|
Prince of Eckmühl -> RE: Status? (1/20/2011 1:42:01 AM)
|
quote:
ORIGINAL: Mobius
So you have that game. Not wanting to get too off topic but I always wondered how it compares to the old Tobruk and SL?
Here's a link to the designer's notes that addresses some of the philosophy behind correcting perceived weaknesses in the "old Tobruk:"
http://www.criticalhit.com/Tobruk5.html
As Ray Tapio suggests in the introduction, you may want to skip down to the section denoted as "The New Edition." To my mind, the most basic difference is the great lengths to which he went in an effort to simplify direct-fire combat. For example, most closed-turreted, gunned-AFV, a Pz.III.H perhaps, have a rate of fire of only "1" or "2" (for acquired targets) per ninety second turn. Compare that to the original game where a Bofors 40mm had a ROF of "17" or "35" (for acquired targets) per thirty second turn, and the reduction in dice-rolling is, shall we say, dramatic. While the AFV mechanics have been streamlined, infantry and artillery have been greatly fleshed-out. As a result, the rulebook has been expanded to 48 pages. The rules are currently on version 3.09.
Squad Leader...
Well, if you set Advanced Tobruk up and invite some friends over, they'll likely think that you've been playing ASL on some unfamiliar maps.
Do you remember playing the first four scenarios of Squad Leader? Man, those things were fun! And it was obvious that someone had paid great attention to the sequence of play, as it was exquisite. However, as I played the later scenarios, it seemed obvious that the same wasn't true of the rest of game, the armor for example seemed far less well thought out. What I took away from the experience was that the game really appeared to have been built around the strength of those early scenarios, ones that focused on infantry play. I purchased and played Cross of Iron and Crescendo of Doom, but never recaptured the magic of those early experiences. I've never played a turn of ASL.
As to Advanced Tobruk, my perception is that the exact opposite process took place. The designer sought to fix that which was essentially joyless and unplayable (at least until CM) in the medium for which it was constructed, boardgaming. IMO, they've done an admirable job in most, if not all, regards. However, the infantry isn't as smoothly integrated into AT as SL, it feels kinda shoe-horned into the former, sorta like armour into the latter. I picked up the game because of my fetish for the North African campaign. Apart from the core ATS game, Tobruk, there are seven modules with tons of scenarios, counters and map overlays that are all devoted to North Africa. For me, it was simply a must have.
|
|
|
|
