|
4outof5 posted:The smallest unit of maneuver in the American Civil War was a brigade so ummmmmm Sure, but a game based around the Battle of the Wilderness would work with smaller units, I doubt much brigade level movement was going on in those woods. 4outof5 posted:Spanish Civil War tactical combat is pretty much early war world war 2 tactical combat/partisan actions 4outof5 posted:WW1 would definitely be over the top as previously stated but if you want ww1 tactical I don't see why you wouldn't like ww2 tactical the technology/tactical differences at the small unit action level are not that great. 4outof5 posted:there are a few age of sail games you should check out: Wooden Ships and Iron Men, Flying Colors (serpent of the seas and blue cross white ensign) from gmt and if you don't mind moving out of hexes sails of glory uses the same system that wings of glory, xwing and attack wing use. 4outof5 posted:Scifi: OGRE/GEV, astra titanus, warp war (if you can find it), if you're brave ad astra space combat games 4outof5 posted:Fantasy: battle lore, battles of westros, wizard kings Never heard of any of these but will look into them. Currently trying to resist buying a copy of Melee and Wizard on ebay.
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 02:31
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 12:18 |
|
|
TheCosmicMuffet posted:If Battle lore is on the table, Battlecry is the civil war flavor of the same rules system. I guess it's not tactical scale, per se, but it has the same feel. Battlecry is very abstracted in size, scope, time and well everything. It's a great game no doubt, I enjoy it's older brother CnC Napoleonic a lot myself, but it's not tactical like Battle Lore can be considered. Battle Lore can be seen as a ancients or medieval game where entire armies met in the same small area. I only make the distinction because he asked about tactical games. bunnielab posted:Sure, but a game based around the Battle of the Wilderness would work with smaller units, I doubt much brigade level movement was going on in those woods. Actually that's exactly what happened in the battle of the wilderness in fact the battle can be explained in cohesive corp movement. Its hard to imagine now but armies are very concentrated things in this time period for supply and communications reasons. At first it seems nonsensical until you realize things like horse drawn supplies can only get about 3 days away from a supply source such as a river or railroad before they eat as much in weight as they can carry in those 3 days. When you really dig into warfare before the first/second world war you realize that people like Caesar, Philip II, Napoleon, Grant etc etc had to be logistics geniuses as well as tactical and strategic geniuses to achieve the things they did. Anyway this will show you better than I can explain the movements of the battle of the wilderness http://www.civilwar.org/battlefields/overland/maps/overland-animated-map.html quote:Sure, but it has always been fascinating to me as a conflict and really the "proving gorunds" of armored warfare. Plus think of all the wacky international brigades you could have chits for! I don't think there would be noticeable differences between squads/platoons in the international brigades. Except in comparison to regular army units which would be a partisan/green to regular unit chit difference in tactical games. If you want a game about the interactions of the different factions in the spanish civil war I would suggest Popular Front instead of a tactical game those are bigger ideas than battlefield simulation. as far as the proving grounds for mechanized warfare I would suggest a higher level of simulation like GMT's spanish civil war where combined arms and the mobility of mechanized units can be shown. quote:Granted, but I could see a small unit game where terrain was a larger than usual factor, even up to the effects of bombardment making space more difficult to cross. Again. it is just a personal thing as I find the tech of that era really intresting. In ww1 artillery pieces beyond trench mortars are not really tactical level assets on either front. Don't let me discourage you but I think the story of world war 1 is really illustrated beyond the tactical level. I think this might be what you're looking for it's not a board game but it's pretty close to one http://www.johntillersoftware.com/SquadBattles/FirstWorldWar.html quote:Wooden Ships and Iron Men looks amazing an I am going to have to hunt up a copy. it's a classic quote:Already have and love OGRE and astra titanus looks like "Ogre in space" so I will check it out. It's a solo game where the AI(s) are programed by cards it's pretty ok and it comes with the worlds smallest dice. quote:Never heard of any of these but will look into them. Currently trying to resist buying a copy of Melee and Wizard on ebay. Well if dudes on a map games games like melee and wizard are on the table....wizwar, krosmaster arena, arcadia quest 4outof5 fucked around with this message at 03:43 on Mar 25, 2015 |
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 03:41
|
|
|
If we do a WS&IM LP the communication should be limited to messages that can be sent by flags 
|
|
#
?
Mar 25, 2015 05:23
|
|
|
AARP LARPer fucked around with this message at 02:22 on Jan 23, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 19:29
|
|
|
If it's stuff fighting other stuff, its a wargame. I don't like exclusionary bullshit.
|
|
#
?
Mar 26, 2015 19:31
|
|
|
Do Not Resuscitate posted:Would Avalon Hill's/Valley Games Titan be considered a wargame for this thread's purposes or must a wargame be grounded in some sort of historical/military authenticity? It says it is, right on the box! (The Monster Slugathon Fantasy Wargame) My all-time favourite game  .
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 02:09
|
|
|
AARP LARPer fucked around with this message at 02:22 on Jan 23, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 02:36
|
|
|
I used to play Titan a ton with a friend back when I lived in Texas. One of my goals is to print up the Abyssal-6 variant so I can play it tabletop instead of only on Colossus.
|
|
#
?
Mar 27, 2015 20:37
|
|
|
AARP LARPer fucked around with this message at 02:22 on Jan 23, 2016 |
|
#
?
Mar 28, 2015 01:16
|
|
|
As requested by Tekopo here are the boards of our game of Fire in the Lake tonight after each of the first three coups.   To be continued!
|
|
#
?
Mar 29, 2015 01:43
|
|
|
This is going back a bit but the ATS system by Critical Hit does have a tactical level civil war module out with more purportedly on the way. http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/26401/gettysburg-turning-point-1863 Expensive though. I'm only familiar with WWII/Korea parts of the system so couldn't really offer any insights.
|
|
#
?
Mar 30, 2015 01:16
|
|
|
Finished up the campaign game of No Retreat with Ilthe tonight after several weekly sessions so I thought I'd post my thoughts. It's good, I like it. There are a bunch of really engaging mechanics and it's fun to figure out how to bend them to your will. However, I really didn't like the 1945 stuff. Seven out of the 10 cards you add to the deck have VP shenanigans on them so I, as the Soviets, felt I couldn't try to play for the sudden death VP victory. It also adds two more reshuffle effects so the whole deck just seems like random nonsense for the last six turns. I decided on the Objective victory because I didn't trust the deck not to screw me if I went for sudden death VP. Sure enough my first hand in 1945 had me losing two VP because I hadn't made it to two specific cities yet. I pushed hard to Berlin early, with no real intentions of taking it, to try to make the Germans over-commit there while I marched to Vienna and Prague. I already had Konigsberg. I attacked Prague for a few turns. One of those turns I had an amazing hand that saw me rolling on the 6-1 column on the German CRT to have a 50% chance of busting the fort unit which failed, and then on the last turn I had a 6-1 again on the Russian CRT which was a 33% chance of killing the fort and failed again for the loss. I had taken Vienna by using the card that guarantees a Defender Retreats result on 2-1 odds or better, and I had Conflicting Hitler Directives and Hitler's Interference to back it up. I won't curse the dice luck because I could have played better at several points in the game, but in 45 I felt hemmed into one strategy. It's possible I could have encircled Prague but it would've required a little luck. Berlin would have been tough to crack as well and would have required just as much luck. The funny thing is that by the tournament scenario I would have won by VP in 1944 (in the campaign the Russians need to beat the German VP total to force 1945 play at all) so I felt like I did pretty well and then a bunch of stuff happened and the game ended. It was really anti-climactic. Unlike the early game where the Russians have to stall the Germans the 1945 stuff didn't feel like there was much room for clever defensive maneuvering, just bunching up in the limited space. Ilthe can weigh in with his own thoughts but he said he found it boring because he basically had to watch me roll dice for six turns. If I wanted to play the long game again I would definitely do the tournament scenario instead of the full campaign because the game would end when both sides are still fighting in the middle of the board with more opportunities for maneuver than the grind in Greater Germany. The individual scenarios don't interest me too much because three or five turns feels too short for the luck to even out over the course of the game. It doesn't surprise me that this part of the game was originally an expansion because it feels tacked on, messy, and pretty much superfluous. cenotaph fucked around with this message at 05:36 on Apr 1, 2015 |
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 04:51
|
|
|
Might as well follow up with my opinions. The game was a bit of a clusterfuck around the middle and that's when it was the most fun. The last six turns were just trying to evacuate from my Eastern holdings as fast as possible and forming a wall around Berlin while the Soviets rolled 'defender retreat' results against fortified units or multiple layers of German defenders. There was some pretty amazing instances of dice luck that had some serious repercussions throughout the game, but overall I liked the CRT. I'd definitely play it again, but like Cenotaph said the last ditch defense of Greater Germany feels tacked on and not fun. At least when the Soviets are getting kicked around at the start of the game they know at some point things are going to get better. Ending on Turn 22 would've been preferable. My only complaint about playing the tournament scenario is losing my precious kampfgrupps, those things are so vital for maintaining the coherency of the German line once the Soviets start punching back.
|
|
#
?
Apr 1, 2015 05:17
|
|
|
I've wanted to get into tabletop war games for a while and having played some Memoir 44 on steam I figured Commands and Colors Napoleonics would be a nice little birthday present for myself. Now that I've received it I see I may have overestimated myself but I am looking forward to labeling every thing and finally playing.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 01:34
|
|
|
Do you guys like pc-based wargames or is the board a requirement
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 01:43
|
|
|
corn in the bible posted:Do you guys like pc-based wargames or is the board a requirement Fellow Corn, There's another thread with Grognard in the title that's just for PC wargames. But there's a lot of overlap, sure.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 01:56
|
|
|
FastestGunAlive posted:I've wanted to get into tabletop war games for a while and having played some Memoir 44 on steam I figured Commands and Colors Napoleonics would be a nice little birthday present for myself. Now that I've received it I see I may have overestimated myself but I am looking forward to labeling every thing and finally playing. All the blocks and stickers seems daunting at first, but it's a really slick system and plays quickly. Invest into a few dozen small plastic bags and label bags by unit type. A can of spray sealer will be your friend to make sure those stickers don't peel off after years of love.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 02:41
|
|
|
corn in the bible posted:Do you guys like pc-based wargames or is the board a requirement If VASL counts as a PC wargame
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 03:42
|
|
|
COOL CORN posted:Fellow Corn, That is good though I can not find it.
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 04:49
|
|
|
corn in the bible posted:That is good though I can not find it. http://forums.somethingawful.com/showthread.php?noseen=0&threadid=3543909
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 12:28
|
|
|
Time has passed. It's not too soon anymore. We can be honest about the deceased: Battlefleet Gothic was a bad game, wasn't it? The little spaceships were so pretty. 
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 13:10
|
|
|
Aston posted:As requested by Tekopo here are the boards of our game of Fire in the Lake tonight after each of the first three coups. Nice! Who's playing who?
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 14:01
|
|
|
Dre2Dee2 posted:Nice! Who's playing who? I'm ARVN, Tek is the US, Aston is VC and NVA is lord_frisk
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 14:06
|
|
|
ASL Rulebook back in stock at CSI for $66 http://www.coolstuffinc.com/p/135575
|
|
#
?
Apr 6, 2015 19:42
|
|
|
Picked up CC: Europe for my birthday hopefully someone will play with me 
|
|
#
?
Apr 7, 2015 04:20
|
|
|
Been playing Paths of Glory solo recently and my does it make my brain hurt. It seems like it's still the go to WWI game despite it's age - other than Pursuit of Glory has anything comparable (or any games relating to WWI really) come out that is worth a look. Did anything happen with the GMT WWI Eastern Front game that was in the works?
|
|
#
?
Apr 13, 2015 00:11
|
|
|
Just played my first game of Sekigahara with Ilthe on Vassal. Lost 13-12 as Tokugawa. I made some noob mistakes but felt I did well other than that. The play is really simple and fluid. It also plays at a really nice pace and it didn't feel like three hours at all. Trying to look back and forth between the block stacks on the board and the card hand in Vassal was a little annoying but I found it got easier as the game went on. I'm always wishing I had a second monitor just for my hand of cards on Vassal.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 03:20
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:Been playing Paths of Glory solo recently and my does it make my brain hurt. It seems like it's still the go to WWI game despite it's age - other than Pursuit of Glory has anything comparable (or any games relating to WWI really) come out that is worth a look. The Great War in Europe, also by Ted Raicer (who designed PoG)? Nothing like PoG, though.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 03:50
|
|
|
MikeCrotch posted:Been playing Paths of Glory solo recently and my does it make my brain hurt. It seems like it's still the go to WWI game despite it's age - other than Pursuit of Glory has anything comparable (or any games relating to WWI really) come out that is worth a look. Did anything happen with the GMT WWI Eastern Front game that was in the works? Yeah, it's pretty much just Paths of Glory. Looking in the WWI category on BGG, there's a few miniatures games, as well as some hex-and-counter games, but nothing really stands out. As for Illusions of Glory (the WWI Eastern Front game based on the Paths of Glory system), they're still working on it. I heard some mutterings that their were some major problems coming up during play-testing, but I don't know anything beyond that.
|
|
#
?
Apr 14, 2015 18:43
|
|
|
Lord Frisk posted:All the blocks and stickers seems daunting at first, but it's a really slick system and plays quickly. Invest into a few dozen small plastic bags and label bags by unit type. A can of spray sealer will be your friend to make sure those stickers don't peel off after years of love. Thanks, it was easy to label everything- was worried about ruining some pieces but they were easy to correct on the spot. Haven't gotten too into the rule book yet but I'm vaguely, vaguely familiar with the overall concept from playing Memoir 44 on steam. What kind of sealer are you referring to? Seeing several different kinds on amazon.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 02:29
|
|
|
Any clear acrylic sealant will work. Gloss may be a better choice in this situation, but it's nowhere near essential. Mod podge makes some pretty good stuff for relatively cheap, but you can't go wrong with krylon.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 02:47
|
|
|
So I played Cuba Libre a couple of weeks back and even though I really like the game I'm starting to have some issues, especially with the Government faction. I know it is more or less a design aim, but the Government of CL is a 'win early or not win at all' faction and once it is past its moment in the spotlight, it is pretty much dead in the water. This can lead to situations in which the Government is just playing in order to keep the game going at the end without even a chance of victory. Has anyone experienced the same for CL?
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 05:56
|
|
|
Kind of? I'm not as good as most of the other players, but I feel that even a successful government is often a rather passive one that relies on just trying to pull out a few targeted attacks and hope the rebels eat each other. CL is balanced enough that I rarely feel like I'm going to lose before at least the last campaign, but it's often kind of a long shot. I do also feel that DR and Syndicate are a little too passive, although that might just be because they're mostly played by newbies.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 06:09
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:So I played Cuba Libre a couple of weeks back and even though I really like the game I'm starting to have some issues, especially with the Government faction. I know it is more or less a design aim, but the Government of CL is a 'win early or not win at all' faction and once it is past its moment in the spotlight, it is pretty much dead in the water. This can lead to situations in which the Government is just playing in order to keep the game going at the end without even a chance of victory. Has anyone experienced the same for CL? Kind of? I've only played CL twice, but I was the government both times and that's more or less exactly how things worked out for me. Then again both times the Syndicate was just running its own show and didn't really care if I had any resources so it may have been a newbie thing and because in my group there's no chance the Syndicate is going to give funding to the Government due to our player mindset.
|
|
#
?
Apr 17, 2015 17:45
|
|
|
There's an article on NR4: Italian Front on InsideGMT. I need to read it but I guess the map looks nice? I'm still reluctant to shell out money considering the issues with NR3 and how stale NR2 gets after a while.
|
|
#
?
Apr 20, 2015 15:36
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:There's an article on NR4: Italian Front on InsideGMT. I need to read it but I guess the map looks nice? I'm still reluctant to shell out money considering the issues with NR3 and how stale NR2 gets after a while. They replaced NR3's plans with leaders who have different abilities which I think work a lot better. It feels like Carl is paring stuff down a bit more, I know at one point he had the idea of players switching sides in the middle of the game.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2015 02:01
|
|
|
Ever since selling Fire in the Lake and feeling terrible remorse, I decided I'd buy Cuba Libre so that at least I'd have an intro COIN game to teach interested people. This map is tiny! Wow, I'd seen it on VASSAL, but I pulled it out of the box and went, "wow... that's it?" Compared to the Fire in the Lake map, it's minuscule. But, I'm sure that'll be better for an intro game I'm actually really excited to play it, I'm sure the small space will make for a more stressful situation.
|
|
#
?
Apr 21, 2015 22:46
|
|
|
Yeah, CL Is def the best intro to the series and it goes pretty well because the decision space is much more limited (and thus players are less prone to AP). Also, good news for the Fields of Fire reprints/Fields of Fire II, it has been pushed back to the 1st Quarter 2016! Wait, poo poo, that's bad news. Still, at least we are getting EotS 2nd Edition (instabuy) in May and Churchill in June (tentative buy).
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 09:55
|
|
|
Tekopo posted:Also, good news for the Fields of Fire reprints/Fields of Fire II, it has been pushed back to the 1st Quarter 2016! Then it'll turn it's due to hiring Chad Jensen to rewrite the rulebooks and the joke's on us. PS. Please shut up and let me dream.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 11:08
|
|
|
|
| # ? Jun 6, 2024 12:18 |
|
|
Tekopo posted:Yeah, CL Is def the best intro to the series and it goes pretty well because the decision space is much more limited (and thus players are less prone to AP). I keep not realizing that's you until I look at your name. Where's Sherman?! Yeah, after I got the game set up for a solo trial last night I kept thinking, "hm, am I missing something? That can't be it, I have to be missing something." But really, I played through it and it was really familiar (since I know FitL) but at the same time really fresh. I like the casinos/cash mechanic, and the fact that M26 gets full-game capabilities while the Government only gets short-term momentems. Something about the COIN system is so elegantly adaptable to give an interesting historic feel. Anyway, enough gushing. Tekopo posted:Also, good news for the Fields of Fire reprints/Fields of Fire II, it has been pushed back to the 1st Quarter 2016! Good news for my wallet though! The designer is doing a testing run of his new rulebook, here's hoping it's somewhat intelligible compared to the 1st/2nd editions. Churchill looks really interesting, but I think it might be too Euro-y for my wargamer buddies and too wargame-y for my Euro buddies. I just got the latest C3i though, and haven't had a chance to read through the article on it, I may not be giving it enough credit. Also, the next two COIN games (Liberty or Death, and Falling Skies) are scheduled tentatively for Q4 2015 and Q1 2016, respectively.
|
|
#
?
Apr 22, 2015 13:17
|
|