Today I had a chance to try a game of
Sticks and Stones from
Tiny Battle Publishing. Tiny Battle is a new wargame publisher specializing in print-on-demand and print and play games. They're a sister company to
Flying Pig Games, and one of the benefits of this is that Tiny Battle publishes games from designer (and owner of Flying Pig Games) Mark H. Walker.
 |
| A US Company Team sets up to defend Gersbach |
Sticks and Stones is just such a game. The game is set in the mid-1980s after a limited nuclear exchange between the NATO and the Warsaw Pact. So far, that back story is really just window dressing for the game, but hopefully we'll see some future scenarios that make use of it.
 |
| The greater range of the US guns slows the advance of the the attacking Soviet Tank Battalion |
This is a fun little zip lock game that is definitely not simply a remix of Walker's older World at War games. With only a few pages of rules the game is easy to learn and turns play quickly.
 |
| I need to rethink the Soviet approach. By turn 5 the Soviet advance had been stopped cold with minimal US casualties. |
The game is only $20 for the ziplock version, and about half that for the print and play game. It's perfect for an evening of light 1980's armored warfare gaming. There are a few ambiguities in the rules, but nothing that can't be resolved with a little common sense. Another game in the series is being released as part of the
next issue of Yaah! Magazine, which bodes well for future games using these rules. Hopefully someone will cook up a Vassal module, because this game would work very well for online play.
OK not to sound like a complete knucklehead here (I have no experience playing let alone shopping for an actual board game): the website shows this as “Solitaire Suitability: High”, does that mean that it can successfully be played by one person? The specific reason that I ask is that when I click on their “Shop” link and then go to “Solitaire” this game is not listed.
ReplyDeleteExcellent question Tim! There is a subtle difference between games that have a high solitaire suitability and games that have been designed specifically to be "solitaire games." If a game has a high rating for "solitaire suitability" it means that while designed for at least two players, there's nothing in the game mechanics that would make it difficult for one person to play. If a game uses hidden movement, for example, that would make it difficult for one person to play successfully, since you'd obviously know where the hidden units are. That doesn't mean a single person couldn't play the game (and such games often are played solo), but there are going to be game mechanics that you'll either need to modify or just ignore.
DeleteA game that has actually been designed to play solitaire usually has some sort of game mechanic that takes the decision making for one side out of the hands of the human player. There is, in effect, a rules-based AI that you, as the human player, will run through that will make decisions for your "opponent." This is done through some combination of rules, chit-draws, and/or cards or other mechanism, and can actually be very sophisticated. A very simple example would be the old "choose your own adventure" books - the "AI" functions based on what decisions you make and those send you to different outcomes in the book. Despite the simplicity of the system, you can still have an interesting RPG experience that is different for some number of play throughs of the game. Solitaire wargame systems are much more sophisticated, but usually not much more difficult to operate.
Sticks & Stones is very playable solo, even if it isn't a solitaire game. You'll just play both sides, trying to do your best best for each side and make moves that are logical and good game play for both NATO and WP forces. Conversely a game like GMT's Won By the Sword, which relies heavily on hidden movement is not very suitable for solitaire play at all...though if you're hard core into the Thirty Years War like me you'll play it anyway!
Thanks for the detailed explanation.
Delete