Game Proposals

HQ for planning the next gaming event in Sandusky
DaveM1
Major
Major
Posts: 198
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2014 6:05 pm

Re: Game Proposals

Post by DaveM1 » Wed Aug 20, 2014 4:31 pm

Also - not familiar with "Third World War" - subject could be fun!

(Has tanks! Has despicable bad guys! Has lots of movement!)

ThisLee
Captain
Captain
Posts: 106
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2014 8:48 pm

Re: Game Proposals

Post by ThisLee » Fri Aug 22, 2014 2:33 am

tombeach wrote: After the BFN game which good friends of mine (hardcore monster gamers) played at BGF 2012, they trashed it, saying that the system was unrealistic and too restrictive regarding the Allies breakout abilities and combined arms. But last year at BGF, Marcus Randall and I had a good discussion on the game. As someone who's opinion I greatly respect, he turned me around on the game, saying Holt had it exactly right and that I should get the game on my table immediately. I know Merv and you guys have played it and wonder what the consensus is? Thought Merv was high on the game last year? But then I've read some negative comments just recently as I recall. Anyway, I too would be up for BFN.
I didn't like BfN the first 2 times I played it, but last year at Winterfest turned me around on it. It plays pretty simply and quickly for a monster game. It's not hard to learn at all.l

CWB series is the pinnacle in brigade-level Civil War gaming. Simple, easy to understand rules, beautiful maps, written orders and the closest thing to actual period field command control I've ever experienced. And while The Seven Days is huge (5.5'x8.5') the counter density is comparatively quite small. I wouldn't recommend it for the sake of novelty. It's far too demanding and unforgiving.
Sounds daunting?
Also - not familiar with "Third World War" - subject could be fun!

(Has tanks! Has despicable bad guys! Has lots of movement!)
It has all of those, for sure. I'm confident we could play it to conclusion before the Fest ends.

tombeach
Major
Major
Posts: 185
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 6:30 pm
Location: Rochester, WI

Re: Game Proposals

Post by tombeach » Fri Aug 22, 2014 4:46 pm

Have you tried these as multiplayer? On BGG several posts suggest the action tends to burn units out, leaving them (and their commanders) unable to do much for the rest of the game.
Those comments, more than likely, are coming from guys who either like to wield their Civil War divisions about like tanks or are old-school TSS gamers who have never been exposed to Dean's concepts of nineteenth century command and combat or reject them out of hand. And while I have not played either NbH or LCV beyond 2-player, I can confidently say that they will accommodate multiple players for the entire length of the grand battles (My game at Expo 2012 was right next to the final play test of LCV and everyone was quite busy all week). There are players who cringe at the notion of things like written orders, following them in the face of changing circumstances, and uncontrolled events like Fluke Stoppage (wherein divisions under attack orders must check to see if they continue on or falter). To each his own. But it's fair to say that if you don't like the notion of being able to grind your troops right down to the last man, you won't like Dean's LoB system.

Extremely accessible, playable monsters. I continue to be surprised how fast they play while still capturing the flavor of the period and making each turn a nail-biter. And the rules are super-clean and the system can be taught to a new player in a a couple of turns.

tombeach
Major
Major
Posts: 185
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 6:30 pm
Location: Rochester, WI

Re: Game Proposals

Post by tombeach » Fri Aug 22, 2014 6:03 pm

Sounds daunting?
Nearly everyone comes to the CWB series games thinking they're perhaps one tick above beer & pretzel gaming. I know I did. It's easy to be so casual when first looking at the games. But nothing could be further from the truth. The games require both grand tactical and operational thinking as well as forethought, planning and coordination with the rest of your army. And as new orders take time to generate, deliver and accept (hopefully!), the expectation of rapidly adjusting to changes on the battlefield can prove frustrating. So they are "demanding" in the sense that if someone thinks they're going to just show up and push counters around turn-to-turn, reacting as things develop, they're in for a rude awakening.

Not daunting, Lee. Just requires a sober approach, appearances to the contrary. ;{)

DaveM1
Major
Major
Posts: 198
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2014 6:05 pm

Re: Game Proposals

Post by DaveM1 » Fri Aug 22, 2014 9:42 pm

Just on principle, the idea of branching out into new areas appeals to me. However, with the War Room being inactive we don't have that resource to work everybody up on the system ahead of time. This might be a real problem in general, and might mean we'd be better off redoing a system that we've all played.

It would be possible to get there with Vassal and Skype, I suppose, but some folks might find that problematic.

(And would some find it hard to play a game with nary a Panzer in sight???)

TEJ
Captain
Captain
Posts: 105
Joined: Tue Aug 12, 2014 12:30 am

Re: Game Proposals

Post by TEJ » Sat Aug 23, 2014 3:26 am

Re. BfN, I find it very interesting that I’ve heard critiques about the Allies being insufficiently powerful and also about how the Germans run out of infantry by mid-June. Both of those critiques can be correct, given the play styles of different groups, but that tells me that my high opinions of the game are correct. The challenge might be to break out of the mindset of whatever other game each of us knows and play BfN as BfN.

As an example, when I first touched the game last year as a German, I obsessed about defending every hex by placing a unit in every hex. As it happens, that can be effective in BfN, but it also has its downsides. The Allies must use supplies to bombard a lot of hexes in order to spend more supplies in order to attack a few places between the bombardments. On the other hand, the German defensive strength is thus low and the smaller Allied attacks can still get good odds that can often take the hex, destroy the defender, and create a hole in the German line with just one attack. A continuous line is a good historical representation of many historical linear defenses, with historical strengths and weaknesses reflected in the game. A discontinuous line, with reinforced battalions in good positions, is a good historical representation of German defensive doctrine in the WW2 and seems very close to that of UN forces in Korea. Either can be effective in BfN, but using only one doctrine is likely to get old fast as the enemy adapts, which also seems to be pretty historical.

tombeach
Major
Major
Posts: 185
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 6:30 pm
Location: Rochester, WI

Re: Game Proposals

Post by tombeach » Sat Aug 23, 2014 2:47 pm

I can appreciate the desire to get some time in on any new game proposal. Didn't realize Mervs war room was out of action.

Either Civil War series I've mentioned have one map scenarios for training. And the systems are quire straightforward and easy to learn.

All of that said I don't expect a groundswell of interest in any Civil War gaming as I am well aware this group is exclusively WWII.

As there have been no comments, I presume that no one in this group has ever played The Killing Ground/Overlord by NES?

kqrgcw
Captain
Captain
Posts: 123
Joined: Sat Aug 16, 2014 1:25 am

Re: Game Proposals

Post by kqrgcw » Sun Aug 24, 2014 3:21 am

I am a big fan of American Civil War games even the many I have not played that are out there.

I also think group interaction games would add a sense of competition and camaradie that we seem to miss. Some of the GMT games like Here I stand come to mind.

The napoleonic era might be a nice change. Compass games has Nations in Arms that covers the Napoleonic period and is multi player.

Compass games also has a complete WWII game out but I can't recall the name.

I am going to bring and set up Europa Universalis ( even if it takes a while between turns) iots differant but lots of interaction.

From reading the posts it seems people know what they hate but are not so sure about what they like.

I think the day when everyone knew the game being played backwards and forwards is over and some thought needs to be given to perhaps having the first day be just a warm up lap to get people not used to the system up to speed.

Unless something is picked that is PLAYABLE and with broad appeal It almost sounds like a couple of groups will be doing their own thing which may be the way we are drifting.

Sorry I can't be more specific, but some of the games being thrown out I have never heard of.

To add my two cents on what I don't like is OCS. I have never been able to understand the supply rules which is probably more my fault as I take a while to learn something. While I am on point one everybody else was barreling into combat leaving me behind in the dust.

Roger

ThisLee
Captain
Captain
Posts: 106
Joined: Mon Aug 11, 2014 8:48 pm

Re: Game Proposals

Post by ThisLee » Mon Aug 25, 2014 4:20 pm

Tom, it sounds like you should use those small training scenarios in CWB as side games to build the groundswell you want for the next year's Fest. I'm up for giving it a try.

tombeach
Major
Major
Posts: 185
Joined: Wed Aug 13, 2014 6:30 pm
Location: Rochester, WI

Re: Game Proposals

Post by tombeach » Mon Aug 25, 2014 6:19 pm

Good idea, Lee. I'll plan on doing it.

If you get over to Buckeye Game Fest next month, stop by the LaBataille table (playing Mont St. Jean with John Haas, Lind Pratt and Dave Mignery) and say hi. And if you have time and interest, perhaps we can push a few counters around with one of the CWB series games or Line of Battle as time permits.

Locked