A Euro is a game where a clever mechanic has a theme painted on it, which differentiates it from Ameritrash and wargames, which are typically a subject with mechanics built around it. Sounds subtle, but has huge implications. A typical Euro will seem deep gameplay wise, but shallow as a simulation and historical teaching device. This is why, for example, COIN is a wargame even though it feels a little like a Euro. The designer was looking for a mechanic to model counter insurgencies, and he developed a new wargame paradigm (actually a progression of CDGs). The old paradigms were lacking on the subject. It may seem like a distinction with little difference, but the end effect is profound. The three genres have entirely different feels, largely for this one reason. I'd wouldn't' consider Versailles 1919 a Euro game, more like a wargame w/o a war in the vein of 1960 Making of a President, AH's Gunslinger and Blackbeard and even Pax Pamir.
Great review as always. Just finished solo games. Very enjoyable experience- a thrilling end as I lost to the Bot. Solitaire play: USA, UK & France are present- you pick country to play & Bot for 2 other countries w/ an Uprising country switch function.
Normally i find negotiation game tedious and overly long in the later stage of a game, but this game is something else! The negotiation always was fluid and snappy. And even better the game itself is mechanically fun, even if you win a issue without negotiate, you still have the influence economy, the happiness track and you army/instability to balance! That's a very rare feat!
The two player variant plays without Italy. The US are controlled alternatively by the two players. The solo variant is really interesting. You always control the country that’s currently losing and to score a point you have to keep control of it for a complete round. If that get too powerful you change the country you control. Seems convoluted, but it works.
My group played this game yesterday for the first time. At first we were rather skeptical... but it is the sort of game that is greater than the sum of its parts. The only complaint I have is that I wish the cards had some more info about issues/events it portrayed. Maybe something like the cards from Pax Emancipation. I know it would remove some "cleaness"of the overall graphic desig (which is quite neat, I would say)... but man, really missing some more flavour. Apart of that, great game.
Thanks for the review! It definitely looks like a fun game. I just would feel bad for someone having to play as the worst US president. I suppose as long as it wasn't me.
I purchased this game 3 days ago and am eagerly awaiting it's arrival in the mail. This was a great review and it brings up a question for me: would someone be able to tell me what cards have mistakes on them? This would go a long way in taking care of any problems concerning this issue when I play it for the first time. Thanks in advance!! Cheers. Looks like a fantastic game.
Haven't played this multi-player yet, but it fell completely flat as a solo game. Purely card manipulation. My pre multiplayer impressions are this is not in the same class as Churchill and Pericles. The theme does not emerge in this iteration of the series at all.
Hi, please give some info about solo play. I'm realy intreasting to buy that game, but i'm only solo play and i dont know that game is worht to have them on shelf.
The war map in Churchill was nothing but a dynamic scoreboard to resolve the outcome of the conferences. Which is why Churchill was always a political game, not a wargame. And 1919 is beyond doubt, a 100% political game. Not even sure why anyone would consider it a wargame.
May I give an advice? You guys play and review so many games... so how about a SOLO review for each of these games that offer a seperate solo mode. Certainly in these Corona times ... SOLO boardgaming is on a huge demand these days. I say this because this game has only 2 pages of pure solo rules, so it is not really time consuming to try them out. Churchill was a let down in the solo bot compartment for me. Despite that I still bought Versailles only to see that it uses a very odd solo system where the players hop from one faction to another after each unsettling issue... I think there is a HUGE demand on this kind of short/10 minutes/ solo reviews that keeps hidden for so many players ... until they buy the wrong game (to them). Keep it up.
@@ThePlayersAid I really appreciate the detail you guys go into - There are so few videos on some of these games that an extra 10 or 15 minutes here or there really helps sell these games to people who are curious about buying them. I disagree about the need for shorter videos.
With all my respect! This is an HISTORICAL GAME!!! You are not bidding on the cards, you are choosing to discuss an important historical decision, that really happened, in these days. You must immerse yourself on what happened in this dramatic days. After all, VERSAILLES pact was a disaster, was the key of the Nazi and Fascism formation, in Italy and Germany. This is not an euro game (For me) at all. This is a beautiful boardgame, but it lacks in history information. For example, more texts on the characters card, will be nice, explaining who was this guy etc. Also on the issue cards. Again, if you try to put yourself in the contest of this very crucial historic event, then will change the feeling and outcome. If you play like other diplomatic games then (for me) you really do a mistake. Thanks for the vid.
You're not wrong, but mechanically it's just gaining points by putting out influence cubes, the theme in this one isn't very rich. Much prefer Churchill, or even Pericles, because it feels like you have to consider your choices a lot more, like a Great Statesperson *would* do.
This is such a wholesome channel just two men chat about games I love it 👍
A Euro is a game where a clever mechanic has a theme painted on it, which differentiates it from Ameritrash and wargames, which are typically a subject with mechanics built around it. Sounds subtle, but has huge implications. A typical Euro will seem deep gameplay wise, but shallow as a simulation and historical teaching device. This is why, for example, COIN is a wargame even though it feels a little like a Euro. The designer was looking for a mechanic to model counter insurgencies, and he developed a new wargame paradigm (actually a progression of CDGs). The old paradigms were lacking on the subject. It may seem like a distinction with little difference, but the end effect is profound. The three genres have entirely different feels, largely for this one reason. I'd wouldn't' consider Versailles 1919 a Euro game, more like a wargame w/o a war in the vein of 1960 Making of a President, AH's Gunslinger and Blackbeard and even Pax Pamir.
Love this game. Negotiation is a huge part of this, if you're not wheeling and dealing then you're missing out on a big part of the game.
just played this for the first time and loved it!
🎄🎅🎁 thanks for all the videos this year
Hope you both and all of your family Have a very merry Christmas 🎄🎅🎁
Great review as always. Just finished solo games. Very enjoyable experience- a thrilling end as I lost to the Bot. Solitaire play: USA, UK & France are present- you pick country to play & Bot for 2 other countries w/ an Uprising country switch function.
Normally i find negotiation game tedious and overly long in the later stage of a game, but this game is something else! The negotiation always was fluid and snappy. And even better the game itself is mechanically fun, even if you win a issue without negotiate, you still have the influence economy, the happiness track and you army/instability to balance! That's a very rare feat!
The two player variant plays without Italy. The US are controlled alternatively by the two players.
The solo variant is really interesting. You always control the country that’s currently losing and to score a point you have to keep control of it for a complete round. If that get too powerful you change the country you control. Seems convoluted, but it works.
I really like this game. Learned it as a two player and had a fun time. Then a four player game and that was a blast.
My group played this game yesterday for the first time. At first we were rather skeptical... but it is the sort of game that is greater than the sum of its parts.
The only complaint I have is that I wish the cards had some more info about issues/events it portrayed. Maybe something like the cards from Pax Emancipation. I know it would remove some "cleaness"of the overall graphic desig (which is quite neat, I would say)... but man, really missing some more flavour.
Apart of that, great game.
thanks I ordered this on your recommendation😃
Ordered this game last week - just starting the review, hoping its good!
Have just bought this. Nicely timed review. Give us a play through now so I don’t have to do anything.
Beard looking good Grant!
I dont know if i prefer this shirt or the Polaroid one 😅. Anyway merry xmas u two!
Thanks for the review! It definitely looks like a fun game. I just would feel bad for someone having to play as the worst US president. I suppose as long as it wasn't me.
So true lmao
I purchased this game 3 days ago and am eagerly awaiting it's arrival in the mail. This was a great review and it brings up a question for me: would someone be able to tell me what cards have mistakes on them? This would go a long way in taking care of any problems concerning this issue when I play it for the first time. Thanks in advance!! Cheers. Looks like a fantastic game.
Playing solo would you go with Churchill or Versaille? I enjoy both themes and the historical contexts
I like churchill more, but have never played the solo on Versailles.
Haven't played this multi-player yet, but it fell completely flat as a solo game. Purely card manipulation. My pre multiplayer impressions are this is not in the same class as Churchill and Pericles. The theme does not emerge in this iteration of the series at all.
Hi, please give some info about solo play. I'm realy intreasting to buy that game, but i'm only solo play and i dont know that game is worht to have them on shelf.
Can anyone find a how to play video? I can't find one
The war map in Churchill was nothing but a dynamic scoreboard to resolve the outcome of the conferences. Which is why Churchill was always a political game, not a wargame. And 1919 is beyond doubt, a 100% political game. Not even sure why anyone would consider it a wargame.
Geoff Engelstein and Pandemic? Nice try Grant :)
We're just trying to swindle him some royalites!
May I give an advice? You guys play and review so many games... so how about a SOLO review for each of these games that offer a seperate solo mode. Certainly in these Corona times ... SOLO boardgaming is on a huge demand these days.
I say this because this game has only 2 pages of pure solo rules, so it is not really time consuming to try them out.
Churchill was a let down in the solo bot compartment for me. Despite that I still bought Versailles only to see that it uses a very odd solo system where the players hop from one faction to another after each unsettling issue...
I think there is a HUGE demand on this kind of short/10 minutes/ solo reviews that keeps hidden for so many players ... until they buy the wrong game (to them).
Keep it up.
I love you guys, but it would be cool if you did shorter reviews! Maybe 15 mins?
Best though hope you're ok!
We ramble.. hard to keep it short when there's so much goodness to discuss!
@@ThePlayersAid I really appreciate the detail you guys go into - There are so few videos on some of these games that an extra 10 or 15 minutes here or there really helps sell these games to people who are curious about buying them. I disagree about the need for shorter videos.
With all my respect! This is an HISTORICAL GAME!!! You are not bidding on the cards, you are choosing to discuss an important historical decision, that really happened, in these days. You must immerse yourself on what happened in this dramatic days. After all, VERSAILLES pact was a disaster, was the key of the Nazi and Fascism formation, in Italy and Germany. This is not an euro game (For me) at all. This is a beautiful boardgame, but it lacks in history information. For example, more texts on the characters card, will be nice, explaining who was this guy etc. Also on the issue cards. Again, if you try to put yourself in the contest of this very crucial historic event, then will change the feeling and outcome. If you play like other diplomatic games then (for me) you really do a mistake. Thanks for the vid.
You're not wrong, but mechanically it's just gaining points by putting out influence cubes, the theme in this one isn't very rich. Much prefer Churchill, or even Pericles, because it feels like you have to consider your choices a lot more, like a Great Statesperson *would* do.