Articles Rants & Raves We the People 2.0
 

We the People 2.0 We the People 2.0 Hot

Back in 1994-95 two very influential board games came out on the market.   In Europe, Klaus Teuber designed Settlers of Catan and in the United States, Mark Herman designed We the People for Avalon Hill.

I think everyone here on F:AT knows the influence of Settlers of Catan.   It started on the downers, which were a hell of a lot better than the uppers because it was a nervous wreck.  But one led to two, two led to four, four led to eight, until at the end it was about 85 a day. Oh, wait that was Corey Haim life not Euros. No, in Euroland, Settlers lead to Carcassonne, lead to El Grande, lead to Puerto Rico, lead to Princes of Florence, lead to Caylus, lead to Goa, lead to Agicola , lead to Dominion, lead to Endeavor or some other crap.

Meanwhile over the last 15 years, We the People lead to For the People, Hannibal, Wilderness War, Path of Glory, Here I Stand, Twilight Struggle and 1960 and a few other games.

Over the last 15 years Settlers of Catan was able to come out with a number of different additions, expansions and versions. Unfortunately, for Mark Herman Avalon Hill had gone out of business so he wasn't able to come out with 27 different variants of We the People.   Instead over the last 15 years Mark Herman was probably able to pay for his kids college by selling left over copies of We the People for $200 a pop on ebay.

 

Mark Herman making $200 a pop selling excess copies of We the People.

Over the last 5 years or so, we saw a number of prints or remakes of great games from the 1980s  and 1990s. FFG took the approach of completely remaking games like Warrior Knights, but only made slight changes to Talisman and Cosmic Encounters.  Valley Games decided to reprint games like Hannibal and Republic of Rome with upgraded components and graphics.  Meanwhile in Euroland there was lawsuits over Age of Steam.  Unfortunately, Dune will probably never get remade with the license for legal reasons.  Luckily, for the fans of Card Driven Games GMT and Mark Herman were able to get together to remake We the People as Washington's War.

As I mentioned earlier We the People started the card driven war game revolution.  Before this time people played war games on boards with hexes, and players were able to move every fracking tiny piece of fricking cardboard board every turn.  Each turn in game like Third Reich took about 12 hours. In 1995 Mark Hermon comes along and now each player can only move 1 piece at a time and players have to make important decisions whether to move armies to attack, build armies or use ops points for political gain.

So now what's the difference between We the People and Washington's War? Actually, there isn't a huge difference.  The main differences is in the combat system.  We the People used Battle Cards similar to Hannibal, while Washington War uses dice.  In a typical battle each side will roll the dice twice and compare results to see who the winner is. In the designer notes Mark Hermon talks about streamlining the game and using the dice rolls rather than battle cards to reduce the game time.  As he mentioned, each battle used to take over 5 minutes.  With an average of 14 battles per game this adds up to 70 minutes of battle time. By switching to the quick dice system a 3 hour game of We the People can be reduced to 90 minutes of Washington'a War. Card Driven Board games are also very popular by email on Vasaal.  Before We the People would take months to play by email. Now Washington's War will take only a couple of weeks to play by email.

Now all this said, I have the feeling  streamlining We the People to Washington's War is like watching the Super Bowl with Tivo.  Back before Tivo the Super Bowl would take 4 hours to watch.  Now with Tivo it only takes 2 hours.  Once I started using Tivo,  I'll never go back to taking 4 hours to watch a Super Bowl,  but the real question is am I enjoying the game any better now than I did 5 years ago?   This same question can be asked about We the People and Washington's War.   I don't think I'll ever play the original version of  We the People now that this new version has come out.  But I'm still not sure whether my enjoyment is any greater now than it would have been 10 years ago with the longer version.

Ok, my rants is over, now onto my mini review:

KingPut is either constipated and taking a shit or he's trying to figure out how to get General Howe to attack George Washington.

Component wise Washington's War looks great and it has great components.   This game is a bargain at $40 even without the comparison against We the People at $150.   The cards are so thick they're hard to shuffle.

Washington's War is the perfect game for people new to card driven war games.  It  is probably one of the easiest and quickest of the card driven war games.  I'd recommend it to anyone who's played Twilight Struggle or 1960 and wants to move onto more of a war game.   Politics and events play a very important role in Washington's War, so don't expect a dicefest.   The game also seems pretty balanced, although I'm expecting many posts on BGG about how one side has an advantage by people who have played twice and the British have won both times. I think the design team has done a pretty good job play testing Washington's War.

Overall, Washington's War is a good game, but not a great game. The greatness has been stripped from We the People,  but at the same time it hits a specific niche perfectly.   Washington's War is an engaging card driven war game that can be played in 90 minutes and is designed to be played on the internet.  So Washington's War will see a hell of a lot of play time over the next few years.

All that all said, who's ready to play some Washington's War on Vasaal?

Powered by JReviews
Comments (7)
  • avatarstormseeker75

    I am! My copy should be here soon now that GMT has games out to distributors. I'll bone up on the rules and we can start a PBEM if you want.

  • avatarWalterman

    Why do you think the greatness is gone from WWr? Is it swapping dice for cards? Is it that we have 10+ years of games based on WtP to compare it too? Or is it just the shortened play time?

  • avatarKingPut

    Stormseeker75 - F:AT mail or Geekmail me. We can probably get a game set up by next weekend.

    Walterman - I think Washingon's War is a very good game but it's not a great game for a combination of 2 reasons you've mentioned. The combat system in WWr isn't very exiting unless perhaps you've trapped a General Washington or British General with 4 or 5 units. The combat system consists of adding up units, plus some DRM than having each side roll a dice. It's basically the same combat system as Talisman. I also think newer card driven games like Twilight Stuggles and Hannibal have more interesting and game changing cards in the strategy event deck (except for the Declaration of Independence and the Ben Franklin must play cards).

    That all said I think in 5 years I'll look back and say Washington's War is one of my most played games in collect because of the 90 minute game length, it is easy to teach, I like the subject matter and it should be a excellent game to play on Vassal.

  • avatarGary Sax

    I am *really* not enjoying the We the People game I'm playing with Joel and it has nothing to do with my opponent or anything like that. I don't know why people like this game so much besides its amazing legacy.

  • avatarMerkles

    "I am *really* not enjoying the We the People game I'm playing with Joel and it has nothing to do with my opponent or anything like that. I don't know why people like this game so much besides its amazing legacy."

    I remember you saying that in Atlanta---but is it mostly b/c it mimics the Continental Army's "run-away, run-away" approach unless it has overwhelming odds? Major battles in the American Revolution was relatively rare, too---very sporadic.

  • avatarKingPut

    I was thinking about what would make Washington's War great last night.
    1. The combat system. What would be more fun is if you counted CUs (combat units), Generals ability and other dice roll modifiers than rolled 1 dice for each point and hit on 5-6s. The side with the most 5-6s wins. The difference in hits ends up the number CUs lost by the defender (up to 3) on ties both sides lose 1 CU and Americans retreat.
    2. Add events to all Ops cards. The events could be small. Some events give battle bonuses. Other add or subtract CUs. Many of the events would be to add CUs that could be Indians, Tories or state or local Militia. CUs could be popping up all over the board. In the revolutionary war many of the campaigns in the South, West and near Canada were about sending Leaders to recruit Indians, Tories and Militia. Players could play out there hand in the game to recreate these events. I would eliminate the current way the Americans recruit units. In the 18th century more men died of diseases than battle wounds so the number of events could be the dreaded disease cards. Players could play a disease card to knock down a pile of CUs and then on the next card play they could attack.

    Mark Herman had the opportunity to redesign the game and make it great but he missed the boat by keeping the events / ops cards too much the same.

  • avatarMsample

    Mark had to walk a fine line when doing this game in that he couldn't change it too much from the original or he would have alienated the existing fan base . I think ditching the battle cards was a good move . Not only did they make the game longer, but they don't add as much as the Hannibal cards IMO .

    Mechanically, making OPS cards double as Events would work . In game play though, it could have the effect of accelerating the game play in terms of things happening faster vs history .

    Lets face it, the game started an entire genre of wargames . Subsequent card driven games definitely made improvements to the idea of CDGs because designers were able to build on the concept . Leave it for what it is . And I like having something this quick - more and more CDG coming out are at the opposite end of the complexity and time spectrum ( Pursuit of Glory anyone ? ) . As a side note, Hearts and Minds from Worthington is a nice addition to the CDG family and worth checking out, once you get past the rather poorly thought out components ( small map, large counters ) .

    I do agree that there is room for a more detailed CDG on the AmRev . David Docktor, designer of Triumph of Chaos, was working on one .

Only registered users can write comments!
Text Size

Top