Triumph of Chaos, an AAR

[CountDeMoney]

The chrome goes to 11.

It's like he took every concept from every game he ever liked and threw them into the pot.

It is top-heavy;  it's not insurmountable by any means, the thing is you just have to be deliberate so you don't miss anything from the myriad of options that, like Habs said, are sometimes never even used.

Personally, I think this kind of approach would work great for another convoluted conflict, entitled "Triumph of Hezbollah".

ZOMG I GOT +2IP FOR THE DRUZE FCM

[ulmont]

The chrome goes to 11.

It's like he took every concept from every game he ever liked and threw them into the pot.

He's crazy like a fox.

I can't wait to read the river control rules.

[Habbaku]

3 : QASSAMS FTW

Ineffectually bomb Israel and prove your peaceful intentions.  Gain 3 IPs with Old Europe.

[Habbaku]

I can't wait to read the river control rules.

Exchange initiated at the latest WBC by mine and Berkut's (semi-drunk) teammate towards Mark Herman during the For the People finals :

Teammate : "Hey, Mark, have you ever thought of making a historical scenario for For the People?"
Herman : "What do you mean?"
T : "Well, you know, like with POG, they add some rules and restrictions to make the game more realistic and historical.  I think FTP would really benefit from that."
H : "FTP is perfectly historical the way it is, I don't think it needs another scenario."
T : "Well, you know, Mark, the Civil War wasn't fought on the streets of Atlantic City."
H : "I reject that premise."

[Alatriste]

I'm still going to get it, though, if only for two reasons: Condor. Legion.

Well, duh.  That and fucking Carlists.  Who doesn't love Carlists?  Bourbon-lovers GTFO.

Errrr... For starters, are you aware Carlist pretenders were Bourbons too? Actually they were quite more Bourbon than the ruling branch, because the pretenders married with princesses of the Bourbon-Two Sicilies and Bourbon-Parma families.

Then, Carlists were

- In religion, rabid fanatics
- In politics, rabid absolutists
- In all fields... well, rabid rabbits in red berets. A return to the Middle Ages.

In short, a series of bumbling reactionary incompetents bad enough to make Louis XVIII and Charles X shine in comparison, that was lucky enough to live during the Romantic period. What's not to love? I'll give them a measure of fashion sense, those big red berets were the very best idea they ever had, if not the only one, but under the beret there was no brain whatsoever.

I could pass to comment you funny ideas on Lebanon and 'Old Europe' (by the way, are you: from the past?) but one cup of reality is enough for a day. Two could plausibly be an overdoses.

Regarding 'Triumph of Fascism' the main problem I see is the sheer difficulty of designing a system in which foreign help is so important as it was, but doesn't become so decisive that anything else is merely a garnish heavy on garlic and olive oil and all depends on what's happening in Central Europe...

Besides, having a prewar system is quite worthless IMHO, because

1. the war was caused by a quite improbable result in which both sides ended up being more or less equally strong. If the game is realistic, 95% of the matches will end in a successful army coup or a successful government suppression of the rebels.

2. If the system is 'loaded' so as to get two balanced sides, anyway an initial setup different from the historic one will cause most cards, options, etc, to become completely surreal.

Consider what would happen if ToC has such a system and the Reds could start without Petrograd, the Whites could have the Tsar and/or the Tsarevitch with them, and the Great War could last until 1920 or be won by the Central Powers in the spring of 1918. How could any game design deal reasonably well with such wild variations?

[Habbaku]

   Welcome back to the forum, Alatriste.  I see you still haven't learned what facetiousness is.

[CountDeMoney]

T : "Well, you know, Mark, the Civil War wasn't fought on the streets of Atlantic City."
H : "I reject that premise."

Awesome.

[Berkut]

Fuck, it was actually worse than that, because my "friend" dragged my ass into it.

Set the scene: It is the finals in For the People - Rikku the Insane Finn against James Pei, who has won this thing, oh 7 out of 10 times? Something like that.



Mark Herman is watching the game, and I am as well. *I* am sitting their quietly, minding my own 'bidness.

James is playing the South, and doing so using the normal Southern "shark" strategy of sending Lee and the ANV to rampage about in Maryland, Pennsylvania, and points north, cutting off the AoP in DC, etc., etc.

SO our teammate comes staggering up, looks at the map, and makes the previously posted set of comments, except for one slight change:

H : "FTP is perfectly historical the way it is, I don't think it needs another scenario."
T : "Well, you know, Mark as my friend Berkut here says, the Civil War wasn't fought on the streets of Atlantic City."
H : "I reject that premise."

While I had made that comment in the past, I certainly was not drunk enough to do so during the damn finals to Mark Herman's face while he watches the masters abuse his game like a altar boy.

[Delirium]

Excellent story! 

On that Fascism game, what's with the sudden surge of games on the Spanish civil war these last few years? Where's the fun in that war except keeping track of a gazillion different factions?

[Ed Anger]

C4 got on my case on the last forum for asking about the Arriba Espana! game. He didn't like that francoist term.

[Habbaku]

So, did turn 2 happen?

[Habbaku]

On that Fascism game, what's with the sudden surge of games on the Spanish civil war these last few years? Where's the fun in that war except keeping track of a gazillion different factions?

No idea, honestly.  I suspect part of it has to do with the fact that it hasn't really been covered in depth by many people before, or at least has no decent modern treatment.  The only one that's really shone in the last several years has been DeVir's Espana 1936, but that is not exactly a simulation-level game, no matter how much fun it is.

I disagree that the amusement is only in keeping track of the varied forces involved, though.  The war was a rather close-run thing at multiple points, from my recollection and definitely had some tense campaigns that could've changed the outcome.  Nonetheless, the factional and political issues are, of course, of major importance to any decent design of the war.

[CountDeMoney]

So, did turn 2 happen?

We're starting back up Saturday, from Noon until the Ravens game.   Gonna try to knock out as many turns as possible, and then hit it some more on Sunday, since it's a holiday weekend.

I probably won't post the Turn 2 AAR til Sunday AM.

[dps]

On that Fascism game, what's with the sudden surge of games on the Spanish civil war these last few years? Where's the fun in that war except keeping track of a gazillion different factions?

No idea, honestly.  I suspect part of it has to do with the fact that it hasn't really been covered in depth by many people before, or at least has no decent modern treatment.  The only one that's really shone in the last several years has been DeVir's Espana 1936, but that is not exactly a simulation-level game, no matter how much fun it is.

I disagree that the amusement is only in keeping track of the varied forces involved, though.  The war was a rather close-run thing at multiple points, from my recollection and definitely had some tense campaigns that could've changed the outcome.  Nonetheless, the factional and political issues are, of course, of major importance to any decent design of the war.

I recommend For Whom the Bell Tolls.  It's maybe my favorite game in the Europa series. 

[CountDeMoney]

I recommend For Whom the Bell Tolls.  It's maybe my favorite game in the Europa series.

It's one of the better Europas, I'll grant you that.