If one unit has to retreat, all have to retreat, so the Mech. Inf. would have had to retreat with the 35th Tank Battalion. Which is why you want to use Non-AV units only when trying to hold a hex, as AV units can be dislodged fairly easily via engagement. Also, City Hexes are Key Terrain, so if it was a Situational Retreat (not an Automatic), the Mech. Inf. could have chosen to lose a step instead of retreating, which it probably wants in the 2nd turn of a 2-turn scenario, if it has more than one left.
Very good playthrough. This and other vids have convinced me that this is my next group of game purchases. Right now I'm setting up Jaws of Victory for the first time. Great game by the way. This is a good time to be a wargamer! Keep up the BCS game play throughs. Next time maybe try a five turn scenario. Thanks again!
I highly recomend Panzer Last Stand in the BCS series. That game is the only one (unfortunatelly) that has a very neat additional activation system that brings some extra flavour, challange to the game...this additional feature is not complicated at all but quite intresting.
I managed to learn the rules myself, but I have to refer to them a lot. I sprung for a printed copy from FedEx with a coiled binding and vinyl covers so I wouldn't wear it out. I am rough on rule books lol. I didn't find nonstandard terminology for standard concepts to be a problem, but I did find the way they describe certain BCS specific topics to be difficult. I love the idea behind support and the way supply works, but I am constantly referring to those sections in the rules. Mostly I enjoy the system enough that I work around those things.
Glad you've enjoyed it, despite the rulebook. I've only played Kasserine game but will need to dive back into this one😀 I was lucky having a good teacher on this one, it did help. I'm still quite curious about OCS as never got a chance to play it, especially curious on how OCS covers things I'm not too happy about with BCS (handling of cut off units - they can still get a lucky activation and wreck havoc), plus longer scenarios/campaigns at a higher echelon level.
@10:28 The two German infantry battalions (I/2111 & II/2111): neither are AV units/are Attack-capable (have an arrow)/don't conduct "Engagements" so I assume you meant they conducted an "Attack". However, after conducting an "Attack", they would be "Finished" (Attacking/Assisting) and no further movement is possible (ie wouldn't be able to jump the 2Cav HQ). Agree with your closing comments on the jargonism in the rules. I was fortunate to have been taught most of the system by someone with excellent teaching skills and who could break things down into familiar terminology... though I still don't know the difference between "Failure Flip" and "Failure Activation"...!
Was tempted to play with it, but already so much going on trying to learn the rules I skipped it. That said, I will likely play with it going forward. I love fog of war stuff.
Given the scale and what the game focuses on for abstraction, it doesn’t bother me. There’s kind of a quantum information state thing going on with most of the game anyway.
I completely agree with your assessment, except I don't mind the terminology. I think Shock Attack is a better term than Overrun, but I understand your argument for continuity, which is no issue for me because it's my first MMP game. When learning from the rules my gripe was only about a handful of sloppy development issues, as there are some problems and errors with the sequencing and/or their presentation, that makes learning it cold a bit annoying. Some rules are found only on the charts, not in the rules, which I consider unprofessional. The Blob rules are incomplete and stubbornly, almost spitefully shortcoming. But now that I'm beyond that, I enjoy BCS a lot, for all the reasons you mentioned. And the vague retreat rules, well, whatever, but you do have to deal with them often. Regarding your hope that MMP will include the Formation Cards, I think Germany will win a world war before MMP adds unnecessary components.
And btw Hard Red are not called tanks / armored because there are tanks / armored vehicles which are not Hard or Red. I guess you could call them Assault Tanks or something, but Hard Red does describe them well, actually, I think, Hard meaning armored tops resistant against artillery, Red for offensive capabilities like firepower.
Great video, has helped learning for sure. Thanks! Trying Brazen Chariots next…
If one unit has to retreat, all have to retreat, so the Mech. Inf. would have had to retreat with the 35th Tank Battalion. Which is why you want to use Non-AV units only when trying to hold a hex, as AV units can be dislodged fairly easily via engagement. Also, City Hexes are Key Terrain, so if it was a Situational Retreat (not an Automatic), the Mech. Inf. could have chosen to lose a step instead of retreating, which it probably wants in the 2nd turn of a 2-turn scenario, if it has more than one left.
Ah, yeah. I read Luneville as village, not city by mistake.
@@Justegarde Ah, I meant the American retreat earlier, now I got to 21:00. This is how rules oversight can decide games ;)
Very good playthrough. This and other vids have convinced me that this is my next group of game purchases. Right now I'm setting up Jaws of Victory for the first time. Great game by the way. This is a good time to be a wargamer! Keep up the BCS game play throughs. Next time maybe try a five turn scenario. Thanks again!
Thanks. Actually working my way through the campaign right now. Also, Jaws of Victory looks great, had my eye on that one…
I highly recomend Panzer Last Stand in the BCS series. That game is the only one (unfortunatelly) that has a very neat additional activation system that brings some extra flavour, challange to the game...this additional feature is not complicated at all but quite intresting.
I managed to learn the rules myself, but I have to refer to them a lot. I sprung for a printed copy from FedEx with a coiled binding and vinyl covers so I wouldn't wear it out. I am rough on rule books lol. I didn't find nonstandard terminology for standard concepts to be a problem, but I did find the way they describe certain BCS specific topics to be difficult. I love the idea behind support and the way supply works, but I am constantly referring to those sections in the rules. Mostly I enjoy the system enough that I work around those things.
Same on the spiral-bound rulebook! And I separated the folding chart page and laminated each!
Glad you've enjoyed it, despite the rulebook. I've only played Kasserine game but will need to dive back into this one😀 I was lucky having a good teacher on this one, it did help. I'm still quite curious about OCS as never got a chance to play it, especially curious on how OCS covers things I'm not too happy about with BCS (handling of cut off units - they can still get a lucky activation and wreck havoc), plus longer scenarios/campaigns at a higher echelon level.
@10:28 The two German infantry battalions (I/2111 & II/2111): neither are AV units/are Attack-capable (have an arrow)/don't conduct "Engagements" so I assume you meant they conducted an "Attack". However, after conducting an "Attack", they would be "Finished" (Attacking/Assisting) and no further movement is possible (ie wouldn't be able to jump the 2Cav HQ).
Agree with your closing comments on the jargonism in the rules. I was fortunate to have been taught most of the system by someone with excellent teaching skills and who could break things down into familiar terminology... though I still don't know the difference between "Failure Flip" and "Failure Activation"...!
Even if they have red support from their HQ?
@@Justegarde That just gives them a DRM +1 on their Attack (see bottom of Combat Table Modifier)... they still aren't considered AV units themselves.
The Simonitch '4x games also have their own term for overruns
I really like the soft jump rule. That's all, I just like it :).
Was tempted to play with it, but already so much going on trying to learn the rules I skipped it. That said, I will likely play with it going forward. I love fog of war stuff.
How do you feel about retreats in BCS?
Given the scale and what the game focuses on for abstraction, it doesn’t bother me. There’s kind of a quantum information state thing going on with most of the game anyway.
I have all of these... I really need to play one and skip OCS for a few months
I completely agree with your assessment, except I don't mind the terminology. I think Shock Attack is a better term than Overrun, but I understand your argument for continuity, which is no issue for me because it's my first MMP game. When learning from the rules my gripe was only about a handful of sloppy development issues, as there are some problems and errors with the sequencing and/or their presentation, that makes learning it cold a bit annoying. Some rules are found only on the charts, not in the rules, which I consider unprofessional. The Blob rules are incomplete and stubbornly, almost spitefully shortcoming. But now that I'm beyond that, I enjoy BCS a lot, for all the reasons you mentioned. And the vague retreat rules, well, whatever, but you do have to deal with them often. Regarding your hope that MMP will include the Formation Cards, I think Germany will win a world war before MMP adds unnecessary components.
And btw Hard Red are not called tanks / armored because there are tanks / armored vehicles which are not Hard or Red. I guess you could call them Assault Tanks or something, but Hard Red does describe them well, actually, I think, Hard meaning armored tops resistant against artillery, Red for offensive capabilities like firepower.
I would argue they are almost 100% necessary!