From: Dave Kohr Subject: I have seen the future and it is Battle Cry. This is the latest Hasbro/Avalon Hill release, a design by Richard Borg (that's German-style designer Borg, not chrome addict Berg, thank goodness :-) ). It comes in a big box with over a hundred little plastic soldiers, a lot like A&A or Shogun. So far, nothing we haven't seen before from Hasbro. What really got my attention was: 1. No fewer than 15 different historical Civil War scenarios, including historical commentary. 2. Hex tile overlays for representing the terain of all these different battlefields using a single map. (And it's a really nice, heavy cardboard map at that.) 3. A card-based unit activation system, reminiscent of _We the People_ but at a tactical level. This gives you command-control effects and high replayability, plus a shorter playing time (under an hour is what I believe they claim). And I bet it's not as gamey as the A5A chit-picking system. 4. A chart-less combat resolution system involving rolling dice with special symbols marked on them. 5. The artwork is the best I've seen on any of the recent Hasbro releases, and it's clearly better than any of the hobby publishers (except perhaps for QED's Blue vs. Grey, which looked pretty sharp too). Overall, this looks like a FANTASTIC introductory wargame. (Now I just have to try playing it. :-) ) If it works as a game, it will pull in Civil War buffs, kids, and German-style gamers. It's just what the hobby needs. I might even manage to get my wife to play it! H/AH still doesn't have a real Website up, so you can see it instead at http://kumquat.com/cgi-kumquat/funagain/08065 Dave Kohr Be sure to remove the SPAMFOILER! Visit the Silicon Valley Boardgamers at http://www.best.com/~davekohr/svb "Cleave the beast Micro$oft of Redmond in twain!" From: Dave Kohr Subject: Re: I have seen the future Here's a capsule review from Greg Schloesser, posted on rec.games.board: BATTLE CRY: This is one I shouldn't like. I don't like miniatures games. Richard Irving correctly pointed out that this isn't a miniatures game ... it is a game which uses miniatures. Still, I had to try it as it is simply gorgeous and it has been getting rave reviews for several years. Well, it is finally released and I sat down to a game. I had a BLAST! This game rocks. It's BattleMasters without the flaws. In 30 minutes or so, Ralph Anderson and I fought the Battle of Chickamauga. I managed to slip Jeb Stuart's cavalry around his right flank and completely annihilated three of his regiments to capture the victory. This isn't deep, fellas, but it is tremendous fun! Initial rating (for what it is): 8 Dave Kohr Be sure to remove the SPAMFOILER! Visit the Silicon Valley Boardgamers at http://www.best.com/~davekohr/svb "Cleave the beast Micro$oft of Redmond in twain!" Subject: Fw: Battle Cry - does it suck? Bob Scherer-Hoock wrote in message <39121AD5.BF6FF1@mediaone.net>... dogsled@u.washington.edu wrote: > Hi, > > I was snooping around Fun Again Games and discovered that Battle Cry had 2 > reviews. One person gave it only 1 star saying that the game was entirely too > random. The other person gave it 5 stars saying it is "a great blend of > choices, tension, interaction, simplicity". > > So which is it? > > Thanks, Mark For what it's worth, my take is this is a war game for non-wargamers. I'm not at all surprised if people looking for a simulation (whatever that is - see other thread) are disappointed with it. I, on the other hand, think it's a lot of fun. I even quickly ended up with an absurdly useless hand of cards in my first game, much like the negative poster on Funagain, but slowly the luck of the draw started to balance out and the game got competitive. I haven't acquired that bad a hand since, but I'm sure it's more than a rare occurance. It's quick, light (for a war theme), well designed, imho, in a way that captures at least some of a historical flavor. I was actually surprised when I opened it how much it structurally resembles the American Heritage series Battle Cry of my youth - three basic pieces, artillery, calvary, and infantry, each with separate strength and movement capabilities - but there is a lot more game play here. Bob Scherer-Hoock Subject: Fw: Battle Cry - does it suck? thomasboeche@my-deja.com wrote in message <8etdre$jdc$1@nnrp1.deja.com>... In article <8eslja$gs4c$1@nntp3.u.washington.edu>, dogsled@u.washington.edu wrote: > Hi, > > I was snooping around Fun Again Games and discovered that Battle Cry had 2 > reviews. One person gave it only 1 star saying that the game was entirely too > random. The other person gave it 5 stars saying it is "a great blend of > choices, tension, interaction, simplicity". > > So which is it? > > Thanks, Mark Battle Cry is an excellent game. I've played just about every Civil War boardgame you can think of (Gettysburg, Chancelorsville, Across 5 Aprils, Terrible Swift Sword, In Their Quiet Fields, etc., etc.,), and Battle Cry is one of my favorites. Yes, it is much simpler than these other games, but on the other hand, it is much more FUN. I would say that of the games I mentioned above, only Across 5 Aprils comes close to Battle Cry in terms of fun and tension. While the Battle Cry mechanics are simple, the more battles you play, the more elegant and interesting the system becomes. You are somewhat at the mercy of your cards, but you will learn to manage your hand more efficiently, thereby making the game less luck dependent. You are in control of the game. Regarding the Funagain review, I do not agree that you are simply an observer of the game action. The more you play Battle Cry, the more in control you will become as you learn to better handle the system's nuances. To me, Battle Cry seems like a combination of Axis & Allies (excellent production quality, fun miniatures), Battlemasters (specialized dice, hex based game map, moveable terrain), and Avalon Hill's For the People (card-based play and incredible tension). I have shelves full of hardcore wargames, but I love Battle Cry, too. I would give it 5 stars. An excellent game!!! Subject: Fw: Battle Cry - does it suck? Neil Carr wrote in message <3911e1f6.5112399@news.supernews.com>... I've only played one game and it was the most basic scenerio. From what I got out of it the game is simply a VERY light wargame with very simple strategies. The board is set up to handle varied terrain components that you put out for specific scenerios. The board itself is divided up into three sections, left, right and center. The units in the game are infantry, cavalry, artillery and a commander. Each type of unit also has flag units. Each unit is comprised of a number of figures of that type such as three infantry + infantry flag, two cavalry + cavlary flag, one artillery + one artillery flag. The flag is the last unit to be removed. Infantry are slow but have lots of hits, cavalry are fast but only attack adjacent spaces, artillery move or fire but get a range bonus on hills. On your turn you have your hand of cards which will give you various options on which units will be activated, such as left, right or center units. The cards could also be move all cavalry, move artillery, or move all your units, etc. You play a card and those units can then be activated such that they can move and then fire. The closer you are to the enemy the more dice you get, with some exceptions in terms of unit properties. Adjacent is four dice, two spaces away is three dice, three spaces away is two dice... Once you have move everything you roll your dice for each target. The dice have symbols that represent the various units plus a result that pushes the target back towards their side of the board. If you roll results that match up with the type of target then you take off one of the figures for each matching die roll. If you kill the unit then you get the flag figure from that unit for scoring purposes. Once you are finished with your attacks you draw another card and it's your opponents turn. In the game I played I was the north in the First Bull Run. We were supposed to get seven flags of the enemy to win the scenerio. We made some tentative attacks on one another at the begining to figure out the game and then we jumped into battle. Scott was the south and I think he was suffering from some lousy card draws and a couple of mistakes in terrain effects. I also had more troops and so by the end game I had chewed him up pretty good. However in my lust to finish him off he got in some good rolls at the end and was able to wipe out several of my units and claim victory. I should have played more cautious and use my lead to assure victory through attrition, ah well. What did I think? It seems too simple and luck driven to me but I would like to try some of the more involved scenerios before I pass final judgement. I think I was just hoping for something with just a wee bit more detail. Units don't have facings, they are just 360 degree nodes of sustained firepower. When a unit looses units it isn't degraded in performance. You just slug away until the units are knocked out. Basically the whole strategy in the game is card management so that you can position your troops to maximize your firepower on your opponents units. You mostly do this by clustering around the usefull terrain features that usually offer some type of benefit for occupying it. The strategy does come from the card managment mostly and thus it is easy to be blinded by the dice as the dominant feature of the game. You are trying to hedge your bets as best you can so in that sense there is plenty of luck in the game, you just have to play the game like you are playing Can't Stop or some other dice type game. Figure out what your best chances are and go for that position, or take your chance that forture will favor you. In the end I guess I was underwhelmed because I was hoping for a little more detail in facing and flanking effects so that position had as much or more importance in the game over just concetration of firepower. However this is a beer and pretzel wargame like Axis and Allies so I'm sure that one could easily modify the game to fit your own tastes. If it at all interests you then definitely give it a whirl, play several different scenerios and see how it goes. -- Neil Carr MetroGamers - Dallas/Fort Worth http://www.earthsea.com/metrogamers/