A House Divided

Played For the People (GMT Games) for the first time today. It's one of the more complex "card-driven" game designs in that there are a number of special rules needed to keep the game more or less historical in nature. I'm not saying that this is a bad thing. Just that these special rules makes the game more complex and more rules "heavy" than most CDGs.

Charlie played the South and I the North. The first year of the war went well for the Union as all three neutral states were "persuaded" to remain part of the Union. The second year of the war didn't go as well for the North. After a successful raid that resulted in the destruction of Atlanta, the Union was forced onto the defensive as the quality of Southern generals made it difficult for the inferior Union generals to succeed in combat. A stalemate developed in the West and in the East General Lee and the mis-named "Army of the West" invaded the North and tried to take Washington D.C. Two battles were fought for Washington D.C. and both battles resulted in draws. The North retained control of the capital, but General Lee and the "Army of the West" remained active and posed to attack Washington D.C. a third time.

We ran out of time and we stopped playing at the end of 1862. Given the concentration of forces the South was able to put together in the East, I don't know that there is anything I could have done to avoid a battle for Washington D.C. Even if I had attempted to build a larger army in Gettysburg (the doorway to Washington D.C.), I think Lee would have rolled right over it anyway. In a future game, I think I would try and create a enclave/bridgehead somewhere in the Carolinas or Florida and build an Army there with the hope that such a threat, combined with offensive action in the west and a large "army in being" in Washington would divert the South's attention away from invading the North.

A good game. I'd like to play it again.

Games Played: Family Fluxx

I know there are some gamers that do not like Fluxx, not even considering it a game in some extreme cases. But darn it, Fluxx can be a lot of fun and it's certainly one of the easiest games to teach and play that there is. Heck, the game only has one rule: "Draw One, Play One."

Family Fluxx is a new version of the original Fluxx. To quote from the Looney Labs web site: "Family Fluxx is the slimmed-down, brightened-up Fluxx. With simpler Rules, color Keepers, neat new family-oriented Bonuses for kids, parents and grandparents, it's fun for the whole family!" There are fewer cards in the Family Fluxx deck and most of the cards are new and have a "family" theme to them. It's a version of the game designed to appeal to a wider audience.

In addition to Fluxx and Family Fluxx, Looney Labs also publishes Stoner Fluxx and EcoFluxx. The rules are the same from version to version. Only the cards change with the "Keepers", "Goals", "Rules" and "Actions" changing to reflect the "flavor" of the version. The various Fluxx games are compatible with each other and can be combined into a single massive Fluxx game, although I personally prefer to keep each game separate as each game has its own "flavor." With the success of Fluxx, in all of its versions, it looks like Looney Labs have found their golden egg...

I decided to play this game because we didn't have a lot of time and I wanted something we could get into quickly and easily. It's hard to find another game that is as quick and easy to get into as any of the Fluxx family of games. As expected, the game went over well. Even non-game players will enjoy a game of Fluxx.

Not every game has to offer difficult choices and deep strategy to be fun. In fact not ever game has to offer anything in the way of choices or strategy to be fun. Anyone who claims that Fluxx is not a game just because it is too simple or too random or doesn't offer any choices is simply showing how limited they, themselves, are in their gaming options. They are showing themselves to be, in fact, gaming bigots.

Games Played: Hellas

The other game I got a chance to play for the first time was Hellas. I've heard a lot of good things about this game and I've been wanting to try it out. After three plays, I can see why the game is appreciated. It is an interesting mix of area control and card play. It has a "wargame" flavor but is easy to learn and play. I can see this game coming to table on a regular basis.

Hannibal Hits the Table!

I got the opportunity (finally!) to play Hannibal: Rome vs. Carthage yesterday. Wow. This game deserves its reputation!

We used my (up unitl now) unpunched copy of the game to play. I collect games, true, but I collect them to play, not as an investments or as display pieces. Getting an unpunched out-of-print game on eBay is nice, but only because it means the game is complete. Games are meant to be played.

By luck of the draw, I played Rome. After one play, I'm not prepared to knowledgably discuss the strategy of the game but I can say both sides feel like the other side is in the better position. For me, that's always a good sign.

Not knowing any better, I started off the game with an invasion of Africa and an attack on Carthage. That was a mistake and resulted in the destruction of the entire invasion force. Oops. This debacle was not as hard to recover from as I thought it might be. Rome is nothing if not resilient.

Fighting Hannibal without an overwhleming force or a good General (and both is better!) is a recipe for disaster. I managed to keep Hannibal out of Italy for the most part. Perhaps my opponent was simply not aggresive enough. I'm not sure what I would have done different had I been playing Hannibal, but I do come to the conclusion that the Carthagenian player cannot let Rome set the pace of the game. Hannibal and Carthage must take the battle to Rome and force Rome to react to Carthaginian moves. Give Rome the strategic inititive and time and perponderance of force will grind the Carthgenians down.

In the end Hannibal was killed in a battle in Northern Italy. Scipio Africanus was the victorious Roman general. At this point in the game, with three turns left, the my opponent was winning on points. With Hannibal gone and having lost a number of armies in other battles, my opponent felt the game was a lost cause and conceded. Personally, I'm still not sure a Roman victory was assured at this point, but maybe I'm too conservative to see the obvious. I think Rome would have won, but I don't believe it was a guaranteed victory. The loss of Hannibal, do doubt, is a hard blow to the Carthagenian hopes for victory.

Hannibal: Rome vs. Carthage is a "card driven" wargame. Card Driven Games (CDGs) are a relatively new addition (the first one, We the People was published just over ten years ago in 1994) to the wargaming family. I find I really enjoy the card driven games. Something about the card play adds something to these games that make them much more appealing to me than a "traditional" hex and chit boardgame. I haven't had the opportunity to play many of the card driven games yet, so I'm always looking for chances to play these games. They are just so much fun!