Jump to content

jvreynolds

Members
  • Content Count

    15
  • Joined

  • Last visited

    Never

About jvreynolds

  • Rank
    Member

Contact Methods

  • AIM
    -
  • MSN
    -
  • Website URL
    -
  • ICQ
    -
  • Yahoo
    -
  • Skype
    -

Profile Information

  • Location
    , Rhode Island, United States
  1. Hello All, I am an OCD board game player/collector and when I buy a new board game I like to get all the expansions at once. To that end what is the best way and in what order should I play the expansions? I typically play a 2 player game (my wife and I), but can add more investigators as needed to be up to 4. Thanks for all your input.
  2. I was thinking about the Solo experience as well. But instead of coming out with specific rule set I was thinking more of specific adventures designed for solo play. I was going to try my hand once the new map editor came out. The player would move from one encounter area to another. As each area is revealed there would be texted detailing the ‘AI’ for the mobs. Would they move forward and attack. Would the beastmen linger by the Naga guarding the door, forcing the player in the NAGA’s command radius. Would the skeletons shoot and retreat. Does the giant stand on the chest, or advance to a position so he can knock the hero into a spiked pit. Things like that. In Multi player there is always time pressure. This could be duplicated to a limited extend by have threat collected each turn. Once a certain threshold of threat is reached the hero’s max health could be reduced. Something along those lines, it would need to be play tested. For those who really want a single player experience, I think you should make one. Try coming up with an adventure. I was going to try converting G1-G3, “Against the Giants” into one. With special stats and different ‘AI’ for each of the giants. The hill giants would be dumb and attack straight away. The Frost would be a little more cunning, perhaps using the environment and finally the Fire giants would throw boulders and execute delaying actions.
  3. kaufschtick said: igfa_277 said: There is a reason that during the Korean war Marines were told to remove their gators. The Chinese were only attacking army positions b/c they could tell the difference between the two b/c the Marines wore gators. Tell that to the Marines at Chosin Reservoir. I was referring to the 38th parallel when the war broke down to a bloody stalemate. But if you want to know more about the Chosin reservoir, know that there were also army units encircled by the Chinese. Want to know why they didn’t become part of American Urban Legend? B/c they were all destroyed. You can read all about it in this book: Marine! The Life of Chesty Puller by Burke Davis Granted it is a little biased but Chesty Pullers disgust with the US Army and its colossal failures during the entire span of the Korean War is palpable. This is one of my favorite bits is Burke Davis’s description of how: as the Marines were withdrawing from Chosin they were scooping up all the gear that the army abandoned when they retreated. When the Marines finally arrived in the port of Hungnam with all this army equipment the army wanted it back and Chesty’s response was essentially: GFYS, if you wanted it you should have taken it with you. The Marines fighting against the Chinese were able to achieve greater than a 10:1 kill ration, destroying three Chinese divisions. This was all while they were completely surrounded. This is one of my favorite bits is Burke Davis's describtion how when the Marines were withdrawing from Chosin they were scooping up all the gear that the army abandoned when they retreated. When the Marines finally arrived in port of Hungnam with all this army equipment the army wanted it back and Chesty’s response was essentially: GFYS, if you wanted it you should have taken it with you. The Marines fighting against the Chinese were able to achieve greater than a 10:1 kill ration, destroying three Chinese divisions. This was all while they were completely surrounded.
  4. kaufschtick said: igfa_277 said: kaufschtick said: Last time I checked the Army and Marine Corps, we were all a part of the same team. You have apparently never been in the service or you would know inter-service rivalry when you see it. Guess again there, Cheif... Like I said before, we're all part of the same team. Inter service rivalry...gimme a break. What, are we all 10 years old now. Ever heard of the Goldwater-Nichols Defense Reorganization Act? Here, I'll save you a little time. You can look the rest up yourself. "The Goldwater-Nichols Act was an attempt to fix problems caused by inter-service rivalry, which had emerged during the Vietnam War, contributed to the catastrophic failure of the Iranian hostage rescue mission in 1980, and which were still evident in the invasion of Grenada in 1983 ." As far as TOI goes, it's an entry level game into wargaming. It's not intended to be Advanced Squad Leader, or a sim. I think the designers state in the Designer Series Scenario book that what they were trying to create was what they describe as a "Gateway" game. There are plenty of other games that strive to create a "simulation" of WWII squad level combat. TOI is designed to be fun, easy to learn, and enjoyable. The scale of the game is actually not really defined, and may change from scenario to scenario, depending on the designer. The squad bases can represent squads, platoons or even larger sized formations depending on the scenario. Time is also somewhat abstract in this game as well, accordingly. I mean, criticizing TOI for not being realistic enough is like complaining that chess isn't realistic enough. That plus, to second someones elses comments, I'll bet you'd be flabergasted as to how fast one can dig when one is being fired upon... I also agree with the above comments from Longagoigo, as well. TOI is pretty abstract to me when I look at entrechments. I mean, if two out of your three issues with the game are artwork related, and the third concerns the placement of entrechments...then I'd have to say that you can't be in too bad of shape, there. I'd think that tanks not having a facing would be more worthy of bringing up here than artwork and the placement of entrenchments. I'm glad you referenced the Goldwater-Nichols Act 'cause I wasn't sure if we were on the same team. However there are differences between the services that go deeper than Army is big, USMC is small, Air Force has lots of planes and Navy has ships. The USMC specifically calls fighting holes fighting holes b/c of the mindset it creates in the young marine who is in it. Whereas fox hole seems like a place to hide. It is these subtle differences that made the Marines have the reputation as the greatest fighting force in the world. There is a reason that during the Korean war Marines were told to remove their gators. The Chinese were only attacking army positions b/c they could tell the difference between the two b/c the Marines wore gators. In Somalia Marines were called “white sleeves” and avoided by the rebels there. “White sleeves” is in reference to how the two branches roll their sleeves differently. Before the first gulf war the Iraqis thought that the Marines were given a puppy to raise and then kill to harden their hearts. On another note I wasn’t saying that I didn’t like the game. It is a light war game and I accept it for its flaws. I just have a hard time getting over the time distortion of converting 2 hours of digging in 2 minutes of digging. Why even give engineers the ability to entrench? I don’t think the game would lose anything w/o the ability and it would show a bit of concern of the designer’s part not to completely distort reality. Tank facing rules would be nice too, but that is Ok. I’m surprised no one else has a problem with the art work. Why did they age already old photos? It doesn’t make any sense.
  5. Hey if that is the penultimate machine gun combo what is the unltimate combo?
  6. 7times7is49 said: I highly doubt bangalore torpedoes, some wire cutters and adrenaline could take out a large enough breach in some barbed wire. You forget the engineers (pioneers) had their own tools and techniques, especially by the time they were on the Siegfried Line. Although I wasn't in the army, I still had a child hood with fireworks and have seen some chain link fences go the way of the third reich... The question isn't if the wire can be breached, it is how long will it take. The my experience with bangalore torpedoes (yes I have used one, not in combat tho’) is that it takes multiple minutes to assemble, place and fire. That is while we weren’t under fire (military doctrine states that obstacle w/o observation and fire are useless). I can’t imagine how slow it would be if we were. Finally after blowing the torpedo we only cut a lane through the wire, enough to move down but if you weren’t going down that lane in that specific axis you would still be impeded by the wire. The wire though degraded was still an obstacle. A quick move by the defender to gain grazing fire down that lane and the wire has turned into a lethal funneling feature, essential a death trap.
  7. kaufschtick said: Last time I checked the Army and Marine Corps we were all a part of the same team. You have apparently never been in the service or you would know inter-service rivalry when you see it.
  8. longagoigo said: igfa_277 said: Dig Entrenchment engineer ability. I don’t think anyone at FFG has ever had to dig a hole. It takes a lot longer than however long a TOI turn/round is. I can’t imagine digging a fighting position in less than 10 minutes and then it would have to be really soft earth and an improvised one, basically a ditch you lie in. Well, this one is easy to solve. Just think of an action turn as being longer than you presently think it is. For an engineer to dig a proper entrenchment, it would take them as long as it would take, which is what an action turn is. They are variable. So I should think of an action turn as an hour long? So in an hour a tank can fire once and move something like 180 meters? It is a game but somethings still needed to be somewhat rooted in reality. I think that the game could have worked just fine without engineers as they completely break the temporal standard set by every other unit.
  9. Here it is: Art style: (1) Why do they take old photos and try to make them look old? They are all ready old. It isn't like it is a new photo they are trying to make look old. (2) What is up with the collection of rusted rivets everywhere? Game Play: Dig Entrenchment engineer ability. I don’t think anyone at FFG has ever had to dig a hole. It takes a lot longer than however long a TOI turn/round is. I can’t imagine digging a fighting position in less than 10 minutes and then it would have to be really soft earth and an improvised one, basically a ditch you lie in. To build a true fighting hole (the Marines call them fighting holes, ‘cause we fight from them, the army calls them fox holes, and I’m not sure what they do it them) take multiple hours. Clearing obstacles is equally time consuming. This is all I can think off, so it isn't that bad but these three thing really annoy me.
  10. Any character that starts with 2 spells can do the same thing as above. The Wizard has always been powerful but certainly no more powerful than the Prophetess. How often does a character get a Talisman on the first few turns? If a character is going to have lucky rolls they can win the game much earlier than most people probably try.
  11. One important point with TT is the more people in the game the greater chance of someone Cosmic Zapping him. TT seems like a power similiar to the Void. Everyone is afraid of TT so in the diplomatic meta game TT is always drawing the shortest straw. If you have ever read the book On Killing about the combat mindset you know what I mean. It is hard for a person to kill another person unless they can demonise them. Something that makes a target evil makes them easier to kill. In WWI and WWII no one ever had a problem shooting the guy with the flame thrower. In all the comsic games I've ever played no one has ever had a problem ganging up on the Void. I image it will be the same way with the TT. Nothing to worry about when he is on Alien Welfare (less than 3 bases).
  12. jvreynolds

    The Reaper

    I wish they had added some additional effects to the reaper: (1) If you land on the spot where the reaper is lose a life. That way a player isn't just trying to move the reaper to land on another player, but also using him to block a location. (2) When moved, the reaper kills all face up enemy’s and strangers in his new location. This means the reaper can be used to get rid of things you don't like around the board. Can't cast spells? Let the reaper kill the scholar! (3) I'm not sure how I feel about this but: If the reaper is in a location all shops, mystics, alchemists, markets, and so on close their doors. Who is going to be turning swords into gold when death is around. This would make the reaper a bit more interesting and make it feel like he was bringing death not just to the characters but to the entire game world.
  13. On page 10 of the rule book it says, under the Attacks section: A battle occurs when a character is attacked by a creature whos Strenght is given, and a psychic combat occurs when a character is attacked by a creature whos Craft is given. It looks to me like the assasin has been nerfed, he will never have a chance to attack a creature, as they are always attacking him. Edited for formatting, the text box program in this forum is terrible.
  14. I'm note sure how everyone else plays this game but my group plays it very aggressively, player on player. If a player is getting ahead everyone else gangs up on them. I find it hard to believe that a 5 fate dwarf running back and forth between the graveyard and the enchantress can survive being on the wrong end of every negative spell and every character who is trying to attack him using fate to land on his space. I'm looking forward to fate as it will allow for PvP action far more often, the best part of the game. How much more powerful will the assassin and thief be when they can roll twice to land on another character. I'm pumped to play with fate, I think characters are going to be dieing early far more often, or burning their fate just to stay alive and not to get more fate. If you think the dwarf is too powerful, imagine this: The Dwarf who got lucky and is evil running between the graveyard and the enchantress and the Assassin hunting him down. I'm pretty sure the Dwarf will lose.
  15. I purchased Talisman in the mid 80's and then got the first expansion. I've never played 2nd or 3rd edition but do own 4th edition. I was disappointed when I purchased 4th edition b/c it was exactly like 1st edition with no balance changes. Overly powered characters were still overly powered and weak characters still sucked. I am really psyched about revised 4th edition b/c from what I see it fixes many of the issues in the game and makes some nice additions w/o making it more complicated The addition of Fate creates more flavor between each hero and speeds up the game/ The small changes in the characters are huge, helping balance them out. The reaper expansion is going to be good too. For those who are annoyed about a lack of additional hero think about this. Would you rather have 4 good heroes you actually want to play than 14 ones that you don’t want to play? The big reason to buy it is the 90+ Adventure cards. That is what is going to make the game worth playing. I hate cycling the adventure deck, after that the game feels worn out, 90 more cards will slow that down significantly and might stop it all together. This is going to be a much better game, one that I will take out and play more often.
×
×
  • Create New...