Recommend
5 
 Thumb up
 Hide
28 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Nations at War: Desert Heat» Forums » General

Subject: There Doesn't Seem to be Much Buzz rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Nigel Heather
United Kingdom
Horsham
West Sussex
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Perhaps it is too early but even though the game has now started shipping there doesn't seem to be much buzz.

There are very few posts, where are the gallery images, the unboxing videos.

Has it reached US Stores yet? No sign in the UK stores yet but that is to be expected.

Cheers,

Nigel
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Robert Ellis
United Kingdom
Newcastle upon Tyne
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Still waiting for my copy to arrive
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Keith Talbot
United States
New Hampshire
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
bob48 wrote:
Still waiting for my copy to arrive


Me too, tomorrow it should be here.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nigel Heather
United Kingdom
Horsham
West Sussex
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Wow, I would have thought all those that pre-ordered would have had their copies by now (especially those living in the US).

Cheers,

Nigel
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Richard Boyes
United States
Bothell
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I had miscut counters that were quickly replaced by LNL. That slowed my enthusiasm a bit.

I've only played the first scenario, solo at that. Man those Valentines are slow! Italians won. It might be worth some replay to come up with a British strategy.

I've recently received a number of pre-order games nearly simultaneously, so Desert Heat will be sharing the spotlight on my game table.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Keith Talbot
United States
New Hampshire
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
nheather wrote:
Wow, I would have thought all those that pre-ordered would have had their copies by now (especially those living in the US).

Cheers,

Nigel


I actually order after the fact (not pre-order) The buzz for it had me want to try it out.

Keith T
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
William Crispin
United States
Wilmington
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
My opponent returned to college right before the game arrived so I have not played yet. Overall the production values are solid and consistent with the previous game in the series (even though they can't be connected). I think it is a good system with the large benefit of being low to moderate complexity so you can basically play with one person knowing the rules and teaching the other right before the game. I had no mis-cut counter like some people.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Sullivan
United States
Lynnwood
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I just got my copy yesterday from a US distributor and poured through the contents, rules, and scenarios. Overall, I'm eager to get some game-play with it. I love the LnL system for NaW and WaW.

First impressions:

I find some of the counters hard to read. The linen texture on the counters distorts things a bit. However, I find this true for a lot of the LnL counters for these systems. The wee numbers often have low contrast with their backgrounds. Add a textured surface and things gets harder to read.

I think the scenarios look interesting. However, I'm struck by the anachronisms. For example, in the first scenario (Mechili I) the British have Crusaders and Valentines. Neither tank was available in the theater in Jan 1941. Instead of Crusaders, they should be A-9s, A-10s, and/or A-13s. Instead of Valentines, they should be Matilda IIs. It's not unforgivable. I understand that within the system, the difference between the Crusader and the older cruiser tanks is minimal or non-existant. Ditto with the I-tanks like the Valentine and Matilda. So, using formations with Crusaders representing various cruiser tanks and Valentine representing I-tanks makes sense rather than have a A-9, A-10, A-13, and Crusader I/II counters whose factors are identical and identical Matilda II/Valentine I, II, III counters. Still, I miss the flavor and it feels odd playing Valentines at Mechili or Beda Fomm.

The same can't be said of the Pz IVGs that appear in several scenarios set in 1941 and '42. The main tank of the Afrika Korps was the Pz IIIF/G until after El Alamein--but there are no counters for them in the game. The F/G model had thinner armor and mounted a short-barrel 50mm gun. The Pz IIIJ with a long 50mm gun, which is included in the game, only appeared in limited numbers in mid-42 in time for the Gazala battles. The Pz IVD was the tank used in the "heavy" companies. It mounted a short-barrel 75mm howitzer and was intended for use against soft targets. As such, its AT capability was minimal. The first version of the long-barrel 75 on a Pz IV was the F2 that was available in limited numbers in time for El Alamaein. The Pz IVG was available only in 1943 and used in Tunisia. It kind of skews the history to have Germans with Pz IVGs in early '41. It was a much better tank than anything they actually had available at that time.

Even though I like the variety of scenarios, I feel that LnL would have done better to have stuck with '41-'42 scenarios (Sonnenblume to First Alamein) for this release and then publish extensions for 1940 (Operation Compass) and 1942-1943 scenarios (2nd Alamein to Tunisia). By doing this we would get Matildas, A-9s, Pz IIIGs, etc. in the scenarios where they should be OR added another sheet to expand the counter mix.

Maybe I'm being a little pedantic about this, but I think that in a game representing historical events, we should get the history right.

Otherwise, I'm happy with the game and, as I've mentioned, I'm looking forward to playing it.
14 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Sullivan
United States
Lynnwood
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Looking at the Crusader counter more closely, it appears that it's a Crusader III with the 6-pounder gun. This version didn't appear until later '42, so it's even more out of place in '40 and early '41 scenarios.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nigel Heather
United Kingdom
Horsham
West Sussex
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Tushratta wrote:
I just got my copy yesterday from a US distributor and poured through the contents, rules, and scenarios. Overall, I'm eager to get some game-play with it. I love the LnL system for NaW and WaW.

First impressions:

I find some of the counters hard to read. The linen texture on the counters distorts things a bit. However, I find this true for a lot of the LnL counters for these systems. The wee numbers often have low contrast with their backgrounds. Add a textured surface and things gets harder to read.

I think the scenarios look interesting. However, I'm struck by the anachronisms. For example, in the first scenario (Mechili I) the British have Crusaders and Valentines. Neither tank was available in the theater in Jan 1941. Instead of Crusaders, they should be A-9s, A-10s, and/or A-13s. Instead of Valentines, they should be Matilda IIs. It's not unforgivable. I understand that within the system, the difference between the Crusader and the older cruiser tanks is minimal or non-existant. Ditto with the I-tanks like the Valentine and Matilda. So, using formations with Crusaders representing various cruiser tanks and Valentine representing I-tanks makes sense rather than have a A-9, A-10, A-13, and Crusader I/II counters whose factors are identical and identical Matilda II/Valentine I, II, III counters. Still, I miss the flavor and it feels odd playing Valentines at Mechili or Beda Fomm.

The same can't be said of the Pz IVGs that appear in several scenarios set in 1941 and '42. The main tank of the Afrika Korps was the Pz IIIF/G until after El Alamein--but there are no counters for them in the game. The F/G model had thinner armor and mounted a short-barrel 50mm gun. The Pz IIIJ with a long 50mm gun, which is included in the game, only appeared in limited numbers in mid-42 in time for the Gazala battles. The Pz IVD was the tank used in the "heavy" companies. It mounted a short-barrel 75mm howitzer and was intended for use against soft targets. As such, its AT capability was minimal. The first version of the long-barrel 75 on a Pz IV was the F2 that was available in limited numbers in time for El Alamaein. The Pz IVG was available only in 1943 and used in Tunisia. It kind of skews the history to have Germans with Pz IVGs in early '41. It was a much better tank than anything they actually had available at that time.

Even though I like the variety of scenarios, I feel that LnL would have done better to have stuck with '41-'42 scenarios (Sonnenblume to First Alamein) for this release and then publish extensions for 1940 (Operation Compass) and 1942-1943 scenarios (2nd Alamein to Tunisia). By doing this we would get Matildas, A-9s, Pz IIIGs, etc. in the scenarios where they should be OR added another sheet to expand the counter mix.

Maybe I'm being a little pedantic about this, but I think that in a game representing historical events, we should get the history right.

Otherwise, I'm happy with the game and, as I've mentioned, I'm looking forward to playing it.


Thanks so much for your comments. I know that many will say that it's the gameplay that is most important and I understand that. But the sort of details you mention is the sort of thing that appeals to me - so unfortunately I would find the historical inaccuracies irksome too.

I agree 100% that it would have been best to concentrate on the early war and cover the later war as an expansion.

Cheers,

Nigel
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jay Townsend
United States
Longmont
Colorado
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
I agree with you 100% David Sullivan, as I noticed this on WSR as well. I think because of the counter limitations of 300 counters, LnL uses common tanks to fit all situations, even if it is not totally historical.

I would love to have seen A-9s, A-10s, A-13's, Matilidas, PzIIIG's and so on.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nigel Heather
United Kingdom
Horsham
West Sussex
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Are there are photos of the counter sheets anywhere yet?

Would love to know what units are present?

Do you think it is because the game covers too much of the theatre so there are too many historical units to include.

Including US forces for the later stages of the war obviously takes up some of the counters limiting the numbers available for other nation. Of course it is very understandable that LnL wanted to include US units to appeal to their biggest customer.

So the limited range of units is very understandable from a commercial point of view - it would have been nice to see the campaign split in two with an expansion covering the later stages but I also appreciate that LnL wanted to appeal to as many customers as possible.

Cheers,

Nigel
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Sullivan
United States
Lynnwood
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
nheather wrote:
Are there are photos of the counter sheets anywhere yet?


I can scan the counter sheets and upload to BGG.


nheather wrote:
Do you think it is because the game covers too much of the theatre so there are too many historical units to include.


If the games are limited to 300 counters, they covered too much. The war in North Africa from 1940 to '43 involved a lot of equipment changes and they couldn't cover them all. So there are ersatz "cruisers" at Beda Fomm in the form of Crusader IIIs. The actual scenario play is likely to be good and balanced with the opposing forces--but there just weren't Crusader IIIs at Beda Fomm.

I have the impression that LnL started out with a Tunisia '43 game in mind and then extended it earlier to '42, '41, and '40 by adding scenarios and some earlier unit types; for example, Mk VI light tanks make the cut as do the wee Italian L3s. The M13/40 was basically found in Italian units from start to finish of the campaign. They were technically superseded by the M14/41 (I think the M15/42 was too late for North Africa), but the differences between the tanks were minimal.

There are no "Honeys", which is too bad given the iconic nature of the tank, especially in Robert Crisp's memoir Brazen Chariots.

nheather wrote:
Including US forces for the later stages of the war obviously takes up some of the counters limiting the numbers available for other nation. Of course it is very understandable that LnL wanted to include US units to appeal to their biggest customer.


As an American, I see the desert war as a very British show to which the US forces were green, johnny-come-latelys. The most memorable events of the campaign occurred with O'Connor's brilliant campaign in 1940-41, the see-saw fighting of Operation Crusader, the slug-fest of the Gazala battles, etc.

If they wanted to provide an American focus, they should have restricted the game scenarios to Operation Torch/Tunisia. They could have put American (and British!) Shermans among other tanks of late '42 to '43 into the counter mix at the expense of the Mk VI, L3, Pz II, etc.

nheather wrote:
So the limited range of units is very understandable from a commercial point of view - it would have been nice to see the campaign split in two with an expansion covering the later stages but I also appreciate that LnL wanted to appeal to as many customers as possible.


Agreed about the need to split into multiple modules--at least two. I think an initial release that addressed the Tunisia fighting in depth would have been welcome. Alternately--and preferably--an initial release for the core battles from Rommel's entry to Alamein would have been better.
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Key
United States
Knoxville
Tennessee
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
As an American, I see the desert war as a very British show to which the US forces were green, johnny-come-latelys. The most memorable events of the campaign occurred with O'Connor's brilliant campaign in 1940-41, the see-saw fighting of Operation Crusader, the slug-fest of the Gazala battles, etc.

If they wanted to provide an American focus, they should have restricted the game scenarios to Operation Torch/Tunisia. They could have put American (and British!) Shermans among other tanks of late '42 to '43 into the counter mix at the expense of the Mk VI, L3, Pz II, etc.


100% agreed. The focus should have been on earlier Operations under such Generals as Wavell, Auchinleck & Montgomery. That being said. The game is good, there are lots of British scenarios that look interesting, glad I got it. The lack of Honeys and earlier Cruiser tanks is baffling though.

Easily remedied though, one expansion sheet of counters should do it!


3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David Sullivan
United States
Lynnwood
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Scott Pasha wrote:
Easily remedied though, one expansion sheet of counters should do it!


A expansion counter sheet would be great, but you'd need to retrofit the new counters to the existing scenarios to get the right vehicles at the right places.

I'm going to try to get a play in this weekend. I'm looking forward to it--but I still need to trim my counters...
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dean Petters
United States
Ohio
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I just submitted sheet scans, so they should be up soon.

I did have a pretty bad miscut on one sheet, but LnL had it in my hands within 3 days of my submitting a ticket. I submitted the replacement sheet, not the miscut one, obviously.

EDIT: Just approved the counter sheets, so enjoy!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Scott Key
United States
Knoxville
Tennessee
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Played scenario 1 today. Good fun despite the anachronisms.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nigel Heather
United Kingdom
Horsham
West Sussex
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
Thanks for the counter photos, really helpful.

Looking at them, I'd say it looks like it is intended to go as far as Operation Torch in late 1942.

I agree it would have been nice to have some more representative armour for the early wars, but with a limited counter numbers I can understand what they did and it is workable.

The biggest omissions for me are Shermans which would have been making an appearance for El Alamein and Torch and the Commonwealth M3s (Honey).

The German armour is generally too good for anything other the later period - could do with some early Panzer IIIs and short barrelled Panzer IVs.

Cheers,

Nigel
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dario Domenici
Italy
Roma
RM
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I also agree with Tushratta.

The counter mix seems to be tailored for late 1942 scenario, with British MK VI and Italian tankettes (disappeared from the first line by mid 1941) thrown in as an aftertough.

A few less MKVIs and L3s would have allowed a few more types: early, short barreled PZ III and Pz IV, A9s and/or A10s, Matildas...

And yes, Shermans are missing! British got them first and used them at El Alamein and after, and US Army had a mixed force of M3s and M4s in Tunisia.

Mk.VIs look too powerful against soft targets, and however they operated together with early cruiser or infantry tanks (A9, A10). They disappeared from the first line in mid 1941 and were replaced by
M3 Stuarts. Where are British Stuarts?

And there is another point: the lack of HE shells for British AT guns (2 pounders and 6 pounders) and tanks!

Curiously, British tanks, even Infantry tanks like Matilda and Valentine were expected to use their guns to fight other tanks, and had a single coaxial MG for their infantry suppression role. Their 40mm and 57mm guns had AP ammo only (almost useless against infantry and dug-in guns: HE shells begun -for 6 pounders only!- to be provided later and in limited quantity). That was the British armor limit for most of the Desert War: that's why US M3 Grants were so well received by British tankers, even if their 75mm gun wasn't turret mounted: it allowed them to shell axis AT guns without having to get close! That's why Rommel valued so poorly the otherwise formidable Matildas tanks, and considered Italian 47mm a better gun (it had HE shells and larger bore than British 2 pounders, even if it was more or less equivalent in AT capability).
British tanks (Valentine, Crusader, A9, A10, Matildas) should have their soft target attack values much reduced and calculated on MG factors only(actually no much better than L3 tankettes'!). The first tanks mounting 6 pounders (Crusader III) appeared at el Alamein so all scenarios including British 8th Hussars set before that battle fail in representing correctly British armor capabilities.

Another British tank formations early-war feature missing in DH is the use of CS tanks: these were standard tanks (Matildas, A9s, A10s, Crusaders) mounting a short howitzer in lieu of the standard 2 pounder gun, and loaded with abundant smoke shells and a few HE rounds: very few were provided to each squadron: a single, no reduced-side unit could be provided as an attached element, with rules allowing it to place a smoke chit to screen its attacking troops according to what was their intended role.

Some says the differences between the missing German and British earlier
models and the 1942-'43 ones provided in DH leave more or less the same balance in game terms: I don't agree: typical tank duel ranges should be shorter, but Marder and 88s would be even more powerful, being able to ruin enemy tank platoons well before these start exchanging fire with their foes: also, Italian M13s wouldn't be so hopeless as against Grants and late Crusaders.

So, the formations and types provided don't do a great work in simulating the real British and Axis units that fought half of the scenarios provided, set in 1941-1942 (and I don't feel much inclined to play them).

Now, try to figure having a better simulated force of 1941 British tanks under your command: all of them with poor long range ST attack values, some of them fast (cruiser tanks) but thinly armed, others slow but well protected (Valentines). Plus a single CS tank platoon (no reduced side), its smoking capability so precious for the protection of your advancing formations...

...even Italian M13s can fight it out with cruiser tanks, but at Beda Fomm they don't have radios, so they have a hard time coordinating their movements...

...the newly arrived Afrika Korps tankers see 50mm (PZ IIIs) and 75mm (Pz IVDs) hits bouncing off sluggish but impervious infantry tanks, but after they succeed in emplacing a Flak gun on their way, the crews abandon their Matildas when they see themseves bracketed by the feared 88...

Isn't this more interesting and challenging?

Nothing too difficult to reproduce at Nations at War level (I'm considering creating homemade counters and rule variants myself), but these details give players that taste of realism, those differences in national capabilities that make a real satisfying simulation game.

Lock'n Load could have done much better.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nigel Heather
United Kingdom
Horsham
West Sussex
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
@moresby - spot on.

The unit list is a bit confused - for late 1942 battles, shermans are missing and for early battles quite a lot is missing.

Of course the main source of HE for the Commonwealth was the 25 pdr. I assume that is modelled as Off-Board Artillery but in reality they used to operate further forward than that.

Cheers,

Nigel
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dario Domenici
Italy
Roma
RM
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I have received my copy yesterday (my counter sheets aren't misprinted), and am still going through unis and combat values; here are some more comments about Desert Heat units:

British tanks: judging from HT values, Valentines are 2pdr armed, while in-game Crusaders have 6pdrs (the first 57mm gun Crusaders appeared only at El Alamein).:
Italians: 1st Light Armored should be used in early war scenarios only, and should be better balanced: even if in 1940, 'tin cans' L3s made most of Italian armored force, Graziani had received a medium tank battallion -more M-13/40s than M-11/39s, with some rule simulating their lack of radios -and coordination): at Beda Fomm one should expect a mixed force from 1st LTARM and 7th Arm: L3s platoons with a few attached M-13/40s. After that catastrophe, the few remaining L3s weren't used in first line duties very much (at least in North Africa) and Ariete division armored regiment was soon formed on a medium tank core, with added armored cars, semoventi, and L6 light tanks when available.

Ever wondered how Italians were able to stand British tank attacks in 1942? Surely not thanks to 47mm guns!
These could be useful only at very short distance, from concealed positions. M13/40, mounting the same gun, were hopelessly outclassed by Grants, Shermans and later Valentines and Crusader.
Italian artillery, always well crewed, placed its guns well forward: short 65 and 75mm guns with special AT ammos, and especially the few available AA guns (75mms and 90mm and German FLAK 88s). Italians were conscious their M13s were almost useless as first line tanks, so they kept them behind, and in counterattacks they were reinforced with Semoventi (which were considered much better at fighting Allied tanks). When, after a long struggle, British finally pierced Axis defences (minefield, emplaced infantry, AT and AA guns) at El Alamein, the M13/40 Ariete regiment was thrown against advancing Grants and Shermans in a desperate attempt to cover the retreat and reorganization of the retiring infantry formations: they were annihilated in few hours. This is to stress the importance AA guns and 75mm semoventi had in the Italian forces in North Africa.

Now, I believe the Italian 3RO 90mm unit has been thrown in just to give Italians an AA unit: actually Regio Esercito lacked a mobile high-rate of fire AA vehicle (like US M16 or German mounted Flakvierling) and leaving Italian units without a proper AA vehicle would be historically more accurate.
Italian 90mm AA gun was a fine artillery piece though, and Italians used it just as Germans did with their feared 88mm Flak 36; accordingly, 3RO 90mm should have really good tank killing values. These were AA guns used to fire at high or medium flying enemy planes, not against strafing fighter-bombers: you needed fast-firing light AA guns or MGs for this: so I'd dispense with AA capability for 3Ro 90mm guns (why hasn't it been given to German 88mm guns then?).

Also, Italian Semoventi M40 had special anti-tank ammo (HESH) and should be given better HT attack values.

If and when Italians get air support from Regia Aeronautica (historically a rare happening indeed) it wouldn't surely be Macchi 202s but some second-class fighter armed with underwing bombs (Fiat CR42s, G-50s...): no real impact on game flow here, just a wrong depiction.

...And what is a Crusader AA doing in the desert??? yuk
8 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Norman Smith
United Kingdom
flag msg tools
designer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for the comments and insight to date - although it is somewhat disappointing!

Is the feeling that 'this' Order of Battle was introduced to give exciting and balanced scenarios at the expense of historical accuracy?

I am quite well up on my mid-war and late-war stuff, but ignorance would have meant that I would not have noticed which models should and should not have been present in the desert for early war.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jay Townsend
United States
Longmont
Colorado
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
I think we will see many more counter types to fill in the void with LOF issues and supplements from LnL. With only 300 counters they cut down the unit types because this game had five nationalities: American, British, French, German and Italian. With WSR there was only three nations, so easier to manage and with Stalin's Triumph there will only be two nations, so the counters types/AFVs should be a better or easier match.

With that said, I am really enjoying the game play from Desert Heat. The scenarios have really been fun to play.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Keith Talbot
United States
New Hampshire
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Jay Townsend wrote:
I think we will see many more counter types to fill in the void with LOF issues and supplements from LnL. With only 300 counters they cut down the unit types because this game had five nationalities: American, British, French, German and Italian. With WSR there was only three nations, so easier to manage and with Stalin's Triumph there will only be two nations, so the counters types/AFVs should be a better or easier match.

With that said, I am really enjoying the game play from Desert Heat. The scenarios have really been fun to play.


+1
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
nick P
United Kingdom
london
flag msg tools
I'm a great admirer of LnL and enjoy WaW and NaW. I'm also not such a pedent that the odd anachronism would effect me too much. However, some of the choices that have been described here strike me as disastrous. I would imagine that were I to buy this game I would feel compelled to design my own scenarios. Early DAK withough Panzer IIIGs and Hs is like fighting the Battle of Britain without BF109s and Spitfires. Sounds ridiculous.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.