|
VoodooXT posted:Let's face it: we're gigantic history nerds. Interestingly, I had zero interest in any sort of military history before I played a few of these wargames. I have enough acquaintance with Cold War history that playing Twilight Struggle didn't really get me to read any history. However, when I played Andean Abyss I got really interested in learning about all the events (and I shared the punch-in-the-gut feeling that Paper Mac mentioned a few posts ago). Then when a buddy introduced me to Hannibal: Romve vs Carthage I got really sucked into the history of the Second Punic War -- I watched a documentary on Hannibal and then read a book on the Battle of Cannae. If you'd told me two years ago that I would read a book on the history of an ancient battle, I would have told you you were crazy. It works a bit the other way, too -- now that I read War and Peace last year, I'm interested in trying some Napoleonic games (especially featuring the Battle of Borodino) if I get the chance. This weekend I played Sword of Rome with some friends. Three of us were totally new to the game (though two of us had played Hannibal: RvC, which shares a lot of rules). I played Rome. The Greeks got hammered pretty early by a Roman/Etruscan/Samnite alliance. By Turn 4, the score was 7 for E/S, 7 for Rom, 6 for Gaul, and 3 for Greece. Then I (as Rome) backstabbed E/S in a particulary ineffective manner and at the start of Turn 6 I was down to 3 points. *sigh* We had to call the game at that point due to time. I enjoyed it a lot and would play it again, although you have to be aware that the combat is really unpredictable and can be brutally swingy. And, as above, knowing that we were playing out a historical conflict (and recognizing a few of the general names) added an extra layer of interest to it.
|
#
¿
Aug 12, 2013 02:03
|
|
|
|
| # ¿ May 3, 2024 19:41 |
|