Gustavo
United Kingdom
Birmingham
West Midlands
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
BoB was my first wargaming experience (aside from Memoir '44, if that counts). Choosing my first wargame was a very tough decision, as it might be for many gamers thinking of dipping their toes for the first time in the consim world. Now, after 6 months playing BoB, I thought I would share my experience with this game, in the hope of helping other possible undecided first-timers (and veterans, why not?) out there with their choices.


6 months ago...


... I was sick and tired of Memoir '44 and its mechanics (let's leave it like that ), and I was looking for a squad-level "real" wargame. I wanted something relatively accessible, not too luck-driven, WW2-themed, with short playing time, and exciting and varied scenarios. My options by that time were:

(not sure if this or Storms of Steel): what caught me was the gradual learning system that introduces new rules on each scenario. However, after looking at several reviews I could see how the AP system could lead to gamey situations. Plus, there were several comments on how scenarios worked almost like "puzzles."

Lock 'n Load: Band of Heroes: looked very promising, but the rules seemed to be too complex for what I wanted. Even if I learned how to play it, I would surely never find anyone who would go through the trouble of learning these rules.

Combat Commander: Europe: no card-driven games anymore, EVER.

Valor & Victory: I'm not a PnP person, and even if I paid for someone to assemble it for me, the graphics just didn't please me (yes, what a heresy for you wargamers, but hey, I wanted cool bits as well!)

Band of Brothers: Screaming Eagles: I downloaded the rules for this one (as I did for all of them) and could read through Part 1 without scratching my head. Plus, they all made quite good sense, and seemed like a tight, elegant system. Components looked quite nice, playing time was advertised as 90 mins. Bought it.


Review


During these six months, I had the chance of playing through scenarios 1-9, 14, and 16. About a third of my games were solitaire, another third in PBeM, and the rest face to face, although I only played scenarios 1, 2 and 16 live.

Despite the initial struggle with hedgerows, learning Part 1 of the rules was not difficult. I really, REALLY liked the simplicity and realistic feel of the rule system from the very beginning.Nevertheless, I had TONS of questions, resulting in many threads on this Forum, kindly replied by the designer himself or one of the more experienced players. The system was not intuitive, but I guess no wargaming system would be so for a non-wargamer. Still, the game proved to be too complex for most of my gaming buddies. Some of them would insist on applying modifiers to the Firepower or Morale number instead of the die roll. The Concealment/Decoy system also seemed confusing to them, but not to me; my problem with it was the fiddlyness involved in stacking them properly so they don't show what is at the botton, and remembering where were each of my units... shake

By this time I was playing mostly the infantry short scenarios, and I already started to feel tired of them. "Is it always going to be Americans whipping out Germans?" I asked. But I decided to give it a chance and learn Part 2. It was then that the game truly revealed itself.

Although the rules kept their simplicity, the elegance and tightness of Part 1 was not there anymore. The best thing about Infantry combat is that the modifiers were always the same, Proficiency, Morale, and Firepower worked always the same way. Now with Vehicles and Guns, Proficiency was not just a "harder" Morale test, it was an independent thing. Each different kind of attacker (Vehicles, Guns, Artillery, SATW) used different groups of modifiers, in some cases completely different ones. "Why is that Terrain just doesn't help Infantry units when attacked by Vehicles or Guns?" "Why SATWs have firepower of 7 against Guns and 11 or 22 against Vehicles if they use the same weapon?" were all cracks on my wish for the perfect system. Although I play lots of abstract games and card games (where rules are as arbitrary as they can ever be), this was a kind of abstraction that I was not used to. In my mind, it was not supposed to be that way, it was supposed to may clear sense from the beginning, because it was somehow simulating reality. I think I understand most of them as of today, but my hopes of having my friends to understand them are minimal.

Despite many attempts to tweak the Conceal/Decoy system for solo play, I am obliged to say it doesn't work for me. The cool thing about the system is exactly to play against an opponent that carefully placed his troops on the map, and at the same time not knowing where exactly each of them is. Placing Conceal markers everywhere and drawing units from a cup worked for a few scenarios, but for the most part important units such as Guns and WTs must be placed in strategic locations, and doing so ruins the "surprise" element. Of course, the game has never been advertised as solitaire-friendly, but after trying to convince people to learn it, I kind of understand why so many wargamers play solo. Solitaire suitability became fundamental for me, and the better the scenarios become in BoB, the less solitaire-friendly they seem to be.

Speaking of the scenarios, this was another aspect that left me a little disappointed. Most scenarios in Memoir '44 played in a very similar way to me, and I was hoping for a lot of variety in the scenarios, as well as exciting missions. I wanted to have some realistic feel in my game, but I also wanted some of the cinematographic moments I had with Memoir '44. The historical information on each scenario was nice, but it never seemed too relevant for the gameplay (as it never did in M44 either); it explained things that happened on the board, but it didn't help me deciding what to do or how to achieve it. Maybe due to my ignorance in WW2 I just couldn't feel the difference between protecting Caen or Son or whatever other town, because they all just look like map 1, 3, or a combination of both. This might be a common problem to all games with geomorphic maps, but I think the maps in BoB could use some help. Map 3 is so symmetrical that it is hard to feel any difference if invading from north, south, east or west. Maybe the same could be said about the hedgerows and roads. Larger scenarios gave more room to manoeuvre (spelling?), but the variety is much more on the combinations of units used than on the actual objectives of each scenario. As a non-wargamer I might be asking for a variety that just doesn't exist, but as a *gamer* I can just keep hoping to find the best possible gaming experience.


Conclusions


Was it worth it? - Definitely. BoB definitely played a role that most other available squad-level games would not be able to do for me. It introduced to many important concepts, mechanics, and especially the mindset of how wargames work, how you should face them and try to understand them. I still didn't give up on it though: I'm playing a PBeM game, and would love to play many more matches face-to-face to see the real potential of the system. I doubt I will ever play it solitaire again though.

Would you buy it again today? As much as I like the system, my answer is probably not. I see a lot of potential in the system, but my hopes is that this is still an ongoing project that will be truly ripen in a couple of years or so. My hope is that Band of Brothers: Ghost Panzer comes with really thrilling scenarios and address a few of the issues I had with BoB, otherwise I might just move on to something else. I really didn't want to go through a 30-page rules overhead, but I would definitely do it if the scenarios were worth it.
47 
 Thumb up
0.35
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Krohn
United States
New York
flag msg tools
designer
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
badge
Ahhh....my misspent youth...
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
Gustavo,

I appreciate your review and I have enjoyed my interactions with you on the boards. Here are a few clarifications that might help:

Quote:
Placing Conceal markers everywhere and drawing units from a cup worked for a few scenarios, but for the most part important units such as Guns and WTs must be placed in strategic locations, and doing so ruins the "surprise" element.


You might have missed that, in my recommendations for solitaire play, when playing a side with concealment that side can choose where to place a unit when using it. So, if that side waits to get shot at and a concealed unit is Suppressed, it is a random draw to find which unit it is. However, if that side shoots either on its turn or during Op Fire, it gets to pick which unit is there. It's another decision that has to be made when playing defense - how much do I care where to place the unit and how long do I risk a random placement in my hopes of maintaining concealment.

Of course, this also gives me an excuse to put another call out there. I've always wanted a dedicated solo system for BoB. Is there anyone out there willing to take the reins and come up with one?

Quote:
"Why SATWs have firepower of 7 against Guns and 11 or 22 against Vehicles if they use the same weapon?"


Well, because they had different anti-infantry and armor penetrating characteristics. The bazooka only has an 11 against armor while the panzerfaust gets a 22 for very good reason - the panzerfaust was much more deadly. On the other hand, the bazooka did help out the Americans in an anti-infantry roll and was used for taking out guns and MG empacements - hence the bump to the firepower of a bazooka armed American squad when firing at those targets.

Although BoB is very simple, I still maintain it is the most realistic representation of tactical combat in WW2.

Quote:
I see a lot of potential in the system, but my hopes is that this is still an ongoing project that will be truly ripen in a couple of years or so. My hope is that Band of Brothers: Ghost Panzer comes with really thrilling scenarios and address a few of the issues I had with BoB


I think Ghost Panzer strongly takes the next step for the system and I hope you like it.

My goal for BoB was a mix of scenarios from short to long. That is one reason why there are 18 scenarios. I like the shorter, infantry only scenarios for new players, when I have a time crunch, and when I am in the mood, but my personal favorites are the larger, mixed force scenarios.



18 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gustavo
United Kingdom
Birmingham
West Midlands
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Hi Jim,

Thank you for your prompt answers (as always).

Jim Krohn wrote:
You might have missed that, in my recommendations for solitaire play, when playing a side with concealment that side can choose where to place a unit when using it. So, if that side waits to get shot at and a concealed unit is Suppressed, it is a random draw to find which unit it is. However, if that side shoots either on its turn or during Op Fire, it gets to pick which unit is there. It's another decision that has to be made when playing defense - how much do I care where to place the unit and how long do I risk a random placement in my hopes of maintaining concealment.


I missed that indeed. That will probably make things better. I just wish there was a way to keep the excitement of the Concealment system in solo play (OK, now I'm asking too much whistle)

Of course, this also gives me an excuse to put another call out there. I've always wanted a dedicated solo system for BoB. Is there anyone out there willing to take the reins and come up with one?

Quote:
Quote:
"Why SATWs have firepower of 7 against Guns and 11 or 22 against Vehicles if they use the same weapon?"


Jim Krohn wrote:
Well, because they had different anti-infantry and armor penetrating characteristics. The bazooka only has an 11 against armor while the panzerfaust gets a 22 for very good reason - the panzerfaust was much more deadly.


Yeah, I just realized I mixed Panzerfausts and bazookas after I submitted my review. But still, having a Firepower of 7 against MGs and Guns and 11 against Tanks just feels weird (it is the same gun after all!). Now I understand that this is just an abstraction of the chances to destroy a tank vs. the chances to suppress/reduce the WT/Gun squad. Maybe it would be more elegant to keep the same Firepower and add different modifiers, although I understand that rolling against an 11 is different than rolling against a 7 with a -4 bonus...

Jim Krohn wrote:
Although BoB is very simple, I still maintain it is the most realistic representation of tactical combat in WW2.


It might as well be. See, I'm not a history buff, I'm a gamer. What I look for is not realism, but rather verisimilitude. It just needs to feel real for my limited knowledge and understanding. Maybe this will change one day the more I learn about warfare, but for now I want to play really exciting scenarios and have the feeling that I'm playing war.

Jim Krohn wrote:
I think Ghost Panzer strongly takes the next step for the system and I hope you like it.


Good! Let's wait for it then!

Jim Krohn wrote:
My goal for BoB was a mix of scenarios from short to long. That is one reason why there are 18 scenarios. I like the shorter, infantry only scenarios for new players, when I have a time crunch, and when I am in the mood, but my personal favorites are the larger, mixed force scenarios.


I just want to make clear that my complain is not about the quantity of scenarios in BoB. In fact I would rather have a handful of them, as long as they kept calling me for more and more.

Maybe it's just me, but I really think the maps could have some of that verisimilitude mentioned above. The symmetrical towns and hedgerows really bother me, plus they don't give enough variety.

----------------------

I'm thinking that I should try games with CRT now. The dice results seem to be more predictable and varied at the same time. In other words, rather than having "60% hit, 20% reduce and fully suppress," you might have more possible outcomes. Is that really the case?
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Hoyt

Durango
Colorado
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
A note on maps. Since the mpas are small, most scenarios start with the sides already in contact. That's true for a lot tactical games, but it can mean that a lot of the important decisions get made before the game starts, especially for the defender, set up is key. I like to play scenarios where things develop a bit more, meeting engagements, ambushes, set piece defense but where attacker can come from multiple directions...

So I wanted more/larger playing area. I picked up a second copy of BoB on e-bay for quite cheap and that gave me more flexibility in map layout. You could do the same thing with a photcopier. Or draw your own maps (I like to fight in my neighborhood). Some tactical systems (PanzerGrendier) have included historical maps if that's important to what you're gaming. Borrow from other games.

In short, you're not limited to the maps in the box.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gustavo
United Kingdom
Birmingham
West Midlands
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
blockhead wrote:
A note on maps. Since the mpas are small, most scenarios start with the sides already in contact. That's true for a lot tactical games, but it can mean that a lot of the important decisions get made before the game starts, especially for the defender, set up is key. I like to play scenarios where things develop a bit more, meeting engagements, ambushes, set piece defense but where attacker can come from multiple directions...

So I wanted more/larger playing area. I picked up a second copy of BoB on e-bay for quite cheap and that gave me more flexibility in map layout. You could do the same thing with a photcopier. Or draw your own maps (I like to fight in my neighborhood). Some tactical systems (PanzerGrendier) have included historical maps if that's important to what you're gaming. Borrow from other games.

In short, you're not limited to the maps in the box.


Great ideas. I actually thought of using maps from other games with the BoB system, but I was not sure that I would be able to adapt the scenarios in a balanced way. Do you create your own scenarios or adapt from other games?

Another problem is that this is the only tactical game I have, so I don't have scenarios from anywhere else to adapt. I might look at the scenarios and maps for Valor & Victory though.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Neal Durando
France
Nantes
Pays de La Loire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
gmsa84 wrote:

Jim Krohn wrote:
Although BoB is very simple, I still maintain it is the most realistic representation of tactical combat in WW2.


It might as well be. See, I'm not a history buff, I'm a gamer. What I look for is not realism, but rather verisimilitude. It just needs to feel real for my limited knowledge and understanding. Maybe this will change one day the more I learn about warfare, but for now I want to play really exciting scenarios and have the feeling that I'm playing war.


Holy crap, that was well put! This is the crux of most criticism of WW2 tacticals since forever. This distinction is one which escapes quite a large segment of wargamers and a fair share of designers. Nice review, by the way.
13 
 Thumb up
0.06
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Krohn
United States
New York
flag msg tools
designer
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
badge
Ahhh....my misspent youth...
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
Quote:
It might as well be. See, I'm not a history buff, I'm a gamer. What I look for is not realism, but rather verisimilitude. It just needs to feel real for my limited knowledge and understanding. Maybe this will change one day the more I learn about warfare, but for now I want to play really exciting scenarios and have the feeling that I'm playing war.


Quote:
This distinction is one which escapes quite a large segment of wargamers and a fair share of designers.


The problem with having ONLY verisimilitude is that if it only has that, then by definition it is only the appearance of truth. For most people that is M44. However, you found out fairly quickly that it wasn't anything like playing war. For me, at one point, it was ASL. It had the appearance of truth....just look at the size of that binder! Once I realized it wasn't truth, I designed BoB.

What is really needed is both realism and verisimilitude. Not only have truth, but it also appears to be truth. Knowing that many people's opinions of WW2 tactical combat were shaped by the games already out there (including my opinion at one point), I wrote extensive designer notes. I tried to gain some verisimilitude by education.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roger Brandon
United States
North Bend
Oregon
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
What I look for is not realism, but rather verisimilitude.


That makes me think of watching war movies, where most viewers have no idea that the "German Tiger tank" is just an old modified American Patton or Soviet T-34 made to sort of look like a Tiger, while those of us that have a fair knowledge of the equipment are greatly irritated, as it just looks so wrong.

Using one of the few actual Tigers still running might cost more, and only a small percentage of viewers would notice, but I think the more realistic you can make things the better.

The same with historical games. You could make a very playable tactical war game that has little or no connection with the true abilities of various units or equipment, but why not make a playable game that tries to get things right too? War gaming is something that tends to attract people with a keen interest in military history, so getting the facts wrong will irritate a lot of the most likely buyers of those games.

Of course, it's been over 50 years and still the modern war game hobby struggles with the right formula for making good games. And, perhaps, like food, music, etc., there's never going to be a game that will make everyone happy, as too many people have too different taste.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roger Hobden
Canada
Montreal
Quebec
flag msg tools
Avatar
Each tactical game has it's own "target audience", and they obviously seem to be succeeding very well, because nearly all of the systems are represented in the top 100 BGG wargames.

Naturally, the target audience for Memoir 44 and the target audience for ASL is completely different, even though you have some rare individuals who would play both.

Others have mentioned elsewhere that Band of Brothers is not really designed for solitaire play and so should not be judged on that criteria. Conflict of Heroes is a another system where a lot of scenarios permit hidden movement and thus is not as good for solitaire play.

I just started playing Lock N Load this summer I find the system very nice, but the rules are written in a complicated style and gives the impression the system is more complexe then it really is.

I have my copy of Band of Brothers and intend starting to play this semester. Your review has not convinced me otherwise, but thanks for sharing your thoughts.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Krohn
United States
New York
flag msg tools
designer
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
badge
Ahhh....my misspent youth...
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
Quote:
That makes me think of watching war movies,


At least now (in more recent movies) they try to make them look like the real thing. I can't watch the battle scenes from Patton. I think they straight up used M48 tanks instead of Shermans.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
beresford dickens
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Many years ago, my father took the family to see a dubious film called 'Frauleins in Uniform'. The plot was soft porn, but I remember being impressed when the battle scenes used real T34s (whereas more respectable films had cardboard tanks or Patton tanks in drag),
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim F
United Kingdom
Birmingham
West Midlands
flag msg tools
Where the heck did this interest in WW1 come from?
badge
Ashwin in front of Tiger 301
Avatar
mb

beresford wrote:
Many years ago, my father took the family to see a dubious film called 'Frauleins in Uniform'


I wonder if that was as uncomfortable as watching the sex scene in 'Coming Home' with my dad, both of us too embarrassed to say anything or switch over blush

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Reaper Steve
United States
Alamogordo
New Mexico
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
What I look for is not realism, but rather verisimilitude. It just needs to feel real for my limited knowledge and understanding.


That is a great line, and a great distinction. It helps me understand why I enjoy playing X-Wing so much (because it feels real), even though it (and every other playable dogfighting game) are not even remotely close in the realism department.

Gustavo, I'm going to borrow your line from time to time if you don't mind. I'll be sure to attribute it appropriately.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gustavo
United Kingdom
Birmingham
West Midlands
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Reaper Steve wrote:
Quote:
What I look for is not realism, but rather verisimilitude. It just needs to feel real for my limited knowledge and understanding.


That is a great line, and a great distinction. It helps me understand why I enjoy playing X-Wing so much (because it feels real), even though it (and every other playable dogfighting game) are not even remotely close in the realism department.

Gustavo, I'm going to borrow your line from time to time if you don't mind. I'll be sure to attribute it appropriately.


Sure. Thanks for the compliments
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
p55carroll
United States
Minnesota
flag msg tools
Games are like songs: you never get tired of playing the best ones over and over, and you can enjoy them all by yourself.
badge
"Fun I love, but too much fun is of all things the most loathsome. Mirth is better than fun, and happiness is better than mirth." (William Blake)
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Jim Krohn wrote:
The problem with having ONLY verisimilitude is that if it only has that, then by definition it is only the appearance of truth. For most people that is M44. However, you found out fairly quickly that it wasn't anything like playing war. For me, at one point, it was ASL. It had the appearance of truth....just look at the size of that binder! Once I realized it wasn't truth, I designed BoB.

Once I realized it wasn't truth, I was shocked completely out of wargaming for about ten years. My realization about ASL led me to believe, with a pretty strong conviction, that no wargame is ever going to show the truth. I'll bet not even BoB does it.

On a scale with real war at one end and chess at the other, every wargame I've ever met sits WAY closer to the chess end. Dig down past the "verisimilitude," and every wargame turns out to be essentially an elaborate chess variant.

Quote:
What is really needed is both realism and verisimilitude. Not only have truth, but it also appears to be truth. Knowing that many people's opinions of WW2 tactical combat were shaped by the games already out there (including my opinion at one point), I wrote extensive designer notes. I tried to gain some verisimilitude by education.

Sounds like the right way to go, if you haven't lost faith. Me, I lost faith, and I'm just beginning to regain a little of it.

For the most part, I keep history and wargames separate. The events behind the game I'm playing really happened, and that's cool, and I might like to read and learn more about them. But those events probably weren't much at all like what's happening on this game board, so I have to take all this with a grain of salt. Yet, to enjoy the game I have to suspend my disbelief and imagine that it's real.

Wargaming, to me, is more like historical fiction than anything else. When reading a Bernard Cornwell novel, you know the particular story being told never actually happened, but you also know that similar things did happen and that the background setting was real once upon a time. Wargaming involves a similar mix of make-believe and historical fact. One can learn something about history from wargames or historical fiction, but there are sure to be gaps and distortions. Hence, there's always much more to learn.

The main effect that change of attitude has had on me is that I'm now much less tolerant of complicated wargames. ASL might have been worth the hassle if it had been what I thought it was. Since (IMO) no wargame can ever be what I thought ASL was, none are worth the hassle. I'll only consider a game if it's relatively small, quick, and simple. If the best I can get out of that is verisimilitude, fine. If there's some historical truth there as well, it's a nice bonus.
11 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
BJ
Canada
London
Ontario
flag msg tools
"Yeah I killed women and children, killed everything that walks or crawls at one time or another and I'm here to kill you Little Bill"
badge
"It's a Sicilian message. It means Luci Brasi sleeps with the fishes."
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks, I really enjoyed this discussion.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jim Krohn
United States
New York
flag msg tools
designer
You keep using that word. I do not think it means what you think it means.
badge
Ahhh....my misspent youth...
Avatar
mbmbmbmb
Quote:
Once I realized it wasn't truth, I was shocked completely out of wargaming for about ten years. My realization about ASL led me to believe, with a pretty strong conviction, that no wargame is ever going to show the truth.


Quote:
I'll bet not even BoB does it.


Quote:
Yet, to enjoy the game I have to suspend my disbelief and imagine that it's real.


Quote:
The main effect that change of attitude has had on me is that I'm now much less tolerant of complicated wargames.


There are a lot of good comments, here. I picked out some of my favorites (the above).

I also was downright shocked/offended/disturbed/troubled/I'm not sure what the right word is when I figured out that ASL was so far "off". This also led me to be much less tolerant of a high rules overhead. Every rule better be worth it. It also led me to a very unique kind conclusion. I might be the only one who thinks this way....

No one would imagine that a Euro game actually represents what it is depicting. All it does is have a theme overlaid on top of mechanics. This part of my conclusion is obvious - no one thinks that Ticket to Ride is anything like building a railroad empire. So, if a wargame doesn't do a good job of representing what it is supposedly depicting (and this is where my thinking gets pretty unique) then it shares much more in common with a Euro game than most wargamers are comfortable with admitting. It becomes a war theme overlaid on top of mechanics. If that is true, then why not just play a conflict euro with much fewer rules.

Having said that, I have landed in a slightly more friendly spot than you did. As I said, I am much less tolerant of a high rules overhead. I also expect the game to capture the flavor and essential points of the conflict.

BoB - well, you are right, it isn't perfect. As the designer, I can even tell you a couple spots that I have intentionally short-cutted. First, despite the fact the squads can fire all day at dug in troops and not cause casualties from distance, it is still too deadly in that department. A very good case could be made for increasing all casualty ratings by 1 or 2. However, that would only serve to make every scenario longer, at times, much longer. I wanted the game to playable. Second, despite decoys and concealed units, both players still have too much information and too much control. It is frustrating to me, but there was no way I could figure out how to restrict the information or control any farther without making it unplayable.

So, what BoB does that other tactical games miss is (in my opinion) capture the essential points of WW2 tactical combat.

1. You will not stack your troops, but will spread your troops out, not because of a rule, but because the fire system punishes bunching your troops.
2. You will have to fire and maneuver if you want to succeed.
3. The suppression system means that you will not know if a unit will respond until you try to use it.
4. It also means that units will recover from fire the right way - time causes the effect of fire to wear off, not the appearance of a leader or the play of a card. Stop shooting at a unit and it will become more responsive.
5. Tanks are very vulnerable to infantry attack in close terrain. You better keep your tanks and your infantry connected.
6. Tank proficiency means that a tank will not be able to automatically spin around and face every threat.
7. The move marker rewards vehicles for changing position.
8. The friction of combat means that your command control becomes more limited with engagement as some of your units get suppressed or reduced so that their activation is not automatic. (it models combat friction well)
9. Etc. - I could keep going...

But, you are right, it is not a perfect simulation.
34 
 Thumb up
0.15
 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.