Gettysburg 77' - Advanced or unplayable?
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 15 ก.ย. 2024
- A brief look at the advanced game of Avalon Hill's "Gettysburg" designed in 1977. A game that never seems to have take off in the wargaming community. Why? Perhaps this video can give us a hint.
It was really interesting to get a glimpse of how this game was supposed to work. I never got past the intermediate game because every time I tried to read the advanced rules, my eyes would glaze over. Now that I have many more years of playing experience, it might be worth digging out my copy and giving it another look. It might even be a worthy project for a "make over" for the playing pieces. Thanks for the video.
A “makeover” was done that uses the advanced game battle line counters but uses the Intermediate game’s rules with some changes. It was available in a General magazine.
I still have my copy. Gave it the best of tries when I first bought it. Really put in the time. It's unplayable imo
I bought this when it came out. Our little band of brothers played this a few times with teams on each side and it takes about 3 days to play it, but if you can dedicate the time, which I could do back then, it was well worth it. It is pretty realistic and well developed. I wish this one was put in as a computer adaption, because the housekeeping would be so much better online. And you could play less time and have the thing saved for a later time. I always loved this game. It's a beast, but I always loved this beast. Thanks for doing this. It brings back some fond memories.
I agree that this is a simulation and not a game. We did wade through a few of these and it is great, but requires teams to accomplish because there is so much going on. You end up with about 1,000 pieces on the board. That's a lot of things to keep track of. We always had a couple notebooks to make notes and keep track of fatigue etc. It was so massive. And I totally agree that the intermediate game is a lot of fun to play, and it has a good flow and feel to it. We used trays. They don't really fit but the box cover just rises with them.
Not to be too picky, but you make a few mistakes on movements and such. Not a problem. Working as teams these things get noticed a lot better. Now maybe it's clear why we used a notebook to keep some notes, things to think about, strategy and whatever, as well as the copies of the casualty sheets that we made. It would make such a good computer simulation. I wish someone had, or would, do that. I would buy that in a minute.
I never really got that far in the 'advanced game' but I recognized at once the depth and work that went into it. I know of people who have blown up the map to about double size and really like playing the advanced game on it.
@@XLEGION1we never blew up the map but we spent many days plowing through it
I remember reading the rules on the advanced game long ago. But I never got the
motivation to actually set it up and try to "play" it. But it may be interesting to mess around with playing solitaire were you could leave it set up.
Anyway thanks for showing, I loved watching.
After having AHs 60s version of Gettysburg which was fun but kind of a joke, I purchased the 77 version as soon as it came out! Reading this war's history voraciously, I got right into the tournament/advanced game rules - which I loved as well. I was a surveyor at the time so I also loved the topo map but it was too small. Nevertheless I soldiered on and would play this from morning till 3AM at times!
Having read the battle accounts over and over I thoroughly believed the Confederates should have won at Gettysburg and their big chances were blown on Day 1 and Day 2 of the battle - when they didn't press on to take Culp's Hill or the Round Tops. Knowing this I took them because early on the Confederates have the manpower advantage and generally better quality toops if they can just take out Buford's cavalry and then the awesome Union First Corps - with Cutler and Meredith.
Once they are out of the way it's keep the pressure on .... keep the artillery to the front and keep pounding the Union lines ... disorganize them and pour in fresh troops. Once Culp's Hill and the Round tops are taken the Union line on Cemetary Ridge is flanked! But yes the Union reinforcements coming in from the South can be a problem because by then the Confederates are out of artillery ammunition until the 4th day and must rely also on Stuarts Cavalry which can finally make its appearance - but which has its hands full now with the better armed US cavalry on defense.
Only the intricacies of the Advanced rules can make this so realistic and awesome - but you really have to love it to endure it and it helps to be young and little time constraints. I wished they could have taken this game system to other battles ... and BTW if anyone has any knowledge of the first AH game from very early on called Shenandoah about Jackson's Valley campaign I would appreciate the information.
i still have this game i played it solo till around 3pm on the second day when my cat decided to sleep on it.
Thanks for showing my pain. My group has been fighting that for years and overall we enjoyed it. It's our "pocket" monster game...tiny but mighty.
I don''t know if you are familiar with the HPS line of Civil War Computer Games. But these have made a project like doing a computer version of Getttyburg 77 rather redundant. The HPS series is at the regimental/battery level and the computer handles all of the stuff that you are talking about. They are superb simulations but serve very much a 'niche' marker and are not mainstream. Just do a google search for HPS Simulations and you will find them. These were done before in the Talonsoft line of products. Superb mapping too.
My feelings John Tiller did a great job of encapsulating an "advanced game" feel. The map was gorgeous, and I never looked back @G'77
I asked a friend to try the advanced game, he left after three hours. That was over twenty years ago and he still refuses to even talk about it.
Similar to my experience. Friends never wanted to bother with this version of the game. IF, the board had been maybe twice the size it could have worked. I think one fellow on the Geek here actually did get the board blown up to double size and he said it worked much better, because there was more room for the counters.
That was me. And I even mounted it on foamcore board. It’s the only way I’ll play it. I’m toying with the idea of writing the elevation in every hex in one corner. My hex sizes on the board are about the same size as the Red Barricade map hexes in ASL.
Thanks for another clear video. This sounds like La Bataille of the ACW. Some very similar features with formations, casualties, movement and indeed only scratching the surface. La Bataille is a study too and has many scenario specific rules. I honestly think both game systems are a little tedious in detail and overly complex rules. But LaBataille looks a bit more attractive in design. That's my observation and how Id compare it. One for players who like details, details more details and just cant be satisfied leaving formations to the regiment commanders.
I would think that in today's day and age all of the complexities of the advanced game could simply be computerized so that this version could actually become playable. For example, all of the options for each counter (e.g., column to battle line changes) that may be available in any given turn could be displayed/selected via a drop-down menu. And counter movements could occur via a drag-and-drop function. And so on so forth. Certainly all of the rules embedded within the various charts could be computerized, and integrated with each and every counter as well. Any computer-savvy game players out there willing to give it a try? There may be copyright issues that would have to be dealt with, but I think the effort could be well worth it.
Gilbert,enjoyed your videos on this game so much that I've just bought a copy on eBay!can't wait to get and set up the intermediate game not even going to attempt this advanced version as its looks migraine inducing, been playing wargames since the mid seventies and always liked Avalon hills production values
I think you might like it Keith. I think I will try another video of the Intermediate game utilizing the variant from the General Magazine.
My first USCW game was AH's "Gettysburg '6? (64 maybe?) with the rectangles and essentially at a basic game level. When AH came out with game (earlier than the '77 edition) I thought the intermediate level was an amazing step forward in Gettysburg gaming. I've looked at the advanced version for many years, but never got any further than the setup even with the VASSAL version.
I've done it a dozen times...it is a SERIOUS commitment!
You are correct. Artillery can be stacked with infantry, cavalry or commanders. Rule 17.2 #4
Hello Michael, yes I am aware that it is Calef's battery, but what is confusing is that the set up card specifically mentions "battery H" in addition to Caleb. Another case of poor proof reading in the original game.
I realize this is late to the game (pardon the pun) but I'd like to point out that you're just reading it incorrectly. It's not "Battery H". Take out the line break and read it contiguously, including the parentheses that you're ignoring, and fully spell out the words and it clearly says: "Tidball-Calef Battery (Horse Artillery)". Remember, Calef was attached to a cavalry brigade, so of course it would be described that way. Check out the other places on the order of appearance where the cavalry artillery is mentioned - Randolph's battery at 12:20 on July 2 - and you'll see the same format.
Gilbert, it's Calef's battery, Horse artillery, not 'Battery H.' Tidball is the Horse Artillery Brigade commander, I think.
23:14 Gamble and Calif's Battery is in the Range of Influence of the CSA's Zimmerman's battery. Calif must stop and proceed no further and you will have to choose to fire calif' battery as you move your battleline forward getting them blown to bits. Zimmerman now has 2 targets to fire at and you only have one target to fire at with U.S. artillery.
14:10 The Activity Cost Chart will show the Formation to Battle line costs & in this situation since Buford is the Primary Commander, you can use the Activity Capability Chart to get those activity points needed to help build up the formation you want. KEEP GAMING! c.s.
This is a computer game with fog of war switched off, in board game format. They could have made it even more complex too. For example, initial salvos were often the most deadly. Subsequent salvos were often increasingly inaccurate as smoke accumulated on the battlefield. They could have included a modifier to simulate this and players could have had fun crunching the numbers by hand and keeping track of them all while trying to remember what they're trying to achieve from a grand tactical perspective. If nothing else, it would be a great way to keep your arithmetic sharp.
27:42 Archer must go into battleline now 1. He is the attacker. 2. He is in the range of influence of Calif's battery. 3. He must get at least 1-marker to go adjacent to a U.S. marker or he will lose his attack status. The Activity Allotment table will be used to move your attacking battleline markers on both sides unless their Primary Commander can influence his range of 3 to help them and then the Activity Capability Table is then used. KEEP GAMEING! c.s.
20:49 Gamble in battleline has just left Buford's Range of Influence and now Gamble will have to use the Activity Allotment table to continue his Battleline advance unless his Primary Commander wants to move forward with him to get back into Buford's range. keep gaming! c.s.
If anyone knows of a video about "No Trumpets, No Drums" (U.S. in Vietnam), please direct me to that video.
7:36 You will see on the OofA chart that there a a few batteries that have an (H). This means it is a "Horse Battery" and most likely is assigned to a CAV Brigade. Tidball/Califf counter is an (H) Battery . KEEP GAMING! c.s.
11:40 Artillery Batteries may be stacked in column limbered. Artillery Batteries (not in column) may be stacked limbered/unlimbered in a hex. KEEP GAMING! c.s.
13:37 Devin & Gamble do have Buford as the Primary Commander and at this time the Activity Capability Chart can be used. KEEP GAMING! C.S.
The problem with Gettysburg '77 Advanced game is it was ahead of it's time, combined with a board that should have been bigger (50% larger hexes, with the same yards/hex scale would have been great).
The problems you mention are now alleviaated with VASSAL.
Thank god.
That being said, I like The Gamers' Civil War, Brigade Series games better, due to the command and control system (senior officer has to write orders (using order-writing allowance), which then are either delivered face-to-face with subordinate commander, or delivered by horseback (at horseback travel speeds... plus variable allowance for courier getting lost)... and then probabalistic acceptance of orders (as opposed to subordinate HQ being confused or just rejecting orders from a mere courier). Makes everything MUCH more intteresting.... planning becomes much more important.
The CWB games adopted brigade extensions and formations changes straight from this game, but handled firepower a little bit better (logrithmic based rather than linear).
I think the ultimate would be this game's pieces, on a bigger board, using the CWB command and control rules.
Love the intermediate version. Map is too small for the advanced.
The record keeping is so involved each commander needs a staff. It makes me think of a bad miniatures game.
My brother and I are inspired by your vid: were taking the football and running with it. We have along way to go due to were just now learning the study.
Yeah, Part of me wants to give this another go. But I think in order to be successful you would have to blow up the map by at least 50% or higher. One fellow did that and it looked really good.
@@XLEGION1 my brother did just that its over 6 feet I had to build a table for it... its ready!
9:21 If HQ Archer did not have a Primary Commander then use the Allotment Table. If Div Heath is the Primary Commander for HQ Archer but somehow HQ Archer was no longer in the Primary Commander's Range then use the Allotment Table. If HQ Archer is within the range of the Primary Commander then use the Activity Capability Chart. HQ Archer will get to benefit in movement being under the range of Primary Commander Heath. KEEP GAMING! c.s.
Hello again, last watched this 2 years ago. Since then I (we) made a homemade map with larger hexes and adjusted the scale some to increase distances.
Alot of effort. Played it a few more times to fine tune some rough spots.
After all that we came to the conclusion that the title Three Days at Gettysburg is what we made!
No battle line markers but additional battalion chits make it as close to the same results. Movent n formations, command spans...etc.
Looking at 3 days n 77 Gettysburg do you believe that we might be seeing the same game but repackaged n modernized?
Still curious about your(?) Le battaille instructional videos. Your amazing teaching skills n calming n commanding voice but a unfamiliar face!!??
As always, thanks for your effort.
Hey Sean, sounds like you have done a lot of work on that thing. For my part, I have a chance to get the game again and this copy is about 80% unpunched. I don't what it is about this particular game but I just can't leave it alone. One fellow photo enlarged the map to twice its size and he said that it works better. I wouldn't know as I have not done that yet. Lately I've been playing "Roads to Gettysburg II" which concerns the campaign, not just the battle. As I get older and wiser I don't think Lee could really have won that campaign in any big way.
@@XLEGION1 Thanks for your insight. I am first most a Napoleonic maniac but ACW comes right after. Lol.
My old group and getting older every day , have tried assigning board edges and rolling randomly for entry. So many Gettysburg games and all the same. With our system we turn it into a simple meeting engagement n no damn fish hook.
Usually Lee loses those but tends to win historical battles. Day one is rough for Union.
Well, thanks again. Roo bad Ohio is so far away....
Bye
16:21 Cav in column can move 6 IF the Cav is in Battleline then it moves 8. **This is because Devin & Gamble have a Primary Commander. KEEP GAMING! C.S.
34:44 At first look it does appear complicated however, after a year of study and play. I am finding this complexity to be a smoke-screen or paper tiger. KEEP GAMING! c.s.
Why not use the advanced game rules and counters to create some detailed and fun smaller scenarios. Use it as a sort of toolbox to create perhaps a division on division game/scenarios with some artillery and cavalry support.
The Gamers/MMP's Line of Battle Series "Last Chance for Victory" has a number of smaller scenarios that could be adapted to this old game, but why do it?
I don't see the "very bad mistake" by AH for having a three-tiered game of Gettysburg. I still have to "bag" numerous games produced today in lieu of being able to use trays. I also agree that the Advanced game is a simulation and not a game per se. That said, I fail to see the comparison that Gettysburg is "essentially a Terrible Swift Sword in a small box" given that Gettysburg is brigade level and TSS was regimental. Advanced Gettysburg is a much maligned game whose critics generally just don't get it or desire a simulation design. And that's fine if its not your cup of tea. But say that instead of calling it "unplayable" which is certainly not accurate. Uhl's system of extension counter's for brigade formations was also a first in games and a brilliant design addition. All that said, I appreciate your review and respect your own opinions.
We will have to agree to disagree on that one. I am fully aware that ADV. Gettysburg is a brigade level game. But, it is a game 'trying very hard to be regimental' in nature. Also BATTERY level?? If it is so 'playable' I wonder why I have NEVER seen a message on Consim or Board Game Geek claiming ANYBODY has completed the three day battle. The same goes for TSS it self. A lot of us own these games but how many actually play it. No, I stick by my original statement. It is a study, but hardly playable as a game. I will not be touching it ever again. However, I do want to try the Intermediate game with those optional battle line counters.
Our club plays monster games of all periods. Not once have we ever finished a game to the bitter end of the turn track. I've also played several monster games at week-long conventions, again not one ever played to completion. I think the claims that no one has ever completed the three-day battle is a misnomer. I also found it noteworthy that in your attempts to show just how unwieldy Adv. Gettysburg is, you were able to complete entire brigade movements in under two minutes each. I think perhaps you and I simply have different tolerances and expectations on just what "playable" means. And that's fine. But I feel pointing those differences out in the name of balance where this game is concerned serves a useful purpose.
We used to play them a lot, too - mostly Fire in the East. We never finished the turn track, either. The game would usually end when one side resigned. Games last as long as 12 months, playing once a week or more. As far as the advanced game of Gettysburg, I thought it was okay. I wouldn't classify it as a monster game. We played it a few times, but there was much better available. The game is completely playable, the map is great, and I thought it had an authentic feel. I'm not a big ACW guy, though.
Agree with you. I had the game in the 1980s and tried to play it a number of times but didn't finish
a single game. I thought it was a lot of work--more a simulation than a game. Not one of AH's better efforts.
You bring back very fond memories. I still have that game, box beaten, missing rules, and even the sheets filled up from a game 30 years ago. I cant let it go for nostalgia but will probably never play it again. It is a game that is more suited for grognards and you are right, I remember it was pretty detailed. I played the advanced game to completion and the fun factor was pretty good to say the least-it was simply tense on first day (as historically) but was too tense on the second (the round tops). The third historical day should not have been as tense as I would not have conducted Pettigrews attack (but I did and it was a massacre as historically). In essence, it is a simulation mirroring history (at least how I remember it and probably how I played it). Lovely game but definitely not suited for the busy person or the feint of heart. While I might not play it again, I am planning to try the LOB series from MMP. It looks promising based on the reviews. Thanks for the videos, very helpful and your insights are truly interesting.
Well after this I'm convinced I don't need this I have enough headaches with TRYING to figure out COIN games
13:46 The Activity Cost Chart will show the Rest to Formation costs. KEEP GAMING! c.s.
Way to much detail. Did they really think Lee and Meade had this kind of information available. In reality casualties are not seperated by artillery adn rifle fire except at the aid station.
I can see how the advance game could be fun--fun? well interesting, to play--if you have bags of time, determination and patience. I'm all for realism, but there has to come a point where realism must be put to one side for the sake of playability..Otherwise we would still be playing this game next Christmas. The advance game overshoots that parameter. If memory serves you made a video showing the intermediate version of this game, about 4 years ago, I think it was. That for me was playable.
Yes, it was the intermediate game that I reviewed and was the only reason I kept the game. I still like the darn thing only after re-viewing the video again I realize I utilized a rule from "Gettysburg: Lee's Greatest Gamble". It was such a darn good rule I assumed it was in this one, which it was not.
I played the game to the second day and ran the Union far the map.
You reach a point where you need a computer to handle the details . . .
The big problem with this game is the advanced game. If memory serves (its been about 30yrs since I played this game, the unit frontages get totally out of control, the rulebook is a disaster, and finally, the nice map fails as a playing surface, because there are too many ambiguous terrain determinations. I remember buying this with such expectations...not to be.
"There is so much in this game its... unbelievable." Really? The AG rules comprise 13 pages with optionals.
Play the advance game first, then make another comment. You will see what I mean.
I bought this game back in 1977 before my second deployment to the Med. We played it a lot. The basic game was a step above Risk but because of the way the rules on flanking were and our understanding, we ended up with long lines snaking across the battlefield attacking from one flank to the other. We played the intermediate which was ok but we really wanted to play the advanced rules, but like you noticed it is overly complex and the battlefield gets crowded quick with more than one battleline marker hard to keep straight. So we tried mixing advanced rules with intermediate rules and as the Confederate player, I ended up with a little toehold in the northwest corner kind of like Dunkirk, because the Union reinforced and got up there so quick. We tried the firing rules also. Later on I bought SPI 4 game set of Civil War Battles and also some of their magazines which explained tactics for the simple brigade games, which were on defense occupy every other hex in line and use artillery to avoid bad odds attacks. On offense try to gang up on the defenders and again use artillery to avoid bad odds attacks forcing them to retreat and if they could be forced to retreat into an enemy zone of control they were destroyed. They were pretty enjoyable but I also wanted the more complex games and read somewhere, that the problem AH advanced rules Gettysburg were that the scale is wrong for brigades in more than one hex. I then bought TSS which was great if you stayed with the first day scenario, the Devils den scenario. With 2 players and 3 maps it got complicated and time consuming real quick plus on a ship you cant leave all that set up. So for the advanced game rules to work you probably need a map or maps that are at least twice the size of the original. I still think that with a tweaking of the rules, the intermediate Gettysburg could be an enjoyable game. From what I know about Gettysburg your battle was going pretty much like real life. Archer and Davis were wrecked and Heth pulled back, Lee held him and Pender up till Rodes and then Ewell came up. Then Lee turned them all loose. The rest of Heth's men were shot up, Pender's were pretty shot up along with Rodes. Heth's and Pender's div would not take part till Pickett's charge on the third day You didn't get to the second and third day but if your first day was any indicator, it probably would have ended up just like real life. Anyway thanks for the memories of a time long ago. I have this game on disk just waiting for a reason to print it out and give those Yanks another go. I wish I had the issues of the General that talked about this game and the variation plus another player willing to play the yankees.@@XLEGION1
I have fond memories of this game too. And some nightmares, in particular the unplayable 'advanced game'. I agree that with a tad more work the intermediate game could have been the best brigade level game out there on the topic. Alas, it was not to be. Avalon Hill tried to cram too much into one box. Even today designers are still going that route in some cases. In 'trying to give you more' in one box they end up 'giving you less'. I do like the latest "Battle Hymn Vol. 1 Gettysburg" game but it still has some warts.
@@XLEGION1 It pretty much was the best brigade level game out there in 1977 at least on Gettysburg. But then if memory serves there wasn't a whole lot to choose from was there?