Liberty or Death is a very fun game with an interesting and
modern take on the historical purposes and goals of the movers involved with
the American Revolution. Liberty or Death is a game with flawed gameplay that
represents a ludicrous historical view of the American Revolution.
Now do you see my issue?
Starting with the components is the easiest thing to do in
any game review, and its particularly easy in this case because of how
phenomenal GMT has done making an extremely attractive and pleasant gaming
experience in one big heavy box. I didn’t think the game map of Virgin Queen
could be topped by GMT, but Liberty or Death gives it a darned good run for its
money. The geography is soft and loving and the city circles are incredibly
evocative and historical. Anyone who grew up visiting both Boston and Quebec
City (or any of the other cities on the map) easily could fall in love with the
portrayal of Revolutionary America. The wooden pieces are wonderful, and even
the raid and propaganda markers have reverse sides with historical figures and
tribes. Last, but not least, the cards each have colorful artwork and events on
them. The player aids are incredible, particularly the “Purpose” section for
each action, which allows new players to feel their way independently through
strategy by looking at each action available to them.
The
rulebook is one part of the presentation that I take issue with unfortunately.
The arrangement of the rules can make looking up some things difficult. The
rules lay out most interactions via the faction command and special activities,
which is fine; the problem is when some information is laid out in different
ways. One particular issue we ran into was stacking villages—it is referenced
vaguely on the faction card/in the faction specific area in the rulebook, but
in fact the stacking rules for the villages is in a completely different part
of the rulebook. Another particular issue involved the West Indies space, which
is treated different from other spaces. I would have appreciated a better
explanation of that space on the faction cards like most actions, or it to be
easier to locate information regarding the space in the rulebook. I won’t pass
judgement too harshly on the rulebook, because I try not to in cases where I
can’t think of a solution myself to the issue.
Gameplay-wise,
Liberty or Death in many ways is a great success of the COIN format. The tempo
of the turn flow-chart with the card faction orders creates always interesting
strategic decisions. The Winter Quarters flipping with the card active is such
a simple and reasonable solution to gaming the final turn that I would find it
difficult to play COIN games any other way. One thing new players to the system
have to understand quickly is that commands and special activities can be done
in potentially many different spaces at the same time. Maximizing your turns is
very important, and the game system really comes alive when you realize moves
like Rally and March can be huge moves across the whole map. Battling, the new introduction to the COIN system
is balanced very well as a difficult to set up yet powerful move if successful
with the Win the Day ability for the winner; and rebuilding armies lost feels
appropriately difficult if a campaign is mismanaged. Each action is a lever
that a player can pull to achieve some effect on the game, and setting your
faction up for a big move like a Battle or Plunder is very fun.
The
teamwork present in the game also is fun, even if it is questionable in theory.
Each player has a team goal and then a personal goal, each which is opposite to
the other team or an opposing faction. Teammates work together but are subtly
attempting to an independent victory. I was worried about the gamesmanship of
this mechanic in theory, as I’ve read about the Patriots suiciding into British
positions to ensure they win rather than the French, and that type of play did
not seem beyond the pale for my own game groups, cutthroat as we are. I have
not found that generally to be the case in play, although the Patriots and
French in particular remain vulnerable to a teammate sabotage, which I dislike
(The British and Indians are much less prone to this because of the more
detached nature of Indian play). I am all for sabotage and betrayal, but in
this particular situation, it is extremely gamey and against the spirit of the
game, and affects one team more than the other (I suspect). I would almost
prefer the Patriots and French to share completely joint victory conditions, since
the players are intended to cooperate closely and have to resort to gamey
tactics to sabotage each other in any case, unlike the Indians and British, who
usually cooperate less at the hip and do have reasonably separate victory
conditions.
Victory
Conditions, wrapped up in this team play, do make up the biggest source of
frustration with Liberty or Death, both on a gameplay level and on a historical
one. The developer, recognizing pre-emptively a source of contention, has laid
out an interesting theory of the war as it regarded the interactions with the
Patriots and Indians, and it certainly has merit as a modern look at the sweep
of American settling and the tragic extinction of Indian civilization as part
of the American Revolution. Yet the Patriot/Indian victory conditions are
easily the weakest part of the game both as historical commentary and gameplay
in action. George Washington and the Continental Army focused on combating the
British forces, not Indian tribes on the frontier historically. Some Patriot
players I have played with have used the main Patriot army not to combat the
British, especially late game, but rather to use as a strike force against the
Indians. They aren’t to blame for this—their victory conditions suggest this
strategy to be a correct one, and when they play historically (which some do
intuitively) they instead help the French win. Playing the game as the Patriots
did historically (building up a Continental Army to be a useful fighting force
against the British, scoring major wins in Saratoga or Yorktown) in Liberty or
Death would lead to British casualties and a conceivable French victory.
Despite the protestations that the
Patriots had a huge chip on their shoulder regarding Indian threats (true
protestations), that does not lead to the conclusion that the Indians merited
the prime focus of the Patriot victory conditions—because that was not the
Patriots’ prime focus in the Revolutionary War. Yes, the Revolutionary War was
an important piece in the large tapestry of America’s persecution of Indian
tribes, but its role in the Revolution does not merit the strange Patriot victory
conditions, and it leads to strange gameplay as well depending on how the
Patriot player acts. I am a recent graduate with a history major, I do not
state this as an appeal to authority but rather to express that my recent
education regarding the revolution in two higher level classes did not lead me
to the same conclusions of the importance of Indian affairs for the Patriots as
it affected strategic decisions in the war.
Truly, this personal victory
condition, and how it affects the potential gamey relationship between the
French and Patriots is frustrating, because of how fun and evocative almost
every other mechanic is. The designer of Liberty or Death went outside the established
COIN box in several areas (battles, French build up, Winter Quarters) and
beautifully integrated his new mechanics into the existing structure. It would
have been nice if he had gone out of the box regarding the victory mechanics.
The teams and factions have diametrically opposing goals that mirror each other’s,
yet the teams in reality and on the board are not co-equal opposing forces. I
think that more asymmetric victory conditions would have made more historic
sense and created more natural gameplay, especially between the Patriots and
French, who had different goals, but largely those goals were equally pushed
forward by defeating the British. I would either want to see a total team goal
on the Patriot/French side encompassing both control and casualties; or more
asymentric goals with the French creating strain by sending troops elsewhere
rather than to the Colonies to combat the British as a sort of expanded West
Indies side theatre. The British/Indian goals on the other hand work fine from
both a historical and gameplay stance, and the explanations in the playbook for
each are satisfying. As it stands, the Fort/Village/Casualty conditions are not
satisfying on the Patriot/French side.
I’ve done a lot of complaining
about victory conditions, and on paper, I have a lot of issues with Liberty or
Death. Those issues vanish while I’m playing. It is such an attractive package,
from the components, to the mechanics, to the addictive gameplay in action. It
is a testament to the game that all my personal gripes vanish when I am
actually sitting down and playing the game as the hours fly by. My question to
the reader at the start of this review (do you see my issue?) remains because
the game is such fun even with the flaws that frustrate me greatly.
I suppose I’ll just have to play
more. Gladly.
ERRATA:
FLOW CHART MANIA: A shout out to the Indian flow chart, who
flew under the radar and beat three humans with beating hearts and apparently
faulty brains.
UPPER MASSACHUSETTS: As a Mainer, I am still salty that my
state, home to the infamous Quebec Expedition (go read Arundel, it’s a good
one), is literally the only inaccessible area in the entire damn Eastern
American seaboard.
FRANGLAIS: Nothing better than playing the French and
attempting to pronounce the French phrases in terrible French accents.
No comments:
Post a Comment