Ulrich Blennemann Today I received the new PA - thanks a lot! A very good mix that I have not yet completed to read. Marcusī observations on the Last Day and the Avalanche Great War At Sea series are right on target in my opinion. Robert Lesco Well, wouldn't you know it - I sent you an e-mail and last night PA was in my mailbox. I will be sending you a postal order shortly (I think I will also be sending money to the Micro-games co-op and Simulations Workshop...). You know, I would buy that Vimy Ridge game in an instant, what with me being a good Canadian and all (and I like other games by the same designer) but as a 'subscriber' to Counter-Attack I am loathe to send any more dollars to Pacific Rim Games. I feel badly about that but it's a matter of principle. CHV: And quite right too! Andy Field Just received PA 102; congrats on another interesting, individual issue. I read the review of First Day of the Somme and was interested in this, and the game on Dogger Bank. But, I've never heard of the magazine Panzerschreck before. Could you tell me where I could order a copy from, please? CHV: minden2@hotmail.com is Gary's email address. Next issue has Jutland for the table-top. Bruce Wilson I was pleasantly surprised when I came across a copy of PA101 in Leisure Games. A very enjoyable read. Coincidentally, I had been off work ill a few weeks before and, looking for something light to read, I unearthed my back issues of PA. And very enjoyable they were too. It brought home to me how much I missed your magazine - I was a victim of your great purge, though I can't quite remember if I jumped before I was pushed. Anyway, I was pleased to see that you are still publishing and indeed seeking subscriptions. I am afraid I have fallen victim to the 40-year old gamer syndrome: lost my regular opponent, busy job, family, etc. As a result, my gaming sessions are few and far between. 1 have played Royal Tank Corps a couple of times and enjoyed it, despite the awful map and not much better counters. The system seems to work and give a reasonable representation of the battle, at least to someone who is not a WW1 expert. But the logic of the artillery support (extra unit adds one to the leading unit) escapes me. But it seems to work so what the hell. I have also got my money's worth out of the recent S&Ts. Not classic games for sure but there was enough to keep me entertained for a couple of evenings solitaire gaming, sad I know, and there were some decent articles in the magazine. While not playing very much, I do keep buying. I buy most everything on the ACW, including the recent monsters from the Gamers and GMT. The Gamers provide an excellent package with good designer notes and other information, nice looking maps and counters, a good system and lots of playable scenarios (well, I will play them one day ... ). I feel I got my money's worth. Unlike with the GMT offering. River of Death contained no designer notes and, essentially, a single four-map scenario. I was not impressed. But GMT has promised to do better next time. I have also bought The King's War. I had the gamekit version but thought it was time to upgrade. In the designer notes you mention three player rules. Did they ever appear? CHV: No, but I have just finished initial design of Unhappy King Charles a butt-kicking We the People style game. The Gamers certainly attract a strong following but not, I think, a widening one. GMT however appear to be doing well, though they still sell their games cheaper to the one group who might pay more for them, but hey I'm not complaining. We find that though many dislike much about PA it remains a valuable specific against whatever ails you. Cheers! Michaele Alboretto Hi, I bought both Lutzen and Lutzen & Bautzen. I enjoyed the first, but the second was a delusion. Hofschroer's prose is very pedestrian, and there is nothing that you can't find in Petre or even Nafziger. The maps cover only 25% of the places named in the text and the chapter at the end on the battlefields today evinces only for sure that the author (a German) has never visited battlefield of Bautzen. There is no comment whatsoever so the reader has to figure out by himself why the French to Allies casualty ratio was 2:1. All in all, wasted money. Robert Lesco I found it interesting that one issue after I had suggested that victory points could be used to encourage France to hold the Maginot Line in 1940 you review Drive on Paris where the French are given VPs for holding (CHV: actually for capturing) Alsace and Lorraine - different war albeit. It is interesting that designers are using the carrot as opposed to the stick to motivate historical behaviour. It is a step towards what was suggested in the quote on the cover - to know or at least understand what was known in the beginning. It is not a particularly memorable game but A Line In The Sand, I think it is, requires players to draw their victory conditions randomly. Sometimes there is more than one winner and sometimes no one wins: life can be like that. It will never replace research but imaginative victory conditions can make for great gaming. Keith Versey Hi Charles, cheque in post to top up PA subs. Have to agree with your comments on First Day Of The Somme excellent little game with lots of period flavour, have you tried the solitaire game in issue 4 Battle Of The Atlantic? Basically its structure and game play reminds me of West End's RAF, with force levels and placement dependent on the card draw which takes account of allied technology, tactics etc. I've been pleasantly surprised by Panzerschreck, you certainly get value and I look forward to future issues. Back to Perfidious Albion #103 Table of Contents Back to Perfidious Albion List of Issues Back to MagWeb Master Magazine List © Copyright 2004 by Charles and Teresa Vasey. This article appears in MagWeb (Magazine Web) on the Internet World Wide Web. Other military history articles and gaming articles are available at http://www.magweb.com