Printable View
I'm wondering what the people on this forum would think of a Rome board game set in the same period as RTW? Do you think it would be possible to make one that was fun, accurate, and possibly innovative? Do you think a complicated a game that took time learn and play or a more Risk like game would be better?
Mad Scandinavian
STW has a board game very much like it called Shogun or Samurai Swords.
I've never heard of it, but it sounds interesting. I'll have to check it out. Thanks.
Ah, Shogun. I've been tried to get my hands on it for quite a while, but I always seem to be outbid, in the wrong country, or whatever other reason.
It was the only Avalon Hill board game other than the famous Axis & Allies ever to receive a second printing. This was for two reasons: 1)its popularity compared to the other board games that were released by Avalon Hill; 2)"Shogun" is already a registered trademark and they were in danger of being sued. The second printing is called Samurai Swords and is completely identical to the first printing except for a single rule clarification in the manual.
Avalon Hill also released a board game set in Rome. I believe it was called Caesar or something to that effect, but my memory on this one is a little hazy. In any case, it was a fun game and inspired a little cult following and a set of widely-accepted house rules, since there was a problem involving catapults and how they tended to dominate the game, thus turning every match into a race to control as many of them as one physically can (the number of units in the game is limited by the number of tokens that came with the game).
...
Okay, I decided to google it just now and found this.
Avalon Hill
There were two board games Avalon Hill made involving Rome - Caesar's Legions and Caesar at Alesia.
Interesting read particularly:
Quote:
Hasbro Games purchased the rights to the Avalon Hill games and back inventory and the name "Avalon Hill." Hasbro now publishes a select number of old Avalon Hill games. Several individual games were licensed to interested publishers. The largest number of the most popular games were licensed to Curt Schilling's Multi-Man Publishing.
Hasbro is the main manufacturer of Star Wars plastic figures.
Hasbro owns Wizards of the Coast (Magic) which in turn owns Dungeons and Dragons and funnily enough the d20 Star Wars roleplaying game and minatures as well.
There was a really interesting board game "Decline and Fall" published in the 1970s by the UK company Wargames Research Group. It was "grand strategic" & simulated 100s of years of the fall of Rome in about 30 turns, with an emphasis on multiplayer interactions. The three barbarian factions needed to ally to break through Rome's frontier, but also were rivals. Rome split into East and West 10 turns into the game. Each side had a different resource model - the Romans had a cash economy, with revenue from cities; the Goths and Vandals had an agricultural one, gaining recruits by holding lands; and the Huns had a "ghazi" type approach, gaining recruits by destroying enemies. It was pretty innovative and, AFAIK, provided a decent historical simulation at a rather abstract level.
I think the game with the terrible catapult rules is Conquest of the Empire. I've never played it but I've read some on it and one of my professors talks about playing it in college. A game company named Eagle Games is re-releasing it this month, hopefully :uneasy: . It looks like a lot of fun. I'm thinking of buying it.
There is also a game about the Senate. I can't remember what it's called but I have it and have never played it. It was borrowed to me by the same professor who used to play Conquest of the Empire.
I'm trying to make a couple of board games right now, one of which is Rome, but I'm dirt poor so most of what I have is ideas some of which would work some of which would not. If anyone's willing to contribute...
I believe this one is Republic of Rome, seems about as close as a board game could come (minus battles) to RTW. From http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/1513Quote:
Originally Posted by The Mad Scandinavian
"Republic of Rome is an abstraction of over 250 years of history. It simulates the politics of the Roman Senate during the republic. The players take the part of various factions vying for the control of the senate. They control the various powerful families of the time, who compete for state offices, military command, economic concessions and new adherents. To win the player must get their faction to become the most powerful in Rome. While doing this, however, a balance must be maintained. A hostile world situation, and the vagaries of the public of Rome means that the players must also cooperate so that Rome herself doesn't go down under this pressure. If Rome does not last, neither does the senate, and all players lose!"
Of course there is always the Civilization board game if you don't fancy playing as one of the 3 Roman factions first ~D
"Republic of Rome" is a great game. I've played it probably half-a-dozen times over the years. If you can put together a few Machiavellian players it's quite an experience. It doesn't have tactical battles, per se, but revolves around political maneuvering. The game is card-driven and can be played during the early, middle, or late Republic. Each period plays quite differently as Rome faces different external wars, has different statesman available, and most importantly has new law cards that when played change the rules of the game somewhat. During the early period, Rome faces Carthage and has the most external worries. An early period game is usually won by the player who amasses the most influence on a particular senator. By the middle and later Republic, external threats are fewer, and it becomes easier to 'cross the Rubicon' and lead your legions against the Republic. Somewhat complex, but highly recommended.
Another 'oldie but goodie' is "Barbarians, Kingdoms, and Empires". The map covers the Roman empire, and each player begins as a small but quickly expanding barbarian tribe. Tribal units become military units and your new army of Huns, Germans, Slavs, etc. dives into the empire looking for land to settle and loot to collect.
What makes the game interesting is that you don't stay a barbarian for long. There is a "kingdom countdown", a given number of turns a barbarian has to acquire land before becoming a kingdom. When the countdown is over, you acquire a king, you can build new units, and you have to begin spending a percentage of your income on administration. The kingdom stage is your true day in the sun, but you have to manage your income wisely.
After that comes the declining stage of 'empire'. The longer you have been a kingdom, the more money you have to spend on 'administration', so that you don't roll poorly on the administration table and become an empire. When you do, your military units transform again into mostly garrisons and a few elite legions. During the empire stage, you hold on to what you can for as long as possible.
The true joy of the game though is that you can leave the game or enter the game at any time. When you grow tired of your position you can simply put garrison markers on all your cities and restart as a new barbarian tribe. Great fun. There are also more structured historical scenarios for quicker games.
~:cheers:
Republic of Rome is a good game, but I think my favorite Rome board game is: Imperium Romanum II. There are 35 different scenarios covering the Mithradatic Wars: including Spartacus' rebellion, the First Trumvirs rise through civil wars a plenty, through Trajan, through the coming of the barbarian hordes, to the Justinian Reconquest. There are also a few what if scenarios like: if Belisauris had decided to march on Constantinople.
Out of... but still , consider a game that you can start as a roman citizen from one of the aristocratic families and you can choose the direction of your advancement in rome politics. let say you choose to be an officer in a legion and your goal (in the end of the game) is to rule the republic as a consul or the empire as a princeps... ah , they are not going to create such games :embarassed:
Imperium Romanum II was a pretty good game. I've got a copy lying around but had a hard time getting people to sit down and play. I think I've played it maybe twice. Still, its got a wealth of detail and it's a nice history lesson with the era-specific troop mobilization and all.
If anyone is looking for a good Roman-era game at the moment, there is a game called "Sword of Rome" that has been getting great reviews. It's subtitled: "The Conquest of Italy, 362-272 BC". The game is partly card-driven, and is based on four players (Rome, Greeks/Epirotes, Etruscans/Samnites, Gauls). Each position plays very differently, but the game is supposed to be very well balanced. I haven't picked up a copy yet, but I'll probably get around to it one of these days. LINK
Well, somebody COULD do a boardgame like that. They did a Star Wars 'Life: Path of the Jedi' a couple of years ago that had you developing four different jedi character traits, and choosing whether to take Dark Side shortcuts. The game ended with the top Jedi and top Sith squaring off. LINK A similar, but hopefully more complicated game, could be crafted around a career in Roman "Life".Quote:
Out of... but still , consider a game that you can start as a roman citizen from one of the aristocratic families and you can choose the direction of your advancement in rome politics. let say you choose to be an officer in a legion and your goal (in the end of the game) is to rule the republic as a consul or the empire as a princeps... ah , they are not going to create such games