Armchair Dragoons Forums
Game With The Dragoons => Saturday Night Fights & Tabletop Simulator => Topic started by: Cyrano on August 23, 2019, 04:49:37 PM
-
So, who's up?
We have two things left unresolved.
If we have MORE than Doug and I we can return to Teugn-Hausen and wrap that. I want to make comments about Teugn-Hausen.
If it's Doug and I, we can Aspern-Essling. That may not last one hour, much less three.
Let the people sing....
-
I shall not be watching this weekend, as I shall be at the Trombone Shorty / Ben Harper concert with my wife that night.
-
I shall not be watching this weekend, as I shall be at the Trombone Shorty / Ben Harper concert with my wife that night.
Trombone Shorty...
Euphemism, right?
-
I am in. Wife is away so no distractions from that quarter.... ;)
-
I am in. Wife is away so no distractions from that quarter.... ;)
(https://encrypted-tbn0.gstatic.com/images?q=tbn:ANd9GcR5UzwiYAQvZHtHZqNtct2CPNJC2UWxOnl7TMANXnlvt6xKZNHkyA)
-
I shall not be watching this weekend, as I shall be at the Trombone Shorty / Ben Harper concert with my wife that night.
Trombone Shorty...
Euphemism, right?
-
What time are we playing this evening? Need to make sure enough beer is properly chilled in time.... :D
-
What time are we playing this evening? Need to make sure enough beer is properly chilled in time.... :D
There's beer?
-
What time are we playing this evening? Need to make sure enough beer is properly chilled in time.... :D
There's beer?
Yes, you use it wash out bourbon glasses. I don't know why he would want to chill it though. (http://www.aarcentral.com/emoti/JC_thinking.gif)
-
I can do 1830 CDT if folks are up for it?
-
If I'm around I'll swing by Steam. That's 1630 my time though and she might have us out for a while on errands.
After all, "We're only going to two places" should be multiplied by a factor of 4 when such statements are made.
-
I'm stuck at work.
-
1900 CDT is better for me. Been working on my car and need to clean up, have dinner, walk dog, etc....
-
1900 it shall be.
-
I'll probably join. Not sure I'm up to playing though. Been up since about 3am. Haven't seen the wife and kids since I got home either.
-
I'll probably join. Not sure I'm up to playing though. Been up since about 3am. Haven't seen the wife and kids since I got home either.
Always glad to have you by :).
-
Won't be able to join but, as always, I've started drinking bourbon. :bigthumb:
-
Haven't seen the wife and kids since I got home either.
Was that intentional? :hehe:
-
Won't be able to join but, as always, I've started drinking bourbon. :bigthumb:
We each do what we can.
-
No, Jake was at a farm auction with friend and patty and O had to take something up for the county fair that starts this week and do some shopping. Olivia was doing stats for volleyball game today. So they didnt get going very early.
-
Why I'm not watching SNF tonight
-
So, a bit of a bumpy ending to the second go-through at Teugn-Hausen, but, on the good side, nobody died.
Also, I think the discussion was a good one and will result, I hope, in a better game next time we play BP(1-2).
There is a NEW PLAN FOR NEXT WEEK...check it out.
-
I'm going to walk back some of what I said about tactical, operational and strategic games last night.
Tactical - Yes, there are some historical scenarios where either side could win. But there are just as many (or more) where one side neve really had a chance. Designers shouldn't try to nerf one side so they can try and get a different outcome than what really happened. What they should do, it challenge the player of the losing side to do better than what was historically done and show plausible effects if those goals are met. To me, it seems like laziness on the part of designers to understand the effects of changing the outcome of a battle could of had on the larger picture.
Operational/Strategic - I did say that it's probably more realistic for designers to setup possibilities that the historical losing side could win. I stand by that, but designers cannot get too wild with it either. As an example, Poland in 1939 had absolutely no chance to stop either Germany or Russia, or both at the same time, as what really happened.
-
Operational/Strategic - I did say that it's probably more realistic for designers to setup possibilities that the historical losing side could win. I stand by that, but designers cannot get too wild with it either. As an example, Poland in 1939 had absolutely no chance to stop either Germany or Russia, or both at the same time, as what really happened.
Summer Lightning by LnLP is a good example of an operational game that gets this right, for exactly the scenario you're talking about.
-
Sounds interesting PanzerDe
https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/42591/summer-lightning-invasion-poland-1939