"Conclusion to Test Game of Tin Soldiers in Action" Topic
8 Posts
All members in good standing are free to post here. Opinions expressed here are solely those of the posters, and have not been cleared with nor are they endorsed by The Miniatures Page.
Please avoid recent politics on the forums.
For more information, see the TMP FAQ.
Back to the Toy Gaming Discussion Message Board Back to the Old School Wargaming Message Board Back to the Napoleonic Battle Reports Message Board
Areas of InterestGeneral Napoleonic Toy Gaming
Featured Hobby News Article
Featured Ruleset
Featured Showcase Article
Featured Workbench ArticleThe Editor dabbles with online printing.
Featured Book Review
|
Please sign in to your membership account, or, if you are not yet a member, please sign up for your free membership account.
Dale Hurtt | 29 Nov 2016 9:38 p.m. PST |
I concluded the test game using the rules Tin Soldiers in Action, finished with addressing some of the comments and questions on the various forums, then applied my patent pending rating system (that I stole). I hope I gave enough caveats about what sort of game I like so that my ratings make sense. I am sure there will be plenty of people that do not agree with me (like the anti-grid crowd *smile*), but that is okay. link In case you missed the first part, you can find it here: link And as always, everyone always likes a little eye candy.
|
Durban Gamer | 30 Nov 2016 5:06 a.m. PST |
Thanks for a really thorough and extremely useful playtest and review! |
arthur1815 | 30 Nov 2016 5:14 a.m. PST |
I second Durban Gamer's comment. Your review inspires me to take another look at these rules – but I remain disappointed that they were not better translated and edited for publication. Had they been presented in a modestly priced softback, I would not have minded so much. |
vonFalkenberg | 30 Nov 2016 8:08 a.m. PST |
Thank you Dale, that is a great review of a very entertaining game. I love your wooden Soldiers, and the game mat is now on my list for christmas. Arthur1815 obviously prefers a softback instead of a hardcover book of good quality. Our tastes are quite different here. A solid book is always worth a few pounds more and may well survive decades, unlike some shitty softbacks I owned which changed into a collection of loose sheets in less than a year. |
Frederick | 30 Nov 2016 8:35 a.m. PST |
Great AAR and sounds like a ton of fun to play |
Samurai Elb | 30 Nov 2016 9:30 a.m. PST |
Both articles in Dale´s Wargames gave an excellent analysis about the rules. Perhaps I should emphasize that normally an army is divided in several commands. A command has a commander and several units. For example if playing Waterloo a command might be a napoleonic brigade. By drawing cards only one command is activated by a drawn card. (The commander in chief has his own card too).Therefore that is not a I-go-you-go system where one side first move units then the other but a system with much interchanging situations in one turn. |
Dale Hurtt | 30 Nov 2016 9:00 p.m. PST |
Yes, the rules have inspired me to make more wooden Napoleonic commanders. |
Bumbydad | 14 Dec 2016 12:13 a.m. PST |
@Arthur1815 and von Falkenberg: I also prefer hardback books, but given their ever-increasing prices, soft-bound copies definitely become more attractive. I would love to have a copy of TSIA, for example, but the $40 USD price tag is simply beyond my budget right now. Chris Johnson |
|