RE: HPS games?
Overall much better, though I was a sceptic when I played my first game. HPS has larger maps, making the battles more about manuver and suprise than forming a line of stacks from one map edge to the other. Also, the tactic of making stacks every other hex is no longer necessary as zoc's are 'weak', so you won't necessarly lose them if surrounded by zoc's.
HPS is superior in all except there can be a tendency for 'blitzkrieg' like tactics in HPS. Players can attack in 'waves' to penetrate your line and exploit. You can guard against this by defense-in-depthToo much power is in the hands of the attacker because of the move-shoot-melee turns where you can do it in any order desired. Sure the defender will shoot as you do this, but they are at a disadvantage in firepower penalties (though they can fire multiple times). Also, the larger the regiment, the more effective it's firepower in the defense, as defenders fire individually, not as a stack. So the side with smaller regiments will come out the worse in a firefight. I would always play with the optional rule of final full def fire for the defender prior to the melee to try to off set some of the attacker's advantage.
I know some will disagree that the attacker's have the advantage, but in the Civil War, the defender always had the advantage, so rightfully, it should remain so to keep the historical feel.
They are worth getting, but you have to adjust to the changes in tactics.
Havoc
|