| Kelroy was here | 29 Nov 2012 1:59 p.m. PST |
I have two photos of how our game ended, showing all that remained of both sides on the table. I would like readers' "professional gaming" opinions on who should be declared the winner.
For the record, my opponent and I both agree on who WE think the winner is. I'm just interested in what others might think.
I guess you can leave a comment here, but please pop on by my blog and leave one there too. link Thanks for looking. |
79thPA  | 29 Nov 2012 2:15 p.m. PST |
As I posted on your blog: I guess it depends on the victory conditions. The Brits have enough men (and ammo?) left to wipe out the Zulus. On the other hand, if the victory conditions were to occupy the building on the right and/or make it over the wall, the Zulu won. Add: The Zulu had to go into this with some objective in mind. Did they accomplish it or not? |
| Shark Six Three Zero | 29 Nov 2012 2:29 p.m. PST |
Agree with 79th PA. Depends on conditions. |
| Kelroy was here | 29 Nov 2012 3:15 p.m. PST |
Good point, I should have included that info. The victory conditions in the rules we use simply state: "At the end of 24 turns if the British are still holding on, they win. If they are in dire straits, they lose." It's a bit vague, I admit. But really, what you see is what the situation is. The Zulu's main goal is to kill British soldiers. The British goal is to try to not all be killed. We don't use victory points or anything. Honestly, the games usually turn out much more obvious as to which side wins. Just curious as to what people's first impressions are. Thanks! |
| Angel Barracks | 29 Nov 2012 3:30 p.m. PST |
How many of each side were left at the end? |
| 79thPA | 29 Nov 2012 3:49 p.m. PST |
Then I would say the Brits are still holding on and are the winners. |
| WarWizard | 29 Nov 2012 4:11 p.m. PST |
I am thinking of doing 2 Zulus per stand also. How do you account for casualties? |
| Pictors Studio | 29 Nov 2012 4:41 p.m. PST |
I'd say the Brits won as well. |
| Generalstoner49 | 29 Nov 2012 5:37 p.m. PST |
Zulus don't have the numbers to win that game. If the brits get one more shot the game is over. Even then the ability of the bayonet to counter act the zulus in close is the telling point that sways my favor to the brits. |
| Whatisitgood4atwork | 29 Nov 2012 6:52 p.m. PST |
The British are alive. They win. |
| Kelroy was here | 29 Nov 2012 9:36 p.m. PST |
@Angel Barracks, what you see in the picture is all that remained at the end. @WarWizard, our rules are the Old Glory rules that came with the figures several years ago, which my friend and I have *heavily* modified and tweaked in that time. But one thing we've left unchanged is the original attack allocation: there are six locations that can be attacked, one of which is rolled for randomly each turn. Then we roll to see how many Zulu are in the attack. We do straight rolls for casualties: if the British hit, we remove a stand. Really, the two-man Zulu stand is only for the convenience of moving all those Zulus around! It's much faster and easier to move 35 stands of Zulu than it would be to move 70 singles. We did try it where a stand took 2 hits to remove it, but then we had to account for the odd stand, plus the size of the attack "swarm" was much reduced, making the game less aethetically pleasing. Thanks, everyone, for your vote! |
