Random Musings On My Recent Gaming Session

1. It was nice to get Hansa Teutonica, Glory to Rome, Yspahan and Ra to the table in half an afternoon - been awhile since I last had a solid gaming session.

2. My appreciation of Hansa keeps growing. Been waiting for the point when the other shoe drops.........but till now, I'm still waiting :) In a way, it seems to be a really abstract game and I have heard the term "cube-pusher" used to describe it but it keeps me engaged throughout. I can't help but be intrigued by the variety of ways in which I can score points and how each 'path' to victory seems equally viable.

3. Discovered a new 'broken' combo in Glory to Rome. If you've played the game before, you'll know that almost every decent combo can be a 'broken' one. It really boils down to who can get theirs up and running quickly enough. In my 30+ games of GtR, I've NEVER built the Academy before. After all, its power seems rather 'ordinary' at first glance, especially when considered beside its more awe-inducing counterparts. The Academy allows you one Thinker action after each round in which you performed a Craftsman action.

I guess with my recent dabbling in A Game of Thrones LCG, I've learnt how crucial draw can be in determining a win. In this case, I sort of stumbled upon it having taking a couple of Craftsman clients in a 3 player game. What the Academy allows me to do therefore is to exhaust my hand using multiple Craftsman actions and then replenish it fully to 5. It not only enabled me to build speedily but helped me in my push to victory. It's one of the easier combos to pull off since you do not require other buildings in tandem but rather just a couple of Craftsman clients. Sure, your opponents can slow you down by refusing to craft but in a game with few players, it will not be long before you can select the Craftsman action yourself. In this game, I didn't get to build the Shrine or Temple to increase my hand size but I can imagine how it'll make the combo even more efficient.

4. The caravan strategy in Yspahan has been touted as especially powerful and different ones have even gone to the extent to deem it broken. In my 3-player game, I found it incredibly difficult to pull off successfully if your opponents totally ignore the caravan. It is simply impossible to fill quickly enough and the game ended without me succeeding in scoring the caravan once (it only scores when it fills completely). I however only realized midway through that there is a single spot on the supervisor track which allows 2 cubes to be sent to the caravan simultaneously. Perhaps that will be sufficient to pursue the strategy - I'll have to try it out again. Even if your opponents try to block you, at least you will still be able to fill the caravan more quickly even if it means sending their cubes together with yours.

Macao: First Impressions

Macao was a game that wasn't really on my radar after I read couple of reviews on the Geek. The thing that turned me off was complains regarding the lack of interaction in the game. If you have been reading my blog, you'll know that multiplayer solitaire games generally do not appeal to me. Nonetheless, I acquired it as it was available at a good price, figuring that I could always trade or sell it if it disappointed.

The rules were well-written and rather straight-forward. I had no problems teaching the rules to Van despite being just as green as her to the game. This is in contrast with some fiddly games where it's often hard to pin down all the rules on the first play. Our first play was a 2-player game and it went extremely smoothly - we felt as if we were seasoned players practically. One of my concerns was that Macao wouldn't scale well as a 2-player game since most multiplayer games seem to disappoint when scaled down to 2. However my worries were unfounded as the game played out rather well with 2. Sure, there would likely be more competition for spots in the city quarters and at the ports but the reduced downtime made up for it.

Another reason why Macao didn't immediately grab my attention was that it generally plays between 90-120min. While I'm hardly alien to games that length (a reasonable length I must say), my recent gaming patterns as well as gaming groups have led me to acquire more games of the 60min length. Yet, Van and I managed to complete the game in just over an hour including the rules explanation and that was a pleasant surprise indeed. I suppose the potential for downtime will be magnified with 3 or 4 players but 90min seems a good estimate for the game.

I must say I did enjoy the game and particularly the unique (at least for the moment) wind rose mechanic. It was almost 'fun' loading up a sector with action cubes and figuring how to spend them all when that turn hits. The intellectual stimulation laid in balancing the short term goal of ensuring there were action cubes available each round and the long term goal of activating all the cards on your tableau, failing which will result in penalty points. While challenging, it didn't give me the headache I received the first few times I played Agricola. However, it was one thing to simply avoid penalty points, it was another all together to further balance those goals with scoring points via shipping goods, occupying the city quarters and trading gold for prestige points. Hopefully with a couple of plays in the pocket, I'll progress from avoiding penalties and scoring points incidentally to a more deliberate approach in racking up the prestige points. The game is definitely more tactical in nature as the randomness of the dice and building cards makes it difficult to plan too far ahead.

What about the criticisms of the game? The most common one I read on the net is that it's plays just like another run-of-the-mill eurogame. I'm not sure it's fair to fault a game for that especially when its designer has made an effort to introduce a mechanic that while not earth-shattering is nonetheless rather fresh and interesting. My own personal criticism lies more with Macao's anti-climatic ending. The game ramps you up in terms of action cubes. Early in the game, you start with few cubes and thus turns pass quickly. Midway through the game, assuming you have sufficiently 'invested' in those rounds, you should be flushed with cubes to utilize, especially when coupled with your newly activated building powers. However due to the fixed number of rounds in the game, the latter rounds results in mostly singular cubes to be taken, resulting once again in short, quick and rather uneventful rounds. While this does wonders in reducing the downtime typically painful in quite a number of endgames, it comes across somewhat anti-climatic here as it makes it very difficult for straddlers to catch up due to the limited actions available. I suppose this could be due to my failure to load cubes in those sectors earlier but considering that that is not always the optimum move, I remain unconvinced that my view isn't valid.

Van seemed to enjoy it at least moderately which was a surprise since she usually shuns games with little interaction. This is a valid criticism of the game but it wasn't as bad as expected. It is true that there is little you can interfere with your opponents' acquisition of action cubes since the choice of dice is non-rival in nature. However, interaction comes in competition for spots on the board in terms of scoring prestige points. You compete to trade particular goods first at ports for higher points, as well as compete on the city quarters front for desired goods and to block each others' longest connection. While this seems largely idealistic in that most of your attention seems to be focused on avoiding penalty points, there seems to be sufficient potential for 'competition' in the game mechanics to be realized by experienced players.

All in all, a keeper...at least for now. I don't see it exactly as a gateway game but neither is it intimidating and I can see myself easily introducing to casuals.

Long Lay-off

Haven't seen much gaming these past 2 months, largely due to travel and work. Brought a couple games back from Europe: Yspahan (which was a steal at 12 Euro), Chinatown, Dixit 2 and Die Kutschfahrt zur Teufelsburg.

It was a tough call, but I decided to sell Chinatown even before I unwrapped it. It seems to play best with 5, which was a number I seldom get to play with. Furthermore, for those rare occasions with 5, I would much prefer to bring El Grande or PoF to the table. I was also hesitant about the negotiation mechanic which was largely what the game was about. It seems to require a certain group for the game to truly take-off.

Hopefully, I will get a session going next week. Still waiting to try Yspahan. Tried Dixit 2 about 4 times with my non-gamer friends and they generally enjoyed it. I can see how repeated plays will lead to diminishing utility but I can see the appeal with the masses. My only attempt to teach Die Kutschfahrt zur Teufelsburg was miserable as I struggled with the rules explanation, having not played the game before. The game ended on a false declaration (due to an unclear communication of the victory conditions by me) but the run-through gave me a better idea of the game flow and left me a little more confident to explain the rules in future. The game did intrigue me nonetheless and I look forward to bring it to the table soon.

Gaming For The Week 22nd - 29th May 2010

Marcus came over early in the week with 2 new games - Innovation and American Rails. I've been dying to try Innovation as I'm a huge fan of Glory to Rome. Verdict? I like it and will be looking to acquire it. It does come across more abstract than Glory to Rome with a definite weaker theme. On the other hand, it feels more accessible than GtR despite its 100+ unique card powers. Perhaps it is due to the fact that only 5 card powers are in play for each player at any one time. Just like GtR, the strength is in the interaction which is a key element I look for in games. I enjoy the fact that not only are many of the card powers interactive in nature but you have to constantly 'compete' with other players to be ahead in card symbols to avoid sharing your powers with others. Van wasn't impressed even though she too is a fan of GtR. I suppose it's down to the theme or in this case, the lack of...

American Rails plays similar to Chicago Express which I own. And I have to admit, it's probably the better game. You get to start anywhere on the board unlike CE's fixed positions, which enhances replayability and offers more strategic options. Secondly, the action mechanism reminiscent of Steam also puts it above CE. I like the fact that each action can only be selected by one player each time round, and your choice of action will determine your turn order subsequently. It definitely adds more depth to the game. The game felt a lot more open, less predictable and many more options available with what you can and want to do with the different companies.

The sole advantage CE has over AR is perhaps its gateway potential. I like the fact that you reduce each player turn effectively down to only 3 options: Auction, Develop, or Expand. However, I find the whole Wabash addition once a company hits Chicago fiddly. Sure it adds an extra layer to the decision-making but new players tend to struggle wrapping their head around that part of the game. Nonetheless, the components of CE are far more attractive and I suppose that always serves as an important hook for casual/non-gamers.

Mid-week, the usual gang came over for our weekly fix of A Game of Thrones LCG. Can't remember much except that Jo (Greyjoy) and I (Lanni) took a close one from Ben (Bara) and Ivan (Martell). We ended off with Ra and Ivan took his first win in that, completely demolishing the rest of us. After Ben left, we managed to squeeze in a game of Dominion:Intrigue and a game of Citadels before calling it a day.

Gaming For The Week 9th-15th May 2010

The usual crowd at the mid-week session where we duked it out with AGoT. Two games were played. I paired with Ivan who played Greyjoy for the first and Ben the next who was playing Baratheon. Jo played Martell and Stark respectively for both games.

Ivan and my strategy was to ignore Jo and concentrate on Ben to garner power in lieu of Martell's characters with the Vengful mechanic (stand vengful characters when you lose as in defence) as well as triggered effects in the same vein. Ben was thumbed down most of the game with minimal characters and Ivan and I took advantage of that to make unopposed challenges.

Jo got off to a fast start in the second game with his Stark deck. My Lannister deck had limited attachments and he killed off my best characters each turn with Bear Island. Ben wasn't faring much better with good income but limited characters to play after being an Intrigue target of Ivan's.

Ivan had to leave after and the 3 of us ended off with Glory to Rome. Ben and Jo have not played the game much as compared to some of my other gaming partners, and seemed generally lukewarm towards it. I had a couple of good draws and managed to get an obscene combo going with Circus Maximus, Bridge, Collosseum and the Wall. Subsequently, I completed the Temple and Shrine and got my max hand size up to 11. I ended the game by using the remaining in-town sites.

With 3, the optimal strategy seems to be getting as many Craftsmen into your client as quickly as possible. Even if your opponents try to starve you of that action, each time you Craft can be a devastating turn, especially with good buildings available.

OCTGN2: A Game of Thrones LCG

It ought to be rather apparent from my blog posts that I'm rather enamoured with A Game of Thrones LCG. So it was a real godsend when I discovered some enthusiast on the Fantasy Flight forums did some work for it to be played virtually over OCTGN2 (for free!).

I have clocked 5 plays so far and it worked better than expected. In fact it recreates the F2F experience satisfyingly , just without the actual F2F part. There is an in-client chat but I suppose Skype or Ventrilo could help further enhance the experience.

But the real kicker is that you get to build a tournament worthy deck and run it out against opponents from all over the world. The former is a boon since finances may hinder one from obtaining sufficient copies of each card while the latter is a boon since AGoT LCG players are far and few where I live.

I have so far only tried it with Ivan and Jo but hopefully I'll soon be able to play against enthusiasts from other parts. Leave a note if you are keen for a game.

Gaming For the Week 18th-24th April 2010

Had two new guests this week joining us at our mid-week session. Jo, JoGi, Ian, Ivan and myself started with a game of Battlestar Galactica. JoGi and I were Cylons from the start. In a bid to speed up the game, I probably made it easy on the Humans by selecting a 3 distance destination as Admiral. I figured the heavier penalty on resources was worth the risk but in the end the humans managed to eek out the victory. I noticed that on this shorter variant of BSG, there is a tendency for Cylons to reveal too late. JoGi and I made that mistake and weren't able to severely deter the Humans as revealed Cylons, especially when he was forced to reveal from the Brig. I suppose revealing too early does spoil the game for the Cylons somewhat since your options are limited, but revealing too late on the hand limits your opportunities to throw those nasty Super Crisis cards in the way of the Humans. Well, I was just happy to clock another play of the game. My fears that it would simply end up a white elephant due to its niche theme has proved somewhat premature so far but we'll see...

Due to the limited time remaining, we opted for Tribune. Can't believe I'm playing this game back-to-back weeks when it's on my WTS list. But I suppose the one thing going for it is that it packs decent game in a short time. Unfortunately, it just isn't the sort of 'game' I fancy. Predictably, Jo took us to the showers in the game (I called it at the start!), proving once again that he's the master of Tribune. My brain simply cannot wrap around the steps I need to take to obtain the objectives in as minimal steps as possible. Well clearly, Jo manages that. Ivan, Jo and I completed our objectives the same round but once we counted points, it was no contest.