Now you might ask yourself why, when I already have Arc of Fire that suits the style of twentieth century skirmish games I usually organise, would I want to do this? Well to be honest I'm asking myself the same question.
It's probably Neil Shuck's fault. He and his compadres on the Meeples and Miniatures podcast have been raving about these rules for so long, I just had to give them a go.
So far they look very interesting. I need to set up a table and give them a test. I'll report back when I've done so.
6 comments:
Every time I see CoC I have to remind myself that I'm not really interested in WWII. I don't suppose there's a modern version?
Every time I see CoC I have to remind myself that I'm not really interested in WWII. I don't suppose there's a modern version?
Last I heard Richard was working on a modern version.
Cool. I'll have to keep an eye out for that.
While I am a huge fan of the Lardies rules I never got the CoC bug. Probably blind irrational prejudice on my part aided by really liking the older TW&T rules. Howevere they are worth the purchase price just for the way they will make you rethink how you play games with your other rules.
Russell the "Modern CoC" are called "Fighting Season" and are specifically designed for Afghanistan. I think there were also some "Cold War" modifications being worked on by Lard Fan Monty but don't know if they are a stand alone set or will be published in one of the Lard Specials.
Fatman
Cheers, Fatman.
Personally I'm not such a Lardy fan. I've struggled with Sharp Practice as it seems to go too far in the direction of friction. It's difficult to design a scenario that's not going to be substantially impacted upon by the random elements in the game.
It strikes me that CoC sits, for me, in a space near Lion Rampant and Maurice as a game I'll play from time to time with a single opponent. That's as opposed to my usual approach of hosting multi-player games.
Let's wait and see though.
Post a Comment