Tag Archives: Colonial

Cortes: Conquest of the Aztecs

cover

 

A two-player wargame that covers the epic three month siege of Tenochtitlan, the climactic battle for control of Mexico, fought in 1521.

This game is the only one that I am aware of that includes rules for Human Sacrifice…

If Cortes is killed or captured, the Aztec player wins immediately. Otherwise, the Spanish player must keep his “Loss Points” to a minimum… as long as the Spanish player does not gain 17 or more points, they win.

 

Intro

 

 

Review

 

 

DAR

 

 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
User Review:
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

Conquistador (Video Review)

box

 

Play one of four European powers in a bid to make your riches in the New World. Originally published by SPI in Strategy & Tactics magazine #58, a new version with a mounted board was published by AH.

This a one to four player game. The green counters are the Spanish, yellow counters are the Portuguese, red counters are the English, and the blue counters are the French.

~ SPI

Intro

 

Review

 

DAR

 

 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
User Review:
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

Pax Britannica (Video Review)

Pax

A multi player game of empire, diplomacy, and global confrontation. The Great Powers of Great Britain, France, the US, Germany, Austria-Hungary, Italy, Russia, and Japan vie throughout the world for the wealth and esteem conferred by vast colonial holdings in the far-flung corners of the Earth. Each player maneuvers his administrative and military assets to establish control over the choicest and most strategic areas, keeping a wary eye toward encroaching opponents whose colonial ambitions are every bit as great. Conflict between national wills is more often resolved through peaceful negotiation than through war; but when national honor is too severely tried, war can occur- on a scale that threatens to evolve into the War to End All Wars!

Time scale = 4 years per turn; Map scale = abstract; Unit scale = Corps/Fleet, Division/Task Force, Regiment/Squadron; Playing time = approx 4 to 7 hours

~ Victory Games

Intro

 

 

Review

 

DAR

 

VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
User Review:
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

Halls of Montezuma (Video Review & Play Through)

 

 

HoM offers a single campaign scenario playable in two to three hours, given sudden death victory conditions. This makes the game ideal for an evening of friendly play as well as for tournaments and play-by-email. If you enjoy the other CDG’s, HoM brings you the Mexican-American War in a format that hearkens to the design elegance and playing time of We The People ™, the ground-breaking game by Mark Herman. HoM uses mechanics and cards to capture the excitement, tension, and uncertainty of this rarely simulated conflict from American history, the war that was a training ground for so many generals who would become fierce enemies in a later conflict. Can Mexico emerge as a new North American power or will the United States fulfill its Manifest Destiny?

Game Components

  • Rules booklet
  • Deck of 80 Strategy cards
  • Deck of 30 Action cards
  • Two 10-sided dice
  • One 22×34 mapsheet
  • Two player aid cards
  • One and one-half 5/8 inch counter sheets
~ GMT

 

Intro

 

 

Review

 

DAR:










I use the term ‘review’ a bit differently from most game reviewers.

The reason lies in the history of how these came about (along with a demand for semantic precision). My videos started out as pure DARs (During Action Reports – based on the wargaming concept of AARs). People wanted me to try and distill some of the commentary and impressions which surfaced during those, and requested a formal ‘review’ of the session – and the game itself. Given that my reviews didn’t provide a good overview of the rules that many were familiar with, further requests expanded to include that – but I cheat on these, using them to improve my own understanding of the game.

How should you use these? Damned if I know. Some people want to see the rules overview in the intro.Some desire the thoughts in the review. Some want the whole replay, so they can see how I got from point A to B. Do keep in mind however, in my mind; the DAR is indeed the heart of this. I’m inviting you into my game. If you don’t want the whole thing, hey, I understand (I wouldn’t want it all), but by the time of the review, I’ll be referring back to events in the playthroughs.


VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
User Review:
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)

Geronimo (Video Review & Play Through)

Covering the inevitable expansion of US military might at the expensive of the native tribes.

The U.S. – Indian conflicts, a tragic period of history.

Each turn, players are randomly assigned a side to play — either Indian
tribes or the U.S. Only one player represents the U.S. each turn, while
the other players each have a number of Indian tribes under their
control. Indian players get to select one or two of their active
tribes, but the rest are dealt to them randomly. There are usually more
Indian tribes available than what are active each turn, but players
don’t really know which ones are inactive. This can be unsettling to
the U.S. player as he must decide where to deploy his limited troops and
columns.

All players compete to earn victory points. The U.S. player is faced with
the task of building up sufficient resources (settlements, towns, railroads,
mines, etc.) to maintain existing states and convert territories into states.
The Indian players play the role of guerrillas to earn victory points, but also
can deny resources to the U.S. player. However, he must be very careful
not to suffer too many casualties, as this could cause his tribe to go on
reservation or become extinct, which costs the player dearly in victory points.

~ Avalon Hill

Intro

This is an innovative game by Richard Berg that never was popular.

Review

DAR





I use the term ‘review’ a bit differently from most game reviewers.

The reason lies in the history of how these came about (along with a demand for semantic precision). My videos started out as pure DARs (During Action Reports – based on the wargaming concept of AARs). People wanted me to try and distill some of the commentary and impressions which surfaced during those, and requested a formal ‘review’ of the session – and the game itself. Given that my reviews didn’t provide a good overview of the rules that many were familiar with, further requests expanded to include that – but I cheat on these, using them to improve my own understanding of the game.

How should you use these? Damned if I know. Some people want to see the rules overview in the intro.Some desire the thoughts in the review. Some want the whole replay, so they can see how I got from point A to B. Do keep in mind however, in my mind; the DAR is indeed the heart of this. I’m inviting you into my game. If you don’t want the whole thing, hey, I understand (I wouldn’t want it all), but by the time of the review, I’ll be referring back to events in the playthroughs.


VN:F [1.9.22_1171]
User Review:
Rating: 0.0/5 (0 votes cast)