A few bad years (Entdecker, In the Year of the Dragon x2)

On Wednesday, June10th, it was Luch's pick and we played Entdecker and In the Year of the Dragon (twice).

Entdecker

The Entdecker session was interesting because despite a setup which didn't particularly seem to promote really large islands, we ended up with essentially just two land masses across the entire board. It was a tooth and nail battle between Luch and I for the really big island with two +5 and one +10 marker in it. Ultimately, I won the island but lost the game to Kozure, who won the second (smaller) island and then wasted no time putting scouts on the native track. Luch and I only completed the big island near the end of the game, so our scouts were tied up for far too long. He beat me by one point!

It was a fun enough session, but it confirmed my earlier feeling that this game is just too long, and too much like other games that scratch the same itch in less time. I'd be happy to play it again, but my copy will be going into the trade pile.

In the Year of the Dragon

The original idea was to play one session of ItYotD and then play Mexica, but since Luch had only played In the Year of the Dragon once before, after we completed the first session he decided he wanted to play again to try to improve his understanding of the mechanics. As a group, we've played +/-5 times, so Kozure and I were substantially more experienced... and in this game that helps.

In the first game, I stayed in front of the people track and the flexibility that afforded me gave me a win. I went for a Big Building strategy, building five temples and housing many workers in the process. This is something I don't normally do, as I normally prefer to keep two or three temples max., to make rice shortages easier to bear, and make my points with dragon tablets and courtisans.Of course, one of the nice things about this game is the multiple paths to victory, s trying a new one was fun.

Speaking of trying different paths, in the second game I was determined to try to make points primarily through the scholars. I've said I would try that before and strayed, and I did it again this time. For some reason, I can't take my eyes off all the incoming disasters long enough to make this strategy work. I fell behind on the people track halfway through the game and so I could never choose the scholar action to take advantage of the scholars I had aquired. I lost the second game in distant last.

Lesson learned... do not fall behind in the people track!

Excellent game. I'll make the scholar strategy work someday!...

A Perfect Storm (Fury of Dracula, Entdecker)

We were three players again, so my plans to pick Cosmic Encounter and Space Alert were dashed. Instead, I chose Fury of Dracula and Entdecker.

Fury of Dracula

Kozure and I have been Dracula numerous times, so Shemp tried his hand as the count for the first time. After the usual rules recap (man, this game has a lot of rules), we started the search. Kozure and I decided after a few turns that Drac was likely in the east... and a bit of searching there revealed his trail as we had hoped. Shemp managed to elude us for a while, but didn't manage to leave the east. Cornered by our four investigators, he tried to escape to sea. Unfortunately for him, I had stormy seas in hand and I was 99% sure I knew which sea space he was in. Even more unfortunate (for Shemp, anyway), after I picked correctly he revealed that to get back to land he needed to cross his path! After losing the blood and clearing his trail, we knew exactly where he was and we closed in for the kill. Outnumbered, outequipped and forced to fight during the day the vamp was slaughtered over the course of a few combats. At 1.5 hours, this was likely the shortest game of Fury of Dracula ever.

This game is interesting because while there is definite room for skill, strategy and cunning, the order that the cards come out can create situations that heavily favour one side or the other. In this case, the only "mistake" Shemp made was to leave himself no way out if he was ever forced to return to land. If I didn't have that card, he would have made a perfect escape and we would have lost him.

While it wasn't a normal session, it was still fun. I wonder whether Shemp will want a rematch next week?

Entecker

Entdecker is a game that I picked up in a math trade, and which exemplifies the problem with good games that don't stand out. For whatever reason, even though the game is enjoyable it lacks a certain spark. I mean, the theme of sea exploration is well captured by the mechanics, the idea of the players creating the regions to be scored is one I quite like and there is no denying that the seascape created in the game is quite attractive. Still, it's ultimately a Carcassonne and El Grande mash-up, a VP fest. As Kozure pointed out, it's also a little long for what it is.

It does work though, and I do do enjoy playing it.

Even though Shemp hadn't yet played it, he did very well. He snagged a couple of big islands, and my attempts to come in 2nd in as many islands as I could didn't pay off. When the native huts where all tallied, he beat me by about a dozen points.

Games with rules and components (Entdecker, Pillars of the Earth, Fairy Tale)

Kozure was camping, so it was a foursome.

Entdecker

Before Shemp arrived, we started with Entdecker, a game we pretty much massacred the rules to last time. What is it about Teuber games, anyway?... We keep mangling the rules to Domaine as well (I should say "kept", as we haven't played Domaine in a really long time... hmmm... we should fix that)

We managed to correctly play the exploration rules, and we filled in the areas correctly. Unfortunately, we completely screwed up the in game scoring because we were only giving points to the first place player! Lucky for us, we noticed well before the game was over and gave back the points to the players who should have received them. I'm pretty sure we got it right, too.

The starting scenario we used had the 4 bonus tiles set up in 2 pairs on either side of a wall of water. Obviously, it was a race to set up two huge, high scoring islands. I snagged the first one, but I poured a lot of effort into it and Bharmer and Luch both received points for it. Luch and Bharmer worked together to develop and close the second island, and I got shut out. Bharmer was way out front in points, so I started closing lots of little islands to get my scouts onto the village tracks and tried to secure a couple of high scoring huts. In the end, it all came down to a single tile draw... if I could flip a tile that closed the second last space on the board, I would be able to send the last scout I needed to secure a pivotal majority. If the tile I drew didn't fit, Bharmer would do it. I got the tile I needed, and won the game by a slim margin. It was close all around (Luch, who was behind most of the game, got a lot of points off the scouts and nearly overtook us).

Entdecker and Domaine actually share a similar space for me in the game landscape. I really enjoy both, but they are somehow unspectacular. Between the two, Domaine is the tighter game, but the late land grab that usually determines the winner is a big problem. If Entdecker was a little shorter, and if it did a little more to differentiate itself from other exploration games (like the superior Tikal), I'd probably want to play it more often. The luck involved may rub some the wrong way, but it fits the theme well in my opinion.

Anyway, I don't intend on trading it or anything. It' a fun game to play once in a while.

Pillars of the Earth

The latest "new" and/or "hot" game mechanic is "worker placement". It was featured in last year's Caylus (which I've never played) and in this year's phenomenon Agricola. Pillars of the Earth was released between those two, features similar gameplay mechanics and has been well received in it's own right.

If you watch Oprah, or if (like me) you have a spouse that does, you know that Pillars is based on a novel that somehow involves the building of a cathedral. Bharmer has read the book but claims not to watch Oprah. Whatever, I have my eye on him. Anyway, here the cathedral simply acts as an elaborate timer: after each round one section of the cathedral is added. When the cathedral is complete, the game ends. As an aside, we all disliked the cathedral design proposed by the game. The one we built with the pieces was decidedly more... deconstructionist.

These worker placement games have certain similarities: There are a lot of options laid out at once, and players must find the most efficient order to choose them in. However, small differences can have a big effect:

-The mechanism used to determine turn order in Pillars is slightly wonky (each player has three token in a bag and they are pulled at random. If you get picked early you have to pay or go to the back of the line). I'm not sure that the cost makes up for getting screwed out of turn order, but is it really worse than Agricola, where placement is simply clockwise?

- Whereas Agricola is fairly devoid of interrelated mechanics, Pillars has several interesting tradeoffs inherent in the system. The resource mini-auction at the beginning has to be weighed against the gold provided by unused resource workers. The resources are converted into victory points at different rates according to the different professionals you've hired. Etc.

- This may sound petty, but the presentation in Pillars is several leagues better than in Agricola. Instead of multiple awkwardly organized boards in the middle and piles of wooden tokens with no place to go, Pillars has a single board with a place for everything. Even money is handled with a track (a system which works remarkably well, and yet I can't think of another game that does it). Also, despite the fact that there is a similar seeding of the board that occurs every round, it's far more reasonable.

Anyway, I thought it was a pretty good game. There is a good amount of push and pull, tough decisions, etc, etc. I'm still wrestling with my feelings over Agricola, because although I can point to several things that Pillars does better I can't deny that it feels more generic than Agricola does. When I played Agricola, it felt like a rather different animal than the other games I've played, Pillars doesn't. Agricola also has the obvious advantage that it's entirely modular design allows it to be more variable and therefore (theoretically) stay entertaining longer. I say theoretically because after five games I've noticed a sameness developping in each game potentially due to the semi-ordered presentation of the action spaces, the need to do things in a certain order to get your farm going, and needing a little bit of everything in order to do well. Keep in mind that I've only played one advanced game and only one multiplayer game, so the sameness issue may not be real (and if it is, the modularity would make it very easy for an expansion to completely turn the sameness on it's head). So, while Agricola lacks severely in the elegance dept., it feels like it breaks new ground.

In our session, I first tried to go long on sand, acquiring a prince that gave it to me for free every round fairly early. I overspent in the second round and bought myself a lead that was already erased by the third. The others where manipulating turn order and stealing all the sand contracts before I could get them, so I switched to stone. I couldn't get it together, though, and placed last. It was a tight race between Bharmer and Shemp for first, but I can't remember who won in the end (I think it was Shemp).

Fairy Tale

This has been a long post, so I'll keep this short: Fairy Tale was much more fun with four players than it was with two. It felt more like I remembered, so it's nice to see it wasn't a worthless trade. I actually think four might be ideal, if only because during the draft you know one of the cards in your original deal will come back to you.

I was doing pretty well until Shemp hunted the card I was using to unflip two cards that would have triggered lots of points on the table. I didn't recover. Still, Bharmer had a huge score on the table and won... I don't think any of us where even within striking distance.

Fun filler.

The Life Aquatic (Entdecker, Race for the Galaxy)

Five months ago, I went to a local math trade and played an oldie called Entdecker by Klaus Teuber. I liked it, but thought it was too long. Still, the mechanics stuck with me and so I figured I'd try to trade for it. And now, here it is...

Entdecker

Many comparisons to Carcassonne were made by the group throughout the explanation. I had the same feeling myself before I played the first time, but unlike the WAGSters, I didn't feel that way by the end.

Why?

There is a physical disconnect in Carcassonne. You draw a tile, and place it anywhere. Carcassonne is essentially an abstract, after all. In Entdecker, tile laying represents the exploration of the sea. You pick a spot to start, invest in your voyage and set sail. The tiles are placed as a representation of bringing your boat into uncharted waters. The tile matching mechanic may be the same as Carc, but being able to place it is not guaranteed. It's meant to complement the question mark tiles as a way to simulate the uncertainties of sea exploration. For me, the risks and rewards of exploration are well represented and it provides a distinctly different experience despite the tile laying similarities.

Also, it looks pretty cool as the board fills up.

The whole "discovery of the native tribes" aspect to the game helps to give the game another dimension which once again separates it from the lighter Carcassonne. (Don't get me wrong, I really like Carcassonne. In fact, I'd pick it over Entdecker given if I had to pick only one. I'm just saying that they are fairly different games)

In the first half of the game, we discovered a gigantic island which Bharmer dominated, launching him into the lead. As is often
the case in this type of game, his lead was attacked by the rest of us. His scouts exploring the native tribes were quickly outnumbered, stripping him of the endgame points. I won the game, mostly because my scouts gave me points.

I AM still concerned that those endgame points make the rest of the game unimportant. Otherwise, it's a good game and I'm glad I got it!

Also, with our group the game played in a very reasonable 1.5 hours. That made me happy.

Race for the Galaxy

We finished with another game of Race for the Galaxy. Not much to say except I had a hard time getting things going again. Kozure, on the other hand, seemed to be far more in control. Luch was just learning, but seemed to be doing well. It appeared that Kozure was way ahead, and Bharmer was firmly in second. That's how it ended, too, but I at least managed to come in third by playing a couple of 6 cards just as the game ended. Despite the fact I suck at it, I'm really enjoying this one.

Over the course of the game, it did occur to me that I do still miss some of the interaction of Puerto Rico. While I still feel that Race is much better in this regard than San Juan, I still miss the jockeying for limited real estate on the ships and trading house. Maybe an expansion will feature cards played to the centre of the table which multiple players can play to? I think that would be very interesting.

Math Trade Day (Entdecker, Lock n' Load: Band of Heroes)

2nd Toronto Area Math trade has come and gone.

This time, instead of Yorkdale shopping center, the trade was cleverly arranged to coincide with the TABS game convention (Toronto Area Boardgame Society). Therefore, after trading all our games, we could elect to go inside and get some gaming in. This year, I traded away Zombies 4 (a very unfortunate purchase) and Betrayal at the House on Haunted Hill (a game I actually sort of enjoyed, but was too often frustrating) for Ingenious, and Pueblo (a game I enjoyed, but never got around to actually playing often enough) for Nexus Ops. While I was at the convention, I also picked up used copies of Jungle Speed and it's expansion for $20 total.

A good day.

Once inside, I wandered around and eventually sat with a few players to try out Entdecker, a game I was hoping to trade for but lost out.

Entdecker

Entdecker is a game by Klaus Teuber which, apparently, was supposed to be part of his original vision for Settlers of Catan. While Entdecker was not a bad game by any means, this type of story clearly reinforces why designers need good editors.

Entdecker is an exploration game. The large board depicts a grided expanse of water, a number of paths which lead to huts and a giant sea snake at the top (the scoring track). The water is then seeded with a few island tiles and bonus point objectives (there are various starting setups available).

On a player's turn, they must pick a starting point for their expedition and then announce how many spaces they plan to explore. There is a cost associated with this, and the full amount must be paid up front. Open face tiles are extremely expensive, and face down ones are cheap but risky. Tiles are then drawn one by one and placed Carcassonne style on the board from the point of origin. If, at any point, the player draws a tile he/she can't play OR the player chooses to place a token on a tile the exploration phase ends... any remaining money spent on unflipped tiles is lost! It's no big surprise that the reason players are placing tokens on tiles is that when an island becomes fully explored it will score points, determined by it's size, to players who have a presence there (area majority style). In this game, all players present get SOMETHING (2nd player gets half of first, 3rd player gets half of 2nd, 4th gets half of 3rd). When the sea is fully explored, the game ends.

There are two major and one minor mechanics which are worth mentioning here:
1) Players have scout tokens, settlements and forts. When determining majorities, numbers matter but there are a few anomalies: a single fort trumps any number of settlements or scouts. A single settlement trumps any number of scouts. Not surprisingly, settlements and forts cost quite a bit more than scouts.
2) When an island is scored, players retrieve any settlements and forts they had on the island. However, scouts are instead placed on the island exploration tracks on the right of the board. At the end of the game, the value of each track is revealed and the player with the most scouts on each track wins those VPs (it's not totaly random, though. Players do have 1 or 2 opportunities to see the value of the huts). These points seem to amount to roughly 1/3 of the entire score, so this mini-game cannot go unnoticed.
3) Money is very scarce in the game. When a player goes to less than 4 gold, he/she must roll a die. That players gets the amount listed on the die, and all other players get that much +1. In other words, you never want the be the one to have to roll the die, because you are giving an advantage to the other players.

Overall, I quite liked the game. I was afraid it would feel like a Carcassonne clone, but it really doesn't. The exploration feeling is there, and the contest for islands and the island exploration tracks works really well. The randomness is important but suited to the theme. It does have a big problem though... it's way too long. This should have been a 1 hour game, but ours took over 2 hours. It simply doesn't stay fun for that period of time. I'm not sure if I'll ever get to play this again, but if I do I would want to try reducing the board size to see if it helped.

Theres a fun game in there, but it needs to be shorter.

(as for the session report, I was trailing for most of the game as one player consistently nabbed the best islands after others would worked hard to develop them and another player was quite sharp at spotting easy opportunities for quick points. I found myself being the money roller one most turns. I managed to send many of my scouts to the island exploration tracks and redeemed myself at the endgame. I still came in 3rd, but the scores were much closer than they had been.)

Next, I played the introductory scenario of Lock n' Load, Band of Brothers with Kozure (who goes regularly to these things, though the rest of our group does not). It's a simple little scenario which involves a small group of allies holed up in a few central buildings as the axis storms in with an equally small team on a random edge of the board. The goal is to be in possession of that central area by the end of 6 turns. I was doing a decent job of holding my own against Kozure (a much more experienced wargamer), and felt I had a chance of winning until the final turn when I did a very stupid thing: I grouped my forces into a large force and ran through open terrain to obliterate his forces in melee. The problem? As I crossed the open terrain, I gave him a beautiful opportunity to mow me down with opportunity fire. And that's what he did.

All in all, I quite enjoy this game. The rules for infantry combat are simple for this type of game, the box ships with a large number of scenarios, the unit count is low (making setup and takedown fast and easy, and making the scenarios easy to digest in short periods of time). It makes for a much more satisfying game than Memoir '44 from the point of view of experiencing a small scale battle with interesting winning conditions and varied scenarios, though Memoir clearly is simpler and has certain advantages of its own (most of them aesthetic).