New tactical level board game

[StieliAlpha]

I just stumbled across a new tactical level board game: "The last hundred yards".

Scale wise very similar to CM: one hex= 40 yards, units are squads or individual vehicles, one turn= one minute. Quite innovative and apparently simple rules, emphasising on the chaos of way at this level.

Very nice maps and counters.

Anybody who cares for board games: Check it out. Looks for me like the best new development since quite a while.

[Michael Emrys]

2 hours ago, StieliAlpha said:

Scale wise very similar to CM: one hex= 40 yards, units are squads or individual vehicles, one turn= one minute.

That is the same scale for the old Squad Leader game, although I am less certain about the time scale. The hex scale was always very problematical for me as it led to such situations as manpack flamethrowers that could shoot 80 meters. Also, hard and fast limitations on vehicle stacking (one/hex) always irritated me. That may have been a more or less normal tactical spacing, but under certain circumstances in real life you could and did shoehorn an entire platoon into that much space. Also, in that scale, streets were 80 meters side to side, which especially in Europe's old cities and towns was laughable. A scale of 20 meters/hex would have been much better and one of 10 meters/hex best of all given the impact of all the rules of play. The excuse given by John Hill for choosing the scale he did was that it was the only way he could accommodate the longer range of weapons like the 88 on the AH mapboards. But they should have either gone to larger maps or allowed certain very short range weapons, like flamethrowers or rifle grenades, to be used within the hex, i.e., during close assault. The existing 40 meter compromises were just a mess, even if aficionados of the game don't like to hear that.

Michael

[StieliAlpha]

18 minutes ago, Michael Emrys said:

That is the same scale for the old Squad Leader game, although I am less certain about the time scale. The hex scale was always very problematical for me as it led to such situations as manpack flamethrowers that could shoot 80 meters. Also, hard and fast limitations on vehicle stacking (one/hex) always irritated me. That may have been a more or less normal tactical spacing, but under certain circumstances in real life you could and did shoehorn an entire platoon into that much space. Also, in that scale, streets were 80 meters side to side, which especially in Europe's old cities and towns was laughable. A scale of 20 meters/hex would have been much better and one of 10 meters/hex best of all given the impact of all the rules of play. The excuse given by John Hill for choosing the scale he did was that it was the only way he could accommodate the longer range of weapons like the 88 on the AH mapboards. But they should have either gone to larger maps or allowed certain very short range weapons, like flamethrowers or rifle grenades, to be used within the hex, i.e., during close assault. The existing 40 meter compromises were just a mess, even if aficionados of the game don't like to hear that.

Michael

Well, have a look at what the project is right now, still under development.

By the looks, there is no way to accommodate 88s in the game. The maps look like 300x200 yards. Small in any case.

Indeed, a friend of mine spontaneously said "Like ASL, but without the two folders of rules."

I have the impression, with their new concept, the hard factors "time" and "distance" become less ruling. The whole thing seems more  "floating". 

As indicated earlier: Interesting project. Let's see how it developes.

[Michael Emrys]

1 hour ago, StieliAlpha said:

I have the impression, with their new concept, the hard factors "time" and "distance" become less ruling. The whole thing seems more  "floating". 

That could be good. The problem with SL was that it tried to accommodate two irreconcilable sets of problems. If this new game sticks with one consistent approach to combat, it might work. If they stick to infantry vs. infantry combat and leave long range weaponry out unless highly abstracted, for instance. I think that SL's big failing, and probably more so with ASL, is that it tried to be all things to all people. It sank beneath an excess of ambition. It was an interesting try for a while though.

Michael

[gnarly]

Nice find @StieliAlpha, thanks for the headsup.

[John Kettler]

StieliAlpha,

If you really want to get down in the tactical weeds of WW II board games, find a copy of H Hour, by Balboa Games. It was designed by Bill Comito, a former infantryman with 6+ years' experience and two combat tours. Squares are a tiny by CM standard 10' on a side and turns a mere 15 seconds. Counters are individual men, and buildings have each floor separately laid out. The battle takes place in a typical medieval European town. Forces can be US, German or Russian, which are marked with appropriate rank insignia. Important, since this game is fought per TO&E. Brother Ed and I helped playtest this merciless representation of WW II streetfighting. If you're extremely ambitious, you can use a full company, and there is low level fire support, too.  You can also mount the buildings on cardboard or sheet polystyrene, add columns to separate the floors and thus directly represent the 3-D component of MOUT. Steeples have a bunch of levels.

Main components displayed.

https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/13678/capsule-overview-game-component-manifest

Regards,

John Kettler

Edited July 7, 2016 by John Kettler

[Michael Emrys]

2 hours ago, John Kettler said:

If you really want to get down in the tactical weeds of WW II board games, find a copy of H Hour...

Never heard of it before, but from your description sounds like a game for the truly obsessive.

Michael

[StieliAlpha]

On 7. Juli 2016 at 6:22 AM, John Kettler said:

StieliAlpha,

If you really want to get down in the tactical weeds of WW II board games, find a copy of H Hour, by Balboa Games. It was designed by Bill Comito, a former infantryman with 6+ years' experience and two combat tours. Squares are a tiny by CM standard 10' on a side and turns a mere 15 seconds. Counters are individual men, and buildings have each floor separately laid out. The battle takes place in a typical medieval European town. Forces can be US, German or Russian, which are marked with appropriate rank insignia. Important, since this game is fought per TO&E. Brother Ed and I helped playtest this merciless representation of WW II streetfighting. If you're extremely ambitious, you can use a full company, and there is low level fire support, too.  You can also mount the buildings on cardboard or sheet polystyrene, add columns to separate the floors and thus directly represent the 3-D component of MOUT. Steeples have a bunch of levels.

Main components displayed.

https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/13678/capsule-overview-game-component-manifest

Regards,

John Kettler

Never of heard of that one, indeed. I'll have a look, when I am back home.

But the older I get, the more I prefer playable games. Gone are the times, when I loved dig into 200 pages of rules....

My last "tactical game obsession" was GMTs "Combat Commander" series, a few years ago. Card driven tactical board games. Great games, once you make your peace with the idea to wait for the right cards, before you conduct an assault. Very playable and nail bitingly exciting. 

[John Kettler]

StieliAlpha,

The rule book is but a handful of pages in large type, and a fair chunk of that doesn't cover rules, but shows how the squads of the various nations are composed, using the appropriate rank and insignia. Believe H-Hour is playable in 2 hours, too, but check the link I gave you. Knew nothing about GMT's "Combat Commander." Offhand, I don't recall playing a card driven board game, but it does sound fun.

Regards,

John Kettler

Edited July 9, 2016 by John Kettler

[StieliAlpha]

9 hours ago, John Kettler said:

StieliAlpha,

The rule book is but a handful of pages in large type, and a fair chunk of that doesn't cover rules, but shows how the squads of the various nations are composed, using the appropriate rank and insignia. Believe H-Hour is playable in 2 hours, too, but check the link I gave you. Knew nothing about GMT's "Combat Commander." Offhand, I don't recall playing a card driven board game, but it does sound fun.

Regards,

John Kettler

Hi John

You don't know card driven board games? Then you should have a look at them. For me the most innovative board game idea in the last 10 or 15 years.

They are played like "normal" board games. But in addition to board and counters, the players hold a hand of cards. The cards are used to activate units on the board, to give special boni in battles, to trigger historic events. In a nutshell: The cards drive the game and add a lot of chrome to the game. Of course, you always have too little or the "wrong" cards. So, you often have to take tough decisions how to use them. Shall I use them to move units? Or better boost my troops in an attack? Shall I use them to defend in a battle now and loose my chance to attack next turn? Or rather play the historic event, which may help me later on?

Most card driven games are of strategic level. Combat Commander the only, as far as I know, on tactical level.

I had my reservations first and waited quite a while before I bought CC in a sale. But when I finally got into it, after the first two, or so, rule revisions, CC caught me from the first battle.

Edited July 10, 2016 by StieliAlpha

[Michael Emrys]

2 hours ago, StieliAlpha said:

For me the most innovative board game idea in the last 10 or 15 years.

The concept goes back farther than that. AH brought out a tactical level game about 30 years ago, the name of which escapes me. Apparently it was quite popular. And even farther back, maybe more than 40 years ago, SPI brought out one called, IIRC, Spies. I never played it (or the AH one either), but ISTR it was all about international espionage. Anyway, the idea has been around for a long time. No doubt the more recent games have elaborated and improved the concept.

Michael

[John Kettler]

StieliAlpha,

I've played card games, Up Front, chit draw based games (many) and action point based games, such as Assault, but I've never played (?) anything in which cards were combined with a board. The closest I've come to what you describe is a stupendously selling (over 500.000 copies)  Italian Western game, Shootout, which uses cards but has no board. Instead, character markers and cover are deployed somewhat in the manner of Up Front. I agree the addition of cards to board games adds a lot of uncertainty and chrome to them, and I'm in complete favor of forcing commanders to make tough decisions when it comes to deciding what to do, where to do it and what scarce resources to allocate.

Regards,

John Kettler

[StieliAlpha]

8 hours ago, Michael Emrys said:

The concept goes back farther than that. AH brought out a tactical level game about 30 years ago, the name of which escapes me. Apparently it was quite popular. And even farther back, maybe more than 40 years ago, SPI brought out one called, IIRC, Spies. I never played it (or the AH one either), but ISTR it was all about international espionage. Anyway, the idea has been around for a long time. No doubt the more recent games have elaborated and improved the concept.

Michael

Hm, interesting. The AH game escaped me and I thought, I knew their catalogue quite well at that time. Any chance to find out the name?

Otherwise, true. One could say, that even Monopoly already carried the idea.

[StieliAlpha]

9 hours ago, Michael Emrys said:

The concept goes back farther than that. AH brought out a tactical level game about 30 years ago, the name of which escapes me. Apparently it was quite popular. And even farther back, maybe more than 40 years ago, SPI brought out one called, IIRC, Spies. I never played it (or the AH one either), but ISTR it was all about international espionage. Anyway, the idea has been around for a long time. No doubt the more recent games have elaborated and improved the concept.

Michael

Ah, look at that. According to Boardgamegeek, AHs "We the People" was the first CDG. It is strategic level and looks indeed very much like the strategic level CDGs nowadays.

And it explains, why it escaped me. Never have been very interested in the War of Independence. In that period, the Seven Years War always was my favourite.

[Michael Emrys]

46 minutes ago, StieliAlpha said:

Ah, look at that. According to Boardgamegeek, AHs "We the People" was the first CDG. It is strategic level and looks indeed very much like the strategic level CDGs nowadays.

No, the one I had in mind was in a WW II setting. I vaguely recall the name 'We the People', but I don't remember if it came out before or after the one I had in mind.

46 minutes ago, StieliAlpha said:

And it explains, why it escaped me. Never have been very interested in the War of Independence.

I wasn't either, but I have a copy of 1776 that has been gathering dust for decades that I would love to play against a live opponent.

Michael

Edited July 10, 2016 by Michael Emrys

[StieliAlpha]

2 minutes ago, Michael Emrys said:

No, the one I had in mind was in a WW II setting. I vaguely recall the name 'We the People', but I don't remember if it came out before or after the one I had in mind.

I wasn't either, but I have a copy of 1776 that has been gathering dust for decades that I would love to play against a live opponent.

Michael

I investigated a little further. Probably, you think of West End Games "Tank Leader" games. But they are scale wise larger than CC. With tank platoons as base unit, where CC has infantry squads and half squads. And individual vehicles, if it had any.

[John Kettler]

Michael Emrys,

I sit corrected! I did play Spies myself a few times. For having checked it out on Board Game Geek, memories started to resurface. I now distinctly recall the mad dash to grab secrets and somehow get them back home for drop off, after which I would then scurry forth to find another one. I recall the game as being very stressful, what with other players trying to get you and steal the fruits of your dangerous labors for themselves. Believe we didn't play it much, for that was a time in which games were coming out all the time. If you want to see what I consider a good depiction of the real deal espionage of the period, may I suggest you hunt down and watch the excellent British TV mini series Reilly: Ace of Spies? Also, I found a thread on BGG which falls into the category of "Well, isn't this just great?" because it turns out there are two CDGs with "people" in the title: We the People and for the People. There's also quite a selection here of CDGs military and not, 28 in all, of which no fewer than 3 are devoted to railroads!

Regards,

John Kettler

[Michael Emrys]

6 minutes ago, John Kettler said:

...watch the excellent British TV mini series Reilly: Ace of Spies?

Yeah, I remember watching this on PBS something like maybe 35 years ago. It was pretty good but it lacked a happy ending.

Along that line, I recall a tv show from the '50s called Foreign Intrigue. About all I remember from it was guys in trench coats with horn rimmed glasses who were always walking somewhere.

Michael

[Michael Emrys]

13 minutes ago, John Kettler said:

I did play Spies myself a few times.

You're maybe only the second person I've ever encountered who can make that claim. I suspect it was not a big seller for SPI.

Michael