| Zookie | 15 Apr 2017 11:07 a.m. PST |
I was wondering what peoples experience has been with GHQ's Modern Micro Amour: The game. Also if anyone has any links to reviews that would be greatly appreciated. I am surprised not to find much on it on the internet considering it is supported by GHQ. |
| MadMax17 | 15 Apr 2017 11:17 a.m. PST |
Played it many many years ago, dont remember a whole lot except that i didnt care for it at all. The one thing i seem to remember hating was the artillery rules, where you weren't allowed to measure for your call for fire, you had to estimate the length and width from the table corner (i.e. 48 inches up, 25 inches left). I understand what they were trying to do to make artillery less accurate to compensate for the wargamer omnipotence. I felt like this was too far though. I may be misattributing this to the Micro Armor THE GAME (awful title by the way) though, like i said its been at least a decade and a half. The main thing i remember was everyone making fun of the arrogant title of THE GAME. I'm much more partial to MSH and FFT3 for what it's worth. |
 Editor in Chief Bill   | 15 Apr 2017 12:06 p.m. PST |
Has there been a new edition yet? I believe the WWII rules have gone to 2nd edition already. |
| Zookie | 15 Apr 2017 12:29 p.m. PST |
The 2nd edition is not out at the moment and I don't know the ETA. I have looked at the WWII rule (2nd) and they look good but I am not sure how similar they are to the 1st edition modern rules |
| CorroPredo | 15 Apr 2017 2:34 p.m. PST |
Haven't played it for awhile, but I loved it. Don't remember the artillery rules being that way, though. |
| MadMax17 | 15 Apr 2017 3:07 p.m. PST |
Like I said it's been a VERY long time, I might be misattributing those to the rule system, but I'm rather confident it was them. Was soon after they came out, so must have been first edition, have no idea about newer editions. |
| Tony S | 15 Apr 2017 3:45 p.m. PST |
I just skimmed through the rules again. When you write your off table fire missions, the rules state that you must be very clear and precise, and that the target must be in sight of your FAO. Doesn't mention anything about estimating. |
| MadMax17 | 15 Apr 2017 3:54 p.m. PST |
Ah my mistake, i dont know what rule set that was then, they say the memory is the first thing to go, my wife would agree with them! |
| 14th NJ Vol | 15 Apr 2017 5:37 p.m. PST |
WW2 rules are now 2nd edition. Played them today. |
| mghFond | 15 Apr 2017 10:38 p.m. PST |
So what did you think of them then? 14th NJ Vol |
| 14th NJ Vol | 16 Apr 2017 7:55 a.m. PST |
Liked it. We've played the early version since the mid 1990s. Cleans up the overrun close assault rules. |
| thedisgruntledfusilier | 17 Apr 2017 9:48 a.m. PST |
Played the introductory scenario "Fulda Gap" in the rulebook. That was a full Soviet Tank Regiment vrs a US Mech Battalion and Tank Battalion. Wasn't bad, but was slow and ponderous, especially with allowing more modern MBTs to fire and move (some of the phases are much longer now since those MBTs can move AND fire). You could get the same result from CWC or FFT3 in half the time. Just my opinion. The rules themselves worked just fine though. |
| CptKremmen | 20 Apr 2017 3:06 a.m. PST |
Slight aside here but we are using our 6mm GHQ models to play Team Yankee. Everyone agrees the rules work better with 6mm than they do with 15mm. |
| Mako11 | 20 Apr 2017 3:23 a.m. PST |
Yea, I must agree on TY, at least on a standard size table, those short weapons ranges, and with 1/100th minis. Saw a battle report the other day with a bunch of Hinds (6 I think), plus a few US helos mixed in, all vying for airspace in about a single square foot of the board. Surprised they were able to get them all jammed in that close, without breaking stuff (perhaps they didn't). |
Michael Farley  | 13 May 2017 9:00 p.m. PST |
Does anyone think GHQ make a 1:1 like the WWII squad battle rules? |
