Latest MMP release

[Barking Monkey]

<<We have nearly a hundred official boards, and BFP has quite a few also ... Also, the game and boards were meant to be representative terrain, not exact terrain. I doubt there are many terrain types that are not represented. For example, we probably never need another city board. Arguably, we may not need any new boards whatsoever, except for historical ones.>> And yet, as far as I am aware, only a single geo-board with a canal (with none in rural terrain.) Not a rebuttal - the point is generally valid - just something that I sometimes wonder about. Canals crop up enough historically that you find them SSR'd from streams from time to time. With so many boards in print it seems a little odd that we never got a second one (or maybe there is and I never ran across it?) or a canal overlay (again maybe there is one I've never seen?)

 

[MichalS]

I applaud the FW and BFP-tested approach of several boards together depicting one terrain feature. It leads towards terrain configurations which are not possible on a single map board.

This particular one seems quite busy, but interesting. Can't wait to try it out.

And yet, as far as I am aware, only a single geo-board with a canal (with none in rural terrain.)

And none, as far as I can tell, with a river with wooded banks. Strange.

(Or a narrow-mouthed gorge, possibly with a river. Or various terrain features on a gradual hillside where the hill does not rise from level zero to fall again to zero - although the FW hill on 80 to 83 is a step in a good direction, those maps are just about that one hill.)
EDIT: Actually these new ones try to fill that gap, although the crest is off-center, hmmm.... And there is also BFP's map board H. Plus one can crop other boards. I might have been too hasty with the last judgement, although I still cannot satisfactorily model the terrain I have in mind for engagements in rugged hilly and wooded terrain.

 

[brunger]

None taken. And even if you came out and said you don't like this or that about the maps, one has to have a thick skin. Heck, I've criticized other people's maps and scenarios. It's all fair game, and as you said, not everybody loves to see new maps.

As one who DOES, though, I think I'll put something together on how this board evolved over the course of 3 years to get where it got. Like scenarios, boards have a certain birthing process, and some take a while to come out. It's also not just The Map Guy throwing the design over the wall and calling it done - there's often a lot of iterating on things large and small, and lots of discussion about unconventional things that may or may not fly. This one in particular was something of a difficult labor, but I hope it eventually hit the spot Pete was looking for, and I hope people enjoy playing on it.

Always a problem getting planning permission from the local councils??

 

[Tuomo]

Always a problem getting planning permission from the local councils??

More like trying to scratch the particular itch that the designer had, plus keeping the publisher happy. Case in point, the "road going into and out of the Gully" idea that FrankH mentioned upthread. Interesting thought, and the associated rules may even seem straightforward, but there's no such animal in any MMP geoboards to date, so it's not likely to pass. Ditto for my "one sided Sunk/Elevated Road" idea that I talked about in a different thread earlier this year. I like the idea, I think it's realistic, interesting, and not particularly complicated, but it's not the kind of thing one can expect MMP to go with, at least not for this kind of annual ASLOK-release product. Maybe as part of an Interesting Map Pack or something, where one could ride the bleeding edge on certain mappish things so that the average buyer could take or leave the product at their own discretion, but not here.

Point being, while not exactly being "Art by Committee", there's definitely more than just one stakeholder at the party, and one wants to make them all happy.

 

[Hutch]

Kudos to MMP, I ordered AP17 on Friday morning, received it today.

 

[Perry]

More like trying to scratch the particular itch that the designer had, plus keeping the publisher happy. Case in point, the "road going into and out of the Gully" idea that FrankH mentioned upthread. Interesting thought, and the associated rules may even seem straightforward, but there's no such animal in any MMP geoboards to date, so it's not likely to pass. Ditto for my "one sided Sunk/Elevated Road" idea that I talked about in a different thread earlier this year. I like the idea, I think it's realistic, interesting, and not particularly complicated, but it's not the kind of thing one can expect MMP to go with, at least not for this kind of annual ASLOK-release product. Maybe as part of an Interesting Map Pack or something, where one could ride the bleeding edge on certain mappish things so that the average buyer could take or leave the product at their own discretion, but not here.

Point being, while not exactly being "Art by Committee", there's definitely more than just one stakeholder at the party, and one wants to make them all happy.

Most new terrain, even if "straightforward" or "realistic, interesting, and not particularly complicated," requires a new rule.
Incorporating new rules into the ASLRB and publishing them is not a simple task, and not one well-suited to an Action Pack.

 

[wrongway149]

I applaud the FW and BFP-tested approach of several boards together depicting one terrain feature. It leads towards terrain configurations which are not possible on a single map board.

EDIT: Actually these new ones try to fill that gap, although the crest is off-center, hmmm.... And there is also BFP's map board H. Plus one can crop other boards. I might have been too hasty with the last judgement, although I still cannot satisfactorily model the terrain I have in mind for engagements in rugged hilly and wooded terrain.

It also gives a scenario desinger a lot more to work with. And let's face it, the same old 'take the hill' Victory Condition' is as old as board 2 itself.

As far as rugged hilly/wooded terrain - this was done on small scale with board 84 (excellent work, Tom) -- but can certainly be broadened.

For example - I tried to do a scenario for AP 17 on this battle -- but the hills were either too sparse or too dense. This one is heavily wooded on one side, brushy on the other. With some stone structures atop.
(I am OK with simply using rubble counters for that part.)

I am trying again with the deluxe map l.

 

[wrongway149]

In no way was I criticizing the artistic talent of our community. Just that personally, I don't want or need anymore stuff. I would probably still buy a Journal, the best value for my money, but at this point, I am not expecting another of those until after I die of natural causes in my 80's. I'm 54.

Roy

I have made a tighter filter for other games (and 3rd party ASL) for this same reason. If I don't see playing it within the next year-- no purchase.

 

[wrongway149]

I think that I was also initially taken back by the Forward Air Controlers and Searchlights rules, but they actually are not very frequent - and/or don't apply in the same scenarios.
My last mental resistances are giving way.
Thanks to all who have encouraged me to overcome my reticence.
At least I was not called a negationist this time.

No air power nor searchlights in AP 17.

 

[wrongway149]

I have so far played anything but the Chinese from Chapter W. Now when I am more comfortable with other stuff, mainly terrain, I plan to start with Chinese. IMO it is less complex than mastering Chapter G, even if you leave out seaborne assaults and Caves. Summer 1950 is more or less 1945 US and Russians agains each other.

There are a couple scenarios in AP 17 that will not overwhelm a CVPA 'first-timer' .

 

[Gunner Scott]

I'll give this pack a go, I do like what Pete does, so I am confident that the scenarios will be fun. I am just not a fan of the FW terrain rules which are just over the top complicated for so little gain.

There are a couple scenarios in AP 17 that will not overwhelm a CVPA 'first-timer' .

 

[Vic Provost]

Start with a Don Petros concept. Add several iterations of Pete Shelling Gnarl. Boom.

I need a scenario for this board in Dispatches in the next few issues, it screams take the village after fighting through some interesting country terrain and over that hill. If anyone comes up with one before we do I can help publish it.

 

[bprobst]

Most new terrain, even if "straightforward" or "realistic, interesting, and not particularly complicated," requires a new rule.
Incorporating new rules into the ASLRB and publishing them is not a simple task, and not one well-suited to an Action Pack.

Speaking of which, when are we getting the Chapter B rules for hex 8AA1? 52V5? gH3/I3?

I realise that we don't want to rush into premature decisions, after all it's only been 30+ years for some of those.

 

[william.stoppel]

It has a new PTO DASL scenario. That alone, with the new maps, justifies this purchase!

 

[Old Noob]

Finally ordered AP 17 via computer. Had been mail-ordering since 1998, but money orders no longer accepted at MMP.

 

[Alan Hume]

I think I have reached a saturation point. Especially with counters and maps. Plus I didn't care for the Korean module and 13 of these scenarios are Korean War.

At this point, it's off the rails, and frankly I don't understand this obsession with new maps and counters. I have literally tens of thousands of counters and the maps are at or approaching 100, just the official ones.

I'm done buying. JMO

I feel like I'm running just to try and keep up at the moment there is so much coming out, I am not complaining though as I have found it all to be very good I just can't afford to buy it all is all. Still, I did get an order in for this latest action pack with the great guys at Second Chance Games in England

 

[BattleSchool]

It has a new PTO DASL scenario. That alone, with the new maps, justifies this purchase!

It also helps justify the purchase of DASL "Redux," as players get to use overlays dx14, dx17, and dx21 for the first time.

 

[bprobst]

I feel like I'm running just to try and keep up at the moment there is so much coming out

You could try moving to Australia; MMP won't let us buy any new products so it simplifies the decision tremendously.

 

[jyoung]

You could try moving to Australia; MMP won't let us buy any new products so it simplifies the decision tremendously.

I'm wondering about things that were pre-ordered long ago (Manila from MMP and Rising Sun through Ritterkrieg), how that will be handled or whether the per-order will just be cancelled.

 

[Alan Hume]

You could try moving to Australia; MMP won't let us buy any new products so it simplifies the decision tremendously.

I forgot that, USPS isn't shipping or somesuch to Australia at the moment is it? That sucks right enough, hopefully they will get it resolved soonest