It's always funny to watch people's comments on Memoir 44 (and probably other Command & Color games as well). This is a fantastic game - simple enough for kids to play - but full of complexity that often trick experienced board gamers to think it's simple and "random" :) BTW - Omaha Beach from the Base Game has a 81/19 win percentage for the Axis.
Thanks for making this video, great intro to the actual game. TH-cam is great for these quick intro things and determining whether this is something for you. This is probably one of the better strategy games to play with younger kids and spouses who are not as likely to want to dive into a 200+ page rulebook and 5 hours of gameplay.
I once saw a review of Battle Cry (pretty much the exact same game as Memoir 44) where the guy complained about the command card system and then also complained about the lack of a "fog of war" game mechanic. The command card system is the fog of war game mechanic. I find the limitation of the command cards to be both a leveling agent (sometimes my 7 year old can still win) and also an incubator for creativity. Armies don't always do what you want them to do. This is a great game but maybe not for total control freaks and people who require very complicated rules systems. It's a great intro to wargaming for younger gamers but still a great game for adults.
The problem I have with the cards in this setting is that you will have opposing groups in an active firefight when one (or both) sides suddenly stop engaging. Why? Because their commander didn't keep nagging them to reload their weapons? I guess it can be explained by lack of ammo, or jammed equipment, or cowering, but then they would/should take cover and be more difficult to rout or destroy. The command cards make far more sense to me in C&C:A, where men (who probably didn't want to be there) wearing their body weight in armor and weapons, under a hot sun, have to be continuously led (or goaded, or threatened) to continue attacking.
I love this game. I don't think there is anything wrong with having so luck elements to it - it makes it fun and not boring like chess. Also it's not bogged down with loads and loads of rules.
Some poor editing during that video, the movement of the tanks was completely obscured from 10:22 due to the artillery explanation still being on the screen. Oh, and 'barrage' does not rhyme with 'carriage' :D This is a *really* good game. It's not designed to be a full re-creation like some wargames so if you're looking for complete realism this probably isn't for you. Otherwise, fun times can be had :)
GGG is a new reviewer. Each reviewer gets their own show. I think its a good thing as you can find the reviewer that matches your opinion the best and make choices by that reviewer.
This game is very wargame light. It is fun, looks great and can be played fast. Sure luck/random card draw is key but it's enjoybale also for kids or those who did not play wargames already in the 1980s and just want to playa fats game without a calculator....
I wonder if any of those crosses happened because of this. Troop: "General. We have enemies flanking us. We need to move NOW!" General: "Sorry. I didn't draw the card that allows you to move."
I own this game, and was pretty excited about it for a while, until I fully realized how a lack of the proper cards can really cripple the game. There are those who deny this problem, either arguing that the problem is unlikely to arise or somehow not significant. I can only conclude that these guys either don't understand what they're talking about, or they refuse to sit by and watch their favourite game being bashed. However, there is no point in denying what's obvious; the luck factor is huge; playing a much bigger part than strategic ability. Most wargame has a little risk involved, but few give that factor such an opportunity to really bog things down. As also mentioned by another reviewer, you can have your troops in a good position, but be unable to fire, due to a lack of cards. Some try to argue that this is realistic, but I think real troops would rather fire than simply sit by and be wiped out. Finding ways to take advantage of your cards really isn't a challenge, what really matters is getting them, especially the grey cards can create a lot of unrealistic drama. I still agree that this game is a great game for beginners, who want to think that they are playing war games, or who find it inspiring that the best player does not necessarily win. It is possible that your son or daughter gets a chance to beat you, yet chances are just the same that THEY get the wrong cards, and so get the buttwhupping of their lifetime. This game really calls for the T word. There is a war theme, and a lot of neat-looking army men to play with. The action is not so much controlled by the players' actions, the game itself takes care of that, often leaving players merely in charge of rolling the dice for the few valid cards that are available, than coming up with any grand strategic plot. Thus, this is not a game at all, it is a Toy. Perhaps a few modifications could help reduce frustration. Consider these optional rules: 1 Any player can discard his entire hand and draw the same number of cards, instead of playing a card that turn. Not a sweet option, but it would help in some situations. 2 Any player can discard a single card and activate any two units in the same area (flank or center) of the board. This gives players a safety valve, a way to dispose of useless cards without being totally ripped off. Perhaps activating even a single unit would be enough to make things better. 3 Remove overpowered cards from the game, or make sure each player gets an equal share of them. This requires some judgment, though, so maybe it's a bad idea. For inexperienced players I would rather recommend a game where you get to move any piece you want, like chess, imagine how that game would be with the introduction of cards saying "you may move a pawn" etc. Another great option is Risk, where you also get to control your whole army, and where the rules are much simpler and less fluffed down than in M'44. If you enjoy light WWII games, consider one of the Axis & Aliies titles. Some of them have been bashed for being too light, however, you get to choose which units to buy, and you may add reinforcements, something that is not the case with M'44. Despite all my negative statements, please don't give up on this game; if your kids or you love the game, please keep playing, but consider the possibility that you might one they want to try a real wargame where strategy occupies the passenger seat.
While you make decent points. And those fixes can ofc be used by anyone as house rules. I disagree with certain statements, as in calling the game a toy is not right in this context. You either call all boardgames a toy or none. As for the player not being in control, that's just silly. Luck plays a role, yes (such is war) but tactic too and working with the cards you got. If you move all your troops to the middle then complain about not having middle section card that's a skill issue and not a game issue.
@@generaljashin8067 I beg to differ... We do have the option to call some games "toys", it's not just all or none. It's just a matter of principles, by which you define games. If a game offers less control, it's not much of a game. It's more like an object that you play with. I agree that making stupid moves doesn't allow you to blame the game. That's not the issue. The issue is that you have no control over what cards you get, so you could very easily end up with your troops crippled, due to no fault of your own. Also, the limitation of not being able to move troops because they are at the wrong side of a line on the game board makes no sense. I recognize that trouble with communication can be an issue during war, it is just that this issue isn't well replicated by this game. It's not realistically portrayed, and it can end up being a deciding factor in quite often. I would rather play a game where units are able to operate on a more realistic level. There are plenty of real wargames that manage to do this properly, so I see no reason for wasting times on toys like Memoir'44. I got rid of it a couple of years ago, and I have not missed it one bit.
I hate the card system in the game. I find other cards systems like in Strike of the Eagle and Washington's War to be far more to my liking. My pick for a gateway wargame would be Hold the Line. It uses the same type of maps and terrain, but no cards and just dice.
Completely agree. Usually if a game takes off, even if I don't like it, I can understand why. The popularity of this game confounds me. Scenario based gaming controlled by a luck based mechanic is a terrible combination. War gaming where your troops movement is limited by luck of the draw is bad design. If there's ever a scenario where you have the dominant board situation and you can't take advantage of it because you can't draw the right cards, it's a bad game.
It's always funny to watch people's comments on Memoir 44 (and probably other Command & Color games as well).
This is a fantastic game - simple enough for kids to play - but full of complexity that often trick experienced board gamers to think it's simple and "random" :)
BTW - Omaha Beach from the Base Game has a 81/19 win percentage for the Axis.
Thanks for making this video, great intro to the actual game. TH-cam is great for these quick intro things and determining whether this is something for you. This is probably one of the better strategy games to play with younger kids and spouses who are not as likely to want to dive into a 200+ page rulebook and 5 hours of gameplay.
I once saw a review of Battle Cry (pretty much the exact same game as Memoir 44) where the guy complained about the command card system and then also complained about the lack of a "fog of war" game mechanic. The command card system is the fog of war game mechanic. I find the limitation of the command cards to be both a leveling agent (sometimes my 7 year old can still win) and also an incubator for creativity. Armies don't always do what you want them to do. This is a great game but maybe not for total control freaks and people who require very complicated rules systems. It's a great intro to wargaming for younger gamers but still a great game for adults.
The problem I have with the cards in this setting is that you will have opposing groups in an active firefight when one (or both) sides suddenly stop engaging. Why? Because their commander didn't keep nagging them to reload their weapons? I guess it can be explained by lack of ammo, or jammed equipment, or cowering, but then they would/should take cover and be more difficult to rout or destroy.
The command cards make far more sense to me in C&C:A, where men (who probably didn't want to be there) wearing their body weight in armor and weapons, under a hot sun, have to be continuously led (or goaded, or threatened) to continue attacking.
Great Review! Can you recommend the essential expansions you would recommend? The options are a bit overwhelming for a new memoir player.
I love this game. I don't think there is anything wrong with having so luck elements to it - it makes it fun and not boring like chess. Also it's not bogged down with loads and loads of rules.
I love Memoir 44, it is a fun game!
Memoir 44 uses the same rules as Battle Cry, with some alterations for the period.
For more than 2 players, use the awesome Overlord rules, makes the game even better for me.
Some poor editing during that video, the movement of the tanks was completely obscured from 10:22 due to the artillery explanation still being on the screen.
Oh, and 'barrage' does not rhyme with 'carriage' :D
This is a *really* good game. It's not designed to be a full re-creation like some wargames so if you're looking for complete realism this probably isn't for you. Otherwise, fun times can be had :)
GGG is a new reviewer. Each reviewer gets their own show. I think its a good thing as you can find the reviewer that matches your opinion the best and make choices by that reviewer.
The BGM of this video is used as the "theme song" of the "cooking with a dog" series. LOL. BTW. I think I would really enjoy this game.
This game is very wargame light.
It is fun, looks great and can be played fast.
Sure luck/random card draw is key but it's enjoybale also for kids or those who did not play wargames already in the 1980s and just want to playa fats game without a calculator....
I wonder if any of those crosses happened because of this.
Troop: "General. We have enemies flanking us. We need to move NOW!"
General: "Sorry. I didn't draw the card that allows you to move."
I own this game, and was pretty excited about it for a while, until I fully realized how a lack of the proper cards can really cripple the game. There are those who deny this problem, either arguing that the problem is unlikely to arise or somehow not significant. I can only conclude that these guys either don't understand what they're talking about, or they refuse to sit by and watch their favourite game being bashed.
However, there is no point in denying what's obvious; the luck factor is huge; playing a much bigger part than strategic ability. Most wargame has a little risk involved, but few give that factor such an opportunity to really bog things down. As also mentioned by another reviewer, you can have your troops in a good position, but be unable to fire, due to a lack of cards. Some try to argue that this is realistic, but I think real troops would rather fire than simply sit by and be wiped out.
Finding ways to take advantage of your cards really isn't a challenge, what really matters is getting them, especially the grey cards can create a lot of unrealistic drama.
I still agree that this game is a great game for beginners, who want to think that they are playing war games, or who find it inspiring that the best player does not necessarily win. It is possible that your son or daughter gets a chance to beat you, yet chances are just the same that THEY get the wrong cards, and so get the buttwhupping of their lifetime.
This game really calls for the T word. There is a war theme, and a lot of neat-looking army men to play with. The action is not so much controlled by the players' actions, the game itself takes care of that, often leaving players merely in charge of rolling the dice for the few valid cards that are available, than coming up with any grand strategic plot. Thus, this is not a game at all, it is a Toy.
Perhaps a few modifications could help reduce frustration. Consider these optional rules:
1 Any player can discard his entire hand and draw the same number of cards, instead of playing a card that turn. Not a sweet option, but it would help in some situations.
2 Any player can discard a single card and activate any two units in the same area (flank or center) of the board. This gives players a safety valve, a way to dispose of useless cards without being totally ripped off. Perhaps activating even a single unit would be enough to make things better.
3 Remove overpowered cards from the game, or make sure each player gets an equal share of them. This requires some judgment, though, so maybe it's a bad idea.
For inexperienced players I would rather recommend a game where you get to move any piece you want, like chess, imagine how that game would be with the introduction of cards saying "you may move a pawn" etc.
Another great option is Risk, where you also get to control your whole army, and where the rules are much simpler and less fluffed down than in M'44. If you enjoy light WWII games, consider one of the Axis & Aliies titles. Some of them have been bashed for being too light, however, you get to choose which units to buy, and you may add reinforcements, something that is not the case with M'44.
Despite all my negative statements, please don't give up on this game; if your kids or you love the game, please keep playing, but consider the possibility that you might one they want to try a real wargame where strategy occupies the passenger seat.
While you make decent points.
And those fixes can ofc be used by anyone as house rules.
I disagree with certain statements, as in calling the game a toy is not right in this context.
You either call all boardgames a toy or none.
As for the player not being in control, that's just silly.
Luck plays a role, yes (such is war) but tactic too and working with the cards you got.
If you move all your troops to the middle then complain about not having middle section card that's a skill issue and not a game issue.
@@generaljashin8067
I beg to differ... We do have the option to call some games "toys", it's not just all or none. It's just a matter of principles, by which you define games.
If a game offers less control, it's not much of a game. It's more like an object that you play with.
I agree that making stupid moves doesn't allow you to blame the game. That's not the issue. The issue is that you have no control over what cards you get, so you could very easily end up with your troops crippled, due to no fault of your own.
Also, the limitation of not being able to move troops because they are at the wrong side of a line on the game board makes no sense. I recognize that trouble with communication can be an issue during war, it is just that this issue isn't well replicated by this game. It's not realistically portrayed, and it can end up being a deciding factor in quite often.
I would rather play a game where units are able to operate on a more realistic level. There are plenty of real wargames that manage to do this properly, so I see no reason for wasting times on toys like Memoir'44. I got rid of it a couple of years ago, and I have not missed it one bit.
This game reminds me of Battle Cry.
Same person designed it, so makes sense
I hate the card system in the game. I find other cards systems like in Strike of the Eagle and Washington's War to be far more to my liking. My pick for a gateway wargame would be Hold the Line. It uses the same type of maps and terrain, but no cards and just dice.
Completely agree. Usually if a game takes off, even if I don't like it, I can understand why. The popularity of this game confounds me.
Scenario based gaming controlled by a luck based mechanic is a terrible combination. War gaming where your troops movement is limited by luck of the draw is bad design.
If there's ever a scenario where you have the dominant board situation and you can't take advantage of it because you can't draw the right cards, it's a bad game.
Sounds like a real war almost. If you don't get the right opportunities, you lose.
Go read Clausewitz's "On war" and check what "friction of war" is.
the royalty free music in these videos really gets on my nerves.. your videos would be fine without the music, in my opinion