Thoughts of Chairman Mike

Another gaming retreat come and gone, so all is sadness. Except that we can start planning for next year’s event!

Highlights, game-wise, for me were the A Most Dangerous Time and Caucasus Campaign, with both Dougs. It was just really disappointing that the latter ended because we’d missed a rule, as it could have been a really tense and close finish. I’d like to try both again.

Lowlight was the Fallschirmjaeger game. Partly this was because of  wacky die rolls, and partly because we didn’t get anywhere near finishing it. I think this is the least prepared Chuck and I have been for any retreat. Normally we’ll fix our target game and go through a few moves a couple of times, so we have the mechanisms and basic strategies in our heads. This time, however, we switched game several times, and only decided on Fallschirmjaeger in the previous week. Originally, we were planning on Liberty Roads as our game of choice. However, with more and more people coming along, we were concerned for table space a little, but mostly we knew we wouldn’t finish it in a day, and wanted to give it a full play.

Most disappointing game was Successors, which felt less strategy game and more Ameritrash ‘beat on the perceived leader’ than I’d expected. There were some interesting facets, and I think I’d give it another go, but in the end I’d have preferred another go at Wellington or Kutuzov, or trying one of the bigger CDGs, e.g. Clash of Monarchs or The Napoleonic War. (Without having played either of those last two, I’m not sure that they wouldn’t end up the same, however.)

The Main Event, Battle for Normandy, was a mixed bag, and I was very conflicted about it. I loved most of the mechanisms, and the general feel was good, but the Mandatory Assault rules took the shine right off it. Following various threads on BGG and CSM, it appears that a few of the rules in that area were last minute additions, and against the designer’s best instincts, and that’s just the way they felt – rushed and poorly thought through, with some crazy side effects. However, I’ve been so intrigued about it that I bought a copy, punched and clipped all 2520 counters, and it’s sitting on my game-table as we speak. And as my major aim was to try the game to see if I liked it enough to buy, then I guess I achieved my objective, so it has to be regarded as a success! Of all the new games that I’ve played over the past year, this is the one that’s got me most fired up.

The biggest challenge at a retreat like this is satisfying all the interests and expectations. I’m more interested in the 2-player wargames, especially those that are longer (perhaps played as teams), others are more interested in the multi-player games, especially those around the 5-6 hour mark. With the numbers we had this year, there was definitely a pressure for more of the latter, although I managed to avoid most of them. After a past event I’ve commented that I’d be happy to play a big OCS (or such) game for the whole week, but hogging the big table for the whole week would be disrespectful of the other attendees, and I’d have to find a partner (or several) to play with. However, I do enjoy the varied company for each game, but trying to schedule some time with everyone there gets real hard.

I had considered going to the ConSimWorld con this year (I got as far as booking a room at the con hotel, but later canceled), also known as ‘MonsterCon’, especially to play in a monster event, and that may not be a bad solution for me. Use MonsterCon to satisfy the monster itch, and the retreat to play the smaller games. (By smaller, I mean games that take 1-2 days to play, rather than 3-5 days.) Time off isn’t an issue, but cost is always the factor that stops me going away to events, as with air fares and hotels, the costs mount up rapidly.

Anyway, this event was a success, and hugely so. I had a blast, and hit all my targets. Even if the games weren’t exactly to my liking (and let’s not even mention Leaping Lemmings at this point), the company was always first class. Many thanks to Doug, once again, for hosting the event, and to everyone for making it a total hoot. Same time next year!

And to to the last day. Boo! This is a pack up day, requiring laundry to be done, tidying and packing up, and with people leaving at various time, you fit in what gaming you can. Eric, Matt and I managed to fit in a game of 18TN (BGG entry), a new one to Matt and I, perhaps even Eric himself, although I think he said he’d played it once.

As part of the packing up I dashed off to get a shower  between turns, and when I came back they were waiting for me, so I just built, ran and paid out, without taking enough time to fully figure out what had happened while I was gone. Big mistake, as there had been a bit of a train rush going on, and my companies needed to withhold to get enough capital to fund some more trains. After that I was playing catch up, and played a little too hard, getting one (or more) companies dumped on me, and ended up well in last, with Matt ahead of Eric, but not by a great deal.

18TN is very interesting, although the Civil War effects are rather minimal, just canceling the income from a single train run when the 2nd (?) 3-train comes out. (Or some such like that.) Ah, who am I kidding? It’s an 18x game. I’ll play it at the drop of a hat.

From there it was the rest of the clearing up, packing, and tidying. Alex volunteered to close up the house, so Doug and I were able to get going in the early afternoon, and had a very clear run home, one of the fastest I’ve seen.

And that was it for another year. I’ll do a wrap-up post later.

Day 6 already, it’s almost over! The week has just flown past. Can we make it two weeks next year?

Today was MMP/The Gamers’ Fallschirmjaeger, another in the SCS series, with Chuck. This one has a good reputation, and a decent length. However, despite an early start, we were barely through half way when we had to stop around 1700.

In this game the German player starts with no units on the map, and performing an airborne operation to land in 5 distinct areas, looking to capture the major river crossings for their main force, which arrives on turn 10. Also of primary importance are the four air fields, the two major ones at Rotterdam and The Hague, and two minor ones. These latter two are outlying, and are really difficult to hold, as we found in our play of the first few turns to get a feel of the game. I was going to go with a variable set up, allowing the German player flexibility in landings, but decided to just use the historical set up.

Of all the games I played in the week, this is the one that suffered most from the now infamous DSDF. Why is it that it’s normally my game with Chuck that sees it kick in hardest? Perhaps that’s just another aspect of it. To achieve and hold their objectives, the German player needs help from the Luftwaffe, and the availability is determined randomly. During the game my rolls were 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 7, and, as you might guess, low is not good. On my air landings my first roll for both major airfields was a 1, meaning that all landings suffered a negative DRM immediately. Against this, Chuck was rolling like a demon for his artillery (and his flak rolls weren’t too shabby, either). Twice I set up attacks to link up two of the air heads, but both times he rolled 3 from 3 on a 1/3 for a hit, following up with 4 from 6 for outright kills, again on a 1/3 chance. Yep, he rolled 4 from 6 1/9 chance.

My initial landings went pretty well, managing to capture all major objectives.

At Moerdijk/Dordrecht I managed to capture the main bridge at Moerdijk, but quickly lost it as his killer artillery removed steps. I was squeezed into a small pocket at Dordrecht, and it didn’t look good for my survival until the main force came in, as they now had to fight their way over the bridges.

At Rotterdam I had a good perimiter formed, but was never able to link up with the Dordrecht forces due to the previously mentioned killer artillery. I started to move more units over in the latter stages, but it was probably too late to save anything. My attacks on the bridge in Rotterdam also came to nothing.

The Hague area also started well, and I even managed to briefly capture the queen. However, reinforcing was an issue, and landing supply suffered from his flak (which also rolled well), putting the entire grouping out of supply. By the time we stopped, his reinforcements were starting to encircle my forces, and I had to contract to protect the perimiter. In the final turn we played I decided to try to break out towards Rotterdam, giving up the airfield. It was either that or be defeated in detail, and still lose the airfield, so trying to aid the troops trying to take Rotterdam seemed the better idea.

At the two outlying airfields north and south of The Hague my units didn’t last long at all, as they’re difficult to support effectively.

Despite all the die rolls, I also managed to play quite poorly, with several really dumb moves. I should have been more aggressive with the units around Rotterdam, trying to link up with the Dordrecht/Moerdijk airhead sooner. Reading the player notes would also have been a smart move.

By the time we had to stop it was not looking good for the Germans. VPs are scored for control of the airfields, and some bridges, and for how far the Germans control the main road towards, and beyond, Rotterdam. Given that the reinforcements were going to have to fight their way onto the board, I didn’t think they were going to get very far, and it was certainly looking like a major Dutch victory.

Overall, and only based on half a game, Fallschirmjaeger is an interesting game, but appears to be a tough one for the German player. The landings have to go reasonably, the Luftwaffe have to make a reasonable contribution, the reinforcing units have to land not too scattered, supply has to make it through. That’s a lot of things that can go wrong, and if several do so then it’s going to be hard to achieve success, at least in VP terms. There is a little weirdness in the reinforcement landing rules, and they can end up a long way from where they’re supposed to be, as they may have to roll twice for scatter, which seems a trifle odd. We went back over the rules several times to see if we’d misunderstood the rules, but we appeared to have it right. I’d really like to give this a full go at some point, possibly even a couple of goes, and at around 15 hours it would be a couple of full days or 5 evening sessions. Fairly doable.

In the evening we played Battlestar Galactica, my favorite of the ‘cooperative’ style games. In the last 3 games I’d been a Cylon, so was hoping to be a good guy, but with last choice of character, and not wanting to play a pilot, there wasn’t much to choose from. In the end I chose Baltar, despite getting 2 loyalty cards right off, and risking being a Cylon again. In the end, neither of the two 3-card characters (myself and Dave, playing Boomer) drew a Cylon card in the game. We had the Cylons fairly well guessed by about two thirds the way through, but Matt and Rog were able to pull off the Cylon win with another massive assault.

BSG is one of the few ‘wacky’ games that I actually like, and I think it’s mostly down to the theme, although it’s certainly the best of the cooperative games I’ve tried. (LotR was good, but lacks inter-player tension; Shadows Over Camelot has the inter-player tension, but the game play is fairly boring; Pandemic is just random rubbish; and the less said about Vanished Planet, the better.) I’m always up for a game.

And so the the main event of the week, The Battle for Normandy (BGG entry), from GMT. I originally had this one on pre-order, but canceled late as I wasn’t sure that it was one that I really wanted. (And let’s not discuss whether I needed it!) So, whilst this was certainly not my first choice for a monster game (that would have been OCS, EFS, The Devil’s Cauldron), it was a game I was interested in trying, to see how it went, and whether it was one that I’d want to pick up.

At my insistence we played the full invasion (what’s the point of a D-Day game if you don’t play the invasion?), so spent the Wednesday evening and the early part of Thursday morning getting through the landings. I played the Commonwealth forces, Eric the US, with Chuck and Doug the Germans, the former opposite me, although that seemed to change during the game, and covered some/most of the Omaha beach as well.

The Commonwealth landings went well, with 6th Airborne getting down without any losses at all, including capturing Pegasus Bridge. The beaches had been mostly cleared, with openings created on both Gold and Juno beaches, with Sword not far behind. However, over on the other side things weren’t going so well. The airborne landings were pretty disastrous, with a lot of units scattered all over the map, and around 25% losses. The beach landings went pretty badly as well, with Omaha being a struggle.

Chuck put little emphasis on pressuring 6th airborne, so they were able to build up and hold the flank. His main concern was with keeping me out of Caen, as I drove forward from Sword/Juno, so most of the reinforcements were fed into this area, managing to block my advance. I also pressed hard on the Juno/Gold axis, reaching as far as the main Caen/Bayeux highway. Around the middle of the 7th June turns we found that we’d been playing the supply rules all wrong, missing that supply lines can only go 1 hex over streams, which left me in a bad position with many units out of supply, and I spent the next turn or two reorganizing to get units back in supply. At this time we also learned more about Mandatory Attacks, which I’ll discuss in detail further below, which exacerbated my supply issues greatly.

By this time Eric had managed to get Omaha stabilized, and had started pressing forward. Utah had also been organized, and was starting to show some coherence.

The June 8th turns saw me use Pegasus Bridge and a gap in the German lines to sweep forward and actually get a unit into Caen from the east. However, this became the focus of Chuck’s attacks, and I was never able to get the die rolls required to fully support it, and Chuck managed to retake it on the 9th. In the mean time I’d been able to clear his unit that was screwing up my supply lines, and pressed on toward Bayeux, managing to take a hex of the city on the 9th PM turn, with the US Omaha forces right there as well. Chuck was unable to get the result that forced me to retreat, which left the Allies with 5VPs when we had to stop.

As a game session, I feel that my objectives were achieved. We never expected to get too far into the game, so getting as far as we did was about as expected. I mostly wanted to get a feel for the game mechanisms, and that was successfully achieved.

There’s a lot to like about BfN. The game focuses on trying to remain playable, and it does that well. There is a marked absence of markers, OoS being pretty much the only markers used, so the map is kept clean. The invasion itself is kept moderately simple, although there is some planning required in the order you land, and where, so it’s a good balance. For a low level game the supply rules are well thought out, and encourage you to keep your divisions together and not have them spread out all over France. Combat is simple, and the structure of the results table make the Combined Arms +/-1 DRM well worth looking for.

The air was is mostly abstracted. The Allies have a number of air points which they can allocate to Armed Recon, Ground Support, and Interdiction missions, the latter being split across the 5 maps in play. The German player has a number of AA points that he also allocates across the maps, which can negate the effects of the Interdiction missions, the net effect being the number of MPs lost, by each map, when a German unit moves. Simple, but very effective. We focused on the first two missions, but perhaps should have allocated more to Interdiction to slow up the reinforcements.

The Allies also have a limited amount of Combat Supply Points, that get refreshed slowly, and which limits the number of attacks that can be made. A single hex attacking without support costs no CSPs. Throw in some support (air, naval, or artillery) and it costs 1CSP. Have a multi-hex attack (with or without support) and it now costs 3CSPs. This introduces a certain tempo to the game, where the Allied player has to arrange his major attacks carefully, and any combat involving the use of CSPs that doesn’t get a result is a serious set back.

Overall, there was a lot there to like. So, what were the negative points?

For me there were three negatives: Mandatory Attacks (MAs); Mandatory Attacks; and (yep, you guessed it) Mandatory Attacks. The general concepts are fine: units in Clear, Farmland or Flooded/Marsh hexes must attack enemy stacks that are adjacent; and if any adjacent enemy stacks are attacked, then all adjacent enemy stacks must be attacked. The first part means that trying to hold weak terrain is really hard, and I think that’s a fair premise, as being caught in the open is not good. The second part means that enemy forces adjacent don’t sit idly by while you attack their buddies, also a fair premise. However, you can barrage adjacent stacks, which counts as the attack, so avoiding any possible negative result on the CRT. All good so far. Where it starts to break down is in the exceptions.

The first major exception is that units need not attack units across a stream or river, which is fair enough.  The second is that units that cannot retreat away due to terrain and/or enemy ZoCs do not have to attack. This is major, as you want to work to put your opponent into a position where he has to attack or retreat, but if you succeed too well, he no longer has to retreat, and just stays there. Even worse, defenders in an OoS state have no impact on their defense strength, so you’re even more up against it. This means that you may be better off without that breakthrough and surrounding enemy units, as you now have to winkle them out. At least if they have a retreat path you can force them out and take the position.

The designer’s rational is that when they’re cut off they wouldn’t attack, as they wouldn’t be in a good position to do so, and would just dig in. Now, that’s not a bad starting point, but is a bit of a generalization. And why are other units not allowed to dig in? Take an infantry unit facing a strong armor unit? Would they really charge forward in a suicidal attack? Of course not. They’d dig in and request support, in exactly the same manner. In the game they’re forced to attack and take a few step losses (probably) as well as retreat. Now, I recognize that troops sitting in poor terrain would want to get off it and into something with more protection, but that doesn’t mean they’d perform suicide assaults to do it.

The next impact is that combats are not permitted at <1:4 odds. Combined with MAs, this means that, again, if it gets too bad for the defender, it actually works in his favor, as a unit that can’t perform the required MA must retreat. So a unit ‘attacking’ at <1:4 gets to retreat, and one at 1:4 will lose steps and (probably) have to retreat? Sorry, that’s just stoopid.

But it gets better. The one final rule hidden in the MA section (and not mentioned in the Movement nor Supply sections, where it should be) is that a unit in an OoS state is not permitted to move adjacent to an enemy unit in terrain that would require an MA. Again, not a bad premise, but what it does is prevent any sort of breakout by the OoS units. Think of a strong armor unit, with an attack strength of 10, cut off by a bunch of weeny 1-strength infantry units. If the infantry units are smart enough to not move adjacent, and ensure that it’s the clear MA terrain adjacent, then the armor units can’t do a thing about it. Not. A. Single. Thing. They’re stuck there with no way to fight their way out. That’s not just stoopid, that has moved into ludicrous territory.

This is all really sad, as there’s a lot to like here, and I think the game just needs some more development, as the problems with MA are easily solved. The first option is to simply do away with MAs altogether. They’re trying to introduce a good concept, but in so doing introduce too many issues. However, there’s a better way.

The system already uses steps to show the gradual friction of combat, but retreats are all or nothing, either the stack retreats, or it doesn’t, and if it can’t then it loses everything, all steps are eliminated. That’s a trifle brutal for a game at this level of details, so why not allow units to swap retreats for step loss(es)? Even better would be something along the lines of the Determined Defense used in GMT’s The Caucasus Campaign, where the result is determined by a die roll which dictates how much strength is lost in exchange for not retreating. This would solve the problem of  MAs, as now they would be truly mandatory, but cut off defenders could be slowly ground down.

Partly this depends on what MAs are trying to show. Combat units in contact don’t just sit there doing nothing, but there is a consistent low level of activity going on. At the higher scales it doesn’t have much effect, but at the low levels depicted in BfN, especially with units having multiple steps, this could represent the general friction/attrition that goes on when in contact with the enemy.

Now, I’ve no idea whether this would work in practice, and I’m just theorizing. But I’m curious to see whether these would make the game better or worse. I don’t think variable retreat/losses would add much overhead, and it would certainly allow the defender to give up force for position, which is not a bad effect in my view.

Either way, I’m still conflicted by BfN, as there’s a lot to like. But those MA rules are just plain broken in my view.

It’s also worth mentioning that the designer’s support of the game has been exemplary. The questions we posted to BGG in our play were answered quickly (within 10 minutes on Thursday evening, I believe), and he has been very ready to discuss his design thoughts when asked. Can’t ask for more.

Day 3 already, and time for GMT’s The Caucasus Campaign (BGG entry) with Tex as the Germans and myself as the Soviets. I’d played this one once before, although it ended quite early, so we never got a chance to see how it developed.

This one turned out to be quite a struggle, with Tex pushing hard with his panzer forces, forcing his way down the main highway all the way to Grozny. The game ended when I didn’t realize that Grozny was a major city (I even commented that one had to go to Astrakhan, as there was no other place to put it, and Tex didn’t correct me.), and so could have been placing my reinforcements there, leaving it defended by a single step. Tex was able to take it with the remaining steps of his, now OoS, lead panzers, even being able to move forward to the next VP city too boot. Although I was able to claim back 1VP, it was not enough and Tex got the win.

This was just as well for Tex, as he was beginning to lose the middle as I’d managed to hold onto Maikop and was starting to push him back, threatening to cut off his lead units and to retake Krasnodar. Another turn or two and the German position would have collapsed, I think. I also had a unit coming in from the Astrakhan direction, heading for the unprotected German rear areas. And that was even with me drawing 3 of the ‘None’ chits over the 7 turns for my 3 variable reinforcements. (There are 4 in the bag of 42 chits.)

Missing that Grozny was a major city meant that the game ended up less satisfying as an experience. With the full rules this is quite a challenge for the German player, and some say there is a Soviet bias, and I can certainly see that. I’d try it again, but would prefer to play with the full rules.

That took most of the day, so with a break for some dinner and relaxation, we started on setting up the main event, GMT’s The Battle for Normandy (BGG entry). We got through most of the invasion phase, but I’ll put it all into a separate post.

The second full day, and my scheduled day with Doug and MMP’s A Most Dangerous Time (BGG entry). We’d had a brief session to work through the mechanisms, and I’d tried it a bit solo to cement them in my head, but this was our first attempt for the whole game, so strategies were going to be a challenge, and who knows how the end-game played.

The game eventually panned out in 3 phases. In the opening few turns, through about turn 8, things went mostly my way, as Doug couldn’t get any of his treachery rolls on the minor clans to work, and I was able to grab a couple of areas with the Ikko Ikki in the south. During this time the ‘End turn’ chit came out early in most turns, including the first chit drawn on one occasion. The Takeda clan arrived and started making progress in squeezing Oda from the east, making some initial progress.

The second phase saw the game swing Doug’s way, as the dice became friendly to him and he won all the battles. The Takeda clan lost most of their forces, and retreated back to Kôfu, their home city, to recover. Oda was starting to take over the map in both directions.

The third phase (around turn 17) saw the dice swing back again, as I won a couple of battles with the Takeda clan to threaten from that side of the map. I also had a card that allowed me to get Tsutsui, one of Oda’s samurai stacked with 6 soldiers, to betray to my side, and from there I was able to capture Kyo. From there it was all downhill for me. Several of the cards in hand were really good, but required holding Kyo, so I was in a good place.

We saw the ‘End turn’ chit come out of the cup first on both the 19th and 20th turns, but I was happy with that, as controlling Kyo is the game winning condition, and it allowed me to build up my forces. The Ikko Ikki claimed areas as Doug contracted, which allowed them to grow rapidly. On turn 24 Doug attacked my force, but I played the ‘Massed Gunnery’ card, and was able to totally remove his force, his last large field army, and we called the game at that point, as the end wasn’t in doubt.

This was a very interesting game, and I’m really glad we got it to the table. The Oda player has to expand and take control early, because the pressure is going to mount with time as the anti-Oda player gets more clans joining the cause, and the game swings away from Oda. The betrayal system, however, means you never know what’s going to happen, and you can have one of your samurai convert to the other side, which can throw a real wrench in the works. I’ll have to play this from the Oda side next time, to see if I can do any better.

The evening saw some lighter fare with the choice being GMT’s recent release Leaping Lemmings (BGG entry). I’d played this the previous week, and instantly disliked it, but I tanked up with some beer and hoped that it would work. I was wrong.

Not a lot to decide in this game, it pretty much comes down to the dice rolls for where the eagles land. Suffice to say that after an early success all my lemmings saw the dice roll against them and get eaten, and once more I ended the game with the most lemmings in the eagle chow pile, this time tying with Doug, for another last place. Chuck, who had to take a phone call for most of the game, so we played his move by committee, won.

This game is all about the die rolls, and has almost zero real decisions to make. Although some of the others like it, it has moved to my ‘Will not play’ list.

The first full day of the retreat is over, and it’s been a busy start. The drive out was very uneventful, leaving around 1015, and getting to Bend around 1315. We’d arranged to Chuck and Dave at the Deschutes Brewery pub, and they were only a few moments behind us. I was disappointed, however, to find they’d stopped doing the mini-keg that I got last year, so no beer for me.

Our fist game was Successors, the GMT CDG, now on its third edition. I was based in the NW of the board with both my leaders, with Dave and Doug split up NE/SE, and Chuck in the south and east. Dave made an early run with Alexander’s body and managed to get to Pella for mega Legitimacy points. I had the Treachery card in hand, but failed both my Interception rolls (needing 3+ and 4+), either of which would have allowed me to steal the body from Dave. However, we all piled on Dave, and he was unable to get to get the required Legitimacy points for the automatic win, being just a few short.

He then tried to consolidate his strength in the NE, hoping to gain the next the next automatic win condition of most VPs and Legitimacy totaled, but again we were able to deny him. The next one was 23 VPs, and we were unable to prevent Chuck from achieving this in the last Turn of the game. Doug had a card in hand that would have taken a couple of points off him, but missed the play.

I had a pretty disastrous game, losing all my generals at one point, but came back right at the end when I took control of Greece, and managed to get second place, which surprised the heck out of me, but everyone was focusing on pounding on Dave, then Chuck.

Despite all the fancy card play and chrome, this goes into the ‘AmeriTrash’ category, as the game just devolved into another ‘bash the leader’ game. Whoever you perceive to be the leader, bash them in any way you can. Doug and I spent enough time bashing on Dave to stop him winning, without improving our positions, that all we achieved was to let Chuck win. I’m pretty unlikely to play this one again.

Following a few games of the finger-flicking fun game, Zopp, it was time for bed. The next day saw us have our traditional first day breakfast at Sintra, one of my favorite events of the week, and one I look forward to. On return, Chuck and Doug got started on A Victory Denied, while Dave and I played 2 de Mayo, as we only had an hour or two before Eric was due to arrive. It’s only a 30 minute game, so by 1030 we were wondering what to do to fill in. At that time I noticed an email from Eric to say that he was running late, so with a longer gap available, we put Stronghold on the table.

This is one that’s been on my gaming radar for a while, so I really wanted to give it a go. It’s got quite an extensive learning curve, as there’s a lot to get through for the first game. However, it’s not really that complex, and we were soon moving along. My attackers got beaten up quite severely, as there just didn’t seem any way past the defenders. I’m sure I’d get better at it if I were to play more, but at mourned 3 hours to play, there are just so many other games that I’d rather play, so another strike. [Dave checked on a few rules, and we played a few things wrong, mostly that you can use the Dispatch actions to move the same group twice. This allows far faster movement for the attacker, and is a major improvement to the way we played.]

After Eric arrived, we got going with Friedrich. I really wanted to see if it was any better with 3 players, after our previous disaster of a game with 4. Well, the player involvement aspect is a lot better with 3, as I thought that we all had enough to do, but the mechanisms still don’t sit right. As Friedrich, Hannover, didn’t draw a single spade suited card until the fourth turn, and guess where all the VP cities were? Yep, in a spades region. So I was unable to defend them and Eric’s France was able to waltz in and pretty much claim them all before I could do much about it, and eventually got an easy win. I think I could have done better by splitting my generals at the end, and forcing him to fight two battles, but too late for that now.

Another game that remains firmly on my sell/trade pile, it’s just too randomly based on the cards for my liking.

In the evening Chuck and I played Martin Wallace’s Gettysburg game. I’d played half way through previously with Chris, and we’d both been very impressed with it, so I was looking forward to getting through a whole game. I remain very impressed with this one, as it gives a great feel of the battle, although it doesn’t claim to be any sort of true simulation. The command and activation mechanism is based on his earlier Waterloo game, but the tweaks just take it to a new level.

After a fairly tight game, Chuck Federals were able to hold onto the line for a solid win. We only got one rule wrong, allowing retreats to non-command spaces, or adjacent, but I’m not sure it would have changed the outcome. I’m looking forward to getting this on the table again.

And that was the end of Monday. These two days had the games that I had the least expectation for, so let’s just say that I wasn’t terribly surprised that they’re just not for me. More and more I’m disliking the multiple-player games where you just play cards and take actions to bash the perceived leader. At least in Wellington and Kutuzov you play in teams, and they play 2-player as well, so they’re acceptable.

The next few days sees nothing but 2-player war-games, which I’m really looking forward to.

And so, with much anticipation, it’s almost time for the yearly gaming retreat. Only a few more hours to go, and I’m now counting down the minutes.  So, what’s on the schedule this year?

• Sun/Mon – Succesors
• Mon – Friedrich
• Tues – A Most Dangerous Time
• Wed – The Caucasus Campaign
• Thur/Fri – Battle for Normandy
• Sat – Fallschirmjaeger
• Sun – 18TN

Succesors

I had a short go at this several years ago (in 2ed. form, I think), but that was a time when I’d really lost interest in wargaming, and it was not a game I enjoyed. It was also partly due to not having looked at the cards, and I have a real hard time with CDG games where you have no idea what the deck contains. I had a similar first experience with Wellington, and now won’t play a new CDG without having a browse through the cards first. I’m looking forward to this one, as I’ve heard it’s good, but more just hanging with the early arrivals before the whole event gets into the swing.

Friedrich

We played this once, four-player, some time ago, and it was a disaster. I played Russia/Sweden, and both myself and the France player had so little to do we both disliked the game. Added to that the event cards knocked us both out in almost the first 4 card draws. So we’d each spent 15 minutes playing in a 3-4 hour game. A little too asymmetrical. This time we’re playing with 3 players, so we’ll see how that goes.

A Most Dangerous Time

A year old release from MMP, and this is its first time to the table. We had a quick run through of the first few turns a couple weeks back, and really enjoyed it. Lots to think about, I’m really looking forward to this one. I’ll be playing the anti-Oda faction.

The Caucasus Campaign

Eric and I played this one a while back, so I’m looking forward to getting it back on the table for a second go. My first play was a good experience, although I hope for the game to go longer, as the previous effort ended very quickly with a Soviet automatic win at the first call. I’ll be playing the Soviets again, and I’m good with that.

Battle For Normandy

The monster game for this year’s event, we’ll spend 2 days on it, starting with the full-on invasion. We played though the landings and a turn a couple weeks back, so we’re comfortable with the rules, but we don’t expect to get anywhere near to the end of the scenario. I’m playing the Brits (natch). This was not my first choice for a monster game. Or my second. Or third. (They were OCS, EFS, and Devil’s Cauldron, respectively.) However, it’s one I’m happy to play, and I’m looking forward to this, as I ducked out of a purchase on P500, so I’m curious to see if it’s one I want to pick up.

Fallschirmjaeger.

This is my game with Chuck, and we looked at several games as potential candidates for our day together. Most we decided that we’d rather play at a later time, as they wouldn’t finish in a day, and we’d rather play the whole game rather than stop in the middle. So it was only in the last week that we settled on this one, with me being the Germans. Principally we picked this one because we’re very familiar with the SCS system, it has a good reputation, and we should get it done in the day.

18TN

Sunday morning is 18xx time, and this was our choice. Mostly driven by the size and time we had available, I think it’s one that we haven’t played before, so it should be pretty even.

There will be lots of evening games, mostly lighter, although we all have varying definitions of ‘lighter’. I hope to play Gettysburg (the Martin Wallace version), 2 de Mayo, Richard III, and perhaps 1825 Unit 3. Combat Commander is another one likely to see table time. Others will, no doubt, hit the more ‘AmeriTrash’ style games, which I’m not that fond of these days, so I’ll leave them to it. And I hope Dave remembers to bring his Zopp board!

Bring it on!

And that was the end of another Sunriver experience.

So, in Sunriver tradition, here’s the bests, worsts, highs and lows:

Favorite game: Manifest Destiny. Time just flew by, I’d be really interested in getting this back on the table soon.

Least favorite game: Doom! OK, I played it twice, but that doesn’t mean that I liked it any more. I just wanted to check whether the Marines had any real chance of completing the mission, and my view is no, they’re screwed, unless they really, really, really get lucky. I’ll be trying to avoid this one in the future.

Best new game: MD or Australia

Worst new game: Heart of Africa

Funnest game: Monkeys on the Moon. I enjoyed it more than the first time, and miming/sounding the chain of abilities certainly made for much chortling.

Most surprising game: Manifest Destiny. I’m not big on long games but the time just flew by, and it’s hard to believe that we spent over 4 hours (I think) on it.

Least surprising game: Doom! I didn’t like it before, and that opinion hasn’t changed.

Most disappointing game: Heart of Africa. This rivals Wildlife in that it sounds so interesting in theory, but it just doesn’t work out in practice.

Least disappointing game: Australia. I’d heard it was quite good and it lived up to its advance press.

High point: Can’t think of a specific one, it was a great weekend.

Low point: Screwing up the final move in Manifest Destiny. I don’t really play to win, but to play the best I can and challenge everyone. If this gives me a win at the same time, then great, but I’m also happy if I came last but did my best. (viz. coming last in my first game of Struggle of Empires, I still feel that I played to the best that the dice would allow me.) In MD, I missed that my final (and game winning card) was a ‘Destiny’ card, and that I needed to go early in the turn, as only one ‘Destiny’ card can be played per turn. I had even hoarded my token that allows you to ignore player order and go first, and omitted to use it. My own oversight. Bah!

Observation: I played far fewer games this Sunriver than in past ones. I only played 12 games all weekend, where I have played 12 in 1 day in prior visits. The reason is that I played far more longer games this time. This is especially interesting as I’ve been ‘off’ longer games for some time. I’m even more convinced that the timing of these longer games has a big impact on my enjoyment, especially if it’s a new game. Playing a long or new (or worse, both) game after dinner is not a good move for me. All of my playings of the longer games were in the late morning or afternoon

It only remains to offer profuse thanks to Doug for hosting us at his family’s holiday home, and to Jim for doing the driving. (My apologies, Jim, for tuning out for a while on the way home, as the tiredness hit me again and I just couldn’t keep my eyes open.) This was the first time up to Sunriver that I haven’t driven and I’ll have to do that more often. Thanks to all who managed to make it, it was a fun weekend, and great to hang out with everyone.

Saturday started bright and early. Too bright and too early. I woke at 4am to find the light and Mac had been left on. Minor grrrr! I managed to get back to sleep and woke up just before 7am to watch my game. I needn’t have bothered as I saw Celtic play crap and go down 3-1. Bah.

(btw, I rate games as follows:

1- I positively hate this game and will not play it under any circumstances

2 – I dislike this game and would prefer to play something else

3 – I like this game and I’m happy to play it

4 – I absolutely love this game

I’m still not sure if I should split up the ’3′ rating, as it covers a lot of territory between ’2′ and ’4′, but there it is for the moment.)

People were up and running and we started with a game of Citadels that Matt won. Another game that I hadn’t played in a long time (24 months). It’s just an ok game, but like a lot of these it gets to be a fun experience because of the people you’re playing with. I enjoyed it and I’d be willing to play it again.

Now it was time for the big game. Doug was wanting to play Manifest Destiny, one of the new GMT mega games, and I’d agreed the previous day. When I started looking at it and Doug was explaining all the rules to Matt, Michael and I, I was beginning to wonder why I’d agreed to it. It appeared to be just the sort of game I’m mostly not fond of, long, lots of stuff to do and lots of fiddly stuff. It took quite a while to expain all the rules, and the first few turns were quite tentative. However, we quickly got into the flow of the game and it became more interesting as we filled up the map and started having to compete. Long story short, Doug was making the pace the whole game but I had a cunning plan up my sleeve and should have won. Unfortunately, I’d neglected to notice that my final card was a ‘Destiny’ card, which meant that only one could be played per turn. I had selected to play later in the turn, which allowed Matt to play a ‘Destiny’ card before it got to me. I could have used my ‘Play first in order’ token, which I had saved all game, and which would have given me the necessary cash and bonus to get the win. (Even more so since Doug played a card that reduced all income.) Bah, gnash, wail and more! It’s not missing the win that annoys me most, it’s the poor play. Anyway, this turned out to be a great game. Not really that complex, but enough going on that you need to plan your plays a turn or two ahead at times. A definite ’3′, bordering on a ’4′. I’d like to play this one again real soon.

After that I wanted to play something that would allow me to turn down my brain usagef, so I joined a Doom game that was starting. Doug, Matt and I were the Marines, and Alex ran the bad guys. We played the same scenario that Laurent and I played a few weeks back. In this game we got to the same place as before, but this time we had lost all 6 frags (last time it was only 1) and the bad guys won. We had a bad set of abilities, too many conflicted with others we had and couldn’t be used, we had trouble hitting anything due to bad dice rolling and Alex seemed to manage to cause lots of hits with his attacks. I still had the feeling that we didn’t play to our strengths, however, and didn’t use our abilities properly, e.g. we didn’t use Doug’s ability to negate events once. Still just a dice fest really, and I’m not moved from the opinion that there are really many options. Still rated a ’2′.

This took us up to 6pm or so, and pizza time. While waiting for the pizza to arrive, Michael and I played Battle Line, which he hadn’t played and wanted to see. It came down to the last column, with him using his leader to great effect to take the win. Nice job Michael. Still a pretty decent game, and a sold ’3′.

After pizza was Heart of Africa. Doug has been trying to get this to the table for a while, and I was interested in trying it, so Matt and Michael joined us in learning. Not a particularly great game, all of us were a bit dissatisfied by it. Definitely no Cooley effect here as I won and I was a bit bleah about it. A bit like Vinci in that you have pairs of tokens that bestow capabilities although here you bit for them. A bit of Traumfabrik in that your bid gets divided and paid to the other players. A bit of a few other games as well, but far worse than the sum of its parts. I only won 3 bids, but timed it to score big and jump over everyone to reach the winning score. I’m not going to give it a final rating until I get a second play, but it starts out as a ’2′.

At this point Alex wanted to give Doom another go, and was looking for victims. I mean Marines. So Matt, Michael and I took it for another spin. We played the same scenario as before, and we dealt 9 abilities and split them up as we desired rather then deal 3 to each player. Even with knowing a large part of the scenario and choosing our abilities we still didn’t make it to the end for a win. Mostly it came down to luck on the dice, we rolled many misses, Alex rolled 1 or 2. I just wanted to see if we were playing it wrong or if it really was just a crap shoot. We spent a lot more time thinking about how best to get what we wanted and still went down. I can now finally say that this is firmly a ’2′ game, bordering on a ’1′. The game is too simplistic to be valid as a role playing type game and has all the luck elements of Risk.

We had planned to re-establish the midnight Piratenbucht (Pirate’s Cove) tradition, but it was almost 1am when Doom finished, so we called it a day at that point.