itch.io

I've played the game now three times. The allies have lost every one of them, but very closely! One or more rounds more and they would have got it.
I've played all solo by the way.

I really like the victory condition. It gives enormous pressure to the allies, and you can really feel that the window is closing. You race to it. But the harder you push, the faster it closes.

Question: If I'm retreating a unit in an already fully stacked area, is the stacking limit enforced immediately? Or does the defender have their own turn to redeploy?

Great submission!

Played a few more rounds solo and like it really much. I've noticed EW matters a lot! If you get a constant -3 range on the enemy, that's brutal.

I just finished my first game, and I was very impressed. It's the first space combat game I'm playing at all.

A lot of the mechanics work great for immersion. Especially the ship building and the facing mechanic contributed to feeling being in the actual ship!

• The ship building example in the rules was very nice and helped a lot in understanding that aspect
• In the movement phase, who picks course and therefore starts the countdown? The one who fast reveals their die?
• How does "simultaneously execute every phase" work in practise? If I destroy the gun of my enemy with my gun, may they still fire this turn? Do both shoot and then losses are applied afterwards?
• If i have a -3 range modifier, my guns only hit when I'm in the same hex, right? And my 9-value gun doesn't hit at all, right?
• Are edge hexes all hexes which are not fully on the map?

I played my first game solo. One ship took the bad decision to not equip any EW components, so it was at -3 range throughout the whole game. On the plus side, it had the overhand on point defense and could repel all missile strikes launched against it. One ship had its guns in the rear and the other in the front, which made for interesting maneuvering. In the end, I called the game after ~10 turn. But I'll definitely try again after I have answers to my questions.

Thanks for the game already!

Thanks for the answers again!

I've played another round, and it's going quite smoothly by now.

> I will revise the text, issues with the space…
Oh yeah, I had the same issue :D

If you like, you can give my game a shot as well. The idea for it came after reading a book on the Cuban Missile crisis. And the Bay of Pigs operation obviously had a few mentions there as well. Might be of interest to you!

Thank you for the clarification! I gave the game another try.

I think in my first game, I forgot the combat limit of two units. That's why I needed more than 5 hit markers. FAR can only get 4 CPT with two units, and there are 4 red hit markers. So that matches. And the same for the CIA forces with 5.

I'm still not sure about the one-big-stack strategy. Since all overstacked defenders function as additional Hit chits, that makes it really hard to attack a big stack. The FAR can site in a choke point location with a big stack to deny the CIA to move north. And a big CIA stack can stay put in some location, as it only needs to survive to win. I might be missing something though.
Maybe a stacking limit outside of combat would be an idea?

Other feedback:

• I would be helpful if the rules text had a bit more structure. A few headings that stick out, so it's easier to read
• I really like the shared chit pool mechanic for fights
• Question: I don't understand this sentence. "Each player can draw as many Chit as many CP are available at the moment of the draw"
  What I was doing: After the chit pool for the battle was determined, the players alternate to draw one chit each from the cup. This continues until, one side is defeated or until one side retreats. Is this correct?
• Another question: Is it correct, that it doesn't matter which side pulls a chit out of the pool, the result is the same. red chit → CIA loses a step. black chit → FAR loses a step.

Hello,

I just finished my first game which was a landslide victory for the FAR.

• CIA units may not move in the first turn, right?
• What about withhold CIA units that enter play in a later turn? May they move immediately? paratroopers for example
• Since the suspend counter is never removed from play, the weaker side can add the counter to the cup in every battle, right?
• in several fights, I had too few FAR hit markers. I used other markers as substitute. Or is this intended ond the FAR can only get to 3 CV?
• I wonder if it makes sense for the CIA to go about with one large stack of all their units. The extra units result in a decent amount of additional +hit chits. In return, they can only get attacked by two units at a time.. And they don't have to conquer anything, just survive until the last turn.

So far it's been an interesting experience. I like the chit pull aspect. The map is also awesome and helps with the immersion.

I definitely plan to play another round.

Thank you very much :)

A few questions and thoughts on the game:

• 2.2 PDF still says 2.1 at the very top

• the font of the unit stats is quite hard to read

• Maybe the uni markers could also have the city symbols on the back for easier identification

• I'm not sure, I understood the attacking cities part. "cities automatically lose one die value per unit". So my units can attack a city and then the city always uses one value from the attack (except the unit has a special ability)? Does every fight in a city location count? Or only undefended cities? What if an attacker kills the last defending unit? Does that also remove one city HP or is a new attack necessary?

• printer friendly PDF is super nice service!

• extra game case to print is an even better idea. I printed mine and the game fits nicely. Will definitely steal that idea.

• first round, command cards can only skip, right? (Nobody could move already two location onto the relic and no city could be damaged already for repairs)

• is 4 the max city value?

• What happens if there are multiple defenders in a location? Attacker choses one unit to engage, right?

• solo rules "match what is attacking with" is a bit unclear to me. I always attacked the weakest defender

• a losing attacker loses no units, right?

• solo bot improvements idea: prioritize going after the relic somehow

• solo bot improvements idea: prioritize attacking of empty cities if in reach

• solo bot improvements idea: city value handicap seems to so hard, since the first two rounds no nukes are possible, so two repairs will happen anyway

• Really awesome that there are explicit solo rules!

• I think attacking should have more risk, I played it so that the attacker never lost anything. Only the defender could lose units. That lead to less "hard decision" making

• Losing a fight also wasn't so bad for defensive play. In one instance, I even wanted to lose a battle to respawn the unit in my city for defense in the next round! Maybe there should be a bigger penalty. On the other hand, losing a battle means that the unit can never reach the opponent's city again because it's so far away.

• I'm missing a bit a more elaborate setting (on the postcard). Who are the two cities? Why are they fighting? Why has the relic site nukes? Giving the player something to immerse helps with engagement, gives purpose and is a big part of the fun in my opinion.
  

My first two games ended with me winning against the bot, at the beginning of doomsday 4. I mostly focussed on the relic and could nuke the bot at 2, 3 and 4. In the end the bot always had units in my city, but I always had one defender, so he couldn't actually attack my city.

To conclude, I really liked the game! It's clear that you put a lot of effort in the components and everything and that pays off. The game is very playable and despite all my questions above, the rules seem clearly written to me. I especially liked the clear headings in the rules. Made it easy to find information for reference and to get an overview over the whole game.

Thanks a lot for your entry!

It's now on my shelf inside the printed sleeve :)

Awesome game!

In my first game, I thought the Danish 2+1 units are undefeatable, since they won the initial dispute on the small land bridge against an English 1+1(+1) unit stack. The English leader was gone and everything looked grim. The Danish moved forward relentlessly, killing two other units. Then in their hubris, 3 squares in front of Maldon, they attacked a lonesome English infantry unit, 3 to 1. But due to a lucky queen of spades, they actually defeated the Danish stack, including their leader. The rest of the Danish horde fled the battlefield.

I really like the randomness generator. Since we're using the cards also for movement, literally everything can be drawn during combats. You can't meaningfully predict it. Thematically, I liked that decision. (By the way, I played with a 32-card deck if that makes a difference)

I also liked the art. Especially the cover image and the counters are a work of art. The map could show a little more terrain, but it's definitely functional and works well.

Maybe room for improvement could be to somehow encourage the players to move forward with their whole line. In my games, I usually went only with the strongest units until they were dead. Except for catching Danish units in -1 terrain off guard with my cavalry, there wasn't too much manoeuvring happening. Maybe I'm missing tactical aspects, though.

The rules were well written and did not leave much room for interpretation. I also wondered about the stacked leader movement, but you already clarified this in another comment.

I really enjoyed playing. Thanks for the entry!

PS: If a stack with a leader attached loses a combat, the unit and the leader die, right?

I'm afraid I don't fully understand the rules, even with the comments here.

Could you clarify

- what you mean with "alternate routes" (airducts and sewers)
- is this when I roll a "you find a venti"?
- when to roll on which chart
- when to use the small "DC X to go to room Y" notes on the map
- what happens when your DC is negative due to a modifier
- what you mean with "running across"

Thanks in advance, I want to try it again :)