In my experience, most first-play game experiences go something like this: you gain a vague grasp of the rules, the mechanics of what you've got and what you can do with it, either by skimming the rules or having them explained to you. Then everybody dives in, expecting that the 'right thing to do' will become apparent as you play, and the path to victory will become clear.

Only in La Guerre de l'Empereur, that never really does become clear. The old 'conquer everything on the map' strategy that we all know and love leaves us with our pants around our ankles. I've watched my group doing all kinds of crazy invasions and huge territorial grabs, only to have the chair knocked out from under them by an unexpected surrender or peace party. What is their instant reaction? 'What the hell kind of crap is that? I've been robbed!'

We have to let you know up front and center that the old territorial ambitions are going to fail, unless the demands of the game are taken into account. People, don't come into this with 'old' ideas of how a game about European conquest is supposed to work. Then when your simplistic strategies fail you'll be on the Internet trashing the game. Which isn't healthy for you, for us, for the game, or the other gamers in the world!

So before you embark on that 'first impression' game, consider this:

The most recent post from a Canadian grognard is particularly telling. He thinks he's dissatisfied with the game because it doesn't match his calculations in terms of march distances and supply lines. The nature of the Internet is to promote quick judgment, not reason, reflection, and consideration. He saw something funny, something unusual, and his reaction was to say: 'This is bad, Kevin has disappointed me.' Why not, 'Something is different about this, I wonder what Kevin is trying to show here?' La Guerre is an invitation into a new experience, a new understanding.

Everybody thinks the game falls down somewhere different. It's because they can't come to grips with what it's trying to do. Frankly, I suspect even Zucker didn't know, initially, what this game was all about. He and the Bunker crew just breathed life into it, and cried 'it lives!'

The hilarious thing for me is watching gamers, whose first instinct is usually to grapple with the issue 'how can I win,' never even getting to that point. There are almost no discussions of play balance, victory conditions, or national strategies. They aren't ever getting that deep into it. They get hit by something they don't expect and immediately fixate on one or two particular game mechanics that they see as 'ahistorical' or frustrating.

But all this thrashing has actually been useful in one respect. Those of us who have been enchanted by the game have been forced to look at what it really is. It isn't at all cut and dried. A game like Serenissima is intuitive and easily grasped, but remains a 'closed' system. La Guerre is the opposite. It's very hard to pin down: while the rules are simple, the implications of those rules are in many respects counter-intuitive and extremely open-ended. La Guerre de l'Empereur by the Numbers

Our new 2nd edition will contain an article on strategy for England and France which will, I hope, give some insight into how you can play this game to win. Some of the points it will cover:

Allowing for Enemy Surrender
Planning Your Invasion
When to Declare War