TDG: Pericles: The Peloponnesian Wars
HTML-код
- Опубликовано: 7 фев 2025
- Hey, anybody up for a 27-year war? How about a board game that takes almost as long? Join Cody as he looks at this game of classical warfare and politics from GMT Games. Will it have you screaming "This is Sparta!!!" or will it leave you sunk in the Aegean? Let's watch!
www.boardgameg...
![Pericles: The Peloponnesian Wars [REVIEW] (GMT Games, 2017)](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/icEUlRPTHyo/mqdefault.jpg)
Thanks for taking the time to do such a thoughtful review. I guess if I was going to one last design on the Peloponnesian War it had to be this one. Sorry it broke your complexity threshold, but I appreciate the endorsement.
I can assure you that Fort Sumter is way below your complexity threshold, so hopefully more to your liking.
All the best in getting your PhD,
Mark
Mark, thanks a ton! Looking forward to Fort Sumter, and anything else you put out.
Always Great Cody your reviews never get old keep up the good work
Thank you, sir. We'll see how it works out after the move.
This is one of my favorite games. It is not a highly complex game at all, despite appearing daunting the first few outings. It does need a few sessions to get your head around how it plays, but the investment is well worth it. If you are one of those gamers that has little patience to persevere with a game, and prefer a quicker fix, all I can say is you are missing out on a gem of a game.
I appreciate your point of view. To each their own.
An excellent (and thoughtful, as Mr. Herman notes) review. As someone with great interest in the topic but increasingly limited time for gaming, I appreciate you considering not just the game's merits but also the demands it would make on our time and our shelf-space, and whether it's likely to justify those.
You are welcome, sir. Glad you enjoyed the review.
Agreed, at first take, this a very different beast of a game and can be intimidating in terms of the complex dynamics involved. But trust me, once you play through the Comprehensive Example of Play and all of the training scenarios in the recommended order, the system and the game as a whole becomes more and more clear. It also becomes clearer how you approach a game like this compared to any typical "cardboard pushing" wargames. It demands a very different take on wargaming and full-concept strategy. I think that's what I love the most about this game.
sentient02970 Indeed. I fear most people, perhaps myself included, lack the patience. Thanks!
I enjoyed your review, as usual. But your comments at 12:00 has me wondering if you perceive Churchill as a wargame? You discussed how Pericles trumped Churchill due to how the Pericles players have more agency in how the war portion of the game plays out. (Summarizing your thoughts, there. Please correct me if I got it wrong).
But in Churchill, the players are never meant to have agency in how the war plays out. The "war" part of Churchill is only meant to represent the environment by which the players have to react to, and in turn to influence. The conferences react to the current war situation and thus implement measures to influence that situation to meet each player's national goals. But influence is all they can do, just as that's all Roosevelt, Churchill, and Stalin could do in real life. The actual conduct of the war was out of their hands. And that's what Churchill models perfectly.
Thus I disagree that Pericles does it better than Churchill. But rather that they're two different games that really can't be compared despite their similarity with the debating mechanisms.
Good point, sir. I'm aware of the dynamics in that regard, and I could have been more clear. What I meant was that I liked the "hands on" aspect of war in this game better. Thank you for calling attention to that and allowing me to clarify.
I feel like as long as you're okay with the complexity it's an amazing game. What others games fill the itch? (Teams with only one winner and some similar mechanics)
Indeed. Team game with one winner does indeed make this unique- one of the dynamics I was talking about.
Have you played any of the GMT COIN series games? I know some of those have a similar dynamic (particularly Fire in the Lake and Falling Sky, but I think others as well, have 4 players in 2 rough alliances with 1 winning player) so I was curious if Pericles felt similar/different compared to those.
I have not yet played a COIN game. I keep thinking I will at some point, but I never get around to it.
0:00 to 11:00 the review. 11:00 to 12:45 comparison to Churchill game. After that, six mins of rambling about liking it, awesome designer...err...too complex...err but try it.... So I really liked the on point portion of the video, it persuaded me to buy, but...err... it was six minutes too long. ;)
Juvi Goat No, 0:00-9:30 was the overview. The review started at 9:30.
This is the problem with most GMT games. Getting them to the table is a massive challenge as teaching one takes far too long for me. Liberty or Death, Virgin Queen, Fields of Despair are part of my collection and all fall into this category. I'm with you on this game too and I'll skip it.
Like I say, if you get a chance you really should try it at some point. Mechanically there is some really cool innovation here.
Fields of Despair shouldn't fall into this category. I played it opposed last week, it's much more straightforward and can be completed in an afternoon.
Pericles takes one hour for most scenarios... if you think Fields of Despair is not too complex, Pericles is at least a notch lower.
I meant straightforward in terms of strategy and decisions more than rules complexity. Fields of Fire gives you clear objectives, a frontline, potential points of weakness; it's not hard to see what the Germans and the Allies are trying to achieve. You can play the whole campaign in an afternoon.
The feeling with Pericles when you start playing as a newbie is "what the hell am I supposed to do?" - which to me is often a good sign as to the richness and replayability of a game but I can understand how it can be overwhelming.
That's a fair point, but I do not design for the first game, I design for the first decade of gaming. I am a big fan of giving folks their money and time value. For The People is now 18 years and counting. Empire of the Sun is 13 years and counting. This was and continues to be my goal with Pericles.
That said, it depends on your historical knowledge base. If you know World War 1 history, then any WW 1 game will seem familiar with obvious objectives. If you are an Ancient History major or a European, the Peloponnesian War also has obvious objectives because you know the history. In any of the Pericles one or two turn scenarios the major objective is go and win a battle and knock out an enemy base. Pretty straight forward in any time frame.
I hope your experience with Pericles will not deter you from trying For the People and Empire of the Sun at some point. Strangely enough I find them both slightly more complex but much more approachable than Pericles, probably because they feel less abstract (so it's easier to see what the rules simulate).
Those are two I would like to hit eventually. I believe I've got an old Avalon Hill version of For the People, somewhere, but I heard many people say it has been superseded by The U.S. Civil War.
Having played both I have to disagree. The two games are doing completely different things. With the U.S. Civil War you're focusing on the military. For the People puts you in the shoes of Lincoln or Davis. It's a military game but each military decision has to be weighted against its political cost or gain, and the system that simulates the political dimension of the war is incredibly engrossing, something that's completely absent from the Simonitch game (not a knock against that game, the focus is just different).
It also adds more flavour with the CDG system, is more playable, less scripted (if you like games that let you explore alternate history) and to me at least, more fun. You're not just fighting a war in a vacuum, you really get a sense of the integration between the military and the broader political context, which seems to be a hallmark of many of Mark Herman's designs.
That's good to know. I'll try to hit it in the future. Thanks.
Just got this one; was a tad nervous about its complexity!
Complexity's there, but give it a shot.
And?
18:35 - Get it together, Carlson.
Got it together, sir!
Don't worry Cody, you didn't slaughter the names. We use letters you don't, so you can't pronounce them. :)
Thank you!
came across this review after looking for solo games to play while sheltering in place. have you ever tried a solo run? how well suited do you think this game would be for playing in that style?
I haven't played it solo. While the game does come with mechs for solo play, I really think where this game shines is with player interaction. But, again, I haven't played it so I can't comment definitively.
@@TheDiscriminatingGamer Thx for the heads up!
Whenever I hear Aristophanes, I think of the Odd Couple:
ruclips.net/video/Ca3lbXGDto0/видео.htmlm20s
Ha!
I never saw that clip before but that is exactly what I would do and my wife would look at me the same way.
Ridiculous!
I wish someone at GMT gave a shit about aesthetics. I mean, I get what they're going for and who their audience is (I like a few of their games), but it is almost like their brand arbitrarily includes eyesore art.
Disagree. I thought this was a beautiful presentation.