Strike of the Eagle! Now that’s a game where I loved the mapboard & components, but came to hate the rules, not thru actually playing it as such (though I have a few scenarios under my belt so far) but through analysis particularly of movement sequence and anomalies possible, e.g.:
Capt: General,, why are you back with your corps?
General: We were blocked & couldn’t get to our target.
Capt: Oh oh, we’re under attack! I’m under orders to withdraw if attacked!!!
General: It’s only a brigade, we can easily handle them now that my corps is here.
Capt: Noooo! I have my orders! We must all withdraw!!! Flee, in panic-striken terror!!!
or:
Cavalry General: I will accompany your force-marching infantry force with my cavalry division. Even though we won’t have any issues marching 2 spaces, we’ll still be only worth 1 combat factor once we arrive.
or:
Cavalry General: I see the enemy Cavalry unit is 3 spaces away from that crucial city, while we’re only 1 space away. However, we must wait for our enemy to finish their forced-move before we can start.
So I basically wrote an extensive set of house rules revising the force-march effects on combat strength, and a three-pulse-movement system wherein 1st pulse is for force-marching cavalry only, 2nd pulse for cavalry march & infantry forced march, 3rd pulse for infantry march, where each moving block moves 1 space only in an impulse, the impulse where it starts and the each of the following impulses. I also use the black & white reinforcement cubes to indicate stragglers, one added to the forced-march moving force for each impulse, & adjusting the combat strength accordingly.
Further: withdrawal in case of a blocked force returning is now optional, stragglers obviate the need to round-down fractional force-march reductions, & the separation of force-march effects for cavalry vs infantry means (for example) that the cavalry force accompanying force-marching infantry isn’t penalized.
My regular opponent and I have play tested my changes a couple of times, I want to try them again on a larger scenario before posting my house rules to BGG. I understand the designer wanted to keep things simple but to my mind the rules as published just led to too many anomalies.
I run a group that meets for euros and similar on Tuesday evenings, good group with social skills and we also meet for dinner in advance. Rip City Gamers, also have a subset of wargamers including a few ASL players as well as a wide range of other titles. Drop me a line at dougc@jazznsax.com if you are interested!
I’m a NE Portland resident and would love to try to get a game of Virgin Queen in. I’ve tried a couple times to get a game of Here I Stand going, but most of my boardgame friends aren’t up for multi-hour historical nonsense
You mentioned High Flying Dice games. I was wondering if you ever played any of these games. The Vietnam titles appear interesting. Is there any that you recommend that played well and is worth acquiring?
Top 5 games in the last 5 years.
5)Reluctant Enemies OCS
4)Blood and Roses GMT Men of Iron
3)Genesis GMT Bronze Age
2)Kingdom of Heaven MMP Crusades
1)The Lamps are Going Out Compass
Honorable Mentions
Beyond the Rhine OCS
Hoplite GMT GBoH
The God Kings Compass
Mr Madison’s War GMT
Nomads No More Desktop Published
Posted by ER Bickford | January 25, 2017, 9:03 amGreat list – totally different than mine! I hear so much good stuff aboutReluctant Enemies. I should try it.
Posted by Bruce Geryk | January 25, 2017, 12:00 pmStrike of the Eagle! Now that’s a game where I loved the mapboard & components, but came to hate the rules, not thru actually playing it as such (though I have a few scenarios under my belt so far) but through analysis particularly of movement sequence and anomalies possible, e.g.:
Capt: General,, why are you back with your corps?
General: We were blocked & couldn’t get to our target.
Capt: Oh oh, we’re under attack! I’m under orders to withdraw if attacked!!!
General: It’s only a brigade, we can easily handle them now that my corps is here.
Capt: Noooo! I have my orders! We must all withdraw!!! Flee, in panic-striken terror!!!
or:
Cavalry General: I will accompany your force-marching infantry force with my cavalry division. Even though we won’t have any issues marching 2 spaces, we’ll still be only worth 1 combat factor once we arrive.
or:
Cavalry General: I see the enemy Cavalry unit is 3 spaces away from that crucial city, while we’re only 1 space away. However, we must wait for our enemy to finish their forced-move before we can start.
So I basically wrote an extensive set of house rules revising the force-march effects on combat strength, and a three-pulse-movement system wherein 1st pulse is for force-marching cavalry only, 2nd pulse for cavalry march & infantry forced march, 3rd pulse for infantry march, where each moving block moves 1 space only in an impulse, the impulse where it starts and the each of the following impulses. I also use the black & white reinforcement cubes to indicate stragglers, one added to the forced-march moving force for each impulse, & adjusting the combat strength accordingly.
Further: withdrawal in case of a blocked force returning is now optional, stragglers obviate the need to round-down fractional force-march reductions, & the separation of force-march effects for cavalry vs infantry means (for example) that the cavalry force accompanying force-marching infantry isn’t penalized.
My regular opponent and I have play tested my changes a couple of times, I want to try them again on a larger scenario before posting my house rules to BGG. I understand the designer wanted to keep things simple but to my mind the rules as published just led to too many anomalies.
Posted by mwiik | January 25, 2017, 1:55 pmWelcome to PDX! Lots of good gamers here.
I run a group that meets for euros and similar on Tuesday evenings, good group with social skills and we also meet for dinner in advance. Rip City Gamers, also have a subset of wargamers including a few ASL players as well as a wide range of other titles. Drop me a line at dougc@jazznsax.com if you are interested!
Posted by Doug Cooley | January 25, 2017, 7:42 pmI’m a NE Portland resident and would love to try to get a game of Virgin Queen in. I’ve tried a couple times to get a game of Here I Stand going, but most of my boardgame friends aren’t up for multi-hour historical nonsense
Posted by Edward Damon | January 25, 2017, 7:49 pmBruce:
You mentioned High Flying Dice games. I was wondering if you ever played any of these games. The Vietnam titles appear interesting. Is there any that you recommend that played well and is worth acquiring?
Thanks,
David
Posted by David Skordinski | February 18, 2017, 10:16 pmHi David!
I answered you by email.
Posted by Bruce Geryk | March 13, 2017, 3:01 pmHi Bruce, welcome to PDX!
I’m out in the suburbs, but am more than willing to drive to get a game of anything in, from Love Letter all the way up to ASL/World at War.
I’m also down for Virgin Queen as well.
Posted by Jon Tse | March 14, 2017, 2:25 pmGreat! We should start lining up those Virgin Queen players!
Posted by Bruce Geryk | March 14, 2017, 6:20 pmSounds good!
Feel free to drop me a line via email if folks want to get a smaller game in, e.g. Mark Walker’s OST (backed it, still haven’t played it… 🙁 ah well)
You can reach me via email: first name at my website.
Posted by Jon Tse | March 15, 2017, 12:25 amMy Top 5 Games of the Last 5 Years:
1.) Next War: India-Pakistan
2.) Next War: Poland
3.) OCS: Tunisia II
4.) OCS: Korea (2nd Edition)
5.) Victory Lost, A (2nd Edition)
Honourable Mentions:
– Fields of Despair
– OCS: Blitzkrieg Legend, The
– OCS: Reluctant Enemies
– Tonkin (2nd Edition)
Qualifier: I only included games I’ve actually played a full game of.
Posted by Cameron Taylor | January 4, 2018, 3:09 am