From: Markus Stumptner Subject: Re: Question on 3W's Henderson Field >So did you like the game, Markus?? :-) Quite a lot, actually. It's a small game for the price, but quick, clear and apparently fairly balanced. It is quite strict in its adherence to the historical reinforcement schedule, but there is a fair amount of variability in strategies and and choosing your lines of advance, so replayability is less of a problem than generally claimed (yesterday we started our third game). Basically, the package is the equivalent of one very good (HF) and one OK (Long Lance) magazine game in a box (close to what 3W is doing with its Wargamer reissues). (Of course, if you really want to play the naval battles, VG's Tokyo Express is far better than Long Lance.) Overall, I have to say I much prefer it to Operation Shoestring, The latter is much more detailed on land, but that means it takes much longer to play, and it suffers from the very strong influence of the abstract and luck-dependent naval subgame (which also shows in the sometimes very strange weighting of the Op Shoestring victory conditions). I've actually thought of using the Op Shoestring naval game in combination with the Henderson Field land game - that might provide a somewhat better balance of playing time spent vs the luck of the naval game. I was even pleasantly surprised to see that engineers have a real function in Henderson Field (I don't recall they had one in Shoestring, but may be wrong on that). One thing I found a bit odd is that the US reinforcements are delayed (and keep incurring additional delay) if the Japanese interdict Henderson Field by moving a unit adjacent or onto it. This probably means the Japanese have their best chance by keeping up the pressure in October - if they get to Henderson before the US November reinforcements arrive, the US will be very hard-pressed to redress the balance. More likely they will just be crushed. I would assume that if US transports had been underway when the Japanese interdicted or took the airfield, then unlike the game, reinforcements would still have been landed in an attempt to regain control. Opinions, anyone? We also didn't find and are idly thinking of introducing a rule that requires a player to take the first step loss in combat off the unit that provides the proficiency rating. Not sure how it'll affect play balance though (no more opportunity to sacrifice the construction workers to limit Marine and SNLF losses :-) So how's Sky, Sea, and Jungle moving along, Lou? I might even buy it despite your recent outbreaks if you dedicated it to that Sampson guy... :-) Markus