GamerChris

Samantha is Born!

Chris Norwood — Sat, 03 May 2008 23:46:35 GMT

Yes, this is back-dated, but I wanted my blog to reflect one of the biggest moments in my life, the birth of my first child, Samantha Hayes Norwood!

If these aren't enough for you, click here to see some more photos of my beautiful daughter!

A Change in Perspective

Chris Norwood — Mon, 10 Mar 2008 20:11:22 GMT

On this weekend before last, I had the opportunity to play a few games with some people after a fellowship dinner at church. I started off playing a few hands of Uno with a youth and some other adults, then progressed to a few games of Diamant, a couple of 10 Days in the USA, and finally a 3-player game of Winner's Circle.  We had a good time, but everybody was pretty tired from the day and all our preparations for the dinner, so we didn't play all that long or anything.

I had planned to write a little blog entry about the games and how they went, but the more I thought about it, another topic seemed to surface about the whole experience. You see, for most of my life I've had a ravenous hunger for playing games but had to survive on scraps of sparse gaming here and there.  Since college, I've bounced from one collectible game to another (and back again, in the case of Magic), searching for a regular community of gamers that I could count on.  For the most part I was unsuccessful, either due to the distance I had to travel, my own schedule, the death of the game involved (oh sweet Babylon 5 CCG, how I loved you!) or the disintegration of the group itself.  So for the most part, my hunger was pretty unsated, and whenever I had the chance to play I went after it like a monkey on a cupcake*.

Then I discovered the full breadth and depth of modern boardgames, and I helped form the Hypermind BoardGamers. Very quickly, I was getting regular "meals" of gaming, and this had a couple of effects. My appetite actually grew and I became more discerning in what I played. I was no longer content to survive on scraps of crappy, traditional games when others would suggest them. While I still liked party games, they just didn't satisfy me like these cool board games did, so I tended to ignore them as well.

And then, after another little while, somthing else happened. Since I've been heavy into the boardgaming scene for over a year now, I finally feel, perhaps for the first time ever, secure and satisfied with my gaming life. This has actually freed me up to better appreciate games of all kinds. I can play the heaviest eurogame with a serious group of gamers, or a children's game with a group of kids, or even a mindless traditional game with a bunch of nongamers, and still I can feel satisfied with whatever experience I have.

It's really a cool place to be. I hope you can find your way here too!

*Everbody Loves Raymond reference

Zooloretto - Game of the Month Review

Chris Norwood — Fri, 29 Feb 2008 15:45:35 GMT

Zooloretto

Designer: Michael Schacht (2007)
Publisher: Abacus/Rio Grande
# of Players: 2-5
Play Time: 45 min
BGG Rank/Rating: #173/7.03
Weight: Medium Light

Zooloretto is a very approachable and entertaining game with a great theme, which has already established itself as one of the very best gateway games in the market. Players attempt to collect animal tiles to fill their zoos, but try to avoid getting extra animals that they can't find room for.  The game looks great, has wide appeal, and is a solid "super filler" that can hold the attention of both gamers and non-gamers alike.

Components and Setup

Especially in its newer edition, Zooloretto looks really fantastic. Each player has their own zoo board made of sturdy cardboard, along with a separate expansion piece that starts play face-down. On each zoo board is pictured 3 different enclosures of different sizes (4, 5, and 6 tiles). The expansion holds another 5-tile enclosure that can be opened later in the game.

Onto these boards, players will attempt to collect sets of tiles which picture animals of the same type. There are 8 different animal types with 11 tiles of each, plus two round "offspring" tiles for each animal type. The animals included are: Flamingoes, Camels, Leopards, Elephants, Pandas, Chimpanzees (NOT MONKIES!!!), Zebras, and Kangaroos. Of the 11 tiles for each animal, 2 are fertile males and 2 are fertile females. Anytime you have a pair of fertile male and female animals in the same enclosure, you produce one of the offspring tiles for that animal. There are also tiles picturing various vending stalls and some that show coins.

All the tiles are mixed together (newer versions have a nice tile bag to do this in) and 15 are pulled out blindly and set aside for the last turn.  Five wooden "trucks" are put in the center of the table, which can each hold up to 3 tiles. Each player takes two coins, and play then begins with whoever was last to visit a zoo!

Basic Gameplay  (click here for complete game rules)

The goal of the game is to score the most Victory Points.  Each enclosure in the zoo is worth a different amount of points, indicated by two numbers separated by a slash. The first number (in front of the slash) is the enclosure's value if completely filled by one type of animal at the end of the game. The number behind the slash is its value if short one tile.  Normally, enclosures missing 2 or more tiles are worth nothing, but placing a vending stall in the special areas in the corners near an enclosure allow the player to score one point per animal tile in the incomplete enclosure. In addition, each different type of vending stall in the zoo counts as 2 VP as well.

Most of the time on their turn, players will draw a single tile and place it in an empty spot on one of the trucks. If, however, a player sees a truck that contains tiles they want, they may instead take a truck and immediately add the tiles on it to their zoo. Once a player takes a truck, they are out of the round and can take no other actions until everyone else has also chosen a truck.  These decisions can often be difficult, because if you make a truck that is "too good", someone will surely take it before you get another turn. But you also don't want to take a truck with tiles you can't use, because you will end up losing points for extra animals at the end of the game. The real heart of strategy in the game is learning how to put together trucks that will cause others harm while knowing when to take a truck that will give you what you want and cause you limited trouble.

Anyway, I haven't spelled this out before (because it's pretty obvious), but only one type of animal may be in any single enclosure. Therefore, if you take a truck that contains one or more animal tiles that you cannot legally place (because all your enclosures are already full or have different types of animals in them), you must instead place the new tiles in your "barn". This is true both for animal tiles and vending stalls (which are only placed there if all of your vending stall spots are full). At the end of the game, you lost 2 points for each type of animal or vending stall in the barn (so multiple tiles of the same type still only cost you 2 points total).

Money is another factor in the game. In addition to the two coins each player starts with, more coins can be gained by taking trucks with a coin tiles as well as filling up some specific enclosures that also contain coin symbols. These coins may be used in a player's turn to take a "money action". The Remodel actions allow you to either move a single tile (Move) or switch all of two types of tiles (Exchange) and cost one coin. For two coins, you can either remove an animal from your barn (which the rules call "discard" but we referred to as "euthanize") or purchase a tile from another person's barn. Finally, for 3 coins you can flip over your expansion and make it available.

Just to recap the actions available on your turn, you can either:

Draw a tile and place it on a truck,
Take a truck and add the tiles to your zoo (and pass for the rest of the round), or
Perform a money action.

After everyone takes a truck, they are returned to the center of the table and a new round starts with the last person who took a truck in the previous round. The game then continues until you have to dip into the 15 tiles reserved at the beginning of the game. At the end of that round, scores are tallied and a winner declared!

Expansions

There are several small expansions that are available both for purchase and (mostly) for download. For the most part, they don't have major effects on the game, but instead just provide a little wrinkle here or there. They are:

Extra Enclosures: Small, 2-tile enclosures that are specific to only one type of animal and which may be purchased for 2 coins as a money action. Enclosures for the Zebra, Flamingo, and Elephant come with the expansion pack in stores, while the Panda, Chimp and Camel enclosures are available for download.
The Petting Zoo: Each player starts with these 2-tile enclosures that can only hold offspring. Instead of points, they provide coins when tiles are placed in them.
Additional Buildings: The Restaurant allows for scoring of duplicate vending stalls and counts as one itself (and costs 3 coins). The Souvenir Shop scores one point for each offspring in your entire zoo, and is obtained automatically by the person who first has a baby. The Pavillions cost 3 coins as well, and can fill an empty spot inside an enclosure just as an animal tile would.
Building Sites: These are nasty tiles that you place in another person's enclosure. They then block that space and make it unusable until that person takes a remodel or discard money action to move it.
Polar Bear: The first person to fill their 6-space enclosure automatically gets the Polar Bear, and at the end of the game each type of tile in their bard only subtracts 1 point from their score instead of 2.

There is also a stand-alone "expansion" called Aquaretto coming out soon, which is obviously based on creating an aquarium instead of a zoo.

What I think…

I've actually wavered a little in what I think about Zooloretto. Finally, though, I've decided that my problems with it were mainly due to the fact that I took stupid risks and was upset when they bit me in the butt. The luck factor is the main issue that most people will probably have with the game. But in general, I think that it's more of the "push your luck" variety than the "stupid freaking luck that I can't account for" kind.

I'm no expert at the game or anything, but the key of the game appears to be to "stay ahead" of the trucks and not to wait too long to take one. Generally, people that are the last to take a truck get screwed over, particularly late in the game. Instead, don't be afraid to take a truck with two, or occasionally even one, tile on it. It's better to get what you need rather than risk it and end up with an extra tile or two that will only be a liability later in the game.

I really like the fact that you can look around the board and try to figure out how you can best "poison" a truck so that a player who really needs a tile on it will pass it by. That's particularly good if you can use both tiles. It's also pretty important to work on gathering a little extra money through the game, just in case you need to pick up or euthanize an animal or two in the late game.

Zooloretto is not my favorite game, but it does what it's supposed to do very well. The theme and appearance are very interesting and attractive, its rules are accessible enough for beginners but have enough depth to maintain interest of even serious gamers, and it plays in a well-balanced 45 minutes or so.  It's a great family and gateway game that ranks right up there with Ticket to Ride, and it's almost always a hit even with non-gamers.

The Verdict!

Altogether, 14 different people have played 11 total games of Zooloretto and have given it an average rating of 8.09.

• Rules: Simple rules that are explained well and provide a depth of play far beyond their complexity.
• Downtime: Players take only one action in their turn, so downtime is limited and usually necessary to figure out your next move.
• Length: Our games averaged right at 45 minutes with an average of 4.6 players per game.
• Player Interaction: Mainly in screwing with the trucks, but the Building Sites expansion allows for blocking as well.
• Weight:  Medium Light
• GamerChris’ Rating: It's a multiple award-winner that does everything it's supposed to do, and I give it an 8.

Couples' Game Day - The First of Many???

Chris Norwood — Wed, 27 Feb 2008 10:32:54 GMT

Gwen and I have occasionally had groups of people over to play games, and we sometimes pull out a game or two with people we've had over for dinner, but this past Saturday was the first time we've really ever had another couple come over for the express purpose of playing games.

Since the first time that we were sure Britt's fiancé Carol actually existed (yeah, for a while we thought she was a figment of his imagination), we've been trying to find a time to get together to play games and get to know each other better. They were great company, and the conversation was really nice and stimulating, but I won't bore you with all that. Instead, let's talk about the really important stuff, what games we played!

We started off with the brand-new Z-Man cooperative game Pandemic. The theme was pretty interesting to everybody, and we figured that a cooperative game would be the perfect way to start a couples' game day. The game also, however, has a bit of a learning curve in figuring out how to work together and make turns more efficient. Before long, the Red Fever swept over Asia and the Pacific, spreading even into the United States and eventually consuming the whole world!

Immediately, we set back up and tried it again. This time, we did a lot better. While few Outbreaks popped up from time to time, for the most part we kept the board pretty under control as we tried to feed Gwen (the Scientist) cards to cure the three diseases. Yellow was the one disease that we hadn't concentrated much on early, and so late in the game I was scrambling to find the cards I needed to cure it. In the end, we came up a turn or two short as we ran out of cards just before I could get the last yellow card I needed. Still, everyone enjoyed Pandemic a lot, and it continues to be one of my favorite new games!

Britt is overwhelmed by our failure to save humanity from pestilent doom!
After that, we pulled out my favorite game, The Princes of Florence. It's also one of Gwen's favorites, and Carol had been wanting to try it out for a while. Britt actually didn't care too much for it the only time he had played, but was willing to give it another good try.

Now, I think that Princes is an absolute work of genius, and I tried to convey how perfectly all of its little pieces fit together as I explained the rules. I also warned Britt and Carol not too worry so much about winning on their first (or second) game, because the game requires a lot of planning to really do well. I went straight for a Jester/Works strategy, and ended up crushing them pretty easily (mainly to show them how powerful this strategy is). Gwen went with her "usual" strategy as well, a balanced approach focusing on Prestige cards, and ended up leaping from last place up into second on the last turn. Carol really liked the game, and in a dramatic change of opinion, Britt came around to like it as well.

After that, we worked on supper. I made the mistake of trying to start explaining Race for the Galaxy to everybody else as the food was being prepared, but Gwen was back and forth to the stove enough that she really didn't pick up anything at all.  When we finally got done with the food and back to gaming, I had to start over with the explanation but didn't do a very thorough job, thinking that Gwen had picked up more than she actually did. Anyway, we had some frustrated moments in the early game as I tried to explain to her on the fly how to play.

Later on, however, things seemed to get more into a routine. I got a pretty good little produce/consume engine going and ended up winning, but Carol and Britt seemed to enjoy the game as well. Gwen and I still need to sit down alone and go through the game again to get her up to speed.

Unfortunately, it was getting late by that time, and our evening of games and fellowship had to end.  This was a really nice and relaxed atmosphere to play in, and Carol and Britt were just fantastic guests to have over. I got to show off my growing game collection, and we shared a nice meal. This is definitely the kind of evening we need to plan more in the future. Hopefully, the little baby girl that will be joining our family in four weeks will give us the chance every so often!

Pandemic Strikes!!!

Chris Norwood — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 16:31:07 GMT

I've been excited about Pandemic since I first saw it mentioned (I believe) on very early pre-Essen lists last year. First of all, I love cooperative and semi-cooperative games, so that was pretty cool by itself. Throw in the fact that I was a biochemistry major who went back to nursing school and has always entertained an interest in epidemiology, and my anticipation for this game was pushed right through the roof. Finally, after many delays and much frustration, it finally arrived here last week.

Last night at game night, I managed to get this to the table early in the evening. When we finished, we played again immediately. Later on, we played it for an almost unprecedented third time in one night. People didn't necessarily think that it was the bestest game ever, but it obviously struck a chord somewhere in their collective game-playing consciousnesses.

Pandemic is a fully cooperative game. There is no "traitor" or any kind of competition between players to dilute their interest or intention to work together. Each player takes on a Role that grants certain special abilities, and even from our limited play so far, it was painfully obvious that a group must make good use of these abilities to have any chance at winning.

Speaking of winning, the victory condition for the players is to succesfully cure all four of the diseases ravaging the world's population. A disease is cured when a player can collect and then play a set of five cards of the same color. Since there is a hand limit of seven cards and it is siginificantly dfficult to trade cards between players, this is harder than it seems.

On the other hand, there are several ways that the game can be lost. First of all, the players fail if they are not able to win before running through all of the players cards (each player has to draw 2 during every turn). Next, if all the cubes of one disease (color) are ever on the board, I suppose it becomes the real Pandemic and the game is over. And third, is if the total number of "Outbreaks" (when a city would receive more than 3 disease cubes of the same color) reaches 8 or more. What is bad about the Outbreaks is that they can cause chain reactions of more Outbreaks, because instead of getting the 4th cube, all neighboring cities get a cube of that color, which could then cause an Outbreak there if there are already 4 cubes of the affected color. In fact, that's what happened in the second of our games when Africa suddenly exploded in a soupy mess of the Yellow Plague!

This isn't meant to be a real review or anything, but I just wanted to express my pleasure over a game that has, so far, lived up to most of my anticipation.  We lost the first two games, but in the third we had enough handle on how to work together as well as a healthy bit of luck in the card draws that allowed us to finally win. Overall, I really like how the game forces both short and long-range planning and cooperation on a lot of different levels. Especially in the first two games, I felt some real tension as we slipped further and further away from our goal. The mechanism of how cities are seeded with disease and how the cards from the discard pile of the infection deck are shuffled and placed on top of the draw pile when an epidemic card is drawn is both clever and elegant. The different role powers are significantly unique and well balanced, and they work together in very cool ways.

Overall, as of right now I heartily recommend this game to anyone who likes cooperative games or who is interested in the well-represented theme.  Check it out if you get the chance!

Power Grid: Halfway through GotM and What Do I Think?

Chris Norwood — Wed, 20 Feb 2008 00:17:26 GMT

Well, mostly what I think is that I don't understand why it's number 2 at BGG.

I'll give you that it's a deep, complex, and interesting game. I'll admit that it's well-designed and relatively efficient. It is, by almost any estimation, a quality game design deserving of respect. What I don't quite get from it, however, is a lot of fun.

Some minor criticisms of the game include that it is profoundly fiddly, with lots of manipulation of the Power Plant auction, resource market, and the whole "Monopoly Money" thing. It's also very repetitive, because you're essentiually doing the exact same thing over and over every turn. And, of course, it's really mathy and can lead into serious Analysis Paralysis, especially in the last few turns.

Now, I'm not saying that it's a terrible game or anything, and I certainly see that most of these problems are both pretty innate to the very nature of the game and are still better solutions than others that had been done before (in crayon rail games, for instance). It strikes a nice balance between advanced planning and remaining flexible each round, though, and in general I guess it feels like you're accomplishing something as you put together your network.

Like I said, however, I keep asking myself "Where's the fun?"

I guess I've got two more weeks to find it...

No, Little Bloggie, I haven't forgotten about you...

Chris Norwood — Tue, 19 Feb 2008 10:01:06 GMT

It's just that I've been so busy at work, and with your little sister on the way I haven't had the time to really spend with you lately. I think about you often, and still have great plans for the two of us. Yes, yes... I know that I already owe you a review of Zooloretto, and that you're looking forward to what I say about Power Grid, too. I'm working on all that right now, and I won't let you down again... I promise*.

* Famous last words...

Age of Gods - Woo-hoo!

Chris Norwood — Fri, 01 Feb 2008 12:11:36 GMT

We had a bit of a surprise at game night this week! Five of us played a game of Age of Gods... and it was actually good!!!

I picked up the game after watching the latest vidcast on Bookshelf Games. The theme and art were certainly very interesting to me, and with Lawrence's endorsement I went ahead and took the plunge and bought it. At home, I was nearly overcome by the pungent, petroleum-esque stench of the ridiculously large box insert. Otherwise, though, the components all looked good, even if they were a little oddly designed (such as the weird board with folds that are off-center).

Anyway, the selection of games I brought this week was a little different than what I'd been bringing lately, including Modern Art, Reef Encounter, Ca$h 'n Gun$, Il Principe, In The Year of the Dragon, and (of course) Age of Gods. I was even a little surprised when the other guys pointed it out to be the first meaty game of the evening. And then, after explaining the rules that I'd only read one and a half times myself, we were deep into play.

Pretty much from the beginning, everybody was really into the game. The incredibly simple rules and evocative theme set the stage for a really fun experience.  You really feel like a stereotypically fickle god of mythology playing with the lives of poor, innocent mortals as you push them into battle with each other. I was Sharur, God of War, and I thought that my power to influence every single battle I started would be really good. In the end, it was useful, but certainly not overpowering or anything.

The oddest thing about Age of Gods is that you don't know who all of your followers are at the beginning of the game. Race cards are dealt out to each player during the 1st, 3rd, 5th, and 7th turns, starting with the large (4-area) races on turn 1 and then following with the progressively smaller races in order. I started with the Dwarves, which I thought was a pretty cool.


On each of the game's 9 turns, there are 4 phases. The first is the "Destiny Phase", where you either deal out the race cards or get to make the unclaimed (smaller) races attack some other race. Next is the "Fortification Phase" where you can place one of your five fortification markers, which gives that area a +1 defense until it is destroyed. Phase three is the "Combat Phase", when you can make any race attack any other race. Combat, like I said, is really simple, where you have to just roll a 3 (after all modifications for technology, fortifications, etc.) or greater on a 6-sided die. If you roll a natural 6, that race gets a follow-up attack as well.

You also are given 8 Action Cards, which you use during phase 4 (appropriately named the "Action Phase"). These cards have one of the races on each, along with the race's special power.  From how we understand the rules, you can use these powers to affect any race (not just the race on the card), or you can instead increase the "technology level" of the race on the card. Powers are things like launching additional attacks, giving a permanent bonus to attack or defense to one race, or something wacky like bringing back an extinct race. For each technology level a race has, they get +1 to both attack and defense. You can instead play one of your race cards face up to perform the action listed there, but once you've revealed that race you can no longer attack with it (and everybody knows to come and destroy it so that you won't win).

If you play an action card that lists an extinct race, you don't use their power. Instead, you roll on the "Divine Wrath" chart, which lets you do all kinds of things such as destroying certain areas (with a tidal wave, plague, waking the dragons, or other similar natural disaster) or, if you roll a 6, bringing back that race.

At one point, Mark revealed that he was the Dark Elves, because his god(dess) power (being the goddess of peace) was that his revealed races got +2 to defense, and along with the other +1 to defense he had given them earlier through an action card. Since the race was maxed out in size and he felt pretty invulnerable to attack, he thought it would be safe. Instead, every single divine wrath that was rolled ended up destroying one of his areas, and he could do pretty much nothing about it since he couldn't attack with them (to re-expand their territory) in the combat phase.

I did a little better at keeping a low profile. I started off paying almost no attention to the Dwarves, even choosing to not retaliate when one of their areas was destroyed. In the midgame, I started placing some fortifications there, and used my size 3 race (the centaurs) in combat. Later on, I tried to make a strong push and got the dwarves up to size 6 or 7 (with their max being 8, of course). In the end, I wound up in second place.

Chip, however, did the best job of keeping his races secret all game long. He kept a very low profile, and his attacks were very well dispersed so as to keep us all guessing. In fact, it was probably turn 8 or 9 before I personally had a good idea of which were his races.

So, in the final analysis, Age of Gods really made a big impact on the group. From reading the rules, it seems like it would be dominated solely by luck and chaos, and in some ways I guess it is. But that isn't the impression that I ended up with from it at all. Instead, the most important factor seemed to be how well each player could subtly manipulate his and other races without revealing his true intentions.  Like many great games that tackle luck and chaos well (Liar's Dice, Ra, Poker, etc.), success in the game doesn't depend as much on the randomness as it does in how you account for, and perhaps even take advantage of, the things happening all around you. And more than anything, Age of Gods is also a lot of fun to play. It's wonderfully themed, moves quickly, and is rather attractive. Overall, I got a lot more from it than I expected, and I hope to get it to the table again soon!

Hypermind BoardGamers Year One Statistics!

Chris Norwood — Mon, 21 Jan 2008 21:47:10 GMT

Just in case anyone is interested in having them for personal reference, here is the one-year reports that I developed for the Hypermind BoardGamers:

Year One Report

If you're interested in the raw spreadsheets that I keep, here it is updated through January 15, 2008.

Backlog of Holiday Gaming

Chris Norwood — Mon, 14 Jan 2008 09:39:11 GMT

I did quite a bit of gaming over the holidays with several different groups, and I just haven't had the time to blog about any of it other than what I've written over on my geeklist-blogs. So here it is, my catch-up report from the last three weeks or so:

Games played (December 25-January 1):

The first two are the games that I gave my wife for our Anniversary (on December 16) and Christmas, which we have obviously played quite a bit so far. I've been a big fan of Tier auf Tier for a long time, but this was the first chance I'd had to play it two-person. It works just as well, but you really need to each take double the usual number of figures to make it do right. 10 Days in the USA has been one of our favorite "couple's" games for a long time, and 10 Days in Asia is just as good or better. We've also learned a lot more geography from it than we did from USA.

Speaking of games played with the wife, the one play of 1960: The Making of the President was also against Gwen here at home. And best of all, she really liked it! That alone makes it way better than Twilight Struggle to me, and will certainly help it get played more often.

Over Christmas, my brother Tony (the one responsible for my gaming obsession) came to town. Gwen and I played the game of Ticket to Ride: Europe with him, my nephew Alex, and my Dad. Everybody had a good time with it, even though it was only the second or third time that my Dad had ever played a TtR game. It's hard to say exactly, but Europe may be my overall favorite of the TtR series, even though it is one that I do not own.

Gwen and I also played Qwirkle for the first time ever with Tony. I've heard so many good things about the game, but never had the chance to see it in person. As far as I can tell from my two initial plays, all of the good stuff was true. It's like a cross between Scrabble and Dominoes, but is more fun than either one. The basic idea is terribly simple, but the game requires a lot of thought, and there are lots of chances for real, tactical play.

Another event included in these numbers is the annual New Year's Eve party that my extended family and friends all get together for. We usually go out to eat, then wander back to my "aunt" Louise's house to play until midnight. The group is made up of people that are mostly nongamers, so it's a good chance to pull out some of the party games that I rarely get a chance to play these days. We played my favorite party game, Balderdash, and also tried out the highly-acclaimed Time's Up!. Both went over really well and led to lots of fun and laughter.  We also played the rather horrid Cranium Tune Twister, which has at least proved to be kinda humorous in retrospect (the dude to the right can't carry a tune in a bucket, and his little friend wasn't much help either).

The game of Gulo Gulo was played on Christmas day, right after we gave it to her cousin's children. When it comes to playing a game with children of all ages, there is just nothing like Gulo Gulo, and I plan on adding it to my collection as soon as I have any possible idea that my as-yet-unborn daughter might be able to play it.

The rest of the games were played either at an impromptu game night at Hypermind on December 27 or at our first one of the year on New Year's day. Nothing much special went on there, other than I played my first couple of games of Race for the Galaxy, which I can already tell is going to be red hot among the Hypermind BoardGamers.

We did also play Imperial for the first time, but I'm not sure exactly what to think about that. Lots of people named it the best game of 2006, but it didn't do a heck of a lot for me. I actually ended up winning by using the "don't control any country but invest in all of them" strategy, so I mainly just sat around and looked at my big stack of investment cards while everyone else actually played the game. We also got a few rules wrong, including both when you could invest and how exactly to give the country status points (or whatever they're called) out. I definitely want to play it another time or two, just to figure out if I like it or not.

Like I said, I wanted to make this quick and painless, just to get something posted here and clear out the backlog of gaming activities I haven't blogged much about.  I'll be back soon!

2007 Year in Review

Chris Norwood — Sat, 05 Jan 2008 02:34:41 GMT

2007 was quite a year for me and the gaming hobby. While I've never really tracked my plays before, I am positively certain that the 647 plays of 143 different games totally blows away any previously held gaming record from any other time in my life. And who I have most to thank for this true renaissance in my gaming life are Denise and Nick Shepherd for opening up Hypermind, my totally fantastic FLGS, as well as all the great people that are involved in our weekly game night there. Anyway, I thought I'd go through some of the multitude of games I've played this past year and point out a few that I've played most (check out my whole five & dime list here) and those that I think are the real cream of the crop. While most of these aren't really new games, they were all pretty much new to me in 2007, and I wanted to share with the larger gaming world what I now consider to be some of my all-time favorite games.

Quantity

Well, without question, the game I've played most this year is Reef Encounter. The catch is that, of the 66 plays I recorded for it, only one was actually done face-to-face. The rest were all on the wonderful play-by-email site SpielByWeb. Reef Encounter is a truly fantastic game that is extremely well-suited to online, turn-based play. I've had a pretty good knack with it from the beginning, and currently have a 38% win percentage. If you haven't tried out Reef Encounter (which I really need to bring to game night some this year) or SBW before, I heartily recommend both.

Other online games that made my five-and-dime lists included Amun-Re (which I suck at) and Wallenstein from SBW, as well as Hansa and Samurai on MaBiWeb (where Michael Schacht and others regularly beat the crap out of me). These sites really seem to fit in with my lifestyle really well, because finding time to jump onto a real-time online site like BrettSpeilWelt just never seems to happen. On MaBi and SBW, however, I can log in when I have a few minutes and play out my turns in whichever games have gotten back around to me. And all of the games that I've mentioned work really well in this format (maybe even better than in person in some cases) and have really excellent implementations. Okay, enough with the electronic stuff, on to "real" game plays.

My second-most-played game is 10 Days in the USA, which represents another cool category of games from 2007, those that I've played with my wife! Close behind is The Settlers of Catan, which Gwen and I mainly play with Nick Borko's 2-player variant. Other favorites for our time together include Ticket to Ride, Cartagena, and the new 10 Days in Asia. I've recently picked up a few other games that I hope will be regular 2-player games for us, including Thebes, Mr. Jack, and 1960: The Making of the President (which she's already played once and liked enough to ask for again!)

Another whole class of games that make a big impact on playlists everywhere are filler games, the best of which get played back-to-back in batches.  Top in this group is Liar's Dice, which got a total of 25 plays, mostly accumulated at the end of one boardgame night or another. As I said in my review of the game, Liar's Dice is a really great game that has universal appeal. Other most-played fillers include Tier auf Tier, Diamant (which I also used as a gateway game a few times), and Hive.

Straddling the line between filler and "real" game, Taluva comes in next on the list with 14 plays. Taluva was one of our Games of the Month! at the Hypermind BoardGamers, and it has remained a go-to game when there wasn't time or interest for longer, more involved games. It also works as a great transition game for people that may be used to more traditional abstracts.

On a similar note, I had 13 plays of Wits & Wagers last year, which was my highest played party game. Both with gamers and non-gamers alike, I've been able to get this to the table and have a lot of fun with it every time.

So, finally, on to my most-played "gamers' games". At the top is BattleLore, which I got to the table 12 times in 2007. I got this for Christmas last year, and have been spending money on expansions on it ever since.  It's just such a great, expandable game that keeps adding more options both in unit selection as well as in setup and gameplay. Of all the expansions, I think that Epic BattleLore is the best, mainly because I like the larger scale and the ability to potentially play two cards per turn. While I also like the idea of Call to Arms and some of the options it gives, it also seems to make the one real flaw of the game (long setup to play ratio) even worse. Of the specialist packs, I think that the Goblin Skirmishers (gotta love hobgoblin spearmen!) and the 100 Years' War are the best, but I own them all and there are good things about each of them.  With all the time and money that I've invested in BattleLore, I really need to find even more time to play it in 2008.

Like I've mentioned several times before on GamerChris, we started the Game of the Month! program at the Hypermind BoardGamers pretty early on, which had a predictable impact on my game play this year. Therefore Arkadia, The Princes of Florence, Citadels, The Pillars of the Earth, Tigris & Euphrates, and Betrayal at House on the Hill all made at least the "fives" list. I really like having at least one game each week that is a given, and how we can all become more comfortable with it and begin to really understand a deeper level of strategy. Since several of these games will show up in the next section as well, let's get on with...

Quality

There are a lot of ways to handle these "best of the year" lists, so I've decided to divide things up into a few different categories, where I'll give a "short list" of games that impressed me for each as well as the overall winner of the category. I've done something similar in survey form for all of the Hypermind BoardGamers to participate in, but these listed here are just my own personal thoughts about each area.

Favorite Filler

When you play games on a weekly basis, you end up playing a lot of filler games. Of the 20+ such games I've gotten to the table, the ones that rise to the top are Pitch Car, , Liar's Dice, For Sale, Tier auf Tier, and Diamant. All of these are great little games that I would play most anytime, but the one that really stands out to me is Cartagena.

Cartagena is such a simple little game that packs a heck of a lot of depth. There's a nice amount of luck with the card draws to keep things light, but success most consistently comes from wise use of your pirates; knowing when to back them up to draw cards, how to space them appropriately, and how not to set up your opponents.  It's probably my favorite race game, and I love to play it with anywhere from 2-5 players. If you don't own this little gem, go out and pick it up!

Favorite Abstract Strategy Game

While I don't play an overabundance of abstract games, I enjoy their simplicity of focus every so often. Some of the ones that have impressed me the most this year include Hive, Ricochet Robots, Taluva, Qwirkle and Blokus. Predictably, my choice in this category is the one that made Game of the Month!, Taluva.

Taluva has the focus and simplicity of traditional abstract games, but has the look of a more heavily-themed game. The thick cardboard tiles are just beautiful, and the completed island at the end of the game is usually very impressive. I also like the fact that there are multiple paths to victory and several different yet viable strategies. I can knock out a 2-player game in less than 10 minutes these days, but can also spend minutes at a time agonizing over a move in a tight 4-player game. Great depth + great look = great game!

Favorite Gateway Game

I'm not going to make a big deal of this category, because I'm not being terribly original with it. My short list includes Diamant, Zooloretto, and Taluva, but the winner is, of course, Ticket to Ride. I'd pick something else, but simply put there just is nothing better out there. A lot of games come close, but TtR just has that magical blend of fun, simplicity, theme, and depth that strikes a chord in so many people.  Even if nothing better comes out this year, I promise to pick a different game next time!

Most Thematic Game

On the Hypermind BoardGamers' survey, I described this as the games which have the "best incorporation of setting and theme". I enjoy all kinds of games, but those that live on most in my memory are the ones that draw me into their own world and build a story through gameplay. This category was an attempt to honor those games that were most evocative in their theme and setting. My short list included , 1960:The Making of the President, Fury of Dracula, , and Shadows Over Camelot.

In the end, I appreciate most how Fury of Dracula tackles what is probably the most difficult melding of theme and mechanics of the whole bunch.  The Fantasy Flight edition feels very streamlined but also remains diligent to the core idea that it is a game about tracking a hidden Dracula through Europe. I've only had two chances to play so far, but I still think and talk about both sessions like they were played just last week.  I really need to try it from the hunters' side, and would like to try it as a 2-player game, just to see if it holds up as well under those conditions as well.

Coolest Game Mechanics

My description for this category is that it covers games with "the most elegant, innovative, or all-around best game mechanics". Three games all immediately come to mind here: Ra, The Princes of Florence, and China. Ra's basic idea, continuous auctions to collect tiles, actually seems pretty boring. But instead, all of the little tweaks to the system make it an exhilarating merry-go-round of fun!. Similarly, the "mish-mash" of mechanics in PoF has the potential to be a big, confusing mess, but the tightness of design and amazing economy of resources makes it purr like a well-oiled machine.

In the final evaluation, however, China is the game that stands out most for elegance in design. It is so efficient and quick, while still maintaining a level of strategic depth greater than many other games that are far longer and more complex. It seems almost magical how all of the scoring is completely interdependent; it's just so intuitive and "organic" feeling to see how more focus spent in an area is reflected in the greater scoring possibilities there. Simply put, China is a masterpiece that has a firm place in my all-time top 10 games.

Favorite Game of the Year

Okay, this is the one for all the marbles. I'm sure that the game I choose will soon be reprinted with "GamerChris Game of the Year" stickers all over it. So, as I feel the gravity of this tremendous responsibility, I think that I'll take a minute to discuss the five finalists for this illustrious honor.

5) Struggle of Empires - SoE is such a cool game. When an auction for turn order and alliances can last for 30 minutes and still keep you on the edge of your seat, something really special is going on. War, politics, strategy, and efficient euro game mechanics all come together to make this a true classic. The only drawback is a play time that can stretch up to 3-4 hours... but it's always worth it when you can get it to the table!

4) 1960: The Making of the President - If this had come out a little earlier in the year, it would probably be even higher on my list. Regardless, this streamlined card-driven masterpiece captures the theme of a presidential election so incredibly well in an approachable yet extremely replayable set of rules. Play is quick and decisions are tough, and the smallest events and actions can have a major effect on the game (particularly in the later turns). This is one of those rare games that I keep thinking about, trying to figure out new strategies to try and weighing the importance of various actions and events. And best of all, my wife even likes it!

3) Shadows Over Camelot - Shadows is a thoroughly entertaining game with a very real feeling of tension in the endgame. The theme is fantastic and well-integrated, and the "cooperative with a traitor" concept is just so cool. I could gush on and on about it, but I won't, so hopefully you get the picture that it's a great game that appeals to almost everybody.

2) Tigris & Euphrates - Despite the vague theme and rough terrain of the map, T&E is wide-open for players to make of it what they will. This freedom and flexability of choices is really what facinates me more than anything else about this classic. The rules are simple to understand, but the interactions they produce are sometimes exceedingly complex. I love how there are almost always at least two ways to get something done, and players rarely feel that they have no real options on the board.  Plus, the Knizia trick of encouraging balanced play really fits so well here. Some criticize the luck factor in tile pulls, but I just think that it encourages both more planning (to protect against the ravages that randomness can generate) and more flexability (in responding to what eventualities the game throws at players) in game play.

And finally... my Favorite Game of the Year...

The Princes of Florence - PoF is a work of pure genius. In every detail of the game, you can see how diligent its designers were in trying to achieve a balance and economy in all areas: money, resources, space, and time. The game requires advanced planning, but also forces a series of difficult decisions every single turn.  Every piece of this game fits together like a puzzle, and the result is my favorite board game of all time. I can't say enough good stuff about this game (although I tried in my review of it), and I would play it any time.

Well, there you have it. That's my final answer after a year of being immersed in this wonderful boardgaming hobby. Of course, I'm not going anywhere now, and I hope to be around for a long time to give reports and reviews like this. Come back and join me any time!

Pillars of the Earth - Game of the Month Update

Chris Norwood — Fri, 28 Dec 2007 11:18:21 GMT

Well, despite it being a short month (only three weeks of game nights) for the Hypermind BoardGamers, we still had a Game of the Month!, which was The Pillars of the Earth. I'm not going to do another full review because, for the most part, I still stand behind the review that I did for it back in June. I did want to give a few additional thoughts that I have about the game now, just in the spirit of completeness.

Updates

First of all, my copy of the game has only been played around 8 times total, and the Master Builder pawns are already in pretty bad shape. They are painted wood, and a good deal of the paint has already rubbed off from them banging around in the bag. Now, this doesn't really have any effect on the game itself or anything, but they do bring a bit of a hobo effect to an otherwise still beautiful game.

As far as gameplay goes, I think that I may have shortchanged the strategic depth of Pillars in my original review. I have been able to pursue different strategies in different games, with relative success in each. I've even been able to adapt my strategy when others claimed craftsman or other important items that I needed while still remaining competitive. I've also seen that several of the different Master Builder actions are often as important (or even more so at times) than just getting the new craftsmen. In particular, many people ignore the Kingsbridge Market, which can really help to maximize use of your craftsmen or make a crapload of money. The more I play the game, the more opportunities I see for strategy, which makes the decisions around paying for Master Builder placement, as well as deciding where to place them, far more difficult.

On the other hand, I also see some more weaknesses in the game than I did before. In particular, the Wood Worker! in the first round that can give 8 gold for 2 wood can give a significant advantage to the player that is able to get it.  In our still relatively limited play of the game, an experienced player that picks this up has a really good chance to win the game.

Another card that seems to be broken to us is the Prior Phillip privilege card.  He gives one extra victory point each time that a player places a Master Builder at the Priory, which can have a huge effect if it comes out on turn 1 (which happened in two of the three games this month). Being able to get from 2-5 VP just in that area (in addition to whatever your craftsmen are producing) each turn can be game changing.

But, one thing that I really see as a strength of the game is that, despite the significant amount of luck in the Master Builder pulls, I see experiences players doing way better than newbies.  There is real skill involved in the optimizing of your VP engine, and a real knowledge base that is built in knowing which Craftsmen, events, and privileges are still available to come later in the game. As I've progressed along the learning curve, I can more easily see the limitations of people further back along it.

Summary

So, what is the final word? From the group, nine different Hypermind BoardGamers have played a total of four games and give it an average rating of 7.22 (high is 8 and low is 5). Personally, my impression of the game is generally more positive than it was before, but I feel that I still need to rate it a solid 7 out of 10.

I would feel very comfortable recommending this game to people who are looking to take a "next step" from gateway games into something more meaty, because while it is still relatively simple to grasp, the game "feels" heavier than other games of its complexity.  I haven't studied too much about the recently released 5-6 Player Expansion for the game, but I look forward to seeing what it adds to the game (other than two more people). I'll probably pick it up when it's available in English, and I'll even feel good about doing so!

Making Christmas Into a Game...

Chris Norwood — Fri, 28 Dec 2007 11:10:22 GMT

Christmas has come and gone, and this year has to rate as one of the best ever in my family! For the weeks leading up to the day itself as well as the 6 family get-togethers (with one still yet to come) within three days, my holiday was busy and exhausting, but still a total blast! And one of the things that made the gatherings even better was how we've incororated a few games into the very nature of our Christmas celebrations. That's why I want to take a few moments here to share this with the gaming world, so that you can see if these activities might be able to fit into your Christmas tradtions as well.

Gift Wrapping Gone BAD!!!!

The first is a friendly competition that has slowly developed between my brother-in-law Kevin and his younger cousin Rebecca.  Every year at my wife's grandparent's get-together on Christmas Eve, the main attraction is to see how Rebecca and Kevin have wrapped each other's gifts. It all started when they were just kids and, since presents were always opened from youngest to oldest, Rebecca would take as long as she could to keep Kevin (the next youngest) waiting. Then one year, she also took the additional step to wrap each individual drill bit from a set she was giving him in a little box of its own, sealed firmly with layers of duct tape. That was the point from which all escalation began, but as they have grown older and more ideas have been used, the creativity and difficulty have risen dramatically.

In general, the presents themselves tend to be gift certificates or gift cards, including everything from a handful of McDonald's Dollars early on to Amazon and Best Buy gift cards in the last several years.  Some of the "wrapping" highlights of this epic struggle include the gift being sealed in: concrete, pipe-bomb looking things (both PVC and metal on different years), ice, chocolate pudding, a block of wood, and being buried in the garden (after a lengthy scavenger hunt involving several small puzzles and riddles). Usually, tools have to be brought to get into the presents, including: wood saws, hacksaws, sledgehammers, a shovel, knives, scissors, a cutting torch, a spoon, an ice pick, and on one particularly interesting occurrence, a 'tater gun.  Last year, as on a surprising number of cases in the past, both Kevin and Rebecca had a very similar idea. Rebecca buried Kevin's present in a huge bag of packing peanuts (that was almost as big as he was) while Kevin buried hers in a large box of packing peanuts.  My wife Gwen, however, also gave Kevin the idea to place the present (cash in this case) into some of a plethora of medicine bottles (collected by throughout the entire year previous by our whole family) buried in the peanuts. Many of the other bottles would also contain some item or other (mostly worthless rocks or pennies) and would be wrapped in the ubiquitous duct tape just to keep her honest and needing to open all the bottles just to make sure she would open them all.

This "granularity" idea carried right over to this year, which once again saw an uncanny similarity between the presents.  All year long, Rebecca and her family collected as many little "gift-card-shaped" plastic cards as they could. Things like the fake credit cards you get in the mail, expired gift cards, plastic coupons (like our favorite, the "free panty" from Victoria's Secret), and other similar stuff. Anyway, she took these 100+ cards and sealed them all individually in their own envelope, which Kevin then had to spend forever opening to find the "real" gift card. Rebecca actually inserted the "real" envelope into the center of the bundle, but Kevin mixed them all up when he opened the gift, and it turned out to be in the very last envelope. It was absolutlely hillarious... and a little exhausting just to watch.

Kevin, meanwhile (using another of my wife's ideas), had printed out an Amazon.com gift certificate and inserted it into one of three reams of paper, along with 90 copies of funny pictures of hiumself, Rebecca, and the two of them from last year (the one above). He then, of course, duct-taped the whole thing together and slapped a bow on it. Kevin was a little too greedy, however. Instead of inserting it somewhere in the middle ream, he instead placed it second from the bottom of the whole bundle. When applying the duct tape, of course, he lost his bearings on up and down and ended up putting the bow on the wrong side. Rebecca therefore started from the bottom and, our of the 1650 pieces of paper she might have needed to sift through, the certificate was the second one she came to. Also hillarious, though a bit of a let-down.

So, what you all need to do is just go out and pick a gift-wrapping fight with someone you love. It will soon become the highlight of your family gathering!

Good ole' Dirty Santa

The gold standard for Christmas games has got to be the Dirty Santa game. Just in case you don't have a clue about this (or call it something different), I'll describe the basic rules to you. Everybody that is going to participate brings a wrapped present, usually of a set value and ideally unisex in nature (nothing's worse as a dude than getting an ugly pocketbook or some smelly lotion that no one else wants). Numbers are then drawn to determine the order in which people open presents. On your turn, you can either open an unopened present or (and here's the dirty part) take a previously-opened present from somebody else. Immediate take-backs (from the person who just stole your gift) are, of course, not allowed. Each round, someone will eventually open a new gift, and then the next number gets their turn. In most all cases, since getting number 1 would otherwise really suck, the first person to go also gets to just exchange presents with anyone else at the end of the game, with no recourse at all for the stolen-from person.

Now, some people also add various other rules to these basic ones as well. The most common is the "retire after three exchanges" rule, where a present is retired from the game (and therefore no longer may be stolen) after it has changed hands three times. This certainly can shorten the game, but in my estimation that is not a good thing, so I don't like it.

Three years ago, I broke the game by realizing that if Gwen and I worked as a team we could always protect any particular gift we wanted. If someone stole my gift that I liked, I could just steal Gwen's gift and she could steal back whatever was stolen from me (so we ended up with the same two gifts). Therefore, we added a rule that no particular gift may change hands more than once per round (until a new gift has been opened).  It doesn't prevent much of the dirtiness, however, because it can still be stolen in as many future rounds as possible.

Now, I've tried to insert this little gem of a game into as many gatherings as I can, both at work, at church, and in our family. It works better with some groups than others (usually better with people who are comfortable with each other and who like to get a little "dirty"). It is a great alternative if you're tired of all the time and expense of buying presents for every single person, and want to just have a good time together at Christmas. Usually, the best way to play is to bring something that you really want to take home, thus ensuring that there's at least one present you think is fighting for.

Anyway, my case in point is the Christmas Eve family get-together at my Aunt Alice's. We've been playing Dirty Santa there for around 12-15 years or so, and we are always pushing the limits of how dirty we can be year after year! This year, there were 15 people involved in the game, ranging in age from 12 to 70+. Most of us have known each other forever, but my cousin Will also brought his girlfriend for her second straight year of dirty, Christmas fun!

Now this was the gathering where Gwen and I broke the game three years ago. There were some really cute little juice glasses with pictures of cats on them up for grabs, and we used the little trick I discovered to keep them in our family any time someone would attempt to take them from us. Of course, Will and his sister Ellen got back at us when they literally stole them (as in, after the game was over they snuck over to the box and committed an actual act of theft by taking out a couple of glasses) from us. What's bad is that we didn't even notice until Will called us up a few days later and asked how we liked the glasses. It was all in good fun, of course, and we now have the complete set in our cabinet.

This year, things were down and dirty from the get-go, with chain reactions of gift stealing from the second round on. My aunt Rachel, the oldest of the group, has a very distinct strategy of, once she gets a gift she likes, putting it back in the box and setting it behind her, getting very quiet and trying to avoid notice for the rest of the game. On the other side of that coin is my 12-year old nephew Peter, who regularly turns into a high-pressre pitch man when holding presents he doesn't care for (which I can't blame him for, since I doubt that he really needed a set of yellow towels or a cookbook rack). Once he got the chocolate fondue fountain (which was far more to his liking), he did his best impression of Rachel, which prompted me to mercilessly taunt him with theft every time I had the opportunity to choose a gift.

As is my regular practice, I stole whatever gift Will was holding every chance I got, and we ended up trading one of those little lights that you strap to your forehead (I think they call it a "head light") back and forth for most of the game. Meanwhile, Will's girlfriend had the number 15 (the second best number in the game behind #1), and was frequently heard to exclaim, "I reeeeally like that!" every time a new present was opened. She ended up with a "Clapper" at the end of the game, which pleased her quite a bit until Will made some reference to being able to turn her mouth off with a well-timed clap or two (which was reeeeally dirty!)

We had a great time, and ended up the night trying to think up some ways to make it even dirtier next year. So, if any of you out there have any additional rules that you use or can think of some way to make it even better, please list them here. Let's work together to make Christmas the dirtiest holiday of them all!!!

Agricola - Will it be the real deal?

Chris Norwood — Thu, 20 Dec 2007 12:35:58 GMT

Well, I went and did it. I jumped head first into the tidal wave of hype over the upcoming Z-Man release of Agricola, the Essen release about the exciting world of subsistence farming, and I even went so far as to preorder the dern game (which is still open until the end of the year... get yours NOW!). I've never done such a thing before, but all the rave reviews on this game are just hard to ignore! I mean, it's already up to number 15 on BGG, and I haven't heard a single bad word about it yet. I think it was the 24-card promo deck and special "animeeples" that pushed me over the top (I still have way too many collectible gamer instincts in me that just won't go away).

Anyway, I guess the real question is, will it live up to the hype? I have no doubt that the production quality will be superb (Z-Man is hitting on all cylinders right now), and the game appears to be have virtually infinite replayability. My biggest concern is about the balance of such a large number of cards. I mean, how could you really adequately playtest even a significant number of the cards and combinations possible? Knowing almost nothing about how the game is actually played, I would just be afraid of the "god hand" vs. "crap hand" phenomenon occurring too often. But maybe that's just very rare and not a big deal at all. Either way, I'll let you know in April or May...

Last BoardGame Night of the Year...

Chris Norwood — Wed, 19 Dec 2007 23:09:02 GMT

Well, last night was the final Hypermind BoardGamers meeting of 2007. Holiday plans got in the way for a few people, but we still got in a lot of good gaming. I'm not going to go step-by-step through every game I played (that's what the geeklist is for), but I did want to take a few minutes to spill out my thoughts on the new games that we played for the first time last night:

Felix: The Cat in the Sack - I had heard mixed reviews about this simple, bidding card game. So going in, I didn't have real high hopes for how it would play. In the end, I was very pleasantly surprised. There's a good bit of bluffing and second guessing, but (especially late in the turn order) you also have quite a bit of information about how many points are at stake. And since "mice money" is both the currency for the auctions as well as the victory condition, you always have to make reevaluations about the relative worth of bids vs. available points vs. money you'll get from passing. We had a great time and played it twice back-to-back, if that tells you anything.

Khronos - Despite being at or near the top of a few "best of" lists around, I had also heard some ambivalent things about this game. I went ahead and picked it up anyway, mainly because of the theme (I really want a great time-travel game). As of right now, though, I'm a little ambivalent about it myself.

The tile-laying mechanic and the rules governing placement and joining of dominions reminds me a little of Tigris & Euphrates, which is a very good thing in my opinion. With the time ripple mechanics, it may be even a little more complicated at times.  I like the predictability of results here, however, opposed to T&E where you never know if your opponent happened to get a lucky draw and has 4 of the needed tiles behind their screen. On the other hand, there is really only one path for conflict in Khronos (as opposed to the internal and external conflicts of T&E), which can make it difficult to disrupt control of a particularly established domoinion.

One thing that burned a couple of people in our game was the random card draw (especially when they had spent 2 Ecus at the beginning of their turn to exchange cards). We'll definitely try out the "hold 'em" variant next time, just to see how that affects the flow of the game. We also mentioned trying the Alan Moon patented "three cards face up plus the draw deck" method of reducing the randomness.

Although the triple boards and time ripple mechanics capture the theme very well, the game still feels very abstract in the way it plays, which bothers my hopes for a really great thematic time-travel game a little.  Our game was pretty slow because at first we were all trying to wrap our heads around the rules concerning tile placement and control, scoring in different ages, and time rippling, and then later as we began to think about strategy and tactics. The game could be rather prone to analysis paralysis as well, and I think that trying it with less than 5 players would be a good thing (I guessing that 3 players would be a nice sweet spot).

All that said, however, I still think this game has a lot of upside potential.  All of us playing were a little tentative with our first-impression ratings, but we also all were pretty intrigued by the game and want to see how it plays now that we know what we're doing. We'll see... hopefully I'll be able to get it to the table again soon.

Kung Fu Fighting - Now, this isn't a "new" new game, but it's new to me. Maybe I'm just a bit of a game snob, but simple fighting games like this just don't hold a lot of attraction for me. That being said, the guys at Slugfest really do have a pretty good basic system going on. I had played the new and slightly more advanced Red Dragon Inn, but after playing this I think I actually prefer the more basic, streamlined core game mechanics of Kung Fu Fighting. Yeah, there's a ton of luck involved, but since you are always drawing tons of cards, there's a real hand-management skill involved in the game. Of course, it probably didn't hurt my overall impression when I managed a come-from-behind victory by giving Mark a fast, wild, spinning, kick of doom (or something like that, anyway) to the face.

Cold War: CIA vs. KGB - This was actually my third overall game of CW:CvK, but I wanted to mention it again here because to game continues to improve as I play it more. I still don't like the single-population objective cards (which are totally random), but now that I really understand the strategy of both the agent cards as well as the group interactions, the game has taken on new life for me. The coolest thing is definitely the bluffing and second-guessing about which agent to use, but the card play itself has a nice balance of random draw and maximizing the combinations of available actions. There are lots of tough choices that have real game impact, such as whether to risk busting (and therfore losing your agent) in order to draw a group that might help you win.  As I begin to see the depths of the game, its length also bothers me less. Overall, it's definitely a game on the rise for me!