Stronghold is a board game covering a desperate battle between an invading host of orcs, goblins and trolls on one side and the human defenders of a castle on the other side. The eventual outcome is not really in doubt as the defenders can not get any reinforcements, but there is glory to be found in a quick victory for the attackers or a drawn-out defence for the humans.
The attacker has an off-board supply (where new units are drawn every turn), a camp (where units go if they are not used for something), two foregrounds where they arrive for battle and several ramparts where they move to attack the walls. The foregrounds, ramparts and walls on each side of the board are connected together but units cannot cross from one side of the board to the other.
Stronghold comes with two 20-page rulebooks, two boards, over 240 unit cubes, various tiles and more than 100 cards. This can be quite daunting even to veteran gamers, however the rules do a good job in illustrating what each piece is for and how it all fits together. There is also a basic game variant which uses only a subset of the possible invader actions, meaning that it is not necessary to immediately master all aspects of the game.
One weakness to be aware of is that the turn order overview on page 2 fails to mention an important point: the defender gets two hourglasses and one stone wall section each turn. This is only mentioned on page 7 under hourglasses and actions. It would have been useful to have a printed reminder on the phase 1 card for this as it is easy to overlook in the rules or to forget during game play. At a guess, people who report that the invader has it too easy has probably missed this rule.
Having navigated the rules and figured out which pieces go where, the next step for us was to remove the stuff that isn't needed for a 2-player basic game. This included the haste tile, all trebuchet and siege tower markers, the battering ram components, many tiles for rituals, training and equipment and a lot of phase cards. Doing this really cut down on the confusion level and I'd recommend everybody to do this as step one.
The camp cards are also insufficiently distinct and caused a minor amount of confusion initially. A clear '2 player' or '4 player' mark would have been appreciated although it wasn't hard to figure out which card was right for us.
Setting up the game was very easy. The board is helpfully marked with colour-coded dots that indicate where each unit goes. A minor inconsistency is that there are no equivalent marks on the glory board for the 10 glory initially given to the invader.
Play then proceeded with the invader drawing phase one units and resources, after which nothing happened for a long time. This is one of the quirks of the game as the player is confronted with limited resources which are to be used over the next five phases and even a seemingly simple choice such as 'do you want sacrifice a unit to get additional resources' leads to immediate analysis paralysis for an inexperienced player.
If you are the defender, you may want to go get drinks and snacks. Experience will no doubt reduce the amount of delay here, but at least as far as the first game was concerned 'fast paced' would not be an accurate description. This is unfortunate because a large part of the defender tactics are reactive, meaning that you can't really do much planning of your own.
Once this hurdle had been cleared, each phase proceeded with reasonable speed. Actions used up resources and units for the invader while generating hourglasses for the defender. The latter were then used up by the defender in various ways to counter the threats posed by the invader. As the defender must use all hourglasses after each phase, there is a constant back-and-forth exchange of activity. This compares favourably with games that had massively long turns for each player.
For a breakdown of each phase, see the next post in the series.
Thursday, 2 August 2012
Saturday, 2 June 2012
Glasgow wargame show 2012
I grabbed my camera and headed to the Royal Concert Hall this morning for my first ever visit to the Glasgow wargame show. The event started at 10am and I arrived shortly after opening, paid £3 for an all-day ticket and entered to find that the hall was already busy with many games going on and a lot of visitors checking out the traders and games.
| Prussian army facing off against Russian and Austrian opponents |
| Bandit down! RAF scores a kill against the Luftwaffe. |
| Indian braves advancing in skirmish line |
| A rifleman seems to be checking his weapon - perhaps after a misfire? |
Several of the tables were massive, showcasing warfare across the centuries (11th to 20th) and the continents (Europe, Middle East and North America). While the majority were focused on historical conflict there were two at least two games with fantasy elements.
| British troops in line formation prepare to face assault by Indian braves |
| Fatimid cavalry advancing in the desert |
| Crossbowmen at the ready in front of the main Crusader line |
| Skirmish at a chapel in a fantasy game |
| A Crusader army faces their Fatimid foes in open terrain near Ascalon in 1099 |
Pictures are licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-ShareAlike 3.0 Unported License. A full set of pictures from the day are on Flickr.
Labels:
2012,
board game,
commons,
convention,
glasgow,
photography,
review,
wargame
Friday, 25 May 2012
Friend of animals
The forests once more
cover the lands, from coast to mountain in every direction. Two
thousand seasons have come and two thousand seasons have gone, acorns
grown to saplings and thence to mighty tree.
Fed by sun, rain and
the great corpsefields, the forests grew and the memory of the deed
that was done faded. The treeherders roam far and wide, the threat of
axe and fire long faded from this world. In the shadow of the boughs,
joyous birdsong fills the world, a choir to please the ear of every
elf and wizard.
Yet I still recall the
day of the great council and a night never passes without dreams of
what could have been had my journey been delayed. There were great
tidings brought to me on the wings of my friends, bestirring me to
leave the long watch at Rhosgobel. The great evil had been banished
from this world and the race of orcs broken on the field of battle.
Human, dwarf and elf had stood together and some even sang of
hobbit-deeds of bravery and endurance. It was a time of great change,
the end of an age and an opportunity to set the great ship of history
on a new course.
When I arrived at the
council the elves were talking of sailing west, making room for the
age of man and letting their race fade from memory. The treesingers
had grown weary and sought peace in exile, with hope that mankind
could grow and mature, to become stewards of the east. Truly the
elven capacity for self-delusion was amazing and at first the shock
at such dereliction of duty nearly sent me fleeing back to the vales
of Anduin.
It was that night that
Corvus came to me. Long had he served as my eyes in the south, a
trusted friend and true heart. His wings were sooty black, not just
of feather but also with ash from the pyres of the orcs, and his
tales of human deeds were of equally dark nature. He spoke of the
strife among the different races of men, how great numbers of them
had sworn loyalty to the shadow. He reminded me of how easily the old
kings of man had fallen, to become wraiths that scoured the land, and
spoke of a new king that had made alliance with the dead of ages
past.
Corvus spoke also of
the Mûmakil, great tusked beasts and wisest among all my friends,
that had been forced to serve in war by man and now lay slain on
Pelennor Fields. The herds that once roamed Harad had been reduced by
the ravages of man and it became clear to me that in just a few short
centuries our majestic friends would no longer shake the earth with
their passing.
By dawn, my mind was
fixed on the task ahead. Fiery words sang in my mind and I knew that
tomorrow would be neither autumn nor winter for the elves, but that
they would rise to my challenge and embrace a new spring. I knew that
the first singers had not been forgotten in these halls and that if I
could evoke their spirit then the elves would rally to my cause.
Six days and six nights
the council argued, some crying for what had been lost and others for
what might never come. Many had set their minds, one foot already on
the ships to the west. Others were less certain and could hear the
reason in my voice. Iron, fire and strife were the signs of both man
and orc, two sides of the same coin. Death and despair ever walked at
the side of man, to think otherwise was madness.
To leave man as
stewards of the east was to condemn the forests and animals to
extinction or servitude. War would consume the lands until one day
man found the means to sail west in pursuit of new lands to destroy.
What then would remain for elvenkind but eternal damnation, having
forgotten the song and their duty? On the sixth night, as the stars
glimmered above, the decision was made.
The leaders of man were
summoned, given guidance and encouragement. It was announced that the
elven hosts would leave, set sail for the lands of the setting sun. A
great celebration was held, a coronation and a wedding sealed the
pact and gifts were solemnly exchanged.
Twelve great founts
were brought forth by the elves, gifts of parting to the new stewards
of the land. From each there flowed, on call, all the food and water
a man might need, sufficient to feed a city of any size. The tendency
for man to huddle together and live in great proximity was well known
and this gift suited them well, for it would free them of the labour
of the fields.
In the years to come,
mankind continued to till some fields and keep some animals for they
did not fully trust the power of the founts. There was ever a
minority who sought to keep apart and sustain themselves, but over
the years suspicion eased and the easy life offered by flocking to
one of the great fount cities, as they were now known, became
irresistible to most.
Fields lay fallow for a
time, but as the seasons turned they became overgrown and became lost
from sight. Years passed and cities grew, becoming ever more vast
with stone covering the old fields as roads, monuments and buildings
sprang up. Generations passed and man began to forget the lessons of
agriculture, relying ever more fully on the founts even as their
numbers grew beyond reckoning.
Then came the day when
the founts produced nothing but ash. At first they thought that it
was only temporary and they called wise men to determine how to
restore the flow of food and water. When their spells and prayers
failed to bring forth sustenance there was a great panic and people
fled, seeking to make their way to other cities that might yet have a
working fount.
As hosts of refugees
met in the wild, rumours travelled far and wide. Some claimed that
all the founts had failed, that mankind was cursed and abandoned by
the gods. Others claimed that at least one fount was still working
but that the city controlling it was keeping it for their own
exclusive use. Truth, as always among men, became irrelevant as the
first among them drew steel and slew a man from another city.
The slaughter that took
place over the next few months was far beyond anything seen in the
war of the ring. Blood turned rivers red and fields were lined with
corpses over distances beyond reckoning. To sustain themselves for
battle the warriors turned to feasting on the red meat of their
enemies, bathing themselves in blood and chanting to dark gods for
strength and victory. Among the elvenkind, any doubt about the virtue
of man was removed when those rituals were revealed by farseeing
stones.
When winter came the
hardship among men became so great that not one in a thousand
survived. Hunting and gathering sustained a few, cannibalism lent
strength to others but despair and hunger stole the strength from the
multitudes and they lay down to a rest from which they never awoke.
The spirit of man had been broken irrevocably.
With the first spring
rain, the elven hosts landed on the eastern shores again. Their
splendour was great, a host such as had not been seen since the first
age. United by desire to wipe the stain of humanity from middle
earth, they marched forth with spears shining in the sunlight. The
campaign would last less than a year as the remaining bands of
mankind were destroyed on the field of battle or hunted like animals
in the forests and mountains.
Thus my plan was
brought to fruition and the brief interregnum was ended. The kings of
man had enjoyed prosperity in the absence of the great shadow and the
elvenhost, but had shown their true nature and been punished for it.
It would take two thousand seasons before the last of the human
cities sank beneath the canopy of the vast forests, but the ship of
history was firmly on the new course I had plotted.
Birds and animals roam free once again, free from harness and fear of the hunter's arrow. The great trees provide shade and shelter, with elf and treeherder lending a guiding hand when needed though their numbers remain few. The lessons of ages past has been well learned and the world shall forever remain free of the taint of the plow and forge. The nightmare of the taming of the lands and rise of industry has been banished for eternity, replaced with the the free spirit of the wild.
Birds and animals roam free once again, free from harness and fear of the hunter's arrow. The great trees provide shade and shelter, with elf and treeherder lending a guiding hand when needed though their numbers remain few. The lessons of ages past has been well learned and the world shall forever remain free of the taint of the plow and forge. The nightmare of the taming of the lands and rise of industry has been banished for eternity, replaced with the the free spirit of the wild.
Mankind lives on only
in my dreams and memories, indistinct and foggy reminders that evoke
the haze that ever gathered over their camps and cities. Sometimes
Corvus speaks to me of them, warning me that just as orcs and man
once rose out of obscurity others could come. Perhaps the dwarves
might one day leave their mines and use their mastery of fire to
destroy the vast forests. Corvus counsels me to craft a ring and
store much of my essence in it, thereby ensuring my immortality and
also enhancing my powers. Only through such means can I truly ensure
that this age will last forever.
I am Radagast of Many
Colours, friend of animals.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a non-commercial derivative work, written for the RPG challenge. Apologies to the late J.R.R. Tolkien for borrowing one of his characters without permission.
------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------
This is a non-commercial derivative work, written for the RPG challenge. Apologies to the late J.R.R. Tolkien for borrowing one of his characters without permission.
Tuesday, 22 May 2012
1d10 design mistakes in DnD 4e - Flanking and facing
DnD combat plays very much like a tactical war game and, as in many tactical games, flanking is an important concept. In the real world this is a tactic where you attack a foe from several directions so that he or she can not effectively defend. While distracted or busy parrying an attack from the front the combatant can easily be cut down from the side or rear by an unseen opponent.
So how was flanking implemented in DnD 4e? Well, take a look at the picture below and consider if the defender (with a green cloak in the centre) might be suffering unseen attacks and struggle to parry attacks from multiple directions. Has the defender been flanked in this example?
In DnD, the answer is no - this is not a flanking situation. The defender gets full defences against all the attackers and none of the attackers gain Combat Advantage (an important concept in DnD which gives +2 to hit and triggers extra effects from many feats and powers).
To flank in DnD the attackers would have to be on directly opposite sides of the defender. The number of attackers doesn't matter and facing doesn't exist so you can never be behind anybody. The defender effectively has 360 degree vision and can spin around instantly to deflect or dodge every attack.
For what otherwise plays like a tactical war game, this is a somewhat odd design decision in my opinion.
Next, consider the second situation shown below.
Here the attackers have wisely taken positions on opposite sides of their target. Although there is only two of them to worry about the defender will now struggle to defend himself or herself, granting combat advantage to both attackers. In the previous example attackers were spread out in the wider 270 degree approach, but the rule set allows only the 180 degree approach to generate advantage seen here.
Not only can the defender no longer spin around to parry, dodge and deflect blows from multiple directions, but there is also no choice to ignore one combatant and focus on defending against the other. Both attackers always gain combat advantage.
This has important implications in fights where there is a great disparity in threat levels between different opponents. No matter how insignificant the threat of the lesser opponent is, as long as it can attack and is in a flanking position you can not ignore it and focus on the more dangerous opponent.
Note that this also holds true even if the lesser combatant is actually fighting somebody else than the flanked defender. Position and capability are required, but actual action is not needed.
If DnD wants to embrace tactical game play the designers would do well to consider adding facing in the next edition, with the associated rules for real flank and rear attacks. Combining this with reasonable rules for parrying and shields would address the inconsistencies and counter-intuitive situations as well as let players make critical decisions about when it is ok to turn your back on a minor threat in order to focus on a greater threat.
So how was flanking implemented in DnD 4e? Well, take a look at the picture below and consider if the defender (with a green cloak in the centre) might be suffering unseen attacks and struggle to parry attacks from multiple directions. Has the defender been flanked in this example?
In DnD, the answer is no - this is not a flanking situation. The defender gets full defences against all the attackers and none of the attackers gain Combat Advantage (an important concept in DnD which gives +2 to hit and triggers extra effects from many feats and powers).
To flank in DnD the attackers would have to be on directly opposite sides of the defender. The number of attackers doesn't matter and facing doesn't exist so you can never be behind anybody. The defender effectively has 360 degree vision and can spin around instantly to deflect or dodge every attack.
For what otherwise plays like a tactical war game, this is a somewhat odd design decision in my opinion.
Next, consider the second situation shown below.
Here the attackers have wisely taken positions on opposite sides of their target. Although there is only two of them to worry about the defender will now struggle to defend himself or herself, granting combat advantage to both attackers. In the previous example attackers were spread out in the wider 270 degree approach, but the rule set allows only the 180 degree approach to generate advantage seen here.
Not only can the defender no longer spin around to parry, dodge and deflect blows from multiple directions, but there is also no choice to ignore one combatant and focus on defending against the other. Both attackers always gain combat advantage.
This has important implications in fights where there is a great disparity in threat levels between different opponents. No matter how insignificant the threat of the lesser opponent is, as long as it can attack and is in a flanking position you can not ignore it and focus on the more dangerous opponent.
Note that this also holds true even if the lesser combatant is actually fighting somebody else than the flanked defender. Position and capability are required, but actual action is not needed.
If DnD wants to embrace tactical game play the designers would do well to consider adding facing in the next edition, with the associated rules for real flank and rear attacks. Combining this with reasonable rules for parrying and shields would address the inconsistencies and counter-intuitive situations as well as let players make critical decisions about when it is ok to turn your back on a minor threat in order to focus on a greater threat.
Sunday, 20 May 2012
1d10 design mistakes in DnD 4e - Tactical movement
Tactical movement speed in DnD is typically in the range of 5 to 7 points per turn. There is no facing and therefore no turning cost. Most squares cost 1 point to enter, with difficult terrain doubling the cost to 2 per square.
The commonly used movement actions are walk (base speed), run (speed + 2) and charge.
You may want to read that again.
Walking is a gait where one foot is always in contact with the ground. Typical walking speeds are around 5 kilometres per hour. By contrast, running humans have a top speed (world record) of 44.72 km/h. That is nine times faster than walking!
This is of course over a short distance and without being encumbered, but even cutting it to a more reasonable 20 km/h would mean running is four times faster than walking. However in game terms, a speed 6 human runs at speed 8, a mere 33% increase. This is painfully gamist for anybody who bothers to engage his brain for a moment to consider the design choices made.
Arguments that this is based on the action split between move and combat activity (such as parrying or attacking) will fail to convince as the same 33% increase applies when doing nothing but moving. Double move at walk speed would achieve a speed of 12, while a double move at run speed would reach 16 speed - this is the same 33% difference.
This can be contrasted with the design in a simulationist game, where the fastest movement speed is five times the base walking speed. A character moving at 15 metres per round (50 feet) at walk speed can dash 75 metres per round (250 feet). This is a far closer match to reality and thus much more believable and the difference is obvious in the illustrations below.
More after the break.
The commonly used movement actions are walk (base speed), run (speed + 2) and charge.
You may want to read that again.
Walking is a gait where one foot is always in contact with the ground. Typical walking speeds are around 5 kilometres per hour. By contrast, running humans have a top speed (world record) of 44.72 km/h. That is nine times faster than walking!
This is of course over a short distance and without being encumbered, but even cutting it to a more reasonable 20 km/h would mean running is four times faster than walking. However in game terms, a speed 6 human runs at speed 8, a mere 33% increase. This is painfully gamist for anybody who bothers to engage his brain for a moment to consider the design choices made.
![]() |
| Walking in DnD |
![]() |
| Running as fast as you can in DnD |
Arguments that this is based on the action split between move and combat activity (such as parrying or attacking) will fail to convince as the same 33% increase applies when doing nothing but moving. Double move at walk speed would achieve a speed of 12, while a double move at run speed would reach 16 speed - this is the same 33% difference.
This can be contrasted with the design in a simulationist game, where the fastest movement speed is five times the base walking speed. A character moving at 15 metres per round (50 feet) at walk speed can dash 75 metres per round (250 feet). This is a far closer match to reality and thus much more believable and the difference is obvious in the illustrations below.
![]() |
| Walking in a simulationist game |
![]() |
| Dash in a simulationist game |
Friday, 18 May 2012
Future of copyright update
Today I got a really nice surprise in my email from the folks behind the Future of Copyright initiative:
We are proud to announce, that finally we selected 10 works which
will make it to our „Future of copyright” book. Winner is among them,
but you need to wait just a little bit more – jury is still deciding.
Here are works we have selected, in alphabetic order:
- Jesse Betteridge „The Brick in Room 207”
- Reuben Binns „History of Copyright 2012-Present”
- Eddie „In Session”
- Mike Linksvayer „Future of Copyright”
- Aymeric Mansoux „Morphology of a copyright tale”
- Alf Melin „Remote Kill”
- Carlos Solís „Blurred – a utopian story”
- Roland Spitzlinger „Future of Copyright”
- Togi „Give”
- Jarosław Żyła „Heritage of ACTA”
Congratulations to everybody who was selected!
Tuesday, 15 May 2012
Retro board game - Fortress America
Published by Milton Bradley in 1986 using a design by Michael Gray, Fortress America is a kitschy thematic wargame that covers the invasion of the U.S.A by socialist armies from Asia, South America and Europe. Only the northern map edge remains safely neutral as Canada refrains from entering the general US-bashing.
While outnumbered and attacked from nearly every direction the U.S. forces have the advantage of partisans and other reinforcements through event cards as well as solar-powered lasers that gradually come into play. The invaders hold the initial advantage and must advance quickly to defeat the U.S.A. before lasers can weaken their forces.
However, if the U.S. is defeated then individual victory goes to the invader that has captured the most cities (10 victory points), lasers (5 VP) and resource territories (3 VP). This can lead to rivalry and open warfare between invaders.
It had been at least 15 years since I played the game and I remembered it as being fairly good fun for 4 players, with the U.S. player relying on a strategy of trading space for time while trying to get the invaders to fight each other.
The invaders must grab cities to defeat the U.S. and also want to take out lasers as quickly as possibly (they are built in cities only), with resource territories a distant tertiary objective. They must also consider supply lines and the risk of partisans appearing as well as the possibility of another invader striking at them.
Recently I had the opportunity to play it again, although only with 3 players (necessitating that one player take on the role of both Asian and European invader). The game turned out to last very long, turning into an unusual protracted battle with huge swings in the number of controlled cities. The invaders regularly pushed the U.S. into loss territory, but could not hold against counter attacks and the game only ends if the U.S. holds less than 13 cities at the end of their turn.
After it finally ended with a victory for the invaders we talked about the high points of the game, the mistakes, the strategy and so on. A couple of points that stood out:
One thing that all players agreed on was that it was actually excellent fun and if the game hadn't taken so long I expect we might have had a re-match immediately. I've re-rated the game an 8 out of 10 on Boardgamegeek after this play, previously I had it down as a more average 6 out of 10.
I think the game is getting a re-release sometime in 2012. It might well be worth checking it out, do not mistake it for a R.I.S.K. type game - this is good fun with quick game play and does not devolve into 'biggest stack' type strategy.
| All invaders have identical order of battle but choose reinforcement order after turn 1 |
While outnumbered and attacked from nearly every direction the U.S. forces have the advantage of partisans and other reinforcements through event cards as well as solar-powered lasers that gradually come into play. The invaders hold the initial advantage and must advance quickly to defeat the U.S.A. before lasers can weaken their forces.
However, if the U.S. is defeated then individual victory goes to the invader that has captured the most cities (10 victory points), lasers (5 VP) and resource territories (3 VP). This can lead to rivalry and open warfare between invaders.
It had been at least 15 years since I played the game and I remembered it as being fairly good fun for 4 players, with the U.S. player relying on a strategy of trading space for time while trying to get the invaders to fight each other.
The invaders must grab cities to defeat the U.S. and also want to take out lasers as quickly as possibly (they are built in cities only), with resource territories a distant tertiary objective. They must also consider supply lines and the risk of partisans appearing as well as the possibility of another invader striking at them.
| U.S. forces are spread thin as the invasion begins - no partisans or lasers are in play |
After it finally ended with a victory for the invaders we talked about the high points of the game, the mistakes, the strategy and so on. A couple of points that stood out:
- The use of dice from D6 through D10 but keeping the target number to destroy an enemy unit constant (always 5 or 6 depending on terrain) is really efficient for quick combat resolution. It avoids addition and subtraction, consisting instead of a fast sort that all players can do easily.
- The combination of combined arms to overcome terrain penalties and the targeting system makes for interesting battles with calculated risk taking.
- The supply rules rarely seem to come into play, partially due to map scale and layout and partially because of the balance of forces. However, when out of supply does occur it can change the board immensely.
- It is unclear if the deck of cards can be reshuffled and used again. We played it as 'when you run out, you get no more reinforcements'. This puts a constraint on U.S. forces (60 + the card effects) similar to the invader limit (60 each). In a long game this means a battle of attrition can be won by the invaders if they can destroy lasers quickly enough.
- The rules are written quite verbosely, but are clear and don't seem to suffer from any obvious exploits or other issues.
| Few U.S. cities remain but partisans fight back and threaten invader supply lines |
One thing that all players agreed on was that it was actually excellent fun and if the game hadn't taken so long I expect we might have had a re-match immediately. I've re-rated the game an 8 out of 10 on Boardgamegeek after this play, previously I had it down as a more average 6 out of 10.
I think the game is getting a re-release sometime in 2012. It might well be worth checking it out, do not mistake it for a R.I.S.K. type game - this is good fun with quick game play and does not devolve into 'biggest stack' type strategy.
| U.S. forces are reduced to mostly isolated bands of partisans |
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)





