I don't know this game that well, but could he have automatically won if he got "control" of Europe? It says "automatic victory" on the Europe score card for control. Would that have actually been feasible in this turn? What do you have to do to have control?
You do automatically win controlling Europe, but only when the European Scoring Card is played. And no, it was not feasible on that turn. To control a region, you need to control all battleground countries (wasn't the case for quill), and the total number of controlled countries must be greater than your opponent's.
Wow. Quill18, Latin American Death Squads is a neutral card that increases the playing player's coup power in those regions by 1 and reduces the opponent's powers by 1. Ouch.
Yeah he also missused the Ussuri River Skirmish if I understood the card right, basically it would have given him 4 influence point for free while still having the China card for something else
I played this once as a physical board game. It was very cool but most of the brain power went to making sure, we played all the rules correctly. It's my impression that it is very hard to play a round of this and not mess up any rules (including active event cards modifying things in strange ways). You have to be a very proficient player for that. This digital version seems great for that. Now you can actually focus on playing the game and making interesting strategic decisions instead of doing dumb rule checking.
I find that to be the problem with most of these more complex board games. Although I really enjoy playing them, you do tend to spend quite a lot of time checking if everything goes by the rules, which can occasionally be frustrating and take some fun away. This goes especially if you play with someone who hasn't played before, or you're both new to the game.
I'm by no means an expert at this game, but this match hurt to watch. I kind of wanted both players to lose somehow. Quill didn't read like half his cards and thinks coups are affected by adjacency (they aren't, coups only care about the stability number; realignments use adjacency). The AI was really bad at using its tempo advantage to control DEFCON by couping a battleground, and in fact did several DEFCON raising things to allow the US more coup attempts.
I know this is late, but it also drives me nuts that he holds on to Romanian abdication for so long out of fear of the Soviet Union getting control of Romania, when he otherwise is making no plays for that country at all.
There are like... a dozen cases where it seems to me that a realignment makes way, way more sense than endlessly spending points reinforcing. Like...africa and southamerica don't care about the defcon level and all those countries are unstable (stability 1, stability 2) so it's got a really big chance of succeeding and seems way, way more efficient. You could boot the soviets out of four of those small countries with just one card, I don't get why it's just never even considered.
I really dislike 'dice' based games. No matter what game you're talking about, the dice do. not. like. me. It's incredibly frustrating to have a good strategy, good timing, strategic execution...and then just get fuckin' whiffed by the dice and lose the game. Takes all the fun out of it for me
If you just didn't play the Iraq Iran war card and played the central American scoring that turn, you would have had lethal... The flower power took those two away from you
![Let's Play: Twilight Struggle [Cold War Boardgame] - Part 3](/img/logo.svg){kind=logo}
