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.

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!

I killed 3 zombies and a hellhound, what did you do? (Theophrastus, Doom)

This week, Kozure, Ouch and I played a session of Doom.

Actually, we opened with a quick round of Theophrastus with Tili while waiting for Luch to arrive. Everytime I play this, I have to be taught the rules... which is unusual for me. Not sure why, but I can't make this one stick. Fun enough game, though. I tied with Tili for the win after drawing 95% yellow tiles in a round where the experiment was long on yellow. The result was that I had personally placed 3 of the 4 cards and spied the last. I did poorly in the metals and elements, but scored big in yellow.

Doom

Was I itching to play Doom until now? Not really. Generally speaking this is not my cup of tea. That, and the reviews for the game seemed to land heavily on the "get the expansion if you want to enjoy this game" angle.

Of course, you never know until you try...

A brief overview of the game: One player plays as the game master, and the others play marines. The game master is responsible for controlling the monsters and laying out the game board as the marines explore the space ship. The goal for the marines is simple (and familiar to players of the video game): fight your way to the exit, finding bigger and badder weapons as you go. The goal for the game master is even simpler: kill the marines. The game features a ton of plastic marines and creatures, as well as many modular "rooms" and "hallways" which get put toghether in various ways according to the scenario. It's all very thematic and cool looking. Finally, there are very interesting custom dice which handle range, ammo consumption and damage in a single roll (this would be the closest to a "clever mechanic" to be found in this game, but it's an excellent one and exactly what this type of game needed to avoid falling into the endless die rolling/ chart checking trap it could have).

Luch and I where the marines. At the beginning of every game, each player draws 3 special abilities for their characters. I was a forward planner (stop 3 gamemaster actions), stealthy (run through monsters and obstacles) and good at assaults (I could move 2 spaces AND assault AND attack 3 times instead of 2). Luch was a sniper (shoot through friends), healthy (start with +3 health) and ... I can't remember the third. The scenario started with a bang. The opening room had a number of hellhounds and zombies in it. We rushed for the guns and chainsaw and started working. We quickly discovered that the GM was able to continously add monsters to the room. This is when we discovered Doom Strategy Number 1: Kill what you need to and move on.

Over the course of the game, we discovered that a chainsaw in the hands of an assault specialist was a dangerous combination. I was dealing a lot of death as I'd run stealthily into a crowd and let loose. My powers, which seemed a little lame at first, were actually quite good. We settled into a routine where I'd open doors and Luch would fire at whatever was on the other side.

As the evening wore on, we realized we couldn't possibly finish the scenario. We called it quits and Kozure revealed what was left. I felt we had played a good game and couldn't quite figure out why all the BGGers said the game was so horribly unbalanced for the marines!... It hadn't been easy, but we were in control the entire time.

The explanation? In true gamemaster form, Kozure had been pulling some punches. He kept it challenging for us without deliberately killing us. I'm glad I didn't know it at the time, but in retrospect this was probably the best decision to ensure everyone had fun.

So, in the end I am surprised by my verdict. I really enjoyed the game! In fact, I'd probably buy it if it weren't so LONG to play. Really long. Our first, incompleted game, took 4 hours.

However, this is much to like. I was impressed by the scope in the game for tactical decisions. I enjoyed the fact that the three skill cards really change the strategy a player will use from game to game (and giving three ensures that no one is cought with a dud. I'm looking at you, Robo-Rally). Unfortunately, a game like this will always be inherently limited by the pieces provided (there are only so many types of creatures and rooms) since plastic is a lot harder to customize than cardboard. Of course, at 6hours per game, it probably would take a while to work through the scenarios provided anyway.

Since I got the distinct feeling that Luch is not a fan of the game, we may not see this one too often (especially considering the length of the game)... still, I hope I get to play it again.

Guillotine, Royal Turf, Louis XIV, Theophrastus.

Quick one:

Guillotine: A very light game about choping people's heads off. Basically, a "take that" type game which takes place over 3 "days" (hands). Each "day" the dealer lays out a string of nobles to be executed. On your turn, you have the option of playing one card before the noble at the front of the line gets executed (you get fame points for having done the deed). Of course, cards allow the order of the line-up to be changed, and other shenanigans. For fast, light, easy fun this is a very good game.
I can imagine that the theme might be awkward to introduce, however...

Royal Turf: This game is much better when played by the correct rules. By rolling first, and THEN picking which horse to move, the game ceases to be completely random. A good, light game.

Louis XIV: I'd heard so much about this one, I'm glad we finally tried it. Thematically, we are dealing with players trying to gain favours from the varous nobles in the court of Louis XIV. Mechanically, it felt a lot like a mash-up between El Grande and Traders of Genoa. From El Grande, there are elements of area control and influence token management. On the other hand, the resource collecting, "missions" oriented gameplay and movement mechanic all remind me of Traders of Genoa.

Overall, the game sounds very complicated when the rules are being read but plays as a "middleweight" game in practice. Your hand of cards dictates to a certain degree what areas you can influence, so the "decision tree" is not too bad. One of my favorite aspects of the game is that the rules make it sometimes beneficial to come in 2nd rather than 1st on any particular noble, which adds a nice twist to the decision making.

Shemp was out of the gate early with 2 missions accomplished by the first round. We did a pretty good job catching up, be we didn't quite make it. I played pretty poorly, and came in last. I'm looking forward to playing that again!

Theophrastus: Theophrastus is supposed to be showing us how to make our own magical experiments. He lays out the recipe, but leaves out some of the details (I know I need 3 base medals, but which ones?). Each player gets a turn developping Theophrastus' spell, and playing cards on their own concoctions to try to match the mysterious recipe. Various cards and abilities give players sneak peeks, allow cards to be exchanged between player, etc.

Also a nice game!