Yuku free message boards

Here is a compare/contrast from a reader at Consimworld:

I've solitaired both, and I prefer Yalu, although I also enjoyed Gauntlet (S&T 190). Yalu puts the entire Chinese offensive on one map at divisional level, with 10 mile hexes.(However, I always felt a bit cramped at the southern end of the Yalu map; one or two more hexrows would have been nice down there).

Gauntlet is at a smaller scale, and only covers the western sector of the attack.In Gauntlet, the units are at regimental level. In Yalu, the U.N. forces can break down to regimental level for the ROK, and all the way to battalion level for the Americans; otherwise all units are portrayed at divisonal level.

Gauntlet features two-sided units, whereas the original Yalu counters were printed on one side only. Also, Yalu used 5/8 " counters; easy to handle and to read.

IMO, Gauntlet is a bit more of a simulation, while Yalu is more of a game. That being said, Yalu has always seemed to have the right "feel" for its subject. A really nice feature in Yalu is the inclusion of "conscript" communist units to represent the unwilling civilians who were herded ahead of the red troops as cannon fodder.

The assymetry of the two armies is one of Yalu's strongest features; this assymetry is less apparent in Gauntlet. This extends both to movement (the reds are leg-borne; the U.N. is more road-bound ) and to combat, where the U.N. can call on powerful support units, while the Chinese must rely on mass attacks.

My final judgement: both are good games, but if I had to choose between them (fortunately I don't!) I would pick John Hill's Yalu.

Here's the link:talk.consimworld.com/WebX...ee6fac1/69

I hope this helps,

Ken at Compass

And the reasons you cite are the exact reasons we want to put this game back into print. And we're particularly pleased of course that John Hill is personally involved in the reprint and is working with Todd Davis the developer to ensure we do it correctly.

Ken at Compass