From: Markus Stumptner Subject: RE: Sea Lion >[on To the Far Shore and Tide of Fortune] > >Which one has the best version of the rules ? > >How does the systems compare to say OCS ? Both games share the same basic rulebook, which is shorter by about a third than the OCS rules (16 pages). TtFS has an additional booklet for the invasion rules, which are another 8 or 10 pages (all the West War games from Pas de Calais have dealt with amphibious invasions, thus the relatively involved amphibious rules). Finally, each game has a booklet with game-specific rules, setups, and historical notes. Significantly less complex than Schettler's Eastfront games from CoA. The scale is smaller than the OCS (2-4km per hex). Units are typically regiments or brigades, and some battalions. Like the OCS, you have to pay supply ("Command Points") for everything you do, but supply lines are only traced, you don't actually store supply on map. Higher level HQ capacity determines how many CP's you can spend via one corps per turn. You don't move all units at once, but instead activate divisions and attached assets for "missions". A mission could be "assault", "advance", "barrage", "strategic movements", and others. These give different combat and support capability (e.g., assault means full combat and support, but at most two hexes movement) as well as different susceptibility to ZOCs. A division can be activated twice, but will suffer fatigue each time. So, missions are similar to OCS modes, but don't last beyond a unit's move (so a unit defends the same all the time, but a fatigued unit will be less effective). The tactical possibilities are similar, except they are not the product of a rigid turn sequence, instead you use the divisions the way you want. Barrage, then blast a hole with some assaulting divisions, then move the exploiters through with a move or advance mission. Basically, you are looking at these things in somewhat more detail due to the shorter timescale. There are two more fairly unusual aspects to the series, one is ZOCs. Units have numerical ZOC strengths. This occasionally requires some computation, but works very well in general. In particular, it provides some great effects as strong units cancel out weak units' ZOCs (blast through that single Bn's ZOC with an Armored division, but a single bn can't simply move by a large unit with lots of firepower), and rough terrain reduces ZOCs (e.g., it's harder to guard your flanks in hilly terrain). The second aspect is that combat strength is generated by comparing the individual units' size with their HQ's combat factor. Step losses are also assigned to HQ's except for nondivisional asset units. You can eliminate lower-level units if you want, but in general it will be advantageous to have a division "spread out" its losses over its component units. The turn sequence is interactive, depending on the amount of command points bid by each side per turn. The winner is the operations player and gets to spend more points. So, "initiative" in this game is not just a dieroll, but goes to the player who has spent more effort on stockpiling CPs to be used this turn.Every three activations, the other (reaction) player gets to do an activation of his own. Adverse combat results collected by the operation player can also give the reaction player free "spoiling points" that can be used for additional missions. The games still suffer from 3W development in places (ToF has some really important setup errata available on Web Grognards), but the rules are fairly clear. Markus