This was amusing.
One of the things I’ve been interested in getting for some time is one of the (fairly) new Apple Magic Mouse pointing devices. However, I’ve been waiting, partly because I didn’t need a new mouse, but mostly because they weren’t readily available. Each time I had cause to visit the local Apple Store I checked the shelves for mice, but no joy. Even the web site said a regular 5-7 days estimate for shipping.
However, my regular Apple Mighty Mouse has been giving me trouble recently. Whilst it’s a great mouse when it works, and being able to scroll in both directions is useful, that little nipple ball/roller contraption is very prone to failure. Even though I’ve been rubbing it with cleaner in an attempt to clean the mechanisms, this time I don’t think it’s coming back to full life.
So it was useful to note recently that the on-line Apple Store was now showing shipping for the Magic Mouse within 24 hours. Did that mean that they were also available in the regular Apple Store? A quick visit proved that it did, indeed.
I’ve been using it for a few days now (a real long-term test) and, so far, I’m very favorably impressed. Comfortable to use, the gestures are very natural, and the pad has a large activation area for use. Being able to flip pages in the browser by just a gesture is useful.
The only downside is that same large activation area can mean that you’re flicking though pages without really meaning it as you move your finger.
Overall, a thumbs up.
One of the CDs in the car at the moment is a compilation of various tracks from my iTunes collection, and one track playing was the Sex Pistol’s Anarchy in the UK. This got me going on some of the music that I listened to in my youth (and not so youth), and I spent a part of the evening browsing through the iTunes Music Store, recollecting old favorites.
I listened to the Vibrators (Flying Duck Theory was a favorite track, but I was disappointed that their V2 album wasn’t in the store), which I remembered from college. From there I searched for Vardis, a 3-piece hard rock band. I’ve got all (well, there were only 4) of their albums, and I even saw them live twice. Their 100 MPH initial album was totally live, with very little mastering done, so it has a great raw feel to it. They disappeared pretty quickly, but they did do a cover of Silver Machine, from my favorite band, Hawkwind.
From there it was a touch of UFO, and with their live double, Strangers in the Night, being only $6.99 I was very tempted. Even more so with Uriah Heep’s 1973 Live album, and I enjoyed my 30 seconds per track. I always liked their combination of hard rock mixed with strong keyboards. Definitely one on the short list for buying.
Digging deeper into my music memory archives, I went for Lindisfarne, a popular English folk/rock combo from the early 70s. I was especially glad to see their Live album on iTMS, as I used to own it, but it got lost somehow. Another $6.99 album that might make it into my basket.
Keeping to the English folk music, The Prospect Before Us, from The Albion Dance Band is one of my all-time favorite albums of that genre. A touch of rock in some of the tracks, to some really good lyrics (I Wish I Was Single Again is hilarious), to some tracks that sound more like 14-15thC music. (I used to have a cassette of the Kincorth Waits, a local Aberdeen band that specialized in early centuries music, played on authentic (and often weird) instruments. Hmm, I wonder what ever happened to it.)
A fun way to spend an evening.
It’s that time of year when I need to re-certify for refereeing, one of the delights of not being a run-of-the-mill grade 8 soccer referee, but trying to be something better, in my case a grade 7. (It’s one louder, innit?) First off was the dreaded fitness test: 12 minute run; 50m sprint; 200m sprint. I was with one other guy my age, and one older, so I was keen to ensure that I was first in each bracket.
There’s been a redefining of the rules since last year, and the first is now a true 12 minute run, no walking, with a minimum of 4.5 laps to be covered for my age group. In the prior years it was required to cover the minimum distance in the time allotted, so you could stop when you’d covered the distance, or take a break and walk for a bit. This time I covered 5.5 laps in the 12 minutes, which included stopping to tie a shoe lace, and taking it generally easy. Stage one completed successfully.
On to the 50m. I came out fast, and pushed all the way through to achieve 6.1 seconds, which is the fastest time I’ve recorded in the 4 years I’ve taken the tests. However, given the accuracy of the timing devices, two guys with 3 stop watches between them, that’s close enough to last year’s 6.36 for Government work. Stage two completed successfully.
And then the 200m, the one I personally hate. In the end I knocked it off in 31.1, a full second faster than last year. Stage 3 completed successfully.
The written tests weren’t something I was too concerned about. Anyone who knows soccer should do reasonably well, and the pass mark is only 75%. However, I thought the test was a lot harder than in previous years, as more of the questions were of the really obscure corners of the rules that you’re just never going to see in youth soccer. Still, an 89% score was very disappointing to me, the first time I have ever dropped below 90%. I’ll make sure that I’m a bit more up on the finer points of the rules for next year.
Either way up, I keep my grade 7 certification for another year. Woo hoo.
One thing my recent play of 1853 (BGG entry) confirmed is that the poker chips I have are totally inadequate for playing 18xx games. Although the 300-chip set is fine in total number of chips, with only the four denominations it didn’t cover enough range of values, and I had to borrow some chips to make the bank work. So, a search for new chips was begun, or rather continued, as I’d already been looking a little.
The first thing to decide was what denominations to get. My 18xx gaming friend, Chris, has a set of baccarat numbered chips, and he’s very pleased with the way they work. Unlike poker chips that are numbered 1, 5, 10, 25, 100, baccarat chips are in 1, 2, 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, 200, 500 denominations. Having used a similar set I tend to agree that those denominations work well for 18xx. So, with that decided, I started looking.
And came up a blank. None of the sites I found offered chips in baccarat denominations, only regular poker. The second issue was that I only wanted 25 of some of the denominations, but all the sites I’d found sold chips in 50-count stacks, so I was looking at making up two sets, and looking for someone else to share.
The first issue was solved when I came across Slam Dunk Labels, who print labels for poker chips. What’s more, they make custom labels, with pretty much any graphic you can supply them. Most places supplied blank chips, so that looked like a solution.
The second was solved when I finally found a place that did chips in 25-count stacks, and had a blank design in the required colors, Poker Chips Wholesale. They sold them in sets, with a case, 2 decks of cards, a dealer button, and 5 dice. So, I placed my order for a 300-chip set, which was shipped the next day, but took a week to deliver as they’re on the other side of the country.
When it arrived, I was slightly disappointed at the quality of the case, but even more so that the card/dice dividers had separated from the inside due to poor construction. However, a quick call to PCW the next day had Megan getting me sorted out with a replacement case, which was in the mail that day, and turned out to be better looking than the previous one.
Now I had the chips, I could get the labels. I emailed a graphic off to Slam Dunk, and received a very quick response. 600 labels for the 300 chips cost $30, and after paying via PayPal I received the samples with the graphic I’d provided. Very nice!
Custom chip label
The labels arrived today, and took an evening to stick them all on, but I’m really pleased with the results. I sure have a rather unique set of chips for gaming now.
A big thumbs up for both Poker Chips Wholesale and Slam Dunk Labels.
Well, the big announcement has come and gone, and the much rumored Apple tablet has indeed been announced. Unusually for Apple it’s not available now, as, with the exception of the iPhone (which required FCC approval, a 6 month process), Apple like to say ‘it’s available in stores from today’. I’m wondering if with all the rumors, hype, and discussion they felt that they had to announce it ahead of time, just to get it on the table. Then again, perhaps the rumors of last minute production delays were, indeed, true.
So, what’s my view, and am I going to get one? First, is all the conflicting reports on what it can/can’t do, as well as all the ‘Bwah, it doesn’t have/do x’ wailers. Yes, it does appear to be somewhat like a larger iPod touch. Music, pictures, all the apps for the iPhone/iPod touch.
But Apple have been very clear that this is not a laptop, and we can’t expect it to have/do the same things that a laptop can do. However, a lot of people appear to have forgotten or ignored that. We’re seeing a lot of people pointing out missing things, in the same way as when the MacBook Air came out.
- USB
- Firewire
- Xcode
- Video out
- Camera
Of all these the first and the last are the two that impact me the most. But, first, what would I look for in this device? I think, rather, I need to examine where would I use this device, and what I would need it to do for me.
Obviously the main use would be away from my desk-bound iMac. These days that generally means away at gaming retreats (WBC-W, Sunriver, Salishan) or off at a games day. Besides all the stuff I’d normally do on the iPhone, mail, music, etc., I’d want to capture the games I’d played, make notes on what happened, read the downloaded rules, perhaps browse for rules or errata, or just some reading when I’m taking a break. Normally I’m somewhere that has wireless coverage, so all these are covered by the iPad. However, it’s when we go into extended coverage that I start to run into problems.
One of my big tasks when away is to update my blog, which I can do from a web page, so no big deal there. However, getting pics from the camera to the host might be an issue. There is a regular connection port on the bottom, but can it be used to download the camera. The next part is what to do with them when they are downloaded, as then they have to make it across to my host. Yes, I could use a specialized pic hosting service, but I prefer to host my own content, as I don’t have to deal with ads. There are some ftp clients for iPhone in the App Store, so maybe they will do the trick.
The next thing that I’d want to do when away, is communicate back home. In the past I’ve done video with iChat on the laptop, but with no camera in the iPad that isn’t going to work. This isn’t a big deal, I think, as I’m sure that someone will produce a camera that uses the connector. Yes, it should have been included from the start, and this is, in my view, the biggest miss.
Originally I was one of those that saw doing app development on the fly with a tablet as a valid use, but I’m not so sure that I would use it that way. Just not enough screen real estate, and I probably wouldn’t be in a social environment where I’d be wanting to do serious work anyway.
Overall, I think I’m likely to get one as soon as they’re released. I’m pretty sure that I won’t need the 3G, and I really don’t want to get into paying another $30/month for it. If I really, really need connectivity wherever I am, then I still have the iPhone.
Memory capacity is the big question, and I’d either go for the 16gb base model or the biggest 64gb model. I just see the middle one as neither one thing nor the other. I think the big question is whether I’d want all my music on it. If so, then the larger one is the option.
One thing that I am sure of, though. The app that makes this an absolutely killer device isn’t out there yet. Yes, a lot what it can do is useful, but I’m not convinced that it is $500+ useful. It’s the potential that I think is going to make it the must-have device of the future.
One of the games I’ve had an eye on for a while has been Liberty Roads (BGG entry) from Hexasim, and being distributed in the US by GMT. From the description in a gaming magazine it looked to have quite a few new idea to add to the simulation of the west front and D-Day, as well as looking quite marvelous. It was one of the few games that I had on my to-buy radar, and as soon as GMT announced that it had cleared customs and was available for order I pounced on it. It arrived Saturday, and I immediately got it sprayed, punched and clipped, and took it for a test play of the introductory Cobra scenario.
First, though, a quick run-through of the contents. First thing to note that Hexasim is a French company, so the game is in French, although most of the components are translated into English. Note that ‘most’, however, as several places are still in French or only half translated, with the occasional word or two of French being missed, as well as quite a few mis-spellings. Not a problem for myself (I did enough French at school that I can read most of what’s there), but might catch out a few people. The other thing is that all the sheets are Euro A4 sized rather than US letter sized. Again, not a big deal unless you were planning on laminating everything, although the box is noticeably taller on the shelf.
The box is bright and glossy, of a similar construction and quality with MMP boxes. Game blurb is in English and French, including historic snippets about some of the units around the sides of the box bottom. The game map comes in two parts, measures 90×84cm, and is a thing of beauty. Sumptuous in color, clear in functionality, it is one of the best game maps I’ve seen. I especially liked the little war posters included in boxes and spare areas of the map. However, whilst most titles/descriptions are in French and English, the TEC is in French only. There is a separate English language TEC.
Speaking of other sheets, they cover scenario set ups, combat charts, other tables, and descriptions of the support chits. All in good color, clear and very usable. The rule book, however, is another matter. This is the weakest part of the production, in my view, and looks cheap beside all the other color components, as it’s just black/white A3 pages, folded and stapled in the middle. It’s not bad, and I’ve seen a lot worse in other games, just nowhere near the level and quality of the other components. There is a separate booklet for scenarios, optional rules, and designer notes done in the same manner. This is odd, as the third booklet, ‘Exemple of play booklet’ is in full glossy color in the same style as the map and other sheets.
That leaves the counters. Thicker than GMT or MMP counters, they’re well punched down the sides, but with deep, heavy corner attachments. That means that they’re hard to separate, and even after clipping several still had ‘ears’ that needed to be trimmed. The graphics are mostly excellent, and I especially liked that all the German panzer KG counters have different graphics. Nice touch.
OK, enough about the stuff in the box, what about the game play. Most of it is pretty standard: attack factor; defense factor; movement factor; stacking; odds combat; shifts for support; no ZoC; supply. So, what’s different or unusual?
First, support is handled by drawing a varying number of chits at the start of the player turn, dependent on ports controlled for the Allied player, and Hitler approval rating (I kid you not, and we’ll come to that) for the German player. The chits offer artillery or air support (column shifts in combat), supply, leaders, and other sorts of goodies. They are generally placed on the board, and removed the following turn, being replaced in the draw pile. However, you can remove two from your unused available pile to retain one on the board for another turn.
Combat has 3 separate results: losses; attacker tactical result; defender tactical result. The first is straight step losses, attacker/defender. The second may give a number of units exploit capability, increase the number of losses, or enforce retreats. The third dictates defender retreats and potential options to retreat for a step loss less, or not retreat for a step loss more. These tactical results are sectioned into groups of 3, and elite units may use their capability to choose any tactical result from that section, at the cost of taking the first step loss.
German Kampfgruppen may be used to replace a destroyed division, but when a KG is destroyed it’s permanently removed from the game, so you may not always choose that option. Armor KGs also have variable ratings and some have 2 steps, others only 1, and are drawn randomly.
And then there’s the Hitler appreciation track. Starting at 10 points, it goes down by a varying number of points as the German player loses cities and ports, all the while reducing the amount of support and replacement that Hitler is prepared to give you. You can increase it by committing armor to attacks, but it’s only temporary. When it hits 0 points Hitler has fired your sorry ass, and you get replaced by another you, and you’re once more at the top of the track. The downside of this is that while you’re getting replaced units suffer movement and other penalties due to the confusion at HQ. Different.
Having briefly skimmed the rules I tried the introductory Cobra scenario, which has its own mini-map. There was a certain amount of rules checking as I worked my way through the turn sequence, and I missed a few rules on the way, but it plays very smoothly indeed and I quickly got into the swing of it. The support chits especially give a lot of room for choices, and the combat is interesting. Whilst the Allies scored a quick and strong breakthrough, they’ve got to grab quite a lot of VPs to win, and in my playing they came up quite short. And I thought they were doing well. However, it was an engrossing little puzzle, and I really enjoyed my time with it.
Cobra scenario - oblique view
Cobra scenario - overhead view
The campaign game includes invasion rules which allow the Allied player to choose the invasion site, with each area being graded for landing capability, air support, defensive strength, and resupply. Each landing hex draws a number of special D-Day support chits, representing naval support, air strength, flak, shore batteries, reserves. Sounds like a lot of interesting goodness and replayability to me.
The obvious game for comparison is MMP’s The Might Endeavor (BGG entry), from the SCS line of games. Both are divisional level, but LR is more detailed as it offers more options on the landing phase and variable levels of support. And it has the Hitler appreciation thing. However, beyond the landing phase I see them playing fairly similarly.
Overall then, very good to excellent. Definitely glad I picked this one up and I can hardly wait to find a partner to dive into the full invasion game with. This is probably going to go straight onto the top of my list for the upcoming WBC-W extravaganza.
Another day, another new 18xx game to play. This time it’s 1853, a re-issue of an older game that I’m told had serious rules/balance issues, although I’d never played the older version. There was a revised rule set done and it’s been re-isued by Lookout/Mayfair, and I picked a copy up over the holiday break, as no-one bought me a copy. (Yeh, poor me….)
There are three main areas of difference to look at:
- Stock rounds
- Operating rounds
- Other differences
The general stock trading is the same as most 18xx games, and is probably most close to the earlier games. One dimensional stock track, fixed issue prices, no reduction in share price on sale of shares, minor and major compaines. This means you can dump stock without hurting other players, as well as buy initial shares at the issue price and sell to the pool at current price, making a little profit in the middle. The major departure from most games is that anyone can sell their stock in a company, even the director (called president in most 18xx games). Any floated company with no-one eligible to be director (either no-one owns any shares, or any players only own a single share each), is run by a manager. If only one player has a single share he becomes manager; if more than one player owns a single share then the player who first owned a share manages the company. If no player owns shares then the player with the Priority Deal is manager. Wacky.
When operating, the first difference is that there are three track types: wide; metre (or should that be meter?); and combined, which acts as both. To go with the track types there are two types of train, which can run on only the correct type of track (duh). Costs for metre track and trains are lower, but run for the same amount. Only minor companies can purchase 1M trains, and they can’t be transferred to major companies. Major companies can lay two yellow track tiles, minors one, but have to nominate at the start of the game whether they will do so from phase 2 or 3, as the former means they pay 20GMU for the second tile throughout the game, the latter means they can’t lay a second tile at all until phase 3, and then it’s free. (This is in the new phase numbering style. Although, rather confusingly, the rules changed numbering style half way through publication, and several places still have the old style, never having been corrected.)
Runs are pretty standard, either paying out or withholding 100%. Stock price can go up in multiples, but only goes down if there are shares sitting in the pool. A company doesn’t have to purchase a train, but the director can contribute if he wants. When being run by a manager a company can borrow a train from the bank, although it has to withhold until it can pay for it and can’t spend money on anything until that happens.
Other wackiness runs rampant. The game starts with players secretly bidding a contract amount, which determines initial player order, and is withheld until later in the game. Players then secretly select a number of cities (dependent on the number of players, e.g. for 5 players it’s 3-5) that, when connected in any way, will see their contract money returned to hand for use. The cities are also associated with one or more companies, the player getting a share of one of the companies for the selected city, which still has to be paid for from the reduced cash. Wacky.
Overall, the word to describe 1853 is ‘Wacky’, as you might have noticed. That’s not to say that it’s bad, just different, and I found it hard to get to grips with all the various little rules. I’m looking forward to getting it back on the table again for a second go, however, and I hope it’s going to be soon.
1853
I managed to play 18West over the Christmas period, another new 18xx game for me, and I’m happy to report and another winner. (Like there was any surprise there. And it’s just as well as it’s on my DeepThought mega-order.) Against 3 very experienced players, and another I didn’t know, I managed to get third, which I was more than happy with.
There are three different types of company: Grangers; Land Grants; and regular ‘major’ companies. The Grangers have only 2 shares, always pay 50/50, and are very limited in where they can operate (the green area in the photo below). They’re really take-over fodder for the majors. The Land Grants are unusual in that they get paid just for building track, as well as in the usual way. They have regular shares, and can become majors. Majors are like normal. There’s also some merging rules that allow you to end up with more than 60% of a major, which is unusual in an 18xx game. Also unusual is that the Union Pacific already starts with a track on the board and 2 2-Trains, so it’s up and running in the first OR.
And that’s where I invested as initial Priority Bid. It didn’t work out too badly for me, but later in the game I decided not to transfer a train from the UP to my Granger, which would have allowed the UP to buy a 6-Train, as it was otherwise train tight. Before I got another turn, someone had bought a 4D-Train, and rusted my 3-Train and 4-Train in UP. Merging my Granger didn’t give me enough to buy a 4D-Train, so I had to use some cash from pocket.
18West
With the non-running OR I lost 2 steps on the stock track, for 8*$45 lost in valuation. I think that alone would have been enough to put me into second. Plus the difference in the 6-Train and 4D-Train (I think I paid $250 from pocket, I forget), but less any difference in the runs (and I have no idea what that would have been) and I could have been close to the first placed player.
Overall 18West is a thoroughly enjoyable 18xx game. It’s already one of my favorites and I’m looking forward to trying it again. Many thanks to Mike M. for inviting me, and special thanks to Mike’s wife (Esther? – I’m dreadful with names) for lunch and chit chat.