Re: Field Marshal Games Pieces Project Discussion thread

@Arthur-Bomber-Harris said in Am I winning or Losing: data analysis of high-level BM4 games:

Interestingly, Moscow and India hold for a much longer time than in the “old” days. This isn’t surprising as the balance mod gives more income to Russia and handicaps Japan.

The India NO of +3 that is easy to hold is also quite significant. +9 instead of +6 per turn

I’ve never done high bid OOB, where like a fighter to India and infantry in a couple territories around there would seem to basically make up for this NO

But like you said “old days” when everyone did small bids like 10-20, India was a house of cards and Russia had a pretty bad time, yes.

This is a preview of the rules:Rules for “The War of the Middle East”

I want to say that this game is simply for alternate future and for entertainment. I do not want to offend anybody, nor do I support the Islamic State. This game is fictional and I hope you enjoy.

Basic Rules: Using one of the 4 Powers; ISIS, The Iraq/ Syrian forces, The U.S.A., and The Republic of Turkey. Each power has originally controlled territories. Each Territory has IPCs, and with those IPCs you can buy units (see What are IPCs?). When capturing a territory you earn the IPCs if you hold the territory until the end of the turn. Then using those units you try to strategically win the game. ISIS has no allies except for Palestine being a aligned neutral. ISIS has 2 moves in one turn.
ISIS has big boost of IPCs because of the oil that they have access to. Each territory that has an oil marker that they control at any point in game they can use it to sell some oil for IPCs. You can save these oil points up to convert to IPCs.Each oil point you receive each turn can then be sold for 2 IPCs. If you sell an oil point on a turn, you must use the IPCs that you earned form the oil the same turn. Oil points on the board are located under each territories IPC count. Only ISIS can make money from oil. Only 15 IPCs can be used per 2 turns from oil. If the number of IPCs that you earn from oil goes over 15 IPCs per 2 turns then oil runs out and you cannot sell oil until the number of IPCs you earn (not from oil) cancels out.
ISIS earns 1 infantry each turn due to “Recruiting”.

You do not need to conduct combat to move into allied territory. Allied troops can defend together but not attack together.

Had a few questions regarding this game.

It says AA guns, supplies and trains are destroyed if targeted by SBR and hit. Was curious if 1 hit destroys all supplies/AA guns/or trains in a targeted zone or just 1 of them? The way it describes them in plural terms throws me off.

What happens when multiple generals meet in battle? For example 2 Russian generals meet 2 German generals in a battle, do you add their skill levels and roll ? Or do u only use the highest skill level and roll? And how is it decided which attribute is used or is the winner of roll able to use multiple attributes?

What are considered vehicles? For times when vehicles get a modifier to their roll. I was thinking vehicles would be all armor, mechs, SP artillery, and maybe tank destroyers but wasn’t sure. I figured SS grenadiers would be considered infantry since their counterparts for Russia are Guard Rifles.

I understand that all units being used for combat are moved in the combat move phase and then all units can be moved in the non combat phase, even those used in combat. However it specifically mentions aircraft are able to move up to their move limit during combat move and then must land in a tt that has been friendly since beginning of the turn. My question is : Are aircraft able to move in the combat move phase even if they aren’t going into combat and then land in the non-combat phase and if so do they need a supply to be used each time like other units?

I wasn’t sure about this since it seemed strange that aircraft could move their limit in combat move and then again in non combat move, but only if they are going into combat.

Any help or info would be greatly appreciated. Thanks.

Hey All,
I’ve had time to play a couple of games of the new Fortress America. Aside from the new pieces, the game is pretty much the same as the older version. Here are the most noteable differences:

The USA’s Partisan cards are spelled out quite a bit clearer than the old ones. These tell you EXACTLY what territories, units and actions are involved. Most of the cards are really the same as in the old deck, except of course one that deals with Colorado Springs, which wasn’t in the old game, but the new cards seem to spell out what you are supposed to do in more detail. They even tell you to discard the card after you are done.
After I compared the new and old cards, I can see that some of the old cards could have been misread. Specifically, the MAJOR AIRLIFT card. With the old game, I always played it by taking ALL US units anywhere on the board and moving them as I wished. The new MAJOR AIRLIFT card specifically says that you pick ONE territory and can move the units from that territory to anywhere on the board that doesn’t have enemy units (even enemy controlled, unoccupied city territories). So, the USA player is basically limited to a maximum of 5 military units that he/she can move around like this. While this can still be a big plus for the US, especially if the invaders have left a lot of cities unoccupied, it isn’t so devastating to the invaders that it might be a game ender. Since then, I have gone back and re-read the MAJOR AIRLIFT card in the old deck and realized that I think I have mis-played it all this time. I think it might have ALWAYS been just one territory of units, not ALL US units. The way it is worded could go either way.

Another big difference is that the Mobile Units are much more useful now. If you have a Mobile Unit and an Infantry (or Partisan for the US) in the same territory, that Mobile Unit can transport that Infantry/Partisan with it in the Maneuvers phase (normally Infantry/Partisans have no movement in the Maneuvers phase). This happens on a 1:1 ratio. So if you have 2 Infantry and 1 Mobile Unit, then only 1 Infantry may travel with the Mobile Unit. That makes Mobile Units much more valuable now. In the old game, they were more or less mobile cannon fodder to me.

Finally, the biggest difference is that now there are cards for the Invaders. Each Invader has a deck of 8 cards that can give them certain advantages if certain conditions are met. During the reinforcement phase, each Invader must decide to get 8 new units or get only 5 new units and draw a card. Each card has certain advantages which could boost their forces’ movement or attacking power or cause a detriment to the US’s abilities (like depriving them of the laser attacks for a round). To gain these advantages, certain conditions must be met, like holding certain cities, or simply a certain number of cities and/or holding certain resource territories (agriculture, mineral, oil). Some cards are one time use and others are “Remain In Play” which the invader that holds that card can use even if the original conditions are no longer met. For example: Say the Western Invader draws a “Remain In Play” card and the conditions are that he has to own Los Angeles, 2 Agricultures and 1 Mineral. Then later on he loses one of the Agricultures, or the Mineral, or even Los Angeles, he can STILL PLAY THAT CARD. Also, even once the Invader’s reserves are depleted, they can still draw cards during the reinforcements phase. If you get a card for which you haven’t met the conditions yet, you simply keep it face down in front of you until you can use it. So, theoretically, Invaders could possibly use several cards in the same turn, provided all the conditions are met for each card.
Frankly, while some of the advantages in the cards are pretty good, I think overall they are more of a detriment to the invaders as well as the overall game experience. As an invader, you might end up becoming too fixated on trying to accomplish the conditions on a card so that you can gain that advantage that you end up not doing other things that would better defeat the USA forces. As for the game, it really takes more time for the invaders to keep checking their cards to see if they meed the requirements. Also, losing that 3 extra pieces each turn so you can draw a card may not seem like a lot, but I think it could be just enough for the USA player to get just enough of an edge that they don’t lose all 18 cities. The longer this game goes, the more forces the US will have and the less the Invaders will have, thus it will be that much harder to gain the 18 cities and defeat the US. Plus if you keep getting cards that you can’t use, then is it really worth losing those extra 3 units each turn. It seems to me like a lot of the conditions, while not impossible, are pretty hard for the Invaders to accomplish. For Example: there are two or three cards for the Eastern Invader where one of the conditions is an Oil Resource. The nearest one for them is clear over by Memphis. That’s a lot of territory to conquer.

Well, there is my report. It’s a pretty cool game, but VERY similar to the old game. If you have the original, unless you just really want the new pieces and map or really want to try out the new Invader cards, I would say save your money and play the original some more becasue except for the few points above, they are basically the same game.

DFWSupertrooper,

Obviously with my Color mapboard being 4’ x 9’ and in two pieces I had planned for my “Gaming Table” to also be in TWO PIECES that could be combined,…or FOLDABLE for transport purposes.

@Tall:

My “A&A Gang” currently are using our 48" x 108" Black & White map mounted on gator-board and laid onto the tops of two tables.

On my version I planned on having a solid 1/2" A/C plywood base that has 1" x 2" lateral and longitudinal wood braces underneath w/furniture grade wood framing around everything and a glass top over the map.  On the bottom I planned to include mounts for detatchable legs to make it versatile.  These are my interests and I’d be interested in your opinions or options for building this for me.  Thanks for your time.

I just wanted to let you know I’d possibly be interested in a two-piece board that could be folded up for transport purposes.  Obviously the glass on top of each mapboard would also be in two pieces.  Let me know of any ideas/opinions you may have on this subject.

“Tall Paul”

Stalingrad wins it look for new thread Stalingrad game. I probably can’t start work on it for a while.

From BGG:

I have not yet played this game but thought I would review the components and rules prior to playing. These are my initial impressions which may change after playing the game.

I was intrigued enough to purchase this game for several reasons: 1) the publisher is offering a significant discount on the game - $25.00 plus shipping (wow!), 2) it has 438 component pieces (I love little plastic armies), 3) it plays on a world map, and finally 4) I love Axis and Allies and have been nostalgic for games like Supremacy ever since I dug it out of storage last month.

In summary, I have not been disappointed yet. I feel I got superior value for my money and would recommend this game to other fans of world domination games. I can’t wait to play!

The Components
The main playing pieces come on plastic sprues and should be removed with an exacto knife. Seven colors came with the set: White (use by all players for factories, air defense, generals, nuclear bombs, and leaders), and colors for six players - Gray, Blue, Red, Purple, Green, and Yellow. These pieces represent infantry, tanks, fighters, bombers, battleships (now called battlecruisers), aircraft carriers, artillery, subs, and transport ships. It doesn’t matter which superpower uses which color. The plastic is good quality.

The game actually allows for up to eight players and the rulebook mentions an expansion pack. I am guessing Brown and Orange would be in the upcoming expansion pack.

The pieces are very good and remind me a lot of Axis and Allies pieces. The one drawback seems to be the tanks which are much smaller than those pictured. In fact, they are almost teeny-tiny. I’m not sure if the small size will hinder or help gameplay at this time.

Other components include circle territory markers, plastic poker chips for stacking under the pieces, dice, plastic container trays, plastic bags, and cards for each superpower, development tracking, and conducting battles.

The gameboard is beautifully illustrated on a heavy, large tri-fold board. It reminded me so much of Axis and Allies I had to go back and look at it to make sure it wasn’t the exact same board!

Finally, the box is heavy duty and will hold up for years. Somewhat surprisingly, the game was shipped to me via Fed Ex with a shipping label slapped on the clear shrinkwrap! Most games would never make the journey but my set survived with a minor dent on a corner. However, if you are at all concerned about getting your set “Mint in Box” I’d highly recommend requesting some type of shipping container when ordering your set from the publisher. They may charge you more but it may be worth it to you. I couldn’t care less.

Rules
I think the rulebook could have been written better. You can view a copy of the rulebook on the superpowergames.com website. The website also clarifies some errors in the Errata section.

Play mostly works like Axis and Allies with players attempting to gain control of enough capitals to win the game. There are a few interesting twists that have been created to make the game fit in a more contemporary setting: Alliances can be formed and broken, technology can be researched, and money is eliminated (technically still in the game just not represented with paper currency). Additional minor concepts have been added like Encirclement which allows players to resolve battles without rolling the dice in certain situations. Clearly the designer is attempting to speed play and focus the game on the fun aspects of world domination rather than the tedium of counting out paper money and fighting insignificant battles.

Final Thoughts
Some of the graphics and illustrations lend the feel of an upstart game maker pursuing his passion with an invention created with a low budget in his garage and home personal computer. Part of that makes me instantly like the game even more. In fact, the creator emailed me shortly after purchasing the game asking for feedback. Very nice personal touch!

If you like Axis and Allies, I think this game may be for you. It looks fun, the components are great, and for $25.00 you are getting a tremendous value. There might be some minor polish issues here and there but it’s got all the goods where it really counts.

I will do another review after I have a chance to play!

Just buy a milton bradly edition of the game and use those pieces. Table tactics is not good quality molds. Only the fortress America rips are decent.

Your would save money by getting c/c or ebay ghq.