Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
7 Posts

EuroFront II» Forums » General

Subject: How does this game play combined with East and west front? rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Jason Kirchin
Canada
flag msg tools
What is the play time like and how good is the gameplay? also since Japan isnt covered could you add pacific victory in as well ?

Just wondering how the full game compares to the axis and allies global and europe/asia engulfed games.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Hoyt

Butte
Montana
msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Azrael1983 wrote:
What is the play time like and how good is the gameplay? also since Japan isnt covered could you add pacific victory in as well ?

Just wondering how the full game compares to the axis and allies global and europe/asia engulfed games.


You'll want to read the reviews and Session Reports to get a feel for how good is it (Outstanding!) and how long (Long!).

The system is not compatible with Pacific Vctory.

EuroFront is far richer and interesting that anything with Axis and Allies in the title. That richness comes with some complexity, this is not a beginner wargame. That's not meant to discourage anyone, I don't know your background, just go into EuroFront with your eyes open. If you've not played East Front yet, start there.

The Engulfed games were, in my opinion, an attempt to streamline the Front games. They do provide a simpler and shorter game, but at the expense of the richness of narrative and decsion making of the Front games. Personnaly I'd rather play the Front games.
8 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jason Kirchin
Canada
flag msg tools
complexity doesn't bother me but long play times give me a bit of pause since I don't really have the luxury of having either the free time for myself or my opponent to hash out a 14hour game.

I have read all the reviews I just didn't get an idea of how much combining the games added to it time wise and gameplay wise. The idea of a huge WW2 game spanning all the theatres is very very interesting though.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sam Carroll
United States
Urbana
Illinois
flag msg tools
Soli Deo Gloria!
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
blockhead wrote:
The Engulfed games were, in my opinion, an attempt to streamline the Front games. They do provide a simpler and shorter game, but at the expense of the richness of narrative and decsion making of the Front games.


You are correct. Rick and Jesse were EastFront players, but were disappointed that you couldn't game the whole European theater in a reasonable length of time (say, 12 hours), so they developed their own game. This game borrowed some concepts from Eastfront and introduced some new ideas, the Special Action mechanism foremost among them. The result is a strong game, necessarily lacking the detail of Eastfront but playing the whole theater and taking less time.

I really like the way EE handles the Western front and strategic warfare; the African front tends to be boring, since at that scale, there's no room for maneuver. The Eastern front is OK, but feels less tense to me than EF. I do feel like the Eastern front in particular could benefit from a stacking limit - it's too easy to create super-stacks (20+ blocks in a space) which aren't as vulnerable to being cut off as you might think.

That said, EE is significantly shorter than EF and far shorter than EuF, and it seems to me that the basic rules are easier to grasp. You might try the 1941 start on your first play, though, to avoid most of the political rules and not have to worry about taking France.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Sam Carroll
United States
Urbana
Illinois
flag msg tools
Soli Deo Gloria!
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I should also say that I've never tried combining Europe and Asia Engulfed, though I've played both. There isn't much that ties the two together. You can send US or UK WERPs from one theater to the other, but at a 2:1 cost, is it really worth it? The Axis won't interact at all.

If I were to do it, I'd probably want four or five players to keep things moving. Again, the 1941 start would be the way to go, since otherwise the Asia board would sit quiet for a few hours.

I think Europe Engulfed is a better game than Asia, though I enjoy both. In Europe Engulfed, it feels like the Germans have a legitimate though difficult shot at taking Russia - or at least enough of a shot to make the Soviet player worry. Contrariwise, the Japanese feel to me like they do about two turns of expansion, then dig in and slowly retreat until mid-1945. Attempting to conquer Australia or India just seems like a bad idea, and they have so little income they have to play conservatively. One strong run of US anti-aircraft fire can cripple their fleet air arm. (Yes, it happened to me; my opponent rolled around 15 AA dice and got something like 10 hits. I stuck it out for the long game, but eventually lost.)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Marty M
Ireland
Fermoy
Co Cork
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Eurofront is a brilliant game, but it requires a big investment in terms of space (a massive board which will really have to be left up between sessions), time (I played Eurofront last year on a weekly basis - we played 4 or 5 x 4-5 hour sessions and got through approximately 2 years of the war!) and effort (many new rules for diplomacy, different front environments etc etc compared with Eurofront & Westfront).

As has been suggested above, I would advise that there is no point even thinking about Eurofront until you have played, enjoyed & mastered both Eastfront & Westfront.

Having said all that, I think Eurofront is sublime - probably my ideal game - but it doesn't get to the table (for the above reasons) as often as a lot of other games.

3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Alberto Natta
Italy
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
mbmb
I have played little Axis and Allies. Frankly I had some recent attempts (1-2 years ago), but first time I played Axis & Allies was when I was like 12.

So overall I'll keep my opinions on Europe Engulfed and Eurofront - where I've extensive experience in both. (EE and EF). I've tried just once Asia Engulfed - which in my opinion is terrible.

EE is of easier access, overall, but ultimately resolves not with a streamlined front but with large provinces held by 1 block and then your superstack (or 2 if you play soviets). The game is based in maneuvering and countermaneuvering of 1 area to ensure you cannot get encircled. That until with the Special Action system the Germans do not have enough special actions to both prevent the Allied Landing AND an eastfront disaster. As German you can seize Baku in '41, and hold it til late '43 or '44 - in '45 your situation will be exactly the same.
All is around how many Special Actions you can buy. Which are dictated by turns and not other variables.

Both games have an Afrikan Campaign that is a joke where Allies steamroll with a yawn the Axis. (EE has it far easier for the UK than EF though.)

EF has major depth, where the maneuvering counts and localized breakthroughts can happen. The East Front is fluid as it was, many open spaces and plains for the most. On the other hand even in '44 the Germans can be powerful, even captured Moscow in '44.
The Germans are most interesting to play because they can choose how to assign their forces. They can rail extra troops for some turns in the Eastfront, exactly as the Allies can land even in '42 or '43 if you're not careful where you put your defences.

EE is an introduction game which new wargamers (do they exist?) or lightweight ones can get a grip of and enjoy it. You'll keep enjoying it through a trial and error way - but once you master it, it will bore you because the pattern is the same, unique and repetitive.

EF on the other hand, spanning in more turns, more localized rolls, extends over a dynamic of variables which allows you to - for how similar they could be - get into different situations, making rarely a game the mirror of the other (which instead I have found often happening in EE).
The lone real issue of EF is that the Axis can eventually run easily into fortified positions if they wish to secede ground without a Hitler barking stand fast orders. The game compensates for it with the Soviet Steamroller - which is good but being roll reliant can come late; as if the Germans play defensively, they can have more tanks (or better an equivalent in combat value) than Allies and Soviets combined. Which is probably realistic (given they've issues replacing them!). For instance most of the '43 scenarioes won't see a Kursk but a Sitzkrieg where both sides in EF looks at each other. (The Germans are too weak to attack but can counterattack well, and so are the soviets.)
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.