Shea, this is an excellent overview! I learned the game over the weekend, and while I feel fairly comfortable teaching this one (in my opinion, it's one of the very best rulebooks I've ever read!), I wanted to find a comprehensive, yet tightly taught, video and yours is head-and-shoulders above the rest. Again, exceptionally well done!
Excellent tutorial (as usual), and I just want to say that I really appreciate the intro. While I do enjoy the regular skit intros, I'm glad that you decided to instead educate the viewers!
Thanks! It definitely felt a little strange not to start on a joke, but I felt it was important to treat the subject matter with the respect these people deserve.
Shea, thank you for the thoughtful prologue to this video. Too often games use historical events purely for entertainment while often glossing over or sometimes glorifying the devastation and impact upon so many people and cultures. War, colonialism, slavery and other atrocities are part of world history and should not be ignored or forgotten. Well designed, historical games like Pax Pamir can encourage education and discussion through an entertaining platform. Thank-you for shinning a light on this issue.
I'm sort of a history buff, so I very much enjoy the thought and attention to detail that was put in to this game. I of course also like when people become more educated, history in particular is essential for understanding why the world we live in today is as it is. However, there's not really a problem with just making entertainment based on history. Like, Raider of the North Sea is perfectly fine with just being loosely based on a general (mis)understanding of the vikings and who they were. Blitzkreig! is a fast and entertaining game of WW2, which I think is fine. It doesn't need a long thesis on the horrors of the Holocaust etc. Tbh, Pax Pamir would be easier to play with bigger symbols and region names on the cards and smaller background text, since the only thing the background text does from a play-ability perspective is overload the players. You want to be able to read the name on cards around the table, some which are upside down. At the end of the game, less focus on history and more on the game would probably have been a net positive.
Wow. I love it. But this game seems to be a tough one. I will have to rewatch. As normally I speed up videos, this one was a bit too quick for me. Great job and energy anyway. Tahx
Excellent tutorial. This is the one I'll link to for any friends that want a preview before coming over to play. Do you have a link for your Wakhan teach?
I absolutely love Strange New Worlds. Best of the new series by far. I'm a little concerned that they're going to just keep killing off cast members until they have the original Enterprise crew. And that's fine but it makes me a little less invested in who we have now, which is a shame, because these characters are great.
I'll always have a soft spot for Voyager. That's the first series I remember watching the premiere and finale of when they aired. But after rewatching them all, my heart lies with DS9.
As the other commenter said, yes you can play 2 without, but it's a different experience, and I think it's recommended to play with wakhan at 2 players. Of course your mileage may vary.
At 20:05, you have a court with a British and Afghan partisan, is this a mistake, or is there a way to get cards of different affiliations into your court that doesn't require playing them from your own hand?
You aren't doing anything wrong. The 20 minutes part of the title is referring to how long it takes to learn the game when watching the video, not how long it will take to play the game.
Great vid! One small thing you might want to correct: In the successful dominance check part of the video you show 5-2-1 VPs and 3-3-1 in case of a tie. I believe this should be 5-3-1 and 4-4-1. Your voiceover is correct but the video isn't.
I probably should've labeled it as such, but what those numbers are referring to is the amount of influence each player has, not the points they gain. The point trackers go to the correct spots.
Thank you for this, and thank you for the note at the begining I love this game, but sometimes I don't want to play it just to not see some cards. It is bad to see stupid kings/peoples/events and not remember the damage all this era caused.
Totally understandable. My partner felt similarly when we first played. Not because of a personal connection, but more because of the callousness of the setting. It's not going to be for everyone, even if we would otherwise want to play.
I struggled with this video. Too much "Here's a thing that I will tell you about later". That always muddies the waters, because now I'm wondering about that thing and struggling to focus on what you've moved on to. I personally just dont say anything about stuff that matters later until the time to discuss it has arrived.
I followed your John Company, Twilight Imperium, and Oath videos, but this one is too confusing. Sorry. What's the objective? Why should you try to buy a card? Why might you choose declaring loyalty to one faction over another?
Buying cards allows you to support your chosen factions and gives you actions beyond just purchasing and playing cards (the only actions you have at the start). Truthfully the cards dictate what factions you would want to support if there were for example a bunch of cards in the market that supported the British it would be to your advantage to support them. However, even if multiple players are trying to support the same faction on the map they are still competing and vying for influence with the faction through gifts (control of the patriots) and killing enemies of their faction (acquiring prizes). The objective is getting VPs through either militarily supporting one of the 3 coalitions until they have a plurality of 4 blocks more than their opponents in which you score points based on your allegiance during the dominance checks (4 scoring cards in the market deck) The alternative (and more common outcome when scoring occurs) is that there is no clear victor between the coalitions and thus the tribes (the players) compare how much influence they have by how many cylinders (spies and tribes) they have in play (which is achieved mostly by playing cards and killing other peoples cylinders). Its like a 1/2 area control game where you want a faction to win but if you waste too much time building up the coalition and you don't actually achieve victory you may lose to a dude that just has a bunch of spies and influence. So it's a bit of a balancing act.
I mean I like it, but this video isn't a review. If you want a more critical approach, I'd recommend watching No Pun Included's review. That might give you a better sense of whether you'll like it or not.
@@RTFM Sure at 2:51 you are saying to build the "draw deck" starting with the "court cards"; 3:03 you say to leave the extra court cards in the box; 3:18 you then say pull out the "market board" and start drawing "court cards". What court cards are you using if you just threw the remaining court card pile in the box?
@@ethidian3444 Ah, I see. You're drawing the cards onto the market from the draw deck you just constructed, most of which will be court cards. I probably should've just said draw out cards from the draw pile, as those are now a mixture of court, event, and dominance cards.
Complexity is relative. The actual mechanics of the rules are actually quite intuitive and quickly learned. Where the game gets complex is in the large number of choices and interactions that develop between cards and the board position. The clever part of the game is in the scoring. Since if someone manages to get two wins in first place in a row they’ll usually have the +4 points necessary to auto win, anyone that score second or third place points is immediately incentivized to switch factions or try to overthrow the first place person’s position. The result is a highly fluid game where switching allegiances occurs often. Cooperation between players changes turn to turn, or even card to card. It’s an excessively clever game design.
@@Spandau-Filet not passive-aggressive at all, I know a gamer who built this as a pnp and sometimes she brings it to a con, I wouldn't say no when she were to explain it.
Wait, so you intentionally left the closed captions empty just to use them to correct a mistake? Please, absolutely do *NOT* EVER do that. Some people can not hear. Closed captions exist to allow those people to watch videos too. If you make a mistake, do what everyone else does and put it in the description or a pinned comment. And remember, *accessibility helps everybody*
So I've actually done both of these things. Like I say immediately after recommending the subtitles, there is also a spot in the video description for corrections. Also, the captions channel has both an option for the "klingon" corrections and auto-generated english (getting bespoke captions is unfortunately extremely time consuming/expensive). Accessibility is important, which is why I try to provide multiple options.
Your videos are pretty much perfect - very clear, well structured, with just a dash of humor that helps with habituation. Awesome stuff!
Thank you so much!
You’re a cult member aren’t you
Shea, this is an excellent overview! I learned the game over the weekend, and while I feel fairly comfortable teaching this one (in my opinion, it's one of the very best rulebooks I've ever read!), I wanted to find a comprehensive, yet tightly taught, video and yours is head-and-shoulders above the rest. Again, exceptionally well done!
Thanks, happy to help!
Excellent tutorial (as usual), and I just want to say that I really appreciate the intro. While I do enjoy the regular skit intros, I'm glad that you decided to instead educate the viewers!
Thanks! It definitely felt a little strange not to start on a joke, but I felt it was important to treat the subject matter with the respect these people deserve.
Lost it at Spies, but will rewatch!
The timing for this video is incredible, just got this game for Christmas and cannot wait to play it!
This was one of the best game walkthroughs I've seen (and I can't wait to dig into this game). Thank you sir!
Happy to help!
Excellent intro and thanks for the rules teach!
Thanks! Happy to help!
Well done! And thanks! We got it 82% right on our own. Cheers!
Shea, thank you for the thoughtful prologue to this video. Too often games use historical events purely for entertainment while often glossing over or sometimes glorifying the devastation and impact upon so many people and cultures. War, colonialism, slavery and other atrocities are part of world history and should not be ignored or forgotten. Well designed, historical games like Pax Pamir can encourage education and discussion through an entertaining platform. Thank-you for shinning a light on this issue.
I'm sort of a history buff, so I very much enjoy the thought and attention to detail that was put in to this game. I of course also like when people become more educated, history in particular is essential for understanding why the world we live in today is as it is.
However, there's not really a problem with just making entertainment based on history. Like, Raider of the North Sea is perfectly fine with just being loosely based on a general (mis)understanding of the vikings and who they were. Blitzkreig! is a fast and entertaining game of WW2, which I think is fine. It doesn't need a long thesis on the horrors of the Holocaust etc.
Tbh, Pax Pamir would be easier to play with bigger symbols and region names on the cards and smaller background text, since the only thing the background text does from a play-ability perspective is overload the players. You want to be able to read the name on cards around the table, some which are upside down. At the end of the game, less focus on history and more on the game would probably have been a net positive.
Best tutorial ever for this game. Congrats!
Thanks!
Awesome!!!!!!! Thanks for another great tutorial for a great game! Keep it up the outstanding work, Shea!
Thanks!
such a professional ! Love your videos. Keep up the excellent work!
Thanks!
Great video! Thank you so much!
Great tutorial and 100%. DS9 is the best
Excellent video!
thanks!
Wow. I love it. But this game seems to be a tough one. I will have to rewatch. As normally I speed up videos, this one was a bit too quick for me. Great job and energy anyway. Tahx
At 19:45 , audio and the text on the screen says different things. One assumes rounding down, the other rounding up.
Oh yeah, hey. Not a rounding issue, just a mistake. They should both by 8/2, so 4. I'll add a note.
It's TNG and I will not hear otherwise.
Great video.
Haha, we will agree to disagree then.
Badly written tripe. Ask Matt Colville.
Definitely DS9. Then TNG. then everything else. That's right, I made it to the end of the video
Excellent tutorial. This is the one I'll link to for any friends that want a preview before coming over to play. Do you have a link for your Wakhan teach?
Sure, it's at ua-cam.com/video/yB5INLTozxM/v-deo.htmlsi=2RAONh7wWqzEYb0s
You are correct about DS9, but give Strange New Worlds a year or two. I give it a chance to take a crack at the king. Oh, and love the game too.
I absolutely love Strange New Worlds. Best of the new series by far. I'm a little concerned that they're going to just keep killing off cast members until they have the original Enterprise crew. And that's fine but it makes me a little less invested in who we have now, which is a shame, because these characters are great.
Deep Space Nine 👍
"YOU WILL NOT ALLOW"
ua-cam.com/video/w0HIQp-jjfc/v-deo.html
Absolutely magnificent.
Great tutorial. Got a subs!
Hello! Maybe I missed the infos, but I thought there was also a solo mode video also planned? Thank you :) Good work as always!
Yep, my Patreon backers have been able to watch it for a while, but for everyone else it'll go live on Saturday.
@@RTFM Ok! :D
While I freely admit that _Deep Space Nine_ is good I'm a _Voyager_ fan myself. I know it has many flaws but I still like it.
Thanks for the video!
I'll always have a soft spot for Voyager. That's the first series I remember watching the premiere and finale of when they aired. But after rewatching them all, my heart lies with DS9.
@@RTFM I'm not surprised, Voyager is a Euro and DS9 Ameritrash.
In a 2p game, its required to play with wakhan?
i think wakhan can be played with up to 2 players but it is not necessary although it would definitely change the game dynamic having just 2
As the other commenter said, yes you can play 2 without, but it's a different experience, and I think it's recommended to play with wakhan at 2 players. Of course your mileage may vary.
@@RTFM thanks a lot!
It would be cool to have a tutorial for Musket and Pike.
I actually let my Patreon backers decide what I vote on, so if you want to suggest a game, joining is the way to do that.
@@RTFM haha I'm seriously thinking about it. Just got excited with this tutorial I guess...
At 20:05, you have a court with a British and Afghan partisan, is this a mistake, or is there a way to get cards of different affiliations into your court that doesn't require playing them from your own hand?
It's a mistake. There's a note about it in the description.
Error at : 17:40 impossible court, russian and english patriots on the same court :o
Ah, good point. I'll add a note.
I have watched your video but it still takes us over one hour to play the game. What are we doing wrong? Thanks
You aren't doing anything wrong. The 20 minutes part of the title is referring to how long it takes to learn the game when watching the video, not how long it will take to play the game.
@@RTFM Ah, sorry. Sarcasm doesn't transmit very well over the internet.
Can i Discard a court card if theres any spy on it?
Yes you can. The spy is returned to its owner
At the end of your turn, can you discard a card with spies of another player on it as a means to get rid of spies?
Sorry for the late response. Yes, if you need to discard a card at the end of your turn, you can choose a card with spies on it.
@@RTFM no problem, thanks for taking the time to respond!
Great vid! One small thing you might want to correct: In the successful dominance check part of the video you show 5-2-1 VPs and 3-3-1 in case of a tie. I believe this should be 5-3-1 and 4-4-1. Your voiceover is correct but the video isn't.
I probably should've labeled it as such, but what those numbers are referring to is the amount of influence each player has, not the points they gain. The point trackers go to the correct spots.
@@RTFM ah okay that was unclear to me but makes sense.
wju dont you just roll the playmat other way around (picture outside).... and no corners roll up :p
Because then the corners roll down and make it even less of a flat surface. Better to just put something a little heavy on the corners in either case.
Thank you for this, and thank you for the note at the begining
I love this game, but sometimes I don't want to play it just to not see some cards. It is bad to see stupid kings/peoples/events and not remember the damage all this era caused.
Totally understandable. My partner felt similarly when we first played. Not because of a personal connection, but more because of the callousness of the setting. It's not going to be for everyone, even if we would otherwise want to play.
I struggled with this video. Too much "Here's a thing that I will tell you about later". That always muddies the waters, because now I'm wondering about that thing and struggling to focus on what you've moved on to.
I personally just dont say anything about stuff that matters later until the time to discuss it has arrived.
I followed your John Company, Twilight Imperium, and Oath videos, but this one is too confusing. Sorry. What's the objective? Why should you try to buy a card? Why might you choose declaring loyalty to one faction over another?
Buying cards allows you to support your chosen factions and gives you actions beyond just purchasing and playing cards (the only actions you have at the start). Truthfully the cards dictate what factions you would want to support if there were for example a bunch of cards in the market that supported the British it would be to your advantage to support them.
However, even if multiple players are trying to support the same faction on the map they are still competing and vying for influence with the faction through gifts (control of the patriots) and killing enemies of their faction (acquiring prizes).
The objective is getting VPs through either militarily supporting one of the 3 coalitions until they have a plurality of 4 blocks more than their opponents in which you score points based on your allegiance during the dominance checks (4 scoring cards in the market deck)
The alternative (and more common outcome when scoring occurs) is that there is no clear victor between the coalitions and thus the tribes (the players) compare how much influence they have by how many cylinders (spies and tribes) they have in play (which is achieved mostly by playing cards and killing other peoples cylinders). Its like a 1/2 area control game where you want a faction to win but if you waste too much time building up the coalition and you don't actually achieve victory you may lose to a dude that just has a bunch of spies and influence. So it's a bit of a balancing act.
It is worth game or not???
I mean I like it, but this video isn't a review. If you want a more critical approach, I'd recommend watching No Pun Included's review. That might give you a better sense of whether you'll like it or not.
You said return the rest of the court cards to the deck then you later said put court cards into the market. Makes no sense?
I'm not sure which parts of the video you're talking about. If you give timestamps or describe the issue a little more I'm sure I can clear it up.
@@RTFM Sure at 2:51 you are saying to build the "draw deck" starting with the "court cards"; 3:03 you say to leave the extra court cards in the box; 3:18 you then say pull out the "market board" and start drawing "court cards". What court cards are you using if you just threw the remaining court card pile in the box?
@@ethidian3444 Ah, I see. You're drawing the cards onto the market from the draw deck you just constructed, most of which will be court cards. I probably should've just said draw out cards from the draw pile, as those are now a mixture of court, event, and dominance cards.
Sounds insanely complicated
Complexity is relative.
The actual mechanics of the rules are actually quite intuitive and quickly learned. Where the game gets complex is in the large number of choices and interactions that develop between cards and the board position.
The clever part of the game is in the scoring. Since if someone manages to get two wins in first place in a row they’ll usually have the +4 points necessary to auto win, anyone that score second or third place points is immediately incentivized to switch factions or try to overthrow the first place person’s position.
The result is a highly fluid game where switching allegiances occurs often. Cooperation between players changes turn to turn, or even card to card. It’s an excessively clever game design.
@@fumanchu7 great to hear you're happy with the game.
@@kosterix123is that passive..? Haha
@@fumanchu7well written.
@@Spandau-Filet not passive-aggressive at all, I know a gamer who built this as a pnp and sometimes she brings it to a con, I wouldn't say no when she were to explain it.
Wait, so you intentionally left the closed captions empty just to use them to correct a mistake? Please, absolutely do *NOT* EVER do that. Some people can not hear. Closed captions exist to allow those people to watch videos too. If you make a mistake, do what everyone else does and put it in the description or a pinned comment.
And remember, *accessibility helps everybody*
So I've actually done both of these things. Like I say immediately after recommending the subtitles, there is also a spot in the video description for corrections. Also, the captions channel has both an option for the "klingon" corrections and auto-generated english (getting bespoke captions is unfortunately extremely time consuming/expensive). Accessibility is important, which is why I try to provide multiple options.
Great review. But,
If you want to be respectful, you don't tell everyone you're being respectful. You just be respectful.
Very bad explanation