Counter Clipping #103 | The Best of Avalon Hill (Part 1, 1954-1971)

— Charles S. Roberts Awards Links —


— Help Support Ardwulf's Lair! —

— Channels & Contacts —

Don't forget to subscribe to this channel for more great content! Questions and feedback are welcomed in the comments!

00:00 Countdown

[leegrant]

I used to play "Facts in Five" with my parents growing up. I game was destroyed while being stored in my basement (flooding). I think it was 3M, not AH. This was played a lot in the mid-70's with my family. I still occasionally play "Bowl Bound", that will be in the next part... Great stream as usual. Happy Holidays!

[robertmoffitt]

Just got home from work, would've loved to have caught this one live!

[s-lenz]

BCS playthrough content sounds awesome, and I'd gladly wait. No stress on video schedule. Also without regular weekly content, I'm sure folks find their way here.

[peezebeuponyou]

You've crapped all over my Anzio, but I don't care. 😂
I still love that game; it was my first 'proper' wargame- if you discount Ostkrieg and Waterloo, and is probably why I have such a soft spot for it. I even fell in love with the map! 40 years later I still occasionally dust it down and have a game- still yet to play the full campaign...

[pizzafrenzyman]

I could be wrong, but I believe that the 2nd Ed D-Day adds an air element.

[joeokabayashi]

Another informative and enjoyable livestream. Thank you for all the work each week.

[ericbrosius]

Soakoffs were certainly a thing in AH Stalingrad.

[kenx]

For me, the game that stands out here is Diplomacy. It's the only one that I would still enjoy playing without any caveat about "considering its age" or "for its significance in the development of the hobby". On the other hand, it's not a true historical simulation, so maybe that's why it's so timeless? Jutland and Anzio are the two actual AH wargames from this period that I would be tempted to play again, or play at all, but I might not feel the same way about Jutland if I were familiar with any later developments in miniatures rules.

[kenx]

There's a theory that soak-off attacks would be less objectionable if they had been called "diversionary attacks". They never bothered me as a game mechanic.

[ArnoVdVelde]

I am really conflicted about C&C napoleonics. I don't have everything, so do I complete it now... but there is also an appeal to waiting and getting all the scenarios in 2 boxes. Which might be more affordable than getting everything separate.

also eager to see Inferno ship.

[lesliedavis]

I played Tactics II and Gettysburg in the years they hit the market. And I empathize with your lack of interest in Tactics I and II because they are not simulating a specific historical situation. But, I'm curious. Do you feel differently about hypothetical tactical games? I have the same problem with all tactical games that do not reflect a specific documented action, such as Lock & Load or even Commands and Colors. Basically, if I can't read an account of the game situation and compare my play with choices and results made by the historical commanders on the ground, it doesn't interest me. But, as long as it models a real situation, I'm in. That includes small naval engagements, paradrops in France, or small actions on the eastern front. As long as some type of log or after-action report is provided with the game, I'm interested. I'm asking you to explain your rejection of non-historical wargames, since (unlike me) I know you do play fictional fantasy games.