We had another "laissez-faire" dictator this week. Luch asked that we bring a few games, and he'd pick on site. From our bag of games, he picked Galaxy Trucker and Agricola.
Galaxy Trucker
Last time we played this, we discovered Luch had been building his ships without necessarily starting from the center. Bharmer hadn't played before, so a rules explanation was in order and we then started on our voyage of destruction.
The first flight was unusually destruction filled, but at least we all made it to the end. The same couldn't be said of the subsequent flights...
In flight two, the meteors where raining down amidst a variety of combat zones. I had a very successfully designed ships, so I managed to escape unscathed, but the others weren't so lucky. Bharmer lost most of his ship, but the most unfortunate story was that Kozure suffered an unlikely hit early which snowballed into a series of losses leaving him limping along. Luch had a ship that was loaded to the max with batteries, which we originally found very funny, but against all odds he suffered so many attacks that he burned through all of them and was destroyed. I ended the flight with a huge hoard of cash... a nearly insurmountable lead.
Flight three was similar, but Kozure had put together a very good ship and managed a huge comeback. I still did OK, but I wasn't sure if it would be enough. Bharmer and Luch? Well, they didn't do so well.
It wasn't. Kozure beat me by 2 dollars (it was something like 72$ to 70$ to 5$ to 2$).
As usual, it was a fun game. Even amidst total catastrophe, the experience is enjoyable... a very unique game indeed.
Agricola
Given Shemp's absence, it was a good time to play Agricola.
I always go for a huge family in a stone house, lots of animals and little farming, so I thought I'd try something different. I've read that gaining family members takes so many actions, and then feeding them takes actions again, that the perceived advantage of having them isn't as great as it seems.
We played with the K deck, and my starting hand had a number of cards that would work well together for a farming strategy. Chief among them was the swing back plow (I think) which allows me to plough three fields instead of one twice in the game. I spent the first part of the game getting a number of occupations and minor improvements out, then concentrated on getting corn and vegetables for my 6 fields. Production was up.
I also had the animal tamer, which allowed me to keep various animals in the house. Between that and the "family member without a room" action, I had a single room with two family members living with a cow.
I finished with a two room clay house and only three family members. Still, with lots of veggies, some sheep, lots of cards played and few open spaces I thought I had a shot at winning. It ended as a very close game, with only 5 points separating the four players. Kozure once again beat me by 2 points, but the margin was small enough that I'm thinking the "Few family members" strategy could probably work if played better.
I'm actually growing more fond of Agricola as time goes on. I enjoy the puzzle aspect, and have come to see the "denial of choice" interaction as a kind of randomizer for my personal game instead of a traditional multiplayer game. I find the process challenging but fun, and the cards do make each session feel different.
Showing posts with label Agricola. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Agricola. Show all posts
Saturday, July 18, 2009
Thursday, November 13, 2008
Aren't we popular? (Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm, Agricola)
This night's session neatly assembles the two hottest games for 2008; Race for the Galaxy and Agricola. What could make this impossibly hot duo any hotter? We were playing the just released Gathering Storm expansion for RftG!!!
Catch your breath. Pick your jaw up from the floor.
Okay, it's not nearly as exciting as that. Particularly for us, because unless I'm mistaken our collective opinion on both those games are : Good/ very good... but not great. Still, good/ very good adds up to a fine night's entertainment, so who am I to complain?
Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm
I find it intriguing that this expansion comes complete with an expanded storyline to further that of the initial game. Mostly, this is intriguing to me because when I play Race for the Galaxy, I am aware of very little theme. I would have gone so far as to describe the original setting as particularly generic. Still, I'm actually kind of glad that the game's designer uses a storyline to develop the game... it makes me feel like there is a purpose behind the development of the expansions even if I currently am not really "feeling" it.
In reality, it was the the addition of a fifth player and the solitaire "bot" that attracted me. The additional cards are nice, but I haven't played enough to really know the base deck that well so the "newness" of the cards will be lost on me (most of the cards are still pretty new to me). I wasn't even aware of the new goal tokens, so that was a nice surprise!
The game played just fine with 5 players. I was a little afraid that all the phases would get chosen every round, making things a little "samey" throughout. It didn't really happen. It's still the same game, but we did play with the goal tokens so it did feel a little different. The goals introduce two new ways to score points: The first is a series of 3 point goals that reward the player that reaches particular achievements first (the ones we drew this game were: First to play 3 Alien cards into their tableau, First to accumulate 5 victory points, First to play worlds that produce all of the possible goods and First to to play a "6" development). The second is a series of 5 point goals that reward the player with the most of something (the two we drew were: The most developments and the most military). For our first game, anyway, the goals felt pretty good. It added a sense of urgency to accomplish certain things before other players, therefore increasing player interaction, without dramatically changing the feel or flow of the game. Of course, the danger with this sort of thing is that the players who's goals naturally align with goals on the table are unfairly advantaged (for example, the most military is almost surely going to go to the player with New Sparta). Anyway, it's a concern but it didn't feel like a problem in our first game.
Having claimed two of the "first goals" and one of the "most" goals, and finished the game with a 12 card tableau (including one 6) I thought I stood a pretty good chance of winning. Alas, Bharmer not only beat us, he was way ahead!
Agricola
Bharmer hadn't played this with the cards before, so he asked that we include them. Kozure shuffled up the entire deck of "E" cards and that's what we used (I actually hadn't played with the whole "E" deck myself, so I wound up seeing a number of new cards too).
Since I always seem to go long on animals, I figured I would try to take advantage of a particular occupation I had which allowed me to pay a food for a ploughed field at the start of every round. Problem was that, just like last game, I got carried away and started trying to get way too many of my other cards on the table as well. Although I feel the cards I did play were at least all used, I'm not 100% sure they got me further than NOT playing them. Because I was trying to coordinate the effects of all these cards, I never actually got around to planting anything in my ever growing pastures! I also was particularly poor at accumulating food without the help of the animals and ovens I was used to. I didn't ever resort to begging, but on two occasions I was saved by lucky breaks (other players giving me food for my master forester's wood space). On the final turn, I had to consume the two vegetables I was holding onto to feed the family, and lost 3 points because of it.
I came in second with 30, but Kozure crushed us with 38.
Catch your breath. Pick your jaw up from the floor.
Okay, it's not nearly as exciting as that. Particularly for us, because unless I'm mistaken our collective opinion on both those games are : Good/ very good... but not great. Still, good/ very good adds up to a fine night's entertainment, so who am I to complain?
Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm
I find it intriguing that this expansion comes complete with an expanded storyline to further that of the initial game. Mostly, this is intriguing to me because when I play Race for the Galaxy, I am aware of very little theme. I would have gone so far as to describe the original setting as particularly generic. Still, I'm actually kind of glad that the game's designer uses a storyline to develop the game... it makes me feel like there is a purpose behind the development of the expansions even if I currently am not really "feeling" it.
In reality, it was the the addition of a fifth player and the solitaire "bot" that attracted me. The additional cards are nice, but I haven't played enough to really know the base deck that well so the "newness" of the cards will be lost on me (most of the cards are still pretty new to me). I wasn't even aware of the new goal tokens, so that was a nice surprise!
The game played just fine with 5 players. I was a little afraid that all the phases would get chosen every round, making things a little "samey" throughout. It didn't really happen. It's still the same game, but we did play with the goal tokens so it did feel a little different. The goals introduce two new ways to score points: The first is a series of 3 point goals that reward the player that reaches particular achievements first (the ones we drew this game were: First to play 3 Alien cards into their tableau, First to accumulate 5 victory points, First to play worlds that produce all of the possible goods and First to to play a "6" development). The second is a series of 5 point goals that reward the player with the most of something (the two we drew were: The most developments and the most military). For our first game, anyway, the goals felt pretty good. It added a sense of urgency to accomplish certain things before other players, therefore increasing player interaction, without dramatically changing the feel or flow of the game. Of course, the danger with this sort of thing is that the players who's goals naturally align with goals on the table are unfairly advantaged (for example, the most military is almost surely going to go to the player with New Sparta). Anyway, it's a concern but it didn't feel like a problem in our first game.
Having claimed two of the "first goals" and one of the "most" goals, and finished the game with a 12 card tableau (including one 6) I thought I stood a pretty good chance of winning. Alas, Bharmer not only beat us, he was way ahead!
Agricola
Bharmer hadn't played this with the cards before, so he asked that we include them. Kozure shuffled up the entire deck of "E" cards and that's what we used (I actually hadn't played with the whole "E" deck myself, so I wound up seeing a number of new cards too).
Since I always seem to go long on animals, I figured I would try to take advantage of a particular occupation I had which allowed me to pay a food for a ploughed field at the start of every round. Problem was that, just like last game, I got carried away and started trying to get way too many of my other cards on the table as well. Although I feel the cards I did play were at least all used, I'm not 100% sure they got me further than NOT playing them. Because I was trying to coordinate the effects of all these cards, I never actually got around to planting anything in my ever growing pastures! I also was particularly poor at accumulating food without the help of the animals and ovens I was used to. I didn't ever resort to begging, but on two occasions I was saved by lucky breaks (other players giving me food for my master forester's wood space). On the final turn, I had to consume the two vegetables I was holding onto to feed the family, and lost 3 points because of it.
I came in second with 30, but Kozure crushed us with 38.
Labels:
Agricola,
Race for the Galaxy,
The Gathering Storm
Thursday, September 11, 2008
On Winning (Glory to Rome, Agricola, Race for the Galaxy)
One thing that this blog doesn't really focus on is who wins and "winning strategies". I think that is largely due to the fact that we're a pretty laid-back group and it's not really the main intent of our play - that is, although we do our best and definitely are competitive, we're not aggressively (or ridiculously) so. I've read a lot of horror stories on BGG and even witnessed a few games playing with other people or groups where it was obvious that winning was the main goal of a particular player. I've seen people storm away from a gaming table; I've seen Paris Hilton-level pouts and sulks and seriously obnoxious rules-lawyers, know-it-alls and "gotta-wins".
Generally speaking, and in fact with probably 97% of boardgamers, they're nice, well-balanced people. That percentage may be a little lower with RPGers (not to knock RPGers, since I am one, but the weirdness factor definitely is a little higher in that social circle).
I do want to comment on what a pleasure it is to play with this gaming group. It's one of the highlights of my week and I always look forward to it, as much as a day or two beforehand. Agent Easy, Bharmer, our occasional visitor Jaywowzer, Ouch, and Shemp are all pleasant opponents and good friends.
That said, (and at the risk of sounding obnoxious) it does feel awfully good to win all three games in an game night. I guess the victory is somewhat sweeter knowing that you're up against decent opponents and often coming in a close second in some tight games the previous three evenings I've attended.
The first game of the evening was Glory to Rome, one of the triumvirate of similar card-based resource optimization games started by San Juan and continued by Race for the Galaxy. I like the theme and general mechanics of this game, but I still have trouble with the powers of some of the building cards, which occasionally seem unbalanced/overpowered or somewhat... I don't know the best word... arbitrary?
The Catacombs - for example. A card which ends the game at the whim of the builder? Or the Forum, which wins the game regardless of influence if you have one of each clientèle (not a difficult situation, with some combos - like the one which lets you perform a patron action for each influence on completion of the building). Another, whose name I've forgotten, lets you perform an action twice for each of your clientèle if you lead or follow an action. The Ludus Magna (allows client Merchants to act as any other occupation) in combination with a few Merchant clients can also be a killer combination. Similarly, the Temple, although difficult to build, can give an amazing advantage to a player (nine card hand!).
The game seems more interesting than San Juan, but simultaneously less balanced, so I'm not sure if one is better than the other as a game design. Given the choice, I'd still pick Glory to Rome, but San Juan is probably a "tighter" design. Glory to Rome also lacks one outstanding characteristic of its two brethren games, brevity.
Since I had missed out on vaulting materials in previous plays, I made sure I did so about mid-way through the game, instead of scrambling at the end. I also built a temple early on as my first building, which helped immensely when I did the thinker action. The combo of decent buildings with a lot of marble and brick in the vault put me well in the lead. It also helped that Jaywowzer was struggling a little with the rules, so his usually savvy play wasn't interfering with my nefarious plans.
Agricola is also a somewhat overlong game in which the deal of certain cards (occupations and minor improvements) singly or in combination can give a player a secret and fairly distinct advantage. This is a different criticism than the imbalance of individual cards which are available to everyone as in Glory to Rome. Inasmuch as that is true, you can still lose with poor play even with the best of card combinations. I think (though I must have at least ten or more plays of the basic game to be sure) that the best way to play this game would be to have a common pool of available occupations and minor improvements dealt at the beginning, with players using coloured markers to indicate which have been purchased. This way, each player has the same opportunity to use and benefit from the same occupations and minor improvements, and the replay value is retained through the cycling of cards (the family game, though interesting and good as a learning tool, does seem like it would become repetitive after a dozen plays).
I pursued my usual strategy of a balanced approach with a slight focus on planting/sowing. This time I did manage to get more animals earlier in the game, which helped with feeding my family and with end-game scoring. Once again, however, I lost out on a fifth family member and a five room house. I also have yet to upgrade to a stone house in this game. I had actually been trying for a build strategy this time around, since I had the master builder card in my hand, but it didn't pan out.
A nice combo appeared for me in the form of the berry picker, mushroom picker, and reed gatherer occupations plus the basket minor improvements. They are relatively short term gain occupations, but can make the difference between begging and not begging when grabbing a lot of wood.
I think a lot of what helped me to victory is managing a third family member early on. The number of extra actions helped me a lot.
As happy as I was with my play, I still only managed a very narrow victory over Agent Easy with 38 points. Easy was super-close with 37, as was Jaywowzer with 34 and Ouch managed one of his higher scores in the game, 24. Ouch did get some nice card combos initially (master baker, potato dibber, grocer(?) and something else) but didn't quite translate them into a higher score, unfortunately.
Race for the Galaxy continues to be one of my more enjoyed light euros. It's quick, competitive and well-themed. One drawback is that it is a less interactive game than Glory to Rome (while still being more interactive than San Juan) which does lend a sense of not really having to pay much attention to the gameplay of others. That's a dangerous habit to fall into, though, because failure to notice strategies, especially produce/consume timing, can make or break a winning bid.
I drew New Sparta, but had a dearth of hostile worlds, so I had to pursue a mixed economy strategy initially. Early play of the Interstellar Bank bankrolled a lot of later purchases and once I did start getting military power in combination with the usual New Galactic Order (I think that's the one, the one with VPs for military power), I was feeling good about my chances. Jaywowzer ended the game a little earlier than I expected, though, with the play of his twelfth tableau card. Ouch and I tied for VPs with 28 apiece, but I squeaked the win with one more card in hand and one more resource in my tableau. Jaywowzer was in the 24-26 range (I've forgotten) and I believe that Easy was in the 20-24 range.
So, I won Race for the Galaxy, but narrowly. Hat Trick... woo hoo! USA! USA! USA!
I'll be quiet now.
Generally speaking, and in fact with probably 97% of boardgamers, they're nice, well-balanced people. That percentage may be a little lower with RPGers (not to knock RPGers, since I am one, but the weirdness factor definitely is a little higher in that social circle).
I do want to comment on what a pleasure it is to play with this gaming group. It's one of the highlights of my week and I always look forward to it, as much as a day or two beforehand. Agent Easy, Bharmer, our occasional visitor Jaywowzer, Ouch, and Shemp are all pleasant opponents and good friends.
That said, (and at the risk of sounding obnoxious) it does feel awfully good to win all three games in an game night. I guess the victory is somewhat sweeter knowing that you're up against decent opponents and often coming in a close second in some tight games the previous three evenings I've attended.
The first game of the evening was Glory to Rome, one of the triumvirate of similar card-based resource optimization games started by San Juan and continued by Race for the Galaxy. I like the theme and general mechanics of this game, but I still have trouble with the powers of some of the building cards, which occasionally seem unbalanced/overpowered or somewhat... I don't know the best word... arbitrary?
The Catacombs - for example. A card which ends the game at the whim of the builder? Or the Forum, which wins the game regardless of influence if you have one of each clientèle (not a difficult situation, with some combos - like the one which lets you perform a patron action for each influence on completion of the building). Another, whose name I've forgotten, lets you perform an action twice for each of your clientèle if you lead or follow an action. The Ludus Magna (allows client Merchants to act as any other occupation) in combination with a few Merchant clients can also be a killer combination. Similarly, the Temple, although difficult to build, can give an amazing advantage to a player (nine card hand!).
The game seems more interesting than San Juan, but simultaneously less balanced, so I'm not sure if one is better than the other as a game design. Given the choice, I'd still pick Glory to Rome, but San Juan is probably a "tighter" design. Glory to Rome also lacks one outstanding characteristic of its two brethren games, brevity.
Since I had missed out on vaulting materials in previous plays, I made sure I did so about mid-way through the game, instead of scrambling at the end. I also built a temple early on as my first building, which helped immensely when I did the thinker action. The combo of decent buildings with a lot of marble and brick in the vault put me well in the lead. It also helped that Jaywowzer was struggling a little with the rules, so his usually savvy play wasn't interfering with my nefarious plans.
Agricola is also a somewhat overlong game in which the deal of certain cards (occupations and minor improvements) singly or in combination can give a player a secret and fairly distinct advantage. This is a different criticism than the imbalance of individual cards which are available to everyone as in Glory to Rome. Inasmuch as that is true, you can still lose with poor play even with the best of card combinations. I think (though I must have at least ten or more plays of the basic game to be sure) that the best way to play this game would be to have a common pool of available occupations and minor improvements dealt at the beginning, with players using coloured markers to indicate which have been purchased. This way, each player has the same opportunity to use and benefit from the same occupations and minor improvements, and the replay value is retained through the cycling of cards (the family game, though interesting and good as a learning tool, does seem like it would become repetitive after a dozen plays).
I pursued my usual strategy of a balanced approach with a slight focus on planting/sowing. This time I did manage to get more animals earlier in the game, which helped with feeding my family and with end-game scoring. Once again, however, I lost out on a fifth family member and a five room house. I also have yet to upgrade to a stone house in this game. I had actually been trying for a build strategy this time around, since I had the master builder card in my hand, but it didn't pan out.
A nice combo appeared for me in the form of the berry picker, mushroom picker, and reed gatherer occupations plus the basket minor improvements. They are relatively short term gain occupations, but can make the difference between begging and not begging when grabbing a lot of wood.
I think a lot of what helped me to victory is managing a third family member early on. The number of extra actions helped me a lot.
As happy as I was with my play, I still only managed a very narrow victory over Agent Easy with 38 points. Easy was super-close with 37, as was Jaywowzer with 34 and Ouch managed one of his higher scores in the game, 24. Ouch did get some nice card combos initially (master baker, potato dibber, grocer(?) and something else) but didn't quite translate them into a higher score, unfortunately.
Race for the Galaxy continues to be one of my more enjoyed light euros. It's quick, competitive and well-themed. One drawback is that it is a less interactive game than Glory to Rome (while still being more interactive than San Juan) which does lend a sense of not really having to pay much attention to the gameplay of others. That's a dangerous habit to fall into, though, because failure to notice strategies, especially produce/consume timing, can make or break a winning bid.
I drew New Sparta, but had a dearth of hostile worlds, so I had to pursue a mixed economy strategy initially. Early play of the Interstellar Bank bankrolled a lot of later purchases and once I did start getting military power in combination with the usual New Galactic Order (I think that's the one, the one with VPs for military power), I was feeling good about my chances. Jaywowzer ended the game a little earlier than I expected, though, with the play of his twelfth tableau card. Ouch and I tied for VPs with 28 apiece, but I squeaked the win with one more card in hand and one more resource in my tableau. Jaywowzer was in the 24-26 range (I've forgotten) and I believe that Easy was in the 20-24 range.
So, I won Race for the Galaxy, but narrowly. Hat Trick... woo hoo! USA! USA! USA!
I'll be quiet now.
Labels:
Agricola,
Glory to Rome,
Race for the Galaxy,
San Juan,
Session
Saturday, September 06, 2008
Yum. Aminals. (Agricola, Colossal Arena x2)
Bharmer is out for the month, so we were four.
Luch chose an animal theme (sorry, aminal), and asked that we lead with Agricola. We set up outside in Kozure's backyard and launched into our first advanced game as a group (it eventually started raining, so we ended inside)
Note to self: Agricola is a difficult game to bring inside quickly when it starts raining.
From my hand, I saw a number of cards which had great potential. Of note, I had a card which let me instantly go from 5 rooms to 6 for free and another which let me get a free stone room. I figured I'd try to build a seven stone room mansion on my little farm!
Trouble is, I got distracted by the pastor card which gave me a ton of goods if i could only manage to be the last player with only two rooms. Considering our last game saw everyone go to three rather quickly, I didn't think it would be too difficult. Unfortunately for me, the cards had a distracting effect on everyone else and the desire to play minor improvements and occupations led to a slower than usual path to a bigger house. Shemp, in particular, was sticking to two rooms forever. By the time I decided I couldn't wait any longer, it was already too late to achieve my goal. I did still manage 6 stone rooms, but the seven would have taken another 2-3 actions to gather the necessary goods for the minor improvement. Meanwhile, I managed a rather lucrative animal based farm which kept my family comfortably fed throughout the game. In the end, despite losing several points for empty pastures and a complete lack of plowed fields, corn or vegetables I snuck past Kozure for the win.
With four players, the game feels significantly less constricted than with five. Of course, as I mentioned earlier the cards were distracting us from the basic actions, so that may have had a lot to do with this feeling (in fact, 50% of our scores were lower with the cards than without, so clearly they take some getting used to).
I think the addition of the advanced game is a necessary thing to keep Agricola fresh, so the added complexity is worth it in the long run. The family game is more or less scripted (not to say that there aren't multiple workable strategies within that framework, just that much of the grain of the gameplay will need to follow the same basic order every game). The cards I've played with don't fundamentally change much that is going on, but it does encourage you to see the value of things differently. It also makes predicting other player's moves more difficult (in a good way).
Shemp and Luch asked that we go back to the family game a few times so that they can get a better grasp of the fundamentals, so we are unlikely to play with the cards for a while. Agricola continues to be a fun game that keeps me thinking, but like Shemp said "It's a good game, but I don't really understand all the love it's getting on BGG"
We finished up the evening with two games of Colossal Arena. We even played with the character powers! Luch proved to be quite the shark in this betting match and won both games. I'm happy to say that both games went much quicker than other games of this we've played and therefore felt much better. If we can keep the length to +/- half an hour, it's a fine game.
Luch chose an animal theme (sorry, aminal), and asked that we lead with Agricola. We set up outside in Kozure's backyard and launched into our first advanced game as a group (it eventually started raining, so we ended inside)
Note to self: Agricola is a difficult game to bring inside quickly when it starts raining.
From my hand, I saw a number of cards which had great potential. Of note, I had a card which let me instantly go from 5 rooms to 6 for free and another which let me get a free stone room. I figured I'd try to build a seven stone room mansion on my little farm!
Trouble is, I got distracted by the pastor card which gave me a ton of goods if i could only manage to be the last player with only two rooms. Considering our last game saw everyone go to three rather quickly, I didn't think it would be too difficult. Unfortunately for me, the cards had a distracting effect on everyone else and the desire to play minor improvements and occupations led to a slower than usual path to a bigger house. Shemp, in particular, was sticking to two rooms forever. By the time I decided I couldn't wait any longer, it was already too late to achieve my goal. I did still manage 6 stone rooms, but the seven would have taken another 2-3 actions to gather the necessary goods for the minor improvement. Meanwhile, I managed a rather lucrative animal based farm which kept my family comfortably fed throughout the game. In the end, despite losing several points for empty pastures and a complete lack of plowed fields, corn or vegetables I snuck past Kozure for the win.
With four players, the game feels significantly less constricted than with five. Of course, as I mentioned earlier the cards were distracting us from the basic actions, so that may have had a lot to do with this feeling (in fact, 50% of our scores were lower with the cards than without, so clearly they take some getting used to).
I think the addition of the advanced game is a necessary thing to keep Agricola fresh, so the added complexity is worth it in the long run. The family game is more or less scripted (not to say that there aren't multiple workable strategies within that framework, just that much of the grain of the gameplay will need to follow the same basic order every game). The cards I've played with don't fundamentally change much that is going on, but it does encourage you to see the value of things differently. It also makes predicting other player's moves more difficult (in a good way).
Shemp and Luch asked that we go back to the family game a few times so that they can get a better grasp of the fundamentals, so we are unlikely to play with the cards for a while. Agricola continues to be a fun game that keeps me thinking, but like Shemp said "It's a good game, but I don't really understand all the love it's getting on BGG"
We finished up the evening with two games of Colossal Arena. We even played with the character powers! Luch proved to be quite the shark in this betting match and won both games. I'm happy to say that both games went much quicker than other games of this we've played and therefore felt much better. If we can keep the length to +/- half an hour, it's a fine game.
Thursday, August 21, 2008
All that, and a bag of chips? (Civilization, Agricola, High Society x2)
We all gathered once again to conclude our latest game of Sid Meier's Civilization. In our last session, I had managed to stay under the radar and gain a significant lead through the purchase of a large amount of technology. If I was permitted to survive until the end of the game, I would surely win. The players all agreed that they would cooperate to take me out. I fully expected to be obliterated tonight, but something else happened... the other players conceeded the game and we played Agricola instead! (Bharmer wasn't enjoying the game, and successfully stopping me meant that I would be eliminated and they would likely have to spend a fourth evening determining the new winner. My success was far from assured, but I had a real shot so we called it a game)
Agricola
Agricola is the new "it" boardgame. So much so that it has currently unseated Puerto Rico as the number 1 game on BGG, a feat no other game has yet managed to do (I have no idea if it will stay there, but I wouldn't pick either game as my favorite so whatever).
The theme here, predictably, is farming. The implementation is more literal than most, however... each player actually gets a board depicting a little plot of land and over the course of the game they have to till the land, grow crops and raise animals while trying to improve the house, raise a family and... you know... keep everyone fed.
The mechanics involve a central board depicting a plethora of available actions, each of which can only be chosen once a round. Players start with a two room house and a husband and wife team, and each of those can choose to do one of the available actions every round. As the house grows, babies can be had and they can grow up and take actions themselves. Meanwhile, gathering food becomes tougher and tougher. Predictably, not having to resort to begging is a prime motivator in the game.
In the end, the farm is scored and almost every aspect is graded: from the number of wasted plots of land, to the number of children, the amount of food on hand and the variety of livestock being raised. Because there are way more things that need doing than there is time to do them, Agricola is a capital "E" efficiency game.
Prior to this evening, I had tried the solo family game a few times. It actually works fairly well as a sort of optimisation puzzle, so that was good. Sadly, the rulebook could have been significantly better... it works as a reference but a new player will be lost for a little while. As an example, there is a simplified "family" game which is recommended as the first game. Wouldn't it be logical then to make the instructions prominent and simple to follow? Instead, the advanced rules are described first, then a paragraph explaining how to convert the rules for a family game can be found eight pages in. In other words, those the least familiar with the game are asked to first read and understand the complex rules and then to modify them according to a few paragraphs at the end. Also, on a number of occasions the rules refer to a board by name without actually ever identifying them anywhere AND they include a number of alternate boards without explanation, leaving a beginning player trying to sort out all these components fairly confused (at least, I was). Once you know what everything is, it's all fairly obvious, but new players DON"T know what everything is by definition. There is more, but you get the idea.
Luckily, the game itself is quite good, and play is pretty smooth and intuitive once things get going. The only direct interaction between players is in the action selection, but since competition for certain spaces can be fierce I don't expect anyone to start talking about "multi player solitaire". If I had a gripe, it would be that reloading the board every round gets a little tedious.
Bharmer proved he is the efficiency king by winning with a farm that was completely built up through a balanced approach that left him with five family members in a clay mansion with just about every scoring category covered. By contrast, I had four empty spaces, only three family members and several blanks in the scoring sheet. I honestly thought that my previous experience with the solo games would give me a significant advantage, but since I came in second-last I think we can forget that. Having so many other players competing for the same actions really changes the dynamics of the game... I spent the last five rounds trying to build fences, but the option was always snagged before I could. Goods rarely accumulated. etc, etc. It's very different playing an efficiency game by yourself than trying to be efficient when the thing you want to do is frequently unavailable.
I guess I can't really talk about Agricola without mentioning the huge amount of cards that can be used in the advanced game. By dealing out a hand of 14 cards to every player, each game is slightly different. We didn't play with them, however, so I can't really comment much.
I actually really like Agricola. I find myself thinking about it quite a bit afterwards, trying to think of a better way to get things done next time. I'm also really looking forward to trying out the decks of cards and seeing how they impact the game. It's not my favorite game. In fact, like Puerto Rico, I'm not sure it's in my top 10. Still, it's good and definitely worth trying out.
Bharmer and Kozure left for the evening. We finished up with two quick rounds of High Society. Shemp rocked us in both games, but at least Luch put up a fight.
Agricola
Agricola is the new "it" boardgame. So much so that it has currently unseated Puerto Rico as the number 1 game on BGG, a feat no other game has yet managed to do (I have no idea if it will stay there, but I wouldn't pick either game as my favorite so whatever).
The theme here, predictably, is farming. The implementation is more literal than most, however... each player actually gets a board depicting a little plot of land and over the course of the game they have to till the land, grow crops and raise animals while trying to improve the house, raise a family and... you know... keep everyone fed.
The mechanics involve a central board depicting a plethora of available actions, each of which can only be chosen once a round. Players start with a two room house and a husband and wife team, and each of those can choose to do one of the available actions every round. As the house grows, babies can be had and they can grow up and take actions themselves. Meanwhile, gathering food becomes tougher and tougher. Predictably, not having to resort to begging is a prime motivator in the game.
In the end, the farm is scored and almost every aspect is graded: from the number of wasted plots of land, to the number of children, the amount of food on hand and the variety of livestock being raised. Because there are way more things that need doing than there is time to do them, Agricola is a capital "E" efficiency game.
Prior to this evening, I had tried the solo family game a few times. It actually works fairly well as a sort of optimisation puzzle, so that was good. Sadly, the rulebook could have been significantly better... it works as a reference but a new player will be lost for a little while. As an example, there is a simplified "family" game which is recommended as the first game. Wouldn't it be logical then to make the instructions prominent and simple to follow? Instead, the advanced rules are described first, then a paragraph explaining how to convert the rules for a family game can be found eight pages in. In other words, those the least familiar with the game are asked to first read and understand the complex rules and then to modify them according to a few paragraphs at the end. Also, on a number of occasions the rules refer to a board by name without actually ever identifying them anywhere AND they include a number of alternate boards without explanation, leaving a beginning player trying to sort out all these components fairly confused (at least, I was). Once you know what everything is, it's all fairly obvious, but new players DON"T know what everything is by definition. There is more, but you get the idea.
Luckily, the game itself is quite good, and play is pretty smooth and intuitive once things get going. The only direct interaction between players is in the action selection, but since competition for certain spaces can be fierce I don't expect anyone to start talking about "multi player solitaire". If I had a gripe, it would be that reloading the board every round gets a little tedious.
Bharmer proved he is the efficiency king by winning with a farm that was completely built up through a balanced approach that left him with five family members in a clay mansion with just about every scoring category covered. By contrast, I had four empty spaces, only three family members and several blanks in the scoring sheet. I honestly thought that my previous experience with the solo games would give me a significant advantage, but since I came in second-last I think we can forget that. Having so many other players competing for the same actions really changes the dynamics of the game... I spent the last five rounds trying to build fences, but the option was always snagged before I could. Goods rarely accumulated. etc, etc. It's very different playing an efficiency game by yourself than trying to be efficient when the thing you want to do is frequently unavailable.
I guess I can't really talk about Agricola without mentioning the huge amount of cards that can be used in the advanced game. By dealing out a hand of 14 cards to every player, each game is slightly different. We didn't play with them, however, so I can't really comment much.
I actually really like Agricola. I find myself thinking about it quite a bit afterwards, trying to think of a better way to get things done next time. I'm also really looking forward to trying out the decks of cards and seeing how they impact the game. It's not my favorite game. In fact, like Puerto Rico, I'm not sure it's in my top 10. Still, it's good and definitely worth trying out.
Bharmer and Kozure left for the evening. We finished up with two quick rounds of High Society. Shemp rocked us in both games, but at least Luch put up a fight.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
