Plays: 3Px1, 2Px1.
The Game
Stronghold tells the story of a siege, where a human castle is being attacked by a giant horde of monsters - goblins, orcs and trolls. You play attacker or defender, and you have all sorts of weapons, equipment, magical powers and special abilities at your disposal. The humans have a limited number of fighters. If they get killed, there are no reinforcements. If they get injured, the small hospital is understaffed and can only heal a limited number of them. The monsters have a constant supply of fighters. However, this being a siege battle, it is easier for the defenders to kill the attackers than otherwise. So despite the superior numbers, the attacker needs to manage his troops well.
The attacker gains wood every round. Wood and fighters can be spent to build all sorts of weapons and equipment, e.g. catapults which damage walls, ballistae which kill defenders, siege towers which help to send fighters to the walls. There is much to be done to prepare for the fighting. Much equipment need to be built to help your fighters. Eventually you will need to march your fighters to the walls and scale them to fight the defenders. To breach the castle, you need to overcome the attackers at only one wall section. The game then ends. However, you may not necessarily win. There are a number of ways for both attacker and defender to gain or lose points. Both sides start with some points, and throughout the game whenever certain deeds are achieved, both gain or lose points. So the game ending just means it is time for the final tally. Naturally, the earlier the castle is breached, the more points the attacker will have. The other ways of gaining or losing points are also much related to how well the attacker and defender have done. E.g. bonus score for attacker when breaching more than one wall, bonus score for defender for keeping the honour guards at their post (i.e. not using them to fight at the walls).
The defender's actions are all paid for by time - the defender's only currency. The defender gains this currency whenever the attacker does something - building siege engines, casting magic spells, marching troops etc. This is an interesting mechanism. It means the more effort the attacker spends on preparing for battle, the more time the defender also gains to prepare counter-measures. So the attacker needs to make sure he fully utilises his resources and not give the defender more time unnecessarily. The defender needs to be careful to preserve his fighters, because unlike the attacker, he has a limited number of fighters. Only one wall breach will cause the castle to fall, so the defender needs to address every single threat at the walls. After each attacker phase, any time collected by the defender must be spent immediately, so the defender needs to be careful how they are spent. The various equipment / activities that time can be spent on can only be used once per round, so where to use it is an important decision for the defender too. Once used, it will only be available next round.
The game starts with a build-up / preparation stage, where the attacker decides what weapons to build, where to deploy them, where to mount attacks, and the defender needs to prepare counter-measures accordingly. Eventually attackers and defenders will clash at the walls. The attackers are under time pressure to breach the walls (the game lasts at most 10 rounds), while the defenders have to manage their limited resources to try to hold on for dear life as long as possible.
The Play
I have played two games so far. The first game had Han being the defender, and Allen and I being the attackers. We made some big rule mistakes, which distorted the game significantly, so although Allen and I won, it was a hollow victory. Throughout the game we didn't even expect to win at all, because we were doing so poorly. We couldn't get our monsters onto the walls quickly enough and were eventually penalised for overcrowding our camp. We later realised we had played the movement rules wrong, causing a traffic jam. Quite a number of times Allen and I told each other that we felt like we were the pitiful defenders, as any fighters that we managed to send up kept getting wiped out by Han. What allowed us to win was the other big rule mistake regarding the battering ram. We breached the castle by ramming through the three layers of gates. The rule mistake was we we assigned more monsters to the battering ram than was allowed. So despite Han's marksmen shooting at the battering ram pushers, whenever one pusher died, another was immediately available to take his place. This made the battering ram unstoppable.
This being our first game, we the attackers learned quite a number of things the hard way. There is much variety in the weapons, magic powers and other special abilities. None of them are complex by themselves, but since there are many, a new player can easily forget about some of them. I had forgotten about the cauldron of goblin poison, and had a bunch of my goblins killed when I foolishly sent them to a wall which still had a vacant spot for goblin poison. The traps that Han placed on the various paths on my side of the board also greatly restricted the movements of my goblins, more or less neutralising them.
Our (attackers) effort felt rather futile. It seemed that whatever we do, Han would then apply the appropriate counter-measure to stop us. I guess this was partly due to how we had misplayed the movement rules, and also because we were not making the most of our actions. I think we needed to coordinate our attacks better. Every action done should have a purpose and not be an attack for the sake of attacking. Well, it was our first game so we were still experimenting.
My second game was a 2-player game against Han. I still wanted to play attacker, this time with the correct rules. I was probably a bit too conservative. I hesitated to send fighters up to attack, because I knew that if I didn't have the numbers, the fighters that I sent up would get wiped out easily. So I preferred to hold back and build up more before launching the attacks. It was only Round 7 or 8 that we had a proper fight at the walls. The delay was also partly due to me sending fighters to man the battering ram. I did have good strong attacks at quite a number of walls. However Han managed to hold on by using the Unearthly Glare special ability to freeze fighting at one wall section where I had the best attackers, and then assigning his men to defend the other walls under attack.
I only managed to breach the castle using the battering ram in Round 10, the last round. I guess that is a small consolation for me. I least I did breach the castle. Han won 17:10. We did a rough calculation. For the attacker to win, he probably needs to breach the castle around Round 7 or 8. I still don't have a good, coherent attack strategy. I need to play this more to do better.
The Thoughts
Stronghold is very thematic, rich and detailed, despite using mostly Eurogame mechanisms. There are no dice; battles are deterministic. So it is very much about how to outsmart and outmanoeuvre your opponent. The luck element is low. There is luck in the card draw in some weapons firing. There is luck in what fighter type the attacker gains at the start of a round, but the number of fighters is fixed. And that's it. Because of how battles are deterministic, over-analysis may bog down the game.
To play well it is important to be able to plan ahead and to anticipate what your opponent may do. It is important to make good use of your resources, and to have a coherent and efficient approach. When taking an action, you need to consider whether you are creating a weakness that your opponent can exploit, and whether the action can be easily countered by your opponent. There is a bit of a game of chicken when you prepare for the battle. When you commit, e.g. building a catapult at a particular wall section, your opponent will know where to apply counter-measures. However if you don't commit, you may be wasting your resources and wasting time. Both sides hope to get the other side to commit first, so that it will be easier to plan counter-measures or workarounds.
I have a feeling that playing the attacker will be more interesting, because there is more freedom to plan and strategise. The defender seems to mostly need to react to what the attacker is doing, and there are less opportunities to take initiative.
Don't be intimidated by the many components. They add much to the thematic feel of the game. The game flow is quite simple. Although there are many small rules, they are all thematic and none of them are complex by themselves. I think you need to play the game 3 or 4 times to fully appreciate it. You need to be able to digest the various small rules first, before you can strategise well and use your actions efficiently.
10 comments:
Finally, a Stronghold review. :) I'm getting this game by the end of the month, but I'd like to know your opinion on the scalability. Since this game is mainly for 2 players and only have 2 sides to play with:
- How was your 3 players game went?How's the experience?
- How does it compared with your 2 players game?
Regards
Damien
The 3P game (rules mistakes aside) went quite well. Attacker side being played by two players meant some restrictions imposed on us, e.g. we could only manage our own side of the castle. We also needed to coordinate between ourselves well in order to be effective in our attacks. I have only played 2 games, which I think is insufficient to get a full grasp of the game, but based on my initial impressions I think the 3P game is as good as the 2P game.
I love the look of this game, and the powerful theme. Have always enjoyed this sort of scenario when it crops up in other games (eg War of the Ring), it's a perfect one to make the focus of a game all in itself.
Have you gone back and played this again? I just picked it up after hearing about it on the d6generation, and we played it three times, but it seemed horribly lopsided in favor of the attackers. In our three games, we breached on turns 6, 4, and then on turn 8 (after goofing around). There has to be something we're doing wrong, but I can't for the life of me figure out what it is.
Whoops, forgot to sign up for follow-on comments.
Unfortunately I have not revisited Stronghold since the first few plays. In those games that I did play, it was the defenders who seemed to have an advantage. But the defender player was a strong player, so maybe it's just that I was a poor attacker. :-) One mistake that we made was overstaffing the battering ram. You cannot assign more fighters there than there are slots. Maybe one way to check whether you missed any rule is to check how you breached the castle.
I've heard from multiple sources that the defender had the advantage, so that's why I'm scratching my head. As for how the attackers won, it was generally a cause of killing the archers with our goblins/ballistas, and then winning through various methods (the quicker kills were with the battering ram, but we also breached the walls normally). I'll see if I can't dig up some help from BGG, thanks for the reply.
P.S. You sir, have a tremendous game collection. I'm amazed.
I have played this game 3 times, I was the attacker each time. I think the defender is completely overpowered to the point where I didn't enjoy the game. Defender archers can shoot anyone but attacker archers can only shoot other archers. Since the Defender can move his people anywhere anytime archers are useless. Special orders are also useless since the defender can nullify them. It is nearly impossible to attack multiple walls at once so even if you place them in secret he can easily guess which one you are going to use. The attacker has to give up units to build anything and the defender gets time tokens so its like the defender gets a double penalty for every action. The catapults have mostly miss cards so they usually don't hit anything whereas the defender gets mostly hit cards for his cannons and he has a much larger firing range. The differences go on and on to the point where I felt anything I did was futile. Pass.
Maybe try playing the defender and see whether the game feels unbalanced. I still have not revisited this game myself. I don't remember it feeling too lopsided.
I truly appreciated perusing your survey of Fortification, and your scrupulousness in making sense of the ongoing interaction mechanics. In spite of the fact that I haven't played this game, your depiction has provoked my curiosity! On a side note, I couldn't resist the opportunity to Taylor Lautner Net Worth.
Post a Comment