1741

I think I’ll check the demo out, as well. I miss tactical hex games. I thought that Combat Mission back in the day would put Steel Panther-style tac-fests to rest, but I guess not.

1742

I didn’t have time to write a review of Conflict of Heroes when it was released but maybe I can now. I’m glad there is a demo available. I think it’s a great game system.

1743

My first wargaming column for CGW was a two-page spread entitled “Combat Mission kills wargaming” or something like that. I definitely thought the days of hex-based tactical stuff were numbered. I was wrong.

1744

I reviewed Conflict of Heroes and liked it. The rules had enough detail to be interesting but very easy to approach. Since this is based on a board game it retains that feel. I only took multiplayer for a brief spin, but it was easy to start a match using the Slitherine system. It was a while ago so I don’t recall all the details. Turns were based on action points and within a round sides alternated. Special cards can be used to give yourself a perk or to the detriment of your enemy.

Sorry for the not-so-helpful description above but my mind is a jumble and I can’t remember the details. I need to play it again with the big update that was released.

1745

I hadn’t seen anyone mention this, but it seems that Shenandoah Studios has been planning the next game in their Crisis in Command series for some time.

http://www.shenandoah-studio.com/introduction/

El Alamein! Designed by Mark Herman!

I’m going to buy this so hard, it’s gonna feel like an 88 hit it.

1746

Roughly how long of a game is Shenandoah’s Battle of the Bulge? Is it a couple hours, a full day, or longer in terms of how long it takes to play?

1747

I have only played the 3 day scenario thus far, but that only takes 15 minutes, more or less. I’d expect long scenario is under 2 hours, probably well under.

1748

Definitely under two hours.

1749

Under 2 hours for me as well- I played an online game with some short pauses that went about 1:40.

1750

Thanks guys.

1751

Back in November Tim Stone of RPS interviewed James Sterrett who works with the US ARMY to look for ways of using commercial war games to improve senior officer training. As someone who grew up with Avalon Hill games, and became a game designer, I found the article really interesting.

I strongly feel that chit games helped my ability to do game design and I am not surprised to see table top games making a resurgence because socially it is fun to sit around with other people and interact, not just through a monitor.

I particularly like his reference to double blind games as I remember the thrill of playing those in the early 80’s.

Thought people in this forum would also enjoy it and perhaps reminisce.

Happy New Year.

1752

A remake of “Up Front” is in the works. The original, from Avalon Hill, was a card game on tactical combat. I never played it, but I’ll almost certainly buy this remake.

Kickstarter page here: http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/1325766284/up-front-the-card-game

Various related threads at Boardgamegeek here: http://boardgamegeek.com/forum/19606/up-front/news

1753

Up Front was a very good game. It really managed to be both accessible and a decent tactical wargame.

1754

It’s a really good, quick, fun game. I have some friends who are general gamers, but not really wargamers at all. Once in college, I came home from out of town to find three of them had been playing my copy of Up Front for the entire day. They had just pulled it off the shelf and learned it themselves. That’s why it baffles me to hear so many people talk about how terrible the rule-set for that game is. It seemed straightforward to me.

In any case, the game should definitely be in print.

1755

I’m probably not going to back it though (looks like they don’t need my help anyhow) because my chances to actually play a game like this are slim and none, given that at my age/occupation/location I hardly ever come into contact with anyone with the same interests…

1756

Am I misunderstanding something here or how are the stretch goals supposed to make financial sense (for them)? They say that everyone who pledges at the PVT tier ($40) gets all the stretch rewards, which at the moment contain a bazillion cards, a leather bound book and might possibly even reach the messenger bag reward. I know printing cards in bulk is quite cheap, but still it’s quite weird. Especially considering that in order to get just the 5 extra base nationality decks, you need to pledge an extra $85 but the stretch goals include at least 10 additional nationality decks (plus tons of other cards) already for “free”.

1757

On the list on the right hand side it says you just get the base game for $40. Rather conflicting!

1758

No, I think you get it. The $125 level is essentially the level where you get everything of value.

1759

5 hours left in the Kickstarter. The project ended up meeting all its stretch goals and the resulting game is massive.

1760

Can someone suggest a WW2 game for me, with these “simple” requirements:

[ul]
[li]Preferred full global map[/li][li] Not super complex. I don’t want to have to micromanage 2,000 units or ammo or infantry clothing.[/li][li]I prefer 2d graphics to crazy 3d units and terrain that I feel interfere with the UI[/li][li]Multi-player, preferably play-by-email as built in feature or able to handle save file passing.[/li][/ul]

In me feeble novice search I found and am aiming at these:
Strategic War in Europe: Seems perfect, but don’t know how it handles PBEM. I know it’s Europe only. Do they have, or plan on having, a full global version of this?

Hearts of Iron III: Seems great but I think it may be too much. I couldn’t find if it has PBEM or even hotseat.

Any other suggestions? I’m a big Axis & Allies boardgame fan, but need something to play between the 2-3 months breaks between times I can find players to play the boardgame. Thankie!