Rindis.com

All my hobbies, all the time
  • Home
  • My Blog
  • Games
  • History

Categories

  • Books (517)
  • Comics (10)
  • Gaming (930)
    • Boardgaming (683)
      • ASL (155)
      • CC:Ancients (84)
      • F&E (78)
        • BvR – The Wind (26)
        • Four Vassal War (9)
        • Konya wa Hurricane (17)
        • Second Wind (5)
      • SFB (84)
    • Computer games (163)
      • MMO (78)
    • Design and Effect (6)
    • RPGs (68)
      • D&D (28)
        • O2 Blade of Vengeance (3)
      • GURPS (32)
  • History (10)
  • Life (82)
    • Conventions (9)
  • News (29)
  • Technology (6)
  • Video (51)
    • Anime (49)
  • Writing (1)

Patreon

Support Rindis.com on Patreon!
Become a patron at Patreon!

Other blogs:

RSS feed: Inside GMT Inside GMT

RSS feed: Playing at the World Playing at the World

  • Playing at the World 2E V2 Arrives May 5, 2025

RSS feed: Dyson’s Dodecahedron Dyson’s Dodecahedron

  • Scavengers’ Deep – Map 36 October 27, 2026

RSS feed: Quest for Fun! Quest for Fun!

  • The $139 Board Game August 7, 2026

RSS feed: Bruce Heard and New Stories Bruce Heard and New Stories

  • Not All Eyes are the Same, Pt. II October 28, 2026

RSS feed: Chicago Wargamer Chicago Wargamer

  • The 2 Half-Squads - Episode 310: Cruising Through Crucible of Steel January 27, 2023

RSS feed: CRRPG Addict CRRPG Addict

  • Ravenloft: Strahd's Gesticulations October 27, 2026
SF&F blogs:

RSS feed: Fantasy Cafe Fantasy Cafe

  • Review of The Sourdough Compendium by A. G. Slatter October 26, 2026

RSS feed: Lynn’s Book Blog Lynn’s Book Blog

  • Can’t Wait Wednesday: Famous Last Lies by Jenny Hollander October 28, 2026
ASL blogs:

RSS feed: Sitrep Sitrep

  • Fireweed Sale August 7, 2026

RSS feed: Hong Kong Wargamer Hong Kong Wargamer

  • FT114 Yellow Extract After Action Report (AAR) Advanced Squad Leader scenario April 16, 2025

RSS feed: Hex and Violence Hex and Violence

  • This still exists? March 25, 2025

RSS feed: Grumble Jones Grumble Jones

  • Halloween 2026 October 22, 2026

RSS feed: Desperation Morale Desperation Morale

  • How to Learn ASL March 16, 2025

RSS feed: Banzai!! Banzai!!

  • October North Texas Gameday October 21, 2019

RSS feed: A Room Without a LOS A Room Without a LOS

  • [Crossing the Moro CG] T=0902 -- Rough start July 18, 2015
GURPS blogs:

RSS feed: Dungeon Fantastic Dungeon Fantastic

  • Felltower & Atheism disadvantage levels October 18, 2026

RSS feed: Gaming Ballistic Gaming Ballistic

  • Harmonized Loot Schedule (HLS) September 22, 2026

RSS feed: Ravens N’ Pennies Ravens N’ Pennies

RSS feed: Let’s GURPS Let’s GURPS

  • Review: GURPS Realm Management March 29, 2021

RSS feed: No School Grognard No School Grognard

  • It came from the GURPS forums: Low-Tech armor and fire damage January 29, 2018

RSS feed: The Collaborative Gamer The Collaborative Gamer

  • Thoughts on a Town Adventures System January 18, 2022

RSS feed: Don’t Forget Your Boots Don’t Forget Your Boots

  • GURPS Supers Newport Academy #8: “Invitation to the future.. of the 1970’s: Part II” August 2, 2026

RSS feed: Orbs and Balrogs Orbs and Balrogs

  • Bretwalda - Daggers of Oxenaforda pt.4 - Fallen King May 27, 2017

Cross Keys

by Rindis on December 5, 2014 at 10:14 am
Posted In: Boardgaming

I’m on my usual trip down south to see my parents, and hopefully get in some wargaming with my dad. After some discussion, he decided to try out the GCACW series. We went with the fourth scenario in Stonewall in the Valley, “Cross Keys and Port Republic”, which is on just the south map, and is probably the biggest basic scenario (though only six turns) and looks about the most even in forces on each side. (I thought I had played the second scenario before, not just the first one twice….)

My dad took the Confederates, and since all of their infantry starts exhausted at Fatigue 1, they stayed in place the first day, while the cavalry advanced to screen them. I tried getting around behind the cavalry to cut them off, but lost one cavalry regiment to an attack by Ashby for my trouble, while almost the entire Union force had a case of the slows.

Cross Keys 1

I got lucky on the rolls for Shields’ division, and had activated everyone by turn 2. The Confederates naturally got to go first, and set up a fairly strong line from Pleasant Run Church to Cross Keys. I decided to continue down the main road, and threaten to go around his west flank while Shields slowly advanced behind the Shenandoah River.

Ewell’s division moved up into contact with the brigades that Fremont was leading (not organized into a division), and a couple of fights followed, one of which drove off Stewart’s brigade behind the North River with some losses and a Demoralize-1 marker. On the other end of the line, both Schenck and Taylor’s brigades were exhausted in a fight.

Cross Keys 2

Not liking how exposed Stewart was to a possible Union advance, my dad moved him out to just north of New Haven. This would keep him demoralized, thanks to the extra fatigue, but got him out of any danger. I moved Cluseret forward to sweep Ashby out of the way, but he stood, and I rolled horribly to lose two strength points. With the Confederates still blocking the main pike across the river, Blenker moved his entire division to the same hex at the west end of the main line, adjacent to Ewell’s position (lots of minuses for a potential assault, but 13-3 odds if he could pull it off). This forced the Confederates to pull back 2-3 miles. Fremont attempted to follow, but a series of poor rolls kept me from doing anything fancy, and Shenck lost a strength point in stragglers.

Shields’ division got close to the solid Confederate position between the Shenandoah River and the Blue Ridge, and the Stonewall brigade moved to joined Taliaferro’s bridgade there.

Cross Keys 3

About my best plan was to continue as I had started. Patton’s brigade moved over to eject the 1st NJ Cav before I could do anything, which made getting at Ashby difficult again.

After three ‘2’s for movement in a row (and I did that well  only because of using the division commander), Blenker’s division hadn’t gotten to where I had hoped for my first movement. Steinwehr caught up to Ashby, who then retreated over the North River, which I had hoped to reach at least a turn earlier.

I managed to get three activations in a row to get the 4th NY Cav into a small gap in the line and then attack Taylor near the middle of the line. Everything went right for Fremont, getting a Grand Assault off for 2-1 odds with a +1 flank bonus… and then blew the combat itself for a final -1. This lost another strength point, and finished two brigades for the turn (1 fatigue for the attack, +3 from the battle).

After that, the Confederates pulled back another couple of hexes, and then I got a couple of good initiative rolls and very good movement to surround Patton’s brigade. This attack went better (final +2, after +3 flanking bonus…), disorganizing both brigades, but retreating Patton out of his bad position so I couldn’t hit him again.

The turn 5 check showed that the river had fallen, and it was now possible to cross the Shenandoah. I got the first activation and moved Tyler’s brigade from Shields’ division across the Shenandoah river to circle behind the Confederate defenses. Jackson then activated both brigades there twice to get between Tyler and the victory hexes, and then activated Stewart to block the ford I’d used while activating the main two to attack Tyler. With a +3, the first attack drove off Tyler, causing two losses in a retreat though bad terrain.

Shields then sent two more brigades across the river, hoping to find some way to threaten to get to the victory area. The Confederates got the next initiative, and pulled back into a ring. After some maneuvering, I finally got a +2 flank attack on Stewart, which wore out both units, and followed up with another from the other flank which sent him retreating south of the Shenandoah River.

Taylor moved over to cover that gap, which left Patton disorganized and without immediate support. I moved Cluseret up to Patton, and then Ewell moved over to attack him, exhausting both units. Ashby pulled out of covering the river to cover the victory area. The 1st WV wore themselves out putting themselves onto Ewell’s flank, but then Ashby moved up to cover that flank, which negated any bonuses I could get. Freemont sent Stahel in anyway, and forced a retreat. Patton pulled out after that, leaving the Confederate line just north of the river.

Cross Keys 5

The river was still crossable for turn 6, and the Union got the first initiative again. Blenker activated his entire division, with two brigades crowding Ewell’s main position, and the third setting off around the North River. The Confederates then fell back on positions right along the river. The Union cavalry went on a ride wide around south, finally arriving near Port Republic. Over several activations, the entire Confederate force crossed south of the Shenandoah, abandoning Newhaven to eventual Union control, and then eliminated the 1 NJ Cav in a sharp battle with Ashby.

With everything compacted down, and the Confederates solidly in the lead from Union losses, there weren’t a lot of options left. First, Shields tried to force a Confederate line that ran from Lewis Mill on the Shenandoah to the victory area in Mt Vernon Furnace. Two attacks disorganized the defenders, but couldn’t force a retreat or losses, and caused one loss to each of the attacking Union brigades. I then tried to get at the Confederate cavalry that was screening the western approach to the area, but they moved out before I could try to eliminate them, and the troops were too worn out for anything more. I called it at that point, with the understanding that I’d have no trouble actually taking Newhaven, or getting a unit within five hexes of Staunton.

Cross Keys 6

The Union losses amounted to 10 strength points (plus another from an extended march), and the Confederates had only lost one (plus two more in extended marches on the last turn). With 3 points for taking Newhaven, and one more for being close to Staunton, the total was -5 for a Confederate Substantive Victory.

Ashby certainly lived up to his reputation in this game, being a constant problem for me to deal with. Losing a cavalry regiment early on did me no favors either. Overall, my dice were fairly cold in battle; most fights were at around +1 for modifiers, and while the first fight went well for the Union, the next three all saw the Union roll poorly. One more winning fight at that point probably would have made a dramatic difference. Lots of opportunities were missed thanks to the superior Confederate initiative, but I got some good streaks that forced positions to be abandoned, and allowed me to stick my neck out with Taylor near Three Springs, but not to fight on my terms.

My dad generally likes the system, but finds it a bit too procedure heavy, which I have to agree with. I think it’s a rule set that could do well with introductory sections giving the basic concept of the rule, and then going into the all the exploit-resisting procedure. Some early problems just came from the fact that it is an usual system for a hex-and-counter game.

└ Tags: gaming, GCACW
1 Comment

Two Rounds of Tanagra

by Rindis on December 4, 2014 at 10:03 am
Posted In: CC:Ancients

Patch and I did another round of Commands & Colors: Ancients this Tuesday, with the Battle of Tanagra from Expansion #6 being the subject (though there were no walls to fall). Both armies are roughly equal, with the Spartans perhaps positioned better, and there is a special rule that turns the one Greek MC unit into a Spartan one if they play a Mounted Charge.

I had the Greeks the first time, and we both started moving parts of our lines forward. I manged to cut off the Light at the left end of his line and kill it mostly with banner results. I then Double Timed my lagging center up into contact with his line, Patch lost slightly more blocks than I did, but I also forced a Spartan MH back two hexes. Patch reshuffled his line a little, and I came in with a Line Command.

And that’s where things went wrong. On one end, three attacks on two Spartan MHs cost him three blocks, but eliminated one of my MHs and reduced two other units to one block each. On the other end, I reduced an Aux to 1 block, but they got two hits on each of three units and a MH-MH fight cost me two blocks for one of his.

Then Patch played Mounted Charge. He finished off two units with that, and forced another MH to retreat after taking two hits. With nothing in my hand for my left, where my only intact units were, I couldn’t really do anything before he finished me off next turn. 1-6

Tanagra 1

In the second round, after a couple turns of maneuvering, I used Double Time to send in much of the center. We mostly exchanged blocks, but I got a lucky four-block hit to wipe out one of his MH on a momentum battle (I had really been wondering if I wanted to push my luck that far). Patch reshuffled his line, and finished off an Aux that had taken three hits before, and knocked a Spartan MH down to one block. My line was broken up, but an Order Two Center finished off an Aux, allowed me to momentum battle a 1-block MH Patch had hidden behind his line to finish it off, and kill his leader.

Patch returned the favor with Order Two Center killing a three block MH and killing my leader. Not having much else I could do, I Ordered Two Center to start walking an unused MH forward, and attack the unraveling line, with a three block hit finishing the game. 6-3

Tanagra 2

Afterword: Nice, fairly balanced feeling scenario. Our luck was high, with games tending to turn on lucky four-block hits. In fact, they were fast games. We usually do one of these in an hour on Vassal, and the first game only took fifty minutes. The second one was only thirty.

└ Tags: C&C Ancients, gaming
 Comment 

One Plus Two Equals Three

by Rindis on December 3, 2014 at 12:00 pm
Posted In: Computer games

This is the eighth in a series of reviews of Paradox’s empire management games. See the earlier reviews here:
Europa Universalis II: A Tale of Two Europas
Hearts of Iron: Europa of Iron
Victoria: Nineteenth Century Essay
Crusader Kings: A Dynastic Adventure
Hearts of Iron II: Return Engagement
Europa Universalis III: A Whole New World
Europa Universalis: Rome: Make a Desert and Call it a Game

Given the number of other projects that Paradox could have done, the four-year gap between Hearts of Iron II (2005) and III (2009) is fairly short (especially when considering that the final expansion to II didn’t come out until 2007). However, in that time Paradox had developed the Clausewitz engine for their empire management games, and with the HoI series being Paradox’s most successful one, it is no surprise that they hurried to get a new WWII-era (1936-48) empire management game out with the new engine.

Unfortunately, ‘hurried’ is all too apt a word. Paradox’s games always had a reputation for being buggy upon release, but would then be patched into a solid game. The release of HoI III was particularly bad in this regard, and after the complaints that caused, Paradox has made an (increasingly successful) effort to release their games in good shape.

After the initial release of HoI III for PC and Mac in late 2009, the first expansion, Semper Fi, was released in June 2010, and a second, For the Motherland, was released in June 2011. These were packaged together as the HoI III Collection, which is all I’ve played, and what this review will be about.

Leadership

Originally, all the resources in the HoI economy were tied together, as they all fed into Industrial Capacity (IC), which was used for everything, including research. In HoI II, research was separated from the IC economy, but still required money to fund, which came from consumer goods (generated by IC), and the number of possible simultaneous projects was controlled by the amount of IC the country had.

HoI III introduces leadership as a second economy that does not generally interact with the resource/IC economy. Leadership is like IC in that it is generated by provinces the nation controls, but is a constant like resources, instead of being upgradeable like IC. Leadership is then split to research, espionage, diplomacy and officers.

Tripartite Threat

HoI II used policy sliders like in EU II to determine government type and which faction a country was close to. HoI III returns to the tripartite political model of the original game of the series, where every country is placed in a triangular diplomatic space with the Allies, Axis and Comintern represented by the points.

As usual, diplomacy has a number of options, including influencing another nation towards your point of view. This is only available if you are already in a faction, or else you are subject to influence from those countries that are (you can align yourself towards one particular point of view). All of these actions cost diplomatic points, generated from leadership. Most actions (negotiating a trade deal, instigating a coup) have a one-time cost, but influence has an ongoing cost for as long as it is kept up.

Most countries also start with a fairly high neutrality rating. This is a new mechanic to represent a country’s resistance to going to war. You can only go to war with a country with a threat rating higher than your neutrality rating. Threat is generated by military build ups, going to war with other countries and the like, and is also reduced by distance. So an aggressive Germany will generate a lot a threat against France, but not so much against America on the other side of the Atlantic.

Practical Engineering

In the first HoI game, research was split into theoretical advances that then allowed practical advance follow-ups. HoI II simplified the model down with nearly every advance having a direct impact, but each was made up a few sub-advances that had different demands, but those did not interact with each other at all.

HoI III introduces the idea of engineering knowledge (or theory), and practical knowledge. Every time you complete research in a field, you get a point in the theory for that field, which will slowly decay over time. Building units, or engaging in combat generates practical knowledge in the relevant field. Knowledge of both types affects the difficulty of research. So, the more you concentrate on one field, the better your theory is, and the easier it is to get more advances. The more experience you get with, say, air combat, the better you know what improvements your aircraft need, and it becomes easier to advance in that field.

In general, each unit type has a number of different advances (often about four) that each improve different unit statistics, and together add up to the next ‘level’ of that unit (Infantry I to Infantry II, etc.). As in HoI II, land and air units can be upgraded in the field when new equipment is available by allocating IC to the job. However, land units can also be upgraded by type, with, say, motorized infantry being converted into mechanized infantry, which places them into the general production queue (removing them from the map), but they will return to their previous unit if it still exists at that time.

The old problem of inappropriate detail returns, with many ship and tank types being given real-world names appropriate to the country. As these are often appended with asterisks to denote one or more differences from the ‘actual’ version, this is cosmetics without meaning. Worse, the ahistorical research sequence of light armor allowing medium armor, which then allows heavy armor returns from the first game.

Espionage

HoI II: Doomsday introduced espionage to the series, and it is still here for this game with spies, counterespionage and the like. Like last time, I’ve generally found it too much effort for the payoff.

However, For the Motherland did introduce a new resistance… mini-game. Countries can try to put together resistance cells in a foreign country. This is the most likely in the occupied territory of the country putting together the resistance. A resistance network is generally invisible to the targeted country, though Police units do have an effect on them. Once it is in place, it can be turned into a normal militia unit, which seizes control of the province it is in.

A long-term problem with the HoI series is that partisans never really worked, despite attempts to include their effects. This much more direct approach actually solves the problem fairly well. Supplies are important in this game, and often get moved up to the front through a handful of province routes, so a few Soviet partisan units can have a dramatic effect. One of the goals of this was to give a human government-in-exile player something (potentially) useful to do for his allies in a multiplayer game, though it would still be a somewhat lackluster experience.

Production

Production works pretty much the same as with HoI II, with the player having to split available industrial capacity between consumer goods, supplies and new production as well as dedicating resources to reinforcements and upgrading existing units (or he can turn it over to the AI). The interface for those settings and the main queue where you prioritize new production has not changed much.

However, it too is affected by the ‘practical knowledge’ rating that affects research. New units have a base time to complete, but the better the related practical knowledge for that item is, the shorter the actual time becomes. Since this will apply to all further units, it encourages setting orders to produce multiples of the same thing in a chain, with each one starting when the previous one finishes, kind of like a… production line.

One small problem with the system is that once you commit an order to the queue, you can’t edit it, say to change the total number to produce. If you change your mind immediately, you can cancel it and start over, but otherwise you’re stuck keeping an eye on it.

Chain of Command

The basic land unit of construction and maneuver in the HoI series has always been the division, with brigade attachments to provide specialized abilities. HoI II expanded on this idea with a more extensive brigade system, that was also used for carriers and air units. In HoI III, the basic unit of maneuver is still the division, but the basic unit of construction is now the brigade.

Divisions are now made up of three or four brigades (or five with the right research), and can be constructed as a unit, or assembled out of component brigades (is possible to have individual brigades running around, but the system doesn’t really support that as a regular thing). Each country has a number of pre-done construction ‘templates’, which can be modified and saved, so a player can easily tailor his production to the structure he desires.

The truly new part is that higher levels of command are now directly represented in the game. Divisions can be grouped together into corps. This does not force the units to stay together (and, sadly, there is no easy way to select every unit in a particular corps at the same time), but does generate a headquarters unit which is an extra brigade. As with previous games, historical leaders are given to each country, and their abilities directly impact the performance of the division they command. A leader assigned to a corps increases the odds of extra divisions reinforcing and taking part in a combat. Corps can be similarly grouped into armies, which add to the organization of child units (which is the unit’s combat effectiveness). Armies can be grouped into army groups, whose leaders decrease supply consumption. And finally, army groups can be grouped into theaters, whose leaders can reduce the combat penalty for having too many divisions in too small a space.

All of these have their own headquarters units, which can take part in combat, but are not especially useful as such. Instead, the main purpose is that each headquarters has a range in which their bonuses apply. Corps have to stay relatively close to their divisions (say, 4-5 provinces), while a theater command in the middle of the Pacific can cover most of that ocean.

But more important than any of the above abilities is the fact that these can be turned over to AI control—at any level. You can let the AI control a particular division. Or corps. Or an entire theater. The AI is, as ever, not the best player, but neither is it truly incompetent. The point is to be able put entire sections of the game under AI control, so that the player can concentrate on those parts that are truly important. Invading Poland as Germany in 1939? Set the western theater to AI control, so it can handle anything Britain and France might do, and then concentrate on Poland.

This is aided by giving the AI directions as well. Once a unit is set to AI control, you can tell it to act offensively or defensively, and can flag particular places as goals. These could be places to defend, and places to attack. Once the UI is set, selecting the appropriate HQ will display a dashed line ‘front’ on the map which gives some idea of what the AI thinks of the situation.

All of this only partially applies to naval and air units. All the headquarters are land units, so while naval and air units can be grouped into smaller units (‘divisions’), they then must be integrated into the land force structure (possibly just at the theater level).

How Wide is my Front?

Combat is largely the same as it was in previous titles, including the ‘movement is combat’ model of HoI II. There are some tweaks and additions, the most important one being that battles are marked on the map with little bubbles that give the current winning/losing percentage. Battles that are going well are in green, ones that are going poorly in red, and the undecided middle ground yellow. Sadly, a big attack by weak units against a well prepared defender will often end in a defensive victory, but the combat rating (and bubble color) are based off the current gross numbers, not who is actually taking damage.

All units have a combat width, and generally each combat has a maximum width that units can fight in (with attacks from multiple provinces increasing the maximum width). Units in excess of the maximum width do not take part until other units are forced out of line (usually from loss of organization) to make room.

Along with the manpower pool needed to reinforce units and create new ones, there is also an officer pool, generated from leadership. When a unit is under heavy strain in combat, it can shatter instead of retreating, which removes it from the map, and forces it to be reformed, either with its parent unit, or somewhere in the home territory of the country. Each unit needs a number of officers, and the ratio of available officers to needed officers adjusts the odds of this happening.

Conclusion

Troy Goodfellow pronounced HoI III a ‘must have’ strategy game on Three Moves Ahead because it solved the ‘virtual viceroy’ problem. I’m less positive than that, as the AI runs into the same problems that SSG’s old Panzer Battles and Great Battles of the American Civil War series ran into: you can tell the AI where you want it to go, but you can’t tell it how you want it to get there.

That said, the hierarchical command system, with the ability to turn control over to the computer at almost any level is, largely, the key to solving the bigger problem of needing to have too many units to control in a real-time game. What is needed now is better communication.

I was surprised to see the armor research model go back to the ahistorical linear model of the first game, but every other place where HoI III goes back to the first game (and there are several), it is for the best. II showed a lot of lessons had been learned from the first game, and this one generally takes the best of the previous two.

The map gets really fine-grained in this title, and that is part of an over-detailed aesthetic that is partially alleviated by all the AI controls. For me, the HoI series remains Paradox’s least engaging effort, largely due to the expectations I bring to a WWII title. HoI III is the best of the series so far, and worth looking into for any grand strategy fan.

└ Tags: gaming, Hearts of Iron, Paradox, review
2 Comments

Server Downtime For Fun & Profit

by Rindis on December 2, 2014 at 2:55 pm
Posted In: MMO

Trion (the company behind the English version of ArcheAge) can’t seem to catch a break. They were having lots of network latency on the servers (enough so that they ended up with overlapping properties because of server confusion!), so they started a cycle of unscheduled maintenance.

On a Sunday.

It’s now Tuesday, and they still have a few servers down, but most of them are going again. Lucius (where Smudge and I are) came back up Monday night, and it was interesting to be in an area that usually has a half-dozen+ people standing around and be the only one. Things started filling in, but it was still much less busy than I’m used to. I’m sorry I didn’t get a chance to see Marianople with only a few people in it. I might have been able to enjoy the scenery rather than watch my machine struggle.

One of the things that’s been in our quest log for a bit is a… tutorial quest for trading with the other continent. If you’ve seen my previous posts, and the trouble we’ve had with that, you can see why we haven’t done the quest, even though the quest complete is comparatively easy. Just getting into the port at all is a complete, even if you don’t live to complete the run. Anyway, with things fairly light for the moment, we decided to try it now, before all the gankers were present. The voyage took a little time, but we got in and got to turn in the trade packs (lots of Charcoal Stabilizer! yay!). And just after we did so, a large ship full of reds came in and charged for us. We ported back home.

In the more normal news (before being interrupted by the server downtime), we’ve actually been questing in the first of the PvP zones, and haven’t been bothered much. (One red tried to kill me in town. He thought he’d be far enough out of range of the guards, but I wasn’t and they reacted to the attack on me and killed him in about four shots.)

I’ve completed crafting Gau’s level-34 set, and am just beginning on mine. The thing is, past level 34 gear we need different components that are largely beyond us. We’ve set up an aquafarm (yes, you can farm corals and the like too in this game), to get some of the ingredients, but the alchemy skill required is crazy. We may be stuck at this point, gear-wise, for a bit. The next project is getting a farm tractor anyway. It’s slower than using the ship, but carries two additional trade packs, so it should make Smudge’s trade runs for money more efficient.

 

Meanwhile, we’ve also been spending some time on Neverwinter lately (the best bad game). On Sunday, Smudge was on an alt and found a big world dragon fight in a mid-level zone that hadn’t been there before, and called me in. I managed to find the list of these fights (there’s five) and we went through them. Looks like they’re from the most recent module, and they added them on to various existing zones, starting in the 20s. The early ones have the monsters rated as ‘skulls’ (instead of a level), which generally means everyone is normalized to a baseline level equivalent (though higher levels still have gear and ability advantages).

The last one…? Hoo boy, the challenge ramps up, and the last one in the set is tough. We had a fair number of people in the fight, and they were needed. I died twice from not being quite fast enough, but since you come back very close to the fight, I got back in and helped finish it off.

└ Tags: ArcheAge, gaming, Neverwinter
1 Comment

Where Wisdom Fails – Part 1: The Attack

by Rindis on December 2, 2014 at 2:01 pm
Posted In: SFB

Crossposted from the SFU blog on BGG.

Patch and I regularly game online, and we decided to have another SFB outing a little while ago. I’ve been going for a ‘historical order’ system, to see how things evolve, and we’re currently in Y157, which is the revised date for the mini campaign in Captain’s Log #4.

We decided to go full-bore with revised rules for this old scenario, which was probably a mistake. Bases were made much tougher in the 1999 version of Advanced Missions, and the first scenario isn’t balanced for that, and we’re not good enough to need bases being made tougher in the first place.

At any rate, Patch took the defending Klingons, who just have a Battlestation (BATS) with reinforcements arriving on Turn 6, and I took the Hydrans, who are testing out the Hellbore Torpedo by assaulting the base with a Ranger (RN) and a Dragoon (DG).

My initial plan was to start bombarding the BATS from just out of overload range, since Hellbores are good moderate range weapons, and Fusions act the same from ranges 3 to 10.

I went in somewhat slow to get the 9-10 bracket with the RN while the DG lagged behind. Towards the end of the turn, the BATS opened up with disruptors and a pair of Ph-4s, hit with both disruptors and got ‘1’s with both phasers to take the RN’s #1 almost halfway down. Patch followed that up with another pair of Ph-4s for 10 more points (1 & 4) and a total of 23 on that shield. In return, the RN missed with two Fusion shots before turning off to show the #2. The DG then hit with one Hellbore, which was absorbed by general reinforcement.

For turn 2, I stayed near speed 10 with both ships, with the idea of continuing the bombardment for a turn. However, I launched all twelve fighters while the BATS launched a shuttle on impulse 1. Patch followed up with a second shuttle on impulse 3, while the RN did the same, BATS shuttle #3 launched on 5, and #4 (and last) on 10.

Mid-turn, Patch used a couple Ph-4s to auto-kill two of the Stingers. A few impulses later, the Stingers and shuttles exchanged fire, killing three of the shuttles, and damaging (but not crippling) two of the fighters. One was a point short of crippling though, and missed with both Fusions at range 5 on a +3 shot before turning off to find the RN.

On impulse 22, the remaining fighters hit ADD range, and the base started picking them off with that. (There was some mix up as Patch didn’t realize that it took time for the rack to switch from one magazine to another at first.) The BATS opened up on Impulse 25, firing overloaded disruptors at two of the Stingers, killing them, and a pair of Ph-4s at the DG, putting 23 points on its #1.

Two surviving Stingers made it to range 1 on Impulse 27, and I should have fired with both of them, as the Ph-3s opened up at that point, but I only fired with a damaged one, doing a total of 6 points through a +2 shift. The DG fired two Hellbores the impulse after, and missed with one, putting 15 points on the #5 shield the fighter had weakened and sandpapering 3 off all the others (except #6 which was reinforced).


Impulse 28, DG misses with one Hellbore, but weakens shield #5.
↓ Read the rest of this entry…

└ Tags: bgg blog, gaming, SFB
1 Comment
  • Page 219 of 320
  • « First
  • «
  • 217
  • 218
  • 219
  • 220
  • 221
  • »
  • Last »

©2005-2026 Rindis.com | Powered by WordPress with ComicPress | Hosted on Rindis Hobby Den | Subscribe: RSS | Back to Top ↑