Recommend
 
 Thumb up
 Hide
8 Posts

BoardGameGeek» Forums » Gaming Related » Recommendations

Subject: A game of thrones Second edition vs Imperial 2030 rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Johan Haglert
Sweden
Örebro
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Which one is the better game and why? What's the major differences? Why do you think so?

(If you think it's appropriate to include Fortress America do so.)
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Kurt Keckley
United States
Bakersfield
California
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Fields of Despair - GMT P500.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I like the apple more than the orange.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Johan Haglert
Sweden
Örebro
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
p38_Lightning wrote:
I like the apple more than the orange.
Spoiler (click to reveal)
That's cool. But if you can decide between those two fruits how about telling me what you think about the two games?

Edit: So you can pick your favorite between two different fruits after all?
Now what about the games?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Geoff Speare
United States
Bedford
Massachusetts
flag msg tools
badge
tee hee, that tickles!!!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Haven't played either one...but I've played Game of Thrones 1st Edition and Imperial, so here goes.

Game of Thrones has a lot more negotiation (think Diplomacy, the game, mixed with clever Euro mechanisms). Imperial has manipulation of the stock market -- you are never tied to one country, so who attacks who is a bit vague.

If you like negotiation, Game of Thrones is excellent. Apparently 2nd edition has some issues with 4-5 players, but there are several straightforward variants suggested. If you like a bit of market manipulation with your combat, go with Imperial. Both are great games.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hype Buster
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Both have a diplomatic element in it...

If you like back stabs in games go with GoT. It is a bit more diplomatic obviously.

If you like stocks market element go with imperial.

Both games are good. Both are different. If this can help, i think GoT is best to play with 5 players and i would not put in on table with 4 players anymore, i only played first edition that say 3 to 5 players but its a really a game to play with 5. While imperial i will play it anytime 4-5 or 6 players.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hype Buster
msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Forgot to say... if you saw the series, go with the new edition of Game of throne. Just seen a video of it and it look a lot more epic then the first one.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Johan Haglert
Sweden
Örebro
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
galfridus wrote:
Haven't played either one...but I've played Game of Thrones 1st Edition and Imperial, so here goes.

Game of Thrones has a lot more negotiation (think Diplomacy, the game, mixed with clever Euro mechanisms). Imperial has manipulation of the stock market -- you are never tied to one country, so who attacks who is a bit vague.

If you like negotiation, Game of Thrones is excellent. Apparently 2nd edition has some issues with 4-5 players, but there are several straightforward variants suggested. If you like a bit of market manipulation with your combat, go with Imperial. Both are great games.
The problem with that is that I've seen a thread from 2008 where the two games was compared and the majority of the people (by quite a large margin) who answered said they preferred Imperial by then.

But since then the second edition has came out and it has also been said that it incorporated many of the changes the expansions for the first edition had. With the expansions and new things probably seen as improvements over how it worked before them.

But because of that it may not be fair to compare it to the first edition (maybe if you have played with the expansions?)

I haven't played Diplomacy so the comparison doesn't help. I do have played A Game of Thrones: The Board Game (Second Edition) however so I know how that game felt and yeah, we tried to convince each other of various things and do deals and the game moved back and forth quite a lot. But since I haven't played Imperial or Imperial 2030 I don't really know how those feel. I haven't played any 18XX-games either so that doesn't help (assuming Imperial is somewhat like 18XX but with war and taxes as result instead of railroad tracks.)

The best thing would of course be if I got to play Imperial. And I do want to get to play that, Runewars, Twilight Imperium and the other games I've asked about but I don't know when I get the chance to. I don't know who got Imperial but I suppose that should be solvable.

We played aGoT 2nd edition with six players. It took us around 7(+) hours with rule walk-through which was much longer than I would had preferred but five of us was new to the game. If I would have to say something negative about it it would be that it was somewhat time consuming to time over time again look up the total value of the units + chip + possible own cards vs looking through someone else cards, his units, chips, find any possibly support and maybe even allies and in the case of the sword add that. Also I think the three additional "tokens" was rather unnecessary and people forgot about them every now and then. (Plus I played green/T* so I started so low on the tracks with stars which felt limiting but I know I've got excellent 3 and 4 point cards.)

Harder to "get" Imperial. aGoT would be quite easy to explain the basic game of for someone if you avoided the auctions and tracks and tokens and things that happened each round + the power tokens.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Johan Haglert
Sweden
Örebro
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
generalpotato wrote:
Both have a diplomatic element in it...

If you like back stabs in games go with GoT. It is a bit more diplomatic obviously.

If you like stocks market element go with imperial.

Both games are good. Both are different. If this can help, i think GoT is best to play with 5 players and i would not put in on table with 4 players anymore, i only played first edition that say 3 to 5 players but its a really a game to play with 5. While imperial i will play it anytime 4-5 or 6 players.
The thing is alliances which are like vapor isn't worth that much anyhow. It would make more sense if they lasted a little longer I suppose. Rex: Final Days of an Empire may be interesting in that regard. Long since I watched the videos of it though.

Haven't played a stock market game. Maybe that is one way to get it to get more variation but then a stock market train game would move it all away from area control to (or well.. a little?)

Because four player become two 1vs1 games? Make less sense diplomatic / make it play uneven if two people cooperate against a third? 2 vs 2?

Imperial isn't anything to play with 2 or 3 players? aGoT?
generalpotato wrote:
Forgot to say... if you saw the series, go with the new edition of Game of throne. Just seen a video of it and it look a lot more epic then the first one.
Haven't seen the series or read the books so I don't had a feeling for the houses or the cards.
 
 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.