August Bank Holiday Offensive #2. Revenge on the steppes

Getting the choice of map, Badger decided it'd be amusing to send us to the wide open spaces of map #23. Oh dear, I thought, this is the kind of terrain you only want to fight over if you've got tanks. A choice between the short ends suited me because I wanted to hunker down behind wire with some MG's in this situation. After events in France my immediate thought was objective 5. This turns out to be bang in the centre of map #23, so I chose to put the next most valuable objective- #4- as far away from Badger as possible.

With green Germans against Badger's line Soviets in 1944, I imagined we were fighting it out in some corner of Operation Bagration, otherwise known as 'the destruction of Army Group Centre', or "the most calamitous defeat of all the German armed forces in World War II". This wasn't really as bad as it might've looked because I'd already decided to play a defensive game. I chose a Volksgrenadier detachment which I figured would:

• Be cheap enough to ensure my posture as defender.
• Leave me enough VP to buy the 2 wire OB's and the foxholes was going to rely on.
• Give me just enough men and materiel to hold (an HMG would've been nice, but to go for one in my OB choice- buying a full company- would've cost me the fortifications I wanted, and might even've left me in attacker posture).

This all worked out in my favour against Badger's Late-War rifle company, especially when he forgot to check for the artillery support which had so bedevilled me before. With neither cover nor sufficient heavy firepower, his units balked at the wire, where they were easy meat for even my light forces. Surrender was quick.

I think this was a game where Badger's best chance would've been to confront the madness of just flat out storming the wire. With a Surrender value of 15 compared to my 6 he could lose 2 for 1 and still win on attrition. Looking back, I think Badger played the Russians in this game with too high a regard for the lives of his men. ;)

Related@RD/KA!
- August Bank Holiday Offensive #1. I take a tanking
- August Bank Holiday Offensive #3. And punishment in Stalingrad

August Bank Holiday Offensive #1. I take a tanking

So, Badger and I had our bank holiday Combat Commander session as announced. I cooked a meatball lasagne (Millefoglie alla 'guardiese'- pasta layers the guardia way- from the Abruzzi region) which was really good if I say so myself, and we got 5 games in, all using the Random Scenario Generator.




France, 1939
I chose the map, Badger orientation. Nationality and OB rolls pitted my line French against Badger's line Germans. A minor setback. Then Badger's objective chit draw turned up chit R, which made objective 5 worth 10VP. Oh look, there's objective 5 right in Badger's deployment zone. A major setback. And sure enough, I ended up forced to counterattack across little or no cover against a German rifle company with artillery support (naturally enough). That's the French. Attacking. With a 4-card hand... Setback upon setback!

I actually had the inklings of a decent plan: pin and break Badger's units on his startline for the sake of rout exit VP while developing an attack on objective 5, whose 10VP I figured would decide the game. There was a viable strategy here, especially since I nabbed an extra HMG with my support roll, leaving me 10VP to spend on fortifications.

With the benefit of hindsight, I wish I'd bought:

• Wire OB- 3VP.
• Strongpoint- 2VP
• Trenchline- 2VP
• Entrenchments x2- 2VP.

Then I wish I'd set up my units something like this. (The C+1 and C+2 notations on the map refer to where I'd've put the leaders I generated during that game.) For readers who've not played the CC RSG, I should here point out that I'd be setting up my fortifications (9 wires, 6 foxholes, 4 trenches and 1 bunker) after Badger'd set up his units. Where would you set up in your 2-hex deep deployment zone in that situation dear readers? How far could you risk setting up right under the guns of that mass of French infantry massing by the primary objective? Might you be tempted by the prospect of making an end run against my weak flank for exit VP?

So anyway, one way or another, there'd be a German comany strung out along its narrow deployment zone with a French company about to kick off up close and in its face. And the fortifications? Well, the situation required the French to attack, forcefully and quickly. The position shown here seems more or less to fit the bill. The assault platoon and the base of fire are right in the line, able to bring their squad FP to bear immediately against the objective and/or its supporting units. The assault units have trenches to cover their move up. And the right flank should be secure with that wire and the covering platoon.

All of which would've been very nice, perhaps. But of course I didn't work all that out on the night. I bought myself 2 lots of wire, for 18, and some foxholes for extra cover. I set up firegroups around the buildings, woods and buildings features across the middle of the board. Considering my main objective I added extra men on my left for the assault. I wired extensively on each flank. I was confident that Badger wasn't going to get forward off his startline, so I was hoping that I'd have time to break him and rout him before he could get clear.

Of course, Badger was going nowhere. And neither was I. There wasn't enough cover to risk much running about in front of all that German firepower, and I'd wired the area in front of my primary objective to boot! And the odds are against the French winning a firefight against the Germans all things being equal, and all things weren't equal here: I was playing the worst hand and cardplay in the game against the best and with most of my units out of range too. Oh yes, and don't forget the artillery! Badger didn't, and neither could I as it rained down on my men with dreadful frequency.

So the game was a painful defeat for me, and just painful for Badger, because I couldn't help myself: I bitched and moaned. I did actually talk myself out of it before the game was finished. And I wasn't totally slaughtered in the end. The result was close enough that I wouldn't've needed all that much luck to swing my way after the glorious good fortune of Badger's scenario generation and early turns of the game, and I was more or less in with a shout (and yes, a bit more of a whinge again, I must confess) to the end.

Italy, 1943
Facing the next game, I had to pull myself together quickly I knew. I didn't want to whinge my way out of another potential victory. Badger's choice of map gave us #5. I pondered my choice of sides as carefully as I could. I decided that putting the marsh and that pond in the middle of Badger's deployment zone couldn't work against me, and that's how he got the long edge at the top there.

It was downhill all the way after that, and certainly not worth the effort of a cut and paste session with the GIMP. I got green Italians against line Americans, which left me defending with my Blackshirts company against Badger's rifle detachment, with artillery support, naturally enough. I bungled my defensive setup a bit again. I'd bought wire again, as is my wont. I had originally planned to put a row of 5 across the woods just above the stream. But I had some kind of brainstorm instead, and put it all on the right, to pin Badger's units there in the brush. This turned out to be exactly as pointless as my use of wire in the previous game. On top of all that I made the mistake of trying to hold a forward firing line with the worst troops in the game, troops who should be lurking out of sight waiting to take pot shots at enemies incautious enough to move into sight.

And so Badger's firegroups and artillery spotters were able to inflict a steady steam of casualties giving them healthy increases in VP without pressing need to worry about objectives or exiting. I tried to hold on, but my line was crumbling in short order and no mistake. I resigned when even Badger realised that he was down to mopping up. I was well and truly stuffed by any measure.

Score
Badger. 2
Me. 0

Ouch! ;-\

That's it for now. I hope to write more about the other games in time to get something posted this week. ;)

Related@RD/KA!
- August Bank Holiday Offensive #2. Revenge on the steppes
- August Bank Holiday Offensive #3. And punishment in Stalingrad

Another Sunday session

A call last week from Donald broke incommunicado, so he and Andy were round for boardgames on Sunday. A recent thread on the Classic AT board at Fortress Ameritrash (F:AT) had reminded the me classic oldie from my collection I most wanted to play after the past few month's hankering for more tactical and wargames-oriented multiplayer gaming. That game was Gunslinger.

Gunslinger
Donald turned up well first, so Andy arrived to witness me finishing Donald off in our first game. I'd got the first hit, typically enough in Gunslinger as in its prototype. Donald therefore spent the game reeling in shock while I finished him off, which had a certain charm of its own thanks to the delights of the system. All that can be said is that I wasn't the utter cold-hearted killer, letting Donald's character pass out from his wounds instead of sending him to Boot Hill when I had him dead to rights.

Andy agreed to join in for another game, and, funnily enough although by pure chance, he and Donald ended up on the same side against me. Against 2 opponents, I figured my best bet was to go in as close as possible against 1- Andy; thus being as far as possible away from the other- Donald; this left me 2 hexes (each hex is a pace, or approx. 1 yard in Gunslinger it seems) from Andy, who'd been chosen for his role because his character had the lowest 1-handed shooting skill, which improved my survival chances against him.

All of which only served to prove the difference between probability and eventually, statistics and luck, when Andy's character nicked mine just as I ran behind him. Looking back, I suspect that the turn sequence management might've broken down a bit there. It wouldn't've changed the result, which saw Andy and Donald's characters finish me off in best clinical spaghetti western fashion. I just think that I might conceivably've been in a different hex is all!

In any event I was pleased to get this old favourite out on the table again. Andy and Donald's reaction was more guarded. Insofaras as application of the actual rules went, I was left with the impression that it was the strict attention to the peculiarities of the turn sequence that both players found most testing. Otherwise, I thought that both players found the mechanics quite intuitive, really startlingly quite intuitive when I look back on it, considering that I actually explained almost nothing to begin with.

Settlers of Catan
My past few month's hankering for more tactical and wargames-oriented multiplayer gaming notwithstanding, after Gunslinger we just had time for a quick game of guess what? Settlers.

Settlers(?!).

Precisely the game from which, for quite some time now, I have been wanting to escape in favour of more martial pastures new in my mulitplayer gaming. 'Combat Settlers' is the multiplayer game I've been looking for for years now, and even as I still look for it (Nexus Ops is the closest I've seen yet), I can't help but enjoy coming back to the qualities of the original.

The main distinguishing feature of our game was there being just 1 grain region on the board. Our setup meant that we each got a corner of it. That single grain region then proceeded to come up for at least 5 of the first dozen or more turns, and then more again later!

We entered the midgame with Andy just behind. I was happy to be generating a lot of lumber and/or ore to trade through my 3:1 port. Donald however was doing much better, with more numbers and cities to generate even bigger hauls of resources. Andy was suffering at this point, having to watch a long, long series of 6's net him just 1 resource instead of the 3 his building should've entitled him to (the robber's responsibility, naturally enough).

And so we entered the endgame with Donald in front and Andy even further behind. And we barely had time to realise we were in the endgame before a series of resource rolls had come round leaving Donald with a huge hand of cards in his turn, with which he, if I recall correctly; promptly built a settlement then a city in one turn to leave him on 9VP, then noticed he could trade for a development card, so picking up a VP card for the game. Curses!

Andy. 1
Donald. 2
Me. 1

Ah well. ;b

Oldie but goodie

Mark and Robert, a couple of old, old buddies, passed through last weekend. Mark was an avid and skillful Up Front player back in the day, so it was a cinch that we'd get a few games in; unless, that is, I could persuade him to try his hand at Combat Commander instead. In the event I deferred, naturally enough, to Mark's inevitable yearning to revisit battlefields of old, and we got stuck in.

We started with Scenario 1. Patrol, as you do; my Japanese against Mark's British (not jungle). My variant Japanese set-up having been decisively refuted at last year's post-Claymore mega-session, I went with the standard Japanese 3-group setup (2 ML rifles, firebase, and Sgt. Okimoto's 4-man bayonetting group). Against this, Mark too deployed 3 groups, including a 5-man firebase and Sgt. Vasey in a 3-man manoeuvre group. Hmm, I thought.

For the unititiated, Mark's choice of setup had reopened the old issue of the better basic British/German 10-man-squad setup: fire, or fire and manoeuvre. Or, as veteran players will know: the 2-group, 6-man firebase setup versus the 3-group, 5-man firebase setup. You lose 1FP from 9 and 10FP at RR1 and 2 respectively by going for fire and manoeuvre, so that the essential question is whether that 1FP is worth the additional fire and manoeuvre opportunities.

Mark clearly thought it was. He was almost right too. My initial Japanese rush was quickly pinned and started taking casualties early. That was the point at which I managed to keep my nerve. I pulled everything back together quickly enough to leave Mark facing the killer tactical problema of the British versus the Japanese: how to avoid your firebase getting stuck at Range Chit 0 while the Japanese swarm forward. His failure to solve this problem left me winning comfortably from the position I enjoyed once I'd rallied from under Mark's early hails of fire.

An excess of whisky renders vague the precise order in which followed the subsequent 3 games. But I can avow that Mark's SS enjoyed an easy victory over my Russian Conscripts in Scenario K. Elite Troops on the Attack. I'm also certain that I defended with the US in Scenario F. Infantry's Iron Fist, and with the Germans in Scenario D. Rearguard Action. What I can't remember (whisky again) is who won which playing what to leave us tied 2-2.

Circumstances conspired to force us to declare a draw just as we were readying ourselves for our next game. I have to confess I was a bit relieved. I was going into the attack with the US against the Japanese in Scenario S. Jungle Assault. A flamethrower and 2 BAR's might be all very well; but you've still got to get through the jungle to use them on the beggars, and they're dug-in with their MMG to stop you. So, like I said, I was satisfied to call a draw! ;)

The Dark Knight... returns?

So, I did go and see this again as I'd said I would. I enjoyed it about as much the second time around as I did the first. That's pretty good going really. I mean seriously: 1983's The Return of the Jedi is the last time I can remember enjoying a movie more than once on its original release. My tone therefore, however restrained, just really cannot be a matter of damning by faint praise.



I agree with Andy about the "non-comic-bookiness of it." It'd been precisely the focus on street-level crimefighting that I'd thought had made Batman Begins the successful film that it was. I can hardly complain about the same aspect of Pt. 2 of the revival of the franchise. And of course The Dark Knight is not as such a movie adaption of The Dark Knight Returns, although I'd argue there's more of the comic in the movie than Andy asserts.

Again, that's the point for me really.

The comic is a masterpiece transcending the limitations of its genre (the presence of Superman is essential to that by the way), casting its shadow to this very day over a truly iconic postmodern character. The movie is just a superior Hollywood blockbuster. Of course, the movie's huge audience suggests that many might disagree with me.

My general antipathy towards Hollywood blockbusters aside, I have to remind readers that reading the original The Dark Knight Returns on its first release stands out as one of my peak comic-reading experiences. Y'know, one of those personal landmarks the memory of which is cherished and brought out for a polish every now and again. What chance did the movie have against that? Let's be honest: none at all really.

It's like the Lord of the Rings movies which, by adding to an already rich trove of delights, delivered the best they could've done for me. I mean to say: by the time I watched Jackson's The Fellowship of the Ring, I'd had the bedtime stories and the calendar; read the books, the geek encyclopedias and the atlas; listened to the Radio 4 adaption; and played with the miniatures, the boardgame and the rpg. Oh, and I'd seen Bakshi's film, naturally enough, which I left out of the preceding list because it broke my heart, being the only bit of my sub-Tolkien Middle Earth experience that was actually shite.

So...? Well, ICv2 reported ticket sales of the order of $B1, or 100 million tickets at a mean $10/ticket. (I'm assuming that the price and multiple-purchase variations mutually cancel.) 100 million?! Holy moley Batman!

I'm going to have to come back to this. ;)

The Dark Knight: not so much superheroics as crimefighting with added latex

Andy asked me to expand on my comments about The Dark Knight, so here's what I'd written up when I decided I was going to see the movie a 2nd time before rounding off my review.

I'm a big fan of Frank Miller's original 1986 masterpiece Batman: The Dark Knight Returns, the comic that recast the iconograhpic caped crusader for the harsher times which became the comics Iron Age. Back then, Miller was a major new artist at the height of his powers being given opportunities to push the boundaries of mainstream US comics just that little bit further. The Dark Knight Returns is the finest product of this period, and is surely the work for which Miller will be most remembered. It is certainly one of the most gripping comics I've ever read, a truly memorable experience unique to serial publishing which goes beyond the simple reading to the obsessive return to existing issues as the anticipation of each next one becomes ever more unbearable.

Against this original 3-month geekgasm The Dark Knight- part 2 of just another movie franchise- could only ever've been an also-ran. Unfortunately The Dark Knight is equally an also-ran as a Batman movie- Batman Begins already gave us Miller's quintessential modern Batman; as a true comicbook movie- that honour still belongs to Spiderman; and even as silverscreen '4-colour' adventures thematically embracing the darker sides of heroism, by Doctor Who, naturally enough.

Those were heavy odds against the movie last night, odds which could only've been bucked by a truly brilliant story, the Batman done as The Wire meets Doctor Who without all the cosmic stuff, say. In the event, 2 key edits in the adaption- leaving out Superman and not killing the Joker- rendered everything else academic by stripping Miller's original story of the genre-transcending features which make it an exemplar of the first rank of all that was great in anglophone comics of the early/mid-80's. 'Genre-transcendence' is simply that quality, shown by great genre writers such as Block, Chandler, or le Carré, to turn the cliches of genre hackwork into something enduringly illuminating, a feature I believe Miller's The Dark Knight Returns enjoys in spades.

I'd suggest it is those 2 missing elements which gut Miller's original story by turning it into cops and robbers instead of superheros. More on this later I'm sure. ;)

The Dark Knight entertains but underwhelms...

Feeling a bit better today. Sleep and self-care indicators have evened out a bit. Some weak late summer sunshine is no doubt helping, but a trip to the cinema with Donald last night was most important. We went to see The Dark Knight, the undoubted box-office-busting smash-hit of this year's summer blockbuster season. As far as I know, the geeks loved it and the 'mainstream' critics were more mixed. I can't be 100% sure because I'm no more interested in reviews of the pale gruel of Hollywood action franchises than I'd be in culinary appreciations of McDonalds' burgers- my expectations of both are similarly low, and they rarely surprise me.

Readers'll've guessed by now that The Dark Knight didn't blow me away as it has so many others. I tried the obvious doublethink, that I'm feeling bitter and twisted because I'm depressed, but that didn't work. I know from experience that really good stuff, stuff like Doctor Who or The Wire, this can always work its magic on me. It's just that, well, The Dark Knight wasn't magic. It was alright really, even if not worth the hype for this cinema-goer. Readers who know me might realise that this is more than just damning by faint praise. Far from the more familiar resentment at Hollywood's time-wasting vapidity I actually enjoyed myself, even if I was ultimately underwhelmed.

No one should be surprised by that I guess. But going back again next week anyway? I'm a bit taken aback, but that's what setting out to blog this movie did to me! More on this another time I suspect. ;)

A short weekend's gaming and other stuff

Still feeling ropey. Sleep cycle and key self-care indicators (medication, feeding and oral hygiene) are all in the red zone. And I've been back incommunicado, which has made getting this post up feel like getting teeth pulled.

Martin found time for his already announced short weekend visit, so that Saturday night and Sunday were occupied with gaming:

• 3 games of Combat Commander (naturally enough!) took us into Sunday's wee small hours and early afternoon.
• We found time for a couple of games of Settlers cards before Sunday dinner.
• Then we rounded off the session with a quick 3 bouts of Ivanhoe.

I cooked too, of course, first doing a delia with sausages braised in red wine sauce (from my mum's old copy of Delia's Complete Illustrated Cookery Course, but you can find a whole lot of Delia's variants on this basic recipie here). This dish had everything I needed as a cook and host that night:

• A comfortingly short list of ingredients entailing the simplest of shopping trips.
• The easiest of cooking methods giving me the most flexibility on the night.
• All the qualities of good comfort food.

I was also pleased to get a chance to use the butcher's Italian sausages which have become my staple when I just can't resist a proper banger!

I've made up the scenario images for the games Martin and I played, so I might post again with more detail. And Badger's due round for another short weekend's gaming with the bank holiday, so there'll no doubt be more Combat Commander to report on soon enough. ;)

DiceConWest 2008

I still made it to this year's DiceConWest, where I took these pictures.

Ivanhoe. Here's Donald, Natasha and Andy in the heat of our medieval tournament.

Wings of War. And here we are at peril in our flying tinderboxes over the trenches...

Dakka! Dakka! Dakka! Complete with Andy's nifty WoW planes.

A family at war! Donald next decided to introduce Natasha to Memoir'44, a game where she'd've felt quite at home (she did, in fact, win, I seem to recall).

Here are some other sights from the day.

Ellis and Gordon at play.

Pandemic. A new release, this game (@BGG) seemed to be something of a favourite on the day.

A game of Battlelore under way.

A DoW Ticket to Ride game.

Twilight Struggle. This card-driven game of Cold War conflict was an unexpected hit for GMT back in 2005. It had long since sold out its first print run by the time that the positive buzz across the web had brought it to my attention. I made sure to look out for the reprint, which meant that I was also looking out for a game at DiceConWest. In the end Alan Poulter, webmaster over at Web-Grognards, was pleased to show me the ropes.

I'm not going properly to review Twilight Struggle here, but that long and painful first game with Alan was certainly a highlight of my DiceConWest 2008. I'm no stranger to long game sessions at all; and Descent means that I'm not unfamiliar with long games either these days; but that game of TI reintroduced me to a brain-burning intensity I'd quite forgotten. I lost of course, going down to an instant victory on VP in the very last turn, but such fun it was!

Settlers: no game for lily-livers!

Tony and Di came round last night to play some Settlers. Still in the first flush of my new cooking enthusiasm I laid on a proper curry spread. I really did sweat and slave over that dinner!

Last night's session reminded me that gamers bored of Settlers are bored of life, or just aren't playing this landmark modern classic with the essential ruthless spirit, namely, "Pick on the person in front!"

Last night's 4 games were notable among other things for my finally finding a good reason to break this, my ironclad strategy of the robber and the soldier in Settlers. I don't know how many games it's been, many dozens over some few years at the very least, but: sitting with no sheep production, and seeing Tony holding 2 resource cards, 1 of which I knew was the only sheep in play, I hit Tony 3 times with the robber looking for that pesky sheep before Diana finally got in on the act and stole it for herself. How we laughed! I wonder how long it'll be before an exception to that rule turns up like that again?

Having watched Di make a brisk march to victory with a 6/6 Ore/Grain city-generator in play, I wasn't going to miss out on a chance to play the same thing on a larger scale in the following game. Di was pipped at the post in that game when my own city-generator delivered me a 2nd 2 cities' worth of resources, I ducked that last seven on my own resource roll, and I sprinted in from 8 VP.

In the 4th and final game a stupid mistake setting up my 2nd settlement left with no lumber production and no immediate access to any either. I had a bad feeling about that. An early investment in a development card came up trumps though, netting me the Monopoly card I used to grab all that lumber which recent resource rolls had churned out in plenty. I husbanded that haul carefully, and although depleted by larceny and the robbers, it still proved enough to overcome the handicap of having no lumber production in that opening phase of road and settlement building typical of Settlers.

The endgame went into top gear when Di pulled out all the stops to generate enough roads from her of endless lumber, which, traded at giveaway rates, enabled Tony in his turn to steal my longest road, which prevented me, in my turn, from winning with a new settlement. The game evened up leaving us all looking for those last couple of points. I enjoyed a stroke of luck when a development card turned up Road Building and, a fortunate resource roll and some off-board trading later, I sprinted in again from 8 VP with 3 very unexepected builds snatching me back my longest road.

Score
Me. 3
Di. 1
Tony. 0

Grins ;)

Di insisted that the last game was the best, and Tony agreed. I can't argue with that, pleased as I was to win a game where I had no lumber production at all in the opening and mid games. Heh. Mwah, ha, etc. ;)

Back

Regular readers will know that 2 months incommunicado can only mean depression. This was unexpected, confounding, as it did, the seasonal cycle my mood swings follow at their most stable. But then, this year's upswing had hit 3 months earlier than in 2007, and the premature downswing was similarly early. I had feared that it'd be downhill all the way until next spring (9 months!). Fortunately I've pulled out of the most disabling depression 2 months after I falling in, just like last year's regular cycle again.

In the end it was cooking that pulled me out of it. I made up a shopping list for a few of my favourite recipies and dragged myself out to make a big trip round the local shops. The immediate result of this was that my arms felt they'd been pulled out at their sockets, but a plateful of my variation on Pan-fried calf's liver with bacon, lemon and cavalo nero made it all worthwhile. (I use chicken liver because I can't find calves' liver; and I've substituted ordinary white cabbage for cavalo nero.) This modern variant on liver and bacon meets bubble and squeak was an immediate favourite. Liver's not for everyone, but chicken liver's melting, almost creamy meats mean that it's the cabbage which gives the dish its toothsome bite. For the sauce, creme fraiche brings a fresh note to the classically rich butter and wine sauce, this little lift then made a kick with the addition of lemon juice.

A Sunday celebration

Last week's Sunday session turned into a bit of an event: Glasgow Games Group (G3) were holding a games day to mark the 10^th anniversary- to the day!- of the club's first ever meeting. As a veteran of founding night I went along, naturally enough. Andy and Donald were both going anyway, so I'd've had to go to get any gaming in any event! Gav and Tony are both founding night veterans too, so they came along as well. Badger, Bill and family all decided to join us.

Ivanhoe
It seems we just can't stop ourselves starting with this neat cardgame these days, although this time we had to play something quick because Tony could only pop in to say hello, having a party to go to (again!). So Badger joined us for a 3-hander.

Got game!

Bank holiday boardgames bonanza!
A busy weekend last week plus a cold I picked up sometime has left me unable to write much. I had Badger round last Friday for Combat Commander, then the usual Sunday session turned into a mass invasion as my old buddy Martin turned up for the bank holiday, prompting Bill to pay a visit to catch up with him. This led to a late night Combat Commander session with Martin on top of the usual Sunday boardgames. With the Monday off work thanks to the bank holiday Badger turned up for yet another Combat Commander session. Truly did my cup runneth over!

Friday night firefight
Pursuing our goal of playing all the official scenarios, Badger and I got in 4 games on Friday.

#29 'Operation Repulse'
Featuring the 101st Airborne scrounging for supplies from a glider drop, this scenario replaces the 5 mapboard objectives with secret objective chits randomly-drawn, then scattered from 5 starting hexes. Worth 5VP plus their hidden value, these 'gliders' are going to be a main source of VP for the US player- who turned out to be Badger- because they are prohibited from gaining exit VP.

My plan involved a base of fire behind the hedge for maximum arc of fire (there were no hills on the map), which I would develop up the right and/or left flanks towards the F1 & F8 objectives. Meanwhile I would be sending an assault force of fallschirmjager to grab the E5 objective, and enter the woods to threaten the J4 objective.

My plan went as smooth as these things can, and I won with 26VP and 5 kills on time 7, the first sudden death check.

#30 'Red Skies at Night'
I drew the Germans in this 1943 encounter between Russian paratroopers and a strong German platoon. The postures are an odd feature here: the supposed attackers- the Russian paratroopers fighting to establish their bridgehead, are in Recon; and the 'defending' Germans are actually in Attack. The most important effects of this are to deny the VP clock and defender-only actions, so no wire, minefields, and other unspeakable fortifications.

My plan was simple. My secret objective was S- all 5 objectives worth 1VP. I could hold 3 objectives easily, and make 1 too hot for the Russians to hold. To this end I placed my foxholes in forward positions and set up to make a quick dash into them: a squad on the left behind the crestline, an HMG nest with the leader in the middle, and another HMG on the right. I put the team ready to make a run for the objective on the eastern map edge.

With his units strung out on the map edge, just 1 leader and only 2 orders, Badger found it difficult to get any momentum behind his attack. My units took their positions comfortably and began laying down defensive fire, forcing a surrender on time 5 with 10VP.

#31 'Blizzard Baptism'
Drawing the Germans again, I drew my secret objective, H- #4= 2VP, for a total of 5. With the close terrain and the blizzard I could expect the US paras to close in. I planned on holding 2 objectives and putting up a fight/delaying action for another- the one out on the east. I laid my wire to make the western approaches look as unappetising as possible and occupied the building with Sgt. Ganz, 2 rifle squads w/LMG's and a line team. I put a foxhole in B8 to deepen the blocking position.

My base of fire was in the other main objective building: v. Karsties, 2 rifle squads w/HMG & LMG, line team w/LMG. A rifle squad in foxholes in H7 gave some cover in the centre and another went in N5, the forlorn hope in objective #5.

My plan worked in a closely fought and very eventful game- as can be seen from all the blazes and other fortifications added to the map during play. Event followed event as Badger's units fought their way through hidden wire after hidden in his main thrust for exit VP over on the east.

I was forced to move v. Karsties' platoon eastwards to the woods as Badger threatened to turn my flank for a free run at the map edge, where they were broken by an airstrike, though they survived in the end. We both got reinforcements of one sort or another aplenty: I got a team w/HMG and pioner w/flamethrower, which I threw into holding back Badger's assault down the eastern flank; Badger got a 203mm radio, which proved more frightening than effective, although it was fun to see it scatter and hit one of his own units, wired in hex O10! My own flamethrower proved a bit of a disappointment, thanks to the smoke that Badger was throwing around liberally to screen his units strung out in the wire.

The game lasted 3 additional time periods, only ending on time 10, leaving me the winner with a slim 10VP.

#32 ' Look Mom, No Tanks!'
I finally drew the Americans, and it had to be this scenario of all scenarios! I'd played this one as the Germans when Martin and I played it just after I'd got hold of Battle Pack: Paratroopers, and I'd seen the deadly efficiency of the SS close combat stacks- Sgt. Ganz, SS squad and line team for a total of 16FP in melee. Truly fearsome!

I decided that I had to have my own killer assault team: Sgt. Smith, para squad and elite team, for a melee total of 18FP. My plan involved trying to hold the Germans with defensive fire from Sgt. White, 2 para squads/MMG in the building in the east, and from 2 para squads in foxholes around the wooded road in the west. Meanwhile Sgt. Smith and his lads would be stalking SS squads, ratcheting-up double elimination VP's.

My plan began to unravel immediately. I'd put Sgt. Smith's team front and centre, which drew Badger's killer stack in, whereupon I promptly lost the close combat, leaving my plan in tatters. Then the rampage began. Sgt. Ganz and his men simply chewed-up my units as they swept across the board, exiting for double exit VP multiple times. It's a measure of how desperate my situation was that it took me until time 7 to get my first kill.

Badger won on time 8 with 35VP and 6 kills (1 short of surrender). A thrashing.

Score
3-1 :)

The Sunday session
Ivanhoe
With 6 players due at the table on Sunday, a fast pick-up game like this Knizia gem was an ideal way to get started while we waited. Martin won.

Score
Martin 1
Everyone else 0





Judge Dredd
The ancient rivalries of Mega-City 1 don't get much exercise these days, so it was easy for us to agree to move on to this classic GW boardgame. I was hoping that the extra new players would give me a chance to wreak my revenge for previous humiliations (A month in the games of, The Claymore mega-session). It was not to be. In a game of surpassing finkery I ended up just one lost arrest shy of victory. At least I had the satisfaction of foiling Martin's midgame rush to the winning post, which left Donald the winner in the end.

Score
Donald 1
Martin 1
Everyone else 0

Paranoia Mandatory Bonus Fun! Card Game
Fired up for some serious finking, and faced with my frankly rather limited choice of decent multi-player conflict games, we decided to have another try at this game, which some of us had played once before. We had more players this time than that first time, which was all to the good.

The Paranoia Mandatory Bonus Fun! Card Game involves clones of various security clearances playing missions defined by cards. The players play action cards to perform the missions, or to help or fink on other players. There are bonuses and penalties for success and failure in missions, plus the penalty of execution for Traitors. Play continues, mission after mission, until 1 player loses their 6th clone, either due to wounds, or to execution. At that point, the clone with the highest security clearance wins.

The mechanics delivering this gameplay are pretty simple. Fulfilling missions in particular is typically done by placing wound or treason tokens (also used for the clones) on the mission card. This is very abstract, but the true fun of this game is in the backstabbing cardplay in any case, so that doesn't really matter. There are a few questions of interpretation opened up by the interaction of certain cards, but once they're attended to, the Paranoia Mandatory Bonus Fun! Card Game is a game which should play fast, furious, and most of all, fun!

I took an early lead in our game by the simple device of using my ownership of the game to appoint myself team leader. This couldn't last, as the other players eventually gangned up on me to make sure I died so that they could elect a new team leader. This passed on again to Martin and he caught up with me. The final mission plus the cards in hand left him in an unassailable position to win. Curses!

Score
Donald 1
Martin 2
Everyone else 0

Roborally
I was a bit reluctant to play Roborally when it was suggested, forseeing a long drawn out game leading to my inevitable defeat. So I insisted on a simple board with easy flags for an open race. Did I get it? Did I heck! Instead I got one of the worst, a hideous array of twisting conveyor belts and pits, alongside the radioactive core. And sure enough, while Martin took an early lead thanks to his robocopter, closely followed by Andy, I ended up footling around stuck on the conveyor loops for turn after turn.

I was eventually able to get into a position to start collecting options in the hope of doing something dangerous to Martin's bot as he headed for the last flag, but the map offered few useful vantage points for these interception tactics, and Martin cruised to an easy victory.

Score
Donald 1
Martin 3
Everyone else 0 :(

More Combat Commander
When everyone else went home after the Roborally, Martin and I sat down to the reason for his visit, some Combat Commander. I gave him the Playbook from Combat Commander: Mediterranean and left him to find something he liked the look of. His first choice took us to the western desert.

#24 'Six Hills'
I'd played this before with Badger, so was pleased when I drew the British- the other side, and they'd been the winners last time. My plan was simple: defensive fire! So I set up Lt. Lyndhurst with the HMG and 2" mortar in foxholes on the eastern end of the high ridge. I put another squad in foxholes beside them, and the corporal with an LMG at the western end of the high ridge to forestall an Italian end run. The rest of my forces were disposed in support of this plan.

In setting up, Martin immdiately showed he wouldn't have to play 2 games to learn the lessons I'd learnt from my losing game as the Italians- he set up a platoon in the SE corner ready to make an end run for exit VP. Next he promptly set up his MG platoons using the lie of the land to break up my lines of fire exactly as I had done. Then he called down artillery on my position, which had the immediate effect of destroying my HMG nest's foxholes, so that they broke, and were eliminated to a man by the following MG fire.

In my shock I surrendered on the spot. I just couldn't help myself. It was only when it was too late to go back that we realised that it was still the first turn. What a shocker! I should've fought on. The position probably was unwinnable- 5 territorial squads with a weak leader against a full strength Italian company with artillery support? Almost impossible, especially with the way the Italians would be ratcheting up exit VP against such weak opposition. In any event, I should've fought on, if only to avoid having a first turn surrender on my Combat Commander record. Anyway, it all just goes to show how important player morale really is in the game.

#19 'Metaxas Season'
Leafing through the Combat Commander: Mediterranean Playbook looking for our next scenario Martin hit upon this one. He plumped for random selection and drew the Germans. I went for the same setup as I'd used against Badger: Sgt. Delvoie, the HMG and the cannon in the bunker on the heights with 2 squads in trenches covering the cliffs; Levasseur and a squad in trenches covering the approaches to the farmstead; the rest in the farmstead; and waited to see what Martin would do.

Martin's setup showed his ability to assess a position and his keen tactical awareness- he split his forces, putting his pioners with their assault weapons in position for an assault up the cliffs in the west.

Coming up with the right plan was one thing, executing it turned out to be another. Getting up those cliffs is a difficult and dangerous manoeuvre: the only cover from which to advance (and note that units advancing across cliffs can't carry weapons) is in view of the bunker. So the manoeuvre as a whole calls for the best available combination of move, advance and smoke grenade cards, and a lot of patience! Martin tried his best- twice- but it was to no avail. His assault troops did get close once, and their close combat ability showed its worth too, but they were destroyed by fire from the bunker each time. The assault on the bunker broken, I was free to mop up his other units.

Score
2-1 :)

In our post-game discussion, Martin felt that this scenario is unbalanced. He might be right, although our 3-game sample proves nothing, even though it is 100% in favour of the Greeks. And the whole point of scenario-driven WW2 tactical wargaming is more-or-less unbalanced scenarios in any case, because these were the most interesting original battles. This scenario is definitely a tough nut for the Germans to crack. I'm looking forward to giving it a try, and I wonder what the statistics will look like when we finally see a German victory.

And yet more Combat Commander!
Badger left his ipod behind on Friday, and he just can't live without it. That was all the excuse he needed to come round for another session on Monday. We got 3 games in.

#33 'We Go!'
I'd played this as the Germans with Martin in our original Battle Pack: Paratroopers session last April. So my setup was easy: an HMG nest to protect the building objectives, and an LMG nest in the woods objective, then hope for the best with the random US setup. Badger and I weren't keeping notes during this session, so I can't remember much of what happened. Sufficeth to say that I won on time 7 with 4VP, a very close run thing!


#34 'Encircled at Hill 30'
I'd played the Germans too with Martin last April and had won a narrow victory in a memorable game. So I was looking forward to having another go when I drew the Germans for Badger and my last game from BP#1.

My basic idea was to develop from a base of fire to my east, using the mortar as much for smoke as anything else. Seeing Badger set up behind the crestline and in the buildings so that he could bring no effective defensive fire into the large field immediately in front of my deployment zone, I set up with a simple line abreast of 3 platoons: Sgt. Bierman on the right, Lt. Leuerbach plus an LMG in the centre, and Lt. Schrader with the HMG and the other LMG on the right. My plan was to take the buildings in the centre first, then send Leuerbach's platoon off in search of exit VP while Schrader's platoon joined Bierman to assault the objectives.

Everything went smoothly at first. I got smoke where I wanted it, and my platoons moved up promptly. Then I got bogged down in the centre. I wasn't helped by the appearance of blazes right beside the action, which seriously hindered my LOS in the big firefight. Badger recieved a pack howitzer as a hidden unit, which I killed and promptly received thanks to scrounging. I put it over on my right, and it helped me clear objective 1. It wasn't enough though. The game ended on time 7, Badger winning by 6VP. A close run thing!

#101 'Rubble-Rousers'
This little slice of Stalingrad was next. It promised to be a titanic struggle: apart from the strong OB's, each side also has a bunker complex- 3 bunkers (6 cover), 3 trenches (4 cover), 3 wire, and 3 8FP mines. Plus each side sets up simultaneously in zones defined by a diagonal line running SW/NE, so we'd be close, and in heavy cover.

My plan involved 3 forces: in the centre- a strong HMG nest to hold the main objective, which I fortified with bunkers and wire; to the west- Cpt. Egorov with all my SMG squads and satchel charges- to assault the church; and to the east- a force to work down that flank. My plan changed immediately when Badger promptly started exiting his own forward units in the NE corner. Exit VP! I'd plain forgot about those, and was much relieved- Badger had strongly reinforced the orchards so that Egorov's assault had been looking much less appealing. So he led his men off the map instead.

The result of this was that the game turned into an HMG slugathon in the centre with skirmishing in the east as I mopped-up the few units Badger had left there after making his exits. Badger pressed hard, and enjoyed some of the luck which we both needed to break the stalemate in the centre, but I held on to win with 4VP- as close as we've got this time.

Score
2-1 :)

Combat Commander score
7-3 ;)

Friday Extra! Which Gears of War will those be then?

A busy week for yours truly, including trips to the pictures to see the Iron Man movie (IMDb), and Doomsday (IMDb); a Combat Commander session with Badger on Saturday; and Descent with Andy, Donald and Tony on Sunday. I've started learning my way around the Linux Ubuntu OS which I installed on my external hard drive not long after my recent rant about Windows Vista. I'm too low on the learning curve to be getting much use out of Ubuntu yet, but I really like the look of it. On top of all that, the housing association sent a workman round with remarkable prompitude so that I've finally got a working shower. Yay!

Meanwhile, here's a story which came to my attention last month. Commenting a while back on this story from ICv2, Yehuda over at Purple Pawn asked "Just how many six hour space themed galactic conflict games does one need?". But are FFG really likely to dish out another Twilight Imperium or Starcraft: the Boardgame with this licence? Gears of War is a 3rd-person squad combat shooter set on an Earth beleaguered by alien Locust horde. Here is a a short sample of the gameplay.



This video gives a deeper sense of the background, shows the richness of the settings across which the battles are fought, and demonstrates the vast scale of the war for which the PC game's protags are the pointmen.



And IGN Gears of War has a rich resource of screenshots and video clips for readers who'd like a little more detail.

Reading this page on the official site gives the impression of a game of tactical combat across an incredibly deadly post-apocalyptic earth battlefield, as human soldiers and their monstrous alien foes lay waste to their surroundings with weapons of extreme destructiveness. Looking at this, I'm more worried that FFG might plump for a cheap Doom clone than anything else.

There is definitely a great board wargame in Gears of War. The question is whether FFG will deliver it. If we're not going to see a Doom clone- which would be a sadly obvious way to represent Gears of War's gameplay, then exactly what kind of game are we going to see? Here is where I think we're more likely to see a dull retread. FFG's whole 'box-full-of-toys' production approach makes me fear that the subject of Gears of War- grunts in combat against waves of monstous aliens- will mean that the new game will be a Doom-clone.

I really hope not. I'm hoping that FFG are following the approach taken with Starcraft, refocussing the gameplay at a higher level of the battle. It is being embedded in this bigger battle which distinguishes the action in Gears of War from that in Doom; and it is this bigger battle which is represented too in the wide and rich variety of settings in Gears of War; so we really have to hope I think that FFG choose to open the game up in this direction somehow or other.

Sleek, intuitive rules for the effects of fear and confusion on the battlefield, the deadly combat environment, the destruction of cover, and hidden aliens strike me as other features of the computer game which would be nice to see in the boardgame. They'd give it its identity and could prove interesting. To be true to its original the game will have to represent a wide variety of terrain features on several different battlefields; and a good system for generating scenarios will be needed to give it strong replay value. Regular readers will need no reminding where I'd suggest the designers look for mechanics to handle some of these systems!

The Gears of War boardgame could prove interesting then, depending on what FFG make of it. I'm going to be keeping an eye on this one. ;)

Meanwhile... Last week's Sunday session

My week started with a hangover after a lovely Thai meal Andy, Donald and I shared on our regular post-session dine-out last Sunday, a little 'adventure' which included my losing my glasses... Erm. Fortunately, just like the last time, I had a spare pair waiting.

As site visitors might've noticed- via the recently-added handy BBG widget which shows the last 5 games entered into my games played database, the last Sunday session saw Attack Sub, Ivanhoe, Nexus Ops, Nuclear War and Settlers hit the table.

Attack Sub
The old Avalon Hill cardgame of Cold War submarine warfare in which designer Courtney F. Allen explored the potentialities of his revolutionary Up Front (BGG) CDG engine, Attack Sub (BGG) is a game that Andy and I had played before, so I was confident that it'd prove suitable as quick filler while we awaited Donald's arrival. Picking up from where we'd left off we played scenario B, 'Search and Destroy', featuring 2 US surface vessels- the nuclear-powered guided missile cruiser USS Virginia and the helicopter-carrying guided missile frigate the USS Simpson; versus 2 Soviet fast attack submarines, the Molniya and the Skvortsov.

Friday Extra! Combat Commander Battle Pack #2: Stalingrad- preview

I commented in my recent review that BP#1 had merely scratched the surface of what the Battle Pack expansions to Combat Commander might offer. So I thought I'd take a look at the Battle Pack #2: Stalingrad previews available on the GMT site to show readers what I mean.

Reading the BP#2 product page the first thing to strike you is that this will be a significantly bigger pack than BP#1, with twice as many new maps, a rulebook, and counters too. Looking at the sample rules and counters shows some of the new units, weapons and special rules that will ensure that Battle Pack: Stalingrad will give CC fans a whole new urban warfare experience. Obvious features like factories and sewers are present, but I'm particularly keen on the new 'Urban Snipers' and 'Ampulomets', which should bring whole new levels of danger and chaos to the battlefield. Meanwhile the 'Melee' and 'Battle' counters among the samples suggest intriguing new variants to existing rules.

There isn't as much detail available in the preview about the new maps and scenarios. But that sample OB is from a single scenario featuring 1 day's attack on the Barrikady’s Great Assembly Hall, which makes it noteworthy if only because of the sheer number of units involved, although those references to 'Group 1' and so on suggest a sequential setup which should prove intriguing.

Most interesting in the scenario stakes in BP#2 is the reference to the special multi-scenario campaign game. Without any more information all that can be said about this is that this sounds very interesting. Will it just be a system for stringing scenarios together one after the other? Or will it offer real campaign choices and consequences? The CC RSG makes me hope very much for the latter.

And there you have it. Battle Pack: Stalingrad is going to define an already familiar battlefield environment in a whole new level of detail, and will also provide an entirely new way to play your Combat Commander. Like I said, this is more than the extra maps and scenarios offered in Battle Pack: Paratroopers, and it also looks to show how easily CC can be expanded into new areas without overloading the system. Where will Chad Jensen and John Foley be taking the game next I wonder? ;)

Meanwhile... Up Front rerelease finally just over the horizon?

A family visit in the heart of rural England left me offline on Monday, and so unable to start your week dear readers. I'll do better next time. I'll take a camera too. The countryside down there is beautiful and I'm going to show it off. Meanwhile, here's the story which had already been pushed down the schedule by my last-straw rant at the steam-driven OS that is Windows. This one will run and run I can promise you!

Browsing the forums over at Fortress: Ameritrash, I found this post about the long awaited rerelease of the legendary Up Front. Sure enough, one of the staff at MultiManPublishing posted details at CSW, including the suggestion that UF might reach preorder in July. Given the infamous history of delays of the so-called 'Up Front 2000' project gamers are justified in taking this with a pinch of salt until something concrete is seen, although I would imagine that the requisite pre-orders will be filled very rapidly once MMP add UF to the pre-order list.

Regular readers will know that UF is one of my favourite games of all time. All the same this news leaves me with mixed feelings for reasons which have little to do with the caveats above. Part of this might be due to my newfound fondness for Combat Commander, and I'm certainly not keen on the increased cost the packaging of the new edition will bear, but I think it's mostly due to some of what I've read about the new edition in recent years.

In that respect though this is a good announcement from Perry Cocke at MMP. Talk of replacing all of UF's counters has been dropped. And the touted gameboard turns out to be just a learning tool rather than a necessary feature of play. So the last major discussed change which has been bugging me is the idea that the Relative Range values will be reversed in the new edition. I won't go into details of what this entails, but this struck me as an unnecessary fix of a key feature of UF which isn't really broken IMO.

Ah well, this might be a trivial revision given that we've been reassured that the core design will remain unchanged, and of course, it's not my money that's at stake in this project. MMP are going to have to do something really stupid to spoil my interest in the long-awaited new edition of this classic game. I'll be watching this one all the way. ;)