Lead Adventure Forum
Miniatures Adventure => Age of Myths, Gods and Empires => Topic started by: Phil Robinson on March 24, 2015, 01:24:04 PM
-
If the campaign system is on a par with Longstreet these will be very tempting,
http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/2015/03/introducing-aurelian/
-
That sounds very promising. Thanks for the heads up!
Having just read "Blücher", I'm eager to give it a go. Sam Mustafa clearly knows what he's talking about, and he has the ability to transform his period knowledge into a very readable (and most likely: playable) format. So, as a Roman nut with a special interest in the 3rd century AD it's fair to say: I'm pretty excited!
-
Iiiiiiiirk ... Elephants in a 3rd Century Sassanid's army :?
Maybe in the Far East , but not facing roman soldiers in Mesopotamia ...
-
Now that a few sample pages and documents are up on Sam Mustafa's site (http://www.sammustafa.com/honour/downloads/), it's become pretty clear that "Aurelian" will be a PDF-only release. Apart from the cards, that is.
I do wonder if and when the partnership with Plastic Soldier Company for this was dropped? Had high hopes for a boardgame variant, especially given the emphasis on using unit cards. I know, never judge a book by its cover, yet the game could definitely do with a proper – and, admittedly, more professional – design. For example, what's up with all those compressed WordArt-style graphics? :?
That said, still looking forward to this release.
-
You may call me old school, but I actually think it is rather refreshing to part from that always perfect sleek design that has grabbed our hobby publications and turned them into an equivalent of adverts from the soap-industry. A step back towards the normal is the right approach in my oppinion and I actually think the layout is visually pleasing.
By the way, out of real interest, what do you mean by compressed WordArt style graphics? The symbols on the cards? The unit depictions?
-
Ultimately it's down to taste, of course. And I concur that pretty pictures and professional layout are sometimes used to cover up worthless rules.
But the alternative to "perfectly sleek design" isn't necessarily an amateurish look. At least basic advice on design is easy to come by nowadays. Nobody has to type-write his rules anymore, and for me that doesn't even hold some sort of nostalgia. Design is not about fancy artworks and fonts or artsy, cluttered up layouts. It's about coherency, an engaging style to support the content and draw people's attention. Although I'm very interested in these rules, the lazy layout is off-putting (to me!).
For reference, take a look at sample chapter 2: most of the symbols shown there appear compressed or distorted, some are even pixelated or cut off (e.g. the laurels framing the page numbers). And let’s not talk about consistent design instead of random (WordArt-style) symbols.
As soon as you ask people to actually pay more than a symbolic price (I know, authors earn nothing already), you really should take care of such things. It’s not that hard to get it right, that is better looking than your average DIY invitation card.
-
Having just skimmed through the sample pages, I've to agree with the Doc. While Sam Mustafas rules generally are well worth their money on their own, I personally prefer my books/ rules to be a little more 'interesting' to look at.
-
I am certainly interested just hope it will not cost very much.
-
Well, I think the price will be very reasonable.
As for the graphics, I have so many of those much-praised coffeetable-picturebooks in my shelf that just gather dusk that I'm very happy about a good ruleset regardless of its design - I'll play with miniatures and the rules are easy to memorize, so I'm planning to be in touch with the books graphic for a very short time but with its contents for a quite long time.
As for the contents, the rules are great. I had the honour to be a playtester, and I really love them. One of the greatest ideas for me is the concept of fatigue: In near all wargames I know the unit fights/dices the same wether it has just started battle or stood hours in the midths of the fray. Here, dices are substituted by cards, and high cards leave the game for one reason or another. Thus after a while combats are fought not with 6 and 5, but with 4 and 3... This mechanism really feels right but is very smooth and uncomplicated in its implementation.
-
In addition, there are a number of really nice little details. For example, civilized armies can bring their own historian that gives them a victory point (important for campaigns) even if they loose - learning from Ceasar, they work their rethoric magic and turn a blunderous defeat into a dead of glory that just missed total success by a few inches...
A lot emphasis is placed on the fog of war - you can never be sure of your cunning plan, there is always the chance of things going terribly wrong - and instead of micromanaging exact positions of units you have to improvise and be happy to salvage at least some part of your strategy.
For me that game really hits the mark.
-
A lot emphasis is placed on the fog of war - you can never be sure of your cunning plan, there is always the chance of things going terribly wrong - and instead of micromanaging exact positions of units you have to improvise and be happy to salvage at least some part of your strategy.
Isn't that just another way of saying that even if your tactics suck, you may still win?
I prefer games that reward the overall better player (on the table, that is, mathematically min-maxing of armies holds absolutely no value to me), not the one most favoured by the dice.
-
As for the graphics, I have so many of those much-praised coffeetable-picturebooks in my shelf that just gather dusk that I'm very happy about a good ruleset regardless of its design - I'll play with miniatures and the rules are easy to memorize, so I'm planning to be in touch with the books graphic for a very short time but with its contents for a quite long time.
As for the contents, the rules are great. I had the honour to be a playtester, and I really love them.
It's hard to argue with a playtester, who's used the rules in raw format anyway. ;) I was talking about gathering interest among the uninitiated, and a pleasing layout is definitely a bonus here.
The more since the rules are (were?) advertised as being playable with unit cards. While this may not appeal to veteran wargamers, it's an option emphasised since "Blücher" at least, and personally I think it's a great way to draw new gamers who don't already own a vast collection of suitable and preferably painted minis into massed battle games.
Still, the rules have to compete against said 'coffee table books', and if they look crude (as do the unit cards as well), they're a lot harder to sell.
It's not style over content, it's about mutual support of style and content.
-
I am more interested in the rules than the graphics, although I have to admit I am a little concerned when the most powerful Sarmatian unit are Amazons ???
-
Isn't that just another way of saying that even if your tactics suck, you may still win?
I prefer games that reward the overall better player (on the table, that is, mathematically min-maxing of armies holds absolutely no value to me), not the one most favoured by the dice.
No, quite the opposite. It is another way of saying if you have only moderate tactics, you can't win. You have to be thoughtfull as well as flexible to cope with all the unforseen events.
Also: No one is favored by the dice, because there aren't any :D. It's all cards, and everyone has the same numbers.
-
@ Mad Doc Morris: I guess then it's just up to you if you want to let the graphics deter you from that (i.m.O. great) game
@ Delbruck: They come with a wink and are strictly optional. Besides, they are great fun to convert/paint
(http://www.ulmer-strategen.de/images/Amazones.jpg)
(http://www.ulmer-strategen.de/images/P1020211.jpg)
(http://www.ulmer-strategen.de/images/P1020216.jpg)
-
Iiiiiiiirk ... Elephants in a 3rd Century Sassanid's army :?
Maybe in the Far East , but not facing roman soldiers in Mesopotamia ...
Err, why not? The Sassanids certainly had access to elephants at this time.
They are attested at Ctesiphon in the following century.
No evidence for 3rd century - but then there's so little source material for this period that it would be a minor miracle if there was hard evidence either way.
-
From my perspective Tobi it's not conjecture, but rather reality in that hardbacks/soft covers sell better then pdf's alone so I'll side with Doc. Actually the best combination is a hard back with the option to buy a pdf as it pleases everybody. Take a look at Sam's own LaSalle in which his now oop hardbacks go for funny money even though you can get the pdf. Oh and yes I happily do have a hardback version. :D
Imho nothing replaces a well made wargames book in your hand. I'll risk the price of a well illustrated coffee table book in that even if the rules suck you still have nice book to get inspiration from which has been the case with a few rulebooks I own and I still don't regret the purchase because of the compensation. What I don't like is spending money on is something that's has bad to no graphics and the rules suck. ;)
All that said I'll still try the rules based on Sam's rules writing pedigree alone, but if I like them I'm likely to grumble even more that he didn't put it into a stylish hardback! lol
Looking forward to trying the game. Perhaps you can give me a demo in the spring. :)
Christopher
-
Love the period and the subject matter and the author has a very good reputation in our group. Design looks a bit amateurish but not enough to prevent me from buying. I think it would probably rule out using the unit chits if they are on par, and I'd probably end up redesigning the cards if I really liked the game, however.
In Sam's defense, maybe this level of design and doing as a pdf are what make it possible to produce the game, which otherwise wouldn't happen? Perhaps his regular publishers thought the period too esoteric and the following too small to be profitable unlike ACW and Napoleonics?
In any case, I will pick it up...
-
I thought all of his games are self-published. Which would be a great achievement whatever the format.
It's just that his games could benefit from a less 'amateurish' layout. Because the rules themselves aren't amateurish at all.
-
In Sam's defense, maybe this level of design and doing as a pdf are what make it possible to produce the game, which otherwise wouldn't happen? Perhaps his regular publishers thought the period too esoteric and the following too small to be profitable unlike ACW and Napoleonics?
Yep, I think the narrow focus had a considerable amount to do with the decision to go pdf and I think he did mention that in a podcast although please don't quote me on that as I could easily be wrong. I still think a hardback would improve sales, but as to improving it enough to offset costs is debatable and maybe the risk was just too great.
Anyhow I'll try it as I'm a big fan of Sam's rules, but I'll still miss it not being in hardback. Something about opening a new rulebook with the smell of fresh pages and a nice illustration gets the interest level up a few notches.
Hmm maybe time to start that Sassanid army I've been meaning to do.... :D
Christopher
-
Well, I would have preferred a printed book as well - especially as I've provided all the photos and painted most figures for it (so I considerably added to the amateurish look of the unit cards, dear Mad Doc Morris ;)) but I understand the maths behind it and I respect that decision. Stil I'm very much looking forward to the final release.
And of course, Christopher, I'll be happy to give you an worthy introduction.
-
Although we will likely have to exclusively use your lovely collection Tobi, because if I paint up some Sassanids they will be based for Impetus which I believe are on larger bases then your collection. So in the end all I have do is show up and play. :D
Christopher
-
If you cannot do without a hard copy, might I suggest that you simply take the PDF to a decent print shop and have a bound copy made?
It is surprisingly cheap, at least in Australia. and I suspect would still run out cheaper than a large format professional job.
A hard copy of the rules in high resolution would be about AU$15.
-
Just briefly looked over the pdf and thought it looked very nice. It looks like most his books and the battles scenes looked quite nice! 8) Wondering if I should order the cards or just make my own.
Christopher
-
I received the cards just a few days ago (and already have two games in!), and am very pleased I did. My printer produces nice quality results, but these were definitely at least several steps above what I can do.
My recommendation would be to buy two sets, as you'll recall from the rules that each side uses its own specific cards, plus 16 neutrals shared by all, so two sets are required.
-
While doing a tutorial/walkthrough-video for Aurelian (you cand find the youtube-links on my blog http://www.tobispaintpot.blogspot.de/ (http://www.tobispaintpot.blogspot.de/)) I also had some fun with photoshop. I know it's not everyone's cup of tea, but I really like the effects you can achieve:
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-CzANpCo7zBs/VwZtZsZmdSI/AAAAAAAAAwE/HjBKmKvLxfQCcw4b-bLdogqQi_76y7Bxw/s640/Bild%2B5.jpg)
(https://1.bp.blogspot.com/-FJEW9p_gl0s/VwZpLLEoD2I/AAAAAAAAAvY/Deq0zckB5zI5rKeyGPUyaQa_QSPyZ1_qA/s640/Bild%2B3.jpg)
(https://2.bp.blogspot.com/-f6DAbpQ0Ebo/VwZqvp7_wrI/AAAAAAAAAv4/IvXHH9zLdBcvh1LPhoaZyODKBpYLOORtw/s640/Bild%2B6.jpg)
(https://4.bp.blogspot.com/--ZihkBHuNj0/VwZtvCR_yYI/AAAAAAAAAwM/kmENSaqJbKcy67pUne075XMW1EWU1GOHQ/s640/Bild%2B4.jpg)
-
Great stuff, a very cinematic feel.
-
Love those photos!
-
Thank you very much for your kind comments. I'll upload part #3 of the video tonight with the game sequence, shooting, moving and fighting.
-
The videos do not appear on a FB page (Sam Mustafa's or another) to share them on FB?