Sign in to follow this  
Rob Zacny

Episode 439: Cataclysm: A Second World War

Recommended Posts

Three Moves Ahead 439:

Three Moves Ahead 439


Cataclysm: A Second World War
In a rare live and in-person episode, Rob joins Dr. Bruce Geryk in his mountain lair to talk about GMT Games' Cataclysm: A Second World War. Cataclysm is a board game that offers a deep political system along with standard military fare, succeeding at the former and passably presenting the latter. Players have to adapt to the dynamic early 1930s political landscape and steer their nations to success in an atypical pre-WWII world.

Cataclysm: A Second World War, Triumph and Tragedy

 

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Was excited to see this game discussed here.  Thought I'd throw in a bit of my perspective from the description of Bruce's game.

 

He describes how the French lost all 4 of their cubes in Eastern Europe as a result of Crisis markers.  I have seen this happen too, but it is not strictly a negative for the Democracies.  It is true that the French cannot gain flags from provocation in Eastern Europe, but remember that Status Quo ends if the Ger+Ita VP is greater than UK+Fra VP.  When France loses all their VP in the east, this should even out the total (2 starting UK VP, 2 starting Italian VP).  This means if the Germans or Italians take a *single* area they end status quo.  This *significantly* hamstrings the European Fascists peaceful expansion, because they don't want to break status quo.  If they break status quo, the Americans start getting flags and the UK and British get free flags each turn.  So losing those eastern europe flags can easily lead to status quo ending early or Germany being walled in to avoid status quo.

 

It sounds like this rule was missed in your game.  Also remember that the USSR can end status quo when they mobilize (not just the Germans).  If the USSR thinks the Fascists are too strong, they can mobilize to break status quo and get the allies started sooner than the fascists may have preferred.

 

Re: Japan focusing entirely on China - I found out the hard way that this can result in Japan surrendering *super-fast*.  The US is only 2 actions away from taking the Japanese capital if the Japanese never take the Philippines.  So if Japan ignores the US and only focuses on China, the US can simply deploy to Philippines, and then invade Japan and win the pacific war.  The only way to prevent that 1-2 punch is for the Japanese to take the Philippines and then take as many allied bases as possible in the Pacific to slow the US from getting back into the Philippines.

 

There are (unfortunately) a lot of subtle rules which, if mis-played, can break the game balance and ruin the experience.  But when you get them right it feels very balanced and is very enjoyable.  Took me about 3 full games to really "internalize" everything correctly.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites
On 7/23/2018 at 12:39 PM, spacerumsfeld said:

Yeah and there is no Effectiveness Check anyway - just play a Flag.

This is incorrect.  The Soviet Posture change does still require a successful effectiveness check if using a flag.  Posture change is only automatic and free when the USSR home front comes up.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Having one of these every 6 or 7 is one of my favorite things about 3MA.  What's I kept thinking about is how you were describing how I felt when I first started playing Warhammer 40K.  We're just rolling a number of D6 over and over again with slightly different results that are hard to remember.  It was slow, painful, and prone to error.

The difference is there is a built in community to play 40K - much smaller compared to magic or other games, but larger compared to any single wargame.  I would love to get a copy of Churchill as a present and would react with such joy.  However, who would I play it with?  Most of my friends have young kids and a night or afternoon spent gaming, even for 3 people, is a huge lift.  Having a standard ruleset allows us to skip over a lot of the learning.

I'm personally frustrated by how expensive 40K is, but if people are buying $80-$120 dollar games for a single playthrough that is a huge investment.  

You guys should always play Churchill and record it so I can get my annual fix.

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Sounds like not the most favorable take on the game.  Now wondering if I should keep my copy and break it out, or pass it on.   Seems like the somewhat abstract military component might work better in a WW1 environment.  In WW1 of course tanks enter the war at the end, but not like powerful panzer or armor divisions that were involved in WW2.    

 

A WW1 system with all the diplomatic buildup in the years prior might be equally if not more interesting using this same system or some equivalent.   

Share this post


Link to post
Share on other sites

Create an account or sign in to comment

You need to be a member in order to leave a comment

Create an account

Sign up for a new account in our community. It's easy!

Register a new account

Sign in

Already have an account? Sign in here.

Sign In Now
Sign in to follow this