tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7111053985478999734.post8430704302187214034..comments2024-03-27T15:59:11.066+00:00Comments on Prometheus in Aspic: Tweakle Tweakle Little Star (1) - here we go againMSFoyhttp://www.blogger.com/profile/14470241067504971068noreply@blogger.comBlogger11125tag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7111053985478999734.post-15302949159081191692014-08-15T14:45:29.619+01:002014-08-15T14:45:29.619+01:00In CCN terms (which are probably paralleled by man...In CCN terms (which are probably paralleled by many other rule sets) the defenders of such a position don't get killed very quickly, but a determined series of attacks (and one of the skills in CCN is to relieve attacking units which become too small to hurt anyone with fresh ones, which can) can whittle them away. The real bummer is when they get a retreat flag, so that they are temporarily dislodged from the position. In such a case, they rarely if ever get back in. Putting a commander in with them helps, and I've also given thought to allowing troops in a village or a redoubt to ignore one retreat flag - potential snag is they might become impossible to shift. I've never actually tried it, but I should. Another potential snooker in CCN is attacking squares on a hill with cavalry - at times it is impossible to hurt them without bringing someone up to shoot them a bit - I realise this is a different situation, but can offer a similar impasse.MSFoyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14470241067504971068noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7111053985478999734.post-3676301038413415572014-08-15T14:29:21.589+01:002014-08-15T14:29:21.589+01:00Since you are knee-deep in rules' revisions th...Since you are knee-deep in rules' revisions thoughts, what is your position on attacking defensive works or favorable terrain? We have found in our games that defensive positions seem to be too easily overrun or reduced by attackers. The attacker, although using reduced dice, strike first and often force the defender out or cause casualties.<br /><br />One could argue that the defensive position might not be properly supported (which may be the case) but even with support, the defender could be whittled down or pushed out prior to Battling Back.Jonathan Freitaghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07862373894196924886noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7111053985478999734.post-74420391911273483862014-08-15T14:13:02.920+01:002014-08-15T14:13:02.920+01:00Version Control! Being in software development, v...Version Control! Being in software development, version control is an essential step in the development process. One, it allows one to keep precise track of where one is and, two, it allows one to step back to an earlier iteration if the product goes awry.<br /><br />You made me laugh on reading your comment about using the wrong version of rules in a game. That struck close to home. Those accustomed to playing under v2.4 are sometimes blindsided by a new introduction under v2.5. Whoops, I forgot to mention that! It is easy to forget why a rule set went from v2.4 to v2.5 until that same situation crops up again in play.<br /><br />Luckily, I game with a reasonable and patient group. Jonathan Freitaghttps://www.blogger.com/profile/07862373894196924886noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7111053985478999734.post-43395637822730673862014-08-15T08:26:45.002+01:002014-08-15T08:26:45.002+01:00Hi Phil (I believe your name has been tweaked, so ...Hi Phil (I believe your name has been tweaked, so better just change it to fit)<br /><br />The left/right/centre in CCN feels like it's a reference to the layout of the battlefield, which seems like a military concept, and I guess it is, but it's really just a part of the army - just a way of limiting what you can do. There are other ways of choosing subsets, obviously, and one which always struck me as intrinsically wacky is that used in a Belgian(?) rule set called (I think) Grognards & Grenadiers. In this, the armies are each split into three colours - you can allocate units to red, blue or green by whatever means you choose - alphabetically, random, position on the table, anything. Units will be activated by dice, giving a random selection of colour - thus you can, if you wish, make your entire army red, but there will be approx 2/3 of the turns when you can't do anything (though, of course, it might be good when red comes up). I always dismissed that as silly, but in fact it is not especially so. If we are going to define a subset on the fly, then there are all sorts of ways of doing it - all units with an L in their nameā¦<br /> <br />I've had some battles where the Short Supply card had a big effect, and it's quite entertaining for the narrative - it's a particularly good way of getting that battalion of legere who have been holding that village all day to abandon it at the critical moment. Some of these were solo games, but it was glaringly obvious how to play the card.<br /><br />Your replacement of sectors with generals and chains of command is interesting - I'll read that over again and have another coffee. A couple of the better command systems I've tried start with a choice of general, and then units within his control.<br /><br />Cheers<br /><br />AlphonseMSFoyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14470241067504971068noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7111053985478999734.post-75289530166027865002014-08-15T00:05:12.847+01:002014-08-15T00:05:12.847+01:00Apart from saying "just so, smart man", ...Apart from saying "just so, smart man", I'll throw in a few random thoughts.<br /><br />1. Ammo card, not sure what it was meant to represent but its been quite fun/distressing (depending on side). I wouldn't use it solo. More to the point I can think of 1 or 2 examples of such behavior. Cryslers Farm 1813 one of the US infantry regiments ran low on ammo and retreated without orders to replenish. 1st Sikh war, into 2 different battles (Moodkee and Feroshah if memory serves British cavalry retreated without sposrent reason. In one case sone blamed an RHA battery which retreated to resupply as triggered the cavalry brigade to follow in error.<br /><br /><br />2. We had real problems adapting the 3 zones to the sort of varied scenarios and table top teasers that we like to play so we replaced them with Generals Left and Right with a 3 hex radius and General Center with 4 hex radius. Their zones had no geographic significance but they could only use their card and only on units in their control. Units out of control could be moved on some tacticsl cards where no zone is mentioned. We use the same system with memoir but they have "on the move" notations on some cards that allow X units to move not fight in addition to ordered units. For earlier periods we just allow a player to discard any card that he cannot use and activate a unit "on the move" The latter being good for reinforcements esp. If a leader is killed tge VP is lost but he us immediately replaced with any unit.<br /><br />Ross (is there another BGotM or am I really Phil?)Ross Mac rmacfa@gmail.comhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/04053555991679802013noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7111053985478999734.post-90802394056797716932014-08-14T19:31:33.658+01:002014-08-14T19:31:33.658+01:00Hi Tony: I forgot to mention the title - Wellingt...Hi Tony: I forgot to mention the title - Wellington's Victory (1976), a complete treatment of Waterloo down to the company level. I still have it. A visually beautiful game with a real miniatures feel. The cavalry charge mechanism was a thing of beauty. I hope to lay it all out and play it again before I die.<br />Thanks the idea on the card exchange, that's helpful.<br />MichaelMad Padrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00410143683610813671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7111053985478999734.post-62715290037251385882014-08-14T17:11:37.931+01:002014-08-14T17:11:37.931+01:00Thanks Michael - what was the SPI game btw? One ho...Thanks Michael - what was the SPI game btw? One house rule I often add to CCN games is the facility to exchange cards. The standard game allows you to a play a card and then not carry out the order, but it can be argued that gives your opponent a little insight into what you're NOT doing, and it's a very slow way of changing cards. As a "scenario extra rule" I like the facility to forsake your turn and, instead, discard say up to half (or whatever you set as the rule) of the cards in your hand, and replace them from the deck without your opponent seeing them. It's not very sophisticated, but it can rescue a disaster. On the other hand, it also does away with the classic excuse for defeat, which is not always a good thing.<br /><br />Cheers - TonyMSFoyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14470241067504971068noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7111053985478999734.post-60376577714003591322014-08-14T16:36:44.854+01:002014-08-14T16:36:44.854+01:00I've only just been getting into CCN and while...I've only just been getting into CCN and while there are some things about it that I share your qualms with, such as the vanilla generals, I do like what I've seen of it. I too struggle with the vagaries of the cards. For example, if all my cards are for Centre/Right and the battle is being decided on the Left, how do I rationalize that? I suppose there are ways, such as the ADC bearing the key orders to the Left flank got lost, or the Left flank sub commander is having a bad day, or whatever, but it does feel, well, gamey.<br />And therein lies the rub because, as you say, we are tempted to tweak to achieve our idea of greater realism, which may not agree with someone else's. I suppose this is why so many Naps gamers use their own house rules, because they have their particular views of the period and how it worked.<br />Another issue for me is my impulse to compare every Naps rules set with the first one that made an impression on me, which was an SPI monster game from the late 1970s designed by Frank Davis. A lot of people besides me love that game and it's hard for me not to want all other rules systems to be like it.<br />That being said, CCN works, its simple, it captures the period reasonably well, and it's a lingua franca for gamers who might otherwise be lost to one another in the morass of other Naps gaming systems.<br />I had another thought, but like you, my brain gets full easily these days.<br />Good post.<br />Michael<br />Mad Padrehttps://www.blogger.com/profile/00410143683610813671noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7111053985478999734.post-417996102404666232014-08-14T09:20:28.757+01:002014-08-14T09:20:28.757+01:00I'm quite impressed with my own success in lea...I'm quite impressed with my own success in leaving the rules unchanged - a new, rather calm, approach. Mind you, I don't use the official Spanish Expansion rules - I developed my own Spanish rules before the expansion was released, so I have stuck with my own - they are, in truth, very similar, though I don't use the "guerrilla rule", which I believe is fun, but looks a bit like Waddington's again. I have explicit guerrillas if i need them, and they have their own tweaks.<br /><br />The ECW game development has gone a bit better than I maybe represented it - there have been a couple of occasions (particularly in the nippy area of the different schools of horse tactics) when I've introduced a change which was definitely not an improvement - for example, in my efforts to give Gallopers some simple advantages over Trotters in melee situations I managed to to introduce a rule change which unintentionally made it a good idea for the Trotters to attack first, to get round the rule, and we suddenly had the most aggressive, gung-ho Trotters ever seen - it only took one trial to drop that improvement. I am, by the way, not entirely convinced by your 30 trials rule, though it is interestingā¦<br /><br />What the use of board game rules has done to my approach is to reduce the time it takes me to reject new rule sets. I only need to get to the first reference to simultaneous moves, written orders, command ranges and/or one or two other features and the rules are back on the Some Other Time shelf in the bookcase!<br /><br />CCN makes a feature of having scenario-specific add-on rules, which is a very useful cop-out for those of us who might wish to tweak but deny they have changed the rules. I have add-ons to cope with bigger armies, to speed up mass deployment away from the fighting, but they are, of course, scenario specific!MSFoyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14470241067504971068noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7111053985478999734.post-45634406980183901772014-08-14T08:59:14.422+01:002014-08-14T08:59:14.422+01:00One problem with active tweaking is the dreaded Ve...One problem with active tweaking is the dreaded Version Control, which becomes more tricky as the years pass. I now have to write everything down, and have very organised folders (i.e. physical, paper ones) with the rules and the various revisions carefully organised. Though I have been playing C&CN for some years now (three?) I have also been putting a lot of thought into the ECW version, and there are occasions when I have to sit down with the original rule booklet before the visitor arrives and have a quick read - it is, as you know, bad form to suddenly announce half an hour into a game that you have been using the wrong rules, especially if the incident that reminded you is now in your favour if you correct them. Battle Game of the Month is highly entertaining and instructive, but developing and improving rules is evidently an important part what Ross/Phil gets out of the hobby - I would like to do that, but would be unable to keep a clear head on where I was up to.<br /><br />A number of people have told me of their enthusiasm for F&F - my only exposure was a home-hashed Napoleonic version sent to me by a very kind fellow who obviously understood what his shorthand notes meant, but I didn't, so it didn't go well - I must try again sometime.<br /><br />Having a full brain is becoming more of a problem for me - if I learn something new, I have to forget something old to make room for it. Sometimes the thing I forget is useful, such as where I live, or the fact I'm supposed to be meeting my lawyer at 10. Ochone. MSFoyhttps://www.blogger.com/profile/14470241067504971068noreply@blogger.comtag:blogger.com,1999:blog-7111053985478999734.post-76764327192557691182014-08-13T23:07:11.217+01:002014-08-13T23:07:11.217+01:00I have to admit being lazy with rules...if I like ...I have to admit being lazy with rules...if I like them I accept their little foibles. I love Fire and Fury, you could write reams about their shortcomings but they are my favourite set of rules. <br />However, this hobby is about what the individual gamer wants to get out of them. This is what makes it so great I think. If you want to tinker with them go for it. As a solo gamer you only have yourself to please. <br />As a lazy gamer I would turn up, play the game and get my fun from pushing the lead around the table and throwing dice.<br />Phil's "Battle Game of the Month" is all about getting the very best from the rules for example. Its a highly readable approach even for a lazy gamer like me!<br />In short, it is your hobby and unlike Football or Bridge you make the rules. Now I am off to contemplate fluff in my navel and paint my new French Guard Horse Artillery!<br />Matthttps://www.blogger.com/profile/15751744958434403184noreply@blogger.com