not just one of three other insurgents but rather throwing a wrench into the peaceful approach of the NV and their conflict with the Raj. They don't even care about support or opposition as much as the amount of population under an Unrest marker (similar to the Terror markers in prior games). The Raj are limited in a neat way in that they can only put Sepoy cubes into the many State areas of the board--the stronger and more versatile Troop cubes (think of other COIN's military where the Sepoy are Police) simply cannot occupy those spaces. The Muslim League faction can even turn Muslim-influenced spaces into States to block even more of the board off. Other things I like are that this is a COIN with lots of fast travel means via Railways as opposed to some of the slower maps in the series; that Gandhi is not a leader piece for battle but a leader piece that enables more Congress capabilities and punishes the Raj severely if arrested; that NV forces get arrested instead of becoming immediately available and have to be pulled out of jail to become playable again; and that the game is on the lighter end of COINs (something along the lines of Cuba Libre or Colonial Twilight if perhaps slightly more involved due to the Non-Violent factions requiring and additional list of operations). As far as first plays go this left the best impression of any COIN I've played outside of Cuba Libre and maybe Colonial Twilight. Haven't played Liberty or Death or Pendragon yet though--but I suspect those won't win over Gandhi. Finally, I like that the playbook has a section dedicated to dispelling three major myths about non-violent protest and their perceived ineffectiveness. It was an interesting and persuasive read.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 03:00
|
|
|
Okay, explain to me as if I was a child, please. Advanced Tobruk. It looks like it is a whole system of games at this point which covers lots of WWII. Does this use the same system as - or an updated version of - the system from the old Tobruk game from Avalon Hill? 
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 14:29
|
|
|
When two chits love each other very much...
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 14:31
|
|
|
Cessna posted:Okay, explain to me as if I was a child, please. Sounds like you've got it. The guy who runs Critical Hit publishing said "hey this Advanced Squad Leader craze is cool, but I don't want to have to read all kinds of rulebooks, and I also wish these products weren't playtested and were produced with lovely quality components and sometimes missing pieces and we could repackage the same game under multiple names to weasel people out of money. I'll just re-use the same system from AH's Tobruk and call it my own" ...and thus ATS was born.
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 14:39
|
|
|
Cessna posted:Okay, explain to me as if I was a child, please. Yep, that’s correct. I’ve never played Tobruk or ATS but from what I’ve heard it’s the system to play if you really love penetration statistics and angled armor plate thickess calculations. Edit: Critical Hit is a terrible company but I assume that at least part of their products are okay since they are still alive Obfuscation fucked around with this message at 14:46 on Jul 3, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 14:42
|
|
|
Huh, cool. I liked old Tobruk back in the day. I may have to pick up one of the new games. Thanks for the info!
|
|
#
?
Jul 3, 2019 14:47
|
|
|
Combat! Just charged to my card. It was like $110 or something even on preorder which seems steep as hell and no, I don’t know what I was thinking at the time.
AARP LARPer fucked around with this message at 02:58 on Jul 7, 2019 |
|
#
?
Jul 6, 2019 19:42
|
|
|
OCS Update - presented at Consim Exxpo last Week. “Curtis H. Bear” posted:
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 02:46
|
|
|
Gonna be interesting to see how they model the operational and strategic surprise during Bagration.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 03:05
|
|
|
The Hungary game sounds cool, I hope it comes out reasonably soon. Last I checked the next BCS game was also going to be about Hungary, I wonder how far along that is.
|
|
#
?
Jul 7, 2019 10:30
|
|
|
OCS Sealion sounds awesome
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2019 00:40
|
|
|
Huskalator posted:OCS Sealion sounds awesome He’ll yeah, I’m all over this (five years from now)
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2019 02:01
|
|
|
I see that CSI still has a few copies of Beyond the Rhine still available. Is that a good place to try a big OCS game after I've done something like Smolensk or, if I find it, Tunisia II?
|
|
#
?
Jul 8, 2019 06:02
|
|
|
Chill la Chill posted:I see that CSI still has a few copies of Beyond the Rhine still available. Is that a good place to try a big OCS game after I've done something like Smolensk or, if I find it, Tunisia II? Check tomdidiot's response to me above, tons of good info about where to start with OCS. I was thinking the same as you and was tempted by BTR, but in the end took tomdidiot's advice and ordered Tunisia II and Korea. BTR seems best saved for much further down the line, after having had a few goes at more manageable campaigns with less maps and unit density.
|
|
#
?
Jul 9, 2019 04:54
|
|
|
Played some Brazen Chariots ftf yesterday with 5.5 Operation Battleaxe. My initial opinion of this scenario is very favorable. We (two somewhat experienced BCS players) finished it in about 5.5 hrs which is pretty ideal for me. The narrative was great. There was a lot of tense back and forth over the VP hexes. 7 Arm managed to capture two objectives then annihilate all armored units in 15 PZ with no loss in fatigue. There were lots of interesting decisions and puzzley situations for such a bite sized scenario. We ended in a draw with the Allies capturing the Hafid Pass and the Axis managing to retake the other objectives.
|
|
#
?
Jul 14, 2019 14:45
|
|
|
For the OCS people in the thread, Hungarian Rhapsody is up for preorder -- http://www.multimanpublishing.com/tabid/59/ProductID/370/Default.aspx Having now received Tunisia II and Korea, with Enemy at the Gates on the way from Ebay, I got overexcited and almost bought this too before I remembered MMP doesn't do EU-friendly shipping 
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2019 19:59
|
|
|
A two map game and it retails for $140, are they loving high?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2019 20:44
|
|
|
That was my first thought too... Last Blitzkrieg has 4 maps and 6 countersheets and it’s ”only” $132, I guess maps are cheap to print?
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2019 22:22
|
|
|
Maps are indeed quite cheap to print if you don't have to mount them. All the cost is for countersheets, so I'm not surprised at the cost. Eastern Front has huge unit density.
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2019 22:27
|
|
|
[q="perrycocke"] Production costs are going up.[/q] From BGG
|
|
#
?
Jul 15, 2019 23:03
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:Maps are indeed quite cheap to print if you don't have to mount them. All the cost is for countersheets, so I'm not surprised at the cost. Eastern Front has huge unit density. Yeah - you can definitely see this by comparing how much this costs compared to Brazen Chariots, which has 3 maps and 4 countersheets, and costs about 2/3rds of the price of this. Admittedly it does compare pretty badly to Beyond the Rhine, which comes with an extra 2 maps and 2 extra countersheets for like $6 less.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2019 04:50
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 8, 2024 08:40 |
|
|
thorsilver posted:For the OCS people in the thread, Hungarian Rhapsody is up for preorder -- http://www.multimanpublishing.com/tabid/59/ProductID/370/Default.aspx I get most of my EU Friendly stuff through Hexasim.
|
|
#
?
Jul 16, 2019 04:51
|
|