Century: Spice Road was a game that was a big hit. Although I wasn't the biggest fan of it, it still saw allot of play as it was quick, simple, and could easily be introduced to groups. My main complaint is that one mechanism doesn't make a game, and it was really hurt by the lack of any non-obvious victory point pathway (such as end game goals or achievements).
So when I heard Eastern Wonders was meant to be a gamer's version of Spice Road, I was excited. And it does indeed add some additional mechanisms such as a tech-tree of sorts and end game scoring. While Spice Road is a card and hand-management game, Eastern Wonders is much closer to a pick-up-and-deliver game. It also has the benefit of being able to be combined with Spice Road.
Eastern Wonders, however, felt like a two-steps-forwards/three-steps-backwards situation. The game adds a bunch of extra steps to set-up (including putting the board together, which should've really have had an included play-mat) and to each turn. In addition to this, the graphic design to see all the information is lacking, with the structures you build always obscuring important information you are missing.
But, for me, I guess this also suffers from a fatal flaw like Spice Road. In Spice Road, the lack of end-game or alternate scoring pathways left it feeling much less exciting than things like Splendor (with the noble tiles). Here, it is that the map remains pretty static for most the game. If you can spot a route that you can turn over resources quicker by travelling in circles, there is very little outside sources that can stop you.
This is alleviated by combining Spice Road and Eastern Wonders to form a larger game, now requiring hand management and board management. The problem with this is that it turns into the same price as an expensive big box game, and you still have the graphic design issue. At this price, the game needs to be stellar rather than just good for what you are physically receiving. Unfortunately, it just isn't.
So in the end, Eastern Wonders wasn't for me. I prefer Spice Road because it plays quicker and is easier to set-up and teach to new players. However, for me, the Century series feels like a series of games that isn't for me as they miss essential ingredients of what makes the style of games fun. Maybe if they release a reasonably-priced box for the combined games than it may be more worthwhile.
2 out of 5 wondrous waffles.
Showing posts with label Board game. Show all posts
Showing posts with label Board game. Show all posts
Saturday, 4 May 2019
Monday, 25 March 2019
BOARD GAME REVIEW: DREAM HOME
Dream Home is a pretty simple game. In effect, you are drafting cards that are a combination of a room and a special card (that gives an ability, points, etc.). You then effectively place the cards in a tableau to make your house.
Dream Home really is a nice little game. The decisions aren't deep but it plays quickly and gives you good decisions throughout the whole game. You are waiting to get the right cards for your house, as you get bonuses for making rooms bigger and having the home be functional. However, collecting a matching roof is also worth allot of points, which may make you choose a sub-optimal room.
The one thing that it may lack is replayability. The cards are pretty straightforward but the variety sometimes feels lacking. While it is an enjoyable gameplay loop, the game mechanisms sometimes feel a bit too straightforward, particularly towards the end. The other thing is that constantly refreshing the display can feel a bit fiddly.
The artwork in the game is great, with each room looking different. In addition, you have decor items which you can place on top of the rooms, which also look great. The artwork and the appeal of making your own house appeals to younger gamers allot.
At the end of the day, this game is a nice game. Despite concerns about it being fiddly and potentially lacking replayabiltiy. the core gameplay loop and choices involved with what combinations of cards you take keep the tension up in the game. It is definitely a game worth checking out.
4 out of 5 architectural waffles.
Dream Home really is a nice little game. The decisions aren't deep but it plays quickly and gives you good decisions throughout the whole game. You are waiting to get the right cards for your house, as you get bonuses for making rooms bigger and having the home be functional. However, collecting a matching roof is also worth allot of points, which may make you choose a sub-optimal room.
The one thing that it may lack is replayability. The cards are pretty straightforward but the variety sometimes feels lacking. While it is an enjoyable gameplay loop, the game mechanisms sometimes feel a bit too straightforward, particularly towards the end. The other thing is that constantly refreshing the display can feel a bit fiddly.
The artwork in the game is great, with each room looking different. In addition, you have decor items which you can place on top of the rooms, which also look great. The artwork and the appeal of making your own house appeals to younger gamers allot.
At the end of the day, this game is a nice game. Despite concerns about it being fiddly and potentially lacking replayabiltiy. the core gameplay loop and choices involved with what combinations of cards you take keep the tension up in the game. It is definitely a game worth checking out.
4 out of 5 architectural waffles.
Tuesday, 19 March 2019
BOARD GAME REVIEW: KEMET
Kemet by Matagot Games is a war game based on area control and battles. Set in Ancient Mythological Egypt, it is a game of conquest. In fact, you are awarded handsomely for winning combats and are punished if your forces are left weak, able to be crushed by the enemy.
The basic engine behind it is a mix of action selections and power allocation (similar to Blood Rage or Cthulhu Wars). You get a certain number of power per turn to spend recruiting and getting technology upgrades. You then also have to move your forces around, trying to win fights and capture key locations.
There is allot Kemet does right. The map is great, with everyone 3 spaces from everyone else regardless of location. It does this and still makes the spaces and territories make sense (mostly). The other good thing is the combat system, which is fast but still gives plenty of decisions and ways to manipulate the outcome for your benefit both immediately and in the future.
However, Kemet does two glaring things wrong that come up in a game this long far too often. The first is that it is very easy to play kingmaker. With how turn order works and the ease points can be taken, people can very easily end up having to choose who is going to win. This is somewhat relate to the second big problem in that you can be stuck losing slowly and it is no fun.
At the end of the day, board games are a big time investment. A bad start that can cripple you in a video game means you can easily hit restart. A board game requires time commitment and so most my favorite games (that aren't co-op) tend to be games where you can still work on things or have fun when losing. Kemet tends to only have kingmaking as something the losing players can do.
So that is it. Kemet is a game with allot of cool mechanics and premise, but the game just takes too long for these issues. I know I am in the minority but it is a game that I think ends up being pretty average.
4 out of 5 mummified waffles.
The basic engine behind it is a mix of action selections and power allocation (similar to Blood Rage or Cthulhu Wars). You get a certain number of power per turn to spend recruiting and getting technology upgrades. You then also have to move your forces around, trying to win fights and capture key locations.
There is allot Kemet does right. The map is great, with everyone 3 spaces from everyone else regardless of location. It does this and still makes the spaces and territories make sense (mostly). The other good thing is the combat system, which is fast but still gives plenty of decisions and ways to manipulate the outcome for your benefit both immediately and in the future.
However, Kemet does two glaring things wrong that come up in a game this long far too often. The first is that it is very easy to play kingmaker. With how turn order works and the ease points can be taken, people can very easily end up having to choose who is going to win. This is somewhat relate to the second big problem in that you can be stuck losing slowly and it is no fun.
At the end of the day, board games are a big time investment. A bad start that can cripple you in a video game means you can easily hit restart. A board game requires time commitment and so most my favorite games (that aren't co-op) tend to be games where you can still work on things or have fun when losing. Kemet tends to only have kingmaking as something the losing players can do.
So that is it. Kemet is a game with allot of cool mechanics and premise, but the game just takes too long for these issues. I know I am in the minority but it is a game that I think ends up being pretty average.
4 out of 5 mummified waffles.
Tuesday, 5 March 2019
BOARD GAME REVIEW: SPACE PARK
Space Park is a game Keymaster Games that seems to be fitting into that ever so crowded genre of light-medium games, or gateway games. It is of the same weight as games such as Splendor and Ticket to Ride. It has a couple of rules and plays quite simply.
In this game, you are travelling around a board (which forms a circle), taking actions to collect gems. You use these gems to trade in for points (either directly or by victory point cards). The cards here also can give you special abilities. It is a victory point race like Splendor, with the game ending once a victory point goal is reached.
The components in the game are really good. The space-rock-gems are great, are a good size and easy to handle. The spaceships moving around the board are also great. The cards and board look really nice, with nice big artwork and also thought given to maximise there usability. The only complaint is that the fast travel and xp tokens could have done to be a little larger.
In terms of gameplay, it is a gateway game. Very few rules, non-complex interactions between the rules, and some player interaction but a lack of heavy take-that. The game plays very quickly as the board only gives each player 3 choices per round, effectively limiting analysis paralysis. This all makes the gameplay smooth and fast, which is good.
In the end the game is good. It doesn't really put a step wrong. It doesn't quite have the potential for big surprising plays that other games do. Although it never really sets out to accomplish this, it does hold it back from those high ranks. Instead it is just a really fun, solid little game.
4 out of 5 whizzing waffles.
In this game, you are travelling around a board (which forms a circle), taking actions to collect gems. You use these gems to trade in for points (either directly or by victory point cards). The cards here also can give you special abilities. It is a victory point race like Splendor, with the game ending once a victory point goal is reached.
The components in the game are really good. The space-rock-gems are great, are a good size and easy to handle. The spaceships moving around the board are also great. The cards and board look really nice, with nice big artwork and also thought given to maximise there usability. The only complaint is that the fast travel and xp tokens could have done to be a little larger.
In terms of gameplay, it is a gateway game. Very few rules, non-complex interactions between the rules, and some player interaction but a lack of heavy take-that. The game plays very quickly as the board only gives each player 3 choices per round, effectively limiting analysis paralysis. This all makes the gameplay smooth and fast, which is good.
In the end the game is good. It doesn't really put a step wrong. It doesn't quite have the potential for big surprising plays that other games do. Although it never really sets out to accomplish this, it does hold it back from those high ranks. Instead it is just a really fun, solid little game.
4 out of 5 whizzing waffles.
Wednesday, 19 December 2018
BOARD GAME REVIEW: ARCHITECTS OF THE WEST KINGDOM
Architects of the West Kingdom is a game by the maker (Shem Phillips) of Raiders of the North Sea. They also made some other games I didn't enjoy nearly as much as Raiders, so the real question is how does this compare? I really enjoy Raiders so is Architects just as good?
Architects does something Raiders also does well. It does worker placement, but puts its own little twist on it. Here, you start with 20 workers. Then, you slowly use them up during the game unless you sacrifice an action to get them back. Outside of this, it is a pretty standard game of collecting resources, turning them in to complete building goals for points, hiring crew with special abilities, and doing one or two other things.
The other things you can do are what gives the game some more flair. One of the actions is capturing workers and sending them to jail (or just rounding up your workers again). This is because the more workers you have out at a spot, the stronger the action you have. This also makes them more tempting targets for capturing. The other action is using the black market, where you lose virtue in order to get more immediate bonuses. But if you are caught there during a raid, your workers go to jail and you lose more virtue.
Virtue is important and is one of the few ways the theme comes through. The virtue track means at higher virtue you can work on the cathedral but at lower virtue you may lose victory points but you also get a discount on actions. Apart from that, the theme is quite generic as a standard conversion of resources to points via the most efficient means possible.
This lack of theme isn't bad. But Raiders had the theme come through allot stronger with the progressive raids, your crew and the skulls. I think Architects is different from Raiders and the mechanisms are as strong. However, Raiders you had allot fewer boring turns. Architects has those building up turns which are a bit quick and boring, especially if you just need to get people out of jail. It does move slightly quicker than Raiders, with a much more deliberate pace and more direct player interactions. I also like the virtue track. I would probably place them pretty equal depending on what type of game you prefer.
4 out of 5 well-designed waffles.
Architects does something Raiders also does well. It does worker placement, but puts its own little twist on it. Here, you start with 20 workers. Then, you slowly use them up during the game unless you sacrifice an action to get them back. Outside of this, it is a pretty standard game of collecting resources, turning them in to complete building goals for points, hiring crew with special abilities, and doing one or two other things.
The other things you can do are what gives the game some more flair. One of the actions is capturing workers and sending them to jail (or just rounding up your workers again). This is because the more workers you have out at a spot, the stronger the action you have. This also makes them more tempting targets for capturing. The other action is using the black market, where you lose virtue in order to get more immediate bonuses. But if you are caught there during a raid, your workers go to jail and you lose more virtue.
Virtue is important and is one of the few ways the theme comes through. The virtue track means at higher virtue you can work on the cathedral but at lower virtue you may lose victory points but you also get a discount on actions. Apart from that, the theme is quite generic as a standard conversion of resources to points via the most efficient means possible.
This lack of theme isn't bad. But Raiders had the theme come through allot stronger with the progressive raids, your crew and the skulls. I think Architects is different from Raiders and the mechanisms are as strong. However, Raiders you had allot fewer boring turns. Architects has those building up turns which are a bit quick and boring, especially if you just need to get people out of jail. It does move slightly quicker than Raiders, with a much more deliberate pace and more direct player interactions. I also like the virtue track. I would probably place them pretty equal depending on what type of game you prefer.
4 out of 5 well-designed waffles.
Monday, 10 December 2018
KICKSTARTER RETROSPECTIVE: STRIFE and A SOFTER WORLD
So this is a new series where I look back at my Kickstarters (2 at a time) and give a retrospective on where are they now.
A Softer World 4- Lets Do Something Wrong: So the first Kickstarter I backed (and how I found out about Kickstarter) was due to a webcomic I was reading (A Softer World). This is a great comic which seems to set up a normal scenario then twists it via a few photographic panels. This kickstarter gave me a flask and a book. The Kickstarter was cool, although you miss the alt-text (what you get when you leave your mouse cursor over the comic) if memory serves me correctly. All up, a good Kickstarter, although I think I eventually wore out the flask (I drank cordial from it because it looked cool, not alcohol).
Strife- Legacy of the Eternals: This was a perfect information game where the conceit was that it was like war (play a card to beat the other), but your champion inherits traits from your last champion (i.e. bonus power, an ability, etc.). It was a better idea than it was in execution. The rulebook needed more examples and the special ability rules needed to be a bit clearer. There was a follow-up Strife that could be combined, but it didn't interest me too much. I did sell this off eventually as better games for 2 players were available.
A Softer World 4- Lets Do Something Wrong: So the first Kickstarter I backed (and how I found out about Kickstarter) was due to a webcomic I was reading (A Softer World). This is a great comic which seems to set up a normal scenario then twists it via a few photographic panels. This kickstarter gave me a flask and a book. The Kickstarter was cool, although you miss the alt-text (what you get when you leave your mouse cursor over the comic) if memory serves me correctly. All up, a good Kickstarter, although I think I eventually wore out the flask (I drank cordial from it because it looked cool, not alcohol).
Strife- Legacy of the Eternals: This was a perfect information game where the conceit was that it was like war (play a card to beat the other), but your champion inherits traits from your last champion (i.e. bonus power, an ability, etc.). It was a better idea than it was in execution. The rulebook needed more examples and the special ability rules needed to be a bit clearer. There was a follow-up Strife that could be combined, but it didn't interest me too much. I did sell this off eventually as better games for 2 players were available.
Monday, 19 November 2018
BOARD GAME REVIEW: RESCUE POLAR BEARS
Rescue: Polar Bears is a board game that was delivered on Kickstarter a little while ago. This game is a co-operative game that has a really cool theme: you are trying to rescue polar bears and get data from the polar caps on global warming before the temperature rises too much or the polar bears get stranded.
While there are some abstractions with the theme (i.e. the time scale of temperature changes and the scales of time), the theme is very refreshing and unique. Most the actions and your goals fit the theme very well. You are moving around, saving bears, collecting data, and trying to keep a lid on the ice melting.
This isn't a co-operative game that is hard. There are some variants and modules that help to increase the difficulty, but you will win most the games on the basic game. This isn't a bad thing, as each game it feels like you have plenty of freedom on how to proceed with what feels like multiple options of what to do on your turn. You can also up your starting level to increase difficulty if desired.
This is a cool co-op where you have options and a nice theme. The components are also really good, with little bear figures and nice ships that all look different and play differently with their player powers. This is a game I would definitely recommend.
4 out of 5 polar waffles.
While there are some abstractions with the theme (i.e. the time scale of temperature changes and the scales of time), the theme is very refreshing and unique. Most the actions and your goals fit the theme very well. You are moving around, saving bears, collecting data, and trying to keep a lid on the ice melting.
This isn't a co-operative game that is hard. There are some variants and modules that help to increase the difficulty, but you will win most the games on the basic game. This isn't a bad thing, as each game it feels like you have plenty of freedom on how to proceed with what feels like multiple options of what to do on your turn. You can also up your starting level to increase difficulty if desired.
This is a cool co-op where you have options and a nice theme. The components are also really good, with little bear figures and nice ships that all look different and play differently with their player powers. This is a game I would definitely recommend.
4 out of 5 polar waffles.
Sunday, 26 August 2018
BOARD GAME REVIEW: GAIA PROJECT
So Terra Mystica is a game I am not too fond of. I think it is okay, but after playing it a handful of times, it just isn't that interesting to me. All the pieces are there, but I think the sum of its parts is greater than the whole. Terra Mystica is a very well regarded game, however, and it has a sequel of sorts in Gaia Project.
Gaia Project is set in space. The goal of the game is to increase your races technology while you terraform and colonise planets on the board. You do this to form federations, get income, and score points. At the end of the game, most points is the winner.
Gaia Project is a very fascinating game. Each of its systems is tied together and feels like it has a good give-and-take. For example, the technology levels don't only give you points and technology, but also make things cheaper and give bonuses. These bonuses can increase your income and make you more efficient, which then let you do other things (such as increase technology) to keep the cycle going.
The changes Gaia Project makes over Terra Mystica makes the game a bit more exciting and gives a bit more freedom. It is still a tight optimisation puzzle, but you can chain up moves allot easier to pull off big plays. The actual board (having blank space between planets) also reinforces this, as it is harder to block people off completely but the focus is still on stealing their planets.
The only downsides are that the rulebook should have a glossary of key terms. The difference between neighbouring, neighbouring area or neighbourhood are huge and take a bit of finding if you need to look them up. The other thing is that the components are plastic. While they are nice, they don't quite have the same timeless wooden feel of Terra Mystica. Analysis Paralysis can also easily set in for players.
This is a very fascinating game. The more I play it the more I enjoy it as I explore the systems. As times is going by, it is slowly climbing its way higher into my favorite games.
5 out of 5 Terraformed Waffles.
Gaia Project is set in space. The goal of the game is to increase your races technology while you terraform and colonise planets on the board. You do this to form federations, get income, and score points. At the end of the game, most points is the winner.
Gaia Project is a very fascinating game. Each of its systems is tied together and feels like it has a good give-and-take. For example, the technology levels don't only give you points and technology, but also make things cheaper and give bonuses. These bonuses can increase your income and make you more efficient, which then let you do other things (such as increase technology) to keep the cycle going.
The changes Gaia Project makes over Terra Mystica makes the game a bit more exciting and gives a bit more freedom. It is still a tight optimisation puzzle, but you can chain up moves allot easier to pull off big plays. The actual board (having blank space between planets) also reinforces this, as it is harder to block people off completely but the focus is still on stealing their planets.
The only downsides are that the rulebook should have a glossary of key terms. The difference between neighbouring, neighbouring area or neighbourhood are huge and take a bit of finding if you need to look them up. The other thing is that the components are plastic. While they are nice, they don't quite have the same timeless wooden feel of Terra Mystica. Analysis Paralysis can also easily set in for players.
This is a very fascinating game. The more I play it the more I enjoy it as I explore the systems. As times is going by, it is slowly climbing its way higher into my favorite games.
5 out of 5 Terraformed Waffles.
Monday, 9 July 2018
BOARD GAME UNBOXINGS: SOME THOUGHTS
Another slow week of board game playing, so I thought I would give my initial thoughts on some games I recently unboxed and read through the rules.
FOUNDERS OF GLOOMHAVEN: Looks great but complicated. The rulebook looks clear but has allot of terminology. It is the sort of game where the impression I get is that it looks more complicated than it actually plays. Components are simple and some races may have issues identifying their colors (i.e. brown vs grey vs orange).
LEGENDARY CREATURES: The game looks fantastic. The rules seem interesting. However, there seems to be a couple of fiddly looking rules which may affect the enjoyment of it, especially as they appear easy to forget. Really looking forward to trying this one.
SMITHS OF WINTERFORGE: Another game that looks great. However, I feel like this may be a King's Forge but more complicated. I don't know if the extra complexity is going to make it worth it. Also am considering a small houserule out of the gate (you get +1 tokens = number of dice rolled if you fail a roll) because the dice rolling seems like it could be brutal.
RISING 5: RUNES OF ASTEROS: Looks nice. The rules seem pretty simple. I got the KS version at a decent price so have the mini-expansions to play around with. The rulebook layout feels a bit off, but still want to get it to the table.
VOYAGES OF MARCO POLO: Such a small rulebook. So many components. This feels like a Stone Age type game. Few rules, but nice to play. Looking forward to giving this one a go, but fear the visual appeal is a bit low with all the hotness around these days.
Hopefully I will get some more games played this week to get back to normal reviews.
FOUNDERS OF GLOOMHAVEN: Looks great but complicated. The rulebook looks clear but has allot of terminology. It is the sort of game where the impression I get is that it looks more complicated than it actually plays. Components are simple and some races may have issues identifying their colors (i.e. brown vs grey vs orange).
LEGENDARY CREATURES: The game looks fantastic. The rules seem interesting. However, there seems to be a couple of fiddly looking rules which may affect the enjoyment of it, especially as they appear easy to forget. Really looking forward to trying this one.
SMITHS OF WINTERFORGE: Another game that looks great. However, I feel like this may be a King's Forge but more complicated. I don't know if the extra complexity is going to make it worth it. Also am considering a small houserule out of the gate (you get +1 tokens = number of dice rolled if you fail a roll) because the dice rolling seems like it could be brutal.
RISING 5: RUNES OF ASTEROS: Looks nice. The rules seem pretty simple. I got the KS version at a decent price so have the mini-expansions to play around with. The rulebook layout feels a bit off, but still want to get it to the table.
VOYAGES OF MARCO POLO: Such a small rulebook. So many components. This feels like a Stone Age type game. Few rules, but nice to play. Looking forward to giving this one a go, but fear the visual appeal is a bit low with all the hotness around these days.
Hopefully I will get some more games played this week to get back to normal reviews.
Friday, 25 May 2018
BOARD GAME REVIEW: KINGDOMINO
So Kingdomino is a game by Blue Orange. After Photosynthesis, a game I enjoy immensely, does this game continue its tradition. The answer is yes and no.
Kingdomino uses domino style mechanics. On your turn, you draft tiles. The tricks are that you want big areas and also crowns, as these are points multipliers. However I said plural, because the better your tile, the worse position you are in turn order next round.
Kingdomino definitely is in the filler category of games. It has a couple of rules, plays quickly, and you can easily play several quick games in a row. It also has enough choices and depth to make it fell fulfilling, like Splendor or similar games.
The main reason that it fails is that there is not enough depth after repeat plays. After a few games, you are left feeling like each game play similar. I am not sure about Queendomino, but maybe something like goal cards or a global rule change (similar to Sagrada or Kokodo) would work well to keep the game a bit fresher.
So there it is. It is a good game. However, it could’ve been a great game with a bit more in box variety. Blue Orange have a hit, but it falls a bit below those evergreen games that are available at the moment.
3.5 out of 5 falling waffles.
Sunday, 29 April 2018
INTERNATIONAL TABLETOP DAY: WHAT DID I PLAY
So with another International Tabletop Day gone, I just thought I would give some quick thoughts on some of the games I played.
CONCEPT: A nice starting game for a large group. It was pretty loosely played until people moved on. Always fun in small doses, but sometimes tends to be overdone.
KEYFLOWER: Brought this out of the dust. Got some rules wrong but always fun. Everyone played consistently so that was good.
TIMELINE: Another filler type game. I lose this allot because I just don't remember specifics unless I focus on them. But also fun, especially when one of the three cards I actually know comes out.
RHINO HERO SUPER BATTLE: Very, very fun. A bit more gamey than Rhino Hero, without adding complexity. It has been added to the wishlist, although it is held back from a must buy because I don't like the random dice mechanic.
XCOM: Another game I adore that has been unplayed for far too long. Added in the expansion, but we lost. The expansion ramps the difficulty up and tries to break your engine. Very fun.
ROLL PLAYER: Was meant to just fill in time as a 2 player, 30 minute game, but 2 more people joined in. It was really good, as I normally play this solo. The only downside was a bit of unfamiliarity with the expansion when I was teaching, but it came together okay.
SEA OF CLOUDS: Another adored game that I haven't got to the table for far too long. It was a close game between the other two players, although I lagged far behind. Still it was very fun and with a bit more artifact luck, I could've stolen it.
CHARTERSTONE: Played a completed game. This part I didn't like. However, I really like the mechanisms. I would love to use the game to design a couple of boards (1 each side) in order to make it a bit more intuitive. Instead, the placement layout seemed very random and it was easy to overlook things.
SAGRADA: I really liked this game. It is very different from Roll Player, which I wasn't expecting. One is a spatial puzzle while the other is a manipulation puzzle. The amount they are compared I would've thought they are similar. Really enjoyed it and high on the wishlist.
THE GAME: Always like the stress in this game. Played the hard variant (3 cards per turn played minimum), but nearly pulled it off, Really like this game.
BATTLESTAR GALACTICA: It was okay. Jumped in because not much else was happening. I am pretty average on this game and really don't enjoy being the traitor. Luckily I wasn't so could just focus on completing skill checks.
So that was my ITTD haul. A pretty good haul of played games for a weekend.
CONCEPT: A nice starting game for a large group. It was pretty loosely played until people moved on. Always fun in small doses, but sometimes tends to be overdone.
KEYFLOWER: Brought this out of the dust. Got some rules wrong but always fun. Everyone played consistently so that was good.
TIMELINE: Another filler type game. I lose this allot because I just don't remember specifics unless I focus on them. But also fun, especially when one of the three cards I actually know comes out.
RHINO HERO SUPER BATTLE: Very, very fun. A bit more gamey than Rhino Hero, without adding complexity. It has been added to the wishlist, although it is held back from a must buy because I don't like the random dice mechanic.
XCOM: Another game I adore that has been unplayed for far too long. Added in the expansion, but we lost. The expansion ramps the difficulty up and tries to break your engine. Very fun.
ROLL PLAYER: Was meant to just fill in time as a 2 player, 30 minute game, but 2 more people joined in. It was really good, as I normally play this solo. The only downside was a bit of unfamiliarity with the expansion when I was teaching, but it came together okay.
SEA OF CLOUDS: Another adored game that I haven't got to the table for far too long. It was a close game between the other two players, although I lagged far behind. Still it was very fun and with a bit more artifact luck, I could've stolen it.
CHARTERSTONE: Played a completed game. This part I didn't like. However, I really like the mechanisms. I would love to use the game to design a couple of boards (1 each side) in order to make it a bit more intuitive. Instead, the placement layout seemed very random and it was easy to overlook things.
SAGRADA: I really liked this game. It is very different from Roll Player, which I wasn't expecting. One is a spatial puzzle while the other is a manipulation puzzle. The amount they are compared I would've thought they are similar. Really enjoyed it and high on the wishlist.
THE GAME: Always like the stress in this game. Played the hard variant (3 cards per turn played minimum), but nearly pulled it off, Really like this game.
BATTLESTAR GALACTICA: It was okay. Jumped in because not much else was happening. I am pretty average on this game and really don't enjoy being the traitor. Luckily I wasn't so could just focus on completing skill checks.
So that was my ITTD haul. A pretty good haul of played games for a weekend.
Monday, 16 April 2018
BOARD GAME REVIEW: MAJESTY- FOR THE REALM
Majesty: For the Realm (hereafter referred to as Majesty) is the latest game from the designer of Splendor (I believe). After the disappointment of Cities of Splendor, does Majesty recapture the magic. The short answer is: yes. The longer answer: it is perhaps one of my games of the year.
Majesty is a simple game. You have a set of locations in your empire. Everyturn, there is an offer where you choose a card. You have to pay to skip the cards at the beginning of the row and get other stuff (sometimes better, sometimes worse).
In addition, there is some attacking. Attacking is very non-personal and the game is so short that, even if you get caught out by attacks, it never feels too personal. Also, there are multiple ways to mitigate against attacks, so it doesn't feel overly important.
As you draft cards, you activate various combo's and effects in your tableau. At the end of the game, your non-injured cards score for majorities and variety. Every card you draft gives you something, and although it is a short game, the decisions feel pretty meaningful.
The only criticism is that perhaps by the end of the games, it might feel a bit samey. That is where alternate locations come in. This keeps the game feeling fresh. In addition, you can come up with your own combinations of location cards to explore different set-ups (although the balance might not be there).
This is another great game in the same style as Splendor. Simple rules, quick playing, but engaging decisions. This has slightly more interaction than Splendor due to attacking, but doesn't overdo it. A great game that entertains a wide variety of people.
5 out of 5 Majestic Waffles.
Majesty is a simple game. You have a set of locations in your empire. Everyturn, there is an offer where you choose a card. You have to pay to skip the cards at the beginning of the row and get other stuff (sometimes better, sometimes worse).
In addition, there is some attacking. Attacking is very non-personal and the game is so short that, even if you get caught out by attacks, it never feels too personal. Also, there are multiple ways to mitigate against attacks, so it doesn't feel overly important.
As you draft cards, you activate various combo's and effects in your tableau. At the end of the game, your non-injured cards score for majorities and variety. Every card you draft gives you something, and although it is a short game, the decisions feel pretty meaningful.
The only criticism is that perhaps by the end of the games, it might feel a bit samey. That is where alternate locations come in. This keeps the game feeling fresh. In addition, you can come up with your own combinations of location cards to explore different set-ups (although the balance might not be there).
This is another great game in the same style as Splendor. Simple rules, quick playing, but engaging decisions. This has slightly more interaction than Splendor due to attacking, but doesn't overdo it. A great game that entertains a wide variety of people.
5 out of 5 Majestic Waffles.
Sunday, 21 January 2018
BOARD GAME REVIEW: GLOOMHAVEN (2016)
Gloomhaven is the current number 1 game on boardgamegeek.com. It is a dungeon-crawl type game from Isaac Childres, and to describe it as a dungeon-crawl is both painfully accurate and yet doing the game a great disservice. I also have barely scratched the depths of the game for its "full" review, so this is more a first impressions (even after playing for 30+ hours).
In this game, you and a bunch of your companions are playing the role of adventurers from the titular city. Every session of this, you will sit down, set up a dungeon and then try to complete it (normally by killing all the enemies). You move around a grid-based map, get experience and items, and then succeed or fail. Between missions, you can buy items, go on a small text-based adventure on the road and in the city (literally just a card with 2 options, normally), and occasionally your character will retire (allowing you a new class).
If that sounds like a dungeon-crawler, it is because it is. But if that last sentence indicated there is more going on under the hood of this game, it is because there is. Gloomhaven inherets all the flaws of old grid-based dungeon crawlers, with non-inutitive and self-defeating enemy AI, blocking on the grid, and classes falling into archetype roles (along with the old damage-is-king effect). In fact, paradoxically, it is important to remember Gloomhaven is just a dungeon crawl (rather than expecting a revolutionary experience) as well remembering that the dungeon crawl is perhaps the worst part of it.
For example, the way classes are unlocked and your character retires is new. In addition, the combat system tends to revolve around playing two cards and combining them in different ways. Levelling up doesn't so much power up your character as also give you a new card to increase your options. So while your character may be a tank or DPS, you can add some healing cards or support cards, for example, to easily fill spots in your ranks.
There is so much to talk about in this game. Hidden combat objectives, the perk system, the legacy-type elements, etc. However, it is important to note that this is perhaps the most ambitious dungeon-crawler I have played. Other games may give better pure dungeon-crawl experiences, but no other game has quite given me the same overall experience yet.
5 out of 5 gloomy waffles.
In this game, you and a bunch of your companions are playing the role of adventurers from the titular city. Every session of this, you will sit down, set up a dungeon and then try to complete it (normally by killing all the enemies). You move around a grid-based map, get experience and items, and then succeed or fail. Between missions, you can buy items, go on a small text-based adventure on the road and in the city (literally just a card with 2 options, normally), and occasionally your character will retire (allowing you a new class).
If that sounds like a dungeon-crawler, it is because it is. But if that last sentence indicated there is more going on under the hood of this game, it is because there is. Gloomhaven inherets all the flaws of old grid-based dungeon crawlers, with non-inutitive and self-defeating enemy AI, blocking on the grid, and classes falling into archetype roles (along with the old damage-is-king effect). In fact, paradoxically, it is important to remember Gloomhaven is just a dungeon crawl (rather than expecting a revolutionary experience) as well remembering that the dungeon crawl is perhaps the worst part of it.
For example, the way classes are unlocked and your character retires is new. In addition, the combat system tends to revolve around playing two cards and combining them in different ways. Levelling up doesn't so much power up your character as also give you a new card to increase your options. So while your character may be a tank or DPS, you can add some healing cards or support cards, for example, to easily fill spots in your ranks.
There is so much to talk about in this game. Hidden combat objectives, the perk system, the legacy-type elements, etc. However, it is important to note that this is perhaps the most ambitious dungeon-crawler I have played. Other games may give better pure dungeon-crawl experiences, but no other game has quite given me the same overall experience yet.
5 out of 5 gloomy waffles.
Sunday, 5 November 2017
BOARD GAME REVIEW: 7TH CONTINENT
The 7th Continent is a game that was on Kickstarter. It took around 2 years to complete after it funded successfully. The goal of the game was to recreate a choose-your-own-adventure style game on a big sprawling map.
And was it worth it. The answer is a resounding yes. Although not a perfect game, it achieves exactly what it sets our to do. It is a cleverly done game where the designers have. Pearly thought through allot of it.
At the heart of the game are two mechanisms. The first is the interconnected cards that form the map. Each card has different events and symbols as you explore around it. The second is the series of action cards that are also your life pile. There is also a crafting and inventory system on top of all this.
And all this comes together awesomely. It is a game system of a choose your own adventure. Sometimes it is unclear where you have to go for your mission (called a curse) and you may waste a session not getting to the end. Sometimes if you miss an obvious clue you can get stuck exploring things unrelated to your curse. But for the most part it works great.
This is a game that tells a story where the mechanisms serve to help tell the story. On top of all this, the mechanisms are pretty simple and the game is pretty easy to learn. It raises the bar for story games and is a great Kickstarter success story (even without miniatures).
5 our of 5th Continent Waffles.
Wednesday, 5 July 2017
BOARD GAME REVIEW: CHAMPIONS OF MIDGARD
Champions of Midgard is a game published by Grey Fox Games that has had no shortage of love. Featuring glowing reviews from the Dice Tower and featured on an episode of Tabletop, it grabbed my interest when it was described by Wil Wheaton as a mix of Lords of Waterdeep and Stone Age. These are both games I really like and, add to that the new expansions that are available for it, I decided to see how it would compare.
In Champions of Midgard, you are trying to earn the most glory over 8 rounds. Glory is earned by building up the village (resources), defeating monsters and fulfilling destiny (or goal) cards. This is done by a combination of worker placement and dice-based combat resolution against monsters threatening your village. The game feels quite tight, with only 8 rounds and normally only 3-4 workers per round meaning you have to focus on what you are doing.
Because Champions of Midgard feels so tight, allot can be dependent on the dice roles (especially when fighting the bigger monsters). The more you want to mitigate them, the more actions you need to spend to earn re-roll tokens. This is probably the biggest detractor from the game, as you can fluff key dice roles (even if you re-roll them) meaning you have lost out on allot of resources.
This is a shame because allot of the other mechanisms are quite nice. The way blame for not defending the village is assigned is what all semi-co op games should aspire too when trying to determine lose conditions (i.e. just punish the people not helping). The worker placement and collecting of dice resources feels nearly copied from Lords of Waterdeep, which isn't a bad thing (why shouldn't designs feel iterative) and collecting resources to send out for raiding feels quite thematic.
However, Stone Age has the advantage of not having each individual roll feel as critical and having the ability to stock up on tools and cards to mitigate this. Lords of Waterdeep is a very tactical game (except for those stupid Mandatory Quest Cards, which should just be reworked into negative points if uncompleted) where you aren't leaving huge scoring opportunities to chance. Compared to these, Champions of Midgard may be average to good, but won't often be a game I would choose to play above these or a bunch of other worker placement games such as Russian Railroads or Ancient World.
On a side note, it appears that the Valhalla expansion addresses most of my main issues with this game so perhaps that will elevate the game into the regular rotation for me.
2.5 out of 5 non-horned Waffles
In Champions of Midgard, you are trying to earn the most glory over 8 rounds. Glory is earned by building up the village (resources), defeating monsters and fulfilling destiny (or goal) cards. This is done by a combination of worker placement and dice-based combat resolution against monsters threatening your village. The game feels quite tight, with only 8 rounds and normally only 3-4 workers per round meaning you have to focus on what you are doing.
Because Champions of Midgard feels so tight, allot can be dependent on the dice roles (especially when fighting the bigger monsters). The more you want to mitigate them, the more actions you need to spend to earn re-roll tokens. This is probably the biggest detractor from the game, as you can fluff key dice roles (even if you re-roll them) meaning you have lost out on allot of resources.
This is a shame because allot of the other mechanisms are quite nice. The way blame for not defending the village is assigned is what all semi-co op games should aspire too when trying to determine lose conditions (i.e. just punish the people not helping). The worker placement and collecting of dice resources feels nearly copied from Lords of Waterdeep, which isn't a bad thing (why shouldn't designs feel iterative) and collecting resources to send out for raiding feels quite thematic.
However, Stone Age has the advantage of not having each individual roll feel as critical and having the ability to stock up on tools and cards to mitigate this. Lords of Waterdeep is a very tactical game (except for those stupid Mandatory Quest Cards, which should just be reworked into negative points if uncompleted) where you aren't leaving huge scoring opportunities to chance. Compared to these, Champions of Midgard may be average to good, but won't often be a game I would choose to play above these or a bunch of other worker placement games such as Russian Railroads or Ancient World.
On a side note, it appears that the Valhalla expansion addresses most of my main issues with this game so perhaps that will elevate the game into the regular rotation for me.
2.5 out of 5 non-horned Waffles
Sunday, 17 May 2015
BOARD GAME REVIEW: PANDEMIC
Pandemic is a classic board game with a simple goal: save the world from a deadly disease. It is a co-operative game (at least the vanilla game is) and it is great fun to be a well-oiled machine in disease fighting. Or just have fun while being a completely ineffectual disease control force- the choice is yours.
Pandemic (sans expansions) pits you against 4 epidemic diseases in a race against time. Played over a world map, each player moves around the board and uses their actions and special abilities to cure the four types of diseases before one of them kills the world. As per all action-management games, you have to decide what to prioritise your actions on as there is never enough time to do everything you want before one of the games lose conditions is satisfied.
Pandemic is a co-operative game that plays simply but gives you a great sense of satisfaction when you narrowly avoid disaster. The mechanics are easy to pick up and it is easy to guide new players through the first game or two. However, be warned to pick your gaming group carefully. An alpha-player can easily bully players around until there is little co-operation and the game devolves into just one player playing multiple characters.
In order to succeed, each player has to use their roles to maximise their actions. Once you get the hang of this, there isn't much more to the game. However, what it does it does very well. It is a very good co-operative game and a good introductory game. The expansions add more challenge and complex mechanics once some regular players are ready for it.
4 out of 5 disease-ridden waffles.
Pandemic (sans expansions) pits you against 4 epidemic diseases in a race against time. Played over a world map, each player moves around the board and uses their actions and special abilities to cure the four types of diseases before one of them kills the world. As per all action-management games, you have to decide what to prioritise your actions on as there is never enough time to do everything you want before one of the games lose conditions is satisfied.
Pandemic is a co-operative game that plays simply but gives you a great sense of satisfaction when you narrowly avoid disaster. The mechanics are easy to pick up and it is easy to guide new players through the first game or two. However, be warned to pick your gaming group carefully. An alpha-player can easily bully players around until there is little co-operation and the game devolves into just one player playing multiple characters.
In order to succeed, each player has to use their roles to maximise their actions. Once you get the hang of this, there isn't much more to the game. However, what it does it does very well. It is a very good co-operative game and a good introductory game. The expansions add more challenge and complex mechanics once some regular players are ready for it.
4 out of 5 disease-ridden waffles.
Friday, 23 January 2015
BOARD GAME REVIEW: ZOMBIE 15"
Zombie 15" is a really good Zombie game. My view of it might just be colored by the fact that this is the first time-based game I have played, I am a sucker for a well-themed game or I really like co-operative games, but Zombie 15" has been the stand-out game that I have played in 2014. And there were allot of new games that I have played over 2014.
Zombie 15" is a co-operative game for 2-4 players. It is played on a modular board, with tiles set-up that can be changed to create different scenarios. Each player takes the role of a teenager with some different powers as they try to survive and outrun the main zombie horde. In each game, you have a goal to achieve in 15", often involving cutting a path through some zombies to a finishing tile.
The main strength of this game is right there in the title. Zombie 15" is played over 15 minutes. At certain times (depending on the scenario, every minute or 40 seconds), more zombies appear on whoever's turn it is. There are no traditional turn limits- just however many action you can fit into 15". This encourages the game to keep moving fast and analysis-paralysis is severely punished. It also means that no games ever drag, as you know that each game will last 15 minutes. The set-up time is also only approximately 10-15 minutes.
The artwork and plastic figures for the game are great and really match the exciting, upbeat tone of the game. They are colourful and never take themselves too seriously. The only complaint is some of the Zombie figures seem quite flimsy, but this is a minor complaint. The board, character cards and item cards all look fantastic and are of god quality.
One thing the game could improve upon is the co-operative aspects of the game. Most the scenarios just degenerate into each player leap-frogging the previous player and trying to kill zombies to clear a path. However, with a modular board and custom scenarios, I anticipate that the replay value of this game will go up. I have already been thinking of rules to put the Left 4 Dead Zombies in the game (especially the Witch and Tank) or to modify some of the tower defence-based scenarios, and the game encourages you to make up your own custom scenarios. There is a website where they will post them, although how flexible the core game is to allow custom scenarios remains to be seen.
Overall, Zombie 15" is my stand-out board game of 2014. Although I have played more serious games and games that ran longer, Zombie 15" has a strong, colourful theme to make it stand-out and is always allot of fun whenever we break it out for a game or 4.
4 out of 5 hordes of waffles.
Zombie 15" is a co-operative game for 2-4 players. It is played on a modular board, with tiles set-up that can be changed to create different scenarios. Each player takes the role of a teenager with some different powers as they try to survive and outrun the main zombie horde. In each game, you have a goal to achieve in 15", often involving cutting a path through some zombies to a finishing tile.
The main strength of this game is right there in the title. Zombie 15" is played over 15 minutes. At certain times (depending on the scenario, every minute or 40 seconds), more zombies appear on whoever's turn it is. There are no traditional turn limits- just however many action you can fit into 15". This encourages the game to keep moving fast and analysis-paralysis is severely punished. It also means that no games ever drag, as you know that each game will last 15 minutes. The set-up time is also only approximately 10-15 minutes.
The artwork and plastic figures for the game are great and really match the exciting, upbeat tone of the game. They are colourful and never take themselves too seriously. The only complaint is some of the Zombie figures seem quite flimsy, but this is a minor complaint. The board, character cards and item cards all look fantastic and are of god quality.
One thing the game could improve upon is the co-operative aspects of the game. Most the scenarios just degenerate into each player leap-frogging the previous player and trying to kill zombies to clear a path. However, with a modular board and custom scenarios, I anticipate that the replay value of this game will go up. I have already been thinking of rules to put the Left 4 Dead Zombies in the game (especially the Witch and Tank) or to modify some of the tower defence-based scenarios, and the game encourages you to make up your own custom scenarios. There is a website where they will post them, although how flexible the core game is to allow custom scenarios remains to be seen.
Overall, Zombie 15" is my stand-out board game of 2014. Although I have played more serious games and games that ran longer, Zombie 15" has a strong, colourful theme to make it stand-out and is always allot of fun whenever we break it out for a game or 4.
4 out of 5 hordes of waffles.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)