From: Stig Hemmer <stig@pvv.ntnu.no>
Subject: Re: Shogun/Samurai Swords

Shogun is one of Milton-Bradleys 'miniature board games'. (Along with
Axis&Allies, Fortress America, and one more which I can't recall)

Samurai Swords is a reissue of this game.  Nothing is changed but the
name.  I have mostly played it by its old name, so I'll use that here.

The miniatures are well made and looks cool, but has an unfortunate
tendency to break. (Though I have seen much worse) If one ensures that
each player starts with the same number of forces of each kind, this
doesn't matter much.

The rules are well-written and has many good examples.

The game is a conquest game, where you try to conquer territory to
increase you income.  Income is used to buy forces and a few other
things.  Forces are used to conquer territory.  And so on.  You win by
holding more than half the board.

This basic idea is used in many games, but I feel it works very well
in Shogun.  These games commonly have one of two flaws: The "runaway
leader" problem, or the "infinite game" problem.  I feel that Shogun
has avoided both these problems.

The "runaway leader" problem: A player has a bit of luck in the early
game and establishes an lead.  This makes them more powerful than the
others and makes it possible to increase their lead and so on.  This
is a problem because anybody who lags behind in the opening will find
it impossible to catch up and win. This can be very boring for them.

In Shogun this problem is countered in two ways: First, leaders tend
to face an (usually quite informal) alliance of the other players, who
then cuts them down to size.  Second, a player who eliminates another
player gets a boost and can easily go from a bad position to a good
one.  So, the position is seldom hopeless.

The "infinite game" problem: Some games tend to end up in stalemates
where nobody is able to win.  If anybody makes an attempt, everybody
else allies and pushes them down again.  This is essentially the
opposite problem of the one above.

In Shogun, there are several mechanisms to make sure the game ends.

First and foremost, each plater starts the game with three warlords.
If a warlord dies, he is gone forever.  If you loose all you three
warlords, _you_ are gone.  And warlords _do_ die every now and then.

(Strictly speaking, if you elimiate another player, you get your
original three back, but that also drives the game closer to the end)

Second, the game rewards agressive play.  A warlord increases in power
as it wins battles.  By attacking, you can ensure that the battle
involves more of your forces than the opponent.  The attacker can
withdraw if the dice are unfriendly, the defender cannot.  All this
means that people will fight and the war flow back and forth instead
of bogging down in a stand-of.

Third, as the warlords gets more powerful, the game becomes unstable.
In the end of the game, a warlords army can kill its way through most
of the enemy territory, attack and kill an enemy warlord and walk back
to its own stronghold.  All in one turn.  (Though this does of course
take a lot of forces...)

All in all, Shogun is a very good game and I heartily recommend it.

Stig Hemmer.

PS: For your reference: I'm generally an enthusiast and will give
   positive reviews of most games I know.  Thus the above level of
   enthusiasm isn't as informative as you may think.