Thanks for taking the time to report on this one Kev! I'll be playtest GOSS NAfrica in 2025, with the 5 mapper Battles for Tobruk volume. there will be plenty of one and two map scenarios in this one. Some new activation and sequencing rules unique to this theater of war.
GOSS is a promising system in desperate need of a talented developer. The rule books prior to Lucky Forward are a nightmare. The latest version of the series rules (and the game specific rule books) is a modest improvement. GOSS is a very frustrating system. There’s a lot to like about it (like the CRT and the supply rules), but that’s all loaded down with a bunch fiddly crap that wrecks playability (like the stacking rules, movement rules, and mandated lulls). While parts of GOSS, like the supply rules) are fairly elegant, overall the system is clunky and inelegant in many ways. Too many ways. I’ve tinkered with every game in the system so far, and have played WaR the most. I was very unimpressed with WaR. For me, the operational Bulge game par excellence is Last Blitzkrieg (BCS). I would be curious to see how GOSS does on the eastern front, but unfortunately the designer/publisher are against that, and have instead decided to take the system to North Africa. I still have some hope for HHF (and maybe AW and LF), and wish you luck in your endeavor. Have a Merry Christmas and may your dice stay hot in the New Year!
Must say that my personal opinion is the exact opposite. I actually have this System, especially with the latest rule set, as the most elegant AND exciting system out there. Is it perfect? Well nothing really is BUT it still delivers in volumes and depth, and above all it's very very exciting. That being said it's not for everyone that's for sure, and your reference to Last Blitzkrieg clearly points in that direction.
@@TheThorgarth Just to be clear, I don't dislike GOSS, I'm just frustrated with some aspects (many of which are driven by a lack of resources dedicated to the system by its publisher). There are a lot of clever concepts in the game, and the scope of the games is fantastic. No other system covers as much of the Normandy campaign at this scale and detail, for example. The supply system is really quite good, when you get to actually use it. Too many of the games replace the supply system with some kind of special rules for one or both sides. The mandated lulls are particularly irritating. I understand what the designer was attempting to do with them, but there's nothing the lull rules do that could not be done better, more elegantly, and more organically by simply using the supply rules already present in the game. I really like how the CRT works. Having both the attacker and defender roll dice is a mechanism I wish more games would use. And having the CRT set up so that both players can use the same DRM is genius. Providing a bonus to combat for keeping the constituent parts of a regiment together is excellent, as is the Combat Reserves mechanism. Maneuver Reserve is something that you don't see (but probably should) in games at this scale. GOSS is a good system, and it certainly delivers on scope and depth (for instance, with the artillery rules), but there's a certain clunkiness in it. One of the bigger offenders is how breakdown units are handled and the stacking rules (and the order of movement rules). Not that any of the concepts are wrong or bad, it's just the way they've chosen to implement them hurts playability. It is also unfortunate that GOSS, like almost every other operational level game, treats armor as little more than stronger, faster infantry (which it isn't). I have no intention of getting rid of any of my GOSS games (although I am tempted to do so with WaR, for a number of game specific reasons), and am looking forward to future releases given the incremental improvements I've seen with each release so far. In fact, I think GOSS would work very well for World War One, with just a few small tweaks. There really aren't any good games on that topic at this scale. GOSS would do justice to the complexities of the operational art involved in such battles as the Somme or Verdun.
Although I agree with you regarding GOSS being a good basic set rules (with specific rules covering meu differences) for WWI Battle I actually would mention another “series” (though technically they are just games that share the same core príncipes and badic rules) which are, for me, the esconde best rulesets bar none, the 1914 games (e.g. 1914: Offensive à outrance Or 1914 Twilight in the East). Like GOSS they have a tremendous depht, complexity and just terebly awesome combat system. Again, not for everyone as the system hás some complexity and the combate mechanics are “deep” BUT damn do they deliver. Thinking about it that combat system May even be more exciting than the GOSS combat system, which, for me, it’s just simply awesome.
@@TheThorgarth; @thetabletopsedge; I kind of agree with both of you... GOSS is an amazinly detailed system which contains just about everything I want in a battalion scale WW2 game. But it aslo can be frustrating due to what feels like a lack of scenerio testing along with too many setup and rules gaffes. The rules and charts included in LF are a great improvement on previous games and hopefully the system will continue to mature.
Good tips thanks man. Yes, I'm close to just 'playing the game' and letting a lot of the clunky shit fall to the way side. LF doubled the rulebook size. DOUBLE lol
Thanks for taking the time to report on this one Kev! I'll be playtest GOSS NAfrica in 2025, with the 5 mapper Battles for Tobruk volume. there will be plenty of one and two map scenarios in this one. Some new activation and sequencing rules unique to this theater of war.
Though I’ll never play it, it’s always cool to see folks play GOSS. Playing a challenging system to fight a challenging operation is wild. Hats off!
GOSS is a promising system in desperate need of a talented developer. The rule books prior to Lucky Forward are a nightmare. The latest version of the series rules (and the game specific rule books) is a modest improvement.
GOSS is a very frustrating system. There’s a lot to like about it (like the CRT and the supply rules), but that’s all loaded down with a bunch fiddly crap that wrecks playability (like the stacking rules, movement rules, and mandated lulls). While parts of GOSS, like the supply rules) are fairly elegant, overall the system is clunky and inelegant in many ways. Too many ways.
I’ve tinkered with every game in the system so far, and have played WaR the most. I was very unimpressed with WaR. For me, the operational Bulge game par excellence is Last Blitzkrieg (BCS).
I would be curious to see how GOSS does on the eastern front, but unfortunately the designer/publisher are against that, and have instead decided to take the system to North Africa.
I still have some hope for HHF (and maybe AW and LF), and wish you luck in your endeavor.
Have a Merry Christmas and may your dice stay hot in the New Year!
Must say that my personal opinion is the exact opposite. I actually have this System, especially with the latest rule set, as the most elegant AND exciting system out there. Is it perfect? Well nothing really is BUT it still delivers in volumes and depth, and above all it's very very exciting. That being said it's not for everyone that's for sure, and your reference to Last Blitzkrieg clearly points in that direction.
@@TheThorgarth Just to be clear, I don't dislike GOSS, I'm just frustrated with some aspects (many of which are driven by a lack of resources dedicated to the system by its publisher). There are a lot of clever concepts in the game, and the scope of the games is fantastic. No other system covers as much of the Normandy campaign at this scale and detail, for example.
The supply system is really quite good, when you get to actually use it. Too many of the games replace the supply system with some kind of special rules for one or both sides. The mandated lulls are particularly irritating. I understand what the designer was attempting to do with them, but there's nothing the lull rules do that could not be done better, more elegantly, and more organically by simply using the supply rules already present in the game.
I really like how the CRT works. Having both the attacker and defender roll dice is a mechanism I wish more games would use. And having the CRT set up so that both players can use the same DRM is genius. Providing a bonus to combat for keeping the constituent parts of a regiment together is excellent, as is the Combat Reserves mechanism. Maneuver Reserve is something that you don't see (but probably should) in games at this scale.
GOSS is a good system, and it certainly delivers on scope and depth (for instance, with the artillery rules), but there's a certain clunkiness in it. One of the bigger offenders is how breakdown units are handled and the stacking rules (and the order of movement rules). Not that any of the concepts are wrong or bad, it's just the way they've chosen to implement them hurts playability. It is also unfortunate that GOSS, like almost every other operational level game, treats armor as little more than stronger, faster infantry (which it isn't).
I have no intention of getting rid of any of my GOSS games (although I am tempted to do so with WaR, for a number of game specific reasons), and am looking forward to future releases given the incremental improvements I've seen with each release so far. In fact, I think GOSS would work very well for World War One, with just a few small tweaks. There really aren't any good games on that topic at this scale. GOSS would do justice to the complexities of the operational art involved in such battles as the Somme or Verdun.
Although I agree with you regarding GOSS being a good basic set rules (with specific rules covering meu differences) for WWI Battle I actually would mention another “series” (though technically they are just games that share the same core príncipes and badic rules) which are, for me, the esconde best rulesets bar none, the 1914 games (e.g.
1914: Offensive à outrance Or 1914 Twilight in the East). Like GOSS they have a tremendous depht, complexity and just terebly awesome combat system. Again, not for everyone as the system hás some complexity and the combate mechanics are “deep” BUT damn do they deliver. Thinking about it that combat system May even be more exciting than the GOSS combat system, which, for me, it’s just simply awesome.
@@TheThorgarth; @thetabletopsedge; I kind of agree with both of you... GOSS is an amazinly detailed system which contains just about everything I want in a battalion scale WW2 game. But it aslo can be frustrating due to what feels like a lack of scenerio testing along with too many setup and rules gaffes. The rules and charts included in LF are a great improvement on previous games and hopefully the system will continue to mature.
Good tips thanks man. Yes, I'm close to just 'playing the game' and letting a lot of the clunky shit fall to the way side. LF doubled the rulebook size. DOUBLE lol
Merry Christmas to you and your family, sir!
Merry Christmas - look forward to additional videos on this.
:)
I took the bait and sent the 9th ID southeast and ended up getting relieved of command...😂😂😂
good tip thanks man! LOLOL