Recommend
4 
 Thumb up
 Hide
8 Posts

Warlords of Europe» Forums » General

Subject: Another Sunday Morning rant against a Great game rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Lawrence Davis
United States
Indiana
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
As you guys already know, this is a great game. I mean really....how many games these days can you yell out .... "Vanquish....Vanquish them all!!!"
That's just cool....I don't care who you are.

But even with great games....there are a couple of things I would have brought up in the design phase.

Remember when Avalon Hill sold those cool interlocking capital and city pieces with History of the World. Remember that.
.....aahhh.....yep..... those were the days....those were the days when men were men and games were games......

Anyway, I wish they had did that with the castle pieces in this game. A wall square seperate from the tower.....two interlocking pieces. The wall goes up first, then you place the tower in the center when you finish it. It would have been so visually nice while at the same time instantly functioning to let every player know which castle has and hasn't been finished. And it would have done away with that "corner construction piece" that I find constantly gets hidden from view when a player masses a large force in a castle fief.

Maybe it costs a lot of money to have two seperate molds like that though these days.....I don't know. But I would have been willing to pay extra coin to have it in my game do tell!!

Now, I do know every player in the game represents a baron or Noble or King just out do what's right. But that seems alittle off to me. Why not every player just represent a king.
I mean Kings build Castles right?
Kings pay knights and rule kingdoms right?
Kings subjugate peasants and tax the counties right?
Kings wear robes and carry scepters right?
Kings drink from goblets and wear crowns right?
Kings.......hey ..... what's my point, right?

Anyway, I see each player as a king and each warlord piece as a Noble or a Baron or just a plain Lord. Each one you pay for represents a highly placed man on the social ladder out to do you bidding,......for King and Country no doubt.

Speaking of warlords, I've started painting the flags on mine.
Not to show allegiance to one side or color, but to give each one a distinct and single identification.

Picture this scene if you will.
"Sire, I have just received message that Lord Blue moves against our castle at Roma"
"What size force, do you know?"
"Sire, the runner only states that it is a sizable force indeed."
"I see......have Noble Orange report to me before nightfall. We shall formulate a jester's plan for our uninvited guest."
"As you command, your majesty."

And hey....what's up with not being allowed to kill these "warlords" (if you insist on using the word) on the spot. You lose half a well paid army to one of them, but he surrenders among the dead and dying only to be sent to some dark and dank dungeon in your castle.
That is totally not cool man.
"Off!!! Off with his head!!!" I say.

Anyway, that's it for me. I've got to go get some more coffee.

I'm enjoying the game and so looking forward to the expansion.



4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave de Vil
United Kingdom
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
Avatar
I'm developing a variant which has Kings.

The player represents a dynasty, and the Warlords pieces the nobles who hold fiefs from the King. This needs a Lord piece for each fief in the game, painted with the relevant coat of arms, and fief cards to denote control of the Lord.

The version attempts to reproduce the Feudal System, with each King entirely dependent on his Lords to provide his armies, as you raise soldiers by feudal service rather than "buying" them.

I'll post some files on this soon.


I was wondering if the producers might make extra sets of combat units available for those of us wanting to mod the game.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave Daffin
United Kingdom
Ledbury
Herefordshire
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I enjoyed reading this post, and agree that the Warlords should (and probably will in my games) each have their own identity, leading to the creation of unique 'stories' in each game.

I only received my copy last Friday, but what a joy to open the box. That mapboard is a work of art. I haven't had chance to play the game yet - I hope to soon. The components are great. I was a bit mystified why the warlords are all gray - but painting each one individually may be a good option.

From what I've seen and read, the game is endlessly customisable. It's great to have the opportunity from the guys to print off your own cards and make your own events - I can see myself doing that and going to some depth. Each game can then be quite different, with cards producing an occasional element of surprise.

I agree with others that a couple more armies would have been nice to have - and an opportunity to purchase them in an expansion would be most welcome.

I'm really glad to have stumbled upon this game, and pleased to be supporting a small company. I hope it sells by the bucketload. Great job, guys.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Russ Rupe
United States
Franklin
Tennessee
flag msg tools
designer
publisher
Nashville board game con every March: tngamedays.com
badge
Warehouse 13: The Board Game
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Be mystified no longer. :)

The reason the warlords are gray and don't match their respective army colors is that we wanted them to form a common supply pool. Thus, they are a limited resource to be competed over (more a factor in a 4 player game). Also, the gray makes it easy to pick out at a glance that an enemy army has a range of 2 (important information to keep track of).

Thanks for the kind words!
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave de Vil
United Kingdom
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
Avatar
Calculating what I need...

My own version of the map currently has 118 fiefs, so I need that number of Lords...

I actually prefer the mounted knight pieces for Lords, so maybe the Warlords will be promoted Kings.

Swordsmen for Knights.

Also thinking about cities (using Mighty Empires pieces); these would have all the benefits of castles, but double the tax value of a fief. Actually the ME "banner" pieces might work better as Lords, though they're from a somewhat later period.

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/image/486017/mighty-empires

The idea of baggage and subsistence from ME is another possible import.

Another idea for the fief cards is a random start; if you don't want all the bother of sweeping up peasant fiefs, or arguing about who has which kingdom, just deal out the fief cards evenly at start. There are advantages and disadvantages of having a scattered start, or a main concentration of fiefs.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lawrence Davis
United States
Indiana
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
sporksfoons wrote:
Be mystified no longer.

The reason the warlords are gray and don't match their respective army colors is that we wanted them to form a common supply pool. Thus, they are a limited resource to be competed over (more a factor in a 4 player game). Also, the gray makes it easy to pick out at a glance that an enemy army has a range of 2 (important information to keep track of).

Thanks for the kind words!
No, Thank you guys!

I've only painted the warlord's flags, because I too agree, it's very important to tell who has one and where.

In the interest of keeping the warlords a limited resource, I understand why the rules don't allow for instant termination of them after battle. Placing them back into the box for repurchase could cause some serious problems for gamebalance.

I may practice with a houserule though that does allow a player to kill them after battle but at some financial cost or other drawback.

1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dave de Vil
United Kingdom
Unspecified
Unspecified
flag msg tools
Avatar
Are you the DocD formerly of the now defunct Avalon Hill A&A forums?

Thought there was something familiar...


Anyhow, my "Feudal System" development of this game increases the importance and number of Warlords. You can have as many warlords as you have fiefs, but now only warlords may command and move armies. Combat is different in that Lords (and Kings) can now be killed in battle; you may get the piece back as the dead Lord's son and heir, but he may have sired only daughters which have to be given away to another player, along with her fief and cash. Lords can be executed, but only for treason against their feudal Lord. They are also expected to pay their own ransoms.

I notice from the photo gallery that some areas of the map can get pretty crowded; one use of my fief cards is as holding areas for large armies under the command of the relevant noble.
They now have 1-4 settlements per fief; a "capital" where the castle or city is built, and 1-3 Knights fees for the Lord's tenants. Since Lords will have their own treasuries, perhaps a Lord can build a "barons castle" with limited powers. The player (i.e. the King) can build this up to a Royal Castle (full powers) at his own expense.

The idea of cities is growing; I like the idea of a limit similar to castles, i.e. one per player per kingdom. Cities are not reduced when captured, but may be sacked if you might not be staying there for long...
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lawrence Davis
United States
Indiana
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Yes Dave, I am in fact the Great DocD from the AvalonHill boards.

I'm looking forward to downloading your new variant. Thanks.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.