วีดีโอ

🤞

Thank you for the kind words! Now the hard work begins...

@@PatricksTacticsTutorials Love your stuff!

I do play GBACW (and am eagerly awaiting both the By Swords & Bayonets and Three Days of Gettysburg releases). GCACW and GBACW are radically different systems (as you'll hopefully see when I get this project underway. GCACW has a scale of 1 he = 1 mile, 1 turn = 1 day, and units are mostly divisions and brigades (with a few regiments thrown in) composed of Strength Points equivalent to 500 men. The entirety of most GBACW games consist of a single turn (or less) of GCACW. For various reasons, I find the operational level of the ACW more compelling than the tactical level. GCACW zooms out and gives you the 10,000' view of the war. Maneuver is a huge part of the series. Large scale battles like Gettysburg or Antietam are pretty rare in GCACW games (as they were historically). The series is well suited for solitaire play due to its core mechanisms, and the pace of play (even face-to-face opposed play) is excellent. Most of the games in the series have a really nice selection of scenarios, ranging from the very small, very short (1 turn, even) to the larger campaign scenarios. To top it off, the rules for the system are really pretty simple. Stay tuned, and hopefully I can give you a good look at this series, how it works, and whether it would be something you would be interested in!

Believe it or not, it is just my iPhone with a small, cheap tripod I picked up on Amazon. I have a bluetooth lapel mic for the sound.

@@thetabletopsedge Awesome! And inspiring! I might do something similar myself! Though I can't afford WIF Deluxe+the DoD3 update atm.

Germany technically declared war on, and invaded (and subsequently conquered) Denmark last turn. However, once the Political Phase is over, no more Political Options are resolved that turn. Declarations of war are considered "reaction" Political Options, meaning they can be done during the WiF portion of the game. This allows players to declare war on countries in any of the impulses of that turn, without giving away their plan ahead of time in the Political Phase (and allowing their opponents time to react before the actual fighting begins). If a DoW is made as a reaction (ie - during the turn, rather than in the Political Phase), it must still be paid for and resolved before the MP can select any other political option in future Political Phases. So what Germany is doing in this turn's political phase is resolving the DoW she made against Denmark last turn. You will see something similar occur on future turns, like when France and the CW declare war on Germany as a reaction to Germany declaring war on the Netherlands. The DoW occurs immediately during game play, but the political costs and effects are resolved in future Political Phases.

@@thetabletopsedge Ok, thanks. For some reason, the turn where this took place is not available to me in the play list, so my play list shows episode 13 and then this episode which is 15. I'm sure it would have made sense if I had been able to see episode 14.

@@juliancate7089 That makes sense. If you look closely at the 7:10 mark, you can see a German unit sitting in Copenhagen. It marched in there in the previous turn when Germany declared war on Denmark. Since Denmark has no ground units that start on map when war is declared (its force pool has only a single Res unit, which doesn't go on map until Denmark's first impulse of the war), the Germans can literally walk into Copenhagen, preventing any Danish units from being placed there, and at the end of the turn conquer Denmark.

The Nationalists rolled first because they are the Inactive side. The Republicans are the Active side in the IMPULSE, and that's what determines who rolls first in Air to Air combat. The type of air mission flown has no effect on who rolls first. Just because one side has fighters and the other does not, does not mean they are the "attackers" and the bombers are the "defenders". In this particular situation, an argument could be made that the Nationalists are the attackers, as they are the ones trying to use the airspace above the battle offensively, while the Republican fighters are trying to defend the airspace. There is no "attacker" and "defender" when determining who rolls first only "active" and "inactive". Remember, the "attacker" and "defender" results on the Air to Air CRT refer to who is rolling the dice AT THAT MOMENT. Which means that if the Nationalists rolled an "AA" result, the Nationalist would choose which front aircraft the Republicans had to abort, while if the Republicans rolled an "AA", it means the Republicans would choose the aborted aircraft. If, however, the Nationalists rolled a "DA" result, the Republicans would choose which of their own eligible aircraft would be aborted, and likewise if the Republicans rolled a "DA" the Nationalists would choose. I hope this helps clarify things. Thanks for watching!

@@thetabletopsedge "I see", said the blind man. Thanks for digging me out of that hole.

Thank you! Glad you are enjoying it!

This is one reason why I want to get more TCS content on my channel. I really love the narrative that the games provide, and the best way to demonstrate that is with a detailed playthrough, which also would give me a chance to do a pseudo-tutorial (by giving explanations as I play) and talk about which tactics work and why. The trick will be finding the right game/scenario to best showcase all this. Something like GD'42 would definitely do it, but it is a very large TCS game. Bloody 110 or Objective Schmidt are very old (although still completely compatible with the current rules). Omaha and Black Wednesday are also huge games, but without the opportunities for maneuver for one side that other games offer. The small games like Semper Fi!, Ariete, Goose Green, and Bloody Ridge lack some key element of the system (ie - lack of armor, too short to demonstrate op sheet mechanics, etc.). I'm sure I'll settle on something. And there's nothing saying I can't do some content with one of the smaller games in a tutorial manner, while using one of the larger games to demonstrate the enormous potential of the system.

@ I’m about to give Raging Storm a try because it appears to be similar to Canadian Crucible (Allies on defence with copious amounts of arty) but it’s larger and has more armor. What won me over with TCS is how it combines spotting into the combat system. One example is how AT guns are hard to spot vs vehicles. I recently read an account of Ariete division losing seven M13/41s in mere minutes to one British 6pdr they could not see. And they never saw it - it was dug in and well camouflaged. TCS can demonstrate this. This all lines up with my own experience in mech infantry. He who sees the other side first usually wins.

Thank you for your support! I consider 4 criteria when reviewing games: Components, Game Play, Historical Accuracy/Theme, and Replayability. I rate the game in each area on a scale from 1-20, with Game Play being 1-40, then combine the scores into an overall grade on a 1-100 scale. Here's the video where I discuss my review format in greater detail: th-cam.com/video/oUY3Wk6p8gY/w-d-xo.html

@thetabletopsedge, very elegant. I'll check out the video this evening

Oh I meant to post that under this account but even so 😅

@@McCainenl Glad you are enjoying the game! Wenn Sie in Berlin wohnen, seh bitte diese Website an: www.eurowif.de/ Sie hat eine Auflistung von WiF-spielern, die in der Nähe sein können.

I really enjoyed your DW videos on Kut and Romania! I was hoping to play DW at the upcoming Winterfest, but have instead found myself in a game of GTS: Utah Beach. I'll be campaigning amongst the other players at WF for a 7-player DW Grand Campaign at next year's event. So we'll see what happens. I won't be waiting that long, though, in any event to play some DW. In addition to channel content, I'm planning on some smaller games locally this year.

Excellent! That was exactly the goal I had for the series. So glad you found it helpful!

Thank you very much! I'm really glad to hear you are enjoying PLS and the BCS. The upcoming "Inflection Point" should be another great addition to the series. The July battle in the Don bend is often overlooked, but it is an excellent situation to showcase the strengths of BCS, while also shedding more light on an interesting phase of the war in the East. The Chir river battles that are also included in the game will provide a nice comparison and contrast to the capabilities of both sides between the summer and winter of 1942.

Thanks for the kind words! LB has killed any other operational Bulge games for me. BCS is a wonderfully innovative system that combines a deeply engaging gaming experience with relatively simple mechanics (once you wrap your head around them). So glad to hear you are enjoying OCS. If you ever get up the courage to try some East Front OCS, Smolensk is an excellent game to start with. It's only a single map and gives both sides opportunities to attack and defend. I'm eagerly awaiting my copy of Forgotten Battles. While it's larger than Smolensk, it is still readily available, so I'm hoping it might make for a good introduction to East Front OCS for the uninitiated.

Thanks Doug. I have Smolensk and it will be my introduction to East Front OCS when I get there. Also have TTW and Crimea. And The Forgotten Battles on preorder. And more importantly, Inflection Point on preorder!

@@RobAshcroft1944 Smolensk is an excellent introduction to Ostfront OCS. Not only will both sides have to attack and defend at various points in the game, but you'll also get an understanding of how Extenders work, and how best to use/protect them. I'm looking forward to IP's release. It should be a nice, reasonably sized BCS game that again, will see both sides attacking and defending. I will definitely be doing some content on it when its released.

If you haven't seen them already, Justegarde's channel has posted some nice BAR content in the past month. They are more AAR's than playthroughs, but I found his videos informative and interesting. There are some BAR playthroughs on TH-cam, but mostly of Lobositz (which I don't currently own), so I will probably do a playthrough of something like Prague.

@ Thank you!

@@thetabletopsedgeThank you! Good luck with Prague. That game is huge! Would be a massive solo undertaking.

@@Justegarde Go big or go home, they say! 😁 I'll make a final determination when I have time to dive deep into Prague. I don't think there's much in the of playthroughs of it out there, and I like to try to create content for games that aren't very well represented. Of course, there may well be a very good reason why there isn't much on Prague so far. However, Prague isn't as large as Last Blitzkrieg or WiF, so I'm game to give it try.

Given the relative scarcity of TSWW videos on TH-cam, I will likely continue to do some tutorial-esque videos on the series. I will be diving into Balkan Fury 2 at some point this year, so stay tuned! I've become a really big fan of Der Weltkrieg games as well, so there will be some content on those for sure. I thought I'd have a chance to play some DW at the upcoming Winterfest con, but instead will find myself in a GTS: Utah game. I'm hoping for next year's con to get a 7-player DW Grand Campaign game together. 🤞

@thetabletopsedge Very glad to hear that. Keep up the good work and best of luck for you 2025 plan😊😊

Likewise!!

Certain political options will increase or decrease Political Effectiveness (PE). Also, failing to declare war on a MP that has declared war on a minor country that you have guaranteed will lower your PE. When the Naval Treaty is in effect, joining or not joining can impact your PE as well. PE does not change very much, and it will mostly move via the selection of certain political options.

So glad these videos have been of help. That was the goal! Good luck with your future WiF adventures!