![[personal profile]](https://www.dreamwidth.org/img/silk/identity/user.png){kind=small}
viktor_haagThis weekend presented another grand panoply of gaming opportunities. On Friday night, a slight changeup up of the Friday Night gang led to us welcoming back friends from England, and a new local friend not used to the crazy boardgame hobby. On Sunday, another slight shakeup of the gaming group led to a new face at the table and slightly lighter fare than usual for a Sunday afternoon.
Ticket to Ride
On Friday night we put Ticket To Ride on the table since both UK friends knew the game, and it does tend to make a great gateway experience. The gaming newbie seemed to quite enjoy the game, and played pretty cleverly, but in the end did not do quite as well as those with some plays under their belts already. I think that five players might be just a bit too much for this game, especially for new players: the early game was pretty open as people were card collecting and feeling out their positions, but once the midgame arrived, there was route-claiming-screwage aplenty and mad rushes to get tracks down. I won by a fair distance, but it was down to an extremely lucky set of ticket draws; I was able to claim five tickets with no misses, and three of those five were essentially all on the same route with one or two spurs. One of my opponents got stuck with a missed ticket which hurt his chances, but he was quite successful in finessing a trans-continental train across the north of the board and thus scooped up the ten points for longest track. Ticket To Ride continues to impress me with how well made a game it is; yes, it has lots of luck, but it plays quickly, and the tension is palpable. If you like lighter games, or are in a situation where you have common opportunity to introduce new players to the hobby, you really should have this game on your shelf. It is quite possible the best gateway boardgame of all time: if we'd had just four players, I might have been tempted to suggest Settlers, but I think this is a better introduction to the hobby for those who've had little to no boardgame experience.
Cuba
This new offering (from the folks who brought us the Pillars Of The Earth game last year) has a lot of similarity to that previous game. It is not, however, as accessible; there are more moving parts in Cuba: more resources to collect, a wider variety of paths to getting points, and a wider variety of ways to exercise control over the flow of the game. Sunday was the second time I've played the game, and the second four-player attempt. While my first attempt resulted in sheer disaster, I was the runaway winner in this one. Oddly enough I followed the strategy of the runaway winner in that first game, because the opportunity presented itself: I built the dam and started collecting water cubes (and hoarding them), then, I built the town hall (to secure the extra votes), and was lucky enough to have both the "turn water into VPs" subsidy card, and the "you may not buy votes" law present themselves early in the game. I spent nearly all my money securing those two laws. From that point on, the game was basically in the bag. Every turn, I raked in seven or eight VPs off my water alone, and nobody could un-seat my control over the government as long as I held back playing either my foreman, or my mayor. I also lucked out by being able to secure the starting player token halfway through the game when I had four products that matched an empty ship in the three-VP harbour, and raked in 12 points off that.
This is a fun enough game that it will see more plays; however, I'm concerned that the addition of the extra knobs and wheels from the Pillars of the Earth design may have introduced harmonic strategies which are unstoppable. If that's the case, this game will have enormously short shelf life. Once I seized control over the government in my game, a third of the way through, the flow of the game was completely under my control and only when I chose would the government control turn to someone else. In order to beat me then, other players had to be able to exceed my seven-eight VP per turn average scoring (there were some turns where I got more, as I was able to ship for VPs, or use the Architect for VPs, as well), and this proves extremely difficult.
It could be that both games depended on having the statue cards come up in a particular time, and in a particular order, to make the water strategy so strong, but everyone at the table should probably be aware how strong it is (especially if you're playing in groups with people of mixed experience with the game). Like most economic games that involve ratcheting up your own wealth, this game (a) demands to be played a few times to figure out the paths to victory, and (b) is not at all suited to play in groups of mixed experience. It is entirely likely that a newbie or two playing with an experienced player (or two) will get absolutely pantsed in their first game or two. Newbies should probably get warned off this as well.
Princes of Florence
I finally broke down and purchased an English translation of this game that I've owned for years and years (boxing day sale), and now I'm glad I finally did. This is one of the few German-style boardgames that is really forbidding unless the components are printed in your own language, because a huge number of the components have writing on them. Since much of the game involves "take five cards from stack and keep one", the game slows to a crawl when played by non-native speakers because all their translation efforts have been done solo on top of their difficulties in deciding which of the five cards to keep. In my first play of this game, I wondered why it got such a high rating on the 'Geek, but now I know why.
Plainly put, this game is excellent. Money is exceedingly tight. Resources are tight. Actions are tight. The interaction in the game is subtle enough to please players that prefer games that have more of a flavour of "puzzle out your own situation" and present (and effective) enough to please players that demand ways to effectively stick a thumb in their opponents' eyes.
I played quite well, I thought; I made no major blunders, didn't overpay for things, was careful to form what I thought was a decent strategy, and yet I still ended up in third place by a huge margin. Wow. Part of the attraction of this game is that you only have fourteen actions throughout the entire game with which to acquire points. You must make the absolute best of those actions. To make matters more interesting, some of those actions (and the resources you can acquire through auctions) have much higher value early in the game than they do late. Even some of the actions with a fixed cost have a higher value early in the game than they do late. The tension in this game, therefore, is effectively judge the relative worth of the various things you acquire, and ensure you acquire them at the right time for the right amount of money, and deploy them at the right time.
There are several strategy tips I would warn players of early in the game. First, the highest value auctioned commodity early in the game is probably the Jester. This token's value pays dividends throughout the rest of the game. Bidding for these tokens will therefore likely be very high. "Conventional wisdom", apparently, is to secure a Jester or two at all costs, and pay as much as you can afford to to get one or two. "As much as you can afford" therefore becomes the operative question. Secondly, there is a seduction to build buildings quickly, but this is (I think) a bit of a mirage. Buildings tend not to be in terribly short supply, and their cost to construct is very high. It's probably best in the first couple rounds to spend your resources on acquiring landscapes, a jester (or two if you can manage it), extra profession cards, and perhaps a bonus card or prestige card (which will inform your strategy for the game and direct your building efforts). If you can then be lucky enough to snap up a single builder token by the start of turn three, your buildings can be placed for a considerably cheaper price and give you a much longer in-game time to plan out where in fact they should go on your mat.
Princes of Florence is in the same class as Puerto Rico, Tigris and Euphrates, and other "gamers' games" of the pure German 90-minute tradition. If you like any of the Alea series of "gamers' games" or other publishers' similar offerings, then Princes of Florence should definitely be in your collection. Right now, the 'Geek has this game ranked "7" and it has been out for eight years. After two plays (with considerable time in between), I do not think this is hype; I think it really is that good. It is on this game, and El Grande, that Wolfgang Kramer most probably built his reputation. I also suspect it's no coincidence that Richard Ulrich was a co-designer on both of these excellent games.
St. Petersburg
To "warm down" on Sunday, I suggested we play St. Petersburg because it was another game I had had in my collection for years, played once, and never really got to the table again. Again, I'm glad I did. This game played quickly, and had lots of tension. There was very little direct interaction other than carefully managing your money and the turn order, in order to maximize your own profit (even less, in fact, than with the previous two games). However, the shortness of the game made up for the lack of interaction, I think, and so it was enjoyable nonetheless. I think it was the weakest of the three games we tried on Sunday (perhaps because it has no interactive elements other than attempting to massage the flow of the game to your favour), but it's still fun, and I believe a bargain-of-fun at its current price point.
I don't think this is a classic game by any stretch, but it might suit some types of player groups quite nicely: (a) it is short and is definitely within the 45- to 60-minute timeframe for the classic German-style family game, (b) it has next to no interaction other than massaging turn-order, and so might suit players that don't like "take that" type activity or play groups that include younger children, (c) it rewards careful resource/money management, which is a skill that one can readily acquire outside the boardgaming realm.
I would not suggest this be the first game you purchase, but if you have a casual group that meets some of the criteria listed above, then this might be an attractive choice to include in your collection.
Ticket to Ride
On Friday night we put Ticket To Ride on the table since both UK friends knew the game, and it does tend to make a great gateway experience. The gaming newbie seemed to quite enjoy the game, and played pretty cleverly, but in the end did not do quite as well as those with some plays under their belts already. I think that five players might be just a bit too much for this game, especially for new players: the early game was pretty open as people were card collecting and feeling out their positions, but once the midgame arrived, there was route-claiming-screwage aplenty and mad rushes to get tracks down. I won by a fair distance, but it was down to an extremely lucky set of ticket draws; I was able to claim five tickets with no misses, and three of those five were essentially all on the same route with one or two spurs. One of my opponents got stuck with a missed ticket which hurt his chances, but he was quite successful in finessing a trans-continental train across the north of the board and thus scooped up the ten points for longest track. Ticket To Ride continues to impress me with how well made a game it is; yes, it has lots of luck, but it plays quickly, and the tension is palpable. If you like lighter games, or are in a situation where you have common opportunity to introduce new players to the hobby, you really should have this game on your shelf. It is quite possible the best gateway boardgame of all time: if we'd had just four players, I might have been tempted to suggest Settlers, but I think this is a better introduction to the hobby for those who've had little to no boardgame experience.
Cuba
This new offering (from the folks who brought us the Pillars Of The Earth game last year) has a lot of similarity to that previous game. It is not, however, as accessible; there are more moving parts in Cuba: more resources to collect, a wider variety of paths to getting points, and a wider variety of ways to exercise control over the flow of the game. Sunday was the second time I've played the game, and the second four-player attempt. While my first attempt resulted in sheer disaster, I was the runaway winner in this one. Oddly enough I followed the strategy of the runaway winner in that first game, because the opportunity presented itself: I built the dam and started collecting water cubes (and hoarding them), then, I built the town hall (to secure the extra votes), and was lucky enough to have both the "turn water into VPs" subsidy card, and the "you may not buy votes" law present themselves early in the game. I spent nearly all my money securing those two laws. From that point on, the game was basically in the bag. Every turn, I raked in seven or eight VPs off my water alone, and nobody could un-seat my control over the government as long as I held back playing either my foreman, or my mayor. I also lucked out by being able to secure the starting player token halfway through the game when I had four products that matched an empty ship in the three-VP harbour, and raked in 12 points off that.
This is a fun enough game that it will see more plays; however, I'm concerned that the addition of the extra knobs and wheels from the Pillars of the Earth design may have introduced harmonic strategies which are unstoppable. If that's the case, this game will have enormously short shelf life. Once I seized control over the government in my game, a third of the way through, the flow of the game was completely under my control and only when I chose would the government control turn to someone else. In order to beat me then, other players had to be able to exceed my seven-eight VP per turn average scoring (there were some turns where I got more, as I was able to ship for VPs, or use the Architect for VPs, as well), and this proves extremely difficult.
It could be that both games depended on having the statue cards come up in a particular time, and in a particular order, to make the water strategy so strong, but everyone at the table should probably be aware how strong it is (especially if you're playing in groups with people of mixed experience with the game). Like most economic games that involve ratcheting up your own wealth, this game (a) demands to be played a few times to figure out the paths to victory, and (b) is not at all suited to play in groups of mixed experience. It is entirely likely that a newbie or two playing with an experienced player (or two) will get absolutely pantsed in their first game or two. Newbies should probably get warned off this as well.
Princes of Florence
I finally broke down and purchased an English translation of this game that I've owned for years and years (boxing day sale), and now I'm glad I finally did. This is one of the few German-style boardgames that is really forbidding unless the components are printed in your own language, because a huge number of the components have writing on them. Since much of the game involves "take five cards from stack and keep one", the game slows to a crawl when played by non-native speakers because all their translation efforts have been done solo on top of their difficulties in deciding which of the five cards to keep. In my first play of this game, I wondered why it got such a high rating on the 'Geek, but now I know why.
Plainly put, this game is excellent. Money is exceedingly tight. Resources are tight. Actions are tight. The interaction in the game is subtle enough to please players that prefer games that have more of a flavour of "puzzle out your own situation" and present (and effective) enough to please players that demand ways to effectively stick a thumb in their opponents' eyes.
I played quite well, I thought; I made no major blunders, didn't overpay for things, was careful to form what I thought was a decent strategy, and yet I still ended up in third place by a huge margin. Wow. Part of the attraction of this game is that you only have fourteen actions throughout the entire game with which to acquire points. You must make the absolute best of those actions. To make matters more interesting, some of those actions (and the resources you can acquire through auctions) have much higher value early in the game than they do late. Even some of the actions with a fixed cost have a higher value early in the game than they do late. The tension in this game, therefore, is effectively judge the relative worth of the various things you acquire, and ensure you acquire them at the right time for the right amount of money, and deploy them at the right time.
There are several strategy tips I would warn players of early in the game. First, the highest value auctioned commodity early in the game is probably the Jester. This token's value pays dividends throughout the rest of the game. Bidding for these tokens will therefore likely be very high. "Conventional wisdom", apparently, is to secure a Jester or two at all costs, and pay as much as you can afford to to get one or two. "As much as you can afford" therefore becomes the operative question. Secondly, there is a seduction to build buildings quickly, but this is (I think) a bit of a mirage. Buildings tend not to be in terribly short supply, and their cost to construct is very high. It's probably best in the first couple rounds to spend your resources on acquiring landscapes, a jester (or two if you can manage it), extra profession cards, and perhaps a bonus card or prestige card (which will inform your strategy for the game and direct your building efforts). If you can then be lucky enough to snap up a single builder token by the start of turn three, your buildings can be placed for a considerably cheaper price and give you a much longer in-game time to plan out where in fact they should go on your mat.
Princes of Florence is in the same class as Puerto Rico, Tigris and Euphrates, and other "gamers' games" of the pure German 90-minute tradition. If you like any of the Alea series of "gamers' games" or other publishers' similar offerings, then Princes of Florence should definitely be in your collection. Right now, the 'Geek has this game ranked "7" and it has been out for eight years. After two plays (with considerable time in between), I do not think this is hype; I think it really is that good. It is on this game, and El Grande, that Wolfgang Kramer most probably built his reputation. I also suspect it's no coincidence that Richard Ulrich was a co-designer on both of these excellent games.
St. Petersburg
To "warm down" on Sunday, I suggested we play St. Petersburg because it was another game I had had in my collection for years, played once, and never really got to the table again. Again, I'm glad I did. This game played quickly, and had lots of tension. There was very little direct interaction other than carefully managing your money and the turn order, in order to maximize your own profit (even less, in fact, than with the previous two games). However, the shortness of the game made up for the lack of interaction, I think, and so it was enjoyable nonetheless. I think it was the weakest of the three games we tried on Sunday (perhaps because it has no interactive elements other than attempting to massage the flow of the game to your favour), but it's still fun, and I believe a bargain-of-fun at its current price point.
I don't think this is a classic game by any stretch, but it might suit some types of player groups quite nicely: (a) it is short and is definitely within the 45- to 60-minute timeframe for the classic German-style family game, (b) it has next to no interaction other than massaging turn-order, and so might suit players that don't like "take that" type activity or play groups that include younger children, (c) it rewards careful resource/money management, which is a skill that one can readily acquire outside the boardgaming realm.
I would not suggest this be the first game you purchase, but if you have a casual group that meets some of the criteria listed above, then this might be an attractive choice to include in your collection.
