Bloody April

[Nefaro]

Picked up an opened (but unpunched) copy of Bloody April at a good price recently. 

Sounds like it can have a sort of narrative play style, along with a Solitaire option for play as the British Flying Corps.

The rules look like they'll take some time to digest, as it's obviously not your typical hex & counter flood of armies but air mission planning and execution.  Looks very interesting, especially since I had been on a WWI flight sim glut for the past year. 

I'm also wondering if the somewhat older Elusive Victory fares well regarding this sort of gaming narrative.

[ArizonaTank]

I have played quite a bit of Bloody April using vassal (am actually playing as I type this).  Currently playing a campaign (basically one real day).  I am slowly putting together an AAR. 

Anyway, once you get past a few "different concepts" (how to calculate altitude for example), the game plays pretty well.  I have heard it called more of a simulation than a wargame, and there may be a little truth to that....but in a good way in my book. 

One common remark I've also heard is that the box says it is medium complexity, but it often feels like highly complex. 

I have not played solitaire, but I think it would be good for that.  Except there is some "fog of war" you would lose. 

Playing on vassal, the game lays out well.  But I have not used the actual counters.  I could see some potential counter management issues, since there are many info counters needed on the board.

[Nefaro]

I have played quite a bit of Bloody April using vassal (am actually playing as I type this).  Currently playing a campaign (basically one real day).  I am slowly putting together an AAR. 

Anyway, once you get past a few "different concepts" (how to calculate altitude for example), the game plays pretty well.  I have heard it called more of a simulation than a wargame, and there may be a little truth to that....but in a good way in my book. 

One common remark I've also heard is that the box says it is medium complexity, but it often feels like highly complex. 

I have not played solitaire, but I think it would be good for that.  Except there is some "fog of war" you would lose. 

Playing on vassal, the game lays out well.  But I have not used the actual counters.  I could see some potential counter management issues, since there are many info counters needed on the board.

Thanks.

My box says Complexity: 7 (High), not Medium.  As does Elusive Victory although that one doesn't come with a solitaire setup.

From the vid or two I've seen of Bloody April, there was definitely some counter spread going on outside any flight's hex location.  But there doesn't seem to be lots of adjacent stacks nearby so it may not be an issue - other than managing all of the extra markers.  Note to self:  Buy more counter trays.

[Toonces]

Something about Bloody April left me very cold.  Which is to say, I haven't gotten past reading (some of) the rulebook. 

It definitely isn't what I was expecting.  I have Downtown and EV and both of them are far more interesting and intuitive to me.  I really want to like Bloody April but it just doesn't look like it will hit the sweet spot.  Having said that, I was thinking of selling it but I'm not quite there yet...

[Nefaro]

Something about Bloody April left me very cold.  Which is to say, I haven't gotten past reading (some of) the rulebook. 

It definitely isn't what I was expecting.  I have Downtown and EV and both of them are far more interesting and intuitive to me.  I really want to like Bloody April but it just doesn't look like it will hit the sweet spot.  Having said that, I was thinking of selling it but I'm not quite there yet...

I'm not sure how much you've read up on WWI air war but I expect Bloody April to be more rewarding for those who have delved deeply into the tactics and technology of the period portrayed.  Probably the same for the other two games.  Or it could just be that you enjoy the extra technical gizmos and variety portrayed in the more modern ones.

I also picked up EV when I got this one, hoping that Bloody April would be a faster introduction to the system due to having read a fair bit on the subject recently.  Also not having to deal with all the extra electronic side of things what with radar, SAMs, and such should take less effort in grasping the concepts of the game mechanics for me. 

I still don't think these will get to the table too quickly.  I still have at least a couple other games ahead of them and prefer to take my time burning the manuals into my thinkmeats before busting them out. 

[ArizonaTank]

I have played quite a bit of Bloody April using vassal (am actually playing as I type this).  Currently playing a campaign (basically one real day).  I am slowly putting together an AAR. 

Anyway, once you get past a few "different concepts" (how to calculate altitude for example), the game plays pretty well.  I have heard it called more of a simulation than a wargame, and there may be a little truth to that....but in a good way in my book. 

One common remark I've also heard is that the box says it is medium complexity, but it often feels like highly complex. 

I have not played solitaire, but I think it would be good for that.  Except there is some "fog of war" you would lose. 

Playing on vassal, the game lays out well.  But I have not used the actual counters.  I could see some potential counter management issues, since there are many info counters needed on the board.

Thanks.

My box says Complexity: 7 (High), not Medium.  As does Elusive Victory although that one doesn't come with a solitaire setup.

From the vid or two I've seen of Bloody April, there was definitely some counter spread going on outside any flight's hex location.  But there doesn't seem to be lots of adjacent stacks nearby so it may not be an issue - other than managing all of the extra markers.  Note to self:  Buy more counter trays.

Oops, yes, the box has complexity 7.  But if you go to the game description on the GMT website, the diagram has it right in the middle of "medium" complexity.   https://www.gmtgames.com/p-307-bloody-april-1917-air-war-over-arras-france.aspx

I think counter management is not an issue for the patrol games.  But in a campaign, when you might have 20 flights in the air, five dogfights, four artillery spotting missions, 20 - 30 ground counters...  you get the idea.  In my vassal games, we often have stacks of 6 - 8 counters.   In the BGG file section, someone posted a game aid that lets you manage the info counters off-board.  I would probably try that option if I were going to play a physical game.

The hook of this game for me is that it does a great job in portraying its subject and the history.  The Germans have superior aircraft for the most part, but the British must still soldier on to get the job done.  Aircraft types are distinctly modeled, and you get very familiar with difference between an Albatross DIII and a DV.  The game clearly puts the player in the driving seat of air operations in a very unique period of history.  Your aircraft are based close to the front.  The Germans are often running scramble missions, against British line patrols, and artillery spotters.  The game also has a nice narrative feel to it.  If you like detail and chrome, each pilot can be named and rated, and you get to cheer them on.  Of course the "end of day" butcher's bill is often sobering...counting up those who went down in flames, crashed behind enemy lines, couldn't nurse their damaged plane back from a dogfight, or who died because of a freak take-off accident.  But I could see the point that if WWI does not interest you, you might not see much in the game.

[TacticalWargames]

I'm obsessed with WW1 so my imagination can fly when playing the game..however those with just a passing interest and not know the characters in the game may be left a little cold.

A good idea would be using the game in conjunction with Wings of War for the dogfighting apsect.

His latest game being developed is a Solo air game which is looking interesting. Called Cactus Air.

[MengJiao]

Picked up an opened (but unpunched) copy of Bloody April at a good price recently. 

Sounds like it can have a sort of narrative play style, along with a Solitaire option for play as the British Flying Corps.

The rules look like they'll take some time to digest, as it's obviously not your typical hex & counter flood of armies but air mission planning and execution.  Looks very interesting, especially since I had been on a WWI flight sim glut for the past year. 

I'm also wondering if the somewhat older Elusive Victory fares well regarding this sort of gaming narrative.

It sounds like Bloody April is more similar to Burning Blue.  I liked Elusive Victory, but my basic impression was that you learned more about
how hard it is to hit targets under a SAM umbrella than anything else.

But Burning Blue, especially if worked on with the help of a book like The Most Dangerous Enemy
(http://www.amazon.com/The-Most-Dangerous-Enemy-Definitive/dp/1845134818),
has a lot of narrative coherence.

So I guess I'd better look into Bloody April.

[Barthheart]

I've got Bloody April and it's a great game.... but it is more of a simulation than just a game. There's a lot of detail to keep track of and using the board game to play you can actually run out of info markers.

Still it's a wonderful study into the air operations of the time . It really points out how air power was being used at the time. More then just air combat. In fact air combat was just a side effect of what the true missions for the Air Corps were.

Great fun, but on the heavy, deep, difficult end of the spectrum.

[ArizonaTank]

Great fun, but on the heavy, deep, difficult end of the spectrum.

+1  in campaign games....when there is a lot going on in the air, it takes my opponent and I about 1 hour per turn.  But easy turns are over in 10 - 15 min.