From: John Best Subject: Re: VERDUN Danny H. asks about... >Conflict's VERDUN >at the Con over the weekend. > >I haven't had a chance to play (setting up RING OF FIRE >right now..) but I did glance through the rules a bit. > >Any VERDUN fans with thoughts/opinions around here? > > The Conflict version was a reworking of a previous game with the same title I think. The Conflict version has a 78 copyright, and it basically came out of the GDW shop--the components are identical with a GDW product of that time period (except for the oversized box which is unlike the zipper that the GDW products usually came in. Wait...I have to go put my kid to bed.) I just concluded a solitaire playing of this on 8/24/97 (as part of a somewhat larger, or should I say "Sommewhat larger" project I'm working on). It's a decent game in a lot of respects. The most serious shortcoming in the package is the rules. My experience with GDW products of that time period is that there a lot of rules lacunae; I'll mention just one here. The rules say you can hold counters off the map if there is not enough room to place them all on the map (and as the German, there is clearly not enough room to place all the initial German counters on the map). What the rules don't say is how you are supposed to compute the range of artillery counters that are currently off the map (and range is important) I let 'em all fire as if they were on the edge of the board--I mean really, I don't think the Germans would have launched their offensive without having all their guns in range. But whatever. It plays ok; I think it was Richard Simon who mentioned that nothing much happens--I tend to concur. It's a real grinding match, as the German you have to claw for every hex. And you have to orchestrate your artillery and infantry--that's really the fun of trench warfare games, yes? I have some thoughts about the game--not criticisms exactly but more like questions I would love to ask the designer if I could. Here's the deal: Each game turn is a week. You fire all your artillery units near the beginning of your player turn (and the other guy gets to fire his "field guns" at your designated attackers before the attack goes in) And that all feels right--there were certainly attempts to do SOS artillery fires on incoming attackers. But the turn lasts a week. So what does the artillery fire simulate? A week-long barrage? The artillery fire missions for one day? (That's how it "feels") But what is supposed to be happening on the other six days of the game turn? I think the problem is that game design theory 20 years ago hadn't yet hit upon the idea of variable lengths to game turns--some sort of an "impulse" system would perhaps improve the illusion of synchronicity between the action in a given game turn, and the amount of time that is supposed to be simulated. I hope the previous sentence communicates something to somebody. Another question I have concerns the ground scale chosen: 1 hex = 1 kilometer. So the trench "system" is just a hexside indication. But at that scale, the trench system should have a lot more depth than just a hexside indication. In reality, the entire position could have consisted of three or more separate trench lines, and their supports and saps. The entire position could have been several miles in depth. The hex scale just seems out of synch with other aspects of the design, at least in the sense that the Germans get past the initial line pretty quickly, but they don't go any faster through the presumably "open" terrain. Well, it's sort of a puzzle to me anyhow. Let us know how your game goes Danny. I'm hoping to use the list to pursue some aspects of WWI trench warfare games, but that's assuming I get it together to do what I'm thinking of doing. Thanks for reading. John Best jlbest@tuscola.net