Hello,
There's a positive review of the new rules in the current issue of Wargames, Soldiers and Strategy magazine.
You have to flick past the Napoleon boringpart to find it.
(https://i.postimg.cc/Sjh0fcFL/20240125-190127.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/Sjh0fcFL)
(https://i.postimg.cc/8Jn1j5cX/20240125-190140.jpg) (https://postimg.cc/8Jn1j5cX)
Best wishes,
Martin
Thanks for sharing, Martin.
And well done Martin G for getting WSS interested and including pictures of your game.
Simon
It was most kind of Guy.
He does support the "normal guys".
Let us see if it sells more CK? I think it is a great set of rules from the RFCM team.
martin :)
Yes indeed, I was very pleased to see the review in the only mag I subscribe to. It was generally very positive, although the rules were clearly not complex enough (i.e. you get bored before the game finishes) for one reviewer. Still, WE know a good thing when we see it.
I've not seen the article, but find it hard to understand how one can get bored before the end, unless one if the players is very bad and/or had some terrible luck.
I find C&K are often in the balance, swinging this way and that. Exciting stuff!
Simon
For me its that not quite knowing if you have won or lost until the points are tallied up. I often guess wrong. Certainly in the "close" games. Its one of the great things about the PP rules.
Derek
I totally agree, Derek. Fights are often close, and the battles bloody.
It's lovely when you get a good win when you weren't sure which side of a draw you were going to be. Less good when you think you've won, only to come second, of course!
The variability in Victory Points until the final tally is of course an important element of maintaining that suspense.
Simon
There are many sets of ancient rules out there.
I believe CK is excellent (of course) . Most armies that players own can be used with CK but most players will never get a chance or want a chance to play CK.
Such is life ???
martin :)
The game has changed my view of playing Ancient games. A lot of people were genuinely surprised when I started talking about playing this game ? As I don't normally play "Ancients" !
So there must be something right about it ?
Miles
Good point, Miles - I'm very proud of you at getting into Ancients! ;D
I think C&K does a great job at bringing out the essence of "ancient" warfare in a readily-comprehensible way that doesn't need the detailed gamey nuances (Light Medium Infantry, anyone?) that has made some other sets hard to get into.
And for those that already have forces for other rule sets, the additional investment to play C&K is very low.
Simon
Quote from: Colonel Kilgore on January 27, 2024, 02:40:35 PMI've not seen the article, but find it hard to understand how one can get bored before the end, unless one if the players is very bad and/or had some terrible luck.
I find C&K are often in the balance, swinging this way and that. Exciting stuff!
Simon
What I meant was that I get bored before the end of complex games. that is why I like the RFCM games that I play - they keep me interested without the need for unnecessary convolution.
As others have said (and I know we're all part of the same congregation!) but it has got me wanting to play Ancients and one of the bits that I really enjoy is the victory points. Quite often it's difficult to predict how a battle has gone. A bit like in real life. Until your commanders report back to you, who knows how it all went!
It's largely a favorable review.
However the author does drop a real clanger when describing how combat works. He says that each failed save deducts half a UNIT. He means half a BASE, but anyone reading the article out of curiosity might think it daft that a failed save means half of the UNIT is destroyed.
Some further work on the part of the reader will show the error of this statement. But some readers may be put off. A real shame.
Good note Sean. I can live with that. Those who are interested will now be aware it exist?
martin :)