I bought the pieces on Amazon from a supplier called Morrison Games. Here is the link. After reading your post though, I checked out pictures of Victory II and found that they look identical. I guess that Victory II buys its pieces from Morrison Games? I don’t know…

Also, I just want to let everyone know that I am planning an online play test. So, if you are interested, please let me know.

Finally, I can post some pictures! Here are some good ones from the most recent play test.

Here is the starting situation.

Here is the board at the end.

It is an older game, but I really liked that first Medal of Honor game. When I first started the game and was on one of the landing boats heading for Omaha beach, I felt as real as is possible in a video game. Maybe it is just nostalgia for a game I played a long time ago, but I remember it as being awesome.

Looks pretty cool. Have you played it yet? And does it really take 1-2 hours to play? I find that time estimates for war games are often off. Also, how do you win?

Diplomacy is a very fun game. You can play it for free on www.playdiplomacy.com against other players from all over the place.

My major problem with the game is that it is incredibly unrealistic to have players’ armies grow for each conquered supply center. It doesn’t make sense that you are able to support more troops in the field as you take over more territory. If anything, you are able to support less because people have to stay in the conquered territories and hold them.

I like this game too. I would say that it is pretty difficult to learn though as rts games go, but it is worth it!

CWO Marc: Yes, I agree with you about multiple versions. Most of my work has been on the full 8 player version, but I am spending some time now on getting the 3-5 player game up to speed.

To everyone that is interested in the game so far, I wrote a blog post about the game’s most recent play test. You can find it at www [dot] imperialscramble [dot] com/blog. (I can’t post links!!!) You can also find more pictures on that site as well. I hope you enjoy!

I have never played the expansions, so I only know the original game, but I think it is a great game too. I wish that there was a more direct way to stop your competitors from winning, though. For example, it would be nice if you could use one of your soldiers to destroy some of their roads or something. Nevertheless, it is still a lot of fun to play.

Thank you all for you comments! I really appreciate it!

The first thing I want to say is that I wish I could post pictures! However, for some reason, the forum does not let me…

Imperious Leader: Thanks for commenting, but I must say that I disagree with your interpretation of my game. I like the game diplomacy, but I feel that it has a lot of flaws and I have tried very hard to avoid all of these flaws in my game. For example, players are not eliminated in Imperial Scramble, the game has a set end point, countries are actually unique and different from one another because of their historically based objective sets, war must be declared upon another player before hostilities erupt, peace agreements can be made, players can trade territories, multiple units can inhabit one territory, etc., etc.

Alexgreat and Pacific War and Gargantua: Thanks for your comments! I am happy to see that people who enjoy A&A (myself included) are also interested in games that do not involve dice. Treachery exists in Imperial Scramble but it is not as devastating as in Diplomacy. In Imperial Scramble, the treachery is a declaration of war when one was not expected. However, the other player then is able to react once war is declared.

CWO Marc: Thanks for your question! Points are not scored until the end. Therefore, if a player completes an objective before the end of the game, he or she must hold on to it until the end. In the example scenario I gave, Germany “completed” the unification objective by controlling all the German territories. However, had he lost one of those territories by the end of the game, then he would have been awarded no points for unification because Germany was not unified when points were tallied. The reason for this is that the points are meant to reflect a country’s power and prestige at the end of the game. At that point, what you did before only matters insofar as it has put you in your current position. Big gains followed by big losses leave you in a bad position because you would no longer be regarded as a powerful world power anymore. A historical example would be Austria. Despite their great strength in the 19th century, they little more than a minor state by the mid-20th century. While their exploits are fondly remembered, they do not entitle them to great power, prestige, or respect as of 1950 and that is the sort of thing the game attempts to reflect. I hope that answers your question. If not, I would be happy to explain more!

I have a couple questions for all of you:

1. Is this a game that you would try playing?
2. Does it matter to you that it includes a shorter version for 3-5 players that takes only 1.5 to 2 hours (whereas the full version takes 5 hours)?
3. Would any of you be interested in possible playtesting when the time comes?

Thanks for the replies! I will tell you a bit more about the rules so you can get a clearer picture of what the game is like.

The game goes from 1850 to 1920. Each decade is represented by one turn and each turn is divided into three phases. Each country has unique objectives that it attempts to accomplish throughout the game. At the end of the game, each player reviews the objectives for his or her country and is awarded points for the objectives he or she has accomplished. The player with the most points wins.

The action of the game takes place during the movement phases of each turn. During the movement phases, players move their armies and fleets around the board and attempt to take or hold territory. Players fight wars against other players, minor powers, and natives. Minor powers and natives are non-playable and are subject to special, simplified combat rules. When players engaged in battles with one another, the full combat system is employed.

Combat is very easy to understand. A battle occurs whenever the units of warring players end a movement phase in the same territory (or sea space for fleets). No dice are used to resolve battles. If either side has double the amount of units involved in the battle, then that side instantly wins and the loser is forced to retreat to an adjacent friendly territory. If neither side has double the amount of units of the other, then the battle is unresolved and continues to the next movement phase. If a battle is unresolved at the end of the third movement phase, then the side with one more unit in the battle than the other wins the battle. If the two are exactly even, then the battle continues to the next turn. The purpose of having battles rage on from phase to phase is to allow players time to bring in reinforcements or adapt to the situation in other ways.

Additionally, the game uses a mechanic called the “battle line bonus.” This threats units in territories that are adjacent to a battle as participating in the battle. So, if there is a battle between two British units and two French units, but the British have one unit in an adjacent territory, then the british have a 3 to 2 advantage. If the adjacent unit, however, is also engaged in a battle, then it only provides half of its value to the other battle. So in the previous example, if the British unit in the adjacent territory is also in a battle then it only provides 0.5 support to its comrades in the other battle resulting in a british advantage of 2.5. The idea here is to encourage players to build battle lines as opposed to clumping all their units in one territory. The result is more realistic looking fronts developing between warring players.

As for movement, armies move one space per movement phase and fleets move three spaces per movement phase. Armies can be loaded on to fleets (two armies per fleet). Fleets are not allowed to go into land territories. As the board is huge, it is difficult for armies to move around large territories. However, to help transport their armies around quickly, players can build sea lanes and railroads. Sea lanes connect friendly coastal territories that are separated by sea and allow armies to instantly move between them during a move phase. Railroads connect long distances of land territory and allow armies to move instantly across them during a move phase.

These are some of the core rules to know. I thought I would also post this little description of a recent player’s experience with the game:

To get a feel for the sort of decisions players will face, let’s take a look at Germany. In 1850, Germany was not yet unified. As such, an important German objective is to unify Germany by conquering the remaining German territories that it does not own. Austria-Hungary, however, does not want Germany to unify, as it has an objective to that effect, and so will work hard to keep Bavaria out of German hands. In its un-unified state, Germany is too weak to fight Hungary alone. So what to do?

Of the many options, we will discuss one that actually occurred in the most recent play test. Like Germany, Italy is not yet unified in 1850 either and also finds Austria-Hungary opposing its unification. Perhaps an Italo-German alliance against Austria-Hungary will allow both to unify? War is declared and Germany and Italy fight together to push the Austrians out of their homelands. Despite some success in Germany, the Germans and Italians have become bogged down in their offensive and major battles rage in Bavaria and Lombardia. In hopes of breaking the deadlock, Germany has a private conversation with the Ottoman leader where he reminds the Ottomans of their objective to conquer Hungary and vows to help them achieve that goal. The Ottomans declare war on Austria-Hungary, and the Austrians go into a panic! They had the power to fight the Germans and Italians, but they cannot manage a new enemy on a third front. Austria-Hungary offers peace to the Germans and Italians. Both accept and, with that, both Italy and Germany are unified. Though the Ottomans are mad at the Germans for leaving the war, such is a small price to pay in order to achieve unification.

Unification completed the German player looked to his other objectives. Of his many options, he decided to pursue colonial goals in West Africa. Unfortunately, he had lost precious time during the war of unification and West Africa was mostly colonized by the French. Ever the crafty diplomat, Germany entered into negotiations with Great Britain, who also had an objective to acquire colonies in West Africa.

The two decided to both declare war on France and split West Africa between themselves. With war declared, France was too afraid of a German invasion of France to send enough armies to defeat the British attack on West Africa. The war ended quickly and Britain stayed true to its word transferring 4 of the 8 West African territories conquered to Germany. And, with that, Germany became a colonial power.

By this point the game was half of the way over. In the end, Germany placed fourth as a result of a failed invasion of Russia. Russia actually won the game with France coming in second. France regained its lost African colonies and took over much of Southern Africa when Britain got caught up in a war with the Japanese over the East Indies. At any rate, this ought to give you a feel for the sort of things that happen in the game.

Let me know if you have any other questions, comments, or criticism. I would love to have any feedback.