|
28th August 2022 It's a Sunday evening and we're logged into Board Game Arena for some gaming goodness. Burgle Bros is a cooperative tile based bank heist/caper game: Can you sneak through the building, dodge the guards, disarm the alarms, find and crack the safes. Time to find out in... Burgle Bros. Caveat: We have only played this digitally. What's in a game?
The art direction for Burgle Bros has some unusual choices. Room tiles have detailed, realistic looking line art illustrations while on the other hand, characters are depicted with highly stylised and exaggerated cartoony art that looks like it's out of the opening titles of a sixties crime caper movie - which is appropriate. It's a weird clash of styles but in this instance it actually works quite well. There are a few icons that are used throughout Burgle Bros but they're all fairly easy to learn, a lot of the game's information is conveyed via text. How's it play? Setup
On to play The objective in Burgle Bros is to find and crack all 3 safes, gain 3 loot cards, then escape to the roof, all without being caught by the security guards. This is done by the use of action points (APs). In Burgle Bros, the active player spends their APs to perform certain actions. Then the security guard on their floor moves along their patrol route. Then play progresses to the player to the left of the active player. A turn is broadly speaking, broken down into 3 phases.
Endgame Play continues until 1 of 2 ending conditions are met. If a player has to discard a stealth token and they cannot because they've already used them up, then the burglar has been caught, players immediately and collectively lose the game. If the players manage to open all 3 safes, get the loot and all of the burglars off the top of floor 3, they collectively win. Overall
First thing to say is that we played Burgle Bros digitally and I felt there was a bit of a disconnect with the game because of this. In the physical copy, all 3 floors are laid out next to each other but the digital copy required visually switching between them. It means the digital copy can never feel as intuitive as the physical one. Anyway, on to the game. Players will need to balance the need to be cautious with the need explore and turn over tiles. Avoiding or neutralising the many alarms is good but so is reaching the objective as quickly as possible. That's because the real challenge in Burgle Bros is managing the movement and behaviour of the guard. This requires thinking ahead and I mean really thinking ahead! There's almost a puzzle-like logic to it but there's also the potential for a lot of randomness too! Players will need to anticipate where the guard will go (And when!) and at times try to manipulate the guard by deliberately triggering an alarm and the like. This is compounded by the fact that the more players there are on a floor; the more a guard may move. E.g., in a 4-player game, a player may think their meeple is 'safe' but if all players' meeples are on the same floor (And they will be in the early game.), the security guard will move at least 8 spaces before that player gets to act again, that's enough to cross an entire floor twice! It can become very hard to predict where the guard is going whenever a new patrol tile is flipped over - which can happen often when the guard moves a lot. I guess the solution to this is for players to get their meeples to other floors ASAP and this will slow down individual guards. From a gameplay perspective though, this feels a little counterintuitive. It turns what is meant to be a cooperative challenge into 3 sub-games with a only tenuous cooperative link between players. From a player perspective, it also feels somewhat counterintuitive. For players, the instinct will be to cooperate; opening a safe can be hard and adding dice to it is vital but also expensive in terms if AP. Multiple players will naturally want to quickly contribute as many dice as possible dice to a single safe to help each other open it sooner rather than later. This is certainly how we played Burgle Bros and in retrospect, that was probably a mistake, it seemed to be that the game punished players for playing this way. Personally I found it the intricacies of having to deal with so many alarms paired with just too unpredictable guard actions a little futile and frustrating to be enjoyable. I suspect that Burgle Bros probably plays best at a 2-player count and could be a good couples game if puzzle type gameplay interests you.
0 Comments
27th August 2022 It's a Saturday night and were logged in Board Game Arena for some gaming fun. Now that I think about it; a crossover game of Dungeons & Dragons and Twister would be pretty interesting. Unfortunately, that's not what Dungeon Twister is about. Instead we get a 2-player sort of chess-like game about manipulating dungeon tiles and running around them. Caveat: We have only ever played this online. What's in a game?
Dungeon Twister has bright and colourful artwork. The room tiles don't feature much in the way of illustrations but do have clearly delineated features. Artwork on the tokens and standees is that sort of chunky and cartoony fantasy style that has been used on a lot fantasy themed games over the last few years, it's a little bit of an unoriginal art direction - but to be fair, it's a style I quite like, so for me it's good. There isn't too much in the way of iconography in Dungeon Twister and I don't imagine it would provide any obstacle to playing. How's it play? Setup
On to play The objective in Dungeon Twister is to accumulate 5 Victory Points. A player can achieve this in 2 ways; by defeating opposing characters or by getting their own characters out of the opposite end of the dungeon from their starting side. Players take alternate turns becoming the active player, playing action cards and resolving them. This is done over 3 phases.
Endgame When any player earns 5 VPs, the end game is triggered. It is possible for the inactive player to score VPs in the active player's turn by winning combat which means the inactive player can potentially trigger the endgame. In any case, the active player finishes their current turn and the game goes to scoring. Points are tallied, highest score wins. Overall
Dungeon Twister is a fairly straightforward game but despite this I feel the game is a little cumbersome, there's quite a bit of exception-driven rules here. For example: No character can stand on a pit trap space except the thief or except a character with a rope token. If a thief standing on pit trap is wounded, they are killed, except any character carrying rope will not be killed, except if an opposing character comes and takes a rope - in which case the wound character is then killed. These are not gamebreakers by any means but they feel counterintuitive and may be obstacles to play. Until players are familiar with the rules, they'll be hunting through the rulebook to get clarifications, it's also likely players may forget some rules even exist! Players will need to employ quite of lot of tactics in Dungeon Twister and generally that's a good thing. Since there are 2 ways to score points, players will need to constantly assess the viability of both approaches. It means playing close attention to the positions of all characters, every one of which will have their own strengths and weaknesses. Characters that are strong in combat will tend to slow at movement. Players will need to exploit the strengths and special abilities while minimising exposure of weaknesses. This is especially true of combat. This neatly brings me to the game's main schtick, that is; rotating room tiles. Well planned use of rotating the tiles can be a game changer, it can trap or free characters, create blockages or short cuts, it can be used to move gear or move a correctly positioned character across the board, etc. It keeps the gameplay fresh and to a degree, unpredictable. It can be tricky to see the outcome of rotating of all tiles to all position. The rule where a player gets to place their opponent's tokens is quite interesting, it allows canny players to exploit the situation to trap opposing tokens but they will need to remember that a twist of the tile can change everything. Dungeon Twister provides players with meaningful decisions when choosing their actions and tactics. Yet somehow, I found it unengaging. Despite fairly extensive rules and a clever premise, Dungeon Twister felt a bit like a simplistic grid based wargame that involves direct confrontation and to be honest, it's not what I look for in a board game. Obviously, you mileage may vary, maybe a fantasy themed 1-on-1 combative game is right up your street but Dungeon Twister is not for me. 18th August 2022 Broadsword! It's a Thursday and we're in Aldershot for some gaming fun! According to Wikipedia, HeroQuest was originally published in 1989, which makes me feel very old. The version that we are playing though, is the 21st iteration. So grab your staff and pull on your loincloth as we set into vaguely generic fantasy world of HeroQuest in search of treasure. Alternatively, take on the role of Zargon and oppose the heroes. What's in a game?
HeroQuest's components are all generally good. The board, tiles and cards are of an acceptable quality. The dice are also fine and in a move that pays homage to the original HeroQuest, there still aren't enough of them to split conveniently between the hero players and Zargon player! The game really could do with a few more combat dice! Probably the biggest components are the miniatures. All the heroes and monsters miniatures come in single colour plastic according to type, heroes are red, goblinoids are green, undead are beige and so on. I'm pretty certain the sculpts are all new as well, the games has undergone cosmetic changes due to licensing issues regarding the original. Speaking of sculpts, I found their quality to be... OK. If I were assessing the miniatures exclusive of the game, they wouldn't be good but since they are meant to be part of a game; and in that context they're pretty cool. Especially since I feel that they're designed to hark back to the original style and design, which I think they do a good job of doing. The scenery and dressing is also a bit of a mixed bag. The scenery in this version is all made of plastic and is much more durable than the original scenery which in part was made of cardboard. However, that cardboard scenery with its printed artwork was a lot more colourful. The modern scenery in comparison is a just drab, monochrome, grey plastic. HeroQuest's art is good wherever it appears, mostly on cards and has a brash, chunky cartoony aesthetic that suitably fits the style of the game. There are a few icons in the game that are easily learned, the Zargon player has to learn a bit more due to having to comprehend the scenarios in the quest book but again, it's not an obstacle. How's it play? Setup Before any play can begin, one player must decide to take the role of Zargon who is essentially the 'Games Master' in RPG parlance and controls all the enemy forces that oppose the players. Whoever plays Zargon will probably be doing so for all 14 quests presented in the quest book. Up to 4 other players will assume the role of heroes adventuring through the campaign. Generally, once players have chosen a hero, they will stick with that hero until the end of the campaign. Having said that, there's nothing to stop players swapping or switching around heroes if they so desire.
On to play In HeroQuest, all the hero players will each take their individual turns and then the Zargon player will finally take their turn. Generally this is done with the player to the left of the Zargon player going first with turns progressing to the left until eventually the Zargon player goes last. The general flow of play will involve the heroes exploring the dungeon game board (Which is unpopulated at the game start.) and in response, Zargon revealing what the heroes encounter, be it doors, dead ends, traps or monsters and so on. Once the heroes have had their turns, Zargon can act. This means they can move any visible monsters to attack the heroes. Thus if no monsters are visible on the board, Zargon basically does nothing.
Endgame Play continues until the hero players complete quest objective, in which case, they collectively win! Otherwise, if all the heroes are instead killed, then the Zargon player wins. Additionally, if the hero players retreat (By returning to the stairs tile.) for whatever reason then they also lose. That's not the end! Once a quest has ended, players can spend their hard won loot and cash to buy equipment. Weapons can increase a hero's attack score and armour can increases defence scores, while daggers and crossbows offer ranged attacks and so on. When buying equipment, the player who will use it takes possession of the card. Furthermore, once all copies of a certain item are bought from the equipment deck , then that item can no longer be bought. Conversely, consumable items such as potions and daggers are returned to the equipment deck when used. End Endgame! If the hero players manage to succeed at all 14 quests, they have won the campaign. Overall
There's quite a lot to write about here and my thoughts will probably wander, so please indulge me - and let's get started! HeroQuest was a pretty ground-breaking game in 1989. Published by a mainstream games producer, it offered people who had never played an RPG an accessible slice of the RPG experience and introduced some game concepts to people who had never encountered them before. It's also a window into how games played 35 years ago and what player expectations were like back then. For example, a modern game with similar themes to HeroQuest probably wouldn't employ a roll-and-move mechanic. Another example are rewards and the game's equivalent of levelling up: As explained below, HeroQuest rarely rewards to players - which come in the form of equipment upgrades. These upgrades occur quite infrequently but are quite significant statistically, i.e., going from 2 combat dice to 3 is a big jump. A modern game would try and find a way to do the opposite and drip-feed players constant but low-impact rewards in what would be called a gameplay loop or moment-to-moment engagement. HeroQuest occasionally also trolls player, forcing them to deal with multiple traps and putting no reward on the other side. Mechanically, HeroQuest is actually a fairly straightforward game. While heroes have 6 actions they can perform, 3 of those are almost identical actions and 1 is very situational. Players will find themselves moving and searching, opening doors and defeating monsters behind them, searching, then moving on. Rinse and repeat. While there are definitely some tactics that players can adopt and repeatedly employ, the random placement of challenges - particularly monsters who form the majority of heroes' encounters - means that players will need to adapt to situations and respond effectively. There's also some randomness to player actions - the roll-and-move mechanic means that heroes may not reach their opponent when they need to and also may not be able to escape enemies when they need to. The combat system is also straightforward and runs smoothly enough, it does feel quite swingy and unpredictable though but that might just be me grumbling about dice rolls! We found that the tougher monsters are very hard to wound. Once their defence is high enough, they're generally guaranteed being able to absorb 1 wound from an attack. This means the heroes will need to rely on luck to get 2 wounds in an attack or use at least 4 dice to attack and have a passable chance of getting 2 wounds. How do the heroes get higher attack scores? This brings me to equipment. Generally, we ended up equipping the 2 front line fighters (Primarily the barbarian but to a lesser extent also the dwarf.) with weapons above anyone else as well as providing the elf with a crossbow. Getting an attack stat up to 4 and gaining ranged attacks were real game changers. Getting the right equipment or getting equipment and using it the right way can enhance or change tactics, improve the odds of surviving, winning fights and so on. What's also interesting is that at the end of a quest, the hero players have the opportunity to buy equipment. However, because the cost is so high, in practice it means they will only get to buy something once after every 2 or 3 quests. It means that the heroes will get maybe 6 or 7 pieces of equipment throughout the entire campaign and will need to choose wisely. Some equipment such as consumables seem very expensive for what they provide. During our playthroughs, we never seriously considered buying things like throwing daggers or holy water. Thematically, HeroQuest is a bit of a strange beast. It has obvious elements derived from tabletop RPGs such as having a games master, combat screen, dungeons to explore, character classes and stats, scenarios, campaigns and narratives, rolling dice for combat etc but there are also some key differences. There's no experience points or levelling, instead character improvements happen via buying better equipment. Also, a key difference for me is the role the Zargon player has, they are part games master but also part antagonist and opponent to the heroes which is different to the majority of RPGs. Why is this significant? Let me explain. The HeroQuest campaign has 14 quests, it took us a total of 15 attempts to complete all of them, in other words we only failed 1 of the quests, the other 13 were completed successfully at the first try. I think that in part this is due to the fact that we're all experienced gamers and it feels the game is targeted at the early teenage market so we mostly breezed through it. (A little more about this below.) I also think this because the game utilises a 'one vs many' system and I've always felt that it's very hard to balance this type of game fairly, 3 or 4 human brains will always have the advantage over 1 human brain. This is compounded by the fact that HeroQuest has a campaign. It means that if the heroes fail a quest, they will invariably have to repeat it again, why is this significant? The purpose of a campaign is to advance through the multitude of quests until the final one can be completed and it can be tedious repeating failed quests, especially if more than once. When the surprise of knowing what is behind a door is gone, the game can become an exercise in rolling dice over strategy. Returning to difficulty: I read that it was originally envisioned that the hero players would behave competitively and cooperation between them would make the game too easy. This of course contradicts the RPG nature of the game and it contradicts the rule book too, which states the players should cooperate and they will collectively win or lose. Finally, it also contradicts player sensibilities; without cooperation, the wizard in particular for example, has a fairly low chance of surviving a dungeon. All of this leads me to suspect that either deliberately or accidentally, the game is skewed in favour of the players. It sort of makes sense because it gives the campaign momentum and keeps events moving forward. The problem though, is that it can become a frustrating experience for the Zargon player, who in essence has to lose over and over. It may have been better to do away with having a antagonistic games master role and have a more traditional games master. I get the feeling though that it was done that way to make HeroQuest seem a little more like a 'traditional' board game. It would have been even better if the game master role could have been automated entirely. I imagine though, that it would've increased the game's difficulty significantly. Ultimately, I found HeroQuest just about engaging enough to keep my attention, you could never afford to become complacent. Not paying attention was a sure-fire way to get your hero into trouble. The campaign does have a narrative, however it's fairly generic and also fairly forgettable. For me, the pleasure I think, came from the opportunity to play a game cooperatively along with friends. If you want a light and accessible RPG adjacent experience that's easy to manage without much prep time, you could do a lot worse than HeroQuest. If you're a parent or adult looking for a way to introduce youngsters to some more elaborate game mechanics and concepts or introduce them to a beginner RPG, then HeroQuest is definitely worth a look in. 16th August 2022 It's a Tuesday and were at The Sovereigns with the Woking Board Gaming Club for some gaming goodness. Have you ever watched the classic Jaws movie and decided, 'y'know I wanna be the shark going round chomping on hapless swimmers'? Then this might be the game for you! Jaws is a asymmetrical game of 2 halves where up to 3 players take on the roles of film's 3 protagonists and 1 player becomes the shark. At first the protagonists will seek to defend Amity Island from shark attacks before finally engaging it in a deadly cat-and-mouse game. Jaws is played over 2 acts (Essentially 2 different games in reality.) and as such, has a lot of double-sided components mostly relevant to each act. For the purposes of this blog, I'm mostly going to write about each act separately. Act 1 What's in a game?
Act 2 What's in a game?
Phew, I think that's it for rules! Component quality for Jaws ranges from average to very good. Things like the cards and tokens are your pretty standard cardboard affair, which is fine. The dice seem to be made of acrylic and although they're not as nice as wood, they feel quality with engraved icons instead of printed ones. The wooden meeples are the standout component, particularly the wooden boats for Hooper and Quint, as well the shark meeple inspired by the films iconic artwork and I think they're cool. As far as I can tell, the Jaws game has a relatively restrained use of photo art sourced from the film which only appears on a number of the event cards and even then it is used sparingly. It's wise decision in my opinion, as too much can make a game look cheap. The game also seems to reference artwork used for the shark from the film but because it's actually art, it looks good. Otherwise, art used throughout the game is good, the swimmers tokens and player boards all look good. The best artwork is found the Amity Island side of the game board though, it's an excellent illustration with lots of pretty detail. There isn't too much iconography and what there is, is easily understood. Most of the rules information on components comes as written text. Act 1 How's it play? Setup
On to play During Act 1, the shark player will be attempting to eat as many hapless swimmers as possible! Meanwhile, the crew players will be using barrels both to try and locate the shark and to attach them to the shark. The more swimmers the shark eats, the more advantage the shark player has during Act 2. The round is broken down into several phases and follows a more or less traditional turn order with each player having a number of action points they can spend to achieve their actions. Phase occur as follows.
Act 1 Endgame Act 1 will immediately end if 1 of the following 2 criteria is met: Barrels: 2 barrels are attached to the shark by the Quint player. Swimmers: The shark player has eaten 9 swimmers. Act 2 How's it play? Setup
On to play During Act 2, the shark player will be attempting to either totally destroy The Orca or deal enough damage to the crew to what amounts to eating them. Meanwhile, in turn, they will be attempting to deal enough damage to the shark to defeat it. Play takes place over a number of phases.
Endgame Play continues until 1 of 3 criteria are met. If the shark's damage exceeds its tracker, it is defeated and the crew collectively win. If The Orca is totally destroyed, the shark player wins, or, if the damage on all the hero protagonists exceed their tracker, they are all eaten and the shark wins! Overall
It's been a long time (And I do mean a long time!) since I watched Jaws but I feel the game does for the most part a good job of thematically emulating the movie. Having Brody rushing around the island kicking pesky swimmers off the beaches and closing them only to have them open and fill with swimmers again felt like the movie. On the other hand, having Brody run around collecting barrels for Quint was strange. While the shark popping up to attack swimmers before vanishing was cool, Hooper and Quint in their boats playing a cat and mouse game with the shark while trying to rescue swimmers seemed a bit strange. Especially considering the heroes are the cats and the shark is the mouse, which is a bit of a reverse of how the film plays out. Having said all of that, Act 2 does a excellent job of emulating the protagonist's final confrontation with the shark. So overall... This is more of a comment than a criticism on the game's theme. Now, on to game play. Act 1 presents an interesting cat-and-mouse challenge to the players which will change contextually according to how swimmers are distributed by event cards. The shark player needs to eat swimmers but avoid spaces that the crew players might target and if possible, avoid the barrels that detect the shark. Astute crew players will need to balance their efforts between trying to protect beaches with lots of swimmers and also covering lesser used areas. While the busier beaches might provide a target-rich environment for the shark, the shark player may anticipate the crew players protecting those beaches and avoid them for smaller 'quieter' targets. I get the feeling that if the shark gets a lot of kills or very few, it will have a big influence on who will win in Act 2. Certainly, the shark getting 5 kills (Which is exactly in the middle.) led to a very close finish. Act 2 also presents a sort of cat and mouse scenario with differing dilemmas for the shark player and the crew players. The shark player will generally be faced with deciding whether doing damage or avoiding it, often the resurface cards will not allow the shark player to do both. The shark player will may also have the opportunity to target the crew instead of the ship. Eliminating one of the crew can be very beneficial as it lowers the number of attacks the shark may have to face but generally, it's harder and will take longer to kill a crewmate than it is to destroy one of The Orca tiles. The crew players also face a dilemma. They know the 3 locations where the shark might resurface so with 3 protagonists could target all 3 locations, but this means spreading their firepower and it'll be a tall order defeating the shark this way. So the crew will need to try and anticipate which option the shark player will choose and this require assessing a bunch of contextual elements such as how much damage the shark will do, how high it's evade is and how damaged that part of The Orca is. All players will need to adapt to the random circumstances provided by the resurface cards and will probably have to trade off one strategy for another. It presents the players will meaningful decisions to make, which is always a good thing. However, there are somethings I definitely do not like about the game. Firstly, Jaws is a one-vs-many game and I'm not a fan of this game type. Generally the mechanics of one-vs-many games can never balance for the fact that multiple human brains will have an advantage a single human brain. For the most part, it's fairly inherent that 3 players will see more strategies and opportunities than a single player. Also; when someone is playing the 'one', games can be become a lonely experience since all the other players will be against them. I can't help but wonder if the shark could have been automated and have the game be fully cooperative. Secondly, because this is such a asymmetrical game, it means that one set of rules must be learned by the crew players and another by the shark player. That's not the end of it! Because there are 2 acts, it means that there are actually 4 sub-games that must be learned. Luckily, none of the rules are particularly complex or hard to comprehend but even so, it feels like a lot of effort to play a game, then have to learn a new set of rules to continue. More effort than the entertainment the game delivers. Normally I don't bother blogging about marketing or sales but I have to wonder who this is aimed at? Dedicated games, movie fans? Most dedicated gamers are with good reason wary of licensed games. They tend to be quick cash-ins with lacking game. To be clear I don't think that's the case for Jaws, while the rules are light-ish, there's depth of gameplay to found in the cat-and mouse mechanics that pits players against each other. I just didn't find it particularly compelling. Jaws is a great, classic movie and I'm sure there are collectors of Jaws memorabilia and merchandise but will they care enough about the game to play it. I'm sure it will end up in the collections of those fans but will they be compelled enough to make make the effort to learn and play the game? If you're really after a Jaws experience and are happy with the game's 2 act structure and cat-and-mouse gameplay. This is by no means a bad game and worth a try. For me this didn't hit the spot and I have no desire to play it. 5th July 2022 It's a Tuesday and we're at The Sovereigns with the Woking Board Gaming Club for an evening of gaming. The world of Victorian anthropomorphic railroad magnates is a cutthroat one in this game of acquiring train lines and towns. Buy low and sell high to become the... Raccoon Tycoon! What's in a game?
Raccoon Tycoon has excellent production values. Wooden tokens are used for commodities and first player token which is a good move, they always have a quality to them and also look cool. The cards (And paper money) have a sturdy feel to them while the tiles are satisfyingly thick. The game's art direction is also equally high. Anthropomorphic art is used throughout the game and I've found that it's a divisive style which most people do or don't like. Regardless of your view on this, it's undeniable that the quality of the art is high. The standouts are the railroad cards which use a oil painting style to display whimsical characterful animals in Victorian clothes. Curiously, the building tiles use a completely different style, instead displaying line illustrated buildings and subjects with mostly flat and barely shaded colours. It's a striking contrast that should theoretically be jarring but actually fits quite well. Icons used to represent commodities on cards are easily understood. Most other game information is relayed via text which is usually very clear. How's it play? Setup
On to play Players are trying to earn VPs in Raccoon Tycoon, this can be done by collecting sets of railroad cards, acquiring town cards to pair with railroad cards and gaining building tiles which are not only worth VPs but can provide avenues to scoring more VPs. All of this requires money and commodities, players will need to manipulate the commodities market to maximise the profit gained from selling their own commodities while trying limit the profit of other players. Racoon Tycoon follows a traditional turn order with the active player resolving their action before play moves on to the player on their left.
Endgame Play continues until one of the following 2 criteria is met.
VPs come from a variety of sources. Sets of railroad cards. Town cards paired with railroad cards. Building tiles earn 1 VP each. Bonuses from building cards may also provide additional VPS. Points are tallied, highest score wins. Overall
Even without the anthropomorphic artwork, Raccoon Tycoon would be something or a quirky game. It packs quite a lot of mechanical systems into a single game albeit to a fairly simple level. A little bit of stock market manipulation, a touch of set collecting, a dash of auctioning and a sprinkling of engine building. It could be a recipe for disaster but in the case of Raccoon Tycoon; the whole is greater than the sum of the parts. A large part of this I feel is due to the building tiles. Their unique bonuses both provide some asymmetrical gameplay elements and can also give players a bit of strategic direction. Raccoon Tycoon is a bit of a balancing act between acquiring cash for railroad cards/building tiles and commodities for town cards. It's hard to work towards both at the same time. Adaptation is important here, as is planning ahead. Players could look to finding ways to raise commodity values to increase profit when selling them later This brings me to commodity manipulation. There isn't too much interaction between players other than auctioning and commodity manipulation, Watching what opponents are doing can prove useful and is something of a higher level of play. I.e., if 2 players are accumulating the same commodity, there's a possibility that one of them will sell it, causing that market to crash. Beating a opponent to the punch so to speak, can cost them lots of cash! Raccoon Tycoon is fairly rules light and I think seasoned gamers won't have any problems grasping all the systems at work here. For less experienced gamers, the curve will be steeper, I don't feel it's a gamebreaker but I imagine it could be off putting. While there's enough gameplay to give players thoughtful and meaningful decisions to make and a fun experience, I also found the game to be a little unengaging and uncompelling, I never felt like I was building railroads or towns and despite the unique art style, it didn't feel like it stood out from the crowd. here's nothing wrong with Raccoon Tycoon but it wouldn't be my first pick for a game, although I'd have no problem playing it if someone else wanted to. 9th June 2022 Gaming night Aldershot continues with Chariot Race. As you might have guessed from the title, this game about managing railway companies in the 19th Century on a hex-based map of North America. NO WAIT, THAT'S NOT RIGHT! Chariot Race is about chariot racing in ancient Rome. That name is sure is confusing! What's in a game?
The components for Chariot Race are pretty good, the tokens and boards all feel suitably sturdy while the wooden dice are a nice touch. Having chariots made of 2 pieces or card seems a little bit of a weird choice perhaps but it's not like it's a dealbreaker or anything and was probably done to keep the cost down. There's very little artwork to write home about in Chariot Race which may be why I'm blogging about instead? There are illustrations on the chariot standees but they'll hardly be noticed since they're quite small, especially when placed on the arena/game board. There's some artwork on the game board as well and it's a fair depiction of a crowd watching the races. Otherwise Chariot Race looks fairly clean and minimalist in a unfussy kind of way, perfectly acceptable in my opinion. The only iconography that can be found during the game is on the dice, those symbols are self-explanatory and I can't imagine they'd be an obstacle to any players. Although, I will say that it feels a little odd and counterintuitive that the damage track is labelled 'damage' instead of something like 'health' since 12 on the damage track is completely undamaged and 0 is wrecked. How's it play? Setup
On to play In Chariot Race, players are attempting to complete 2 laps of the track, avoid being wrecked and of course, finish first. This is done by each player in their turn rolling dice and resolving the results. Chariot Race does not use the usual turn order. Instead it's determined by position on the track round-by-round, whoever is 1st on the track goes 1st, 2nd on the track goes 2nd and so forth. When the player in last place has gone, the round is over and play returns to the player in the lead at the start of a new round. Of course it's likely the turn order will now have changed. In their turn, the active player will have several phases they can act in.
Endgame Chariot Race is played over 2 laps and there are several criteria which can determine the winner. If a player's chariot completes their 2nd lap and no other chariot crosses the finish lap, they win the race. If 2 or more chariots finish the race in the same round, then the chariot that went the furthest past the finish line wins. Finally, a wrecked chariot cannot win, even if it crossed the finish line first or got furthest past it. Overall
Chariot Race is a fast playing and mechanically speaking, actually a fairly straightforward game; roll the dice and carry out the resulting actions displayed. The decisions that players get to make are also fairly straightforward, although their consequences can be significant - which is good. Meaningful decisions are always good. Player decisions take the form of choosing which dice to keep and which to re-roll, players must choose what to try and prioritise, this will of course be contextual and change from round to round. The other area where player's will probably be making the most is going to be about speeding up and slowing down. It's obvious that players will want to be fast in the straights but manage their speed through the race's 4 corners. Managing speed is the game's best mechanic, I like that the faster a chariot goes, the less dice the player gets to roll and consequently, the less options they have. It feels suitably thematic, not only does it represent having less thinking time at speed but also that this a horse race and players are never entirely in control of them. Players can find themselves hurtling through corners and taking damage, the question is how fast for how much damage? There's only 4 corners, so this means it's ok to take damage... right? This brings me neatly to damage. There's definitely a combative edge to Chariot Race which makes it an usual racing game. Damaging opponents has its benefits. Firstly; it lowers their maximum top speed, hindering them and secondly, it can lead to their elimination for the game. It's vital to keep an eye on damage, in the early game players will probably be congenial, but in the late game, that will all change. Having low damage points can make a player a big target, especially if that player is ahead and which others will look to exploit this to put them out of the race. It does mean that Chariot Race can have a lot of direct conflict and there may well be some 'pick-on-the-leader' tactics going on as well. If this isn't your cup of tea, it's one to probably avoid. The game also has player elimination as a mechanic, which is something I have little fondness for but fortunately, this is a quick playing game so there isn't too much downtime. In conclusion though; while it won't set the world alight, it is quick to learn and quick to play, Chariot Race is a fun light game If you like your racing theme with some extra competitive zing and a generous dollop of luck, then this might interest you. 3rd June 2022 We're round Simon's for some Friday night fun. Apparently, delving into dangerous dungeons in adventuring parties is a hazardous vocation, but in Arcadia Quest, there's loads of them wandering the dungeons! What's in a game?
It's hard to fault the component quality in Arcadia Quest and nothing feels cheap. It comes with a generous amount of minis The game utilises a chibi art style throughout, this extends to the hero and monster cards as well as the miniatures. The illustrations on the cards and boards is colourful and has a lot of character. Arcadia is a fairly miniatures heavy game and they're the components that I would say are the the most eye-catching. They're all good quality sculpts and while it's all part of the game's art direction and charm; I have to say I'm a bit ambivalent towards the chibi styling personally. As an aside; figures are supplied unpainted but haven a paint job. The game also contains a a fair amount of iconography but it never felt unintuitive. How's it play? Setup Arcadia Quest can be played as a traditional board game but is clearly meant to be played as a series of linked scenarios, thus the Campaign book will determine the specific setup required, although it will generally involve the following:
Arcadia Quest follows the typical turn structure with the active player taking their turn, then the player to the their left acting next. During their turn, the active player has 2 basic options they can choose from.
Endgame Depending on player count, the first player to complete 2/3 quests wins the game, provided at least 1 of those completed quests is a PvE quest. It's not possible to win by just fighting other players. Campaign Hang on, there's some more rules-talk after the endgame! When a scenario is completed, players earn rewards as per the scenario, quest cards and other successes in the scenario. These can be used to purchase more cards for the heroes, providing them a route to upgrade or 'level-up'. If a hero accumulated 1 or more death tokens during the scenario, then that hero will randomly acquire a death curse card, which inflicts some sort of penalty on the hero in the next scenario. Once that next scenario is completed, the death curse card is discarded. If the hero was unfortunate to die again, they would acquire a new randomly drawn death curse card. Campaign endgame If players are going through the campaign, then at the end of each scenario, each player's results are recorded on the campaign sheet and they will earn points for events that occurred in the scenario. The player who has the best overall results at the end of the campaign, wins the campaign! Overall
It's tricky to describe Arcadia Quest. Mechanically it's a pretty straightforward, player's use the fairly obvious actions on their cards, looking for ways to sync or combo effectively until they need to be refreshed. Different scenarios will present players with different options, opportunities and objectives. Objectives are always a mixture of PvE and PvP goals and players will need to be aware of retaliation from monsters as well as attacks from other players. This brings me to something I consider a bit of a bugbear. I'm not a fan of games that mix PvE and PvP elements together, particularly in a game that aspires to be 'RPG-adjacent'. As someone who's played a lot of traditional RPGs, I find it grates a little because it's not something I want from a RPG. Having said that, the other players who don't have any RPG experience found it all enjoyable, so maybe I'm the outlier, Otherwise, I found Arcadia Quest sort of average, it plays well enough but I found nothing really engaging about it. It never felt like there was a clever strategy I could employ and there was a kind of inevitability to the gameplay. You spend your action to fight a monster or fight a player and doing one often meant the other could happen to you. I mean if one of you're heroes has been wounded by battling a monster, what better time for another play to target? I think this is why completing a PvE quest is mandatory to winning, otherwise the game would descend into total PvP combat. When thinking about it, Arcadia Quest ultimately seems like a mini-heavy, light-strategy skirmish wargame on a board with the veneer of RPG-adjacent gameplay. And truth be told; if I'm after a skirmish game, I feel there's plenty of better alternatives out there. There's nothing really wrong with Arcadia Quest and if you want a light strategy game (Which let me emphasise is no bad thing.) with accessible rules then it's worth a look. But it's not for me. 29th May 2022 Sunday gaming on Board Game Arena continued with mancala styled game Fruit Picking. I'm not the fruit picker, I'm the fruit picker's son, I'm only picking fruits 'til the fruit picker comes. Hmm, it doesn't work... Caveat: We've only ever played Fruit Picking digitally. What's in a game?
The boards in Fruit Picking feature a couple rural landscapes depicted with a appealingly stylised illustrations showing idyllic countryside. The fruits are also well illustrated and Fruit Picking has solid art style. Other than the fruit and waterdrop symbols, there's no iconography in the game and it should not prove any problem to players. How's it play? Setup
On to play In Fruit Picking, players take turns moving their resources clockwise around the spaces on their board which allows them to active one space to gain more seeds or buy a card. Play begins with the first player and once their turn is over, proceeds to the left.
Endgame Play continues with players acquiring fruit cards until one player has the cards to meet one of the criteria which triggers the game end. Fruit Picking provides players with 4 ways to do this. A pair and 3 of a kind, 4 of a kind, 3 pairs and 1 of each fruit. When this occurs, the current round is completed and if the player who triggered the game is the only one to have met any of the criteria, then they win. In the likelihood that more than one player has met any of the criteria by the end of the last round, then ties are broken by quantities of fruit and seeds on cards. Overall
Fruit Picking is a lightweight games that has a good mix of logic and luck. Logically, it's not hard to think several moves ahead if you want. Once farm cards have been distributed on to the player boards, moving seeds and activating farm cards is entirely predictable and only driven by player decisions. Manipulating the Harvest House action to game more actions is a key tactic, especially as it can be used to quickly fill the Harvest House and used to purchase cards. Fruit Picking is essentially a race to acquire cards before other players. When cards are drafted, everything can change, which neatly brings me to the next facet of the game The game's unpredictability comes into play on the market track. As play progresses, cards will come into play randomly, not only that, their costs will also vary, especially as they move along the track. It means that some times, the cards appearing will play into certain players' strategies and other times, potentially scupper those strategies. Players will have to be prepared to change direction for long term plans when this occurs and adapt their approach according to what is available. It's something I've encountered in other games and found to be irritating, Fruit Picking is no different. I know that this can be an important element of a game because without some randomizer, it can sometimes very quickly become obvious who's going to win. Even so, it irritates me. Fruit Picking also sits in a strange place of feeling a bit overlong for a filler game but definitely a bit too light for a main game. Having said that, it's accessible game that's easy to learn. For people who want something which engages some tactical thinking but is not along time brain burner, Fruit Picking may hit that sweet spot. 26th May 2022 It's a Thursday evening and I'm in Aldershot with friends for some gaming goodness that's been a long time coming! Is it tiny? Yeah pretty much. Is it in a dungeon? Definitely. Is it epic?... Well, you'll just have to see! Tiny Epic dungeons is a cooperative tile laying (Or card laying really.) dungeon crawler with players taking on the roles of various heroes who will spend much of their time managing a goblin epidemic before being chased around by the big bad before hopefully defeating it. What's in a game?
Tiny Epic Dungeons packs a lot into a small box. The cards feel a little flimsy and the dice are plastic and feel a bit average but other than that, the components are all good quality. The character figures are sizable and a pretty cool touch for a game of this proportion, while for the most part the tokens are small (Other than the disarm tokens.), they're still solid and well made. But for me, the standout components are the meeples, not only are they nicely shaped wooden tokens, they also illustrated. It shows some thought and care has gone into the production. The use of art is also good throughout the game, portraits of heroes, minions and bosses are all chunky and colourful, utilising a cartoony style that's used in a lot of modern fantasy games, it's a style I like Artwork used on the dungeons cards is also pretty good, there's a nice contrast between somewhat grey looking rooms and the colourful dressing and scenery that inhabit them and even the box lid features some evocative art. This brings me to iconography. It's rare that I'm critical of a game's iconography and this is one of those occasions. It's just that there's so much of it. A good proportion of it is instantly comprehensible, but a smaller proportion of it is not and a smaller proportion of a lot is still quite a lot!
I know that this is the result of game that is trying to emulate a D&D RPG style dungeon-crawl experience without a dungeon but even so: we played the game several times and I still did not recognised some icons. Between the fairly extensive rules and the extensive iconography, it gives the game a bit of steep learning curve. Additionally; not only are so many icons, some of them are quite small, icons in the corner of the dungeons cards and the first time we tried to play I didn't notice them! How's it play? Setup
On to play In Tiny Epic Dungeons, the players must explore and reveal the dungeon, fighting goblins and acquiring loot and magic until they defeat enough minions in order get into the boss' lair and defeat them. The dungeon in Tiny Epic Dungeons is always a 7x7 grid in size, with the entrance always being the exact centre of the dungeon. When it comes to the active player's turn, they can broadly speaking: move, perform exactly 1 'heroic' action and any number of free actions.
There are also some other rules that need covering.
Endgame In the first act, if a 5th goblin comes into play before any of the 4 adjacent to the torch mat are defeated, then the players collectively lose. If at any time the torch token reaches the end of the track on either side of the torch mat, then the players lose. If the players get to act 2 and reduce all the boss's health tracks to 0, they collectively win! Overall
So, Tiny Epic Dungeons has quite a lot rules, I feel it's not particularly complicated but there's certainly a lot going on and that means that there's a lot to remember in this fairly ambitious attempt to recreate the D&D style dungeon-crawling experience. The question is, does it succeed? Well... sort of. The thing is, Tiny Epic Dungeons can't hide it's cooperative board game DNA. it utilises a commonplace cooperative mechanic of making the players choose between working towards their objectives (In this case exploring the dungeon, finding and defeating minions and finding the boss lair.) with managing an ongoing, constantly expanding threat (In this case preventing 5 goblins spawning in the game.). Players will be faced with choosing between the two. Furthermore, the constant ticking countdown of the torch track will encourage players not to dawdle and cooperate as much as possible. Another challenge facing players is placement of dungeon tiles all current passageways must be honoured and the game has a strict 7x7 size. If player don't think a step ahead, there's a risk that a pathway may lead to a dead-end too early, leaving a portion of the 7x7 grid inaccessible. Mechanically, these are all good, they put players in the position of having to make meaningful decisions. However, they do feel a little un-RPG-ish. During this early stage of the game we did encounter a noteworthy quirk; one character could not leave the entrance for about a quarter of the game! At the start of their turn, there was always a goblin on the entrance card thanks to spawning from the torch track. Once they defeated the goblin, they could no longer move and by the time of their next turn, there was another goblin on the entrance! One thing I like is how the game clearly differentiates between the early and late game. When the boss is revealed, everything changes and priorities shift somewhat. Exploration and goblin management become less important and dealing with the boss more so which thanks to the altar tokens requires more than just dealing damage to the big bad. All of this should serve to make Tiny Epic Dungeons a good game but truth be told - it's all a little unremarkable. Combat feels unexciting, particularly when dealing with goblins again and again, it felt repetitive and frustrating. They're not a threat because they're tough (They're not tough!), they're a threat because the rules say that you lose if you don't defeat them quick enough. The dice mechanic used is pretty cool though. I like that the unused dice can give a benefit, e.g., not using a 6 as the result of a skill check because as it provides a point of health gives players a meaningful decision to make when choosing which die to use for a skill check. The dungeon exploration experience it provides is pretty standard and OK but the lengthy rules and having to interpret fiddly icons mires the game in slowness and interfere with the pacing. Even after several play throughs, I look at the icons and think, 'Wait, what does that do?'. After more play throughs I'm sure that the rules will provide no obstacle but I feel little compulsion to play it again, which is a bit of shame as it looks really nice. While there's nothing wrong with Tiny Epic Dungeons and I can't find any fault with it, I also can't find a reason to like it. 24th May 2022 It's a Tuesday and we're with the Woking Gaming Club in The Sovereigns. Fly as free as a err flying pirate? Libertalia: Winds of Galecrest is set in a world of fantastical aerial ships, anthropomorphic heroes and adventurous voyages to find loot and lost treasure. What's in a game?
Component quality is solid throughout, cards, tokens and tiles are well constructed but the chunky loot tokens really stand out, even if I have to resist the urge to try and unwrap and eat them. Libertalia: Winds of Galecrest makes use of excellent use of bright, eye-catching, cartoony art presenting a larger than life setting and characters. About a dozen icons are used throughout the game, they are all fairly clear and easily understood. How's it play? Setup
That's pretty much setup done. On to play Libertalia: Winds of Galecrest is played over 3 'voyages' which have a length of 4, 5 and 6 days. For each day, a player will put a character card into play and this is done secretly. Thus over all 3 voyages each player will use 15 character.
Endgame Play progress until the night actions for the 3rd and final voyage are resolved. Players compare their scoring dials. Points are tallied, highest score wins. Overall
Libertalia: Winds of Galecrest feels like a complex game but in practice is quite straightforward. In essence, a character card is played and the resolved up to 3 times. Where the game's complexity comes from is how a character card played interacts with character cards played by other players. Everyone starts with the same hand of cards and will acquire a further identical 12 cards during the course of the game. It means that all players will be using the same 18 cards played over in total 15 actions. But since it's unlikely that all players will make use of the same cards at the same, it means the game encourages players to watch their opponents. Knowing when someone has or hasn't played a certain card can prove very useful. This contextual information can allow players to adapt their tactics and can change the flow of the game. Additionally; Libertalia: Winds of Galecrest injects a dose of 'take that' into the game, the 40 cards have a varied set of abilities that can be brought to play, including being able to eliminate other characters, pulling cards out of the graveyard, etc. It's also worth noting that while the 'calm' side of the game board has the potential for some friction between players the 'stormy' side increases this. The game also provides short and long term goals which require short, mid and long term strategies. Day abilities on cards give players immediate benefits, but dusk and night abilities can also provide desirable benefits. A player may choose to put a high value character card on to the initiative track so they go earlier in the dusk phase to secure a certain type of loot. Which brings me to long term strategy, loot is vital here. Loot typically provides benefits during the end of voyage phase and the loot for all days is openly shown on the board which players must take this into consideration during the whole journey. All of this means that Libertalia: Winds of Galecrest hits a sweet spot of accessible but tactical game play. Players are always given meaningful decisions to make using a degree of imperfect information. I found it an engaging game. Definitely one to try. |
AuthorI play, I paint. Archives
March 2024
Categories
All
|
RSS Feed
