Easily one of my favorite games. The asymmetry works, and is fascinating. (How do I best play my faction? How do I best deal with the others?) It's a rollicking period of history, and the game does a great job of portraying it. Every game is memorable, with great moments like your Pyrrhus anecdote. Love it.
The Etruscan & Samnite player side makes a little sense in the period represented since they allied against Rome at some point. Despite having somewhat different cultures. Although the Samnites were more tribal in civil organization, compared to the city-state Etruscans, the tribes were always quick to unite with each other against Rome and had a lot of Greek influence when it came to warfare and arms. They gave the expanding Romans quite a bit of difficulty for awhile and, in turn, influenced changes in the Roman military. Thanks for the initial look. Heard good things about the multi-player asymmetry of this CDG over the years.
My brother and I played the five faction game once with just the two of us. His idea to do it was setting each faction at a place around the table. We then moved around the table, each skipping over the other player, to the next faction to play that turn. This way a faction is never played by the same player two turns in a row. Order of Play: Gauls - Etruscans/Samnites - Romans - Greeks - Carthaginians Turn1: Player1; Gauls - - Romans - - Carthaginians / Player 2; Etruscans/Samnites - - Greeks Turn 2: Player 2; Gauls - - Romans - - Carthaginians / Player 1; Etruscans/Samnites - - Greeks It was the best display that I've ever seen of the adage, "a nation has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests". Despite having differing play styles, with a common understanding of the rules, we tended to pursue the same goals with each faction when we took it over.
I have played Sword of Rome about half a dozen times and it is an excellent multi-player game. It is very well balanced despite the asymmetry between the different factions, and I enjoy it equally well with 4 or 5 players. Having the Carthaginians as an active faction introduces an additional set of strategic problems and opportunities for playing the Greeks, which has spillover effects for the Romans and Samnites. Instigating Carthaginian Unrest in the off-map box provides something else for the other factions to play their Neutral Power Activates cards. The combat system is very innovative. Large battles can sometimes deliver punishing losses which do lasting damage, and the unpredictable nature of combat means even the stronger side needs to prudently assess the risk of a costly outcome. Diplomacy and negotiating alliances is an important element of any successful strategy. The game is very replayable.
Love this game. Played this 5 players with mates on Vassal during the pandemic, with non wargamers, and was surprised how much they enjoyed it. It's actually very simple as a CDG I think and they game flowed very well. In fairness each player had no problem checking the rules themselves instead of having constant questions so that helped a lot.
Great game! Last time I played Carthage was only 1 point from winning after 2 turns in- after 3 more turns they were in last place. Ending early definitely changes the dynamics! One of the best strengths of the game is that everyone has an enemy at their back.
Let me get this straight: You decided to shorten the game, to change the dynamics slightly? I have played it a couple of times, but we didn't manage to play it to end.
For those reading the comments: If you liked Hannibal: Rome vs. Carthage, you will also very likely enjoy this game. They use basically the same system.
SoR is up there among my favorite CDGs (behind Here I Stand / Virgin Queen). I’ve got over a dozen plays in. I’ve played at 5-player 3-4 times. It isn’t that one can’t have fun at that player count. The core problem is how it devolves into two different games, Greece v. Carthage and Rome v. Gaul/EtrSam. This just leads to a strange end game where usually Rome will steamroll unless either Greece or Carthage puts it adversary down for the count. I’m not concerned about Carthage’s rear theater, as one deals with similar in HiS.
Sword of Rome may get reprinted, hard to believe it was published over 20 years ago, and I have a few tweaks I am considering. If you plan to play again I would love for you to play with the tweaks and let me know what you think.
Hi Alex, you guys are on a roll tracking with me. Another game I have but have never played. Sounds great, but I have a BIG question for you. If this game is so great, why did if FAIL to complete the P500 several years ago? I don't understand due to the high cost of the game in resale. It would seem that with high resale (several years ago) it would be a sure winner. But alas, it seems that there is no demand for it now, and the price for resale (according to BGG stats) is going down. Why? Any ideas? Is is too punishing for newbies? I am really trying to figure this out. Is it too hard to get four people together? Please post any ideas you may have. Thanks!
I bought this game years ago as I am a big fan of Roman history, we played it with four players but none of us had ever played it before. It did not go well. One of the players hated it because he got hammered early. Overall there was no feeling amongst the group to ever try it again so there it sat for years before I sold it off. Glad to see you guys enjoyed it though!
Wow, you're just getting around to reviewing SoR? It's an old game. I like it, but caution two things: first, I think it tends toward runaway leader; second, nine turns is overly long. I think limiting play to six or seven turns cuts potential play time without sacrificing too much.
Played this twice as the Romans. It is common with card-driven games but I didn't like how the cards channeled players into making historical moves. It's like playing a VCR, not a game. Good game design should put players in historical situations, not straitjacketing them with historical events.
Easily one of my favorite games. The asymmetry works, and is fascinating. (How do I best play my faction? How do I best deal with the others?) It's a rollicking period of history, and the game does a great job of portraying it. Every game is memorable, with great moments like your Pyrrhus anecdote. Love it.
The Etruscan & Samnite player side makes a little sense in the period represented since they allied against Rome at some point. Despite having somewhat different cultures. Although the Samnites were more tribal in civil organization, compared to the city-state Etruscans, the tribes were always quick to unite with each other against Rome and had a lot of Greek influence when it came to warfare and arms. They gave the expanding Romans quite a bit of difficulty for awhile and, in turn, influenced changes in the Roman military.
Thanks for the initial look. Heard good things about the multi-player asymmetry of this CDG over the years.
One of my favorite games. And that is my playaid you were looking at.
Love this game. I just wish I had people to play with.
My brother and I played the five faction game once with just the two of us. His idea to do it was setting each faction at a place around the table. We then moved around the table, each skipping over the other player, to the next faction to play that turn. This way a faction is never played by the same player two turns in a row.
Order of Play: Gauls - Etruscans/Samnites - Romans - Greeks - Carthaginians
Turn1: Player1; Gauls - - Romans - - Carthaginians / Player 2; Etruscans/Samnites - - Greeks
Turn 2: Player 2; Gauls - - Romans - - Carthaginians / Player 1; Etruscans/Samnites - - Greeks
It was the best display that I've ever seen of the adage, "a nation has no permanent friends or enemies, only interests". Despite having differing play styles, with a common understanding of the rules, we tended to pursue the same goals with each faction when we took it over.
My pleasure doing the teach and being a punching bag for Grant!
I have played Sword of Rome about half a dozen times and it is an excellent multi-player game. It is very well balanced despite the asymmetry between the different factions, and I enjoy it equally well with 4 or 5 players. Having the Carthaginians as an active faction introduces an additional set of strategic problems and opportunities for playing the Greeks, which has spillover effects for the Romans and Samnites. Instigating Carthaginian Unrest in the off-map box provides something else for the other factions to play their Neutral Power Activates cards. The combat system is very innovative. Large battles can sometimes deliver punishing losses which do lasting damage, and the unpredictable nature of combat means even the stronger side needs to prudently assess the risk of a costly outcome. Diplomacy and negotiating alliances is an important element of any successful strategy. The game is very replayable.
Love this game. Played this 5 players with mates on Vassal during the pandemic, with non wargamers, and was surprised how much they enjoyed it. It's actually very simple as a CDG I think and they game flowed very well. In fairness each player had no problem checking the rules themselves instead of having constant questions so that helped a lot.
Great game! Last time I played Carthage was only 1 point from winning after 2 turns in- after 3 more turns they were in last place. Ending early definitely changes the dynamics!
One of the best strengths of the game is that everyone has an enemy at their back.
Let me get this straight: You decided to shorten the game, to change the dynamics slightly?
I have played it a couple of times, but we didn't manage to play it to end.
I've really enjoyed this game. It is very much a wargame with nonstop conflict. Look forward to hearing your review.
Finally!
For those reading the comments: If you liked Hannibal: Rome vs. Carthage, you will also very likely enjoy this game. They use basically the same system.
SoR is up there among my favorite CDGs (behind Here I Stand / Virgin Queen). I’ve got over a dozen plays in. I’ve played at 5-player 3-4 times. It isn’t that one can’t have fun at that player count.
The core problem is how it devolves into two different games, Greece v. Carthage and Rome v. Gaul/EtrSam. This just leads to a strange end game where usually Rome will steamroll unless either Greece or Carthage puts it adversary down for the count.
I’m not concerned about Carthage’s rear theater, as one deals with similar in HiS.
Sword of Rome may get reprinted, hard to believe it was published over 20 years ago, and I have a few tweaks I am considering. If you plan to play again I would love for you to play with the tweaks and let me know what you think.
Any news on a reprint or should I buy a copy of one I can get a hold of?
@@moedean3342 Reprint, if it happens, will probably be late 2024, early 2025 so I would buy a copy if you can find one.
@@wrayferrell4305 Thank You kindly for the response
Hi Alex, you guys are on a roll tracking with me. Another game I have but have never played. Sounds great, but I have a BIG question for you. If this game is so great, why did if FAIL to complete the P500 several years ago? I don't understand due to the high cost of the game in resale. It would seem that with high resale (several years ago) it would be a sure winner. But alas, it seems that there is no demand for it now, and the price for resale (according to BGG stats) is going down. Why? Any ideas? Is is too punishing for newbies? I am really trying to figure this out. Is it too hard to get four people together? Please post any ideas you may have. Thanks!
I bought this game years ago as I am a big fan of Roman history, we played it with four players but none of us had ever played it before. It did not go well. One of the players hated it because he got hammered early. Overall there was no feeling amongst the group to ever try it again so there it sat for years before I sold it off.
Glad to see you guys enjoyed it though!
Thought I saw GMT had Sword Of Rome up for a P500 reprint not long ago. Guess it hasn't reached the number yet.
It was dropped, and said they might do a deluxe edition later
How is this a review and not a filmed conversation between two adult men who enjoy each other's company very much?
Why not both?
Wow, you're just getting around to reviewing SoR? It's an old game. I like it, but caution two things: first, I think it tends toward runaway leader; second, nine turns is overly long. I think limiting play to six or seven turns cuts potential play time without sacrificing too much.
Fun fact about this game that a lot of people don’t know: Volko was the original developer on the project
Played this twice as the Romans. It is common with card-driven games but I didn't like how the cards channeled players into making historical moves. It's like playing a VCR, not a game. Good game design should put players in historical situations, not straitjacketing them with historical events.