We played a 4-player Normandy game of "Rapid Fire Reloaded" today. (Mouen scenario) – using British Airborne for the Allied side:
theminiaturespage.com
"TMP link
theminiaturespage.com
"TMP link
The Germans won but like any good wargame, this did not matter as much as the fun of the game itself:
theminiaturespage.com
"TMP link
theminiaturespage.com
"TMP link
We were struck by how collaborative it felt. For me, it was actually only my second RFR game so there's no wealth of experience behind my question.
Everyone seemed highly involved in every turn — spotting, firing, checking stats, offering armour & gun classes, discussing outcomes etc — rather than waiting through long opponent phases. We kept bringing in history & tactical knowledge in discussion over what was happening in the game. In my experience, most other historical games don't have this level of involvement.
For those who've played RFR more than I have — is this level of player involvement typical?
In particular, does RFR deliberately encourage table-wide discussion and shared resolution, or is that mainly a feature of multiplayer games?
