Reload Magazine - Kickstarter Preview

Apologies for the brief lull in posts. A temperamental disc in my lower back decided that it wasn't happy so it initiated the Bagpuss Principle (it wasn't happy so it decided the rest of me wouldn't be happy either), putting me out of action and unable to sit at a computer or even use a laptop. As someone who has posted regularly and has articles to submit for publication, this turned out to be a bit of a bugger. Fortunately, a way has been found to handle the situation whilst my back decides if it want's to have a civil relationship with the rest of me. I am still able to write using pen and paper, and my good lady has taken on typing and layout duties for the time being. Thank you ever so kindly! With that solution in place, I'd like to draw your attention to a Kickstarter that I found out about a couple weeks ago.

You may remember E1M1 magazine from a year or so ago which focused on that evergreen genre, the first person shooter. Well, Zach Murphy (co-creator and designer of E1M1) has created a new publication and is being aided by John Kavanagh (of Retro Format and Eight Bit magazines) in launching Reload Magazine. Since I enjoyed E1M1 and indeed enjoy the FPS genre itself, I thought I'd tell you lot about Reload too.

The initial Kickstarter is to fund and publish a 100-page mag that will focus on indie and AA-tier shooters, the mods and maps scene, as well as more bespoke pieces such as retrospectives and features on historical games. The Kickstarter is live until the 31st of August and has already hit its primary funding goal. There are stretch goals too.

If this sounds like your thing, you can check out the Kickstarter here. As part of the funding drive, a sampler has been created (available from the KS page) that will give you an idea of the style and content you'll get in the main issue. It also lists the contributors, some of whom may be familiar. From the sampler alone, this is looking good to me and I have pledged to the project. 

As always with Kickstarters, be aware of the nature of the fund raising platform but also understand that the people involved have a good track record in delivering their projects. 

Anyhoo, that's it for this weekend. Good lady permitting, there will be further posts next week to catch up on the backlog of reviews. As you may understand, I have had plenty of time to catch up on my reading recently. 

Seven Days to the River Rhine - Preview

Seven Days to the River Rhine by Great Escape Games describes itself as a fast play set of rules covering the NATO/Warsaw Pact 1980’s. It claims it is suited especially for large multi-player games where each side has an overall commander who guides strategy and the other players control the actual units. In this preview, I’ll let you know what I think.

Not as gung-ho as Team Yankee

I had heard of this game last year but it wasn’t until the First Partizan of 2019 that I saw a demo game taking place. Intrigued, I searched for a copy of the rules and found a set for around a tenner. The rules themselves are a nicely produced 44-paged softback accompanied with a set of special cards. More on them later.

The overall layout is clear and concise, with quite large text and numerous photographs. Unlike Team Yankee, these picture detail miniatures from several manufacturers and credit is given to them with each picture.

The process of play is based on command tokens and initiative. One player has the initiative, uses their command tokens, then there are reaction rolls and this continues until all of the command tokens have been used or the other player steals the initiative via a 6 on a reaction dice roll. On the whole, this is probably the part of the game that I am dubious about the most. It just seems so finicky and I can’t help but think that the process as described might hinder fast play more than help. Having said that, most games I have played are simultaneous movement and effect so this initiative malarkey is a bit of a stranger to me. When we do get round to playing these rules, we’ll see how this goes. There is the usual morale and stats sections and the rules don’t get too bogged down in minutia unlike some sets I could care to mention.

The biggest game changing aspect of the rules would be the Tactical Advantage Cards. These are mostly generic but there is a card specific to each side and whilst I can see how they can add to the game, I am not entirely sure they help the game play to the period, and that is a thing for me and my approach to historical gaming, hence the amendments I made to the core Team Yankee rule set last year. A play through will sort out that question. 

Another interesting part of the game is range, or lack of it. Except for infantry fire, there are no defined ranges for weapons, the inference being that given the scale of miniatures used, assigning ranges to say tank cannon fire in relation to an assault rifle would make the scale of the game look a bit funny. Again, I can see how this would help the game but would add a caveat in that if you game on quite a large table as we often do (say 16x5 feet), you’ll need to consider terrain and buildings in you scenarios or you’re just going to have a shoot ‘em up on your hands. Then again, maybe that was what they were going for with the fast paced point of the game.

Sgt Bradford and a QR code? Tsk!

There is one bugbear that I must comment upon, and it’s nothing to do with the mechanics or the style of play. No, it’s a layout choice and one that peeved me slightly with my recent look at Cruel Seas. It’s the ‘advice’ boxes, from either Sgt Bradford for the British or Lieutenant Vasilov for the Soviets. These seek to impart tactical or strategic advice for those in it for the game and whilst I can understand why the designers put these sections in, they do come across as a little condescending for anyone with only a little knowledge of the tactics of the period. It’s a small thing, and you may very well disagree, but I would prefer it if games designers did not think every reader is a bored child with the attention span of an MP in a re-election campaign. Oh, and in case you don’t understand what the rules are trying to tell you, there are QR codes that will lead you to videos explaining the relevant section of the rules. Helpful, maybe, appearing to cater for the Fisher Price ‘My First Wargame’ market, almost certainly. I know I am being waspish here but if you can’t explain a simple process in two paragraphs, are you really trying at all?

It could be considered easy, and lazy, to think of Seven Days to the River Rhine as a kind of Team Yankee lite without the model catalogue level of miniature pictures. And yes, it would be. The designers have clearly thought long and hard about what they wanted to put on the table and, my reticence aside for initiative table tennis, it feels like they have succeeded in their self declared goal. For the price, I don’t feel set upon by the rules and there isn't the relentless commercialism of Team Yankee and its ilk. As with my recent Cruel Seas preview, I have certain doubts but am more than willing to give these rules a full airing, probably in late 1990’s H’irraq at 15mm or West Germany in 20mm if the kit is available. Command Decision is our usual modern rule set (albeit at a different unit scale to Seven Days or Team Yankee), but the latter has become our alternate go to set with suitable amendments. You never know, maybe Seven Days could replace TY in that role. We shall have a play and find out.

Cruel Seas - a preview

I have posted what others have considered some unkind thoughts on Cruel Seas back when it was released and, for a good while, I had no intention of approaching the game in any form. However, as time passed, I gave it a bit more thought and considered giving the game a go because the period had some attraction. I picked up a few books on the subject and that decided it. Let me be clear though: the interest in the period dictated the renewed interest in the game. History first, gaming second as far as I go.

That decision was followed by some umming and ahhing about buying the rule set and the kit to go with it. Seeing as I only wanted to give it a go, I didn't want to spend a great deal on what might only be a single outing. Fortunately, Warlord Games' marketing department (un)knowingly provided a solution. With a couple of issues of Wargames Illustrated sporting Sellotaped sprues, one magazine purchase by myself and a couple of donations (thanks, Andy and Shaun!), meant I had the kernel of a game. First Partizan this year saw me taking the plunge and buying the rule set (the only money I have actually paid directly to support the game, by the way. Maybe the marketing trick of free sprues worked???). Incidentally, at that show, the WI stand were offering a free sprue with every purchase. Hmmm...

Miniature Wargames then got in on the act, offering another sprue, so another magazine purchase added two more boats, followed by some more donations (thanks again to Andy and Shaun). As you can see below, I now have a dozen boats and some torpedo markers to play with for the cost of £20. The magazines would have been purchased regardless of their cover gifts.

I paid for one item here...

Now, I haven't played the game yet, having just perused the rules, but before passing comment on those, I must note the method in which I have acquired the kit. Maybe the marketing of the game was designed to nudge you in the direction of buying the rules, then you'd get more plastic after giving it a go. Maybe the game didn't launch as well as expected and that led to the deluge of plastic on magazine covers. Maybe something in between. I don't know, but in past employment, when I saw so much given away so early in a product's life cycle, that raised concerns about the success of that product. As I say, I could be totally wrong, (and I am also a cynic at heart), but it just feels a little off. Anyhoo, to the rule set themselves.

Pretty, yes. useful, no.

What we have here is a very glossy, picture heavy tome. A couple of spelling and grammar issues (I know, stones and glasshouses here!) do not spoil the overall quality and the game itself seems very straight forward. The mechanisms seem well thought out and not too finicky, though I am not a fan of either the activation process or the dice heavy torpedo rules. The amount of actual historical content is surprisingly high (with a but to be included below) and is backed up by a good bibliography with some excellent sources included. An observation though: the bibliography starts by referencing the Osprey titles about the period (indeed, most of the hand drawn illustrations are from those Ospreys), before noting the non-Osprey sources. Would I be too cynical to suggest that the publisher is guiding readers to their own products first, with the high probability that the "other recommended" sources were also used in the production of those Ospreys in the first place? Possibly, but then there is the full page Osprey advert a page later...

From what I have read, I am looking forward to putting on a game with the group when I get the kit painted (stop sniggering at the back!) and see how we take to Cruel Seas. I do, however, have a few points to make just from the read through...

• The rule set is a giant catalogue. Let's not kid ourselves here. I have seen more than one interview with games designers who has stated that the whole point of rule sets is to sell toys and it is no different here. True, the photographs of the boats are lovely and certainly give a sense of action and drama, but since these are diorama style set ups, no game will ever look that good without some serious (and OTT) effort. Also of note, nearly every page has at least  illustration/image, others are single or double page spreads of photographs, and others are a mixture of both illustrations and photographs. Out of a count of 108 pages, only 12 do not have an image of some kind - and I am not counting the token counters as images. I know the game designers needs to earn a crust, but this is very much style over substance.

The layout. I'm not sure...

• Dice - they will sell me dice for each of the fleets in their own little bag. For £24 a pack. 16 dice (plus bag) for £24. Yes, I know these are unique dice for the game, but seriously, a quick internet search for dice can get me 20 of the buggers for £4! Slightly bigger dice, plus a bag will cost £4 for 10. I can work round the usage issues from there with a teensy bit of thought. And Warlord want £24 for one(!) fleets' worth. Get tae f...!
• As a mechanism, the activation process isn't something I like. I know, it's a personal thing, and it may work well with the game so we'll see. Most games I have played have been simultaneous movement so I will withhold judgement until we play a game.
• Torpedo hits - they require 16 dice (where could I get that many dice... Oh!). It also means, on average scores, you are unlikely to destroy any of the bigger ships, meaning the other player won't go into a huff early on if you sink their big shiny model. Regardless, it's finicky.
• Points - This is a personal thing again, and take into account I have never been a competition gamer, but the designers have put a fair bit of thought into this game and have nodded to historical accuracy. Why then, instead of actual dispositions and force strengths, go for a points based allocation system? Then I remembered, you build your force to the points level you are playing with, which means you buy the kit to fit that points total. Historical accuracy be damned! A lot of my ire towards points systems stems from its inability to be historically accurate unless a ton of thought has gone into it. I recall a rule set in the 90's where you couldn't field what 2 Para had at Goose Green because you didn't have enough points. But that's me, and as I have said before, I am a history buff first and foremost, a historical war gamer second and a gamer third. In any case, I will decide the scenario based on the kit I have and the points allocation will not be taken into account when we do our play through. 
• Historical accuracy. Well, it's there. It's a bit hit and miss, and as noted above, the use of points to define forces means you can do pretty much whatever you want in the game. But the biggest issue I have is that the designers have started off well and then gamed the accuracy out of the window. Would an order of battle been too much to ask for specific theatres? What about actual battles or contacts? Why not try and teach a little bit of history to players in the guise of a game? 
• Condescension. There are little dialogue boxes with hints and advice, each fronted by a nation specific character. Why? I do not need to imagine a chap giving me advice. Place this information in the body of the text and let me read it there. I can cope with this. Finally, there is the whole "have fun, enjoy yourself, treat your fellow player/players with respect" and all that jazz. If you are the type of person who has to be told by the rule set how to be civil or friendly (considering who you are likely to be playing this game with), then something went seriously wrong long before you picked up Cruel Seas.

It may seem that I am being a little harsh but, on the whole, I am cautiously optimistic about playing it. It is plain to see that a lot of effort has gone into the game and my view is tempered by my cynicism to corporate,  marketing and gaming innit bull poo. However, play the game we shall and I will place a report, alongside observations from myself and the rest of the group, on here afterwards. As for when, probably later on in the year.

Of Things To Come - 2018

So, here we are, firmly into 2018, with a couple of blog posts already done and more to come. This is a good start, for me, anyway!

The aim this year is to post more frequently and more regularly, adding book, film, game and music reviews, with retrospectives in those areas as well branch out with a couple of side projects that I'll cover when they get underway. What I can say is that I am looking forward to those and hope you enjoy them too when they come to fruition.

In addition to the above, there should be the usual wargames shows that I hope to attend. Those will be Vapnartak (York - 4th February), Salute (London - 14th April), Carronade (Falkirk - 12th May), Partizan (Newark - 29th May), Durham - date TBC, Claymore (Edinburgh - 5th August) and 2nd Partizan (Newark - 19th August). I hope to add posts about these shows as they happen but that all depends on how much time I have at each. I may try to get to one or two others but that will be at the mercy of spare time.

Of course, alongside the shows, there will be the semi-regular TWATS meetings, details of which will be (semi-)honestly reported (depending on how I do) here as well ;-) I know there is Shinyloo to come first but after that, it's all a mystery - in other words, we decide at the end of one meeting what the next one will be. However, as always, there will be fine ale and victuals on hand. It's not just about the dice rolling - seriously. I would add intellectual conversation, but that could be stretching it a bit - funny, near the knuckle and interesting, but intellectual? Hmmm...

With that, I hope 2018 is a good year for you all and you enjoy reading this blog as much as I enjoy writing it.