Replies

Which one is that, Gettysburg?

In any case, you are not a hardcore "board"gamer unless you magnetize your counters, mount your map on sheetmetal, and hang the game on your wall. :)

Had a buddy do that with Avalon Hill's Stalingrad. Awesome.

In any case, you are not a hardcore "board"gamer unless you magnetize your counters, mount your map on sheetmetal, and hang the game on your wall. :)

Had a buddy do that with Avalon Hill's Stalingrad. Awesome. I would like to see you try that with my favorite AH game Jutland. We did have the big search hexes laid out on my basement floor with masking tape.

I was a big fan of the Civilization games. But I agree that after Civ II the series went down hill. Civ II added the ability to tweak the rules and add new units. That made a big difference changing some of the PC elements of the game (For example Civilization game gave communism low corruption).

The other great waste of time games were the command and conquer series. Those actually made you think, rush in for the quick kill, or try to build a fortress and run you opponent out of resources. Again the ability to tweak the rules was a big advantage. The Russian naval units could not attack land targets and hence were nearly useless. But changing the SSN to and SSBN by swapping out one of the two torpedo tubes with a Scud launcher allowed the guy playing the Russian to hit NATO shore emplacements. It also gave a reason for the NATO player to build destroyers. Also when playing the computer you could make infantry real cheap to give the unimaginative AI a chance of actually winning. It turns out a human wave was about as sophisticated a tactic as the AI could come up with.