DVG's Tiger Leader

[BanzaiCat]

I'm really hoping they DON'T go with something more detailed, combat-wise. I kind of rolled my eyes when I saw rules for AP ammo and flank shots and all that crap. I just want something that plays fast and makes general sense.

Really BC?  Sorry, I just don't get this statement. 

You don't need to apologize. It is what it is. DVG games of this kind of scope are pretty well known for trying to balance large-scale tactical combat without getting fiddly with lots of details. For me, going into lots of details is a wrong turn. Keep reading below, maybe this will make more sense in a moment.

Who wouldn't want to actually play a "tank commander" in this thing by simulating those kinds of decisions?  Or is the individual tank abstracted in this game and it's more about the platoon or company? 

It's more about the platoon/company (Kampfgruppe) versus Battalion-strength enemy units. It's NOT Patton's Best, not at all. That's the whole point I'm making. This does not need Patton's Best levels of detail in a sim of this scope. Besides, there's already mods for Patton's Best if you want to change things to being in command of a German tank, with that system.

I'm just so totally opposite of this statement; I was basically looking for an updated (and German crewed) version of Patton's Best with this one.  Clearly this is not that.

Right. That's my point. This is NOT Patton's Best. DVG has always tried to balance playability with realism, something they've caught flak on numerous times, but trying to do what they do is not easy. You can't make everyone happy - those that want more detail think it's too light, those that don't want enormous detail might get miffed at adding unit positioning (front/side/rear), hex facing, flank shots, different ammo types, ammo versus target types, and so on, and so on.

I tend to lean more into the latter category. While there certainly ARE things that need to be fixed in this TL game (Infantry versus tank combat is one, which actually was rather well changed by making Infantry unable to engage vehicles except at Range 0, where they might have a lucky shot at taking down a tank), in general, I think the system is fine. It reminds me a lot of the old Thunderbolt/Apache Leader game (by GMT), which was a good game system with just enough realism.

Now, GJK, TW - I could be wrong. I was merely expressing an opinion that I hope they do not go overboard on the detail and turn this into a fiddly tactical simulator, which in my opinion is well beyond the intended scope of the game. A little detail, I have no problem with. A lot of detail, I'd prefer that it go into some kind of Optional Rule category, so you can tailor-make your game to the level of detail that you want. This way, you get the game you want, and I get the game I want.

When I review this game...and I am waiting for this refurbished rule set from them before doing so - I'm not going to lambast it if it gets too detailed. Who knows - maybe flank shots, unit facing, and all that jazz will actually make it a much better game!

I don't know.

I was merely saying I hope they don't try to overthink it and get this too bogged down into a game that it clearly was not intended to be.

[TacticalWargames]

BC..fully understand. I think what we both want is probably very similar. I'm not wanting uber detail that would turn the game into a slow mind melting chore (that type of game is much better suited to being a PC wargame where the computer keeps track and does the rule implementation etc thereby taking the burden away)..but also don't want MG units taking out Tiger tanks etc.

Finally like myself your happy with two sets of rules for two types of game player. That way no one loses out! Who wouldn't want that?

[BanzaiCat]

Here's some more stuff posted from over at BGG.

******** PROGRESS REPORT 7/26/2015

Hi, Dan and I have had some hectic schedules but we are almost ready to launch the PDF v1.0 beta of the updated rules and components. Dan is testing out the updated tactical rules and we are both going over proofing the updates. Rick already gave his approval of the changes. So far the updates include a set of modified tactical rules, easier to understand DRMs, a split attack vs defense die roll system, updated counters and German unit cards, and some new optional rules. We should be ready to post the PDF by around Mon-Wed.

If there are any questions let me know.

******** UPDATED RULES SAMPLE 7/26/2015

The rules below will be included in the beta PDF files. I am posting them so players can try them out while we finalize the rest of the update.

* AT Teams can only attack out to range 1.
* MGs and Halftracks cannot damage vehicles#. They can only cause stress.
* Infantry can only attack vehicles# at range 0.
* Artillery and mortars cannot move and fire on the same turn.
* Long range attack DRMs: Range 2 -1, Range 3 -2.
* US tanks can fire out to range 3.
* Maximum MG and Halftrack attack range is 1.
# Exception: Trucks can be damaged and attacked at max range.

Stay tuned for further updates.

Thanks
Christopher Dean
NWS

What are your thoughts on the list? MGs and Halftracks not being able to attack vehicles, but able to cause their Commander Stress, is good. Not lumping Infantry into that rule, but saying they can only attack Vehicles at Range 0...I guess it will depend on how, if at all, they change the enemy movement chart.

I've filled out more of the TL rule revision to include the set-up section and some other info, but does anyone find the flow of the previous download more helpful, or not?

[Double Deuce]

Kind of happy I didn't jump on this early but glad to see it getting revised. Makes it worth a second look.

[Barthheart]

Kind of happy I didn't jump on this early but glad to see it getting revised. Makes it worth a second look.

Wait for a second reprint.... it will have updated cards and counters... unlike mine....  >:(

[Barthheart]

Here's some more stuff posted from over at BGG.

******** PROGRESS REPORT 7/26/2015

Hi, Dan and I have had some hectic schedules but we are almost ready to launch the PDF v1.0 beta of the updated rules and components. Dan is testing out the updated tactical rules and we are both going over proofing the updates. Rick already gave his approval of the changes. So far the updates include a set of modified tactical rules, easier to understand DRMs, a split attack vs defense die roll system, updated counters and German unit cards, and some new optional rules. We should be ready to post the PDF by around Mon-Wed.

If there are any questions let me know.

******** UPDATED RULES SAMPLE 7/26/2015

The rules below will be included in the beta PDF files. I am posting them so players can try them out while we finalize the rest of the update.

* AT Teams can only attack out to range 1.
* MGs and Halftracks cannot damage vehicles#. They can only cause stress.
* Infantry can only attack vehicles# at range 0.
* Artillery and mortars cannot move and fire on the same turn.
* Long range attack DRMs: Range 2 -1, Range 3 -2.
* US tanks can fire out to range 3.
* Maximum MG and Halftrack attack range is 1.
# Exception: Trucks can be damaged and attacked at max range.

Stay tuned for further updates.

Thanks
Christopher Dean
NWS

What are your thoughts on the list? MGs and Halftracks not being able to attack vehicles, but able to cause their Commander Stress, is good. Not lumping Infantry into that rule, but saying they can only attack Vehicles at Range 0...I guess it will depend on how, if at all, they change the enemy movement chart.

I've filled out more of the TL rule revision to include the set-up section and some other info, but does anyone find the flow of the previous download more helpful, or not?

Not sure about this yet. MG and Halftracks can't damage tanks, armoured cars and halftracks. They can cause stress to the commanders.... but they can't wound or kill the commanders....
Some of this makes sense. Some of it is going to make my current games pieces and cards obsolete... unless I pay $4000 to pay for shipping the update kit to my igloo.... :P

[BanzaiCat]

Here's an updated version of the previous fix I created. I added the setup info and think I fixed most of the text to reflect its place in the manual.

Please download if interested and let me know if you think it works.

I incorporated the few changes that are listed on BGG. A summary (highlighted) can be found on the last page.

Still not sure why I'm doing this, other than the fact that I'm a freak and enjoy manual writing and editing.  O0

Note: the TOC is broken because I didn't update it in this last version. Sorry about that.

[Staggerwing]

Thanks again B_C. I've been reading the rulebook and scratching my head ever since the game arrived on my doorstep.

But then again, when it comes to actually playing I'm not as smart as the average warbear.  ::)

[BanzaiCat]

I'm not sure I did much other than to just put the current rules into a more logical order, but maybe that makes all the difference? Let me know what you think.

It still feels like it needs a re-write, but that's me. It's difficult for me to leave well enough alone.

[Jamm]

'Still not sure why I'm doing this, other than the fact that I'm a freak and enjoy manual writing and editing.'  O0

I wish I knew you liked doing this for kicks BC,  :)
I found the Rulebook writing, layout and edits to be one of the most difficult aspects of the 'Old School Tactical' design.

[BanzaiCat]

Jamm, I've been a technical writer/instructional designer for 12+ years now. When I see something that is in desperate need of editing, I see it as an opportunity to enjoy myself.

I've done several board game and computer game manuals over the years, for pay, but my experience is that most companies don't have the coin to truly engage a full-fledged technical writer, as the market rate for this kind of work is VERY high, usually, because it's per word in most cases.

In this particular case, I just like this game at heart and know if it can be better through a re-write, I'll do it. But just to be clear, this was totally on my initiative and not asked for by anyone, anywhere, and not for any kind of compensation. It helps me wrap my mind around the game better.

When you say 'Old School Tactical' design, what are you referring to exactly? A particular title or are you meaning something like the line of Avalon Hill products from the 70s and 80s?

[Barthheart]

...
When you say 'Old School Tactical' design, what are you referring to exactly? A particular title or are you meaning something like the line of Avalon Hill products from the 70s and 80s?

It's his, Jamm's, new game design coming out soon as it was successfully kickstarted and will be published by Flying Pig Games!  Do you live under a rock?!?  :o

http://grogheads.com/forums/index.php?topic=12711.0

:D

[bayonetbrant]

Do you live under a rock?!?  :o

He's in Houston, so yeah, kinda...  ;)

[GJK]

And it's mosquito season there, where the mosquito's are the size of small birds, so I imagine that he doesn't get out much.  ;)

[Barthheart]

Well if you've ever get to go to Newfoundland.....




:P