Today’s post will be a bit long, as I need to cover three games and one event. Last Saturday was Deep Fried Lard Day in Musselburgh, a full-day gathering devoted to TFL games. It used to be organised by Derek Hodge, but after his death, John Anzani took over and has done a fantastic job. The event was held at Musselburgh Rugby Club. Mike and I ran one of the games there, and today’s post will be about that game and the others played on the day.
Before we get to the games themselves, it’s worth reminding ourselves what Deep Fried Lard Day actually is. As mentioned in the introduction, we play games published by TFL. Participants suggest titles to one another, and over the course of the day, you can play two games—one in the morning and one in the afternoon. In addition to the regular players, authors also take part, and that was true this time as well, but more on that later.
DFLD is held every year. Unfortunately, I’ve had quite a long break from attending, but this year I promised myself I would not only take part, but also submit a game. This post is about how that turned out.
1. Full Nelson.
For my first game, I chose Full Nelson, which is still in development. Charley Walker is responsible for the project and continues to work on it, so what you see on the table—all the aids, dice colours, and so on—may differ from the final product. If I were to briefly describe the rules by comparing them to an existing game, I’d say it’s basically What a Tanker, but at sea. That’s essentially how it plays. You command a ship and roll various dice that determine sails, guns, and command. Each unit has its own characteristics that determine whether you can take more actions. I don’t want to go into too much detail, because, as I said, the rules are still being developed, and I don’t know if what I experienced at the table will fully reflect the final product.
In our game, we had four squadrons: two British and two French. One French squadron attempted to break the British blockade, and a second French squadron came to its aid. The two British squadrons tried to stop them. During the game, we had one explosion, a failed boarding attempt, and plenty of firefights. In the end, both the British and the French lost one ship, but the French managed to break away from the British, punch through the blockade, and score one more victory point than the British.
I’m really happy with the rules at this level. I’ve been looking for something like this for a long time. The rules we’re currently using aren’t quite to my liking, but this experience was completely different. The rules are very easy to learn and perfect for a club night. I’ll definitely be buying them as soon as they’re released.
2. Other morning games.
Here are pictures of some other games from the morning:
3. Chain of Command. WW3.
During the afternoon, Mike and I presented Chain of Command, set in an alternate reality: a potential World War III unfolding in the mid-1980s. Mike has been promoting this expansion in our club for some time, so I came up with the idea of showcasing it to a wider audience. DFLD is probably the best place for this.
Below are two games. The first was a playtest held in our club, and the second was played during the event. In both games, the forces were identical. The Warsaw Pact forces had a platoon of T-72 tanks (3 x T-72), a reconnaissance platoon (2 × BMP-1, 1 × BMP-2, and 1 × ZSU-23-4 “Shilka”), and a motorised infantry platoon (3 × BMP-2). The British had an infantry platoon (with transport consisting of 2 × Land Rovers and 4 × FV432s) and a tank platoon (2 × Chieftains).
During our club game, Tim and I played Warsaw Pact forces, while Peter and Mike fielded the British. In both games, we used the "Capture the Objective" scenario. In our first game, Tim commanded a reconnaissance platoon, and I commanded the tanks, while on the other side, Peter commanded the tanks and Mike the infantry.
In that game, the Soviets pushed forward but were either unable or unwilling to end their turn, which was required to bring in the mechanised infantry. This tactic proved flawed and, despite knocking out one of the British tanks and a desperate attempt by the reconnaissance team to assault the objective, the Soviets still failed to win. The decisive factor turned out to be the lack of infantry, which would have provided crucial support for the Soviet attack.
The game played out completely differently during the event. The turn ended in the first phase, so the Soviets had all their forces available from the start. They also showed much greater aggression. Tanks supported the infantry, which quickly seized the objective. The British then shelled the area with tank fire, forcing the Soviets to withdraw—but only temporarily. The British pushed forward, likely what the Soviets had been waiting for. A firefight broke out between vehicles on both sides, and the Soviet infantry took advantage of the chaos, managing to retake the objective. It remained in their hands for the rest of the game, earning them a final victory. It was very satisfying to watch this second game unfold and see what I learned from the first.
4. Other games during the afternoon slot.
The entire event was a huge success. I was especially pleased to have the opportunity to play Full Nelson before the game was released. I’m also happy with how our own game turned out; it was one of the first I’ve ever exhibited, and even though I was mainly in a support role, I gained valuable experience. I think I can now prepare to exhibit games as a main exhibitor. We’ll see. The next events are Claymore in August and Partisan in October, and I’m looking forward to both.
Gallery on Flickr:
https://www.flickr.com/photos/asienieboje/albums/72177720334289459