Here I Stand vs Struggle of Empires vs Friedrich

Chapel wrote: I dislike all the current 2player CDG's, so neither.

Do you mean to say you dislike Path's of Glory? If so, I'm afraid you have perished and are now dead to me.

For the heavy weights:

Here I Stand It's a great game but as has been said it's an all day affair. And getting six to commit isn't easy. I'm surprised so many here say that they are fans of it. I guess when we get F:ATcon rolling (like BGG Con only cool) we'll have to have a pre-convention for this game.

Undercard 1: Never played any of them.

Undercard 2: Twilight Struggle is a great game. I haven't played Labyrinth.

Thanks for all the great input so far!

In regards to the main event, the fact that Here I Stand is an all-day affair isn't much of a hurdle. I'm going to be hosting a 72-hour game-a-thon this spring/summer, so fitting in a longer game is achievable. The real hurdles will be: one, getting people to read the rules beforehand (though I downloaded a helpful guide for learning and teaching the game by Ed Beach) and two, getting people interested in a detailed game about the Protestant Reformation (when we play longer games, they tend to be sci-fi or fantasy). Of the many games I own that I have yet to play (and there are even some I forgot to include in the original thread), HIS is the one I'd like to try the most, but getting my friends hyped up about it would be a real challenge. Both Friedrich and Struggle of Empires (especially SoE) would be easier pills for them to swallow.

In regards to the adventure game, odds are I'll play it with my wife, at least for the first game or two, so ideally the winner of that bracket will be good to play with just 2 players. I have the Black Isles version of Talisman 4th ed, not FFG, so I won't be playing with any of the expansions.

In regards to the 2-player CDGs, these will get played rarely. Labyrinth would be easier to hit the table since it's got the solitaire option. Whichever game wins, chances are I'll take up Matt on his offer to have a PBEM game.

bfkiller wrote: In regards to the 2-player CDGs, these will get played rarely. Labyrinth would be easier to hit the table since it's got the solitaire option. Whichever game wins, chances are I'll take up Matt on his offer to have a PBEM game.

I wouldn't recommend trying to learn Labyrinth solo. I personally found it a fairly difficult to game to get to grips with. It looks simple, but the rules are a mess: everything impacts on everything and in that sort of game model writing clear rules is extremely difficult. There are also some very small, easily overlooked rules points which have a big impact on the game. I've played it about five times now and I still wouldn't fancy trying to teach it to anyone.

Plus, compared to TS, it blows. Mind you, compared to TS, pretty much everything blows.

HiS is my favorite game, but ain't no shame in either Friedrich or SoE. great games, all.

I thought Labyrinth rules were pretty well written, myself...

Let the # of players you have committed to play determine the game.

4: Friedrich
5 or 7: Struggle of Empires
6: Here I Stand

I probably wouldn't play any of these games outside of those #s. You also can't really go wrong with any of them.

Gary Sax wrote: I thought Labyrinth rules were pretty well written, myself...

Yeah, I didn't mean to sound snarky. My point is that they're about as well written as they could have been, given that the game structure is inherently circular. When the only place, effectively, that you can start talking about the mechanics is by introducing other mechanics any rulebook is going to be hard work.

BFkiller the votes are in:

There's a number of fans of Here I Stand on F:AT including me and if you get a chance to play you should. My recommendation is that if you're planning a game of Here I Stand with newbies have them read the direction before they come and give out the countries a week before the event. At the end of this post I included a note from one of the guys in our game group. Note: I probably would have voted for Struggle of Empires because it can be played with 5 - 7 players, it's more of a hybrid euro and rules are much easier than HIS.

Feature Match - Big mult-player games:
Here I Stand 10
Struggle of Empires 3
Friedrich 1

It looks like the classic adventure game champion, Talisman defended it's crown of command from World of Warcraft.

Under card - Adventure Games: World of Warcraft the Adventure Game: 1
Talisman 4th edition: 7

The highest rated war game on TOS, Twilight Struggle defended it's crown against Barnes 2010 game of year Labyrinth.

Under card - 2 Player card driven - "war like" games.
Twilight Struggle: 9
Labyrinth - The War on Terror: 4

Steve & I were planning a nice multi-session game of Here I Stand for the two weeks after everyone gets back from Prezcon. It's a little bit of a bear for rules so it's useful to focus on the rules that only apply to you. They are on the GMT site.

I probably know the flow of the game the best so I'll play the Hapsburgs. Steve is probably right with me so I'll suggest he play the Protestants to oppose me.

Thus we need (in order of "beginner" recommendation):

1) ENGLAND - Can ignore most of the religion rules at the beginning. Learn how your home card works (both for Declarations of War & Marrying New Wives)
2) OTTOMAN - Can ignore religion rules, New World stuff. Learn Piracy.
3) FRANCE - Can ignore religion rules. Learn how to Sue for Peace.
4) PAPACY - Can ignore New World stuff. You are militarily weak but a big power broker. Learn about Debates & Excommunication.

There is a nice beginner strategy guide at home.comcast.net/~ebeach/HISAdviceByPower.doc

Let me know who wants to be which power and we should be able to play 5 or 6 turns in 2 nights. Usually, that's enough the end the game naturally but if not, we'll declare a winner at the end of the last turn of the 2nd night.

Excellent. Thanks for the recommendations, everybody. I'll get these bastards to the table in 2012 or die trying. (Well, maybe I won't try THAT hard.)