Armchair Dragoons Forums
Wargaming => The Modern World => Topic started by: bob48 on November 12, 2018, 07:00:23 AM
-
For anyone who may follow this series of WW1 tactical games from TBP (and I'm looking at you, Doug), there is a new addition to the series - 'Devil Dogs II - Faith and Sacrifice'.
This gives us more US Marines, maps and counters, and the module is designed by our own Cap'n Darwin, so it should be a good 'un.
https://tinybattlepublishing.com/products/in-the-trenches-devil-dogs-2
-
It's possible that I may have play tested a fair bit of it, made a Vassal module for it (that was never used), and have most of it here in my ITT box...
-
Nope - as you know, there are no Vassal mods for any of the games.
-
Actually, I believe there is for this new one. They had someone put one together.
-
So, when you and I were talking about it before, you mentioned an erratta, which I've never seen anywhere. Am I right in thinking this just exists in one of the expansions?
-
So, when you and I were talking about it before, you mentioned an erratta, which I've never seen anywhere. Am I right in thinking this just exists in one of the expansions?
I believe so. It might have been on one of the BGG pages for one of the expansions as well, or buried in a discussion. IIRC, it was from Gorkowski.
-
I have just ordered the '1916' expansion as a birthday present to myself :)
-
I have just ordered the '1916' expansion as a birthday present to myself :)
:applause:
-
I have just ordered the '1916' expansion as a birthday present to myself :)
setting out to relive your youth, huh? :bigthumb:
-
Cheeky bugger :tickedoff:
-
You have to admit you pretty much lobbed him a softball.
-
Well, yeah, but I didn't think he would stoop that low to catch it!
-
Its a really nice little game system. Could do with a few rules clarifications and a couple more examples of play.
-
So, despite some misgivings, I brought the '1916' expansion since it includes a nice selection of nationalities and a few 96) scenario's.
Whilst you should not expect too much from 'budget' type games, there are a few things that I have found so far which are quite annoying;
Although the die cutting is not too bad, there is quite a few instances of 'colour bleed' and misalignment of printing on the backs of some counters. Fortunately, this is not so sever that you cannot read the info, but its poor QC for sure. Also, the counters are joined to the sprue at the edges rather than the corners, thus making it impossible to get a nice smooth edge. This does not, of course, affect play, but ti does make the counters look untidy.
The three maps are nicely done albeit a bit thin. the game description tells us that they are 11" x 8.5" but in reality they are 17" x 11"
The counter mix includes British tanks and French infantry, but none of the 6 scenarios include these units, so they are 'spares' maybe useful for people who wish to make their own scenario's.
Also included - 2 German flamethrower units with no explanation or rules detailing how to use them. There is a very brief mention of them in the core rules, but nothing in any detail.
The first scenario calls for the capture of three 'strong point' without any clue as to what a strong point is, and there is not an illustrated terrain key to show what it looks like. The map has nothing that is an obvious feature, so I'm a bit baffled by this.
I've posted question on both BGG and CSW, but so far, it seems that no one bothers to read them any more.
Its a great pity, as the underlying game is very good with just a few niggles that, for me, detract from its play-ability.
-
Having gone back and looked at it, I would have to say that the 1916 expansion looks like it wasn't really checked or play tested.
The first scenario in fact makes no sense. There aren't any strongpoints identified, at all. I have no idea what that means.
Looking at the picture for the second scenario, it looks like there should be British tanks. They're in the picture. What they aren't is listed in the OOB for the scenario. What I don't know is if maybe you were sent the wrong counters - I punch all of mine and have no idea what came with what game anymore. There are definitely British, American, French, and German tanks in other scenarios, so it's possible you have at least one sheet of counters that shouldn't have been in there.
Flamethrowers, as indicated on the counter, have no ranged attack, which makes sense at this hex scale. They are only useful in close combat. If you check the Close Combat Table, you'll see that they have a close combat value of 12, versus the close combat value of a normal rifle platoon, which is 3. So, in a Close Combat between a flamethrower platoon and a rifle platoon, the odds are 4:1 if the player with the flamethrower is the phasing player, resulting in a +4 DRM when rolling for close combat. That's gonna suck for the rifle platoon.
The only problem is getting the flamethrowers close enough to actually perform close combat...
Both the 1916 and Rising Sun expansions had terrible die-cutting on the counters and very thin paper on the maps. Later expansions have properly die-cut counters and somewhat heavier maps. I've laminated pretty much all of the maps because the paper is so damn thin.
It's unfortunate that some attempt hasn't been made to go back and fix the 1916 expansion. I have to admit that I really haven't played any of those scenarios, and so wasn't aware of what a mess it was. I may have a go at trying to straighten the scenarios out and providing my private versions of them.
This really is the best WWI tactical system out there. I genuinely wish that some other company had the rights to it, since it clearly isn't going to get treated right in it's current home.
-
Yep, a great waste!
I've looked at the counter sheets on BGG and I definitely have the correct ones.
-
The two core games and the first one or two expansions were all produced under Mary's tenure at Tiny Battle (though the expansions wouldn't actually be released until later). Everything after that - including the 1916 expansion - was produced after, and I'm not sure who was looking at it at that time.
Did the 1916 game have a lot of new material? I ask because the first two expansions drew heavily (maybe even completely?) from the original Grenier Games publications. While Mary and I needed to check them, we didn't need to do all that much with it or change anything. But if the 1916 game had new scenarios, of course there's more things to check, more room for error.
-
Hello, Tom.
I think that the 1916 expansion was maybe the third, or even fourth one to be released.
This is an extract from the TBP page;
Note: The six scenarios of In the Trenches: 1916 were originally published in 2009 by Grenier Games, as part of their In the Trenches: The Lost Generation expansion. We have taken these scenarios, tweaked and polished them, and treated them to brand new artwork by Jose Ramon Faura and a full-color eight-page scenario guide.
Now, this does not seem a very accurate statement, since, as noted previously, there are glaring issues with at least the first 2 scenarios, which, on the face of it, seem to indicate a distinct lack of play testing or checking of the product to insure it complies with what it said it does.
To put it another way, the product does not achieve customer satisfaction, nor is it fit for purpose in its present form due to the errors noted above.
I fully accept that the physical components may not be up to the same standards as more expensive products, but even so, there must exist some minimum standards of quality. In the case of my game, the die cutting is not good and a quality check conducted by a publisher who had some sort of minimum quality standards would most likely have rejected at least one counter sheet.
I am, to say the least, very disappointed in the product and, whilst I do like the system, its doubtful that I will do as I originally intended and purchase the remaining games in the series or any later additions.
-
Completely understandable.
I'd like to think that if we had been responsible for 1916, those problems wouldn't be there. But then of course we wouldn't have gotten Hollandspiele off the ground. So it worked out okay for us, even if it didn't for this series, unfortunately...
-
Yep, I agree with you. I have also sent an email to TBP, but if and when I get a reply remains to be seen.
Whatever, thanks for your reply, it is appreciated.
B-)
-
hiya, Tom!
-
Take no notice of Brant - he's just trying to ingratiate himself...............
-
Take no notice of Brant - he's just trying to ingratiate himself...............
Tom's met me; he knows I need all the help I can get :)
-
https://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/30521890#30521890
Typical Mark Walker.
-
No comment. :-X
-
Just...wow. Wow.
-
And the sad thing is, he probably actually believes what he says.
He also seems to have forgotten that he is a vendor and that I, and others like me, are paying customers. For some reason, he takes the attitude that he is doing us a favour by making games for us to spend our money on.
I will not waste any more time or money on either him or his companies.
-
I will not waste any more time or money on either him or his companies.
Ditto. I was happy when he sold LnLP.