The games are becoming very close run things, and we are remembering more in relation to the nuances of the turn sequence, optimisation of card play benefits, movement - and thus use of commanders, and offensive/defensive tactics.
And, here's the thing. The more you play if it, the more you realise what a fine design it really is.
Highlights this time:
- Rallying can really amount to saving the the line when it is about to collapse - but it's using precious resource, and by adopting a rally stance, you can do precious little else.
- Keep your forces together, but then you can't always...and it's using time and resources.
- Focus your attack and defence, but then you can't always...as that is using up resource...
There's a theme there of course. The key here is initiative. The design and card mechanic (your resources) really make you think about where you need to focus in order to drive down enemy morale and/or protect/reach the objective. We've said that before, but then in other games it's either arbitrary or more random. (Black Powder, I'm looking at you). You have 'choice' in Maurice, and yet each choice is a clear dilemma, and you can't do it all.
Here's the gem of this system. You start to think like a Horse & Musket commander. I want to drive the enemy from the field, not waste my time on the left when I know the weakness is in the centre, yet I simply can't exploit every opportunity that is there, and of course my opponent is trying to do the same.
Wonderful game, and very intuitive. It's mastering the nuances that takes a little time.
Very close game, and as stated, we appear to be remembering more and more, and thus applying more subtle methods with each game. Like Field of Battle, there are nuances which can only be discovered through play.