Well said about many of the complaints about war games. There are also some who want the game to be something different, some who try to stretch the rules and some who want the game to be exactly like an old 1970's style game.
I did go and watch the Video by Gilbert Collins. I don't think he was as harsh on the game as you seem to think. I believe he was pointing out the problems with scale and trying to do an operational and tactical game all in one package.(I agree with him on that. Pick your lane and do it well)
I think ‘Stacking Limit’ sees better what I was trying to demonstrate in my video. As Steve points out, for a time mine, was the only video out there on the series. This shows that the game never really caught on. For any of the reasons that I pointed out? I don’t no. For me, the rather generic system could have been used for just about any time period. Our hobby is very much a ‘visual medium’ and what I was trying to point out, is that the game doesn’t look like battles of the seven years war. Of course, I understand that at that scale, those stacks of units are actually beside each other. But ‘visually’ they are not, and that is why I preferred the GDW Torgau to this version. I am not happy to see any game fail, and if there are those who like it great!
If you want a more detailed look at battles from this period you should try Clash of Arms Battles from the Age of Reason. I have PG2 and will have to get it to the table.
Hex 2 Hex pulled himself away from WW2 and US Civil War to do a couple of videos of the Torgau scenario from Prussia's Glory. I am curious to see your take on the games.
I constantly see both of these at Half Price Books all over the country, maybe the most common used GMT titles for sale second hand. While I appreciate the designer’s mission to bring this era to the table, Clash of Monarchs is… not good.
@@stevendolges8372 Way too much procedural work to play the game compared to the amount of effect/fun you get out of your decisions, and the French-British front is so static and such a sideshow to the main game that those two players sit around not doing much for a majority of the first part of the game (which is a significant amount of time). We played all day and got through two full turns, and nobody ever wanted to play again. Hoping Clash of Sovereigns has dialed down the intricacy.
@@Justegarde I have heard it works better 2 player for the reasons you mentioned. Id like to give my copy a go at some point soon. Having read through the rules several times I do get the sense it is complex and asks a lot of the players.
I have PG1 and 2.and like you I have never really got it onto the table. You have inspired me to do so.
Well said about many of the complaints about war games. There are also some who want the game to be something different, some who try to stretch the rules and some who want the game to be exactly like an old 1970's style game.
if you want a zoomed in tactical representation of these battles you need to look at Battles from the Age of Reason (BAR) from Clash of Arms
A VERY complex system, conceptually and rules-wise.
Agreed. Considerably more complicated, but said to play quite smoothly.
I definitely am getting both these games
Calandale made videos and review on PGII 12 years ago.
I did go and watch the Video by Gilbert Collins. I don't think he was as harsh on the game as you seem to think. I believe he was pointing out the problems with scale and trying to do an operational and tactical game all in one package.(I agree with him on that. Pick your lane and do it well)
I think ‘Stacking Limit’ sees better what I was trying to demonstrate in my video. As Steve points out, for a time mine, was the only video out there on the series. This shows that the game never really caught on. For any of the reasons that I pointed out? I don’t no. For me, the rather generic system could have been used for just about any time period. Our hobby is very much a ‘visual medium’ and what I was trying to point out, is that the game doesn’t look like battles of the seven years war. Of course, I understand that at that scale, those stacks of units are actually beside each other. But ‘visually’ they are not, and that is why I preferred the GDW Torgau to this version. I am not happy to see any game fail, and if there are those who like it great!
A rules challenge here, and some have claimed the action is not historical. I have both of these games, but have not played either one.
If you want a more detailed look at battles from this period you should try Clash of Arms Battles from the Age of Reason. I have PG2 and will have to get it to the table.
Sweet!
Hex 2 Hex pulled himself away from WW2 and US Civil War to do a couple of videos of the Torgau scenario from Prussia's Glory. I am curious to see your take on the games.
I will have to check that out and see his thoughts thanks mentioning!
I constantly see both of these at Half Price Books all over the country, maybe the most common used GMT titles for sale second hand. While I appreciate the designer’s mission to bring this era to the table, Clash of Monarchs is… not good.
Which aspects of CoM do you think bring it down?
@@stevendolges8372 Way too much procedural work to play the game compared to the amount of effect/fun you get out of your decisions, and the French-British front is so static and such a sideshow to the main game that those two players sit around not doing much for a majority of the first part of the game (which is a significant amount of time). We played all day and got through two full turns, and nobody ever wanted to play again. Hoping Clash of Sovereigns has dialed down the intricacy.
@@Justegarde I have heard it works better 2 player for the reasons you mentioned. Id like to give my copy a go at some point soon. Having read through the rules several times I do get the sense it is complex and asks a lot of the players.
Anecdotally, I also see these for sale pretty frequently. The folks on eBay seem not to have gotten the memo that they're not in much demand.