Please note that the complexity of these rules is officially set at "bake your noodle" level and whilst I would be the first to admit to being skeptical at first, it has been a real eye opener.
All maps, including the supplements will be used. The plan as agreed was to replace the counters with 3mm figures and micro aircraft/ships. Whilst there will be cost implications to this it will look spectacular.
Operational map E from the General magazine additional supplement will replace the 1983 original map E.
I suggested that we try the alternate Eastern European variant. This will feature on next week's game, with the "Flogger strategem" in play.
"Buy in" is strictly on knowledge of the rules, (1983 please, none of your 4th edition ... And you know who you are sir). The game is too complicated for long rules discussions and needs a "press on" attitude. May I point out yet again that my 2nd edition has the commemorative Desert Shield expansion and "Saddam Strike" sticker on the front of the box. Just saying.
The Eastern Europe variant for this week.
A Quick Infamy Interlude
After an agreement that 20mm would be our recommended scale for the new Infamy rules can I draw attention to the quality of my HaT figures, unlikely as it may seem this cheap route has real visual appeal. For those elderly fellows who insist on metal we agreed the quality of the Newline and the "quirky" Irregular.
May I also reiterate my thanks for choosing the late republican period. I am keen to get Marius Mules on the go.
If anyone has questions on Gulf Strike 3d please direct them to Dr P or Captain the Honourable QW, or the Savage McGurk via the blog. None of these gentlemen have the Saddam commemorative edition but all have proved to be keen Strikers over the last few weeks.
Also our thanks again to Master Nellikyn Trollope for reintroducing us to this lost classic.
Dear Auntie Petain, can I just agree that this is a great game, but the players have to be right on it. Initiative vs reactive; front line vs reserve; intercept vs offensive; actions 1&2 vs 3, etc... Also can I ask for clarification, as demonstrated on the Zoom game, in the second reactive segment, and more specifically in the second combat phase, can a combat unit from step 6 pursue an adjacent retreated defender. Will that require a change to MC and will there be an MP cost?
ReplyDeleteHi Geoff and welcome. Glad you enjoyed the game I hope our next one will be as enjoyable. In answer to your query it states in the paragraph on Pursuit that "To pursue, the attacking unit reverts automatically, and at no Movement Point cost, to Movement to Contact formation and follows the path of the retreating unit, regardless of the enemy Zones of Control." So the MC change is automatic and there is no MP cost in any circumstances as far as I can see.
ReplyDeleteBTW guys before ordering 3mm stuff from Magister Militum check that the listings in the Rules are accurate as there may be one or two typos (or simple mistakes). For instance, when putting together my order for the Iraqi aircraft I noticed that the Yak-36 is listed under Multi-Role Air units. It should be the Yak-38. Now MM don't do a Yak-38 in 3mm but you can use a Harrier which looks virtually identical, especially at 3mm. Hope this helps.
ReplyDeleteAnd another excellent game yesterday. I note that the "flogger strategem" is available in pdf from the forum, and our "Foster ammendments" use has been praised. Can we put the issue of retreating in the second combat phase after a variable roll up to a vote next week, or go straight to Sall' for a ruling?
ReplyDeleteKeep on Striking.
Was initially skeptical about "Foster" but have to admit it worked well and certainly speeded game play. The standard First-Second-Third Action Phase sequence gets things done but can get a little tedious, especially in the very early stages. Viva Senor Foster!
ReplyDelete