QMG is one of my absolute favorite board game systems. My only problem with it is there's quite a bit of FAQ to cover with various card interactions. It can get wonky with interrupts at times.
Great choice. East Front seemed pretty streamlined. We haven't (yet) encountered any problems that took us reaching for help. Maybe rough edges have been smoothed?
There are no interrupts in this game, only reactions that can be played at very specific times. The only tricky bit is Anti-Air and Naval Combat and how they interact with Exchange, and the rules spell that out pretty clearly.
1:012:30, Lwow would intercept into Warsaw and cut of ALL German Units in the Soviet Union (unless the Germans put a unit in Warsaw or get rid of Lwow & Romania on their turn)? Also the Soviets have the seprate one time five (5) cards to use on their turn, chosing from 7 is a lot bettre than up to 2 out of 2. Good video, looks like an interesting game this one :)
re Lwow into Warswaw: yes, if the Russians pushed in there, that would be great for cutting supply routes, but there is another supply flag and route up to Finland keeping those Germans supplied (through the Baltic States and the Gulf of Finland). It is a tricky game to master I am sure..!
@@PMMagro yes, good spot. But if Leningrad falls, Finland falls shortly after, and Finland is a key supply flag. Taking Finland cuts off the whole of northern europe for the Axis. Tough game !
How similar are all the Quartermaster General games to each other? Are they similar enough that if you know how to play one, you more or less know how to play the others? I really enjoy playing Memoir '44 and own pretty much all of it, but I am always looking for another fun war game that's doesn't require counter clippers and tweezers :) This looks like it might be fun to get into. Also, do the multiplayer versions suffer from the "Attack the weakest" person thing that a lot of games like this suffer from at more than 2 players?
I'm a hardcore hex and chit grognard (though I enjoy M44 too), but QMG:WW2 is one of my absolute favorite wargames. I'll never say "no" to playing it. It's just buttery smooth and plays well with large groups. I'd even say it plays *easier* with large groups. Turns tick by quickly and there's not as much information paralysis. The only problem is perhaps the fact that there are so many diverse cards, sometimes you get interactions that will make you scratch your head. Thankfully the developer is pretty active over on the boardgamegeek forums and most of the common card-interaction questions have been resolved. As far as picking on the weakest, there's not really much kingmaker here because you win or lose as a team. That said if Japan struggles in the WW2 game then the US can frontload Europe and it can get wonky. A veteran player should probably always take Japan.
I would say yes, they are all pretty similar, because they are using the same system of rules; but there is enough variety in each one to make them stand out. If you know one game, they you will find it easy to slip into the next, just learning the specific rules for that version - e.g. contingency cards, unit specific rules (such as the aeroplanes here).
@@BoxofDelights You are once again "responsible" for me wanting to add two games to my collection. I have ordered a copy of WWII and East Front after watching through both of your videos. I know it's my fault, but if it weren't for you, I probably wouldn't have even known about them :P So I'm still blaming you.
@@BoxofDelights The physical components are really good, especially the "trooples". I really hope GMT starts making games with these. The artwork in QMGEF, however, is not that great I think. They should have used photographs instead of mediocre commissioned art for the cards, for example.
