Grant and I spent a few a hours finishing off our campaign of Volko Ruhnke’s Wilderness War, published by GMT games. What a blast that game was. By the end of tonight’s session we both felt that the game was moving along very quickly which made the game very enjoyable as we weren’t getting bogged down as much in AP or flipping through the rule book [as much].
This is how things started off with 2 years [4 hands] left in the game, as we were playing the shorter 1755-1759 scenario. Monkton’s campaign in the north successfully took him and his army all the way to Montreal, however had stretched himself too thinly and was decisively driven back by Levis’ healthy troops. Johnson’s siege was successful and took some control in the centre of the board, however was tied down defending the two forts there from Levis’ positioning going up and down the river with easy.
So here it is, the final scoring after three sessions and five years.
That’s right, the game ended in a tie, we both had a card in hand, but Grant was unable to use his to activate Levis, his only potential point scoring force, and my forces were in to tenuous a position or too wounded to risk an open battle for VPs.
Whilst that might seem disappointing, I thought it was both fair for our first game and also refreshing, because the score really related the tension of the game, and the blunders on the side of the British that counter balanced their various successes. I’m also from the UK so I’m used to watching ties in the Premier League!
All in all, this game was excellent to play and I’d highly recommend it. The two factions play extremely differently which leads to many intricate and reactive strategic decisions. Laying siege and assaulting really feels like it should do, and avoiding battle is something that is integral to maintaining a strong presence on the board. The deck plays really well, and as you don’t have to worry about the opponents events in your hand the management aspect is much simpler.