Maori

Plays: 2Px4.

The Game

Maori is a tile placement game and a build-up-your-own-play-area game. The theme is about discovering islands, but it's pretty thin. I ordered this game a long time ago after reading some favourable reviews. I thought it might be suitable as a 2-player game with my wife Michelle. Something quick, easy to set up, but not too light. Now that I have played it, it turned out to be trickier than I had expected. And Michelle completely slaughtered me. And this is not even an accountant game like Power Grid or Factory Manager, so she doesn't have a professional advantage over me. I have yet to make my first win.

In Maori there is a ship sailing around a 4x4 grid of tiles. On your turn you must move the ship and then you can claim the tile next to the ship, or another one in the same column if you are willing to pay. You place these tiles on your player board, and when one player's board fills up, the game ends, and you score based on how well you have assembled your island nation. Sounds simple?

The 4x4 grid at the centre of the table, from which players pick up tiles to add to their player boards. I arrange the tiles so that all palm trees point at the same direction, so that it's easier to read.

What's tricky is the various restrictions on how you can place the tiles. The game comes with a number of variants, and each of them introduces additional rules, restrictions or scoring opportunities. We started with the basic game, and with each subsequent game, we introduced new advanced rules. In the base game, palm trees must point north. Islands stretch either north-south or east-west. The available spaces on your player board is itself a restriction, because to fill it up you need to get the right tiles. Single tile islands and ship tiles, although often not high-scoring, are attractive because they are convenient. You don't need to worry about finding a matching island tile to complete the island. When you add the first variant, you gain your own ship on your own board, which you can move around, but on your next turn you must place your new tile next to your ship. With the second variant, you can't move your ship anywhere you want. You must always move it to the most recently placed tile. These additional rules force you to plan well ahead how to construct and complete your board.

Ship icons allow you to move the common ship at the 4x4 grid further, giving more flexibility in picking tiles you want. Shells have various uses, e.g. picking tiles not directly adjacent to the common ship, moving the common ship further, moving your personal ship etc. Both also score bonus points at game end, but only if you have the most.

My player board. The game has ended, so I will have to remove the two tiles on the bottom right because the island is incomplete. Scoring methods are summarised on the right side of the player board.

Game components: common ship, shell, tile back, volcano tile (a special tile which cannot be picked by players, and blocks players from picking tiles beyond it), a regular tile with 3 palm trees.

The Play

In the first few games that I played, I might have been too ambitious and also too liberal in my spending of shells. In the end I couldn't complete some big islands before Michelle ended the game, and I had to discard those half-done islands. So instead of scoring big, I was penalised for the empty spaces on my board. Michelle had been thrifty with her shells, and had also been careful in collecting ship icons. These gave her many points at game end. I lost by a mile.

As we added more and more advanced rules, the game became more and more interesting. It plays as quick as a filler, but the long-term planning of how to move your personal ship, the denying your opponent of tiles she wants, the push to end the game before your opponent is ready, the positioning of the common ship to help your next turn, all make the experience very fulfilling and challenging. This game is not as easy as it looks. Well, at least not when playing with all the advanced rules. This is not Carcassonne-like at all. It is tighter and tougher. It is just different; they should not be compared.

I still have not been able to beat Michelle. I came close, and really thought I could win, but alas, it was not enough. Rematch!

Michelle's completed player board. She even has a completed flower circle, which is worth 10pts (which is a lot).

My player board, using the advanced rules (that's why you see my green personal ship). This is a big improvement compared to my first few games, but I still lost to Michelle.

The Thoughts

Maori looks pleasant enough, but is actually quite tricky. I guess you can play in a more relaxed way by only playing the basic game, but I prefer to have the advanced rules added, at least the first two variants. It becomes a game with lots of tactical opportunities and lots to think about, and yet is still quick. I wouldn't call this a filler game though, or recommend it to be played as one, unless you stick to the basic game.

---

Buy from Noble Knight Games. Status: in stock (at time of this post).

---

2010 games eagerness ranking

Here are the games published in 2010 that I have played, and ranked according to how eager I am to play them now. Nothing very scientific. One game being above another doesn't mean it's "better" (whatever that means). It just means I'm probably more likely to pick it to play. It's an interesting exercise to try to rank these games. Maybe you'll find it interesting too. I exclude expansions, but I'll talk a little about some of them further down.

Keen to play

1. Axis & Allies Europe 1940 - I actually have not played this game even once, so I'm keen to play it. I've only played Axis & Allies Global 1940, which combines the Europe 1940 and Pacific 1940 games. It feels a bit too long for the enjoyment I get out of it, so I suspect I will like the theatre-specific games being played by themselves.
2. Innovation - I'm getting comfortable with this game. The expansion Echoes of the Past adds some interesting elements, but I am quite happy with the base game and am in no hurry to expand it. Allen has bought the expansion and we have played a few times.
3. Merchants & Marauders - The game feels very open, much like the PC game Sid Meier's Pirates. I prefer to play to a higher number of Glory points than the standard game. It gives a fuller experience.
4. First Train to Nuremberg - I think I am going to break down and buy this. Managing the game components is a little tedious, but I like how the game requires careful planning, and there is a certain story arc to it, where you try to earn fast money and then eventually you need to plan to sell off your rail network to suckers.
5. 7 Wonders - There is luck. There is set collection. There is no particular innovation. There is a mesh of familiar mechanisms. But somehow this game is a lot of fun. It's an adjustable-depth game - you can think a lot and plan a lot and calculate a lot, but you can also play by gut feel (and still win).
   Axis & Allies Europe 1940. I really need to play this.
   
   First Train to Nuremberg

   Happy to play

6. 51st State - Not much player interaction, but I like how you need to constantly plan for replacing cards already played because the points-generating cards have limited capacity and quickly get used up.
7. Sid Meier's Civilization: The Board Game - Lots of civ elements, which is fun. But this game is a sprint and not a marathon. In the early game you can explore various paths, but by around mid game you'll need to decide on which victory condition to go for, maybe with one back-up plan if Plan A doesn't work out. You don't really experience the rise-and-fall feeling like in Civilization and Through the Ages. But still, a pretty good game.
8. Earth Reborn - Interesting scenarios and rich story. I have only done half of the learning scenarios, so I don't know the full game yet.
9. Inca Empire - Network building, blocking, and playing good and bad event cards that always affect two players.
10. Alien Frontiers - Complexity level feels like The Settlers of Catan. You develop and colonise. An impressive effort from a new designer and publisher team.
11. Haggis - Climbing card game (like Big Two) that works with 2 or 3. I have only played with 2. Surprisingly that session was very funny. Learning the tricks and exploring the strategies in the game were fun.
12. Zombie State: Diplomacy of the Dead - More an experience game than a strategy game, but it's fun to try to survive a zombie apocalypse and to direct your nation at a strategic level.
13. Labyrinth: The War on Terror, 2001-? - Long game. Hard decisions. Long-term planning and patience is required to achieve anything significant. The two sides are very asymmetrical. Actions are completely different, it's not just about having different strengths and weaknesses.
14. Washington's War - Relatively quick CDG.
15. Evolution: The Origin of Species - The formula of focusing on one super specie seems the best strategy. If I'm right about this then the game becomes rather one-dimensional strategy-wise. This is a light card game, the fun being in creating species with interesting combinations of abilities, the ongoing struggle between hunter and prey, and the game of survival when food is scarce.
    51st State

    Lukewarm

16. Merchants of the Middle Ages (I played Die Handler, the earlier version) - Requires negotiation and cooperation. Overall a well-crafted game.
17. Dominant Species - The big hit which was not as big a hit for me personally. The game is interesting, there are big moves to be made and devastating disasters to try to survive through. The area majority mechanism is not quite my thing.
18. Wars of the Roses: Lancaster vs. York - Good implementation of managing loyalties and betrayals. There's double guessing but I didn't mind it too much here. Deciding whether to be defensive (cheap, but you may be wasting your money) or offensive (expensive, and it's hard for your victim to protect everything, but if you fail, you will waste a lot of money) is interesting. You need to pick where to fight and where to concede. But there's area majority too.
19. Nuns on the Run - Fun and exciting to play a novice. I have not played the nun side yet.
20. Commands & Colors: Napoleonics - I never was a big fan of the Commands & Colors series (Memoir '44, Battlelore, Commands & Colors: Ancients). Don't quite like the cards restricting flank thing.
21. Catacombs - I enjoy it for the novelty.
22. London - Quirky card game that I couldn't quite grasp. I guess I can't really conclude until I try again and understand it better.
23. Dungeons & Dragons: Castle Ravenloft Board Game - Easy to learn cooperative dungeon crawl game without the need for a dungeon master. I'm not a particular fan of the fantasy / role-playing genre, so the theme dosen't do much for me.
24. Navegador - The key seems to be to focus on areas with least competition. Admittedly I have only played two games and there is much space for improvement for my tactics and strategies. I get a feeling I've seen most of what's there to be seen, and the urge to dig deeper is low.
25. The Great Fire of London 1666 - Interesting enough theme, and mechanisms do match the theme, but the mechanisms aren't very interesting to me.
26. Troyes - Feels familiar, a little "been there, done that". And this is despite the not-seen-before dice mechanism.
27. Space Hulk: Death Angel - The Card Game - Not knowing your mission until you reach the last room rubs me the wrong way. Feels like I'm just trying to passively survive and last until the last room, as opposed to going in with an objective and a plan.
    Wars of the Roses: Lancaster vs. York . Hmm... who among my opponents' followers should I bribe? Which city should I attack?

    Rather not play

28. 20th Century - I like the positive message of reducing garbage and pollution. I feel like I've seen most of what's there to be seen.
29. Horus Heresy - I feel quite restricted in what I can do and how much I can move my troops or get them to fight. The game tells a great story though.
30. Tikal II: The Lost Temple - Feels like too many paths to victory that don't quite mesh together thematically. Game is very attractive and production quality is superb.
31. Grimoire - I didn't like the double-guessing.
32. Irondale - I didn't find this construct-buildings-in-a-grid card game interesting.
33. Resident Evil Deck Building Game - It didn't feel very different from Dominion, so my interest is low.
34. Leaping Lemmings - Rules and gameplay require more effort than the light theme suggests.
35. The Speicherstadt - One nifty mechanism wrapped around an uninteresting game.

Expansions

These are not ranked. Just a simple list of what I've played among expansions released in 2010.

1. Dominion: Prosperity - Played on the computer. I like this expansion which expands the strategic possibilities.
2. Dominion: Alchemy - Also played on the computer. This is just OK. Going for cards requiring potions feels like a "Do or Do Not" thing (Yoda), so going down that path feels like taking a different route, as opposed to the base strategies being expanded.
3. Race for the Galaxy: The Brink of War - I'm a big fan of Race for the Galaxy. I enjoy the additional scope, but the deck is getting rather unwieldy.
4. Power Grid: Russia & Japan - More variety for Power Grid.
5. Agricola: Gamers' Deck - I like that the cards are not crazy and are not just a novelty. They feel like they are well thought out and well balanced. Subtle.
6. Hansa Teutonica: East Expansion - I think I have only played it once, Allen's copy. I don't feel I have played the base game enough, so I have not decided to buy the expansion. I find that I feel this way about many expansions. I have not played the base game enough, so even if I like the base game a lot, I feel no urgency to buy the expansion. E.g. Innovation and Echoes of the Past, 51st State and The New Era. Well, The New Era is technically a standalone game, a kind of 51st State v2.0, but I'm enjoying v1.0 well enough and don't love it that much to want to spend money to replace it with v2.0.

Race for the Galaxy: The Brink of War. We call the 1 Prestige "cherry" and the 5 Prestige "flower".

Not Played

When I browsed www.boardgamegeek.com to do this section, I was quite shocked that there were so many games published in 2010. This list is by no means complete. It's just some of the better known games that I have heard of.

1. Runewars
2. Dixit 2 - I have played Dixit. It's fun and lets you be creative.
3. Cosmic Encounter: Cosmic Incursion
4. Battlestar Galactica: Exodus Expansion
5. Fresco
6. Defenders of the Realm - Low interest. Some say it's Pandemic with a fantasy setting.
7. Vinhos
8. Age of Industry - I'm content with Brass.
9. Glen More - Some interest to try.
10. Battles of Westeros
11. Luna - Low interest, because most Stefan Feld games don't click with me.
12. Forbidden Island - I'm content with Pandemic and don't really need a similar but more family-friendly game.
13. Ascension: Chronicle of the Godslayer - Low interest in trying deck-building games.
14. K2
15. Mr. Jack Pocket
16. Julius Caesar
17. Lords of Vegas
18. Founding Fathers
19. Puzzle Strike
20. Merkator - Uwe Rosenberg game, but it seems to be doing poorly compared to Agricola and Le Havre.
21. Rattus
22. De Vulgari Eloquentia - Allen has it and I have read the rules. Still in the (long) queue to be played.
23. Gosu - I had some interest in this, but it sounds quite confrontational so I doubt my wife will be willing to play.
24. Conflict of Heroes: Price of Honour - Poland 1939 - Sometimes I am tempted to try war games, but I never work up the courage.
25. High Frontier
26. Asara - I like many Wolfgang Kramer designs. In recent years my gaming tastes have shifted to heavier games, so his new releases don't interest me as much as before, but I still like many of his classics, especially The Princes of Florence.
27. Onirim
28. Samarkand: Routes to Riches - If this is similar to Chicago Express, low interest.
29. Settlers of America: Trails to Rails
30. Invasion from Outer Space: The Martian Game
31. Key Market
32. Constantinopolis
33. Poseidon - I enjoy the complexity of 18XX games, so if this is 18XX simplified, low interest.
34. Famiglia
35. The Rivals for Catan - I have the older Catan card game, which I have not played for a very long time.
36. Magnum Sal
37. Hanabi & Ikebana
38. Grand Cru
39. Norenberc
40. Isla Dorada - I think Bruno Faidutti is a wonderful guy - good presence on the internet, friendly and responsive; but somehow his games don't click with me. But I like Castle, which is much less famous than Citadels.
41. Olympus
42. Mystery Express
43. Dust Tactics
44. Dragonheart
45. Mousquetaires du Roy
46. The Mines of Zavandor
47. Antics! - Limited print run, so this is hard to buy. It sounds interesting.
48. Wok Star - Interested to try this real-time cooperative game.
49. Sun, Sea & Sand
50. Keltis: Das Orakel - They say it's the most strategic of the Keltis family, but I don't play the others enough to justify getting this.
51. Black Friday
52. Mord im Arosa - You need to listen to cubes falling and guess where they land. Interested to at least try.
53. Junta: Viva el Presidente! - Interested to try. You get to negotiate, beg, bluff, threaten and lie.
54. 1880: China - I only recently dipped my toes into 18XX games, but this one sounds daunting. Not so soon I think.
55. Prêt-à-Porter - The English version is published this year and it seems to be doing well. Interested to try.
56. The Hobbit - Reiner Knizia cooperative game. Similar to Wolfgang Kramer games, nowadays I tend to be less interested in Reiner Knizia's new games, despite still enjoying many of his older games.
57. Show Business - I followed this game a little because it has rock stars.

Tobago

Plays: 4Px1.

The Game

When Tobago first came out many predicted it would win the Spiel des Jahres. It didn't. I don't think it even made the shortlist. But still, it is a good family game, and it has very good-looking components. Tobago is a game about treasure hunting on a mysterious island. Players put together clues to determine the locations of buried treasure. Once a location is determined, the first player to reach that spot can raise the treasure, which will then be split among those who had contributed towards finding it. The game ends when the deck of treasure cards run out, and players sum up the coins on their treasure cards to determine the winner.

The key mechanism in the game is how players construct the treasure map by playing clue cards on one of the four treasures being hunted. Clue cards are restrictions which narrow down the possible locations of the treasures, e.g. a clue card may state that the treasure is within two spaces of a river, or that the treasure is not in a forest, or the treasure is next to the ocean. Every player has a hand of such clue cards, and he can choose to play one on his turn. Each contribution entitles the contributor to a share when the treasure is raised. When the treasure is raised, every contributor draws and looks at a number of treasure cards according to his number of contributions (raising the treasure is treated as one contribution too). All these cards, plus one extra card which noone has seen, are then shuffled, and the loot splitting begins. The shuffled treasure cards are revealed one by one. Each treasure card is offered to one contributor after another, priority being given to those who contributed most recently, until it is accepted, and that contributor removes his contribution marker. Treasure cards have 2 to 6 coins, so when presented with this take-it-or-pass-it-on decision, you need to decide whether to be contented with the card offered, or to hope for a better one later.

The four piles of cubes represent the four possible treasures that can be found. The clue cards played narrow down the possible locations of the treasure. When the number of possible locations are few enough, the cubes are marked on the board to make it easier for the players to quickly see these remaining possible locations. A player marker is placed on each clue card when it is played. Looking at the 3rd column, the clue cards mean: within two spaces of a hut, next to a beach, not next to a river, next to a hut, within two spaces of a statue, and in the largest mountain range.

One twist is the curse cards. If one turns up during loot splitting, the loot splitting ends prematurely and all contributors who are still waiting to claim treasures are penalised by having to discard their highest valued treasure card. Those who had contributed and had already collected their share of the loot do not suffer from this penalty, so some people may settle for less because of the fear of curse cards. One way to protect yourself from curse cards is to pick up amulets. These mysteriously appear every time a treasure is raised. They can be used for other purposes too, e.g. taking an extra action.

Amulets (that one in the foreground) wash up to shore where the mysterious statues are facing every time a treasure is raised. The statues then rotate to face a different direction.

Every player has a jeep (called an ATV - All Terrain Vehicle - in the game), and to raise a treasure or to collect an amulet you need to drive to the right spot to do so. Every turn you are normally either piecing together treasure maps to narrow down possible locations, or driving your jeep around the island to where the treasures or amulets are.

The game ends when the treasure deck runs out. You total up your treasure cards to see who wins.

The Play

I played a full four-player game with Allen, Dennis and Heng. Both Allen and Dennis had played before, but only online. Dennis confidently declared this a 30-minute filler. It turned out to be a one-hour (or so) game. Playing on the computer made things much faster because the computer handles all the rules details. In fact Dennis and Allen realised that they didn't really know the rules, since when they played, the computer did all the hard work of determining legal placements and movements. Heng and I were both new to the game.

Most of the time we were adding clue cards to one of the four treasures, trying to contribute as much as we could, so that we could share the treasure when it was raised. Some treasures took many cards to determine their final location, some just four or five. Due to the game rules, the more clues required, the bigger the treasure. It was always good to have a monopoly or near-monopoly of a treasure, because it meant you'd see a large number of treasure cards when it came to loot splitting. As we played clue cards, we tried to narrow down the locations to where our jeeps were, to give ourselves better chances of raising the treasures. I found that the cards that you draw can restrict your choices quite a fair bit, so the option of spending a turn to discard all cards and redraw is important. There are quite a number of things you can do. Play clues to "book a seat" to share treasures, go digging, go collecting amulets, and use the amulets in various ways.

The game board is made of three pieces, each of which are double-sided, and thus provide different setups.

Cubes mark the possible locations of treasures.

My cards were not very good, and I didn't manage to contribute to as many treasure maps as I wanted. However I was luckier than average when it came to loot splitting. The fear of the curse cards played an important role. All of us were cautious and remembered to pick up amulets just in case. Eventually most of us were indeed struck by a curse, and all had an amulet to ward it off, except for Dennis, who had unfortunately gambled on not getting hit, and had spent his amulet on something else.

The end game was quite exciting for us. At any one time there are always four possible treasures to be discovered. Towards game end when the treasure card deck is running low, you'll know there will only be one of two more treasures that can be dug up before the deck is exhausted. This is when things get interesting, when players race to "complete" the treasures that they have bigger stakes in.

When our game ended, Heng the first timer and non-rule-reader-and-teacher (which would be me) won the game at 35pts, 5pts ahead of the second place. He had contributed much to the treasure maps and thus had many treasure cards.

The Thoughts

Tobago is very much a family game, but probably not for completely-non-gamer families. It's far from as accessible as Ticket to Ride is, but I can see why most gamers feel it is simple. It is simple, to gamers. Components are excellent. Gameplay is interesting and refreshing. There is a fair bit of luck in the game, but you do feel like you can always do something to improve your position. There are opportunities for clever play, and that is satisfying. It gives you a little light mental exercise.

I didn't expect Tobago to be something I'd be a fan of. I was keen to try it to see whether it's something I can buy for my 6-year old daughter. Now that I have played it, I think it's a little beyond her. Maybe one or two years more.

---

Buy from Noble Knight Games. Status: in stock (at time of this post).

---

concise reference sheets v14

I reached a milestone of having done 200 concise reference sheets. Visit this link to download the latest set. Updates are as follows.

1. 51st State (new)
2. Cavum (new)
3. Commands and Colors Napoleonics (new)
4. De Vulgari Eloquentia (new)
5. Evolution (new)
6. First Train to Nuremberg (corrected)
7. Great Fire of London 1666 (new)
8. Illuminati (new)
9. Labyrinth: the War on Terror (corrected)
10. Manoeuvre (new)
11. Maori (new)
12. Maria (new)
13. Nightfall (& Martial Law expansion) (new)
14. Pacific Typhoon (new)
15. Shipyard (corrected)
16. Tinners’ Trail (corrected)
17. Tobago (new)

Pacific Typhoon

Plays: 5Px1.

The Game

Pacific Typhoon is a card game using the Pacific War during World War II as the setting. The players do not belong to the Japanese side or the Allied side, and instead every round they can pick which side they want to be on. At the start of a round the start player (which rotates) reveals two battle cards and chooses one to be fought over. Then every player has one chance to play force cards to participate in the battle on one side or the other. Force cards contribute strength, and the side with the higher strength total wins the battle. The battle card itself and the force cards of the losing side become the spoils of war. They are distributed among the players of the winning side by the player who contributed the most strength. What's interesting is this player is only required to distribute the number of cards as evenly as possible, regardless of the point value of the cards. E.g. if I have five spoils cards of values 5, 4, 2, 1, 1 that I need to split among 3 players, I'd probably give myself 5+4, and give the others 2 and 1+1.

The game can involve much negotiation, cooperation, bluffing and even betrayal. Players can persuade one another to work together to be on the winning side. They can gang up on the leader. Since noone is tied to being on the Japanese or the Allied side, it's pretty much every man for himself, and alliances will likely be shifting all the time.

The above is the high-level overview. Going into details, there are rules around card characteristics and restrictions on playing cards. When the start player of a round picks a battle card, he decides whether to fight a day or night battle, whether to fight an air, surface, submarine or combined battle. These restrict the force cards that can be played that round. Every battle card has a year of battle, which also restricts the force cards that can be played. Normally each player can only play one force card, but there are some special force cards - bonus cards and event cards - which are not limited. They have various special abilities. Some basic force cards also have special abilities, e.g. being able to immediately destroy another force card, or getting double strength when fighting a particular battle. All these details are based on historical events, so the game does have many historical details.

The game ends when the battle card deck runs out. The player with the most points on the spoils cards captured wins.

There are many variants that come with the game, e.g. a variant where players belong to one specific side of the war, and one where battles are resolved following the historical timeline. I have not tried these variants.

The Play

I did a 5-player game, since this game seems to be best with 5 or 6. Han, Allen, Wan, Shan and I played. I found that the start player's choice of battle can give himself much advantage, especially when the restriction is high and he has just the right card to play, or when he has a very powerful card or card combination that meets the battle type he declares. However, there is also a disadvantage because playing your force card(s) first means you are already committed and others can decide how they want to play based on the force cards already committed on the table. This means that the last player of the round has the biggest advantage in terms of having information available to him, and can often decide the outcome of the battle.

From the early game I jumped into a big lead, and somehow despite the others working together to stop me, I continued to lead. My early victories let me increase my hand size, so I had more flexibility. I also drew good cards, and I was lucky with my die rolls. Some cards require die rolls, but not many. I was quite amazed at my lucky streak. I thought I'd have to bribe and cajole to get some of my opponents to help me or at least victimise me less, however my cards were so good that a few big wins put me even further in the lead.

We didn't manage to finish the game. We played about half the battle deck. It was enough to understand the game. Initially the restrictions and symbols took a while to internalise.

Game in progress. In each round there will be a battle card in the centre, and each player can play a card(s) to fight for it. So far three players have sided the Japanese (red) and only one the Allied (blue). The fifth player has played a white event card and has not yet committed to any side.

The spoils of war that I have won. The top three are battle cards which are kept face up. Force cards won and kept face down in a stack. The numbers in the yellow circles are the victory points. The full green card and half green card icons are resource icons, which increases your hand size. I have a full resource and two half resources, which means my hand size is increased by two.

The Thoughts

Despite the many details and restrictions surrounding the card play, all of which are relevant to the Pacific War theme, the game didn't feel like refighting the war at all. It is a numbers game, trying to squeeze out as much strength as you can from your cards and thus winning spoils which are worth victory points. I think this is the first time I see so much historical flavour in a game (the photos, the specific rules, the ships and planes represented, the events represented) and yet the feeling of the gameplay is nothing like the setting. I get a strong feeling of "pasted-on theme", but I don't believe this is a mechanism-before-theme game. Too many individual rules are directly related to the theme.

I see Pacific Typhoon as a card game good for 4 to 6 players who like some negotiation, some bluffing, and shifting alliances. In fact, for each battle there is probably more competition among the players on the winning side trying to be the top contributor. In each round it can feel like there is one winning player as opposed to one winning side with multiple players, unless the players on the winning side negotiate and agree on the spoils distribution beforehand. The historical elements are a nice touch and is quite educational, just don't expect to feel like you're fighting a war much. You'll feel more like some diety nudging the battle outcomes one way or the other.

Game mechanism-wise I don't find the game outstanding, but if you enjoy the Pacific War theme, you will like the rich details here.

---

Buy from Noble Knight Games. Status: in stock (at time of this post).

Washington's War

Plays: 2Px1.

The Game

Washington's War is a game about the War of Independence of USA. It is a redesign of We the People, the first Card Driven Game (CDG), which preceded the well-known Hannibal: Rome vs Carthage. This is a 2-player-only wargame, with one side playing the British and the other the Americans. To win, you need to eliminate all enemy armies, or control a certain number of states when the game ends. The game is played over a number of years, and game end is variable and may even change from time to time, depending on the card draw. So players need to be on their toes and need to be prepared in case the game ends sooner (or later) than expected.

One round in the game corresponds to one year. Both players draw cards and then take turns playing them. You play cards to recruit troops, to activate generals (move them and possibly attack enemies), to boost your strength during battles, to place political control markers on the board, and to trigger events on the cards. Unlike Twilight Struggle, where every card has an event and an ops value, here a card is either an ops card or an event card. I had thought this would make things much less interesting, but it turned out to be not so at all.

Both sides have a number of generals with different abilities. The American generals are much easier to activate. Some can be activated by any ops card, some can be activated by value 2 or 3 ops cards. In contrast the British generals are much harder to activate, needing value 2 or 3 ops cards, and even only value 3 ops cards. However, all American generals suffer from winter attrition because many soldiers go home for winter, except for Washington who can keep his troops if he is in winter quarters (fortresses). The British don't suffer from winter attrition as long as they find winter quarters, and if they are in the south where winters are gentler, no attrition at all. The Americans can raise troops quite freely and have two opportunities to do so every round. The British only have one chance to bring in reinforcements every round, and they follow a pre-set schedule, generally alternating between big and small numbers. Also the British reinforcements can only land at a port.

Battles are quick and simple and only take a few die rolls. Both sides calculate their strengths, which depends on a number of factors, e.g. number of troops, ability of general, battle cards played, and control of the state where the battle is taking place, which are then added to their respective die rolls. Washington has a special ability of adding +2 strength if he attacks just before winter, i.e. using the last card in the American player's hand. Once the victor is decided, regardless of the final strength difference, the loser will lose one to three units, depending on a die roll, and the winner will lose none or just one unit, also depending on a die roll.

Ultimately, generals, armies and battles are but a means to an end, which is political control of the states. It is relatively easy to place political control markers on empty spaces, but quite hard to flip over those already placed to your side. You will need the presence of an army to be able to flip them. The 13 states have different numbers of cities, some as many as eleven, some as few as two or three, even some with just one. This is an interesting aspect to plan around. There are rules which remove isolated political markers, e.g. those completely surrounded by enemy markers and not supported by any friendly army. This is another consideration to take note of and to make use of.

As part of the game setup, the American and British armies are already right next to each other and ready for battle. The American generals are in blue, and the British in red.

This is the start of the game. Most cities do not have political control markers yet. Square cities are fortresses, which are important for wintering. Round ones are just regular cities.

The Play

Han played the Americans and I played the British. I had quite a good hand in the first round, allowing me to mobilise my British armies quite easily. Unfortunately that made me underestimate the difficulty in mobilising my armies. In subsequent rounds, I gradually found myself stuck with little mobility. I hadn't planned for that. The British should be planning for few but big moves, unlike the Americans who can engage in guerilla warfare. I had some early victories, but soon Han was winning battle after battle, making good use of Washington's strength, mobility and pre-winter attack power. Things on the battle front looked bleak, so I decided to give up on that front and just be defensive. I had a strong general squatting with ten units on a city which is the only city of a state. At least that guaranteed one state on my side. Only at that point I started spending more effort on political control. I couldn't do much with my generals and armies anyway. It was then I realised the importance of the political aspect. That was the real objective of the game.

Han didn't have American generals in the south, but I had one British general there. So I started placing more and more political markers there. Han had more generals in the north, and spent effort on using them to flip existing markers to his side. This was a slower process because his generals would need to move onto my markers first before he could flip them. Gradually he tried to secure the northern states to try to cut me off. If he could secure the port cities, it would be difficult for me to directly send in reinforcements.

Unfortunately we did not have enough time to finish the game. We had played about 80% through. Han had won many battles and controlled more states than I did at that point. I wasn't too far behind. If I could reach 6 states (I think I had 5 at the time) and hold on to them until game end, I would win. A rematch is in order. The game will be much quicker now that we are more familiar with it.

Towards the later part of the game, many cities had political control markers. Han and I had two armies facing off each other at the centre, neither daring to attack because it would be very risky. I had one army in the south (left side of this photo) working on converting American political markers to British ones, and Han had an army in the north doing the opposite.

The top left number on the general is the activation number, the smaller the better, i.e. easier to activate. The top right number is the leadership value, which increases army strength during battles. The number in the circle is mobility, which determines the ease of interception and retreat.

The Thoughts

Washington's War is a relatively simple wargame, but it is still a wargame, so there is a fair bit of details in the rules, like how generals can intercept, and the various factors in calculating battle strength. The big picture is not hard to grasp, and the game is smooth to play once you get past the initial hump and can see the big picture. The two sides are quite asymmetrical, which is interesting. There is much historical flavour in the game, which makes it fun and thematic. The cards that you draw do restrict what you can do, more so than say Twilight Struggle where cards have more uses. Depending on what you draw, you need to plan out how you can make the most out of them in the current round.

I enjoy the two layers in the game - the armies and battles, and political control. The game reminds me a lot of Hannibal: Rome vs Carthage which also has these two layers.

I wonder when I will play my copy of Wilderness War (also a CDG), which I bought about 8 years ago and still have not played.

---

Buy from Noble Knight Games. Status: in stock (at time of this post).

blocked

Recently I discovered that this blog has been blocked at work. All this while I had no problems accessing any Blogspot websites from the office (not that I browse blogs at work all the time *ahem*), so this was unexpected. So this means my blog is popular enough to catch the attention of the firewall guys right? Ooh... *stride proudly feeling important*

Normal view.

Connecting from work.

Maria rematches, iPhone Civilization Revolution

2 Oct 2011. Maria. This was the second game that I played with Han and Allen, this time Han was France, Allen was Prussia / Pragmatic Army and I was Austria. This is a photo of me using my hussar unit (thin white disc) to disrupt the supply of the Bavarian (orange) army.

In the early game Han and Allen declared a temporary truce between France and Pragmatic Army, which allowed the Pragmatic Army to build up, and also allowed France to focus on attacking me (Austria). Things didn't look good for me. There were many times during battles that I played cards in such a way that allowed me to retreat while taking minor losses. In hindsight, maybe I should have simply avoided those battles in the first place. Small losses do add up. I spent many cards on events, which also made me weaker in battle. I did manage to make Saxony neutral. It was initially an ally of Prussia, and was attacking me from the north. Later it even became my ally, and started threatening Prussia.

Prussia (Allen, blue) advanced steadily from the north, and my general (white) advanced to engage. Prussia did not capture these Silesian fortresses as quickly as the first game that we played, but I am not sure whether it was a good idea for me to engage so early. I eventually paid heavily for this decision. I lost my armies one after another, being defeated by Prussia, France and Bavaria, eventually losing all five armies on the main (Bohemian) map. I had almost become a non-factor. It was up to Han and Allen to see who was quicker in capturing enough of my fortresses to win. However, I still harboured a little hope. In this game we were mostly aggressive in capturing opponents' fortresses, so that we could place our victory markers. We didn't put much effort into recapturing our own fortresses to remove our opponents' victory markers. So I still had most of my victory markers on the board, and only had a few more to place to win, despite the shortage of generals and being very defenseless. My general on the French map could still capture fortresses, and the Saxon army was on my side by that time. I just needed two more fortresses or major victories in battle.

At the border between France (red) and Netherlands (grey). By this time the truce between France and the Pragmatic Army had expired, and Allen (Pragmatic Army, grey) was well prepared to start his offensive into France. Austria (white, me) was allied to the Pragmatic Army and they couldn't attack each other, but they could race to capture French fortresses.

My last general (white) on the Bohemian map before he too was defeated. One good thing he did was to destroy the French and Bavarian supply trains (red and orange cubes). This slowed down the French and Bavarian armies somewhat. Eventually it was Han who managed to beat Allen in conquering enough Austrian fortresses to win the game. A victory for France.

Family portrait of Losers (with a capital L) - the Austrian generals.

Allen, Han and I later did a third game of Maria, this time with Allen playing Austria, Han playing Prussia + Pragmatic Army, and me playing France. This was so that each of us had the opportunity to try all three factions. However this third game ended so abruptly that I didn't manage to take any photo. We were all cautious in the early game, accumulating cards and not battling much. As France I quickly grabbed a few Austrian fortresses. Every round France was first to take actions so there is an advantage if France is close in the race against other nations to place all victory markers. In the first round of the second year, i.e. 4th of 12 rounds, my single Bavarian army engaged an Austrian army and won a major victory, eliminating it. I was lucky to have some big cards (an 8 and a 10) in hand. I killed 7 units, which let me place two victory markers in the recent victory slots. Then in the same round I attacked and captured more Austrian fortresses on the western map, and placed my remaining victory markers. The Austrian general on the western map was out of position and could not protect the fortresses. So France won again, a surprisingly swift victory (even to me). Han was all ready to launch a major offensive, having accumulated many cards for his Pragmatic Army.

Later we realised that we had misplayed a rule. The Pragmatic Army general could protect Austrian fortresses, so I should not have captured those last few fortresses even though the Austrian general was too far away to protect them. The outcome of the game might have been very different. Things were just about to get interesting. We vowed to have a rematch with the same player configuration.

14 Oct 2011. Civilization Revolution on the iPhone. I have been a fan of the Sid Meier's Civilization computer games since Civ II. I recently bought the iPhone app for USD0.99. Unfortunately only the Chinese version is available in Malaysia. I have no idea why the English version is not available here. The game is much simplified compared to Civ V, the latest version in the PC game series (I think it is closer to Civ IV). However still it is quite fun to play.

The screenshot above is the victory screen from my first game as Rome. I won a cultural victory, by having 20 great people or wonders, and then building the United Nations wonder.

My second game as Greece (green). I was very cultured at this point, and my borders were pushing against two English (red) cities. Eventually both of them decided to overthrow English rule and join my civilisation.

This iPhone game reminds me of the boardgame version of Sid Meier's Civilization published by Fantasy Flight Games, which I also like. Some things are simplified compared to the PC game, but gameplay is still interesting.

I won my first two games comfortably, and decided to go for the hardest difficulty level. It turned out to be too difficult for me. The AI's seemed to be able to produce tons of units, and all of them kept declaring war on me. Eventually I gave up after losing 3 of my 6 cities, and the attackers still wouldn't stop coming. I switched to the second hardest level, and found the right challenge for myself. Some AI's did better than me; not all AI's were aggressive all the time. I had to work hard for the win, and had to switch strategy too.

I got all the way up to the modern age. I was the Indians (brown). The Romans (purple) were my neighbours and built a super city out of Rome with many wonders of the world and great people. They had so much culture they almost made my border city flip to join their civilisation. See how their border was pushing against my city. I couldn't keep up in technology, in wonders or in great people, and eventually had to attempt an economic win.

The Indian economic victory. The Chinese translation was obviously done from English and some were done rather directly and awkwardly. They should have just rephrased some of the sentences completely.

---

Buy Maria from Noble Knight Games. Status (at time of this post): in stock

revisiting the 2009 games eagerness ranking

In Nov 2010 I ranked games published in 2009 that I have played based on how eager I am to play them. It was a fun exercise and I planned to make this an annual thing, around the end of the year, assessing games published in the previous year, i.e. giving myself about a year to experience as many games published in the year being assessed as possible. As I prepared to write about the 2010 games, I realised that it was interesting (at least for me) to look at what I wrote for 2009. There are some games which I feel a little differently about now. There are some games which I hadn't been able to play and assess last year, but I have now played six of them and can rank them. So here's revisiting the 2009 games. Major changes and additions are underlined and in italics.

Keen to play

1. Automobile - Tight and thematic. There seems to be not many things you can do, but every decision is important in this game.
2. Axis & Allies Pacific 1940 - Have only played half a game. Japan seems overpowered at the moment, even without attacking in Round 1. There is a variant where Japan is not allowed to attack (except China) in Round 1, to balance the game. Need to play again. I still have not managed to play this again. The designer has been working on improving the rules and game setup, and is up to version ALPHA 3 now. I have not yet played with any of these improved versions.
3. Hansa Teutonica - Very interactive. Simple actions, but a wide-range of strategies. The many scoring options can be overwhelming.
4. Endeavor - Quick, and you have the feeling you are just a few actions short of executing your perfect strategy. Some say a bit too polished and too streamlined, but I don't think it was overdone. I like it so much that I'm actually proud I could resist buying it. Umm... I have now bought the game
5. Factory Manager - Previously undecided. Now I'm keen to play it again because I still feel I have not explored it enough.
6. Shipyard - A pleasant surprise. I had expected something overly complicated, and the rondel mechanism itself isn't something I drool over. It turned out to be a nice build-things-and-feel-proud game, and the rondel mechanism just fades into the background. It's a seamless part of the game, but it is not the game.
   Automobile, still my favourite among the 2009 batch.
   
   Axis & Allies Pacific 1940. I've always liked the Axis & Allies series but I never get enough plays of them.

   Happy to play

7. Cyclades - Clean, streamlined, multi-player conflict game. Feels like The Settlers of Catan in complexity.
8. Maria - Previously not listed. A game designed for 3. Much historical flavour. Battles are few but crucial, with much positioning and planning before engaging.
9. Power Struggle - The corporate politics theme did not annoy as I feared. In fact it helps to tie the many moving parts together.
10. Chaos in the Old World - Previously not listed. I'm happy to play, but I insist on the full 4-player game.
11. Roll Through the Ages - I really should play this more. I'll probably like it more if I play it more. There are many different techs and combinations of techs that I haven't explored. And this is a short game. This has gone up a little. Despite being short, there is some strategy, and you do need to pay attention to what your opponents are doing.
12. Bonnie & Clyde - 5th in the Mystery Rummy series, which I've always enjoyed. I don't think any rummy game can ever replace Mystery Rummy: Jack the Ripper as my favourite rummy game, but Bonnie & Clyde is quite decent, and unique too.
13. Campaign Manager 2008 - Thematic card game for 2 players. Normal game (i.e. with card drafting) is much better than the beginner's game.
14. At the Gates of Loyang - Not bad as a 2P game. I've only played with two (against my wife), but I can imagine how it can drag with more. This has dropped from Keen category to Happy category. It feels too much like a solitaire puzzle.
15. Dungeon Lords - Given such a complex game, the double-guessing part turned me off a little.
16. Summoner Wars - Well-balanced battle game.
17. Stronghold - Previously not listed. Quite thematic and tense. I don't have a good grasp of the game yet, despite having played it twice.
18. Jaipur - Previously not listed. Quick and clever 2P card game with interesting decisions and tricky plays.
19. Vasco Da Gama - I think I missed the big picture in my first play, and was too tactical. Pang won decisively by one big move which he had planned for for some time, and none of us saw it coming (or at least didn't really try to stop him).

    Lukewarm

20. Waterloo - The combat resolution is a little convoluted and takes time to digest. I will have to relearn it when I play again because I've forgotten it all by now. Dropped from Happy to Lukewarm. Over the past year there have been more other war / battle games that I'd rather play.
21. Carson City - Construct buildings, earn money, fight when necessary / profitable, then plan to convert what you build into victory points. Didn't feel very new or different, despite the gunfight mechanism.
22. Macao - it felt JASE (Just Another Soulless Euro) to me (sorry), despite the never-seen-before windrose mechanism. There are multiple paths to victory, but they feel like mechanisms looking for a theme, and the mechanisms aren't very interesting to me.
23. Homesteaders - 10 rounds of auctions, but there is a lot of thought you need to put into every auction decision - which tile to bid for, how much to bid for, when to pass etc. It's a lot about getting good combinations of buildings.
24. Dominion: Intrigue - Previously not listed. This is more or less my general keenness to play the Dominion family of games.
25. BoardGameGeek Game - It's mostly about collecting sets. Although it's fun to see so many boardgames and elements of boardgames in one single game, the gameplay didn't really grab me.
26. Middle Earth Quest - The game is fine, and I did enjoy my play. It's only the genre that deters me. I'm not very into the fantasy theme or Role Playing Games-like boardgames.
27. Ra the dice game - Nothing wrong. Just unnecessary. Because Ra is better.
28. Rabbit Hunt - It was a pleasant surprise when I first played it. It certainly is quite unique. You need to keep a poker face as you hide your rabbits, and you need to try to read your opponents. I'm not sure why my enthusiasm dropped very quickly. Maybe I just don't like games with bluffing, although mechanism-wise I think the game concept is interesting.
29. Greed Incorporated - I'm biased by my very poor performance in the only game that I played. This game is brutal. Boohoo... I'm scarred for life... Now that I have played 18XX games, this game is not as scary as before. But I'm still uncomfortable with how brutal and unforgiving it can be. Every round only two awards are given, so even if you are only $1 behind 2nd place, you get nothing. I'm uncomfortable with the winner gets everything, losers get nothing approach, which I guess matches the theme well. You can easily fall into a downward spiral and have no hope of winning. At least in 18XX games I feel that I am continuously earning money and jostling for the win (unless I have made a very bad move or have been victim of a particularly ingenious attack).

I'm still not yet cured of my phobia of Greed Incorporated.

Other more popular 2009 games that I still have not played. Additional comments underlined and in italics.

1. Steam - I'm happy enough with Age of Steam (Keen To Play), so trying Steam is low priority.
2. Small World - I've played Vinci, and it'd be a Happy To Play. No real urge to try Small World.
3. Imperial 2030 - Have not tried the original Imperial either.
4. Warhammer: Invasion
5. Claustrophobia - likely not my cup of tea.
6. Space Hulk (3rd edition) - I've played 1st edition with Han a few times. This would be a low Keen To Play or high Happy To Play game.
7. Conflict of Heroes: Storms of Steel! Kursk 1943
8. Egizia
9. Thunderstone - I'm contented with Dominion being the only deck-building game I play. Well, now I have tried Resident Evil, which I found just okay, and Nightfall, which I found quite different from Dominion.
10. Tales of the Arabian Nights - I think of this as a much older release. I have played it. It's very different, and eagerness to play will depend very much on who I'm playing with. At the moment, I'm probably Lukewarm, but I hope when my children are older we can play this together.
11. Railways of the World - I have played Railroad Tycoon. I think it's quite similar to Age of Steam. I'm happy enough with Age of Steam. I actually prefer the more spartan artwork of Age of Steam.
12. Tobago - interested to try at least once.
13. Mr. Jack in New York - Played the original Mr Jack and thought it was just okay.
14. Rise of Empires
15. Finca
16. Last Train to Wensleydale - I have now played First Train to Nuremberg, which contains this game. However I did play the Nuremberg side of the board, so this should count as a 2010 game. But I'll say this was a pleasant surprise. Quite tempted to buy. Quirky train game where you are making some quick money and then trying to sell off unprofitable parts of your rail network. Tight economics with four different currencies to manage.
17. Richard III: The Wars of the Roses - No big urge to try this since I have Hammer of the Scots. I hear it's cleaner, more streamlined. I don't mind some of the rough edges in Hammer of the Scots, and enjoy the very asymmetrical sides.
18. Peloponnes
19. Maori - interested to try. Ordered, still waiting.
20. Axis & Allies Spring 1942 - I wonder how much quicker this is compared to Axis & Allies Anniversary Edition (AA50). If it is significantly shorter, I may actually prefer to play it over AA50. It uses the new concepts introduced in AA50, which had improved the game.

The Kids of Carcassonne

Plays: 3Px1, 4Px1, 3Px2.

It was by chance that I happened to play The Kids of Carcassonne. Nowadays I don't actively seek out new children's games to play with my daughters (who are 6 and 4). They already have many games at home, and I have also starting teaching them "grown-up games". Some of these grown-up games need to be simplified, some even need rules to be reinvented, but they are able to play some simpler games using the grown-up rules. We were at OTK when I saw a copy of The Kids of Carcassonne lying around. I have heard of it before but never read up about it. I took a look at the rules. They seemed easy enough. Since we were waiting anyway, I asked Michelle and the children to sit down for a game. I liked the game instantly and decided to get one.

The Game

Similar to Carcassonne, The Kids of Carcassonne has no board. Instead, every turn you draw a square tile and add it to the playing area, thus building a mosaic. Your tile must connect to an existing tile. One difference from Carcassonne is that every edge of a tile has a road, so any edge of a tile can connect to any edge of any other tile. I road extending from the edge may run to another edge, or may reach a dead end. Some roads have children on them, wearing one of the four player colours. If you lay a tile such that a road is terminated at both ends, that road is completed, and players can now place their pawns (of matching colours) onto the children on that road. This means it is possible to place your pawn even on other players' turns. It depends on the road being completed. The objective of the game is to place all 8 of your pawns.

The artwork is nice. Only the roads and the children are relevant to gameplay. The buildings, trees, animals and ponds are only decorations.

The Play

The rules are simple and gameplay is quick - about 10 to 15 minutes. Despite being much simplified, there is still some strategy. You need to think about how to increase the chances of completing roads with your children (children in your colour), and also need to try not to help others do so. There are some opportunities for cooperation. E.g. if you add your child to a road which already has children belonging to another player, then both of you can work together to complete the road. Also you can add an opponent's child to a road with your children, to intice him to help you to complete the road.

The rules are simple so the game can be played quickly. Since all edges can match up, there is no need to worry about how to fit the tiles. Younger children may not fully grasp the strategies, but they can still enjoy the game. They may not see the best locations to place their tiles and the best ways to orientate the tiles, but they can still place the tiles easily, and they will still enjoy placing their pawns whenever a road is completed.

It may not be apparent in this photo. The tiles are actually much bigger (and also thicker) than Carcassonne tiles.

The Thoughts

I like that The Kids of Carcassonne still retains some strategy, especially the cooperation part, despite being much simplified. I am impressed. It still retains the Carcassonne feel. This is not a mindless luck-based game. It's not something that an adult gamers group would find interesting, not even as a filler, but it's a game that adults can enjoy playing with children. It works with children of different skill levels, and it encourages thinking and interaction.

Buy from Noble Knight Games. Status: in stock (at time of this post).