Steve and Don, comments on Usk.
Posted: Sun Feb 04, 2007 11:05 am
Now that Steve and I have had a chance to sit down and reflect on Usk, here our some of our thoughts.
1. We enjoyed all the games. Even Saturday afternoon, when Bruce had us in all sorts of trouble and deserved to beat us 32-0..
2. The basic mechanisms seemed to work well ??“ CMT, Combat and Cohesion.
3. We liked the difference between the various foot troops. Hammy and Martin used missile armed light foot to great effect against us.
4. We certainly do not want to see medium foot changed. I think if you are not careful you are in danger of changing things for a small minority of opinion and making all close order foot look very bland.
5. The ???Problems??™ seemed to be with movement and the exact sequence of events within bounds.
6. I struggled most with routing and pursuing, as it is possible within various bounds within the same move.
7. We did think that 4 generals within an 8 BG army seems a ???little over the top??™. Well done to Bruce for spotting this and giving it a go. It certainly worked against us.
8. Should generals affect BGs of elephants in the same way as other troops? I am sure that real life generals did not control them with as much certainty. Should they not be unpredictable?
9. We felt it good that all troops have a chance of winning combats ??“ even if it can be a little frustrating when you are on the side that has the advantage and misses!
10. There were those who commented that it did not really look like an ancient battle, and to a certain extent we agree with that. However, we cannot think of any rules we have seen that always looks like our idea of an ancient battle. Certainly, in most cases DBM does not look realistic. We feel that the fact the game flows so well is more important.
11. From what we could see at the weekend there is going to be relatively little need to look up the rules on a regular basis. Once you have played a few games it does seem easy to remember most of the factors.
Steve and I have decided to stop now for a couple of weeks. I have just painted a load of new WWII Rapid Fire 20mm British that I want to use. We will also give DBMM a go when they are published.
We feel sure that you will be coming with a new version, following all the feedback from Usk and would like to come at that a fresh. Following my conversation with Simon about war wagons at Usk, I look forward to seeing rules for these in the next version.
In conclusion, we both enjoy the rules and like the feel they give. The basics are just fine, it is the detail to cover all eventualities that is missing.
Don M
1. We enjoyed all the games. Even Saturday afternoon, when Bruce had us in all sorts of trouble and deserved to beat us 32-0..
2. The basic mechanisms seemed to work well ??“ CMT, Combat and Cohesion.
3. We liked the difference between the various foot troops. Hammy and Martin used missile armed light foot to great effect against us.
4. We certainly do not want to see medium foot changed. I think if you are not careful you are in danger of changing things for a small minority of opinion and making all close order foot look very bland.
5. The ???Problems??™ seemed to be with movement and the exact sequence of events within bounds.
6. I struggled most with routing and pursuing, as it is possible within various bounds within the same move.
7. We did think that 4 generals within an 8 BG army seems a ???little over the top??™. Well done to Bruce for spotting this and giving it a go. It certainly worked against us.
8. Should generals affect BGs of elephants in the same way as other troops? I am sure that real life generals did not control them with as much certainty. Should they not be unpredictable?
9. We felt it good that all troops have a chance of winning combats ??“ even if it can be a little frustrating when you are on the side that has the advantage and misses!
10. There were those who commented that it did not really look like an ancient battle, and to a certain extent we agree with that. However, we cannot think of any rules we have seen that always looks like our idea of an ancient battle. Certainly, in most cases DBM does not look realistic. We feel that the fact the game flows so well is more important.
11. From what we could see at the weekend there is going to be relatively little need to look up the rules on a regular basis. Once you have played a few games it does seem easy to remember most of the factors.
Steve and I have decided to stop now for a couple of weeks. I have just painted a load of new WWII Rapid Fire 20mm British that I want to use. We will also give DBMM a go when they are published.
We feel sure that you will be coming with a new version, following all the feedback from Usk and would like to come at that a fresh. Following my conversation with Simon about war wagons at Usk, I look forward to seeing rules for these in the next version.
In conclusion, we both enjoy the rules and like the feel they give. The basics are just fine, it is the detail to cover all eventualities that is missing.
Don M
