Recommend
22 
 Thumb up
 Hide
19 Posts

Spearpoint 1943» Forums » Reviews

Subject: Going Through the Motions: One Arbitrary Decision After Another rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Adam Ruzzo
United States
Manchester
Connecticut
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Edit: I have come to the conclusion that this review may be holding this game to too high a standard. It's not the kind of game that I typically buy, so take that into account when reading the review.

So this game surprised me by showing up in the mail when I had completely forgot that I had ordered it. I read the rules twice, then brought my normal opponent in for a game.

Rules
Unfortunately, the rules are pretty shoddy. There are quite a few holes in them and the parts that were there didn't seem to be complete. Here's a few examples:

1) The Combat step breaks down into a few phases: Declare Target, Initiative, then take turns Attacking with each unit one at a time until each unit has attacked. The Initiative phase is just each side rolling a die and whoever gets highest gets to roll first (this essentially gives one side the ability to kill one of your units before it fires, which makes going first very powerful, and to leave that up to a die roll flies in the face of game design in my book).

OK, So after Initiative we take turns attacking, but what about the "Declare Target" phase? The rules simply state that the players verbally declare targets. There is no procedure, there is no taking turns, there is no going first or second. It just says "declare targets" as if it didn't matter what your opponent does. This could easily degenerate into me targeting one way, then he targets to counter that, then I change my targets to counter him, etc. Yet there is no system for this in the rules at all. This is a huge hole and I was very surprised to see it.

2) Speaking of the combat phase, the rules suggested no method to keep track of how many turns the planes were on the board or how much damage each of your units had taken this round (damage accumulates throughout the round). We had to resort to pulling out coins to mark air units, and using some spare dice to keep track of damage. I haven't had to add my own pieces to a game in order to play it in a very long time. I expected more.

3) We had an odd situation where a unit with 4 health was delt 3 damage, thus requiring us to draw a damage card for it. We complied, and the damage card said "additional damage, roll a D10 and add that much damage." OK, fair enough, but the roll was 1. Do we add that 1 to the 3 and kill the unit? Or now that the unit took damage was it's endurance reset to 2? There was no clear answer in the rulebook. This is a bit of a smaller nit pick, the above two points were mainly my problem with the rules.


Gameplay
So when it actually game down to playing the game, we both made a deck with some mixed forces. I pretty much took 2 or 3 rifle squads and one each of most of the other support options and 2 tanks and a plane. We played through a game and here are my main thoughts:

1) I really like the damage system. I actually remember seeing that concept in a screen shot and that's why I preordered it without learning anything else. The elegant system of requiring only one deck to deal with each type of unit along with the turn based damage tickers printed onto the cards is very cool! The concept that units take damage and then that makes them easier to kill later was also interesting.

2) There are very few actual decisions - to the point where I find the game is likely determined more by luck than by any decisions the players make. As I see it the only real decisions that are made is creating the deck at the start and deciding whether to draw from one pile, the other, or both during the draw step. The rest of the decisions are very arbitrary and the game feels more like book keeping and just "Going through the motions" of finding out which side will be favored by the dice God's this time.

Deciding which units to commit is not actually a decision at all. You always commit every unit except for ones you can't commit because you don't have the crew/units. There are no limitations, nothing that makes you think "should I choose X or Y?" You just always choose both X and Y, because there is no reason not to.

When it comes to deciding who to attack, this feels even more arbitrary. Units that have low health get targeted by no more than one unit because anything else would be overkill. Units with high health should be targeted with at least 2 units, possibly 3 or 4 if they have high armor. Always kill off the easiest to hit before the biggest, because it lowers the enemy units firepower instantly. It's the same concept as a WoW Raid or an RTS game. You don't attack the "tanking" character/unit, you kill off the little guys, because that's the easiest way to lower enemy firepower.

Speaking of firepower, there's very little difference in this game. One unit has to beat a 14 and the other has to beat a 12. One adds 3 damage, and the other adds 5. Everything seems almost equally capable of killing infantry. Some units have less damage and cost less, others have more and cost more, but any unit in the game can one shot an MG team or a sniper.

It becomes a game of making sure you follow the simple rules outlined above and then hoping the dice roll your way. Lets say you target your MG against his rifles, and your bazooka against his sniper, and your artillery against his artillery. Deciding to have your bazooka shoot at the rifles and the MG shoot at the sniper and the artillery shoot at the rifles isn't going to make any difference if you don't hit anything. The combat system requires 2-5 rolls of 2d10 for each side, which can quite easily create an unbalanced game right from the get go.

3) The game has a very powerful slippery slope problem. If one side has a lucky streak for one turn, the game could wind up with the Germans having 5 units on the table and the Americans having 2. The next turn the Germans will have 7 and the Americans will have 4, but now the american firepower is almost half that of the Germans. Why even keep playing? The Germans now have an almost guaranteed win.



Final Thoughts

I felt like this game was designed for someone who is not familiar with games. A person who is not a gamer could play this game and enjoy throwing the dice and seeing what happens. A non-gamer would not see the rules problems that I out-lined above. The problem arises when you can analyze the system and recognize that the decisions you are making do not matter, and that the ones which do matter are controlled by dice, or not even specified at all. You might as well be playing Risk at this point. With that being said, I could only recommend this game to someone who is young, or someone who is new to gaming. No one else is really going to enjoy it for long.

19 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Tullsen
United States
VANCOUVER
WA
flag msg tools
designer
48 hour turnaround time for Prototypes!
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Regarding your Rule #3 point, the rules say that damage is cumulative for that combat round only. So yes, the unit would die.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Adam Ruzzo
United States
Manchester
Connecticut
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Howitzer_120mm wrote:
Regarding your Rule #3 point, the rules say that damage is cumulative for that combat round only. So yes, the unit would die.


That's how we played it, and for some reason it seems easier to figure out today than it did yesterday.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dennis Bingham
Germany
Herford
NRW
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
My son and I had a similar impression of the game. Basically, the biggest fun we had when actually creating our "Army" from the card deck. Everything that came after seemed like a very random "I hit you-you hit me - Who's left standing after the dice rolls".

We played three times to see if we missed something or if we just didn't "get" it, but after three plays, he was kinda bored. There seems no propose, no big strategy you can follow or develop.

If i look back now and realize i paid $30 for this, then i must say it's a little overpriced for what you get. It's a filler game for a VERY limited audience and I'm not sure if that specific audience is very forgiving as far as the randomness goes.

PS: i totally agree, the manual that comes with the game is fairly horrible.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Byron Collins
United States
Suffolk
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for your feedback. Sorry you didn't enjoy my game. Many people are enjoying it, they play it more than once, they try the 8 free situations which add objectives, starting units, and modify the rules and win conditions. Many people (including other publishers, other designers, playtesters, distributors, retailers, and our supporters) feel it offers plenty of "non-arbitrary decisions" to keep them playing it again and again. Most are not "young" nor "non-gamers", and most are wargamers that want a "fast filler". It's beer-and-pretzels. It's not ASL, it's not Twilight Imperium, and it's not a 6 hour wargame. It's not a consim, not as complex as say Up Front, nor is it meant to be.

Just a few comments regarding your specific points on the rules-

It sounds like you have two main issues with the rules- initiative is determined by a die roll, and tracking various things during play. The third point was covered in the rules as Andrew mentioned.

1. the chaos of battle and who's firing first and where is well simulated with dice IMHO, and it can change each turn and even be modified by discarding a commannd card for +1 or playing No Retreat. If you don't like the die roll for Initiative (choice of first attack), then simply alternate choice each turn.

Many wargames are known for their dice. The key to it is not rolling the dice- it's the stats, odds, and restrictions built in to the units, how realistic the outcomes are, and whether or not things 'make sense' that matters most.

Declare Targets is simultaneous- it's meant to be that way so there's no downtime. Targets are set once initiative is rolled. If players are reactionary and change targets a lot, you're welcome to house-rule a die roll to determine who declares first, then alternate, or just agree but in my experience, that hasn't been necessary.

2. Other people have mentioned this as well and it's good feedback. Personally I don't use anything to track damage in the current turn or turns of flight. Damage is never tracked beyond the current turn either (a unit is either at its full endurance, half endurance, or destroyed at the end of each combat phase, and at the respective breakpoint if damaged, which is tracked by the damage card). Turns of flight is a max of 3 for aircraft in this game (the P38). You can easily use a scratch piece of paper or some spare dice to track these things if desired but typically there are only one or two aircraft out at a time, so it's not terribly difficult to remember. To add tracking bits or more dice to the game would make the game cost much more.

Regarding some of your gameplay points-

Deciding to Commit everything all the time- Sure, you could do so, and that's a valid strategy, but many times there are risks involved that make it not so smart. It's sometimes best to not take those risks and hold on to the units until in a better position to commit, esp. if being overrun.

Examples:

1) if you have no frontline forces currently out but have a 105 howitzer with crew in hand, would you commit it? No, it'd be cannon fodder and would be easily taken out. With no frontline to protect the gun, it's suicide to bring it out.

2) If the opponent has two 8.8cm FlaK guns in play and you have several frontline and one or two artillery pieces in play to deal with those FlaK guns this turn, but have an aircraft in your hand with pilot, would you commit it and risk losing it that turn?

3) If you have 1 Infantry unit in play along the frontline and your opponent has two tanks on his front, would you commit another infantry unit to their death? Or consider playing a Withdraw card if you have it..

And this example also addresses the slippery slope point mentioned:

4) If you're being overrun (all units in play destroyed) and the count begins (3 turns and the game ends), would you commit one or two units from your hand the very next turn? No. Save up a full hand and commit on the third turn for a decent counterattack. If he only has tanks out and you know you have some aircraft in your deck yet to be drawn, wait till you draw those aircraft and send them against his tanks with bombs, then commit your ground forces on the third turn.

I've played and witnessed many a game that has been won after all units of one side were completely destroyed. Overrun count begins, the player 'regroups' and the counterattack by that player wins the game.

This game is a lot more than rolling dice and 'arbitrary decisions', but I thank you for your feedback regardless.

Best,
Byron
19 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Buetow
United States
McHenry
Illinois
flag msg tools
Combat Commander Archivist
badge
Move! Advance! Fire! Rout! Recover! Artillery Denied! Artillery Request! Command Confusion...say what?!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Bridger wrote:

Rules
Unfortunately, the rules are pretty shoddy. There are quite a few holes in them and the parts that were there didn't seem to be complete. Here's a few examples:


The game is not that complicated so the rules don't have to be a novel. However, given the number of questions I had and that have appeared here in the Forums, I would agree that they can definitely use some tightening up.

Quote:

OK, So after Initiative we take turns attacking, but what about the "Declare Target" phase? The rules simply state that the players verbally declare targets. There is no procedure, there is no taking turns, there is no going first or second. It just says "declare targets" as if it didn't matter what your opponent does.

OK, here's where I go after your review. With a very competitive gamer with whom I play and ten games, this is not any kind of problem at all. You aim your units; maybe you adjust one or two. Anything that takes any longer is just being obtuse or having AP.

Quote:

2) Speaking of the combat phase, the rules suggested no method to keep track of how many turns the planes were on the board or how much damage each of your units had taken this round (damage accumulates throughout the round). We had to resort to pulling out coins to mark air units, and using some spare dice to keep track of damage. I haven't had to add my own pieces to a game in order to play it in a very long time. I expected more.


Seriously? You can't keep track of how many hits a unit has? How long a plane has been on the board? Surely your opponent can. The unit density in this game and the quick play hardly necessitate elaborate or any bookkeeping.

Quote:

3) We had an odd situation where a unit with 4 health was delt 3 damage, thus requiring us to draw a damage card for it. We complied, and the damage card said "additional damage, roll a D10 and add that much damage." OK, fair enough, but the roll was 1. Do we add that 1 to the 3 and kill the unit? Or now that the unit took damage was it's endurance reset to 2? There was no clear answer in the rulebook. This is a bit of a smaller nit pick, the above two points were mainly my problem with the rules.


It is answered in the rules because damage resets after the combat phase. Likely that unit is going to die that turn anyway, but maybe not.

Quote:

1) I really like the damage system. I actually remember seeing that concept in a screen shot and that's why I preordered it without learning anything else.
For what it's worth, Byron put together a pretty detailed example of play. Likely you didn't see it as you didn't even remember you ordered the game. A little different from my perspective since I heard about the game, followed its development to some extent, read the promo material and decided it's the kind of quick playing game we enjoy.

Quote:

2) There are very few actual decisions - to the point where I find the game is likely determined more by luck than by any decisions the players make. As I see it the only real decisions that are made is creating the deck at the start and deciding whether to draw from one pile, the other, or both during the draw step. The rest of the decisions are very arbitrary and the game feels more like book keeping and just "Going through the motions" of finding out which side will be favored by the dice God's this time.


Dice. Sure. Bad luck. It happens. But you certainly have plenty of decisions. You gonna lay arty fire on that Panzerfaust team before he takes out your Sherman or are you gonna try to flatten that Tiger which is a bigger objective? Do you go one-for-one with the enemy squads or do you group your men to try to take out that tank with a Close Assault? The Reserve Deck build is also pretty important. Do you have a motorized infantry or do you have a tank column? Lots of air support or tons of infantry? These all come into play as to how you decide which targets to fight.

Quote:

Deciding which units to commit is not actually a decision at all. You always commit every unit except for ones you can't commit because you don't have the crew/units. There are no limitations, nothing that makes you think "should I choose X or Y?" You just always choose both X and Y, because there is no reason not to.


If he's got tanks and all you've got is infantry, you may not want to commit. The Overrun rule means you get a couple of turns to get some forces collected before you make a counter attack. And waiting to commit means you can react a bit more to what the enemy lays down.

Quote:
...You don't attack the "tanking" character/unit, you kill off the little guys, because that's the easiest way to lower enemy firepower.


Perhaps. But if you've got men and he's got men you wanna take out any opposing MGs which will shred your men. That means taking out tanks.

Quote:

Speaking of firepower, there's very little difference in this game. One unit has to beat a 14 and the other has to beat a 12. One adds 3 damage, and the other adds 5. Everything seems almost equally capable of killing infantry. Some units have less damage and cost less, others have more and cost more, but any unit in the game can one shot an MG team or a sniper.
Don't forget there's more coming, expansions and such.

Quote:

3) The game has a very powerful slippery slope problem. If one side has a lucky streak for one turn, the game could wind up with the Germans having 5 units on the table and the Americans having 2. The next turn the Germans will have 7 and the Americans will have 4, but now the american firepower is almost half that of the Germans. Why even keep playing? The Germans now have an almost guaranteed win.


Perhaps. But that did happen in real life some times. If nothing else, the short play time mitigates the pain of such an occurrence. On the other hand, with the dice, there's always SOME hope. In the games we played, that happened once or twice but it was possible to overcome it.


Quote:

Final Thoughts

I felt like this game was designed for someone who is not familiar with games. A person who is not a gamer could play this game and enjoy throwing the dice and seeing what happens. A non-gamer would not see the rules problems that I out-lined above. The problem arises when you can analyze the system and recognize that the decisions you are making do not matter, and that the ones which do matter are controlled by dice, or not even specified at all. You might as well be playing Risk at this point. With that being said, I could only recommend this game to someone who is young, or someone who is new to gaming. No one else is really going to enjoy it for long.



I won't try to persuade you it's a great game. We enjoyed it immensely and my favorite game is Combat Commander (as is one of yours). A little imagination and no expectations for the game to be other than it is: a brief tactical card game--will go a long way toward people enjoying it. I liken it to being a step up from something like The Battle for Hill 218. It plays quickly and gives a thematic feel while not pretending to be any kind of heavy wargame or simulation.

Finally, you didn't even mention the situations available on the website. These add some interesting challenges and special rules to take it beyond the basic point/deck building game.

In the end, I think you're a little harsh on Byron here. If you look at his other games, they're pretty meaty offerings. To each his own, of course, but while it seems you shook a lot of dice, it doesn't sound like you've given Spearpoint the fairest shake. IMHO.

(Edits to fix quotes)
14 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mark Walker
United States
Henry
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
'65 Squad Level Combat in Vietnam. On Kickstarter!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
Finally, you didn't even mention the situations available on the website. These add some interesting challenges and special rules to take it beyond the basic point/deck building game.


Yep, I think the situations are very interesting. They add quite a bit of variety. I've played the game several times and I've never had problems with the targeting or the dice rolls.

I will say, however, that as reviews go, I thought this was well-considered. I don't agree with the conclusions--I like Spearpoint and would recommend it to any of my friends--but at least the reviewer eschewed the silly bashing that is so often prevalent on the Geek, and the primary reason publishers are leaving this site in droves for Facebook. Facebook makes people use their real names...where children, family, and friends can see what you say and how you deal with people. I predict it will put the Geek out of business within 18 months.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Darrell Hanning
United States
Jacksonville
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
We will meet at the Hour of Scampering.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Mark Holt Walker wrote:
I will say, however, that as reviews go, I thought this was well-considered. I don't agree with the conclusions--I like Spearpoint and would recommend it to any of my friends--but at least the reviewer eschewed the silly bashing that is so often prevalent on the Geek, and the primary reason publishers are leaving this site in droves for Facebook. Facebook makes people use their real names...where children, family, and friends can see what you say and how you deal with people. I predict it will put the Geek out of business within 18 months.


In my seven or so years on this site, "silly bashing" isn't actually all that prevalent. It's certainly less prevalent than what I've seen on Facebook, where people routinely bare their souls (why, I do not know), only to get ripped by complete strangers...and friends, alike.

People have been predicting the demise of BGG, for various reasons, since I've been coming here. Facebook isn't going to replace it, because Facebook doesn't have Clue One about (much less motivation for) organizing boardgame data, or have gamers' best interests as its focus.

I use my "real name". If you don't like what I say, I can deal with it, and I don't lash out at posters out of relative anonymity. Granted, a small percentage of posters do, but that's true everywhere, and there sure as hell is no shortage of that on Facebook, either.

In short, BGG is one of the more rational, well-behaved open sites I've seen on the internet, and I likely won't see any bashing more silly than yours, about this site, for the rest of the week.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Savage
United States
Clearwater
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Call me behind the times, but where in heck do you have war game reviews on Facebook?
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Adam Ruzzo
United States
Manchester
Connecticut
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
frontlinegeneral wrote:
It's beer-and-pretzels. It's not ASL, it's not Twilight Imperium, and it's not a 6 hour wargame. It's not a consim, not as complex as say Up Front, nor is it meant to be.


Well maybe part of my issue is hoping/expecting it to be more than beer and pretzels. I don't play beer and pretzels games. Perhaps I was a bit too harsh on it for that reason.

My definition of a beer and pretzels game is one in which there are few decisions that really matter, and/or the ones that do will be obvious most of the time. Axis and Allies, Risk, Memoir '44, these all fall into that category for me and I don't play them despite the fact that I have some friends who ask. I have played them in the past, but I am past that stage in my gaming career. You could say I'm jaded in tha sense. I cannot enjoy basic experiential games. I need something that challenges the mind. In that sense this is clearly not a game for me, and it's my fault for buying it without actually looking into it!

Quote:
And this example also addresses the slippery slope point mentioned:

4) If you're being overrun (all units in play destroyed) and the count begins (3 turns and the game ends), would you commit one or two units from your hand the very next turn? No. Save up a full hand and commit on the third turn for a decent counterattack. If he only has tanks out and you know you have some aircraft in your deck yet to be drawn, wait till you draw those aircraft and send them against his tanks with bombs, then commit your ground forces on the third turn.

I've played and witnessed many a game that has been won after all units of one side were completely destroyed. Overrun count begins, the player 'regroups' and the counterattack by that player wins the game.


I agree with your previous points that there are some cases where you do not just commit everything in your hand, but the cases you state are so obvious that, again, I feel like I'm not actually making a decision. I am simply following a series of logic gates. "If, front line = collapsing, set 'commit artillery' to '0'".

However, regarding the 4th point here about the overrun rule; saving up a hand of units to commit simultaneously still means your opponent is saving up a similar hand and/or committing those units while you save up your hand. He will still be significantly out-gunning you when you finally put your hand together.

The main slippery slope issue is that when you do start to win (killing more enemy units than he kills of yours) you will enjoy an advantage in future rounds of combat relative to how close you are to "winning" (causing an overrun). This is simply an inherent aspect of most games. A perpetual comeback mechanism is usually required to keep the game interesting after the first bout.

Perhaps a rule that said "if a player is overrun, his opponent is limited to one draw from his reserve deck per turn until the overrun player has committed new units." This would simultaneously provide a perpetual comeback mechanic to deal with the slippery slope as well as simulate how it would be more difficult to commit new units to the front line if the front line is moving forward, further from the reinforcements.

I would like to point out that the Company, FrontLine General has been fantastic through the whole experience, even if their game isn't for me

FWIW, I have decided to give it one more shot, if I can convince my friend to give it another go. I'll report back/edit the review with any new thoughts.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Drake Coker
United States
San Diego
California
flag msg tools
badge
This is my tank for Combat Commander
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
I predict it (Facebook) will put the Geek out of business within 18 months.


I counter-predict.
12 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Josh Look
United States
Coventry
CT
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
[q="Mark Holt Walker"]
Quote:
...silly bashing that is so often prevalent on the Geek...

I predict it will put the Geek out of business within 18 months.


 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew S. Fischer
United States
Devon
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
frontlinegeneral wrote:


Perhaps a rule that said "if a player is overrun, his opponent is limited to one draw from his reserve deck per turn until the overrun player has committed new units." This would simultaneously provide a perpetual comeback mechanic to deal with the slippery slope as well as simulate how it would be more difficult to commit new units to the front line if the front line is moving forward, further from the reinforcements.


Sounds good!
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Holyoak
United States
Idaho Falls
Idaho
flag msg tools
designer
Designer Wannabe
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Bridger wrote:


My definition of a beer and pretzels game is one in which there are few decisions that really matter, and/or the ones that do will be obvious most of the time. Axis and Allies, Risk, Memoir '44, these all fall into that category for me and I don't play them despite the fact that I have some friends who ask. I have played them in the past, but I am past that stage in my gaming career. You could say I'm jaded in that sense. I cannot enjoy basic experiential games. I need something that challenges the mind. In that sense this is clearly not a game for me, and it's my fault for buying it without actually looking into it!




I think that negative reviews can be just as influential and helpful as positive reviews when it comes moving me to purchase a game.

By including your stance on the wargame hobby and the games you enjoy and don't like, it helps me put your review in the right perspective.

After reading your review with an understanding of where you come from and what you look for in a game, it leads me to believe that this is probably a game that I will enjoy and fits my play style and time restrictions.

Thanks for the review.

9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Byron Collins
United States
Suffolk
Virginia
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Bridger wrote:
frontlinegeneral wrote:
It's beer-and-pretzels. It's not ASL, it's not Twilight Imperium, and it's not a 6 hour wargame. It's not a consim, not as complex as say Up Front, nor is it meant to be.


Well maybe part of my issue is hoping/expecting it to be more than beer and pretzels. I don't play beer and pretzels games. Perhaps I was a bit too harsh on it for that reason.

My definition of a beer and pretzels game is one in which there are few decisions that really matter, and/or the ones that do will be obvious most of the time. Axis and Allies, Risk, Memoir '44, these all fall into that category for me and I don't play them despite the fact that I have some friends who ask. I have played them in the past, but I am past that stage in my gaming career. You could say I'm jaded in tha sense. I cannot enjoy basic experiential games. I need something that challenges the mind. In that sense this is clearly not a game for me, and it's my fault for buying it without actually looking into it!

Quote:
And this example also addresses the slippery slope point mentioned:

4) If you're being overrun (all units in play destroyed) and the count begins (3 turns and the game ends), would you commit one or two units from your hand the very next turn? No. Save up a full hand and commit on the third turn for a decent counterattack. If he only has tanks out and you know you have some aircraft in your deck yet to be drawn, wait till you draw those aircraft and send them against his tanks with bombs, then commit your ground forces on the third turn.

I've played and witnessed many a game that has been won after all units of one side were completely destroyed. Overrun count begins, the player 'regroups' and the counterattack by that player wins the game.


I agree with your previous points that there are some cases where you do not just commit everything in your hand, but the cases you state are so obvious that, again, I feel like I'm not actually making a decision. I am simply following a series of logic gates. "If, front line = collapsing, set 'commit artillery' to '0'".

However, regarding the 4th point here about the overrun rule; saving up a hand of units to commit simultaneously still means your opponent is saving up a similar hand and/or committing those units while you save up your hand. He will still be significantly out-gunning you when you finally put your hand together.

The main slippery slope issue is that when you do start to win (killing more enemy units than he kills of yours) you will enjoy an advantage in future rounds of combat relative to how close you are to "winning" (causing an overrun). This is simply an inherent aspect of most games. A perpetual comeback mechanism is usually required to keep the game interesting after the first bout.

Perhaps a rule that said "if a player is overrun, his opponent is limited to one draw from his reserve deck per turn until the overrun player has committed new units." This would simultaneously provide a perpetual comeback mechanic to deal with the slippery slope as well as simulate how it would be more difficult to commit new units to the front line if the front line is moving forward, further from the reinforcements.

I would like to point out that the Company, FrontLine General has been fantastic through the whole experience, even if their game isn't for me

FWIW, I have decided to give it one more shot, if I can convince my friend to give it another go. I'll report back/edit the review with any new thoughts.


Adam, Thank you for the very well put thoughts and additional comments. You do have good points here and I am a designer who does actually listen I do appreciate constructive criticism.

I do like the idea of mitigating the Slippery Slope point you mentioned- I think your proposal is a great way to do just that. I'll begin testing it right away, and will likely add it in to the rules.

I'm glad you've been pleased with our customer service so far and hope to retain you as a customer- whether or not for games that are similar to this one (this isn't the only game I've done or am working on-- 3 other games are in the works right now).

Thanks
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brandon Pennington
United States
Springfield
Missouri
flag msg tools
designer
badge
If your orange juice doesn't burn on the way down, then you need more vodka!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Mark Holt Walker wrote:


I will say, however, that as reviews go, I thought this was well-considered. I don't agree with the conclusions--I like Spearpoint and would recommend it to any of my friends--but at least the reviewer eschewed the silly bashing that is so often prevalent on the Geek, and the primary reason publishers are leaving this site in droves for Facebook. Facebook makes people use their real names...where children, family, and friends can see what you say and how you deal with people. I predict it will put the Geek out of business within 18 months.


I actually see you doing more bashing than most.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Pete Pariseau
United States
Tulsa
Oklahoma
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
A fair review, even though I like the game much more than you do. it does have a slippery slope problem, but I think it also has plenty of decision-making. As we replay it, we're finding that what seem like small differences in forces, commitment and targeting decisions can have big effects.

The one change I would make is to limit units to firing one weapon at a time, with the chance to fire up to 2 in 2 separate attacks. That helps slow down hot dice.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chuck Parrott
United States
Wilmington
North Carolina
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Peter Pariseau wrote:
The one change I would make is to limit units to firing one weapon at a time, with the chance to fire up to 2 in 2 separate attacks. That helps slow down hot dice.


Doubtful, instead you'll have units dying from lucky shots without being able to fire all their weapons. I think it would make the wild swings in dice luck more noticeable. With multiple shots, dice luck should average out in a series of rolls affecting one unit. I say should, because I know that sometimes you just get on a hot streak.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Drake Coker
United States
San Diego
California
flag msg tools
badge
This is my tank for Combat Commander
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Olvenskol wrote:
Quote:
I predict it (Facebook) will put the Geek out of business within 18 months.


I counter-predict.


Yay, I won. By a lot.
5 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.