Tomorrow's War Review

[Warren Abox]

Sure it would be interesting. I can "feel" the potential of these game mechanics, but I 'm too dumb to properly understand and play them (even if I bought FoF)  

That is exactly how I feel when I play it.  I'm not even smart enough to figure out if I'm missing something or the rules are.  For all I know, I'm playing it right, and just don't like the game!

[PF]

FoF/TW is one of my fav games. I always played it for asymetrical battles. Really enjoyable for playing a few squads vs hordes of bandits. Cool system, easy to play once you get the rules (luckily someone taught me how to play it) and Fog of War cards are fun too.

It gets a bit tricky with too many regulars tho. Also, vehicles are a bit crazy for my taste and some of the scenarios are just bad or almost impossible to achieve like when you have six turns to go somewhere (often in straight line) and if you stop for any reason (morale, pinning, fog of war cards) or just make a curve, you lose.

My favorite book is the one about Somalia. I liked less the Vietnam one: more a history book with only a few missions but the cards are cool.

[Malebolgia]

We played TW for a while and we liked the game. Once you get through the (terrible) rulebook and get into the system, it works well. Main downside I experienced is that dice rolls can have a huge impact on the game (especially because you're using different types). The last game we played was the scenario where a small elite force takes on a large force of dummies as they try to extract a person from the centre. The dummy force was absolutely steamrolled because the elites rolled well (especially for saves and casualties). In the end all dummies were shot down while one elite had a bleeding finger...
And I agree, the missions are a bit hit and miss. But it isn't hard to design your own missions.

But for what I'm looking for in games I think that Black Ops suits my needs better and will be the new set of rules I will be playing instead of TW

[Gunbird]

But for what I'm looking for in games I think that Black Ops suits my needs better and will be the new set of rules I will be playing instead of TW

Same here Mal. So....demo at Poldercon?

[PF]

I agree and even if I haven't played it yet I think I'll love Black Ops but looks like you may have more minis on the table with FoF si I'll keep using it for bigger skirmishes.

[Pijlie]

There might very well be a Black Ops demo at Poldercon. As for TW, who knows? 😁

[Warren Abox]

The last game we played was the scenario where a small elite force takes on a large force of dummies as they try to extract a person from the centre. The dummy force was absolutely steamrolled because the elites rolled well (especially for saves and casualties). In the end all dummies were shot down while one elite had a bleeding finger...

We played that game and had the opposite result.  The elites took an early casualty which slowed them down long enough for the mobs to bring their superior numbers to bear and clog things up until the time expired.  I remember it as one of those scenarios where everything has to go perfect for the elites or there's no way for them to achieve victory in the given timeframe.

[Ragnar]

Thanks for posting this Pijlie, it made me get the book out and have another look at it.

I think you have cleared up some issues that I had with remembering the rules.

[zemjw]

I too have dug out my copy of the rules. I had the infinite recursion problem as well, so hopefully they'll make a bit more sense now.

I still think the colour choice of grey text on grey paper is dreadful, and I seem to remember my eyes starting to twitch big time after a couple of pages 

I also remember imagining how much ink was wasted to print the book and being really glad it wasn't a pdf that I'd had to print myself

[The_Beast]

I too have dug out my copy of the rules. I had the infinite recursion problem as well, so hopefully they'll make a bit more sense now.

Thanks to EVERYONE who may have admitted this! I've seen less than complimentary reviews, but never saw anyone describe this. I REALLY thought I was THAT dumb! (Okay, really, I'm just happy that's an open question again.)

I, too, will find that damn copy and give it another look.

Thanks again!

Doug

[Pijlie]

Well, I can't really say as I never timed it. But since TW tables usually have a lot of cover lines of sight tend to be limited in general. As reactions are triggered by visuals so are these. And the procedure is quite fast. It's a bit like this:

Human squad A is Active and announces to run across the road. They will cross the view of Alien (Passive) squad A which announces it wil fire at them. Human squad B sees the aliens attempt firing and announces that it will provide covering fire. Both players roll for each acting and reacting squad. Human B wins, then Human A and then Alien A. So human B may fire at the aliens. Human A may run across the street before the Alien can shoot and the Aliend has no one to shoot at.

That's about it. Chains are usually no longer than that. And of course if Human A stays out of sight, no one may react.

To be honest it is slightly more complex than my example.

A unit reacting by moving may only do so once per turn. A unit reacting by firing may do some multiple times. However, the unit loses a fire die every consecutive salvo until no more fire dice remain. The more you shoot as a reaction, the less effective it becomes until it is no longer even possible.

[The_Beast]

...However, the unit loses a fire die every consecutive salvo until no more fire dice remain...

Okay, I'm afraid again; keeping the count (of dice) straight could be daunting, but, as I said, I have to find my book.

Doug

[Pijlie]

Nonono. There is rarely even a handful of units per side. Just place a D6 next to the unit. Shot once, shot twice....

Let's re-write my example a bit:

Friendly A is Active and announces to run across the road. They will cross the view of squad Enemy B (Passive) which announces it wil fire at them as soon as they are in the middle of the street.

Friendly squad C sees the aliens attempt firing, may react to en enemy (re)action and announces that it will provide covering fire for A, attempting to drive off or pin B before they can shoot.

Both players roll for each acting and reacting squad. Friendly C wins, then Enemy B and then Friendly A.

Squad C fires at Enemy B, killing one trooper but not accomplishing anything else.

Enemy B fires at squad A. B has already fired in this turn and has lost a trooper, so loses two fire dice: one for firing for a second time and one for the lost trooper. Still B's fire is very succesfull, wounding two and killing one. If B fires again in this turn, it will do so minus 3 fire dice: one for the lost trooper and 2 for firing two times already.

Friendly A may now finish running across the street, leaving three casualties behind them.  Friendly A may still react to things further on in the turn by firing, but has already moved, so may not move again.

This is how we played it.

[Ragnar]

Sounds about right to me.  To take it up one level, Friendly (active side) units can also react to enemy reactions but that completes that units turn.

So the active player, especially i they continue to win activation can construct a plan based on all the above knowledge.

[Ragnar]

I would also humbly suggest that if you don't have a knowledgeable player to teach the AA/FoF/TW system that you play a simple game with two teams a side.  That should create some dynamic without going over the top.