Recommend
6 
 Thumb up
 Hide
9 Posts

D-Day at Peleliu» Forums » General

Subject: Anyone Else Fight To The Bitter End? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Michael J
United States
Folsom
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Am I the only one that doesn't stop after reaching catastrophic losses? I note the "official" loss, but I always keep playing to see what happens. Sometimes crazy amazing things happen, a hero enters play, I get a critical barrage or lucky turn of events, and my guys make a comeback and I creep back above the catastrophic loss line and create a memorable story. And no matter what happens, I get to play deeper into the game, invade the airfield, clear the beaches, experience how the battle shifts when moving further inland, and see the battle through to its bitter end. Being told to stop playing at a magic number printed in the rules is counter to my sense of honor and duty. Under my command, soldiers do not stop until I say so.

I do the same thing in DDAOB, because I like to see how the game changes when new enemy actions come into play and I hit the high ground. I only stop plying when I feel like my chances of coming back are near zero. But I never stop due to a "number". I find the games more fun that way.

In fact, while the difference between the first half of the game and the second half is greatest in DDAOB, all three D-Day games have a significant change in how they play out once turns get longer, once depth comes into play more, once artillery and engineers become more active, and last, but not least, once new objectives become available to you. In Peleliu, the post-beach phase is a nail-biting struggle to secure the wide-open, zero-cover airfield. DDAOB adds the challenge of managing vehicle traffic under heavy fire once the roads are secure. To me, storming the beaches with all the tanks and setting up command posts and moving traffic up the draws to the high ground after fighting so hard to take out the MG nests is one of the coolest moments in board gaming ever, like in an RPG when your level 1 characters were too weak to cross the rope bridge but by the end of the game they cross it with attitude, cutting down anything that moves with ease. That's the fun of progression. It seems a shame to only see these parts of the three games once in awhile.

I know the numbers are based on historical goals and that we are supposed to see if we could have done better than the original battles. But unless a game's randomness and difficulty match history exactly, the specified catastrophic loss numbers are kind of meaningless anyway. And even if they are calibrated to give the player a win X% of the time, it's my game, so I don't feel bad with variants.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gordon J
United States
Eagan
Minnesota
flag msg tools
Print and Play Gamer
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I never win a Butterfield game, so I just basically ignore the victory conditions and just try to see how much of the island I can carve out and secure.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chris Montgomery
United States
Joliet
Illinois
flag msg tools
Dear Geek: Please insert the wittiest comment you can think of in this text pop-up. Then times it by seven.
badge
The Coat of Arms of Clan Montgomery - Scotland. Yes, that's a woman with the head of a savage in her hand, and an anchor. No clue what it means, but it's cool.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DDaOB is winnable - it's like a puzzle, and once you figure out how to crack the shell, you can get inside with a pretty reliable success rate; or, OTOH, maybe I have been playing it wrong all these years.

The others look like they are pretty much not winnable, at least statistically speaking.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael J
United States
Folsom
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I know some are more winnable than others. It's more the fact that I like to play them through no matter what to experience the whole game. How would you ever know that a certain enemy position on the other side of the island is brilliantly defended unless you get there? I hate having parts of the game that never come to light. So I just play on.

I've come close to winning Peleliu. I'm still working at some strategies...
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Martin Åkerlund
Sweden
Stockholm
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
I can't continue if I know I've lost. I prefer to start over. That said, I definately understand those who do continue.

The difficulty level differs a lot among J.B.'s games, with DDaP being the most difficult (at least of the five I've played).

RAF suffer from some game mechanic issues and is probably the easiest to win, at least if playing solo as the RAF.

Enemy Action (AS and GS) and DDaOB are well balanced and winnable.

DDaT, my least favourite J.B. game, suffer from too much randomness but has at least become (barely) winnable after the rules changes.

That leaves DDaP which still seems to be impossible to win. Maybe if all the stars aligned and you found the perfect strategy it could be done.

I look forward to hearing how Michael's strategies work out, and of course if anyone else ever gets close to winning I'd love to hear how they did it.

3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Geromino Pares
msg tools
mbmbmb
I moved over to Enemy Action... I don't feel like im getting whooped every turn
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dane P
United States
South Denver
Colorado
flag msg tools
I stopped playing DDaP pretty quickly because it's so hopeless. I gave it a pretty awful review here, and I'm a guy who owns all of Butterfield's solitaire games.

I can win DDaTarawa, Omaha Beach, and Enemy Action: Ardennes.

When I get a mid-point win in Tarawa, I continue playing, and I've never won a game of Tarawa even having achieved "first day victory". I kind of dig that about that game. Plus in Tarawa, there is no appreciable Catastrophic Loss level relative to Omaha and Peleliu
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Warren Smith
United States
West Nyack
New York
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Hmm ... I have Omaha Beach and Tarawa and was thinking about buying this one, but the thought that it's impossible to win is making me seriously reconsider it. Sure, you have the experience and all, but it'd be nice to think that if I played well and maybe even got a little lucky, that beating the game is possible. If it's just simply not possible, then it kind of feels like a waste of time (having not played the game) to put the time and effort into learning it. Surely the designer didn't intentionally design a game so that it couldn't be won? So, should there be errata or a change in VC or something like that to at least make it a possibility, even if remote?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Martin Åkerlund
Sweden
Stockholm
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
There has already been proposed adjustments to the Victory Conditions by J.B. (Link here: DDaP Proposed Adjustments)
Having used all the proposed changes, my feeling is winning is now impossible - which is an improvement from before when it was truly impossible...
That said, I believe quite a few still like this game over Tarawa. It's less random, you'll have more and better forces to command and the game will most likely feel winnable for the first 20 turns or so!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
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.