FIRE IN THE SKY

FROM

PHALANX

From the close-up tactical air war in the Pacific soloing the Japanese in my previous review, we switch to a two player strategic level treatment spanning the whole Pacific War.  This game is a  

re-implementation of the game originally published by MMP.  Inevitably, the comparable artistic qualities of both games have come under scrutiny, starting with the box art.  In terms of solidity and durability, the new edition wins easily, as it is both larger and far more solid.  Other than that it may be argued that all the rest is personal taste.  Having owned the original game, here are my views.

I much prefer the new box art in part because of the colour palate. I really did find the total yellow/ochre background of the original insipid and rather muddy.

While some found the minimalist art work stylish and effective, I prefer the archetypal image of carriers under attack and the dogfight in the skies of the new edition.

The maps too couldn't be more different.  The original was a strongly coloured, striking paper map which gave the feel of a more realistic aerial view especially with the many additional sculpted clouds.  Viewed by itself I rather liked it, but with the images of the bases on the map combined with the many counters, I ultimately found it overwhelming and not the easiest to read or identify locations.

The new mounted map sits at the opposite extreme.  A steely grey, it is both more sombre and more functional.  In the end, I've come to prefer it mainly for the greater ease of being able to read off at a glance where all the key locations are and for how the counters stand out against it.  Considering that this is a very long game to play as well, it's also much more restful on the eye.

Most important is that you can read locations' names when counters are placed on them.

The counters too have drawn mixed reactions, again largely through contrasts with those in the original game.  Once more my preference is for the new style which, like the map, I find easier on the eye.  I particularly didn't like the overwhelming pink of the Japanese counters and the white blossom emblem and the dominating image of the American bald eagle in the first edition.  No doubt if that earlier imagery really pleased you, then the new style may be less to your taste.

Criticism of the new counters has mainly focused on the blue of the US counters - a heavy negative view has been expressed that it is too dark and that the numbers lack distinction and so are hard to read.  As someone with not the sharpest [old] eyes, I considered them neither too dark, nor had any problems reading the numbers or symbols.

The second criticism - some quite vehemently expressed- is that there is a slight imperfection in some of the cutting as the next image reveals.

If you zoom in on the Interpid [sic]  Franklin, you can see what is meant.  Personally, this is no big deal and when on the map it is neither noticeable nor impedes play.  [If I was bothered at all it might be about the misprint of Intrepid!]  I mention this criticism merely for those who might have seen some of the more extravagant outbursts about poor quality control, which I don't think is justified.

For me the major improvement is the decision to make the naval units square, the air units hexagonal and the land units round.  This simple distinction is very helpful during play. Your mix of forces is obvious at a glance, instead of having to work your way through a uniform pile of counters.  Other simple physical aspects that I welcome are the attractive Task Force screens...

and the Battleboard, which continues the more restrained colours of this new version.

The final elements are the rule book and scenario book.  Both are a major step up from the typical average quality paper of the time to today's high quality gloss printing.  Also the layout has been much improved  in the rule book, though the rules themselves are [and here, I'm relying mainly on memory, as I no longer have the first edition] virtually identical.  The significant change is the doubling of Transport costs accompanied by a similar doubling of Transport available. This may seem a pointless exercise, but it does away with the first version's often occurring division sums involving fractions!

Rule and Scenario Books

On the face of it, the basic rules - a mere 16 pages - seem more than accommodating, especially when merely looking at their apparent brevity and well spaced layout, but this can be deceptive.  In part, this is caused first of all by the organisation of the rules into Core Concepts followed by the General Course of Play.  The former are often closely tied to the latter with information in the one being needed or relevant to understanding the other.  This doesn't help either in learning the rules or finding crucial aspects of them again, as you play the game.  

Each turn is based on the seemingly old-fashioned Igo-Ugo system, but the inclusion of a Reaction Phase introduces more interaction than at first appears likely, as does some of the asymmetrical elements of each player's turn.  

In  all, the Sequence of Play breaks down into ten Phases.  What happens and when can sometimes seem strange; for example the first Phase is Economic. In the Japanese player's half of the turn this allows the transfer of Oil Pts and/or DD units, whereas in the Allied Player's half of the turn the Economic Phase is totally different, as the Japanese Player may first undertake anti-submarine warfare followed by the Allied Player undertaking submarine action.  

There is a lot of novelty, both here and elsewhere.  It makes for a unique and fascinating experience, but it doesn't ease the learning process.   The next Phase: Reinforcements, for all its brevity, is not a simple matter and took repeated checking to make sure not only that I understood them properly, but that I realised the consequences of my choices.  Almost all the information pertains specifically to the Japanese player, while the Allied player is left by contrast with a very, very brief and simple set of actions.

Each Player's turn involves no less than five Phases that involve movement of one sort or another. For the Phasing player there are the First [Major] Deployment Phase, the Operational Movement Phase, the Return to Base Phase and the Second [Minor] Deployment Phase while the Non-Phasing player has a Reaction Phase,  which inevitably involves movement.  Each time there are mixes that incorporate different distances and requirements depending on type of unit whether air, naval or land, which Phase it takes place in and different numbers of Transport Points for both sides, while sometimes the cost of movement is paid for in oil but only by the Japanese player.  

Remembering accurately and consistently all the differing factors and qualifications is not only a formidable task, but one which I've found slows the game down considerably.  What I find even more frustrating is the lack of any explanation of the design intent behind many of the actions.  For example, the already mentioned Transport allowance is a very important factor and I appreciate the restraints and limitations that are imposed on both players.  Still I would like to understand better the reasoning behind some of the variations for each player.  Similarly, considering the significantly large distances involved in the sea hexes, I wonder why aircraft exert air zones that impact on and restrict the movement of naval vessels and supply lines.

With Movement itself so complex, it's no surprise that Combat is convoluted too.  Even the Submarine Attack Segment has three steps, before we even reach the Battle Segment.  The latter is divided into:- 

Battle Board Preparation Step

Air Combat Step [broken down into 4 stages]

Surface Combat Step [broken down into 4 stages]

Sea Control Step

Land Combat Step [broken down into 5 stages]

Administrative Step

The Battle Board is certainly both an attractive and useful feature that helps in this process.

This looks even better when units are laid out on it, but weaving your way through the steps and bearing in mind all the nuances of the rules is again a slow and steady process.

Units are divided into Carrier Task Forces and Bombardment Task Forces, while Naval, Air, Long Range Air and  Land units all have separate boxes on the Battleboard, if they are not part of a Task Force.  Fortunately, not all types of units and types of Combat occur in every battle that takes place.  What seems strange is that, despite a fair degree of complexity, air and land combat ultimately involves rolling modified fives or sixes to hit. 

Naval combat demands a different approach, amplifying a very familiar system from the classic Avalon Hill game, Victory In The Pacific [VITP]. In this, one player - the one without Air Superiority - lines up his ships and the other matches one for one.  If one player has more ships involved than the other player, they can assign the excess ships in any way they wish. 

However, one side or the other can then choose to withdraw.  Though the player who chooses to withdraw relinquishes the ability to fire, any withdrawing ships that are faster than their attacker avoid being fired on - another feature seen in VITP.  If neither player withdraws, then fire is simultaneous, but unlike air and land combat, the hit number needed is found by cross-referencing Fire Power against Defence Rating. 

Up to this point, I had really liked this part of the system.  It involved no modifiers [hurrah!], yet took account in a simple way of different types of ships firing at each other.  However, now you have to look up the effect of the hits on each ship by rolling two dice plus any possible modifiers and comparing this with the ship's defence rating to see if it is damaged or sunk!

A smaller engagement, though still encompassing all types of combat

To add to all this, you have to calculate the differing effects of damage to carriers, to ships, to air units and to land units.  There are no simple consistencies across your forces as to modifiers, rules for influencing factors or how to calculate them or their effects.  Some damage causes losses to the Transport Pool, some damage causes a ship to be placed on the turn track, some damage causes a reduction in strength and so it goes on ...   

There are many cumulative elements and factors with no logical connections to make remembering them easier.  As a result I found myself checking and rechecking rules and constantly referring to the Player Aid card for modifiers.

The final substantial component of this game, the Scenario Booklet, is intended to help you thread your way through the rules.  As such, it might have been better to present them in reverse order and that is partly how I used them.  The seventh and last Scenario, Battle of Midway is just that.  It needs only the Battleboard and a very small number of units, mainly carriers.  Frankly I would have appreciated similar micro-scenarios designed to practice such things as Naval Combat or Land Combat and Amphibious Landings.  The next shortest [two Turns] is Scenario 6 Guadalcanal Campaign is billed as a short learning scenario too, but suffers from needing an additional series of special rules to explain rule elements that are not used. 

Scenarios 3, 4 & 5 [3 Turns, 10 Turns and 4 Turns respectively] reduce playing time by presenting portions of the whole game.  The latter also shortens play by using only a portion of the map.  Finally, Scenarios 1 & 2 present the war in its entirety, the only difference being that Scenario 1 [classed as the game's main scenario] omits Turn 1 : Pearl Harbour.

These large Scenarios would benefit greatly from Set-Up Play Aids to reduce set up time and help  sort out the many units and where they are placed on the map, along with the position of various important tracking markers on the board.  

Last and by no means least, as it is 17 pages long, is a massive Example of Play. [incorrectly labelled Scenario 2, it is in fact Scenario 1] that takes you through all of Turn 2.  Once again high hopes of its help were not wholly realised.  Despite its extensive thoroughness or perhaps because of it, following the information and understanding it, especially the numerical aspects and calculations, proves a major undertaking in itself.  Much of the time I found myself having repeatedly to sit, rules in hand, to make sense of how  the numbers were derived.

This is not a game for the faint hearted, nor is it one that can easily be taught by a player however familiar with the rules to someone who isn't.  Perhaps, if this were to be your go-to strategic level game for the Pacific war with expectations of frequent play, your efforts may be rewarded, but as yet they elude me.

As always many thanks to Phalanx Games for their kindness in providing a review copy of Fire In The Sky.

 Panzer tactics: Tank Operations in the East, 1941-42

Oskar Munzel

Translated by Linden Lyons

 This is part of a set of books that were written in Germany in the 1950's, and 1960's. It was meant to be a history of World War II operations from the German point of view. Because of the Cold War, the NATO countries were all interested in the German accounts of fighting Russia. Considering they had the Warsaw Pact breathing down their throats, it is not surprising. 

 This author served in the 6th Panzer Regiment of the 3rd Panzer Division from June 1941 until September 1943. He rose to become commander of the regiment. After that, he served in several staff positions, and then became the commandant of the tank school. He commanded at the division and corps level before the war ended. In 1955, when Germany created the Bundeswehr in 1955, he became the commandant of the tank school once again. So, you can see he was the perfect person to write about panzer operations during the war. 

 The book is around 160 pages, and goes from the beginning of Barbarossa to the drive to the Caucasus and retreat in 1942. This is a history of the 6th Panzer Regiment, and in a broader scope, the attack of Army Group South during that period.

 The book is well written, and the translation seems to have been done very well also. It is an easy read for those who already have some knowledge of the Eastern Front in WWII, and specifically panzer operations. The book has twenty-one maps! The only caveat is that they are just copies of the original ones in German. They do, however, allow you to follow along with the author's prose to get a good look at the operations he is describing.

 This is a great work on a small slice of operations on the Eastern Front during the first two years of the war. It shows just how tough the Russians were in 1941 (the Germans lost about a million men that year). This is not a paean of praise for German troops. The author gives his thoughts on what the Germans and Russians did both right and wrong. Being a trained staff officer, he was appalled at the decision to attack toward both Stalingrad and the Caucasus at the same time. Thank you, Casemate Publishers for letting me review this very informative record of these operations.

 Robert

Book: Panzer Tactics: Tank Operation in the East, 1941-42

Author: Oskar Munzel 

Publisher: Casemate Publishers

  

 Against The Odds: A Journal of History and Simulation

Rome, Inc. Issue #53

 Against The Odds magazine has had a great history so far as the games that have come with the magazine, despite the fact that many wargamers slightly hold their noses up at 'magazine wargames'. Basically, if it didn't come in a three inch box it wasn't really a wargame.  Some of my greatest memories have come from playing magazine wargames, a few of them from games that came from ATO. Unfortunately, a lot of gamers look at wargaming magazines as teens look at Playboy magazine. They rip open the plastic just to find the game inside. A little like emptying the box of Cracker Jacks to find the prize. The articles that come with the magazines are just as important, if not more so, than the game inside. Yes, we are wargamers, but we were history nuts long before we found our first wargame (unless you were lucky enough to have a wargamer in the family). Here is a list of the written pieces that come in this issue:

The Whiff  of Grapeshot: This touches on the sweeping history of the issue's contents. This one also has a touching farewell to David W. Tschanz, a long time wargamer and contributing author. He also was a former editor of 'Cry Havoc'. Even while battling cancer he made sure to contribute an article on Marius's Mules.

Order of Appearance - Information on upcoming issues

Rome, Inc: The Roman Empire from Augustus to Diocletian, 27BCE - 286CE

 The Republic

 Julian Emperors

 Claudian Emperors

 Flavian Emperors

 Adoptive Emperors

 Antonine Emperors

 Severan Emperors

 Barracks Emperors

 Illyrian Emperors

 Appendix 1: Incorporating Rome

 Appendix 2: Bread & Circuses

 Bibliography

The above are all from the pen of Philip Jelley

On Guards : Who Guards the Praetorian Guards? - Philip Jelley

Gaius Marius and the Reform of the Roman Legion - David W, Tschanz

And the Data Shows:

  Good Pop, Bad Pop - This is Mostly About Some of the  Egyptian Pharaohs and Then Goes Into Louis XI, and Louis XIV of France - Ed Heinsman

Simulation Corner:

 War on the Installment Plan - This is About Resources/Money in Games - John Prados

The Fifth Columnist:

 In-Depth Book Reviews From Behind the Lines - John D, Burtt

So, you can see that there is a ton of history to read about between the covers of Issue #53. It is amazing at times the amount of nuggets that one finds in articles like these.

 The game that comes in this issue is Rome, Inc. This is a solitaire game that places the player as the CEO of the Roman Empire. Your job is to see the Empire through all of the tumults that can possibly happen during those years. Many times the threat to your plans will come from inside the Empire, and not from barbarians without. A good number of the Roman Emperors did not die in bed. You are sometimes stuck with an Emperor that you would probably like to get assassinated ASAP. This is what comes with the game:

Map - One full color 22" x 34" mapsheet

Counters - 280 full color 1/2" die-cut pieces

Rules length - 12 pages

Charts and tables - 2 pages

Complexity - Medium

Playing time - From 3 to 4 hours per scenario

How challenging is it solitaire? - Excellent

Design - Philip Jelley

Development - Dave Boe

Graphic Design - Mark Mahaffey

 This is one of ATO's blurbs about the game:

"You decide where to allocate resources (capital spending), raise new forces (hiring), undertake prestige projects (public relations), pleasing the mob (shareholders), or even setting aside a reserve for a rainy decade or two. You’ll need to blend military expansion with careful administration, as well as intrigue, making the most of what you have each turn, just like any modern-day business.

ROME, INC. will give you a new perception of how war is a cost, business is a benefit, and empire is somewhere in between. It’s up to you to find a balance."

 So, a solitaire game on a period of history that I am all too familiar with. Not by my own choosing, probably eighty percent of the books written about Rome are in the Empire period. I much prefer the Republican Era, but it is not like I am adrift here. I have a liking for a few of the Emperors. One of my favorites was a Thracian named Maximinus Thrax. He was a giant of a man that was the first Emperor to not be of the ruling classes. In fact, he was a lowly soldier that worked his way to the top. I also know that having an Emperor with a 'C' starting your name was not a good thing. Hence, Caracalla, Commodus, and Caligula (I know it is not his real name, in fact it means 'little boots', but everyone knows him by it). You also get to deal with some 'baddies' (from the Roman point of view). Queen Zenobia, who was a much greater threat to Rome than Cleopatra was. She actually conquered a good amount of Roman territory. She is hardly known about at all, compared to Cleo. 

 As the game states, "The player, a CEO of this vast corporate empire, appoints consuls and governors, raises taxes, deploys legions, fleets, and auxiliaries to garrison provinces, and fights wars to expand the prestige and power of Rome." I would add, to also try and keep the Empire alive. However bad the 3rd century was for Rome, the 4th was much worse. So, the player gets a break in only having to last until Diocletian. The game goes from the first Emperor Octavian (the other name will not be mentioned), to the emperor Diocletian.  With murder, and mayhem galore for roughly 300 years. My favorite Emperor story is Octavian wandering about the palace beating his head on the walls shouting "Quintili Vare, legiones redde ( Quintilius Varus, give me back my legions).

 One thing about the game that you need to know is that it is a 'big' game. 'Big' in the fact that there is a lot to do, not in space. Myself, and others, have been amazed when we opened the rulebook, and saw what we had bought into. I had really assumed that it would be close to a beer and pretzel game than the simulation it turned out to be. If you are not looking for an in depth simulation of the period, then look somewhere else. I would liken it to any other deep empire building game, which instead of building an empire, you try and keep this one off life support. I would say remember what Kenny Rogers said "know when to hold them, know when to fold them",  keep an eye out for the next great Emperor, and then try and keep him alive as long as possible.

 The game/simulation shows exactly how tough it was to keep the Empire in statis, let alone to try and conquer more territory. You do not want to roam about your house like Octavian. 

  The game is very deep, and dare I say, excellent. It shows you in an extremely small footprint the history of Rome in the first three centuries. Naturally, after the beginning setups in each scenario it becomes the history of your Rome. You will, however, feel all of the pressures that were put on the empire at different times. The scenarios are:

27 BCE Scenario

70 CE Scenario

138 CE Scenario

222 CE Scenario

Any of these may be combined into campaign games.

 The magazine articles are top notch, and they only lend to the player's feeling that "he has chosen well". Thank you, Against The Odds Magazine, for allowing me to take this issue's game for a spin. Thank you also for all of the deep history of the Roman Empire that you have crammed into your magazine.

Robert

Against The Odds Magazine

Against the Odds (atomagazine.com)

Against The Odds Magazine Issue #53

Against the Odds (atomagazine.com)

Rarely have I been more excited to play a game than Paper Dungeons which is bizarre because it’s a small-ish game containing a dungeon adventure-themed roll-n-write.  However, when I saw the box art I was smitten, they had me at ‘A dungeon scrawler game’.

Gameplay

Each game will see you and a number of your intrepid friends scribbling their journey through a dungeon, fighting minions, monsters, triggering traps, picking up treasure and moving around obstacles.  It will take a fairly accurate ‘30 minutes’ if playing with others to complete a single game although I’ve completed some solo adventures in under 15 minutes.

Each game will consist of just 8 rounds in which you will use 3 dice.  To start the round, you will roll a pool of 3 white and 3 black dice which remain freely available to all players no matter if they’ve been used or not.  These dice will dictate your actions for the round.  There are four main actions you can take with each dice, but the colour and symbol of the dice will limit your choices.

The actions are Level Up, Craft Artifact, Brew Potion or Explore the Dungeon.

Each player will start with an identical dungeon and a pretty much identical party of a Warrior, Wizard, Cleric and Thief.  There will be some minor differences between the colour of each of these, for example I might have a black Cleric and black Wizard and a white Warrior and White Thief.  I will only be able to level up my white Warrior if there is a warrior symbol on one of the white dice.

Crafting most artifacts can be done with any dice but you will need to burn two of your actions to complete it.  When you consider that you only have 24 discrete actions in a game there is a small trade off between using the dice for their affect or trying to generate combos.  In my experience with this game, it is always better to move at least one if not twice each turn than do almost anything else.

Any dice can be used for 2 movement, but there are 3 boot icons in the dice pool which allow you to move 3 squares.  This doesn’t seem like a big change, but I promise you that moving is the most powerful action in the game.  When you move, you’ll likely take damage but also gain rewards and moving is the quickest way to unlock the combos which are evenly dispersed throughout this game.

For me, there is a direct correlation between how fun a roll-n-write game is and how many combos you can do.  I don’t know why but I get a little kick each time my movement triggers a fight, which give me a reward, which lets me craft an artifact which gives me more potions…  That type of combo is fairly typical in this game, but unlike other roll-n-writes where the combos are usually towards the late game, they are available right from the beginning in this game.

The final action is to brew health potions.  These are critical for success as you will take damage directly to your party without them.  Damage is tracked alongside the combined level of your heroes and the more damage you take directly, the more score deduction you get at the end.  If you can assign that damage to potions there’ll be no impact to your score.  It is possible to die in the dungeon (the only game play effect is a -9 points) but I’ve never seen that happen.

This is not a big score...

My top tips for getting a big score, move lots, have plenty of potions and look for combos.  As you can see this is a fairly simple roll-n-write but with an applied theme that is far more successful than others of this ilk and heft, e.g. Welcome To or 30 Rails.

Seemingly the biggest difference between games will be in which monsters you meet and where any dungeon walls may be.  Each game will pit your party against a level 1, 2 and 3 monster. There are 4 of each in the base game and across a ‘campaign’ of 12 dungeons the monsters and extra walls are all that separate the dungeons.  Unfortunately, each level of monster is identical in strength and damage, so the difference quickly just feels cosmetic although it is certainly a nice cosmetic change.

However, before you start playing you will choose a secret objective and power; there will also be three public missions.  Not only do these help to set up your party but they also give a variable number of points based on how well you achieve the card.  These cards are a nice addition to the game as they do prevent every game from feeling the same (it still does get a little bit samey after a few plays).

Components

There are no gripes here, the components are all perfectly adequate.  I particularly like the artwork and iconography.  The prime engine of the game is driven by nice chunky 20mm dice – think King of Tokyo for comparison. Which are easily readable, even from across the table.  The publishers deserve some extra praise putting this into a sensible sized box.  There’s still some space left over but it’s not excessive, most of it is taken up by the game pads of 100 sheets. 

Criticisms

I was looking forward to playing the campaign (it’s a dungeon scrawler after all) but after the fourth or fifth mission I realised there was little beyond flavour text linking the missions together.  This minor flaw, the game stands alone in its own right, is compounded by the fact that monsters don’t change in strength.  Dungeon A of the campaign feels just as easy/hard as Dungeon L.  There doesn’t appear to be any progression beyond a cards-worth of story.  Each dungeon and monster are too similar in feel if not aesthetic.  This is partially mitigated by the objective, missions and power cards.

The other criticism I have after having played it close to 20 times is that it is too easy.  I have never seen a player die and it is rare for a player not to reach a monster’s room, which acts as an in-game timer of sorts.  When you’re playing with other players the highest score wins (duh!) and as you’re all playing with the same constraints this effectively negates this criticism.  I would like to see more jeopardy or tougher decisions.  I think I’ll suggest playing with one less round next time…

This is a much better score

This isn’t really a criticism but I’m over halfway through my pads, is that I’d like the publisher to release a pdf of the score pad to download and print.  Failing that I’ll be laminating my last 10 to be able to continue to take it to game nights.

Conclusion

I’ll always recommend this as a fun filler. At game nights it easily accommodates a wide number of players   If you like roll-n-writes and have played D&D then I think this will quickly become a favourite.  There’s a lot to like here.  The gameplay is quick, simple and most importantly it’s fun and has gone over very well with everyone I’ve introduced it too.  There isn’t a dearth of combos until you get to the late game which is an issue with some other roll-n-write games.  In this you have to find the combos right from the beginning of the game.

I’d like to thank Asmodee UK for sending this review copy. You can use this link https://www.asmodee.co.uk/contentpage/find-your-game-store to find your Friendly Local Game Store, which need all the help they can get at the moment.

Designer: Leandro Pires

Bgg page: https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/291962/paper-dungeons-dungeon-scrawler-game

Playtime: 30 minutes 

Players: 1 - 8