Recommend
52 
 Thumb up
 Hide
40 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

A Victory Lost» Forums » Reviews

Subject: So, this is what all the fuss is about. rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Severus Snape
Canada
flag msg tools
Pascal said, "The eternal silence of these infinite spaces terrifies me."
badge
"The heart has its reasons which reason knows nothing of."--Pascal
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Introduction:

As is often the case with MMP, the sum of the game product is usually better than its individual components. In a word they are cheap. At the same time, the game is overpriced on the OOP market, whereas, when it was new, it seemed a sweet deal.

I have mixed feelings about MMP and its IGS series. It seems that MMP has a way of taking pure gold and turning it into sheer bronze, rather than the reverse. I suppose, in the case of AVL, it is because of how much effort was placed into producing a product with such seemingly cheap components. I realize that we could bandy about "cheap" until the cows finally do come home. But take your standard GMT box, charts, counters, and anything else you can find, and go one-for-one with what is inside A Victory Lost. You can both see and feel--especially feel--the difference.

Then again, MMP is making it possible to get some nifty games translated into our English speaking hands, and MMP must be commended for that. Why, I wouldn't be able to complain about AVL's cheapness if it wasn't for MMP.

I am particularly interested in this particular historical period of Soviet thrust/Axis counterthrust, and I would love to see the Stalingrad campaign expanded with the system.

Components:

Map: The glossy finish detracts, and if you do not place the map under a plexiglass type surface, your panzers will literally pop all over the place. Why MMP used such inferior components is beyond me, but if we continue to buy it, they will continue to sell it.

Rulebook: I am not sure what all the buzz about clarity is all about, but I found it average, except for the generous use of examples. The text itself is rather so-so, so I guess that helps us to appreciate the examples.

Tables & Charts: Except for one expanded sequence of play, everything else is found on the map. The teeny-tiny CRT is ludicrous, and the terrain chart is hardly outstanding in terms of comprehension. The placement of both charts assumes both players can read sideways, and at a distance, or one of you has to take them on upside down. Gee, how much more might it have cost to have inserted them onto separate charts, one for each player? There's room for both tables on one chart.

Counters: The tank images are a throwaway; why put money into needed things when we can just give you something you do not need? I do like the historical period symbols used on the counters, something I first encountered, as best as I can remember (other than in a history text or two), in Red Star Rising. Once you get used to it--and it should not take long--there should not be a problem. And the unit SP's and MP's should be a give away as to what is what. I find the counters to be of better quality than the map, though it is difficult to pin down why.

Set-up:

Here is an area where AVL truly shines. By using different colour schemes on the counters, and by showing the map placements on the map itself, the game set-up is among the fastest I know. The colour patterns help both sides units to be identifiable without being ugly or standing out in such a way as to bring negative attention.

Some Historical this or that's:

A quick glance reveals how "standard" each sides combat units SP's are. I can see why a designer would opt for the simple. It still makes for a good game, even if most of your Soviet infantry has an SP of 2 or 3. And let's not forget to make the Axis Allies incredibly weak with their standard SP of 1. I also "get" how difficult it might be to research Soviet OB's in order to determine the flavour differences between units. However, there seems to be more material for the Axis side. I get tired of hearing how "elite" the Italian Alpini units were, while seeing them with SP's of 1 each.

That being said, for the Red Army to steamroll the Axis, that have to use what it takes: a steamroll. Unless the Soviets pile-on or surround Axis units, they do not die easily.

I do find it more than gamey to see enemy reinforcements being placed deep behind your front line because you did not adequately cover a railway. That is simply ridiculous and it is a rule that I do not use. It defies both history and common sense, as well as railway gauge conversions that take, ahem, time. If AVL wants each side to cover its proverbial rear, just make a rule that penalizes the offender in VP's if it is not done.

As far as HQ's being able to control any force within range, it makes sense in the game's chit-pull design, even if it does bend aspects of history. I have read that after the Stalingrad debacle, the Germans had staff helping to run the Romanian HQ's, or to at least "assist," so it makes sense that the Rom 3 Army can order any German troops. As far as the others Axis HQ's, that seems more questionable, but hardly impossible. Anyway, without a chain of Red Army HQ's, whatever happens can likely be stemmed by the late rush of German reinforcements.

The game needs to be played several times, with the Soviets attempting different approaches, to see what does and does not work best. Going for Rostov to knock out the 1st Panzer Army is always a treat for both sides. But what about just going down the middle to the more centralized VP cities?

The CRT:

I am not sure what all the negative vibes are concerning the CRT. If your units are surrounded by ZOC's, the CRT is hardly "bloodless" in its effects. And if the Soviet sledgehammer is hammering away, you'll need more than Bactine and bandaids to cure what ails you.

Overall Evaluation:

Why give AVL a high rating? It comes down to the variables presented in the chit-pull system. Both sides are presented with a choice of which HQ's go into the cup, and then must deal with the randomness of the draw. The Soviet side has to decide, at the outset, which HQ's, including future reinforcements, will be used. I do not understand the concerns about replayability, given the many options that can unfold in the course of the game. It is tight and tense and fun. I would like to see the system used in other games.

A Victory Lost is a fun game to play. I would like to see if anyone has addressed the concerns others have raised by the use of house rules. I would like to see the game reprinted with a higher standard of component quality, and with the addition of optional rules and counters.

goo

Edited for clarity, to expand the discussion a wee bit, and for those annoying mistakes that everybody but me makes; which would be true, except that it isn't.

45 
 Thumb up
5.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joe Thompson
England
Winchester
Hampshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
bentlarsen wrote:
I do find it more than gamey to see enemy reinforcements being placed deep behind your front line because you did not adequately cover a railway. That is simply ridiculous and it is a rule that I do not use


Omitting this rule will change the game a lot. Yes, it may not make a lot of sense historically, but there again I'm not sure much in a simple game like this does.

Also, when discussing component quality are you comparing MMP 2006 (when AVL was published), with GMT 2012?

I actually think AVD is a better game than AVL.

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
Cheap components, indeed. I'm in the process of punching and trimming (i.e., "rounding") the counters from The Blitzkrieg Legend: The Battle for France, 1940, and wishing to God that Essig and Co. had thrown in with GMT, instead. I absolutely detest this die cut where the counters attach to each other on the sides, rather than the corners. I'd think that, for a list price over a hundred dollars, the counters should damn-near fall out of their sheets under a stern glare.

MMP prints games we all want to have, but only as opposed to not having them at all, from anyone else.
11 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Borchers
United States
Keller
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
Cheap components, indeed. I'm in the process of punching and trimming (i.e., "rounding") the counters from The Blitzkrieg Legend: The Battle for France, 1940, and wishing to God that Essig and Co. had thrown in with GMT, instead. I absolutely detest this die cut where the counters attach to each other on the sides, rather than the corners.


Hmmm ... I don't own The Blitzkrieg Legend, but the images here on BGG seem to show the counters are joined on their corners. I haven't seen too many games in the last 10 years or so where the cutting die was meant to leave counters joined at the side rather than the corner. I believe the counters for AVL were attached by the corners as well.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Severus Snape
Canada
flag msg tools
Pascal said, "The eternal silence of these infinite spaces terrifies me."
badge
"The heart has its reasons which reason knows nothing of."--Pascal
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
Omitting this rule will change the game a lot. Yes, it may not make a lot of sense historically, but there again I'm not sure much in a simple game like this does.

Also, when discussing component quality are you comparing MMP 2006 (when AVL was published), with GMT 2012?

I actually think AVD is a better game than AVL.


Joe, what else in the game do you feel does not make historical sense?

It's theme seems more than a paste job, both in feel and play.

My GMT Crown of Roses, Virgin Queen and Mr. Madison's War seem to be of high quality. Or do the mounted boards count as a miss?

I had AVD in my hands for a matter of days before it went out in a trade, just as it had come in a trade.

goo
2 
 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
mr_peabody wrote:
Quote:
Cheap components, indeed. I'm in the process of punching and trimming (i.e., "rounding") the counters from The Blitzkrieg Legend: The Battle for France, 1940, and wishing to God that Essig and Co. had thrown in with GMT, instead. I absolutely detest this die cut where the counters attach to each other on the sides, rather than the corners.


Hmmm ... I don't own The Blitzkrieg Legend, but the images here on BGG seem to show the counters are joined on their corners. I haven't seen too many games in the last 10 years or so where the cutting die was meant to leave counters joined at the side rather than the corner. I believe the counters for AVL were attached by the corners as well.


Well, I've already gone through 3 sheets of them. Each counter is connected to the counters next to it (or the sheet, itself) by a 1/16" piece at the top and bottom, but clearly on the side, and not on the corner. If you want a clean cut, you actually have to run a razor knife vertically between each pair of counters. Otherwise, you're left with two side nubs on each of the two vertical sides of the counters.

Corner connections are literally at the corners, and not at the upper- and lower-ends of counter sides. Breaking such counters apart leaves you with strands coming off the corners of the counters. Breaking apart these counters leaves you with HUGE stubs on the sides, just above the lower corners and below the upper corners. A PITA, if you plan on rounding the corners, and not just clipping them off, as they interfere with proper seating in the rounding tool.

Unlike what I see with GMT counters...
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Paul Borchers
United States
Keller
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Okay, I see what you mean now - I thought you meant a stub literally halfway between the corners, like I used to encounter on older half-inch countersheets from Avalon Hill.

Whenever I've bothered to trim counters, I've always done it with an X-Acto knife so I can avoid the counter details, should the alignment be slightly off. I'm more concerned about the functionality (that is, not colliding with other counters on a dense mapboard) than a strictly uniform appearance. There's definitely a trade-of between clean punching and having enough sturdiness to avoid counters falling off the sheets during shipping.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joe Thompson
England
Winchester
Hampshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
bentlarsen wrote:
Quote:
Omitting this rule will change the game a lot. Yes, it may not make a lot of sense historically, but there again I'm not sure much in a simple game like this does.

Also, when discussing component quality are you comparing MMP 2006 (when AVL was published), with GMT 2012?

I actually think AVD is a better game than AVL.


Joe, what else in the game do you feel does not make historical sense?


In the games of AVL that I played control of those railroads, to prevent those nasty reinforcements behind the lines, played an important part. I guess my point is that it's an integral part of the game as designed; omitting this aspect would lose some of the gameplay. Now I think you could probably pick on other parts and decide it's not historical. eg, the chit pull mechanic, or perhaps that giant Stavka chit.

Quote:

It's theme seems more than a paste job, both in feel and play.


Agreed.

Quote:

My GMT Crown of Roses, Virgin Queen and Mr. Madison's War seem to be of high quality. Or does the mounted boards count as a miss?


Yep, GMT component quality is superb. But I've noticed in the two or three years that I've been buying wargames that GMT have visibly improved. You list 3 games from 2012; my question was what was GMT like in 2006 when AVL was published?

Like other people I'm concerned that TBL seems to have taken a step backwards with thinner counters.

Quote:

I had AVD in my hands for a matter of days before it went out in a trade, just as it had come in a trade.


What put you off?
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Severus Snape
Canada
flag msg tools
Pascal said, "The eternal silence of these infinite spaces terrifies me."
badge
"The heart has its reasons which reason knows nothing of."--Pascal
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
Yep, GMT component quality is superb. But I've noticed in the two or three years that I've been buying wargames that GMT have visibly improved. You list 3 games from 2012; my question was what was GMT like in 2006 when AVL was published?


Joe, I missed the 2006. I'll have to dig around, though I have a copy of Ukraine '43 near by, published in 2000. I would not call its components as good as what GMT is now making, but I would consider them to have the qualitative edge on AVL.

Quote:
What put you off?


Good question: I think I just wanted something else, and did not/do not think of AVD as a "keeper."

goo
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Joel Tamburo
United States
Justice
Illinois
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Remember MMP 2006 was when they were putting way too many folds in the paper maps. The GMT maps have always had the fewest folds possible. As to counters, GMT counters have been high grade for years. They may sometimes be the thinner white stock but they are properly die cut and mostly the fronts and backs are correctly aligned.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jon
Canada
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mb
Thanks for the review (as always)...

I have mostly positive feelings about the AVL.

The rulebook was clear. Quite frankly, it should be for such a simple game, but all to often in this hobby I come across lack of clarity in even light weight games' rulebooks. In addition, whenever I did have a rule question I always found the answer easily. Kudos for that.

The game play was fun and the historical situation interesting. I liked the impact that the initial Soviet attacks can make and the resulting decisions forced upon the Axis player as he/she needs to deal with a deteriorating situation. Furthermore, I think that the Soviet player has a number of options regarding overall strategy. Similarly, the Axis player has to determine just how much effort should be made north/east of the river line.

Most interesting, for me, is that the game allows for an active, mobile defense by the Axis. The Axis can lump those panzer divisions together to form the nucleus of very hard hitting counter attacks. Determining when, where and the duration of those counter attacks lies at the heart of this game. As I understand it, this mobile defense strategy formed the basis for von Manstein's ideas and, as such, I think AVL captures this very, very well.

I only came across a couple of cons during my play experience. One a solid issue, the other more vague...

For one, the game is long. Too long really given the relative simplicity of it in my opinion. From my experience it will take roughly nine hours to get to the end of all of the turns (should it last that long).

The other deals with the chit pulls. Now, I have no problem with the chit pull mechanism at all. However, in this case I have a slight concern that given the relatively few chits in the cup, the order of pulls can have a more weighted impact than I would like. As I say, this is a rather vague, ill-defined feeling that I have and so take it as such.
17 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Severus Snape
Canada
flag msg tools
Pascal said, "The eternal silence of these infinite spaces terrifies me."
badge
"The heart has its reasons which reason knows nothing of."--Pascal
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
I only came across a couple of cons during my play experience. One a solid issue, the other more vague...

For one, the game is long. Too long really given the relative simplicity of it in my opinion. From my experience it will take roughly nine hours to get to the end of all of the turns (should it last that long).

The other deals with the chit pulls. Now, I have no problem with the chit pull mechanism at all. However, in this case I have a slight concern that given the relatively few chits in the cup, the order of pulls can have a more weighted impact than I would like. As I say, this is a rather vague, ill-defined feeling that I have and so take it as such.


Jon, thanks for your contributions (as always).

For two thoughtful, careful players--or sides--I can easily see it taking an hour per turn, though perhaps not so much for the Red Army at the outset. How the Axis attempts to get its bacon out of the frying pan and away from the fire is another matter.

The order of the chit-pull reminds me of how, in a CDG, the deck can clearly be stacked against you. It is a random riot of fun and games.

goo
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jon
Canada
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mb
I remember a FtF game over two sessions that went nine hours in total. We played at, what I thought, was a pretty brisk pace. That is, little time spent yakking or shrouded in AP. And it was about the third or forth playing for both of us. Even if my memory is faulty and we slagged a bit, it would not be much less than nine hours for us to complete it. My fear is that it might be much more for dawdlers.

True, the element is luck is inherent in most games and dealing with it's waxes and wanes is a large part of what makes the hobby fun. Where my concern originated was in observations from the early game. If the Axis is unable to "unstick" itself from the initial Soviet onslaught they will not be able to form a viable river defense. Fair enough. However, I have seen that ability hampered severely by the order of the activations. Plus superior Soviet play of course.

Again though, I should emphasize that it is just a vague, ill-formed concern. Like a slight gastrointestinal twinge an hour after eating a delivery pizza. "Is it real?" one asks oneself.
9 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Osprey
United States
West Virginia
flag msg tools
badge
Errg...Argh..
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I love this game. The only issue I have with the rules now is the retreat toward a supply source. There are plenty of instances when retreating toward a source is actually putting you further away from being in supply due to enemy unit placement. It makes more sense to me to retreat closer to a supply route than to a source that you will never get to heading in that direction.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jon Gautier

Rhinebeck
New York
msg tools
badge
mbmbmbmbmb
Yeah, the rail reinforcements is a gamey rule that has no basis in reality, but losing it changes the game because it very much alters the flexibility players have with their units. And although the rule has no grounding in fact, it does enforce more historical behavior (that is, covering your front). In that way it is a bit like the OOS rule in PoG. I like the game so much as it is, I have never house-ruled it. I'd be interested if losing the rail reinforcement rule throws off the game balance. I agree with Joe on this point.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Severus Snape
Canada
flag msg tools
Pascal said, "The eternal silence of these infinite spaces terrifies me."
badge
"The heart has its reasons which reason knows nothing of."--Pascal
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Dieroll Honker wrote:
Yeah, the rail reinforcements is a gamey rule that has no basis in reality, but losing it changes the game because it very much alters the flexibility players have with their units. And although the rule has no grounding in fact, it does enforce more historical behavior (that is, covering your front). In that way it is a bit like the OOS rule in PoG. I like the game so much as it is, I have never house-ruled it. I'd be interested if losing the rail reinforcement rule throws off the game balance. I agree with Joe on this point.


The railroad reinforcement placement farce reminds me of Ty Bomba's dreadful Drive on Stalingrad. The Axis player can wipe out virtually every Soviet combat unit but still lose the game because one Red Army survivor manages to get to Rostov.

Sis. Boom. Bah. Hiss.

That being said, yes, both sides need to cover their rear ends. It is unbecoming otherwise. modest

goo

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rui Serrabulho
Portugal
Lisboa
Lisboa
flag msg tools
badge
You have to, at least from a distance, look as if you know what you're doing, and I can manage that.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
bentlarsen wrote:
Introduction:

As is often the case with MMP, the sum of the game product is usually better than its individual components. In a word they are cheap. At the same time, the game is overpriced on the OOP market, whereas, when it was new, it seemed a sweet deal.


I do not agree because MMP as great games with good components, such as: Angola, Battle Above the Clouds, None But Heroes, Kingdom of Heaven: The Crusader States 1097-1291, the better components on the OCS series,The Devil's Cauldron: The Battles for Arnhem and Nijmegen and Where Eagles Dare. The Special Ops Issues were a great addition as well.
I do agree that A Victory Lost is overpriced, it´s not historical accurate but it gives great fun and tense plays. For me, just my opinion, the counters have a nice artwork and the map is just fine. The quality of the map is good.

bentlarsen wrote:
I have mixed feelings about MMP and its IGS series. It seems that MMP has a way of taking pure gold and turning it into sheer bronze, rather than the reverse. I suppose it is because of how much effort is placed into producing a product with such seemingly cheap components. I realize that we could bandy about "cheap" until the cows finally do come home. But take your standard GMT box, charts, counters, and anything else you can find, and go one-for-one with what is inside A Victory Lost. You can both see and feel--especially feel--the difference.


We must situate in time AVL, it was released for 6 years ago in 2006. It is such a cheap full game for that time? Twilight Struggle (is not a wargame) it was released a year earlier, in 2005, and it did not have a mounted map and the counters were of more quality of the ones in AVL? Of course the cards made Twilight Struggle more expensive..

bentlarsen wrote:


Map: The glossy finish detracts, and if you do not place the map under a plexiglass type surface, your panzers will literally pop all over the place. Why MMP continues to use such inferior components is beyond me, but if we continue to buy it, they will continue to sell it.


I can´t understand this type of comment because GMT, as well as other company's, had released several games in maps that we need to use plexiglass type surface. I am playing Panzer (second edition) with plexi and the game out in 2012. Bloody April, 1917: Air War Over Arras, France, Mr. Madison's War: The Incredible War of 1812, Pax Baltica, Bomber Command and I could continue.

bentlarsen wrote:


Tables & Charts: Except for one expanded sequence of play, everything else is found on the map. The teeny-tiny CRT is ludicrous, and the terrain chart is hardly outstanding in terms of comprehension. The placement of both charts assumes both players can read sideways, and at a distance, or one of you has to take them on upside down. Gee, how much more might it have cost to have inserted them onto separate charts, one for each player? There's room for both tables on one chart.


I agree with you but unforgettably that happens in a lot of games.

bentlarsen wrote:


That being said, for the Red Army to steamroll the Axis, that have to use what it takes: a steamroll. Unless the Soviets pile-on or surround Axis units, they do not die easily.


That´s not the major objective of the game. You also have to earn VP´s in city's or try to cut supply and then attack. The last option is difficult but you could mess pretty bad the HQ´s of the Axis.

bentlarsen wrote:


I do find it more than gamey to see enemy reinforcements being placed deep behind your front line because you did not adequately cover a railway. That is simply ridiculous and it is a rule that I do not use. It defies both history and common sense, as well as railway gauge conversions that take, ahem, time. If AVL wants each side to cover its proverbial rear, just make a rule that penalizes the offender in VP's if it is not done.


Instead of your thoughts of being gamey I find more realistic. The Dark Valley is coming out one of this days and it also will use rules regarding the railways, but of course it is different. Supply is almost everything in a war.

bentlarsen wrote:


Anyway, without a chain of Red Army HQ's, whatever happens can likely be stemmed by the late rush of German reinforcements.


That´s what make the game tense and fun. The later you do your thing, as the Soviets, the more you will get in trouble.

bentlarsen wrote:


But what about just going down the middle to the more centralized VP cities?


When two players are experience, know how to play the game, that will happen and it will disputed until the end.

bentlarsen wrote:


Overall Evaluation:

Why give AVL a high rating? It comes down to the variables presented in the chit-pull system. Both sides are presented with a choice of which HQ's go into the cup, and then must deal with the randomness of the draw. The Soviet side has to decide, at the outset, which HQ's, including future reinforcements, will be used. I do not understand the concerns about replayability, given the many options that can unfold in the course of the game. It is tight and tense and fun. I would like to see the system used in other games.


You will see a completely revolutionary chit and pull system in The Dark Valley.

bentlarsen wrote:


A Victory Lost is a fun game to play. I would like to see if anyone has addressed the concerns others have raised by the use of house rules. I would like to see the game reprinted with a higher standard of component quality, and with the addition of optional rules and counters.


I agree that is fun and could be reprinted so that other players who do not have the game could play but to me the quality is just fine and I am now curious about which house rules could be applied...

GMT and MMP are my favorite company´s.

Thanks for writing this review of AVL and don´t see my views like I have reason on my side. Just thoughts about a precious game to me for several factors...

edit: substitution of ) to ,
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Osprey
United States
West Virginia
flag msg tools
badge
Errg...Argh..
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yeah, I can't say that the rail rules model anything realistic, but they do add another aspect of strategy to the game which I don't mind at all. And yes, you do have to cover all of your holes, or asses, or both, to prevent the enemy from getting behind you. However, there have been times where I have actually encouraged an opponents attempt at doing so by making it look like I forgot to plug a hole someplace. This can't be done just haphazardly, you must have a planned out response if the bait is taken, but if it works as planned it will be your opponent that finds himself as the one being cut off from supply and then dying on the vine. I once had an opportunity to get behind my opponents lines with some armor units and hit a lone HQ unit to drive it out of command range of his units which were breaking out (this was using normal movement and not rail movement however). It cost me some armor units and delayed his ability to get back to his spearhead for 2 turns. I'm still debating whether that was worth it or not. I did win however.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tim Taylor
United States
under surveillance
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
I do find it more than gamey to see enemy reinforcements being placed deep behind your front line because you did not adequately cover a railway. That is simply ridiculous and it is a rule that I do not use. It defies both history and common sense, as well as railway gauge conversions that take, ahem, time. If AVL wants each side to cover its proverbial rear, just make a rule that penalizes the offender in VP's if it is not done.


That would be a "Design for Cause" solution. This is a "Design for Effect" game.

That is, the effect generated within the design is correct, but for all the wrong reasons as you noted.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Severus Snape
Canada
flag msg tools
Pascal said, "The eternal silence of these infinite spaces terrifies me."
badge
"The heart has its reasons which reason knows nothing of."--Pascal
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
That would be a "Design for Cause" solution. This is a "Design for Effect" game.


How about if we just call it "Design for Annoyance Effect" and call it a day for this dead horse? sauron

goo

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kev.
United States
Austin
Texas
flag msg tools
Read & Watch at www.bigboardgaming.com
Avatar
Well,
I wondered the same thing about this game overall. I like MMP a tad more than you do by the sounds of it. But mostly fair if not scathing comments.

OOB issues that you mentioned...hmm don't these guys have the research and work from dozens of OCS titles? Or does the designer hold those to the vest?

I thought the map was bland, the counters distasteful/ugly.
The command and control rules awkward .
The Chit pull system here was laborious... I like chit pull games. This one. Geez every time STAVKA came up I called a break. What a freaking grind.
Then after all that I have never had a Soviet win, nor heard of one where RAW were used.

The OOP price is silly. I was fortunate enough to borrow a friends copy for play. Now AVD is a refresh of these rules and a refinement. Much better.
A superior game in many ways, and one of the recent crop to attempt to replicate the great PanzerGruppe Guderian title.

I'm doing a side by side play thru of both titles. Should be fun to examine and contrast the play of both games, I'll post AARs on The BigBoard.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Sosa
United States
Newark
Delaware
flag msg tools
badge
I will break him.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Where AVL is simple and effective, AVD is convoluted. I was so annoyed at all the rule additions that I traded it away immediately, just like the reviewer here. Now I think I may have rushed that decision, but it was definitely a negative first impression from an AVL fan.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sean McCormick
United States
Philadelphia
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Herr Niemand wrote:
Quote:
I do find it more than gamey to see enemy reinforcements being placed deep behind your front line because you did not adequately cover a railway. That is simply ridiculous and it is a rule that I do not use. It defies both history and common sense, as well as railway gauge conversions that take, ahem, time. If AVL wants each side to cover its proverbial rear, just make a rule that penalizes the offender in VP's if it is not done.


That would be a "Design for Cause" solution. This is a "Design for Effect" game.

That is, the effect generated within the design is correct, but for all the wrong reasons as you noted.


Agreed. I don't mind the rule because it's a very simple way to encourage historical behavior, much like Paths of the Glory's draconian supply rules. Considering the complexity level of the game, I think it's a reasonable approach.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
olivier R
France
flag msg tools
Avatar
Interesting review but calling AVL's components cheap makes it sound like you have been a tad spoiled imo. You have a nice glossy rulebook, the counters are a bit on the thin side maybe, but they're perfectly fine otherwise and personally I like the way they look a lot. The map is not mounted, sure this is the exception rather than the norm.

To sum it up, having a game whose production is not lavish and luxurious doesn't make it cheap. It is just standard.

Also your perception is probably skewed by the fact you got it at a hefty price, being oop now. But when it was published I can't remember exactly but it can't have been more than 50€.

And there is something to be said about the recent pricing policy of gaming companies where you have more and more games costing a hundred euros or more, which imo is setting a bad trend. I am perfectly happy with games of the AVL quality if it keeps the price at a reasonable level. But that's just my opinion.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Severus Snape
Canada
flag msg tools
Pascal said, "The eternal silence of these infinite spaces terrifies me."
badge
"The heart has its reasons which reason knows nothing of."--Pascal
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Olivier, I am sure that I am spoiled in the area of games, and so many other things besides. But having owned and played war-games for longer than I'll admit--in public--I know "cheap" when I feel it, play it, see it. And people seem to be unaware that I still rate this game a ten. Perhaps I am not so spoiled after all.

If I had only paid the original price for AVL, I would stll call it cheap. And I would still call it great.

goo
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
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.