Shadow Queen
Mongoose
Wander whats in 'em.
S&P 50
- Thread starter Shadow Queen
- Start date
shotgun-toting chipmunk
Mongoose
gaming stuff.
toothill man
Mongoose
lots of gaming stuff
AlphaStrike
Mongoose
No sign of 'em yet! 
Greg Smith
Mongoose
They are both up now.
shotgun-toting chipmunk
Mongoose
Just finished going through Wargamer #50. I like the new game design article. Beyond that, we had the standard battle reports for ACTA and one other game, one tactical article for ACTA, and Extinction Protocol. Of course, there was also a blurb on the new Order of Battle book (which pretty much just included info we already got on the forums). The sample of another company's product (Osprey's Duel Series) seemed odd at first, but upon further review is a welcome addition. It is also nice to see a two-page spread on the works of the Mongoose Infantry.
All in all, I was a little disappointed in this one. I guess I was kind of expecting something, well, more for the 50th issue (usu. a big deal, as I understand it). Complaints are no good without suggestions, right? So here's what I would have liked to see:
--A bigger issue. Nice pictures/artwork, more articles, something. The only thing that stood out from a standard issue was the full-page artwork of George Gay from the Battle of Midway, and that was borrowed from another company's product. It even seemed like most of the usual content was toned down and lacked anything special (see below). It's Issue #50 for cryin out loud!
--A more dynamic battle report for BF:Evo. A bunch of MEA infantry charge straight across a sparse battlefield, ho hum. Let's see some more terrain (really brings out the tactical beauty of this game, some of the advanced rules being used (structures, grenades, etc) or even some of the S&P unit cards. Take a look at evocommand.com for some good examples. I recommend the Hostage Rescue (a great home-made scenario), the Urban Throwdown (highlights the new sniper rules), and the Village Skirmish (nasty urban warfare using some of the advanced rules). The PLA Incursion is probably the most visually appealing report I've seen so far.
--Speaking of unit cards, this would have been a great thing to add to this issue. Personally, this is a feature I most look forward to. perhaps a focus on PLA or MEA units, or some more variants of existing vehicles.
--A little more meat to the OOB preview. While this article may have been useful to those who don't check out the VaS forum (which included all of this information already) it doesn't do much for those die-hards. In fact, you put all the same information, and more, into the one-page "Eye on Mongoose" feature. A few sample pages, like you've done with past books, would have been great.
--A new stand-alone scenario or two to try out for one of the existing games. Slugfests are great, but every now and then it's nice to try out some objectives. I'm not talking a generic battle a la the previous BF:Evo campaigns from previous S&P issues, but missions with specific objectives beyond "shatter or kill the other guy" or "get unit X across the board." Again, the hostage rescue scenario above is a good example, or some of the scenarios that used to be provided for SST (ie the Skinnie raid with the patrolling CHAS).
--Bring back the painting and terrain guides. It's always nice to see new ideas to add detail and realism to the table top. I was a big fan of the Monty's Modification Modules and the Unique SST units.
In general, do something that highlights the strength of your games and gives the existing players something to try out, discuss, and get excited about.
Note that while I would have loved some news on the Evo games, I understand you guys are currently in discussions about those games and Matt's already mentioned that NDAs are in place, so I figured there was no need to ask for it.
One last minor point: I was kind of surprised to see no special offer in the 50th issue.
All in all, I was a little disappointed in this one. I guess I was kind of expecting something, well, more for the 50th issue (usu. a big deal, as I understand it). Complaints are no good without suggestions, right? So here's what I would have liked to see:
--A bigger issue. Nice pictures/artwork, more articles, something. The only thing that stood out from a standard issue was the full-page artwork of George Gay from the Battle of Midway, and that was borrowed from another company's product. It even seemed like most of the usual content was toned down and lacked anything special (see below). It's Issue #50 for cryin out loud!
--A more dynamic battle report for BF:Evo. A bunch of MEA infantry charge straight across a sparse battlefield, ho hum. Let's see some more terrain (really brings out the tactical beauty of this game, some of the advanced rules being used (structures, grenades, etc) or even some of the S&P unit cards. Take a look at evocommand.com for some good examples. I recommend the Hostage Rescue (a great home-made scenario), the Urban Throwdown (highlights the new sniper rules), and the Village Skirmish (nasty urban warfare using some of the advanced rules). The PLA Incursion is probably the most visually appealing report I've seen so far.
--Speaking of unit cards, this would have been a great thing to add to this issue. Personally, this is a feature I most look forward to. perhaps a focus on PLA or MEA units, or some more variants of existing vehicles.
--A little more meat to the OOB preview. While this article may have been useful to those who don't check out the VaS forum (which included all of this information already) it doesn't do much for those die-hards. In fact, you put all the same information, and more, into the one-page "Eye on Mongoose" feature. A few sample pages, like you've done with past books, would have been great.
--A new stand-alone scenario or two to try out for one of the existing games. Slugfests are great, but every now and then it's nice to try out some objectives. I'm not talking a generic battle a la the previous BF:Evo campaigns from previous S&P issues, but missions with specific objectives beyond "shatter or kill the other guy" or "get unit X across the board." Again, the hostage rescue scenario above is a good example, or some of the scenarios that used to be provided for SST (ie the Skinnie raid with the patrolling CHAS).
--Bring back the painting and terrain guides. It's always nice to see new ideas to add detail and realism to the table top. I was a big fan of the Monty's Modification Modules and the Unique SST units.
In general, do something that highlights the strength of your games and gives the existing players something to try out, discuss, and get excited about.
Note that while I would have loved some news on the Evo games, I understand you guys are currently in discussions about those games and Matt's already mentioned that NDAs are in place, so I figured there was no need to ask for it.
One last minor point: I was kind of surprised to see no special offer in the 50th issue.
Well, at least they flipped the artwork horizontally for OoB when making the cover up for the wargamer S&P. I hope that they do that for the actual product when they make the print runs. :idea:
I understand that Mongoose is probably "stuck" with the artwork, being that it's a finished job and hard to correct now. My critique isn't with the artist's skill, which I find is excellent. In fact, I'm very very pleased with the overall work.
It's the choice of the P-40 as a central subject, wearing a Navy paint scheme and acting as a fighter-bomber (supposedly at Midway). While this does indeed point to the inclusion of fighters armed with bombs as a game possibility, the only way this art "works" is to state this as a game reference and not as any part of history. In other words, this "fight" should be described as that of a game of VaS, reinacting a carrier engagement. Still though, even if it was the subject of a player's "minds-eye" cinematic scene, the Warhawk (Kittyhawk to the UK) should be sporting a more bland Olive Drab of the U.S. Army Air Force. Then again, Alaska is the closest locale from which these were based.
I'm not trying to be a picker of nits and bring out all of this doom and gloom over what is imho a great piece of artwork. I just want the best for Mongoose Publishing and for their products to hold up under historical oversight. The "history grognards" will no doubt have a field day discussing this at length on the various history and game forums.
I am thus dropping the hint here that those that will be defending MGP (me, being one of that number) should be "armed" with the respectful retort that this represents a "replayed" carrier battle and is a "view" of a game between players of VaS. Besides, even if it is the Midway action (I'd venture the carrier is Kaga), MGP never said it WAS Midway, now did they?
Now as to how to explain an Army P-40 dresed in Navy paint, I'm still working on that! :roll:
I understand that Mongoose is probably "stuck" with the artwork, being that it's a finished job and hard to correct now. My critique isn't with the artist's skill, which I find is excellent
. In fact, I'm very very pleased with the overall work. It's the choice of the P-40 as a central subject, wearing a Navy paint scheme and acting as a fighter-bomber (supposedly at Midway). While this does indeed point to the inclusion of fighters armed with bombs as a game possibility, the only way this art "works" is to state this as a game reference and not as any part of history. In other words, this "fight" should be described as that of a game of VaS, reinacting a carrier engagement. Still though, even if it was the subject of a player's "minds-eye" cinematic scene, the Warhawk (Kittyhawk to the UK) should be sporting a more bland Olive Drab of the U.S. Army Air Force. Then again, Alaska is the closest locale from which these were based.
I'm not trying to be a picker of nits and bring out all of this doom and gloom over what is imho a great piece of artwork. I just want the best for Mongoose Publishing and for their products to hold up under historical oversight. The "history grognards" will no doubt have a field day discussing this at length on the various history and game forums.
I am thus dropping the hint here that those that will be defending MGP (me, being one of that number) should be "armed" with the respectful retort that this represents a "replayed" carrier battle and is a "view" of a game between players of VaS. Besides, even if it is the Midway action (I'd venture the carrier is Kaga), MGP never said it WAS Midway, now did they?
Now as to how to explain an Army P-40 dresed in Navy paint, I'm still working on that! :roll:
shotgun-toting chipmunk said:
Absolutely - glad to read any comments on S&P.
We _did_ consider doing something 'special' for this issue, but I nixed that idea. I decided we would save that for issue 60 which, as a five year mark, seems a better goal.
BuShips said:[
I was looking for a special centerfold edition, but I can wait for issue #60.
We can do one in issue 51 of Ted Chang. . .
msprange said:BuShips said:[
I was looking for a special centerfold edition, but I can wait for issue #60.
We can do one in issue 51 of Ted Chang. . .
Er, can I take back requests? :?: :lol:
Since it's my birthday today, I'll use my wish for that when blowing any candles out. Thank God it's my birthday, you know? That was a close 'un. :lol:
127th Angry Angels
Mongoose
It was an ok issue. I was more down on the BF:Evo report. I thought the lack of terrain made it alot less intersting. I know it was a break from the urban board but from the field map it was like killing field and building. I'd like to see more of the scenerio's battle rep'ed or a battle we haven't played/seen.
P.S Happy Birthday Buships! You get any wargaming goodies?
P.S Happy Birthday Buships! You get any wargaming goodies?
lastbesthope
Mongoose
msprange said:BuShips said:[
I was looking for a special centerfold edition, but I can wait for issue #60.
We can do one in issue 51 of Ted Chang. . .
I seriously doubt Ted would go for that.
But if anyone does want to see a Mongoose product with a centrefold try and get your hands on SLayer's Guide to Amazons.
LBH
