Command Post "Gettysburg" Part 2

[@gull2112]

Over all a very good review! I did notice one major snafu (sorry to nitpick). Combat only occurs after all units have been activated, not after each command moves! This is probably the hardest rule for grognards to wrap their heads around. If you move adjacent to someone who hasn't activated yet, they can simply move away (or turn to face, if you contacted them in the rear). This is the simultaneous nature of the game. Once you understand the ramifications of this, the game becomes much more elegant and nuanced. If you want to attack and possibly destroy a defender, you want to move after he does. However, if you just want to take the position, you might want to move first and give him the option (likely if he is spent) of just giving ground.

[@jon7043]

Did you misassign hits at about 15 minutes? I thought the Confeds did 3 hits on the Union. And also, what is your opinion of a really good ACW game that is in print right now and caps out at about 4 hours. I really like the look of this. I am a huge fan of Columbia Games. I like the look of their Bobby Lee and their Gettysburg game. There is also a battle in a wood game (I forget the name as I know little about US history at the moment).

[@williamdelashmutt1421]

Very nice presentation once again Gilbert.

[@daveryan2148]

"for a game that doesn't have a lot of rules they sure are hard to look up". Accurate! The pub battles games in general hinge on the players or player coming to conclusions about rules on their own. Very different than your traditional hex and chit game where for the most part rules dictate everything. Pub battles make an excellent "beer and pretzels" game. You can even wrangle non wargamers into playing. They make excellent solo games as well.

[@chrisatkins1665]

Gilbert I would love to see you do a play through of a Gettysburg game where you don’t follow the historical tactics. I think you know this battle so well that you would be able to explore some really interesting ahistorical tactics. It would be fun!

[@XLEGION1]

Hey Chris. Often, when I do a replay of a 'historical' game such as Gettysburg, I play out the game generally as the generals fought it because my primary interest is answering the question: Is the game capable of re-producing the actual event. If it is not, I kind of lose confidence in it. It's almost like my 'barometer' as to whether I will like the game or not. Of course in 'competitive' play with opponents I still try to 'win' but am still influenced to some degree by my knowledge of a particular battle.

[@Dd214medaddy]

Gilbert Collins which game, either full battle or partial battle, do you think pass this acid test?

[@cjstout4711]

Isn’t all movement by all corps resolved before combat is begun?

[@williamstewart4620]

Thanks for the battle report. Miniature gamers do deal with these types of movement/ position/terrain considerations almost every turn. "...a player MUST move his units in a way that is un-ambiguous." would indeed cover a lot of sins and greatly reduce rule verbiage. On turn 7 you use the !st Corps' baggage to rally Barlow's Division of the 11th corps. Does it matter which baggage a unit can use to rally?

[@XLEGION1]

@William Well, that's one thing the rules 'are silent on'. Maddening really. One would think, because the Corp designation is on the baggage train that means only that corps can use it. But the rules don't really say. Add to the fact that the union only gets 3 baggage trains, it wouldn't make sense to limit them to only those corps.

[@gull2112]

@@XLEGION1 The Corps designation is only for activation. Any unit within command range can rally when it is activated.

[@gull2112]

Yes! When I play I always try to tell tell my opponent what my intention is if I think the position might be unclear. Sometimes it's obvious. If I'm halfway sticking into Gettysburg and still fresh, then my unit isn't in the town. If it is spent, then it is in the town (since it's treated as cover at the cost of becoming spent, why wouldn't you want to be considered in town?). There are some small towns that are iffy on some maps, and such a status is easily determined based on whether or not the unit is spent or fresh.

[@Jubilo1]

The counters on the map and the map itself are visually impressive. What becomes apparent is the functional beauty of hexes: are the divisions on the ridge? Half on the ridge? a third? Difficult to agree upon and ripe for argument. In Battle Hymn a unit is either on ridge or not. Period. Unlike a "campaign" game this game seems like it would become wearisome after a few plays. If the games cost $500.00 could the rules be clearly and inclusively written? It seems almost every game recently published is deficient in rules clarity . Thanks again for your historical comments and the video. Superb efforts by you.

[@XLEGION1]

This is actually covered in the rules and I didn't expect it to be. The designer 'words' the rule to the effect, that a player MUST move his units in a way that is un-ambiguous. Thus, you clearly move it 'on a hill' or not. This may still cause problems but its a long way from the 1958 Avalon Hill Gettysburg game..

[@XLEGION1]

Thanks David. The RULES are no doubt the hardest thing to do in designing a game. I'm still working on "War for America" and the RULES are the hardest part of any game design. This game is a hell of a lot of fun, but the rules need work. Nothing a veteran can't figure out, but for a newbie they would be a problem.

[@gull2112]

@@XLEGION1 This reminds me, I wanted to mention the Town of Gettysburg and buildings. A block occupies whatever terrain most of the block occupies. The buildings scattered about the map do not meet that criteria, but Gettysburg does. Hope this helps! They could have spent a lot more time on qualifying LOS, as well. However, they simply went with "Do you think that unit could see that unit?" A lot of excess rules were avoided by simply assuming that between two gentleman, a solution can be agreed upon. Like you, I mostly play solitaire. I do have a FLGS that I go to from time to time (minus covid), but I'm older and have a very comfortable study to retreat to, and I find Pub Battles an ideal series of games. They are deep strategy with light rules, perfect for solitaire!

[@XLEGION1]

@@gull2112 Yes, I picked that up later too. I see you need 'experience' with this game to grasp all of its treasures. A read through of the rules is not enough. The rules DO need work though. The designers notes and opinions and other things are not ordered very well.

[@gull2112]

@@XLEGION1 Yes, the designers have a notion of clean, simply stated rules that aren't plodding or legalistic. Most of us are used to reading rules to see what they will allow us to do (i.e. what can we get away with). The theory with Pub Battles is that between two gentlemen, you can agree on what ought to happen within the framework supplied. The bonus is that the rules can be very brief. The downside is that among players who are used to rules that spell out everything, these rules can seem incomplete.

[@marshallbarrington4986]

An interesting observation on the rules: We notice that hex and counter wargamers often see Pub Battles as incomplete or unclear. Miniature gamers find them very clear and tight. (and very fast playing) I think much of the 'uncertainty' comes from the miniature style of play. Where is this piece? On the hill or not? Is that in my firing radius? Does that piece block LoS? What about that clump of trees? etc. These are very 'loose' and uncertain if you are used to traditional wargames. Not what we are used to. Simmon's Games nails all this down with defined areas. Hexes will do this too. The trade off for this 'clarity', is a ton of rules, and play time. It is an interesting trade. Depends what you want in the end. -and maybe what you are used to.

[@XLEGION1]

Quite True, but coming from a war gaming background there is plenty of evidence in the rules that some key concepts are not explained at all.

[@gull2112]

@@XLEGION1 You are absolutely correct that the only ranged fire is for Artillery units. FoF affects movement only. You can not end your turn in a field of fire unless you make contact. In fact, if you were behind a unit (not adjacent and supporting), and after combat you are in a FoF, you must immediately retreat.

[@asgaard636]

I like the basic game mechanics in this, Gilbert. You might like the LBH game......

[@dougwinslow3817]

Hi Gilbert, thanks again for your review...just a little off topic, but do you own/play any ACW computer sims...I've been keeping an eye on The Grand Tactitian's ACW, it looks amazing, due out this summer on Steam

[@williamdelashmutt1421]

QUESTION for Gilbert. Do you this game could be made into Brigades?

[@XLEGION1]

I don't think so. The map is too small for brigades. Besides, you would have over 52 Union counters and at least 37 counters for the Confederates. In theory, it could be done but the map would need to be at least 3 times the size in my opinion. Sounds like an interesting project though.

[@johnbairos3982]

Who sells this game ? Not found on Amazon or eBay.

[@XLEGION1]

The company is called "Command Perspectives" and they have their own website. I purchased my directly. But they are VERY expensive for what you get.

[@johnbairos3982]

@@XLEGION1 Ok thank you

[@2000spqr]

appreciate any personal comments/analysis how this game may be superior to Guns of Gettysburg.

[@XLEGION1]

In the end I cannot recommend this game. There are several things agains it but the worst offence are the rules which are short, not complete and missing critical information. I wrote the designer several times and he DID send me revised rules. But these were even missing pages. After awhile I just gave up. Also, the games are waaaaaay to expensive for what you get. Unfortunately, the maps are really cool but in the end, it is kind of like a 'kit' where you have to design and alter the game itself. I made the mistake of getting the "Little Big Horn" and that one was worse. A terrible experience and I would see the two of them.

[@mikestrand3023]

An example of experienced gamers having problems with the rules is movement after combat. There is no advance after an opponent is destroyed or retreats. Why mention it at all? How many pages of rules must be added to unlearn experience from other games? There are countless examples of this. People have complained because the rules didn't include the penalties for being spent. That's because there are no penalties other than having one less step. (minus the mounted stuff, which is in the rules). Another biggie is that when your command moves, if you have been attacked earlier in the turn, you can just move out of contact. This simulates simultaneous movement, but is different from most hex and counter games. Again, they felt there was no need to specify that you can do that. If you couldn't, THAT would be in the rules. This caused so much confusion that it is now spelled out in the rules (right below FoF).

[@nickmorgan8078]

I don't dig the block games. The average confederate division was about 2.5 times as large as a union division. Also you never deviate from the standard battle plan. The Union will continue to win every game.

[@nickmorgan8078]

This game is Bs. No 2 union divisions were as large as a confederate division.

[@XLEGION1]

@@nickmorgan8078 to say nothing of the Corps artillery, which the union don't have. In my solitaire playlists though, the confederates are hard pressed to win agains average union play.

[@gull2112]

@@XLEGION1 I have played over a hundred games. It is an up hill battle for the South because they have a slight edge in the beginning and that draws them into a battle, but after that the odds get even (in more ways than one), and eventually the North gets an edge. If you follow historical paths, you will tend to end up with historical outcomes. Imagine that! The odds are much more even, but the South needs to follow a game of maneuvering the North out of position through the morning of the second day, then hit hard before the V and VI corps get into position. Oh, and you really don't want to lose Buford on day one. That gives the South a decided advantage on Day 3. Use him to delay, but avoid combat!

[@XLEGION1]

@@gull2112 That's sound advice Mike. Like yourself, I have been playing Gettysburg games for nearly 45 years now. What I was trying to do and show in the video is how the game works IF you used the historical moves. That always interests me first. For if the game cannot mimic the historical result, I lose confidence in it as a simulation. That doesn't mean that after I do that experiment I try and win as the south. I do.

[@gull2112]

@@nickmorgan8078 The southern divisions are each two blocks, and the Northern, one block.

[@manuelkong10]

WAY too expensive....other games you get HUGE amounts of "stuff" for the money, and with pub games, you get a fancy map and a few second rate pieces....incomplete rules....it's more of a game KIT rather than a real finished game