Great video guys. The best part: Grant: "I remember that we played that on New Year's Day and we started early in the morning - I think you came over at 8 - we played the entire whole day. And I think you actually left after eating - we had like a New Year's Day dinner - and I just remember thinking that was the best New Year's Day I ever had. In my entire life." I wish I had somebody like that to play board games with.
@@ThePlayersAid Yes, the barrier to entry on rules for it have been eased by the similarities - and it will be interesting to be out of the phone-booth-knife-fight (but wow have I been enjoying that phone-booth-knife-fight!)
I would be very happy to watch a COIN game live stream game from Alexander and Grant. I'm just tryng to understand Cuba Libre rules, i'm a newbie boardgamer, playing exclusively solo and i really would like to watch you guys playing. Thank you so much for your very useful videos!
I've discovered your channel today and you are the type of people I was looking for talking about wargames. I have hours of content to watch on your channel now :)
Wow ... Falling Sky is my favourite!Coming from Europe, Julius Caesar and the Gauls resonates. Fire in the Lake next (I think the full game is required to get the best experience, and in game play terms the NVA is a little dull ... build up, build up, explode and hope to win, if not dodge the bombs and go back to build up), then Cuba Libre. Pendragon is on the shelf in the queue to learn.
In addition to being great games, they give the history and the nature of these conflicts and can be used as teaching tools. This is the main reason why I buy COIN games. Good discussions here, thank you.
This video came along at the perfect time for me - thank you TH-cam algorithm! Looking at picking up my first COIN game after playing Andean Abyss a few weeks ago - thanks guys.
I was definetly going to reccomend you do a video on this when I saw you had finally played Andean Abyss. And here it is! I didn't even have to ask the question
I like all COIN games, however my favourite is A distant plain. It may sounds strange as I see that most people prefers Fire in the Lake, but my reasons are that I was personally involved during my studies and job in the topic. I also feel that the designers made an accurate job to the game conflict especially with the cards. Moreover the game flow made me feel feel somehow the tension behind the conflict. For instance how the warlords move to gain spaces, but at same time they had to keep an eye on not giving so much space to government. Thank you so much for your videos, Will be great if you could make some streaming videos also (suggestion)!
I like the them for Distant plain also, since I was involved in the conflict it portrays and it would be neat to see how the game views all the other factions involved in the conflict as far as the game mechanics see them.
Pendragon. Rich and colorful history. Detailed background history of each card in the Playbook. Even mythical ones like Merlin and King Arthur. I highly recommend to read background story of played cards after a session. Tells a great story. It plays well solitaire. The bots for barbarians are relative simple as they do most raids. You play Brits and Rome as best you can until fragmentation. - Guess it plays well as 2 player too with the same setup. I played 4 player with the short scenario, but to make it shine, you need those pivotal cards.
Great vid guys! I've only played Cuba Libre, and I like it so much, I want to get a few more in the series... notably, Fire in the Lake will be my next purchase. And don't forget our Genesis game this year at GenCon!
For awhile now, I thought my first COIN game would be A Distant Plain (thinking it would be a roundabout companion to Pax Pamir, telling Afghan history on either side of a 200 year divide), but I dithered on purchasing it. So then I got Gandhi. The theme and period really speaks to me. I hope I enjoy it.
I have Falling Sky. Bought it as my 1st COIN because of the theme & because a lot of comments said it was on the easier side of the series to learn. Love the look of the game - map, cards, pieces are all gorgeous! I love the turn sequence & capabilities but found combat really clunky & dare I say boring but still enjoyed the experience of playing it. I have the expansion though haven't played it yet but I'm desperate to try it. I also own Colonial Twilight (again everything looks gorgeous) but haven't played that yet either (sad face). I'm interested on your views as to why the combat is "better" or "worse" in some of the other title's & aside from Colonial Twilight which game(s) plays best at 2 player? Also it's a shame GMT don't have a Star Wars licence as I feel this could be AMAZING in the Star Wars universe (I own FFGs Star Wars Rebellion and always wish it played as a COIN game). Maybe they could do a Sci Fi one in the future (though without real history it may lack something). Cheers for your awesome video's guy's. Like other's have said it would be great to spend a weekend with you playing some games! Cheers from the U.K.
I would agree that the "system" can be adapted to many different historical periods. I'd love to see this system used in some lesser known conflicts... The Mexican Insurgency (1911), The Unification of Italy (1869?), Simon Bolivar's liberation of South America (1811?), and maybe The Boxer Rebellion (1901?). Great system... looking forward to buying the Algerian campaign.
I had the same thought about Mexico, although really to do it justice it would need to be a more long term narrative game like pendragon where the revolutionaries initially are allied against Diaz, until they defeat him, then break into civil war
I got into COIN with Cuba L back in January of this year. I own all the way through Liberty or Death now. I have one buddy that plays with me but it's hard to find others. I'd love to play with y'all, as you guys appear to love this series.
I love this series and would also love to have a game with you guys. Sadly, I estimate that I live approx 7,000 miles away, so not sure I can commit to a regular thing :)
For me its gotta be A distant plain and Colonial Twilight; I particularly like the initiative mechanism in CT. That said I've yet to try the others, they're on my shelf of shame....soonish lol
ColonialTwilight is a solid solo system which plays quickly. although some players have pointed out some balance issues that have appeared over time on BGG.
Out of curiosity which would you recommend in terms of solo play and in terms of accessibility/ease of learning? I understand that passion for the period is always a factor and at this point in time I'm leaning towards A Distant Plain as I'll only be playing it solo in all likelihood. Andean Abyss has made it onto the radar due to researching the series and the setting piquing my interest due to dealing with the cartels. I was originally going to get Fire in the Lake but it's currently between print runs. Pendragon is also on the list but it doesn't sound particularly approachable for getting into the series.
Fantastic review. I don't keep track of my games, but I believe I have 6 or 7 of the COIN games. I know for sure I don't have Colonial Twilight because the era didn't interest me, but I may pick it up later just for completeness sake.
I thought it this was a great idea for a cast. My first only COIN game is "Fire In The Lake". Which my only Vietnam games prior were "Year Of The Rat" (S&T) and "Vietnam" (AH Victory Games complex game). I love FITL. I graduated from High School in 1974 but did not know a lot about Vietnam but this game is excellent and really gave me a feel for what was going on Politically at that time.
My faves are Cuba Libre and Andean Abyss, for similar reasons to those stated by Alexander here - they're the "purest" COINs - no extra cruft in the rules, four independent factions all fighting eachother, everything's as straightforward as it can be in the system. I think CL just edges out AA but only because we're more likely to be able to finish a game of CL in one evening but I think I prefer the theme in Andean Abyss. I've played Colonial Twilight a few times and it's neat because it's a 2p COIN and we usually just have two players, but I'm danged if I can figure out what to do in it. The other COINs have a strategy guide included in their playbooks but CT doesn't, and I really suffer for the lack of that. I played ADP once and liked it. It does start to add complexity and allied factions though but it's not too bad. Would like to play it again at some point, and the theme is great too. I played Fire in the Lake once and... ugh. We'd only played AA and CL before we tried FitL and the jump in complexity was just too much for us. It's a shame because I'd love a complete Vietnam War game. I got rid of it but have since rebought it (years after the first attempt) because maybe I'll be able to handle it better now. But it's still one that I'm going to set aside til I feel we're ready for it. I had Liberty or Death but got rid of that too. I was only marginally interested in the theme but I didn't like how it was turning into a proper war game rather than actually a COIN (I wasn't keen on the Battles, I want my COIN to be more like "sniping from the bushes" like in CL and AA than pitched battles). Also wasn't a fan of the "two allied factions per side" concept either. The map was pretty though. I have Falling Sky but haven't played it yet. Probably won't touch Pendragon since it's (a) really complex and (b) they say it plays very differently from the other COINs. I have Gandhi on the way, hopefully that'll be good - not that interested in the other COINs in development (All Bridges Burning and People Power).
After hearing everything you had to say about the COIN series, what I’d really like to hear about is what you think about two non-COIN games that I think are in very much the same vein: Root Dune I am ESPECIALLY interested in what you have to say about Dune
I’ve only played 5 so far, but my ranking is; Falling Sky Fire in the Lake Colonial Twilight Liberty or death A distant plain. I love them all, theme and faction mechanics I just get on better with in terms of some of the higher ups.
As COIN aficionados I'd be really interested on your take on Root which I usually see described as 'COIN for non-wargamers'. It seems to get almost universal praise, and I wonder how similar it is to the rest of the COIN series. I've not played any of them, but wonder if Root could be a gateway for the wife and others into the rest of the series.
Root is a really good asymmetric game, but it is not COIN system, nor is it an introduction to the COIN series. It might be a good gateway game to introduce people to the concept that not all means, methods and motivations apply equally to all players, if you need to go back that far.
If you can more regularly play two players than more Colonial Twilight was my intro. Excellent game. The complexity is there but manageable , loads of depth and I at least recommend it. (As well as Brian! and TPA guys). Give it a go.
Haven't played any but colonial twilight has my interest. Theme. Trouble is I really don't have anyone to play against no one in my family wants to play any of my conflict simulation games so I'm pretty much playing all my games solo if the games I've can be played solo. Great video as always still need to go back and catch up on some of the older ones since I only recently subscribed
Having watched your COIN videos I'd now be interested which upcoming COIN game you are most interested in playing, and why? People Power? China's War? Red Dust Rebellion? The Pure Land? Thanks
For Grant, China’s War is my most anticipated but I really can’t wait to go as Sci-Fi with Red Dust Rebellion and then to feudal Japan with the Pure Land!
I am getting my first coin game this weekend, I am not new to strategy games and I like the theme for Liberty or Death, so I think that is the one I will go with. I know its not the easiest to learn but I have to go with a theme I am interested in or I wont get it to the table. Also what is available to buy.I ended up getting Fire in the Lake going to hunker down and play thru all the factions each against the other three in solo mode to rap my head around the game play
Love your videos and echo request for a livestream. REALLY wanted to like Liberty or Death but just can’t get past the head scratching and constant lookups of the flow charts in solo mode. Every video I watch has the solo player translating what they read in the boxes. Who’s to say if they’re right or not. No offense but designer really needs to take a Flowcharting 101 class.
Wow, this 8s a gret video. I would consider myself a veteran gamer in many ways but never dipped my toes into COIN Games games until now. As I am playing most of my games with my wife i wonder whether you can recommend any of the series that plays particularly good with two players? I would very much appreciate your feedback. Thanks in advance.
Colonial Twilight is strictly 2 player only. Liberty or Death is also good 2 player as well. The new All Bridges Burning (not in this old video) is 3 player but has good bots if you're inclined.
Fantastic ranking video! Thanks. What would you all say, are the top (3) COIN’s for solo play (with or without bots)? I am leaning towards Colonial Twilight but havent played the half of them.
@@ThePlayersAid I also think that a lot of people weight the era/theme pretty high. For example, the Vietnam era has little interest for me, while WW2 and ancient warfare ranks high ... Are all the games set out in the video above the extent of the COIN series?
@@willscurran at the time of recording it was. Since we recorded they released Gandhi and All Bridges Burning, both of which I (Alexander) rate very highly.
Thanks for the video. I have played 4 of these titles and (for anyone who might care) my rankings would be 1. FitL 2. Andean Abyss 3. Cuba Libre (Agree with the opinion that it feels like a small AA. Not enough room to maneuver for my taste) 4. Falling Sky (played only once at WBC and the Gauls felt vanilla) 99. Pendragon (played only once. Game rules are a nightmare and every card feels like a "must take" event)
COIN is one of those games that can be overwhelming because there's a lot of choices and making them work together well can be a challenge for newer players. Having someone visually teach you is something I would recommend, if available in your area.
Pendragon does not work with the COIN system it basically breaks it. I would rank that one last. A Distant Plain is basically just a reskin of Andean Abyss. Colonial Twilight is meh.
I just bought Fire in the Lake and am watching playthrough videos and readin the rules, and it looks quite complicated... I don't want to focus on the rules but on the game experience. Should I return it to Amazon or am I being too premature?...
Aside from Colonial Twilight, do you recommend any as a strictly 2P game? Or better off just playing other war games? You have only played Pendragon 2P, and rate it very highly. Does that mean it is a good 2P game? Or just projecting how it would play with 4? How do you like FitL at 2P? Thanks for the video!
Liberty or Death works very well 2 player and is the other one I would recommend, in that you don't lose all that much by having only two players as opposed to four. Fire in the lake is okay, but is best at four. All the others you lose a good chunk of the exciting interactivity that COIN brings. They're still okay, just, not as good as they could be with max player counts.
I think all of the games now have dedicated AI's, but at times that can be more work than it's worth. They're all decently soloable, but I think Grant only played Liberty or Death solo. Not sure we've done any of the others.
Since mostly you play COIN games with just 2 players, do you use 2 of the bots, or do you each control 2 factions? If you've tried both ways, any thoughts on your preference?
We play a lot of other games, it just happens to be that we've played all the COINs too. If we're playing 2 player then typically we control 2 factions each, it's much quicker than going through a flowchart. Although the new bot system for Gandhi looks like it might be more efficient, so we'll see on that one.
I have finally gave a try to the COIN. Start with Fire in the Lake then Cuba Libre. And....don't like them. The games are easy to learn, the components are gorgeous too, the gameplay goes smoothly. But...I don't know. Never understand how to play the different faction. Everything is to abstract for me. And I never done better than being beaten to crap with any faction. FITL was the worst one for me. I've never found how to play any of the 4 factions in the game. VC seems helpless to play (never see a player win with them). NVA is way to complex to handle. ARVN is not fun at all as I always been "bullied" the US draining away my ressources. US wins too quickly and too often (well not when I played it...but for the first time I've got the impression I still be close to every one else on the game). It's too big, to many variables. Never had fun playing it in the end. Cuba Libre gave me the same feeling. Don't understand how to play. Syndicate is boring to play (to say the least as I've been wiped out of the game playing it. Overwhelming defeat to say the least). The smaller size made a bit more comprehensive on how to do and when. But on the long run, I never had fun as I was always just struggling to survive (not very fun when every other player were fighting for victory). So definitely good games though. Every player was prying high of the game. But not for me. I'm better stick to conventional wargame
How did you get wiped out as syndicate your casinos cant be taken off the board as long as you are building then in spaces with the government you should be fine.
@@charliesmith5783 No more cash, all casino closed, every cube wipe out from the board. In the final no opportunity to win at about half the game. All I could do was to pass to raise a bit of cash to hope for a miracle (never occured)
What do you think about my worry/claim that in multiplayer wargames like COIN games, you don't have much autonomy or control of your own win. The players are keeping each other in check and smashing the leaders down which keeps anyone from winning until the end. You are not allowed to succeed. At the end it seems arbitrary who wins. Or maybe inexperienced players just let someone win quickly. Perhaps I would like the 2 player Colonial Twilight the best.
Boris Caro honestly pick the theme that interests you. Yes, some like Fire in the Lake are a bit more complex then others, but not overwhelmingly so, especially if you love the theme.
Honestly, it varies from title to title. Colonial Twilight is 2 player only. All Bridges Burning (not in this old video) is 3 player max, with a great bot if you only have 1 or 2 players. Others are a mixed bag. Liberty or Death, Fire in the Lake, and Andean Abyss can easily be done piloting two factions each (the more natural allies) for example.
Grant, I must have a lot on common with you, because I would have ranked them EXACTLY in the same order. How weird. Shane you guys live so far away from where I live. Would love to hit up some wargames with you guys. Been playing for more than 38 years.
The new one Gandhi has the best bot systen. They're currently working on a version of that for Fire in the Lake. Other than that they all work similarly using flow charts. If you just want to play all four sides then they're all equally soloable.
Being really interested in the subject, I am disappointed that they just talk - without showing any game in playing situation, without even explaining what a COIN game is and what they jave in common, without saying what the three future games are about, without mentioning whether it is exclusively 4-player or easily 2-player, or even solo?, length of the rules, duration, etc. Very poor journalism. Just two initiated mumbling "Oh I think Pastafar is the best god" and you don't know what is Pastafar.
The Treatment of the Indians is what really broke Liberty or Death for me, it’s shoehorning 100 years of Indian interaction into a revolutionary war game, where it just doesn’t fit. For better or worse the Indians end up being far bigger players game wise, than they were. 3 player would have been much better.
Hi Chuck. I actually think the Indians are fairly well represented as their real impact in the conflict. They caused a lot of trouble on the frontier and the British really invited them and used them as they are used in the game. I’m not going to say it’s 100% historically accurate but it amalgamated their role.
Yeah, you need to learn more history before you declare that the Indians weren't an important part of the Revolutionary War. They had a much more significant role than what most of us were taught in school.
@@bgm-1961excuse me, I did not say that native americans had no impact upon the revolutionary war, what im saying is that the game is basically wacked in its presentation of them as a separate force, with a game play experience that has almost nothing to do with the actual impact they had on the war. basically if you know much you would see that, especially after Washington sent Wayne through the tribal villages in a sweep and destroy mission the Indians were not much of a factor at the scale of the game, 1775 is far more realistic and historical in its dice fest based portrayal. Ive had fun playing Liberty or Death a couple of times, but its a joke how it portrays the Indians especially if you have any actual knowledge of the war. It would have been far better to go with a 3 player with the Indians as a somewhat random faction, not one that was somehow building up villages and infrastructure, but more like the Germans in the Roman game. a nuisance with an occasion impact.
A fair response. I apologize for misunderstanding your previous comment. Your reply does explain better what you meant. So essentially, your argument is that the Indians didn't factor in the war *enough*, for them to be a separate, playable faction in the game. Unless you've already read the designers notes which are found in the Playbook that comes in the box, you might find this comment from the designer interesting: "The selection of Factions for Liberty or Death created controversy from the beginning. Some play testers wanted a two-player game. Others thought the addition of the French and Indians were unnecessary because these two Factions couldn’t “win” the American Revolution. Some thought the theater choice was too small for the French to be a factor. Still others disagreed that the Indians, made up of a number of disparate groups, could be represented as one faction. I was accused of forcing a two-player conflict into a four-player game system (COIN)-my view is the opposite, that the American Revolution is a four-player conflict that has been forced into a two-player model for 40 years. I have explained my view on these issues throughout so I won’t rehash. I would say it might be eye opening for those who that disagree to try the game as designed and see if it changes perspectives. It certainly did for me."
I've only played Falling Sky and found it really boring. Claustrophobic map, deterministic combat, no maneuver, gamey card play that seems clever for the sake of being clever, action menus that are just similar enough to each other that it becomes painful to try and remember what the small differences are... I just couldn't feel any connection to the topic being depicted. It didn't help that my faction (the Aedui) basically couldn't accomplish anything on their own unless the Romans were successful. Seeing that it's listed here as the least interesting title, I wonder if the others are different enough that I might enjoy them anyway.
What you described is similar to our experience. The other titles are significantly different. Some titles do tie the "allied" factions closer together, but others do not.
I don’t like Euro mechanics in my historical wargames. They are not really simulations either. I played Cuba Libre and Falling Sky and you don’t learn anything about the Cuba Revolution nor see what Caesar was up to against the Gauls from an historical perspective. Canondale on BGG did a superb review of Falling Sky and his conclusion was that in no way Caesar would have waged war or decided things the way they are portrayed in that COIN game. I heard the exact same complaints about the others in the series: eurogames with some historical flavor text on the cards.
Great video guys. The best part: Grant: "I remember that we played that on New Year's Day and we started early in the morning - I think you came over at 8 - we played the entire whole day. And I think you actually left after eating - we had like a New Year's Day dinner - and I just remember thinking that was the best New Year's Day I ever had. In my entire life." I wish I had somebody like that to play board games with.
No doubt sound super fun
This comment nearly made me cry haha ! :P
@@gibsonlyle5148 lol wth is this ched?
Same.
Really enjoyed reading this ranking as I’ve been getting into this series. I am keen to play them all. Played CL 5 times and about to play AA.
You'll feel right at home in AA coming from CL, just a much bigger map so many more tactical choices!
@@ThePlayersAid Yes, the barrier to entry on rules for it have been eased by the similarities - and it will be interesting to be out of the phone-booth-knife-fight (but wow have I been enjoying that phone-booth-knife-fight!)
I would be very happy to watch a COIN game live stream game from Alexander and Grant. I'm just tryng to understand Cuba Libre rules, i'm a newbie boardgamer, playing exclusively solo and i really would like to watch you guys playing. Thank you so much for your very useful videos!
this please
Stefan, same here trying to learn we should get a game together
Would love an updated version of this with the new games. Great video!
I've discovered your channel today and you are the type of people I was looking for talking about wargames.
I have hours of content to watch on your channel now :)
Cheers, and welcome! We have plenty more to come too.
@@ThePlayersAid Awesome!
Aw, it's OK Grant.... at least I made it into the video!
Brian you did a wonderful job with CT! The soloplay is just fantastic.
@@frankmunnecom5341 Thanks a lot! Praise for the bot goes to Vesa Arponen, and Curt Sellmer for his computer program that automates Vesa's bot work.
in Pendragon when the whole game states flips and the Dux and Civitas suddenly cease to be allies, its just breathtaking. A really memorable moment.
Wow ... Falling Sky is my favourite!Coming from Europe, Julius Caesar and the Gauls resonates. Fire in the Lake next (I think the full game is required to get the best experience, and in game play terms the NVA is a little dull ... build up, build up, explode and hope to win, if not dodge the bombs and go back to build up), then Cuba Libre. Pendragon is on the shelf in the queue to learn.
In addition to being great games, they give the history and the nature of these conflicts and can be used as teaching tools. This is the main reason why I buy COIN games. Good discussions here, thank you.
This video came along at the perfect time for me - thank you TH-cam algorithm!
Looking at picking up my first COIN game after playing Andean Abyss a few weeks ago - thanks guys.
I was definetly going to reccomend you do a video on this when I saw you had finally played Andean Abyss. And here it is!
I didn't even have to ask the question
Not the first time we've been asked, so it has been in the works for a while!
I like all COIN games, however my favourite is A distant plain. It may sounds strange as I see that most people prefers Fire in the Lake, but my reasons are that I was personally involved during my studies and job in the topic. I also feel that the designers made an accurate job to the game conflict especially with the cards. Moreover the game flow made me feel feel somehow the tension behind the conflict. For instance how the warlords move to gain spaces, but at same time they had to keep an eye on not giving so much space to government. Thank you so much for your videos, Will be great if you could make some streaming videos also (suggestion)!
I like the them for Distant plain also, since I was involved in the conflict it portrays and it would be neat to see how the game views all the other factions involved in the conflict as far as the game mechanics see them.
We played A Distant Plain yesterday with 3 players - it is an amazing game. Love the system - can't wait to try some of the other titles!
LOL...I love the sounds of the drums in the opening signaling the arrival of The Players Aid boys to render a verdict on the best COIN games. :)
Colonial Twilight: just for fun, I did make a 4-player variant for this 2-player game. Glad you like the eligibility mechanism!
Go on...
I can't stop seeing how nice the Liberty or Death box aligned with the background once Alexander moved the boxes around.
Hey, 5000 subscribers, congrads!
Thanks! Watch out, we're going to do a give away as a celebration.
Pendragon. Rich and colorful history. Detailed background history of each card in the Playbook. Even mythical ones like Merlin and King Arthur. I highly recommend to read background story of played cards after a session. Tells a great story.
It plays well solitaire. The bots for barbarians are relative simple as they do most raids. You play Brits and Rome as best you can until fragmentation. - Guess it plays well as 2 player too with the same setup. I played 4 player with the short scenario, but to make it shine, you need those pivotal cards.
Great vid guys!
I've only played Cuba Libre, and I like it so much, I want to get a few more in the series... notably, Fire in the Lake will be my next purchase.
And don't forget our Genesis game this year at GenCon!
Really enjoyed this video guys keep up the great work!! Love the COIN series!
For awhile now, I thought my first COIN game would be A Distant Plain (thinking it would be a roundabout companion to Pax Pamir, telling Afghan history on either side of a 200 year divide), but I dithered on purchasing it. So then I got Gandhi. The theme and period really speaks to me. I hope I enjoy it.
I have Falling Sky.
Bought it as my 1st COIN because of the theme & because a lot of comments said it was on the easier side of the series to learn.
Love the look of the game - map, cards, pieces are all gorgeous!
I love the turn sequence & capabilities but found combat really clunky & dare I say boring but still enjoyed the experience of playing it.
I have the expansion though haven't played it yet but I'm desperate to try it.
I also own Colonial Twilight (again everything looks gorgeous) but haven't played that yet either (sad face).
I'm interested on your views as to why the combat is "better" or "worse" in some of the other title's & aside from Colonial Twilight which game(s) plays best at 2 player?
Also it's a shame GMT don't have a Star Wars licence as I feel this could be AMAZING in the Star Wars universe (I own FFGs Star Wars Rebellion and always wish it played as a COIN game). Maybe they could do a Sci Fi one in the future (though without real history it may lack something).
Cheers for your awesome video's guy's. Like other's have said it would be great to spend a weekend with you playing some games!
Cheers from the U.K.
Not Star Warz. DUNE...and GoT, if you're going to go there.
I would agree that the "system" can be adapted to many different historical periods. I'd love to see this system used in some lesser known conflicts... The Mexican Insurgency (1911), The Unification of Italy (1869?), Simon Bolivar's liberation of South America (1811?), and maybe The Boxer Rebellion (1901?). Great system... looking forward to buying the Algerian campaign.
I had the same thought about Mexico, although really to do it justice it would need to be a more long term narrative game like pendragon where the revolutionaries initially are allied against Diaz, until they defeat him, then break into civil war
My favourite COIN in last place. How dare you? Kidding. Nice list. This system is just too good.
Björn Franke I have the most fun playing Falling sky so I agree
~ huh? Falling Sky + Ariovistus is my 'runaway leader' here too. Gandhi might knock it back a notch though...
I have it near the top as well.
Falling Sky is my favorite as well! Love the setting and playability of the board compared to some others
I got into COIN with Cuba L back in January of this year. I own all the way through Liberty or Death now. I have one buddy that plays with me but it's hard to find others. I'd love to play with y'all, as you guys appear to love this series.
I love this series and would also love to have a game with you guys. Sadly, I estimate that I live approx 7,000 miles away, so not sure I can commit to a regular thing :)
Love coin game system. I really think the board game Dune would be perfect in a coin system.
Off the cuff. Do you two ever get into a fight over some of your playing of games? Love your channel and your banter.
For me its gotta be A distant plain and Colonial Twilight; I particularly like the initiative mechanism in CT. That said I've yet to try the others, they're on my shelf of shame....soonish lol
From the ones I played:
1- Fire in the Lake
2- Cuba Libre
3- Liberty or Death
4- Pendragon
ColonialTwilight is a solid solo system which plays quickly. although some players have pointed out some balance issues that have appeared over time on BGG.
I love your videos man! Thanks for this
Out of curiosity which would you recommend in terms of solo play and in terms of accessibility/ease of learning?
I understand that passion for the period is always a factor and at this point in time I'm leaning towards A Distant Plain as I'll only be playing it solo in all likelihood. Andean Abyss has made it onto the radar due to researching the series and the setting piquing my interest due to dealing with the cartels.
I was originally going to get Fire in the Lake but it's currently between print runs. Pendragon is also on the list but it doesn't sound particularly approachable for getting into the series.
Fantastic review. I don't keep track of my games, but I believe I have 6 or 7 of the COIN games. I know for sure I don't have Colonial Twilight because the era didn't interest me, but I may pick it up later just for completeness sake.
Colonial Twilight on the table. Thanks Brian. Think I got it figured out now-mostly. Thanks for the great video. At least my second time watching.
I thought it this was a great idea for a cast. My first only COIN game is "Fire In The Lake". Which my only Vietnam games prior were "Year Of The Rat" (S&T) and "Vietnam" (AH Victory Games complex game). I love FITL. I graduated from High School in 1974 but did not know a lot about Vietnam but this game is excellent and really gave me a feel for what was going on Politically at that time.
You convinced me again: purchased Fire in the Lake today
My faves are Cuba Libre and Andean Abyss, for similar reasons to those stated by Alexander here - they're the "purest" COINs - no extra cruft in the rules, four independent factions all fighting eachother, everything's as straightforward as it can be in the system. I think CL just edges out AA but only because we're more likely to be able to finish a game of CL in one evening but I think I prefer the theme in Andean Abyss.
I've played Colonial Twilight a few times and it's neat because it's a 2p COIN and we usually just have two players, but I'm danged if I can figure out what to do in it. The other COINs have a strategy guide included in their playbooks but CT doesn't, and I really suffer for the lack of that.
I played ADP once and liked it. It does start to add complexity and allied factions though but it's not too bad. Would like to play it again at some point, and the theme is great too.
I played Fire in the Lake once and... ugh. We'd only played AA and CL before we tried FitL and the jump in complexity was just too much for us. It's a shame because I'd love a complete Vietnam War game. I got rid of it but have since rebought it (years after the first attempt) because maybe I'll be able to handle it better now. But it's still one that I'm going to set aside til I feel we're ready for it.
I had Liberty or Death but got rid of that too. I was only marginally interested in the theme but I didn't like how it was turning into a proper war game rather than actually a COIN (I wasn't keen on the Battles, I want my COIN to be more like "sniping from the bushes" like in CL and AA than pitched battles). Also wasn't a fan of the "two allied factions per side" concept either. The map was pretty though.
I have Falling Sky but haven't played it yet. Probably won't touch Pendragon since it's (a) really complex and (b) they say it plays very differently from the other COINs. I have Gandhi on the way, hopefully that'll be good - not that interested in the other COINs in development (All Bridges Burning and People Power).
After hearing everything you had to say about the COIN series, what I’d really like to hear about is what you think about two non-COIN games that I think are in very much the same vein:
Root
Dune
I am ESPECIALLY interested in what you have to say about Dune
I’ve only played 5 so far, but my ranking is;
Falling Sky
Fire in the Lake
Colonial Twilight
Liberty or death
A distant plain.
I love them all, theme and faction mechanics I just get on better with in terms of some of the higher ups.
Just an excellent chat - thanks.
Really looking forward to this one.
Liberty or Death! My first COIN game. Fire in the Lake most likely next.
"evil empire" seemed a bit harsh, lol. poor Alexnder took that very gracefully.
Great video guys - nothing more interesting than controversial or conflicting opinions! love it!
As COIN aficionados I'd be really interested on your take on Root which I usually see described as 'COIN for non-wargamers'. It seems to get almost universal praise, and I wonder how similar it is to the rest of the COIN series. I've not played any of them, but wonder if Root could be a gateway for the wife and others into the rest of the series.
Root is a really good asymmetric game, but it is not COIN system, nor is it an introduction to the COIN series. It might be a good gateway game to introduce people to the concept that not all means, methods and motivations apply equally to all players, if you need to go back that far.
If you can more regularly play two players than more Colonial Twilight was my intro. Excellent game. The complexity is there but manageable , loads of depth and I at least recommend it. (As well as Brian! and TPA guys). Give it a go.
Haven't played any but colonial twilight has my interest. Theme. Trouble is I really don't have anyone to play against no one in my family wants to play any of my conflict simulation games so I'm pretty much playing all my games solo if the games I've can be played solo. Great video as always still need to go back and catch up on some of the older ones since I only recently subscribed
Having watched your COIN videos I'd now be interested which upcoming COIN game you are most interested in playing, and why? People Power? China's War? Red Dust Rebellion? The Pure Land? Thanks
For Grant, China’s War is my most anticipated but I really can’t wait to go as Sci-Fi with Red Dust Rebellion and then to feudal Japan with the Pure Land!
@@ThePlayersAid yeah, cannot wait for Red Dust
I am getting my first coin game this weekend, I am not new to strategy games and I like the theme for Liberty or Death, so I think that is the one I will go with. I know its not the easiest to learn but I have to go with a theme I am interested in or I wont get it to the table. Also what is available to buy.I ended up getting Fire in the Lake going to hunker down and play thru all the factions each against the other three in solo mode to rap my head around the game play
The nice thing is that if you do like it and you want more the others will be a lateral or easier game to learn.
Love your videos and echo request for a livestream. REALLY wanted to like Liberty or Death but just can’t get past the head scratching and constant lookups of the flow charts in solo mode. Every video I watch has the solo player translating what they read in the boxes. Who’s to say if they’re right or not. No offense but designer really needs to take a Flowcharting 101 class.
From the COIN games I've played, I rank them:
Fire in the Lake
Colonial Twilight
A distant plain
Cuba Libre
Andean Abyss
Falling Sky
Wow, this 8s a gret video. I would consider myself a veteran gamer in many ways but never dipped my toes into COIN Games games until now. As I am playing most of my games with my wife i wonder whether you can recommend any of the series that plays particularly good with two players? I would very much appreciate your feedback. Thanks in advance.
Colonial Twilight is strictly 2 player only. Liberty or Death is also good 2 player as well. The new All Bridges Burning (not in this old video) is 3 player but has good bots if you're inclined.
@@ThePlayersAid Hey, that was unbelievably fast. Thank you so much. I will further investigate. Kind regards from Germany!
Fantastic ranking video! Thanks. What would you all say, are the top (3) COIN’s for solo play (with or without bots)? I am leaning towards Colonial Twilight but havent played the half of them.
Check out the brand new All Bridges Burning as well, it plays excellently solo.
@@ThePlayersAid bought it, just reading the playbook, this has to be one of the reasons to COIN, learning “new” history.
Great video, guys!
Surprised Falling Sky is last. I absolutely love that game. I captures economics/logistics of the Gallic campaigns so well.
That's one of the things I like about COIN, everyone has their favourites and the variety caters to a lot of people.
@@ThePlayersAid I also think that a lot of people weight the era/theme pretty high. For example, the Vietnam era has little interest for me, while WW2 and ancient warfare ranks high ...
Are all the games set out in the video above the extent of the COIN series?
@@willscurran at the time of recording it was. Since we recorded they released Gandhi and All Bridges Burning, both of which I (Alexander) rate very highly.
This is an outstanding video!
Great thank you the honest review !
great video guys, which one would be the best for solo?
Still waiting on a Grant & Alexander game night live stream !
Oh yes. Play FITL on stream!
Thanks for the video.
I have played 4 of these titles and (for anyone who might care) my rankings would be
1. FitL
2. Andean Abyss
3. Cuba Libre (Agree with the opinion that it feels like a small AA. Not enough room to maneuver for my taste)
4. Falling Sky (played only once at WBC and the Gauls felt vanilla)
99. Pendragon (played only once. Game rules are a nightmare and every card feels like a "must take" event)
(* FIVE of these titles)
Did you play all the games two player? Thanks for another informative video!
We've played Falling Skies, Liberty or Death, and Cuba Libre four player
Fire in the Lake is on my pickup list for Origins.
With several new COIN games, I was wondering if you had an update to this list? Curious where entries 9+ would fall.
We will update at some point.
thanks a lot for this COIN reviews : i own Cuba & Colonial Twilight : not very easy to grasp
COIN is one of those games that can be overwhelming because there's a lot of choices and making them work together well can be a challenge for newer players. Having someone visually teach you is something I would recommend, if available in your area.
Great run down, gents. Believe it or not, I've still never played a COIN game. Can't decide which to start with.
Andean Abyss. Bet three buddies and gooooo!
Pendragon does not work with the COIN system it basically breaks it. I would rank that one last. A Distant Plain is basically just a reskin of Andean Abyss. Colonial Twilight is meh.
Gamer Hudson i love Colonial Twilight.
I just bought Fire in the Lake and am watching playthrough videos and readin the rules, and it looks quite complicated... I don't want to focus on the rules but on the game experience. Should I return it to Amazon or am I being too premature?...
Like all games that are worth it, it does take some time. The nice you get the actions down though, you’re fully in the game.
Aside from Colonial Twilight, do you recommend any as a strictly 2P game? Or better off just playing other war games? You have only played Pendragon 2P, and rate it very highly. Does that mean it is a good 2P game? Or just projecting how it would play with 4? How do you like FitL at 2P? Thanks for the video!
Liberty or Death works very well 2 player and is the other one I would recommend, in that you don't lose all that much by having only two players as opposed to four. Fire in the lake is okay, but is best at four. All the others you lose a good chunk of the exciting interactivity that COIN brings. They're still okay, just, not as good as they could be with max player counts.
@The Players Aid Awesome, thanks for the reply!
Did you solo play any or all of the games? Would the "ranking" be any different? What's your general opinion on COIN played solo?
I think all of the games now have dedicated AI's, but at times that can be more work than it's worth. They're all decently soloable, but I think Grant only played Liberty or Death solo. Not sure we've done any of the others.
@@ThePlayersAidthx. Keep your videos coming!
How are you playing the 4 player COIN games without 4 players? Using the bot charts for the non-player sides?
The rules come with options for playing Two factions and the changes to victory thresholds etc that brings, which is what we usually do.
I never see all bridges burning on any of these lists I'm just getting into COIN games .
It came out after this was made
Actually, that's a nice shirt Alexander.
You can call it the evil empire..
At least you peeps booted them, we're still saddled.
~ smirks ~
Since mostly you play COIN games with just 2 players, do you use 2 of the bots, or do you each control 2 factions? If you've tried both ways, any thoughts on your preference?
We play a lot of other games, it just happens to be that we've played all the COINs too. If we're playing 2 player then typically we control 2 factions each, it's much quicker than going through a flowchart. Although the new bot system for Gandhi looks like it might be more efficient, so we'll see on that one.
2 more games out now, so new ranking soon (he asks hopefully)?
Might do at the end of 2023 because there's at least two more this this year.
Fantastic review. Got a lot out of it
"THE BOOTY!" - Grant 2019
Did Gandhi or All Bridges Burning shake this list up enough to change anything?
Well All Bridges burning (best 3p) and Falling Sky (real cool war game) are the best to my group and me.
I have finally gave a try to the COIN.
Start with Fire in the Lake then Cuba Libre. And....don't like them. The games are easy to learn, the components are gorgeous too, the gameplay goes smoothly. But...I don't know. Never understand how to play the different faction. Everything is to abstract for me. And I never done better than being beaten to crap with any faction.
FITL was the worst one for me. I've never found how to play any of the 4 factions in the game. VC seems helpless to play (never see a player win with them). NVA is way to complex to handle. ARVN is not fun at all as I always been "bullied" the US draining away my ressources. US wins too quickly and too often (well not when I played it...but for the first time I've got the impression I still be close to every one else on the game). It's too big, to many variables. Never had fun playing it in the end.
Cuba Libre gave me the same feeling. Don't understand how to play. Syndicate is boring to play (to say the least as I've been wiped out of the game playing it. Overwhelming defeat to say the least). The smaller size made a bit more comprehensive on how to do and when. But on the long run, I never had fun as I was always just struggling to survive (not very fun when every other player were fighting for victory).
So definitely good games though. Every player was prying high of the game. But not for me. I'm better stick to conventional wargame
How did you get wiped out as syndicate your casinos cant be taken off the board as long as you are building then in spaces with the government you should be fine.
@@charliesmith5783 No more cash, all casino closed, every cube wipe out from the board. In the final no opportunity to win at about half the game. All I could do was to pass to raise a bit of cash to hope for a miracle (never occured)
Sorry for the question but what does COIN stand for? Is it an acronym for something?
COunter INsurgency
@@ThePlayersAid ahah! Much thanks. All my googling turned up nothing helpful.
What do you think about my worry/claim that in multiplayer wargames like COIN games, you don't have much autonomy or control of your own win. The players are keeping each other in check and smashing the leaders down which keeps anyone from winning until the end. You are not allowed to succeed. At the end it seems arbitrary who wins. Or maybe inexperienced players just let someone win quickly. Perhaps I would like the 2 player Colonial Twilight the best.
Where would you place Gandhi in this list ?
What would be your pick for a newbie in the COIN system? For personal reasons I would not like to start with Cuba Libre.
Boris Caro they will all equally kick you in the nuts with overwhelming rules
Boris Caro honestly pick the theme that interests you. Yes, some like Fire in the Lake are a bit more complex then others, but not overwhelmingly so, especially if you love the theme.
Angola is another great one!
Hwo does those work at 2-3 players? Are bots always necessary or we just pick factions?
Honestly, it varies from title to title. Colonial Twilight is 2 player only. All Bridges Burning (not in this old video) is 3 player max, with a great bot if you only have 1 or 2 players. Others are a mixed bag. Liberty or Death, Fire in the Lake, and Andean Abyss can easily be done piloting two factions each (the more natural allies) for example.
Fire in the Lake and Liberty or Death for me, all great tho'.
What happened to "Labrynth"? I always thought it was a COIN game? Just me.
It's not, although it is one of the best wargames of all time.
I've been considering Gandhi. Where does it rank amongst these?
On the higher end of the scale. It's very fun, but a bit different from the others, in how it works.
Another good video but I disagree ours was an evil empire. What would America be without the British?
Americans have the ultimate little brother syndrome.
@@ThePlayersAid that makes us family. I'll take it!
Grant, I must have a lot on common with you, because I would have ranked them EXACTLY in the same order. How weird.
Shane you guys live so far away from where I live. Would love to hit up some wargames with you guys. Been playing for more than 38 years.
Great minds think alike!
Which one plays best solo ?
The new one Gandhi has the best bot systen. They're currently working on a version of that for Fire in the Lake. Other than that they all work similarly using flow charts. If you just want to play all four sides then they're all equally soloable.
@@ThePlayersAid Thanks.
So, what was the first ranking? I'm 7 minutes in, he's done, and I don't see or hear the order, just a lot of commentary.
what does COIN mean
It stands for COunter INsurgency
What is the definition of a coin game?
COunter INsurgence
@@Joseph-wc6qd Thanks
They're also all by specific company.
Being really interested in the subject, I am disappointed that they just talk - without showing any game in playing situation, without even explaining what a COIN game is and what they jave in common, without saying what the three future games are about, without mentioning whether it is exclusively 4-player or easily 2-player, or even solo?, length of the rules, duration, etc.
Very poor journalism. Just two initiated mumbling "Oh I think Pastafar is the best god" and you don't know what is Pastafar.
Falling Sky > the rest
The Treatment of the Indians is what really broke Liberty or Death for me, it’s shoehorning 100 years of Indian interaction into a revolutionary war game, where it just doesn’t fit. For better or worse the Indians end up being far bigger players game wise, than they were. 3 player would have been much better.
Hi Chuck. I actually think the Indians are fairly well represented as their real impact in the conflict. They caused a lot of trouble on the frontier and the British really invited them and used them as they are used in the game. I’m not going to say it’s 100% historically accurate but it amalgamated their role.
Yeah, you need to learn more history before you declare that the Indians weren't an important part of the Revolutionary War. They had a much more significant role than what most of us were taught in school.
@@bgm-1961excuse me, I did not say that native americans had no impact upon the revolutionary war, what im saying is that the game is basically wacked in its presentation of them as a separate force, with a game play experience that has almost nothing to do with the actual impact they had on the war. basically if you know much you would see that, especially after Washington sent Wayne through the tribal villages in a sweep and destroy mission the Indians were not much of a factor at the scale of the game, 1775 is far more realistic and historical in its dice fest based portrayal. Ive had fun playing Liberty or Death a couple of times, but its a joke how it portrays the Indians especially if you have any actual knowledge of the war.
It would have been far better to go with a 3 player with the Indians as a somewhat random faction, not one that was somehow building up villages and infrastructure, but more like the Germans in the Roman game. a nuisance with an occasion impact.
A fair response. I apologize for misunderstanding your previous comment. Your reply does explain better what you meant. So essentially, your argument is that the Indians didn't factor in the war *enough*, for them to be a separate, playable faction in the game. Unless you've already read the designers notes which are found in the Playbook that comes in the box, you might find this comment from the designer interesting:
"The selection of Factions for Liberty or Death created controversy
from the beginning. Some play testers wanted a two-player
game. Others thought the addition of the French and Indians
were unnecessary because these two Factions couldn’t “win” the
American Revolution. Some thought the theater choice was too
small for the French to be a factor. Still others disagreed that
the Indians, made up of a number of disparate groups, could be
represented as one faction. I was accused of forcing a two-player
conflict into a four-player game system (COIN)-my view is the
opposite, that the American Revolution is a four-player conflict
that has been forced into a two-player model for 40 years. I have
explained my view on these issues throughout so I won’t rehash.
I would say it might be eye opening for those who that disagree
to try the game as designed and see if it changes perspectives.
It certainly did for me."
I've only played Falling Sky and found it really boring. Claustrophobic map, deterministic combat, no maneuver, gamey card play that seems clever for the sake of being clever, action menus that are just similar enough to each other that it becomes painful to try and remember what the small differences are... I just couldn't feel any connection to the topic being depicted. It didn't help that my faction (the Aedui) basically couldn't accomplish anything on their own unless the Romans were successful. Seeing that it's listed here as the least interesting title, I wonder if the others are different enough that I might enjoy them anyway.
What you described is similar to our experience. The other titles are significantly different. Some titles do tie the "allied" factions closer together, but others do not.
5 minutes in, & you haven’t explained what a COIN game is or shown any game laid out for play. Thumbs down.
I don’t like Euro mechanics in my historical wargames. They are not really simulations either. I played Cuba Libre and Falling Sky and you don’t learn anything about the Cuba Revolution nor see what Caesar was up to against the Gauls from an historical perspective.
Canondale on BGG did a superb review of Falling Sky and his conclusion was that in no way Caesar would have waged war or decided things the way they are portrayed in that COIN game.
I heard the exact same complaints about the others in the series: eurogames with some historical flavor text on the cards.