Post originally by Tim Moerke at 2004-06-02 09:28:53
Converted from Phorums BB System
I can't wait to get a hold of this! I love Battle Cry and have long wondered if they were going to make other games along its lines. I'm glad to see that they are.
Post originally by Chris Farrell at 2004-06-02 10:43:32
Converted from Phorums BB System
I got to play a demo of this game at a recent local con (KublaCon) myself.
I think it's a neat little game which I'll buy, but it's not without one semi-major issue, that being the card design. The command cards are such that some are just a lot better than others; you'd be hard-pressed to argue that a "move 3 units on the left flank" card isn't simply superior to a "move one unit on the left flank". Or that in scenarios like Pegasus Bridge where the Allies have neither armor nor any units on the right flank, the special armor movement cards and the right flank movement cards aren't completely worthless.
There are no "combination" or "synergy" cards. Powerful cards don't have drawbacks or tradeoffs; they're just better. The pressure to save cards for a critical situation vs. playing them now (like in, say, Blue Moon) is negligable. Since it's so easy to determine which cards are simply better than others, the cards you draw do have an inordinate impact on the game. What's kind of annoying is that this doesn't seem like a hard problem to mitigate, game-design wise.
Coupled with this is an inability to "cycle" weak or unplayable cards. You can't pass your turn to draw a new hand, or discard cards; you just have to play one each turn and draw a replacement. So what tends to happen is that lousy cards will stack up in your hand and your options diminish over the game, further aggravating the difference between simply drawing good and bad cards.
All this said, I do like Memoir '44 significantly better than its predecessor, Battle Cry, which I was lukewarm on. It's more textured than Battle Cry because of the more interesting terrain effect and more varied units. Decent, light wargames can be fun but are hard to come by. But the design on the card deck is somthing out of the 70s or 80s, unfortunately.
Post originally by Nathanael at 2004-06-02 11:42:16
Converted from Phorums BB System
In Battlecry, many have suggested ways around the bad card clutter. My favourite take on it is that you may forgoe your orders phase to discard and redraw any number of cards.
My big concern is that, other than the varied terrain, this game seems exactly like Battlecry from the description. Instead of Cavalry, Infantry and Cannons, you have Tanks, Infantry and Artillery. The ranges are the same as is the movement. Are the cards even differnet in function or are they just along the lines of changing the names for flavour?
So what's so unique about this game that I'd want to spend money on it as opposed to switching out my Battlecry pieces for a dollar bag of plastic army men?
Post originally by Shannon Appelcline at 2004-06-02 11:51:25
Converted from Phorums BB System
The whole issue of randomness in card draws and differentiation in card power levels is largely going to be an issue of personal like. I personally think it's fine (other than my comment in the review that it's possible to get entirely screwed)--but then I'm also unlikely to play most of the other wargames you mentioned in the blog entry you linked.
However, I wanted to disagree with one comment:
<i>The pressure to save cards for a critical situation vs. playing them now (like in, say, Blue Moon) is negligable.</i>
I am definitely not guaranteed to use my most powerful card in any situation, because I know that I might get stuck with a large set of less powerful cards otherwise. Reasons I might use a less powerful card:
1.) To cycle cards at a time when my opponent isn't able to do much damage to me because she's entirely or largely far away.
2.) To set up my units for better use of a better card at a later time.
3.) Because I have fewer units in a section and expect to have more at a later time.
Post originally by Shannon Appelcline at 2004-06-02 11:55:24
Converted from Phorums BB System
I've never played Battle Cry, so I can't comment on why it might be forth buying this new game--except to say that Battle Cry is definitely on my buy-list now, because of my very good experience with Memoir '44.
Perhaps someone with more experience in Battle Cry could talk about differences having read my review?
Just from the Memoir '44 side of things, I can say that it gives a superb feeling of place. As I understand it the terrain rules are better developed and there are some special terrains for Normandy (e.g., hedgerows). The tactical cards seem very well designed for World War II battles, with things like air strikes and "behind enemy lines". You also have sandbags, barbed wire, and tank stoppers among the pieces.
I suppose the question is how much chrome influences your game enjoyment versus pure mechanics.
Post originally by Chris Farrell at 2004-06-02 13:58:34
Converted from Phorums BB System
You're right that there are occasionally situations where your units are out of position and you'd rather sit on a good card. I'd certainly agree with your point #3, and point #1 is valid if infrequent. Both really boil down to "inability to fully utilize a better card" though.
For example, let's say you've got a target in firing range of one of your units and one further away. Your choices is between a '1' and a '2' card. You're still much better off just using the good card to fire the one unit and move the other into position, then hoping you draw somthing good as a replacement, then you are using the '1' to get everything set up and then whack your opponent with one concentrated attack.
I don't want to come down too hard on Memoir '44 because it does seem a rather solid little game. The worst of the card luck has been smoothed out from Battle Cry, which is good. However, I still think the luck of the draw is a bit out of line given the time & energy comittment, price, and standards of modern game design.
Post originally by Bill Bennett at 2004-06-03 07:08:32
Converted from Phorums BB System
I get the impression that you don't really understand that the concept behind the command cards is to limit the players control on the battlefield. They are meant to simulate the "fog of war", i.e. to place limitations on the player that interfere with his ability to control his troops. The varying strength of the cards simulates better or worse command and control issues, without any detailed rules that most tabletop wargames use. As the game goes on you do often find less useful cards in your hand, which makes sense as command and control becomes increasingly difficult in the chaos of battle.
Frankly, I think the command card system is brilliant. It accomplishes so much (command decisions, fog of war, utilization of resources and personnel, period flavor, etc.) in a simple and elegant way.
I have tried some of the variant rules for card use for BattleCry and I haven't found one I like better than the basic rules. They all seem to have the effect that both sides generals are brilliant and lucky, which in the end is kind of boring to me.
Linear Mode
