Its really interesting to hear you review a game that doesn't quite hit the mark. You give such a fair and honest review, without being brutal. Good work!
Great review. I think this is the first one I have seen from you that has so many negatives. Looks to me like they should have playtested outside of the 'inner circle' with so many things you have pointed out that should have been caught before publication.
Thanks, Peter. I do think the core gameplay is solid. I'm not sure that the issues are ones to "catch" as they aren't really broken things. I mean, the game works fine as is. It feels a bit more like a few rounds of "how could we make this smoother/better?" to me. But yeah, as fun as the gameplay can be, a fair number of things jumped out that seemed to be clear opportunities for improvement.
I feel the flowchart as game board is a great leap forward for this style of DIxon's games. Took me a while to set to memory all of the steps in Target For Tonight. Would have made fewer mistakes had I had this to follow.
Yes, that's a great point. I really like the game board to help structure the play. It feels really good. I can imagine it being harder to play without something like that. It also visually places the plane in space, too.
That's great! I think some modding around the edges like you're thinking of doing has some great potential. Good luck! And if you want to share the files on Board Game Geek, I bet people would be grateful. :)
Nice review. Thank You. Love your channel and I always watch the playthroughs/reviews. I've had this for a while, but it really didn't hit with me, which I find surprising since I love most of the other narrative games like Target for Tonight, B-17,... I'm going to let it sit for a while. Maybe I'll like it more when I pick it back up. Which has happened with other games in the past. Sometimes you're just in the wrong mindset.
Thanks for the kind words and I'm glad you're enjoying the channel. :) Definitely agree that sometimes a game (or a book too) just needs the right time to really resonate with someone. :)
I was thinking of getting this but that rulebook would bug me. Those kind of text heavy and search around rulebooks can send my Fibro crazy and just lock me up. Also I do like a damage system that you can feel tension and if its as you say it'll take some of the drama out. It looks great but some of those graphic design matters would bug me. I'd personally rework the damage table as well to 2d6 so there's a bell curve. Same modifiers but a better survival chance.
I do think it wouldn't take much to make a series of notes or even an ordnance chart to clear up a lot of the searching. And to be fair, it's not a super complicated game, so eventually you remember the details on the various types of ordnance and engagements and things get considerably faster. So with a bit of patience, I think many of the challenges can be overcome. But if rule-searching is not for you, then I might wait to see if someone creates/posts some player aids.
@@ZillaBlitz depends on the level of searching. Walls of text have a habit of triggering flares then causing my head to feel like I'm trying to think through liquid sludge, think of it like trying to wage a succesful bombing campaign with a government constantly interfering worried about optics. It somewhat spoils the campaign. I think it would definitely have to be a wait until player aids. As you say the other things can be "adjusted" . Even better headings, boxes round important rules and different coloured highlighting or examples can be a make or break for my head. Small typesetting alterations and logical rules order/grouping make a lot of difference. All the same though loved watching your playthrough and review. Your enthusiasm is infectious.
I don't know much about Fibro, thanks that's helpful. I definitely am a huge fan of graphic layout and organizational information. To me, it's much like good editing in a video. It respects the consumer's time.
Hi Zilla/Mike enjoy your videos! Can you recommend a good solitaire and/or 2 person tabletop wargame that based in the modern era with small unit battles involving special operations forces? I would be interested in also knowing about a good PC video game in this era as well. I know the Lock n Loaded PC Games series has some modern type DLC focused on the Black Hawk Down scenario, any others you recommend?
Thanks, George! That's a good question, have you seen the World at War 86 videos that I put up a week or so ago? The new module (Blood & Fury) will have the solo mode in the base game. Alternatively, the Long Road kind of gets at what you're looking for too, but adds a paranormal element to it. Both of these are more platoon level than squad level, though. World at War: th-cam.com/video/fiVobIjMTEQ/w-d-xo.html The Long Road: th-cam.com/video/C4M2zLtygNg/w-d-xo.html
Hmm. Offhand, I'm not coming up with anything, but I know there are some tactical combat systems out there like that. Have you checked Slitherine's website for some stuff? And I know that Lock 'N Load Tactical's digital version is pretty good too.
Yes, it really did seem to me that this one could have been so much improved with another pass or two in development. Mind you, you can have fun with it and if you like the time period I think it can be a game many people will really like. I just felt compared to other games in this category, it could have used more work.
Great analysis, Zilla. I still intend to get this game, as I really like these sorts of games, but I will have to come up with “homemade” work arounds. Maybe photocopying frequently used charts and tables onto a separate sheet, or using clear, plastic coloured bingo chips on counters to signify off/on states (fins in or out), etc. As for green pilots being especially vulnerable on a roll of 9, I might use a second die roll (say 50-50 or 60-40] to determine if the original roll stands or you get a re-roll. Just some thoughts
I do think if someone is inclined they could mod the game pretty easily, yes, and the core gameplay is solid. I was thinking the same thing for the green pilot vulnerability! :) I was also thinking to rework that chart to make it 2d6 instead of 1d10, or perhaps even spreading it out over 100. (100 might be a bit clunky though.) I was also thinking to test reducing the hit boxes on main sections/subsystems by 1 each (So hydraulics would be knocked out on 1 hit instead of 2), or reworking the "Superficial Damage" results for hits to always be meaningful damage.
It's really nice to see a review with a lot of the same thoughts that I had...the ordnance table confusion being a big one. Not only is the info all over the place, but the ordnance weight limit should be printed on the ordnance planning card as well. I need to look through Board Game Geek to see if anyone has made a comprehensive ordnance table before I make my own. Has anyone figured our why there are white backround and black background versions of the individual Pilots? The plane counter is going to travel on the map from right to left, they know the pointy bit is going to be facing left, so why is the A-4E Skyhawk text printed upside down in that configuration (I know this is a nit-pick, but still)
For the ordnance weight limit, as long as you're under the weight limit fo each individual section on the ordnance card, you won't be over the 8700lb total plane limit. If you add up all the limits on the individual sections it adds up to 8700. :) So you're really don't need that total plane limit info in planning. I think I saw something somewhere that said the different styles of pilot counters was to provide variety of choice? Not sure, though, I might be misremembering something. And yeah, it's a little thing, but I did notice the plane lettering as well. It works coming home after bombing, but the outbound is the meat of the game. :)
Interesting thoughts about the overall 'death ratio' being tied to the pilot experience. I can see your pilot experience helping, a BIT, against MiGs, but I'm less sure how pilot experience allows you to avoid SAMs or AA fire. MAYBE you learn where they might place those on the ground so avoid flying directly over them? I get the designers wanted to try and preserve the overall actual death rate for the whole of Vietnam war, and also wanted to give you an advantage for being a vet, but maybe getting your ordinance ON TARGET should have been the reward for being a vet? And then you just have to always know your time can be up on any mission no matter how experienced you are. Though perhaps not the brutal green pilot level--unless that really reflects the overall death rate.
I could see pilot experience come into play with knowing when and how to jink to avoid SAM's - there was a definite technique and manuever they used to outmaneuver them. Also knowing when to jink and change altitude to avoid AAA took experience as well, they developed a certain feel for when they had been straight and level for too long.
Yes, I think it makes sense to differentiate among the levels, and I can certainly see a veteran pilot being better at avoiding AA fire. Veteran pilots do a DRM to help hit targets too. :) For me it's more the degree of difference? So green feels particularly deadly, even considering that weather and ECM coverage can take away the risks in many (but not all) cases. And Veteran feels too safe.
I'd have to go through things to come up with a complete list but off the top of my head...The Hunters, Silent Victory, Aces of Valor (squadron, not single plane though), and Ju 87 Stuka (reserving judgement until I can play a full campaign on this one, but I like what I see so far). At some point I want to look at Target for Today/Target for Tonight and Sherman Tank Ace too, and a few others.
Excellent spot on the rules, as I am considering purchasing the game, I will probably make my own spread sheet, to make life easier. Great review.
In retrospect, I think it might be more efficient to create one's own playing aid for ordnance as you read through the rules, yes. That's a good idea.
Its really interesting to hear you review a game that doesn't quite hit the mark. You give such a fair and honest review, without being brutal. Good work!
Thanks, Custard! I'm glad you found it helpful. I do think the game can really shine with a bit of refinement. :)
As a former A-6E Intruder avionics tech, that F-6 Intruder counter is painful to see!
They mention that in the errata sheet, I was tempted to write over it with pen. :)
Great review. I think this is the first one I have seen from you that has so many negatives. Looks to me like they should have playtested outside of the 'inner circle' with so many things you have pointed out that should have been caught before publication.
Thanks, Peter. I do think the core gameplay is solid. I'm not sure that the issues are ones to "catch" as they aren't really broken things. I mean, the game works fine as is. It feels a bit more like a few rounds of "how could we make this smoother/better?" to me. But yeah, as fun as the gameplay can be, a fair number of things jumped out that seemed to be clear opportunities for improvement.
I feel the flowchart as game board is a great leap forward for this style of DIxon's games. Took me a while to set to memory all of the steps in Target For Tonight. Would have made fewer mistakes had I had this to follow.
Yes, that's a great point. I really like the game board to help structure the play. It feels really good. I can imagine it being harder to play without something like that. It also visually places the plane in space, too.
Great honest review I agree with everything you said
Thanks, Rob! Much appreciated. :)
Nice review! I ordered my copy and am thinking about creating some templates and counters for the A-6, F-8 and Navy F-4s for variety sake.
That's great! I think some modding around the edges like you're thinking of doing has some great potential. Good luck! And if you want to share the files on Board Game Geek, I bet people would be grateful. :)
Nice review. Thank You. Love your channel and I always watch the playthroughs/reviews.
I've had this for a while, but it really didn't hit with me, which I find surprising since I love most of the other narrative games like Target for Tonight, B-17,... I'm going to let it sit for a while. Maybe I'll like it more when I pick it back up. Which has happened with other games in the past. Sometimes you're just in the wrong mindset.
Thanks for the kind words and I'm glad you're enjoying the channel. :) Definitely agree that sometimes a game (or a book too) just needs the right time to really resonate with someone. :)
I was thinking of getting this but that rulebook would bug me. Those kind of text heavy and search around rulebooks can send my Fibro crazy and just lock me up. Also I do like a damage system that you can feel tension and if its as you say it'll take some of the drama out.
It looks great but some of those graphic design matters would bug me.
I'd personally rework the damage table as well to 2d6 so there's a bell curve. Same modifiers but a better survival chance.
I do think it wouldn't take much to make a series of notes or even an ordnance chart to clear up a lot of the searching. And to be fair, it's not a super complicated game, so eventually you remember the details on the various types of ordnance and engagements and things get considerably faster. So with a bit of patience, I think many of the challenges can be overcome. But if rule-searching is not for you, then I might wait to see if someone creates/posts some player aids.
@@ZillaBlitz depends on the level of searching. Walls of text have a habit of triggering flares then causing my head to feel like I'm trying to think through liquid sludge, think of it like trying to wage a succesful bombing campaign with a government constantly interfering worried about optics. It somewhat spoils the campaign. I think it would definitely have to be a wait until player aids. As you say the other things can be "adjusted" .
Even better headings, boxes round important rules and different coloured highlighting or examples can be a make or break for my head. Small typesetting alterations and logical rules order/grouping make a lot of difference.
All the same though loved watching your playthrough and review. Your enthusiasm is infectious.
I don't know much about Fibro, thanks that's helpful. I definitely am a huge fan of graphic layout and organizational information. To me, it's much like good editing in a video. It respects the consumer's time.
Hi Zilla/Mike enjoy your videos! Can you recommend a good solitaire and/or 2 person tabletop wargame that based in the modern era with small unit battles involving special operations forces? I would be interested in also knowing about a good PC video game in this era as well. I know the Lock n Loaded PC Games series has some modern type DLC focused on the Black Hawk Down scenario, any others you recommend?
Thanks, George! That's a good question, have you seen the World at War 86 videos that I put up a week or so ago? The new module (Blood & Fury) will have the solo mode in the base game. Alternatively, the Long Road kind of gets at what you're looking for too, but adds a paranormal element to it. Both of these are more platoon level than squad level, though.
World at War:
th-cam.com/video/fiVobIjMTEQ/w-d-xo.html
The Long Road:
th-cam.com/video/C4M2zLtygNg/w-d-xo.html
@@ZillaBlitz Mike, Thanks I will check out your videos on the 2 table top games. By any chance do you know of any similar computer games?
Hmm. Offhand, I'm not coming up with anything, but I know there are some tactical combat systems out there like that. Have you checked Slitherine's website for some stuff? And I know that Lock 'N Load Tactical's digital version is pretty good too.
You made up some good points. This sounds to me like the development has been cut short before the game was ready. Nonetheless it was released.
Yes, it really did seem to me that this one could have been so much improved with another pass or two in development. Mind you, you can have fun with it and if you like the time period I think it can be a game many people will really like. I just felt compared to other games in this category, it could have used more work.
Great analysis, Zilla. I still intend to get this game, as I really like these sorts of games, but I will have to come up with “homemade” work arounds. Maybe photocopying frequently used charts and tables onto a separate sheet, or using clear, plastic coloured bingo chips on counters to signify off/on states (fins in or out), etc. As for green pilots being especially vulnerable on a roll of 9, I might use a second die roll (say 50-50 or 60-40] to determine if the original roll stands or you get a re-roll. Just some thoughts
I do think if someone is inclined they could mod the game pretty easily, yes, and the core gameplay is solid. I was thinking the same thing for the green pilot vulnerability! :) I was also thinking to rework that chart to make it 2d6 instead of 1d10, or perhaps even spreading it out over 100. (100 might be a bit clunky though.) I was also thinking to test reducing the hit boxes on main sections/subsystems by 1 each (So hydraulics would be knocked out on 1 hit instead of 2), or reworking the "Superficial Damage" results for hits to always be meaningful damage.
It's really nice to see a review with a lot of the same thoughts that I had...the ordnance table confusion being a big one. Not only is the info all over the place, but the ordnance weight limit should be printed on the ordnance planning card as well. I need to look through Board Game Geek to see if anyone has made a comprehensive ordnance table before I make my own.
Has anyone figured our why there are white backround and black background versions of the individual Pilots?
The plane counter is going to travel on the map from right to left, they know the pointy bit is going to be facing left, so why is the A-4E Skyhawk text printed upside down in that configuration (I know this is a nit-pick, but still)
For the ordnance weight limit, as long as you're under the weight limit fo each individual section on the ordnance card, you won't be over the 8700lb total plane limit. If you add up all the limits on the individual sections it adds up to 8700. :) So you're really don't need that total plane limit info in planning.
I think I saw something somewhere that said the different styles of pilot counters was to provide variety of choice? Not sure, though, I might be misremembering something.
And yeah, it's a little thing, but I did notice the plane lettering as well. It works coming home after bombing, but the outbound is the meat of the game. :)
Interesting thoughts about the overall 'death ratio' being tied to the pilot experience. I can see your pilot experience helping, a BIT, against MiGs, but I'm less sure how pilot experience allows you to avoid SAMs or AA fire. MAYBE you learn where they might place those on the ground so avoid flying directly over them?
I get the designers wanted to try and preserve the overall actual death rate for the whole of Vietnam war, and also wanted to give you an advantage for being a vet, but maybe getting your ordinance ON TARGET should have been the reward for being a vet?
And then you just have to always know your time can be up on any mission no matter how experienced you are. Though perhaps not the brutal green pilot level--unless that really reflects the overall death rate.
I could see pilot experience come into play with knowing when and how to jink to avoid SAM's - there was a definite technique and manuever they used to outmaneuver them. Also knowing when to jink and change altitude to avoid AAA took experience as well, they developed a certain feel for when they had been straight and level for too long.
Yes, I think it makes sense to differentiate among the levels, and I can certainly see a veteran pilot being better at avoiding AA fire. Veteran pilots do a DRM to help hit targets too. :)
For me it's more the degree of difference? So green feels particularly deadly, even considering that weather and ECM coverage can take away the risks in many (but not all) cases. And Veteran feels too safe.
What comparable better games do you see out there?
I'd have to go through things to come up with a complete list but off the top of my head...The Hunters, Silent Victory, Aces of Valor (squadron, not single plane though), and Ju 87 Stuka (reserving judgement until I can play a full campaign on this one, but I like what I see so far).
At some point I want to look at Target for Today/Target for Tonight and Sherman Tank Ace too, and a few others.
I'll wait for the revised version.
I wonder if at some point we might see a fan-created player aid for the ordnance. That would accelerate things quite a bit. :)
Gaz-a-Teer
Hmmm. Not sure I follow...