The Advance After Combat Podcast

A running commentary on the Podcast –

The guys have Lucas Brooks on as mystery host….Captain Laidback cracks me up. Special shout out to Lucas on his impeding new baby boy!

The fellas talk about a range of interesting games. Which all starts at about the 35 minute mark. Lucas knocks out the quiz, naming all of the Wu Tan gang.

Red Winter Played with Whiskey.  Jeff visits and has a sleep over. Cozy! Dave shares his impressions which lean toward the appreciation of quality components and map art, and historical theme. He likes the title overall as it gives you a great feel for the brutal conditions. The only detraction is the limits to replay. I can dig that.T2_startRW

Library of Napoleonic Battles The conversation turns to a topic that I have spent more than a little time on this year. Tactical Napoleonics. I think all my views are pretty clear.

Lucas is a huge fan of the system. So we have absolutely nothing in common in regards to opinions on this title. He means 500m per hex ish! LOL [time:58.40]. The title is tactical despite the claim however.  The time and hex size mandate that. The Days system I would agree are Operational.

But this is an interesting notion to consider. The approach to battle is primary in Zuckers view.  It was suggested to me that much of the battle tactics really don’t matter as much as the actual position at the time of contact.  I guess that could be true for any game at this scale. Zucker in his titles for this series provides (nearly always) a “approach to battle” scenario. Perhaps this is where the joy in the game is. Where the Napoleonic flavour for me is.

Wonderful maps {despite most having no TEC chart with images next to them, just a text table}.

A nice discussion about ZOC ‘s and Command and ‘envelopment’ at 500m away.

Chat about combat, 10 rating! …wow.

This is great, it just show that for many folks this is  the perfect amount of detail for a tactical game. A quick chat about Hammer of the Scots.

Liberty Roads/Red Winter

Dave played a tonne of games but most of all –

ASL: Decision at Elst Starter Kit

An apparently solid ASL title to acquire if you have an interest in Historical tactical modules. Good stuff. I want to break out my ASL Starter Kit at some point. A hilarious recounting of Daves tanks battle.  Lots fun detail tactical game playing.

OCS: Tunisia

I have this one and I’m keen to get going with it in our chronological walk thru of WWII. Dave played Kasserine Pass scenario. Lots of love…of course. Which is a superb learning scenario. Then Dave shares one of the core elements of the system which is the random aspect of the Surprise roll and modifiers for the large range of results on the CRT. Coolness.

Battle for Stalingrad

This was a SPI classic and on my want to buy list. This is an image of the revised map I think.  But..this is not that game.   Its this game:

Seems a higher scale set at divisional level. Rations are the currency for movement, and combat, they also serve as a means to avoid damage by spending them. Other counters denote rubble, locations and the like. There are 5 zones that need to be controlled. Movement occurs via ‘perimeter moves’, ‘advances’ and ‘control moves’.

Combats play out via card play and a flipped card from the deck.

Sounded interesting. I’ve heard its not bad.

I wonder how it compares to Spearpoint 1943?

Fire in the Lake

Lucas even took this pic!

Jason does a great job with FitL, even hammered. Hey takes us thru ARVN, US, VC and NVA factions. Interestingly the discussion about faction resource sharing and victory conditions appears to be the heart of the game. With fantastic tension between each faction and within each side.

Dichotomy of events and actions will drive the VC/NVA crazy, and keep the players making hard choices regarding events.

Oops…they almost started the what is a wargame’ chat.

Lots of random commentary about the game.  Both Dave and Jason go gay for the game. In a big way. Systemic play over the long haul might reduce fun factor as experienced  players could drive the game.

The other good news is Dave gets Karma revenge in the car wash line!

PRE ORDER planned

OCS Beyond the Rhine. Yep so in.

Toulon! whoot!

VCS  stuff. For sure.

India Pakistan Next War!

La Batt stuff.

Fields of Fire…darn it really want to order that!

Please no splashing in the urinal!

Note that the 2015 Whiskey Bottle challenge is announced. Line up bitches!

20 thoughts on “The Advance After Combat Podcast

  1. Great review. Finally, somebody gets us. Big Board really brings it.

    As for Zucker’s LNB system, I’ve played a bit of Napoleon at Leipzig since the podcast. I think the abstracted level of detail works when a player asks the ubiquitous “Dave question”: Who am I? In this game, the player IS Napoleon (Army Commander).

    This can cause strange/frustrating results at the regimental combat level, but really the player should be concerned about corps deployment and pressure, logistics, and mass.

    I love La Bataille for its grand tactical simulation of Napoleonic combat, but it has a weird player view where you command everything from rifle companies to army leadership. No friction.

  2. Its a good point Dave, I’m looking for that ‘just right’ Grand Tactical Nappy game. NLB aint it. I just posted a vid about NLB and CC:N…. lol. But I think Operationally OSG is the single best sim out there. The Days series is superb .. well for me anyway. There I can suspend disbelief over tactical stuff and all that surrounding bull shit.

  3. There is also some experience differential in the LNB system between solo and fog of war FTF play. Hard to estimate the impact.

  4. Well, its one thing to play on vassal…oh wait no vassal. Well it its one thing to play face to face and use the hidden movement….what does that do? YOU have to track where all your crap is. I found my self writing on the plex…..kind of pointless. Then just like LaBat you make the game look FUGLY with all the counter flipped to the national flags.

    It is entirely another to memorise where 100 counters are…yes I understand the spotting ranges. Same issue with the Days system. The hidden movement shit is broken for me. The Corps and Divisions all need to stay close together so that mitigates some of the drama but not enough to compensate. Anyway an overhaul of the combat system and tweaking hidden movement would be welcome touch, as would making supply and demoralization more impactful.

  5. Nice review Kev.

    They did get rather gay over FiTL, didn’t they? Gross. Especially if you see Jason’s head on Susanne Somers body.

      1. Yeah. Both ME and MT rule sets. They cool, but the micro management gets tedious. I’m more of a fan of getting the forces where they need to be, not the actual combat. Hence, my passion for TLNB games.

    1. LNB is by their own definition a Grand tactical. Corps and the major entities the units are brigades. In time, hex scale, and unit size it is tactical. Just not the combat system.

      1. La Bat is 100m per hex and has 20 minute turns.

        TLNB is 500m per hex and has 1 hour turns.

        I think that calling them the same scale is a stretch.

        They are very different, and that’s a good thing.

  6. They are both Grand Tactical. That is what they both claim. I’m not disagreeing with you. If you feel that 1 hour turns is ‘operational’ @ 500m hexes. Go for it.
    What Scale is Days then? It covers 7 days @ 1m hexes.. Or the 2X system @ 3.75m a hex and 3 day turns? Grand Strategic? Therefore Empire in Arms is….?
    There can be different ‘scales’ applied to Tactical and Grand Tactical. Just because 2 systems use a different scale does not mean they do not qualify.
    Other things define scale too. The contentious point – combat systems, can influence the feel of game play. NLB feels Operational due to the level of combat abstraction.

    Le Bat makes you pay the heavy price with a lot of tactical nuance, and detail. While it is stated to be Grand Tactical it feels ‘squad’/company level in terms of detail. Lots of minutiae that likely do not fit the scale as a commander of the army in the role you play.
    It is heavy on attempting simulation versus game play based on what I have seen so far.

    NLB goes the other direction and takes what I think is a lazy approach of grafting a 1980’s designed combat system designed for Operational or higher games and slapping it on a grand tactical with a bit of lipstick. Its either lazy design or a completely different design intent which means its shitty marketing.

    Please dont sell me a game as Grand Tactical when it is using ostensibly Operational and “grand” Operational rules. The more I think about the more annoyed I get.
    He trades on his Historical credentials and days at SPI. But NOTHING has changed since then.

    I do want to use Cavalry and Arty and work thru command details in Grand Tactical, I do want to see the impact of French Column and British Line, I do want to see weapons impact and different types of Cavalry.
    I do want a representative tactical combat system, but not crammed with minutiae LE Bat style. I dont want surrounding a unit to be about the ONLY way I can be certain to kill it at 500m hex scale. I don’t want to spend 20 minutes sorting out how to close to combat. …..One lacks authenticity the other lacks playability for me.

    Meanwhile his Days system titles – for me PERFECT Operational games from many view points- sit languishing. That is his sweet spot. Why he is not doing more there I have no idea.

      1. I’m serious! If you put as much effort and thought into designing a game as you do into gaming, it’s sure to be good. Do it!

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published.