Archive for Gaming

755 results.
Aug15

Sekmem

by Rindis on August 15, 2022 at 12:00 pm
Posted In: Boardgaming

After warming up with Sumer, Mark and I went for a second battle in Chariots of Fire. Mark’s initial thought was to get straight into the chariots with Megiddo, but it’s a much larger scenario, and we switched to Sekmem, which turned out to be a good choice. It was more interesting than it looked, is only moderately bigger than Sumer, with two wings per side (melee and missile), and gave us good infantry tactics practice, and let us clear up more of the rules.

Mark had the Egyptians who have a much larger force of shock infantry, and start by entering the far edge of the map. The Canaanites all start in the walled city of Sekmem (any number of units can be in a city hex here, and it’s also where they go when routed). The map is basically a broad valley, with the north and south edges rising up through levels 1-4, all of which are considered rough terrain.

The Egyptians had the initiative for the first turn, and came in with their shock infantry filling the south side of the valley, with the missile troops (all bows) following behind. Then my light infantry poured out of the city, forming up four deep in places because of a lack of room to maneuver from a single hex in one activation. Mark moved the SI up with his momentum (we still hadn’t noted the cohesion hit this causes), and finally my SI filed out of the city in column, and piled up on the southern side of the valley.

I got the initiative for turn 2, and sent my shock wing forward, getting a little in front of the missile troops and starting to come out of column. The Egyptian line got to ~5+ hex range as they got their chit next, and then the Canaanite LI shook its line out with the bowmen right behind the slingers. My momentum came next, but Mark successfully trumped it to get his shock wing into contact (at this point we had noticed the cohesion hit on shock and heavy infantry that moves more than once a turn). Thankfully, I had two shots at most of his units, as they came adjacent to two different slingers, because I had a lot of high rolls, with two units going to low ammo, and one entirely out of ammo, but seven of his shock infantry were now at two cohesion hits (so a well-distributed one hit each after the penalty for moving twice).


↓ Read the rest of this entry…

└ Tags: , ,
 Comment 
Aug07

Sumer

by Rindis on August 7, 2022 at 12:00 pm
Posted In: Boardgaming

At the start of June, Mark and I got to trying out the Great Battles of History series. Or, I did, as Mark has played a little of it in the past. That said, we were trying Chariots of Fire, which apparently has somewhat different rules than the rest of the series. (I am disturbed by the fact that the series seems to have never picked up a single unified rule set, other than the variant Simple GBoH.) In fact, we were starting at the beginning, the battle of Sumer, ca. 2320 BCE.

This basically marks the transition from the old kingdom of Sumer to the kingdom of Akkad. There is, naturally, not a lot known of this period, and it’s obvious this is more of an excuse for an evenly-matched training scenario. Both sides get ten shock infantry, three light infantry (one of each of the three missile types), and one battle wagon (or battle car, as I’ve seen them elsewhere), and one heroic leader. The last is the only real difference between the two, with Sargon (the historical winner, and soon ‘the Great’) being one better than Lugal-zagessi in all ratings.

The map is flat and featureless, under the presumption that the battle would have taken place away from all the valuable irrigation infrastructure (I really doubt that, but again, training scenario…).  We used the standard setup (you can figure out your own) given in the rulebook. So the first few turns consists of the two sides advancing on each other across an empty plain….

I had the Sumerians, and edged constantly to my left as we advanced, with the hope of being able to wrap around his flank. It’s technically a chit draw system, but there’s only one formation on each side in this small scenario, and an initiative roll means one person gets to choose what the first chit of the turn will be. However, there’s still four chits, as each side gets a “momentum” chit, where they have a chance to make a particular wing go again. Overall, the wrinkles to a regular chit draw system are nice, though it feels a bit odd in this extreme case.

Both of us were somewhat nervously edging up as we got into range of each other. I got a double move at the start of turn 3 (tied initiative, drew my momentum, which was successful, followed by my main wing chit; we did not catch the double-move cohesion penalty at this time) and moved about half of my line into contact with the Akkadians, with my right flank refused.


↓ Read the rest of this entry…

└ Tags: , ,
 Comment 
Jul30

34 Race to the Bridge

by Rindis on July 30, 2022 at 12:00 pm
Posted In: Boardgaming

At the end of May, Mark and I returned to Great War Commander. He has gotten the first Battle Pack expansion, and we went to the 1914 scenario from that. It reuses a map we’ve seen before, and doesn’t have any new unit types, so it’s easy to set up in the current Vassal module. However, there is a bridge on the map that doesn’t exist in the scenario (by SSR), and counter for that doesn’t exist. So we just put a shellhole marker on it.

It’s a couple of weeks after the battle of Mons, and the British are falling back. At this point, the rearguard is trying to take and hold a bridge near Antwerp, while the Germans are trying to block them. Both sides are in ‘recon’ stance (the first time we’ve gotten to see that), and get one leader with four platoons. They both start off on the right side of the map, with the bridge on the left. However, the time index starts at 2, and at 3, both sides get five more platoons (including an engineer) and a better leader, and then on 4 they both get three more platoons and a third leader, with sudden death rolls starting at 8. The open VP marker makes the bridge worth 4VPs, and you can deny that to someone about to take it from you by having an engineer blow it up (leaving no one able to cross).

Mark had the British, who go first, and he started with an Air Assault, which didn’t find my troops, and then Moved out. There was then an exciting round of both sides discarding before I started Moving. Mark managed to Fire at them, and broke Lt Ruhberg, but one of his platoons broke to a sniper. We both tried to Recover, but blew our rolls before I did it on a second attempt, and Mark Advanced to get the broken guys out of the way. Fire broke a second British platoon, but it recovered (and the first one didn’t) with a Recover, and he Advanced further. I Moved towards the bridge, largely staying out of range, and occupying the farm house (objective 1). Mark Moved to cross the stream on his side, but I broke two platoons in it. Further Fire eliminated one of them, and then the other Advanced out of the stream. Mark attempted to Recover him, but failed on a 12 to get a time trigger, and I Dug In near the farmhouse.


At the end of the initial turn. Objective 5/bridge K6 doesn’t exist.

I got my reinforcements Moving first, and then ordered an Offensive for the first contingent to seize the bridge. The fire from that action finally eliminated the second British platoon, and an Air Assault let me suppress one of the reinforcements. Mark got his reinforcements moving with minimal trouble (I broke a platoon, which immediately came back with Probe) before we both needed to discard cards again. I Moved my reinforcements up to the rest of my troops just before running out of cards for the next time trigger.

Mark used an Offensive to get Perry closer to the bridge and shoot at the platoon there, but couldn’t get a result. He then Advanced the entire mass of both reinforcements. I Moved my newest reinforcements, getting them around the orchard before committing to an Offensive with everyone else. Air Support managed to suppress the stack of my highest-ranking leader, and a Sniper broke one of the reinforcing platoons, but I suppressed Maj Stone with an Interdiction event. I didn’t manage to break Lt Perry and his platoon on that turn, but the next turn, Fire broke Perry (recovered with a Probe) and the platoon. Mark continued Moving up, but a regular platoon, Maj Stone, and the engineers broke to my Fire. High Command Meddling “forced” me to recover at this point, clearing a few suppressions that had built up, and rally my one broken platoon. I then Fired and eliminated a broken platoon. Mark then Recovered, getting the engineers and and remaining regular broken platoon back, but not Maj Stone.

He also ran out his deck during this, taking us to time index 5. He then Fired to break Lt Ruhberg and his platoon, who both successfully Recovered. I Fired on Maj Stone again, but while he made his defense roll easily by rolling a 12, that put us at time 6, and the engineers broke again, and he lost Lt McBeath to Recall Leader.

Mark Recovered both his units, and Fired, breaking Ruhberg again. He then tried to Move across the stream again, getting another time trigger to my Op Fire, returning McBeath to play, and I got a Reinforcements event, which sadly did nothing (out of fusilier counters). And then he got a time trigger again, to take us to 8, and did not pass the Sudden Death check to end the game very suddenly with 11 German VPs.

Afterword

The general scenario concept is good, and it was very nice to see a meeting engagement style scenario. I’m a bit concerned that it may be a little too weighted to whoever can get near the bridge first. Worse, that stream the British need to cross is just nasty. 3 movement, and it makes you more vulnerable. Once I got in range of it before Mark got to it, it was largely downhill for him as I could do a lot of damage as he tried to get close enough to the bridge to contest it.

Much of the action also pointed up the disturbing all-or-nothing nature of defensive fire. Either you don’t have or want to use a card when someone moves, or you do and the game grinds to a halt as each and every hex in a move becomes subject to fire which breaks up the normally free-flowing nature of the game. It’s also a stark contrast to the “normal” Fire Order where everyone just fires once and is done.

The sudden string of time triggers at the end was unusual, but something that has to be expected once in a while. It cut short my expected grind to six casualties to force a surrender, but also prevented any opportunity for the mid-game turn around which GWC has certainly delivered on occasion.

└ Tags: , ,
 Comment 
Jul22

3 McDowell’s Opportunity

by Rindis on July 22, 2022 at 12:00 pm
Posted In: Boardgaming

Back during May, Mark and I returned to the GCACW series with the third All Green Alike scenario. Interestingly, it’s simultaneously historical (in that the opening setup is just where everyone was two days before First Bull Run), but ahistorical in that it assumes that McDowell assumes the offensive with the Army of Northeastern Virginia two days early, with the Confederates less prepared.

Somewhat oddly, part of Tyler’s 5th Division, and Early’s Brigade start exhausted because of a small fight the day before (seeing the overall set up for that would be interesting). The Confederate Army of the Potomac is behind the Bull Run, with abatises under work, and Johnston’s units are still far away, while the Union troops are already concentrated at Centreville. The Union forces are going to need to deploy and shake themselves out, but there’s plenty that can be done. And they need to do plenty, as the victory conditions are suitably more ambitious than the pure historical battle.

I reprised my role as the Union player, who gets the first initiative by scenario rule, and I sent Hunter’s 2nd Division towards the Confederate west flank, and on my second activation (thanks to Confederate command paralysis) came around behind Stone Bridge, while Burnside attacked across the bridge, blowing the roll to do little more than exhaust and disorganize both sides. Porter’s Brigade managed to go again and forced a retreat, which wiped out the Confederates blocking Stone Bridge.

Then I sent Heintzelman’s 3rd Division towards the east flank of the line. The trip took a bit, and ended with Franklin’s Brigade crossing the Bull Run at Butler’s Ford and taking up a position to block the fords while the rest of the division was still on the other side. Mark finally got a real chance to move, and shifted Longstreet’s Brigade to confront Franklin, sent Early to Camp Pickens, and Bonham to reinforce the west flank and occupy Groveton (in two moves).

Hunton’s Brigade moved on the Union flank but had slow going to end up near Sudley Springs. Tyler’s 1st Division took positions along the middle of the line, now that the Confederates were getting spread out, and Miles’ 5th Division headed west to try and get around the flank. Good rolls got him to Sudley Springs for hasty attacks against Hunton, but it took both brigades to force him to retreat near Gainesville despite good odds. Mark moved Early down the Manassas Gap road to join Hunton, along with the 13th Mississippi and Radford’s cavalry. Munford’s cavalry went to get behind Franklin and keep me from using the fords a bit further downstream.

Jackson’s Brigade and the 6th North Carolina entrained and got into the area of the fighting, but the rest of Johnston’s army had a struggle to get to the closest station (Rectortown) for entraining the next day.


End of July 19/turn 1, after fortifications are built, but before recovery.
↓ Read the rest of this entry…

└ Tags: , ,
 Comment 
Jul14

Planets of Tripoli Y77 Region 5

by Rindis on July 14, 2022 at 12:00 pm
Posted In: SFB

At the start of April, Mark and I returned to our SFB campaign. This time, we went to the battle at Mark’s third base, in Region 5. This features one of my two main ‘base busting’ fleets, led by a WDN. With it, I had two heavy cruisers and a light cruiser, plus two frigates. With 25 EPV left in my command limit, I could have put in another frigate (the WNF is only 21, though everything else is too big at 31 and up), or used destroyers instead, but I was out of any of those. Mark, limited by the first turn rules, only had a WCA and and WFF with his base, making it a notably smaller force than last time.

Mark set up next to his base rolled low for weapon status 1 again, while I set up behind the ships (at range 35). I came in at speed 10, while the Carnivons went 7. At that speed the WDN and WVF were running with good EW, though the WRL had a minimal 1/0 and the WFF couldn’t manage any. Only the base put up EW for Mark (it is easy to suppose that charging phasers was more than enough power drain as it was).

On turn 2, the Carnivons picked up to speed 11, while I split between 11 and 12. The Carnivon WCA Wolfbite (201) put up a point of ECM, while I generally reduced mine. On impulse 9 the base launched a pair of death bolts at the oncoming fleet. The Carnivon ships slowly turned clockwise, and on impulse 24 I turned towards their new course at range 17 from the base. The Carnivons immediately turned off, presenting a stern chase. On turn 3, he slowed down to 9 and 10, and then continued counter-clockwise, putting the base between the fleets.  I had increased everyone’s speed to 12, and on impulse 11 broke off to turn for a run at the base, which fired its disruptor cannon at WVF USS Intrepid (SF-68) on impulse 17, but missed, thanks to ECM it was running.

On impulse 32 the lead two ships reached range 8 and unloaded. WCA USS Mare Serenitatis (SF-25) and WRL USS Gatherer (SF-70) each hit with one out of two photons (fairly good with a +1 shift, and it would have been all four without it), while the seven phasers from the two ships rolled horribly to do 3 damage. This left the base’s #6 at one box (I regretted that one box, as knocking it down would have forced him to use general reinforcement only on that shield).


Initial maneuvers, turns 1-3.
↓ Read the rest of this entry…

└ Tags: , , ,
1 Comment
Jul10

Settlers of Versailles

by Rindis on July 10, 2022 at 12:00 pm
Posted In: Boardgaming

Back on the 3rd, Mark and Jason came over to join me and Dave for a four-player FtF game day. The primary activity for the day was the group’s second game of Versailles, 1919 (Jason’s third, and Mark and I’s fourth). Random draws of cubes gave Mark Britain, me France, Dave the US, and Jason Italy.

Dave struggled with converting influence into settled issues all game, and ended the game with only three. They were all high-value, which helped, but his score was certainly limping along. Mark and Jason did fairly well at first before bogging down a bit, and was starting to get somewhere with getting more issues settled to me as the first uprising happened. By the end of the game, I had actually accumulated the biggest collection of issues, though I was aware that my strategy wasn’t going anywhere. Mark also did well on issues, and dumped a lot of influence on Game End, and rushed it through, with the 7 VPs there beating out my card total.

Dave had the first pick of strategies, taking 14 Points, which got him 13 VPs combined with 18 in issues (mostly self-determination and Japan and Italy signing the treaty), and second-place happiness (22), Jason had the second pick for Global Trade for 14 VPs (including 6 for doubled top happiness, and 10 for industrial expansion, but lost three for reparations), I picked third for Contain Communism for 10 VPs (mostly from Japan and Italy again, hardly any opportunities for communist containment came up), and Mark picked Reparations for 9 VPs (even 2s across the board, except 3 for reparations), and got 2 for third-place happiness. Isolationism was left unpicked.

There was a rush to demobilize early on, and the US had completely demobilized by the end of the game. I only demobilized once, as part of an event, so my happiness was well below the others. We also fairly flew through the deck, with only a few pulls from the discards, so even for the ‘short’ game, this was fairly short, and we finished before lunch. The spread was a little closer this time, with Mark getting 47 VPs, Jason 42, me 40, and Dave 35. Last time I noted that generally, who got Game End would determine the winner (Dave was out of reach of it) and this time… this was true again. If Dave had taken Game End, he’d tie with Jason in first at 42… and still come in second, since Italy’s happiness was higher.

After lunch, we spent some time figuring out “what next”, and ended up going to Settlers of Catan. Random tiles and numbers put an 8 and 6 next to each other, and since I got first pick put a settlement there. Even better, it was near the 2:1 wheat port (and the 8 was wheat), which I built to as soon as I could. Dave locked up the other 6 on the other side of the island, while Mark and Jason were a little more central, though Jason settled next to the other 8, which produced bricks.

At the start, a number of 6s were rolled, but no 8s, so my scheme of producing lots of wheat to turn into whatever I needed didn’t work out. Dave managed to build out a third settlement, taking the third slot around the lumber-producing 6. This turned into a mistake, as that was obviously too dangerous and the robber was magnetically attracted to that tile and choked off Dave’s economy. The rest of us got going and left Dave behind, and the robber just didn’t move at all for a long time during that critical phase of the game. I think I produced my third settlement a little after everyone else, and then the luck turned around and my economy exploded. I produced a couple of cities (I just couldn’t get the resources for towns), and I sprinted to a victory. At the end I built a bunch of road sections to take Longest Road from Dave, and then revealed a Chapel for a 10th VP.


Red = me, 10VP; Orange = Mark, 6 VP; White = Jason, 4 VP; Dave = Blue, 3VP.

After that, we tried one of the various small games Dave has and hadn’t tried yet. Samurai Jack is a semi-cooperative game based on the Cartoon Network series. Like a lot of games of its ilk, the rules are both well-written, and a mess. Reading through the rules, they kept answering questions just as we were asking them, but finding things later was nearly impossible.

The biggest trouble was that Jack’s sanity meter stayed stubbornly at the bottom the entire time. This is good, but it was obvious that a big tension in the game should be fighting its rise towards insanity. After the game, Dave finally found that it should rise by one whenever he is in a location without any of the players (okay, this we knew), but that this is judged when Jack moves, instead of during the main character resolution phase when everything else is judged. So we were aiming for where he was, instead of trying to be ahead and have him join us.

The rest of it operated fairly well. The building and tearing down of the journey path for each round makes things a lot more fiddly than they should be, while the mechanical reasons are sound, it needs work. Building up resources to fight a couple of enemies and then Aku is the primary scoring mechanism, with everyone trying to get the most honor with limited choices to get the high score. I managed the top score in the second round, and nothing in the other two, though I had a bunch of spare resources for 21 honor. I think Mark was the only one to score for fighting the first enemy, and won at 28, while Jason was at 27. Dave only had 18, but I don’t remember if he scored in the first two rounds (I know he did in the last), and didn’t have much in leftover resources like me and Jason did.

Like other cooperative games, I find it good (especially with at least some problems figured out), but not great. I think there’s too little going on for the amount of fiddliness that it has, though it is nicely quick. I also note that Jack is too much of a non-entity in the game (actually having to fight the sanity meter back down would help). The concept of playing as his friends and allies is good, but he doesn’t do anything other than randomly move down the track. There’s some language around him helping in the fight against the bad guy at the end of each round, but I’m not aware of anything actually happening.

└ Tags: , , ,
 Comment 
Jul06

1 Fighting Withdrawal

by Rindis on July 6, 2022 at 12:00 pm
Posted In: ASL

After finishing “Lost Opportunities” with Mark, I took him back to the beginning. The first scenario for ASL, 1 “Fighting Withdrawal”, is a very strong one that really does show off maneuver and firepower. Set in the initial Finnish thrust towards Leningrad at the start of the Continuation War, both sides are trying to exit off the far edge of board 21, while fires rage behind the Russian lines.

I played it with my then-current roommate when I first got the game around ’96. As I recall, I came up just shy as the Finns as I could match, but not beat, the Russian exit points, and the Finns need to exit more off the far edge of board 21 than the Russians. I can still remember one squad generating heroes on back-to-back morale checks, and Colin was asking, “Why am I even shooting at these guys?”

I had the defending Russians this time, who have a six column setup area (V–AA), with 14 squads, three leaders and MGs, and 8 OB-given “?”. They also get two HIP squads, but I forgot about that during setup. They suffer from ammo shortage, but also have a SAN of 7 versus 2 for the Finns. The MMG went in the back behind a wall, concealed squads went in the rear of each flank, and a mostly concealed line went up front, with leaders on each flank, and the 7-0 in the rear to help catch anyone routing back. The dense buildings make for easy initial routing, though it can become a problem later.

The Finns have 16 of the ‘super’ squads (648, spraying fire, assault fire, self-rally, and they’re not even elite!), with three leaders, and one more MG than the Russians. Across a ten hex frontage, that’s about where you want to double up and put the MGs. Mark avoided stacking, and had a fair amount slightly in the rear.

Mark opened by firing everything with an LOS, and broke and ELRed one of the visible squads, while pinning the other, and revealing and pinning the 8-0 and the LMG squad with him. Movement was minimal, other than one squad shifting flanks.


Situation, Finnish Turn 1. North is to the left, and the goal is to get off the south side.
↓ Read the rest of this entry…

└ Tags: , ,
 Comment 
Jun24

Battle of Chios

by Rindis on June 24, 2022 at 12:00 pm
Posted In: Boardgaming

Back in April, Mark and I decided to return to the Flying Colors series, and ended up at the “Battle of Chios” from Blue Cross, White Ensign. We had some troubles as we started going, as there are some charts oddities that took a while to sort out. The latest versions actually do fix it all, but we only have those because of the deluxe version of Flying Colors. For some reason, GMT has not put the latest and greatest main rules and charts up on the their site.

The scenario itself is hard to find much out about. The Battle of Chesma seems to be the… “siege” of that bay after this battle when the Ottomans withdrew into there, leaving no easy references to this action 1-2 weeks earlier. At any rate the scenario is interesting, with a Turkish fleet at anchor and near shallow water (the shoals near them automatically cause ships to run aground, while the shoals on the other map are ignored). The Russians have the higher audacity rating (2), and in this period are using the “edinerog”, which was a cannon designed for using incendiary shells. This means any damage result can cause fires, but there is a chance of setting your own ship on fire with a poor roll. Overall, there’s more Turkish ships, but they’re all low 3rd and 4th rates, while the Russians have two 1st raters with the rest being 4th.

Mark had the Ottomans, and won the initial initiative, after declaring his entire fleet as one big formation, rotating everyone at anchor (we used the optional rules around anchoring, including only being able to rotate 180° while anchored, and the “turn in succession” rule). I had split into two formations, the lead three ships, and then the rest. Spiridov’s leading formation simply went forward, running with the wind, and headed for the end of the Ottoman line. The larger formation turned towards the Ottomans (just starting at the end of movement) to close the range.

The same arrangements continued into turn 2, with the Turks now having turned 120° towards the oncoming Russians. Evropa got to range 9, and did a hull hit to Seyf-I Bahri. Mark completed his 180 turn at the start of turn 3 (making Seyf the front of the line, instead of the rear), and Evropa and Seyf traded a hull and rigging hit, with Evstafii Plakida missing completely with it’s broadside (this is still all range 9), while Orlov’s main group was still in the middle of its turn.

For turn 4, I split off the rear two ships into a third group (which basically ended the ‘turn in succession’ order), and Mark split his fleet into three formations. For the first time, I won the initiative (on a tied roll), and Spiridov’s formation continued firing at the Seyf and turned in, getting an R and H on it, while taking 2R on Evstafii and Trekh Sviatitelei suffered an accident with its edinerogs to take a hull hit. Cafer Bey’s (now) forward section slipped anchor and started turning towards the shore to bring broadsides to bear, with Tilsim-I Bahri firing for no effect (the rest were still out of range). Elphinstone’s rear ships ran with the wind to pass behind the former center of my line, and head towards Spiridov and Evstafii. The other two Turkish formations got underway, while Orlov continued in, and started turning to fire broadsides into the middle of the mass of Turks. Ianaurii took 2R 1H while doing 2R to Peleng-I Bahri.

I won the initiative on turn 5, with Orlov going first to engage the Turkish line, Rostislav suffering another mishap with the edinerogs, but Trekh rolled well, helping put Cafer Bey’s flagship, Ziver-I Bahri, to 6 rigging damage, and -2 movement. Cafer’s command did 1H1R to Evropa while approaching the shore. Two of Spiridov’s ships turned to the opposite course of Mark’s line and did 4H to Seyf and set it on fire. (This had been the rough plan from the start, to get to the end of the line, and then start cruising down it, firing both broadsides. I never got a chance at that part.) Hassan’s large command cruised forward, doing 6R1H to Ianaurii (one shot got down to range 1!), while Peleng took defensive fire for 1H and caught on fire. Elphinstone turned to follow Orlov and try to close the range faster, while Ali Bey turned to come right at them. Seyf took another 1R1H from the fire, while Peleng‘s magazine caught, causing the ship to explode while still in good shape.

On turn 6, the wind shifted two points clockwise, which put half my ships in irons (including Elphinstone’s ships), and the rest reaching, while the Ottoman fleet was scattered between every status other than in irons. Commands stayed largely the same, though we had some trouble during the turn with finding the exact rules for ships that were reduced to 0 MP by rigging damage, so things went a little strange there for a bit. Ianaurii and Mukadd Serif traded broadsides for 4H and 2R damage respectively. Trekh had another mishap to take a self-inflicted hull, but Ziver caught on fire from the shot. Evropa and Trekh took rigging damage during Cafer Bey’s activation, and Spiridov managed to get Trekh out of irons, and a couple broadsides caught Ukaab-I Bahri on fire. Ali Bey’s “rear” section was now running with the wind, and did some more damage to Ianaurii, while Rostislav suffered firing mishap. Elphinstone got his two ships out of irons and Hassan largely just moved to better positions, but another close-range broadside flipped Ianaurii to damaged. Seyf‘s fire went out (after one more rigging hit), Ukaab took a rigging hit, but the Ziver-I Bahri, also exploded, taking Cafer Bey with it.

We left a session there for the week, and then I remembered we needed to do the break check, so the next session was very short as the Turkish fleet broke and fled, ending the scenario.

Afterword

Once I got used to the edinerogs, they were interesting; trading a DRM for a possibility of damaging yourself. I had a fair amount of bad luck during the scenario, as you can see from all the mishaps with them. But as things went on, the odds started evening things out, with multiple ships catching on fire, though I never managed the multiple fires on one ship which is a special feature of the edinerog.

Mark’s dice were better, but when they failed him, did so in spectacular fashion, with two ships exploding from the fires.

Mark got three VPs for the audacity difference and damaging one ship, while I got 14.5 for the two destroyed ships and Cafer Bey’s death. A fairly convincing victory, and purely because of the edinerog.

 Comment 
Jun16

Triumph of the Conversion

by Rindis on June 16, 2022 at 12:00 pm
Posted In: Boardgaming

A while back, Mark and I went back to Necromancer to try the conversion scenario. Some options don’t play very well with it (the miasma needs to be and stay in the middle), but we used the miasma demon, and each took two picks of optional units. Mark had the ‘conversion’ side, with 400 CP (and three conversion attempts a turn) and a 20-unit army, and gave his necromancer a magic bow and ring of flight. I had the side with the large, 80-unit, army and took a dragon as my two picks. Technically, Mark had plenty of CP to scare it off, but that would mean less for actually converting units, and in the meantime, it wasn’t hampered by me being at the top of the conversion chart (my zombies are worth 3 at the start; that’s what I’m used to seeing wraiths at).

My first turn was spent starting to close with Mark, and… doing so illegally, as I had forgotten that wraiths use all their movement to climb across a cliff hexside. Mark shifted forward slightly and converted two stacks of skeletons on the lower edge who then wiped out two stacks of zombies by forcing them to retreat when there was nowhere to go (even with displacement, they could only go onto slopes). The second turn was more of the same with Mark converting two central stacks of wraiths, and a set of zombies adjacent to the dragon. The former knocked out another stack of wraiths, while the zombies tried the dragon (and the two zombies it was escorting), but only got an AR on a 1:1.

I got wraiths into the miasma for my turn 3, though an opportunity attack got two of them. I had a couple attacks that did nothing, and one stack of searching wraiths got converted. Mark converted two more stacks of wraiths, including some of my only units left in the bottom, while combat knocked me out of the center, and forced the dragon and one remaining zombie to retreat into a pocket. And one of his searching stacks converted to me.

At this point our forces were nearly equal (I had an advantage in zombies), but Mark had barely touched his CP pool. I lost the dragon and zombie to an opportunity attack as they had nowhere to go on a DR, and I’d been trying to get them out of the trap. I wiped out two stacks of wraiths, and Mark started coming down off the mesa he started on. I got one wraith in an opportunity attack, but Mark converted two stacks of zombies (which gave him the heavy unit advantage, but dropped him to a ‘mere’ 148 CPs) and a stack of wraiths, while combat took out another stack of wraiths.

The fight continued in the center, with me taking out one wraith in a DR-1, and I finally searched a hex with nothing there, but lost two stacks of wraiths to Mark. He moved his new zombies back towards my main (necromancer-protected) force, and converted a stack with one of each type, who lost the wraith and retreated in combat, while he eliminated another four wraiths. Miasma conversion gave me two stacks of wraiths back, after March successfully searched another empty hex.

Other than those two stacks, and one last set of wraiths who’d been slowly working up on Mark’s rear, I was out of anything not adjacent to the necromancer, who was slowly working his way forward to the center area. I managed to eliminate a stack of wraiths and two zombies (DR-2), while Mark started putting together a real strike force near the top, and the bottom forces came up overlooking my small army. Mark converted one of the center wraith stacks, and then eliminated the other and a stack of zombies. He searched two more hexes, turning up nothing.

I pressed ahead, and an opportunity attack knocked out a stack of skeletons. In turn, I took out a stack of zombies with a boulder attack, and forced some skeletons back. Mark moved in, and I got a DR-1 to drive back some skeletons before Mark converted the only units I had away from the necromancer (and he still had 53 CPs). A boulder attack forced a skeleton out of the necromancer’s hex, and then a DR-1 against a zombie stack put the survivors into the skeleton’s hex, but another stack of wraiths in the miasma converted.


Final stand…

My turn didn’t do much, and Mark had three failed 1x conversion attempts against the wraiths, and then lost some of his wraiths in a 1-3 soak-off against my zombies on the center rise without a valid retreat. A similar attack was an AE against my zombie/skeleton stack, and my necromancer (+2xS) survived a 1:1 with a NE.

I reinforced my engaged necromancer with a zombie, and positioned my stack on the rise to boulder attack on the skeletons with Mark’s necromancer and the forward zombies. I did nothing to the skeletons, but killed a zombie and forced the others back. The necromancer could then attack downslope to make the defenders retreat. Mark came back in, and got a 2:1 vs the necromancer who was forced to retreat with nowhere to go…

Afterword

This was a disaster for me right from the start. Mark reduced my army to nearly nothing with a combination of conversions and retreats in congested terrain, often with enemy units in the way to boot. Things got better towards the end when the usual tough end-game took over, and Mark had to find ways to concentrate on the necromancer; but there wasn’t much left to give him cover, so even that wasn’t so bad.

Miasma conversion continued being much higher for both of us than the 1-6 it should be. Four of the seven hexes got searched, but no jewels ever turned up. Neither did the miasma demon, of course.

I’m not sure how the non-conversion player should go about this scenario. One thought is to spread the army out as much as possible (a blob covering half the map…) so that only one or two undead can be converted at a time. Losses should still be high, but it buys time, and the landing in the lower part of the conversion table might be a bit softer.

└ Tags: ,
 Comment 
Jun12

Last Stand at Tara

by Rindis on June 12, 2022 at 12:00 pm
Posted In: Boardgaming

Jason came over last Sunday for a FtF game, where he finally got to try out the GCACW series. I decided to try the final scenario in Atlanta Is Ours, “Last Stand at Tara”, as it’s three days, and features a moderate number of units. After being used to All Green Alike, it was an adjustment to see almost entirely divisions running about instead of brigades and regiments. As set up, the action is a little more confined than I might have hoped for, but it is a fairly good situation.

Jason decided to take the Confederates, as they have a smaller force, which led him to have the first initiative. He contemplated an attack on the Union forces right outside Jonesboro, but I pointed out that the odds were… nearly even, if everything goes right with the chancy process of an an assault, and with more Union units strung out behind, it could (pardon the expression) go south pretty fast.

However, that put Jason into a fairly passive strategy of entrenching nearly everything he could, though after moving Ferguson to cover Rough and Ready station, with Hood’s corps covering Quick Station. This was also a new experience for me, since I haven’t played any other 1864 scenarios, where entrenching is available as an action (what is the general consensus on the optional 1863 rule?). My first maneuvers were against the northern end of the string of rail stations that the Union is trying to destroy.

The 4th Corps went to Quick Station and the lone division of Hood Corps back out, though the fight pretty well ended them for the day. The 22nd took the end of the line, destroying East Point and Rough and Ready. The 14th moved between the two Confederate corps, but didn’t get to the point of a real fight, while the 16th headed across Harris Bridge on it’s way to the southernmost stations (this was a mistake; I’m not used to station burning either, and figured you could destroy a damaged station—i.e., spend an extra activation on it—instead of needing 5+ manpower in a single unit to destroy one).

The second day saw the 16th Corps arrive at Lovejoy’s Station (which at least was worth plenty of VPs even without destroying it), and real fighting developed between Hood’s Corps and the 4th, and 14th that saw me push him out of the area, but wear everyone out. Meanwhile, Jason counterattacked out of Jonesboro to push the 16th Corps back across the Flint. As I recall, he had two failed assaults (6), and then one that only got one division, but he rolled very well in the actual combat.

Things were getting late as we did the third and final day, so it was a bit abbreviated. Jason tried to push the 17th Corps out of Lovejoy’s, but used up much of his time marching there, losing stragglers on the way. He made a try anyway, but didn’t roll nearly as well as he needed to after that. I declined (again) to attack Jonesboro, with a bunch of well-fortified Confederates coming up to 75(!) combat value in forts, though it had been considered a couple of times during the last couple days.

Afterword

So, I did destroy four stations, and the three Confederate divisions in Jonesboro had no LOC south with all the Union units putting ZOCs around it. That plus Lovejoy’s station, 6 Confederate manpower losses and 8 Union manpower losses added up to 38 VPs, which put me in “substantive” victory territory.

I’d say the Confederates are going to have to get inventive and maneuver more, but perhaps staying in Jonesboro until a strong division can entrench to try to hold it alone is not a bad idea. Just where they maneuver to is still a big question, as there’s lots of Federal troops out there. However, trying to catch up to one of the smaller corps (16th, 17th, or 22nd) and declaring ‘Hood’s Attack‘ could get places. It’s certainly not going to be easy, though holding one of the primary locations and having most of the units intact with LOC to the south can probably hold the Union to a marginal victory.

At any rate, Jason is definitely impressed with how the system depicts the ACW at the operational maneuver level with some fairly unusual mechanics. I’m thinking that the Stonewall in the Valley scenarios are probably a better introduction to the system with their lower density.

└ Tags: , ,
 Comment