Saturday, March 28, 2020

Download FOR HONOR Game For PC

Download FOR HONOR Game For PC

| For Honor – New Content of the Week (November 30) | Steam/Backup |

 Platform:  PC
 Game Size : 42.7 GB
 Type: Online/Network
 File Type: RAR
 Game Language: English
 Publisher: Ubisoft
Minimum System Requirement:
OS: Windows 7, Windows 8.1, Windows 10 64-bit
Processor: Intel Core i3-550 | AMD Phenom II X4 955✔
Memory: 4 GB RAM✔
Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GTX660/GTX750ti/GTX950/GTX1050 with 2 GB VRAM✔
Network: Broadband Internet connection✔
Storage: 50 GB available space✔
Sound Card: DirectX-Compatible using the latest drivers


DOWNLOAD
SIZE: 42.7 GB:.

Download Onimusha Warlords Free For PC

Download  Onimusha Warlords Free For PC

| Onimusha: Warlords [Eng/Jap voice + Multi8 + Bonus] – CorePack |


SYSTEM REQUIREMENTS:
OS: Windows 7 64 bit
Processor: Intel® Core™ i3 Dual Core Series or AMD equivalent or better
Memory: 4 GB RAM
Graphics: NVIDIA GeForce GTX 760 or AMD Radeon R7 260x
DirectX: Version 10
Storage: 12 GB available space
Sound Card: DirectSound _DirectX® 10.0c or better





DOWNLOAD LINKS:
PASSWORD :
www.dlfox.com

ORDER YOUR LOGO
https://www.fiverr.com/s2/b543cf7fc5

 

UCLan Games Design Alumni, Saija Sipila Interviewed On Linkedin.

Checkout this interview on Linkedin with our Alumni, Saija Sipilä.
We're very proud of her and her achievements in the games design industry!



























Saija Sipila is a Senior Artist at Rebellion Games in Oxford, having worked on Sniper Elite 4, Sniper Elite 3, Hunt the Grey Wolf (DLC), Save Churchill Part 3: Confrontation (DLC) and Zombie Army Trilogy.

Saija is a 3D Environment artist.
See examples of her beautiful work at:

http://www.saijamaririna.com/




















Title

Total Duration

Monday, March 23, 2020

Alter Ego Progress

Alter Ego has been around forever, and it's about time I finished it up! In order to light a fire under myself to get it done, I actually hired an artist and graphic designer to start working on it...

So last week I brought Alter Ego out again with my playtest group. Looks like it's been about 2 years since it hit the table! I think the overall structure of the game is solid, but there are still a lot of details I think need work. Here's some stuff that's happened just in the last 2 playtest sessions:

Deck Size

I have always used a starting deck size of 12 cards -- 4 each of Job, Family, and Support cards. Actually, since I added "character" cards (each with a unique fight icon and a specific starting deck configuration), the decks started with 13 cards. The game takes about 5 rounds to play... I could lengthen it, but I think it would drag a bit. However, this means that you only add 5 cards to your deck, which isn't very many for a deck learning mechanism...

I don't have much in the way of deck thinning in this game. There are a couple of equipment cards that do it, but mostly I had decided that instead of thinning your deck, players could focus on Family, thereby drawing a ton of cards instead. This is equivalent in some way to deck thinning, and it means that if you want a "thinner" deck, then you have to focus on Family. If you focus on other things and neglect Family, then you will suffer from deck bloat.

I think I chose 4 of each card (plus or minus) so that you could reasonably have 3 of them at a time. If you play 1 Family card, you avoid a penalty and draw +2 cards next turn. If you play 2, then you draw +4 cards. But if you commit 3 of your 5 cards to Family in one turn, then you draw + cards AND you get a Teamwork token, which is valuable.

Similarly, if you play 1 Community card, you avoid a penalty and draw 1 extra henchman to choose from. 2 is a little stronger (draw +2 henchmen to choose from). 3 Community cards means you draw + 3 henchmen to choose from AND you get to call the police on one of the henchmen in play.

Job cards are a little different in that you gain $ tokens, which you don't have to discard. Playing 3 at once doesn't do anything too special, but most of the equipment costs about 3 to obtain.

Anyway, because of all that, I wanted to make sure players had enough cards to invoke those more powerful plays if they wanted to. However, I might try reducing the starting decks to 3 of each (10 cards if you include the character). Then if the game lasts 5 rounds, then at least a larger portion of your deck will be changed. Also, with the changes below, it's possible I could add a few rounds to the game, further impacting the amount your deck changes over the course of the game.

Villain Format

Since the games inception, the Arch Villains would sit there, out of play, until one (or more) of them were triggered to enter play. Part of the point of the game was to make sure the "right" one came into play, the one you'd have an easier time beating based on the cards you'd taken into your deck throughout the game.

Last week I tried a slightly different format, which I think has a lot of good things going for it. Instead of being "out of play," the three Arch Villains could be in play the whole time. When henchmen come into play, they are placed in front of their affiliated villain, in a way protecting them. During the game, you can't attack an Arch Villain if there are henchmen in front of them. Theoretically, this could lead to more interesting decisions about which henchmen to defeat (you want to save certain colored civilians so you don't lose, you might want particular trophies, you might want to defeat what you can afford to defeat, and you might want to "dig" toward one of the Villains in particular). This way you could also have to face decisions mid-game such as "do we defeat this henchman over here, or do we hit that villain while we have the chance, since he has no henchmen in front of him?"

This format seemed to work, though it'll require some tweaks and changes to fully implement. I think it feels more like a real game this way. It might mean cutting the few henchmen that are affiliated with multiple different villains, and I'll have to decide if unaffiliated henchmen are in front of no villain, or all villains.

Turn Structure

It had come up before, more than once, that the turn structure was not intuitive. I have considered changing it, maybe even tried changing it once, but never liked the results. After playing a couple games with my regular testers, I finally conceded that the turn sequence needed to be different. What I had was this...
1. Income phase: collect $ based on what you have in play
2. Support phase: draw cards based on what you have in play (now you have cards in play, a hand of cards, a draw pile, and a discard pile)
3. Patrol phase: draw henchmen based on what you have in play
4. Fight phase: spend icons in play to defeat henchmen. Once in a while you maybe have a card you can play from your hand, but mostly you have a hand at this point to help decide what to do this turn based on what you could maybe do next turn.
5. Recoup phase: discard everything in play, play new cards from hand to use next turn, then discard hand.

The long and short of this was that players were having several problems:
* Confusion between the hand, draw pile, discard pile, and display
* Planning the turn, then having to re-plan the turn once new henchmen were revealed (in the patrol phase, right before fighting)
* Confusion between cards in play that they could use this turn, and cards in hand that they can't use until next turn

There had been suggestions of putting the Support phase right before Recoup, so you draw cards right before using them. I think I even tried this once, but it didn't really solve the problems, and I didn't like it.

I have finally decided to re-organize the turn to actually address those problems. The new sequence is:
1. Support phase: draw cards and play some of them into your display
2. Income phase: collect everything you collect ($, teamwork tokens, penalty tokens)
3. Fight phase: use icons in play to defeat henchmen currently in play
4. Patrol phase: NOW bring new henchmen into play
5. Recoup phase: note how many cards you're supposed to draw, then discard EVERYTHING, hand and display.

So now you still technically have a hand, display, draw pile, and discard pile, but you don't access them at weird times. You draw cards ant the beginning of the turn, use them during the turn, and then discard them at the end of the turn.

Putting Patrol after Fight means you only have to plan each turn once. This is not only less confusing, but it speeds things up quite a bit, and makes a lot of sense. It also approximates other cooperative games in which players get a turn, then the AI they're fighting against gets a turn.

So we tried that a couple of times, and it definitely seemed smoother. I personally sort of missed the ability to know what you would be able to do next turn, but I also didn't have a problem with the old turn sequence. Other players weren't using the info about next turn, and were getting confused, so the obvious right thing to do seems to be reorganizing the turn like this. Also, while you don't know exactly what you'll be able to do next turn, you DO know the general contents of your deck, so you should know what's likely or possible.

On the down side, this new structure introduced a new issue. Now you plan out the turn at the beginning, and then you resolve it. As nothing changes between when you play your cards and you resolve them, there was something a little off about the very end of the game. When you could win, you would know it during the planning stage, and that felt bad somehow. You're sitting there figuring out your turn, making your plans, etc, and one of the other players just says "GG guys, we win this turn." So anti-climactic.

Sure, at SOME point in every game there will be an instant when you've realized you will win. But that should really be you're resolving the action, not when you're planning it. What really ought to happen is that you play the cards, then something happens such that you don't know for sure whether you'll win or not. In the old format, you'd plan your turn, maybe see that you can win this turn, then you had to add new henchmen which might lose you the game before you resolve the fight phase. that wasn't perfect, but it was enough to counter that anti-climactic feeling which appeared as soon as I changed the turn sequence.

So, how to solve this problem, while keeping the improvements of the new turn order? Well, I need something that happens between card play and resolution that could change or foil your plans...

Villain Events
Fortunately, there's something I've been meaning to add to the game anyway: effects each villain could have, which make the game harder, and make the villains feel more different from each other. I hadn't designed those, but I had a few ideas for some effects. For example, the Sadist could kill civilians (you don't get them back when you defeat henchmen), and the mastermind could block access to some of the rules (no calling the police, for example).

So I made a small deck of cards for each villain with some effects on them. At the very beginning of the Fight phase, before anything else happens, you'll flip the top event card for each villain. Their effect will occur, which may be immediate, or may be a static effect that stays active until the next turn's fight phase when a new card replaces this one. These effects could very well foil your plans, making them exactly what I need to keep the game interesting. For example, if you plan the turn and decide that you're able to win this turn, and then all of a sudden, the Anarchist makes you draw new henchmen, and they happen to go in front of the villain you were going to defeat, then you'll have to wait until next turn. Or perhaps the villain you were after suddenly requires 1 more Strength icon to hit -- can you still afford it? Or perhaps they take an extra hostage - can you hit them one more time? Maybe next round...

Further, I wanted to make sure it wasn't all about picking 1 villain, and just piling up the other two with henchmen while you beat up the chosen one. Therefore I put 3 effects on each card, each more severe than the last. The effect in play depends on the number of henchmen in front of that villain. The first tier is currently "no effect" for 0-1 henchmen, but it could also be some small, mostly insignificant effect. This way, if you have the villain's henchmen mostly under control, then the event won't hinder you that bad.

The 2nd tier (2 henchmen) is a bigger effect, often local to the villain and his henchmen. Things like "my henchmen cost an additional Smarts to defeat" or "I cannot be attacked". This has the potential to mess with your game, but not in a huge way.

The 3rd tier (3+ henchmen) is an even bigger effect, often global, affecting all villains or henchmen. Things like "ALL henchmen cost an additional Smarts to defeat" or "no villain can be attacked this turn".

I brainstormed enough effects to make 5 cards per villain:
* The Mastermind effects mostly limit your access to rules (can't call the cops, can't use Teamwork, Equipment costs extra to buy/use).
* The Sadist mostly deal with henchmen and hostages (bring new henchmen into play, rescued hostages are removed from the game, remove civilian tokens from the game, take extra civilians hostage).
* The Anarchist has wild or chaotic effects (players take penalty markers, players draw fewer cards, players draw fewer henchman to choose from)

This is just the first draft, but I'm excited to try it out tomorrow. Assuming the structure works, then I think a little testing and development of those abilities will really make this game feel like a proper co-op.

Friday, March 20, 2020

Gonzo Flavored Ice Cream


A friend came to me with a question the other day, "How would you adjust using [generic fantasy adventure or campaign] with Cha'alt?

My advice was thus...

If you're interested in mixing vanilla fantasy with Cha'alt, I'd suggest separating the two.  There's the "normal" D&D world, and then there's Cha'alt.  Just like Alice tumbling into Wonderland, Dorothy being swept into Oz, or Neo leaving the matrix.  There needs to be a dividing line.

Mixing the two would be like mixing vanilla ice cream with raspberry, pineapple, and lime sorbet with a banana split and double-chocolate mint rocky road.  The vanilla would get utterly lost in the wild flavor extravaganza.  Mix any generic fantasy setting with Cha'alt and you get Cha'alt.  It dominates, and rightfully so... my eldritch, gonzo, science-fantasy, post-apocalyptic campaign setting and megadungeon kicks fucking ass!

Ok, so what about introducing the PCs to Cha'alt?

Instead of Ravenloft mists, I'd suggest fuchsia and chartreuse slime.  It creeps up on the adventurers, rises up over their heads, and then SPLASHDOWN on the hapless PCs!  Consumed but not devoured, they're transported to the weird world of Cha'alt.

FYI, I've got less than 250 hardcover books in stock.  They're going fast!  These signed, limited edition, luxurious books are going for $60 (USA shipping included) or $85 outside the USA.  I take paypal.  My email address is: Venger.Satanis@yahoo.com

Thanks,

VS

Thursday, March 19, 2020

Recreating Classic Puzzle Mechanics In A Very New Shape

One of the most classic puzzle mechanics that we can find in games (specially in mobile games) is to push certain elements to the right places; sometimes the movements are limited, so we need to carefully study the challenge, sometimes we have unlimited movements, but usually get an element stuck in a place, so we need to start over again.



Push Maze Puzzle and Rebuild Chile are excellent examples of this gaming mechanics (by the way, the last one was used in a social campaign to earn donations for earthquake victims in Chile few years ago). Below, you can check out the gaming trailers to understand how this kind of puzzle game works:





This is a very traditional puzzle mechanic and, what we regularly see in many games, is the change of elements: sometimes we need to move rocks, other times we need to move boxes, plants, zombies, elephants and (fill the blanks).

However, recently I played one interesting game that caught my attention completely: Baba is You. The game has the simplicity of this previously discussed pushing mechanics, but you can interact with elements and words; when you interact with words, you can change the order of some phrases and affect game's ecosystem and dynamics. Check the trailer below to understand this clever idea:



Baba is you reaches a new level of experimentation and recreation of a classic mechanic. This game is an excellent example of how we can (re)think something that, apparently, was exhausted in terms of innovation. By using words as a key to the puzzle design, Baba is you invites the player to use his mind in a creative way. On this subject, Koster (2005, p.152) reminds us that the "toughest puzzles are the ones that force the most self-experimentation. They are the ones that challenge us most deeply on many levels – mental stamina, mental agility, creativity, perseverance, physical endurance, and emotional self-abnegation".

#GoGamers



Reference:

KOSTER, Raph. A theory of fun for game design. Arizona: Paraglyph Press, 2005.

Small Things Come In Good Packages

I was drawn to the Kickstarter campaign for Deadwood 1876 by its terrific artwork and simple, elegant graphic design, so let's talk about that first.

It is a great looking game. It comes packaged (like all of the games in the "dark city" series from Facade Games) in a box designed to look like an old leather bound book with a magnetic lid. All the game components other than the cards are made of wood (no plastic) and beautifully designed, especially the three engraved discs that represent the locations in the game. The artwork on the cards is very well-rendered, in a style that is just cartoony enough to be expressive but without looking silly.

The game's design is also very minimal, which appeals to me as a respite from the current trend towards overproduced Kickstarter games with hundreds of plastic miniatures and overdone, hard to read boards and rulebooks. Finally something simple and (hopefully) easy to play.

Or is it?

The rules and mechanics of the game are simple enough. The game consists of Safe cards, Deadwood cards, and three locations at the center of the table. Each player starts with two face down safe cards in front of them, and there is a stack of three more in the center; Safe cards consist mainly of gold in various denominations, with a few guns and other items sprinkled in.

Players also start with a hand of Deadwood cards that represent items used to perform actions: guns for fighting, horses for movement, and various bits of leatherwork such as hats and holsters for manipulating the cards in various ways. Player pawns are randomly distributed among the three locations (more on this in a moment).

The goal of the game is to be in the location whose occupants collectively have the most gold (depicted on their face down Safe cards) at the end of the game. Once the winning location has been determined, the occupants of that location use their remaining weapon cards to fight it out to see who the final winner is.

Play consists of each player playing one Deadwood card from their hand. A card can be played as a weapon to attack another player, in order to either take one of their safes, or to switch places with another player's pawn or force them to leave your location. Weapons have variable strengths but use dice to determine the outcome of combat, so a lower card isn't necessarily a lost cause. Or, it can be played for another effect such as moving between locations (if there's room, each location is limited to a certain number of player pawns), peeking at face down Safe cards, or drawing extra Deadwood cards from the deck.

After each player has had a turn to play a card, there is a heist round, where players use weapon cards to fight it out for one of the safes in the middle of the table. Then another round of play begins, and so on, until all the safes in the center have been claimed. At that point there is one final round, and then the winning location is determined and the final showdown happens.

It sounds like there's a lot going on, and there is, but there is one critical problem. A key strategy to the game is figuring out who has the high value safes, so you can either steal them or make sure you're at the location with the most gold at the end. It's supposed to be a "game of shifting alliances" where you side with the others in your location to make sure you collectively have the most gold, and then backstab them in the final showdown. The problem is that with only four turns per player before the final showdown, you just don't have enough time for the amount of social deduction or level of strategy that the game calls for.

Because of the amount of bluffing and secret information involved, the game relies on all the players having a roughly equal understanding of the rules and especially the strategy, which makes it very difficult to teach. This is a major problem for a game that, like any "shifting alliances" game, needs a large number of players to be interesting.

On the other hand, I think there is a fun game here somewhere, and the gorgeous design and components make me want to keep trying to make it work.

Rating: 3 (out of 5) Too much social deduction for a board game, or perhaps too much structure for a social deduction game, but the game is beautiful to look at.

Bimonthly Progress Report For My Twitch Channel, FuzzyJCats, Sept 2 To November 1

FuzzyJCats Twitch Channel

It's going into December, so as usual, I've been procrastinating because there hasn't been any major changes at the level of no longer caring about viewer numbers. Albeit there are times when I have my neuroses and insecurities about numbers, though I was able to get over it after processing with my best friend, Todd

Because that breakthrough was huge, I felt I wasn't making any monumental improvements, except for taking 15 minute breaks after 2 hours of streaming, which helped me to last an extra 2 hours or so, getting in the much needed practice without fatigue.

I didn't think about taking breaks because I see my streamer friends stream 12 hours straight without any breaks. And the meme in Twitch is stream until you drop to gain viewers. I would stream until I couldn't focus any longer (normally around 2 hours) and stop. 

I stopped typing my streamer friends' link as I noted the emotional issues and stress it was causing me. It's so easy to forget to shout someone out that if you don't do so, you're concerned if the person felt slighted. Therefore, I'm only shouting out when being hosted and raided. Further, having excessive shoutouts made the chat harder to read, and I wanted a cleaner interface.

Since this progress report was long overdue and it was in the back of my mind, I was wondering what else can I do in the meantime to take streams to the next level? The answer has to go back to the basics - what do I want to achieve in streaming? Because if I know what I want, I can find out ways to accomplish that goal. Clearly, to "git gud" but specifically what is that? 

This is where the cliches of two heads are better than one, and how you can achieve anything with friends ring true, even as it makes everyone cringe when they hear that.

I kept asking the smotpoker887 extraordinaire how can I improve over and over again, but I wasn't sure what I wanted to accomplish in streaming. After hearing my neurotic rant, Smot merely asked, "why not be the best friend you can possibly be" from streaming.

That is what I wanted to accomplish! This is not too hard because you easily get to know your viewers - by remembering the past stream chats and talking to them through any of the social media messaging - so that when they show up, you can ask how is their house coming along (only if they mentioned that publicly to respect privacy).

Because I don't have photographic memory and we miss a lot of chat while streaming, I've been using Chatty to review the chat logs - this helps remind me of what was said in stream so I can get to know my new viewers better. Thanks to Smot, he explained how I can upload these logs to Google drive since it was hard to read on the potato PC. I can then read these logs anywhere I have access to internet.


Because I was working on being more friendly and engaging, I didn't have as much gameplay (this will improve through practice). As soon as I notice, I say hi as soon as a viewer shows up, but I forgot how I was to focus on then going back to what I was talking about, which takes a lot of mental focus.

I wasn't conscious of using that strat last month. Writing this progress report is quite helpful to concretely remind myself to be less tangential - which is why I want to be more timely in these bimonthly progress reports.

The discussion with Smot occurred maybe 2 months ago, and I got lulled into complacency as we all do as I focused on being more engaging with viewers.

However, recently, I wanted to see how I can be more entertaining: being a friend, but being an entertaining friend, which I think will take streaming to the next level, especially as it's an entertainment media.

After having two sleepless nights, I then talked with my best friend Todd who helped me to be more specific in what I mean by being entertaining. I told him that I wanted to be socially engaging. However, he mentioned the eye-opening reality that hearing another person's conversation may not be entertaining. Saying hello to viewers one after the other is not the most riveting or compelling conversation after all and most likely, only interesting to the person you're addressing.

After clarifying what I wanted, he mentioned the radio broadcasting 101 basics. This was rather shocking considering when you search how to be an entertaining Twitch streamer, no one wrote about this, but this is the most basic thing to do as an entertainer! In other words, that is how behind Twitch is compared to other forms of entertainment. 

Todd mentioned that I can write down the stories I want to tell and rehearse before each stream. After he said that, my immediate thought was "wow, that's so basic!" even as I didn't think about rehearsing. Because we all hear about how much entertainers rehearse out loud, spending hours a day honing their skills.

I noticed that when I have ideas to say while streaming, I even rehearse it in my mind, but when the time comes, I'm too inhibited to actualize how I envisioned it, and it didn't come out as colorful as I wanted it to and falls flat. I also noticed that I wanted to expand on conversational threads, but I hold back for fear of burdening the listener (growing up in the New England area, children were treated as to be seen but not heard). I know exactly why I do these things, but knowing is the easy part, changing is the challenge.s

Therefore, I have to do "inner work", accepting myself and not caring about "acting the fool" on stream for fear of viewers thinking negatively of me. Cognitive Behavioral Therapy (CBT) here can work, because what's the worse that can happen if I'm able to rehearse and then act the way I envision the story, uninhibited? The absolute worse is that the viewers think I'm stupid or a loser or bad at acting (which I already know that I am), but who cares? If someone actually writes that and means it (i.e. a true troll, my viewers tease me affectionately on stream) during stream, then ban.

I'm also working on self-compassion - accepting yourself unconditionally - so you don't judge yourself (leads to inhibition ) or others (pinched soul).

Writing down a full-fledged "script" and rehearsing it aloud, practicing may help me to be less uninhibited and perform the way I want it to. I can even force Todd to watch. It'll be an exciting adventure to see if these preparations will significantly improve the entertainment value of the stream!

Goals Achieved:
  1. 15 minute breaks = longer streams = more practice
  2. No more excessive shoutout commands = less stress, cleaner chat
  3. Be a friend (first priority) and easier ways of reading chat logs
    1. Be more diligent about reading chat logs
  4. Realization of rehearsing scripts
Improvements to be made aside from the above:
  1. Make sure I work on the bimonthly progress report as it solidifies what I'm supposed to be working on, and forces me to find out what other things I can improve.
  2. More gaming action and fluency as per usual.
The How of Happiness Review

Monday, March 16, 2020

Barbarrossa Chain Of Command Try Out At The WHC


Just spent a thoroughly enjoyable day with Mark at the WHC. We wanted to continue exploring Chain of Command, after originally thinking that when Mark puts on a weekend there it would be in 20mm. Many advantages to this,Mark has a vast 20mm collection and a huge array of beautiful bespoke buildings..but, 20mm is very small. Less of an issue maybe when you are fielding 30 or 40+ AFVs and several hundred infantry, but even for BiG Chain of Command you are only looking at having perhaps half a dozen tanks and a hundred infantry a side. It needs to be impressive in order to attract players, and the 28mm stuff is pretty awesome....Well, we thought about this, and talked long and hard...thought some more...ummed and ahhed...and have decided to go with 28mm.
 Bigger.
 Trouble is of course that we don't have that much stuff.
 YET.
 That will change very soon!
I've got enough Germans and Soviets for a decent 1 on 1 but for a multi-player weekend with up to 12 players, with 2 x 3 a side campaign games going on simultaneously we are going to need a lot more...a lot more.
Not an issue of course, any day now a MASSIVE box of kit is expected to land on Mark's doormat! 
Meanwhile, the game;we just wanted an excuse for a duff-up really, get a look at terrain, have a think about size, time, space etc. Big Coc is going to be different but we can still learn quite a bit just from 1 on 1 games.
So we wanted to see how my 28mm kit looked on Mark's table (well, a little bit of Mark's table), and the answer we thought was pretty good!
When it comes to doing a full weekend the plan is to run 2 games of Big CoC side by side, each on a 12' x 6' table, but for today we were just using a mere 6'x 6'
Above is the view of the battlefield from the Soviet side. The bombed out sewing machine factory complex  dominates the surrounding countryside of fields. We were playing a pick up 1941 attack/defend scenario with a 4 section German infantry platoon on the attack, supported by a Panzer 38T, an MG34 MMG, and the Germans benefited from a preliminary artillery bombardment which severely hampered the deployment of the Soviets, who were defending with a big 4 section rifle platoon, supported by a 45mm ATG. Force morales were equal on a 9. There followed a tense patrol phase
 The view from the southern edge, the farm and woodland was a priority for the Germans during the patrol phase, the fields were deemed to be light cover for infantry in them if observed from the flat, but no cover from troops at higher elevations in the factory or on the rises in the NW and NE corners of the table. The fences were light cover but didn't block LOS (unless you looked through 3 of them). Mark ended with JOP tucked behind the wall in the very top of the picture, one behind the little house next to the wood, and another in the farmyard. I managed to constrict him so was fairly pleased
 a view from the German side, good approaches and JOP positions, but difficult open countryside to negotiate in order to get into the factory area
  another view from the Soviet side, 2 of my JOP's are visible 1 bottom left in the bombed out roof and another in the field next to the road and the factory. A third was just out of shot on the left in amongst the fields, but with a somewhat obscured view of the road running back to the German side
Above is the 3rd Soviet JOP with my first deployment, a section hunkering down in the wheat behind the fence line.
The second Soviet deployment, a section tucked in with views over the fields. Why I put it there, I've no idea....should have deployed into the factory, not the field. I think my original intention was to push forwards into the trees, but I never even got started. A heavy crossfire from the front and an MMG in the farm whittled them down, eventually I pulled them into the factory but they were still exposed and took terrible fire.
By having a good look at Mark's 20mm buildings,there are plenty that are perfectly good for 28mm games. Personally I've always found that a lot of 28mm WWII buildings look enormous when they get on the table, but these factory buildings are a really good size even for 28mm, as are the 20mm farm buildings in the picture below.
This MG 34 put down a heavy fire onto the section on the Soviet right
Joined by a German section in a deep ditch over-looking the fields, the 2 together put down a crossfire on the hapless Soviet section.
A 38T moves up. Ahead of it is the German section in the ditch which is on the other side of the wall.
Way off in the distance, the 38T is spotted! A 45mm ATG deploys in the southern field alongside the first rifle section plus the platoon mortar. It opened up, missed and continued pumping shells at the tank. On the 3rd attempt it immobilised it, but the tank kept firing. Finally the 45mm fired and rolled a double 6 to hit! Weak spot! resulting in a KO. The tank didn't explode but it was silenced permanently.
The other section is being whittled down by fire from the ditch and the MMG
eventually it gets the message and retires into the adjacent building.....where it should have been in the first place!
German section moves up through the wood to engage the section in the southern field.
Behind the section, is the JOP and the platoon mortar giving occasional supporting fire
The 38T burns in the road after its exchange with the ATG
Having reached the edge of the woods the German section trades fire with the Russians, and starts  to come off worst. Another section is sent out to reinforce..eventually this gives the Germans  the upper hand.
The section in the ditch continues to lay down fire on the section the factory, which ended the game with a single LMG gunner and its corporal!
Casualties mount in the wood, but the Germans hold firm
A third Russian section is deployed out on the right and attempts to flank right, but it is too late...
In the field the mortar and the ATG have been shot down, and the section has lost a few men..I think its time to scuttle back into the factory, by this time my FM was down to 3, and was going to get worse - the Germans were still on 5 or 6. I threw in the towel.
A fun game, even though it degenerated into a firefight which the Soviets lost. They gave a lot back, but the Germans were more flexible, took the lumps on their core sections rather than having a lot of support teams completely wiped out which hurt the Soviet FM.
The big problem was that my plan was utter rubbish. I just shouldn't have done what I did. I had a fabulous defensive position, high buildings overlooking open fields! So what do I do? try and push out of them....(FFS!) Idiocy!
My reasoning (poor as it was) was influenced by falling into the CoC "psychological tank trap". I became obsessed by the idea of getting the ATG out where it could cover the road any German armour would need to approach from. Subsequently I had to commit to protect it, more and more kit gets sucked in....etc.
There was absolutely no need fro me to do this! I Should have just hunkered down in the factory. Not bought much on at all, rattled through the phases (which would speed up the turn end and finish the barrage), and I could have got some CoC die. Meanwhile the Germans would have to come on and eventually get caught in the open in the fields. But no....Really stupid play on my part. Meanwhile Mark cheerfully shot me to bits! (but he did it very nicely, and, most important of all, we had a great time!