Gamer's Notebook

Gamer's Notebook, April 2009

Thu, 09 Apr 2009 16:39:56 EDT

Trouble Comes in Threes

I hope. It has been a traumatic few months: a bad bike crash; having my wallet, keys, phone and design notes stolen in the British Museum; and finally a water leak which, uncannily, homed in on some of my favourite books - mainly the big, expensive ones with pictures. This latter event gave rise to all sorts of emotions, none good, and of course a frantic effort to save what I could. Despite this, I now have several crinkly paper doorstops lying around.

All of which is the main reason for my tardiness. The other reason was a writer's block of enormous proportions, lasting over two months. It started to ease last week, and 11,000 words later here I am. I'll try not to let it happen again. As if I knew why they happen in the first place.

Blogging

Do I blog? No, if the paltry number of my inbound blog links is anything to go by. My natural rhythm is quarterly, not hourly, daily or weekly, and I admire those that can bash out those columns that require one to start work again as soon as one is finished. Frankly, I can't come up with interesting topics that regularly. It has to be said that neither can many other people.

One of my favourite, well paced, always interesting blogs can be found at The Game Ranch. As in many cases, the appeal is that the writers, Susan and Ed Rozmiarek, share many of my interests but always have a good angle, or analysis, that makes me think. I was chatting to Susan recently and she said that she hadn't been blogging as much because was a little burned out with Euros ("another worker placement game...") and that she had been playing Descent and World of Warcraft. But she is all better now.

Fortunately I am not currently singed, hopefully having had all my burn out in one big five year slice. That position is rooted in a conscious and constant effort to pace myself on Euros. I am also very aware of my expectations in that just one play is highly likely, as is a degree of disappointment. At the moment I would say that most games are at least okay, which has been true for a couple of years now, and almost all have something interesting and 'new' to offer. One is always reminded of the film industry where the sequel is often the safe option. So even if Stone Age is recognisable in many ways, and draws on previous titles, it is good enough to stand on its own and generate the magical five plays. A Castle for All Seasons and Wasabi, on the other hand, were definitely not.

Then occasionally a game comes long that makes you sit back and say, yes, that's really good. Numerically, it pushes into the eights and even the nines. These are the ones that make it all worthwhile and there are two or three mentioned this time. Does one have to go through the sampling to get to these games? I would say yes, and that the sampling (done with the right people) is still fun, or at the very least a positive experience.

Once again, the social element is an important factor and one that keeps me firmly engaged. The problem I have, like the movies, is that often reviewers or friends will not like a game, but usually I find I need to play it to decide for myself. The best verification, after playing, is a quick Geekbuddy analysis where there are usually enough trusted people at least in the same ballpark, but one still returns to the blogs and friends that got you to play Stone Age in the first place.

Treefrogged

Martin Wallace had quite a year in 2008. Toledo, Tinner's Trail, Steel Driver and After the Flood. Not a bad haul, I am sure you will agree. While Toledo is by no means a heavy game, it is very good and I detect some belated interest even amongst hard core gamers. A bit of a sleeper perhaps? I will say no more because I did a bit of work on this one. We have also been playing Struggle of Empires, Brass and Byzantium regularly and with Waterloo and Automobile imminent, this could well turn into a regular Wallace love fest.

Steel Driver

Martin Wallace for Treefrog

That Mr. Wallace and his railway games, eh? You can't get him away from them. This one is a bit different though, and I think it is fair to say it is lighter and easier to play than his usual brain busters.

So, the good bit. For one joyous moment in the first turn, I thought Martin had designed my dream railway game. There is an unfettered choice as to where you build your empire, and an ever changing, interesting map results. Some areas close down, others remain open for exploitation. Rail routes grow in believable ways most of the time.

The weird bit is that there is a bit of herky-jerky throughout the turns, where you are obliged to change company and lay track you don't really want to, and a very strange end game where bonuses are handed out for all sorts of things. Let's just say that in the second game, one might be clearer what to do. Because of the former aspect, control and strategy also felt compromised but, again, one would do things differently second time around.

Overall I found the game good, with some great bits and some odd bits. I would definitely play again. Two of the other three players did not agree with me and were quite critical. I know why this was, and I suspect it relates to the management of disappointment I was talking about earlier. For me Steel Driver was a solid game that had some very promising aspects, but which was ultimately a bit disappointing because of a dose of short termism. As I was playing for the first time, I was not too worried about winning or even balance. I do however want to be a contender in the game, playing it my way, and trying to enjoy the ride. One to return to.

After The Flood

Martin Wallace for Treefrog

Last year, Brass was just pipped for top honours by an outstanding game: 1960. No playing second fiddle this year. After the Flood has been on the table four times and I experienced a very different, and enjoyable, game in each. That may not be a good sign in some cases, but in a Wallace game it is usually a sign of replayability and robustness. The game has a lot of clever ideas, not least in the way the game handles the traditional two on one problem in three player games. As of now, my view is: all good, nothing bad. An excellent game from a designer now well established amongst the world's best.

Snow Tails

Fraser and Gordon Lamont for Fragor

Powerboats

Corne van Moorsel for Cwali

I have grouped these two games together because they are both fun, clever, light race games. They are very quick to complete, feel strangely alike, and make Formule De seem an even longer marathon than it already is. Most impressively, they actually convey a sense of speed. As such, they constitute the ideal filler.

Snow Tails deals with husky sled racing, tackled years ago by Mush, and typified by the Iditarod race. The steering and speed mechanism is rather clever, and unless you have trouble with right and left, you will pick it up in an instant. While I cannot say that the sleds have the correct physics when cornering or hurtling through trees, it is these two skills that you will need to master to win the short, frantic races. I didn't, and my sled is still wrapped around a Scots Pine. I can confidently state that, for me, Snow Tails is the best yet from the Brothers Grimm Lamont.

Dominion

Donald X Vaccarino for Rio Grande

Some of you probably think I am holed up in my internetless, phoneless, TVless little house in the Fens, oblivious to what is going on in the wider world. You would be quite right. But out there, because I have been around a long, long time, I have a number of operatives. Agents, if you will. And they tell me things.

They tell me of hobbits, and a ring. They tell me my teams, the Phillies and the Steelers, will be world champions at the same time. Pah! They tell me that some gamers are taking each other to court. They tell me that my bank is now owned by the government and that I personally owe the directors some bonus money. They tell me I can't afford to go to Essen or Paris ever again. They tell me that Martin Wallace is churning out good to great games once every four weeks. But mainly they have been telling me that Dominion is the hot new game and that it is the next Agricola.

Sometimes, I have to replace my agents.

Mr Yu, Ms Putman; please collect your final payslips.

I have played Dominion three times now. The zealots told me I must play it at least one hundred times to get the net. Preferably two hundred. I think not! All I remember is a lot of shuffling and a neat little bit where I had to stop getting money and start buying land. This reminded me of Carpe Astra's excellent resource arc. Apart from that I could not really see the appeal. The theme is embarrassingly weak. The artwork is plain nasty. It ain't exactly cheap to buy, and, predictably, I won't be doing so.

My level of excitement here is much lower than that for Fairy Tale which was interesting, different, and a game I will play every now and then. They are both clearly very good ideas in search of a decent game. That game will undoubtedly come along eventually.

And Dominion will of course be a huge success.

Diamonds Club

Rudiger Dorn for Ravensburger

It is a long time since Ravensburger had a game in my annual top ten, let alone the top five. But I don't mind where games come from if they are as good as this one. Ironically, the Ravensburger 'luxury' production is a bit cheesey but there is nothing that will stop you playing. There is a lot that is clever here - the main appeal being the role selection/auction system (borderline genius) and the distinct 'loosened corset' feel – you can always get something done, without much pain. Which is more than can be said for some of Rudiger's other games.

It also has genuinely different routes to victory the validity of which are currently being hotly debated. Which is good. It all plays quickly, considering. This is excellent stuff, overall. Not only can I say I liked this game, I can also say that everyone I have played with has liked it as well. Everyone. Apart from Jambo, I don't really care for Dorn games but this one is a must buy. We await the English edition, not that this is in any way necessary to play the game.

Comuni

Acchittocca for Huch/Tenkigames

Frank Branham said, a little while ago now, that the Eurogame is dead. I generally agree, but we seem to have moved firmly into the Zombie Era regardless. Because these games surely keep coming, with their little tweaks and occasionally good ideas, and they are a pain to kill off. Once in a while I set aside a couple of days to blitz the latest twenty apparitions. At a recent weekend session the outstanding game was Comuni. Not because it is stellar, or because it is going to set the world afire, but because it works, it is fun to play, it has some of those clever little ideas and only one or two little concerns. It has an original auction that even I enjoyed. It even has a decent theme. Okay, so the theme is Renaissance Italy, but as I've said many times before if the game is good, I'll take a repeat theme every time.

So, what do we have? Comuni pretty much checks all the boxes in the cliché column: auctions, cubes, worker placement, erecting buildings, collecting guildmasters, majorities, a dose of co-op, catch-up mechanism, longest road, fight off invaders, collect VP's. I hope you are not dissuaded by this identikit approach. Every single aspect of this game feels fresh. It hangs together well, even if the rules are a pain and it badly needs crib sheets. It provides plenty of opportunity for clever and wicked play. It is all over in an hour and a half. Comuni missed winning a Sumo by a hairsbreadth, which I hope says a lot for this game.

Battlestar Galactica

Corey Konieczka for Fantasy Flight

No, I have not yet watched the new series. Yes, I easily understood the game. I have almost no clue why I enjoyed it so much.

You want more? Okay, the selling point here is superb atmosphere. I did actually feel like a Viper pilot, launched to fight the Cylons. Raiders turn up with alarming frequency, building pressure. I managed to take out six fighters before I crashed and burned. It was tense, gripping, exciting. Bottle that feeling. Better still, there is a traitor or two in the game, one of whom was my wingman who left me to fight alone. Remember Shadows over Camelot's little agitator? This is way, way better. We saw real paranoia at the table. Accusations, suspicion, betrayal, classic poker faced lying. Wonderful, flavoursome stuff.

The trade-off? It is slooooooooow. It takes three to four hours with considerable downtime. In this respect, one reaches the half-way point with a sigh of relief, and a sense of terminal achievement, only to have to do it all over again. Also, the traitor is superbly set up, then weakened because the Cylon has to know the rules and timing strategy, and exactly what to do to cause disruption and when to reveal. The card play, while clever in itself, feels samey because no-one took the trouble to write some interesting text, they just cut and pasted duplicate cards. Over time, one will become familiar with the situations and I suspect it will become stale.

The solution for me would be to put it away on the shelf, and take it down again sometime next year. This will remain the fate of Fantasy Flight games (the playable ones, anyway) until someone comes in and does some decent development work. I think the game could happily play in 90 minutes. I fully understand that FF and their audience may not want it to. In short, BSG is a very, very good game that is criminally overlong. That will not stop me playing it when the stars are right, once a year.

Shuuro

Alessio Cavatore for River Horse

It is said that there are as many chess variants as there are players of chess*. Sometimes they remain a brief glimmer of inspiration, a fleeting daydream; others are nurtured, tested and sometimes brought to market. Shuuro adds to the genre, and is notable both because it is designed by Alessio Cavatore of Warhammer and LOTR fame, and because I think it is worth your time.

* I said this, just now.

Shuuro comes in a very classy box, which contains a sturdy folding board, a load of plastic chess pieces in blue and red, dice (dice in a chess box? Sacrilege!) and a plush rule book that seems to have been translated into every major language and a couple more for luck. As an added bonus, you can use the components to play standard chess as well.

The purest variants retain the core movement rules of chess, meaning that the game is easily learned – doesn't everyone know how to play chess? Clearly, this is a major advantage for accessibility and learning. Hundreds of board games experience the purchased-stored-sold unplayed cycle because of lengthy or opaque rules. In Shuuro one has just two pages of rules to absorb and we were underway in no time at all.

So how does Shuuro differ from standard chess? Well, in three major ways. Firstly the board is extended to 12 x 12 squares. Secondly, a number of blocking obstacles are randomly placed to create battlefield terrain. Thirdly, you get to choose your own pieces secretly, generating two different sides. In true wargamer style, each chess piece has a points value and you select a mix that suits your style of play and intended tactics. The King is free, Queens cost 110, Bishops 40, down to pawns at 10. Anyone thinking 'Chess with an Army List' or Seastrike may claim their £5 reward when you next see me.

I have to say that this army building is good fun. There is a great temptation to buy lots of bishops, because they seem good 'bang for buck' value, but they bring their own drawbacks which you will soon encounter. Neither should one ignore the humble pawns as without them you will have no screening capacity. I leave the discovery of the rest to you.

In play Shuuro is essentially chess but with enough differences to make it a completely novel experience. I know this because I am a pretty bad chess player. Okay, really awful. But this did not seem to matter so much in Shuuro. The asymmetric sides create one level of interest, and the obstacles, which always seem to be in the wrong place, add another. Indeed, they seem to be specifically designed to frustrate bishops, he said with feeling. While some of our games went a little longer, we found that the indicated time of 30 minutes per game was not far off the mark.

Shuuro brings chess a little closer to the battle game it claims to be. For collectors of chess variants, I expect this will be a must buy. It will make for an excellent closer, or a change of pace from the 36 page rulebook games. Good fun, and recommended.

Self Satisfaction

And finally, the most delayed Sumos ever. These are my personal awards for the top ten games of the previous calendar year, minus those that I didn't get round to playing, plus those played late from last year (!). They mean nothing to anyone but me, although three other people apparently enjoy looking, and one is waiting to berate me for choosing the top two.

The Sumos 2008

Yokuzuna

After the Flood
Leader 1

Ozeki

Diamonds Club
Battlestar Galactica
Pandemic

Sekiwake

Tinner's Trail
Jet Set
Monuments
Race for the Galaxy
Robokrieg

Honourable Mentions

Age of Discovery, Carpe Astra, Comuni, Dominion (for the idea), Hamburgum, Le Havre, Powerboats, Roll Through the Ages, Shadow Hunters, Snow Tails, Steel Driver, Stone Age, Sylla.

Unplayed and Still On the Urgent List

Android, Corunea, Metropolys, MonPoc, Mwhahaha!, Nefertiti, Okko, Planet Steam, Senji, Scripts & Scribes, Uruk and Wormhole.

Decent Wargames

Espana 1936, Spanish Eagles, Unhappy King Charles, Warriors of God.

Mike Siggins

Essen 2008 Special (Sort Of)

Mon, 10 Nov 2008 12:20:25 EST

My Essen started early. Melissa Rogerson arrived in Cambridge in early October and we spent a very enjoyable day pottering, chatting and gaming. There was a lot to take in from those few hours, all positive, and with Melissa safely off to Europe the next day I was left to look forward to Spiel.

I was due to travel on the Wednesday with Richard Breese. On the Monday night I managed to pull a muscle low in my back. It has happened before, it heals eventually, but this was cruel timing. By Tuesday it had stiffened up nicely and I could barely walk downstairs without a lot of pain. Reluctantly, and knowing the prognosis, I decided that eight hours a day on my feet at Spiel was a really bad option. Dejectedly, I retired to bed, wondering once again how I was going to put my socks on, and dreamed of German beer, friends and new games.

Oddly, there was a silver lining. Due to this enforced break, I got a lot of reading done, cleared the DVD backlog, and generally did absolutely nothing. It turned into a genuine rest, much needed, where I was often sleeping half the day. I feel much better for it, a good antidote to a madly busy year. Much calmer, I didn't spend a penny and I still have the games to look forward to. Quite a positive outcome, on balance.

From the reports I have read, I am most looking forward to After the Flood (easily top for anticipation), Kriegbot, Krakow, Planet Steam, Comuni, Jet Set, Snow Tails, Uruk, Palais Royal, Golden Age, Power Boats, Corunea, Saladin, Cavum, Name of the Rose, Dominion and Le Havre. Okay, okay. I am interested in anything you put in front of me. I am even reasonably intrigued by Duck Dealer, Battlestar Galactica and Space Alert.

Monday after Essen. Still struggling with the whole walking thing. Enter Chris Payne, long time gaming friend, regular Essen attendee and, best of all, possessed of working legs. Chris did a useful round up for those of us who didn’t attend, and we quickly decided that this might well be of interest to you. So, over to my able sidekick:

Essen 2008 – The Dream Ticket

It’s the event every office junior dreams of or dreads: it’s the big day and the boss rings in sick because he is flat on his back pumped full of painkillers and told to rest, having put his back out. The key to the executive wash room is mine! Hot tubs, booth babes, parties and cocktails! [MS: Now they all know…] The reality then soon dawns – 300+ new games and three and a half days of the fair left means its time to hoist the press pass into a more prominent position and go game!

Every Essen starts the same: reading what one can from the Geek, Spielbox and Cliquenband and then progressing to the companies’ own websites to see what crumbs they are releasing about their new games. And every year, the carefully prepared scheduled list goes out of the window in the first hour as news starts to ripple through from fellow gamers – either people you know from back home, or people from the hotel, or snippets from people you get a game with.

Each Essen is also different. This year’s mention must be the number of no shows, caused in many cases I gather by problems at the Chinese factories which unexpectedly closed down for 3 weeks to avoid pollution at the Olympics but which hadn’t been factored into their promised production schedules. [MS: some reports indicate that a third of Chinese toy and game production has disappeared] So, at there was no sign at least of the following (and probably many others): Ascendency, Middle Kingdom, Constantinopolis, Roll Through The Ages, Battles of Napoleon, Black Sheep, Genji (said to be stuck on a lorry somewhere) and Tulipmania.

What else was new this year? A number of five and dime stores selling games on the pile ‘em high, sell ‘em cheap principle. New games stacked in the following price bands on one store €2.50 / €5 /€7.50: although post Essen I have read about the apparent demise of Uberplay which could explain some of the stock. So there were real bargains like the old version of Money by Reiner Knizia for €2.50 which I’d been looking for as presents for my German RPG chums who I’m weaning on to boardgames. Obviously there were less successful games amongst those piled high but the odd classic appeared.

There was a noticeable non German buzz in the background: lots of Dutch, Italians, Poles with a smattering of French and a leavening of Brits, Irish and Americans. The trickle of English rules in the boxes that started last year seems to have become a bucket this year. The big German boys like Kosmos and Ravensburger are still not swayed by this but there are also often dual releases of their games with an American partner such as Mayfair and Rio Grande Games.

Rio Grande were again there in force with a big demo stand, but this year they seemed to have taken things one stage further and there was a noticeable lack of people to explain a game. Thus an hour’s game creeps to two hours as you read the rules from scratch, put out the bits to play the game, and re-do odd bits of various turns as the meaning of a particular rule becomes absolutely clear or clarified. This means less turnover of games being played and a more stress exercise. Some the translation of rules into English was also poor in places.

My personal view, based upon experience, is that the best translation is done by a gamer, and by gamers who have also played the game. At €30-€40 for a new game in English then I do start to expect better translations. (A Castle for All Seasons was the Rio Grande translation in question). I would argue that successful promotion of a product at Essen really does need demo space and a demo team if it is to succeed. As always it is noticeable how some of the smaller companies, possibly at their first Essen hadn’t considered how they were going to sell their product.

What follows are personal comments based upon what I saw or played at Essen:

Steaming: (too hot to touch) Agricola Extra ExtraBits and Le Havre (Lookout). For long parts of the days it seemed as if the queue was always at least thirty minutes until they had sold out or given the last promotional item away. Duck Dealer by Splotter was sold out within an hour.

Luxurious long soak in the Hot Tub with Candles: Krakow 1325

Hot Tub: (popular and well regarded) Dominion, Comuni and Cavum. I bought all three, but have only played the last.

Quick Shower: Wasabi, Longarno, Sushizock im Gockelwok, Mow

Slippery Floor: (rules issues to be clarified, or some concerns) Aztek, Windriver, A Castle for All Seasons

More details…

Krakow 1325

Geode Games

First game from a new company and our group was he first to play it at Essen on the Thursday morning. It’s only a four player game and is played as a partnership game but with an overall winner. It’s also language dependent with text on cards (available as English, Dutch and German I think). The players are one of four groupings but this is kept secret until the end – The Good and Decent Citizens, The monks and Mystics, The Secret Societies and The Underworld. These are randomly dealt out at the start and nobody knows who is who. Players are then in partnership with who they are sat opposite. Players are dealt 9 intrigue cards of which they will play only seven cards for one season. Four Seasons make up a game year and the initial start player changes each season. The aim of the gain is to get your control markers (black or white) into the areas of the board, whilst advancing (i.e. winning) cards of your colour. Your score at the end will be the total of your black or white partnership colour plus the points scored by your grouping. Thus I was partnered with black but wanted blue agendas in the winning pile to score black and blue. The intrigue cards will show what area they will grant control cubes in, and their score in four colours, although what matters is the colour of the first card down. If it is for example yellow then the yellow scores on cards will be totalled. Thus, I may lead with a +6 yellow, to be followed by a -8 yellow from the opponent on my left, and my partner plays a +5 yellow, and the last opponent can only play a -2 yellow, so the result is victory for our team. There are 56 different intrigue cards. There is further subtlety in money, immediate victory points for a faction on some cards if successful and assorted other actions.

I wallowed in the medieval theme, the artwork and the cards and gameplay. It all seemed to hang together for one of those games that is just a pleasure to play. Others that I personally enjoy as much range from Advanced Civ (Avalon Hill), to Ticket to Ride, to short snappy games like No Thanks! and Poison. Talking with the designer he is working on a three player version which will need new control markers and new cards.

Cavum

QWG

Build Track – Find Gems – Sell them to the market is Cavum in a nutshell. A longer version could be describing it as 18xx meets Shear Panic with dynamite. The basic premise is that people are miners seeking to exploit what lies within a mountain. At the start of each round everyone takes 12 different action tiles (these range from things like build a single straight, to build two, three or six crossing straights – the game is hex tile based – to such things as prospecting or dynamiting. Each action is done once, and only once per turn by a player although the “option” tiles may allow more of the same depending upon what is in the “bank” pool. So, in Shear panic you have twelve actions on your board marked off one by one: in Cavum you have twelve action tiles. Alternatively the limited twelve action tile sequence can be seen as a way of speeding up those games where one gets say ten actions point and then deliberates how to spend them (e.g. Tikal) and some people will spend a very long time working out permutations of their points. Each round you play three of your tiles, so the choice of options decreases each later round in the turn. The gem placement tile is such that you will only be able to exploit it the following round, so turn order starts to become important. Dynamite will only affect hexes if left uncovered at the end of a turn, so will often be covered over by another tile.

The English rules were well written to the point of being perhaps a little “over written” for the purposes of a rules explanation when some of the nuances would only need to be checked if they occurred. With hexes on a blank board and multiple options for a round then there is much strategy to be explored here, and lots of reply value as the tiles will probably be in different layouts every game. The only disappointment I have heard so far has been from railway game fans who feel that the game is too short to fully satisfy them.

Wasabi

Z-Man Games

Place ingredients to meet recipes and score points. Recipes range from two to five ingredients. Ingredients are tiles placed on a square grid which is the board. To “score” a recipe the ingredients have to be in a line or column on the board. Get them in the right order and for recipes above two ingredients then bonus points apply. Additionally there are a few special cards available after completing recipes that allow some tweaking – for example play to move ingredients around, play to place two ingredients rather than the usual one and a few other special moves. Turn order is place an ingredient from your stock of three held, then check to see if you have completed a recipe, and if so, score it. Collect a replacement ingredient and collect a replace recipe (I forget the exact order). Wasabi is fairly quick, and nicely produced and therein lies the problem: I consider it relatively expensive for the game length that comes out when other games in the same price band are looked at. It’s likely therefore that I may suggest this as a club game for our club where the quality of the components may ensure some longevity in a 45 minute opener or finisher. Game end either when a points total achieved or when the board is full.

Lungarno

Red Glove

Place tiles and (limited supply) control markers to score city blocks alongside the canal and main roads of Lungarno. Tiles are acquired from a choice of three face up ones (free, one VP or 2 VP’s) accordingly and once taken tiles shuffle along accordingly thus reducing in cost. Tiles come in three different types – palaces which belong a noble families and which will score points for who controls them, towers which score across the roads and a few special buildings such as shops that can increase the value of the nearby merchant houses or Churches and Cemeteries which can decrease the value, and the Plaza’s which have a special scoring mechanism.. This was off to a good start with me because it’s medieval themed and tile placement. Tile placement does mean though that if yours is a group that has people that think it is fun to play Carcassonne in two hours, then Lungarno could take two hours rather than the suggested 45 minutes.

Sushizock im Gockelwok

Zoch

A Knizia dice and dominoes game. The dominoes are sushi morsels or fishbones and to score a sushi morsel you need a fishbone as well. Excess morsels will not score, whereas excess fishbones will. The dominoes (nice chunky plastic bits) have a picture and positive or negative number. Roll the five dice up to three times (setting a dice aside each re-roll) to obtain a combination that either enable you to take a tile from the centre of the table or from somebody else, so there is some element of memory. Fail to get a workable combination and you get the biggest fishbone (minus score) tile. Not Reiner at his very, very, very best I feel but not far off for a dice and tiles game that plays in 20 minutes.

Mow

Hurrican

I’d better express some self interest here since once of our group did the English translation on this. Deal five cards to each player, and its play a card followed by pickup. Cows are placed in a line based upon the number of the card, and if you can’t play at the low end, or the top end of the line then you take the cards and will be scoring the flies on the cows at the end of the round. There a few special cards that do things like allow insertion into the line, block the line off, can be played over another card etc. The 6 nimmt comparison is obvious: this is a little bit lighter and quicker and has pictures of cute cows on the cards.

Aztekz

Yun Games

Think multiplayer Pacman meets Labyrinth. Players are a chieftain and two slaves searching a temple for lost souls. The souls have to be got to the chieftain who can then “release” them and thus score them. The pyramid is a set of 5 x 5 cards, although cards can be placed on top of other cards thus altering the arrangement of wall and rooms and access. Our slippery floor is that we are unsure if souls once captured by a slave are open to inspection by other players, and our scores seemed very low such that one lucky run could win the game. I have emailed the author on this point and will report back.

A Castle for All Seasons

Rio Grande

Rival builders building different parts of a castle for victory points or occasionally money using resources (sand, stone, wood, bricks and metal) combined with a card from one’s hand. Everyone starts with the same hand of eight cards, one of which is played face down in a round and revealed simultaneously. When revealed there is a turn order for resolution of the cards, for example traders go before the stonemason or bricklayer who goes before the more humble workers. Often there is lots of flexibility when your card comes to be resolved and if building is possible, exactly what one builds. Buildings can range form the humble tower requiring a mere eight points of mixed resources but giving six victory points, to the Hall requiring 30 points but gives 18 victory points. The larger buildings also open up what are termed “helpers” in the rules, although I think Castle Officials would make it easier to understand, as your team is limited in numbers. Placing one of our team as a Castle Official also costs you money. The worker cards get you free resources from stock and the chance to build but only for half victory points due to poorer workmanship. If a Master builder card has been played that round and you build then you have to give five victory points to the Master builder as the union inspects your work. The master builder card is also the way to get your played cards back into your hand. In the game I played there were two master builder cards played in one round, and I chose to pay out 10 victory points (five each to two players) which I think cost me the game. With only twelve rounds played then everything – resources, money and actions from the cards always seem tight. I suspect not all the buildings will be built in every game causing variable results. The reverse of the game board contains the castle in winter adding more options and some cards that also affect game play.

Personal dislikes on the game were the presentation – the English translation of the rules seemed poor in places and occasionally not very intuitive (for example the resource exchanging ability of the blacksmith was found under the building rules and not the blacksmith building description). The sample couple of rounds described in the box were of a two player game that has a few differences from the main game: I feel a three player game using the “normal” rules would have been better.

I liked the game. The physical presentation is top notch with nice artwork and tiles. With the basic mechanism being to acquire resources – money – jobs and finally build relationships, then there are obvious comparisons with Pillars of the Earth (plus expansion) and Stone Age. I’m on a slippery floor here as without playing more games then I cannot express an opinion of which of the three may be better than any other.

Windriver

Argentum Verlag

Get your teepees to keep up with the buffalo who are moving cross the plain and exit on the other side of the board to score victory points. On your turn you move buffalo equal to your excess over tepees, feed your teepees and then have a special action which can be acquire food, build more tepees, move one buffalo or move one tent. It becomes a struggle to keep up and survive. A couple of minor queries to raise with the designer if possible over the rules but on the slippery floor because of a concern that whoever is going to come third or fourth may be able to act as a kingmaker and determine who wins. Also, it starts as a fairly friendly almost race game, and then the last stretch bogs down as analysis paralysis starts to take over.

I’m told the boss is better now, so here’s wishing Mike a speedy full recovery and normal service will be resumed shortly. The office boy also now knows how hard the boss actually works as well and I’m surprised that Mike actually finds time to do normal things like eat and sleep in the Essen four days.

Chris Payne

Gamer's Notebook, October 2008

Thu, 30 Oct 2008 09:21:10 EDT

Another long break. Sorry. Designing two games, and developing three more, in eight months is not an ideal recipe for regular gaming and writing. But here I am with an overdue update, and I am hoping to deliver the usual Essen report later in October.

Leader 1

Ghenos Games (via JKLM/Rio Grande)

There are very few negative moods associated with gaming. Perhaps the empty hole after a day of new, but distinctly average, games is among the worst. But for me it is having designed a mechanism years ago, failing to produce the associated game, and then seeing the market come up with a similar idea. Yes, I know, only myself and a dose of procrastination to blame. That is exactly where I found myself with Leader 1, the latest cycling game to hit the shelves, which came worryingly close to spoiling my day…

The good news is that it is a really impressive game, and an added bonus is that the components are excellent. I say all that in the firm knowledge of Ghenos’ earlier output. While Bolide’s and Rugby World’s vector system appeal to many of the engineering mindset, and work perfectly well, they are not my idea of fun. Leader 1 is a different beast altogether, as I hope to explain.

The first clue to the game is opening the box to find a stack of lovely thick card hexagons, each with a section of a bicycle stage race route. Wide and narrow roads, flat sections, climbs, descents and finish straights in all combinations. And there are plenty of them, allowing mix and match. There is even a roundabout and uphill and velodrome finishes, which instantly give away the designers as true fans.

The graphics are bold and computery, but also rather good. You could happily use these hexes for your own designs, or perhaps for car races. Each type of section is rated for speed (obviously climbs are slow, descents are easy) and the system is clear and elegant. Importantly, each hex also has a number which when totalled gives us the difficulty (think par in golf) for the entire stage, and also dictates the number of stamina points your riders are allocated. As the race progresses you will burn the stamina, and so management of these is key. Only a feed station or tactical riding (‘sitting on’) will gain you more energy. It seems to work very, very well and while I should work out the math, I am happy to remain ignorant for now. Trust me, this system is spot on.

You have three riders in your team, each identical to the other players, although you can differentiate them by allocating one sprinter skill and one descending skill. In the background, but not depicted, are your five or six domestiques. This set up will give you an equal chance to win the race, and the game is well balanced in that sense. For those who know me, and my love of replay systems, this is a proper game, with decisions and stuff. It also happens to have a strong feel for cycling, so I am happy both ways.

The clever part, and the mechanism that sent a warning shot across my bow, is the peloton. This is simply a marker that moves along the stage setting the race tempo, representing all the uncommitted key riders and domestiques. It is automated by die roll and rules but, in a sense, also seems to have a mind of its own. Nicely designed, this. In theory, if no-one did anything, it could go all the way to the finish and it would be a big boring draw. But in reality riders will attack and get away from the peloton, at which point their individual marker is placed on the road, or even drop behind the pack and have to catch up – not easy. Once outside the peloton, especially in the initial breakaway, you will burn energy at a much greater rate than those left safely behind. And that is the rub.

The key to the game is team tactics which, oddly enough, is very much like cycling. The decisions forced – timing, stamina management, risk - are interesting and true to life. The resulting narrative is excellent. Riders breakaway and bravely ride off on their own. Will their stamina hold? Will you commit early or bide your time and go for broke on the descent? Where is the best place to launch an attack for a climber? When will you chase the leaders? Can you get another man up to support them, or hold back to get your sprinter home first? Riders who have made a long lone break struggle at the final kilometre, sprinters and the peloton closing in for the kill. Brilliant stuff. If you like that hidden gem that is Metric Mile, and it is one of my all time favourites, you will have a feel for this element of the game.

There are few negatives. The main one is that, as with most games that allow individual ‘space’ decisions and movement for a lot of pieces (Homas Tour, DTM, Formule De and so on), Leader 1 is not that fast. I would reckon on around 90 minutes, depending on length of the stage. We took two hours (three players) on the basic layout, so whatever you do don’t build a massive track for your first game or you may never return. Timing is initially deceptive, because the early phases of the game are very quick – not many riders to move with the peloton. But as more breaks come, and every rider on the team gets onto the road, it slows up towards the end. Irony of ironies, the final sprint is the slowest part.

On a strategic level, you can record remaining stamina and points and then move on to the next stage with a neat carry over rule. Riders behind the leader are charged with time difference and quickly you see how a stage race works. Whether you would want to do an entire Tour de France in this manner would be debatable (think a full season of Formule De), but you could certainly do a long Spring Classic in one sitting, or a three day race - with a mix of flat stages and mountains - in a long session or over a weekend.

Another oddity is that of your three team members, the team leader is in some respects the weakest. It obviously depends on the type of stage you are racing, but a rouleur will always be faster on the flat, and a climber better going up the lumpy bits. The leader is an average guy, and so in our game, albeit with a very close and exciting finish, a sprinter won. The beauty of such a mechanism is that you can easily tweak the ratings to taste.

Finally, there is an annoying translation error on the English game aid card. Phase 1 should read ‘movement’, not ‘placement’. It will drive you mad until you fix it somehow.

I am going to go out on a limb here. Even allowing for my bias towards cycling of any description, this is an excellent race game. In fact, I would also say it is the best cycling title published so far. Even though there are a few rough edges, and the rules could be tighter, it combines convincing theme and narrative based on evident knowledge of the sport. As a result it has plenty of race drama and decision making thrown in. If it played in half the time we would be talking genius. If you like Homas Tour/Um Reifenbreite hunt this one down; you won’t regret it. Highly recommended, and one of my highlights of the year. I am off to track down at Ghenos' sailing game.

Tinner's Trail

Martin Wallace for Treefrog

There is certainly no lack of spectacle in the career of Martin Wallace. The trends and phases are always worth watching and analysing, the changing pace and weight of output remains an eternal mystery, and his gradual departure from inconsistency now makes each new Wallace game an enjoyable experience. Usually... He is, as I have said before, the most interesting and talented designer working in our field (meaning, loosely, gamer’s games with some theme and substance). Long may he continue.

Martin’s latest, and the first in the fascinating Treefrog line, is Tinner's Trail. It fits firmly into the economic game mould that Martin frequently returns to. It is lighter than Brass, and quicker, and I think better for both those achievements. Where it fails is in being a little dry and calculable. This is balanced by an excellent theme, some clever ideas, and an engaging system that impressed me and seemingly most people who have been lucky enough to get hold of one. A very good release, and establishing a strong pointer for the two new games at Essen.

Age of Discovery

Alfred Schulz for Mayfair

Oh boy. This game is so nearly good. I like everything about it except for the awful, inexplicable, unbalanced, (untested?) Mission Cards. It also only seems to work with two or three. I think it is fixable, however. Mayfair, I would like you to meet Development. Development, Mayfair.

Pandemic

Matt Leacock for Z-Man

You will all have played this mini-hit by now, and if not please correct that omission immediately. Whether or not you like co-operative games, this is worth playing at least once to experience the clever mechanisms, uncanny appeal and involvment, and inevitably, to get the rules badly wrong. I liked it enough to play four games in a weekend. I may not play again for a while, but that should not put you off. Excellent design work.

Shadow Hunters

Yatsutaka Ikeda for Z-Man

A lot of people have been bemoaning the fact that games are no longer fun. Well, this one is. It is not perfect, and in fact it has some strangely unbalanced cards that should have been picked up in testing. But it is good. We played it again immediately, and you know how rare that is. Essentially Werewolf: the Boardgame with a bit of Bang! and Kutschfahrt thrown in, but different enough to deter lawyers. You are a Vampire, a Vampire Hunter, or a Neutral. You know your identity, but no-one else does. By playing cards you try to work out who is on your side, and how you might generate a hope in hell of achieving your victory criteria. Meanwhile, there is mass carnage and everyone edges slowly toward death. But even in death you might win! As I said, good fun. Leaner and meaner than Kutschfahrt, and altogether better than Bang!

Stone Age

Michael Tummelhoffer for Hans im Gluck

Early on this year, when this game was being previewed, someone described it like this: ‘Stone Age is a worker placement game. There are dice that are used to find out how many resources you collect. You have to feed your people. You build buildings which give victory points. You can use resources to gain bonus cards that give you an immediate thing and an end game bonus.’

My response was Wow! I have been looking for a game like this for some while, without success…

Okay, sure, it sounds exactly like any cube pusher of the last five years or more. This one could (and would) surely be a twist on Leonardo, Pillars of the Earth, Notre Dame, Cuba, Yspahan, Caylus, KeyX etc etc. But as I firmly believe most games offer at least a very small design step forward, and because I love to be proved wrong, I sat down to play Stone Age. I liked it. I played again. I liked it some more. I now rate it marginally above Pillars, which I have yet to play with the expansion, but will play either happily. Yspahan is still okay, as is Notre Dame, but I am still not sure Cuba works properly.

Meanwhile, Stone Age clearly does work and has a lot of good stuff going on, with even a decent bit of theme in evidence (‘Just off hunting, love’). And while I am now bored by Leonardo, I have not yet become bored with action draft systems in general. I also really like the way that four gamers can play Stone Age and come up with four different routes to victory (or in my case, defeat). Some espouse the tool approach, others make babies, some collect civ cards, while I generally starve. I am sure there are other tactics… About the only thing I am not keen on is that ‘apparently in contention until the final add-up when all the VP multipliers are played and ending up dead last’ thing. A trifle annoying. Multipliers are such difficult things to control, especially when we can’t see them. Overall, considering it is about as hackneyed as they come, recommended.

Espana 1936

Antonio Catalan for Devir

Warriors of God

Makoto Nakajima for MMP

What with design, playing and miniatures, my opportunities for board wargame play are few and far between these days. So, my purchases are restricted accordingly. Having survived several years without adding a single wargame to the collection, two good ones came along at once… They are both very good, and very different.

Warriors of God is that pleasing rarity, a game about the medieval era. We are looking at a top level strategic game with Euro overtones, in that it is quick, highly flavoursome, decision heavy, and there are lots of options and tricks to learn. The rules meanwhile are pretty awful, but they are at least thin. The most appealing element is not combat, but the management of leaders and factions, and land grabbing. Leaders die off at inopportune moments (much like the clever ageing process of In the Shadow of the Emperor) and armies, titles, kingdoms and territory change hands. For a historical game, there is a surprising amount of risk analysis and many outright gambles. Good stuff. The resulting narrative is impressive. It is all based on a well tried Japanese system and works well. Enjoyable, light and fun - one to return to when the opportunity arises. Congratulations to MMP and to Adam Starkweather who both championed the game and developed it.

At the other end of the scale is the gutsy and grinding Espana 1936, now available in an English edition from Devir USA. Depicting the Spanish Civil War at a strategic level, with excellent components, it uses simple, easily remembered rules, victory conditions and combat procedures to put both players in a tough position. The system is transparent; you are left to your own devices with flavoursome cards adding regular chaos. Heavy on decisions, and never enough actions, you may feel that you are having it bad, with your entire front trying to hold and a key objective city under imminent threat, but the other guy is probably feeling much worse.

If you like games that offer tense, nervous energy, constant pressure and epic battles, this is the game for you. Fortunately (and appropriately) you need suffer this only for two to three hours, and there may often be a quicker sudden death resolution. Historical atmosphere is excellent, graphics are great, I learned quite a bit about the period (through the point to point map and clear objectives), and the game situation is one of the best I have ever encountered. Not since Friedrich and Wallenstein have I played such a good game in this category. Highly recommended.

NB Devir’s English edition is well worth tracking down as it saves on card lookup, and it also includes a naval expansion as standard – I have yet to play this.

Carcassonne: New World

Klaus-Jurgen Wrede for Hans im Gluck

Unless it is absolutely necessary (social pressure, monetary bribes, Toblerones) I don’t play Carcassonne or any of its fifty seven varieties. Having played New World recently, and twisting my own arm, I would prefer to play this one more than any other. Not bad for a little filler. Almost fun.

Enough! To Essen!

Mike Siggins

Gamer's Notebook, March 2008

Thu, 20 Mar 2008 10:31:52 EDT

Many apologies for the delay. January is always busy to the point of running out of time. This year was worse. Then I got ill. Anyway, plenty to write about.

Tribune

Karl-Heinz Schmiel for Moskito/Heidelberger

Regular readers will remember that I got to play this game last year at Essen. Then it was a game about collecting, tentatively entitled Sammelsurium. Now re-themed, and published in a professional package, we have Tribune. And it remains a very good game indeed.

To head off the inevitable 'pasted-on theme' comments, I would say that the new theme is actually a much better fit, not that there was much wrong with the original. Now we are dealing with political wrangling in ancient Rome. Each player is trying to build support from the various factions, eventually gaining enough to become tribune and win.

The game structure is a straightforward action drafting system, which we seem to see more and more these days. At the moment I like them, but familiarity can breed contempt. Your markers are placed into various sections of the board, which offer money, faction cards, and various other items needed to progress. The clever part is that rather than just claiming on a first come first served basis, as one does in Pillars of the Earth, some of the sections trigger a short sub-game. This is all good.

Interaction is excellent. You always seem to have a rival for the cards you want to recruit, and there is even more friction when claiming majorities. The whole basis of the game is to knock the leaders over, and I will leave that for you to discover. The game offers some interesting decisions, not least on timing of your tactical moves, and generally works perfectly as one might expect from this designer. No complaints here.

I'll finish with what was, for almost all those who played, a definite issue. Tribune is over too quickly. Games were taking an hour or less. Now many will regard this as a plus, and remind me that this is a prime trait of German Games. But this is a game that plays engagingly, has plenty going on, and seems to suggest a 'long game' strategy. Wrong. In one game, it was all over in four turns – you really must be in there and fighting from the start. This is okay if a title feels like an hour game, but this one seems to have a pacing issue. It also means that a gamer who has played before will have an advantage over rookies in knowing when and where to focus.

Fortunately, if you consider pacing and length a problem, it is easily fixed. Victory conditions require us to achieve three from eight or so targets. To set the winning terms at four or perhaps five conditions satisfied would seem to be eminently workable. Either way, as with all variants, it is your choice. Play as it is intended first, feel free to tweak, but do play – it is not broken, just quick!

On language, the German version (Tribun) is playable but there is just enough German in the game to make waiting for the English version well worthwhile. So, definitely a strong recommendation but I can see some variants coming into common usage for this one. Good to see Herr Schmiel, the Old Master, back in business.

Year of the Dragon

Stefan Feld for Alea

I remember one nasty incident in my school life. I was watching a bunch of older kids in the playground who were picking on some unfortunate lad. He ended up 'running the gauntlet'. At school, this meant that he had to run along a narrow channel between a wall and a line of the bullies, and be kicked and punched all the way. The military equivalent is much less pleasant. In some small way, this game reminded me of that memory.

Don't get me wrong. Alea are still a source of good games. Stefan Feld is one of my favourite designers. I like all his games, and all have a welcome, fresh approach. So I had high hopes for this one, and was very keen to try it. The systems are clever, the components are lovely. You can score points in many ways, and there are several options to explore.

Simply, there are twelve turns in the game, loosely representing the months in the Year of the Dragon. Each month has a randomised chit – famine, tributes to the emperor, disease – you get the picture. Two of these months are harmless, and we let off fireworks to celebrate, the rest are just plain nasty. Life in China was evidently one long nightmare.

As a player, you are a landlord (or similar) building houses to accommodate the dozen or so types of character. Each of the characters has a special skill, either providing protection against the nasty events while others provide immediate or deferred victory points. Your task, apparently straightforward, is to make sure you have the right balance at the right time, and have the rooms to accommodate them all.

The trouble is one can rarely really get this right, I managed an optimum in just two of the turns, and it seems you face losing something most of the time. Even in a well played game there will be substantial tenant turnover. You even lose buildings if they are unoccupied, which tends to happen a lot when your lodgers are dying or leaving in droves. In short, you are taking actions and planning ahead just to avoid pain and stand still. Add to this the pressing need to get money, rice, fireworks and victory points at the same time, and the game quickly takes on Kafkaesque overtones.

So let me sum up in a way I have never done before. I really liked the idea, theme, game systems and mechanisms, regarding the whole idea and process as original and clever, but didn't at all like the negative experience it provided, of being kicked at every step of the way. Also, it is fair to say, I am not representative of everyone who played. At the convention, I would say the split was 60:40 pro and con. I will have to play again, but I don't see this one changing its tune, and it is a tune I definitely didn't like.

Year of the Dragon is the antithesis of those positive, building/snowball games. It is also overlong by 20 to 30 minutes. It is a little like watching a three hour war documentary: technically it is spot on, but it is not entertainment. Eventually, the seat becomes uncomfortable.

Origins: How We Became Human

Phil Eklund for Sierra Madre Games

I have still not managed to define this design from Phil Eklund. It is no secret that I am a fan of Phil's games, but this is a new departure. Not only does it have professional quality presentation, it is also the closest to being a game in the normal sense. Nevertheless, there is still a huge dose of experience gaming, and 'going along for the ride'. I like this, I realise that others don't. There are also some very clever mechanisms, not least the cards. The theme itself is highly ambitious, but it does work. It beats all of last years games for innovation. I have some reservations about the 'levelling up' and some of the powerful cards and options. That means I am questioning balance, which also means here is an Eklund design that is also a game. I recommend it highly, and would simply say that if you have played an Eklund before, give this one a chance. It is different.

Starcraft: The Board Game

Christian Petersen and Corey Konieczka for Fantasy Flight

After my lengthy and negative reaction to Descent, which seemed to run against most of my friends' views, I will keep this rant short. I believe the explanation is that there is still a surprisingly large market for eight hour plus games with huge amounts of bits, seventeen different types of unit, r&d trees, resources (money) and with play values that deserve to have stayed in the 1970's.

I was, despite all the above, and having suffered Warcraft: The Board Game in the interim, still keen to play (!). But apart from the sheer excitement of opening the box and sorting the ridiculous number of bits, this one was a bust from start to finish. Oh, and the rules take an evening of study and a dry run. In summary, I feel saddened that there are still people who can term it a game, and give it a 10 on our favourite ratings site. The game is preposterous and represents the worst outcome of a 'throw everything in and keep true to the license' mentality. I would like to say it is unplayable, but I know there are people who will sit there and persevere for a considerable chunk of their lives.

If you really must play, ideally you should all know the rules, be set up, ready to spend two hours learning, and play with no more than three. My biggest tip is that all those minuscule little icons on the tiny counters all mean something, and the yellow and the orange counters are virtually indistinguishable. Otherwise you should be fine, given enough time. Enjoy.

Me? I am moving to Greenland to avoid it.

Phoenicia

Tom Lehmann for JKLM

It is probably no secret that I didn't care for Outpost. But since then age, changing tastes and experimentation have secured Sceptre of Zavandor a one-outing-per-year visa. Then word arrived of this game. The latest, final (?) incarnation of the system, it was rumoured to play very quickly indeed. Thanks to a review copy from JKLM, I have played this one twice in recent weeks. It is definitely quick, and it is very good. It is also clearly the son of the father.

I have two slight reservations, otherwise it is all positive.

Firstly, I will need to play more to get a feel for what exactly to do, typical prices for the cards, and to master the key task of balancing one's assets. In my first game, excusably I hope, I worked my way into a dead end by which I couldn't access sufficient storage late on in proceedings. Game over. The second game was better, but because my opponent knew what he was doing, he romped away. While I am no natural at these games, I am not an idiot either. So, as with most of Mr Lehmann's games, there is some serious learning to be undertaken. No bad thing, but not to everyone's taste.

Secondly, the game predictably retains a similar feel to the earlier designs. If anything, it is even more mechanical and teutonic. This is, I feel, compounded because the system has been boiled down to the minimum – perhaps to far? Like an overcooked Brussels Sprout, boiled until the flavour has all but gone. Also, in Outpost and Zavandor one felt some affinity to the items and artifacts being bought, building into the story (such as it was), here I am not sure the implementation of theme helps any – we have probably seen far too many instances of ancient civilisation to make a storehouse seem interesting.

I am working a balance here. While the game feels an even more sterile exercise in calculation, it is at least the right length for such an experience. And it is an experience I enjoy occasionally. Why? Because there is definitely some meat here, with interesting angles, and if I want to apply my brain this is one of the environments I will work within. However, as I have said before, I do feel as if I am playing around with a spreadsheet. Sure, there is an unknown in the form of the auctions and the run of cards, but still, these are math heavy, and cash driven, games.

As it happens I quite like spreadsheets, and financial models, so there's the answer. It gives me the good parts of Outpost without the length. What I can't tell is if you have been looking for a copy of Outpost, whether Phoenicia will end your search. Apart from the pokey little card icons, and some ragged edges in the rules, I liked it a lot.

Brass

Martin Wallace for Warfrog

I feel quite pleased that I was there at the start of Martin's efforts to design the ultimate train game. To an extent, this can be seen as the latest attempt, and what an attempt it is. It will take you two hours, and more when learning, but that time is well spent. This is a very clever, modern, deep game that really works on just about every level. It is also full of flavour. I have played five times in the last month, and it is still getting better. In any normal year, it would easily be my favourite game.

I'll tell you how much I enjoyed this one. The box that arrived in the mail got The Treatment by the Post Office and is best described as 'distressed'. I feel I should go and buy another copy so that I have a good one for the future and one to play. As a reformed collector, that is not something I easily say or do. Excellent stuff.

The Sumos, 2007

Tough year. In a generous mood, I have fifteen games that might easily have won a Sumo in 2007. But there can only be ten. Cue lots of juggling with list, comparing Qwirkle to Age of Empires, Phoenicia to Uptown, Giganten der Luefte to Tribune. Not easy. Anyway, I eventually got there.

Yokozuna
1960: The Making of the President (Z-Man)

Ozeki
Agricola (Lookout Games)
Brass (Warfrog)
Key Harvest (R&D)
Origins (Sierra Madre)

Sekiwake
Age of Empires III (Tropical Games)
Before the Wind (Phalanx)
Qwirkle (Mindware)
Tribune (Heidelberger)
Uptown (Funagain)

Honourable Mentions
Amyitis, Caylus Magna Carta, Giganten der Luefte, League of Six, Race for the Galaxy, Notre Dame, Phoenicia, Power & Weakness.

On the radar: more games of Race for the Galaxy to see if I remain in the 'like it' camp or move to the 'adore its'. Dust, because I just love the backstory and graphics. Hamburgum, because several trusted friends say I will enjoy it. A re-play of Cuba, because the first time it sent me to sleep. Cold War, because I just plain like the look of it. And Perry Rhodan, for which I have very high hopes.

Mike Siggins

Gamer's Notebook, December 2007

Mon, 03 Dec 2007 18:44:08 EST

To sunny Eastbourne on Britain’s South coast for the regular post-Essen get together organised by Mike Clifford and myself. Twenty five or so gamers leave their other halves looking at the calendar, with a sense of deja vu, and whizz off to a small hotel to enjoy four days of fish & chips and solid gaming – hopefully ticking off most of those titles unplayed and bought in the previous month. Uncannily, it runs at the same time as bgg.con, and we like to note that we are the senior event, if somewhat smaller in scope (!). And it was sunny. I don’t know how, but it was. A few hardy souls were sea swimming in late November.

Age of Empires III

Glenn Drover for Tropical Games

I like Age of Mythology, but realise I am in a minority. Otherwise, there have been a long series of computer game spin-offs that I can happily live without. I would therefore not have given this game a second glance if it weren’t for some very positive word of mouth coming out of the States. In the end, it became my game of the summer and it got a lot of play at the club and at home sessions.

This is a clever twist on the action drafting mechanism that is very much in vogue. Each player places their markers on areas in the Old World, ready to be shipped across to the New. Once there, they might annex a region (killing the indigenous natives), exploit an areas’ resources, fight or explore. Once established, you start in on buying ships, buildings and strategy cards. Another nice element is that you have several types of marker, some of which have different powers.

So, not anything we haven’t seen before, but re-jigged into a very appealing format. There are, cliché time, several routes to victory which genuinely seem to be distinct. As a result there is a real sense of building an empire somewhat different to your neighbour’s, and when the seats on the settler ships become scarce, one really feels the pressure. You can, say, completely ignore your merchant fleet and go for colonial holdings. You can explore rather than bothering about resources. As usual, a mixed balance can also work. Because these options work so well, you can actually play the game five times or more just trying out strategies. Good stuff.

AoE has that slight problem that only seems to bother hardcore gamers. You can play the whole game cleverly, brilliantly even, but you are still at the mercy of the fates. If you get the right cards at the right time, or you have a run of good luck on discoveries, you will find the zero-luck addicts crying into their coffee. As you may have gathered, I don’t mind it. What guarantee was there ever for a group of explorers landing on a foreign shore? Who is to know the ultimate outcome of a merchant naval policy?

Apart from the gaudy and overblown plastic production, and the map where the space could have been better used, I really like this game. I find the situation appealing, I very much like the feel of the Old and New countries, the constraints of shipping, and the actions available. It all adds up to one of my favourite games of the year. When Tropical Games catch on about wooden bits, they’ll be dangerous.

Agricola

Uwe Rosenberg for Lookout Games

You may have heard of this one.

Despite the massive PR machines behind Ravensburger, Amigo and Hans im Glueck, it is the tiny Lookout Games who have, this Autumn, created that most valuable resource – buzz. I say again, buzz, not hype.

Agricola is a game about farming in the 17th century. How long we have waited for a good one. Each player has their own farm, is given a set of cards that indicates their probable route forward, and you get fourteen turns to score as many victory points as you can. Alternatively, for reasons that will become apparent, it is also a sandbox where you can just have fun doing your own thing. It seems everyone I know really wants to play this game, me included, and many were prepared to jump through hoops to make that happen.

Hoops? Well, the game is in German. Although we have an excellent rules and card translation, more on that later, however many assurances you might get that ‘it is only fourteen cards’, it isn’t. If you want to paste up all the cards, it is over three hundred, which by anyone’s calculation is a lot of hours. You can get by on less, just the ‘E’ pack is enough to get started, but there is old school work to be done before the game can be played. Ideally someone you know will have done this paste-up work for you.

It must be said here that any Anglophone who buys the German version will not be left adrift. Lookout Games have promised to sort out something, and I believe them, but at the moment they are snowed under with the success of the game. We need to be patient.

The interesting twist with Agricola is that it seems to have generated a passionate level of enthusiasm. I believe this is down to a cocktail of the designer’s reputation, the subject matter, the multi-level gaming it offers, the frisson of the components, the potential of the cards, and the long lost frustration of not being able to play a German game that you have just bought…

There is also something else: positive mental attitude. A significant number of gamers have played Agricola, enjoyed it to a point, and said that they expected it to improve (and this might be from 7 or 8, to 9 or 10). They also sit down and play again as quickly as they can. This compares well with almost all other Euros. Typically they might be ruthlessly discarded after one play, or less in some cases! But gamers seem to be willing to give this one every chance of repeat play.

Why would that be? I wish I knew, because goodness knows it is a quality that too many games lack. And what is the appeal of a game about farming? As the person who has facilitated hundreds of games through her excellent and timely translation, I asked Melissa Rogerson why she was so keen on this particular game. She generated a list of reasons:

It's complex. Big and meaty, and not too long.
It's a game with relatively little player interaction. See below.
I spent quite literally every spare moment for a month translating the game. It has to be hot!
The theme and the mechanics seem well integrated. I love a good theme.
It was super-cool trying to learn all about 17th century agriculture. Although I was sorry I didn't call the swineherd, ‘Pig boy’.
Variety. Lots and lots of variety.
The Mystique of Essen.
I had such a good time translating it - the people factor. There were lots of late-night conversations, about precisely what particular terms meant and how we could translate them. That was fun.

I also love getting right into the guts of a game like that. And I tend to be lazy with rules of games in English - I skim through them, and am impatient to get to playing the game. So really getting to understand it is good. And tends to make me like the game regardless.
Hamburgum and Cuba, as well as other Messe titles, sound interesting but 'done' already. I'm sure I'll enjoy playing them, but they didn't float my boat.
Insight into the game development process.

I can relate to those comments.

The next point Melissa raised was very interesting and is something I have been thinking about for some time. The subject is multiplayer solitaire. Agricola is such a game, because the only interaction is the joint action drafting/choice of resources, and not getting what you need, but I am not going to label this a good or bad attribute.

Melissa says, “Agricola is a game with relatively little player interaction. When I look at my top-rated games (Princes of Florence, Louis XIV, Notre Dame) there is a bit of a trend there. I know that my gaming weakness is that I start out making a plan and don't allow for enough variables or adapt well to change - so I tend to be weaker at games like Caylus where it's easy to screw other players over, although I still enjoy them. But I'm good at the planning kind of game - and don't we all like to win, sometimes?”

My take on this is that almost all the time multiplayer solitaire is cited as a negative. Like Melissa, I find that some of my favourite games are in this vein, and it doesn’t greatly bother me. In fact, it can be a plus. If it means I can avoid auctions then that is another bonus, usually. Sometimes it is good to sit and try to implement a strategy, hindered only by the inability to get resources when you want them. Not exactly my beloved chaos gaming, but sometimes it is what I enjoy. Agricola seems to score (based on the eight gamers I have so far played with) because you can do your own thing. Every single farm I saw was different. Some were harvesting crops, some had sheep, others cattle and wild boar. One of my farms was essentially secondary to a wood turning business.

Mainly then, for me, such games are an experience and I am happy to go along for the ride. How well can I do with what I have been given? What is my plan? Can I get enough food? Do I want to have children? Can I try a weird tactic, or left field strategy, and still stay respectable or even win? Most importantly, am I having fun?

Having played Agricola, I feel there is definitely an element of ‘personal best’ going on here. After my derisory 20 point opener, I was determined to do better the next time. And that next time may as well be right away. I made 23, with very different cards, and was pleased. I also enjoyed it a lot. I’m so easy. So it is a challenge, in a puzzley sort of way and I can see myself playing it for some while, even at the basic level of cards.

On the downside, and you just know this is going to relate to theme, I have a quibble. While this is a game about farming, it is farming from a strange angle. I think it is clear we are micro-managing. A fair amount is made of one farmer having a cooking pot, another having a proper hearth, or a makeshift barbecue. The fact that someone might not have a cooking pot at all, but does own a hut, seems inconceivable. Doesn’t it? But this is where you start. Perhaps you have lost everything and have to re-build from scratch. And where are the chickens and geese?

More worrying is that ‘technologies’ develop, but they do not become available to rival farmers, even though we are all looking over each others hedge all the time. This compared sharply to a game of Origins going on at the next table, where skills can often be learned. This also strengthens the solitaire aspect, already discussed – you are on your own, doing your own things, building little card ‘engines’, working your own land. I suspect what has happened is that some aspects have been tweaked to make a game of it, which is fair enough. Perhaps that is how it was? None of this is going to stop me playing it, or even give me a second thought, but it doesn’t sit too well.

The other area is the cards. From what I have seen so far I think the cards are reasonably well balanced. This is, without doubt, quite an achievement. But my neighbour in game one did have a hand that looked considerably less useful than mine, with quite a few ‘secondary’ cards that were not immediately useable. There is undoubtedly a degree of improvisation required; you make the best of your lot, and that will improve with experience. I am just slightly worried that you might be going into a two hour game (it runs 30 minutes per player, pretty consistently) with little chance of having a good time or scoring well. This might happen because of bad cards, or more subtly and more likely, cards that do not combine well, nor permit synergies later in the game. At the moment, I don’t know if this is an issue. I would like to hear your experiences.

So, to conclude, Agricola is a very interesting game which has all the signs of being well designed, developed and tested. There is definitely more here than the sum of the parts, and I think we must look to the cards and the combinations (how I love combinations) to explain this. And this without yet venturing into the mysterious ‘I’ (interaction) and ‘K’ (complex) decks which will add a raft of cards and variety. Though whether Agricola will remain fun while suffering ‘interaction’ remains to be seen.

Congratulations to Hanno Girke and all at Lookout Games for backing this one. In case you have not been reading the web, there will be an English version from Z-Man Games. I think we can safely predict a big seller. I know it is easier said than done at the moment, but do try to get a game of this excellent release.

Filou/Felix

Friedemann Friese for 2F Spiele

After quite a run of games from Friedemann that I didn’t care for, here is a very enjoyable filler. I have been thinking that we should see some positive by-products from the poker boom (now fading?) and sure enough Filou picks up on the betting trend. Nothing complicated, just assess a partly exposed hand based on knowledge, numbers and reading the opponents, and stick a bet on the total value. Filou is not quite there because you have to know not to run out of money during play – this is very important! – but overall this is quick, fun and interesting enough to revisit. Recommended.

Battleground: Fantasy Warfare

Chad Ellis and Robert Dougherty for Your Move Games

About thirty years ago the boardgame company GDW released an innovative product called System 7. With front page splashes in The Dragon, wargame magazines and elsewhere, it caused quite a stir. It certainly caught me up in the excitement created. Although comprising cardboard markers and a separate rule book, it was trying hard to replicate the mechanisms, colour and glory of Napoleonic miniatures gaming. It did this by offering high quality base-sized counters in evocative uniform shades, nominally using 7mm figures. Most of the major nationalities were available in sets, with units named and jacket/facing colours represented.

The basic idea was that you could start miniatures style gaming without the front loaded time and money investment, or indeed easily move into Naps as a new period. The overall effect was not unpleasant, and it achieved a creditable level of success for a while. System 7 foundered, I think, because it fell between two stools, the terrain was lacking, and the accompanying rules were not the best. With hindsight, the ‘figure’ ratio may have been mistaken – there were several fiddly counters to a unit, making the adaptation too literal. But ultimately, if you are a miniatures gamer at heart, well, you probably want miniatures. Still, the game has fans and you can find updated rules and components on the web.

However, for beginners or for testing rules, I still know gamers who will cut out card or even paper counters. I know I did when funds didn’t permit much more. There are a couple of groups on the web that actively promote paper wargaming. It is at least lighter than anything else. Some of you will remember the Micro series from Tabletop Games, and I played a lot of the Napoleonic and Naval games back in the day. I also bought into the CCG craze in a major way. Games such as The Last Crusade, Eagles and Dixie were all collected and played with some enjoyment, and they still come out occasionally even now.

So, there is scope for this ersatz solution. But what is the appeal here? Probably, the chance to get a taste of the miniatures experience in a ready made, ‘open and play’, immediate gratification package. Miniatures fast food, I suppose. You can do the whole thing with BattleLore and Command & Colors: Ancients, but they are £50 games. Compromises are inevitable, but with colour graphics, printing and game design moving ever forwards, we are getting closer to having everything but the little lead guys. And that is exactly where Battleground and Your Move Games are coming from.

Battleground is purchased in packs of playing cards. These each represent a fantasy faction, and comprise a range of units, tactical ploys and events. Each faction – men, dwarves, elves, orcs, undead, killer turnips etc – also has a reinforcement pack available, allowing for huge battles and that undeniable urge to grow instant armies. More factions are promised on a regular basis to keep the games’ match-ups fresh. You can also buy cut-out terrain sheets, which are very nicely done indeed, scenario booklets, and even custom pens and dice. If you can summon up a table and green cloth from somewhere, the overall effect of terrain and units is impressive.

Graphically, everything is functional but it doesn’t excite. Units are top down, which aesthetically cuts both ways, and ‘figure ratioed’ rather than 1:1 but there is a good sense of unit size and pose diversity. You may not care for the style – it is computer generated in intense colours, particularly the grass green – but realistically there is no other economical way to do it in these volumes. Certainly, the figure graphics do not survive the close-up shots. Of course there are options here to make your own cards and factions, for those with graphics skills. The rules book is well written and we had few queries. We did however feel that putting some advanced rules in the reinforcement packs was a bit cheeky.

The game is played by choosing a force from the unit cards, usually to an agreed points value. As ever with miniatures, once you have had your fill of equal sided encounter battles you can switch to attack/defend, the excellent scenario book, or even play one of Mr Grant’s teasers. Each unit card has a row of casualty boxes, progressing through green, yellow and red and these are marked off with a pen as casualties are taken. This works fine, but being an anal type I encased mine in Card Protectors which you can get at hobby and big bookshops. For reasons expanded upon below, I suggest that you do not play to the ‘kill all opponents’ game end condition.

We played two games. The first was a 750 point learning exercise. The second a 2,000 point battle, which still fitted on a card table. At the start of the game, you choose your army mix, set terrain, deploy, and assess the situation. Up to this point, the game is actually pretty exciting, because you get there so quickly and your fingers are paint free. For a while after, things are still looking very good. And then, well, you start to question results and pacing, and in truth it goes on a bit. We came in at almost four hours for the big battle. That’s a long game when we started with six to eight units each.

There are three main timing issues here, all interlinked. Firstly there is a lot of dicing. This is time consuming and not always productive. Secondly, some units have quite a number of hit points, and even the weaker ones aren’t necessarily going to disappear very quickly (because of luck of the dice) – one small unit of wolf riders had a charmed life and stuck around for ages. As mentioned, some scenarios require you to eliminate 100% of the enemy, which will get to you long before you get to them… I suggest 50% or 66% would make your C.O. more than happy. It is the death of a thousand cuts problem, and boredom sets in. Thirdly, linked to the hit points, the game system is curiously indecisive. By this I mean that it is quite forgiving of errors and that to exploit any tactical advantage is difficult indeed.

Let me give you an example. At one point, my opponent’s dwarves did a reckless manoeuvre and ended up exposing their flank, at right angles to my battleline. Right on cue, my Treant (really just an ent with a good copyright lawyer) saw his opportunity, lumbered across the field, and smashed the dwarves in the flank. This was early in the game and in my head, even allowing for fantasy fudge, I expected to either do a ton of damage, have them rout, or simply flatten the lot of them. Or all three at once. Glorious victory was in my grasp, the enemy centre would be pierced. In fact, I did a little damage (the bonus for flank attacks is negligible) and I was still there, branches flailing, roots a-stomping, seven turns later. By that time the dwarves had hurried their little legs and brought up leaf-free reserves. My Treant eventually ran off having failed a morale check in the eighth turn, which was not entirely as I’d imagined the encounter.

In a nutshell, the cards and concept may be born again, but the rules are essentially old fashioned. They give a longish game where a quick one might well be preferable – 90 minutes rather than 240. Broadly, we are looking at something akin to Warhammer, when something like the weight of Warmaster, Armati or perhaps DBA might have been a better fit. I can understand if this was done to allow quick conversion for existing miniature gamers, but I think a major thrust of this game is to let newcomers try their hand. I can see some recruits playing this and thinking twice about playing again. It would be very interesting to hear your experience on this one.

I am very much stating a personal preference here, liking a quick, decisive, decision heavy/dice light game, and it may well be that the rules are acceptable to most, and even perhaps what is ‘expected’. Whatever, one of my opponents came out with the damning, ‘It is like every other figure game I have ever played’. I know what he means. On the other hand, there is some clever stuff in there. Initiative and command is well handled, as is movement – there is a handy-dandy scale, driven off of card widths. Units are similar to the extent that they all have half a dozen ratings, and often a special rule to distinguish them. The ratings cover movement, close and ranged combat, and the interesting ‘to hit’ ratings.

These latter numbers are surprisingly powerful as narrative builders. Some units may be very hard to hit while on the move, but much more vulnerable in melee – so we get the feel for fast, evasive, light troops. Conversely, the Treant is easily hit, but very hard to hurt, and it has a lot of damage points. This in addition to the usual flavour stuff – deadly Elven bows, slow but sturdy Dwarves, swarming Undead. You know how it goes. I liked this unit differentiation – it is simply and elegantly handled. The fact that the spread of these ratings works well, and cleverly conveys the feel of very different units, shows that the game has been well designed and developed in this area. As I said, there are a lot of positive qualities, they just struggle to keep their head above water.

Of course, you know what I am thinking. I would doubtless have enjoyed the whole thing more if it were historical. I have heard rumours that this development is coming soon. In fairness you can get generically close by using the Men factions, but in the end I played Elven Rangers and Trees – a traditional fallback if required to do the fantasy thing.

Despite its problems, Battleground does a lot right. For all my moans, it is playable and it does work, given time. Nothing is ‘broken’ here, to use that dismissive and rarely appropriate term. The battles have their moments, there are some fresh ideas in a field that has pretty much seen it all, and I can see that the sets will appeal to certain gamers, or make ideal presents for the younger generation. From those gamers that can’t or won’t paint, or simply don’t accept the expense and storage of miniatures, to those wanting to instantly recreate Tolkein’s battles, or those of the Warhamster World, then, well, you can see the huge potential. Whatever I may say about price, two starter packs are a bargain compared to any investment in figures.

As for me, not necessarily the target market, I have to say I am wary. A key test is whether one would play again, after the initial exploratory sessions. Personally I would, under some duress, but I would definitely want to make changes long term. These would be targeted at play length and combat decisiveness. The obvious solution is to self modify the rules, or wait for the second edition on the web, or draft in another set entirely. The cards themselves, and the base idea, are fine. If the rumoured historical units appear, then that would be another major draw, but one can see how easily the releases might run out of steam with one wrong turn – ‘Nobody bought the Swiss and Burgundian packs’. But you can be sure that I would.

I wish Chad, Robert and Your Move the best of luck. They have bravely launched a timely and interesting system, and I know it has already found a niche with a good many gamers. This could grow within the fantasy genre, then into science fiction, and hopefully for we sad old buffers - not strictly requiring pointy ears, gauss rifles or resurrections - into historical periods. If I were them, I would personally be looking to tweak my product to speed the game up, possibly through an official variant quick play rule set, and perhaps improve the graphics a little. That done, I could happily say that Battleground could be an outstanding product and worthy of your time.

The Sumos

While my list of top games of 2007 already has a number of definites, there is still some gaming and ranking to be done in the last four weeks. So I’ll list the lucky ten games next time. What is certain is that the runners-up will be of a high standard, and it will be close for the final few spaces - at the moment I have a dozen possibles contending for three or four slots. I have yet to play Cuba, Hamburgum, Cold War, Brass, Dust, Power & Weakness, and Race for the Galaxy. I want to give Phoenicia another workout, but I like it so far. Will League of Six prove to have staying power? Will 1960, Key Harvest, Origins or Agricola get the ultimate Yokozuna accolade? All will be revealed.

Mike Siggins