COIN: Do I Give A Toss?

I sooooo much want to become a fan boy for one of the hottest game systems to emerge in the wargaming hobby in recent years: COIN. Short for 'counterinsurgency', in which - generally - each player controls one of 4 factions vying for dominance in a historical conflict, COIN has quickly morphed from dealing with recent conflicts in Colombia and Afghanistan, to the American War of Revolution and even - now - back to Caesar's Gallic Wars.

A fan of CDGs (card driven games), I was quickly attracted to the COIN system. To date, I have played Cuba Libre half a dozen times and Liberty or Death (which students of history unfamiliar with the game would quickly link to the American War of Independence) three or four times. 

I have to say that I enjoyed my first games of Cuba Libre. Roger of the famous Roger's Reviews Geeklist on BGG handily summed this game up as being like a 'knife fight in a phone booth". From my experience, that's a very apt description. You're often into the action very quickly, with 4 factions duking it out for dominance on the non-too-roomy island of Cuba. The game narrative is dynamic and spirited, with a single card play capable of creating quite an upset to what had been the status quo in cosy Havana for instance. 

But the Cuban magic started to wear off after I played a couple of games in which I controlled the Directorio (yellow markers) guerrilla faction. No matter how much I wanted to exercise the full palette of commands and special actions available to me, I could never quite seem to do so. Instead, I often found myself doing the same, repetitive command combination. Then I heard one of the other players express a similar sentiment about his own faction.

Yet, undeterred by this, I persisted with COIN and soon fastened my attention on Liberty or Death. Being a huge fan of Washington's War and the historical period and theatre in general, I went to quite some lengths to get hold of a copy before they sold out (ably assisted by the terrific staff at GMT in the US, I must say - a quality team). Besides, it's such a gorgeously handsome game, with first class components. Here's a taste:

Upon receiving my copy, I sooooo wanted - now - to be a fan boy of Liberty or Death. But, several games later, instead I've become a 'Doubting Thomas'. Maybe even a Benedict Arnold. Let me hasten to add that it's not that I have been punished by the game, to trail the field at the finish. Quite the contrary...in most of the games, I have come close to winning. It's more about the game experience that has left me a little cold. Let me explain. First and foremost, it is the sheer down time of waiting for your turn to come around again. This is of course an issue with many 4p games in which player interaction can be minimal. But in COIN, this feeling is intensified by the fact that there is often little to be done when your turn does come up. For a start, depending on the eligibility table on the game map, you may either choose the event on the card, or exercise a particular combination of command and (possibly) a special ability. That may seem fine, but some of the commands are specific to a particular situation in the game, so can often be ruled out. At least in my experience, what normally results then is that you either go for the event or enact the usual command that you have become accustomed to. Mustering with the British. Rallying with the Patriots. 

Whatever you choose, the sum total is that you often find yourself doing a few small actions on the board, before handing the baton (figuratively speaking) to the next player....before resuming your snooze. This is particularly the case if all you have at your disposal is a limited command, restricted to a single area.

Gaming buddy Steve shares my views on COIN. He points out that one of the pleasures of CDG games is that you receive a hand of cards, which then allows you to plan your intended strategy for the turn, taking advantage perhaps of the combination of events and 'op points' on offer. The intrigue is seeing if the strategy can be implemented....largely depending on whether it survives 'contact with the enemy'. This approach to gaming supports conceiving an overall plan....strategic goal setting. By permitting you to only respond to a single card, COIN is a much different ball game....you never know what your next option is likely to be. It's piece-meal.

This probably sounds overly critical, but my experience of COIN thus far often leaves me somewhat frustrated and feeling like a kind of machine attendant, in which the machine is the game system. A gaming buddy of mine who now avoids COIN games, quipped that you don't play the game, it plays you. I can't help but feel that there is more than a grain of truth in this.

Of course, COIN now has a legion of fans....so it has to be doing a lot right, doesn't it? Are they deluded, or am I just a lonely voice, signifying little? Certainly, I would love to hear the views of other gamers. Perhaps my viewpoint can be rehabilitated. That would be nice, especially as Liberty or Death now takes up considerable space in my game collection. Sometime, someday, it WILL return to the table.  For deep down - in the guerilla-infested forest of my mind - I still want to love COIN games.

MY CURRENT TOP 5 WARGAMES - #3

#3 WASHINGTON'S WAR 2010 

A great photo from Margin of Victory

This is the first CDG (card driven game) on my list, and I have to say that it's currently my all time favourite game. As a gamer, I seem to oscillate between traditional hex and counter games and CDG-style games, which generally involve area or point-to-point movement. After a bout of one type of game, I generally get a hankering for the other. Re CDGs, I enjoy the interplay of either playing cards for their events, or (usually) for their 'Ops' (operations point) values. At their best, these games are immersive in the way they're able to communicate historical 'layers' that relate to the conflict in question. Cards often reflect events, individuals of influence (such as commanders) and battle tactics or methods of the period.

Back in 2013, my local gaming buddy Roger and I decided to tackle the problem of getting games to the table, by using Vassal to either play games that we already own, or road test games of interest to us. Since then, we've been keeping a record of our games as a Geeklist on Boardgamegeek (BGG). I'm happy to say that Washington's War was one of our first choices. With an interest in the period and CDGs, I noted just how highly rated this game was on BGG, so suggested we give the game a spin. In the end, we played it 3 times and each contest was a nail-biter that went right down to the line. I enjoyed it so much, that I bought a copy of the game, and now consider myself a fanboy of the game's designer, Mark Herman (just bought a copy of his US Civil War game, For the People...but that's another story).

Focused on the American Revolution, Washington's War (WW) is probably a great gateway CDG, as the ruleset is little more than 20 pages. In usual GMT-style, it's also ably supported by a generously illustrated Playbook, containing an extended example of play. The scale is strategic and the playing pieces represent the commanders on both sides of the War and their armies.

A great feature in WW is that there is uncertainty governing just exactly when the game will end, as drawing a Lord North card can either shorten or extend the War.  The game is asymmetrical, with Patriots and British bringing their own set of strengths and weaknesses to the conflict, as each vies to achieve political and military mastery. The British, for example, have control of the seas and can swiftly land forces into controlled or neutral ports up and down the coast. The Patriots have an easier time in calling up reinforcements, and can stage rapid land marches.

I really can't recommend this game enough. If you are new to gaming and want to give CDGs a try, this is a great starting point.

When getting stuck into a particular game, I like to also read up about the associated history of the conflict. For the American War of Revolution, after some research, I settled on:

The Angel in the Whirlwind by Benson Bobrick is an absorbing single volume history of the War. I would have liked to have seen more maps (I have the paperback version), but if you are seeking a concise, yet expansive, overview of the Revolution, this is a good choice.