//
you're reading...

Podcasts

Wild Weasel #16

The weasel is so wild, we had to call animal control. While they wrassle the critter down, we talk to Paul Rohrbaugh! Also, what I did on my summer vacation. Plus news!

Timeline

News: 4:45
Paul Rohrbaugh: 23:07
Room for negativity? 58:47
Memoirs found in a boxtop: 1:06:06

Links to items mentioned

High Flying Dice Games
The Player’s Aid review of Hitler’s Reich
Red Factories (ASL HASL)
A Victory Awaits
The Conquistadors
The Korean War: June 1950-May 1951, Designer Signature Edition
Third World War, Designer Signature Edition
Compass Games – all the preorders
Imperium Romanum
Thunder in the East
Next War: Vietnam
People Power: Insurgency in the Philippines, 1983-1986
Mystery Wizard
Commands & Colors: Samurai Battles
Triumph of Chaos v2
The Invasion of Russia
Meltwater
NATO Air Commander
Napoleon Retreats
Old School Tactical Stalingrad Expansion
The White Tribe: Rhodesia 1966-1980
Lookout Games

Discussion

16 Responses to “Wild Weasel #16”

  1. Hi, Bruce.
    I have a youtube channel called No Enemies Here War Gaming News. I would appreciate very much if you could do a video intro to my channel.
    Please let me know if this is possible and I’ll give you the details.
    Thanks.
    Dan

    Posted by Dan Pancaldi | October 31, 2018, 7:41 pm
  2. Great episode – again. Can I see an overview somewhere of the games you have played?

    Posted by Torsten | November 1, 2018, 4:18 am
  3. Just curious, you mention you love War & Peace. Are you referring to the Worthington version or the Avalon Hill version?

    Posted by Chris | November 1, 2018, 2:45 pm
    • I was referring to the Avalon Hill version (which is going to be reprinted one day by One Small Step). The Worthington Games “version” is just something with the same name that is basically Axis & Allies in Napoleonic times.

      Posted by Bruce Geryk | November 1, 2018, 5:59 pm
  4. The Lion of Khartoum looks very promising – can’t you pre-order on White Dog Games?

    I always thought an interesting game topic would actually be the relief column under Wolseley. It already has built in to it the tension of trying to race up the Nile in time to save Gordon, against the risk of ambush and death of your men like with Burnaby at Abu Klea.

    You should start a new podcast as well just discussing the history of the period of the games with the designers – that was really interesting!

    Posted by Sam Spackman | November 1, 2018, 5:13 pm
    • Hi Sam,

      White Dog does not do pre-order, no.

      Your idea about Wolseley sounds like a great game idea. You should design it! 🙂

      I unfortunately don’t have enough time to do even 1/10 the stuff with games that I’d like, but I’ll definitely try to get more historical discussion with wargame designers into the mix.

      Thanks for listening!

      Posted by Bruce Geryk | November 1, 2018, 6:01 pm
  5. Bruce: thanks for the podcast. I found your comments about the rules of the recent McLaughlin-Schacter game from GMT to be both frank and honest. I do not own the game, but it stirs similar unpleasant memories from a few years back with another title from this same team.

    For me, “Rebel Raiders on the High Seas” was ultimately a decent, light-complexity game that approached the American Civil War from a different perspective. To arrive at this assessment, however, I bad to endure a taxing experience through the game’s rulebook. Yes, the rules are in English (my native language), but several passages within were worded such that I could only describe them as completely ambiguous. Furthermore, the organization of said rules bordered on ramshackle.

    My lifeboat for surviving this game’s rules were online resources such as BGG and CSW. Had this been decades ago before the internet, I most likely would have just given up and tossed the box on the shelf to collect dust.

    Without a doubt, the ability to write and express oneself well with words and images is an important and necessary skill in the game design business. It should make no difference if the rules fit on a single sheet of paper or a 30-page booklet. If you’re a designer and your playtesters can’t understand the rules for your game without significant internet help or a game sherpa, it’s time to reevaluate your rulebook. Poorly written and/or ambiguous rules will skew the player’s perception towards your game before the first die is rolled or first card is drawn.

    My experience with Rebel Raiders is the very reason I opted to pass on the new game. I’m both bummed and relieved that my instincts seemed to be correct. A pity.

    Bottom line: Game rules are not an afterthought. Leaning heavily on online errata or kicking the can down the road a year for the inevitable v2.0 reprint (only $10 + shipping if you preorder today!!) is bad form and in my opinion, bad for business. Publishers, take note.

    Posted by Skyrider68 | November 2, 2018, 2:15 am
  6. I liked the commentary about the Room for Negativity. There should be open and frank negative reviews but how the review (even positive ones!) is written or spoken about.

    I was just reading yesterday the review/takedown of AH’s revered monster classic The Longest Day by Geoff Barnard. The article author (edited by legendary Charles Vasey) is a British Army expert and lays out all the wrong things the game got in terms of units and history.

    As much as I appreciated the write up of getting the history right, the tone and use of words like “disgusted” and “illogic” does not serve any reader the benefit of trying to be balanced and explain why the game is not good.

    With today’s insta-internet rage comment posting or posting quick off the cuff rambling and mumbling rant reviews (not yours of course), there is a loss of a negative yet balanced review.

    I will nitpick to no end inaccuracies in games and have at times used phrases that were taken harshly by designers (“a slap in the face of the soldiers who served” and “a love letter to Tessin”) and those were in off the cuff posts, yet in formal article writing for magazines (I have several in the old Operations magazine and the newer Specials Ops), I avoid language like that and remember my term paper lessons from High School and College.

    We should also allow the reviewee to respond in kind. One negative reviewer of Last Blitzkrieg (who apparently cited me as being pro-American and also a Wehraboos, go figure) gave me a vague lambasting but shied away from I tried to pry from him his citations and sources where he faulted me for being old and biased. He then hid and just wrote more negative things in the BGG ratings comments where I wasn’t able to directly respond. In an attempt to reach out to him for more commentary, he smugly replied, insulted me, to which my only reply was, “Wow, you are condescending. Good bye”.

    We should all hope to be profession in our critiques (yet never shy away from bring negative or critical) so in this day and age of 280 character sound bite/byte world.

    Posted by Carl | November 2, 2018, 12:47 pm
  7. I think since you allowed Paul Rohrbaugh to share his views on the history of the Vietnam War as part of your show, which I have no problem with but then only fair to allow the listeners to respond.

    What became the Republic of South Vietnam, close to a million people fled to it from the North when the line demarcation was put up. Over 250,000 ARVN were killed in the war. So it was not a country indifferent to the cause of fighting against communism.

    My father served as an advisor in 1972 and said the ARVN troops he was with and other he saw were some of the bravest troops he has ever seen.

    Some history, after WWII France tried to create the State of Vietnam, the Viet Mihh predominantly in the North did not accept this, and after they beat the French at Diem Bein Phu the conflict went to the 1954 Geneva Convention to be settled. The French government fell and was replaced by the socialist party that promise to get the French out of Vietnam. They agreed to leave and with left Vietnam split in two until an election could be held in 1956.
    One this pissed off the US, who had been backing the French and now were abandoning Vietnam. Second the Agreement with the French for an election favored with Ho in the North because the populous in the North was bigger and he was certain they would win the election. The French did not care, they wanted out. However, the representatives of the State of Vietnam had no say in the decision to have elections that would decide their fate. On top of that, the North backed by the Soviets and China refused to agree to any monitoring of the elections and the elections would not be a private ballet. Diem now in charge felt if elections were held they would never be fair. One can debate if they would have been fair, but it is easy under the circumstances for them not to trust the elections (see North Korea, or Poland)

    When Ho could not gain control of Vietnam through elections he forced his will military both directly and by supporting the VLF. All of this back by the USSR and China.

    We can talk about the corruption in the South, we can talk about the mistakes made by the US, all valid. But what about the support given to the North by the USSR and CHina, who deployed over 300,000 troops to the North during the conflict.
    Again, I am not going to argue if the US should have been involved or not, but to suggest that the people of The Republic of Vietnam were indifferent or lack any patriotism, were pawns of a puppet regime or did not believe in a free society is completely 100 percent wrong. They even fought against their own government when they felt it was wrong, a luxury those in the North did not have. When their country fell, millions fled. Those that are disputing this are the revisionist.

    Posted by Andrew | November 3, 2018, 12:37 am
  8. Enjoyed the podcast, especially at the end about the pages and notes of game played from years past. I one time came across some old box scores from a baseball game my child hold friends and I played and the memories came back like yesterday. I also agree that sharing things like AAR’s are nice, even when playing solo by sharing it makes the experience seem not so lonely.

    As for who doesn’t like the Eastern Front, Colonel Klink and Sgt. Schultz didn’t seem to keen on it.

    Posted by Jamie | November 3, 2018, 1:29 am
  9. Hey thank you for this latest instalment of WW,I enjoyed it very much.

    To follow up on your monologues.

    Yes,seriously agree with you on critical and incisive commentary in regards to reviews. I think if it’s done with respect and states the reason for the reviewer liking or not liking a game, there’s no reason (hopefully) for anybody to get offended. A thoughtful, tempered appraisal is much more useful than a glossy once over.

    I liked your story on discovering those old game logs. Very evocative. I’ve been thinking about writing up some reports myself on my latest gaming capers….I’m grateful whenever I see a well written one on a game I’m interested in or already own. It’s like someone opening a door into their private world, sharing it with you.

    Anyway, hope you keep up the pods! They provide alot of food for thought!

    Posted by Gary | November 4, 2018, 5:23 am
  10. Hey Bruce! I love your podcast and I’m a fan of the idea of wargames but I usually end up playing solitaire. Are you still in the Portland area? I live on the west side and would love to find time to play pretty much anything with an opponent (or 2-3 others depending on the game!).

    Posted by John | January 10, 2019, 3:33 am
  11. I ran across Wild Weasel #16 a few weeks ago, and was so impressed I listened to #1-15. I was not disappointed. Thank you, I began wargaming about the same time you did and have played many of the same games it seems. Great work and I’m eagerly awaiting #17. Btw, I just pre-ordered the Dien Bien Phu game from Legion Games based on you recommendation.

    Posted by Matt Davidson | February 17, 2019, 7:39 pm
  12. W W17 for Easter Bruce ?

    Posted by Rob | March 15, 2019, 5:23 pm
  13. New book on Dien Bien Phu

    Valley of the Shadow
    Kevin Boylan and Luc Olivier
    Osprey 2018

    Posted by Michael Sundborg | March 15, 2019, 10:31 pm

Post a Comment