GMT Combat Commander--ASL Lite???

rdw5150

it's just a game
Joined
Feb 13, 2003
Messages
8,288
Reaction score
941
Location
Erie, PA
First name
Roger
Country
llUnited States
Hi!

IMHO you guys are way too hung up on the lack of vehicles.......

there were plenty of small unit actions without vehicles......

If CC had tanks, I would be willing to bet most of us would still not like it.....

Peace

Roger
 

Steven Pleva

Elder Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2007
Messages
3,425
Reaction score
1,080
Location
Connecticut
Country
llUnited States
The lack of vehicles doesn't bother me. What bothers me is the basic functions of shooting and movement are done through cards. Those items should be influenced by cards, not driven by them. For example, I played a scenario where I was attacking the Germans. On the first turn I ran a squad through the open adjacent to the enemy. He didn't fire. I then ran my entire force up to him. On his turn he still didn't fire. On the second turn, I blasted him to bits. He never fired because he didn't have a fire card. Just plain dopey...

There are some good things in CC, but the basic chassis still needs work. If I was a fan, I would put the energy into some better mechanics. For a light tactical game, I prefer Conflict of Heroes. I find it much more fun to play and the components are first rate...
 

Pitman

Forum Guru
Joined
Jan 27, 2003
Messages
14,104
Reaction score
2,371
Location
Columbus, OH
Country
llUnited States
A card driven engine can work for a tactical game, but cards have to have default values; like any card can be used to do at least a minimum fire attack instead of its main purpose. This would lessen the "well, my hand totally ****ed me over" phenomenon. Personally, I liked the idea of a card-driven game engine where each nationality might not only have separate decks, but also even different hand sizes (the greater the hand size, the more tactically flexible), or hands composed of (let's say) 5 random cards from the deck and 2 cards that this nationality always has.
 

Ray Woloszyn

"Fire and Movement"
Joined
Aug 20, 2003
Messages
4,080
Reaction score
1,215
Location
Kernersville, NC
First name
Ray
Country
llUnited States
When I play CC and get hosed without firing a short due to lack of cards I just consider I have been in command of F Troop and hit the reset button. I usually get a lot of laughs out of this game that I consider a diversion and nothing more. Nor do I dare compare it to ASL but it inevitably pops up here on this forum for some reason. I'd love to play John Hill's "Battle for Stalingrad" again but it is generally easier to find an opponent for CC at one of our weeknight wargame gatherings.
 

--E

Member
Joined
Oct 28, 2006
Messages
39
Reaction score
1
Location
<---- Over There
Country
llUnited States
Nor do I dare compare it to ASL but it inevitably pops up here on this forum for some reason.
I can understand the detractors's severe dislike, if they bought it thinking it was a wargame with cards added (which seems to be root of the most common gripe above?). It seems obvious to me it's the opposite (with a whopping two games under my belt *grin*). It's a card game with a wargame map & counters added ( just to make the worth of various cards in a hand, very fluid).

To me, it's a variation of Up Front (which takes longer to setup, if nothing else! *grin). I'm enjoying it immensely, when approached from that point of view. But then again, ask me again after 50 games. *grin*
 

Steven Pleva

Elder Member
Joined
Jun 28, 2007
Messages
3,425
Reaction score
1,080
Location
Connecticut
Country
llUnited States
I can understand the detractors's severe dislike, if they bought it thinking it was a wargame with cards added (which seems to be root of the most common gripe above?). It seems obvious to me it's the opposite (with a whopping two games under my belt *grin*). It's a card game with a wargame map & counters added ( just to make the worth of various cards in a hand, very fluid).

To me, it's a variation of Up Front (which takes longer to setup, if nothing else! *grin). I'm enjoying it immensely, when approached from that point of view. But then again, ask me again after 50 games. *grin*
The problem isn't that it is card driven. The problem is that the cards are used for everything. Cards are good for randomizing events, not allowing basic functions. This is where CC falls down. They should've had each card work for fire and/or movement even if it was at some reduced capacity. Want to see a good implementation of a wargame with cards, look at "Battles of Napoleon: The Eagle and the Lion". The basic functions are done as in most wargames while the cards add the chrome and battlefield chaos.

I agree that CC is more like "Up Front" with a map. As Fort said, it carries the worst of "Up Front" without fixing it. JMHO...

Steve
 

RobZagnut

Elder Member
Joined
Apr 1, 2003
Messages
8,814
Reaction score
1,378
Location
USA
Country
llUnited States
The main reasons CC sucks.

1. Too generic. Playing one nationality is similar to playing another. In Up Front the hand size and discard ability made each nationality unique and really interesting to play. CC usually has the attacker get 6 cards and defender get 5, and discards are similar. Gets old fast.

2. Beautiful maps, but they have borders? So, they're not geomorphic so you can't combine them to make bigger and cooler playing areas, thus no maps big enough for tanks? Who made THAT stupid decision?

3. Random events up the ying-yang. Nuff said.

4. Card play wasn't enjoyable. You're either frustrated searching for the right card or there's an embarrassment of riches, followed by discarding again, etc. Rinse and repeat. Nothing in the card play made me want to play again.

5. There wasn't a lot of strategy in the cards that tied it to units on the board. It was like trying to play a card game and a different board game at the same time. They just didn't mesh well enough.
 
Last edited:

klsmith

Member
Joined
Jan 27, 2003
Messages
184
Reaction score
14
Location
Radford, Virginia
Country
llUnited States
I bought the CC stuff because it looks great. The maps are awesome; the counters are colorful and cool (except the Japanese, which have pink dots). It's a just a great-looking game.

And I've played about a dozen scenarios using vassal (which isn't an optimum practice for CC). And I like it; it feels sort of like ASL-light. The rulebook is practically flawless and super-easy to use. The concepts are all pretty similar to ASL. I don't miss tanks (I find the ASL tank rules pretty difficult, so I don't seem to use them that much anyway)

Some say ASL is like a simulation of a war-movie (I agree); CC is maybe more like a game about a war movie. It plays like a game; it feels like a game. Not so much a simulation (although I've read a few posts by military guys that say the randomness and chaos of CC feels more "real" than the ASL simulation).

To each is own; I think both games are cool. And I just got Fighting Formations; curious to see how that works too. The rulebook is certainly sweet.
 
Top