Designer: Mark Herman

In recent days I have played quite a bit of Mark Herman’s classic Washington’s War yet despite the game being number 15 on my top 20 games chart I did back in February 2022 and No. 6 in my Top 10 War Games I did in 2020, I’m yet to do a proper review on it. It’s a long past due oversight that I really wanted to correct and so here we go!

Mark Herman is a brilliant designer, a statement I make without hesitation and he made a big splash as the founder of the influence struggle and historical CDG war game genres in a single game called We The People in 1993. This led to a number of what are now considered classic historical war games in their own right that used these mechanics like Twilight Struggle, For The People, Empire of the Sun and Paths of Glory just to name a few. It was, to say the least, a pivotal moment in game design history that lead to the release of Washington’s War which is for all intense and purposes the 2nd edition of We The People.

It would not be an overstatement to point out that while We The People sparked an evolution in the historical war game category, breathing life into two different genres of historical war games it remains wildly underrated. Washington’s War, its follow-up, is really no different, in my mind it is one of the most criminally underrated games in all of board- gaming sitting in a shockingly disgraceful 730 on BBG as of this writing.

Washington’s War is a game about the American founding father’s struggle to create a new nation out of 13 fledgling colonies as they opposed the British Empire in what has got to be one of the most fascinating pieces of history there is. The Revolutionary war is chock full of extraordinarily interesting personalities, political struggles that make The Game of Thrones look like child’s play and some of the most vicious military engagements in all of American history. Washington’s War manages to squeeze all of that history into a game that is easy to teach and learn while remaining streamlined to precision.

I love the influence struggle and CDG category of historical war games, my collection is full of them, but Washington’s War is the only game in my collection that I feel comfortable in pulling out with just about anyone. Whether you are a Eurogamer, casual dabbler, or a serious historical war game fan, you will fall in love with this games incredible back-and-forth tension. It is not just a great historical war game for historical war gamers, it is just good gaming period by any measure.

Now I have played my hand a little here, clearly, I’m a fan but given the accolades it has already received on my site over the last few years, I don’t think it should come as a surprise to my more frequent readers. The devil is in the details however and while I would describe this game as a good time in a box, I think it’s fair to say I owe more of an explanation to this review, so let’s dig into the revolutionary war!

Overview

Final Score: (4.2 out 5) Great Game!

Washington’s War is an asymmetrical influence struggle CDG (Card Driven Game) war game. That is a mouthful, but given that We the People, the 1st edition of Washington’s War effectively created this style of game, it’s perhaps reasonable to explain what it actually is even if we have already watched this genre evolve over the years in so many other games.

In Influence Struggle CDG’s like Washington’s War, players take turns playing cards which they use to execute actions on a point-to-point map. In our case the map of the eastern United States where the revolutionary war takes place. One of the key elements here is control of different areas via influence tokens called Political Influence in Washington’s War which represents the political control the Americans or British have in an area in any of the 13 colonies.

The object of the game is to have sufficient political influence markers in each of the colonies to control them and essentially whichever player controls the most colonies by the end of the game will win the game. Technically the US needs to control 7 colonies while the British only needs to control 6 of them to win.

The catch is that there are also generals and armies on the board who can take these areas by force, so part of the game is also using actions to move armies around and engage in battles to force your influence onto the board.

The different cards also have event effects, special actions players can take when playing a card. These events represent different actual or hypothetical events from revolutionary war history. There are also several unique conditions and phases in the game like Winter Attrition for example that represents the harshness of the winters and the complexity of keeping standing armies in the field in this era. These various unique conditions create the challenges players must contend with as the war progresses.

Suffices to say that description is probably insufficient to really get a feel for the game, but I think what is most important to understand is that this game like all influence struggle CDG’s is about board control, timing, and about the back and forth tension between players as they vie for power on the point to point map. Since We The People, we have seen many games in this genre that leverage this mechanic, most famously Twilight Struggle. Washington’s War however takes a much more rules-light and less restrictive approach to this style of play.

Most notably, players share a deck and cards don’t have as many multiple uses as many games in this genre do where a card is both an event and an “ops value”. Instead, cards either are events or are actual ops cards (1, 2, and 3 ops). This makes the decision matrix for Washington’s War much simpler, in fact, in the influence struggle genre, it actually makes Washington’s War one of the lightest and most approachable games in the genre.

More importantly perhaps is the fact that Washington’s War has few exception-based rules, which is very commonly seen in historical war games and is by far the primary reason in creating a division between mainstream and historical war games. Historical war gamers love their “historicity” (made-up word, I know). What it means is that historical war gamers have a far higher tolerance for heavy rules implementations and rules exceptions as long as those rules breathe historical simulation into the game and this road can go quite deep in many historical war games. Washington’s War, while it certainly is historical, does this more with core rules rather than exception-based rules. What this boils down to is that though Washington’s War has not really become a mainstream game, there actually is no reason for it not to be. This, like any other board game, has straightforward rules that anyone can learn and is actually a lot simpler than many if not most Euro games mainstream gaming communities readily play.

That leaves the question, what is it about Washington’s War that has prevented it from crossing over to mainstream gamers as Twilight Struggle did? Is there a problem?

Components

Score: 
Tilt: 

Pros: GMT is a great publisher that never has never disappointed me and in Washington’s War they once again nailed it.

Cons: Looks deceptively like a complex war game which it most certainly is not, hardly a complaint but my explain why it’s not as mainstream as it deserves to be.

As a courtesy to the reader, I will make this brief, this is a GMT production which means that by default all components are top-notch quality. From the gorgeous and sturdy gameboard to the thick card stock and counters, everything is made to last with a wonderfully clear presentation.

The rulebook is super clean and precise, the game includes a playbook that is so good you can almost learn how to play the game without reading the rulebook and just following along with the playbook. Finally, the game has the best reference cards I have ever seen in a game, so well thought out that once you play one turn of the game you aren’t likely ever going to have to reference the rulebook again as the reference sheets have everything you need to play the game on them.

Short and sweet, the components of the game are pitch-perfect. Nothing is overcooked, it’s just right, no complaints from this reviewer.

Theme

Score: 
Tilt: 

Pros: Washington’s War has just the right amount of nuance to breathe life into the fascinating history of the revolutionary war without overwhelming you with rules “chrome”.

Cons: Veteran historical war gamers looking for a deep and/or complex revolutionary war simulation may not find what they are looking for here.

When it comes to the historical war game themes, it’s always a matter of taste on how much simulation, replication and historical accuracy a person wants in their game. I’m of the opinion that a good historical war game will allow you to play inside a historical period, but keep the scripted elements of the game to an absolute minimum. I don’t want to replicate history or follow along some historical path forced on me by the mechanics of the game, I want to be put in a position to make the same decisions the commanders and leaders of the time had to make and ultimately find my own path to victory in a sort of alternate history of the subject matter.

In this vein, Washington’s War is ideal because while the game has all of the elements of the revolutionary war including the important personalities, events, locations and abstracted conditions of the period, how the game plays out is not going to reflect the actual history of the revolutionary war. From the very first action to the last, you are going to inevitably change history.

Despite this a-historical execution, the game still captures the period perfectly from the asymmetrical sides and unique conditions they had to contend with to the interesting political events and personalities involved all making an appearance in the game. What changes are elements like when the French join the war if ever, or when if ever the declaration of independence is signed. Does Washington get captured during the war? Does the continental congress get dispersed? Do the British win or lose the south, can they use their dominance of the sea to win the war? All of these aspects of history are thrown off their axis in some form or another, many historical events may or may not ever take place and much of what does and doesn’t happen in your version of the revolutionary war history will depend on card draw, dice and most important decisions you make as a player.

I found the game to be extremely thematic, hitting the high points of the revolutionary war in particular in the way the Americans struggle to have a military that can face the British, the difficulties of the Americans to bring the French into the fight and the tough challenges of trying to control a country that was really quite divided on the subject of independence. Washington’s War feels like a game on the revolutionary war in every regard, yet doesn’t impose the history on you for posterity. It allows the a-historical outcomes unapologetically and as far as I’m concerned, this is exactly what I want out of any historical war game.

I found that every game of Washington’s War played out wildly different while always maintaining these struggles that were part of the history of the period. More importantly, however, these struggles are imbued into the mechanics so they feel natural rather than scripted, nor are they infused with a lot of exceptions to force the subject. Certainly, you are going to make some of the historical decisions as did the founding fathers because they make sense, but often I found myself in what-if moments, the execution of which is exciting and tense and triggers discussions with your opponent about the history of the game.

One of the ways Washington’s War really comes to life as a historical game is the uncertainty of the conflict. There are never any breakthrough moments in the war, there is a lot of attrition, a sort of push and pull where no matter where you push and win, it always results in you having to pull back somewhere else. This creates great tension in the game, really giving you that sensation of being an underdog as the American, while making you feel powerful as the British. Yet despite this, the game has incredible balance, even within the constraints of the asymmetrical feel each side has and despite Americans being the underdogs and the British being big and powerful, the game never gives the impression that either side has a leg up in the final outcome of the game (war). It is a war that either side can win and strategy plays the predominant part in that outcome, which feels both historically accurate and makes for a great gaming experience.

Finally and I mean this as a complement and not a negative comment, the game doesn’t overdo the history. Mark Herman designs very often are so regimented when it comes to history and while in many games like Empire of the Sun which is the driver for the game and ultimately what brings you to the table, Washington’s War relies far more on the strategic play to pull you in. Historical it certainly is, but this is a streamlined machine that introduces the history in subtle ways, while it remains far more a game than a simulation throughout. There are almost no exception-based rules in the game that try to force historical elements on you, which is not often the case with historical games and certainly not Herman’s designs. Mark takes a light-touch approach in Washington’s War and strangely it’s this distancing from exceptions that makes the game feel more historical and thematic, as it all just becomes more accessible.

General Washington for example is represented as a strong commander for the Americans and comes with a special ability allowing him to avoid some winter attrition penalties. This is a very subtle special power and it’s easy to remember because Washington is a unique commander, the game is named after him after all. It’s one of the very few exception-based rules and it kind of just makes sense and is logical enough to be easy to remember.

I really love this approach and I’m reminded of the fact that while I love games like France 1944 and Empire of the Sun, two other Mark Herman designs, I often wish I could play lighter versions of those games that still capture the same historical principles and strategic elements without being so complex and filled with exceptions. Washington’s War really nails this streamlined, more direct approach and I think the result is a far more enjoyable and notably more accessible game which ultimately lets the theme actually flow a lot better. You could almost say that there are fewer interruptions to the enjoyment of the history of the game thanks to a lighter rules approach.

If there are any flaws in the theme and mind you this requires one to get very nit-picky is that the CDG mechanic uses the one deck approach. This means both players draw from the same deck and that British and American events when drawn by the opposite player ultimately get discarded for 1 ops actions as they cannot be used for the event. There are a lot of really cool events in the game that simply never see the light of day in any given game as a result simply because of who drew them and while there is a mechanic in place where opponents can pick up discarded event cards, it typically doesn’t happen as players usually plan out their entire turn based on the cards they do draw. I personally prefer CDG’s where each asymmetrical faction gets its own deck as seen in countless games like Twilight Struggle, Empire of the Sun and Paths of Glory for example. The result of such a setup is that you are always drawing cards relevant to you, and more events hit the table which brings into the game more of the history and ultimately the theme of the game.

I would put this complaint in the minor quibble category based on personal preference rather than an actual issue with the game. It’s just a me thing.

As a whole, I think Washington’s War nails the theme beautifully in this game. It’s just the right amount of rules to get the theme across, there is a lot of attention to detail in the history even though all the various conditions and unique elements of the period are handled very subtly. I’m sure there are games on the revolutionary war that are far more detailed and make better historical simulations, but I think Washington’s War was aiming to be more high-level and abstracted and in approaching the design in this way, it has made this historical game a lot more approachable and easier to get to the table. I don’t think it really sacrifices anything critical with this approach and while I could understand that more serious historical gamers might be looking for more chrome, as a guy who plays in both casual and serious fields, I found this game highly thematic and fun.

Gameplay

Score: 
Tilt: 

Pros: As a fan of CDG influence struggle games, I’m like a moth to a flame here, I adore this genre and this game.  It’s a fantastic introduction to the genre, perfect for newcomers.

Cons: Washington’s War is based on the We The People formula which while great and revolutionary (pun intended) is a bit dated compared to how the genre has evolved. 

As simple of a mechanic Washington’s War is, there is tremendous weight in the strategic gameplay of the game, in fact, I would argue that the complexity of the game is quite high when you consider the deployable strategies possible here.

It’s a bit like chess where you can learn the rules easy enough, but becoming a good chess player is a considerably more robust topic.

For one Washington’s War is a very tight game, it’s really about very subtle motions where placing a token in one place rather than another can have a profound impact on the outcome of the game. That is not to say it’s sensitive to mistakes, but rather that each action really matters. You rarely make irrelevant decisions, every move and counter move is important and the whole thing just feels like it has weight behind it, adding to the tension and attrition.

In any given round for example as the British player, you may have the ops cards necessary to move a couple of units, place a couple of tokens and perhaps play an event. That is not a lot of activity in the big scheme of things, but because the game is relatively short and exactly when the game will end dynamic, these decisions can be quite critical and impactful. In fact any round after the 4th round requires you to be vigilant because the game can end quite abruptly so you need to make sure at the end of each round you are in a winning position.

The game doesn’t have this 3-4 rounds from now I will be in a position to win approach to strategy. You need to effectively be winning at the end of every round of play.

Rounds can end because there are cards in the deck that if drawn must be played which define when the game will end and this starts after the 4th round. The tension this brings to the game is awesome.

Generally, the game is about playing cards and taking actions, so the sequence of play is quite simple and like most influence struggle games it’s about having the most pieces on the board you can muster in the right places. You need to control a certain amount of colonies to win and control of a colony is defined by how many political control markers you have in each colony.

The difficulty of this is that each colony has a varied number of spaces that can be controlled, some like Virginia have more than half a dozen, while others like Rhode Island have a single space that defines control of the colony. This means that while more is clearly better, where you put your influence is equally vital. There is a trade-off between controlling a colony with a lot of tokens, which can make it more difficult to take away from you, and colonies that have a small number of control points which are more volatile and more likely to trade hands during the game.

Adding to the mix of this go-like game of point-to-point area control are the armies of each side and the generals that lead them. These armies move about the board forcing their will onto territories and the only method to control their ability to project power by your opponent is with their own armies.

This is where the “war” element of the game comes to fruition and again it’s handled in a simple and elegant manner. The factors that go into the effectiveness of an army are easy to calculate, there is ways to surprise opponents with cards and the dynamic factor of the dice makes outcomes calculable but not reliable. More than that, losses are generally minimal, battles can be won and lost, but armies are not easily dispersed so winning a battle does not mean you sort of breakthrough and dominate an area, but rather just push your opponent back in what really is a war of attrition.

There is also difficulty in moving armies and this is very asymmetrical and historical. The British have larger and more powerful armies, but they require a higher OPS card to move them, so you are likely going to move them less often. Meanwhile, the Americans have smaller, generally weaker armies that require lower ops cards to move, meaning you are likely able to move them more often. America’s military agility is further supported through two special rules, their ability to intercept and retreat, allowing them to intervene and avoid British attacks.

This game of cat and mouse creates a tense and very thinky mini game where each player is thinking less about outright crushing the opposing military, as this is highly unlikely to happen, and more about trying to position their military in the most optimal points on the map to exert power and control, adding to the influence struggle theme rather than overwhelming it.

Finally, there are a few other elements in the game that I like to refer to as “historical conditions” that create challenges for the players to overcome.

Winter attrition already mentioned, creates a real headache for the American player who is constantly having to contend with their armies dispersing between rounds. There is the struggle to get the French into the game which is pretty vital for the Americans as it brings into play the ability to blockade ports and a much-needed French command with French armies.

For the British the struggle and often the frustration is really dealing with the reality that with the right hand of cards you could really bring the fight to the American’s but the high maintenance commanders can only be moved with higher ops cards, typically 3 ops which means that you really have to plan way ahead and around their stubborn refusal to cooperate with your plans. You are simply never going to have the cards to do exactly what you want and your circumstances continually get worse as the war progresses. Ideally, you want to win this game as early as possible as the British because it gets tougher and tougher as time goes on.

The event cards are a mechanical layer here and while I would say the impact of these cards varies from “meh” to “holy shit”, generally their inclusion is more about infusing the game with theme than it is about strategy. They certainly can play a significant role in the plan of a particular round when drawn, but usually, you are trying to squeeze the events into your strategy rather than building a strategy around the cards if that makes sense. In fact, generally speaking, that is usually how all of the cards in the deck are used. You have a strategic plan and you are trying to use whatever you draw to make that happen, rarely if ever does your hand dictate your plan.

What can I really say about the gameplay in Washington’s War other than that it’s absolutely fabulous? It’s just such a great tense game, with easy-to-understand mechanics, and lots of great history full of surprises, twists, and turns. It’s just a really fantastic gaming experience, nailed down to a 2-3 hour 2-player game that just works in every way. It’s game design brilliance.

I have no complaints about this game at all but know that my love for CDG-driven influence struggle games likely makes me a bit biased here. I love this genre of games and Washington’s War is one of the most approachable and satisfying takes on this genre out there. It certainly does not replace my love for Imperial Struggle, which I consider the current ranking champion in this genre, but this one is so much easier to teach and learn. I think it’s the best way to introduce new players to the genre.

Longevity and Replayability

Score: 
Tilt:  

Pros: The game is very dynamic offering endless replayability, you aren’t ever going to play two games that resolve the same.

Cons: The simplicity of the design is a benefit for the purposes of introductions, however all but the most casual of gamers are going to graduate from this one rather quickly.

Washington’s War has a static start and that might give the impression that there is a limited number of plays built in that once you expire them you will have seen everything there is to see.

This is categorically false and I say that from having played this game at least a dozen times at this point. The dynamics of this game are a combination of decisions and strategies implemented, cards drawn and dice rolled. There is just no way two games will ever repeat or even appear similar to each other. Despite the static start, this game is a dynamic rollercoaster, whereas a player you will find yourself trying to unravel countless puzzles this game presents.

There is a lot of replayability here and there is no doubt in my mind that like many games in this genre including the famed Twilight Struggle, this is a game you can play over and over again and always make new discoveries.

Now in terms of longevity, for me personally, after a dozen plays while I’m always ready to go for it again, I find that anytime I have taught someone Washington’s War, my urge is to take the next step with them into more involved and complex CDG influence struggle games.

This game is light and as a veteran gamer, I enjoy complex games and it’s what I want to be playing. Washington’s War for me is a great way to introduce new players to the wonderful world of historical war games and in particular to the CDG influence struggle games, but it is not the final frontier and I want to graduate new players to more robust games. I feel the longevity of this game for most historical war game fans is going to be limited to using it as an introduction to historical war games, game. I would be surprised if two veteran historical war gamers would find the game enough of a challenge long-term.

That said, I do think more mainstream and casual gamers would find this game very satisfying long term. I hope that doesn’t come off as elitist and rude, but the term “complexity” means something completely different in the world of popular mainstream gaming and historical war gaming. As a historical war game, this one is feather-light, but I think compared to most modern-day board games, it would be generally considered a medium, perhaps even heavy weighted game on the complexity scale. The rulebook is 23 pages, practically a pamphlet for modern historical war games but quite heavy if this were say a Euro.

Conclusion

Among historical war gaming geeks like me and fans of Mark Herman’s work, Washington’s War is by many considered his masterpiece, his Mona Lisa. I would personally argue that this honor goes to Empire of the Sun, but certainly, Washington’s War is one of his stone-cold classics, there is no denying it.

Washington’s War is easy to learn and teach, it’s nuances offer a much deeper level of strategy than the mechanics suggest and it does a wonderful job of capturing the theme of the Revolutionary War without being a hard simulation. All of these things combined make Washington’s War an amazing gaming experience and an excellent addition to any fan of the CDG & Influence Struggle genre of games.

I would also make an argument for this game to get more mainstream attention, it certainly has all the hallmarks that have made other CDG’s like Twilight Struggle such smash hits and really I find it surprising that Washington’s War lives in general obscurity. I will say it again for posterity, this is not just a great historical war game, this is just a really great game period and you should not let the stigma of historical war games frighten you from trying it. Any fan of Twilight Struggle will find themselves quite at home in Washington’s War, in fact, I would argue this is a far better and much easier entry point into the genre than Twilight Struggle is.

If there is anything to complain about when it comes to Washington’s War, I’ve certainly missed it. It fires on all cylinders as far as I’m concerned, I give it my highest recommendation for pretty much anyone looking for a great, tense 2-player game, historical or otherwise.