I really appreciate this video. You did a great job explaining the basic features of combat in a concise and easy to understand way. I recently picked up GMT's new "Great Battles of Julius Caesar" which uses the same format as SPQR and this video has helped immensely!
This looks like the "deluxe" 2nd edition. I hope they cleaned up the rules because I spent a lot of time editing the rules with the available errata at the time. Probably 25 years ago. I think I first got GMT's Great Battles series with Alexander the Great, that was around '92 I think. Fantastic! I think the Germans say it best "Ausgezeitnet!" Someplace between outstanding and fantastic, usually translated as "unbelievable" but that kinda falls short.
Paul, it!s actually "ausgezeichnet" in German, which translates into "excellent" or "outstanding." Which makes sense, because it's root comes from "eine Auszeichnung erhalten." Engl. "to receive an award", or being praised, honoured, decorated, receivinng a prize etc. Whatever, I fully agree with you. I received my GMT SPQR box this morning in the mail, read and went through the Simple GBoH rules last week. After unboxing I a was stunned, flipping through all the contents was exhilerating, then reading for hours the scenarios etc. etc. etc. Found this Learning Scenario in the booklet and found this introduction.. Best to come: My very supporting wife sensed my excitement, grabbed the box too, unboxed it again and then watched (!) this clip. What more can I ask for? BTW ,GMT's new Caesar Deluxe will probably show up on my doorstep in the next 4 - 6 weeks (living across the pond in Germany). Crossed fingers GMT will have their new Alexander Deluxe out in the next 6 months. Resulting in: Probably gaming Ancients for a couple of years ... 👍
They didn't make it very easy to learn the rules. I'm new to war board games (The Hunted is the only other one I've played). As an example I can't understand why they named cohesion and troop quality two different things. Just call troop quality cohesion that way when a newb reads in the rules that they are flipping through constantly that about cohesion hits they know to actually look at tq. Also coloring the cohesion hits markers with red numbers and black backgrounds when tq has white numbers and grey backgrounds is another example of unnecessary difference. Furthermore footnotes at the bottom explaining what the historical relevance of the rule was instead of in the middle of the rule would be much better because of how much reading is required anyway. Just my two cents.
I really appreciate this video. You did a great job explaining the basic features of combat in a concise and easy to understand way. I recently picked up GMT's new "Great Battles of Julius Caesar" which uses the same format as SPQR and this video has helped immensely!
Looking forward to the next episode! 🙂
Your videos are the best I've found to introduce this game. Any chance for follow-up videos?
I know that voice. You are the Rich from the Civil War podcast. You are a man of many historical interests!
Great tutorial, one of the best acctually. Thanks a lot!
Just found your channel, excellent video, subscribed.
First class introduction. Nce and calm explanations, veyr precise, well made video. Thanks so much.
Awesome stuff, really helps in understanding and visualizing different items as they come up during a battle. Ty for your time!
Very thorough and helpful. Thank you!
Excellent series. Full marks.
Excellent video. Just what I was looking for. Thanks.
Bought this when it first came out. Even got quite a few of the supplements. Also bought Ceaser: The Civil Wars and The Gallic Wars. Great game.
You should more content as these are very good teaching vids.
Wonderful. I've been looking for something exactly like this!
Very helpful! I'd love a follow-up video (or 3 or 4) if at all possible!
thank you like Rough looking forward to this😄
What are the tweezers called that I see in these videos? I need to buy some
This looks like the "deluxe" 2nd edition. I hope they cleaned up the rules because I spent a lot of time editing the rules with the available errata at the time. Probably 25 years ago. I think I first got GMT's Great Battles series with Alexander the Great, that was around '92 I think. Fantastic! I think the Germans say it best "Ausgezeitnet!" Someplace between outstanding and fantastic, usually translated as "unbelievable" but that kinda falls short.
Paul, it!s actually "ausgezeichnet" in German, which translates into "excellent" or "outstanding." Which makes sense, because it's root comes from "eine Auszeichnung erhalten." Engl. "to receive an award", or being praised, honoured, decorated, receivinng a prize etc. Whatever, I fully agree with you. I received my GMT SPQR box this morning in the mail, read and went through the Simple GBoH rules last week. After unboxing I a was stunned, flipping through all the contents was exhilerating, then reading for hours the scenarios etc. etc. etc. Found this Learning Scenario in the booklet and found this introduction.. Best to come: My very supporting wife sensed my excitement, grabbed the box too, unboxed it again and then watched (!) this clip. What more can I ask for? BTW ,GMT's new Caesar Deluxe will probably show up on my doorstep in the next 4 - 6 weeks (living across the pond in Germany). Crossed fingers GMT will have their new Alexander Deluxe out in the next 6 months. Resulting in: Probably gaming Ancients for a couple of years ... 👍
@@Jimo1956 Thanks for the correction. My German is more towards the spoken than the written.
They didn't make it very easy to learn the rules. I'm new to war board games (The Hunted is the only other one I've played). As an example I can't understand why they named cohesion and troop quality two different things. Just call troop quality cohesion that way when a newb reads in the rules that they are flipping through constantly that about cohesion hits they know to actually look at tq. Also coloring the cohesion hits markers with red numbers and black backgrounds when tq has white numbers and grey backgrounds is another example of unnecessary difference. Furthermore footnotes at the bottom explaining what the historical relevance of the rule was instead of in the middle of the rule would be much better because of how much reading is required anyway. Just my two cents.