Sorry .My friends and i do NOT like this game, I find the combat rules are TOO complex. The map is good ,but playing this games is not FUN.
Sorry to hear that. You roll four dice.
But what did you specifically not like?
Your results sound very historical, as the Union broke fairly early. The Rebels were able to sweep the field while only taking 600 casualties. As you stated, there’s great replayability so the odds are good that the Union will do better next time.
Though I am the designer of this module, I have worked with Hermann on a number of these games and there’s no reason to reinvent the wheel. Thanks for your AAR and glad to hear that you had a good time.
Great job Claude and thanks for watching. It’s a cool system. What is next?
Kevin, Thanks for the very kind review of the less popular 2nd Kernstown fight. During my multiple visits to Kernstown, the Battlefield Association admitted that about 80% of their visitors wanted to know about Jackson’s fight first and foremost; 2nd Kernstown was almost an afterthought.
As for the future,1st Bull Run is the next planned offering and Hermann is going to work on Stones River (plus I have been tinkering with another battle that must remain un-named at this point). So a number of projects are in the pipeline.
In the last two days, a few things have changed in the land of “Blind Swords” but it is up to Hermann to make the announcement. Let’s just say that we will be a busy group of guys and “Blind Swords” fans will be getting a real treat!
Nice review of our game, Kev. Even though the Union put in a ummm, weak showing. 🙁
In terms of my playing of the system, 2d Kerns may be the “least fav” I’ve had. 1st Kerns was very fun as both forces are close mirrors in terms of capability on the battlefield in the scenario and is easily playable to completion in a sitting.
Really looking forward to Stonnes and Bull Run as mentioned above. Kudos to the design / development team.
i cant help it if you get all the chits and do nothing useful…just saying….it was the “dice”
Sorry .My friends and i do NOT like this game, I find the combat rules are TOO complex. The map is good ,but playing this games is not FUN.
Sorry to hear that. You roll four dice.
But what did you specifically not like?
Your results sound very historical, as the Union broke fairly early. The Rebels were able to sweep the field while only taking 600 casualties. As you stated, there’s great replayability so the odds are good that the Union will do better next time.
Though I am the designer of this module, I have worked with Hermann on a number of these games and there’s no reason to reinvent the wheel. Thanks for your AAR and glad to hear that you had a good time.
Great job Claude and thanks for watching. It’s a cool system. What is next?
Kevin, Thanks for the very kind review of the less popular 2nd Kernstown fight. During my multiple visits to Kernstown, the Battlefield Association admitted that about 80% of their visitors wanted to know about Jackson’s fight first and foremost; 2nd Kernstown was almost an afterthought.
As for the future,1st Bull Run is the next planned offering and Hermann is going to work on Stones River (plus I have been tinkering with another battle that must remain un-named at this point). So a number of projects are in the pipeline.
In the last two days, a few things have changed in the land of “Blind Swords” but it is up to Hermann to make the announcement. Let’s just say that we will be a busy group of guys and “Blind Swords” fans will be getting a real treat!
Nice review of our game, Kev. Even though the Union put in a ummm, weak showing. 🙁
In terms of my playing of the system, 2d Kerns may be the “least fav” I’ve had. 1st Kerns was very fun as both forces are close mirrors in terms of capability on the battlefield in the scenario and is easily playable to completion in a sitting.
Really looking forward to Stonnes and Bull Run as mentioned above. Kudos to the design / development team.
i cant help it if you get all the chits and do nothing useful…just saying….it was the “dice”