What's on your table right now?

[mirth]

So play Carrier, jerkoff?

[bayonetbrant]

So play Carrier, jerkoff?

something like that

[BanzaiCat]

I can always rely on these forums for solid, sound advice.

[mirth]

I can always rely on these forums for solid, sound advice.

'Play Carrier' is sound advice.

[mirth]

Especially since you own a game that is pretty much unobtainable by mortals.

[BanzaiCat]

lolz

[mirth]

^that's the proper reply  O0

[GJK]

Me and Mike Dorosh used to call these "YAWP's" (Yet Another Wargaming Project) but one that I've been working on for a while is a web-based app to handle all the chart look up's for Carrier.  The long-term goal would be to use it for a full game, where it would keep track of various states of things so that you didn't have to (Japanese commitment levels for example).  Maybe some day, but for now, I have a good number of the charts plugged in including the cumbersome Air Attack charts that goes from CAP to AA to the actual attack on the ship. 


The one benefit (and curse) to the rules for Carrier is that it's in the "programmed instruction" format.  Great for learning, horrible for when you're playing the full game and have to find something (though it does have a good index).  The first 3 or 4 scenarios are pretty easy to learn and get going with and these online versions of the charts will definitely help:


http://garykrockover.com/games/carrier/

[Nefaro]

<..>

The one benefit (and curse) to the rules for Carrier is that it's in the "programmed instruction" format.  Great for learning, horrible for when you're playing the full game and have to find something (though it does have a good index).   

<..>

One thing I've begun to see, regarding some board game manuals, is a slow shift towards the Two Manual approach.  When done properly, I think it's the ideal way to go.

Having a heavily cut-down version of the rules, for a "Learn-To-Play" or introductory version that only explains the basic mechanics of the system, has worked out quite well for me. 

The second manual being a full mongo-sized Reference Manual containing all the extra clarifications, special circumstances, optional rules, and so on, that were trimmed from the basic Intro book.




I've also seen a handful of these setups where the reference manual is organized alphabetically; like a dictionary or large rules glossary with all the key words & subjects being quicker to look-up, and listing all the related rules and cross-references under each entry.  Provides surprisingly fast look-ups in the middle of a session, but it means the Intro manual needs to be more complete regarding game mechanics than the other Two Manual method.

This cuts out the extra step of checking the alphabetical index at the back, removing the need for the rule number look-up.   

After using a few of these, I really prefer this latter Manual + Rules Glossary style.   While learning the system, you can blow through the Manual pretty quickly.  Then just reference the turn structure, during gameplay, from that or a player aid while looking up whatever rules you need to via the alphabetical rules listings based on subject ( "Combat Phase", "Reaction Movement", or "Line Extension" for examples). 

Of course that would require an extra manual, and the extra effort in organizing such an all-encompassing rules glossary.   Rules-heavy wargames would benefit greatly from that type of organization IMO, if done thoroughly enough.

[BanzaiCat]

I've cracked the manual on Carrier and Tokyo Express a few times, but the rules look far too obtuse to take in, in just one sitting. I'm too used to the more user-friendly rules that are around these days - full color, lots of examples, glossy stock, as opposed to tiny tax-law-sized print.

[bayonetbrant]

I've cracked the manual on Carrier and Tokyo Express a few times, but the rules look far too obtuse to take in, in just one sitting. I'm too used to the more user-friendly rules that are around these days - full color, lots of examples, glossy stock, as opposed to tiny tax-law-sized print.

you want a lollipop for reading the rules, too, don't you! :D

[BanzaiCat]

Don't trigger me, you bastard!!  :'(

;)

[Yskonyn]

Playing 'Silence that Gun' with my regular opponent. I play the Americans.





Turn 1. The idea is that the right flank will draw out fire with deployed squad into half-squads. The left flank will move up through the woods and then move towards the center. There's a hero unit on the left side to aid the rest.



Turn 2. The left flank is doing their job, but the right flank is unable to lay down supressive fire. And the open hexes prove to be too great a distance. Smoke attempts fail. And I had not thought properly about setting up a firebase. The MMG's I have are on the other side of the village, but should have been used on the right flank instead.
The plan quickly turns to shit here.



Turn 3/4. The left flank is still pushing nicely, but the right flank has completely disintegrated. I decided to pull back some units and approach the center building containing the big enemy stack (that's where the target gun is) via the houses in the center. I obliterate a unit that runs across the street to defend and the CC end with my units victorious. Also, the gun crew is now broken, so it won't fire for a while.
My units are spreak thinly now and I have lost 1 MMC and 2 HS in the process.
It's not looking very good from this point.

[PanzersEast]

......

[Pinetree]

Just arrived through earthquakes (and now damn floods):