Sunday, 8 February 2015

Zhanguo

Plays: 4Px1.

The Game

Zhanguo means the Warring States Period in ancient China. However the game is more about nation-building after the warring period, when all seven kingdoms have been united under the Qin banner, rather than the warring itself. You serve the First Emperor, and you are tasked to perform construction and introduce reforms in the five regions of China. This is a point-scoring Eurogame. Quite a few actions provide victory points. At game end, the highest scorer wins.

You play five rounds, and you receive six cards at the start of every round, each card allowing you to perform one action. There are seven types of actions. Six of these are shown on the board at the top left corner. If you choose to do one of these, you play a card onto the discard pile on the board. Under certain circumstances you gain some bonuses depending on whether the number of your card is higher or lower than the previous card played. The seventh action type is sticking a card under your player board, which grants you the ability to gain the bonuses mentioned above. Improving your player board is important because it can greatly enhance your future actions.

The six normal actions you can do are: recruiting officials, recruiting labourers, transferring officials, deploying governors, building palaces and building the Great Wall of China. You need officials to recruit labourers and to deploy governors. You need governors to quell unrest. You need labourers to build palaces and the Great Wall. Having the most governors in a province at game end gives you points. Building palaces and sections of the Great Wall also give points.

Every round you always draw two each of beige, orange and brown cards, and their number ranges are 1-40, 41-80, 81-120 respectively. The number is relevant if you take a normal action and want to trigger your action bonuses. The two icons in the top half are relevant if you stick this card under your player board to enable a bonus ability. What these mean is in future when you perform the action type as indicated by the icon on the left, you may gain a bonus as indicated by the icon on the right. E.g. the card on the right means if you build a palace, you may gain a military officer (red cube) in a particular province.

This is the player board. At this point I have stuck six cards under it. Each column here accommodates up to three cards, and also correspond to one of the five regions on the main board. Some bonuses must be applied to the specific province where the card is located. Some don't matter, e.g. gaining influence or gaining points. The hammer tiles are the labourers. I have two in the second province. The red, white and grey cubes are officials.

To recruit labourers in a province, up to two officials can be put on recruitment drive duty, i.e. you have to move them to the lower row. I have officials manning recruitment booths in the first two provinces. The black cubes indicate unrest, which is caused by recruitment drives (which I suspect is a fancy name for forced labour) and card plays. In the second province unrest is at the max, so I can't recruit more labourers or play more cards here, at least for now. I will need a governor to come tell the populace to keep calm and carry on. At this level of unrest, I can't even build a palace or trigger the bonus ability of the card here.

The meditating Buddha-like pieces are governors. The first three governors sent to a province may claim a bonus benefit. At game end, the player(s) with the most governors in a province scores points.

The table at the bottom left shows the round-end bonuses available to players who have the most beige, orange or brown influence. Normally you gain influence by playing cards to your player board. This is another avenue for competition among players.

The Great Wall has many sections where you can contribute. Those large tiles indicate how you will score, and they differ from game to game. That tile on the right means you score (at game end) depending on how many of your provinces have white officials. How much you score also depends on which subsection of the wall you build. If you spend just one labourer to build the one-stroke section, you earn 2VP per province with white officials. If you send three labourers to build the three-stroke section, you earn 4VP per province. If all five of your provinces have white officials, that's 20VP - not a small amount.

Building palaces, building the Great Wall and deploying governors are all more or less disparate ways of scoring. However there are two mission sets on the right side of the board which link them together. Let's look at this green mission set, which consists of three missions. The mission details vary from game to game. In the first box (i.e. first mission), the icons mean that if you are first to build wall sections in a purple zone, a green zone and two yellow zones, you will score 3VP. If you are second to do so, you score 2VP, and so on. The second mission requires you to build palaces in the 2nd and 3rd provinces. The third mission requires you to deploy governors in the 4th and 5th provinces. Now if you complete two missions within the same set, your total score from these missions will be doubled. If you complete all three missions in the set, your total score is tripled. These multipliers are what makes mission sets attractive. The mission sets link together all the other main scoring methods, and give you a blueprint to work towards. At least that was how I played. I picked the green mission set at the start of the game (without telling my opponents of course), and focused my effort on completing the full package.

The Play

We did a full four-player game. One thing I am quite impressed by is the functionality design of the game board and the components. All the icons and reminders are there, and after Ivan went through the rules once, everything was clear, or could be checked by simply looking at the main board or the player boards.

Building wall sections, building palaces and installing governors all require quite a few steps and some forward planning. I set my sights on the easier mission set, so I had a checklist in my mind to tick off. Most of my actions were just filling in the blanks, and I needed to plan to be able to fill in all these blanks. It was a logistical exercise to get everything in place.

In the early game I tried to play cards to my player board too, to give me bonuses for my future actions. These bonuses are quite nifty and can save many actions. In fact some of the bonuses cannot even be achieved via the basic actions, e.g. transferring labourers.

Eventually I was able to complete a mission set. However I was slightly surprised that it actually didn't score more than other ways of scoring. But then perhaps I should see it as a bonus on top of what I had already scored from other avenues.

This was the late game. Many sections of the Great Wall had been built. In our game, three of us aimed for the top mission set (top right, green), which was easier, and only one went for the bottom set (bottom right, brown). I (blue) was always just one step behind Ivan (yellow) in the missions.

Game end. One critical move for me was to make use of one of the round-end rewards to place one more governor in the fourth region (square icon consisting of four strokes). Prior to that Ivan (yellow) and I (blue) were tied for most governors, and we would both score 7VP. That additional governor allowed me to monopolise the scoring. 18VP for me, none for Ivan.

The Thoughts

Zhanguo didn't leave much of an impression. It is decent but not remarkable. There are some interesting mechanisms, like how you collect bonus abilities and try to trigger them as often as possible. The competition among players is mostly around how quickly you get to a location, because doing something first normally gives a better reward. You also want to do more, in order to score more, but doing more is mainly dependent on how you manage your own player board, and is not affected by your opponents. You are racing against time to complete what you want, and you try to maximise your efficiency.

Without the mission sets concept to link together the various ways of scoring, the various aspects of the game may feel a little disjointed. The mission sets help to tie the various elements together and give players an overarching objective. However it can also feel like giving the players a colouring book to fill in, as opposed to giving them a blank canvas to freely express themselves.

Fun fact: Regions 1 to 5 are represented by icons that look like Chinese writing, and these icons have one to five strokes respectively. In Chinese, the numbers 1 to 5 are written this way: 一, 二, 三, 四, 五. The icons used in this game are not valid Chinese characters, but the icons for three and four put together would look like "Little Mouth" or "Small Opening" in Chinese - 小口。

Friday, 6 February 2015

2013 games eagerness ranking

This is one of those things I do roughly once a year. I list down games published within a particular calendar year which I have played, and rank them according to how much I feel like playing them at that moment. Usually I do this just short of one year after the particular year has passed, but for year 2013, I'm doing it more than one year later. I am no longer at the forefront of playing all the hot new games. There are still a number of widely acclaimed 2013 games I have not tried. So my list is in no way authoritative. It's just one gamer's fun exercise of stringing together 2013 games. When I play a game I don't take note of the year of publication. When I put together this list, it was interesting to discover which games were from the same batch, like meeting co-workers who went to the same primary school (elementary school).

    Keen To Play

    None. No particular game that I am itching to play.

    Happy To Play

  1. Axis & Allies: WWI 1914 - Played once, and I quite enjoyed it. It's not the type of game that I feel like playing all the time. It's an event game, something you need to plan for and arrange early. This is the first game in the Axis & Allies series that uses World War I as the backdrop. There are some changes to fit the system to better reflect warfare of that age, but the overall structure is still familiar.

    Axis & Allies: WWI 1914

  2. Impulse - This is a Carl Chudyk design (Innovation, Glory to Rome). It is interstellar exploration, colonisation and warfare via a clever card mechanism. It has Carl Chudyk's signature all over it. I wonder why it is rarely discussed and seems to be not very popular. In contrast Red7 is getting tons of attention.

    Impulse

  3. Nations - A card-based civ game with no map element, but it has many differences from Through the Ages.

    Nations

  4. Legacy: The Testament of Duke de Crecy - A game in which you build your family tree. I really enjoy building the tree, and making combos of all the sons- and daughters-in-law which I'm marrying to my children and grandchildren. Other aspects of the game are rather pedestrian though. I wonder whether its star will drop significantly after the lustre of the family tree mechanism wears off, if it does wear off.
  5. Cuba Libre - A complex game with lots of story and history. I think this is best played with exactly four. Two players each controlling two factions is tough to play.

    Cuba Libre

  6. Glass Road - The two key ideas are identifying strong building power combos, and correctly guessing your opponents' intended actions.
  7. Ascension: Rise of Vigil, Ascension: Darkness Unleashed - Other than categorising these Ascension expansions under the Happy To Play category, I struggle to actually rank them. I am playing Ascension every day and I don't think about whether I want to play it. It's like breathing.
  8. Race for the Galaxy: Alien Artifacts - I didn't like the Alien Orb module, and by itself it would be Rather Not Play. However I do play this expansion with just the new cards, and I feel right at home with it.
  9. Level 7 [Omega Protocol] - I probably won't play as the dungeon master, because I'm too lazy to read the rules and manage the scenarios. Playing as a soldier? Count me in! I'm happy to shoot some monsters.
  10. UGO - An unusual trick-taking game with a little board element.

    UGO

  11. The Builders: Middle Ages - A light card game in which you recruit and manage a team of builders and race to construct buildings worth a certain number of victory points.

    Lukewarm

  12. Wildcatters - I truly like 90% of it, but can't stand the area majority scoring mechanism.

    Wildcatters

  13. Kashgar - It has an interesting deck-building mechanism, but the rest of the game is nothing special.
  14. Concordia - The rules are very different from Navegador, but they feel similar, because in both games you score in an AxB way, where you try to specialise and focus on your specific A's and B's.

    Concordia

  15. Cappuccino - An abstract game for 2 to 4. It reminds me of DVONN, but it is simpler.
  16. Rialto - Area majority competition, where the values of the areas you are fighting for only get determined bit by bit during the course of the game.
  17. Bremerhaven - The blind bidding is brutal because losers get nothing (other than frustration and a sense of impending doom). This can be good or bad. Some like the ruthlessness and find it exciting. Some can't handle the truth (Jack Nicholson in A Few Good Men). Other elements of the game like receiving ships and sending goods off are OK but not particularly memorable.

    Rather Not Play

  18. Duel of Ages II - A squad-level battle game. I generally don't like this genre. This game has a sci-fi setting, which gives the designer an excuse to pit characters from the past, the present and the future against one another.

    Duel of Ages II

  19. Eight-Minute Empire: Legends - A highly-simplified and streamlined dudes-on-a-map game on the surface, an area majority game under the hood. I don't think dudes-on-a-map games need to be streamlined. They are more fun when they are epic.
  20. Coin Age - I still don't get this microgame. It has a clever mechanism, which is equivalent to flipping multiple coins at the same time to determine what action you get to do. I feel there is still some strategy or some tactics which I have not fully grasped, but at the moment I've lost interest to continue to probe.
  21. Stone & Relic - I only remember it's a card game and I didn't enjoy it.

Have Not Played

Here are some which I have heard of but have not played.

  1. Caverna - I do like Agricola a lot, but I'm not particularly keen to see what Agricola 2 is like. What's wrong with Agricola?
  2. Eldritch Horror - I've read good things.
  3. Russian Railroads - Won many awards. I'm interested to try this.
  4. Legendary: Dark City
  5. Lewis & Clark - Another one I'm interested to try.
  6. Pathfinder Adventure Card Game: Rise of the Runelords
  7. Bora Bora
  8. Bruges
  9. BattleCON
  10. Battlelore (2nd edition)
  11. Forbidden Desert - I should try this, since I liked Forbidden Island and found it different enough from Pandemic.
  12. Pandemic: In the Lab
  13. Bruxelles 1893 - I like the artwork.
  14. 1775: Rebellion - Interested to try.
  15. Amerigo
  16. Euphoria - Allen has this.
  17. Rococo
  18. Francis Drake
  19. Spyrium
  20. Viticulture - Allen has this too.
  21. Quantum
  22. Madeira
  23. Sushi Go!
  24. A Study in Emerald - Martin Wallace design.
  25. Terror in Meeple City / Rampage
  26. Tash-kalar - Vlaada Chvatil design, but it seems rather abstract, so my interest level is low.
  27. Coal Baron
  28. Star Trek: Attack Wing
  29. Mysterium - Interesting idea, something like a more advanced version of Dixit. One player is a ghost trying to give clues to the others to help them solve a mystery.
  30. Augustus
  31. Concept
  32. Patchistory
  33. Space Cadet: Dice Duel
  34. Nothing Personal
  35. Mascarade
  36. Ticket To Ride: Netherlands - I have collected quite many Ticket To Ride maps, but I don't have this one yet.
  37. A Distant Plain
  38. Robinson Crusoe: Voyage of the Beagle - I have not tried all the scenarios in the base game yet. I should bring out this game again. I quite like it.
  39. Compounded - Allen's copy is on my shelf, but I still have not read the rules.
  40. Relic Runners
  41. Innovation: Figures in the Sand - Innovation is one of my favourite games, but I don't own any of the expansions. Maybe I should consider this.
  42. Cinque Terre
  43. Power Grid: Australia and Indian Subcontinent - I own many Power Grid expansion maps too, but not this one yet.
  44. Kohle & Kolonie
  45. Bioshock Infinite: The Siege of Columbia
  46. Canterbury - I think Allen has this one too.
  47. Origin - Very good-looking game. Impressive components.
  48. Lost Legacy - A descendant of Love Letter. I'm interested.
  49. Dark Darker Darkest - I have read the rules and made a rule summary, but I still haven't played it.
  50. Field of Glory: The Card Game - Martin Wallace design.
  51. Kobayakawa - Microgame. Interested.
  52. Corto
  53. The Hobbit: An unexpected Journey
  54. Gear & Piston
  55. Mars Needs Mechanics
  56. Cafe Melange - Great artwork.

Wednesday, 4 February 2015

boardgaming in photos: Tragedy Looper, Eclipse

14 Dec 2014. Chen Rui (7) wanted to play UNO. I'm not a fan, but I said yes. I treasure the time when my children still ask me to play games with them. This particular game took a very very long time. We exhausted the deck twice and played some more before someone (I don't even remember who) finally won by playing the last card. I told Chen Rui next time we must use a variant of ending the game as soon as the deck is exhausted for the second time. Whoever has fewer cards win.

23 Jan 2015. No Friday gaming night at Boardgamecafe.net this day, so Ivan, Dith and I arranged to play at my place instead. I was keen to bring out Tragedy Looper again, and to play as one of the protagonists. We didn't manage to get a fourth player, but the game worked well in 3P mode too. As protagonist I could still discuss with Dith, and work together to guess Ivan the mastermind's intentions and secrets. The mastermind is at a slight disadvantage with fewer than three protagonist players, since one player will be controlling more than one protagonist, so the chances of two Forbid Intrigue cards getting played is less (which is good for the protagonists because when this happens the cards cancel each other out).

Playing as a protagonist feels very different. I can openly discuss strategies (just short of coordinating card play) and exchange theories. The buzzwords "teamwork" and "synergy" flash by. It is very satisfying to find clues and piece together the main plot and subplots. One thing I find is the mastermind role seems to be very hard to play. The mastermind always plays cards first, so the protagonists can react accordingly. The mastermind needs to place enough paranoia markers on a culprit to trigger an incident. The protagonists can see this coming and can work towards preventing the characters from reaching their paranoia threshold. In the game we played, Ivan was not able to trigger any of the incidents because Dith and I worked hard to get rid of paranoia tokens, some by using our cards and some by using character goodwill abilities. I later discussed with Ivan, and his view is that the mastermind needs to fully utilise the information available to him and all the incidents, plots and secret roles in the scenario. It was his first time playing the mastermind role and he had not played optimally, which gave Dith and I an early victory in Loop 2 (of 3). We were able to prevent the tragedy, despite still not knowing quite a few roles. However we did have some idea of what plots were likely in play.

Tragedy Looper is fun and I look forward to play again.

What are you looking at your pervert!

I wonder what this journalist (rightmost) is doing at the school. He already has one Intrigue token, and the mastermind has played a card on him. Time for the protagonists to Forbid Intrigue I guess?

Ivan wanted to play Eclipse. This was my first time playing the physical version. I had played a few times on the iPad, and was lukewarm about it. Now that I have played it face-to-face, I find it much better.

Dith was white, Ivan was yellow, and I was green. We all played alien races and not the vanilla humans. Dith picked Planta, which could expand very quickly, and scored extra points for each star system (tile) controlled at game end. We were still in the first round, and he had already explored four tiles. We played with some of the expansion modules, and one of it is these three ancient ships in the starting setup, each two tiles away from our homeworlds.

The tile at the lower left is my homeworld. It is connected to the next tile via a complete wormhole, i.e. that target-like icon formed by the edges of both tiles. An edge allows passage only when there is a complete wormhole. That means I have no access to the ancient battleship on the right yet. Not that I'm particularly eager to say hi.

This is my player board. The row at the top are the blueprints for the various classes of spaceships. I have not yet upgraded any of them, so there are no tiles placed here. The middle section is for the technology tiles. There are three categories, and for the fourth tech onwards in each category you will gain bonus VP. The section with cubes indicate your production of money (to pay for actions), science (to buy techs) and materials (to build spaceships).

The round discs are action discs. There are six action types, and whenever you execute one, you move a disc onto that space. The number next to your rightmost unused disc is how much you have to pay at the end of the current round. The more actions you take, the more you have to pay. Action discs have another function, which is to stake your claim on a tile (star system). That means the more star systems you control, the fewer discs you will have on your player board, and the most costly your actions will be.

Now all three of us had spaceships next to the automatic defense system at the galactic core. I (green) had two dreadnaught class spaceships (the largest type), but mine were technically inferior compared to Dith and Ivan's. Ivan (yellow) was now attacking a weaker ancients spaceship.

This is the tech board. Depending on the number of players, some tech tiles will be added to this board at the start of the game and at the start of every round. That means the techs available, and also the number of tiles for specific techs will differ from game to game. Sometimes a highly desirable tech may only have one tile turning up, and players need to race to grab it. Sometimes it may not even appear at all. Since we played with expansions, there are some bonus tiles on the left, and some special tech tiles on the right.

This stack of three ancients warships and the tile they are on are an expansion module. I was shocked to run into this when I was exploring the backwaters near my homeworld. I didn't know this expansion was in play. In fact I didn't even know what it was until Ivan explained it to me. This is how it works: After discovering this tile, three ancients warships are placed here. At the end of each round, one of them will randomly move into an adjacent tile, ignoring the need for wormholes. This is contrary to the behaviour of normal ancients warships, which are passive. I had three star systems next to this ancients hive, and they were poorly defended. In fact, some were undefended. This was a moment so tragic that it was funny. I was already no match for Dith or Ivan, and had to put up as much defenses as I could afford at the frontlines. Now I had these hostile warships popping up behind me.

Now Ivan (yellow) had captured the galactic centre. During our game, both Ivan and Dith upgraded their ships very quickly, and they were ready to attack the ancients much earlier than I was. My pacing was rather off. I wasn't much of a threat to either of them throughout the game, but at least I didn't score too poorly at game end. In balance, that ancient hive probably helped me more than it hurt me. Ivan and Dith didn't really want to bother to attack me. They were more concerned about each other. I pulled back my spaceships and attacked these ancients, which gave me some points. Many of the other ancients had already been wiped out by Dith and Ivan by the time I was ready to take them on. So these three ancients ships that turned up in my backyard were mine mine mine.

I had finally upgraded my ships, but they were still nothing impressive. I didn't upgrade my hull (circle with seven-point star in it), which meant just a few hits would destroy my ships. The plasma cannons (orange square with two black dots) meant every hit caused two points of damage.

I think the spaceships in Eclipse are rather ugly. I don't mind it much. They are functional enough, easy to tell apart.

Finally Ivan (yellow) struck at Dith (white). They had been building up towards this big battle. We all knew it would happen sooner or later. Dith's race had an advantage in exploring and in scoring for star systems controlled, but had slightly less customisable spaceships. However he still managed to arm his ships quite well. Unfortunately he could not beat back Dith's invasion force.

Later, after the game ended and we summed up our points, Ivan won by just a handful of points. If he had not attacked at the opportune moment, Dith might have outscored him due to the power of Planta. Never underestimate this margarine.

In the last round, since Ivan still had some spaceships remaining, and they were conveniently positioned next to one of my star systems, he decided to attack me too for some quick points. This was the final battle of the game. I could summon some reinforcements, and outnumbered him 3:1, but I knew it was a rather lopsided fight and I would likely get wiped out in no time. My ships were much too inferior. It turned out that I came very close to repelling him. Too bad, I was just short of that little bit of luck. I lost the star system, and I lost more points than he had gained. Not that it impacted the end game positions at all. We just wanted to have one climactic space battle.

Face-to-face Eclipse is better than the iPad version. For one thing, I can choose to be green. On the iPad, I can be green, but it limits me to specific races. When playing the electronic version, the computer handles many details. I did the tutorial but didn't read the rules. I could play but didn't fully understand every rule detail. That detracts from my enjoyment of the game. I can only blame myself for being lazy and not reading the rules. In the boardgame version I am forced to understand the rules (I read them before we played), and I find that I can plan better and I feel more in control.

It is primarily a wargame. You know you are building up to fight. Most of the techs are for fighting. There is exploration, production and economy to manage, but they are mostly supporting your military. You do score points via peaceful means, but without a strong military to deter attackers and defend against aggression, you will soon find yourself losing system after system. So you need to play with this mindset. Within the military aspect, there is much variability and many strategies to follow. You can customise your fleet in many different ways. Some players may not focus on the big, lumbering dreadnaughts (like what we did in our game), and may instead upgrade the small but numerous fighters, giving them a mobility boost and getting them to sneak past the front lines to wreak havoc in the enemy's territory.

The balance of the economic system and the number of rounds feel just right. You start small and gradually build up for some big conflicts in the mid and end game. The 9 rounds are enough for the players to have developed very different technologies and empires.

I may not seek out Eclipse to play, but if anyone suggests it, I would be happy to play.

Monday, 2 February 2015

R / BraveRats (by Senji Kanai)

Plays: 2Px6.

The Game

R, now published as BraveRats, is another microgame by Senji Kanai of Love Letter fame. Similar to what happened with Love Letter, I found a lovely Star Wars themed version on BGG, and decided to make a copy. It is also a 16-cards game, but the gameplay is very different from Love Letter, and it is a 2-player-only game.

Both players start with all eight cards in hand. The two sets of cards are identical, and are numbered 0 to 7. Every round both players simultaneously play a card, and the higher number wins. Each card has some special text, which may change the result or affect subsequent rounds. Win four rounds, and you win the game. Naturally, the attraction of the game is all in these nifty powers. The #2 card forces your opponent to play a card first next round, so that you can decide what to play after seeing his card. The #6 card gives your next card a +2 bonus. The #1 card beats your opponent's #7 card and instantly wins you the game, without needing to count the number of rounds won. These powers and their interaction are what give the players something to chew on.

The game rules list 20 or so variants and alternative microgames, but I have not tried any of them.

I found these wonderful pictures for the card backs from Google.

The artwork for the Light side and the Dark side is different, but the powers are the same.

The Play

I have played R with non-gamers (my wife and children) and gamers (well, technically just "gamer" - Dith, no plural). For such a simple game, I am surprised that it is a variable depth game. You can play very casually, giving it minimal thought, little above rock-paper-scissors. You can also think about what your opponent may play, and what is the card in your hard with the highest probability of beating a card still in his hand, and how he may be considering that too and thus may decide to play the exact card to counter yours, and how you thus need to pick the card which counters what he will play, and how he may be thinking this far as well and may choose a different card which will counter the one you are picking. Of course, if you are sick of this thinking X steps ahead, you can randomly pick a card, but that would defeat the whole purpose of the game. You might as well play rock-paper-scissors.

I have played six games, but I don't feel I have mastered the various cards, knowing which ones are definitely suitable for the early game, and which ones for the late game, or mid game. Maybe it is impossible to pigeonhole the cards this way, which would be a mark of good design. I discovered that seemingly powerful cards can be vulnerable to quite a few other cards. It is rare to have a sure-win round (well, not counting the situation of you having played the #2 card in the previous round, thus forcing your opponent to play first this round).

Compared to Love Letter, R is a bit more thinky, because you have more cards to consider. In Love Letter, you only have two cards in hand and usually you can decide very quickly.

NNNOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOOO

The Thoughts

I am very impressed by the balance of the card powers in R. There is a counter for every card. There is no super card. There is no rubbish card. R is a great filler. It's the kind of game you can use to bet unpleasant tasks on, e.g. who is going to clean the toilet this week. I also think it works well when played in succession. From each game played, you get to glean how your opponent thinks, and that may help you in the next game. Maybe.

Saturday, 31 January 2015

Roads & Boats session

I first played Roads & Boats last year, with Allen, as a 2P game. For a brief overview, follow this link. Recently Jeff suggested playing it (he hadn't tried it before), and we arranged to play on one of the regular Boardgamecafe.net Friday gaming nights. This time it was a 4-player game - Jeff, Dith, Boon Khim and I. I was the only one who had played before. Here's how our game went, plus some of my additional thoughts at the end.

The map we picked was suitable for beginners. There were enough resources (especially mountains) so the players didn't really need to compete for space or resources. In Roads & Boats you can set up your own map, but we were beginners so we stuck to the recommended maps. I was green and I started in the lower right quadrant. Jeff was blue, upper right. Boon Khim yellow, upper left. Dith red, lower left. I picked a spot next to a river, with the intention of using the river for transporting goods.

At the start of the game our only mode of transportation was donkeys. On the right, the two geese left alone on a pasture will breed. In the game, geese are needed to discover new technologies. This makes no sense thematically, and even the designers make fun of this in the rulebook. However game mechanism-wise it is very interesting. You need to remember to breed your geese and manage when they get converted to new technologies.

We had started building roads now - the black lines drawn on the transparent plastic sheet on top of the tiles.

My (green) little kingdom. I had now built a raft workshop (light blue square), so I was making use of the river. In the background you can see Jeff (blue) had sent a raft over to raid my goods. He had grabbed one of my tree trunks. Jeff was first to go offensive, and I was the first victim. There was a lake in the middle of the board, and Boon Khim's and my areas had rivers running to the lake, so we were vulnerable. Jeff built a raft workshop at the shore of the lake, and launched a pirate raft against us.

I hurriedly built walls along my coast to prevent further attacks. Jeff could spend wooden boards to destroy my walls and harass me more, but he decided to not spend the effort, and switched to bug Boon Khim instead. He actually managed to steal gold from Boon Khim! That is a big deal, because gold is worth victory points.

In Roads & Boats the bigger square tiles are the factories or production facilities. The smaller square tiles are the goods or resources.

Dith's (red) area didn't have any river, so he operated purely using land transportation.

Jeff (blue) had a river in his area, but he didn't make use of it for transporting goods. In fact he had to spend stones to build a bridge across it to allow him access to both banks.

Boon Khim's (yellow) area. He had a mine now (the brown pillar) on the brown mountain tile.

I found that compared to the others, I built fewer production facilities. I produced less, and had to be very careful with how I spent my resources. The others often produced so much that they had surplus lying around. I didn't build many factories because I wanted to save space for other factories I was planning to build. You can only build one factory per tile, and once built a factory cannot be demolished. I didn't want to build too many factories because it would force me to spread out, and some of my factories would end up being quite far from others. By being compact, I hoped to save on transportation time. I'm not entirely sure whether this is a good idea. High production has its merits. Perhaps it depends on the type of map.

Look at Jeff (blue). Now on the right he had extended his road to the tile right next to my (green) home tile (the one with a green house - as in green-coloured house). Even the blind could see he didn't have good intentions. I quickly walled up this front, and he later decided I wasn't worth the trouble.

Both Boon Khim (yellow) and Jeff (blue) had sent their transporters into Dith's (red) territory. Dith had completely surrounded his home tile with walls, but not before one of Jeff's donkeys sneaked in. Now the donkey was stuck (you can't move through other players' walls) and needed to be rescued by other transporters. Jeff would need to tear down a wall to let the donkey out.

I was third to build a mine. Mines are important in this game because they produce gold, and gold is the base product that can be upgraded to higher valued products. Gold ore is worth 10VP. When turned into coins, it is worth 40VP. When coins are turned into stocks, it is worth 120VP. In our game I was the only one who built two mines. This later gave me a strong advantage.

Boon Khim (yellow) not only trespassed into Dith's (red) land. He also started building his own walls, like he owned the place. Well, strictly speaking, according to the rules, no one owns any land, building, or road. You only own walls, transporters and goods on transporters. Walls are built to block off others, but they can also be built to secure passage for your own transporters.

One section of Dith's (red) wall had been destroyed, and replaced by the natural coloured wall piece. Natural wall means no wall, but you still need to place the pieces to remind everyone how many times a wall has been built / rebuilt / destroyed at this border. So the two wall pieces here means a wall had been built and destroyed twice. Each additional time a wall is to be built or destroyed, the resource cost will increase.

I (green) was the only player whose road network did not connect with those of other players. Dith (red) and Boon Khim's (yellow) road networks had pretty much merged into one big network. Boon Khim's network hooked up to Jeff's (blue) via that one road, which later became a key channel of aggression between them.

At the lower edge Dith did have one road extending towards my area, but at this stage he only intended to use it to ship his valuables away from Boon Khim and Jeff, and upgrade them into improved goods. The option to invade my area was there, but eventually he didn't take that path.

At this point I had built my second mine, at the bottom right.

My little kingdom still remained the smallest. Perhaps it was because I produced barely enough for my own consumption, and did not have any tempting surplus lying around, the others didn't perceive me as a threat. They didn't bother me much, but they fought like rabied dogs among themselves. That was of course fine with me. I could peacefully plan my development.

Look at the many transporters belonging to Jeff (blue) running around in Boon Khim's (yellow) area. Jeff had even built walls in this area.

Boon Khim wasn't going to let Jeff get away with this easily, and launched his own offensive against Jeff. Gosh, I am making a complex economic Eurogame sound like an Ameritrash-style wargame. Here Boon Khim had one truck carrying enough boards to destroy a wall, and another truck with enough stones to build his own wall.

Some of Jeff's (blue) gold ore in the top right corner was later stolen by Boon Khim (yellow). Jeff overlooked one avenue of attack, and Boon Khim took advantage of that. Boon Khim had his revenge!

This was Boon Khim's (yellow) home tile, and it had become a battleground. In the background to the left is Jeff's (blue) donkey which had stolen some gold ore from Boon Khim. It still hadn't returned home. Jeff had yet to launch Operation Saving Private Ryan.

Finally Ryan was on his way home. Those two yellow trucks (Boon Khim's) were very tempted to run him down, but rules were rules, no violence allowed.

Notice some of the walls here are up to the third level.

This was the board situation at the end of our game. Only Dith and I managed to build stock exchanges, which produced stocks - the highest valued product. Dith's advancement was overall fastest in our game, but he was only able to produce one stock. Although I was slightly behind, my two mines allowed me to produce two stocks, and this was what won me the game. Towards the late game Dith knew I was racing against time. I needed to produce my second stock to win, so he tried to speed up the game by actively contributing to complete the wonder. Too bad the others were not all that keen on completing the wonder, so eventually I was able to produce my second stock.

My (green) little kingdom was still using its initial donkeys at game end. I never upgraded them to wagons. I did build a truck factory, but I could only afford to produce one truck. It did help tremendously though. My two stocks are on the right (black square tiles with a yellow rectangle on them), next to my donkey.

Near the end of the game, I realised I had taught one rule wrong. A good can only be moved by one transporter within the same turn. Although it can be passed to another transporter at the end of the movement, this next transporter is not allowed to carry it further. During our game we had allowed this back-to-back movement, which was wrong. I know I certainly made use of it. I think the others did too. If we had used the correct rules, we would not have been able to move our goods around as quickly. So possibly I would not have produced stocks, or would not have produced two of them.

I mostly played a multiplayer solitaire game, concentrating on my little empire and not bothering others much, only occasionally putting up defenses when I saw threats. I worry whether Roads & Boats will become multiplayer solitaire if everyone plays this way. It would become a long race game and efficiency game with players building their respective ecologies in isolation. However, I was able to play this way only because the map setup allowed me to. On a tighter map, or a map with limited resources, I would have no choice but to fight for land and goods. In fact, I might even need to do some collaboration, constructing buildings together, taking turns to use it etc. Even on a map of abundance, the players can actively engage one another if they choose to (what a nice way of saying "attack"). What Jeff did in our game may be very worthwhile - spending few resources and committing few transporters but being able to disrupt your opponents' progress, and even steal their points.

If you ask Dith, Boon Khim or Jeff, they would say no way this is multiplayer solitaire. They certainly had much "active engagement" during the game.

Now that I have played my second game, I think the development outline in each game will be similar. You will need a sawmill quickly. You will need to breed geese. You will be working towards mines, and aiming for minting coins and creating stocks. You will be making adjustments here and there, depending on the map and your opponents' actions, but the general direction will be similar. It is the differences in the details which make the game interesting. Experienced players will be able to take a look at the map even before the game starts, and already make rough plans on how to tweak their development strategy to make the most of the terrain.

The pacing is an important aspect - whether and when to speed up or slow down the wonder construction. Contributing to the wonder gives you points too. Even if you don't mess with you opponents on the board, manipulating the wonder construction progress can greatly affect the outcome of a game.