Last Hundred Yards V5

[bob48]

https://www.gmtgames.com/p-1061-the-last-hundred-yards-volume-5-for-king-country.aspx

I know a few of you are into this system, and this is interesting as it add the Canadians, so that should please Vance!

[Barthheart]

https://www.gmtgames.com/p-1061-the-last-hundred-yards-volume-5-for-king-country.aspx

I know a few of you are into this system, and this is interesting as it add the Canadians, so that should please Vance!

Yep, just saw that. But you need Vol. 1 and Vol. 2 to play Vol. 5. Why do they build such dependencies. 

Oh, and also sold my copy of Vol. 1 to Doug. 

[bob48]

Yes, I did note that you have to own the first two.

Ah yes, I had forgotten that you had sold your copy off to Doug. He's very much into playing 'Band of Brothers' at present, though.

...we'll just have to wait for JD to get it then. 

[Barthheart]

 

[JudgeDredd]

I found the game difficult to grasp. It was an entirely new system, to me at least, and it proved - challenging. Not necessarily the games fault or the ruleset, which I think was well written, iirc...just I found them difficult to get my head around.

However, not challenging enough to sell the games on. I have volumes 1 - 3 and I don't think I've played volume 1 or 3.

As for

...Why do they build such dependencies. 

Cash grab - innit.

TBF to them, they're games are very reasonably priced. I think they were about £50 a pop when I bought them (just checked and they're closer to £60 now) which, I think, is good value for money for a platoon level game.

[bayonetbrant]

Why do they build such dependencies. 

Probably because they figure you're more likely to be all-in on the series rather than just individual games, and that way you're not getting repetitive components.  That'd be my guess, at least

[bob48]

It seems to be a common trend with a few games series. I was looking at the Horse & Musket games again, and to play any of the expansions, you need the base game .

[JudgeDredd]

I doubt they're doing their business any favours if they do expansions like that but the base game can't be bought

[bob48]

I've really become quite interested in this series, and thus downloaded the rules and watched a few vids - the best one by far when it comes to explaining basic gameplay is one by Stuka Joe.

Whilst there is much to like about the series, I took a look at the forums on the game's BGG page (as is my usual practise) and found that the posts run to some 19 pages, and of that, over 600 of the posts were related to rule queries.

Maybe this is just an indication of how popular the game is, or does it possibly signify that a lot of people have issues with the clarity of the rules?

[Barthheart]

I think it's more because the system is very different from other games at this level. It's takes a bit to "unlearn" all the "usual" rules for squad level games and relearn this new style.

Plus, I think, if you look close a lot of the questions are about how to figure out LoS across the contour lines on the maps. Not too difficult but again very different from "the standard" games at this level.

I liked what the series was trying to show but eventually found it too much "work" to unlearn and relearn just to have a squad level scrap. Getting old I guess....   

[JudgeDredd]

I think it's more because the system is very different from other games at this level. It's takes a bit to "unlearn" all the "usual" rules for squad level games and relearn this new style.

Plus, I think, if you look close a lot of the questions are about how to figure out LoS across the contour lines on the maps. Not too difficult but again very different from "the standard" games at this level.

I liked what the series was trying to show but eventually found it too much "work" to unlearn and relearn just to have a squad level scrap. Getting old I guess....   

I literally just PM'd bob my experience with the game  explaining exactly what you said.

[bob48]

having now had a chance to fiddle about with the Vassal mod, I can see exactly what you and Vance mean. Its just a different approach, but, at the end of the day, its really nothing that different that some other tac level games. I do like the way all combat is resolved after all action/ reaction have been conducted, but again, the end result is no worse or better than the results you would expect from other similar games.

The one aspect that originally got my interest was that of command control and unit integrity. I do like the fact that the game is based around a 'proper' if somewhat generic unit structure. However, there is no real requirement to maintain unit cohesion although there are obviously game advantages to doing so, and therefore, that works to an extent.

Like JD, I found the contour lines /LOS a bit of a struggle, although to be fair, its often an issue with other games, so I guess its really just a matter of getting use to it.

The thing I did feel is bit odd about the system is that units that are marked with a hit modifier marker, and then subsequently move, carry that marker with them. I'm not saying that this is wrong, but I would have thought that this would incur a penalty of some sort that would reduce the effects of the fire, as in being a moving target. I think this happens with the vehicle rules, but I have not got that far into it.

Its certainly an interesting game, but would I buy it?

Maybe, but only if I could find a decent pre-owned copy of that and the first expansion. I'm not really interested in the EF or Pacific expansion, but would be very tempted by the next one which will feature British & Commonwealth forces - something which, as I may have mentioned before, is sadly lacking in tac games (ASL not withstanding).

[JudgeDredd]

Yeah there was lots to like. I loved the variable time lapse function and as you said, the command element was well done I thought.

Like I said - you just seemed to have to close with the enemy to get a decent chance of reducing them. Although that makes complete sense in real life, from a game perspective I found it difficult to get my boys charging over open ground to take an MG nest.

Having said that, suppression was key to - fire and move is very important.

It was different to other games I'd played which made me struggle a bit with it and then the contour lines. Personally I didn't like the fact there were some that didn't make a difference...why have them on there - they were purely for show (as far as I recall they didn't impact gameplay) and all they did was busy up the map. I was fine with the contours that affect LoS...but the others?? I don't recall them making a difference.

But as I said to you in PM - I wanted to like it. I knew it had potential if I could just change my mindset a wee bit - so I kept a hold of all 3 games. I haven't plunked for the Russian one though...which I may reconsider.

I really thought they were a steal. There's alot in there for £60.

[bob48]

I just was looking at the counter sheets for vol 2 since there are some interesting units on there.

There are some British tanks included, but they seem to be organised as 2 platoon, each consist of 6 M4's, one of which is a Firefly. However, the OB for a Brit 'platoon' - known as a Troop, would be 4 tanks, one of which would be a Firefly, and three Troops would constitute a Squadron, (company) + command sections extra, of course.

[JudgeDredd]

...
Its certainly an interesting game, but would I buy it?

Maybe, but only if I could find a decent pre-owned copy of that...

Keep an eye out on your postal service