12:30 You can spend Progress as 1 Population or 2 Materials, so you did actually have 5. I think you forgot this rule the whole game, though I don't know if it would have made a difference (you are spending victory points when you do that) 29:49 You cannot have both Confucianism and Legalism out at the same time - playing one causing you to abandon the other. This is thematic, meant to simulate the conflict between the two philosophies of government as they wax and wane in influence. Good playthrough overall though!
You might no see this as it’s been three years, but thanks. I have bought and sold the game twice, twice the game felt so opaque (not to mention the atrocious rule book). Thanks to your playthroughs, it finally clicked, and I can see the greatness in this game.
I really appreciate that you took the effort to show the bot charts on the screen. That made it much easier to understand how you were handling the bot.
Thank you for the video. It's always helpful to see these really carefully made tutorials, especially ones as carefully edited and labelled as this one. We'd love to see more. There's so much unique content in this game, there is so much to cover!
I must say. First things first - thank you for videoing this and sharing it. I got the game after seeing both your review and this game play. It is without doubt the most complex card builder I've ever played. It's taken me 2 play throughs and 2 views of this video to finally feel comfortable with the rules. Now that I finally understand the rules and can play most cards without referring to the rulebook... I enjoy the game a lot, although a solo play is a lot to manage. One of the most amazing aspects of the game is how the the ruleset works with nation specific cards to mimic unique aspects of ancient nations. The ones I've played so far are very unique, but make sense for the nation and have a balance relative to the other nations. It all blows my mind.
Much appreciated Colin. Totally agree about the rule book! It needed to provide some 'picture' of a turn or what the game looks like. With the help of you and Paul I'm finding my way into a gorgeous looking but difficult puzzle.
Yeah I feel like they could have shown an example of play it would have really helped. But once you get the flow... it's awesome!! Thanks so much for watching!!
For once you are beaten as a teacher Colin, thank you for recommending Paul's video it's just a relief to see a great tutorial, the game is very intimidating at first. Now I can continue watch all your videos about imperium, really like your channel keep up the good work !!
Thank you for the amazing video. I came to watch it after losing twice within 3 rounds using the same matchup. I was resolving bot's unrest cards with 'other' effects...
This is great, Colin. I hope you will post more plays. I just played my first solo play of this game and your video showed me some things I did incorrectly. More please - and thank you!
Being a history buff, you've inspired me to buy the classic edition, my poor wallet 😬, but you only live once 😇. Good tutorial here Colin, thanks for that.
I keep hearing how wonderful this game is so I decided to watch a playthrough (came to yours as you all do great playthroughs), I involuntarily groaned during setup. Too fiddly for my tastes. I don't know what it is I have other games that require more time to setup than this, oh well different strokes for different folks. Solid explanations, setup tutorial and playthrough as usual.
1:06:25 Pennisula was revealed which draws 2 cards when played. You could have used Cataphract to acquire it then played it with your last action to get through your deck that round.
For prononciation, it’s Duke Joo-ang of Tchin. :) The designers made the choice of using proper Chinese Pinyin, which can be confusing to English speakers. But great playthrough, thanks for that!
I can't believe this game has garnered so much attention and praise. I am not saying it is a bad one, quite the contrary, but with so many things that should be read, arranged, etc it sure fails to be a great one. Thank you for the great video as always, you saved me money this time!
Really enjoy your videos, thanks for all the hard work. I have a question, on your first turn, you played two cards from hand and one acquired from the market. That would leave you with three cards in hand, so the maximum you could discard is just three, no?
Hi Colin, great video. Not sure if you look at comments on older videos, but are you drawing from the appropriate decks when refilling the two market cards on the left after you acquire/break through them? Looks like you might not be with the regions at least.
Yup I am just it's off screen. Remember those 2 cards on the left side come from the main deck so it can have any type of card in them such as regions etc.!
@@OneStopCoopShop ohh thanks! I thought appropriate deck was referring to the deck of suit of the card taken but you mean it's the origin of the card that was taken. Appreciate it! Cheers
Great gameplay video! Loving the game so far, i am a huge sucker for History, civ games and card games. Colin, i still had a question about reshuffling the bot deck once it is empty outside of the bot's cleanup phase while filling empty spots. Do i add a dynasty card as well into the discard pile first, or simply reshuffle the discard pile into the deck?
Thanks so much for watching!! So whenever if the bot deck is empty during any other phase then when it is refilling it's line of cards, you don't shuffle and create a new deck. So for example, if I play a card that allows my opponent to draw a card, but the bots deck is empty it does nothing. However if I don't have enough cards to fill all the slots during cleanup, I will continue to add Dynasty cards until it is full. Does that help?
OK I'd love clarification here. If you have a Pinned (continuous) card already in play aye you able to use it for an action or are actions limited only to your hand? I thought it was only what's in your hand though I could have sworn I saw actions being taken on Pinned cards (mainly ones that weren't realms) Thanks!
I played this once on TTS and liked it a lot, but I'm not a fan of the automa. I don't really like automa systems in games like Scythe or Root where you have to consult a spreadsheet to tell you what the opponent is doing. I much prefer, when playing by myself, either playing a solo only game, a co-op game (like Pandemic, Spirit Island, Robinson Crusoe, ect) where I can play all the characters or a game that gets out of its own way and lets you just play, like Everdell, Terraforming Mars, Ark Nova, or The Networks. I liked playing this game solo just ignoring the bot completely and concentrating only on what I was doing. There is some take that stuff in there, but I just ignored it or put it back in the box and replaced it with something else when it showed up. Or if a card required me to get stuff from the opponent, I got stuff as if there was one opponent. Like if a card said steal 3 materials from every opponent and any opponent who can't takes an unrest, I just took 3 materials. It worked much better and was way more interesting to not deal with a spreadsheet for an opponent. The game is super intriguing and I'm going to play it again for sure.
That makes a lot of sense. There are many members of our discord who have the same preferences as you. My tastes go the opposite way, though. I prefer a solo mode that matches me against an opponent, as realistic as possible. Those are the types of solo modes I design usually
Nice game, congrats on the victory! I would gladly watch more plays. It reminded me a lot of Imperial Settlers but more fiddly and aparently more complex. By watching it I also felt it run a little long. Have you played multiplayer? Since there is no simultanuous play, and there are so many things to do and manage on your turn it seems it would take a while to play a 3 or 4 player match. Also downtime might be an issue.
I am with you on everything you just said! I have not played multilayer and I feel it lasts about 20 minutes to long in solo. In competitive I would imagine that would be worse! Overall though solo is pretty freaking great I think as long as you can spend the time!
This looks a lot funner than it has seemed from other reviews and videos I've watched. Seems like a good solo mode, but definitely a bit of a fiddly game.
Well done Colin. The botciv had to take it on the chin (groan) I had no idea what was going on most of the time! I can understand why you felt the brain burn lol To be fair I was mostly only half awake but there was a lot going on for my tiny brain Thanks for the playthrough and look forward to the next video
Great playthrough Colin, this is one I've been looking at but not seen a huge amount online for. How do the different factions play, is it like playing Villainous where each one has a different objective to complete? Thanks!
I've never played Villinous but each faction has an entirely different way to gain points! For example the Arthurian civilization never becomes an empire but instead tries to complete quests! The Atlantian civilization starts as an empire right away! So far the 3 I've played have been drastically different!
@@OneStopCoopShop Thanks, so each civ scores VP's in different ways. I think it's worth a gamble, it's relatively cheap but only Imperials is available so I'll jump into the deep end like you. I'll definitely be interested in another play through, and if Mike can get his hands on it, a 5 in 5 review :D Keep up the great wok guys! Edit: I managed to order Classics so I'll be at the shallow end for a while :)
Glad you got classics! I would recommend starting there these civilizations can be quite challenging when also learning the game. I'm thinking of doing a classics play too. Maybe the vikings vs. The Roman's! I of course would be the vikings!
@@OneStopCoopShop oh great, a playthrough would be very welcome! I do like Vikings, but I've always had a sweet spot for Romans, so I'll be rooting for them! 😜
Qin is my favorite faction. also, i found it isn't really necessary to remove the 3-4 player cards for 2 player games. i think the designers just wanted a smaller amount of commons cards for 2 player games, which makes sense. but i never take them out. they work fine in 2 player games.
Well, this means two things: 1. You are cheating by having more unrest cards. 2. Most of the 3+/4 player cards are interactive oder even offensive by harming all opponents....so most are less effective against 1 opponent.
The problem with civ games for the Historian is this: the Historical nature of the game draws you in, but it is also likely to annoy you for the whole game as well. For instance, apparently the Zhou and early Qin were "uncivilized barbarians."😳 In the Western context, that's a bit like having Alexander's Hellenistic Empire come along after the Classic Era of Greece and only eventually be allowed to graduate from "barbarian" to "civilized" status. Sorry Socrates and the entire Classical Greek era! In both the Chinese and Greek cases, the older eras are widely seen as classic examples of the cultures at their hight of civilization, and the latter centralized empires weren't examples of moving from barbarian to civilized, but of reorganizing and spreading the already highly civilized cultures. Even if you decide you are willing to use the inherently troublesome terms "barbarian" and "civilized," the Zhou and early Qin were certainly *not* barbarians. The flippant use of this kind of terminology is highly insulting to the cultures, not to mention inaccurate. Also, apparently religion tends toward unrest. That is a really weird design choice since religion was a major unifying force for the internal development of most civilizations in human history. If anything, it should tend toward unifying the civ and be a limiter on unrest. This comes off as having the modern "religion causes conflict" mentality. In reality, religion tends to be a source of conflict *between* cultures, but actually a source of unity and cultural stability *within* a given culture. So, while I appreciate games at least attempting to have their representations of history be shaped by historical reality (like high population and the "double-edged-sword" of the Mandate of Heaven for the Qin), if you are going to attempt historical theming, you have to be consistent. Either be like most Euro-games where the historical theme is just window-dressing, or shape the game to historical reality at a consistent level. You can't be Historical and a-Historical across the same level of design choices. To use all the trappings of a Five-star restaurant only to unabashedly serve microwaved ramen is to slap your guest in the face. You should have just opened a Ramen shop instead. To not have the Qin bare any mechanical flavor related to historical reality would have been preferable to show an awareness of the material and an intent to utilize it only to be inconsistent and *choose* to have the Qin begin as an "uncivilized" barbarian tribe or to completely misrepresent the role of religion in the development of human cultures. As you can see, I have already had my historical interest first teased and then insulted, and this is only part-way along a playthrough featuring only two of the sixteen civilizations featured in the Imperium games. That hardly leads to a great deal of confidence that I would enjoy this game.
It seems the designer anticipated view points such as yours and addresses some of your concerns on the first page of the rulebook. Just bringing it up as it seems he really cares about the historical aspect but realized that for it to be fun for a general audience some sacrifices have to be made. "Imperium is a game that is based heavily in history of nations and empires from all across the world in the time period 3100 BCE - 1066 CE. But while historical accuracy has been a core value throughout development of this game, it has consistently given way to the needs of the game. Indeed, the very mechanic of deck-building is inherently abstract, and the notion of a linear and inexorable rise of nations into empires is a knowing misrepresentation of actual events. Moreover, some of the game terms used, such as ‘barbarian,’ ‘empire,’ and ‘uncivilised,’ are very crude for the purposes of historical study, but serve as useful shorthand for the purposes of the game. In particular, the use of the term ‘nation’ in these rules do not accurately denote real-world nations. Utopians, Atlanteans, and Arthurians are obviously fictitious nations. The Minoans, the Greeks, and the Macedonians all represent different, and sometimes overlapping, subgroups of Ancient Greeks. The Qin covers not only the Qin dynasty of Chinese history, but also the Zhou dynasty and the Warring States Period. Every single deck in this game will fall short of capturing the richness and complexity of the peoples depicted in it."
@@Visage13 Thanks for the quote, it's definitely applicable and shows that they are aware of the issues. The nature of the thing is still the nature of the thing, which is what the quote basically admits. It's just a frustration inherent in having a game with this kind of theme, which I admit in my gripe. Still, it seems like admitting that "barbarian" etc. are "crude" but using them anyway is a bit of a cop-out. Using the excuse of, "Well we have to generalize and sacrifice acurracy for the sake of the game," works for most of my gripe, but not for that. There are a multitude of less denegrating terms they could have used. "Formative vs Established," "Nation/kingdom vs Empire," etc. Accuracy issues I get are just something inherent to the process. Using loaded labels like barbarian/uncivilized/civilized etc. do not fall under that umbrella, and are avoidable. (Sorry for the long reply. I tend to use twice the words necessary to explain myself.)
12:30 You can spend Progress as 1 Population or 2 Materials, so you did actually have 5. I think you forgot this rule the whole game, though I don't know if it would have made a difference (you are spending victory points when you do that)
29:49 You cannot have both Confucianism and Legalism out at the same time - playing one causing you to abandon the other. This is thematic, meant to simulate the conflict between the two philosophies of government as they wax and wane in influence.
Good playthrough overall though!
Thanks for both of these!! Appreciate you watching!
Thanks for the shout out.
Your videos are what got me interested in the game so thank you!!
You might no see this as it’s been three years, but thanks. I have bought and sold the game twice, twice the game felt so opaque (not to mention the atrocious rule book). Thanks to your playthroughs, it finally clicked, and I can see the greatness in this game.
I really appreciate that you took the effort to show the bot charts on the screen. That made it much easier to understand how you were handling the bot.
Glad to help! Thanks for watching!!
Thank you for the video. It's always helpful to see these really carefully made tutorials, especially ones as carefully edited and labelled as this one. We'd love to see more. There's so much unique content in this game, there is so much to cover!
Thanks so much! What a wonderful game you have here!! I could play this all day if my brain allowed it!
I must say.
First things first - thank you for videoing this and sharing it.
I got the game after seeing both your review and this game play. It is without doubt the most complex card builder I've ever played. It's taken me 2 play throughs and 2 views of this video to finally feel comfortable with the rules.
Now that I finally understand the rules and can play most cards without referring to the rulebook... I enjoy the game a lot, although a solo play is a lot to manage.
One of the most amazing aspects of the game is how the the ruleset works with nation specific cards to mimic unique aspects of ancient nations. The ones I've played so far are very unique, but make sense for the nation and have a balance relative to the other nations. It all blows my mind.
I'm so with you!! One of the most unique game experiences ever! Glad you got through it!
Much appreciated Colin. Totally agree about the rule book! It needed to provide some 'picture' of a turn or what the game looks like. With the help of you and Paul I'm finding my way into a gorgeous looking but difficult puzzle.
Yeah I feel like they could have shown an example of play it would have really helped. But once you get the flow... it's awesome!! Thanks so much for watching!!
For once you are beaten as a teacher Colin, thank you for recommending Paul's video it's just a relief to see a great tutorial, the game is very intimidating at first. Now I can continue watch all your videos about imperium, really like your channel keep up the good work !!
Paul is awesome!
I found this video more instructive due to the camera work, which is lacking in Paul's live stream.
Yes i wanna see another one!
It's going to happen!
Thank you for the amazing video. I came to watch it after losing twice within 3 rounds using the same matchup. I was resolving bot's unrest cards with 'other' effects...
Oh man!!! Brutal!! So glad to help!!
This is great, Colin. I hope you will post more plays. I just played my first solo play of this game and your video showed me some things I did incorrectly. More please - and thank you!
Thanks so much Sara, more is coming!
Just got both versions in a trade. Thanks for this. I have a much better understanding now
Glad it helped! The game is solid once you get past the rulebook just being a reference instead of teaching the game!
This is a fantastic playthrough and tutorial. Thank you!
Thank you for watching!!
Being a history buff, you've inspired me to buy the classic edition, my poor wallet 😬, but you only live once 😇. Good tutorial here Colin, thanks for that.
Yessss!! I think you'll enjoy it! Appreciate you watching!
I don't know what *abandon* X effects do, but I feel like you shouldn't be able to have both of them in play at the same time. It's a gut feeling.
You've got it I missed that!
I think you forgot the legalism and cofucionalism make you abandon the other so you could not have both at the same time on your tableu.
Yup 100% missed that! I'll make a note thanks! For some reason I thought that was flavor text..
I keep hearing how wonderful this game is so I decided to watch a playthrough (came to yours as you all do great playthroughs), I involuntarily groaned during setup. Too fiddly for my tastes. I don't know what it is I have other games that require more time to setup than this, oh well different strokes for different folks.
Solid explanations, setup tutorial and playthrough as usual.
I get that! I will say after multiple plays setup is a breeze but understand it can be a deterrent for sure! Thanks so much for watching!
Would like to see another „classic“ Playthrough.... thanks for this
Planning on it I like the game so much! Thanks for watching!
@@OneStopCoopShop yes, i think I will preorder it here in Germany, your Playthrough looks great.
Nice!! Totally worth it, it's a blast!!
1:06:25 Pennisula was revealed which draws 2 cards when played. You could have used Cataphract to acquire it then played it with your last action to get through your deck that round.
Thanks for that! I'm sure I didn't make the best choices on camera! But a ton of fun regardless
For prononciation, it’s Duke Joo-ang of Tchin. :) The designers made the choice of using proper Chinese Pinyin, which can be confusing to English speakers. But great playthrough, thanks for that!
Thanks for that!!
I can't believe this game has garnered so much attention and praise. I am not saying it is a bad one, quite the contrary, but with so many things that should be read, arranged, etc it sure fails to be a great one. Thank you for the great video as always, you saved me money this time!
I'm glad to help! I personally love it but the best part is we can all enjoy different games!
Really enjoy your videos, thanks for all the hard work. I have a question, on your first turn, you played two cards from hand and one acquired from the market. That would leave you with three cards in hand, so the maximum you could discard is just three, no?
You can discard any number of cards at the end of your turn!
@@OneStopCoopShop in the manual it says “you may discard any number of your cards from your hand in to your discard pile”
Yup any number in your hand so no limit!
Hi Colin, great video. Not sure if you look at comments on older videos, but are you drawing from the appropriate decks when refilling the two market cards on the left after you acquire/break through them? Looks like you might not be with the regions at least.
39:23 is an example!
Yup I am just it's off screen. Remember those 2 cards on the left side come from the main deck so it can have any type of card in them such as regions etc.!
@@OneStopCoopShop ohh thanks! I thought appropriate deck was referring to the deck of suit of the card taken but you mean it's the origin of the card that was taken. Appreciate it! Cheers
Glad to help and have fun!!
Great gameplay video! Loving the game so far, i am a huge sucker for History, civ games and card games. Colin, i still had a question about reshuffling the bot deck once it is empty outside of the bot's cleanup phase while filling empty spots. Do i add a dynasty card as well into the discard pile first, or simply reshuffle the discard pile into the deck?
Thanks so much for watching!! So whenever if the bot deck is empty during any other phase then when it is refilling it's line of cards, you don't shuffle and create a new deck. So for example, if I play a card that allows my opponent to draw a card, but the bots deck is empty it does nothing. However if I don't have enough cards to fill all the slots during cleanup, I will continue to add Dynasty cards until it is full. Does that help?
@@OneStopCoopShop yes, i finally found out in the bgg forums, but you confirmed it.
Thanks Colin! Love your streams, especially Drunagor =)
Awesome!! We will be back to it soon one we both are back from vacations!
OK I'd love clarification here.
If you have a Pinned (continuous) card already in play aye you able to use it for an action or are actions limited only to your hand?
I thought it was only what's in your hand though I could have sworn I saw actions being taken on Pinned cards (mainly ones that weren't realms)
Thanks!
I played this once on TTS and liked it a lot, but I'm not a fan of the automa. I don't really like automa systems in games like Scythe or Root where you have to consult a spreadsheet to tell you what the opponent is doing. I much prefer, when playing by myself, either playing a solo only game, a co-op game (like Pandemic, Spirit Island, Robinson Crusoe, ect) where I can play all the characters or a game that gets out of its own way and lets you just play, like Everdell, Terraforming Mars, Ark Nova, or The Networks. I liked playing this game solo just ignoring the bot completely and concentrating only on what I was doing. There is some take that stuff in there, but I just ignored it or put it back in the box and replaced it with something else when it showed up. Or if a card required me to get stuff from the opponent, I got stuff as if there was one opponent. Like if a card said steal 3 materials from every opponent and any opponent who can't takes an unrest, I just took 3 materials. It worked much better and was way more interesting to not deal with a spreadsheet for an opponent. The game is super intriguing and I'm going to play it again for sure.
That makes a lot of sense. There are many members of our discord who have the same preferences as you. My tastes go the opposite way, though. I prefer a solo mode that matches me against an opponent, as realistic as possible. Those are the types of solo modes I design usually
44:17 you could have played "independent" straight away as it was a free play.
Thanks!
Nice game, congrats on the victory! I would gladly watch more plays. It reminded me a lot of Imperial Settlers but more fiddly and aparently more complex. By watching it I also felt it run a little long. Have you played multiplayer? Since there is no simultanuous play, and there are so many things to do and manage on your turn it seems it would take a while to play a 3 or 4 player match. Also downtime might be an issue.
I am with you on everything you just said! I have not played multilayer and I feel it lasts about 20 minutes to long in solo. In competitive I would imagine that would be worse! Overall though solo is pretty freaking great I think as long as you can spend the time!
after your first few games it plays in a bit under an hour which i think is fine for a game with this much thinking and strategy
I'm not there yet it seems! Thanks for telling me though. I might also be slow haha!
Which is better for solo play, Classic or Legends?
Both they are essentially the same! Legends just had more complex civilizations!
Hi Colin. Do you think the bot will become easy to beat, even on the highest difficulty, after 40+ plays?
There are ways to increase the difficulty so I would say yes! I haven't played that much yet. Only about 20 plays
@@OneStopCoopShop "yes" means that it's easy to beat even on the highest level or that it's hard even if I become a Pro?
Not sure I'd suggest asking on boardgamegeek.com as I'm sure there are people who are experts and can tell you!
Yes more plays please
Just finished recording Vikings vs. The Roman's!
What does the abandon on legalism mean?
It meant i should have discarded confuscianism!
Played this for the first time today (finally). My luck is very different from yours. I rolled a 6 on the bots first 5 turns!
Haha!! You just want it harder my friend!
This looks a lot funner than it has seemed from other reviews and videos I've watched. Seems like a good solo mode, but definitely a bit of a fiddly game.
For sure fiddly, but once you get over that hurdle, for sure fun!! Thanks for watching!!
Well done Colin. The botciv had to take it on the chin (groan)
I had no idea what was going on most of the time!
I can understand why you felt the brain burn lol
To be fair I was mostly only half awake but there was a lot going on for my tiny brain
Thanks for the playthrough and look forward to the next video
Haha yeah that's how my brain felt! Half awake!! Thanks as always Paul for watching even if you are tired!!
Great playthrough Colin, this is one I've been looking at but not seen a huge amount online for. How do the different factions play, is it like playing Villainous where each one has a different objective to complete? Thanks!
I've never played Villinous but each faction has an entirely different way to gain points! For example the Arthurian civilization never becomes an empire but instead tries to complete quests! The Atlantian civilization starts as an empire right away! So far the 3 I've played have been drastically different!
@@OneStopCoopShop Thanks, so each civ scores VP's in different ways. I think it's worth a gamble, it's relatively cheap but only Imperials is available so I'll jump into the deep end like you. I'll definitely be interested in another play through, and if Mike can get his hands on it, a 5 in 5 review :D
Keep up the great wok guys!
Edit: I managed to order Classics so I'll be at the shallow end for a while :)
Glad you got classics! I would recommend starting there these civilizations can be quite challenging when also learning the game. I'm thinking of doing a classics play too. Maybe the vikings vs. The Roman's! I of course would be the vikings!
@@OneStopCoopShop oh great, a playthrough would be very welcome! I do like Vikings, but I've always had a sweet spot for Romans, so I'll be rooting for them! 😜
Hey now!! I don't blame you but being that the Vikings is the name of Minnesotas football team I gotta go for them!
Is there a TTS mod?
I don't know I don't use tts sorry!
@@OneStopCoopShop this seems really interesting but I’ve already spent my board game money on tapestry (which is AWESOME)
Haha I understand!! We have to pick and choose!
No yet but it's something that we may have some news on soon...
@@OspreygamesUk that is really exciting, I would like to try this game
I don`t think you can have Legalism and Confusianism in play at the same time
Yup! Make sure you have your Klingon subtitles on when you watch I have it notated there!
Are you supposed to shuffle development cards during setup? The rules don't say to and it's throwing me for a loop
No because you can choose which one you want when you develop! At least for most nations!
Qin is my favorite faction.
also, i found it isn't really necessary to remove the 3-4 player cards for 2 player games. i think the designers just wanted a smaller amount of commons cards for 2 player games, which makes sense. but i never take them out. they work fine in 2 player games.
Yup totally agree make for a shorter game too with less cards
Well, this means two things:
1. You are cheating by having more unrest cards.
2. Most of the 3+/4 player cards are interactive oder even offensive by harming all opponents....so most are less effective against 1 opponent.
The problem with civ games for the Historian is this: the Historical nature of the game draws you in, but it is also likely to annoy you for the whole game as well. For instance, apparently the Zhou and early Qin were "uncivilized barbarians."😳 In the Western context, that's a bit like having Alexander's Hellenistic Empire come along after the Classic Era of Greece and only eventually be allowed to graduate from "barbarian" to "civilized" status. Sorry Socrates and the entire Classical Greek era! In both the Chinese and Greek cases, the older eras are widely seen as classic examples of the cultures at their hight of civilization, and the latter centralized empires weren't examples of moving from barbarian to civilized, but of reorganizing and spreading the already highly civilized cultures. Even if you decide you are willing to use the inherently troublesome terms "barbarian" and "civilized," the Zhou and early Qin were certainly *not* barbarians. The flippant use of this kind of terminology is highly insulting to the cultures, not to mention inaccurate.
Also, apparently religion tends toward unrest. That is a really weird design choice since religion was a major unifying force for the internal development of most civilizations in human history. If anything, it should tend toward unifying the civ and be a limiter on unrest. This comes off as having the modern "religion causes conflict" mentality. In reality, religion tends to be a source of conflict *between* cultures, but actually a source of unity and cultural stability *within* a given culture.
So, while I appreciate games at least attempting to have their representations of history be shaped by historical reality (like high population and the "double-edged-sword" of the Mandate of Heaven for the Qin), if you are going to attempt historical theming, you have to be consistent. Either be like most Euro-games where the historical theme is just window-dressing, or shape the game to historical reality at a consistent level. You can't be Historical and a-Historical across the same level of design choices.
To use all the trappings of a Five-star restaurant only to unabashedly serve microwaved ramen is to slap your guest in the face. You should have just opened a Ramen shop instead. To not have the Qin bare any mechanical flavor related to historical reality would have been preferable to show an awareness of the material and an intent to utilize it only to be inconsistent and *choose* to have the Qin begin as an "uncivilized" barbarian tribe or to completely misrepresent the role of religion in the development of human cultures.
As you can see, I have already had my historical interest first teased and then insulted, and this is only part-way along a playthrough featuring only two of the sixteen civilizations featured in the Imperium games. That hardly leads to a great deal of confidence that I would enjoy this game.
Ha! Well I get you, this might need to be a pass then but thanks for watching and commenting!
@@OneStopCoopShop ,
I just realized how long of a rant that was, thanks for replying!
No worries it happens!! Especially on things we are passionate about!
It seems the designer anticipated view points such as yours and addresses some of your concerns on the first page of the rulebook. Just bringing it up as it seems he really cares about the historical aspect but realized that for it to be fun for a general audience some sacrifices have to be made.
"Imperium is a game that is based heavily in history of nations and empires from all across the world in the time period 3100 BCE - 1066 CE. But while historical accuracy has been a core value throughout development of this game, it has consistently given way to the needs of the game. Indeed, the very mechanic of deck-building is inherently abstract, and the notion of a linear and inexorable rise of nations into empires is a knowing misrepresentation of actual events. Moreover, some of the game terms used, such as ‘barbarian,’ ‘empire,’ and ‘uncivilised,’ are very crude for the purposes of historical study, but serve as useful shorthand for the purposes of the game. In particular, the use of the term ‘nation’
in these rules do not accurately denote real-world nations. Utopians, Atlanteans, and Arthurians are obviously fictitious nations. The Minoans, the Greeks, and the Macedonians all represent different, and sometimes overlapping, subgroups of Ancient Greeks. The Qin covers not only the Qin dynasty of Chinese history, but also the Zhou dynasty and the Warring States Period. Every single deck in this game will fall short of capturing the richness and complexity of the peoples depicted in it."
@@Visage13 Thanks for the quote, it's definitely applicable and shows that they are aware of the issues. The nature of the thing is still the nature of the thing, which is what the quote basically admits. It's just a frustration inherent in having a game with this kind of theme, which I admit in my gripe.
Still, it seems like admitting that "barbarian" etc. are "crude" but using them anyway is a bit of a cop-out. Using the excuse of, "Well we have to generalize and sacrifice acurracy for the sake of the game," works for most of my gripe, but not for that. There are a multitude of less denegrating terms they could have used. "Formative vs Established," "Nation/kingdom vs Empire," etc.
Accuracy issues I get are just something inherent to the process. Using loaded labels like barbarian/uncivilized/civilized etc. do not fall under that umbrella, and are avoidable.
(Sorry for the long reply. I tend to use twice the words necessary to explain myself.)