Brian Bankler
United States
San Antonio
Texas
Modified Limited Rampage!
-
[This review originally written in 2001 -- Brian]
In the class of Essen Games, Liberte stood unknown. In theory, Warfrog games are great. I just don't play them. But I read the rules online, and anxiously awaited my shot to play the game. I've recently played, twice.
Short form: The players battle to control France during the revolution. The game has two main phases: action and resolution. There are four turns. During the action phase, you either play a card or draw a card (typically). Cards let you put 1-3 blocks on the board (in the same region, but in multiple provinces, if the player wishes). Each province can have (at most) 3 stacks of blocks, and each stack can only be a single color. A player can have at most one stack in a particular province. Blocks represent Radicals, Monarchists or Moderates. When one color of blocks run out, the action phase ends. Then you resolve the election.
For each province, look at the highest stack. That party gets a vote, and the owner of the stack keeps a block (representing influence). Since stacks max out at three, there are often ties. In that case, each player pushes forward a (played) card that matches the color of his stack. The best card wins, both cards are discarded. Players do this in order; the second player isn't forced to play a card. And in a tie, all blocks (except the one that the winner gets to keep) are tossed off the board at the end of the turn to replenish the stocks.
Once the provinces are resolved, the player with the most control of the majority party gets some points, the player with the second most control gets less, and the player in control of the opposition gets points.
I'm skipping chrome. A lot of chrome. There are lots of ties possible, each using the same "push a card and lose it" them. Each player can only have 4 cards in front of them, so when you play a card, you have to decide if you are keeping it for tie breaking (or for next turn ... any cards not used for tie breaks may be kept!), there are special action cards. Paris has special rules on voting. There are spaces that give victory points, and battles, which require card plays but give victory points.
The twist -- victory points might not matter. If the radicals win a landslide, you have a revolution. Game ends, and only control of radicals matters. You red blocks in front of you, red blocks on the board and red block symbols on cards. The Monarchists can also have a counter-revolution, which depends on control of enough key provinces. This can happen at any time (during the final two turns). So VP grubbing must be matched with keeping the game alive. Alternately, a desperate last player can try to seize France!
The basic idea works. And fairly quickly with up to 6 players. [Or read the rules to find out the details.]
Liberte presents good choices. After reading the rules I was dying to play it, and dying to play it again. Now, after a few days, I want to play it again. But, I'm afraid it might all be an illusion, for three reasons.
1) Kingmaker issues. To be fair, that's the theme of the game. There are some "take that" cards and even forcing a tie can be a huge swing for uninvolved players.
2) [My standard pet peeve.] Some cards are better than others. Since you get to pick cards from a selection of face up cards (ala Alan Moon), it's a minor nit. It can be very noticeable during the first turn; however, being the leader after the first turn is it's own disadvantage. Not only will get picked on (you will); because 'winning' players (as determined by VPs) have to go first in the next turn, a disadvantage. [Each player gets the same number of plays each round, barring a counter-revolution].
Everyone seemed to like this game, but there were complaints. Several people thought it was better with 4. I prefer 6. (Besides, I have a ton of 90 minute games that play with 4 people). Also causing consternation were the subtle differences on how ties work. The english summary sheets do a nice job, but I can see the issue. Finally, some people disliked the Terror cards. These are special cards that can radically affect the board and card situation. (Other special cards can affect one or the other). The catch is that the terror cards only work if a) it's currently a radical government and b) you got at least one block when it was installed (i.e., you helped support the radicals). So that means that Terror cards are "All or Nothing." No radical government, then they sit in your hand taking up space. I think this is perfectly reasonable, but some consider it too powerful or too random. Players often take the random card when choosing, either because they don't like the cards on display or would rather gamble so as to hide their capabilities.
[Later Update]
I was playing a rule incorrectly. I looked at the online rules, I was playing it incorrectly. The difference is that if you play a personality to add blocks, you do not need to add all of the blocks to the same province, but may add them to different provinces in the region. This is a huge difference. The person who pointed this out to me mentioned that that rule change allowed a rather dramatic last-to-first victory via an "Instant Win" Monarchist Counter-Revolution. Of course, this does mean that the 3 block cards are even more powerful than I had thought, but the downside of this discovery is much less than the benefit. I'm tentatively upgrading my review from "will play again" to "probably very good."
Updated 2002.
I have played (with all new players) with the correct rule. Quite simply, the game is amazing. I have cleaned up the above review to eliminate my concern that the special victories would never happen. They happen frequently! Both games ended in a special victory, one a radical revolt on turn four which meant that a player in last place (by VPs) won. The second game saw a monarchist counter-revolution early on turn 3. (It became apparent that two players were aiming for the counter-revolution on turn two, taking control of key provinces. I decided to make a waiting move on Turn 3, as I played first. It was clear by my second play that I had to do something, but it wasn't enough. I never got a 3rd play!) In fact, with a 5 or 6 player game, it may well be that the game tilts towards a special victory. It will matter how closely bunched the leader(s) are, and how many of the trailing player(s) try for the same condition. I now consider this game to be the best game of Essen, 2001.
-
|
|
