Enrico Viglino
United States
Phoenix, AZ
Arizona
-
I don't think I've FINISHED, let alone won, an opposed game of this.
I was on fairly good track as Russia a couple of times though.
-
-
suPUR DUEper
United States
Villa Hills
Kentucky
-
Wendell took WiF so I will go with EIA.
EPIC!
The power of France
Shifting alliances
Battle tactic selecaton
Small well lead corps shredding ponderous armies
How far Moscow is from Paris
Mighty sea battles.
Forcing an opponent to the peace table.
Turkish CAV. Lots of Turkish CAV.
The Duke of Wellington. Davout. Blucher. Charles. And 5.5.6 Napoleon himself.
-
-
Warren Bruhn
United States
Portland
Oregon
-
At the almost invitation of the OP to post two games if there was a tie, I'm adding AH/ADG's Empires in Arms to my previous listing of VG The Civil War. The reason why I'm doing that is because multi-player games are so fundamentally different from two player games. Unlike VG The Civil War and other great two player games that are like chess matches with dice and/or cards, Empires in Arms is a 3d/4d, multi-player chess/poker/Diplomacy/economic. The variables of interaction are radically expanded.
While the antique Diplomacy game was far too raw, and was mostly a popularity contest, EiA retains a bit of Diplomacy at its core but moderates that with the economics of force building, a diplomatic system of limited peace terms and enforced periods of peace, and an adequately stimulating military movement and supply and combat system. The end result is a structure for true multi-player competition in which a military disaster can be compensated for by good diplomacy and good economic planning, where a diplomatic disaster can be compensated for by great military moves, etc. The system therefor allows players to compensate for temporary failures in one aspect of the game or another by success in other aspects. This is far more rewarding than the simple rawness of Diplomacy, or the two player contests in an otherwise good wargame.
The diplomatic system in this game is nothing short of brilliant. It is a work of genius. The formal alliances, the political point cost of declarations of war, loss of territory, defeats in battle, limited available peace terms, and periods of enforced peace are just better than anything I've ever seen in another multi-player game. But that alone would not make it a great game. The diplomatic system is built on a good wargame.
This virtually antique game is not without its flaws. There are numerous grey areas in the complex looking rules that have provoked a nickname of "Empires in Arguments" to be applied. However, the fundamental ideas behind these rules are good. The basic system of production of troops and ships, the basic system of movement and supply, and the somewhat elaborate method of resolving land combat, are all good enough that they are enjoyable to play in their own right. The diplomatic game is thus built on a solid foundation of a good wargame. The system is actually not too complicated, even though the rules look intimidating to modern wargamers. Most groups of players can manage to hammer out solutions to the various grey areas in the rules.
The combat system is often remarked upon as one of the gems within the game. I'm not referring to the naval combat, which is rather bland, but to army battles. Picking combat chits leads to a three round interaction of dice rolls on a 5 by 5 grid of casualty vs morale effects tables. This looks stupendously complicated at first to somebody who is used to picking up a handful of dice to roll in Axis vs Allies or The Napoleonic Wars or any of the many other buckets of dice type games. But sitting down with these tables, punching in the numbers into a calculator to come up with total force and total morale, picking the chits while trying not to sweat too much on them, and then revealing the chit and going through up to three rounds of combat in a day, wondering each round which side's morale will break, is a truly exciting experience. For something that seems so wierdly over-envolved, this combat system actually produces some of the flavor and tension of great Napoleonic battles. And that punchuates the narative of the grand sweep of the long strategic game. If definately beats the "I've got 3:1 odds, so role on that table" kind of game. I love the lack of odds tables. Casualities are based on percentages, and morale is critical.
This is probably the game that I most crave playing. That is odd in some ways. I normally like historical games. History has often been thrown out the window in EiA before the first move is even made, due to pre-game declarations of war. And it just gets less and less historical after that. However, as a long running fantasy role playing game of empire sized conflicts, this game is unmatched among cardboard games. The choice of the Napoleonic era as a setting, and the many bits of Napoleonic chrome, give the game an identity as an adventure in the Napoleonic era, no matter what the historical flaws might be.
While the victory conditions aren't really related to the specific national aspirations of any of the powers, at least the victory point targets are weighted according to the strength or weakness of each power. This makes any power a potential winner, at least for some considerable length of time into the game. It's not too hard to graft on a bit more historical motivation onto the victory system with some house rules, but it's not absolutely necessary in order to have a fun grand campaign.
While it is somewhat difficult for players to understand the power balance in the 1805 campaign, in which France is really the 800 lb gorilla, there is a more balanced 1792 campaign variant available, in which France is wracked by revolution and famine, and in which good French generals might be decapitated by the guillotine. Perhaps someday players will actually try my own 1796 campaign variant, though I'm not holding my breath for that.
While this game is clunky, bland looking, and seems archaic in its mechanics, it is actually one of the richest and most absorbing gaming experiences that a player can have with cardboard. In a wargaming life, this one should not be missed.
-
-
J.L. Robert
United States
Sherman Oaks
California
-
|
Poll:
The 2012 AH Cup
|
|
Fourth Round
|
| |
Your Answer |
|
Vote Percent |
Vote Count |
|
22 Empires in Arms - Middlesbrough
|
|
|
39.1% |
45
|
|
12 Diplomacy - West Bromwich Albion
|
|
|
60.9% |
70
|
|
Voters |
115 |
This poll is now closed.
115 answers
Closes: Mon Mar 19, 2012 6:00 am
-
-
Rich Hussein Shipley
United States
Baltimore
Maryland
By some definitions, gaming is my religion
-
The group I was in knocked it out in about 9 months of Monday nights (around 5 hours each). A great and truly epic game. It has strategy, economics, and a combat system that provides tactical options.
I played World in Flames and some of the big OCS games with them too. I might have to join them again soon.
-
-
J.L. Robert
United States
Sherman Oaks
California
-
|
Poll:
The 2012 AH Cup
|
|
Third Round Replay
|
This poll is now closed.
100 answers
Closes: Mon Mar 12, 2012 5:00 am
-
-
Bonaparte
United States
DesMoines
Washington
-
This was not the first monster game, nor the first Napoleonic game. But it was definitely the first Greatest Game of All Time type game.
-
-
Evil Bob
Canada
Montreal
Quebec
-
I played this game a number of times, back in the day and loved every session. Now that my friends and I are older, scheduling 7 people committed to 200+ hours (approx. 400 hours in our last game) is next to impossible. Chances are that I'll never play Le Grand Campaign again.
My copy of this game will never leave my collection and I'm hoping to brush off the 10+ years of accumulated dust to perhaps play one of the shorter scenarios.
-
-
Wendell
United States
Arlington
Virginia
All the little chicks with crimson lips, go...
Hey, get your stinking cursor off my face! I got nukes, you know.
-
Small World is a wargame!
Are you suggesting it takes hexes to make a wargame? Does that mean Settlers of Catan is a wargame, and Empires in Arms isn't??
-
-
David Dockter
United States
Minnesota
-
Empire in Arms set in the ancient world. I don't care if will take a few hundred hours to play it: I know my wargame group would enjoy every minute of it.
There are tooooo very few meaty, complex multiplayer wargames; lots of beer and pretzel games (all hail Risk), but too few Empires in Arms and World in Flames.
-
-
-
Found this at Goodwill for a $1.99. Everything accounted for. It says on the cover that play time is from 2-to-200 hours depending on scenario. I didn't realize one of the scenarios taking 200 was counting the pieces!
-
-
Dave Elder
Canada
High River (near Calgary)
Alberta
-
Empires in Arms...complete at MCC Thrift...$2.00.
-
-
♬♪♪ ♫ ♩ ♫♫♪ ♩♬♪ ♫
Australia
Victoria
What happens when typographers play Busen Memo? . . . . . . . . . ὠ ὡ ὢ ὣ ὤ ὥ ὦ ὧ
-
I fondly remember every game of Empires I have played, winning or losing. It creates great stories, and the games become narratives.
Empires is a huge, looong game - the duration is the whole point. Stuff happens- fortunes change, then change again. Alliances form, break, reform... There is always something fascinating happening!
Anyone in Melbourne looking for players? Mail me, please!
-
-
Matthew Wettstein
Switzerland
Washington
-
Pre-2000 Position: #72
Current Position: #344
Year: 1983
-
-
David Dockter
United States
Minnesota
-
3 words
-
-
-
What, no Napoleon??
Vive l'Empereur!
-
-
David Dockter
United States
Minnesota
-
If you invited Kirk and Picard over for games, I say Kirk show up with a copy of Empire in Arms or World in Flames.
Picard? You know what he brings; he's packin something with a Pink Pony. 
-
-
Martí Cabré
Terrassa
Catalonia
-
1805-1815
Napoleonic Wars.
Featuring France, United Kingdom, Austria, Russia, Prussia, Spain, Turkey.
-
-
-
Posats a recordar jocs que un vol jugar, el EiA és el joc a tenir en compte. Vist que no hi ha quorum per jugar-lo en viu, em fet un parell d'intents per jugar-lo per correu peró tampoc ha pogut ser. Ja sabeu el bo es fa esperar.
-
-
-
First published i Australia 1983, back then it looked like this:
-
-
Martí Cabré
Terrassa
Catalonia
-
We're currently playing the campaign by email. This is the great classic of Napoleonic strategy and the game is going through strange ways, though it makes it really instructive.
-
-
David Dockter
United States
Minnesota
-
I always thought the Empire in Arms map was a great game map: functional, nice looking, simple. And, the big double map. I'm tired of playing on the industry standard table size. Give us some double maps: our eyesight is failing.
-
-
Wendell
United States
Arlington
Virginia
All the little chicks with crimson lips, go...
Hey, get your stinking cursor off my face! I got nukes, you know.
-
Completed three full campaign games.
-
-
Wendell
United States
Arlington
Virginia
All the little chicks with crimson lips, go...
Hey, get your stinking cursor off my face! I got nukes, you know.
-
Portuguese have an important role in this classic game of the Napoleonic Wars.
-
-
David Dockter
United States
Minnesota
-
Cornerstone of wargaming.
-
-
|
|
Wow. Jaw drop. Really, I'm not a big wargamer, but this, this I would play. I love the idea of really engaging long term in something this outrageously expansive. Dave, I'll go with you to the island. Or hell, I'll meet you in Regina. That's about halfway, near as I can tell, between St. Paul and Calgary. Oy.
