Been reading the rules today. While I love the footprint and components I have to say, the rules are really awkward for such a small ruleset. Each element has several special cases and so far at least, the rules dont “flow” for want of a better word. Feels very stop/start. A mixed beginning but we shall see how it actually plays.
I’ll likely await the Vassal mod to begin trying it out. I expected some Berg-ian principles in the rules given the quirkiness of the theater…you gotta have if/or/but chrome. But it’s too slim to really full-Berg. So far, in their small size (yet complexity) the rules remind me of Frank Chadwick’s Race to Tunis and Bloody Kasserine games. Hopefully the replay value will be similar to those.
Ayup. I may get this one to the table this week so I will post thoughts.
Cataclysm game ended, a bit anticlimactically. It’s still a hella random game- the Axis were in control the whole way and basically all of the possibilities of the Allies making the points back vanished with some bad rolls and bad luck- eventually they had to take a huge risk with unstable countries and it ended up biting them in the ass.
Decided to set up CC:E to refresh myself on the mechanics and play through the lopsided scenario of a fallschirmjager detachment punching through a Soviet early-war rifle platoon.
Kim’s rules seem like what it would be like to have Kim sit and explain each step in the sequence of play while sitting at the table. I very much got that feeling from the organization of the Final Gamble rules. As my friend Don said, “It’s all there, and it makes sense. It’s just not how you expect it.”
Er, that would be a very interesting historical subject.
What’s your take? Is it beer and pretzels disguised as serious Macro, or is it just very open to varying outcomes because of the very macro scale?
Hmm I miss this game. I need to play it again soon. Its just fun.
Sigh and my wife’s name is…and autocorrect says the name of the pass is a misspelling. Priceless.
I ran into this right away and am afraid it may kill the game for me. Not because it is random, but because the randomness prevents any sense of narrative. It is one thing to have a game turn on a die roll and have that be a story. It is another thing to have a game swing around on die rolls from turn to turn without any sense of how the game is developing or could have been thematically coherent. I was not impressed by my first play-through.
I think there’s a lot to it, a lot of potential plays, ways to do things, definite approaches. It is also a very random game. I wouldn’t say it’s beer and pretzels. I found the decisions a lot more interesting than, say, an A&A type game. But, that being said, the US flubbed a roll to join the alliance with the UK and that made the possibility of any victory other than Fascist almost minimal.
I’m a bit concerned that passive Japanese play(e.g., avoid US provocation, don’t break the Washington Naval Treaty) is too effective, but I otherwise liked the general play balance.
There is a lotta fancy-pants Axis and Allies out there lately. Seems to be a thing.
Have you done Pacific?
Note to self, Trademark title “Fancy Pants Axis and Allies”.
Yeah I think Pacific is better than the European one. Just a great series, but yeah Pacific is best imho. The rules just flow smoother. Plus Burma built in from the start, canny be bad :)
I do feel that, being newer players, we missed some avenues of play that might’ve been more efficient- i did tell the democracy player that he might’ve been better off using UK flags to pressure the US and getting it to fight a seperate war with Japan to try to make up for a lack of progress in Europe.
The game continued for a long time because I as the communist player kept making stability check after stability check. If I had surrendered, it would’ve ended the game a lot sooner, and that’s generally how the Fascists win- surrendering a power of each opposing ideology while they have the lead.
I’ve seen a lot of other games where the US proves decisive and it doesn’t end up this way, so it might just be a game state made of a lot of bad events going against the Allies (The UK spent a good chunk of 1933-36 at effectiveness 1 due to parliamentary inquiries).
I’ve been accused in the last week of having a serious case of the “Old Mans”, but I really have come to the conclusion that I just don’t much care for the huge WW2 Strategic Global Game anymore. I think, maybe, that Theater-level may be as high as I go echelon-wise for that War anymore. It’s either Beer and Pretzels or significantly flawed monsters in that genre.
Ooh, Combat Commander. I have Pacific… still in shrink, because nobody around here will play it with me anymore, and there’s still like a hojillion scenarios in Europe I’ve never played. Oh well!
I’d love to see GMT make a reworked versions of Europe/Med with the improvements from Pacific- there’s some good stuff in there, where it’s a lot more difficult to have a dud hand, for example.
I know I read somewhere where someone had suggested rules to back-port to Europe. I know the “insta-kill if attack is more than double the defense” rule was in there.
It plays like a dream solo, fyi. Which is surprising for a CDG with hidden cards but it really does. roll something up on the built in random scenario generator and you are up and playing. Which I appreciate.