GMT Coin Series

[Bison]

What's everyone's take on this series?  I think I like the concept from what I've read and they seem solo friendly, but I'm on the fence as whether to get into the series.  For a number of reasons I am not too interested in the more modern variants, but how are the pre-WW2 games?

[Staggerwing]

I've been thinking of ordering Pendragon of Falling Sky because of the subject matter, however, since it would be my first COIN game I don't have any real insight into how any of them play. Anyone know if there will be VASSAL mods?

[bayonetbrant]

Of the Pre-WWII games, I've only played Liberty or Death, and a full review is coming soon, but the short version is this:

good job of being asymmetric - Brits have big mobility advantage b/c of naval movement, French fight reasonably well, US avoid casualties pretty well

Downsides:  full campaign game isn't as good as shorter games b/c (1) French player is bored for 1/3 of game, and (2) w/ US and Brits banging on each other, Indians are left alone to build HUGE lead in villages and are very, very hard to beat in full-length game.

If you have an adult supervising, though, and helping drive the game, it's a GREAT learning tool for kids (middle/high school) about the AWI and the bigger strategic issues that faced the sides, rather than just the usually "this battle was fought on this date here and then this next thing happened"

[Bison]

That's sort of what I wondered about with some of the game implementations and the need for four sides.  The there may be some imbalance between the factions or that one or two would sort of dominate the play.

[bayonetbrant]

The problem is that the historical start should nerf back the French after the Seven Years / F& I War.  But I think the Indians start off a little too strong, too, since it gives them the ability to build really quickly while everyone else is preoccupied.  The other problem is that it treats the Indians as a monolithic faction, instead of a collection of disparate tribes who are loosely aligned in their dislike of the White Man, but not so much united among themselves in how to proceed.

[Bison]

I'll have to read the rulebook on GMT site, but from what I've read I don't think that geopolitical relationships outside of the colonies are modeled on the map.  Perhaps that would more accurately reflect the British/French tensions and the divided nature of British attentions?  The treatment of the tribes as monolithic is problematic, but not necessarily unique to this game either.  Still I think the game could be interesting.  However I wonder if Washington's War (granted it's a card driven game and not COIN) isn't the better approach to a conflict that clearly has two primary factions with several ancillary factions.
   

[Cyrano]

I have them all, but have not played "Liberty or Death". Still in shrink from Origins...as are a number of other games.  I have a problem.

My opinion:

1.  "Cuba Libre":  Best in the system covering a conflict that few others do.  One of the two COIN games I consider essential.

2.  "Andean Abyss":  Again, great implementation on a grossly under-covered topic.  The other essential one.

3.  "Fire in the Lake":  I still struggle with the shenanigans the U.S. can employ versus the ARVN in late game and win.  I gather they're working up some variants to address this.  This was also the game I wanted to love the most so it suffered from high expectations.

4.  "A Distant Plain":  Good game, not enough plays to judge fully.  At the moment, I think I'd rather play "Labyrinth".

5.  "Falling Skies":  Only started noodling this one.  Trying not to let my love of the concept weight my judgment, perhaps trying to avoid a bit of "Fire in the Lake" syndrome.

They can be solo'd, but I've found VASSAL opponents -- both live and PBEM -- readily available.

[Bison]

Falling Skies is the one that I looked at with the most serious consideration.