Not an accurate representation of either EotS or Pacific War.
EDIT: oic there has been a big discussion above. I’ll stay out of it. Either people like games or they don’t. Arguing is useless.
LOL Tom Chick made a wargaming joak!!
Oh, I like them all, I just don’t play the ones that annoy me!
The grand campaign doesn’t work, and Mark Herman even admits as much, but that’s ok because the operational scenarios are the point. Not the tactical ones, though. There are many better tactical games, in my opinion, than the Battle Games in PacWar. But the operational scenarios are where the money is. A few years ago (maybe 3-4 years ago?), I engineered a work trip specifically to fly back to North Carolina from Portland so I could stay with a friend for a week and play the Guadalcanal scenario. One of the best gaming experience I’ve had.
Some pics:
Btw, shame on GMT
OMG what a complete bald-faced lie!
I am attending Unthirl Your Banners next week for 4 days of groggy goodness.
Deadly Woods
Holland '44
A Distant Plain
Hannibal Rome v Carthage
are on my dance card, cannot wait…
Thanks for the AAR and info. This looks fantastic, and it’s interesting to hear how the convention culture differs in Europe.
And I’ve noticed on Twitter a steady and large volume of wargaming tweets in Spanish, second only to English. Japanese and French come in quite a bit too, but so many Spanish tweets. I’ve been using them to refresh and improve my rusty and dysfunctional Spanish skills.
Anyway, looks like you had a great time, thanks for sharing!
Thanks! I didn’t realize the grand campaign was as broken as you mention, but I wonder if it’s been revised for the new version? And I didn’t even realize there was a tactical level to the game. But yeah, I’m most interested in the operational scenarios.
Looking at your screenshots, there are only a few counters on the map. Makes me wonder, why are there “9 counter sheets” in the game?
The campaign has not been magically fixed because it can’t be magically fixed, any more than a Squad Leader game designed to portray all of Operation Typhoon could be made to work: when you design a game based on the considerations and tempo of one level, you lose the considerations of the level above. It’s a structural issue, not one of changing some orders of battle or inserting some special rules.
There are a lot of counters on record sheets off the map: ships in task forces, planes on carriers, etc. Few of the units are placed on the map itself. There a lots of ships that will not be used in a given scenario. Then there are all the counters needed to make “change” for different strength values of different aircraft types: 5-strength F4F counter, 3-strength F4F counter, 1-strength F4F counter. Then there are the informational markers. And see those number counters (which mark hits, etc.)? There are like two sheets of those.
Sounds like people should stick with Empire of the Sun for the strategic level, then. Not that I’ll be jumping into a 100-hour campaign game with War in the Pacific at any point in the near future in either case, but good to know.
And thanks, that makes sense with the counters too.
Just as an aside, that map broke my brain - “up” appears to be South West-ish. Even as an Australian it took me some time to figure out what I was looking at!
Whoops, sorry I missed this. Happy to help!
I’m not sure I’ve seen a company charge $30 for just the VASSAL module like that. That’s different.
Well I’ve just finished reading and trying to digest the rules for Holland '44, Simonitch’s apparent tribute to John Butterfield.
Holy unnecessary chrome Batman!! It looks like an absolute blast to play in terms of “narrative” but wowser, there’s a lot of “in detail” stuff that surely could be abstracted away in a game of this scale.
I’m due for some initial counter pushing tomorrow and I’d set aside about an hour to get a handle on the mechanics of combat, movement and ZOC-Bonding. I reckon 3 or 4 is going to be required…
I can’t tell by scanning the BGG page, but is this a built-from-the-groud-up true solitaire system like Butterfield’s Ardennes? Or is it another loosey-goosey “just figure out the best move for your opponent and do that” game? Because if it’s the former, an actual solitaire design, I’d be much more inclined to a GMT release about Market Garden than a Compass Games release about Normandy.
Also, @sincilbanks, I’ve still got your excellent Ardennes videos queued up for when I learn the game. But I hope you’re considering more video playthroughs and I’d love to see something on Holland '44, or any other games you’re playing.
-Tom
Holland ‘44 has no solo system. It is a two-player game only, although it can be solo-duotaired.
You mean Butterfield’s Hell’s Highway, right? I think you confused Tom Chick.
I find Simonitch’s games to have the right amount of chrome to capture the particular situations. France ‘40, Stalingrad ‘42, Ukraine ‘43, Holland ‘44 all have chrome that works well for the specific battles they’re trying to recreate. ZOC bonds and infiltration are pretty crucial to allow the differential movement in the campaign, especially in the area of the 1st Airborne.
You are right, Hell’s Highway is the apparent game this is tribute to…
I have a face to face at Unthirl Your Banners of Holland '44 and I figured I at least should put some effort in to learn the system beforehand out of respect for my opponent.
@Brooski I’m keen to get to grips with ZOC bonds etc. They are one of those new fangled concepts I haven’t come across yet in my previous games.
However with my sceptics hat on…
I’m not entirely sure (for instance) modelling tank gun values and modelling armour shifts based on whether you have better guns than the opponent and having “a squillion” different interactions between them is really adding much to an operational game with unit sizes which mainly seem to be battalions. I mean the example of play for this in the manual has 24 different examples to illustrate them! Then bolting on top of that 2 specific German types of Assault guns and giving them special rules is surely over-egging the pudding…
To quote just a portion of these rules: “Units with an armour rating in red or yellow box are classified as Anti-Tank units. These units have their armour rating reduced by one when attacking. The JgPzIV and Jagdpanther units are classified as both a Tank unit and Anti-tank unit - they can earn the armour shift but must reduce their armour rating by one when attacking. The Flak units on the other hand cannot earn their armour shift.”
And their gun ratings are in addition to their attack and defend factors, it’s just used to provide armour shifts (which are then ignored in terrain like woods, marshes and city hexes…)
Massive caveat, I haven’t even played the game yet, so all of these concerns might be completely put away once I fire up Vassal and have a go tomorrow…
I just barfed a little. :(
-Tom
I don’t own the game, I need to learn the game…hence Vassal. Needs must when the devil vomits into your kettle as Lord Blackadder would say.
I loved the original Hell’s Highway. Then again, I also loved the original SPI monster game on Market-Garden, whatever it was called. Highway to the Reich maybe?
ZOC bonds in the Simonitch games are basically a nice way of saying you can’t move between two hexes in the same unit’s ZOC for the most part. It’s there to strengthen ZOCs.