$10.00
Recommend
48 
 Thumb up
 Hide
12 Posts

The Halls of Montezuma» Forums » Reviews

Subject: Welcome to Mexico. Now get the hell out! rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Francis K. Lalumiere
Canada
Brossard
Quebec
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
(Originally posted on http://boardgamenews.com/)

For Mexico, the 1845 annexation of Texas by the United States of America meant war. Both nations exchanged acts of defiance for a few months before Mexico, though politically unstable as it was, came down on a U.S. patrol of 63 men (led by Thornton, hence the Thornton Affair) in the contested territory north of the Rio Grande with a cavalry force no less than 2,000 strong.
This led President Polk to declare war on Mexico, a struggle that was to last until 1848.

In The Halls of Montezuma, players reenact this conflict starting before the declaration of war, when diplomacy was still supposed to serve its purpose. The war might run its course and end - historically - in the spring of 1848, but it may very well come to an abrupt conclusion before that if either side achieves its victory conditions.

Montezuma is a Card-Driven Game - often called a CDG - inspired by a few predecessors, most notably Wilderness War (from which the raid mechanics were borrowed). Traditionally, the cards in a CDG are referred to as strategy cards and can be played, one per turn, to perform a variety of functions. One way to play a strategy card is to implement the event described on it; you can do this only if the event pertains to your nation. In other words, the Mexican player can only play Mexican or dual-nation events, never American ones.
The other way to play a strategy card is to use the number in its upper left corner, called the Operations (OPS) Value. Depending on its OPS Value, a strategy card used in this manner allows the player to activate a leader (and, most probably, a force attached to him), receive replacements, build fortifications, perform a naval operation (such as an amphibious landing or seizing a port), place control markers (essential to maintaining supply lines and reaching victory conditions) or execute raids against strategic locations.
Players alternate playing strategy cards until both have run out (or kept one), at which point play moves on to the next turn.

The game unfolds on a map of Mexico and the southern portion of Texas, where units move from space to space along connecting lines. Some terrain is more difficult to enter, while some spaces are inherently easier to defend, such as the Vera Cruz and Mejico fortresses.
When two opposing forces find themselves in the same space, combat occurs. A variety of familiar modifiers are computed, and each side then cross-references its firepower together with a die roll. The result indicates losses inflicted upon the other side, which in turn regulate the necessity of a retreat for the losing side.
One set of modifiers that are not of the familiar variety is the requirement for each side to designate a lead unit, and the option to commit one or two units (depending on the leader involved and the quality of said units). When calculating total firepower, the leading unit is counted at its full FP and each committed unit at twice its FP, while each of the other units is counted as adding one to the sum. Battle events - found on strategy cards - can also be played to alter the outcome.

Both sides can achieve "sudden death" victory through the control of key locations in enemy territory. Otherwise, the game ends at the conclusion of a turn on the successful roll of a die, starting with turn 6 (summer of 1847) and where the odds of the game coming to a close rise with each passing turn - culminating in an automatic end on turn 10. In that case, Mexico wins unless the victory marker currently stands in the US zone.

NEW IN TOWN
In Montezuma, strategy cards offer two additional twists.
Firstly, the pool of strategy cards is split in two halves: Crisis cards, which are used from the beginning, and War cards, shuffled into the deck when the US declares war on its neighbor (which can happen in a few different manners). Crisis and War cards offer different options at different moments while altering the overall taste of the game, a subtlety players of Twilight Struggle will be familiar with.

Secondly, some strategy cards (too many of them - or at least that’s the way it feels when your supply line is stretched to the limit...) sport a supply icon. When one of those cards is played, a die is rolled, and a result equal to or less than the card’s OPS Value triggers a supply check, with all that bad stuff for out-of-supply units: movement attrition, firepower penalties, and inability to build fortifications or receive replacements.

But wait! There’s another stack of cards begging for some attention: the Action Deck, which dispenses four random events - two for each side - at the start of every turn. You may get reinforcements, a heat wave may hit the battlefield, Santa Anna may unexpectedly return from exile, or better/worse (depending on which side you’re playing, of course).
In addition, each card in the Action Deck serves as a movement enabler. Whenever a unit (or group of units) attempts to move, the top card of the Action Deck is flipped and the leader’s strategy rating looked up on the little movement table that’s printed - with different values every time - at the bottom of each strategy card. This yields a movement allowance that the active unit or group must conform to. An underlined MA indicates movement attrition (and yes, all types of attrition are cumulative...).

As someone else might say, reinforcements in Montezuma are like a box of chocolates: you never know what you’re gonna get. Units allotted for reinforcements are drawn blindly from a cup. Keep drawing until you get your fill, and make do with what Chance handed you.

WAR PRODUCTION
Some of the recent GMT game boxes have been quite something to glance at, but The Halls of Montezuma looks spectacularly good on the wargame shelf. The game map is also one of the most beautiful to grace my table in recent memory. I was worried that the monochromatic approach might turn the map into a visual quagmire, but the board remains highly readable throughout the game.

The unit tokens are standard wargame fare and do a good job. The other markers are also adequate, although the Civic State and State Control markers are somewhat perplexing. Several colors are used for those, and while the setup instructions make no mention of this, we are led to assume that Civic/Control markers are supposed to go in State Status boxes of more or less the same colors. Except that those colors don’t quite match up between the counters and the map. Might have been easier to simply go with one color for all the Civic/Control markers, especially since the different hues have no effect on gameplay.

Both card decks are printed on good cardstock with a fine layout and a pleasing design, but confusing nomenclature. The deck that contains the strategy cards is referred to as Strategy Deck in the rules; yet each card therein says "Event Deck" on its back. On the other side of the fence, the Action Deck generates random events at the beginning of each game turn... although strategy cards are played during each action phase of a turn to, well, implement an action of one type or another. Not a big problem once you’re up and running, but this is something that could have been ironed out.
The card backs of both decks were also printed in three different shades. Three slightly different shades of blue for the Strategy/Event Deck, and three slightly different shades of gold for the Action Deck. Again, not a deal breaker - unless your regular opponent is an obsessive card-counting colorist - but a glitch that I’ve rarely encountered.
Lastly, arm yourself with a sharpie: the faces of two of the strategy cards are missing their blue Response labels at the top.


RULES OF ENGAGEMENT
While certain concepts require some deeper study (Battle in a Zone comes to mind), for the most part the rules are relatively easy to grasp and flow logically. The full-page index at the back of the rulebook - although incomplete - is quite welcome, as is the very detailed player aid (in two copies in the box). A Quick Start Sheet is also provided, which makes for easy reference while learning the game.
For some reason, GMT decided to print a "Set Up Card" on the back of the Quick Start Sheet. This features all the setup information, information that is not repeated in the rulebook proper. The problem is that one crucial sentence is missing at the bottom of the first paragraph on the Set Up Card:
Blindly and randomly place one Political Will marker in each PW city and Alta California.

The missing information is readily available online - and many a gamer will eventually come to the conclusion that they have to setup the PW markers in just that manner - but as a result of this little omission, the game is unfortunately unplayable right out of the box.

A sprinkling of typos throughout the rules and some mistakes in the example of play further confuse matters. Which is not to say that Montezuma is impossible to decipher; far from it. But it will take a couple of games as well as a good look at the FAQ for everything to connect into your (and your opponent’s) brain.
Once that light bulb goes on, though, hang on: you’re in for one exciting ride.

One final note on the rulebook: it contains one of my favorite features: card histories! Each strategy card’s event is described in one concise paragraph. Instant education for those who knew little on the game’s topic to begin with. ("Guilty, your Honor!")


FUN FACTOR
I was never a big fan of Wilderness War, one of the godfathers of Montezuma. It felt too static to me, and a bit scripted at times. Not true here.

Thanks to the Action Deck, movement is a LOT of fun (who would have guessed?), with just the right amount of uncertainty thrown in to keep players double-guessing their mobilization plans.
Start-of-turn events provide more controlled chaos: since the number of different such events is limited, players soon learn to anticipate what may befall their forces.

I love the combat system, both very effective and quite simple. The little battle diagram on the board may look like nothing, but it really helps newcomers learn the system, and makes sure old hands keep everything straight.

The designers did a great job of making a Mexican win possible. It’s a question of holding out long enough for the American player not to achieve his victory conditions until time runs out. Of course, invading Texas might also help the Mexicans earn a victory, not to mention revel in the pure pleasure derived from the looks of anxiety the American players generally casts about in such a situation.

Still, in a period rife with scenario-based wargames, where we’re getting used to each new game being necessarily different from its predecessor, how would Montezuma’s one and only scenario hold up? Very well, I’d say. All of the cogs found in the box combine to create a dynamic machine that feels fresh every time it’s fired up.
16 
 Thumb up
0.10
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mateusz Wilk
Poland
Warsaw
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
A great review, I just got interested in this one. (I was a bit lukewarm before, despite the fact that I love CDGs).
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Francis K. Lalumiere
Canada
Brossard
Quebec
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
wilk wrote:
A great review, I just got interested in this one. (I was a bit lukewarm before, despite the fact that I love CDGs).

Thanks! It's well worth the (relatively small) effort required to get into it.
Come back and let us know what you think once you've played the game!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mateusz Wilk
Poland
Warsaw
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
weishaupt wrote:

Come back and let us know what you think once you've played the game!


Well, I'll do my best to play it, I don't know if anybody in my usual group owns it, though.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tom Volpe
United States
Evanston
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
weishaupt wrote:
It's well worth the (relatively small) effort required to get into it.!


I'm wondering what you mean by "relatively small". This may be a bit misleading since many others posting here on BGG and ConSimWorld have had a frustrating time with learning how to play Halls of Montezuma.

Combined FAQ, and eventually a revised rule book, may help with the steep learning curve.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Francis K. Lalumiere
Canada
Brossard
Quebec
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Cosmid wrote:
weishaupt wrote:
It's well worth the (relatively small) effort required to get into it.!


I'm wondering what you mean by "relatively small". This may be a bit misleading since many others posting here on BGG and ConSimWorld have had a frustrating time with learning how to play Halls of Montezuma.

Combined FAQ, and eventually a revised rule book, may help with the steep learning curve.

I wouldn't call the learning curve steep at all. My gaming partner and I spent the first game clearing up any confusion we had about the rules, and writing down the few holes we found here and there. Then we did some online research to answer our questions, and we were all set for game #2. So I'd say it was a relatively small effort. Not a piece of cake, but not an uphill battle either.

If you want steep, take a look at Fields of Fire... zombie
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Dan Dolan
United States
Highland Lakes
New Jersey
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
If you've played other cdg's HoM is not a problem to get into. Get a copy of the FAQ and you're good to go.

It's my one of my favorite cdg's. The criticism is overblown IMO. If you find the topic of interest this is a good buy. Good support by the designers over on CSW as well.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gregory Bay
United States
Kernersville
North Carolina
flag msg tools
mb
Cosmid wrote:
weishaupt wrote:
It's well worth the (relatively small) effort required to get into it.!


I'm wondering what you mean by "relatively small". This may be a bit misleading since many others posting here on BGG and ConSimWorld have had a frustrating time with learning how to play Halls of Montezuma.

Combined FAQ, and eventually a revised rule book, may help with the steep learning curve.


This game has a steep learning curve. I do not see any way around it. I have sat down for a few hours at a time and still do not have a handle on this game. There are enough odd ball rules, or I should call them circumstantial, to make this learning curve steep. I want to play this one but get tired of "walking" through it.

Thanks for the review.

Greg
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Brian Morris
United States
Raytown
Missouri
flag msg tools
2nd, 6th and 7th Wisconsin, 19th Indiana, 24th Michigan
badge
24th Michigan Monument Gettysburg Pa
mbmbmbmbmb
Phlegm wrote:
If you've played other cdg's HoM is not a problem to get into. Get a copy of the FAQ and you're good to go.

It's my one of my favorite cdg's. The criticism is overblown IMO. If you find the topic of interest this is a good buy. Good support by the designers over on CSW as well.


Agreed. If you are familiar with CDGs it isn't that huge a learning curve. It has it's chrome but then again all CDGs have that to some extent in order to reflect the historical situation. This one isn't that much harder than a lot of other CDGs. Mind you the more familiar with the historical situation the easier it is because you see better what the designer is trying to simulate. A good example of this is Unhappy King Charles. I found that a steeper learning curve for myself in large part because I was so unfamiliar with the English Civil War. On the flip side I had an easier time with Shifting Sands because I had a better working knowledge of the conflict.

I do think the rules could have been a bit clearer written but they are not nearly as bad as some of the exaggerations I've read including someone who said the game was unplayable. I suspect a smoothing out in the Living Rules will eliminate some of the confusions some have had. The game however is solid and worth getting if it's an era you find of interest.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Michael Debije
Netherlands
Eindhoven
The Netherlands
flag msg tools
Steep learning curve? I supposed if you've never played a CDG, it might be mildly difficult, but it's a pretty straightforward game with a few details to reflect details of the era. Sure, compared with Caylus it takes a bit more attention, but take a little time, do a solo turn, and you're good to go.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tom Volpe
United States
Evanston
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
Phlegm wrote:
If you've played other cdg's HoM is not a problem to get into. Get a copy of the FAQ and you're good to go.


I'm a big fan of card driven games and have played many (We the People, Hannibal, Wilderness War, For the People, Empire of the Sun, etc.). For me, Halls of Montezuma has been more frustrating to learn than these. It's clear that there are very different opinions about the game but I'm not the only one who has had problems with HoM.

Has an updated FAQ been posted yet?

The rules, in my opinion, are organized very poorly. The designers tried to model them after Wilderness War (WW has a great rule book btw). Someone has updated the index for HoM (this should be very helpful for new players). There are several rules that are still being solved as far as I know (PW hit on the Americans when taking extra units/ PW cap at 35 is one, how to resolve the RIOTS card is another). My advice for someone thinking about getting into Halls of Montezuma would be to wait until these things have been resolved first.

In my opinion the game is unplayable out of the box unless you guess at what the designers intent was in many cases. Remember, there was no mention anywhere that the PW counters were supposed to be placed on each PW city (this is just one example, for others you can check some of my previous posts here on BGG). The updated FAQ will help but I think a complete rules revision would be best.

As far as how easy the game is to play I would say HoM is not the most complex of the CDGs out there IF you have someone teach you how to play (someone who has spent lots of time reading through the rules trying to figure out how it works). Even then you will encounter issues that are not covered in the rules (every game has these, HoM has more than most).

In my opinion the game has a steep learning curve for new players.






3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Randy C
United States
Chicago
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmbmb
Thanks for the review.

I love the topic, love card driven games, but there are a few key rules I do not understand and feel the rulebook has left things out. For example supply, naval, and mexican will maxed at 35. These rules are not difficult, just incomplete.

I have played it 4 times so far.

On the opposite side, I think the river rules in For the People are very clear as written in the rules. But many players have hard time getting them.

I have decided to let others that like the game play it for awhile and eventually living rules will clear it up. Thanks to GMT for living rules. I will play it again then.

The OP does not like Wilderness War but likes HOM. I feel Wilderness War is a near perfect game, but HOM, at this point is not. We are all lucky to have so many game choices!




2 
 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.