Thanks. This game is great and definitely is a gateway to the greater wargame genre. We love it for its simplicity and its randomness (as all card draws can be) but also love the theme as it is one of my favorite periods of history. Thanks for watching.
If you were creative you might be able to com up with a way to do it, but the common deck would be pretty difficult to do effectively. Unsure about vassal, but you might be able to play over skype but use an online Vassal deck that both of you could draw from?
I think the deck would be the thing that would stop you as it must be the same as it is a common draw deck. If you could have your wives or friends or whoever talk and set the deck up the same it sure would be worth a try. Good luck and thanks for watching.
I think you are missing the GMT player aid card. it has an abbreviated sequence of play. Those player aid cards you have are from BGG not GMT and they probably don't have the sequence of play because the GMT aid card did
As a fan of the game, that was a fun video to watch! I have a few comments: 1) Regarding the drawing of four "War Ends" cards like you did... well it looks like Mark already commented on that, above! Seriously, I've never heard of it being an issue in all the years since the game has been out. 2) If you're still looking for a Sequence of Play aid, I invite you to check out this single page aid, found on BGG: www.boardgamegeek.com/filepage/82817/ww-one-page-expanded-sequence-play 3) When you guys were rattling off other CDGs to be in your top three... am a little surprised that 'For The People' didn't spurt out instinctively! 4) Regarding your comment about playing the game solo, I'm sure you've heard of Stuka Joes' Solo CDG method? He's recently streamlined the system so is on version 2, now. The documentation can be found in the files library section for "Paths of Glory' on BGG. 5) At the very end, you said to expect a review of Washington's War to be posted [soon after this video]. Yet the title of this video says, "Review". So did you abandon the review attempt mentioned in this video to let this video be it? (I hope that makes sense!) Anyway, this was a good video. Thanks!
Here is a link to the written review which we posted in early August: theplayersaid.com/2017/08/02/the-revolution-was-effected-before-the-war-commenced-the-revolution-was-in-the-minds-and-hearts-of-the-people-a-review-of-washingtons-war-from-gmt-games/
Just finished reading the written review. It was a great read. 1) I agree with you - that while WW is a wargame, it's a game that's more about political control than military victory. This is exactly I say that the game models the Revolution and not [only] the war. Such a comment usually elicits a "Huh? What's the difference?". It's important for people to realize that the Revolution wasn't only about George Washington, the Continental Army, The British, Saratoga, Yorktown, etc. All of THAT was the WAR. The WAR was a SUBSET of the larger Revolution. Or IOW, the Revolution was much more than the war. The war, or as the Brits call it, "The American War for Independence (AWI)", was merely ONE of several means to the end result of the Revolution. So, as you very eloquently remarked in your written review, 'Washington's War' captures very nicely the REVOLUTION - not just the AWI. The battles and maneuvering in this game are again, merely a means to the end result and not the entire focus of the game. If someone is interested in a light-mid weight game that models only the WAR, I suggest 'Liberty: The American Revolution 1775-83', by Columbia Games. It's an interesting block game that focuses strictly on the [entire] military war. ... 2) I also liked your comments about the asymmetry in the game. And yes, asymmetry has been a hot game design element these last few years. But I think Mark deserves a lot of credit for incorporating asymmetry SO well in Washington's War, eight years ago, back when the concept was in its infancy. And I believe (though don't know for sure) that 'We The People' (WW's predecessor) had some asymmetrical elements designed into that, way back in 1993!
@@misomiso8228 this game plays very differently and it's a bit longer. Sure it's card driven, but the deck here is a much larger deck and the actual map has point to point movement with generals and armies with strength point stacks. This one is a bit more crunchy whereas 1775 is lighter fare and easier to teach to new wargamers.
My one piece of advice is next time shuffle the deck a bit more . :-)
I have not played this solo, but Stuka Joe has put up specific solo rules for his solo system on BGG
Great review. I’m long to return to the hobby this is getting me in the mood. Thanks
Thanks. This game is great and definitely is a gateway to the greater wargame genre. We love it for its simplicity and its randomness (as all card draws can be) but also love the theme as it is one of my favorite periods of history. Thanks for watching.
You guys gotta give For the People a run. It's the US Civil War based on Mark Herman's Washington's War/We the People CDG War game.
Do you think it’s possible to play this game over Skype? Not sure with common card deck. Thx
If you were creative you might be able to com up with a way to do it, but the common deck would be pretty difficult to do effectively. Unsure about vassal, but you might be able to play over skype but use an online Vassal deck that both of you could draw from?
I think the deck would be the thing that would stop you as it must be the same as it is a common draw deck. If you could have your wives or friends or whoever talk and set the deck up the same it sure would be worth a try. Good luck and thanks for watching.
I think you are missing the GMT player aid card. it has an abbreviated sequence of play. Those player aid cards you have are from BGG not GMT and they probably don't have the sequence of play because the GMT aid card did
As a fan of the game, that was a fun video to watch! I have a few comments:
1) Regarding the drawing of four "War Ends" cards like you did... well it looks like Mark already commented on that, above! Seriously, I've never heard of it being an issue in all the years since the game has been out.
2) If you're still looking for a Sequence of Play aid, I invite you to check out this single page aid, found on BGG: www.boardgamegeek.com/filepage/82817/ww-one-page-expanded-sequence-play
3) When you guys were rattling off other CDGs to be in your top three... am a little surprised that 'For The People' didn't spurt out instinctively!
4) Regarding your comment about playing the game solo, I'm sure you've heard of Stuka Joes' Solo CDG method? He's recently streamlined the system so is on version 2, now. The documentation can be found in the files library section for "Paths of Glory' on BGG.
5) At the very end, you said to expect a review of Washington's War to be posted [soon after this video]. Yet the title of this video says, "Review". So did you abandon the review attempt mentioned in this video to let this video be it? (I hope that makes sense!)
Anyway, this was a good video. Thanks!
Here is a link to the written review which we posted in early August: theplayersaid.com/2017/08/02/the-revolution-was-effected-before-the-war-commenced-the-revolution-was-in-the-minds-and-hearts-of-the-people-a-review-of-washingtons-war-from-gmt-games/
Just finished reading the written review. It was a great read.
1) I agree with you - that while WW is a wargame, it's a game that's more about political control than military victory. This is exactly I say that the game models the Revolution and not [only] the war. Such a comment usually elicits a "Huh? What's the difference?". It's important for people to realize that the Revolution wasn't only about George Washington, the Continental Army, The British, Saratoga, Yorktown, etc. All of THAT was the WAR. The WAR was a SUBSET of the larger Revolution. Or IOW, the Revolution was much more than the war. The war, or as the Brits call it, "The American War for Independence (AWI)", was merely ONE of several means to the end result of the Revolution.
So, as you very eloquently remarked in your written review, 'Washington's War' captures very nicely the REVOLUTION - not just the AWI. The battles and maneuvering in this game are again, merely a means to the end result and not the entire focus of the game. If someone is interested in a light-mid weight game that models only the WAR, I suggest 'Liberty: The American Revolution 1775-83', by Columbia Games. It's an interesting block game that focuses strictly on the [entire] military war.
...
2) I also liked your comments about the asymmetry in the game. And yes, asymmetry has been a hot game design element these last few years. But I think Mark deserves a lot of credit for incorporating asymmetry SO well in Washington's War, eight years ago, back when the concept was in its infancy. And I believe (though don't know for sure) that 'We The People' (WW's predecessor) had some asymmetrical elements designed into that, way back in 1993!
3:55 have you ever played 1775?
How does it compare (if you have)?
The one from Academy Games?
@@ThePlayersAid Yeah.
@@misomiso8228 this game plays very differently and it's a bit longer. Sure it's card driven, but the deck here is a much larger deck and the actual map has point to point movement with generals and armies with strength point stacks. This one is a bit more crunchy whereas 1775 is lighter fare and easier to teach to new wargamers.
@@ThePlayersAid Cool ty. Just found your channel and think its really good.