Blood on the Clocktower

Blood on the Clocktower is a social deduction game with the same concept and structure as Werewolf. It is an improved, more complex and more strategic version of Werewolf. In Werewolf you don't really have much basis for discussion or deduction. You rely on observing the facial expressions and reactions of your friends. In Blood on the Clocktower every town resident has a unique ability, and as a team the townsfolk have a lot of information to work with. You have more concrete data as a basis for discussion. 

There are two teams. The bad guys are the demon and his minion, and they try to keep their identities secret. Their goal is to kill most of the townsfolk. If the demon can survive until there are only two players remaining, the demon team wins, even if the minion is killed. The good guys are the townsfolk. Their goal is to kill the demon. In order to do that they need to work out who the demon is. Game rounds alternate between day rounds and night rounds. Night rounds are when the demon gets to secretly kill a town resident. Day rounds are when the townsfolk can vote to lynch a person suspected to be the demon. This game requires a facilitator who does not participate in the game itself. Being facilitator in this game is much more complex than being one in Werewolf. You have much more work to do and more information to manage. In night rounds everyone closes their eyes and the facilitator gives instructions about who should open their eyes and convey or receive information without the rest knowing. 

In a day round, the townsfolk get to discuss who they think the demon is. They can vote to kill the person. This is how you kill the demon. One difference from Werewolf is you don't necessarily have to pick someone to kill if you are not sure. If none of the accused get enough votes, or if they are tied in votes, nobody dies. Another difference from Werewolf is dead people continue to play. After you are killed, you are still allowed to speak, just that you don't have your powers anymore. You are even allowed to vote, but from the moment you are killed until the end of the game, you can only vote once. People who get killed are usually the good guys. Since they get to continue to speak, the demon cannot silence them by killing them. The demon needs to be careful not to expose himself, because all these dead people still have one vote each, and if they band together, they can get him killed. I think this aspect makes the game better than Werewolf. There is no player elimination. Everyone is engaged till the end. 

The best part of the game is the character powers. Every character has a unique power. Only the facilitator and you know which character you are. There is no card indicating who you are. You don't have anything to prove you are who you say you are. Players may declare who they are, but whether the others believe so is a different matter. Certainly the bad guys want to pretend to be good guys. 

Here are some of the townsfolk characters. The fortune teller gets to pick two players every night, and she will know whether the demon is among them. There is a weakness to her power though. One specific town resident will be mistaken as the demon. All of this is handled by the facilitator. The monk protects one player every night. If the demon attempts to kill that player, the protected player is saved. The washerwoman starts the game knowing that between two town residents, one is a particular character. 

These above are the townsfolk. There is another type among the good guys, and they are called the outsiders. They are on the same team as the townsfolk, but their powers are liabilities. Their existence helps the demon. One outsider is the drunkard. He doesn't know he's drunk and he believes he is someone else. He thinks his information is correct, but it may not be. As you can see, the existence of this character can really mess with the townsfolk. All of this needs to be managed by the facilitator. 

The demon's minion can be one of four characters. The poisoner gets to disable and confuse the power of a town resident for 24 hours. The scarlet woman can take the place of the demon if the demon is killed early, allowing the game to continue. 

Although the townsfolk collectively have much information which help them figure out who the demon is, the demon and his minion do get tools and information to help them too. For example the facilitator will let the demon know about three specific characters which are not in play. This is helpful because the demon can pretend to be one of these characters, and there won't be any town resident who can verify that he is lying. 

Part of the facilitator's toolset

I did a 7-player game. I drew the demon, and that made me rather nervous. My minion was Sam. I didn't know which character he was. Right off the bat we got into a rather sticky situation. Xiang Yang was the empath, and he was seated exactly between Sam and I. The power of the empath was he could sense how many evil persons were next to him. He sensed two, which meant it must be both the demon and his minion! Game over?! This sucked big time. Another problem was Han was the washerwoman, and at the start of the game, he knew that between Xiang Yang and I, one was the empath. This meant his information matched what Xiang Yang claimed. I knew for our game the soldier was not in play. I was prepared to say that I was the soldier. The soldier could not be killed by the demon. So I planned to say that I couldn't reveal my character early, because I needed to lure the demon to kill me. He would fail, and I would have given us one more precious round. I didn't dare to deny what Xiang Yang had said, because Han's input matched his. If I went against two of them, I would arouse suspicion. So I said I believed Xiang Yang was the empath, but I said that his information was wrong, and that he must have been poisoned by the poisoner. Thankfully there was such a character in the game, and I could make use of this to wriggle out of this tight spot. At the time I had no idea whether Sam was the poisoner. It turned out that he was. 

In the first night round I promptly killed Xiang Yang. It felt too dangerous to have him seated right between Sam and I. In hindsight, that might not have been wise. The townsfolk might have interpreted that this meant what Xiang Yang had said was true - he was sitting between the demon and the minion. I could have let him live, and then let the poisoner do poisoning every round. Then what Xiang Yang said would become inconsistent, and it would just be considered gibberish. In fact he might end up being suspected. 

Game in progress (photo courtesy of boardgamecafe.net)

Joon Lam was the slayer. Once per game the slayer can attempt to kill the demon. He just has to point, and if that player is the demon, the demon is killed. During our discussion, Joon Lam was convinced that Sam was the demon. Sam did try to defend himself somewhat, at least to try to put on some show. I did not try very hard to dissuade Joon Lam. Sam wouldn't have been hurt anyway. I did not egg Joon Lam on either, so as not to appear too keen. The end result was the slayer wasting his holy water and Sam needing a towel for his wet face (figuratively speaking). 

Eu Vin was the fortune teller. Every night he could point at two persons, and Jeff the facilitator would tell him whether the demon was among them. This was done in the evening when everyone had their eyes closed, so no one knew who he pointed at and what answer he received. In fact, we couldn't even be sure he was indeed the fortune teller and all this happened at all. We had our eyes closed. In one night round Eu Vin pointed at Sam and Joon Lam, and Jeff signalled at him that the demon was among them. Eu Vin was given this answer not by mistake. The fortune teller's power had a weak point. One of the townsfolk would be mistaken as the demon. In our game, that error was Joon Lam. Eu Vin was convinced that Joon Lam was the demon, and asked everyone to vote to get him killed. I, of course, quietly supported the motion. So another innocent person was killed. Well, technically the townsfolk didn't know that yet. They could only be sure that the demon wasn't dead yet since the game continued. It might have been the minion getting killed. The identities of the dead were not yet revealed. 

Crunch time was the day round when we had four players remaining. If the townsfolk didn't manage to kill me, by night there would be only three left, I could kill one more to get to two players left, and I would win. This time Eu Vin was convinced that I was the demon. He proposed that I be sent to the gallows. Joon Lam was already dead. In this game most of the dead are townsfolk, and most of the time they are honest. They can still speak, and since they usually have no more reason to lie, you have to be careful about arguing with them. I stayed away from any such argument. Joon Lam said he was the slayer, and since his attempt to kill Sam had failed, it meant Sam wasn't the demon. I said in a matter-of-fact manner that with only four of us left still alive, the possibilities would be Eu Vin, Zackler and me. I said I thought Eu Vin was the demon, and that I too wanted to nominate him to be hanged. Up to this point, none of the three dead people had voted yet. Their votes could be make or break. Since Eu Vin had nominated me first, the voting to kill me went ahead first. With four players alive, only two votes were needed to get me executed. There were exactly two votes. In this game to vote means to support hanging the person. There is no vote for disagreeing. If you disagree, just don't vote. I had also nominated Eu Vin, so we had to vote for him too. Naturally Sam and I voted. We had two more votes from the townsfolk, making a total of four votes. I escaped the hanging, and Eu Vin was executed. That meant game over for the townsfolk. The demon and his minion won! 

This game gave me a lot of anxiety. I was nervous but I had to act calm and innocent. Looks like I'm a pretty good liar. I managed to convince the townsfolk of my innocence. Blood on the Clocktower is an improved version of Werewolf. It addresses several shortcomings of Werewolf. Werewolf is simple, and if that's what you are looking for, it will still work for you. In Blood on the Clocktower you have much more information to work with. The game is more strategic. You have more basis for discussion and deduction. You are not deciding on who to lynch based on gut feel. There is some logic and reasoning. The townsfolk have more information, which makes things harder for the demon. However the demon also has more tools to balance things out. There is more information, but there is also possible misinformation. The designer has done a lot of work balancing the game. This game must have been a huge undertaking to playtest thoroughly. I am truly impressed. If you like social deduction games, you must give this a go. 

Still lots of discussion and debate after the game

Jeff (in green) was a great facilitator 

Demon (me) and poisoner Sam

Steam Power

Steam Power is Martin Wallace’s magnum opus Age of Steam simplified to become a family game. Well, not exactly. Indeed much is simplified, but some elements in Steam Power are just different. Some are a little like Brass. 

In Steam Power, you build your own rail network. You also build factories. Every city allows one specific factory type. When you build a factory, you place five goods next to it. Anyone can use these goods for fulfilling contracts. Your factory will score points at game end only if all its goods are used up. Your railroad network doesn’t score points directly, but they give you access to factories. When you fulfil a contract, you can use any goods accessible by your network for free. You can use goods outside your network but you’ll need to pay for using your opponent’s railroads to bring these goods to your network. 

The game ends when a player completes his 11th contract. You score points for completed contracts, fully utilised factories and major cities you connect to. During game setup, two unused city tiles augment the values of specific factory types. This creates variability from game to game.

Network building is competitive. You want to claim territory and access to cities. Access to major cities does give you points, but it is access to factories which is more important. You get to use goods at these factories for free. You are not limited to build factories within your network. You can build in others’ networks if you foresee there is demand for your goods and your opponents will be willing to use your goods even when they know they will be helping your factory score. 

This is a very clean design. Building factories is free. Building tracks is free as long as you avoid hills and mountains. You don’t use cash often, and this cuts down a lot of tedium. There is much board play. You have to analyse the distribution of goods production to decide how best to start and grow your network. There is a race to expand your network. There is also a race to fulfil contacts. You must watch your opponents and make sure the game ending doesn’t catch you off guard. 

Steam Power is quite a different beast from Age of Steam. It is lighter and the pace is brisk. It is not as unforgiving but it is still competitive. This works as a family strategy game. This deluxe edition that I played is very pretty and welcoming. 

my 2025

The biggest change at my boardgame blog in 2025 was the quantity. Since starting this blog in 2007, I have never written this many blog posts. The number of posts is more than double of the next highest year. This is mainly because of the many new-to-me games I played on BoardGameArena.com. Together with my long-time gaming buddies Han and Allen, we started playing asynchronous games on a regular basis. I discovered many new games this way.  

This year I have played 260 different games, and of these, 187 are new-to-me. For comparison, in 2024 I played 72 different games. In 2025, I had 777 plays, of which 280 are my usual suspects top three - Star Realms, Race for the Galaxy (played vs AI) and Ascension. My other dimes are Innovation, Daybreak, Regicide and Ali Baba and the Forty Thieves. I played 46 games of Innovation, almost as many as Ascension. I shouldn't count Ali Baba, because my records of games I design are not accurate. I demo them a lot and don't always record these. Also I treat demoing games as work and not play. I get all these numbers from the https://geekgroup.app website. This is such a nifty tool. It's easier to use and has more features than what BoardGameGeek.com currently does, and its data is synced from BGG. 

Surprisingly when I list my favourite new-to-me games played this year, the top two are heavy Eurogames, a genre which I proclaim to no longer like. Stupor Mundi offers very different ways to improve your capabilities. You need to compete in several different aspects. It presents difficult decisions. The many aspects in the game are linked in different ways so you have to take care of all of them. There are so many different ways to build your castle. 

Darwin's Journey was a challenge to learn. Part of why I like it is the challenge. I did so poorly in the first game it motivated me to want to do better. It was a puzzle to solve. There was so much I was supposed to do, and I was appalled by how little I had achieved by the end of the game. This is a rewarding game to learn to play at least half competently. 

My most memorable game session was Blood on the Clocktower. This is a social deduction game, and ironically social deduction games are generally not my thing. Blood on the Clocktower is an improved and more complex version of Werewolf. In the game I played, I was the demon, i.e. the main bad guy. That made me rather nervous. In this game, every single villager (here called townsfolk) has a unique ability, which makes playing the demon challenging. Thankfully there are balancing factors. Even though the townsfolk do know some pieces of information, this information might be wrong. The moderator might give them wrong information because they have been poisoned, or their powers have weaknesses in certain situations. I won as the demon, and learned that I can be a pretty convincing liar. 

I played many good games this year. Others new to me which are memorable include Santa Maria, Tiger & Dragon, Maracaibo, Lord of the Rings: Fate of the Fellowship, Duel for Cardia, and Drones vs Seagulls.

Tiger & Dragon

Santa Maria

On the game designing and publishing side of my boardgame hobby, this year I published the fourth game under Cili Padi Games - Pinocchio. This was also the year the Matagot edition of Dancing Queen was released. My first game published under an established international publisher. This is an important milestone for me. I have now exported my games to USA (Portland Games Collective) and Denmark (Games Kobenhavn). I have a second game which has found a publisher. Malaysian Holidays has been licensed to Specky Studio, and it will be released early 2026, in conjunction with Visit Malaysia Year. I thought I wouldn't be participating in many boardgame and boardgame related events in 2025, because they are tiring and sales aren't always great, but I still went to quite a few - Sarong Music Run, Dice & Dine, Keretapi Sarong, Asian Board Games Festival in Penang, and Thailand Board Game Show. There was a boardgame event at my hometown of Kota Kinabalu, Sabah, but unfortunately I couldn't make it. My friends who were there said they did great sales. Looks like Sabahans are hungry for boardgames! I hope there will be a similar event in 2026, and I will do my best to be there. It's my hometown! 

Keretapi Sarong event

Asian Board Games Festival in Penang

Thailand Board Game Show 2025

I have been participating less in game design competitions. This year I've only participated in the one organised by STTOS, designing a game for Sabah tourism. However this year I became one of the judges of the Design & Play (DNP) game design competition organised under Malaysian Boardgame Design (MBD). There were six judges, all Malaysian game designers who have published games. It was an interesting experience, seeing a game design competition from the other perspective. We hope Malaysian boardgame design continues to grow and we see more and more good games from local designers. 

Haireey, Buddhima, Chee Kong, Logan, Jon and I 

This year I did a seminar at Connaught Chinese Primary School on boardgames and parenting. I'm doing a little part in creating awareness of boardgames. When I visited Hong Kong on a personal trip, I met up with and interviewed Charles Yan, a Hong Kong publisher. It was fun to learn about the boardgame industry in Hong Kong, and to some extent China and Taiwan too. 

At SJK(C) Taman Connaught with my friends who helped run games with the attendees.

Charles and I in Hong Kong

I am running out of space at home for boardgames, and did a small purge this year, giving away some games to friends, and selling some. Now that I have some space on my game shelves, I hope I don't use it up too quickly. 

This year I participated in the annual BGC (BoardGameCafe.net) Boardgame Retreat for the first time. I've known Jeff and Wai Yan for years and they have been my main game supplier (drug dealer) for a long time. Now I'm selling my own games through them. I had a blast at the retreat. It was great to have a few days of being away from everything else and simply enjoying my hobby. 

Here's wishing everyone a wonderful 2026 ahead, and many more happy gaming moments! 

Catan: New Energies

Catan: New Energies is a variant and a standalone game in the Catan universe. 95% of the original The Settlers of Catan is still here. Some elements have been added. The additions are a social commentary. This game explores the concept of sustainable development. In order to do well, you must develop your cities and towns in an environmentally-friendly way. Otherwise you will be penalised. 

You start the game with one town and one city. Every turn, the active player rolls two dice, and they determine which hexes produce resources. If a producing hex is next to one of your settlements (town or city), you gain a resource. Resources can be spent to build roads and new settlements, or to buy development cards. You can trade resources with others. You can also trade with the game supply. Your goal is to get to 10 points. Towns are 1pt, cities 2pts. Some development cards are 1pt. Having the longest road is 2pts, and having played the most clean-up cards is 2pts. These are all the same as base Catan, just that some resources and components have new names. 

Here are the new stuff. At the start of every turn, event chips are drawn from a bag. When a specific number of chips for a particular event type is drawn, that event is triggered and players suffer (or enjoy) the effects. The bag starts with bad events, but when players build clean power plants, good events will be added to the bag. A new way the game ends is the bag being exhausted. Depending on how polluting the players are as a whole, the number of chips being drawn from the bag differs. The pace of the game is affected by player actions. 

Player board

Cities no longer produce double the resources. Instead they produce one resource and one science. Science (lightbulb icon) is a new resource. You can spend science to build power plants. Dirty power plants are cheaper than clean power plants. Dirty power plants, towns and cities all increase your carbon footprint, while clean power plants reduce it. It is always good to have a smaller carbon footprint. Many events penalise players with the largest footprint. Power plants produce yet another new resource - power. Power can be spent to increase your storage, remove pollution, remove dirty power plants or take resources. 

With these elements added, the game is a bit more complex than the standard Catan. 

Along the edges of the board there are spaces for event chips. Whenever a set is completed, the corresponding event is triggered. Brown events are bad. 

This track indicates how polluting everyone is as a whole. At different pollution levels, the number of chips being drawn from the event bag differs. 

Towns can have at most one power plant, while cities can have three. The town pieces have only one curved indent, while the city pieces have three. These indents remind you of the number of power plants allowed. 

The game instantly feels familiar because almost all of what you have seen in The Settlers of Catan are also here, just that some are called different names. I like Catan, so this game works for me. I'm just playing Catan with some additional rules. Do they make the game better? At the moment it's hard to say. I'm certainly fine with basic Catan, so the additions are not a necessity. To me it's just a variant, and it is nice to have some variety if you have played a game many times. 

I played this online at BoardGameArena.com, and I think it's not very well suited for asynchronous play, because this is a trading game. The trading aspect is slow and tedious. If playing face-to-face, or playing a live game with Zoom on, we will be able to negotiate and conclude trades very quickly. In asynchronous mode we have to wait till the next time we login, only to see our trade proposal declined, and then we try to propose another trade, and then we have to wait again. I want to play this game again, but not in async mode. 

This is how you do trading when playing in async mode

I call this game social commentary because it feels like I am being preached to. It is more expensive to build clean power plants, but if you build dirty power plants and have a large carbon footprint, you will cause bad events to happen more frequently, and you will likely suffer from them more too. Pollution slows your production. More towns and cities mean more production, but also more pollution. Still, I think it is a good thing that they make a game to create more awareness about sustainable development and clean energy. Catan is a huge brand, which means they have social impact. 

Our game ended unexpectedly (to me), due to the bag running out of chips. This is a new way the game ends, and I was not prepared at all. We were all still far from the 10 points winning condition. I feel I was unlucky with the die rolls, and often couldn't do much. My progress was slow. Overall we became pretty green. When you are very green, the game actually speeds up, with two event chips being drawn instead of one. I didn't pay close attention and was caught unprepared. When the chips run out, the greenest play wins the game. 

Fishing

Fishing is a deck-building trick-taking game from mad scientist designer Friedemann Friese. The game is played over eight rounds. Every round you score points based on the cards you win. These cards are shuffled, and they go to the bottom of your personal draw deck. In the next round, you draw cards from your personal draw deck. Your draw deck starts empty. In the first round, if you don’t even win enough cards to add to your draw deck, you will get some help. This is where things start getting interesting. When your draw deck runs out, it means you need help, and the game will help you by letting you draw powerful cards from reserve decks. There are several reserve decks, each containing cards more powerful than the previous. How many of these decks will be used in a game depends very much on how the game goes. Due to how more and more powerful cards get into circulation, the landscape of the game changes as you play.

It is probably not accurate to describe this as a deck-building game since you don’t have much control on what cards get added to your deck. You just know the cards which get added becomes stronger and stronger. 

Cards come in four suits. The reserve cards will introduce a trump suit. In the reserve decks there are also cards with higher numbers than the starting cards, and also some cards with special powers. One special power in the game allows you to steal one card from the current trick, even if you don’t win it. Another power lets you become the start player for the next trick.

The game has an interesting ebb and flow. If you do poorly, you will get to draw new powerful cards, and they can help you greatly in the next round. It might not be a good idea to intentionally lose all the time. It is still important to score points. The special power card which can steal someone else’s card is important. This is one way you can improve your deck without needing to lose too much or taking too many weak cards. 

Whenever you win a trick, you place the cards in the pile on the left, so that you can keep track of how many cards you have won in the current round. When the round ends, you shuffle these cards and add them to the bottom of your draw deck, on the right. 

These are some of the the reserve cards from the strongest reserve deck (5 stars). 

For 4 players, these are the hand sizes for each of the 8 rounds.

You can do a fair bit of card counting. By observing which cards your opponents have won, you know what cards they have in their decks so you can somewhat anticipate them. This is a strategic element in the game. 

Fishing is a fun twist to the trick-taking genre. I like it! 

Little Fighters 2 - The Card Battle

Little Fighters 2 was a hit digital indie game released in Hong Kong in 2000. It was remastered and re-released in 2025, its 25th anniversary. Together with the re-release, a novel was published, and the deluxe version of the novel comes with a small box card game. This is that small box card game. 

This is a game for 2 to 4 players. You play one of four characters in the digital game and you will have a hand of 13 cards, corresponding to one suit in a typical poker deck. That means the numbers go from 2 to Ace. The card values represent strength, and depending on the character you play, some cards have special abilities, e.g. taking back a discarded card. 

Every round, everyone simultaneously plays a card from his hand. The highest number wins, but if there are ties, all tied players automatically lose. The winner of a round gets to place the winning card into a 3 x 3 grid. You play tic-tac-toe on this grid. Whoever makes three in a row in the grid wins the game. If the grid is filled without anyone managing to make three in a row, you can use your winning card to displace a weaker card in the grid.

After reading the rules, I thought the game was rather simplistic. There was nothing particularly new or interesting. Only when I played the game I found that it worked better than I expected. It is indeed pretty simple, but there are some meaningful tactical considerations. I did a three player game, and I think 3 or 4 players will be more interesting than 2, because it is possible to clash numbers. When Han was leading and Xiu Yi (or was it Xiang Yang) and I wanted to stop him, we played the same high number and lost that round to Han. With three or four players, you can actually discuss what numbers to play if you want to gang up on the leading player. It is important to count cards. If you know your opponents' Aces have all been played, you can be confident yours will certainly win. The four characters are similar but not exactly the same. When you understand their personalities, you can adjust your play style accordingly. 

Overall this is still a simple game. Fans of the original computer game will find this enjoyable. Some IP boardgames and card games are made by non-gamers, and these are painfully obvious to us gamers. Little Fighters 2 is made by gamers, so you get a package which not only honours the original IP but is also a properly decent game. 

5 Towers

The first thing 5 Towers reminds me of is Lost Cities. You have five suits, and you must play your cards in a specific order, with no turning back. However there are several important differences, so 5 Towers delivers a different play experience. You can build up to five different towers, each a different colour, and you most likely will. Building a tower means playing cards of the same suit in a column. The numbers must go from highest to lowest. At the end of the game, each card scores 1 point, but if you cap your tower with the 0 card, the tower scores double. 

You don't have any hand cards. You gain cards through a bidding mechanism. Every round, the start player reveals five cards from the deck and declares how many he wants to take. If anyone wants these cards, they must declare a higher number. This goes on until everyone has had a chance to declare a number, and the one willing to take the most cards must take that number of cards and add them to his play area. Naturally if anyone is willing to take all five, he immediately does so and the bidding ends. 

Cards at the centre of the table are not always good for you. Ideally you want to build your towers slowly, letting them grow one step at a time so that you can have many levels in every tower. If you take a card which makes you jump from a high number directly to a low one, you are forgoing the opportunities to build many levels in between. 

One important difference between 5 Towers and Lost Cities is you can renovate your towers. Once per round, you can remove the topmost card from one tower. This means it is possible to go backwards. You can remove one card to make space for other cards. However there is a cost associated with every card removed. You keep them in a rubble pile, and at the end of the game you lose points for every card there. The first card costs you 1 point, the second card 2 points, and so on. So renovation is not something you take lightly. 

The game is played until the deck runs out twice. Then the highest scorer wins. 

This is a component from another game, but we used it as start player marker. 

Playing 5 Towers you will constantly be torn between grabbing points and sacrificing opportunities. Unless you get lucky, most of the time when you take a card to play, you will skip some numbers. These are the opportunities you will lose, unless you renovate. You must constantly evaluate how useful the set of cards at the centre are to each of your opponents. If you want the cards and they are also highly desired by others, you probably need to bid a high number, or even take all five. However if the cards are bad for everyone else, you can safely bid to take only one or two that you really want. 

Player tableaus will quickly develop to become quite different, so the set of cards at the centre will often be of different values to everyone. It is always interesting to analyse how good that set of cards is for each player. You are often in dilemma about whether to take the cards, and how many to take. In an ideal world, you are able to build your towers one step at a time, wasting no opportunity. But life is not perfect, and we have to choose our imperfections. That's life. It's about the choices we make.