Great analysis. I agree with you that the card system works well to replicate the frustrations commanders must have faced during this era, while at the same time being very easy to manage rules wise.
@Hex2Hex
2 жыл бұрын
I must admit this is the 1st game where I have not been concerned with the rules to any extent.
@alansaunders1828
2 жыл бұрын
Bro, You've convinced me to pull the damn trigger and get this one :-)
@Hex2Hex
2 жыл бұрын
You will not be disappointed Alan!!!
@timothyvance3830
2 ай бұрын
Just bought this game retail to celebrate the 161st. Is the first Battle of Gettysburg game I've ever owned. Your excellent review along with those of others convinced me this was the game to get, even though the price tag exceeded my comfort zone. Thanks for the enthusiasm!
@Hex2Hex
2 ай бұрын
Tim - you will have a blast with this game and system.
@purplenorseman426
2 жыл бұрын
really enjoying ur coverage of this play through. awesome job. ur enthusiasm is contagious!
@Hex2Hex
2 жыл бұрын
Thanx Norse.
@davidmurray5399
2 жыл бұрын
The nearest I've come to a Civil War era experience[other than than re-enacting], is listening to my Dad's great Uncle describing going to Abraham Lincoln's funeral viewing in Cleveland. Will Murray was 108 years old, I was eight years old. He was twelve when his father took him and his younger brother up to Cleveland to go through the viewing line and see the dead President's body. No, they didn't have any photos of the event, though there are some pictures in the State Historical Society.
@Hex2Hex
2 жыл бұрын
Wow David, there's some heritage there!!! I had relatives in the ACW, but don't have any real stories to share.
@xPEACExTSM
2 жыл бұрын
I ♥️ this system!
@Hex2Hex
2 жыл бұрын
It is damn good, isn't it Peace?
@stephenjantscher4116
2 жыл бұрын
I'll start this comment by saying I have the game, haven't played it yet, and have followed those who have. My major concern is over the introduction of units to the field of battle, and how closely the game mirrors the historical reality. I'm aware that the exact time that units appeared on the real field of battle is at best a historical guess (participants often varied in their time estimates by hours), but the order of units relative to others was generally known, and the arrival of certain units reaching certain positions on the field, before or after others (friend and foe alike), is also generally known. I'm concerned that a game mechanic, while simulating the vagories of the 3 FOGs of war, seems to preclude reproducing the historical "reality" of when the actual units reached their "first contact with the enemy" positions. In a meeting engagement type of battle, this is very important. As HL says, "Its our game" and he's not likely to take it back if we play it other than the way he designed it. Making excuses that this game mechanic simulates something is fine and dandy, if it generally allows the historical playing pieces to reach where the actual units did in real life. If however it leads to needless frustration in units reaching their historical "time on target", its a knock against the game that otherwise looks great. I think reviewers and players should pause before apologizing for what appears at first glance to be a serious flaw in the game system.
@Hex2Hex
2 жыл бұрын
Sorry this took so long to reply, Stephen. Comment - "If however, it leads to needless frustration in units reaching their historical "time on target", it's a knock against the game that otherwise looks great." For my re-creation of a historical battle, I found the mechanic to work quite well. For example, Rodes and early arrived 45 minutes to an hour apart on July 1st, which the game represents by Early entering 1 turn (An hour) after Rodes. Once Early hits the field it is my responsibility, as the overall commander, to issue instructions for his deployment. I feel that the DP mechanic shows the potential for failure to issue orders, maybe because couriers were not getting to the commanders, or maybe Ewell does not see Early arriving from the northeast, or he was too busy working with Rodes to see Early. Could be a number of things, and instead of writing 500 extra rules for command this mechanic simplified it. Again, this my opinion. I would love to hear back from you once you play the game to see if you see the mechanic as good or bad. I am curious to other's opinions. There are Event cards in the game that will allow you to simulate a leader of a child unit to act on their own. Example: Early is not DP1 for II Corps, but you use an event card to activate Early as if he was making a battlefield decision without orders from above. I appreciate your input, it gets the mind to working.
@WARdROBEPlaysWWII
Жыл бұрын
Rewatched - enjoyed your excitement on how to prioritize.
@Hex2Hex
Жыл бұрын
Thank you sir.
@782hrr
11 ай бұрын
I’m playing small battles… waiting for picnic table…THE GAME IS PERFECTION… no made up cards needed it represents how command works in civil war. As for the “ sound of the guns” these unit commanders knew it wasn’t the best choice because you were blind from lack of information and lack os visibility… the battle field was full of smoke from firing or fires.
@Hex2Hex
11 ай бұрын
Awesome 782, great insight on this too. Excellent points.
@robertmoffitt1336
2 жыл бұрын
Oh my, I'm not saying a thing this comment! I'm just going to stick with the rules as written! I've had zero games published, mainly because I have never designed a game, nor made any attempt to. From this point forward, I'm zipping my lip and just watching! 🤐🤐🤐🤐🤐 For the record, I've heard most ACW soldiers had better ear plugs than they do today, and were extremely safety conscious and always wore their ear plugs in a fight, so they couldn't march to the sound of the guns anyway due to wearing their hearing protection. 🤥 😉
@Hex2Hex
2 жыл бұрын
I'm not sure if this bad or good Rob? I love feedback and potential options, and I know the Devs do too. Please don't stop the input.
@robertmoffitt1336
2 жыл бұрын
@@Hex2Hex I'm just joking mainly, but I'm not commenting because I haven't played the game yet! Lol! Even after I play the game I know already I'm going to love it, because I love the Blind Swords games. If I have any comments to make after I play the game, just a warning here, anyone reading them should ignore them immediately. Mainly because I have no idea how to design a game! LOL! 😄
@Hex2Hex
2 жыл бұрын
Lol, I gotcha!!!!
@robertmoffitt1336
2 жыл бұрын
@@Hex2HexGreat series of vids, BTW!👍
@TheBlueTweezers
2 жыл бұрын
I think people had a problem with Union 1st Corps counterattacking at the same time as bringing reinforcements up. I think there is a misconception that you need to prioritise a division that is on the defense. I think in this game what Wadsworth Division does doesn't need to be micro-managed beyond the odd default event. So Reynolds can concentrate on bringing the other divisions up.
@Hex2Hex
2 жыл бұрын
I agree with the Default Event use Blue, I just didn't learn it until after the fact.
@thomasbeach7307
2 жыл бұрын
I don't own the game and have only skimmed the online rules. That said, I admire the concepts seemingly adopted to add chaos and confusion to the Civil War battlefield. But there was one thing you said that really struck me, however. And that is, that the game abstracts command decisions so that players don't have to think about it too much. And grasping as I could, the concept of "Command Priority," by placing division command cards in an order of priority strikes me as a game mechanic that I would not find believable. So you don't really know if your subaltern will get, understand or implement the order sent, but you can choose who to prioritize for the best chance? I'm dubious on that concept of play if I'm understanding it correctly. There was never a shortage of aides at corps level to maintain contact and attempt to try and coordinate all the divisions of the corps. Many times, (Thomas at Chickamauga comes to mind) corps commanders would send three or four aides with the same order to the same commander, understanding that one or more aides might get lost, captured, killed etc. So my initial opinion is that the mechanic of divisional prioritizing in this game employs an artificial abstraction to favor speed of play at the expense of sacrificing genuine effort to coordinate ones commands with heavy randomization. This give and take in the design strikes me as an undesireable tradeoff. Again, I have not played the game and perhaps as you say, this is a great mechanic and system which is faithful to the period and very worthy of being played. What I truly appreciated was your confronting the issue head-on that Hermann has employed and trying to give viewers a balanced view of both sides of the argument. This was very much appreciated. But as I soaked-in all of your commentary, it seemed to me that what was being abstracted was far more realistically presented in Dean's CWB series and the Orders rules, all without the need for cards, displays, randomizer chits and the requirement to line up your division commanders in an artificial order of priority. After all, I can't think of one corps commander who didn't consider all of his divisions equally important. It is true that in CWB one must parse a limited number of Command Points to his commanders. So perhaps Hermann's approach is comparable. I wouldn't know until I played it. But that is so unlikely, given the hefty price tag. As for the "Marching To The Sound of the Guns" option, I'm glad it's an option. There are far too many examples of commanders ignoring the sound of the fighting, sometimes, as with Kearney at Second Bull Run, even with orders!
@Hex2Hex
2 жыл бұрын
Always love to hear your input Thomas. I agree with you on CWBS Orders, it's definitely the most unique, mind-bending and realistic system. I would definitely like to see you play AMFS and compare it against CWBS, or any other system for that matter. As far as couriers/Aides go, we all know Lee kept only a small staff, and I also recall Meade sending only 1 Aide to Sickles to see his disposition, and the 2nd trip was conducted by him, which was too late because Hood was already on the attack or kicking off at least. If I remember correctly, in defense of multiple couriers, didn't Lee send like 3 separate dispatches on the same "INFAMOUS CIGAR ORDER" during the Maryland Campaign? In this card system, ie the Command Tables on the cards, it provides a simple approach to getting units moving in that each Corps Commander has a different level of efficiency, as do also, the division commanders. While it is not written out like a CWBS Order, it is still rolled on by the subordinate leader, granted in a simpler fashion, as to whether he executes it in full, minimizes it and in some case says "No", ie Harry Heth on a roll of "1". All in All, I think Hermann and the gang gave this an easy approach to command that represents in a efficient matter to allow players to play the game without spending long sequences of decision making at each command level. Although, it would be interesting to write orders in this game. Hmmm brain working now. Thanks again Thomas, always love your input, it gets me thinking.
@thomasbeach7307
2 жыл бұрын
@@Hex2Hex Thanks for your in-depth response, Jeff. You make some very good examples to counter my own argument (i.e. Sickles, although please recall that Sickles himself road to Meade's HQ to plead with him for his chosen disposition and support of Hancock and was kept waiting outside until he rode off to do it alone) and I agree that Lee's staff was indeed smaller and more likely to be slow to get his commanders orders. I'm not knocking the game as I haven't even played it yet. And your presentation is inticing. Perhaps I can pick up a copy on the used market and get to it. Thanks. Always enjoy your opinions as well. Tom
@nordicmaelstrom4714
2 жыл бұрын
Hexy I think I speak for everyone when I ask this very important question and if you have taken a Gettysburg battle walk you will get the joke. All I want to know is whether or not General Weed got whacked in your game play??
@Hex2Hex
2 жыл бұрын
My Weedeater batteries were dead.
@nordicmaelstrom4714
2 жыл бұрын
@@Hex2Hex That is a very serious problem. That happened to me last week.
@lonl123
2 жыл бұрын
Thank you for this...still waiting on my copy of the game to show up (Hopefully tomorrow!) so I have been watching every KZitem video I can on the game....was somewhat confused why some people have started making huge rule changes and the game hasn't been out but what? A month? As i researched the Issue I think the big reason is some people don't like "Chaos Mechanics"...they want more control over the units and the like and when the game simulates something that didnt happen in the battle, they get frustrated. Plenty of games on Gettysburg out there that give you god-like power over your units, and conflict just isnt anything like that. I think with the way the rules are it pitts you to try and deal with the situation as it develops historically or not. That to me is more of a simulation than trying to reproduce exact history with absolute control over how things play out.
@lonl123
2 жыл бұрын
I will probably have a lot more thoughts on this once I have played the game a bit....This game looks absolutly fantastic.
@Hex2Hex
2 жыл бұрын
I love the Chaos-Mechanic. It's what turns checkers into chess. No sense in playing a game if I don't have to use my brain.
Пікірлер: 36