gittes
Rating: 10
There is a strange Chess like flow in Liberty that I find intoxicating. While hardly the exciting dice fest that is The Napoleonic Wars, the charms of Liberty lie in what the game rewards. It rewards forces that mix unit capabilities and players who know when fight and when to run. In short, it rewards diligence, prudence, and intelligence. If you want a rollicking good time, play Fortress America. If you want a game that more accurately reflects history, go for Wilderness War. If you want a game that plays fast and easy, and rewards the careful and the shrewd, go for Liberty.
ForestRunner
Rating: 10
My favourite wargame. The perfect balance of asymmetrical forces with polar opposite objectives. Intricate game design that provides an appreciation of 18th century warfare.

One of Columbia Games rules light publications, and shines with the hex based system. Easy to play and difficult to master. I love the addition of warships/naval combat, but personally favour optional rules for French Entry.
axisboulder
Rating: 10
A great 2 player wargame. Multiple strategies available for the British, and always fun for the Colonists. I recommend that you add the variant of storms in the islands.
Carl Willner
Rating: 9
Liberty may not be a perfect game of the American Revolution, but it is one of the best offerings available. The American Revolution is a difficult event to simulate in a playable game, though many have tried, with the war stretching out over nine years, multiple theaters of action and long quiet periods intermingled with intense activity, as well as political variables and the combination of naval and land campaigning. Liberty captures the overall feel of many of these elements surprisingly well though with some (necessary, I think) simplification. Having played the game at the Prezcon tournament for three years now, with a tournament win and a second place finish, I've found that doing well at Liberty requires a good deal of patience, maneuver and long term strategy; simply charging ahead aggressively, even with the Brits whose units tend to be superior to the American militia, is likely to lead to setbacks or at best short term victories that can be negated over time. It is possible to win a game without ever fighting a major decisive battle, an optimal "Sun Tzu" result. As the Americans, I've seen Washington with his main army surrounded and destroyed by the Brits and still gone on to win with French aid; with the Brits, I've seen Washington repulse the Redcoats in the biggest battle of the game and still ended up conquering most of the colonies and putting down the rebellion. With a relatively small number of units and simple card-driven mechanics for actions, reinforcements and supply, the game plays quickly and it is easily possible to get through the nine years in a three-hour tournament time limit. The usual Columbia block-based fog of war system works well with the widely varying quality of both American and British units. Quibbles? French entry really shouldn't be just based on a standard random die roll, but should reflect to some extent political events and military successes as it did historically; in tournaments such as Prezcon, this is typically dealt with by having a die roll modified annually for entry (11 on 2d6 in 1776, 8 on 2d6 in 1777, the standard game roll, and 5 on 2d6 thereafter - if the French never came in the Americans would have weak chances against a competent British player). And port garrisons don't seem to do well resisting sea attacks that are accompanied by land units aboard ship, unless the defender has his major army in a port, owing to the immense firepower of the ships - certainly there were some big successful invasions by sea in the Revolution, as at New York and Charleston, but also other situations where seaborne attackers were repulsed by relatively small fortified garrisons, as at Savannah and again at Charleston earlier in the war. But these issues do not detract much from the play of a very enjoyable and interesting game that never seems to repeat itself, with lots of strategic choices for both sides.
Drewcooter
Rating: 9
Awesome game, use the optional rules listed on Columbia Games Website. The optional rules do a good job tweaking the French intervention rules (without them it is too easy for the French to make an early entry,or potentially not at all).
ericleesmith
Rating: 9
This is an excellent war game, quick to learn, easy to play, fun, and it has a nice historical feel. I highly recommend it.
freebird52
Rating: 9
Bought this from the vender at BGGCON 2012. Waiting to play...
Habsburg1497
Rating: 8.8
A lot of fun to play. Good tactical game, but dice play a role a bit larger than I'd like.
cmdr layman
Rating: 8.5
not quite as good as hammer, but close. the random french entry roll determines the outcome of majority of games i've played.
Brien Martin
Rating: 8.5
Another winner from Columbia! After going my whole life not having even *seen* a Columbia game, I now own three!! I love the Revolution, and this game captures the feel of the nature of the conflict. As history, it's definitely dodgy, but as a game, it's great!
gametweaker
Rating: 8.5
Probably my favorite block game (at this time). I love the theme and this game offers some real "meat" without moving into the "too complex to really ever play" category where so many AWoI games seem to fit. The only thing that drops my rating (a bit) is a few too many "little" rules that are easy to forget or easy to play incorrectly at some point in a particular game (hexside limits, town control, river retreats, sea attacks, etc.)
BagdadBob
Rating: 8
Another fun Columbia Block game! Quick to set up and quick to play,
baghdadbob
Rating: 8
Another playable block game by Columbia. Nice game to break out from time to time.
Belisarius88
Rating: 8
Another game in the standard Columbia format. You played one you played them all? Not much difference between them but, the historical flavor makes each one rather uniquely enjoyable. I do find myself liking all of these more each time I play them.
Jan van der Laan
Rating: 8
Very good game, using the blocks for step-reduction and fog-of-war. Very nice game map.
itsmarty
Rating: 8
I love the naval element, and the French blocks are fun (especially making them take the last hit..."thanks for helping out, guys").

I'll have to play more often, but my initial feeling is that I enjoy it more than Hammer of the Scots.
Blind Squirrel
Rating: 8
I really like the system and speed of the game. Might get ranked higher with more plays, but more plays will be difficult becuase even thought I don't mind the lack of balance, others will.
Bobby Tweaks
Rating: 8
Great! Very balanced game for both sides, though strategy is quite different. Interesting prisoner exchange mechanic, but I have never seen anyone use it effectively.

2/17/08: After several plays this one gets a bump-up!
geas
Rating: 8
Not sure about the necessity of the random weather rules.
Braveheart
Rating: 8
Have enjoyed the game about 10 plus times know. It's good, but French entry based on luck as been annoying.
Fury
Rating: 8
A very enjoyable game. The rules are easy enough, especially if you have any Columbia block game experience. It seems well balanced and can (should) be playd in 3 hours or less. I like it better than Washington's War.

In comparison to Hammer to the Scots; overall Liberty has less battles and more positional jockeying. Liberty battles, in general, involve less blocks. Your card draw value is much less critical in Liberty than in HotS. Unlike in HotS, a whole handful of "3s" doesn't necessarily mean you will roll this turn, likewise a handful of "1s" is not the end of the world. Liberty plays faster because there are less battles, battles are smaller, and not so many permutations to think through during the regroup phase. In HotS, a bad regroup can be devastating during the winter phase. On the otherhand, in Liberty if the French don't show up in a timely manner for the Americans, their fighting chance to win independence is greatly diminished (the 11, 8, 5 sliding entry roll fix is a nice optional rule, you’ll see what I mean when you read the rules). Also because the whole eastern seaboard is on the map, there isn’t the whole focus on one or two choke points (like Mentieth). Players can swing to another part of the map to make trouble if they are stymied elsewhere.
Deeevorce
Rating: 8
Liberty uses the same system as Hammer of the Scots but adds some interesting twists. I didn't know a lot about the American War of Independence, but this game made me look deeper into the subject.
Like HotS both sides play very different. Very good game!
acbmml
Rating: 8
Second (and probably current favorite) block game.
airjudden
Rating: 8
A very fun game. Lots of great chrome! It's not strong in the ways of simulation, but it captures aspects of the war and is quite enjoyable and very easy to play!
When it works, it works really well. When it does not (America draws high point cards and doesn't draw supply cards, whereas the British player draws excessive supply cards and low point cards), then it becomes a stagnant game. While not necessarily ahistorical, it is not fun from a gaming standpoint. Statistically speaking, this is pretty hard to do, but it did happen to me, and caused me to lower my rating by a point.
Also, this is the only Columbia game that I have played with unclear rules, namely in the area of sea invasions. Even BGG-based errata is not well-thought out.
Hence, while a good game, it is not on the level of its cousins [thing=37836][/thing] and [thing=25277][/thing].

For more, read my review.
bobwieler
Rating: 8
Not sure
djberg96
Rating: 8
Impressions after a few plays are quite positive. Good tension, simple rules. There are lots of tough decisions to make.

While the rules are based on the traditional rule set that Columbia uses in most of their games, here it works well. Getting a handful of high-op cards isn't necessarily a good thing since there are definitely times when you won't want to go first. Also, the fog of war automatically provided by being a block game feels appropriate.

In the goofball Washington's War you get a completely chaotic narrative because of that huge mono deck and a PC flipping mechanism that feels bolted onto the theme. In Liberty you're much more in control of your own destiny and the VP mechanism tied to individual cities makes much more sense. Plus, if things go wrong it's probably because you made a poor decision, not because you drew a handful of your opponents' events or you couldn't move a general because you drew a bunch of low ops cards.

Also, unlike Washington's War which has the ridiculous possibility that the French never enter the war (gee, fun game for the Americans), French entry is progressively more likely to happen if you play with the optional entry rule, and I suggest that you do. So, you'll still get variation with the French entering the war almost probably somewhere between turns 3 and 5, and not an American player who's lost the will to live because Ben Franklin was too busy stoinking a French socialite to bother with that whole diplomacy thing.

As for those who claim that Hammer of the Scots provides a more interesting and intense experience, I say bullshit. As someone who has played Hammer too many times to count, I can tell you that Liberty provides the more interesting experience by far. The map in Liberty is more open, and the river/lake movement along with the forest/marsh restrictions, plus forced marches, create some interesting movement dilemmas. In Hammer the game often degenerates into the "Mentieth Wall" and it becomes a slugfest. On top of that, in Hammer we tracked ops over the course of many games in our own little tournament and realized that a poor English hand in the first two turns dooms them 90% of the time. You don't see that kind of determinism in Liberty, nor do you get stuck with a bunch of useless events or the possibility of the British getting screwed because the turn ended early.

Anyway, the result is a game that's twice as good as Washington's War with half the rules. Thumbs up.
kostek
Rating: 8
Great game. Best of the triology HotS, CR, and Liberty. Simple rules, plays fast, and has lots of choices at the strategic and tactical levels. Captures the spirit of the war in broad brush strokes.
jmoody
Rating: 8
While not my top block game (currently Hammer), it does feel different enough that it is a nice change of pace. I love the theme.
Andy Parsons
Rating: 8
It is easy to understand why Liberty was poorly received when it first appeared. First impressions are of drab artwork (box, map and particularly the cards) and a lot of air in the box. Typically of Columbia, the rules are all there but they're poorly organized. The game itself suffers from the timing of the French entry being too critical and too random, and from the prisoner exchange system simply not working.

Print off the optional rules and use most of them (I found that the turn sequence and vp tracks downloadable from the Geek were helpful too). These fixes applied, the end result is a much more fluid and strategically interesting game than its close cousin, Hammer of the Scots. There's a nice contrast between the two sides; the Brits powerful along the coast, but stretched by the need to garrison everywhere and desperate to land a decisive blow before the French arrive; the Americans picking their fights and with replacements popping up anywhere.
Jim Krohn
Rating: 8
Underrated game on the American Revolution. Key differences from other Columbia block games get the essence right. The Americans have to keep an army in being and the British have a hard time holding ground.
anton
Rating: 8
Compare this game system to AH's "1776" or even that "We the People" thing of theirs, I'd still choose this game over either of them.
Jasonofindy
Rating: 8
Better than Crusader Rex- not as compelling as Hammer of the Scots
chris0zz
Rating: 8
This is a really good war game! I love the theme and it's captured pretty well here. I know people complain about the randomness but I like it! You never know the french are going to arrive and the random unit draw pool, it makes every game different. And there is some complaints that the war in the south isn't so important but me and my father are always battling for those extra victory points in the south. This is a fun game that's definitely worth a try
dumpty
Rating: 8
Great block game. Not too complicated. Hex movement. Several scenarios.
djberg96
Rating: 8
Initial impression after two plays is quite positive. Good tension, simple rules. There are lots of tough decisions to make.

While the rules are based on the traditional rule set that Columbia uses in most of their games, here it works well. Getting a handful of high-op cards isn't necessarily a good thing since there are definitely times when you won't want to go first. Also, the fog of war automatically provided by being a block game feels appropriate.

In the goofball Washington's War you get a completely chaotic narrative because of that huge mono deck and a PC flipping mechanism that feels bolted onto the theme. In Liberty you're much more in control of your own destiny and the VP mechanism tied to individual cities makes much more sense. Plus, if things go wrong it's probably because you made a poor decision, not because you drew a handful of your opponents' events or you couldn't move a general because you drew a bunch of low ops cards.

Also, unlike Washington's War which has the ridiculous possibility that the French never enter the war (gee, fun game for the Americans), French entry is progressively more likely to happen if you play with the optional entry rule, and I suggest that you do. So, you'll still get variation with the French entering the war almost probably somewhere between turns 3 and 5, and not an American player who's lost the will to live because Ben Franklin was too busy stoinking a French socialite to bother with that whole diplomacy thing.

As for those who claim that Hammer of the Scots provides a more interesting and intense experience, I say bullshit. As someone who has played Hammer too many times to count, I can tell you that Liberty provides the more interesting experience by far. The map in Liberty is more open, and the river/lake movement along with the forest/marsh restrictions, plus forced marches, create some interesting movement dilemmas. In Hammer the game often degenerates into the "Mentieth Wall" and it becomes a slugfest. On top of that, in Hammer we tracked ops over the course of many games in our own little tournament and realized that a poor English hand in the first two turns dooms them 90% of the time. You don't see that kind of determinism in Liberty, nor do you get stuck with a bunch of useless events or the possibility of the British getting screwed because the turn ended early.

Anyway, the result is a game that's twice as good as Washington's War with half the rules. Thumbs up.
Dean_H
Rating: 8
Played this a few times but still getting trying to get the nuances of play.
fatso
Rating: 8
I love the period of history and the game... The Atlantic box is great and allows you to pounce on the shoreline in several places at once. It lets you build up your units in secret much like a hand of cards. The threat of naval invasion reminds me of playing the Union in Bobby Lee and adds suspense to the game. I also think it's unique how forces can melt away before winter and rebuild anywhere with card play. It makes a very fluid game with a feeling of freedom. To its credit it plays quickly and is easy to get into, making it a great weeknight wargame. I look forward to many more plays! I think it's interesting how the Victory system from Columbia Games feels different with each game. Liberty feels very different than other games using the same system (Crusader Rex, Hammer and Victory) yet shares enough rules that it's easy to transition into. I love the use of ships in the game. This game plays shorter than Crusader Rex and Hammer of the Scots. Good design in this one!
Charles Vasey
Rating: 8
Clever game full of neat tricks, clearly not overly historical but not entirely wrong either.
elijah234
Rating: 8
Nice, easy-to-play yet interesting game. Only 8 pages of rules yet there's interesting decisions to make almost every turn. The US can play their clever, guerrilla "pop up anywhere I like" game, while the Brits have to maintain the pressure. However, the game can hinge upon a few high-stakes dice rolling and for the British, bad dice-rolling will sink your game. Not as interesting as Crusader Rex or Hammer of the Scots in that sense. Yes, HotS also has high-stakes dice rolling but the "nobles" victory conditions make it more interesting than just conquest of territory.
itm1340
Rating: 7.8
mint
altohorn
Rating: 7.6
Good block game with card driven system.
Deeevorce
Rating: 7.5
Liberty uses the same system as Hammer of the Scots but adds some interesting twists. I didn't know a lot about the American War of Independence, but this game made me look deeper into the subject.
Like HotS both sides play very different. Very good game!
Alessandro Raimondo
Rating: 7.5
Similar to Hammer of the Scots, with some minimal changes: naval operations, forced marchs.

There is no siege warfare. The force pool (only 50 blocks) looks limited by economic constraints: maybe some more blocks would be useful: British do not have enough units to conquest and garrison major cities.
I don't like the prisoner exchange mechanic.
a2greg
Rating: 7.3
With Liberty, Columbia makes a playable wargame but there's some fiddly rules to remember (and 1.01 rules help but more work is needed and use the FAQ). The fog-of-war using blocks is usually excellent but there's so few blocks (25 a side) that it's less important here. The refined battle system (seen in some other Columbia designs) is elegant and sometimes brutal to the attacker. The map has subtle terrain features not obvious at first and it requires study to effectively use it. The differentiation in units (militia, loyalists, foot, guards, dragoons, leaders, warships, indians) contributes to a fine feeling of this period's warfare albeit at a strategic level. [Addendum: my rating has gone down as the game incorporates so much randomness with battle die-rolls, card draws, French Entry by chance, and game turn weather conditions by chance that play balance (and game outcome) sometimes hinges on the randomness of chance as much as strategy. The game appears to be quite brittle in terms of play balance (especially concerning the French). If played as published, you'll need to play it 2 or 3 times in a session in order to be fair to both players.]
Bill Romaniecki
Rating: 7
The standard Columbia system has been modified to good effect. The strategic situation is more interesting and offers more viable options than Hammer of the Scots.
Harae
Rating: 7
Good: Strategic - American Revolution - Easy

The plus:
-A very well themed game with a very good execution: nice comprehensive rules & exciting gameplay
-Easy to play, challenging situations-Excellent for newbees with some gaming experience and interests
-Time will only be a few hoursThe minus:-Production quality could have been so much better(box cover, cards(!!!), map, would have loved big blocks a la HotS / CR)-Only 1 scenario (in the meantime 3 additional have been posted)
-The Southern Front is a bit underwhealmed (okay, historically right but it would have been nice to have a little more action). Mind you, if you do not watch the South you can have a nasty surprise as British Player! a realy tricky theater but absorbes half of the board with only 20% of the action.

-I like the assymetrical forces and first players should play the English. The last game I played, the English went for the 30 VP's in 1777 in a desperate attempt to avoid the French (coming in 1778). A blast and it came down to the last die roll. I think it is a balanced game where both sides have good chances with compelling gameplay. Replay value is good but the immobility of the units are a bit of a worry (1 MP per unit) although you have the option for a Forced March. And all in all a wonderful result where gameplay is the outright strength.

The 'bad' (
(these ar eall minor issues)
-Southern map is almost 50% of the total map but sees minor action.
-I I am not really fond of the 1 hex move per round units. Okay, you have 4 cards per round so you will be able to move units bit it feels a bit contrained.
-The box cover is very plain.
-The playing cards are plain ugly and a disgrace. Columbia should pay some attention into this.
-I would have loved the bigger HotS / CR blocks

If you are looking for a short easy and exciting wargame, look no further as this one has it all.

I have not touched it the past three years. Sold it.
JasonRMax
Rating: 7
Based on one VASSAL play of the 1775 scenario. I expect to revise this rating with more plays
Ghaerdon
Rating: 7
This is a very solid game. It is light in that you can grasp the rules very quickly; but it is indeed complex! Retreats, Naval situations and battles are all tense affairs!!!

This game is not Hammer of the Scots, so don't expect a clone. This is a fine period wargame. Spend the money and get it from Columbia Games. Especially if you enjoy block games.
Arbuthnot
Rating: 7
Played a few times. OK.
goldenboat
Rating: 7
A solid offering from Columbia, easy to play, with remarkably good historical value for only a little bit of rules overhead. More than a passing similarity to Hammer of the Scots, but less chaotic. More brittle than Hammer, and the game can get away from you on the last march of a year if you aren't careful, particularly around Boston, where ten-point swings in area control are possible. The vastly different strategies required of the British and American sides lends additional depth and replay value. Can stalemate if the two sides have naval parity, but can also be a fast-moving and surprising game if gamers play with some elan.
hotspur
Rating: 7
Reminds me of my old copy of 1812. That's a good thing.
cosarara
Rating: 7
it gives a very historical feeling with few rules. It's very luck oriented and the best player can be foolished by sheer bad luck.
Give it a try. It deserves it.
Dieroll Honker
Rating: 7
Another fun and quick block game from Columbia. As per usual from CG, it is not meant to be more than history-lite, but it does provide some strat Am Rev flavor. The Brits move up and down the coast with powerful units, trying to catch those damn ragged rebels before they scurry away. The Americans do seem to have too many units, and they also seem to have too easy a time attritting the Brits, none of which seems quite right. Overall not as asymmetrical, nor as tense and balanced, as HotS, but then, few games are.
alexgrant
Rating: 7
Good, but I'd rather play one of their more popular games like Hammer of the Scots or Crusader Rex. They're more popular for a reason.
Andy Parsons
Rating: 7
It is easy to understand why Liberty was poorly received when it first appeared. First impressions are of drab artwork (box, map and particularly the cards) and a lot of air in the box. Typically of Columbia, the rules are all there but they're poorly organized. The game itself suffers from the timing of the French entry being too critical and too random, and from the prisoner exchange system simply not working.

Print off the optional rules and use most of them (I found that the turn sequence and vp tracks downloadable from the Geek were helpful too). These fixes applied, the end result is a much more fluid and strategically interesting game than its close cousin, Hammer of the Scots. There's a nice contrast between the two sides; the Brits powerful along the coast, but stretched by the need to garrison everywhere and desperate to land a decisive blow before the French arrive; the Americans picking their fights and with replacements popping up anywhere.
da pyrate
Rating: 7
This game plays very quickly.
Cleitus the Black
Rating: 7
Fun game. Much like Hammer, but without the switching nobles. Naval power adds a new dimension and a huge amount of maneuverability for the Brits.
JimM
Rating: 7
Sold on Ebay 2/16/15
Alphawolf
Rating: 7
This game has more to give than it might look when just skipping thru the contents. 8 pages of rules are easy to digest, fog-of-war system that always uses the same set-up (not like the East- / WestFront games) as a starting point. But because of (blind-)drawn reinforcements the game develops into a bluff / attack / counterattack game that needs time and experience to master it. The British seems to be overwhelming until the French enter the war on the side of the Americans. In the games we played the Americans seem to use a strike-and-run tactic while the British used their overwhelming power to "free" some cities on the map only to face the problem of leaving troops behind to "secure" these cities. Definitely a game that will see some play over the year in our monthly game-day.
claudio212
Rating: 7
A very solid Columbia block game. On the one hand, I really like the fact that, as the British, you actually need to hold all the recruiting towns to keep them from turning American again and spawning units; on the other hand, it REALLY stretches you thin, even when you've mustered pretty much all your blocks. At that point, you've probably got one or two big armies in Philly, New York, or Boston. And then, with the French, how do you hold the damned southern cities? Seems like playing with the optional/variant French entry rules works a bit better; they are such a game changer for the Americans that it seems the Brits really need a few turns to get a foothold. I liked the idea of the native american units, but I'm not sure I actually felt they were particularly useful; I'll probably need to try using them more effectively next time. In any event, a nice, open and dynamic, asymmetrical game.
davedanger
Rating: 7
Missed many nit pick rules first time though... Will try again...
cfarrell
Rating: 7
I think repeated play has more or less settled the play-balance issue - there is one, but it's not *that* bad. The British do have to play a tighter game to win. There are definitely strategies for the British that appear tempting but are non-viable (going South; the game will be won or lost in the Northeast, where the big cities are). Once you've filtered that stuff out, Liberty works, and is interesting. Do make sure to use Columbia's "slightly less random French arrival" variant, though.

I still find it to be in the lower tier of Columbia games, however (which is still a 7 rating!) and I think that this is just because Liberty seems really, really lucky. Battles are small but very high-stakes and a quick turn of the dice and your chances in the game go completely down the tubes because blocks that are eliminated ("captured") are so hard to get back, and because the British particularly are very manpower-constrained because of the need to garrison and the ability of the Americans to pop up anywhere. It's not a game-breaker, because players have lots of tools for managing the risks, but it's still tough. You have to be careful.

The advantages of Liberty are that it is a pretty simple, playable, accessible game that is of quite sensible length (2-3hr, as my experiences is that the vast majority of games end well before the end of the turn track) and that provides interesting tactical situations and a fair amount of excitement. It's not a Columbia classic, but it's a fun game and good for a few plays. Of the three current "Hammer"-style games that they've done (Hammer of the Scots, Liberty, and Crusader Rex), I think it's probably the weakest, but the margin isn't great (I like Crusader Rex significantly the best).
cerulean
Rating: 7
Strategy level wargame covering the entire American Revolution. On this subjct I'd rather be playing Washington's War, but Liberty has its block game charms.

Unlike Washington's War, Liberty focuses solely on the military campaigns. The blocks give the game a thick fog of war. With the requirement to capture 30 VPs (minimum of 7 cities) with only 25 units minus captures, the game feels biased against the British player. Perhaps captured units should be automatically exchanged like in Washington's War.
JimM
Rating: 7
I got this in a game trade! Thanks Peter! Great fun!
anemaat
Rating: 7
Not a too bad Columbia Blockgame, but ...
* Too few blocks to occupy the towns you want.
* Not much happens on the Southern part of the map.
* You often find yourself in the position that you don't know what to do.
* The game feels like a table with a too small cloth. If you pull on one end, the other end ...

However the exchange of prisoners is nice though.
jens_hoppe
Rating: 7
The American War of Independence. First impressions: This is an excellent block game offering from Columbia. Components are top-notch, rules are elegant and simple (a close cousin to Hammer of the Scots, although with some interesting new twists), gameplay is exciting, with plenty of interesting decisions to be made. Game might have a balance problem, with balance hinging on the random arrival of the French.
fralim
Rating: 7
Another excellent, fast playing block game from Columbia. Not as compelling as Hammer of the Scots, but still interesting. The way you can use actions to build blocks from the force pools and the tight wintering rules make for some tough decisions. The game is balanced and has a strong narrative.
Aardvark
Rating: 7
I like the assymetrical aspect of play. It is especially fun to play the British. The ability of the Redcoats to land essentially anywhere on the Atlantic coast opens up play which otherwise would be fairly static. Probably too much hinges on the random French entry (some rule fixes address this). The rules are for the most part clear, but terse, and they could use a series of examples to clarify play. Still, I enjoy this game for its strategic possibilities, and look forward to many more outings.
cannoneer
Rating: 7
Great game on an interesting conflict. It's the map that makes this one - the long American coastline and narrow strip of VP towns along the coast make for a very fluid situation, where marine landings can and do occur anywhere along the coast.

The Brits have overwhelming firepower, but must garrison the cities they hold, making it really hard to get those last 1-2 VPs to get to 30.

The Americans have to avoid battle when possible, counterpunch when able, and hope for French arrival :)

Outstanding game.
Gamedeity
Rating: 7
A good GMT block game. Nice strategy without the volumes of rules like hex&counter wargames. Playable in a couple of hours.
Cthulhu1
Rating: 7
I have a real weakness for Columbia Games, as 1812 was my first wargame, and I enjoyed Liberty as well. My only complaint is the production quality -- a heavy mounted board, please, gentlemen. :)
Jefftoe
Rating: 7
Can use the fog of war to play solitaire.
bigwhipper
Rating: 6.5
Just okay, not one of the better Columbia games, could be a combination of the subject and the stalemate that typically occurs.
essjam
Rating: 6.5
So far, this has proven to be a challenge for the British. The game plays well and has me pondering what different strategy to employ as the British to gain the victory.

However I rate it down on a few points
1. It is easier to disband and reform than to reinforce. That seems a bit strange, the supply cards are rare and golden
2. The overall production quality is not great
a) Several blocks weren't cut square (b) Block labels are starting to show wear after only 3 plays. (The fix for this is to draw blocks out of a bag) (c) The unmounted card stock map is a bit flimsy
3. A few rules required discussion and agreement on principles. Left a bit unclear in definition.
fretless1962
Rating: 6.5
Decent game. Even better with optional rules found at Columbia's web site.
capt yid
Rating: 6.2
Great game, FOG of war not needed though; still figuring out British strategy.
To keep track of things, check out the draft of a one-page “notepad” I’ve put together that can be downloaded from: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/6719 It is a graphic jpeg file and I appreciate comments.
Notepad includes the Liberty standard starting positions, unit strengths, turn track and a labeled victory track. It also proposes a hex numbering scheme and a table to convert die rolls from single to double dice (more rolls means luck evens out). The nearly historical French entry variant is also included. Graphics could be improved but this gets the ideas across.
brandysta
Rating: 6
Not a bad game, but you play the system instead of the "setting," so I never was able to get a sense that this was the American Revolution.
dougadamsau
Rating: 6
A Columbia "block" wargame featuring the American Revolutionary War at a strategic level. Both sides have only 25 units each, so the density of pieces is low. The British begin with 15 points and must attack supply towns in an effort to amass 30 points at the end of any year to win. The Americans have to either reduce the British below 12 points, or stop them winning by the game end. Simple mechanics, but subtle rules. The cards from Hammer of the Scots are back, and it works well. Each side feels very different, with the British having to feed their regulars across the Atlantic, while the Americans harry and wait for the French to arrive. After a couple of games, the balance appears to be very good. Excellent game.
charlescab
Rating: 6
Interesting gameplay and capture key areas. Not really a close tie in to history, but an interesting introduction to the importance of certain areas in America and how the terrain makes those areas important and hard to control
capt yid
Rating: 6
Great game, FOG of war not needed though; still figuring out British strategy.
To keep track of things, check out the draft of a one-page “notepad” I’ve put together that can be downloaded from: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/game/6719 It is a graphic jpeg file and I appreciate comments.
Notepad includes the Liberty standard starting positions, unit strengths, turn track and a labeled victory track. It also proposes a hex numbering scheme and a table to convert die rolls from single to double dice (more rolls means luck evens out). The nearly historical French entry variant is also included. Graphics could be improved but this gets the ideas across.
jcrim13
Rating: 6
Not my favorite Columbia block game. A little dry. There are several titles I'd rather play first. I'm a bit concerned about the play balance here.
Jon Karlsson
Rating: 6
Nice wargame, but The Revolution itself is too abstracted. I think this would be improved with some flavourful events on the cards or special abilities for an appropriate subset of the units.
alhay1959
Rating: 6
Fun Game. Quick to play
jens_hoppe
Rating: 6
The American War of Independence. First impressions: This is an excellent block game offering from Columbia. Components are top-notch, rules are elegant and simple (a close cousin to Hammer of the Scots, although with some interesting new twists), gameplay is exciting, with plenty of interesting decisions to be made. Game might have a balance problem, with balance hinging on the random arrival of the French.
airjudden
Rating: 6
Not one of the stronger block games using the Hammer of the Scots system. The victory conditions do not coincide with those of the historical war. The game becomes whac-a-mole for the British.
The rules also have problems (especially on invasions) that do not exist in other games and thematically, it's not very strong.
If you want a fun block game, it is that, but it's not much of an American Revolution game.
fattylumpkin
Rating: 5
[1 play] Nice solid block game. Mostly my problem with it is the French. If they come on as soon as possible, I see little chance for the British to win and vice versa for the Americans. It just seems like this could have been handled a lot better while still providing some variance. At least if the French are going to arrive the first round they can, you should have a round of warning so you can make a desperate lunge at the Americans in an effort to be in a more defensive stance against the French.
djlg
Rating: 5
I've found this game a bit of a miss. It has a similar feel to We the People (with a dependence on a key game changing event; Brits port hopping along the coast and hopeful withering battles), but isn't as fun or tight. It a bit more complex than its sibling Hammer of the Scots (via the naval & terrain rules & hex control), but without much more of a pay-off.
The main trouble I have is "when would I play it?".
Simple block game: I prefer HotS.
Short, simple AWoI game: I prefer WtP.
Liberty falls between the cracks.
dr glaze et al
Rating: 5
[Dagliesh & Kwasny] A respectable wargame which did not deserve its poor reception [in some circles at least]. Has minimal complexity, so it is useful as an introduction to block wargames. Suffers from the fact that it is very very similar to HotS but not as good. It leans too much toward simulation instead of being an exciting game.
BradyLS
Rating: 5
After one play. I'm not much of a fan of block games, but this one covering the American Revolution is on a par with the classic AH title, 1776--and a lot shorter. My only complaint is that if the French arrive early, the Brits have a definite climb on their hands. Same for the Revolutionaries of the French arrive late. Their entry is handled by a die-roll trigger, which is easy to implement and easily tweaked.
alfredo lorente
Rating: 5
Gah!

The same basics as Hammer of the Scots, a game that was interesting but annoying to play. Then, thanks to lazy design, we get hexes instead of areas. And too much map! What could have been an easy to play game turned out to be a rather pedestrian project, thrown together rather than carefully crafted.

I don't know how the Charles S. Roberts awards are nominated, but I am very glad it was just a nominee.
jormungandr
Rating: 5
Too attritional to hold my interest and I didn't care for the powerful strategy of holding a "fleet in being" to smash small outposts along the coast. The low hexside limits make for a situation that feels more like Wizard Kings than Hammer of the Scots, even if it does feature a nice tweak of the latter's wintering rules to force armies to unstack towards the end of the year.
blockhead
Rating: 4
Did not grab me. Traded away.
Duke_Rufus
Rating: 4
Ben and I couldn't even get halfway through this. I love the subject matter, and the map, though unmounted, is beautiful. But a bit of a snore.
brandysta
Rating: 4
You play the system instead of the "setting," so I never was able to get a sense that this was the American Revolution.

Attrition vs. the American side is too easy, and it's a game winner for the British.

Just not a simulation at all, more like Wizard Kings played on a map depicting the 13 Colonies.
chrisgledhill
Rating: 4
I wans't a big fan of block games whenI first bought this: maybe worth a second roll of the dice?
dshaw80916
Rating: 4
Just not my cup of tea. Will Trade.
Herr Dr
Rating: 3
I loved East Front and East Front II, so decided to try another block game. With this one, I just didn't feel like I was playing the American Revolutionary War.

A bummmer, since there are so few good games (1776 and a handful of others} on the subject. I like heavy wargames, and, this one is an intro wargame with minimal chrome...and less history...and close to zero political dynamics. It fails to capture the American Revolutionary War that I am familiar with.
catosulla
Rating: 2
I am VERY disappointed in this game. I was looking for a game on this topic and read the reviews here at BGG and thought this looked like a good idea, plus I have never tried Columbia Games or a block game before. I do not think I'll be trying a block game again anytime soon. The system is WAY too simplistic for my taste. If your top concern in playing time then this might be a good bet, but if you are looking for detail and insight to this epic event, then I do not recommend this game. If this is what other block games are like, then I am at loss in trying to comprehend all the interest surrounding them.
bentlarsen
Rating: 1
Next to Athens and Sparta, Liberty is the WORST Columbia block game I have played. Its "badness" defies description, and a review is not worth the effort.
cscottk
Rating: -
Recieved in trade for Victoria's Cross.
conky
Rating: -
I love block games and I love the American Revolution time frame. So hopefully this is a winner.
DesertWargamer
Rating: -
Purchased on: 8/1/15
Purchased from: [url]www.amazon.com[/url]
Purchase price: $53.98 (+ $5.49 SH)

Notes:
- Purchased new

Weight: 2.6 (8/1/15)
4x scalper
Rating: -
Good to VG. Trade Interest HIGH.
agripa
Rating: -
Played twice and did not enjoy the experience.

Deja-Vu mechanics already seen in others CG titles.
Washington's War give a better feel of the campaign.

I don't like the hex-area system in this particular title.

Probably In the trading list.
GeneSteeler
Rating: -
Columbia Block Game
irishalum1989
Rating: -
Seems to be getting a real mixed reaction from games but the theme and simplicity appeal to me.
bigjobbies
Rating: -
60 wc
folalqui
Rating: -
ECI
jadegleave
Rating: -
Not played.
Kevin_Whitmore
Rating: -
One of several Columbia block games I have in anticipation of eventually playing.
CrazyCatman
Rating: -
2 players

Bought from Holgeir
agripa
Rating: -
Played twice and did not enjoy the experience.

Deja-Vu mechanics already seen in others CG titles.
Washington's War give a better feel of the campaign.

I don't like the hex-area system in this particular title.

In the trading list.