Posts made by Mr Ghoul

I was into the CCGs too, about 10 years ago or so. I played everything from Magic, Vampire, Arcadia, Star Wars, X-Files, Dragon Ball Z and of coarse Mythos, which is based on the awesome writings of H.P. Lovecraft.

Mythos was the best muti-player CCG(3 or more players) by far and the only CCG that I still play from time to time. It does not suffer from power gaming or rule-lawyers looking for a angle to cheese. The only problem was its lack of mass appeal. Its a particular genre and not knowing anything of Lovecraft’s work can take away from the games atmosphere.

@djensen:

Mr Ghoul, on average for all of these would you seek out a website? Visit it regularly? Post articles or comments? Participate in forums?

@Mr:

GMT’s The Napolenoic Wars
GMT’s Sword of Rome
GMT’s Barbarossa to Belin
Horror Clix
CCG- Mythos

Yes I would and I have. The GMT games usually need a errata posted to clarify rules and they encourage feedback.

GMT’s The Napolenoic Wars
GMT’s Sword of Rome
GMT’s Barbarossa to Belin
Horror Clix
CCG- Mythos

We also went to a coyotes game and somehow ended up on the internet

Hey, CC got to see the Jets play live again, nice.

I just read over the 4th edition rules. Thanks for the link WG.

It appears they made alot of subtle changes.

I like the rule that removes transports last in navy combat.
I dont like the extra ipc for 1 infantry placement outside factory.
I kind of like the the limit on AAguns (3 per piece). It forces you to buy more.
I Don’t like the convoy rules. It seems a bit weighted down.
I really don’t like the levels of damage/production to/for factories.
I don’t like bonus given to Germany for their first attack(limit one area) into Russia +1/-1(if this is not a added rule, I do not ever remember using it)
And I don’t like the new technologies

Kamikazi is something you should not have to research.
The German Tiger/King is silly. The game takes place on a grand scale it is not necessary to lable armor types. SS panzer units are enough. The armor piece you buy represents all types of tanks and assult guns and maybe even self-propelled arty.
It just seems too bogged down. Unnecessary.

I should note that I do like some of the techs.

I’ve never had a problem at all with the rules as they are, or should I say as they were, for Xeno’s World at War. The game was designed to be difficult, as mentioned, for the Axis, very difficult. If someone is changing rules to balance the game, thats fine, but its only being done in the interest of gameplay, not historical accuracy. Not that this game or any A&A game is the epitome of historically accurate games.

Our group had fun trying to find a way to win with the axis.

Going back to the infantry build rule.
I don’t mind this rule either. I can understand someone having issues with it, as one in our gaming group did, but it makes some sense. Why couldn’t Britain support the raising of the local population into an army in African controlled territory? However, it makes less sense when Germany captures a Russia terrortiy and, after having held it for a round, places infantry there on the next build phase.
Maybe a nation should only be allowed to build infantry, up to the territories value, in certain areas. For instance, Germany could build infantry in any game starting territory plus countries like Spain or turkey, Romania(I don’t remember if this is starting territory of not) and Finland.

If this rule is changed then there should be a modification to rail movement. Maybe doubling the amount of infantry that can be ship per nation.

Really, though, I think I like it the way it is or was.

Russia purchasing infantry at 2 is REALLY tough for the Axis to overcome.  This is the Infantry Push Mechanic on steroids!!!

Based on the amount of IPCs the Russia are making they kind of need this. If they were paying 3 ipcs like Germany, the war would be over quick in Germany’s favor.

I wasn’t aware there was a 2nd edition.

The only added feature from the new version that I think it needs would be artillery. I don’t think its needs the new tank defense because you will always have infantry at the front due to the build rule and the rail movement you can use to reinforce newly conquered territory.

Now that I’m thinking about it. The game could use the fighter escort rule for Industrial bombing.

Did anyone ever play Manhunt? That was one messed up game.

That game was fun. Good stuff. Rockstar makes the best video games.

Its not really suited for young kids but it is only a big deal when someone tries to make it a big deal.

I played this game a many o night in the early nineties and I still own a copy. It was a great game. It is definitely more involved than the original A&A game. I don’t know about the revised as I’ve never played it. Its tough for the axis to win. Usually, you’d know after round 3 if the axis had a chance of winning. Round 3 was the best time for Japan’s ‘blitz’ and the best time for Germany to strike Russia.

I loved all the rule variants. I think this verison introduced the two hit BB and the half-battleship(destroyer) It was a 2/3 and the BB dropped to a 3/3 until you repaired it. The different unit price for each country was nice too, although, one would end up buying infantry most of the time. You could place newly purchased infantry in any territory controlled by that nation up to the value of the country you were placing it in. T’was tight.

I could go on and on….

Anyone who has played A&A should give this game a day in court.

Mr Ghoul reporting.

Here’s my take.

If one believes in God and that God is omnipotent, then the question I would ask is why would he allow all this terrible stuff to happen? I mean, if he has the power to prevent it, why not do so? If he truly loves us, and is as compassionate as Christians would have us believe, then he would. If he has the power and doesn’t then he is not worthy of worship and is pretty dam malevolent.

The “your free will” argument doesn’t hold water for me at all. So a man chooses to hatch the limbs off small children and rape babies. Its all good is Gods eyes. He allowing this person the right to chose. Nice.

beached or treated….ummmm this should read bleached.

Sure, i’ll send it. I’ll let you know when I do.

Alright, the rule book cover has fallen away. All of the cannons are painted and boy, it’s not pretty. You might consider throwing these in some paint thinner. None of the painted pieces were beached or treated before hand so the paint does chip off easily. Some of the cards are faded and I think one card is a little warped from a coffee stain. On the positive side, the map is in good shape. You have all the units you need with extra control counters and ships. The battle board is fine too. All and all its really not that bad but no one is going to be fooled into thinking this a new game.

All the componets should be there. I ordered the extra pieces originally. I’ll double check tonight and let you know tomorrow.

It’s not in tip top shape and some of the pieces may be painted…poorly, but if you want it, I’ll send it. Never mind about the money. If you decide it’s worth paying for, then you can send whatever you think is fair. It really doesn’t matter though. The only issue is shipping it. The box is heavy yo.

If you lived near me, I’d give you my copy. Its a weak game unfortunately.

Try “The Napoleonic Wars” from GMT games. It’s far better.

Best movies ever, eh……

Drama: Heat

Comedy: Tenacious D “Pick of Destiny” I know its not out just yet but if it’s anything like the HBO show, it will rock.

Action: Desperado/ Once Upon a Time in Mexico

suspense: The Ninth Gate

Horror: Evil Dead/Dawn of the Dead-original one.

War: Platoon

And let’s not forget I’m speaking about the Gauls that Ceaser dealt with.

And agian let me say that my “naked” comment was a weak response to the weak “levies” remark leveled at Alexander’s victory against Darius’s army at Gaugamela. I fully realize that were not……not …not… all naked, every one of them, always, everytime they went into battle.

Based on what I’ve read, so far, the indication is, in general, that the Gaul were not well lead  and they were difficult to organize, which leads trouble when fighting Rome in large battles. And this was the case during Caesar campaigns. However, this does not diminish Caesar’s accomplishments as I tried to make clear in my last post.

i dont think you can dismiss both Vercingetorix and Commius

I don’t belive I really was. I knew nothing, really, of Vercingetorix before this thread. And I don’t know Commius, either.

I doubt that Caesar would allow some ‘naked savage’ the opportunity to fight alongside Caesar and share in his victories.

I think anyone would be uncomfortable with a naked barbarian standing beside you. :mrgreen:

Chieftains would have been able to afford proper armor and quality weapons. They probably would not have been naked, unless they were trying to be particularly heroic or they we just that" hardcore"

I’m not saying shooting their own soldiers was any better. But intentionally harming animals  is an abuse of innocents. Why not strap a bomb to a 2 year old child or a mentally challenged person too.

IP, I am not saying that Alexander is a far greater general that Caesar. I give him a edge, just a slight one.  You, however, are giving Caeser credit for things he did not create and discrediting Alexander unfairly but calling his opponents “levies”, saying he only fought two seperate nations and dismissing the leader/generals he fought against.
Darius’s army had Greek hoplite mercenaries in it. He had the elite “Immortals” with him. He had Elephants, tons of cavalry and scythe chariots. Alexander also fought in Egypt, he fought Greeks, northern barbarian tribes, Scythians, Thracians, Persians and Indians.

The Celtic tribes in Gaul that Caesar battled were  certainly not all naked. In general they were poorly armed, not usually in armor, poorly lead and were not a well organized army in large scale battles. I’m not trying to take anything away from Caesar here I’m sure the barbarians he fought against were fierce. If anything I’m trying to draw
similarities between the two, Caeser and Alexander.

As far as the Corhort vs Phalanx is concerned, I never claimed the Phalanx was better
That was a nice post about the two formations.