Print

Please login or register.
1 Hour 1 Day 1 Week 1 Month Forever
Login with username, password and session length

[eHalcyon]

I was at a local board game convention this weekend.  Learned some new games, played a bunch of others, mostly with people I did not know.  One friend was also at the convention, but not the whole time.  I like reflecting on new games, and I will share it here as well for anybody who cares to read.  I'll also talk about two tournaments I entered and some other games I played.

New Games I Learned

Five Tribes
2p with a friend.  I enjoyed it, but the intense analysis paralysis makes me hesitant to play it again.  It might be better with more than 2 players.  With only 2, you bid for turn order with two pieces each.  I found that getting a double turn was far more important than vying for first player, so I just went for that every time.  I don't think I ever paid money for turn order.  The double turn also adds AP because you have to think through how you want to set yourself up.  I completely destroyed my friend in this game, probably because I handle AP better than he does.

??? Prototype
I don't remember what the game was called, but it was a prototype.  There wasn't an NDA but I won't say too much about it anyway.  It is a bluffing game inspired by Coup, with the intention of making it a deeper experience with somewhat lengthier play time.  I've never actually played Coup so I can't compare very well, but it was still pretty quick (about 30 minutes, I think).  We played twice.  My friend crushed us the first game.  The second game was extremely close but a bit of luck allowed me to take the win in the end.  There was one small aspect that I think was overpowered, but it's tough to tell with just 2 plays.  Overall I was pretty impressed with the design.

Deus
Played with 4.  Really, really neat game.  Everything is colourful and looks good.  It played smoothly and felt tightly balanced.  There were tough choices pretty much every turn, but it always felt like there was something good for you to do.  There is some light engine building and the possibility of cool combos.  I lost to the owner of the game by about 2 points (it was relatively new for her as well; it was actually somebody else who taught us).  Definitely try this if you get the chance (and note, it is playable on Boite a Jeux).

Macao
4p game only with strangers, all new to the game.  I've been interested in this one for a long time just because of that neat rondel mechanism.  There was some rules confusion early on and probably some accidental cheating by all by the end, what with all the tiny cards with special abilities.  Also, it is really easy to jostle the rondel and get all your cubes mixed up, as one other player discovered.

Early on, my strategy was mainly to get the things that were easy to build.  Whenever I started taking too long with analysis paralysis I defaulted to choosing the biggest dice, giving me giant heaps of resources to deal with in later turns.  This worked to my advantage in the end because I was able to fuel a giant cross-map spree to sell 3 different goods.  I won with a moderately healthy lead.

There was at least one special power I had that we all misinterpreted early on, but it only gave me $2.  Not sure how much of a difference it would have made.  There may also have been other rules that we all missed because we mostly just skimmed the rulebook.  I may actually read it later to see.

Overall impression is good.  Again, I liked having all the tough choices, special powers and multiple paths to victory.  I do think that it gets a bit unwieldy at the end, when we had a dozen different tiny cards that all did different things.  I couldn't really keep track of my opponents' actions at all.  But yeah, it was fun.

Kingdom Builder
4p game.  The scoring cards were Knights (build in a horzontal line), Miners (build next to mountains) and Farmers (build in all four quadrants).  I don't remember their names but the special powers were [extend a line], [build 1 on grass], [move 1 to just-played terrain] and [move 1 onto water].

On my first turn I went for the line-extending power, but it was actually a bad choice because it got me stuck in a really poor location.  I also had some bad luck -- I purposely avoided being adjacent to flowers terrain, but I never drew a single flowers card.  Two other players were similarly lost, though one recovered a bit by the end.

My friend though.  Oh man.  He also used his first placement for the line-extending power, but his second placement allowed him to go across the map and grab the place-on-grass power AND put him in position on a nearly unimpeded horizontal line that also happened to go past a large number of mountain regions.  It was pretty much a perfect location.  By the end of the game, he had also managed to land a cluster in the fourth quadrant, allowing to score well on all 3 cards.  He wiped the floor with us.  He likes the game.

As for me, it actually left me feeling a little cold.  Granted, a large part of that is probably because my friend won by such a huge lead and it was completely predictable from about round 4 on.  Even in retrospect I don't think there was anything we could have done to stop him.  That said, I expect I would have a better time on second play because I have a better idea of how to look for a good starting placement.  Moreover, I expect that the mix of new special powers and scoring cards would really appeal to me, much like how Dominion really clicks when you play your second game with a whole new kingdom.  I'll play it again if I get the chance.

Tournaments I Played

Dominion
It was a poor tournament setup, but I wasn't expecting it to be good based on previous years (when I had not participated).  Everybody played 3 preliminary matches.  They were all 4p games with base only, and each set of matches used the same kingdom for all.  Every preliminary match had Gardens, one had Witch, two had Chapel (and these were randomly dealt, not designed kingdoms).  Some specific number of semi-finalists were chosen based on how many wins they got out of their 3 prelim matches.  Of course, with only 3 matches (and the chaos of 4p base), there is not much spread in there.  Their tie-break solution was to use your actual scores from each game, which were incredibly variable.  Some groups had extremely low scoring games, others extremely high (mainly depending on how Gardens got played).

Anyway, my first match was OK.  The player to my right made some rules mistakes early on (she was nesting actions and also shuffling just-played actions back into her deck mid-turn) that got her some early Gold and 2 Provinces.  The other 2 players did not want to start over so we played on.  She was very nice about it when we corrected her (and also very nice when we played Macao together later on); I have no doubt that they were honest mistakes.  I won in the end, but my score probably would have been higher if she hadn't  those 2 provinces.

My second match was terrible.  I somehow did not notice a couple of key cards during the opening and did a lot of other really idiotic things.  I lost horribly and it was completely my fault.

My third match was just a matter of bad luck.  I went for a Gardens rush, another started going for Gardens as well but did not commit, and a third half-heartedly started following halfway through the game.  I got a favourable Gardens split and the game ended on piles, but I lost by one point.  I was a single card off from Gardens levelling up.  Heartbreaking.

I know that some other players who only had 1 win got to to move on to the semi-finals because their one win came from a group that had extremely bloated scores from huge Gardens.  So yeah.  Disappointing.  But I was really, really stupid in my second game, so I put that on me.

7 Wonders
I hadn't played this in about a year.  It was base only.  The tournament structure had six tables with (I think) 7 players each.  The winner from each table advanced to the final table.  Very simple.  By tournament rules, you could not choose between sides A and B; you got what you were dealt.  They allowed us to change that if everybody at the table agreed on a method.  Personally, I much prefer the choice.

In the first round, my table agreed on only using side A (there were a couple of players who were still new to the game, and I preferred that over full random).  I was dealt Giza.  My friend had Alexandria on my left and my other neighbour had Babylon.  I think it's a bit problematic for a tournament to allow friends to sit next to each other due to the chance of collusion, but whatever.

The strategy with Giza is pretty straight forward.  I was really resource-starved after Age I (I had to pass on two Caravanseries because I had no access to a second wood, and I had to discard for coin at least once) but I managed to make it up by the end of Age II.

A highlight -- for the final hand of Age I, I had to choose between left and right Trading Posts.  Since Alexandria was left, I figured it would be better to trade right.  By the end of the game, I had purchased Ore from Alexandria 3-5 times.  The only thing I bought from Babylon were commodities, so I never got any use out of that TP.

Another highlight -- I built my second wonder stage on the first turn of Age III, burying a Palace that I couldn't afford.  I was then passed the second Palace, which I immediately buried for stage 3 (other options were poor too).  I think the third hand allowed me to get the Arena, so I actually built my wonder stages just in time.
One of the "rookie" players actually ended in second place by a single point (bolstered a lot by a big Philosopher's Guild -- the one that counts neighbour's science).  I was first!  And if I had built the correct trading post in Age I, I could have done even better.

At the finalists table, at least two really wanted to play full random.  I ended up with Babylon B.  Babylon has always been my least favourite base game wonder.  In last year's tournament I got Babylon A for the initial table and came in second (I think).  As it turned out, the person who won at my table last year also won that tournament, and this year she was on my left with Ephesos B (my favourite wonder)!  I didn't realize it was her until the end of the game.  She also told me that Ephesos was her least favourite wonder.  On my right was Alexandria, but there was an empty chair between us so I ended up paying less attention to what he was doing.  Anyway, I like Babylon B better than Babylon A.  But still, I am not a fan.

Age I was not good for me.  I only got a few resources and commodities, 1 science card (tablet) and a couple of weak blues.  Halikarnassos (left of Ephesos) also went science.  Even though she was downstream from me, she got a better science start (having cloth to begin really helped her).  I got my tablet before Hali had started on science, and luckily nobody else followed suit (probably because everybody was savvy enough to know that 3 science players spells doom for all).

My Age II was much better.  By the end of it I had all three commodities, a Caravansery, my first two wonder stages (and the resources to build the third), a military card and a couple more science.  Hali was still doing better on science thanks to her round 2 passing advantage.  IIRC she was almost done her second set while I only had two tablets and a gear.  I also had a decent amount of money thanks to Ephesos purchasing from me.

My 2 military beat Ephesos (at 0) but Alexandria was going steady on red.  It was weird because Rhodes was on his right, and Rhodes did not even try to fight back.  Alexandria did not go overboard on reds either, I think he built 2 in Age I and one more in Ages II and III.  At the end of the game, he said he just doesn't like to let other people win military.  I don't know if he gets into counter-productive arms races, but it worked out fine for him at our table.  He built up just enough to deter us from competing.

Age III was scary.  Unlike the Dominion tournament, it was clear that everybody at the table knew what they were doing.  Everybody could actually afford things.  The very first hand was scary because my neighbour Ephesos' first card was the Philosopher's Guild (VP for neighbour's green).  By the end of the game, it was worth 15 points for her.  Insanity!

By the end of the game, I had not seen a single Guild card in my hand.  Hali ended with 2 sets of science plus a tablet and gear (so, short 1 compass for set 3).  Olympia (seated between Hali and Rhodes) and Alexandria got most of the guilds between them, with almost all of them being beneficial for them (Alexandria built the Scientist's Guild to deny me).  Rhodes got many of the blues, but Ephesos had the biggest blue stack.  That blue stack was very intimidating; on my last turn I had to buy a resource from a neighbour and that big line of blue pushed me to pay it to Alexandria.

As for myself, I ended the game with exactly 2 science sets plus my final wonder (which I only built because that hand was really bad) for a science score of 31.  Hali's science score was 36, so I really managed to catch up.  I had a smattering of VP from all other sources (except for guilds).  Notably, Ephesos still had not built a red card.  I think the main reason was because she knew I could trump her, since I was passing to her.  I didn't built any age III reds either, so my one age II red managed to net me 8VP.

All scores were over 50 at the end.  My neighour Ephesos, the previous champion, clocked in at 63.  She was second place.  I scored 64 points.  Yes, I won both games by a single point.  My prize was a $40 gift card for our local board game cafe and, more importantly, a really fun story.

Other Games I Played

Dead of Winter
I taught a group of 4 strangers how to play.  There was some good thematic stuff going on, with my John Price, the student, following the principal to the school to rummage around.  Despite the possibility of a traitor, it turned out that everybody was good.  We all managed to fulfill our secret objectives (me on the last turn, running to the hospital to find medicine).  We all had fun.

Splendor
Later on, I noticed that some people (including a couple from the DoW game) were playing Splendor for the first time and doing so very incorrectly.  They thought that the Nobles also counted your chips, not just your purchased cards, so there was one player sitting on a bunch of chips with 3 nobles and only one card bought.  I let them know their mistake, there was a collective lightbulb moment and they restarted their game.

One of the players had to leave so they invited me to join them.  I'm still pretty unfamiliar with the game, but it was fun.  One guy won pretty handily (about 4+ points ahead of the rest of us), but they all really enjoyed the engine building aspect (which was, of course, absent when they had their rules misunderstanding).  He won by focusing on the level 1 buildings early on when the rest of us were going between levels 1 and 2 trying to net some points.  It seemed like he was behind, but then suddenly he was getting noble after noble (not all on the same turn -- we remembered that rule) and he was suddenly buying the level 2 cards with ease.  They all wanted to play again.

Now we were all savvy to this tactic so we all went at it.  I kind of stumbled about at first but I somehow managed to get a combination that coincided with multiple nobles.  The previous winner (on my right) and I were going for the same colours while the other two players were competing with each other.  I managed to stay two steps ahead of my counterpoint.  We actually ran out of the level 1 cards.

There was one key moment.  My neighbour picked up 3 chips with the intention of buying the only available level 2 black gem (what kind of gems are those, anyway?).  He did not notice that I already had everything needed to buy it, which I did.  The amazing thing was that it wasn't only him who groaned -- the other two players cried out as well.  I was barely paying attention to them because they were aiming for different nobles, but they both wanted black cards as well.  It was hilarious and wonderful.  I won that game with a good lead.  The others expressed an interest in buying a copy in the future, which was even sweeter than the win.  It's always nice when everybody at the table has a good time.

For the record, I know that this "spam tier 1 cards" strategy may not actually be the most competitive.  I've read reviews that talk about tournaments where the winners build point-scoring cards (read: not tier 1) almost exclusively.  I just have no idea how that works.

Betrayal At House on the Hill
I will avoid spoilers here.

At the very end of the conference, my friend and I ran into another friend of mine (plus two of his friends).  He had just purchased a copy of Betrayal and was punching out the tokens.  They invited us to join them for a game, so we obliged.  Most of the other players got buffed pretty heavily.  My sanity went up extremely high, but my physical stats got nerfed into the ground and I never found a single item or omen.

I ended up becoming the traitor anyway, but it was late in the game, I was super weak, the others were powerful and loaded with items and useful omens, and key haunt-specific items for the heroes spawned just a couple tiles away from one of the heroes.  My character was killed immediately, though that was not the end of the game because I still had a monster that they had to defeat.

Unfortunately, all my movement rolls were really bad.  Instead of running at the separated heroes and picking them off one by one, my monster just travelled a single tile each turn for a few rounds, allowing the heroes to group up together.  When the groups finally collided, it was pretty much a foregone conclusion.  Nonetheless, it took about 4 full rounds for them to bring down my creature.  It was hilarious.

Amyitis
I just learned this game recently; we've actually been playing it here in the games forum.  I did not actually play it this weekend, but I found a used copy of it for $20 at the convention flea market.  Everything was in good condition and the discount was steep.  I am enjoying the game online so I decided to pick it up.  I don't think it is particularly innovative and the theme feels a bit generic, but the mechanics seem solid and, from what I can tell, there are multiple viable paths to victory.  There are a lot of tough choices and a lot of stuff to think about in the game, but it also seems very simple to teach and learn.  I look forward to playing it IRL.



Overall, it was a very good weekend.

[Lekkit]

Congrats on the tournament win! And congratulations for getting to play a ton of games!

[ghostofmars]

Congrats on your 7 wonders win

Splendor
For the record, I know that this "spam tier 1 cards" strategy may not actually be the most competitive.  I've read reviews that talk about tournaments where the winners build point-scoring cards (read: not tier 1) almost exclusively.  I just have no idea how that works.

I've read that Splendor is one of the games where nongamers consistently beat gamers in the first games. Gamers like to build an engine of the level 1 cards and then collect the higher level cards whereas nongamers just save for the big point cards. In my first game, I was beaten by one player that had two 5vp cards and only ~4 other cards.

After a few more games, I would say that the basic strategy works like this (spoiler tags for those that want to figure it out by themselves)
After the cards/nobles have been revealed look if there are some efficient high-value point cards (high points/crystal ratio). Check if there is some overlap between them (crystal color needed). If you can get some efficient level II cards that help with that color, the saving strategy is probably faster. You may want to reserve the critical level II cards, if you see that other players go for the same color. Level I cards are only bought if they are cheap and if you plan to use them for at least three of the level II/III cards.
In games where there is no overlap between the level III cards or if they are not very cost efficient, look for overlap in the nobles. If you find overlap there, go for an engine build collecting the colors of these nobles. It is helpful if there some level III card that needs the same colors.
I wonder if Splendor would also make a nice forum game?

[GendoIkari]

Macao is great. My wife and I made custom playing boards for it to hold the cubes and the rondel... will post pictures later. The English translations are known for being pretty bad; so it's easy for new players to mis-interpret some of the cards.

[eHalcyon]

I learned some more new (to me) games recently!  A friend has been inviting me to join another gaming group, so I've been playing with relative strangers.

Chinatown
An old negotiation game; I was the only one who had never played before. 

The game plays for several rounds.  At the start of each round, every player randomly receives ownership of various city blocks (set up in multiple grids on the board) as well various tiles which represent businesses.  The goal is to place matching sets of tiles onto the board in adjacent city blocks.  At the end of each round, you receive income based on the businesses on the board that you own.  You can place incomplete sets on the board, but complete sets are worth significantly more.  Different businesses have different sizes to become complete (e.g. I think tea houses only need 3 tiles whereas an antiques shop needs 6).  Since you are receiving city blocks and tiles at random, it's tough to come up with full sets of tiles and appropriate locations on the board to place them.  The crux of the game is negotiation -- you have to buy, sell and trade tiles and block ownership with others.  You can also form joint ventures with an agreed-upon way of splitting the income.

We played a 3p game and I was somewhat less cooperative and less patient than the other two expected.  While the other two tended to hold out to see if they could get a bigger business (e.g. the 6-size antique shop) onto the board, I tended to drop smaller complete sets early on.  I regretted this a bit because I ended up owning a large swathe of connected blocks in one grid that could have accommodated some big businesses, but I had dropped a small set there in the first round (before I had acquired the other adjoining city blocks).  However, my sporadic builds also made it difficult for the others to make big sets, and I think they held out too long for those.  One other player also joined me for a couple of big businesses while offering me generous (IMO) 50-50 splits.  I did indeed come away with the win at the end.

Overall impression -- good game, though there's a lot to track.  You really need to write down your deals or else it's easy to miscount you income by accident.

Cosmic Encounter

Played 3 games, all with 4 players.  In the first game I had the Loser, which allows me to declare an Upset before encounter cards are chosen and makes the loser win.  I used the power very well and won pretty handily.

In the second game, I was the Macron (can only ever send one ship, but it counts as 4 in strength).  Another player was the Parasite (can always ally) and he ended up getting this ridiculous combo.  He had a flare that let him return a played artifact card to his hand (once per encounter), the Emotion Control artifact (turns attack cards into negotiations), and the Forcefield artifact (removes opposing allies).  He also had the Macron flare, which allowed him to double the power of his ships.  I think he had some other flares as well.  He used the Parasite power to join defense at key times in order to maintain his hand.  His flare and artifact combos gave him a permanent get-out-of-jail-free combo, turning any losing battles into negotiatons, but the Macron flare meant that he had a good chance of winning every time anyway.

There was one turn where I was attacking the Parasite player.  Instead of using the above combo, he wanted to do something else (he had an artifact that turned Negotiate cards into a 15 power attack).  But he miscounted by 1 and it allowed me to win a colony.  This would prove key.

Another player was the Vacuum and he had been working on depleting the Parasite fleet with his power.  I think the fourth player was the Miser, who essentially kept two hands.  We all ended up at 4 colonies.  IIRC, the last turn saw me attacking the Vacuum player and I had to choose which planet of his to target.  My choice would dictate which other playe could join me.  I chose my target to allow the Parasite to join me, or else he would join the defence and it would be trouble.  It worked out, so I achieved joint victory thanks to that one earlier miscount by the Parasite player.

The third game I was the Mind (in any encounter, may look at one player's hand) and I managed to draw my own flare (can look at both players' hands) as well as the Gambler flare (before encounter cards are revealed, call a spread; if the number is less than the difference between the two attack cards, add that value to my own).  It was a nice combo, but the power was less helpful than it should have been probably because I was exhausted and not that familiar with the game anyway.  I eventually lost the flares because I didn't have a solid way of maintaining my hand.  I can't remember what the others had, except that the winner had Reincarnator(?), which had him randomly become a new alien whenever he lost an encounter.  It worked out for him.

Overall impression -- fun, but I'm glad that I didn't impulse buy it when I first started getting serious with the hobby (I came close a few times).  Some of the flare combinations seem very overpowered, and the interactions between all the powers and cards can create some very confusing scenarios even when playing with the simplest aliens.  I'd play it again though.

Council of Verona

Played with 5.  It's a micro game where you draft and then play characters to one of two spaces in the center (either on the council or in exile).  Some have immediate effects while others have agendas and spaces for bid tokens.  After you play a card, you place one of your tokens onto one of the cards on the board.  Your tokens have different numerical values and they gain you points if the corresponding agenda is fulfilled.  Example agenda -- "Council has more Capulets than Montagues" or "More characters in Exile than on Council" or "Romeo and Juliet are together".

It was strange.  I drafted haphazardly; each player only got 3 characters in the 5p game.  Not many plays at all.  I did not do well. 

Overall impression: not that impressed, but it's more interesting than Love Letter at least.

Mascarade

Played twice with 5 players each time.  Very fun game.  There's a nice mix of bluffing, planning and chaos.  I don't really remember the first game except that I don't think I won.  In the second game, my friend on my left was first and swapped (or not) with me.  When it got back to my turn, I knew that there was a chance that I was the Thief and I called it.  My friend didn't counterclaim, but on his turn he also claimed Thief.  I figured that he had to be lying or he would have called me out to start and I was right, so I got off to a strong start.  After that there was a whole lot of swapping and counterclaiming (Spy and Fool were in the game).  The courthouse built up to 7 coins.  We had a vague idea where the Judge was but the players kept swapping for it.  On my turn I declared Spy (correctly!) and picked who I thought had it.  I found it.  My friend did something inconsequential and then the next player deliberated before declaring Judge.  I counterclaimed and won.  It turned out that somebody along the way had swapped when they thought they had not (or vice versa) so that player legitimately thought that he had the Judge.  It was hilarious.

Overall impression: Fun party game with a lot of laughs.  Might even pick up a copy of my own.




I also got to play my copy of The Ancient World again.  I think I've played it 4-5 times now.  I still haven't won once but I am enjoying it a lot anyway.  I think my problem is that I am not very good at pursuing the banner sets.  I tend to take the buildings I want and attack titans whenever I am able, and then halfway through the game I realize that I have 1-2 of every colour which is not good for scoring at all.

[GendoIkari]

I did not like Cosmic Encounter. Too Munchkin-like.

[eHalcyon]

I did not like Cosmic Encounter. Too Munchkin-like.

I definitely see the similarities.  The thing is, I dislike Munchkin because it drags on forever and it always plays out the same.  Cosmic Encounter, however, seems to move more quickly and the giant stack of different powers means that every game is different.  I also think the player interaction is more interesting than in Munchkin.

[Lekkit]

I definitely see the similarities.  The thing is, I dislike Munchkin because it drags on forever and it always plays out the same.  Cosmic Encounter, however, seems to move more quickly and the giant stack of different powers means that every game is different.  I also think the player interaction is more interesting than in Munchkin.

This is definately why I can play Cosmic Encounter but won't bother to play Munchkin.

[GendoIkari]

I did not like Cosmic Encounter. Too Munchkin-like.

I definitely see the similarities.  The thing is, I dislike Munchkin because it drags on forever and it always plays out the same.  Cosmic Encounter, however, seems to move more quickly and the giant stack of different powers means that every game is different.  I also think the player interaction is more interesting than in Munchkin.

I can see that. But one of the things I dislike about Munchkin is the chaotic / non-structured fighting system. Where people can just play what they want when they want with no defined order or priority. Cosmic Encounter has this same sort of thing with the way people can choose to jump in on battles; or the way discussions happen to try and reach agreements. I like games that have very specifically defined rules about turn priority.

[eHalcyon]

No lengthy session reports, but I got a chance to play a few more new games.

Elysium

I bought this before trying it despite mixed reviews (notably, a very lacklustre review by SUSD but a surprisingly positive review by Tom Vasel and company).  It comes from the publisher of Splendor.  The concept intrigued me, the art is beautiful, and I love the Greek mythology theme however pasted on it is.  The KdJ nomination pushed me over the edge.

The game works like this.  There are 8 decks (families) representing 8 different gods of the Greek pantheon.  For each game, you pick just 5 of them to mix together.  Each family has a distinct theme and feel, e.g. Zeus gets bonus VP, Poseidon facilitates aggressive attacks, Hades focuses around transferring cards (a key concept in the game).  This variable game setup reminds me a lot of Dominion.  The cards all have various special effects and they come in 3 levels (1, 2 and 3).

The game is primarily a drafting game and thus reminiscent of 7 Wonders, though you draft from a common pool rather than hand-to-hand.  You start each round with 4 columns of different colours.  On your turn, you draft a card from the center and then "dismiss" any one of your columns.  Cards have column prerequisites on them, so your selection becomes more limited as the round progresses.  Cards you draft go above your player board into your "Domain".

Then there is the "Writing of the Legends" phase, where you transfer cards from above to below your player board, the "Elysium".  Transfers cost money and the number is limited, but it is the primary way to get points.  You score points by forming sets according to family or level.  Being the first to make certain sets also gets you bonus points.

There is some interesting tension in how players dismiss their columns during the drafting phase, and the "writing" phase has tension between forming those sets quickly vs. keeping your special powers or engine intact.  Very, very neat.

Welcome to the Dungeon

Very nice little push-your-luck microgame.  On your turn, you either pass or draw a monster card from the deck.  If the latter, you secretly look at the card and then choose to either put the monster into the Dungeon or else discard one piece of equipment from the common character.  When all but one person has passed, they take the character with whatever equipment remains and enter the Dungeon with all its monsters.  If you survive, you get a Success card.  If you fail, you flip your reference card to the red side.  If you fail twice, you are eliminated from the game.  You win by either getting two Successes or by being the last player remaining.

It's a very simple game with a surprising amount of tension.  There are four different characters with different equipment which adds replayability.  Not sure what else to say.  It works!

Red7

A simple-but-deep card game by Carl Chudyk of Glory to Rome fame.  The deck is made up of 49 cards, 1-7 in 7 colours.  Each colour has a different win condition printed on it.  At the start of the game, you get 7 cards and 1 card in your "palette", i.e. a face-up tableau in front of you.  The initial win condition is "highest card wins".  The player to the right of the winning player is first player.

On your turn, you either play a card to your palette, discard a card to the center (thus changing the win condition), or both.  At the end of your turn, you must be winning the game.  If you can't achieve this, you are eliminated.  Last player standing wins.

In some advanced and variant rules, there are some other twists.  For example, playing a 5 to your palette forces you to play another card to your palette.  If you discard a card that is larger than the number of cards in your palette, you get to draw a card.

Very simple, extremely quick, but surprisingly deep decisions that aren't obvious at first.


Both Welcome to the Dungeon and Red7 are very affordable.  I recommend picking them up if you have the chance.

[Voltaire]

I'm all about Elysium. It was actually that mediocre SUSD review that sold me on the game* - a drafting/tableau game with high production values and *gasp* a pasted-on theme? SOLD.

*and why they're such good reviewers - even though they didn't like the game, they did such a good job explaining why I knew I would personally like the game based on my own tastes

[eHalcyon]

Dice Tower was a big factor for me.  Those guys are so big on theme that their praise suggests extremely strong gameplay.

One more new game!

Monikers

It's a party game in the style of Taboo and Charades.  There are a bunch of cards with different people and a description.  Players individually choose which ones to use from a hand to form the deck for the game, so they start with some knowledge.

In the first round, it plays like Taboo.  You take a card and then describe it, trying to get others to guess it.  You try to get as many as possible until time runs out.  And players take turns doing this until the deck runs out.

The neat thing is that you reuse the same deck for a second  and third round.  In the second, you can only say one word.  In the third, you must be silent (so it's Charades at that point).  The fact that you have developed a sort of meta around these cards means that the restriction isn't that bad.  In the game I played, Oedipus was guessable in the final round with just a pelvic thrust!

[AdamH]

Elysium

I bought this before trying it despite mixed reviews (notably, a very lacklustre review by SUSD but a surprisingly positive review by Tom Vasel and company).  It comes from the publisher of Splendor.  The concept intrigued me, the art is beautiful, and I love the Greek mythology theme however pasted on it is.  The KdJ nomination pushed me over the edge.

The game works like this.  There are 8 decks (families) representing 8 different gods of the Greek pantheon.  For each game, you pick just 5 of them to mix together.  Each family has a distinct theme and feel, e.g. Zeus gets bonus VP, Poseidon facilitates aggressive attacks, Hades focuses around transferring cards (a key concept in the game).  This variable game setup reminds me a lot of Dominion.  The cards all have various special effects and they come in 3 levels (1, 2 and 3).

The game is primarily a drafting game and thus reminiscent of 7 Wonders, though you draft from a common pool rather than hand-to-hand.  You start each round with 4 columns of different colours.  On your turn, you draft a card from the center and then "dismiss" any one of your columns.  Cards have column prerequisites on them, so your selection becomes more limited as the round progresses.  Cards you draft go above your player board into your "Domain".

Then there is the "Writing of the Legends" phase, where you transfer cards from above to below your player board, the "Elysium".  Transfers cost money and the number is limited, but it is the primary way to get points.  You score points by forming sets according to family or level.  Being the first to make certain sets also gets you bonus points.

There is some interesting tension in how players dismiss their columns during the drafting phase, and the "writing" phase has tension between forming those sets quickly vs. keeping your special powers or engine intact.  Very, very neat.

I picked up Elysium on this recommendation, mostly. It sounds like it has most of the things I like in board games. I've played it twice, once with 4 players and once with 3 players.

Everybody describes this game as a drafting game and it feels like 7 Wonders. I think the only resemblance this game has to 7 Wonders is the theme -- the "drafting" mechanic just feels like worker placement to me, and I honestly don't understand why people think it's drafting. Drafting necessarily requires a hand and worker placement is when you're taking things from a common pool.

That's OK, though. I like the worker placement aspect of the game, especially with the columns. Usually you just take the most important thing that you think will be contested, but now you have quests to compete for your attention along with cards. That plus you have to throw away a column which pulls you toward the other end of things: if I keep this column around I can take this thing last because nobody else can get it anymore. Some people I've played with say it's counter intuitive and they say it's hard to figure out what the best move is, but that's exactly why I like this mechanic. If a game can be intuitive after 3 plays, then it doesn't have enough replay value for me -- I want strategic depth that lasts a long time, I want to continue to learn new things about a game 100 plays in.

I tend to like games where you look for synergies between cards and build your strategy around it. Of course Dominion has this, but I also see it in games like Agricola, Last Will, and Greed. This element is present in Elysium, but I don't know if it's there to the extent that I like it in those other games: that isn't to say it's not there, but I haven't played it enough to really see. Hopefully it isn't just "these cards are good early, these cards are good late, these cards are mildly good all of the time" but more like "I have card A and I see card B; together they are worth more than the sum of their parts".

When I played with 4 people, I really liked how it was difficult for everyone to get a quest. When I played with 3 people, it was rare for someone to not get a quest, just because there was an extra one out there. It seemed like one of the best mechanics of the game was just missing in 3P.

Conversely, I tend to dislike worker placement games with more than 3 people -- often I find you can't really expect anything all that desirable to be left there for you once everyone else gets a chance at the board, so it takes some of the strategic finesse away from the game and replaces it with extra play time (which I really dislike) and some tactics and luck. Granted, I don't know if this game has that issue -- I've only played 4P once and it was my first time so nobody had any idea what they were doing, but I expect this to be a big factor in how much I like the game going forward.

It looks like in a 2P game there are only 2 available quests, which looks exciting. I actually think this game might be best with two, but I haven't tried it yet.

The iconography on the cards is very thorough. Normally I hate icons but I actually liked them in this game.

The variety mechanic: you have X families, you choose 5 of them to play with. Honestly I haven't even read all of the cards (I don't really want to, I'd rather not be suddenly better than everyone else at this game so I'm going to wait on this) but in my first two games I didn't really feel any sort of synergy or interactions between card families as I played. I really hope this changes, because that's what will take this game from 10 plays to 100 for me.

I really liked all of the other mechanics. After 2 games I really want to play more of it, and this is the best possible thing I can say about a game after 2 plays.

[eHalcyon]

Everybody describes this game as a drafting game and it feels like 7 Wonders. I think the only resemblance this game has to 7 Wonders is the theme -- the "drafting" mechanic just feels like worker placement to me, and I honestly don't understand why people think it's drafting. Drafting necessarily requires a hand and worker placement is when you're taking things from a common pool.

I'm going to correct your terminology here.  Drafting is simply when you select an option which prevents other people from selecting the same option.  The easiest place to see this is in sports (and fantasy sports), where there are player drafts that allow teams to select players from a single common pool.  Elysium is definitely a drafting game.  7 Wonders drafts hand to hand, but that is not the only way to draft.

As noted on the BGG page, a more precise name for Worker Placement is "action drafting".  You already get that you can have worker placement without the physical act of placing a worker.  And I guess you could say that Elysium is this kind of game, but I think a fundamental part of Worker Placement games is that the same pool of actions (possibly expanding) is available each round.  That's not the case here -- when you select a card, it becomes yours and nobody else's.



I compare it to 7 Wonders because of the theme, the drafting, the tableau building, and the elements of set collection.

Regarding synergy between families, I think Hermes will be your favourite deck.

[AdamH]

I've never heard of "drafting" being used that way before in terms of board games, it's always described a hand that you pass around. I'm not saying you're wrong, it's probably my group that uses that term differently then.

[eHalcyon]

I've never heard of "drafting" being used that way before in terms of board games, it's always described a hand that you pass around. I'm not saying you're wrong, it's probably my group that uses that term differently then.

Some other games that are tagged as Card Drafting on BGG include Nations, Kemet, Splendor and Ticket to Ride.  Drafting from a common pool is (I think) actually more common in board games, but usually as one part of a bigger game.  7 Wonders is probably the most popular game that is totally focused on drafting, and many other draft-focused games follow in the same style, which I guess is why that style of drafting is now more well known as "the card drafting mechanism".  Or maybe it's because of the popularity of the Booster Draft format in MtG.

In any case, I'm glad you've enjoyed your games so far! 

[eHalcyon]

Thanks for reminding me that this thread exists.  I played two more games this weekend!

Tragedy Looper

One player is the Mastermind, a villain who is trying to incite a terrible incident.  The other players are protagonists who have the ability to rewind time.  The Mastermind sets up the scenario and the plot (there are a bunch provided with the game, but it's really designed to allow people to make their own; you can already find fan-made scenarios online).  A scenario involves multiple NPCs stationed among 4 locations, with various events occurring at specific times depending on certain conditions.

The game lasts for several Loops, each of which comprise a maximum number of Days.  Each Day, the Mastermind puts out several cards face-down to influence and manipulate the NPCs.  Then the Protagonists do the same.  The cards are then all revealed and resolved.  Then the Mastermind tells the Protagonists if any events have occurred and if the Protagonists have lost.

In the event of a loss, the Loop ends and the next one begins.  To win, the Protagonists only need to make it through one full Loop without a loss.  If they run out of Loops, they can still win if they can correctly identify which Roles are present in the game, and which NPCs correspond to those Roles.

We played this game twice.  The first game was a mess; our Mastermind (who owns the game and should be the one to teach it) had never actually played it before, and it had been a while since he last reviewed the rules.  The second game was better because we all knew how the mechanisms fit together.  We Protagonists won easily though.

I can't give many details because there are actual spoilers.  The key thing to note is that the two sides are pretty different.  The Mastermind needs to bluff and set up the loss such that it is unclear what actually caused the loss.  The Protagonists need to deduce and respond appropriately.

The game is really interesting though.  I can't really say much more.

Artifacts, Inc.

This is the most recent release from Red Raven Games.  I received my KS copy recently and finally got a chance to play it.  First, I want to note that the component quality is really nice.  The cards could be better, but the cardboard tokens are the best I've ever seen.  I've never had any chits punch out as smoothly.  Usually chits still have a little divot or dimple from where it remained connected to the frame, but they're pretty much indiscernable here.  So smooth.

Anyway, the game.  You play as archaeologists trying to gain reputation(?) by building up your team, recovering artifacts and selling them to museums.  You roll dice (your adventurers) and then place them on personal spaces to take actions.  It's sort of like a dice worker placement game, except each player takes all of their own actions at once and the actual spaces are personal rather than communal.

You start out with a few basic cards, but one of your actions is to Buy, which allows you to purchase asset cards from a Splendor-like setup.  When you buy cards, they go into your tableau which consists of two rows (and infinite columns).  You have to place your card adjacent to something, and some cards care about what they are next to.  Your Buy action also allows you to upgrade your cards, making them more powerful and valuable.

A big part of the game is collecting artifacts and selling them to the museums.  This plays out as an area majority thing.  You sell 1 fossil to the museum, you place a cube on the 1 space in that museum (which represents fulfilling an order for 1 artifact).  You sell 6, you put your cube on the 6 spot.  If there isn't a spot remaining for that number of artifacts, you can't sell that number.  At the end of the game, having the most cubes in a museum garners bonus points (with tie breaker being the biggest order size).

There's also an option to go diving for treasure.

I loved it.  I get the sense that the game can feel very different depending on which assets are available at the start.  Most of us ignored the Diving option, but later in the game there was a Diving Suit asset that would have made it a more powerful option.  I like that rolling dice limits your options a little, and you have to adapt to be as efficient as possible.  At the same time, I never really felt that "bad" rolls were hurting me too much.  There's always something decent you can do, and there are a few mitigation options available as well.

The game flow is interesting.  Find artifacts, sell for money, buy more stuff, repeat.  It's a comfortable cycle.  As the small orders fill up in Museums, you need to save up more artifacts before selling.  Alternatively, you may just sell to private collectors for some quick cash.

It's pretty simple in the end, and some people are classifying it as a filler.  I'm happy with the complexity and the kinds of decisions available in the game.  I recommend it!

[Kuildeous]

I enjoyed Tragedy Looper and would play again. The one thing I'd add is that the Protagonists should strive to never lose the same way twice. I haven't dissected the plots, but it seems to me that if the Protagonists can force each loss to happen only once, then they win on the last loop. I could be wrong on that.

After I played it a couple of times, I borrowed it to show other players. I bollixed up my Mastermind session so that I was unable to force a loss, and the Protagonists won on like the first or second loop. Not a very effective demonstration on my part.

A friend of mine has it, and I don't foresee the need to buy my own copy, so I'll play it again later sometime. Same friend also has X-Com, so that game will probably come out before Tragedy Looper—if only so we can get a full game of X-Com going.

[eHalcyon]

Went to a board game cafe yesterday and played a bunch of games!

2-Player Real-Time Mech Dueling Game

I don't remember the actual name of it, but I think it starts with an H and it's based on a video game with the same name.  It belonged to a friend who loved it enough that he picked up a second copy (stand-alone expansion?) to allow up to 4 players.

Each player has a deck filled with various weapons, armour and special ability cards.  It has an interesting mechanism where you simultaneously simply flip cards from your deck as fast as you can and either play them face-up as is or face-down as defensive cover.  When you've played at least 3 cards you can hit the Fire button to end the phase, at which point you have initiative and both players resolve the cards they managed to play.  You may wish to Fire earlier because most cards you play generate Heat, which can damage your mech if you accumulate too much.

Your deck is also your health; when you run out, you toss one of your reshuffle tokens.  You start with 3, and when you run out of cards after that, you lose.  Our third player arrived just after we started so we played with zero reshuffle tokens.  Since I was a beginner, we also played with pre-made mechs (decks) instead of onstructing custom ones.

Unfortunately, I did not like it that much.  It was probably beginner's luck, but I won handily while having no idea what I was doing.  I simply played all cards face-up and hit Fire if I ever went past 5ish Heat.  Part of my victory was probably because my opponent was unlucky and was never able to move into short range, where his basic weapons were most effective.  By the end, I had actually put us into long range combat where his basic weapons were actually useless, whereas my basic weapons were simply consistent.  Overall, I got the impression that luck plays a huge factor in the game, more than I personally like.  That said, there may be a lot more skill involved when constructing your own deck and playing a longer game with multiple reshuffles.


Tales of the Arabian Nights

This was the second time I've played it, and I had such a good time that I may actually buy it.  The first time I played it was not as fun simply because of horrible luck -- I almost never got any stories where I got to make use of my skills.  Not the case this time though.  I had a rough first turn, but after that it was mostly smooth (and wild) sailing.  I went into the game knowing that (for example) choosing to Rob somebody was no guarantee at all that you would get to make use of Stealth and Stealing skill, so I didn't stress as much about trying to pick the best option (since it never works out anyway).  Not only was this more fun, but luck made it lucrative as well.

I was Scheherazade, so of course I started with Storytelling.  I chose to augment that ability by also starting with Acting and Disguise and Appearance.  I left on a Gourmet quest to taste the greatest foods around the world.

I've forgotten what happened exactly, but a rough first morning left me Enslaved (all my destiny points go to somebody else while under the effects of the status).  Luckily, I encountered a con game that afternoon.  With my particular set of skills, I thought I was in a great position to Aid in the con... and it paid off!  I was able to pay myself out of slavery with only 1 turn of destiny loss.

A funny thing happened... I backtracked, and in the same city as the first con game, I ran into yet another con game.  I could have chosen the same option to receive known positive rewards, but I decided to try a different action.  It did not work out in my favour.  Oh well.

My journeys took me around the world.  I slowly picked up some more skills as I pursued exotic cuisine.  My Acting and Disguise ability got me out of a few hairy situations.  Eventually I picked up my third Quest marker... but a rules misunderstanding led us to believe that we always had to return to Baghdad to turn them in.  I continued moving home.  When I finally reached Baghdad, I encountered a ship captain (even though I was travelling only on land).  I foolishly tried to rob the captain and I was ultimately left destitute and thrown overboard.  Even though I was nowhere near the ocean, I still somehow drifted all the way out to southeastern-most island, south of Pan'Pan.  I was Lost.

I did not like being Lost, so I opted to take one of the special lost encounters.  I set forth and ended up walking on an ancient road that led me all the way to the Jeweled Fortress in Africa on the west side of the board.  I entered the fortress and used my sweet storytelling skills to inform the king of all the troubles that had befallen the world outside his doors.  I gained a bunch of Destiny and Story points for my trouble, and I think I gained either wealth or a new skill or two as well.  It was a big jump for me.

I eventually made it back to Baghdad and turned in my Gourmet quest, learning some Courtly Graces in the process (but not before having a negative encounter due to my lack of Courtly Graces).  Now that I had tasted of the world's finest dishes, I now wanted a taste of love (I forget the exact quest name, but I just wanted to be in 4+ cities or gem spaces and then roll high enough to find the woman of my dreams). 

While looking for love, I somehow ended up Lost again.  This time I cried for help and (IIRC) I encountered a dervish who seemed a little off.  I boldly decided to accept his help, and my charm (courtly graces, I think) managed to get him on my side even though he really was a little deranged.  He led me all the way to  a Haunted House and said that I was destined to cleanse the place of the spirit that possessed it.  I heard a disembodied voice call out, "Scheherazade, what shall I do with it?"  I can't even remember the first two options because I immediately went for the third -- I told the voice to just "put it in the corner, please".  This led to the spirit showering me with gold and treasure, and my Storytelling ability (I think!) once more allowed me to come away with a positive outcome... I became a Sultan.  Not only did that make me obscenely, fabulously wealthy, but I also got to skip from city to city and ignore all the terrain spots inbetween.  What a spectacular change in fortune.

I continued trying to fulfill my quest, even though the awards for it at this point were actually detrimental (my wealth could no longer increase and my status was already above the one I would have been granted, so the only thing I could really get out of it was the Married status, which ties you down).  Filled with hubris with my new nobility, I swiftly travelled to Su-Chou where I attacked an entire war fleet with one tiny little boat.  But I managed to convince the fleet's commander to accept a one-on-one challenge.  I still had no skill with weapons so I lost the fight and was Wounded, but my courtly graces(?) earned the respect of the captain and I got something good out of the exchange anyway (I forget what though). 

By my last turn I had ended up down south again somehow but my fabulous wealth allowed me to quickly travel up the coast.  I stopped just east of Su-Chou.  I was Blessed (all the way from my first quest, but this was the first time I both was able and remembered to use it) and had the ability to bend fate to my own will.  Still searching for love, I arranged an encounter with a Beautiful Princess.  Now, I had learned the art of seduction, but I was still reeling a bit from my Sultan-ly status and my semi-successful attack on the war fleet.  (Actually, I was still Wounded so I had no access to Appearance and maybe not Seduction either).  In any case, I went for a more direct route -- I chose to abduct the princess.

Things did not go as planned.  I was caught (due to lacking Stealth and Stealing, I think) and banished, becoming an Outlaw of Su-Chou (now my Origin).  But somewhere in this escapade I managed to find love!  So I finished that quest and was Married... and the Origin marker was already in the nearest city of Su'Chou.  Tragedy!  I would be Imprisoned if I ever set foot in Su-Chou again, but I could not help but return there to visit my new spouse.  Well, I never got to see how that would turn out.  My new quest was Carried Away, in which a djinn magically sent me to a faraway land... and I gained the Lost status once again.  Incredible.  But that was my last turn, so I never got to see what other adventures would have awaited me.

In the end, I had: Quick Thinking, Acting and Disguise, Wisdom, Courtly Graces, Storytelling, Scholarship, Appearance and Seduction.  I was Wounded and Lost but I was also a Blessed and Married Sultan.

After this second game, I'm far more on board with the weird and wild stories in the book.  I'm also wondering if the special Lost encounters always turn out so favourably... probably not if you don't have specific skills (or if you roll negatively on the destiny die).  I'm kind of curious if Storytelling is always a useful skill for those special location encounters.


Elysium

So this was only the second time I've played Elysium, even though I really enjoyed it last year.  And this play wasn't even with my own copy!  It was a 4p game with two of the same players as last time (also their second play) plus one new player.  We used the recommended families for our first game, so we used the others (Apollo, Hermes, Ares) this time.  We also took Hephaestus and Athena, so we actually left out the big three (Zeus, Poseidon, Hades).

I won by a pretty big margin.  The others were all in the 50s but I was all the way up at 86.  I won the full 16 points from Ares PP, completed a full family legend for each of Apollo, Hermes and Ares (and got the 2VP bonus for Apollo and Ares), and also completed a full level 1 legend (including the 3VP bonus and using 3 Gathering cards, each worth the full bonus 5VP in the end).  I got 3 bonus VP from the Hermes family legend as well, plus a nice 15VP in tokens.

I still really like this game.  I love the chaining together of different abilities.  The biggest cons are the large amount of reading at the start of each round as you try to process all the new cards, and the amount of AP that may be induced, but I don't mind either of those things.  My friends are lukewarm on it though.

Currently my favourite families are Apollo (Oracle), Athena (effects that give other players minor benefits as well) and Hermes (tricky interactions, mostly with other cards).  I'm not that fond of Ares.  I don't remember Poseidon being especially fun either, though I don't think I hated them either.  I'm not sure which of the other gods would be more fun to include though.  Transfers were really tight this game and Hades would help with that, but it might be tough to pay for those transfers without Hephaestus.  Then again, Zeus might allow you to pursue a strategy that gains VP without making many transfers at all...


Rhino Hero

Simple card stacking dexterity game.  You start with a hand of 5(?) roof cards.  Each one has L-shaped lines on it for walls, as does the Ground Floor card that starts in the center.  On your turn, you build walls according to the plan on the top card (there are special folded cards for walls) and then put a roof from your hand on top.  Many of the roof cards have special effects.  Your goal is to be first to play all your cards, or to have the fewest cards when the tower falls (tie-breaker is most special-effect cards).

It was neat, though my actually experience was not great.  I made the tower fall in the first game and so was automatically lost regardless of remaining cards in hand. in the second game, a direction reversal card and a "draw a card" card put me far behind in terms of handsize.  I only got to play one card in the end, while the winner had played a 2x card (lets you put down a second roof card immediately).  When the tower fell I still had 5 cards in hand while the winner only had 2.

It was still fun, but I feel like the special power cards can be pretty swingy.

[Kuildeous]

Tales of the Arabian Nights

This was the second time I've played it, and I had such a good time that I may actually buy it.  The first time I played it was not as fun simply because of horrible luck -- I almost never got any stories where I got to make use of my skills. 

If you like Tales of the Arabian Nights, I advise that you check out Agents of SMERSH. There are many of the same elements, but it has a lot more going on.

One thing that bugged me about Arabian Nights is that it felt like my decisions had no impact. It sounds like something where sneaking might be useful, so I choose that route but nope; I needed some other skill altogether. SMERSH still has some of that, but for the most part, it actually makes sense.

[eHalcyon]

Tales of the Arabian Nights

This was the second time I've played it, and I had such a good time that I may actually buy it.  The first time I played it was not as fun simply because of horrible luck -- I almost never got any stories where I got to make use of my skills. 

If you like Tales of the Arabian Nights, I advise that you check out Agents of SMERSH. There are many of the same elements, but it has a lot more going on.

One thing that bugged me about Arabian Nights is that it felt like my decisions had no impact. It sounds like something where sneaking might be useful, so I choose that route but nope; I needed some other skill altogether. SMERSH still has some of that, but for the most part, it actually makes sense.

Yeah, I've heard of SMERSH as well.  I should see if the board game cafe we go to has a copy of it available to try.

[junkers]

I initially avoided picking up Tragedy Looper because I was worried my Japanese wasn't good enough, but even as my interest in it grew, I was still skeptical as to how much replayability it had. Your posts have made me question that skepticism, though - thanks.

[Watno]

You don't need any Japanese for the English version of Tragedy Looper. I like it a lot, but it requires a lot of concentration.

[junkers]

You don't need any Japanese for the English version of Tragedy Looper. I like it a lot, but it requires a lot of concentration.

It caught my eye upon release in Japan, and I'd remained unaware that there was even going to be a translated version until this very thread. That last bit you mention, though, is what stuck with me in my initial impression and made me wary. I'm still a little torn as to which version to pick up, but it's looking more likely that I'll do it one way or another.

[GendoIkari]

I just learned Elysium, and searched this forum to see if it had been discussed. I really liked it; can't wait to play it again.

[eHalcyon]

I just learned Elysium, and searched this forum to see if it had been discussed. I really liked it; can't wait to play it again.

Any specific thoughts?  Did you play with the recommended starting set of families?

[GendoIkari]

I just learned Elysium, and searched this forum to see if it had been discussed. I really liked it; can't wait to play it again.

Any specific thoughts?  Did you play with the recommended starting set of families?

Yes, we used the recommended first set. It reminded me of Macao or Bruges, at least the card abilities part of that. The mechanic for returning a pillar each turn was unique and great. What was really interesting was the tough decisions. Similar to Race for the Galaxy (and Bruges), you have the thing where you really want to use the abilities of all your cards; but you have to be willing to part with some of them for the purposes of scoring.

I made that mistake in the game; and only scored things in the last 3 rounds. Though I was playing Zeus-heavy, so most of my score was in-game point tokens. Still, I was really needing to transfer way more than I could on the last round.

The experience was lessened a bit by the fact that 2 of the 4 players were being exceptionally slow in their decisions; when I could see how it isn't necessarily a very long game.

[eHalcyon]

I played 1.5 new games on Saturday!

Dead of Winter: The Long Night

I'm going to provide a little rules explanation here, but some of it will assume you are at least somewhat familiar and/or able to infer some stuff from context.

The Long Night (TLN) is a stand-alone expansion to Dead of Winter (DoW), a game I already own and like a lot.  DoW is a semi-cooperative game set during a zombie apocalypse.  In each game, there is a scenario with a main objective, plus each player has their own secret objective.  In order to win, you need to fulfill your secret objective, most of which also requires fulfilling the main objective.  There is a possibility of a traitor, in which case they want the main objective to fail (among various other things).  Players control a party of characters that explore a town, searching for items and killing zombies as they try to survive and do what they need to do.

TLN changes the game up in a few ways.  Along with a new roster of characters, updated item cards and a new deck of Crossroads cards (events/stories that may trigger on each player's turn), the game also features 3 modules: bandits, improvements and the Raxxon Corporation.  We played a 4-player game with the latter two modules, without mixing in the original game.

The improvements module provides a few more options for building items with permanent bonuses.  The improvements we saw in our game were all positive, almost strictly so (as know on f.ds, there are always edge cases).  Worst-case, we could just never build them and the game continues on as if the module were not there.  Thus, this module just makes the game easier.

The Raxxon module does a lot more, and it was way better than I expected it to be.  This module adds Raxxon as a new location.  Raxxon was essentially a research facility where they developed some ridiculously great tech, but they also experimented on people and created some unique zombies.  Every round, some of those zombies threaten to break out unless players collectively contribute 2 dice each round to cover specific numbers on the card.  Dice are limited and used to perform many other actions, so this added responsibility makes the game a lot harder.  However, this is balanced by the powerful item deck at this location (which is counter-balanced by having to roll for exposure with every search here).  As a group, we felt that the balance was good.  Chaotic as a whole, but it evened out very nicely.

Our early game was plagued with bad luck.  Early on (second round, IIRC), I was hit with a Crossroads event which gave me 3 options -- 1 with a bad penalty, 1 with a risk to avoid the penalty, and 1 with a bigger risk to avoid the penalty AND gain a huge benefit.  I chose the third for the sake of excitement and atrocious luck killed BOTH of my starting survivors.  Over the course of the game, our group as a whole would have bad luck with dice.  We rolled Bites on the exposure die something like 7 times, with one player rolling it twice on consecutive actions.  2 or 3 times we had someone gain a new character, only to have that character immediately die during the move out of the colony.  It was unbelievable.

But we also had some good luck.  One player had Blue the Chimpanzee as a character.  As a test subject from Raxxon, Blue has improved searching ability at that location.  This player did not suffer from the bad luck the rest of us had with the exposure die, so he was able to support us with powerful Raxxon tech throughout the game.  He also had luck from getting certain items early on to help snowball that particular advantage.

We had some good luck with our set of improvements.  We pushed hard as a group to get some nice Bedding for our colony, which provided every player with an extra action die each round (or a way to remove Despair, but that didn't actually come into play for us).  This was essential for us to keep the special zombies locked away.  Also, my two early character deaths pushed us to build the DVD Player -- a cheap improvement to build which had a large cost to use -- 2 fuel and 2 action dice to raise morale by 1.  As luck would have it, we triggered a Crossroad on that same turn which resulted in us obtaining a box of good movies on DVD, so that using the DVD player would raise 1 additional morale.  Over the course of the game, we used it twice to raise morale a total of 4.

For me, my initial loss was very disappointing because one of my characters was an explosives technician who could place explosive traps.  She died before I had a chance to use that ability though.  My replacement character (a  blind Motivational Speaker with a boring power) immediately moved to Raxxon because I had a number needed to keep the special zombie contained that round.  One search at Raxxon provided me with a buffed second character to give me some much needed utility.  This new setup stuck me into a specific role for much of the rest of the game -- my one character stayed at Raxxon with Blue the Chimp to continue locking away special zombies, usually with each of us contributing one die.  Blue searched Raxxon for items to support people all over the colony (passing a few items to my character as well) and my other character stayed outside to find items and kill zombies as needed for food and the crisis, the main objective, and my personal objective (in that order).

In the end, we managed to complete the main objective, but only I and the player with the chimpanzee completed our secret objectives.  My objective was relatively easy to accomplish and I did it on the last round.  The Chimp player had a tough objective, but his abundance of Raxxon items gave him the control to make it work.  One player's objective was to have exactly 4 characters, but a character death and little luck with Outsiders cards kept him from success.  The last player needed there to be more survivors than zombies in the town, but numerous deaths and a zombie-adding crisis on the last turn undermined his efforts. 

There was no traitor.  Even so, our group as a whole tends to be too cooperative in this game.  For example, the players who were not able to fulfill their secret objectives could have been more selfish, withholding items needed for the main objective until their secret objective was complete.  Instead, they contributed to the main objective fairly significantly.  Granted, one of those players is a lot more concerned with good story moments than winning gameplay.

And we did have some excellent story moments.  Early on, his character entrusted his pistol over to the chimpanzee - a ridiculous act if you think about it in-setting.  That chimp proceeded to arm itself with various gadgets and improve himself by reading various books.  Later on, it passed the pistol on to the blind man -- perhaps more trustworthy with a firearm than the monkey, but probably not much better.

I could go on.  Suffice it to say, it was a good time.  Lots of excitement, many ups and downs with luck, good tension, and a nice dash of humour.  Our luck with the Raxxon items was great and it let us overcome some major setbacks, but it felt balanced overall.  We managed to lock away every special zombie so I don't know what they would have been like.  It would have been more difficult if there had been a traitor, or if the group had been a little more self-serving, or if Blue had not found a force-field generator early on.  Other swings in luck could have made the game much easier or much harder, which may be a negative for some. I enjoy DoW more for the story elements though, and TLN certainly delivered on that.


Mansions of Madness

I think we played the second edition?  It's the one that uses an app to essentially act as a DM.

MoM is like an RPG where players are various characters trying to solve a Lovecraftian mystery.  We played the introductory scenario.  I won't go into much detail because I expect that there are major spoilers here, but players start in the lobby of a mansion and the app guides us through various setup and story elements, showing us points of interest to Search and doorways to Explore.  At first we have little idea of what's happening beyond the fact that unusual and frightening things have been happening, but we learn more as we explore the mansion.

I enjoyed it a lot.  The writing was solid and the app was easy to use.  It was a longer game than advertised on the box so there was some fatigue there, but I personally remained engaged throughout.  By coincidence, one player ended up solving all the puzzles (I mean this literally -- sometimes you encounter puzzles which you solve in the app as a mini-game, e.g. solve a code-breaking puzzle to open a locked safe) and another player ended up fighting almost all the time, almost always against the same type of monster.  But since it was a cooperative game, we all discussed general strategy together.

My biggest complaint is that the app had no undo button.  At one point I accidentally clicked to end a phase when one player had not yet taken her turn, and there was no way to backtrack.  I don't think this had a major impact after all, but it's hard to say because there is a fair amount of stuff that happens behind the scenes in the app.

We won without much difficulty, but the scenario was only 2/5 difficulty anyway.