Wednesday 25 September 2019

Further thoughts on Rommel

Rommel: End of the road...
Further to my last post, Little Wars TV also have a pretty astute review of Rommel here. They note the difficulty of adding historical flavour to a high level game, and see the Tactics in Rommel as Sam Mustafa’s way of providing it. Unfortunately, Tactics give players so much choice that they begin to slow an otherwise fast-moving game.

Sam’s decision to make the basic unit a company rather than a battalion was in my opinion extremely disappointing. The companies are little more than strength markers. They require you to have lots of stands, and they limit your ability to play large battles.

In LWTV’s D-Day game they took things up a level so the companies became battalions. You can get the scenario and the rule revisions under 'Free Stuff' once you have signed up. As you will see, the changes required were absolutely minimal and are contained in just a few sentences.

Notwithstanding the attraction of this option I remain unmotivated for a number of other reasons.

(1) IMO the success of high-level rules depends as much on the availability of historical scenarios as it does on the rules themselves. Sam Mustafa has not provided many scenarios for Rommel, relying instead on players to produce their own.

(2) Sam's publishing venture, Honour, used to have a proper forum where scenarios could be presented and rules discussed, but this was subsequently replaced by a private Facebook group, another bad decision and a complete barrier to anyone who doesn’t want any FB involvement.

So here we have a game that has failed to attract any other local champions, is only half done because it lacks scenarios, is effectively unsupported unless you want to surrender your life to Facebook, and would be better played at a totally different level from the one intended.

It looked full of promise, but those negatives just stack up in a crushingly large heap. If there was a local group of people keen to pursue it I’d give it another go, but I don’t have the energy and don’t see the point of going out on a limb when there are so many easier avenues to pursue.

What I’m looking out for now is a much higher, Operational level, game but as far as I'm concerned, it must come with a range of ready-made scenarios to attract my commitment.

17 comments:

  1. I agree that having an operational WWII game at the company level is a level (or two) too low.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Janathan

      Rommel may claim to be Operational but it's a Tactical or Grand-Tactical game at most. Having the boardgame-style abstractions (the Tactics) in a game at this level is odd and probably the main reason why people are critical of it.

      Richard

      Delete
  2. I suspect it was limiting feedback to a small group of relatively uncritical "fan boy" playtesters is the reason for Rommel as it currently is.
    From what I understand, the early versions used battalion stands, but very quickly became companies. I suspect due to the playtesters not having the correct mindset and requiring the sop of familiar concepts. It's like Nappy players who want grand battles but also want to form battalion squares and control Sharp's riflemen.
    I'm waiting for Frank Chadwick's "Breakthrough" rules, supposedly on kickstarter
    https://wargamecampaign.wordpress.com/2019/08/30/breakthrough/


    http://theminiaturespage.com/boards/msg.mv?id=502983

    https://wargamecampaign.wordpress.com/2017/08/07/battalion-per-stand-rules/

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Neil

      Many thanks for those comments and leads. Lots to look at and think about there.

      Richard

      Delete
  3. I think they missed the goal by not making unit cards like Blucher. I was pondering Rommel, but somehow I could not sum up enough interest in it. I have seen several rule books on Bring & Buys.
    Hope you are well Richard.
    Cheers
    Si

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. Hi Si

      Sam is an exceptionally good rule-writer IMO but he missed the target on this one. Blucher and Maurice are both very popular locally.

      I’m doing well, thanks.

      Richard

      Delete
  4. I agree with most of your points sir. Field of Battle:WWII uses 1 base as a company too, which is too small for the Market Garden game that I've always wanted to do.
    I have however considered the 'Three Star General' rules mentioned at this wonderful site. Everything is free, including scenarios (and a number of Rommel scenarios):
    https://www.hexesandminiatures.com/ww2-hexes

    Have also considered 'Hexblitz' in the past.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I will certainly take a look at 'Three Star General' but I note there aren't many scenarios there. I was also seriously considering 'Hexblitz' but the updated version never appeared, AFAIK, and, again, there weren't many scenarios for it. I once saw Market Garden done with Megablitz. I'm not sure it was a proper game so much as a scripted demo. I'm also not sure if the whole of Market Garden was covered, but I think quite a lot of it was.

      Delete
    2. AH...perhaps you're thinking of Megablitz.
      'Hexblitz' is here.
      https://www.amazon.com/Hexblitz-Bob-Cordery/dp/0244394369


      Now it so happens that I have an extra copy if you'd like. Also have the original free version if you want me to email.
      ducdegobin (at) gmail (dot) com

      Delete
    3. https://www.amazon.co.uk/Hexblitz-Bob-Cordery/dp/0244394369/ref=sr_1_2?keywords=hexblitz&qid=1569537665&s=gateway&sr=8-2

      sorry - UK amazon version here

      Delete
    4. It was definitely Hexblitz I was planning to pursue: https://doctorphalanx.blogspot.com/2013/04/plans-for-1940-high-level-game-in-3mm.html

      Megablitz was very interesting but too incomplete. I also prefer the precision of hexes (or grids) at this level.

      It was this France 1940 project that I eventually pursued with Rommel. I bought loads of 3mm stuff but it's still in the packets.

      I also put a lot of work into co-authoring this Hannut scenario for Rommel: https://doctorphalanx.blogspot.com/2017/10/hannut-scenario-for-rommel.html

      On reflection I'm rather glad I didn't go ahead with this. When I find the right game I will, though I guess I will only need a third of the stuff when I go from company to battalion level.

      Thanks for the offer of a copy of Hexblitz but it's so cheap I might as well just order it from Amazon. It might not be my final choice but I think it will be worth looking at.

      Delete
    5. Understood. I hadn't realised though that there was an updated version of Hexblitz being talked about - hence my confusion. I have planned to use it for a while to do Market Garden, though am a bit concerned re. the sequencing/activation via playing cards for active units, which seems a little bit too gamey for me.
      We'll see.

      Delete
  5. Steven Thomas did a review of high level rules here https://balagan.info/what-wargaming-rules-to-use-for-the-operational-level-of-war

    He is also working on some Operational rules of his own.

    ReplyDelete
    Replies
    1. I do have a set of rules near publication. My aim is before Xmas. But, in truth, they probably come behind a version 2 of Tilly's Very Bad Day. And scenarios would have to come later.

      Delete
    2. Steven

      Good to know it's coming so soon! I'd hope that you would do at least one scenario in or with the rules so that people would have something to get started with.

      Richard

      Delete
  6. I do not know if I entirely agree. Yes, it is a pity that the old Honour forum had to be taken down and I do not like FB either for this kind of thing. Still, scenarios can be found elsewhere. For instance, a fairly large number of scenarios has been collected on the hexes and miniatures site (https://hexesandminiatures.com/ww2-squares-rommel) if you would be interested. Mind you, I do still have to play my first true Rommel game and I do not hold any shares in the Honour company, so my view may change; but my limited experience so far and what a have seen online make me want to give it true test drive.

    ReplyDelete