Gamer's Notebook

Gamer's Notebook, February 2013

Mon, 04 Feb 2013 19:48:38 CST

Delayed Reaction

For various reasons, I have only just got round to playing Eclipse properly. I had long been wondering whether to buy it based on others’ very positive views and my initial one hour try out. In all attempts I was stymied by either the high prices asked or unavailability. In a way, that was fortunate. I am glad I didn’t bite. I really liked playing Eclipse – three games now - I think there is a lot of clever stuff going on and the design is elegant. But given how many shots designers have taken at the 4X and Civ formats, perhaps we have every right to expect this.

Accordingly, Eclipse is the culmination of many, many evolutionary design advances. There is some excellent design: I could name the ship building, post pass actions, tech tree, resources, and expenditure track mechanisms off the top of my head. There are many more. It is very good, it is clean, it is accessible, you should play it. It wins a Sumo. But what puts me off a full blown love-in is that (with set up included) it is not a short game – I don’t get many four hour slots – and, to be frank, it hasn’t tackled the key issues of the multi-player game.

At heart, it is still a build up, squash your neighbour exercise. It would be nice if it wasn’t (it was sold to me on the basis that combat was not necessary to win), but the designers have taken the easy route and certain types of players will follow them. The first player attacked, or with poor luck, or poor resources, will always remain behind and unlikely to catch up. Ultimately there will be two (or three) on one situations, there will be players sandwiched and unable to expand, and there will be a curiously mad game end where everyone wants to fight and grab. This is not edifying and it would have been good if the design talent clearly on show in the systems had also been applied to the wider interactions. I could forgive much of this if the game was an hour long, a little less dependent on dice, and stronger on narrative. “Oh, it all went wrong here. I had those awful die rolls, I got kicked by the weak alien, it left a gap in my defences and Toby took the opportunity to walk through the hole and steal all my hard work. Game over.” That’s fine to explain away 90 minutes, but not 240.

Another disappointment is that one of those 4X’s is distinctly lower case. Given the choice, in this type of game I will always eXplore. I am quite happy doing that, and still want a game that lets me do it properly. In Eclipse, any initial exploration seems largely designed to establish lebensraum and routes and buffer zones between neighbours. There simply aren’t enough ‘external’ hexes to make exploration very useful as a long term strategy (or even medium term). I understand that it is promoting interaction – what fun is a game where all four players head off in different directions? – and that, anyway, most tables couldn’t handle the length of an explorer’s vapour trails. Still, one of the more disappointing aspects for me.

Balancing that is the really good news. As normally accrues from a decent game, I can see that Eclipse II or perhaps the expanded game, or of course another entrant to the lists, may move us a little closer towards the ideal. Which neatly brings me to Clash of Cultures. After a couple of turns I thought, and then voiced, that it seemed to be Eclipse meets Civ. The more I played, the more it appeared that this was the case. I have no problem with that; mainly I am impressed at how quickly the Eclipse model was absorbed, adjusted and returned to market with a new coat of paint.

You will know how Clash works because you have played all the previous Civ wannabee games. In this case it works a little better than all of them, and will take around three hours if you keep up a good pace. The downsides are that you can probably win or lose a game based on the objective cards you are dealt – Good fit? Easy VPs. Bad fit? Almost impossible! - but you do get quite a few cards to offset this. You can also get that common setup issue where someone is quietly turtling in a corner while rivals are at each other’s throats, again like Eclipse.

As much as I like the 4X/SF genre typified by Eclipse, I have to say I thought Clash of Cultures at least as good, if perhaps not as polished. It has a different approach to the overarching multi-player issues (not perfect, but good) and I felt the tech tree was more interesting (high praise given Eclipse’s clever subgame). I definitely want to play the designer’s pirate game, and I recommend Clash of Cultures highly.

Starship Merchants

This was a very pleasant surprise. When the box was opened, and the lovely artwork admired, I was expecting a lightweight, fun game. More Huber than Lehmann, if you will. In fact, this is a rondel based game that has a lot of interesting decisions, considerable depth and some clever design work. I liked it a lot and apart from some issues with the length, rules and timing of actions, it worked just about perfectly.

There is little new in the theme. Players are space traders, sourcing and selling various interstellar commodities. You have options to improve your existing ship, to buy more, and to do all those neat things that one wants to do in Merchant of Venus (but usually give up on while waiting). There are also further mechanisms that really up the ante. You can, for instance, put a hold on your resources allowing for guaranteed supplies and denying others access. You can buy refineries that enhance your profits. The destination mechanism is pure design class, if we read the rule right. The rondel confers a challenge in the timing of trades and actions – one is reminded of petrol stop strategies in motor racing. All good stuff. Ultimately though, all this comes down to the old business cycle – befitting that rondel – of acquire, sell, invest, expand, acquire more but also wedded with the choice of one, fast, vessel or several slow ones, or perhaps several fast ones!

The only negative comments I am going make are, firstly, it drags a bit. Try for two hours if you can. Secondly, the rules are not the best. Actually, they are among the worst I have seen this year. I know this is probably not down to the designers, but someone deserves a roasting. Thirdly, I know the designers quite well, and know their gaming preferences, but I would politely suggest that they look to move away from 18xx mechanisms, such as rusting, especially for a middleweight, public accessible game like this. It is a pain for those to whom rust forecasting is neither fun nor second nature and, in this case, it makes little sense. There’s no harm in innovating from time to time.

1989

This will be one of the easiest, and shortest, reviews I ever write. 1989 is a re-theme and slight re-design of Twilight Struggle. Perhaps even a streamlining exercise, at heart. I believe that the changed mechanisms help the game no end, and offer some subtle strategy distinctions. I also much prefer the theme, largely because it seems to me a much better fit for the system. As you may recall, Twilight Struggle is a Top 20 game for me. As a result 1989 cannot really fail to gain a Sumo. The fact that I don’t own Twilight Struggle is no longer an issue as I will always play 1989 in preference. However, this does not mean I am now happy with the game length (still an hour too long) and the core mechanism of scoring regions known to only one player and understanding the resulting tactics! If you like Twilight Struggle (and I understand it has a few fans) then 1989 is a must buy.

Offputting

Two games I have played recently have been rather offputting, yet eventually proved to be good, solid, very enjoyable games. I just wonder if they could have been made better through development and downsizing. The games in question are Terra Mystica and Robinson Crusoe. By the time we had set up the myriad piles of cards, counters and markers, and read the rules, I was ready to abandon both there and then. I was having a Fantasy Flight moment. Peer pressure (Terra M) and intrigue (Robinson) kept me on board. What was the issue? Essentially that there was way too much clutter and at least one or two mechanisms too far. In short, they are overwhelming when they should be accessible and welcoming. I cannot help but think that both titles could have used the Alan Moon policy of “when you think a game is finished, take something away.”

Pax and Polis

I go way back with Phil Eklund. I reviewed Lords of the Sierra Madre in 1993 very positively and, with the odd exception, I have revelled in and supported his games ever since. For instance, Lords of the Spanish Main is right up there in my all time favourites. So, all in the garden was rosy. Until recently. First there was the move to boxed games and higher prices – if nothing else, Phil’s games are somewhat experimental and experiential, so lower prices ease us over that speed bump. Second, there was High Frontier (rules that could make a non-engineer weep) and Bios: Megafauna (rules and development that were so poor I called a halt on Sierra Madre altogether, particularly because I had bought the game twice already.)

In fairness, Eklund games have always been challenging on the rules front but this was a case of proper production values with rules that made the experience painful. For me, a major fan and evangelist, it was simply the last straw. For two years I refused to play the games, and I stopped following one of my game design idols. That told him! But I was not alone, and even if I was keen, finding players to try Phil’s games was an increasingly difficult job. Most of my regular opponents did not hesitate to use their veto if the idea of an Eklund game was mooted. For those that didn’t buy into his experience game ethos, there had just been too much pain for too long. Was it all up for our favourite quirky rocket scientist?

Then along came Pax Porfiriana. Small box, reasonable price, and – hallelujah! – a very tight set of rules. This may or may not be down to the co-designers who worked on this one. Given that I knew the theme already – this is Lords of the Sierra Madre in card form – I decided to lift the embargo and pre-order. In truth, I would have bought and played it anyway as a card adaptation, but it turned out to be a game that also solved the major issues of LotSM while reducing game time by about 70%. Things were looking very positive. We played. We played again. At the last count I am at twelve games in two months. Almost all the former cynics have enjoyed it. I really like it. And best of all it has done something to unlock my design process such that I have cracked at least three sticky problems over the holidays.

So for those who don’t know what I am on about... Pax Porfiriana is a multi player card game concentrating on Mexico in the early years of the 20th century. Revolution is in the air, the U.S. is keeping a watching brief. You are a powerful landowner looking to topple the president and, ideally, make a lot of money in the process. There are wooden cubes but there is usually plenty of military action in the game mixed in with the economic and political systems. Be ready to deploy local militias, rail guns, Federales, banditos, U.S. Rangers and Apaches (among many others) in ploys that will deny rivals their income, encourage American intervention or prompt a revolution. The game runs around 60 minutes, sometimes a bit longer depending on the president’s fate, and I have to say it is an absolute gem. Not perfect, definitely tweakable, and I have some concerns over the calculable toppling procedure, but different every time, very chaotic, excellent narrative, great fun and already being hailed as one of the best of the year.

Secondly, we have Polis. This is a Spanish designed two player game about the Peloponnesian War and the surrounding decades. Again, as with Pax Porfiriana, there is a distinct economic and political element to this one. Indeed, the first two turns of four do not even allow for battles – you are assumed to be indulging in strategic manoeuvre, trade agreements and border skirmishes. The scenarios include both naval and land considerations for Sparta and Athens, providing a nicely asymmetrical situation that I am sure you will find interesting. Control of the sea lanes is almost a game in itself. Elsewhere, you will approach and besiege neutral city states, or perhaps send a diplomat, in trying to build your population, resources, power and military strength. As if the strategic considerations weren’t enough, you must also ensure your cities are fed and nurtured – you will find yourself scavenging desperately for wheat, trading, building temples, holding festivals and erecting statues to keep your campaigns on the go. It is in many ways like nothing I have ever played, and the design is first rate. The jury is out on the history, but it is certainly not too far adrift. Whatever, the ludic challenge in Polis will not disappoint. It takes around two hours, and it is intense, rewarding gaming. Based on three plays, this is my favourite game of the year.

The Sumos, 2012

Yokozuna

Polis: Fight for the Hegemony

Ozeki

1989 Clash of Cultures Keyflower Pax Porfiriana Starship Merchants

Sekiwake

Robinson Crusoe Terra Mystica Village

Belated Sumos

Eclipse Yggdrasil

Mike Siggins

Gamer's Notebook, February 2012

Sun, 12 Feb 2012 15:38:18 CST

It is not difficult for me to open this column with my current bugbear. In fact, I can feel a rant coming on. At our recent post-Essen convention we endured three days of dodgy rulebooks and resulting problems. It was either just a very bad batch of games, or standards are dropping. Whatever, we may have spent a good 20% of the gaming time struggling with rule comprehension and interpretation. Not good enough.

I am going to blow my own trumpet here (usually far better than sucking it, I find). I am pretty darn good at working out rules. I think this is based on solid English comprehension, knowledge of game systems (and even how certain designers do things), on having written several sets of rules myself and developed/edited loads more, and, I suppose in truth, some empathic guesswork. I am aware of the dangers of the latter approach, so it is only used in dire situations!

I feel this obscure superpower gets us through most games, hopefully playing something at least related to what the designer intended. Combined with Ken Tidwell or Charles Vasey at the same table, we are almost invulnerable in crushing poor drafting, sloppy thinking and fuzzy logic. Nevertheless, this recent batch of games was beyond our combined skills. There were rule sections that were not finished. There were unclear rules. There were rules that said the opposite to what was intended. There were clear rules, clearly contradicted by later rules. There were rules contradicted by examples. There were rules hidden within examples. There were rules that weren’t needed, and rules that were just missing altogether. There were games where the rules were on the cards. And finally there were rules that were so poorly drafted that they rendered the game unplayable and raised blood pressures around the table.

Okay, I concede that sometimes this problem is down to translation and one can often get the real meaning by referring to the French or German rules. I am less competent if those rules are in Spanish, Russian, Serbo-Croat or Polish... Sometimes, as I know, it is not possible for the production to allow for much time to finalise rules. Living rules help here. I have known rules to be re-written just before release without the designer seeing them. And I am also totally aware that rules drafting is not an easy task in the first place. But come on guys, as a minimum, let’s at least try to get the final ruleset in front of some blind testers and see if they play the game correctly. Note to self: possible business opportunity, even if gruesome work.

A few of the worst culprits? Bios: Megafauna, Rallyman, Colonial, Hammerin’Iron, Pergamemnon... I could go on.

1st & Goal

As far as I am concerned, it is a brave man that releases a game in the same slot as Football Strategy, one of the finest games to grace my table. Ever. Okay, so I am not entirely sure that one can get hold of Football Strategy these days, and some would point to its near perfect symmetry and complete lack of team flavour as a drawback. So, after consideration, perhaps I can see why someone would do it.

1st & Goal is an excellent game: slight emphasis on game. I approached it with a completely open mind, and in truth it is some years since I played either Paydirt, Statis Pro or Football Strategy anyway. Ninety minutes later we had learned it, played it, and were sitting there discussing a gripping 14-13 win for the Mortlake Tossers over my Fenland Eels. I had a last minute 60 yard drive, only to fumble within the five. Earlier, I had slotted a long field goal and almost landed a long bomb. We had some exciting punt returns. I could go on.

In short, the whole game was completely immersive and full of narrative flavour. I find it helps to put on a bad American accent. It is fun to grab and roll the dice. The magnetic chain gang is genius. The playlength is just about perfect. I like the fact that I can go and buy team expansions. It is tense, and a little draining. Most importantly, it is an awful lot of fun. And I don’t get to say that much these days.

Rallyman

I love rallying. I used to go and watch them, still watch them on tv, I even like playing the console games. Predictably, I would love to design a boardgame that evoked the speed and excitement of this underrated spectacle. I had though that it would be a tough task, but I have to say that Rallyman has come very close. It suffers from that boardgame issue of depicting a high speed sport at a much slower pace. Inevitable, but Rallyman does a clever job of concealing the join.

Otherwise, it is a very good game. The highlight is the cornering mechanism, which pretty much captures the very different approach to the racing line, compared to say, Formula One or Nascar. The fact that the mechanism changes depending on the surface in the expansion just made me even happier. Accordingly, one gets the feel of the various surfaces, the key tyre choices, and the time trial nature of either setting the pace or chasing the man in front. I thought it was very good, and like Powerboats or Snow Trails, I would always play if the opportunity arose.

As I mentioned above, the rules (especially in the Rallyman: Dirt expansion) are a little woolly. The games took a while because of the rules discussions, not helped by ‘an expert’ on another table misleading us every half hour... I think it is fair to say that in a race stage consisting of six major corners, we played each of them under different rules! That said, I am not going to let the rules get in the way of a neat system. On the buy list.

Merkator

Since the earliest days of my gaming life, I have been looking for a good trading game. You know, one that would evoke the excitement and flavour of the East India Company, or Hudson Bay, the Hanseatic League, stellar empires or even just wheeling a cart of potatoes around Germany. We have seen many attempts. Many. And I like to feel I have played almost all of them. At least it feels like that. The problem was always that the games took a long time, and that the trade off was usually a loss of atmosphere.

Merkator is the latest candidate to shuffle into the interview room. I liked it. A lot. Yes, it is dry and not very flavoursome, and by the end of the game you feel you are going through the motions. But it is clever, it has most of the trading elements I am looking for, and - importantly – it is quick. Possibly too quick. The reason I am writing it up is because the Merkator system can easily be built upon, adding back some of the flavour that has been taken away in the pursuit of playing time targets.

Gettysburg

Martin Wallace dropped Gettysburg on us, a little out of left field. He often does military based game themes, but this is an out and out tactical wargame. Of course, because it is area based (hurrah!) and spiced with Martin’s clever ideas on how command and control should work, it pretty much sets itself apart from the army of hex and zoc clones. We usually play the first day as the main event, and push on in to the second day only if the situation demands it. As such it cuts down the play length to a reasonable time frame. Unusual, but we liked it a lot.

I had heard very good things about K2, and I was hoping for something in the vein of the excellent Safe Return Doubtful. I was not disappointed. For once, here is a game designed by an aficionado of the sport that does not sink under factors, chrome and boredom. The designer has extracted key elements of climbing, made a challenging and innovative game out of them and, frankly, has done an excellent job of balancing the difficulty of the task. To make it an effective multi-player outing is just icing on the cake. And I really like cake.

Sentinels of the Multiverse

Fate is a funny thing. At the Eastbourne convention in November, we were at a loose end. As usual, I dug deep into a friend’s crate of new games and, unusually, came up short. Then, by chance, I spotted his bag behind a chair. I rummaged, not hopeful of finding anything apart from ziplocs. Nestling forlornly at the bottom was Sentinels of the Multiverse. I swerved round the loud cover artwork to read the box blurb and, oddly, immediately wanted to play. We gave it a run, and another, and another. So, who would have thought that a co-operative game with an automated opponent could grab our attention like that? The explanation is that this is a well designed, well tested game with tons of atmosphere. As a first design, it is rather good.

The enemy is an arch villain, their evil deeds driven by a card deck. The players are a team of super heroes, each with different skills, again represented by a unique deck of cards. There is also an environment deck (Megacity, Mars etc) which provides welcome variety and flavour (let’s call it the stock in this recipe). The game provides a decent selection of all three types of deck (nearly 600 cards in all) and you can bet that more will be coming along. You can guess the theme – all the heroes work together to defend against, and then overthrow, the villain.

I have three concerns with an otherwise impressive debut. Firstly, the game does not scale too well – playing with one or two heroes is tough; three and four is usually a bit easy. You can work out the approximate sweet spot, which at times (new players, weaker villain) may be an advantage in disguise. Secondly, the game is based on dishing out damage. Yes, I know that is a comic staple. There are however several types of damage, and you are always thinking about how your hero and team can deliver it in a clever way; it is not mindless fighting. But in the end you are simply reducing a pile of hit points to zero – there is no way of plotting downfall by other means. Or at least none I have yet spotted. Thirdly, the font on the cards is not exactly the clearest – especially for numbers. Otherwise, it’s all good.

The game scores highly in several areas. It feels fresh, it all works seamlessly, it is not overlong, it is an unusual topic done well, it engages the players and they work as a team without reservations, it is full of comic book atmosphere and I thought the rules were excellent despite the mixed rules/flavour text layout (although others have disagreed on this). The best part for me is choosing, playing and gradually discovering the heroes and their interactions with the villains and environments. You will not see all the cards in every game, and almost every card adds an interesting aspect to your character and the battle. Different environments can adjust these aspects in subtle or greater ways. Multiply this by the different hero decks on offer, whose skillsets really are diverse, and you have a lot of fun just running through the decks in the basic set. This aspect is so good that I am moved to design my own deck, and it has been a while since that happened – with Middle Earth: The Wizards, since you ask. Sentinels comes highly recommended.

A Few Acres of Snow

As good as Sentinels is, my favourite game of 2011, by some margin, is A Few Acres of Snow. Designed by Martin Wallace, this is a two player card game loosely based on the French Indian War, thus offering scope for establishing settlements and forts, sparring for key Canadian terrain and drawing on trade resources and Indian allies over a wider period. How good? Well, I really must get hold of another copy as this one is having a hard life.

Like Dominion, to which it gives a tip of the hat, this is a deck building system – you start with a very small hand of cards, and add cards as the game progresses, expanding your options but reducing the access to any one card – usually the one you need. The major difference from Dominion is that this game has a theme, and I am happy to play it. Actually, make that a lot of theme and very happy. It isn’t perfect – there is a curious middle game where one marks time waiting for certain cards – but that is a minor quibble.

It is possible to approach the game in several ways (aggressive, passive, military, settling, naval, economic, besieging, raiding, fortifying etc), each of which adds a fascinating new slant to the experience. Then when you think you have mastered it, you can change sides. Big deal you say, but the twist is that Acres is asymmetrical. The French have subtly different cards to the good guys, which is not immediately apparent. Add in the geographical positions, plus the naval imbalance, and this is a game that offers many, many hours of strategy to explore, test and experience. The telling factor is that when it comes to adding up the VPs, it doesn’t really seem to matter because the game has been so enjoyable.

The Sumos, 2011

Yokozuna

A Few Acres of Snow

Ozeki

1st & Goal
Castles of Burgundy
Colonial
K2
Sentinels of the Multiverse

Sekiwake

Chaos in the Old World
LOTR The Card Game
Pergamon
Star Trek: Fleet Captains

Wargames

A Few Acres of Snow, Bulge 20, C&C: Napoleonics, Die Fighting, Gettysburg, Hammerin’ Iron, Might and Reason, Strike of the Eagle, Test of Fire, The American Revolution, The World Turned Upside Down, Zouave II.

Mike Siggins

Gamer's Notebook, January 2011

Mon, 07 Mar 2011 17:00:10 CST

Absence

What with the economy, work, stress and illness… I had a really bad year. Sorry.

Innovation?

My worst game experience of the annus horribilis was, by quite a margin, Innovation. Let me qualify that. This was easily my most anticipated game for at least five years, possibly more, based on early reports, buzz and designer pedigree. The rules confirmed my estimation. Even now I admire the ideas, the flow, the combos, the clever card mechanisms. I want to love it, and I still like it a little tiny bit. I may even buy it. But overall here is a game experience on a par with Fluxx. Actually, worse than Fluxx. There is so little control; it is very easy to get hosed and effectively eliminated, often by nothing more than bad cards, timing or situation. And I write as someone who champions both chaos and innovation (ironically). If the process were a huge amount of fun, I could accept the premise. In reality, it is pointless and dull; an arrogant exercise in design theory, failing to produce enjoyment. Carl Chudyk will design more games, and I suspect all will be better games. I hope, in time, he (or someone else) returns to Innovation and re-uses the good bits. Meanwhile, if you must play it, make it two player and don’t get your hopes up.

Balance

Conversely, one of my best game experiences was Key Market, but since I was involved with that one, and you can’t currently buy it cheaply, I’ll shut up. Either way, this is probably the best Key game for me. Not by much over Harvest and Dragons, and not Reef Encounter in stature, but still very, very good. Congratulations to David, and Richard, who both put in a hell of a lot of work.

To Infinity, and Beyond

Because I am getting old and therefore predictable, I am going to give an mention to Sierra Madre’s High Frontier. I think it is common knowledge now that I am a huge Phil Eklund fan. I realise there are many dissenters, and that some of you believe I should be banned from mentioning him or his so called ‘games’ again. Each to their own, but I am the one hovering over the keyboard and the editor isn’t paying attention.

Okay. Brass tacks. On the downside, High Frontier is only half a game, displaying many of the Eklundian traits I know and usually love. Like most of the others, it is nothing if not an experience. A big criticism is the slightly contradictory rulebook/walkthrough and the steep learning curve which are typical Eklund – read seven times, mentally edit, start play, lurch forward, realise you are wrong, re-read, repeat. Those of us without rocket science PhD’s get there eventually. Engineers (and I know a few, a few too many) just giggle at me and get on with it.

For Eklund veterans, the core system is the same old, same old. Auction the cards, do things based on the cards, keep the pace up. But money is so tight there is an all too familiar slog at the start, even with the optional kickstart variant. Crucially, you can’t do high tempo because you are consulting the rules all the time and trying to grasp the game. But it was ever thus. This painful early game is compounded as once you have all launched your rockets (this took us over an hour of play), there is every chance that your flight will be something of an anti-climax. There is a strong possibility of choosing the wrong route or planet, dying, running out of fuel (dying), exploding (dying) or being decommissioned (yep, dying). And that is just the basic game.

The main appeal, and oddly also the problem, is what you actually do once in space. In management speak, it is lacking structured goal attainment paradigms. We just flew around happily until one of the above death conditions applied, organised a couple of rescue missions, and in one delirious case, managed to return safely to Earth orbit having achieved a fly-by of Mars. On the plus side, it is good, solid Eklund experience game design with a great theme and a genuine ability to get one interested in the subject matter. It offers very few ludic qualities, but the price of admission is that you make your own fun. Doubtless we will willingly fly onto the expansion board in due time. Go on, you know you want it!

Fillers Filling

Parade (Alice in Wonderland)

Naoki Homma for Grimpeur

You may remember my earlier comments on Japanese games. There are lots of them, they look lovely, they are quirky, the rules are comical, they cost a lot of money, and they hardly ever function. In fact, one might argue that there are less than ten that work at all. Here is one more. This is a straightforward card laying game that I suspect most people bought because it has pretty Alice in Wonderland artwork (by Tenniel?). In play it is in the Six Nimmt family – you can hold off taking pain for a long time, but eventually you will probably be forced to accept some. In Parade there is a very nice Hearts/Black Maria shoot-the-moon quality in there as well. We all enjoyed it, and most of us added it to our buy list. Oddly, the game feels as if it might be a traditional game, possibly tweaked to include a German style scoring system. It may derive from Europe where short or tarot decks are common. I say this as a compliment. On balance, it is either an existing game that I now know about, or the designer has come up with a clever and original system right off the bat. Either way, a playable Japanese design which is, as I said, something to be welcomed. Recommended.

13 Nimmt

Wolfgang Kramer for Amigo

But no sooner has the Parade passed by, the old warhorse returns to centre stage. 13 Nimmt is a belated, but very welcome, development of 6 Nimmt, a game which has probably sold several million copies by now. Actually, it is quite a large development in that it uses the familiar ox cards, and the same key idea, but is a much much better game. It is also very clever indeed. If you liked 6 Nimmt, you will definitely like 13 Nimmt. Get it.

CarDcassonne

Karl-Heinz Schmiel and Klaus Jurgen Wrede for Hans im Gluck

Note the D. We were sitting at a games day recently and one of the players kept suggesting Carcassonne. I was forced to refer to my excuses book several times. Turns out she was saying CarDcassonne, which we played and I liked. Forget Carcassonne. Apart from the logo and some graphical and mechanism references, there is very little similarity. This is a card game, something of a Coloretto/6-Nimmt hybrid, with a bit of extra push-your-luck. Quick, fun, light, but not without some interesting card play. One would expect nothing less from the master, Karl-Heinz Schmiel.

Blood and Guts

On the wargame front, it was a very good year. In truth many of the best games I played involved miniatures rules and/or figures, and I certainly expect that to continue into 2011 with Command & Colors: Napoleonics. On the boards, the truly excellent Maria rode high as a three player marvel, helping to fill that difficult slot. Yes, it has the silly card system but that is tolerable for most, and the rest is wonderful. I finally got to grips with Gettysburg, and thoroughly enjoyed it – far more than I did Waterloo. For those of us who stupidly sold We the People, you should save the pennies and buy GMT’s Washington's War pronto. I much prefer it to the original. As ever, the Columbia block system and its successors continue to provide balanced, tense, exciting games: I am going to tip Julius Caesar over Wars of the Roses, but there is really nothing between them; both are hard fought fights and quality design work. A game that slid in under the radar was Dos de Mayo. This was a pleasant surprise, and is quick, interesting, and fairly light. Finally, God's Playground could easily be in this category as well, given the right type of players.

And some of the better ones….

Age of Industry

Martin Wallace for Treefrog

I really enjoyed Brass, so it is logical that I would like the cleaned up, slimmed down, streamlined second edition that is Age of Industry. It is quicker, more logical, and has lost that slightly uncomfortable feel of some of Brass’s rules. On the downside it may have been sanded a little too much, and we have lost a bit of character. Still, doesn’t stop me getting Brass out again does it? I think that is all I have to say, except that despite the box legend, it doesn’t seem to work with two players. I look forward to the expansion maps.

Battles of Napoleon: The Eagle and The Lion

Ugo di Meglio and Sergio Guerri for Nexus

The widespread success of Command & Colors: Ancients, seemingly throughout both the boardgaming and miniatures hobbies, has inevitably seen related games in other periods. We have had WWII, Medieval/Fantasy and ACW, and now, belatedly, we have Napoleonics. I say belatedly because I have had the C&C Nap rules for over a decade and, as a right minded individual, Napoleonics should clearly have been first choice! But the long awaited GMT game has not reached me yet, which has given its rivals a chance to perform unchallenged. To be honest, C&C is going to have to work a bit when it finally appears.

The first rival game on the table, just beating out Worthington Games’ 100 Days, is The Eagle and the Lion by Nexus, out of Italy. I did have a slight involvement in this one, as I helped get the uniform research underway, but that was such a small role it doesn’t even merit a credit. So my conscience is clear! The game is huge and looks a treat. It comes with four large, thick card hex maps which will fill a decent sized table. The maps are double sided and also have overlays, thus adding to the terrain options. There are full colour unit and tactical cards, rules, scenarios, dice and markers and, tadahhh, rather nice hard plastic figures with stands – French and British, just as it should be (!). Some of you may wish to paint these. I couldn’t possibly comment.

I think I can sum up the game very quickly. It does exactly what C&C does – battles at a high, fairly abstract pitch – but it does it all at one level of complexity and detail higher. This is not far from a basic set of Napoleonic miniatures rules. Not only is the game good in its own right, it is different in feel from C&C (mainly manifested in the orders mechanism), and it also allows gamers to decide on a more involved (dare I say realistic?) game system. I think it will fit right in above C&C and I think it will do very well.

I am doing a good selling job here, but there are some drawbacks. The first is that the ‘gravestone box’ (description based on size and weight) and quality components attract a chunky price tag. Definitely try before you buy. There are a few odd rules (immobile lines for one) which are, of course, tweakable. It is not the quickest system out there – reckon on around two hours per scenario. And finally, a certain something is not quite there. It is that experience of playing a new rule set in your favourite period and thinking, mmm, I wouldn’t do it quite like that… So, nothing more than we usually encounter. Recommended.

Founding Fathers

Christian Leonhard and Jason Matthews for Jolly Roger

I am impressed that two designers would set out to design an interesting game on this subject, but as someone still grappling with Negro League baseball and 1980’s Rallying, I should just… empathise. That they managed to make a very good multi-player game out of it is impressive. Think Credo, think Campaign Manager. You are playing cards to sway opinion and votes to crystallize the Constitution. As with most such games, this is an enjoyable exercise but with weak control (I suspect rightly) and some ‘take that’ card play, it is probably best to go along for the ride rather than hope for a skilled victory. In truth, the game is not as polished as either Twilight Struggle or 1960, and there are some rocky moments – don’t get tied down in the repechage committee room! - and even worrying moments in the case of some of the heavy handed cards. But it works, it engages as do most CDG’s, it is highly flavoursome and I found myself wanting to read up on the history – always a good sign.

Maria

Richard Sivel for Histogame

Friedrich was very good game indeed, and was in some ways exactly what I had been seeking for many years. Okay, so it has its quirks, the playing cards, and the balance was a bit off, but I think most people enjoyed it. For whatever reason, after taking fifteen-odd years on Friedrich, Herr Sivel ‘rushed’ out Maria, made some tweaks, ignored half the historical war, and gave us a little gem. It gets a ‘Siggins 9’, which is a 14 in most people’s purview.

Navegador

Mac Gerdts for PD Verlag

Yes, it is another rondel game and have we not now seen enough of these? Well, no, because while the circular mechanism stays pretty stable, the games hanging off it are getting better. I think this is the best yet, although I still have a soft spot for Hamburgum and the pleasing financial chaos that is Imperial. In Navegador you are all done in 90 minutes, there is plenty of decision making and just about everything is tight – the race for the East, the money, the ships, and if you are not pipped at least twice in the game I would be surprised. On the downside there is a feeling that if you are successful in one area of victory point harvesting, someone else will certainly be beating you hands down in another. And there are huge swings in the luck of the draw of the face down chits. I didn’t mind this, partly because I was on a run and gun strategy. Overall this is a good, solid game design that I will play again.

Seven Wonders

Antoine Bauza for Asmodee

I know a lot of you are getting very excited (again). Don’t worry, I am not going to knock it. Even I played this one repeatedly on first encounter, and that is a rare occurrence. I like it a lot, but I currently don’t love it. There is not much wrong with the game, but it is what it is – a very clever, and synergistic, combination of existing mechanisms which works well, quickly and is fun to play. In some senses it is too quick, and certainly most of the sense of theme and narrative are lost in the rush. It is also a filler, even though it has decent depth, and after the initial foray of five games I thought it might fade as quickly as it plays. Still, I know I will return to it many times, and teach others, even if I have suspicions about the science score weighting. I also thought the card symbology was very well handled in exactly the same way that Race for the Galaxy wasn’t. I think when the inevitable expansions arrive it could easily go up a level - I just hope they are fairly priced. Good stuff, and a definite buy for large game groups as it scales very well.

The Belated and Current Sumos

And finally, two year’s worth of Sumos for your enjoyment.

Mike Siggins

The Sumos, 2009

Yokozuna

God's Playground
Hansa Teutonica

Ozeki

Android
Automobile
Endeavor
Peloponnes
Roll Through The Ages
Uruk

Sekiwake

Shipyard
Tobago

Honourable Mentions

Arena: Roma II, Campaign Manager, Fauna, Planet Steam, Tulipmania, Vasco da Gama.

Special Retrospective Yokozuna

Tales of the Arabian Nights (West End/Z Man)

Wargames

Pax Baltica, Pocket Battles, Richard III, Waterloo.

The Sumos, 2010

Yokozuna

7 Wonders
Age of Industry
Key Market

Ozeki

Founding Fathers
London
Macao

Sekiwake

Bombay
Dos de Mayo
High Frontier
Navegador

Wargames

Gettysburg, Julius Caesar, Lost Battles, Maria, Washington's War, Wars of the Roses

Gamer's Notebook, December 2009

Sun, 20 Dec 2009 10:26:34 CST

I have said too many times that I can become disenchanted with German games. This almost always follows a period where I play a lot of new titles and they are all average or worse. It happens, but not as much as it used to, and a restorative menu of old trusted favourites and good friends normally cures me in a hurry. Then again there are those sessions of gaming where it seems every new game is a winner, and even somehow fresh and exciting. This time I have three such games to describe, all fall into the ‘about an hour, sometimes much less’ slot, and all have deceptive weight. Sort of Super Fillers, but a little bit more.

First up is Peloponnes, a neat, lean little game from a small German company - Irongames. The drawback here will be sourcing a copy quickly and cheaply, but everything else is positive. This is a straightforward auction game, but one that offers new angles and, it must be said, makes the boring old Amun Re mechanism interesting again. Well, at least for a week. You are trying to build your ancient civilisation (yes, I know…) and achieve this by avoiding disasters and buying civilisation tiles. Each tile offers either buildings or land, and brings something different to the party – for instance population, powers, or income. Some tiles will be hotly contested because they will ‘fit’ better for some players than others, while others have fairly obvious use only to you. Tiles acquired, after just eight turns you assess your civilisation for balance, add up the points, and that’s it. Because there is an asymmetrical element early on, and because you can’t always get what you want, there is a constant decision level throughout with some recognisable strategy, neatly countered by a good sense of actually building a Greek city state. I think that is impressive in such a short game. It needs a graphical overhaul, perhaps a bigger publisher, and I would make the disasters uncertain. But apart from that, stick it on your Christmas list.

I was a little slow to get hold of a copy of Roll Through The Ages, but I have made up for it with several plays since. Like Pandemic, I will play three or four games in a short period, and then put it on the shelf. Unlike most games, it comes down again a few weeks later and impresses me, and any new recruit that I foist it upon. By now you know the score, and I have to say it is a very clever game with surprising amounts of narrative – hard to believe that a simple roll of a few dice can depict an empire with starvation or years of plenty or booming trade. In short, it is Yahtzee, but it is Yahtzee with soul.

Next is Endeavor (I will suffer the spelling mistake in the cause of world peace). Strangely enough, there is a similar feel to Peloponnes here. There is a lot to do, but you are fully aware that the game is short, and that your actions are precious. Given that, here is a game where you feel you achieve a massive amount of expansion in no time at all, and from choosing a single building at the start, you are managing a worldwide empire by the end. Yet, only an hour has passed. Very clever. This is probably, but only just, my favourite of the three.

All three of these games, along with Hansa Teutonica and even the lighter Tobago reviewed last time, offer a credible gaming challenge in a short and, importantly, appropriate period of time. In fact, in some respects, they can run out a little too quickly. We already have a widely played variant for Roll Through, and it would not surprise me to see spin off expansions for Peloponnes as well. As ever, if you start with a quick, solid, streamlined chassis you can always add some more accessories without affecting performance too much.

As you have probably gathered I like this style of game. I don’t want to play them all the time, preferring a balanced diet of card, short, medium, and longer/flavoursome games, but I like their utility, their clever design, I can see that their creators have made sure that they are ‘finished’ before publication, and I am more than happy to spend an hour or so with them. Like no other type of game, they make me think and analyse. I put this down to their transparency and economy of mechanism. Predictably, I would like to see more of the same and, I hope, the designers feel the same way. Hobby affirming games – I like ‘em!

Fauna

Friedemann Friese for Huch

A slight oddity this, a party style game designed by our old mate FF. In truth, Friedemann and I have drifted apart in recent years. The decline started with Fresh Fish, and was compounded by that awful rolling board monster game Fearsome Floors. In short, I haven’t liked any FF games for what seems like a decade. Felix was okay, and I hope to enjoy Factory Manager, but generally, in Friends terms, we are ‘on a break’.

And then along came Fauna. I really like Fauna. It puts a new spin on the trivia game staple, and it sits proudly as one of my most fun experiences of the last year. I will play it when I can and when there is an English version, will buy a copy. It is this simple: a card is drawn which lists an animal. It is our job to identify its habitat(s), guess how much it weighs and how long it, and its tail, is. In turn, and turn order is crucial, you place your bet markers on the board – either on the world map, or on the weight/length tracks. If you are bang on you get points, if you are close you get points too, but not as many, and if you are way off you lose a marker for a round. Play a few rounds, have a laugh, have your head swell as you recall some dim and distant facts, feel that all is right with the world. A simple idea very well executed, and great fun for kids (like me).

Basketboss

Corne van Moorsel for Cwali

The latest game from Cwali, who are a bit hit and miss, but for me have delivered for the last few years with Factory Fun and Powerboats. This is an auction game – not my favourite beast these days – but this works well enough to overcome Auction Ague and has some clever ideas to boot. You build your basketball team from five categories of player, with an eye to height, form over several future seasons and income potential. In time your squad and income should improve, but may also decline, while you try to win as many titles as you can over six years. The season is resolved by having the highest team value – no games are played, so it is rapid fire stuff and it is all over within an hour. A degree of variety is added by choosing coaches, referees and agents to help the cause. Fun, light and for those that are worried it is NOT a replay game! Another success, but I would say mainly suitable for the late night finisher slot. On a par with Slapshot/Phantoms of the Ice, World Cup, the much underrated Hockeyswap! and similar fun games – and if you like those, you will certainly like this.

Hexer von Salem/The Witch of Salem

Michael Reineck for Kosmos

This co-operative game immediately looks like a slimmed down version of Arkham Horror but is in fact based on a successful series of German novels. The novels seem to use the Arkham mythos, and we get the same Old Ones and most of the monsters, so people seem happy enough to regard it as the real thing. At least it saves me having to bang on about IP for a paragraph. Either way, I think all this game will do is offer a quicker, leaner version of Arkham Horror for those that are willing to give up on the plot cards, immersive play and characters. Hexer is essentially the exact same plot (discover rifts, seal them up, don’t get eaten by an Old One in the process) boiled down to the essentials. You can play it in an hour, and frankly I can see many more opportunities to play this one than the Elder Game. Obviously there will be times when I prefer the longer, richer form. A classy piece of downsizing, beautifully presented.

Richard III

Jerry Taylor and Tom Dalgliesh for Columbia

Block games and I go way back. I like almost all of them, and in some respects they can provide the optimum gaming experience. This year I have greatly enjoyed the very limited run Pax Baltica (currently awaiting a reprint by GMT) and, more recently, Richard III. This latter game started life as War of the Roses (now reduced to a mere strapline) and has often been tagged as Kingmaker for the new century. I think that probably presses all the buttons for me.

The first comment, in case you were flinching at the mention of Kingmaker (games of that old warhorse could, and did, last many hours and/or hit painful stalemates), is that the playing time has been hauled down close to two hours. This in itself is a decent piece of design work. Perhaps as a trade off, it is now two player only which seems fitting as we are still dealing with the Wars of the Roses – Yorkists vs Lancastrians, get your pretender established on the throne to win – but as befits a block game we have strayed over towards a wargame rather than a 1970’s gamer’s game. Think Hammer of the Scots, or Martin Wallace, in weight.

In short, there are twenty one turns split into three campaigns of seven phases driven by a simple, rather bland, CDG system. Between each campaign is a political phase where the King may be usurped. In this way, players take turn to be the King and the Pretender. In each phase you can move your forces (including your valuable heirs), or recruit more nobles and armies. The most nobles on the board when the political phase is reached either holds on to the crown, or takes it over. You can quickly see that killing enemy heirs and nobles, preferably by risking only bog standard troops, is a key element. This is fortunate because when two armies end up in the same area of England or Wales, there can be, and usually is a battle. This follows the usual pattern of block games and is fine, if a little drawn out sometimes.

Overall, Richard III feels slightly more game than wargame. You have a limited number of actions, and – Euro style – you always have more things to do than you have action points. This is solid decision making territory. Combine that with the restrictive geography of the map, no sieges, nicely handled treachery, and a decent fog of war element, and you have some interesting situations to encounter. Wider, there is definitely some depth of strategy to explore. I certainly felt I wanted to play again to correct my first game errors (protect your heirs!), and I could see that once into games two or three, four and five should soon follow. At that point we have had the value from the game, and it is all free fun thereafter. Is it fun? Yes, in that Wallacian way where one is negotiating a number of different obstacles and considerations under limited time and action point restraints.

Against this, I am not yet convinced play is balanced, and there is a definite sense that big killer stacks are the way to go, and that there isn’t an awful lot of strong history here. Frankly, for this type of game, and game it is, I don’t think the latter matters too much, but the two former comments do. We do have a feel for campaigning and noble power bases, a sense that there might be two or three decisive battles and several smaller actions in the duration, and a decent stab at the heraldry, names and atmosphere of the period. Some of this fits well, some of it doesn’t – we still have plague cards as a hangover from Kingmaker. But it’s a good game, commendably quick, fairly challenging, and I suspect many will like it as a complement to, or perhaps even replacement for, Hammer of the Scots. Good stuff.

Mike Siggins

Gamer's Notebook, November 2009

Mon, 30 Nov 2009 12:39:44 CST

It has been a while. Too many reasons to explain, but apologies. What you have below are my thoughts on games recently played at the Eastbourne convention here in the UK. Next time, and I promise it before Christmas, there will be another batch of new games written up, plus (probably) The 2009 Sumos.

Pocket Battles

Paulo Mori for Z-Man

I don’t think I have ever seen such a good game come out of such a small box… Pocket Battles is right up my street. A quick, easily learned game that is both reasonably historical and fun. To be honest I wasn’t at all hopeful after reading the rules and play sheets, which have some small holes and fuzziness, but in play it all came together well.

This is how quick it is: choose your army up to a set number of points, take 10% of that number in command chips which are depleted when hits are taken. Set up the armies. Attack. Win by killing 50% of the enemy points. That’s it. As a result, a common complaint is that the game is over too quickly (oh, what a disaster!). We had games that were over after a handful of turns – this is a decisive system. So play best of three, or just choose bigger armies. Problem solved.

Pocket Battles is one of those games that punches above its weight. The best guidance I can offer is a game somewhere between Battleline and Command & Colors: Ancients. This first set is Romans vs Celts. But I suspect we will see more armies, more periods and, inevitably, fantasy battles before too long. Assuming, that is, everyone likes it as much as I did. Some units have traits, such as fury for berserkers and command for Roman generals. These give a good feel for the different troop types even if some (Druids) do stretch the historical envelope.

Overall we are talking deadly, fast and fun here, with army choice, set up and play in about thirty minutes or less. Think below C&C:A’s complexity level, but much quicker. The game can indeed turn on a bad or good die roll, but that rather adds to the narrative appeal with a sense of making your own luck. The historicity will be the test for some hardcore wargamers, but we had some believable stuff going on at the combat level if not the command, and it would be very easy to tweak the setup and add on further rules. On my buy list, and a nice surprise.

Hansa Teutonica

Andreas Steding for Argentum

While he has produced some oddities, Andreas Steding always comes up with an interesting game. Hansa Teutonica, as befits its name, is a dyed in the wool German Game, riffing on the network building/trader theme. While we have seen many of these network games - some good, some bad – I think I can now say, after four games, that this one is among the best. It solves a lot of the common issues and, with the right people, really rattles along. There are several ways to score VPs, the game end triggers add a pacing dimension, and it has that lovely, ‘Can’t wait for my turn’, quality. My first game was excellent, the second marred by being kicked a lot by rival players, the third and fourth games returned to form. I was impressed and so were all the others that played.

This is a game you will learn by instalments. The early play is quite leisurely and friendly. Even fun. Later in the game you will experience the pain of interaction, and needing to pronounce escritoire all the time. Then you start to work out new tactics and strategies, for this game has many. By the second or third game you will have realised how tactical, cutthroat and just plain nasty Hansa can be. Some players take this sort of thing well, others get very stubborn, and some are genuinely hurt. Because the game will drag with slow gamers, you need to choose your opponents well: thick skins and fast brains should do it.

Hansa Teutonica is hampered by some woolly rules; the drafting is poor throughout and, worryingly, some German words remain untranslated…). The play aids aren’t much better (fancy Latin terms in games never really work), but we were there by game three. The board is nicely rendered, but the white Germanic text on pale grey is a disgrace – town names can’t be read, so much historical and geographical flavour is lost. But overall this one has struck a chord and I am putting it right up there in my favourites of the year so far. I wouldn’t want to be playing for more than 90 minutes with five, and I have a nagging doubt about something indefinable lurking, so I am really hoping this has been tested to destruction. That slight caveat aside, highly recommended.

Uruk: Wiege der Zivilisation

Hanno & Wilfried Kuhn for DDD Verlag

I like this company and, by extension, these designers. Last year I played their earlier effort - Die Wiege der Renaissance - and while it wasn’t quite there, I saw enough clever ideas and differentiation to make me sit up and take notice. When I finally got a chance to play Uruk recently I was hopeful, even a bit excited. Fortunately I was not disappointed and managed three games in the same weekend. That doesn’t happen very often. Plus, I now have Seidenstrasse to hunt down…

Uruk is another game from the Civilization-lite school. It is a small box game, is reasonably priced, and gets the best out of its limited components. Clever use of cards and cubes, and an hour or less duration, makes this a game that can be played on a train, and we did exactly that.

The game is simplicity itself. You have five slots in which to place inventions, or Civilization cards if you prefer. Think bean fields, but there is no planting in this game. You start in Epoch I with a basic skill and, fairly quickly, you build more low level cards. Soon you will be able to purchase a settlement which validates your slot for more VP’s, and later these upgrade to cities which double the slot value. Time passes, Epoch II and III come along, and you start to overlay your original slots. You will now be looking at more powerful cards, useful combinations and even game winning coups. In the later stages gods appear, as do disasters, and the game accelerates to the endgame. While cards buy cards, which can generate resource cubes, and cubes buy settlements, Uruk somehow manages to avoid that conversion game ennui that many of us are now suffering.

After the third game I started to pick up some concerns from other players. Firstly, there was a suspicion that the game could often be close overall, and a marginal win may come down to a lucky run of card draws, or timing and focus of a god or disaster. For me, given the speed of play and the weight, this is okay. If anything it is a plus. I can’t see myself levelling the same complaint at Roll Through The Ages, for instance, which has similar victory points/turn considerations. Also, Uruk can finish quite quickly. Epoch III in particular can disappear in a blur. Perhaps, as with all these lite games, we are left wanting a little more.

Secondly, interaction is undoubtedly low, and in some cases minimal – the whole thing is a race, you keep an eye on the other players’ actions, count cards if you wish, and sometimes you get a chance to make a build that affects them, or pushes on the game tempo to your advantage. But in the main you are building your own empire, as quickly and efficiently as you can. There are no armies, and so no combat. There is not even trading (there may be, as we haven’t seen all the cards). Again, the game length mitigates this criticism but it may bother others more than it does me.

As you can tell, I was impressed with Uruk. As soon as you start playing it is clear that the designers have grasped the problem and made a decent fist of cracking it. It felt quite fresh and, like all these new fangled fast and solid games, it gives me confidence in seeing some really classy games in a year or two. Another firm buy…

Arena: Roma II

Stefan Feld for Queen

I like Stefan Feld’s games; even if he does sometimes run against my preferences, the designs are always good quality. That said, I don’t have much to say this time as apart from new cards and some minor play tweaks, this is much the same game as Roma, still one of my favourite two player games. In fairness to Queen’s marketing team, Arena is both a stand-alone game and an expansion to Roma, which rather covers all the bases. It isn’t very expensive either. In an ideal world I had hoped it would take Roma to the multi-player level, but that treat hopefully lies in the future. Meanwhile, this delivers exactly what you might expect and all fans of Roma should buy Arena immediately.

Maria

Richard Sivel for Histogame

Another short review, because there is no need for a longer one. Everyone who played raved about this follow-up to the excellent Frederick. This time, the three players have well balanced armies and options, and there are some minor improvements to the system. The map is gorgeous. So, it would seem difficult to go wrong here. Another buy for me, even though I didn’t get to play it. I don’t expect it to be cheap when I get the chance.

Colonia

Dirk Henn for Queen

The latest from Queen and Dirk Henn, a designer who once sold you games from his backpack, but who now has probably made it to the elite group of designers. Seemingly Queen will publish anything he delivers, so that can’t be a bad gig. I say that advisedly as Colonia doesn’t quite work. There is much that does, but it is the final reckoning that is flawed, which leaves a strong sense of anti-climax.

In essence, this is a game governed by the days of the week, which is a pleasing idea. We all progress through the week, phase by phase, placing workers, visiting the market, producing goods, passing bye-laws, loading goods onto ships, sailing for foreign lands, earning foreign currency and finally, on Sunday, buying relics (VPs) at the church. It is mainly resource conversion with knobs on, and nothing we haven’t seen before, but it is fair to say that each day has something original going for it – the waiting list for the tradesmens’ goods is especially clever. Shorn of theme, this is buy resource a, convert to b, to c, to d and then e. Added back in, the theme just about raises it above the abstract algebra.

But when we get to the end of the cycle, there is a big problem. You have carefully worked your way through the week, planning and squeezing out your optimum play. Come Friday it is starting to get a bit chaotic, Saturday compounds to that feeling, and by Sunday you are desperate. In short, you lose control of how many d’s and e’s you can reliably identify and obtain, so you take what is on offer and make the best of it. Sometimes it works, sometimes it doesn’t, but to go through all that, and to commit two valuable gaming hours, you rather expect more correlation between effort and reward. Don’t get me wrong, this is a decent game but even I, a notoriously uncompetitive gamer, wanted a more refined end game because I felt short changed. So good in parts, and plenty of ingenious ideas, but on balance not properly finished. The result was, quite surprisingly, a game that none of us felt we needed to play again in a hurry.

Vasco da Gama

Paolo Mori for What’s Your Game?

This is a much bigger game from the designer of Pocket Battles, showing his range and talent. Vasco da Gama is the archetypal Euro design, offering a set of tweaked, clever mechanisms, role selection and a brand new action selection/auction technique, all wrapped up in a thinnish theme. Phew. This time we are buying, crewing and launching ships to sail to India and set up trade ports. I thought the sub-games, the coastal contest and the action selection worked very well, but the latter wasn’t perhaps shown in its best light. The mechanism allows for fine and discrete player order resolution, but I felt we didn’t always need that level of granularity. Still, it does work. Like Colonia there is a sense of just going through the motions and I wasn’t engaged overall in a theme I should theoretically enjoy. Between me and you, I thought it would work much better as a space race game: public opinion, recruiting astronauts, obtaining funding, suffering political setbacks, and launching missions. Yes, on balance, that would have been better. Overall, good but not great, but offering plenty of quality hints for Mr Mori’s next design.

Tobago

Bruce Allen for Zoch

And to finish, a really excellent game that reminds me of why we play German games. Tobago is a lightish, family style Euro, so you wargamer types can put your wallet away, but this is a brilliant design, with lovely graphics and a fun, original system all in one (admittedly rather expensive) box. It has family Game of the Year written all over it, if only I could be bothered with such things.

On the island of Tobago are several buried treasures that are slowly tracked down by the play of clue cards. We all drive around in ATV’s hoping to be first to the site, but anyone who helped to locate the treasure gets a share when it is finally dug up. The share out mechanism is a rather nifty card draft with a couple of kickers, and it makes for a short, intense decision making sequence. There are three neat systems on offer here (movement, treasure locating, and treasure sharing) and the whole thing plays in an hour. Universally liked, even by the jaded bunch of gamers I played with. Highly recommended.

Mike Siggins

Postscript: I couldn’t make Essen this year. A long time friend and gamer passed away suddenly and I felt my loyalties were to her family – my best friend Paul, and my godsons – rather than a trip to Germany.

Jayne Townsend, 1959-2009.

I therefore, as last year, hand over to Chris Payne who did an excellent job of spotting the new releases.

Essen 2009

by Chris Payne

There is an old English saying ‘one man’s meat is another man’s poison’, which has become a modern American saying of, ‘One man’s trash is another man’s treasure’, and I would use this to describe the response to games this year at Essen. Not only was the party of four that I travel with often split on views on games but that seemed to be echoed with other people that I spoke to as well. This year was one of the hardest years to decide which games are the potential long-term classics and which will fall by the wayside.

For me personally, space to store games (I have 475 already) has become an issue and the poor Pound:Euro exchange rate meant that €30-€40 for a game equalled the same amount in pounds. So savings from Essen purchases compared with buying from my FLGS at home were close to non-existent at times. So, I’m looking for the best in games that expand my frontiers of gameplay, or which cover topics or areas that interest me.

Of course Spiel is still enjoyable, but it is long days and late evenings, with the mental exertion not only of playing lots of games but hearing the explanations, descriptions and tales of many more, with a diet of meat, beer and cream with the occasional fruit or vegetable thrown in. And this year for some reason seemed to be one of the more gruelling Essen’s that I have been to, in a year when my remit was very open.

As always with 500+ new games and 27 hours at the show, what follows must be a personal view. This year’s top runners were always going to be dominated by the fanboys with the release of Gates of Loyang and Fabrik Manager and these dominated the Fairplay lists. Both of these games will be more than adequately covered elsewhere. So, what of the rest? Before I went I had an “A” list and a “B” list of games that I wanted to play, or at least get a run-through of play and a look at. I managed to cover in one way or another virtually all of my A list, and little of the B list. I was originally giving games a marking in my comments but have now deleted them after my comments on Savannah Tails as its marking really does depend on if I want a game to play in a family setting or if I want a game with hardcore gamers.

Two other trends featured heavily in the halls: Dominion and its expansions were being heavily promoted and Train games, train maps and train game expansions also seemed present in numbers and again will be heavily covered elsewhere.

First game that I got to play was Endeavor (Magister Navis in German) and by agreement with Z Man we were able to play a full game from start to finish, whereas future gamers were likely to be time curtailed as had happened to us last year with El Capitan. It’s good that we were able to play through fully; otherwise I could have had very different views on this as the ability to place tokens and do things expanded rapidly on turn 4/5 after a slow start.

The game is about scoring victory points for building settlements and trade routes, and this is done by activating buildings that offer tokens (essentially workers) for placement, money to pay workers, raw materials for expansion or the ability to generate new workers. Advancement along these tracks will also earn victory points at the game end. As an economic resource management game it is very easy to end up in a state of mismanagement: too many workers to place or not enough resources to pay them, or more money than is needed to pay the workers you have. Using buildings to “do” things seemed reminiscent of Puerto Rico or Agricola, and advancing along dual ability/victory point tracks reminds me of another game that I cannot currently place. That said Endeavor stands in its own right as a game and not just a blend of older games recycled: there is something new in mix although it is quite hard to place exactly what that is. As always, some possible strategies emerged during the first game, and there was lots of ‘next game I would do this’ comments. Random placement of the bonus markers will ensure every game is different (we were told after placement that we would have an especially slow game to develop after no extra turn markers appeared in Europe) which is something I generally like from my games. The Slavery issue has been debated in the hobby: my personal stance on it is that is historically accurate to reflect it, and the game mechanisms do remind people of the exploitation.

Endeavor Summary

Likes: random marker placement ensuring game variety, variety of building options (although I would have liked a few more) causing different tactics from different players.
Dislikes: stylised swirly board pattern that meant at times some trade routes weren’t as clear as they might be.
Buying: Personally wavering, one yes, two no.

Each Essen brings some changes in games companies and their apparent standing as judged by the hall they are in, and the size of stand and glitz that has gone into the stand. International enclaves and alliances also seemed to be the order of the day this year with the French and Italian speaking stands clustered near to each other. From the voices I heard in the hall though I would guess that the number of foreign visitors (including Americans) was down, I suspect because of the financial costs of attending. Boardgamegeek.com though were there in force, both with the game, promoting the website itself and encouraging visitors to log what games they had played during the fair. I got to shake Derk’s hand as well.

My next game was from one of those companies moving apparently up in the league tables: Eggert Spiele with now not only their stand in hall 9 but also their tented stand in hall 12. Superficially Havana looks like Cuba – the cards, the cubes and the action cards all look very familiar. The game is not language independent the card test is important and the game is of the length and style where you need to be able to read the cards reasonably quickly to get the most out of it. The game is pitched at a different level to Cuba (shorter although not necessarily easier) and with more direct interaction between the players as resources change owners. There is luck in the game from what resource cubes get drawn from the bag and the effect of other players on the turn order. There is skill in the game in the card management.

Havana Summary

Dislikes: some randomness in play caused by the mechanics and the superficial resemblance to Cuba.
Buying: Personally wavering, one yes, two no.

I stand to be corrected but the Scots I suspect are in a global village of one stand at Essen represented by Fragor. I don’t think Fragor have ever done a bad game, it’s just that their target audience can substantially vary with each game. This year was Savannah Tails, featuring ostrich racing. Race game, modular board and fairly fast game play, with sensible price tag at the show (€23) should have made this an essential purchase for me, yet it wasn’t. I already have Snow Tails and whilst the movement mechanic is different in Savannah Tails the game itself seemed much more luck based than Snow Tails. Cards come in different colours and numbers, and broadly speaking its play a card and move that number of spaces and end up on a space of that colour. Only one movement across the track is allowed each turn and some track spaces have different effects. There is some element of card management and forward planning but I would put Savannah Tails at the family game end of the race game market with Snow Tails nudging into the gamer’s game market.

Savannah Tails Summary

Dislikes: Luck element on the card draw, lack of relationship between cards in the deck and length of course. For shorter courses I think there needs to be some element of removing the higher value cards to equal out the card draw element.
Likes: Quick, reasonably simple and ostrich shaped meeples.
Buying: One yes, three (including me) no.

Credit must go to the Fragor team though. Normally Scotsmen are famous for their parsimony. The Leap of Death expansion tile (for Snow Tails) was originally going to be only available on presentation of the big paws tile from Snow Tails, but the policy at the Spiel seemed to be more relaxed and I heard the quote from Gordon “If we have them, we give them out, and we get given them at various times”.

Political/Diplomacy games have always had an interest for me, but I also dislike where a political game is defined as “extended and protracted negotiation”. I gave up playing Diplomacy when I ceased being a student and these days I want some structure to my games, if only to keep the negotiation to a reasonable limit. Caligula was therefore of interest. We only played a shortened game (fewer action cards) and with a relatively poor initial rules explanation and a designer who clearly likes his use of Latin words and phrases we were off. The game is about bumping off emperors and choosing if to join conspiracies to bump them off or keep your man on the throne, or waiting until you are in a stronger position to do something. Caligula is always the first emperor to be bumped off and some of our team felt that the title was somewhat inappropriate as a result. This seemed to be a game where one understood the mechanics fairly quickly or struggled with how to achieve anything. A later rules explanation in the game helped as did access to the rules. This is a boardgame where cards on the table form the board.

Caligula Summary

Dislikes: not very intuitive.
Likes: Political game, seemed to work.
Buying: Two yes (including me), two no.

Every Essen seems to have a ‘sleeper’ waiting to be found and Vasco da Gama may have been that game, although it was soon winkled out. Relatively unknown company and unknown designer, but the looks of something promising and a hot tip or two. We played this on Friday morning. Score victory points by sending boats on expeditions. Boats come in different sizes with different crew requirements and occasional bonuses. Crew are dealt in five random groups: buy all of one colour from a group for 1 gold, buy all of two colours for 3, and buy 3 colours for 6 and so on. Captains cost the number of crew actually taken and each ship needs a captain. What was novel in this was the move sequence: broadly speaking (and there are always a few tweaks) it was take one of your action chits (four per round) and take an activation number chit with a range of 1-20. Want to go later, then take a high number, want to go earlier then take a low number.

The catch (there’s always one) is that activation number may have to be paid for: there is a marker which as a starting place within the turn order chits, and before they are activated it may be moved randomly upwards or downwards up to four coins, so you have some guidance but do not know exactly where it will end up. Activation chits above the number will always be free, but those lower will have to pay the difference if one wants to activate the chit. If one chooses to do nil action with the marker then there is some monetary compensation. Vasco da Gama had a very Caylus feel to it – everything always seemed tight: money, crew, ships, captains just about went around but carefully planning was needed, and planning was definitely needed on the activation numbers. In this respect it had elements of Goa where at times I have had to write down the order in which I have to do things to achieve what I want to do, to avoid the embarrassing things such as taking the money with the action after I needed it to spend on the acquiring seamen action.

Vasco da Gama Summary

Dislikes: some of the graphics (on ships and on board) could be a tiny bit more user friendly and the captain pieces were tiny for big fingers. I suspect there is huge scope for analysis paralysis prone people to agonise over both what to do and what activation chit number to take.
Likes: Tight gameplay (each decision counts), novel turn activation system.
Buying: One collectively for a particular purpose, otherwise four no’s but sold out as the later decision to buy was made by some.

Tobago was next up. Concept sounded very clever –search for buried treasure by playing clue cards to determine where the treasure is. The mechanics are very clever and cards will define where a treasure is (e.g. within two spaces of the coast), or where is treasure is not (e.g. not within a jungle). Once a treasure is specific to one location then all those involved in finding it (defined as playing a clue card to determine its location or the person to physically drive to it and dig it up) will participate in the spoils. Spoils are treasure cards with various values, and are chosen in a reverse order of clue placement on a limited knowledge basis. A couple of curse cards in the treasure card mix spice up the decision on taking treasures.

Tobago Summary

Dislikes: the scope (and time) for analysis paralysis prone people to determine what card to play, probably a bit light for a gamers game.
Likes: very clever system, semi random board and set up ensuring variety of play.
Buying: Four no’s: game should be readily available in the UK and this probably a bit light on gameplay without being a filler game in terms of time for most of the group.

The last final big game that we could guarantee to play because of early access to the hall was Cyclades. Lovely production (although plastic figures and monsters are to follow once they arrive (from China probably) with wooden gaming pieces in the interim. Place men and fleets for territory control, although winning the game is achieved by building two metropolises which require one each of four buildings in your control. These buildings need to be ones that you have either built, or other peoples’ that you have managed to acquire by combat. Actions in turn depend upon the favours of the Gods, and having enough gold to pay for them. One God (with specific powers) per player is available each turn, but with fewer than five players the choice will be random although Apollo is always available. Any God not appearing will be available on the following turn. Bidding for the God’s favours runs on an Evo type system: if a higher bid appears on your God you are forced to bid on a different God. Monsters are also available for hire on payment of gold on a random choice of what is available (three different ones).

Two of us felt that given this was a building domination game then there could be swings backwards and forwards and a “pick on the leader” type problem until someone was able to hang onto a winning position. In the event a “sudden win” occurred where by the use of one of the Gods and one of the special Monsters (Pegasus – the equivalent of an airborne drop) someone was able to do more than the rest us expected, or were watching for, on the one turn.

Cyclades Summary

Likes: Graphics and components, nice combination of economic and military game. No elimination as a player’s last island may never be attacked.
Dislikes: Lack of control to move towards victory. If the God you need doesn’t come up when you need it, or you get outbid, then it may be several turns before you can achieve what you want. Two of us had concerns about game length before the “island too far” became the “island too soon”.
Buying: two yes, two didn’t (including me).

Saturday seemed to be combat day as we followed with Ants! Be the last ant colony standing. Build PeasANTS and SergeANTS to advance and defend your colony and gather food with which to build more ants. Attack the other colonies until you can eliminate the Queen. Cute graphics and reasonable gameplay from (I assume) a new British designer. Our four player game ended up as a slugfest between two players, whilst one player was eliminated very early on. Our initial feelings are that this would turn into a game swinging backwards and forwards until somebody won, whilst the elimination aspect meant that somebody could be looking for something else to do for a substantial length of time. Perhaps I’ve become too used to playing Eurogames that don’t have player elimination as a feature normally, or if they do, then there is often some aspect that is then introduced that speeds up the endgame so that a short while later (say 20 minutes) the game is over. Twenty minutes can soon be lost in a comfort break, or teabreak without people feeling unduly upset.

Ants Summary

Likes: Graphics, concept.
Dislikes: Player elimination, potential length, randomness of the food drops causing major changes in the game.
Buying: none (although if the player elimination issue and potential game length can be addressed this could be a good “Euro wargame”).

From Ants we moved to another title beginning with A: Atlantis. The Austrian Spiel Museum had a number of tables given over to this, and some very kind German speaking people who were vacating the table stayed behind to explain the game in excellent English. Pre show there were some thoughts that this was “That’s Life/Verflixxt” with attitude and I can see why, although this is different. Move along tiles by card, pick tiles up from the square behind where you land (which then become victory points), and create water areas which then have to be paid for in cards or victory points. A mixture of skill (card management) and luck (card drawing) in a nicely presented game.

Atlantis Summary

Likes: graphics, gameplay.
Dislikes: Felt very much like an abstract game with the theme pasted on. There might be scope for the analysis paralysis freaks to ruin this game, although a process of elimination should soon narrow options down.
Buying: One (who can cope with a German version), three no’s (including me). I’m waiting to see how much an English version retails for, and I suspect the free expansion the spiel museum was giving away (boats) will expand the gameplay greatly. At least one other of my crew now regrets not buying this.

Other Personal Purchases.

The three player expansion for Krakow 1325. As per my last Essen report I like the flavour, graphics and feel for this game, even if for some people it is too simple or random.

Expansion for Marquis (LudoArt).

Inquisitio and Modern Society. The former sounded interesting as a political/intrigue game from the description beforehand and from what gameplay I saw, even if the topic is a little “dark”. The second game I saw being played and sounded interesting and was a purchase to take advantage of a multiple discount deal.

Copies of reasonably priced TransAmerica and Hey that's my fish (in foreign language editions) to give away as Christmas presents to spread the hobby.

I received a copy of the BoardGameGeek Game due to my involvement with its design. Graphically astonishing, I consider the gameplay puts it at the lighter end of the gamer’s game market.

Tricky Trek to get the expansion for Factory Fun.

Mosaix for my partner who will play games occasionally preferring puzzle games like Take it Easy or Factory Fun, or the hardcore two player gaming action of Lost Cities.

So, how am I left now that Spiel 09 is over?

Most regretted non purchases: Vasco Da Gama (sold out at some point), Court of the Medici (sold out very quickly), Atlantis (but I do need English rules).
Most regretted non look at: Dungeonlords, Albion, Assyria
Most missed no show: Lords of the High Frontier
Most awaited to appear in English: Macao
On the Wavering list: Endeavor / Havana / Shipyard
Most disappointed: lack of a deal on buying Ghost Stories together with the expansion at a discount price.
Meat or Poison?: Carson City, Colonia, El Paso, Grenada, Stronghold, Peloponnes, Rise of Empires.
Still searching for: that Civ Lite game that gives me the flavour of Avalon’s Hill’s Advanced Civilisation in half the time.

Chris Payne