Review of boardgaming year 5 (2018-19)

A collated list of games we have played is tabulated below. The list is primarily aimed at providing me with a detailed record of my boardgaming activity, so that I can spot and understand trends and favourites. It also sparks my enthusiasm for games I overlooked and want to play more of. The first figure is the number of times a game made it to the table, whereas the superscript number is the number of actual games played.

No Games played	Boardgame
1216	Targi
1017	Quacks of Quedlinburg
913	Ganz Schon Clever
626	Mind the Gap
510	Western Legends
58	Roll for the Galaxy
58	Ticket to Ride
414	Carcassonne
410	NMBR9
48	Azul
47	Keyflower
46	Doppelt So Clever
44	Dungeon Petz (& Dark Alley)
38	Mah-Jong
37	Paperback
35	Metro
34	Parade
34	Wingspan
28	Schotten Totten
28	Machi Koro
26	Santorini
25	Onitama
24	Blueprints
24	Pandemic
24	Ominoe’s
23	Patchwork
23	Lost Cities
23	Century: Spice Road – Eastern Wonders
22	Transatlantic
22	Now Boarding
22	Merchants & Mauraders
16	Deception; Murder in Hong Kong
14	Timeline
14	Marrakech
14	Parfum
13	7 Wonders – Duel
13	Sushi Go
12	Tiny Towns
12	Unexpected Treasures
12	Cockroach Poker
12	Small World
12	Five Tribes
12	Key to the City; London
12	Bang; The Dice Game
11	X-Wing
11	Port Royal
11	Castles of Mad King Ludwig
11	Lords of Las Vegas
11	Mexica
11	Kingsburg
11	Railroad Ink
11	Apotheca
11	8-Minute Empire
11	Arboretum
11	Welcome To...
11	Hey, That’s my Fish!
11	Castles of Burgundy
11	Pyramids
11	Citadels

 

In sharp contrast to my wargaming activity, this year has seen a bumper crop of boardgames played and a wide range of differing games. Elaine and I have played many more two player games and these feature strongly in the above list i.e. Targi, plus some multiplayer games that translate into good two player versions (e.g. Roll for the Galaxy).

There were a number of ‘stand-out’ games this year. My favourite must be Wingspan; the game is both beautiful and enjoyable. The mechanisms work nicely and the pace of the game accelerates, so that by the final 3^rd round players struggle to achieve all they want. A close second place goes to ‘Quacks of Quedlinburg’; a very simple push-your-luck style game that includes enough variants to ensure it remains fresh and fun. I have bought the ‘Witches’ expansion, which is OK but not really necessary. The next game that deserves mention is ‘Western Legends’; a game I wrongly thought Elaine may have disliked and would sit gathering dust. We have really enjoyed this ‘Sand-box’ game, particularly as a 2-player experience. A higher player count results in much more player confrontation and slows the game down, which I’m fine with but may not be to others taste. Finally, we discovered ‘Targi’; an old game but new to us. This simple 2-player game really tests the players, and combines the right amounts of decision making about your own actions, together with a degree of blocking moves to disrupt your opponent.

Other points to note from my listing are: (1) The high number of plays for ‘Mind the Gap’ resulted from a short city break in Amsterdam where this was the only game available to us. (2) The appearance of Mah-Jong on the list; we used to play this many, many years ago with my mother. We discovered a Mah-Jong group locally and decided to give it a go again. The game is fine but suffers because there does not seem to be a set of universally recognised rules! For example, the local group only accepts “clean” hands whereas I have always played “dirty” (as allowed by the British Mah-Jong Association rule book I have). Also all the “special” hands make the game more complex than it need be. (3) The ‘Clever’ Roll’n’Write games are a current favourite when it comes to a filler game, but it is not easy to flip between the two games (play one or the other, with a gap between the 2 game types). (4) Finally we have joined a newly formed local gaming group, which has expanded and added to the games we play. For example, we took ‘Bang, the Dice Game’ to a meeting and played with 8 players and found it to be highly enjoyable, whereas previously with only 4 players it was a much less fun. Another example of improved game play was a recent game of ‘Citadels’, which again benefits from a high player count.

So, a very busy and good boardgame year, and I’m looking forward to the coming year.

Review of the wargaming year 2018-19

The fifth year of my blog has now been completed and the number of hits still seems to be rising but only slowly (up 9% on the previous year). The audience appears to be consistent, with USA, Russia and UK dominating, but a good number of European readers spread across the continent. Most interest concerns new rule sets (e.g. Saga v2, Impetus v2), but there are more views on posts related to my painting progress than in previous years. Boardgaming also continues to be highly viewed (see my next post on the Boardgame Year). I still would like to see more comments but overall I’m happy with how the blog has gone. The main purpose is to keep a sort of diary of my activities for my own record, and I’m happy that others may find this interesting.

The games I have played this year are listed below:

	Period	Rules	Type	Scale
1	Ancient	Impetus; EIR vs Germans	OpposedL	28mm
1	Napoleonic	Grande Armee	Solo	6mm
1	Ancient	TTS: Lysimachid v Thrace	OpposedL	15mm
1	Medieval	Saga: Teutonic v Pagan	OpposedL	28mm
1	Ancient	S&S; Persian v Indian	OpposedL	15mm
2	Dark Ages	Saga: Viking v Anglo-Danes Saga: Normans v Scots	OpposedW OpposedW	28mm
1	Ancient	S&S: Succesor v Greek	OpposedD	15mm
1	Ancient	Impetus2; Punic Wars	OpposedL	15mm
2	WW2	Chain of Command	Solo	20mm
2	Napoleonic	Sharp Practice	Solo	28mm
1	Pirates	Blood and Plunder	Solo	28mm
1	Modern	Cold War Commander	Solo	6mm
1	AWI	Washington’s Army	OpposedD	15mm
1	Ancient	Impetus; Han Chinese	OpposedL	15mm

 

I have played a similar number of games compared to last year but more of these have been opposed games rather than solo efforts, but I continue to lose more than I win!

The wargame highlights of the year must be the new editions of Impetus and Saga, both of which I think are improvements on their earlier versions. I enjoyed trying the “To The Strongest” rules and think they give a good game. I have also started to revisit other rules that I feel have been neglected, such as “Blood & Plunder”, and I hope to get my pirates on the table soon.

In summary 2018-19 has been a very quiet year. I continue to say that I must play more regularly, but life just seems to get in the way! I don’t have any specific plans in mind for next year projects, but the upcoming Colours show in Newbury may help.

AAR: Han Chinese (Impetus v2) 1Sept19

This was the first outing for my 15mm Han Chinese armies, and only the second use of the Impetus 2^nd edition rules. I worked out two 400 point armies representing the Eastern and Western Han armies (very similar to each other), and I randomly got the Western Han. Both armies had 3 commands, and all the commanders were rated as ‘Reliable’. The terrain selection procedure resulted in another open field of battle, with a small difficult hill on one flank and a field of crops on the other flank. I personally think the terrain selection part of these rules are very weak and too often produce featureless battlefields.

My Western Han deployed on the right
(Notice my deployment error!)

Ian deployed his army in a conventional manner with a central infantry command flanked on each side by cavalry commands. I was going to have a similar deployment, but after placing my central infantry command, I changed my mind and decided to place both my cavalry commands both on my right flank. I hoped to overwhelm Ian’s cavalry and press in on his centre. I was to learn an important lesson: Never (!), never (!!) change your battle plan on a whim and halfway through your deployment (!!!). I soon realised that I did not have the space to manoeuvre both cavalry commands between my infantry force and the difficult hill on that flank. Attempting to overcome this bottleneck slowed my advance, disorganised the units and lead to congestion. In addition my central command needed to be nearer the crop field on the other flank, which meant it was dangerously exposed.

My central infantry command under pressure

Disaster rapidly came! My unit of heavy chariots failed to unplug the pinch-point, they were then destroyed by a counterpunch from Ian’s elite cavalry, who went on to knock out further units in their pursuit. In just a couple of turns my army was in disarray and taking heavy losses. Meanwhile on the other flank, Ian’s unopposed cavalry command was wreaking havoc on my exposed infantry. Thankfully I was swiftly put out of my misery, as first one command routed and then the army morale collapsed soon after.

My losses rapidly mount!

This heavy defeat was solely down to my stupid deployment and change of battleplan! The Impetus v2 rules work well but do take time getting used to. I like the changes and clarifications to the charge reactions: the options to evade/counter-charge/defensive fire etc. are much clearer. I also like the reactive fire options, and these were one of the changes it was most difficult to remember to enact. The only criticisms I have concern the terrain selection mechanism, and possibly, the victory conditions. It feels that the loss of a single command rapidly progresses to the loss of the whole army, whereas I would prefer a more gradual, nuanced approach.

Overall, an instructive game for me and I am keen to play more Impetus v2 games. The Han Chinese armies are interesting to use. I noted that bolt-throwers are useful against ‘large’ formations, and the crossbow armed cavalry are more effective than I originally thought.

AAR; AWI (Washington's Army, RFCM) 11Aug19

This game was arranged by Ian using his beautiful AWI figures and terrain. I played using a fairly regular American Continental force versus Ian using a more irregular British Southern force of loyalists. The rules we used were Washington’ Army (RFCM). Like most Peter Pig (RFCM) rules the game starts with a pre-game phase, which determines attacker/defender, terrain placement, delays/reinforcements, flank marches, officer quality etc. etc. This process does take some time and involves much dice rolling, but does allow significant choices to be made and results in a less predicable, and asymmetric, set up.

As the American player I was determined to be the defender, and as a result some of my units suffered losses and others were delayed as reinforcements. My flanking forces was only small (1 unit of raw militia) as opposed to Ian’s strong 3 unit force. Ian’s generals were better quality than mine, but I was lucky and a sharpshooter killed his C-in-C before the battle started.

I determined to hold a solid defensive front with my regulars and force Ian to attack across the open ground. I was concerned by my flank objectives which were only weakly defended.

Americans on the right defending the road between the river and stream.

On my right flank a single regular Continental unit lined a rail fence. Ian’s attack suffered a stuttering start and took some casualties before finally forcing my forces back from the fence, exposing the objective marker. In the centre the British attack moved faster but was met by good fire from my main Continental line and artillery. My militia skirmishers battered their opposing British skirmishers. The situation looked comfortable for the Americans, but events on the far left flank were to prove ‘interesting’! Ian’s sole unit of mounted light dragoons rapidly advanced, by-passed my militia in a town, and speedily took the centre objective on a hill in the rear of my centre position. I did receive some reinforcing militia and artillery, who moved to contest this situation. I thought Ian would dismount and hold his position, but instead he charged my centre forces in the rear. I lost my artillery unit, but before Ian could fully exploit his advantage, I managed to get a veteran Continental unit to change facing and counter-charge the British cavalry in the flank. The cavalry routed and disaster was averted. This move did expose the Continentals to a British charge in their rear by a nearby unit. I was very lucky, and rolled good dice; the charge was repulsed, my veterans survived and re-took the centre objective.

British centre force (left) about to receive a battering from the Continental line.

In the last turn we played, the British flanking force turned up on my left flank but I did have some militia present to contest the objective. We did not have time to finish the game (there were probably 2 more turns still to play), so the game was drawn. I think Ian would have control of my right flank objective, whilst I controlled the centre objective, where Ian’s centre attack was severely mauled. On my left, I don’t think Ian had time to force me off the objective, so this would remain contested.

The game played at a nice pace and was enjoyable. I think the pre-game process is good, but takes maybe too long, and this meant the main game was not finished in the 4 hours we played. I feel the time taken would be less if we were more familiar with the rules. The core rule mechanics follow the same systems common to most Peter Pig rules and are very easy to remember and use. I find the save mechanism for hits to be a bit too easy but this is just a personal gripe; saving on anything but a ‘1’ too often means a good volley of hits achieves no appreciable effect. I’m also not convinced by the ‘Determination’ dice roll mechanism that appears to be unique to this rule set.

Anyway, my thanks go to Ian for putting on this game. His armies are lovely to look at, and he always supplies an excellent array of game markers etc. that make play easy.

Off the Painting Table (Aug 2019)

I have finally finished my Han Chinese armies!

I feel relieved to have completed this project; it dragged on a bit with so many crossbowmen. Overall I’m fairly happy with the results. The Lancashire Games figures look OK. I did not go for a ‘uniform’ look across the army, but did give most units a uniform colour scheme within the unit. I plan to use these armies as Han and late Warring States forces, and they should morph nicely.

I have almost 900 points (Impetus) in total, so I can easily field pairs of armies with a range of variations. I have 4 units of peasants, so rebellious Yellow Scarf or Red Eyebrow forces can be fielded.

Their first outing will use the Impetus rules, but I want to draw up some Sword and Spear lists to use as an alternative.