For the people great point to point movement cdg, Nevsky for its innovative ideas, classic Breakout normandy and Point blank V for victory for fun factor
VPG: States of Siege games; White Dog Games: Ben Madison designs; Hollandspiel: 'Charlemagne'; Histogames: 'Maria', 'Frederick'; GMT: 'Twilight struggle', 'Labyrinth', 'For the people', 'Here I stand', 'Triumph orTragedy', 'Churchill'; Compass Games: 'Attrition of Souls', 'No peace...', 'Brotherhood and unity'; Phalanx: 'Sucessors', 'Total Domination'; Worthington: 'Struggle for Europe', 'Cruel Necessity'...
One of my favourite point to point designs is the classic Raid On St Nazaire. It has this odd mix of a classic hex and counter feel (lots of DRM's, military symbology, etc) combined with more mainstream point to point movement. Lots of luck involved, tough as nails, but it always tells a great story to the point where even a loss is a satisfying experience
Another top video. I do think that while area movement isn't particularly popular and has a bit of a bad rep in wargame circles. It is perhaps the best way of capturing modern (WW1 and post) tactical battles. Looking at the Russo-Ukrainian war for instance, it is being fought block by block, hedgerow by hedgerow, entrenched strongpoint by entrenched strongpoint, which splitting terrain down into 'areas' works well to simulate. Hex and counter to me does work better for more linear warfare showing how a formation might say turn a flank on an open battlefield.
My greatest gaming experience..Empires in Arms the AH edition played over 9 months once maybe twice a week all in area movement. ADG's icredible gming experience with 6-7 players unmatched..other than Fire In the East 6 player..
I just played a game recently from Legion called Blenheim 1704 that uses both hexes and areas, and in a tactical battle game no less. It was very creative and fresh.
AH classics Storm over Arnhem. and Breakout Normandy/ Thunder at Cassino/Turning point Stalingrad and of course Up Front, Raid on St Nazaire and Victory in the Pacific. DVG Field Commander Alexander and Field Commander Alexander plus others.
Compass published Granada, which also uses the Sekigahara rules applied to the end of the Reconquista. I actually think it is a better game in some respects. It’s also probably Compass’ best produced game.
I don’t have a problem with point-to-point in theory, but from a visual perspective such games all seem to look worse than an equivalent area map. My favourite Stalingrad game is a Rinella area/ impulse game, Stalingrad: Verdun on the Volga. A dull title, but excellent game. The map is much, much better on the table than in pictures. Vento Nuovo’s Barbarossa trilogy, Moscow/Leningrad/Kiev 41, is a lot of fun and looks great. Definitely not a simulation! Unfortunately the maps don’t link up, so can only be played individually. Race to Moscow is barely a wargame. Point to point, deterministic combat, somewhat co-operative. It’s all about moving your supplies, but doesn’t really simulate Barbarossa logistics. Good fun though! I have played PoG and Triomphe à Marengo (new one) quite a bit. Both quite good. But I’m not a fan of TàM’s combat. It feels very much like chess (not a compliment). And I find PoG frustrating because it makes real historical events very difficult, to the extent that I have never landed American troops in Europe. Interesting that most of the games I’ve mentioned are definitely on the gamey end of the spectrum, with little simulation value. Are hexes needed for a proper simulation? Surely not!
Assault on Gallipoli looks interesting, but this quote from the Hexasim site puts me off: “One player commands the Entente forces, made up primarily of Australian and New Zealand soldiers, but also including Brtish, Maori, Gurkha, and Sikh soldiers.” Ignoring the fact that the Entente forces were primarily (sic) Brtish, it’s pretty bad that a game published by a French company ignores entirely the French contribution to this campaign. I may be wrong, but I think there were more French than Australians and New Zealanders combined!
Going by the map, the game seems to primarily focus on the Anzac landings at Anzac cove and not the French contribution further south. So it makes sense why they are omitted from the game.
This game focuses on what became known as the 'Anzac' theatre, north of Gaba Tepe, which was primarily Australian, New Zealand and Indian forces. The British and French were mainly based down at Cape Helles which isn't covered here.
