Emergency summons on March 2. Spent rest of month spinning the Hamster Wheel of Eldercare. Hope to start gaming again this week, but back TAD shortly. Oh My!
Free
Finally set up my Kriegsspiel maps and blocks. Long story.
Components were purchased as a Xmas gift for me from Command Post Games, Photo Cutters Studio, and Two Fat Lardies. Shipments went astray, problems happened. The first two providers were fantastic, while the latter provider’s reaction to a lost shipment was (and I’ll use British understatement) less than cooperative and gave me deeper understanding into Vinegar Joe’s phobias.
Anyway, had the maps printed out and used spray adhesive to affix to large card. Bought a unfinished box, stained it, and added a couple of dividers for a storage space. The final touch was adding my Grandfather’s civil engineering drafting instruments to help with measurements.
Aesthetically very pleasing.
The rules are fun. I purchased the 1860’s version, rather than the 1820’s Napoleonic rules. Very common sense, and the Kriegsspiel dice eliminate a great deal of chart reading.
Command Post has expanded their Kriegsspiel product line to include blocks and maps, building on their fun Pub Battles Series.
With this system, the player is free to set up scenarios and explore them to his liking. It’s all about command problems, without any need for an umpire. After so many years of gaming, and military experience, it’s fun to just mess around with an open system.
Here’s a quick shot of the maps, with a regimental defense, supported by 6lb artillery and cavalry set in. The bone folding ruler’s been in the family for who knows how long.
Last Stand
Finished up the fourth turn of The Alamo: Victory in Death.
Figured out the casualty rules that had baffled me. Silly me, just read the rules and interpret them literally. Things will work out.
Crockett’s attempt to push out beyond the walls was a foolish. Now surrounded and locked in , he’ll eventually be killed. The west wall has been overrun and now all that is left is the time consuming chore of isolating each Texan unit and destroying it. Reorganized Mexican units are flooding back onto the battlefield, and there seems little chance that the Texans can last another ten turns.
The initial setup is everything. The Texans have to react quickly to stop any massed Mexican attacks, and the Mexicans, in turn, must be creative to exploit any Texan attempt to reinforce a threatened area by judicious of their reserve units.
It’s a tense contest for the first several turns. Worth the time to play.
Fast Attack Boats AAR
During Round One the Israelis aggressively engaged the Egyptian ships, while the Egyptians fired just one missile and turned away . Both tactics seem to work. The Egyptians enjoyed some good luck and sank two of the Israeli boats . The Israelis also sank two vessels and had one boat remaining on the map. By the rules this is a victory for the Israelis. But, give in an asterisk.
Round Two also went to the Israelis . Both sides fired at maximum range and moved off the board. After two rounds the Egyptians have lost three boats and the Israelis have lost two.
The Egyptians changed tactics in Round Three, aggressively pursuing the Israeli boats. This tactic backfired, with three vessels sunk, with only one Israeli boat lost. This loss required rolling cosmic boxcars for a missile on the third leg of its flight. However, the round went to the Egyptians for remaining on the board.
Both sides husbanded their resources during Round Four. The Israelis sent out only one boat against three opponents. Both sides were cautious. The Egyptians launched only two rounds of missiles before turning away, with the Israelis launching only one round of missiles. Ironically, the sole Egyptian boat remaining on the board was sunk by the last Israeli missile. By RAW, it’s a draw.
Round Five was a a decisive defeat for the Egyptians . They lost four boats to only one Israeli boat. The fifth Egyptian boat suffered significant damage. Once again, the Israeli tactic of staying far away enough to allow Egyptian missiles to hit at maximum range paid off. The Israeli missiles retain their destructive punch even on the third and last leg of flight.
Overall, the Israelis were the winners, but the Egyptians still have a operational fleet ready for more.
Remembering
Snow and sickness can lead to some desperate measures. After FAB I opened a shrink wrapped time capsule…..The Alamo: Victory In Death.
It’s not like my recent games. Yes, there is a lot of wristage, but with counters and a map that contains all of the charts. So 1980’s, and so appreciated.
Here’s a great overview at Boardgamegeek.
This game is well-suited for solitaire. I used a die to determine where the Mexicans were to attack.
But, it can be tedious, with many die rolls for shooting and melee combat. However, the tension factor is excellent, especially when the defenders have to fall back from the walls to defend the interior of the mission.
I still am badly confused by the rules concerning Mexican losses that result in an immediate Texas victory during the first five turns.
Here’s a picture of the setup
Solo and Simple
Resperitory ailment, snow and an empty house makes for interesting decisions.
Grabbed a copy of Yaquinto’s Fast Attack Boats (FAB) and set it up. Reviews aren’t that kind, but there is some agreement that the campaign game shows FAB in its best light.
Agreed. Plus there are some other attributes. Game is quick to set up, has plenty of action, minimal bookeeping and poses some real tactical quandaries.
I’m not a big naval wargamer, despite my fetish for Avalanche Press’ Great War and Second World War At Sea series(s). Tactically, it all seems a bunch of line ‘em and go at ‘em. While GWWAS and SWWAS provides an operational context for battle scenarios, FAB does not.
I tried finding doctrinal information on modern fast boat tactics, but it’s pretty slim out there. What I did discover within the context of this game’s play is that it’s “shoot and scoot”. Crank off missiles at max range and get the hell out of the way.
Problem is, and this is a nice design feature, that victory in each of the five segments comprising the campaign game are based on last force to have craft on the board. While this would lend itself to all kind of gamesmanship in a FTF contest, when playing solo it requires a level of steadfastness and willingness to accept damage.
Egyptian and Israeli boats have their respective advantages. The Egyptian boats are more numerous, can be faster, and have a longer missile range. On the other hand, the Israeli boats can launch more missiles per turn, and have greater hitting power at longer ranges.
Each force will get hit with missiles. The CRT is simple, but for this type of game, reasonable. The longer the range, the less the effect. Even at close range, the chances of a miss approximate 40 percent. Missile fire is “fire and forget”, as they will hit a target if it is in range. Missiles have a running time of three turns.
Boat maneuver is simple, but, again, fitting for this game. All ships must move their maximum distance each turn. Any turn must occur after one hex of straight-ahead movement, and is limited to 60 degrees (or a change in hex orientation). This leads to some interesting group maneuvers.
My first campaign finished as a marginal Egyptian victory. The Israeli’s got shy and decided to get ready for the next go-around. I’m looking forward to it.
Ready To Get On It………
Too Fun To Solo?
Really enjoying Supply Lines Of The American Revolution .
Bought it with some Christmas money after having read the excellent reviews and perusing the Hollandspiele website . That site is a fun place with several intriguing titles .
It’s a real puzzler of the game and a departure from a card-driven or hex and counter game .
The map is attractive with the counters more than serviceable. I do like the wooden cubes. The rules are well organized, but what really makes things work is the online example of play posted by the designer to the game’s Boardgamegeek page. Invaluable.
However, by the time I was well into the first turn I started getting uncomfortable . A great game, but it’s solo playability, for me, is marginal . It’s a cat and mouse affair begging for two players, not one trying to outguess himself .
I’ll set it up again and try a scenario in which the British focus on a specific course of action ie. attack down the Hudson Valley…..just like Gentleman Johnny B. We’ll see how that goes .
What Was I Thinking?
Fortify Montreal……Fortify Montreal. The object of the game is to prevent Montreal from being captured…………
If you ever play this game, please, please, please fortify Montreal. Here’s why…….
The British have the strategic advantage, with the ability to advance on five fronts simultaneously . However, the French have the operational advantage in that they can attack both during their phase and the British Advance phase . Tactically, it’s a push. Both sides have special tactical cards which influence not only tactical advantage but also the total number of battalions used in the battle.
Tactical advantage is critical . The side with this advantage toss their “bucket of dice” (one die per battalion in the fight) first with any enemy casualties (battalions) removed immediately . In many cases the side without tactical advantage is simply wiped out before being able to inflict casualties of their own. While this system has its shortcomings, it is appropriate in a game of this scope and size .
During my first real play thru the British were hampered by a lack of leaders, advancing on two fronts and making it easy for the French to use their action points not only to stop any advances, but also construct Forts and Trading Posts .
Trading Posts provide the French with valuable replacements each turn. While Forts prevent the use of light troops for tactical advantage and offer an advantage themselves.
Once there were British leaders for each of their five axes of advance towards Montréal, the French were hard-pressed.
Just as the British were ready to enter Montréal , and end the game, I drew the Montcalm Leader Card.
Montcalm has extraordinary capabilities , and almost turned the tide for the French. But the simultaneous advance of the British armies , combined with some less than favorable die rolls, resulted in the eventual removal of Montcalm and two other French leaders. This re-opened the door to Montréal. And, of course I made it just that much easier by not placing a fort there.
Game Play was relatively smooth . It took a while to figure out which cards to trash and which to discard, rather than place back in the recycle deck . It also took two turns to figure out that the recycle deck is shuffled into the active deck at the end of each turn , or in what is called the Housekeeping Phase.
This is fine addition to the States of Siege series . While the playing time is extended compared to other offering, this trade off is well worth it in terms of depth of play .
Getting It
Worked my way through several turns of Empires In America. Getting the hang of it.
Once again, the only way to learn the rules is to play the rules. Only way to see the method in the early-play-madness.
The French player is stretched thin, especially if the British can conjure up leaders for each theater and apply constant pressure from each of the tracks leading to Montreal.
Going to re-set and have another go. This time I’ll get the play of fortresses and auxiliary troops right.
Back At It
Down south coaching baseball for the past month. No chance to wargame.
Starting off new round of games with Empires in America by Victory Point Games. Solo game for the American Revolution.
It’s very highly rated and considered more involved than the typical States of Siege game. Have it set up and am grinding through the rules.
Rules……once again they’re a problem. That old learning style condition, again. Still, I find placing the optional rules as sidebars and only limited examples of play to be problematic.
My other early complaint is that I had hoped to get another of those fun “jigsaw” maps. No, a two piece card stock map. Pretty, but hard to keep aligned.
Small complaints. Nice components. Here’s a picture of the set-up.
