Apologies to the gods of blogging, I'm posting this a week and a half late (it's a session report for Wendesday the 12th of Spetember). Why the delay? I'm blaming in on Metroid Prime 3.
We kicked off the evening with Jungle Speed. Does age matter? maybe. Shemp wasn't doing too hot in our game, but JayWowzer and I were neck and neck. Does time matter? Definitely. Starting out the evening with the game led to a far slower game than normal... I guess we hadn't properly "stretched" our gaming mojo yet.
RoboRally with 5 players should be chaotic enough, but I wanted to up the ante. I chose a scenario which appeared to be quite deadly (3 flags concentrated at the center of a board, with pits and conveyor belts all around). No one died in the first round, so that was discouraging. I cruised along unimpeded to the 1st and 2nd flag while the others struggled to get anywhere. Sadly, I lost all my mad programmin' skilz and ran around in circles trying to get number 3. Meanwhile, Luch managed to finish it off. I did manage to reprogram a few robots with my radio control beam, and Luch did manage to shoot alot of robots with his rear-firing laser. Kozure lost his last robot before the end of the game, and I don't beleive that Shemp ever made it to flag 1. Hmmm.
Canal Mania
Canal Mania can be best described as Railroad Tycoon meets Ticket to Ride (and, to a much lesser extent, Maharaja). You've got a board littered with English cities, and you need to connect them with canals. It resembles Ticket to Ride because you have routes you are trying to fulfill, and you must draw cards from a face up supply in order to pay for playing the canal pieces. It resembles Railroad Tycoon because you place hexagonal pieces of canal paths on the board, and ship goods from town to town once you've made the connections. Scoring also draws from both of it's sources: You primarily get points for completing your routes and sending goods across a long network of your cities. From Maharaja, the game borrows a very similar "role" system.
When I first was explained the rules, I thought the whole thing sounded pretty clever. It seemed like many of the downsides of the previous games had been addressed and/or streamlined. You would no longer be frustrated for a long period of time waiting for a particular colour of card to come up, because the cards come in only 5 varieties (actually, 4+ wilds) and every route can use a combination of all 4 different types. Also, the routes you choose determine the only places you can play on the board, so there should be much less analysis paralysis than the totally open options of Railroad Tycoon.
Oh, and the special powers of the roles, and the ease with which they can be swapped around, makes it possible to do SOMETHING productive at almost any time.
But you know what? It didn't do much for me. I'd play the original games before this one any day. It wasn't bad at all, but the process felt slower and more constrained than they do. The slower part might resolve itself with more plays (it SHOULD move fast, because there aren't many choices at any one time. I guess the multiple phases in each player's turn takes it's toll). I think the part that bothered me, though, was the scoring...
There are just a few ways to score points:
1) fulfill routes (contracts)
2) place tiles along those routes that are worth points
3) deliver goods along a long series of your cities
The problem I have is that the points for the routes seem irrelevant. A route worth twice as much takes twice as long to complete. They also go through 2 cities. Therefore, after I've completed a long route, you've completed two short ones, and we are even again.
Then, the choice of tiles used is fairly prescribed as well. I haven't played this often enough to know for sure, but it seems like over the course of a game most players will gain approximately the same number of points from tiles.
So, that leaves connections for delivering goods. Here, major differences in points can occur. If I have a good series of unconnected routes, and you don't, I bet there is nothing you could do to win. Therefore, it seems like the other two paths to victory engage players in a very close battle where 1 or two points will separate the winner from the loser, but the goods delivery makes that race irrelevant. So, then, why bother with counting the rest?
And finally, if the delivered goods are the key to victory, I would hope that there would be fair control over which routes you pick. Not so. On your turn, you pick from the available 5 routes (or much less, if some have already been taken). You can't play without a route, so if you don't have one, you pick from what's available. It seems that only 6-7 routes get completed in a game, so the luck of having the right route available at the right time seems very important to victory.
Now, I could obviously be missing something because I've played only once and didn't do well. Kozure CRUSHED us with a well connected series of canals. Clearly, he "Got It" way before we did (at least, long before I did). We were all virtually tied in second place.
I'd definitely play again. I eventually came around to Maharaja, and it's quite possible I just didn't get Canal Mania this time.
Note to potential buyers: there is very little "mania" involved in Canal Mania.
Friday, September 21, 2007
Thursday, September 20, 2007
Conan the ...Eurogamer (?)
"Between the time when the first game of Chess was played, and the rise of the sons of Caylus, there was an age undreamed of. And unto this, Conan, destined to wear the jeweled crown of Essen upon a troubled brow. It is I, his chronicler, who alone can tell thee of his saga. Let me tell you of the days of high adventure!"Ouch suggested we throw off the burden of heavy thinking and play using only our Conan-brain - quick and intuitive play without deep strategy. Amid much thick Austrian accents and exhortations to "get out of the tunnel, it's not safe," we completed a full game of Power Grid in just over one hour last night. Conan-thinking!
Interestingly, despite the low-brow intent we played a relatively close game of Ticket to Ride - Shemp and Ouch tied at 101 (I trickled in at 80 with a poor mid-late-game ticket draw unfulfilled, Hilaria - something less... she elected not to count, I believe) - it came down to destination tickets filled - of which Shemp had more.
Power Grid was a lop-sided win for Shemp. I did my initial placement poorly (grabbing easy early connections rather than going for long-term strategy) and then Ouch was persuaded to blockade me rather than go for a more long-term strategy himself. Consequently, Shemp had the western half (we played with the top three regions of Germany) all to himself for most of the game. He earned it, but we helped by playing poorly.
"He did not care any more... life and death... the same. Only that the crowd would be there to greet him with howls of lust and fury. He began to realize his sense of worth... he mattered. In time, his victories could not easily be counted... he was taken to the east, a great prize, where the war gamers would teach him the deepest secrets. Language and writing were also made available, the designs of Knizia, the philosophy of Ulrich and Kramer.. But, always, there remained the discipline of dice."Oh, I finally won a game of Trans Europa! Wooooooo! Apparently all I have to do to do well at games is to say "This is the time I will not suck at playing X." Power of positive thinking! (gag)
We played Carcasonne stupid-fast. It was... interesting. Any faster and it would have been pointless-fast. The layout was a mess.
Ticket to Ride (~0:50) [Shemp 101, Ouch 101, Kozure 80, Hilaria >80), Power Grid (~1:10) [Shemp 17, Ouch, 14, Kozure 11 - not even close] , Trans Europa (0:35) [Kozure 1, Shemp & Ouch - 14+] and Carcassonne (0:20) [Ouch (by a wide margin), Kozure, Shemp (scores not fully calculated after Ouch was shown to be easily the winner)], all after a 7:45 PM start time. Not bad, eh?
"So, did Conan travel to all his destinations in America, power the grid of Germania, connect the cities of Europa and lay waste to the fields of Carcasonne. And having no further concern, he and his companions sought adventure in the West. Many wargames and euros did Conan play. Honor and fear were heaped upon his name and, in time, he became a king by his own hand... And this story shall also be told."
Friday, September 07, 2007
OK, Maybe I Don't Loathe El Grande as Much as I Used to.
"Don't call it a comeback
I been here for years"
LL Cool J, "Mama Said Knock You Out"
For about a year and a half, my feelings toward El Grande have been somewhat ambivalent. I said on Wednesday night that the way I feel about playing El Grande is probably the way that bands like Taco, Soft Cell or Thomas Dolby feel about the 1980s; it's something that I was good at once but haven't had a hit with for years and would likely never have again.
Never say never.
Celebrating the triumphant return of Shemp, we played an oldie but goodie, the third true Euro introduced to the group after I brought Puerto Rico and Settlers of Catan one fateful weekend, El Grande.
As I alluded to earlier, once I was quite good at this game. I applied my personal experience with strategic wargames, building up powerbases and defending them tenaciously. For about three or four straight gaming sessions of this (and we didn't play it all that often), I was winning consistently and by a fair margin. It was... glorious.
Then it went downhill. My fellow gamers cottoned onto the fact that the game isn't about (well not entirely about) powerbases, and a fluid/dynamic style of play would more often be rewarded with victory. Slowly I slipped down the VP tree, eventually reaching my usual spot of fourth or fifth out of five players, often by quite a wide margin from the first place player. There I have remained for the better part of two years or so, never really managing higher than a third place finish. While I appreciate the skill and challenge of the game, I haven't really enjoyed it very much during most of that period.
Wednesday night, all that changed.
I've abandoned my previous, methodical approach, to adopt what I call the "smash and grab" approach. Most of my bids and moves are aimed at grabbing quick points and spreading my caballeros across the board (but not too thinly) so that all of my resources aren't tied up in the aforementioned powerbases. I defend my Grande, of course, but I also know when to cut losses and either shift the Grande or otherwise abandon it's extra two points to concentrate elsewhere.
Special scoring, mobile scoreboards, and tower scoring are important to this approach. A careful watch on the VP track is also important, as your moves must be geared to giving the least aid to the leader(s) while giving the most to yourself or lower score players.
I'm still no El Grande "Grande", but I've finally pulled myself out of the doldrums of fifth place finishes. Last night's game was very close, with 2-3 points separating each place, and a total of 7 points (I believe) separating the first place player from the last.
Our second game of the evening, Theophrastus was also very close. I came in first with 60 or 61 points, the last place player was 54 (?) - not much wiggle room there. The game is quite different but equally enjoyable with two, three or four players - more strategic with two, much more back-stabby and rapid with four. As I commented last session we played this, Theophrastus has a lot of rules which are easy to forget - for example, in the so-called "scoring round" (which is actually a limited play round before scoring occurs), you are not permitted to discredit other students' or Theophrastus' work, or change any aspect of Theophrastus' formula. In the heat of alchemical battle, this is easy to forget.
Still a very enjoyable game with a lot of opportunity for optimization as well as player interaction. Solid without being stellar.
I believe our generous host Shemp snapped some pics of the VP tracks to commemorate the closeness of the games. I'd also like to thank Shemp for hosting and welcome him back after a long summer hiatus.
Thursday, September 06, 2007
Closer
El Grande:
That's showing Kozure @ 110 points, Easy @ 108 points, myself @ 107, and Bharmer @ 106. The closest game of El Grande we've had. The lead changed three times during the scoring of the final province! A squeaker, big-time.
Theophrastus:
As you can see, really close scores here, too. AND there were close through all three rounds. In fact, after the second round, you can see that our cumulative scores (in the squares) were 26,26,27, and 27. Not very good scores, but close ones, indeed. Kozure won w/ 60, and I brought up the rear w/ 54. An extremely evenly matched night made for a thrilling return!
That's showing Kozure @ 110 points, Easy @ 108 points, myself @ 107, and Bharmer @ 106. The closest game of El Grande we've had. The lead changed three times during the scoring of the final province! A squeaker, big-time.
Theophrastus:
As you can see, really close scores here, too. AND there were close through all three rounds. In fact, after the second round, you can see that our cumulative scores (in the squares) were 26,26,27, and 27. Not very good scores, but close ones, indeed. Kozure won w/ 60, and I brought up the rear w/ 54. An extremely evenly matched night made for a thrilling return!
Thursday, August 30, 2007
Terakh, Tikal and Tan Tuan...er... San Juan
Or, "How Bharmer Kicked our Behinds Repeatedly"
First up was Terakh, the light strategy game with a fantasy/magic theme. I enjoy this game for its combination of chess-like strategy with a few wargame-y aspects like attack and defence modifiers, asymmetrical player powers and to-hit rolls. The designers have done a good job of finding the right balance between simplicity and theme for a game of this size and intended investment of time.
I came out swinging and dealt some pretty good hits quite early, eventually knocking both Ouch and Bharmer down to 2 and 1 points respectively (with a little help from Ouch), remaining at 3 points myself. Bharmer was in a tight spot, sandwiched between the two of us (an unfortunate but common occurrence when you're the third player to place in a three player game) and was attacked from both sides. I was feeling pretty satisfied with myself, but then Bharmer laid both Jason and I low with two successive Plague (?) cards, which reduce all Elders by one point unless they are already at one point or on a purple tria. Then the Terakh Crisis hit, which promptly killed Ouch and I, leaving Bharmer standing. So, after about 50 minutes of play, the game winner was decided by a dice roll. Normally, not my ideal ending, but a fun game and all the more impressive to see Bharmer win after being knocked down so thoroughly earlier in the game.
Tikal followed. For the first time in about a half-dozen or more plays, I think we actually managed to remember to place a new hex tile at the beginning of each player's turn, rather than forgetting and placing it afterwards, or not placing one at all, or remembering a turn or two later. This simple rules error has been the bane of our Tikal-playing careers, for some reason, we never got into the solid habit of remembering to do it at the right time.
So, this time we really cracked down on each other, heaping scorn on people who forgot.
Despite this revolutionary advance in gameplay, Bharmer pulled away early on and remained in the lead for the rest of the game. He grabbed at least two three-sets and three (or more) two-sets of treasure by the end (something like that, I can't remember), having scored between 12 and 21 points on treasure alone almost every scoring round but the first. I fell behind initially but eventually regained a little ground with treasure and careful positioning, though in the end it wasn't enough. Bharmer scored somewhere in the 110-115 range, I scored in the 85-90 range, and I think Ouch was 70-75 range. My personal mistakes here were failing to block Bharmer as often as I was able to block Ouch, and not getting in position to take treasures first before Bharmer. Our Tikal games are typically closer than this, so this substantial victory by Bharmer was pretty embarassing for both Ouch and I. Bharmer was helped substantially by placing almost every treasure site save one (as I recall), so luck of the draw did enter into it, but not to detract from his victory; he did play quite well.
At this point, Ouch had to leave, claiming the need to retire early.
With only about half an hour left in the evening, we turned to the only short two player we had on hand, San Juan.
What a shambles. Bharmer thoroughly trounced me, scoring something like 48 to my measly 21. I was completely outclassed in every category, failing to build even a single 6 building.
In my defence, I never actually drew a six-building to begin with, but I still played horribly. I missed several opportunities to build silver mines due to bad planning, and invested too many cards in the chapel before I had cards to spare. I was beaten by Bharmer's good play and my own poor judgement and timing.
I build a coffee roaster early, but my second build, a black market, and third build, the archive, were poorly chosen. I added stupidity to mismanagement by building a chapel fourth. I did have some poor draws, but this was a hole of my own digging. I had built all of seven (eight?) buildings when Bharmer plunked down his twelfth. Bharmer did well with the production building + guild hall combo, and also managed some other 6-point building bonuses, including a bunch from his palace.
I limped to the finish line, my only uncertainty about the victor being whether he doubled or tripled my score in the end.
This remains a decent game, and very elegant in its size, playing time and complexity. I remain somewhat leary of the problem like mine; once you fall behind you are almost certainly doomed against any player of competence - and it is not terribly difficult to fall behind due to bad early draws. Still, I deserved to lose that one.
And that, my fellow WAGSters, is why I vote that Bharmer not be allowed to play any more.
Just kidding. Mostly. Well... sorta.
Die Bharmer, die!
First up was Terakh, the light strategy game with a fantasy/magic theme. I enjoy this game for its combination of chess-like strategy with a few wargame-y aspects like attack and defence modifiers, asymmetrical player powers and to-hit rolls. The designers have done a good job of finding the right balance between simplicity and theme for a game of this size and intended investment of time.
I came out swinging and dealt some pretty good hits quite early, eventually knocking both Ouch and Bharmer down to 2 and 1 points respectively (with a little help from Ouch), remaining at 3 points myself. Bharmer was in a tight spot, sandwiched between the two of us (an unfortunate but common occurrence when you're the third player to place in a three player game) and was attacked from both sides. I was feeling pretty satisfied with myself, but then Bharmer laid both Jason and I low with two successive Plague (?) cards, which reduce all Elders by one point unless they are already at one point or on a purple tria. Then the Terakh Crisis hit, which promptly killed Ouch and I, leaving Bharmer standing. So, after about 50 minutes of play, the game winner was decided by a dice roll. Normally, not my ideal ending, but a fun game and all the more impressive to see Bharmer win after being knocked down so thoroughly earlier in the game.
Tikal followed. For the first time in about a half-dozen or more plays, I think we actually managed to remember to place a new hex tile at the beginning of each player's turn, rather than forgetting and placing it afterwards, or not placing one at all, or remembering a turn or two later. This simple rules error has been the bane of our Tikal-playing careers, for some reason, we never got into the solid habit of remembering to do it at the right time.
So, this time we really cracked down on each other, heaping scorn on people who forgot.
Despite this revolutionary advance in gameplay, Bharmer pulled away early on and remained in the lead for the rest of the game. He grabbed at least two three-sets and three (or more) two-sets of treasure by the end (something like that, I can't remember), having scored between 12 and 21 points on treasure alone almost every scoring round but the first. I fell behind initially but eventually regained a little ground with treasure and careful positioning, though in the end it wasn't enough. Bharmer scored somewhere in the 110-115 range, I scored in the 85-90 range, and I think Ouch was 70-75 range. My personal mistakes here were failing to block Bharmer as often as I was able to block Ouch, and not getting in position to take treasures first before Bharmer. Our Tikal games are typically closer than this, so this substantial victory by Bharmer was pretty embarassing for both Ouch and I. Bharmer was helped substantially by placing almost every treasure site save one (as I recall), so luck of the draw did enter into it, but not to detract from his victory; he did play quite well.
At this point, Ouch had to leave, claiming the need to retire early.
With only about half an hour left in the evening, we turned to the only short two player we had on hand, San Juan.
What a shambles. Bharmer thoroughly trounced me, scoring something like 48 to my measly 21. I was completely outclassed in every category, failing to build even a single 6 building.
In my defence, I never actually drew a six-building to begin with, but I still played horribly. I missed several opportunities to build silver mines due to bad planning, and invested too many cards in the chapel before I had cards to spare. I was beaten by Bharmer's good play and my own poor judgement and timing.
I build a coffee roaster early, but my second build, a black market, and third build, the archive, were poorly chosen. I added stupidity to mismanagement by building a chapel fourth. I did have some poor draws, but this was a hole of my own digging. I had built all of seven (eight?) buildings when Bharmer plunked down his twelfth. Bharmer did well with the production building + guild hall combo, and also managed some other 6-point building bonuses, including a bunch from his palace.
I limped to the finish line, my only uncertainty about the victor being whether he doubled or tripled my score in the end.
This remains a decent game, and very elegant in its size, playing time and complexity. I remain somewhat leary of the problem like mine; once you fall behind you are almost certainly doomed against any player of competence - and it is not terribly difficult to fall behind due to bad early draws. Still, I deserved to lose that one.
And that, my fellow WAGSters, is why I vote that Bharmer not be allowed to play any more.
Just kidding. Mostly. Well... sorta.
Die Bharmer, die!
Tuesday, August 28, 2007
Dying the Sky with Blood, and Pounding the Earth (Crimson Skies, Jungle Speed) 8454
Short post:
We played Crimson Skies, a "Clix" game featuring a boardless movement system (similar to Wreckage). In it, concept planes face off in arial combat. I beleive it's a two player game, but it worked fine with 4. Not much to say, except that I thought it was quite a bit better than HeroClix (and wreckage, for that matter) due to a more reasonable learning curve. This would be due to the fact that planes tend to start off with powers which they can only lose as they get hit... HeroClix characters aften gain abilities as they weaken. Also, those powers are relatively easy to absorb since the colour chart matches up reasonably well. The most interesting part (also the one I had the most problems with) was the movement mechanic. After initiative is determined, you play a "Maneuvre" card (my term, not theirs) to describe how your plane will fly. The card shows a flight path and you essentially place cardboard hex pieces end to end and match the flight path until your flight reaches it's speed rating in spaces. In theory, it's a nice way to encapsulate many of the possible movements that a plane could do without adding much complexity. In practice, I sometimes wished I could deviate slightly from the flight paths available since it seemed arbitrarily limiting at times. Also, while the cardboard spacers eliminate the need for a board, precision is lost and alignments can get out of wack if people aren't careful.
Ultimately, though, it's not a game for rules lawyers. It's a fun game if you accept the inherent "sloppyness" of a board-free environment and some of the game's limitations (and let's be honest... planes go fast. I might be kidding myself that such modifications in flight would be easy).
Team Easy-Bharmer took the skies in a tight formation and barreled towards Luch, leaving Kozure to fight a single one of Bharmer's planes. Much questionable maneuvring occured, mostly on my part, and planes threatened to crash on multiple occasions (that was mostly Luch, Kozure, Bharmer. Mostly.) I took down one of Luch's planes and Kozure got enough solid hits on Bharmer that he decided it was wise to escape rather than crash and burn. Team Easy-Bharmer ultimately shot our way to victory, despite much flying ineptitude all around. Well, everyone but Kozure (and that was expected).
We finished off with Jungle Speed.
We played Crimson Skies, a "Clix" game featuring a boardless movement system (similar to Wreckage). In it, concept planes face off in arial combat. I beleive it's a two player game, but it worked fine with 4. Not much to say, except that I thought it was quite a bit better than HeroClix (and wreckage, for that matter) due to a more reasonable learning curve. This would be due to the fact that planes tend to start off with powers which they can only lose as they get hit... HeroClix characters aften gain abilities as they weaken. Also, those powers are relatively easy to absorb since the colour chart matches up reasonably well. The most interesting part (also the one I had the most problems with) was the movement mechanic. After initiative is determined, you play a "Maneuvre" card (my term, not theirs) to describe how your plane will fly. The card shows a flight path and you essentially place cardboard hex pieces end to end and match the flight path until your flight reaches it's speed rating in spaces. In theory, it's a nice way to encapsulate many of the possible movements that a plane could do without adding much complexity. In practice, I sometimes wished I could deviate slightly from the flight paths available since it seemed arbitrarily limiting at times. Also, while the cardboard spacers eliminate the need for a board, precision is lost and alignments can get out of wack if people aren't careful.
Ultimately, though, it's not a game for rules lawyers. It's a fun game if you accept the inherent "sloppyness" of a board-free environment and some of the game's limitations (and let's be honest... planes go fast. I might be kidding myself that such modifications in flight would be easy).
Team Easy-Bharmer took the skies in a tight formation and barreled towards Luch, leaving Kozure to fight a single one of Bharmer's planes. Much questionable maneuvring occured, mostly on my part, and planes threatened to crash on multiple occasions (that was mostly Luch, Kozure, Bharmer. Mostly.) I took down one of Luch's planes and Kozure got enough solid hits on Bharmer that he decided it was wise to escape rather than crash and burn. Team Easy-Bharmer ultimately shot our way to victory, despite much flying ineptitude all around. Well, everyone but Kozure (and that was expected).
We finished off with Jungle Speed.
Thursday, August 09, 2007
Let's build cities (Blue Moon City, Carcassonne:The City)
Just Bharmer and myself this night. I brought along a selection of two player games and we each picked one. I did my best to convince him to go with Rommel in the Desert, but he didn't bite.
Blue Moon City
We started out with Blue Moon City (Bharmer's pick). It was an interesting mix of completing each other's buildings and running off and doing our own thing. With only two players, it seemed like cards were more abundant (though I can't explain why that would be). On a couple of occasions, we would complete three section buildings on one turn! (after calling a dragon or two, of course). This obviously led to big swings in position. I had the early lead, building three sections of the obelisk pretty quickly. Bharmer had only one, but late in the game he managed to complete a lot of buildings without giving much to me, so he was winning the crystal race pretty handily. I tried to force a last minute scale payout to get the last few crytals I needed in time... but it wasn't fast enough. He swooped in and placed his last two cubes in the obelisk for the win.
This game continues to be good fun for me. It's typically a very tight race, and the way payouts work keeps everyone in the running while making the leader hard to spot. I noticed once again that Knizia's math was pretty honed in making this game: every time I play a two player game there appears to be JUST ENOUGH crystals on the board to allow both players to win (and then only if they've managed some shared payouts earlier in the game). Very tight indeed.
Looking at your hand and coming up with a clever use of your cards is always satisfying, and is probably my favorite aspect of the game.
Carcassonne: The City
The second (and last) game of the evening was Carcassonne: The City... a game I enjoy but rarely play due to it's similarities to the original (if it weren't such an attractive set, I'd probably trade it away) . Anyway, the session was unfortunately hurt by a number of rules missunderstandings (caused by the overly brief overview I gave Bharmer), which led to moves he wouldn't have made otherwise. Example: thinking he knew that roads split neighbourhoods, I didn't mention it. Boy, that led to an "aha!" moment, and not in a good way! Anyway, I did manage a very lucrative guard which overlooked a loooong section of the city full of public buildings, but I also scored a ton of points from the neighborhoods I won due to the rules mistakes. Anyway, I had a good time... hopefully so did Bharmer!
Oh, and judging by the city we've built, Iwould guess we would make terribly poor city planners. I won't be quitting my day job.
Blue Moon City
We started out with Blue Moon City (Bharmer's pick). It was an interesting mix of completing each other's buildings and running off and doing our own thing. With only two players, it seemed like cards were more abundant (though I can't explain why that would be). On a couple of occasions, we would complete three section buildings on one turn! (after calling a dragon or two, of course). This obviously led to big swings in position. I had the early lead, building three sections of the obelisk pretty quickly. Bharmer had only one, but late in the game he managed to complete a lot of buildings without giving much to me, so he was winning the crystal race pretty handily. I tried to force a last minute scale payout to get the last few crytals I needed in time... but it wasn't fast enough. He swooped in and placed his last two cubes in the obelisk for the win.
This game continues to be good fun for me. It's typically a very tight race, and the way payouts work keeps everyone in the running while making the leader hard to spot. I noticed once again that Knizia's math was pretty honed in making this game: every time I play a two player game there appears to be JUST ENOUGH crystals on the board to allow both players to win (and then only if they've managed some shared payouts earlier in the game). Very tight indeed.
Looking at your hand and coming up with a clever use of your cards is always satisfying, and is probably my favorite aspect of the game.
Carcassonne: The City
The second (and last) game of the evening was Carcassonne: The City... a game I enjoy but rarely play due to it's similarities to the original (if it weren't such an attractive set, I'd probably trade it away) . Anyway, the session was unfortunately hurt by a number of rules missunderstandings (caused by the overly brief overview I gave Bharmer), which led to moves he wouldn't have made otherwise. Example: thinking he knew that roads split neighbourhoods, I didn't mention it. Boy, that led to an "aha!" moment, and not in a good way! Anyway, I did manage a very lucrative guard which overlooked a loooong section of the city full of public buildings, but I also scored a ton of points from the neighborhoods I won due to the rules mistakes. Anyway, I had a good time... hopefully so did Bharmer!
Oh, and judging by the city we've built, Iwould guess we would make terribly poor city planners. I won't be quitting my day job.
Tuesday, August 07, 2007
This is a "Hot" scene, with... "Heat"... and ... "Chemistry" (Maharaja, Taj Mahal, Yspahan) 8237
Games set in the Middle-East, played in a very hot apartment.
Maharaja
We've played Maharaja many times. My opinion on the game has swayed, but one thing that has remained constant is that Bharmer always wins. He is always very much in control, always a few steps ahead. I was determined to make this evening the exception...
Out of the gate, I had the lowest character so I went first (we dealt these randomly... more on that later). I of course went to the next scoring area and secured a majority by claiming the center palace. With money in hand, I proceeded to the next scoring area (though I also accelerated the return of the first scoring area by advancing the character track). As the game went on, I was awash with money and doing very well. On my final turn, I placed two palaces and ended the game with a comfortable lead.
Here's the thing: this game got me thinking, and I'm pretty sure that the player who goes first in the first turn usually wins. The money earned in the easy majority on the first scoring round makes the rest of the game significantly easier. Unless we are collectively doing something wrong, it seems very difficult to catch up once you've fallen behind. I'm not sure why it's taken so long for me to notice it, but it seems rather mandatory to bid for starting order in the future! There's probably a way to take a loss on the fist round and secure a majority on the next scoring, but all it takes is a single person messing with the track to kill that strategy. Anyway, I had fun but I suspect that those who weren't in the running didn't enjoy it much.
Taj Mahal
We played our first four player of this wonderful game. Not much to tell, but I has a great time as always. Easily one of my favorite games (funny, too, because this is one I normally win but Luch beat me by a point). Kozure, who vowed to make this the "time he played Taj Mahal and didn't suck at it" was doing quite well for the majority of the game, but fell back in the last few rounds. Oh well!
Yspahan
We finished off with a three player of Yspahan. In my second outing, I tried to go for cards rather than the camel track. I was monumentally lucky by pulling the exact card I wanted the first time I drew (I gathered lots of gold and then immediately drew the card that lets you build a building ignoring the cost of the camels). I built the one that gives me a bonus cube every time I placed in a disctrict. Wow, that's a powerful ability to have from the beginning! That, combined with a very lucky die roll for 4 souks in the most expensive disctrict on the last round combined to give me a decisive win. It's actually a little boring when exceptional good luck gives you a win over your opponents, but it's a short game and it's too early to tell whether this sort of thing happens often. I still like it.
Maharaja
We've played Maharaja many times. My opinion on the game has swayed, but one thing that has remained constant is that Bharmer always wins. He is always very much in control, always a few steps ahead. I was determined to make this evening the exception...
Out of the gate, I had the lowest character so I went first (we dealt these randomly... more on that later). I of course went to the next scoring area and secured a majority by claiming the center palace. With money in hand, I proceeded to the next scoring area (though I also accelerated the return of the first scoring area by advancing the character track). As the game went on, I was awash with money and doing very well. On my final turn, I placed two palaces and ended the game with a comfortable lead.
Here's the thing: this game got me thinking, and I'm pretty sure that the player who goes first in the first turn usually wins. The money earned in the easy majority on the first scoring round makes the rest of the game significantly easier. Unless we are collectively doing something wrong, it seems very difficult to catch up once you've fallen behind. I'm not sure why it's taken so long for me to notice it, but it seems rather mandatory to bid for starting order in the future! There's probably a way to take a loss on the fist round and secure a majority on the next scoring, but all it takes is a single person messing with the track to kill that strategy. Anyway, I had fun but I suspect that those who weren't in the running didn't enjoy it much.
Taj Mahal
We played our first four player of this wonderful game. Not much to tell, but I has a great time as always. Easily one of my favorite games (funny, too, because this is one I normally win but Luch beat me by a point). Kozure, who vowed to make this the "time he played Taj Mahal and didn't suck at it" was doing quite well for the majority of the game, but fell back in the last few rounds. Oh well!
Yspahan
We finished off with a three player of Yspahan. In my second outing, I tried to go for cards rather than the camel track. I was monumentally lucky by pulling the exact card I wanted the first time I drew (I gathered lots of gold and then immediately drew the card that lets you build a building ignoring the cost of the camels). I built the one that gives me a bonus cube every time I placed in a disctrict. Wow, that's a powerful ability to have from the beginning! That, combined with a very lucky die roll for 4 souks in the most expensive disctrict on the last round combined to give me a decisive win. It's actually a little boring when exceptional good luck gives you a win over your opponents, but it's a short game and it's too early to tell whether this sort of thing happens often. I still like it.
Friday, July 27, 2007
Potluck! (Yspahan, Dungeon Twister, Louis XIV, Jungle Speed) 8169
I had everyone bring a game they owned tonight.
Yspahan
Yspahan is a game I'd heard much about recently, but what I heard hadn't intrigued me very much. Having played it, I'm happy Bharmer took the plunge... it's a very good game.
It's a game about trading in the middle east, but the theme is thinly applied. This falls squarely in the category of games where theme could be just about anything (not to imply that the theme isn't appropriate or welcome, just that it's somewhat irrelevant). Really, it's just one in a long line of euros where the goal is to get as many victory points as possible by managing your resources and making tough choices along the way. What sets this game apart for me (after one play, mind you) is that there seems to be several legitimate avenues to success and the level and type of confrontation feels just about perfect. All this, and the game is very short at 45min. to an hour!
Each turn. players must choose between claiming souks for points, building buildings (for points and special powers), claiming spots on the "camel track" and gaining money or camels (a form of currency in the game). One of the most interesting aspecs of the game is the dice mechanic which generates these choices: the starting player rolls eight dice. The dice are then spread on a board with 6 fields. All the dice showing the highest number rolled get placed in the "generate money" field. The dice showing the lowest value is placed in the "generate camels" field. The rest of the dice are spread out according to the value shown on the fields in between in ascending order. Example:
Roll=1,2,2,2,4,6,6,6.
Result=Place the die with the 1 on the camel field, the three dice with 2s on them on the second field, the die with the 4 on the third field and the three 6s on the highest field (because no 3s or 5s were rolled, this leaves the fourth and fifth field empty).
The fields with dice on them determine the choices available to the players. 3 dice on the camels would allow a player to take three camels. 3 dice on the second field allows a player to place three cubes on the sooks of a particular region (among other things). Etc, etc. In this way, the choices are constantly changing, and depending on the situation a player might want to choose something to advance his strategy, or to prevent another player from doing something advantageous to them.
My biggest complaint about the game would be that for such a quick and light game, there are a lot of rules. Once learned, it's easy to ignore this criticism, but I would consider it a barrier to teaching it to some people I think would otherwise enjoy this level of game. On the other hand, rules density shouldn't be a surprise considering one of the main strengths of the game is that many viable strategies are available.
Bharmer won. I came in a reasonably close second and Tilli was third.
Dungeon Twister
Luch arrived and we set up to play Dungeon Twister. Rather than attempt a four player game, we played two simultaneous 2 player games. I really enjoy the game for the balance it brings between strategy and chaos, and the theme helps releive it of some of the dryness it could have had otherwise. The rest of the group isn't enamoured with it, sadly, so I might not get to play much until I find someone who likes it as much as I do.
I won against Kozure 5-0, and Luch won against Bharmer 5-4.
Louis XIV
Another game I like very much, Louis XIV is another example of a very nice strategy game that packs a lot of punch in a short timeframe (and a small box). Now that I think about it, it's also pretty rules heavy. Goes with the territory, I suppose.
Things went very well for me. I was able to get almost all the goods I needed, when I needed them. I completed the mission which gives you a free cube where Louis is every turn... I think that one is very powerful. With it, I managed to fulfill 7 missions over the course of the game, giving me a victory (Bharmer was a close second). Very good game.
We finished off with two rounds of my favorite closer of all time, Jungle Speed . Good times.
Yspahan
Yspahan is a game I'd heard much about recently, but what I heard hadn't intrigued me very much. Having played it, I'm happy Bharmer took the plunge... it's a very good game.
It's a game about trading in the middle east, but the theme is thinly applied. This falls squarely in the category of games where theme could be just about anything (not to imply that the theme isn't appropriate or welcome, just that it's somewhat irrelevant). Really, it's just one in a long line of euros where the goal is to get as many victory points as possible by managing your resources and making tough choices along the way. What sets this game apart for me (after one play, mind you) is that there seems to be several legitimate avenues to success and the level and type of confrontation feels just about perfect. All this, and the game is very short at 45min. to an hour!
Each turn. players must choose between claiming souks for points, building buildings (for points and special powers), claiming spots on the "camel track" and gaining money or camels (a form of currency in the game). One of the most interesting aspecs of the game is the dice mechanic which generates these choices: the starting player rolls eight dice. The dice are then spread on a board with 6 fields. All the dice showing the highest number rolled get placed in the "generate money" field. The dice showing the lowest value is placed in the "generate camels" field. The rest of the dice are spread out according to the value shown on the fields in between in ascending order. Example:
Roll=1,2,2,2,4,6,6,6.
Result=Place the die with the 1 on the camel field, the three dice with 2s on them on the second field, the die with the 4 on the third field and the three 6s on the highest field (because no 3s or 5s were rolled, this leaves the fourth and fifth field empty).
The fields with dice on them determine the choices available to the players. 3 dice on the camels would allow a player to take three camels. 3 dice on the second field allows a player to place three cubes on the sooks of a particular region (among other things). Etc, etc. In this way, the choices are constantly changing, and depending on the situation a player might want to choose something to advance his strategy, or to prevent another player from doing something advantageous to them.
My biggest complaint about the game would be that for such a quick and light game, there are a lot of rules. Once learned, it's easy to ignore this criticism, but I would consider it a barrier to teaching it to some people I think would otherwise enjoy this level of game. On the other hand, rules density shouldn't be a surprise considering one of the main strengths of the game is that many viable strategies are available.
Bharmer won. I came in a reasonably close second and Tilli was third.
Dungeon Twister
Luch arrived and we set up to play Dungeon Twister. Rather than attempt a four player game, we played two simultaneous 2 player games. I really enjoy the game for the balance it brings between strategy and chaos, and the theme helps releive it of some of the dryness it could have had otherwise. The rest of the group isn't enamoured with it, sadly, so I might not get to play much until I find someone who likes it as much as I do.
I won against Kozure 5-0, and Luch won against Bharmer 5-4.
Louis XIV
Another game I like very much, Louis XIV is another example of a very nice strategy game that packs a lot of punch in a short timeframe (and a small box). Now that I think about it, it's also pretty rules heavy. Goes with the territory, I suppose.
Things went very well for me. I was able to get almost all the goods I needed, when I needed them. I completed the mission which gives you a free cube where Louis is every turn... I think that one is very powerful. With it, I managed to fulfill 7 missions over the course of the game, giving me a victory (Bharmer was a close second). Very good game.
We finished off with two rounds of my favorite closer of all time, Jungle Speed . Good times.
Friday, July 20, 2007
The "War and Peace" of Eurogames (Die Macher) 8098
Die Macher has a certain notoriety at BoardGameGeek for a few reasons. It's the first game entered in the database, 20 years after it's release it's still in the top 10 highest rated games and it's one of the longest and most complicated eurogames ever. Despite it's high praise and legendary status, I was never under the impression I would actually PLAY it...
Well, Valley Games recently reprinted this classic as a very nice language independent version and Bharmer decided he wanted it. There you go.
Die Macher
The Idea
Each player represents a german political party trying to win a series of local elections in an effort to win the national one.
How it works
The game consists of 7 local elections played more or less sequentially. Each election consists of several short phases, where players engage in various activities meant to further their campaign. They will modify their party's platform to more closely match local opinion, purchase media support, plan local parties to drum up support, use special members of the party (termed the "shadow cabinet") to lock votes, create/ sway key issues, improve public opinion for their party or damage the reputation of others, etc, etc. Finally, Opinion Polls are commissioned and the results are manipulated by the commissioning party in order to achieve the desired effect (to boost their party or hurt others), or they simply do not publish the results if they can't be salvaged. When all is said and done, votes are tallied and a winner of the local election is declared. Players then move on to the next regional election, and the cycle begins again.
This being a game about politics, it only makes sense that the central concern revolves around opinions. Each player's party has a position on five issues (such as being "pro nuclear energy"). Each region, similarly, has a position on four issues. As the elections progress, the national opinion is slowly formed and/or changed. Parties with platforms which closely match the position of the region get more votes. Parties with platforms which closely match the national position gain party membership as the game progresses, and gain victory points at the endgame.
I said earlier that the elections are played more or less sequentially. In fact, while players are competing in the current local election, the next 3 are also visible and can be influenced by all the tools at the party's disposal in advance of those elections actually occuring. Certainly, a player who has layed the foundation for a successful election ahead of time stands to get greater rewards with less work. On the other hand, nothing is etched in stone, and effort/ money/ resources played too early can easily be reversed before that election starts.
In typical german game fashion, all this theme is represented rather dryly by hordes of wooden cubes being manipulated on a large abstract board (in this case, the board looks like a giant illustration of a circle divided into many little rings). Luckily (and also in typical german game fashion), the mechanics are quite interesting and work well together to make a very challenging and clever game with little or no downtime, despite it's length.
Thoughts
I actually didn't feel that Die Macher was the monster it's made out to be. Maybe it's because we've played lots of games, or maybe it's because I also play wargames on occasion (or maybe it's because I took the time to watch the introductory video by "Boardgames with Scott"). It's certainly the heaviest pure german game I've played, but despite the long playtime, many phases in the game and myriad interlocking mechanics, the end result did not feel overwhelming or overlong. In fact, our first game, including rules explanation, took only 4.5 hours! I suspect our next game would be roughly 3.5 hours. Die Macher remained engrossing throughout and was quite fun. My only (minor) gripe with the game as a system would be that no matter how cleverly the game mechanics represent real life politics the experience feels alot more like pushing cubes around for victory points that blazing the campaign trail. The theme is so strongly embodied in the rules that it's a bit of a shame that it comes off as abstracted as it does. From a components point of view, most things are quite functional and of high quality, but a few unfortunate icon choices has led to difficulty differentiating between certain political stances. It's really unfortunate, too, because you find yourself doing that quite commonly over the course of a game. Also, there is a mechanic for forming coalitions which doesn't seem to work that well. While coalitions are an integral part of german politics (I'm told), their impact on the game is a little underwhelming considering how many stars need to align to make it happen (congruent stances on at least 2 issues + the play of certain shadow cabinet cards in the current election). I won't pretend to have a good understanding of how all the scoring opportunities come together, though, so that comment might be very premature.
Kozure mentioned that he liked the fact that this was a german game which managed to combine passive-agressive play with aggressive-aggressive play successfully, a rare feat (most shy away from direct conflict). I agree with him. Off the top of my head, the only other one I can think of which tries to do the same is Kramer's Wildlife.
Session Report
This has been long enough, so I'll keep it short.
I came out strong at the beginning, locking a few high scoring media cubes and winning many votes in the local elections. Problem was, I pushed my shadow cabinet to hard at the beginning and was left without their support in the last few regions. The fact that the local and national position on most issues went from positive to negative over the course of the game without a similar shift in my party's ideals led me to a score of 0 in the final three regions!
I'll have to be more careful about that in the future.
The game was characterized by enormous bids for opinion polls (I beleive $26 000 was pegged as a "ridiculously high" price for those cards, but commonly surpassed none-the-less). In the first few rounds, I overbid drastically for turn order (though aside from the wasted money I think the turn order advantage was worth it). We were all quite aggressive on the media front, typically filling the 5 cube limit well in advance of any local elections.
Anyway, Luch was the decisive winner, with Bharmer and Kozure nearly tied for the 2nd prize. As for me, the three 0s put me out of the running to win. I was too absorbed trying to make things go my way to really notice what Luch did to come out ahead, but he DID have the largest national party at the end along with a couple of high scoring media cubes.
Next time, I will crush him.
Well, Valley Games recently reprinted this classic as a very nice language independent version and Bharmer decided he wanted it. There you go.
Die Macher
The Idea
Each player represents a german political party trying to win a series of local elections in an effort to win the national one.
How it works
The game consists of 7 local elections played more or less sequentially. Each election consists of several short phases, where players engage in various activities meant to further their campaign. They will modify their party's platform to more closely match local opinion, purchase media support, plan local parties to drum up support, use special members of the party (termed the "shadow cabinet") to lock votes, create/ sway key issues, improve public opinion for their party or damage the reputation of others, etc, etc. Finally, Opinion Polls are commissioned and the results are manipulated by the commissioning party in order to achieve the desired effect (to boost their party or hurt others), or they simply do not publish the results if they can't be salvaged. When all is said and done, votes are tallied and a winner of the local election is declared. Players then move on to the next regional election, and the cycle begins again.
This being a game about politics, it only makes sense that the central concern revolves around opinions. Each player's party has a position on five issues (such as being "pro nuclear energy"). Each region, similarly, has a position on four issues. As the elections progress, the national opinion is slowly formed and/or changed. Parties with platforms which closely match the position of the region get more votes. Parties with platforms which closely match the national position gain party membership as the game progresses, and gain victory points at the endgame.
I said earlier that the elections are played more or less sequentially. In fact, while players are competing in the current local election, the next 3 are also visible and can be influenced by all the tools at the party's disposal in advance of those elections actually occuring. Certainly, a player who has layed the foundation for a successful election ahead of time stands to get greater rewards with less work. On the other hand, nothing is etched in stone, and effort/ money/ resources played too early can easily be reversed before that election starts.
In typical german game fashion, all this theme is represented rather dryly by hordes of wooden cubes being manipulated on a large abstract board (in this case, the board looks like a giant illustration of a circle divided into many little rings). Luckily (and also in typical german game fashion), the mechanics are quite interesting and work well together to make a very challenging and clever game with little or no downtime, despite it's length.
Thoughts
I actually didn't feel that Die Macher was the monster it's made out to be. Maybe it's because we've played lots of games, or maybe it's because I also play wargames on occasion (or maybe it's because I took the time to watch the introductory video by "Boardgames with Scott"). It's certainly the heaviest pure german game I've played, but despite the long playtime, many phases in the game and myriad interlocking mechanics, the end result did not feel overwhelming or overlong. In fact, our first game, including rules explanation, took only 4.5 hours! I suspect our next game would be roughly 3.5 hours. Die Macher remained engrossing throughout and was quite fun. My only (minor) gripe with the game as a system would be that no matter how cleverly the game mechanics represent real life politics the experience feels alot more like pushing cubes around for victory points that blazing the campaign trail. The theme is so strongly embodied in the rules that it's a bit of a shame that it comes off as abstracted as it does. From a components point of view, most things are quite functional and of high quality, but a few unfortunate icon choices has led to difficulty differentiating between certain political stances. It's really unfortunate, too, because you find yourself doing that quite commonly over the course of a game. Also, there is a mechanic for forming coalitions which doesn't seem to work that well. While coalitions are an integral part of german politics (I'm told), their impact on the game is a little underwhelming considering how many stars need to align to make it happen (congruent stances on at least 2 issues + the play of certain shadow cabinet cards in the current election). I won't pretend to have a good understanding of how all the scoring opportunities come together, though, so that comment might be very premature.
Kozure mentioned that he liked the fact that this was a german game which managed to combine passive-agressive play with aggressive-aggressive play successfully, a rare feat (most shy away from direct conflict). I agree with him. Off the top of my head, the only other one I can think of which tries to do the same is Kramer's Wildlife.
Session Report
This has been long enough, so I'll keep it short.
I came out strong at the beginning, locking a few high scoring media cubes and winning many votes in the local elections. Problem was, I pushed my shadow cabinet to hard at the beginning and was left without their support in the last few regions. The fact that the local and national position on most issues went from positive to negative over the course of the game without a similar shift in my party's ideals led me to a score of 0 in the final three regions!
I'll have to be more careful about that in the future.
The game was characterized by enormous bids for opinion polls (I beleive $26 000 was pegged as a "ridiculously high" price for those cards, but commonly surpassed none-the-less). In the first few rounds, I overbid drastically for turn order (though aside from the wasted money I think the turn order advantage was worth it). We were all quite aggressive on the media front, typically filling the 5 cube limit well in advance of any local elections.
Anyway, Luch was the decisive winner, with Bharmer and Kozure nearly tied for the 2nd prize. As for me, the three 0s put me out of the running to win. I was too absorbed trying to make things go my way to really notice what Luch did to come out ahead, but he DID have the largest national party at the end along with a couple of high scoring media cubes.
Next time, I will crush him.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
