Thank you, Mark... great summary. Watched it after our first plays today. It confirmed some understandings, but corrected a couple and clarified a *lot*! Eager to get it back to the table.
Simply outstanding! I own the game, but have yet to get it on the table. Your clear explanation of how it plays makes me feel confident that I can set it up and follow the sequence of play to figure out how it works. Just a really great video on how the game works!
Thank you for your video. This mechanic of initiative, action, reaction/interruption sounds very similar to a historical miniatures war game system called Force on Force by Osprey publishing. Of course I don’t mean to imply copyright violation or anything. The system allowed for breaking up the typical I go you go format of games. Allowing for an attacker or defender to realistically interdict an opponents action. Provided he of course pad line of sight to that action. Therefore being familiar with that old game and having purchased this new game I look forward to cracking the box. Your explanation being very helpful and appreciated!
Sounds cool. There are not interrupts per se here; it’s up to the active player to pass it to the inactive player for reaction. But both are definitely not the usual way of tactical games.
Thanks for the video! Really helped me make my mind toward this new system. I’m new to the tactical games and the number of games and systems to choose are just overwhelming...finally a decided to go with Combat Commander and The Last Yards.
Oh boy - I have too many tactical systems !!!! LHY is certainly unique in many ways - do I rip the shrink? Conflict of Heroes, Old School Tactical, LHY, Band of Brothers Ghost Panzer, Combat Commander - Pacific.... ... and a darn cat.
I am an avid Combat Commander fan. I also play Panzer/MBT, Lock’n’ Load: Tactical, Combat Infantry, and some others. LHY stands apart with its force organization (Company and platoon integrity) and its fluid Action/Reaction system. Break the shrink and give it a go!
Great tutorial video!!! You're a natural at this!!! I've just started my first (Vassal) game of LHY, and your vid helped in understanding and getting started. Well, yeah, I'm getting my arse kicked in my first game, but still.... :)
hi mark saw an interview with mike denson, i THINK he said (paraphrasing) the reacting player only gets to fire at moving active units in their final hex for example, you don't get to reaction fire at moving units in the open, you have to wait til they're already in the building, i think there might be modifiers for moving in the open is that true? i'm interested in the game but not sure yet, thanks ken
Correct, there’s no “Opportunity fire” as in other tactical games, where you can shoot at a moving unit in each hex as it moves. In TLHY, there is a positive modifier for firing on a unit that ends movement within two hexes of the firing unit. It works quite well actually and keeps the game playing very fast and fluidly.
No. But one interesting aspect of the way the game works is that if units have markers on them from fire, they will (usually) carry those markers with the when they move. The way fire is resolved after all activations works out very well despite the lack of the Op Fire mechanic many gamers are used to.
@@WARdROBEPlaysWWII It's a little bit procedural to learn but once you've played a few times, it's really fast and smooth playing. This is one of the best games I've seen that models small unit *behavior,* which really makes you think hard about your tactics and what's possible and what you have to accomplish in the constraints of the time your'e given.
Maybe. But LHY does a good job of modeling “behavior.” It’s action/reaction system puts some important constraints on what you can and can’t do that limit the do everything you want part of gods eye view games.
In terms of complexity/detail, far below ASL; on a par with Combat Commander. I like lots of different tactical games so I think it's fun like any of those games, but it has a different and sometimes more fluid and smooth feel than those.
Hmmm Ive seen a few of the gameplay videos and it seems that it tried to brag about innovation and uniqueness by just having the steps performed out of order or performed in reverse compared to standard tactic games. Rolling for damage at the end of the round though is too abstract. Oh yeah we attacked them, but they are moving away now so lets roll for damage much later once the round is done. The rules are cleaner, thats for sure. But if you already play SL or LnL i dont see a reason to give this a shot. It just taking some of the same rules and then mix them up to call innovated for innovation sake. Again I only saw the videos, so I hope I am wrong about this simplified observation.
Crushing It Well, it’s more than just a matter of the order of doing things. The action and reaction limitations are unique and highly interactive. In practice, the placement of Fire resolution works very well. I guess the advice to not judge it until you’ve played it holds here. I like all the tactical games I play for different reasons and having another option was never a reason *not* to try something. In my video, I did try to make some brief comparisons with how other tactical games do things. I really don't think LHY fits the usual mold.
Crushing It, rolling for damage after movement/reaction is the game changer that makes LHY so interesting. It simulates the asynchronous nature of combat, no longer does the battlefield stop for you to resolve and see the results of a prep fire before you move out. You're moving, shooting, reacting, shooting reacting, moving... all without the predetermined knowledge that something you shot at 30 seconds ago even noticed you shooting at them.
@@buetowmt Thanks Mark. I see your point of view. I am trying to tackle this form a minimalist perspective. I dont like having more than a few boardgames in my collection. If two games are roughly the same genre. And one plays better. Im ditching the other one. Right now I LOVE LOVE LOVE Lock n Load series. And I am interested in additional tactical games that take different approaches 100%. But from video gameplay I dont see much different in the way of flow. Just the same mechanics played out in different times. I can be 100% incorrect here. I would love to get my hands on this game though and give it a shot.
@@crushingit5128 I agree completely with Mark on this one. I have/play just about every WWII tactical game out there. This one is radically different from all the others. The fact that Op Fire *doesn't* stop your units dead in their tracks means there will be a lot of assaults back and forth, for example. The timing mechanism and how it impacts whether you win or lose the scenario is another unique feature. It's not just "take those buildings" before the scenario ends, you will add/subtract several minutes for the casualty differential. You could capture the buildings, but lose the scenario because you lost one unit too many and that added an extra 4 minutes to your time. There's also a level of auto suppression by small arms and mortar fire that's missing from most other games. There's a *lot* of stuff that's unique about this one. Now, I can appreciate sticking to one system, and LnL is one actually one of my favorite/most played, but this one plays so differently that I'm glad it made the cut and finally got released.
14:05 What!? Are draws an intended part of the design? That sounds horrible! Draws should be avoided, not purposely added into the game! Am I alone thinking this?
Well, the attackers didn't achieve their objectives but were not completely defeated by the defenders. I suppose you could say it represents a stalemate for the time being in that particular sector. In any case, in the games I've played, draws tend to be rare. Of course, you could find fault with having any thing military have a numerical "score" attached to it, so I guess it's just part and parcel of this being a game. Why do you object to the possibility of a draw?
![[FINALE] 💸ที่แท้พ่อเป็นผู้ถือหุ้นบริษัทพันล้าน เขากลับใจตอนนี้ก็สายไปแล้ว🙇🏻♂️#ละครคุณธรรม #short](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/yFwgjTFISUI/mqdefault.jpg)
![Chris Langan - The Interview THEY Didn't Want You To See - CTMU [Full Version; Timestamps]](/img/n.gif)
Thank you for this, and also for all the help you give to new players by answering questions on BGG and FB.
You’re welcome. Thanks for the kind words!
This is the best LHY video on TH-cam, i like your explaining style.
Thanks! Glad it’s helpful.
Thanks, I really appreciate the way you have given an overview of this game and your clear explanation of some key mechanics. Well done!
Thank you, glad it was helpful!
Best video for getting a player started in this game. Just outstanding.
Thank you, Bill!
Many thanks. Really enjoying the game and very pleasing to see your clear explanations.
Thanks! Glad you like it!
Thanks for this. Got Vol 2 today and this has helped lots. Not actually tried playing yet but spent hours today with my head in the rule book.
Glad it's helpful!
Great work - thanks.
Excellent forensic explanation. Very impressed with your delivery. Well done.
Thank you!
Thank you, Mark... great summary. Watched it after our first plays today. It confirmed some understandings, but corrected a couple and clarified a *lot*! Eager to get it back to the table.
Rob Linxweiler, thanks! Glad it was helpful.
Simply outstanding! I own the game, but have yet to get it on the table. Your clear explanation of how it plays makes me feel confident that I can set it up and follow the sequence of play to figure out how it works. Just a really great video on how the game works!
Thanks, Jaimey! Yep, just follow the sequence precisely, walk down each modifier on the charts, and you'll have down in no time.
Have this game inbound, thanks to you and the cameraman for this great overview!
Great!
Thank you for your video. This mechanic of initiative, action, reaction/interruption sounds very similar to a historical miniatures war game system called Force on Force by Osprey publishing. Of course I don’t mean to imply copyright violation or anything. The system allowed for breaking up the typical I go you go format of games. Allowing for an attacker or defender to realistically interdict an opponents action. Provided he of course pad line of sight to that action. Therefore being familiar with that old game and having purchased this new game I look forward to cracking the box. Your explanation being very helpful and appreciated!
Sounds cool. There are not interrupts per se here; it’s up to the active player to pass it to the inactive player for reaction. But both are definitely not the usual way of tactical games.
Thanks for the video! Really helped me make my mind toward this new system. I’m new to the tactical games and the number of games and systems to choose are just overwhelming...finally a decided to go with Combat Commander and The Last Yards.
Thanks! Glad it was helpful! You've picked my two favorites. :)
Great video, just discovered your channel. Thank you.
Thank you!
Awesome Mark!
Thank you, Marcos.
Oh boy - I have too many tactical systems !!!! LHY is certainly unique in many ways - do I rip the shrink?
Conflict of Heroes, Old School Tactical, LHY, Band of Brothers Ghost Panzer, Combat Commander - Pacific....
... and a darn cat.
I am an avid Combat Commander fan. I also play Panzer/MBT, Lock’n’ Load: Tactical, Combat Infantry, and some others. LHY stands apart with its force organization (Company and platoon integrity) and its fluid Action/Reaction system. Break the shrink and give it a go!
Great tutorial video!!! You're a natural at this!!! I've just started my first (Vassal) game of LHY, and your vid helped in understanding and getting started. Well, yeah, I'm getting my arse kicked in my first game, but still.... :)
Stiglr Thanks for the kind words. Fight on!
Thank you, will pick this up next month! Another sub :-)
Thanks for the comment. Enjoy the game!
hi mark
saw an interview with mike denson, i THINK he said (paraphrasing) the reacting player only gets to fire at moving active units in their final hex
for example, you don't get to reaction fire at moving units in the open, you have to wait til they're already in the building, i think there might be modifiers for moving in the open
is that true? i'm interested in the game but not sure yet, thanks ken
Correct, there’s no “Opportunity fire” as in other tactical games, where you can shoot at a moving unit in each hex as it moves. In TLHY, there is a positive modifier for firing on a unit that ends movement within two hexes of the firing unit. It works quite well actually and keeps the game playing very fast and fluidly.
thanks, so there's no pinning a moving unit before the unit reaches cover
No. But one interesting aspect of the way the game works is that if units have markers on them from fire, they will (usually) carry those markers with the when they move. The way fire is resolved after all activations works out very well despite the lack of the Op Fire mechanic many gamers are used to.
@@buetowmt thanks and good luck
Is this suited to solitaire play at all? Thank you
WysteriaGuitar Many have been playing solitaire. There’s no bot or system, but it seems people are enjoying just playing both sides.
@@buetowmt Thank you
Funny how I watched the video and didnt notice the t-shirt till the end... Did it come with the game?
Al Mol Not quite. Gift from the designer.
Debating whether or. It to get this game
Any questions to answer that would help you decide?
Mark Buetow I’m talking w Kev Sharp about this. I’ve downloaded the rules and am starting that way at the moment.
@@WARdROBEPlaysWWII It's a little bit procedural to learn but once you've played a few times, it's really fast and smooth playing. This is one of the best games I've seen that models small unit *behavior,* which really makes you think hard about your tactics and what's possible and what you have to accomplish in the constraints of the time your'e given.
No tripod?
No tripod.
@@buetowmt ouch
The God's eye view is why these games will have a very difficult time in truly simulating squad-level warfare.
Maybe. But LHY does a good job of modeling “behavior.” It’s action/reaction system puts some important constraints on what you can and can’t do that limit the do everything you want part of gods eye view games.
@@buetowmt Except that you know where the enemy is NOT. Huge difference compared to real life.
Not when units are hidden. But it’s still a *game* in the end.
It seems to be a level below Asl combat commander.
In terms of complexity/detail, far below ASL; on a par with Combat Commander. I like lots of different tactical games so I think it's fun like any of those games, but it has a different and sometimes more fluid and smooth feel than those.
Hmmm Ive seen a few of the gameplay videos and it seems that it tried to brag about innovation and uniqueness by just having the steps performed out of order or performed in reverse compared to standard tactic games. Rolling for damage at the end of the round though is too abstract. Oh yeah we attacked them, but they are moving away now so lets roll for damage much later once the round is done.
The rules are cleaner, thats for sure. But if you already play SL or LnL i dont see a reason to give this a shot. It just taking some of the same rules and then mix them up to call innovated for innovation sake.
Again I only saw the videos, so I hope I am wrong about this simplified observation.
Crushing It Well, it’s more than just a matter of the order of doing things. The action and reaction limitations are unique and highly interactive. In practice, the placement of Fire resolution works very well. I guess the advice to not judge it until you’ve played it holds here. I like all the tactical games I play for different reasons and having another option was never a reason *not* to try something. In my video, I did try to make some brief comparisons with how other tactical games do things. I really don't think LHY fits the usual mold.
Crushing It, rolling for damage after movement/reaction is the game changer that makes LHY so interesting. It simulates the asynchronous nature of combat, no longer does the battlefield stop for you to resolve and see the results of a prep fire before you move out. You're moving, shooting, reacting, shooting reacting, moving... all without the predetermined knowledge that something you shot at 30 seconds ago even noticed you shooting at them.
@@buetowmt Thanks Mark. I see your point of view. I am trying to tackle this form a minimalist perspective. I dont like having more than a few boardgames in my collection. If two games are roughly the same genre. And one plays better. Im ditching the other one. Right now I LOVE LOVE LOVE Lock n Load series. And I am interested in additional tactical games that take different approaches 100%. But from video gameplay I dont see much different in the way of flow. Just the same mechanics played out in different times. I can be 100% incorrect here. I would love to get my hands on this game though and give it a shot.
Crushing It All I can say is that from experience (CC, ASLSK, LnL:T, CI), Last Hundred Yards plays and feels very differently from other games.
@@crushingit5128 I agree completely with Mark on this one. I have/play just about every WWII tactical game out there. This one is radically different from all the others. The fact that Op Fire *doesn't* stop your units dead in their tracks means there will be a lot of assaults back and forth, for example. The timing mechanism and how it impacts whether you win or lose the scenario is another unique feature. It's not just "take those buildings" before the scenario ends, you will add/subtract several minutes for the casualty differential. You could capture the buildings, but lose the scenario because you lost one unit too many and that added an extra 4 minutes to your time. There's also a level of auto suppression by small arms and mortar fire that's missing from most other games. There's a *lot* of stuff that's unique about this one. Now, I can appreciate sticking to one system, and LnL is one actually one of my favorite/most played, but this one plays so differently that I'm glad it made the cut and finally got released.
I think this guy Likes coffee
Instructive was very good but your sound system is poor and need to be reconfigured.
Yeah, I noted I had some audio issues. It was an iPad with no extra gear. Thanks for watching.
14:05 What!? Are draws an intended part of the design? That sounds horrible! Draws should be avoided, not purposely added into the game! Am I alone thinking this?
Well, the attackers didn't achieve their objectives but were not completely defeated by the defenders. I suppose you could say it represents a stalemate for the time being in that particular sector. In any case, in the games I've played, draws tend to be rare. Of course, you could find fault with having any thing military have a numerical "score" attached to it, so I guess it's just part and parcel of this being a game. Why do you object to the possibility of a draw?