Rommel Rules Review

[@chrislsheppard7626]

Fine review Alex. As a latecomer to miniatures wargaming, "Rommel" was the first set of rules I played using figures from an Axis & Allies board game, and a scrap of plywood (painted and gridded) as a table. And I think I was quite fortunate to start with one of Sam's games; very well written and easy to learn. Still playing, but I've moved on to a real table and 10mm Pendraken figures!

[@StormofSteelWargaming]

Cheers, yes, Sam's rules are very easy to pick for a new player and very well presented.

[@GreenBlueWalkthrough]

15:57 Greet idea! And I would add having back lines instead of just roads to enforce the fact at this level the lines of battle are more obveus and prevent roads being OP by players sticking to roads to spread head deep into the other players lines... Which yes that can be realistic thge Blitzkrieg in France and the low countries was that but they were also doing an epic flank though a mostly unguard position... Which I fear in Rommel rules as written that tatuic would be more normal and just on roads.

[@chrisrobinson196]

For this scale of game in particular, grids just speed things up so nicely. I've played similarly scaled games where you spend your time moving a tank company millimetre by millimetre to make sure you're staying in cover, rather than worrying about what a divisional general worries about.

[@StormofSteelWargaming]

Yep, I agree

[@GreenBlueWalkthrough]

21:53 Sure if this was mid/high crunch platton level game... But division level when that does matter? Like why does a grey hound unit have the same range as a tiger 2 unit? Which in tank engaments do happen at that range... Meaning a click is a bit big for this game a should really be 100m or 500m and give each unit a engamnt range and have rules to being in CQC, close, mid, long and extreme.

[@Edward-Plantagenet]

Great review. I like Blucher and recently bought Nimitz. Can’t make my mind up about this though. The grid and board game feel don’t bother me that much, inevitable at this kind of level. Buying the tactics, nearly all of which merely result in +/- 1 (despite the attempt to make them feel WW2 with the names, something LWTV alluded to) seems very gamey and a bit cheesy. Still pondering this or Battlefront WWII. Admittedly BFWWII is battalion and not divisional but Rommel is definitely not operational level either. I was also disappointed with the lack of logistics rules.

[@chrismikucki9107]

Well done Alex! I think it’s an interesting review of the way to look at these rules. Enjoyed the battle report very much!

[@StormofSteelWargaming]

Glad you enjoyed it!

[@BearGrisham]

Love the rules reviews you do 👊🏻

[@StormofSteelWargaming]

Thank you!

[@GreenBlueWalkthrough]

19:45 Meanwhile Chess figured it out a long time ago... pretty much you move to a diangle square like you would a not diaangle square... Serouly who is saying the buship moves twice the distance as the Rook?

[@GreenBlueWalkthrough]

18:02 Yeah that exemple imaige is very odd and shows how broken the supply system is... Like grey-A should not be in supply as they as exermly far away from the supply point infact Red-3 should be able to eneg the supply units and cut off Grey-A so I suggest 1. The supply line needs to be straight and or have units near each other and can be cut by enemy units being closer to the line they the receing freadly unit.

[@aaronjones2117]

Any interest in Mustafa's new ruleset Eisenhower?

[@StormofSteelWargaming]

Sam asked me if I'd like to playtest Eisenhower, but I couldn't commit to the time required to keep up with his schedule. I'm certainly be interested in it though.

a game of rommel we did based on the little wars DDay game: www.youtube.com/@elclubsherman

[@StormofSteelWargaming]

Thanks

[@GreenBlueWalkthrough]

29:01 How exactly is that at all simple?|Like wat is wrong with adding a dice per condition and comparing it the the oponants condition and having a dice roll off? If you hit they die if they hit you die... That is I feel simple and low crunch that you just read is high crunch in a very abstract game.

[@GreenBlueWalkthrough]

11:12 I disagree with that approach as it's aracdy... Like you can and I believe should design the game in a way to encourage realism with out limiting the player... And as we know adhoc units happen all the time IRL then and especly now so giving a harse penty for none doctrinal use is unrealistic... What the could have done is instead made the units in a way so they would syngize better with their group... Like have a bonus web for all the different syngize's in stead of a flat non adhocing here penalty.

[@GreenBlueWalkthrough]

Great review which having made a one page game kinda like this just "genricized" I really like what the dev did in this one very clean.