Let's Play: Twilight Struggle [Turn 1]
ฝัง
- เผยแพร่เมื่อ 25 ธ.ค. 2024
- The first turn of a play through of "Twilight Struggle", a two player card driven game that is currently (as of 4/20/14) the number one rated game on boardgamegeek.com.
In 1945, unlikely allies toppled Hitler's war machine, while humanity's most devastating weapons forced the Japanese Empire to its knees in a storm of fire. Where once there stood many great powers, there then stood only two. The world had scant months to sigh its collective relief before a new conflict threatened. Unlike the titanic struggles of the preceding decades, this conflict would be waged not primarily by soldiers and tanks, but by spies and politicians, scientists and intellectuals, artists and traitors. Twilight Struggle is a two-player game simulating the forty-five year dance of intrigue, prestige, and occasional flares of warfare between the Soviet Union and the United States. The entire world is the stage on which these two titans fight to make the world safe for their own ideologies and ways of life. The game begins amidst the ruins of Europe as the two new "superpowers" scramble over the wreckage of the Second World War, and ends in 1989, when only the United States remained standing.
Twilight Struggle inherits its fundamental systems from the card-driven classics We the People and Hannibal: Rome vs. Carthage. It is a quick-playing, low-complexity game in that tradition. The game map is a world map of the period, whereon players move units and exert influence in attempts to gain allies and control for their superpower. As with GMT's other card-driven games, decision-making is a challenge; how to best use one's cards and units given consistently limited resources?
Twilight Struggle's Event cards add detail and flavor to the game. They cover a vast array of historical happenings, from the Arab-Israeli conflicts of 1948 and 1967, to Vietnam and the U.S. peace movement, to the Cuban Missile Crisis and other such incidents that brought the world to the brink of nuclear annihilation. Subsystems capture the prestige-laden Space Race as well as nuclear tensions, with the possibility of game-ending nuclear war.
Follow me on Twitter : / thatpenskyfile
If you're interested in Twilight Struggle strategy, please visit TwilightStrategy.com. It's an amazing website (complete with e-book!) that covers various strategies, card uses and other essential knowledge to play the game at a higher level.
![Let's Play: Twilight Struggle [Turn 2]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/voFgz789rWQ/mqdefault.jpg)
![Let's Play: Twilight Struggle [Turn 2]](/img/tr.png)
Thumbs up for editing in the cards. Makes it much easier to follow.
Thanks, it's definitely worth doing. Plus, it'll give a greater chance for people to notice and mention screw ups.
the opening Kennedy speech was fantastic
Appreciate this being posted. I'm gonna buy this for sure.
Presidential speeches have copyright nowadays?
***** It's as surprising to me as it is to you. Although, I think that it was hit with a copyright from a company that owns a song that itself uses the speech... So, it's more a problem with the broken TH-cam copyright system that allows companies to claim things that they themselves are using in a song. I just got tired of having to debate it, so I deleted the audio from the video. Thanks for watching and commenting!
Great playthrough! thanx
Just find out this game. Awesome i think thanks for video
Question about the play of Norad near the 6:50 mark. Does the US really have "control" of Canada? or merely "influence"? My understanding is that the country must have the darkened side of the tile flipped for control thus currently US has no control and so Norad (played by USSR player) shouldnt trigger.
thanks in advance.
Great video series btw. Very helpful. Also learned how to th play Labyrinth: War on Terror watching you videos. Any plan to do Let`s Play: Fire in the Lake?
J Palarino The card text has to do with controlling Canada at the end of the action round. You don't need to control Canada to trigger the event, but in order to gain the benefit of the 1 influence at the end of the action round where DEFCON drops to 2, you must control Canada at that point. It's being played here with the hope that Canada will eventually be under US control.
Thanks for the feedback! I would like to do a FitL game, but I probably need a few more games of it. There are enough mistakes in this and Labyrinth...
Yeah. I just spent the last 3 days watching this video....play testing and checking pdfs online to get Labyrinth down myself. I think, stressing "I think", I finally got it down though there are still a bunch of cards that I think may fudge. Great games with a pay off when you learn them but there is certainly a learning curve.
Anyway, thanks for the quick response.
J Palarino Yeah, the limited space for text on a card sometimes comes back to bite you in games like this.
2:16: "My understanding of that card is: you can look at those cards whenever you want."
Interesting question. The card (CIA created) says "USSR reveals hand this turn.", but then I remembered a different card, "Aldrich Ames Remix", which says: "US player exposes his hand to USSR player for the remainer of turn. [...]". I think the part of "for the remainer of turn" is the important part here, so I would say "CIA created" gives a one-shot look into the hand of the USSR player's hand.
The digital version has impact here: in the app you can look back at the card play and re-read the cards you saw.
To be honest, I also play it that way, since this is a game of strategy, not memory. :) I generally don't like it when games reward good memory, since people have different skill levels of memorising information, so it can potentially really mess with a game's balance because of that. There are exceptions to that though, like Small World, because the hidden victory point count here often prevents players from always ganging up on the player in the lead.
Nice example to get more familiar with rules. I guess Marshall plan (14:10) also adds influence point to Finland and Austria as these are still not controlled by USSR. (besides Canada and Turkey were forgotten to add a point - West Europe region in TS)
Marshall Plan only adds seven points (one in each country) so, while you could add it to the countries you listed, the player here chose not to use those. Thanks for watching!
The Pensky File
Oops, missed that. I'm still learning :) another question: At 15:57 Middle east scoring card shows, I guess, presence of USSR and dominance of US +1 battleground.. shoud make difference of 3VP for US
esence77
ok, I got it. Presence means control of 1 country and dominance 1 battleground and 1 non-battleground at least. I've found better translation of rules ;)
esence77
Domination is control of more total countries AND more battlegrounds. You also need to control at least one non-battleground.
One comment - it would have been nice if there was a quick graphic or mention of what the starting distribution the two of you did in Europe prior to Headlines was. Even though I think I puzzled it out (US - France 3, Italy 2, Greece 1, Denmark 1; USSR looks like "East European Unrest" Safe of Poland 4, East Germany +1 for total 4, Austria 1), it's difficult to see the numbers from such a zoomed out view.
At any rate, though, thanks a bunch for uploading these.
Thanks for watching!
I have just bought this game and it's in the mail, been doing lots of research and just eager to play it and see it played. This is really enjoyable to watch, may even watch through the whole thing.
I'm surprised to see the USA start so strongly, even with having De-Stalinization in the starting hand.
Question for you: Given the USSR player had 2 scoring cards immediately, was there anything else he could have done to score better in either Asia or Middle East? I saw that he effectively ceded the Middle East and played the Score Asia card sooner than I expected. Did he just not have enough muscle in the cards to create a superior outcome?
Thanks, this has been a great learning experience. :)
I was the USSR player. While I don't remember exactly what I was thinking, I probably played scoring cards when I thought I had the best chance at getting the most points without getting stuck in an endless battle for a specific region. Sometimes I play the scoring cards just to be rid of them and when you put influence in an area only to have the opponent match it, you've basically wasted a turn since you gained no points from that process. Also, the Middle East is a region that consistently provides the USSR with a slight advantage, so I'd rather claim Asia early and get the Mid East later on in the game. Thanks for watching!
Same as Daniel, just learning the game. I was wondering, was there a reason the US didn't put 1 influence in Lebanon (instead of Iran) knowing that the Middle East scoring card was coming up? That would have gotten him a couple more VP for Domination.
CardiacCat20
I don't think there was a good reason. Looks like he made a mistake, or was preoccupied with the battleground of Iran.
The Pensky File On my other email account. TY for answering my question! I did in fact watch the whole thing, it was so very close, very intense and interesting the whole way.
I guess I should add to that I am obviously new to the game. I am re-reading the rules and it seems that only cards played by your opponent with your superpowers events get triggered not split ones? Is this correct?
Yes, "neutral" or split events do not activate for your opponent if you play them for ops. They act as cards aligned to either player. Thanks for watching!
Why did you play the Asia scoring card when it was a wash I just bought the game and have yet to play and wondered what the strategy behind that was
Potentially because there was a risk of the situation deteriorating further. Stalemate best hope. The scoring card needs to be played by end of turn anyway.
Hey I just bought this game. Still learning. I have a question:
I noticed you did a coup on the first AR. You are able to carry out that event as well? I thought a coup costs “1 card”
Nvrm, I just answered I think. A coup is an operation and since the card had opponent event, the opponent still gets to exercise the event, but the player gets to chose if it’s before or after the coup. Is this correct?
@@minorthreatmikey Correct.
What kind of card sleeves are you using here? They look like a pretty good fit and I was thinking about doing the same for my set.
The standard Ultra Pro sleeves!
Well... Guess I'm just going to play my XCOM board game until I get someone to come over and watch this video while playing this game with me. Looks fun but a bit mind boggling to get into... Just like masters of magic...
It's not too bad. Looks worse than it is!
@TheZjensen in this game's terminology, 5 > 4 is degrading (since it gets worse) and 4 > 5 is improving.
A question about the Olympics card ... it was the US who played it yet the USSR didn't get the text benefit even though it is a split card?
Dregar Ironfaith If you play a card for Ops points and it's your card or split, the event doesn't occur. Only if it's your opponent's card will the event occur (as if they played it themselves).
You cannot coup if you don't have any influence markers in the region you wish to coup. How did you coup Italy?
You can coup any country with opponent influence, as long as you abide by DEFCON limitations. Italy could be couped at DEFCON 5 by the USSR.
Ok thanks for the explanation
I have never played this game, so I might be way off, but wouldn't you start at defcon 1? it says to "degrade" defcon on the duck and cover card. If it starts at 5, then you cannot degrade it since 5 is the lowest amount of severity and 1 is the most severe. Am i wrong here? Going from 5 to 4 is upgrading the defcon level, not degrading it
It mean "degrade" in the sense that you're moving closer to nuclear war. DEFCON 1 is nuclear war and ends the game (whoever causes it to happen is the loser), while DEFCON 5 is essentially world peace. What you're saying isn't an uncommon confusion, we can blame the English language for the issue. Thanks for watching!
The Pensky File
Thanks for the reply. That makes sense now. It means the situation degrades, not the number basically. You seem to know a lot about the game, so I figured I was wrong haha
TheZjensen It can be confusing! Some of the cards are worded a little bit loosely ("free coup").
canada starts with 2 us influence or was the usa player to place 2 of his "free" 7 influence there? i'm a little confused, seems some rules say canada receives start influence, mine rules not hahahaha
They start with influence. On the board, the starting amount of influence is detailed on each country that should have influence.
The Pensky File
mmm, I'm italian, and my rulebook don't mention canada in the nation that starts with an amount of influence, maybe i have a different version?
Why are you using the event text on the card if you're playing it as an Operations (Coup)? Aren't you supposed to choose one or the other? I just got the game and read the instructions and I'm confused because you seem to be playing it wrong.
I think you're talking about "Duck and Cover" at 3:30? In that case, the USSR player played the card (which is a US card) and used the ops points for the coup. Since the USSR player played a US card, the event happens (in addition to the coup). The USSR player chose to do the coup before the US event happens. Thanks for watching.
Warsaw Pact (8:31) allows to remove or place influence in Eastern Europe, but you go ahead and place influence in Thailand and other Asian countries... That's a long way from Eastern Europe on my world map :-) Has the game such inaccurate geographical definitions or was that just a blunder while playing?
Neither. Warsaw was played for ops, not the event.
The Pensky File Ah ok, thanks, that makes more sense now!
Seems like u guys are both fairly new to the game when this playthrough was played. The things that I would have done differently:
US: 1st: Coup Angola on AR1 after DEFCON was degraded to 3. In that way u get MILops and u take away the second Coup of the USSR. 2nd: As soon as DEFCON hits 2 spend influence in Libiya1 and/or Jordan2. In this way u would dominate MiddleEast and have solid backup against Arab/Israel war and continiues pressenence in ME.
USSR: 1st. Risky play Decolanization on headline since US could have couped u easily out of Angola. Great play though using Duck&Cover to degrade DEFCON that much quicker. 2nd: Also make the play for Middle East! U let US get away with 4 VP's! U should have played at least 1 inf into Syria so u had pressence. Its a difference of 3 VP!
Anyway these are my thoughts on the matter, im sure u both had ur reasons to play like u do. :)
We're somewhat new at this point (the US in particular), but it also can't be understated how much a camera impacts how you perform. It's something that's always on your mind. Thanks for your thoughts and for watching!
Cool bro, its fun to watch! I tend to favor the USSR side too. It seems easier to play with them, especially early game they are a lot stronger. Veteran players play just as well with US but for starters it's more difficult. It's common to give a +1 or +2 bonus to the US player at the start of the game. Don't know if u guys applied it too but it can make a big differnce for the US to stay in the game a bit. :)
mm. beer. enjoying this playthrough.
Thanks for watching! Have a beer on me.
If someone could make this game into digital...
Not sure if you're joking, but the digital version is coming! They did a kickstarter for it a while back, it's due sometime in the near future.
mmm bongs