วีดีโอ

I hear ya. With Bismarck as a topic, I imagine a game would have to be designed as solo-only to work. For two-player Bismarck games, so much of the game is the cat-and-mouse search stuff, it's hard to imagine how a 2-player system would work for solo play. It's a bit like the old Battleship game- there's no way to solo that without completely making a new set of rules.

@PushingCardboard agreed, this would be like another Carrier Battles Philippine Sea. I wouldn't mind trying the game out, if I can get a cheap copy😆

Maybe you can play someone via VASSAL who has a copy. That way you could try before you buy.

@@PushingCardboard yeah, it's on my to do list😁 Basically anything naval will usually find its way onto my wishlist sooner rather then later. A pity so much of it is 2 player only

I never mind it in WWI air games, but it does frustrate me in WWII armour games.

There's a nice touch with the mounted maps - The British player's map is labelled with English names for everything, where the German map is all in German.

When I interviewed Patrick, I asked him about it (this was before I had a copy), and he really downplayed his contribution. False modesty, it appears.

The combat is much more manageable in CotB. The tactical map can lay parallel to the back to back movement boards.

I've heard it works great via VASSAL. Not sure if that includes PBEM, but I'm interested in trying it.

Thanks! The card activation system is unlike anything I've played. It has the momentum system attached which is just as it is in Freeman's Farm, but the way the leaders them selves get activated is unique (maybe the Chancellorsville game does it the same way). It means that there is a finite number of times a leader can be activated as each activation card is only used once. There are some wildcard activations as well, so you might squeeze a bit more out of a key unit. This means there will be a limit to how much offensive action a unit can take. As well, whenever a unit takes action, it eats up one of its cohesion points. So a sort of attrition is taking place which feels right. There's a lot of games where you can keep attacking and attacking and as long as you keep winnning, your unit stays in top shape. I'll have to see how the whole thing plays out, but so far it's a really satisfying set of mechanisms.

We stuck to the same basic format of the rules as for Chancellorsville - partly as we felt that owners of the two previous games would probably prefer that we didn't change it. This is despite, personally, finding the original structure a little 'unusual'. Out of interest, why would you have preferred one of the other two colours?

The rulebook looks good, but I do find myself scrambling to find where specific things are when I want to look something up. Things are not always where I expect them to be. That said, it's a short rulebook so I'm never lost. As for the tan, butternut coloured uniforms were pretty common by 1863. Some were created this way, and some just faded to the tan colour. There are even surviving examples of the kepis that were dyed this colour. Blue and Gray is our iconic idea, but it seems Blue and Butternut was just as common.

Yeah having gotten into rulebook editing and proofing as my side gig, I would have done a lot of things differently in the Chancellorsville rulebook. I agree that the tan works and is historical, it just kind of looks like it will blend into the map where the colours are already bland to look like an old map of the area. Something darker or brighter would stand out or pop a bit more...but that's just me. Still looking forward to acquiring this at some point soon!

@@brendanirvin4277 The tan blocks actually do stand out just fine as the map is pale green. The lighting of the video may have obscured that.

Thanks for the game. I'm halfway through my first play now and really enjoying it.

That's really interesting. I have Freeman's Farm, but not Chancellorsville. But something about the board made me think of FF. They aren't really the same other than in there are sort of tracks. Maybe with was the shape of the spaces, they don't look like a regular point-to-point map.

@ I had read somewhere that the designers were fans of Chancellorsville 1863 and Maurice’s designs. About the only difference between the Gettysburg game and the Chancellorsville one (besides theme) is Chancellorsville has a built in solo mode that uses cards and comes with the game and Gettysburg does not have that.

I started playing it tonight. Very interesting. Feels like there is a lot more choices than in Freeman’s Farm. And very quick to learn.

@@IronHamR There are 'official' solo rules on BGG (and, I think, the Worthington site).

@@IronHamR correct when the game was released. But since we have uploaded on BGG the Solo bot.

At the time I recorded it, 720 was the highest quality my streaming service plan allowed. Now I can do 1080, so we'll see if future interviews are crisper.

Maybe this will be the year you teach me GCACW via VASSAL...

@PushingCardboard 👀 Happy too when you have some free time! I know you have many games on the go.

This year, for sure. I'll hit you up on discord

Welcome to the hobby! It sounds like you put your foot in the door 20 years ago, and now you're opening it. Glad to have you.

Great, I'll definitely have one in my bag next time I come south.

Funny how old games can trigger memories. I was looking at Thunder at Cassino the other day, and could suddenly remember the first place I played it, a hotel.

discord.gg/MPwHvQHH Hopefully that works.

You and me both. Totally agree about other Phalanx reprints. I did not need minis in Hannibal.

@@PushingCardboard Agreed, I think they actually also are about to start doing a version of Hannibal without miniatures. I do think they generally make very well produced games though.

In their original KS for Hannibal, you could order cardboard standees to replace the minis. But it cost an extra $20.

Ha! I hear you about the box. I haven’t checked yet. I’m hoping it will fit with Maria and Friedrich. Though that will screw up my shelving “by publisher” set up.

Looks like a Fantasy Flight size of game - Eldritch Horror might have to budge up a bit!

Thanks for confirming that, Tim. I thought I’d read that somewhere but didn’t want to state it definitively in case I was totally def the mark.

@PushingCardboard No worries. I was involved in the development of the new UKC edition although I only got to meet James in person at last months SDhist.

I met him there as well. Lovely fellow. And I've been speaking with him online now that he's involved with Nuts rather than Phalanx.

Ha! It’s laughing at both of us!

As I mentioned in the video, I’m sceptical of needing new versions. But this it very beautiful. Don’t regret it based on components. Full judgement after I try read and use the rules, something Phalanx has tripped on in the past.

You’re welcome, Justin. Thanks for the chat!

Glad you enjoyed it, Mike! It's always fun to talk with designers.

You aren't the first person to question Mark's decision to go with a different map orientation. I have a NatGeo map of Asia and the Pacific area during WWII on the wall by my desk, and it's just as you say, China on the right. I can't remember Mark's rationale. Probably something to do with fitting everything he needed onto the map more efficiently. I imagine once you start playing, the distraction will receded as you focus on your objective.

@ ok thank you.

er...China on the left on my NatGeo map. I must be dyslexic.

I was surprised at the minimal amount of scenarios as well. Hopefully they have plans to release more. I agree that it will lose some sizzle if it’s just randomly created in-historical battles.

Hi Grant, I'm Jose from Trafalgar and after watching this video, which is great 🙂... although when you can read the rules you will understand better the reason of the markers and cards, I make here a small summary... Tactical Comander, as you say, is a card game, but the actions of the cards you play are represented on the board that comes with the game, the movement and attack are reflected on it... you can build your own battle or play some scenarios where the cards that you are going to use already come predefined and where to be able to download them you will have to fulfil some requirements... the extra decks that come with the game have some units more than those that come in the basic deck and new units... so depending on the battle that you want to do you can build your pack of cards to your taste... if you have any questions about the game, we will be happy to clarify them... in the bgg you have videos of how the mechanics of the game work... greetings!! 🙂

@@trafalgarediciones7140 Hi Jose, thanks for the info. I hope to learn the game over the holidays. I'll reach out if I have any questions. It looks intriguing.

@@PushingCardboard If you have any questions Grant, let me know and we'll clear them up 🙂... happy christmas!

I finally played my first scenario a couple weeks ago. It was from the For the Empire expansion pack, but that's not much of a difference. We had a great time. If you're not into trying ASL but still want a tactical game with meat on its bones, OST is a good fit.

Thank you! Steve is a great guy. I've talked with him both in San Diego and at GMT events in Hanford. Retired from work and spending his time making terrific games.

@PushingCardboard I met Steve year's ago at GMT West and did some playtesting on his "We Must Tell the Emperor" and a Napoleonic 20 game he was designing for GMT. Hes a great guy to game with.

Always enjoy listening to Steve. He clearly has a passion for the ACW and wargaming. It’s clear he’s a wargame lover first who also happens to design games.

@@NOTBOBROBERTSHis We Must Tell the Emperor game is a hot seller on the after market. I’m sure Steve could republish it if he has its rights. Lots of folks say that’s their fave state of siege game. 😊

@@MikeC-p6mI think that’s exactly right. He’s been a gamer for probably 40 years and has a huge collection of games. Very broad tastes.

I'm not sure I'll go so far as "undoubtably unbalance", but there are definitely some where the interest is just in adding some chrome without a large worry about balance. I imagine some players will use more than one at a time, with one favouring one side and another the other. The great thing about the package is you can use as many or as few as you wish. And I bet more players use none, and just play the regualr game.

Welcome aboard! At present, I'm playing Grand Havoc and really enjoying it. Also, while at San Diego Histcon a couple weeks ago, I interviewed designer Steve Carey. He designed the one you're playing, as well as the just-released Shiloh: The First Day. Check out my podcast or website to hear it.

@ That one and Shiloh are on my list for future purchases!

@@MikeC-p6m Revolution has a November sale on. Buy one and get a second game at 50%. (Man, I really am the Pusher!)

@@PushingCardboard Oh Il’m well aware! 🤣 That’s how I found myself “trying out Blind Swords” to having 6 of the games within a week or so. Between those and GCACW, I might have enough to keep me busy for a decade. 😅

@@MikeC-p6m I'm going to try GCACW this year if it kills me. I have a few volumes because I'm sure I'll like it. Just haven't made it to the table. I think those rulebooks make it look more daunting than it should.

I'm very impressed with their output so far. And very nice to deal with. I hope to arrange an interview with someone from Catastrophe in the new year.

I never know if I'll be back one year to the next, but if I'm there, that would be fantastic, Andy. Do you think you'd have a prototype of another game in the series by then? Or maybe you'll already have another one out by then?

@@PushingCardboard Grant, Maida 1806 and Capri & Santa Maura will both be out by then, I will make sure you get copies of both. By next November Vendee and a game on the American Revolution should be ready as well.

I forgot to mention, I'm pretty sure I saw Eastern Empire played at San Diego. I'm kicking myself for not taking more photos of all the interesting things I sawa being played.

@@PushingCardboard Thanks for the heads up, good to hear Bonaparte's Eastern Empire was being played at SDHistCON. Hopefully I'll be playing it out there next year.

I'll be interested to see if this brings an uptick of interest in CC Medieval.

That's very funny. Glad I could be your relaxation while you stickered. I still really love Ancients. I've bought the whole thing as opposed to Nappy where I just have a couple expansions.

@@PushingCardboard I just have the base Ancients + expansions #2 & #3, but am the opposite of you for Napoleonics as I have all of them, including Epics. There are quite a few differences between the two, which is great. Looking at the rules for Medieval I also notice a good number of changes, so will probably order that and Crusades. You've convinced me 😄

@@shaunouellette649 I'm probably going to spring for the whole Napoleonic set when they repackage it into a smaller set of boxes. But I will mention that Tricorne is probably my favourite of them all, despite not being with my fave publisher. I love the rally rules there and the huge risk when retreating.

@@PushingCardboard I have not tried the Tricorne but have seen them. One concern I had was Grant at the Player's Aid mentioned being annoyed that some of his full strength units just fled the field during a fight even with no casualties. That gave me pause. Also not sure what "more" they bring to the table over the GMT C&C series.

@@shaunouellette649 That's funny. What Grant dislikes is precisely the thing that makes Tricorne my favourite. The "more" is the morale system. If you are forced to retreat, your unit has to take a morale check. If it fails, it flees. But there are many things that boost a unit's morale: its strength, being adj to 1 or 2 friendly units, leaders, etc. In Tricorne, you don't see units wandering around by themselves. You really need to maintain some sort of line.

Glad you enjoyed it! I certainly had a great time being there.

I was surprised at how many there are. Very cool.

Yeah, it was my sleeper game of the con as well. I hope it catches on.

Terrific system, Brian, thank you for the design. Afterwards we were both talking about how the game felt like it had ended not on the exact historical outcome, but a very plausible one. And I certainly felt Napoleon's frustration at getting to Moscow but having nothing to show for it!

@@PushingCardboard music in my ears :)

I'm 100% certain you're not alone with that opinion. When the first one came out, there was a lot of folks saying, "Wait a minute, this isn't the medieval I was interested in!"

Fair enough. I do agree that it will be a lot like Op Theseus. But I think the selling point maybe that the four battles are all smaller, so can be set up and played more quickly. Hopefully I'll get it played soon so that I can report back.

I'll take a look, it might make getting started a little easier.

I'd heard that this one wasn't as fun in two player mode as the Ardennes game. But no problem, I'll try the solo mode as you suggest.

Ha! Thank you!

Yes, I'll put them in the podcasts, I think, or maybe even a couple special episodes. However I do it, they will appear somewhere in the Pushing Cardboard podcast feed.

@@PushingCardboard Perfect, thanks!

Just once, and only solo so far.

Same here. Hoping to at least try one of the four in the next two weeks.

Well then, we'll have to get you on for a similar interview. You can tell us how Volko has been a slave driver and so difficult to please!

@@PushingCardboard Ha, would be happy to be on at some point. We're getting close!

Will I see you in San Diego? Maybe we can talk about it then.

@@PushingCardboard yep!

I'm glad you found me as well, George. I also do an audio podcast on wargaming (though I've started to try make both audio and video versions lately). You can find it at pushingcardboard.com

Thanks for the feedback. As for the air units, you're quite right, a bit of an odd choice. The only thing to distinguish them (apart from the aircraft depictions which are quite small and you'd need to be very good on your WWII bomber IDs to pick out the Italian one) is a small nationality symbol on each one. Rondels for the Brits, Balkenkreuz for the Germans, and the three stick Fascisti symbol for the Italians. And all these are quite small as well. It would have been much better to simply have different background colours.

I think you'll find it pretty easy to get going.

I liked it as well. I have one more of them and look forward to playing it.

Thanks for the visit