I used to be a historical game snob!

[Kool Kat]

Gents: 

I used to be a historical game snob! 

My nose turned up and I looked down at anything that reeked of non-historical content.  

Play a hypothetical scenario?  Forget it! 

Look at a hypothetical game?  No way!  

But, that all changed after I purchased my first hypothetical game - Fulda Gap '85 several years ago. The speed and lethal aspect of modern combat was brought home to me in exciting and fun PBeM matches! I was hooked and that led me to purchase and play all titles in the Modern Campaigns Series. I recently completed a PBeM Danube Front '85 campaign game and was blown away by the immersive game play. 

In the past month, I also purchased Sealion '40 - another hypothetical game. I've completed two PBeM games and have a third one underway. Wow! Each game has come down to the last few turns deciding the outcome! These matches have been rollicking adventures as panzers raced across the English countryside, battling aside the initial 2nd and 3rd rate Allied combat units, and then encountering stiffening Allied defensive positions covering the objectives.

Now, don't take this the wrong way. I love me some very historical Smolensk '41 action - nothing beats huge panzer formations maneuvering over the Russia steppes! Or sweeping desert battles as Crusaders and Shermans tangle with panzers and 88's!   

Let's just say I've broadened my appetite! Since both historical and hypothetical games are on the John Tiller menu - why not try both? 

Good gaming everyone! 

[Stas_sche]

Are you going to try Japan'45 and Japan'46 PzC games? They are the hypothetical as well. The only problem - do not expect tank races across Japan :)

[NikolaiB]

Yes, a long time ago, one of my first JTS games was NGP'85. After playing it, I purchased Panzer Campaigns Smolensk '41. The troops felt so slow and clunky in comparison to the modern mechanized formations. It was quiet a shock!

@Stas_sche What is the difference between the two, gameplay wise? They both seems like games about initial beach landings that then progress into fighting in rough terrain as you advance into the interior. Actually.... isn't every beach landing game like that?

[Kool Kat]

Are you going to try Japan'45 and Japan'46 PzC games? They are the hypothetical as well. The only problem - do not expect tank races across Japan :)

Gent: 

Yes. I purchased and played Japan '45. Unfortunately, the lead developer was not experienced with the PzC Series. He did not understand the impact of certain Optional Rules on game play and there were quality control issues with the initial release of the game. 

It was a shame as much of the historical development work was sound, but the execution of it within Japan '45 did not translate into a solid design. I asked for and received my money back for Japan '45.

Hopefully, with subsequent patch releases, Japan '45 will be improved? However, I don't plan to revisit it.

[Liebchen]

@Stas_sche What is the difference between the two, gameplay wise? They both seems like games about initial beach landings that then progress into fighting in rough terrain as you advance into the interior. Actually.... isn't every beach landing game like that?

After exiting the beaches in Normandy, the Allies had to contend with the region's hedgerows, but they eventually broke past them. Plus, hedgerows, while prevalent, were not universally present.

In the Japan titles, the land behind the beaches consists mainly of two types of terrain: Mountains and endless, endless rice paddies. This was much different.