Comments for Opportunityfire.com http://opportunityfire.com History, Gaming and More... Thu, 11 Mar 2010 06:17:24 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.6.5 Comment on Playing with yourself? by dropded http://opportunityfire.com/index.php/2009/09/30/playing-with-yourself/#comment-49 dropded Thu, 01 Oct 2009 16:01:28 +0000 http://opportunityfire.com/?p=416#comment-49 Oh, the VPG title was <i>Red Dawn</i>, the one on the Russian Civil War. Oh, the VPG title was Red Dawn, the one on the Russian Civil War.

]]> Comment on Playing with yourself? by dropded http://opportunityfire.com/index.php/2009/09/30/playing-with-yourself/#comment-48 dropded Thu, 01 Oct 2009 15:58:20 +0000 http://opportunityfire.com/?p=416#comment-48 There is certainly a bit of a renaissance of solo games at the moment. If I had any gumption I would write a big blog post in my own blog about this. Matt Kirschenbaum was drawing one kind of distinction between solo games that are played mostly on 'tracks' (Discord) and those that are played on hex maps (Olympic). I would tend to group them by period. All of the below is from memory, so no apologies for omissions. The old SPI games (Wolfpack, Olympic, Fall of Rome) The Victory Games/West End Games (Mosby's Raiders, RAF, Tokyo Express, Carrier, Ambush and descendants) The interregnum (What notable solo games came out between the end of VG and a few years ago? Miranda put some in S&T, and I'm sure there have been others, but any standouts that people would recogonize by name? Catherine the Great is one that appeared in S&T.) The modern glut...(RAF II, Fields of Fire, D-Day at Omaha Beach, Discord, the Victory Point Games ones, etc.) The one I tried from VPG was interesting until after the second play. Once you know the cards it's like...playing a game of solitaire rather than playing a solo wargame, if you know what I mean. Anyway, why am I wasting good blog content in your comments section? ;-) There is certainly a bit of a renaissance of solo games at the moment. If I had any gumption I would write a big blog post in my own blog about this. Matt Kirschenbaum was drawing one kind of distinction between solo games that are played mostly on ‘tracks’ (Discord) and those that are played on hex maps (Olympic).

I would tend to group them by period. All of the below is from memory, so no apologies for omissions.

The old SPI games (Wolfpack, Olympic, Fall of Rome)

The Victory Games/West End Games (Mosby’s Raiders, RAF, Tokyo Express, Carrier, Ambush and descendants)

The interregnum (What notable solo games came out between the end of VG and a few years ago? Miranda put some in S&T, and I’m sure there have been others, but any standouts that people would recogonize by name? Catherine the Great is one that appeared in S&T.)

The modern glut…(RAF II, Fields of Fire, D-Day at Omaha Beach, Discord, the Victory Point Games ones, etc.)

The one I tried from VPG was interesting until after the second play. Once you know the cards it’s like…playing a game of solitaire rather than playing a solo wargame, if you know what I mean.

Anyway, why am I wasting good blog content in your comments section? ;-)

]]> Comment on History in a box by Matt Foster http://opportunityfire.com/index.php/2008/12/17/history-in-a-box/#comment-45 Matt Foster Wed, 02 Sep 2009 03:53:40 +0000 http://opportunityfire.com/?p=157#comment-45 @Jonathan During her US Navy years, USS Staten Island's hull number was AGB-5. The WAGB hull number was put in place when she entered Coast Guard service. There's a photo of Staten Island in Arctic ice somewhere up-thread that shows the numbering AGB-5 - and I've got a bunch more photos of same. The 1953 cruise book is the only one I have. My Dad was out of the Navy by the 1955 Arctic cruise. @Jonathan

During her US Navy years, USS Staten Island’s hull number was AGB-5. The WAGB hull number was put in place when she entered Coast Guard service. There’s a photo of Staten Island in Arctic ice somewhere up-thread that shows the numbering AGB-5 - and I’ve got a bunch more photos of same.

The 1953 cruise book is the only one I have. My Dad was out of the Navy by the 1955 Arctic cruise.

]]> Comment on History in a box by planet4589 http://opportunityfire.com/index.php/2008/12/17/history-in-a-box/#comment-44 planet4589 Wed, 02 Sep 2009 03:15:35 +0000 http://opportunityfire.com/?p=157#comment-44 There's a science paper published on the results of this, Ellis et al 1954, Phys Rev 95,147, which explains that some of the flights that year were launched from Staten Island and some from Eastwind. I have Staten Island as "AGB-5" in my list at http://host.planet4589.org/space/lvdb/launch/Deacon and http://host.planet4589.org/space/lvdb/launch/Loki. Are you saying I should really be calling it WAGB-278? I have Staten Island launches in 1953 and 1955. But some sources suggest there were also launches from it in 1957. I would be very interested to see any references to this, and to any maps of the cruises for any of these expeditions. Thanks, Jonathan McDowell; planet4589 at gmail There’s a science paper published on the results of this, Ellis et al 1954, Phys Rev 95,147, which explains that some of the flights that year were launched from Staten Island and some from Eastwind.

I have Staten Island as “AGB-5″ in my list at http://host.planet4589.org/space/lvdb/launch/Deacon and http://host.planet4589.org/space/lvdb/launch/Loki. Are you saying I should really be calling it WAGB-278?

I have Staten Island launches in 1953 and 1955. But some sources suggest there were also launches from it in 1957. I would be very interested to see any references to this, and to any maps of the cruises for any of these expeditions.

Thanks, Jonathan McDowell; planet4589 at gmail

]]> Comment on Don’t fear the cards by dropded http://opportunityfire.com/index.php/2009/08/21/dont-fear-the-cards/#comment-43 dropded Thu, 27 Aug 2009 14:01:07 +0000 http://opportunityfire.com/?p=402#comment-43 >Does that mean your machinegun team is just watching the advance while they sit behind their silent gun, boisterously arguing over who just farted? I think this is just one of the 'problems' with tactical war gaming. When you move a battalion/regiment/division/corp into a hex and roll some dice to attack everyone accepts the abstraction. By their nature tactical wargames likewise contain a very high amount of abstraction, but because of their 'personal' aspect ("I wouldn't sit on my nuts and let that guy march by me!") we feel qualified to pick at the abstractions whether we know anything about being on a battlefield or not. Or at least I do. >Does that mean your machinegun team is just watching the advance while they sit behind their silent gun, boisterously arguing over who just farted?

I think this is just one of the ‘problems’ with tactical war gaming. When you move a battalion/regiment/division/corp into a hex and roll some dice to attack everyone accepts the abstraction. By their nature tactical wargames likewise contain a very high amount of abstraction, but because of their ‘personal’ aspect (”I wouldn’t sit on my nuts and let that guy march by me!”) we feel qualified to pick at the abstractions whether we know anything about being on a battlefield or not.

Or at least I do.

]]>