-
Memoir '44 - Memoir 44: Why this Grognard still likes playing with toy soldiers.
.
Background:
I was introduced to Memoir ‘44 recently by my fellow geek and gaming buddy Kent Reuber. We got to play 3 games in about 4 hours. At one point, Kent said something along the lines of: “You know, as I get older..”, and then went on to talk about how
he didn’t have the time or the inclination to devote lots of effort to complex rules and painfully long setup times. The moment was fairly poignant to me, as the exact same words have come out of my own mouth at various times. He went on to wonder aloud about older guys even wanting to devote lots of time and effort to the playing the more complicated and involved games. I had to confess to him that I couldn’t really imagine having more fun if we’d been playing one of those old wargames like we once played in our youth. (Those games with the realistic handling of weapons, morale, logistics etc)
I lived and breathed that stuff in the 1980s and ‘90s. I cut my wargaming teeth on games like The Rise and Decline of the Third Reich, 6th Fleet, Flat Top, and Squad Leader. Additionally, as I’ve related elsewhere, one of my buddies and I routinely corrected naval wargames based on weapons specifications we’d gleaned from actual classified tech pubs. Our doctored games were probably illegal in the literal sense of the word, but there you have it. We weren’t going to play games wherein someone stated that the warship Kirov had a maximum speed of “x”, when in fact we knew it to be “y”. We were pigheaded and very literal about that kind of stuff.
A very quick peak in the box:
M44 is a light, card driven wargame. You get a bunch of toy soldiers, tanks, and cannon, and you play with them on a simplistic board which is prepped with the modular hex terrain for that scenario. The board and the terrain hexes are printed on heavy card stock. They should last a good long while. The art is adequate, if a bit bland. The plastic pieces are serviceable. The soldiers look like soldiers, the tanks look like tanks, and the cannon look like cannon. The different armies are cast in different colors of plastic, and some effort has been put into making the pieces distinctive. The sculpts are not historically accurate, but I’m going to refrain from getting upset about that. We didn’t bring M44 to the table to learn about WW2. We brought M44 to the table to have fun. Our enjoyment was in no way diminished by our factual knowledge of WW2 tactics, logistics, materiel, or morale.
Setting Up the Game:
The rules have glossy drawings that show you how to set up the board, and it goes pretty quickly with both players pitching in. If you store the parts in a Plano or craft box, things go even faster.
How it Plays:
M44 is very light on realism and specifications fetishism, but heavy in the fun department. It gets going fast, and rolls right along from the beginning of a scenario right ‘til the end. The rules are easily mastered and aren’t particularly complicated.
The three games we played were asymmetrical, which was a big plus. That means that the two sides play somewhat differently from each other, based on the types of forces and terrain available. Kent and I played “Omaha Beach” from each of the two sides, as well as one of the Russian scenarios from a newly opened expansion. There are tons of expansions, adding more terrain and units. I can easily envision hundreds of hours of play between the basic materials and the expansions.
Your play board is divided up into three parts: The left and right flanks, and the center. The cards you use to activate units typically refer to a specific sector, and a certain number of units that can be used. There are of course a variety of special cards, but their use is relatively easy to understand just using the text on the cards themselves.
Combat:
Some would say that M44s combat system can be summed up thusly: “You pick a strategy you’d like to use, and then the cards and dice screw you”. While that may be true to some extent, the game really hinges on you making the best of what you’ve got. You do this with the understanding that your best laid plans may go awry. This is really about chaos management, and staying flexible no matter what is thrown at you. (By your opponent, the dice, or the cards)
In summary, your turn boils down to this:
1. Play a card.
2. Move and attack with the forces in the sector(s) indicated.
3. Resolve combat and remove casualties.
4. Draw another card.
I could go into greater detail about the exact order of battle, terrain and die modifiers, and that type of stuff, but that would detract from the simplicity of M44. This is a “pick up and play now”, kind of game. It’s not complicated – and you get the basic ideas down within a few moves. The real meat of the game is not found in the realistic depiction of the fighting forces present in WW2. It’s really about chaos management, and out maneuvering your opponent. Since the forces on the two sides are nearly identical, it becomes a contest of wits between you and your opponent. (The cards and dice may support your plan if they’ve got nothing better to do)
To me, a good game is one in which you’re asked to make interesting or difficult decisions. While not accurate or realistic from a historical perspective, M44 forces you to make lots of choices throughout the game. Granted – some of them are along the lines of “What am I going to do with this crappy hand?”, but it’s a decision none-the-less. You have choices, and while they’re not always palatable, they are usually engaging. It’s part of the asymmetry of the game that I mentioned earlier. It’s actually due in part to the cards and dice, that the scenarios play differently from game to game. You never quite know what to expect.
Some would argue that the choices presented by M44 are rather meaningless. They’d say that the randomness of the cards and dice remove the player from having a credible experience as a field commander. I respectfully disagree. Ladies and gentlemen, while luck is indeed a factor in the game, I submit to you that planning and forethought will often carry the day. One thing is certain however, and that is that you must contend with the unknown. Often times, the question is not: “What’s the strongest attack that I can make at right this moment?”, but rather: “What kind of attack can I launch that is sustainable? Will I be able to maintain momentum?”. Sure, you may have a nice card or two in your hand right now, but that will change momentarily. While you may be able to rally the boys around the flag this turn, subsequently they may decide that they’re tired and need a rest.
Sounds more like a real war every minute!
The cards represent a type of logistics. While amateurs may worry about troop strengths, professionals fret about logistics. The cards are your logistics, and they’re your life blood. Spend them thoughtlessly at your own peril.
Looking at the array of action cards in front of you, you have to decide what the best course of action is. You’re forced to ask questions that are actually quite difficult. For example, if half of your cards are for the right flank, do you just “go for it”, or open with a feint? Do you lure away the units straddling the sectors so that they can’t respond adequately to your future attacks? Does your preponderance of right flank cards indicate that your left flank will be quieter? (Due to a reduced number of cards available to your opponent) Lots of decisions. I found them interesting, and the games didn’t drag on into a slugging match like so many war games do. Decisions, decisions, decisions.
On the Critical Side:
Earlier I used the term “specifications fetishism” – this was a sideways comment directed at people like myself who once had serious reservations about games where technical accuracy wasn’t of paramount importance. In M44, the homogenous treatment of military tactics and materiel will drive some people nuts. Let’s face it people – the tanks, infantry, cannon, etc are all pretty much the same. Additionally, both sides draw from the same deck for the purposes of executing orders. There’s precious little difference between the two sides engaging in conflict. (Except for force disposition) There’s also a large amount of luck here, as conflicts are driven by the card deck as well as the dice.
After enjoying playing this game immensely, I had to ask myself: “Does this game lose any credibility with me because the designers didn’t adhere to readily available fact, figures, and statistics from WW2 history?”.
Simply put: “No”. Kent and I had a blast. As much as it depends on me, he’ll always have a ready opponent to sit across the table from him.
M44: The Final perspective.
M44 makes no pretense about being a realistic depiction of war. It is however – a very enjoyable light wargame. We had a blast playing with our toy soldiers, and I even caught myself making spontaneous “shooting sounds” when one of my squads did particularly well. I caught myself before I continued, and sheepishly went back to the turn at hand. I did apologize however, and issued myself a geeky “Grognard demerit” for conduct unbecoming a wargamer.
We had loads of fun playing M44, and I’m certain we’ll continue to do so. While I’m still acutely aware that my 88mm Pak 43 parked on that hill over there could blow that T-34s engine cleanly out of its chassis at 500 meters – Frankly Herr Field Marshall, I don’t give a damn.
I like this game. A big thumbs up from me!
-
Battlestar Galactica - BSG - Why I love it.
To begin I should admit I’m a fan of the new Battlestar Galactica show. Keep my potential bias in mind as you read the review.
I’ve played the game twice now. The first play was a five player game with four fans of the show. (including me) The second game was a six player game where I was the only one that had ever seen the show. So far this game has been universally loved.
I was happy to get a game in with people who were not familiar with the show. I was worried that the table time for BSG would be limited by people who didn’t like the theme. I’m pleased to say the folks that didn’t follow the series liked the game just as much as the people who did.
Here are some characteristics of games that I love on how BSG stacked up:
Limited downtime.  
The one thing that can quickly kill a game for me is long stretches of downtime. I’m happy to report that BSG does not suffer from this problem. Even when it’s not your turn there is plenty to do. If someone steps away for a few minutes the odds are that you will need to wait for them to come back before proceeding…even if it’s not their turn.
I subtracted half a star because while you do participate in everyone’s turn there can be a big lag between your turns with a six players. Fortunately that time is usually spent observing other people trying to figure out which side they are on.
Tough, Interesting Decisions 
I subtracted a star only because in our second game the Cylon victory appeared unavoidable a few player turns before it was officially over. Galactica was badly damaged, surrounded, and unable to protect civilian ships. Two of us had landed in the brig and we were relatively powerless to stop the Cylon master plan as it came together in a crushing human defeat.
As a rule the decisions are really great. Each turn you collectively decide if you will try to pass a challenge or just take it on the chin to conserve cards. Even if you decide to try the challenge you still have to contemplate how much power you should throw in to the challenge. It’s great!
Player Interaction
This is really the strength of a game like this. The metagame of who is a Cylon is fantastic. We regularly threw around accusations and on our first game we were stunned when one of the players revealed.
I did subtract half a star for a couple reasons. While I’ve not been the sympathizer I’m told it feels a little third class when you can’t do all of the cool things regular Cylons can do. I can also attest that it can be slightly less fun once you have revealed yourself as a Cylon as a lot of the player interaction goes out the window.
Variable Powers
I’m a sucker for variable powers. Battlestar Galactica takes variable powers a small step further in that each character has three powers, two positive and one negative. One of the positive abilities is typically a once/game ability and they can really swing a game. The combination of abilities really forces you to strategize together to maximize your effectiveness. Of course this opens up endless opportunities for the sleeper agents to manipulate other people.
Some of them seem to be a handy more frequently but everyone seems balanced. In our games we have not had any one character that anyone felt like was too powerful or not good enough to pick. That’s not to say we didn’t have our favorites, only that we felt like the game was balanced.
Theme
In fairness I love games with a great theme. I’m a sucker for several different themes. (Superhero games and dungeon crawls come to mind) While it’s not enough to make me look past the gameplay it’s hard for me to really love games with a pasted on theme.
Battlestar Galactica’s gameplay appears to have been heavily influenced by the show. The components are great and I don’t see how fans of the show can’t enjoy it even more then people who have not seen the show.
Overall I love the game. I don't feel like I'm blind to it's flaws. There is certainly a step down in the excitement once you have revealed yourself as a Cylon. The actions of a Cylon is fine but the interaction during other peoples' turn goes down and thus downtime goes up. (For the revealed Cylon anyways) It's also a little rough on your first play to realize how previous every resource (including skill cards) can be so they end up having a slight learning curve. It's typically solved in the first few turns though.
Our six player game (with five new people) only took about two and a half hours though it ended a bit early as the Cylons ran us out of resources. I would expect a six player human victory to take at least a few hours, even with experienced players.
In summary, I highly recommend it and I can’t wait to play it again. I’m really excited that it was published by FFG as I’m really hoping for an expansion.
-
Race for the Galaxy - Another hit with the wife
I picked up this game shortly before Christmas. I had missed out on a lot of the hype when it first came out, but what I started reading intrigued me. Was it possible to make a great game that was played entirely with cards (and VP markers)?
I read the rules several times before bringing it to the table. Our first play was a little sketchy as we both tried to figure out all the different icons. By the third game we'd figured out the icons and were developing strategies. By the fourth, the wife thrashed me soundly.
So, what makes this game great for us?
Once you figure out the icons, it's a pretty straight-forward. I think it's a neat mechanism that uses cards for playing in front of you, for money and for goods. All the different worlds and developments, as well as the choice of phases to play each round, give great diversity and replayability, but it's not so much that it causes brain cramps. All of our games have been 20 minutes or less, making this a great way to get a game in when we don't have the time to play one of our other favorites. And the fact that it's just cards and a few victory point tokens means hardly any setup. Count out some chips, shuffle some cards and you're ready!
But even though it's easy to get into, it's definitely got some depth. There are enough different kinds of cards to play to a number of different strategies, but with the need for flexibility depending on the draw. This is one that neither of us will master for some time.
We both are avid sci-fi readers, so the them is a hit with us. The artwork reminds me of a lot of the movie posters and book covers that were coming out when I was younger. I love Twilight Imperium, but hardly ever have the time. This is a great way for me to get a sci-fi 'fix' in 20 minutes or so.
Race for the Galaxy is one that comes off our shelf quite a bit, and is sure to come off the shelf a lot in the future. If you want a game that's fairly easy to learn, but has some fairly deep strategies and a cool sci-fi theme, this is one to look at a little closer.
-
Sorry! Sliders - Two-for-one special! Sorry Sliders review!
The first review is by my 27-year old non-gaming coworker. When I say "non-gaming", I mean it. She does NOT like to play games at all. I was surprised when she left me this 35-second game review on my work voicemail this afternoon. Vasel and Nicholson, fear not! She's got a long way to go.  [MP3]http://www.nicholasdavis.info/Media/1520092052HKre.mp3|H's Review[/MP3] (.mp3 format, 545 kb file size)
**available at http://www.nicholasdavis.info/Media/1520092052HKre.mp3
This second review is mine. My first on BGG. I guess I feel compelled to write a quick-something about this game because it's one of the few times that I've gone with the hype and truly enjoyed what I got. Thanks hype-machine! Sliders has been out of stock in town (and online) for quite some time now and yesterday I saw two on the shelf of my local Super Walmart. YAY! The worker informed me that they were both returns: unopened and unwanted. My heart went out to these lonely, abandoned boxes. Shh shh shhhhh.....everything's going to be okay.
I picked one up for my work (I work as a counselor at a shelter house for teenagers ages 9-17) and one for myself (my wife, 4-year old daughter, Acacia, and 11-month old son, Janek).
Oooooooooh, goody goody! I had a bounce to my step when walking out of that store like I was the coolest guy on the planet. Yep, I get excited when I find certain things. It usually happens with 'holy grail' finds, but Sliders has been on my treasure map for a short time, so I felt invincible walking through that parking lot. Where were my bodyguards for my $30 purchase?
Quite a bit has been written about the game already so I'll keep it quick.
The pawns (4 small ones of each color to keep track of the score and 4 large ones of each color that contain the ball bearing for sliding) are sweet. I can't say they are "beautiful" or "awesome", so I'll just go for a taste adjective and say they are "sweet". Are they sweet tasting? I'm not sure. At some point my son may be able to tell you....but I hope not. 
As far as the tracks and rails go, they aren't indestructible by any means, but are of good enough quality that if taken care of properly, they will last a long time (which goes for any game). The same can be said about the 2 'target' boards you get (with a different 'game' on each side for a total of 4 'games').
Board one gives you different targeted zones with the ability to move that many spaces (outer edge is 1 and moving inward until number 5 at the bullseye) to get your pawns home. Board two is similar, with the exception of four "not-so-hot" spots that if landed on, kick your slider pawn off the board and it scores no points for that round. It's fun to knock your opponents into them! Board three has a hole cut out of the center that when landed in automatically moves one of your scoring pawns to home and similarly, board four's hole sends that slider piece out of the game for the round and forces you to send your highest scoring pawn (not already in the home area) back to start. Going off the un-railed corners of any of the boards does the same thing. Watch out!
Concentrate on advancing your own pieces, try your hardest to flick your pawn into someone else's to make them suffer! Mua ha ha ha ha ha. When my opponents give me that jaw-dropped look of "how could you??!?!" it feels good to simply say, "Sorry!" An apology has never felt so evil. hehehe
It should be noted that we have found it more effective to give your slider pawns a good finger-flick or wrist-flick - just enough to get it down the track. It seems that excessive force just makes your pawn (and other pawns) fall over (which sends them off the board for the round with no scoring capability). So take it easy, turbo!
This game is fun!. Good, "stupid" fun (with some strategy involved)! The teens at work had a blast with it, my wife is loving it, and my daughter feels like a bowling/darts queen when she wins! The rules are simple and effective. The game is easy to explain, easy to learn, etc. I like the versatility of the track/board/rail setup for different numbers of players (1-4) and different track shapes (L-shape for example). I'm quite excited to make some custom 'target' boards with different options to advance your own pieces or wreak havoc on those of your opponent.
One more thing: when anyone has a Big Lebowski "Donny" moment of going over that foul line with their fingers - I can't help but have a "Walter" moment of yelling, "Over the line! Mark it zero!" 
**Thank you to Nick (Fygar here on BGG and over at www.ccgtradepost.com) for putting the mp3 on his site for me.
-
Fury of Dracula - Fury of Who?
I've wanted to try Fury of Dracula for some time. On Saturday I had my chance. My friends Bob & Emily had bought the game so Emily and I played Hunters while Bob played Dracula. So this review is really our first impressions.
Our first impression was that this was obviously an "earlier" FF game. Most of the artwork is great, and the board looks nice. But the character cards seem a bit flisy and the "railroad" dice seems a bit cheap. We were also surprised that Drac's counters have only artwork and no words. I suppose once you've played a few times it doesn't matter....but for a first game its frustrating to continually have to refer to the rule book.
It took us about 30 minutes or so to review all of the rules. Not too bad considering the size of the rule book. Luckily, the game play is much easier than it would appear from the size of that rule book.
Starting the game:
Emily played Godalming & Van Helsing and I played Doc Seward and Mina. We spread out across Europe in hopes of finding Dracula's trail early. Drac started out in Barcelona...which is not where we thought he would start.
We noticed right off the bat that by spreading out we were able to ascertain Draculas location fairly quickly. Thus we spent several turns trying to get the hunters close enough to intercept and fight Dracula. At the same time, Dracula had an unlucky draw of encounters, so anytime we hit upon his trail, the effects were minor. Early in the game, Mina caught Drac and got him down to 5 blood before he escaped. This was a big let-down for us as the fight was during night-time, and Dracula really seemed underpowered.
Mid-game:
By midgame it was apparent that much of Drac's success is dependent on him drawing the proper encounters. In our game Drac never got a vampire, so there was really no way for him to win. While he did pull out some tricks to evade us, we had pretty much blocked off Castle Dracula by placing consecrated ground and by placing our Hunters near the castle. We knew the only way for him to heal himself was to get back to the castle, and by blocking it, we essentially made the game drag on and on....
5 hours later:
Finally we managed to catch and kill dracula. I noticed that once we had ascertained part of his trail, we could fairly well predict other spots in the trail and avoid most of them. This prevented us from hitting too many bad encounters. Also, Dracula never drew his vampires so he was not maturing them and getting points. Still...Dracula had enought tricks that he could prolong the inevitable for a very long time.
By the ennd of the game I think we were all a bit disappointed. We had high hopes for this game and it did not seem to live up to our expectations. I really want to give the game another try. The interaction between hunters seems like it could be a high point....but for us it really didn't seem like we were hunting down "Dracula"...but just some guy. not one hunter ever got bitten, and no one lost more than 5 health counters. The hunters just seem too powerful.
-
Niagara - Great "family" game and solid game overall!
OK board game fans! I think this game is note worthy for a few reasons.
1. Accessable for most ages, 8 and up, (I agree w/ the manufacturer on this one).
2. A twist on conventional game mechanics that actually works and works really well!
3. Fast paced gameplay and about 45 minutes to complete a full game!
There are not a ton of basic rules to learn before playing this game, actually there are very few. The most difficult part of playing is setting up the board and you use the box to set it on, totally convienient. We read and understood the rules in under 15 minutes. The actual rules don't read as easy as they are to play. For someone under 12 I'd say it would be much easier for an adult to explain. That being said the simplicity of what actually goes on is easy enough for someone the age of 8+ to grasp quite easily.
The basic idea of the game is move up and down the river, collect gems and bring them back to the docks. Normal movement each round is determined by numbered cards 1-6 that you place secretly each turn. Once you play a certain number, it can't be played again until all other numbers have been used. You can move your raft(s) up river or down river, (not both), and/or collect gems without falling over the edge of the river. The interesting part of the game mechanics happens after each turn, (each player playing 1 movement card and moving their Rafts). Then you have weather affected current and the board actually moves. Depending on the number cards showing that turn and the amount of weather affect the river moves down stream X amount of spaces! Each player also has 1 card they can play to affect the weather. Makes strategizing a little less cut and dry because even though you ended up in safe spot the current may carry you over the waterfall.
We played a 5 player game and it was everyones first time. I'd say round 1 went fairly slow, but after that the game moved smoothly and fast. We finished in less than an hour, including reading the directions. With more experience, I'd say the game could finish in as little as a half an hour!
The couple of minor flaws to this game upon first impression was that the board will take some breaking in. While moving the river for current, it helps to have one person move the current and others hold down the sides of the board. I imagine this will get better with use. The other thing is really minor. It's the ability to have a 5 player max, usually the gaming proup I play with is between 4-8 but like with most games, it doesn't have the support for enough players.
You can find this game at your local brick and mortar for $40-$50 or on-line probably 10-20% cheaper. I like to support the locals though! They usually have discount type deals for repeat shoppers.
All in all and excellent "family" game and a good overall game. One other thing to note, is it looks pretty. Some games, though their play is intriguing, tend to look a bit drab. Not Niagara, it's very well designed and brilliantly colored.
Overall rating for Niagara: 7.6 out of 10
-
Samurai - The Bottom Line Review
The Bottom Line
Samurai is a game that projects an appearance of tranquil, Zen-like play, but in reality, it is a game of timing, frustration (in a good way), and abrupt swings of fortune. If you accept it for what it is you'll be rewarded with a tense, angst ridden, medium weight game that will alternately have you cursing your luck and praising your skills.
The Components
The components of Samurai are very pleasing. They project a peaceful and serene sense of game play. The board comes in a 3 piece jigsaw puzzle in the shape of Japan. The color scheme is attractively muted and easy on the eye.
In addition to the board there are figurines of three types (Buddhas, warrior hats, and rice paddies). The figurines are molded out of heavy plastic (Bakelite?) and highly polished. Their heft and jet-black, yet polished, surfaces make them extremely satisfying to hold and manipulate. When they populate the board they contribute their share to the Zen-like countenance projected by the components.
Each player gets a set of 20 colored tiles. There are four sets for up to four players. Each set is identical except for the color. The sets have pictures corresponding to the figures, as well as pictures of Samurai and ships, plus a couple of special tiles. Each tile also has a number designating how much influence that tile is worth.
As I've been saying, the components are aesthetically pleasing and, at least to me, project a sense of calm. A sense that turns out to be at odds with the game play, but I'm getting ahead of myself. As you might expect, components such as these have inspired their share of creative photographs.
The Rules
The Setup
There are several options for setting up the game. The simplest option, and the one I prefer, is simply to randomly place the Buddhas, warrior hats, and rice paddies on the board (subject to the constraint that no two figures of the same type can occupy the same city), and have each player randomly draw 5 tiles into their hand. Another option is to randomly seed the board with figures, while the players select their initial 5 tiles from among their pool of 20. The final setup option is for players to take turns placing a figure onto the board (again subject to the constraints above), then selecting their starting tiles from their pool. The theory behind this option, I suppose, is that players might orchestrate certain arrangements of the various figures that complement their starting hand, such that they have a desirable opening move.
In practice, however, I find that all the setup options, besides the totally random one, just aren't worth the hassle. No matter what your starting hand, and what the distribution of figures, there is practically always several equally acceptable starting locations. And I haven't seen the long term strategic benefit from selecting your starting hand versus drawing it randomly to make that option worth while.
I suggest just setting up randomly and rolling with whatever configuration the board and your tiles present to you.
The Game Play
The goal of Samurai is to capture the figures from the board by using your tiles to exert influence on them. In that sense it's kind of an area majority game where the areas are defined by being adjacent to the city hexes (which contain the figures). When a figure is completely surrounded by tiles on all adjacent land hexes (water doesn't count for surrounding) then the figure is "scored". All of the influence on the figure, exerted by adjacent tiles with a picture matching the figure or by a "Samurai" or "Ship" tiles which are wild, is summed. The player with the most influence captures the figure and places it behind their player screen. In the case of a tie no one gets the figure, and it is removed from the game.
A turn consists of playing one tile to the board. Only ship tiles can be played on water, all other tiles must be played on the land (ships, like samurais, are wild in terms of influence). A player can play more than one tile if the additional tiles are the ones with the little Japanese symbol on them. In other words, a player may place as many Japanese symboled tiles as desired plus one normal tile. If the played tile or tiles triggers the scoring of a figure then that figure is awarded as described above.
After playing tiles a player refreshes their hand back up to five tiles by drawing from their face down pool (each player has their own personal pool of tiles, which they draw from throughout the game. Once it's exhausted that's it. And it is possible to exhaust the pool though it's rare to be completely out of tiles to play).
There are two special tiles which I should mention. There is one tile which is not played to the board, it is simply
set face up in front of the player screen to indicate it's been played. This tile is very powerful, it let's you switch the position of any two figures on the board (subject to the constraint that two identical figures can't occupy the same city). As I'll explain below in the strategy section I believe this is the most important tile in your pool. Making good use of it is key to winning the game.
Another special tile is the "zero" tile. This tile is played on the board in place of a previous played tile of your color. The replaced tile then may be "reused" somewhere else on the board. Basically the zero tile doesn't have any influence, but let's you reuse one of your more powerful tiles (generally the 4-influence figure tiles, or the 3-influence samurai tile).
Another note is that the "1" Samurai, kind of looks like a "7". Make sure you point out that it's a 1 when explaining the rules.
The End Game
The game can end in one of two ways. By far the most common way to end the game is by capturing the last figure of one type from the board. When this happens the game ends immediately, and probably some number of the other two types of figures will be left on the board uncaptured.
The other way to end the game is by when three figures are removed from play due to ties in influence. Since ties are pretty rare this doesn't happen very often.
Once the game ends the players reveal their captured figures and the winner is determined. The scoring mechanism in Samurai is rather unique and is the subject of some criticism. Generally, either you love it or hate it.
Basically, in order to be eligible for the win you must have a plurality in one type of figure. Being tied for the most doesn't count. If you have such a plurality then congratulations, you might win. Next, you set aside the figures of your plurality and count your figures of the other two types. This is your score, and the highest score wins.
The scoring method is one of the things to break the elegant balance implied by the components. The three types of figures are all functionally equivalent, and the players tile pools are all identical. Thus there is a certain symmetry to the components that would lead you to expect a more balanced scoring mechanism (perhaps one like T&E where the fewest figures becomes your score, this would encourage balance in capturing figures). Instead we have a scoring system that encourages imbalance in your play. Basically, you would like to capture as many of two types of figures as you can while completely ignoring the third, although, it's never practical to specialize to this degree.
I suspect that the scoring mechanism isn't arbitrary, however. I don't know for sure, but I think it makes the endgame much more tense and crucial as you are forced into some difficult decisions about what you would like to capture versus what your tiles allow you to capture.
Theme to Mechanics Integration
There is not really much thematic integration here. The theme is mostly suggested by the components, not the game play. The three types of figures are all functionally equivalent, there are no special rules for warriors versus Buddhas, for example. There is no differentiation in the players' tile set (they aren't playing different tribes with different abilities or victory conditions, for example.) I think the game could easily be rethemed to any number of other settings.
The Random Element
Samurai has a very healthy dose of randomness in it. As long as it is played reasonably quickly the random element shouldn't overwhelm the game, but it definitely doesn't pay to have AP in this game and, in fact, AP will kill the enjoyment of it. Thanks to the large randomness newbies have a decent chance at beating a veteran player which is one of the things that helps make this a good gateway game.
As I've said before Samurai is mainly a game of timing. As the game progresses it will present you with scoring opportunities that require certain tiles to capitalize upon. If you happen to have the right tile at the right time you will succeed. Often you won't have the right tile, or your opponent will have a tile or combination of tiles that will allow him to take advantage of an opportunity you were trying to set up for yourself.
The availability of these tiles largely depends on when you randomly draw them. A tile that might have been great for you early in the game can be near worthless if drawn late, and vice versa.
There is also a healthy dose of player induced chaos in the game (especially in the four player game where a lot can happen between your turns). The chaos isn't truly random as it is the result of player choices, but it certainly can have the same feeling. When a juicy scoring opportunity appears and then disappears all between your turns it certainly can seem like you got randomly shafted.
In my opinion the game is a tiny bit too random for its length. I don't necessarily mind random or chaotic games, but I do like them to be short. Samurai needs to be played briskly in order to prevent the randomness and chaos from becoming a real problem.
Strategy vs. Tactics
Samurai is mostly a tactical game. It's important that you examine all of your options each turn and choose the one that gives you the most payoff. Trying to set up a long term strategy can actually be risky as other players can capitalize on scoring opportunities you are trying to set up for yourself. The best strategy is generally to maximize your tactical gain on each turn.
That said, there are a few strategic considerations to take into account. First, it's important to understand how much to "pay" to capture a figure. What I mean is that each figure you capture is probably going to require you to use more than 1 tile, but shouldn't require using 2 (the actual number of tiles per figure is probably slightly above 1.5). With this understanding, you'll obviously jump at the chance to capture a figure using only a single tile if your opponents are foolish enough to set that situation up for you. But, you should think twice about using two tiles to capture a single figure if neither of the tiles can be used against a second figure.
It also follows from this that the last thing you should do is leave a scoring opportunity on the board that can be completed with the play of a single tile. In Samurai it's impossible to not leave opportunities for your opponents so the thing to do is always make them cost two tiles to capture. The practical upshot of this is that you should never leave a figure with only one open space and a total influence of less than 4. Doing so means that somebody could drop down their 4 strength token, score the space, and capture the figure. At least make them use their 4 plus a ship.
There is also some strategy involving the special tiles that you should be considering right from the very start of the game. I'll get into that in the strategy tips section below.
Scalability
When it comes to scalability Samurai does something that I love and wish more boardgames did. It scales the size of the board to the number of players. With 2 players you use only central Japan, with three you add one of the islands, and with 4 you add the other. Thumbs up for that.
Samurai is at its best with 2 or 3 players because that limits the amount of player induced chaos in the game. There is simply less happening between your turns with fewer players. It makes a very tense two player game with a strong sense of direct competition with your opponent. 3 players, for me, is the sweet spot. 4 players is a bit chaotic and events can often feel out of your control, still I don't turn down 4 player games and if I'm setting up Samurai I welcome a fourth player who is interested in joining.
One big flaw of Samurai emerges here, and that's turn order bias. It's possible for some players to get more turns than others in this game, and in a game where you might only get twelve or thirteen turns that can be huge. Whenever I lose a game of Samurai I inevitably feel like I would have won if only I'd had one more turn. Well, that could often be true if you just flat out got one less turn than the winner.
Gateway Potential
Samurai is a game that I've had good luck introducing to nongamers. The components certainly help in that regard, but also the rules are really not that complex if explained succinctly. And the strategy is shallow enough that the mental load won't overwhelm them. The only hiccup is the victory conditions, which I usually start with and get out of the way. I don't think Samurai is the first game I would reach for with newbies, but I have used it and have had success. So it can work.
Tips
The key to going form a good Samurai player (one who recognizes the basic strategic considerations I laid out above) to an advanced one is recognizing how to use two of the special tiles. In fact, these two tiles are so important that I'd almost go so far as to say that the winner is often the player who deploys them the best. The tiles are the "switch figures" and the "Japanese samurai" (the one with the Japanese character that lets you move again), both of these tiles are enormously powerful compared to the others in your arsenal, and you need to use them to their best advantage to have any chance in the game. The "zero tile" (the one that lets you reuse an already played tile) is also quite powerful, but I find its use to be generally obvious. It doesn't really warrant any special tips, when it's time to use it you'll know.
Let's start with the "switch figures" tile. This tile lets you switch any two figures on the board (subject to the constraint that no city can have two identical figures). This is powerful because you can take a figure from a position where an opponent had strong influence on it and put it in a position where you have strong influence on it, while at the same time capturing another figure.
What I mean is that whenever you play the switch figures tile you should always capture at least one figure. Never play it if you can't capture one of the figures you switched. Then, with the other figure involved in the switch, you should ideally put that in a spot where you originally had little influence, but where you'll be in a position to capture it the following turn.
For example, let's say your opponent has four influence on a Buddha figure with one space left to close the city and claim the figure. If you switch this figure with a rice paddy, then you should be able to capture the paddy with a Samurai, or a 2 value rice paddy tile. You've blunted your opponent’s strong tile and used a weak one of yours to great effect. Then, hopefully, the spot for the Buddha figure should be set up for you to capture next round. Perhaps it's a spot where you had a strong Buddha influence that was being wasted with the rice paddy. In this scenario you've played three tiles (switch, capture the rice, capture the Buddha) for two figures - a 1.5 ratio. That ratio is pretty good, but it's really better than that if you include the damage done to your opponent’s position, and the fact that the two tiles you played to capture might be reused on another figure themselves.
In some cases it's even possible to capture two tokens on the same turn. One game I used the switch figures and the Japanese samurai to capture 3 figures on one turn!
Variations on the above example come up often during a game. When you have the switch tile in your hand you're first priority should be to find those situations or create them if you can. You really need to maximize the use of this tile.
Much the same advice goes for the Japanese samurai tile. This tile is powerful because it is the only land tile that can be played along with another land tile. This let's you close off a city with 2 open spaces. This tile should ideally be played when it leads to the capture of two figures on the same turn. If you can't do that, you should certainly capture one that your opponent was counting on. It's great for closing off EDO unexpectedly, or one of the other 2 figure cities. Sometimes you can use it to close off two different cities netting you both figures. It can also be used to great effect in combination with the switch figures tile, or the 0 tile. When you have this tile in your hand, your strategy should revolve around it. You should look for the biggest score possible or try to set one up.
Efficient use of these two tiles is often the determining factor in the game, which otherwise tends to be very close.
If you're playing the variant where you select your starting hand you might be tempted to put one or both of these tiles in it to ensure you have access to them when the ideal opportunity arises. But in my experience, the right time for these tiles rarely comes in the beginning of the game, and until it does they're just taking up space in your small hand. You really have to depend on a certain amount of luck to draw them at the right time (towards the middle of the game because they diminish in value as the game goes on because of fewer opportunities on the shrinking board). I've taken to not including them in my starting hand when I play the game that way.
My Opinion
My opinion of Samurai is actually higher than you might gather from the review above. After 30+ face to face games, with all numbers of players, I rate it a 9/10. It has its flaws (turn order bias, a high degree of luck, and a high degree of chaos in 4 player games), but it succeeds spectacularly at the one thing all games should do well. Every turn it gives the player a manageable set of interesting decisions. Every turn is a mini tactical puzzle, one that's not too hard, nor too deep, but one in which you constantly feel like a clever play is right at the tip of your fingers. Sometimes it is, and when you find it it can be quite rewarding. Even when a brilliant play doesn't emerge from the current position it's a mentally pleasing process to scan the board and try to fit your particular hand of tiles onto the opportunities presented.
It's a game of timing, every tile is potentially exactly the right tile you need and every position has a tile that is exactly right for it – it’s just a matter of getting the right position with the right tile at the right time. When I play Samurai I constantly find myself hopeful that the next turn, or the next tile draw, will bring about the conditions I need for my brilliant plan. The game is simple enough that you have reason to hope for that, and complex enough that you feel it's your own skill that brought about the situation, or caused you to see the play.
The flip side is that it can also be a game of frustration when, occasionally, the timing never works for you in a game. Maybe you don't draw your special tiles until the end, or whatever the reason, the fact is that through no fault of your own your timing can be off.
The frustration that goes hand in hand with the optimism of the game means that it never delivers on the sublime Zen-like play promised by its presentation. Instead it’s an affair of taking advantages where you see them and trying to set up a couple of big scores in your favor.
Samurai is a game that I hope always finds its time on the table.
-
Time: the Game - The only review that will ever be necessary for this travesty
True story: Our neighbors picked up this game at a garage sale, figuring it might be worth a try for our weekly game night. After one excruciatingly long play, they decided that it would go into their next garage sale. Like the proverbial Christmas fruitcake, this just needed to be passed on and on, over and over...
Time: The Game is a trivia game, designed to take up as much of your time as possible. Players can play in teams or individually, but this should only be attempted by Mensa-level trivia junkies with eidetic memory. On your turn, you roll and move to a new space that will determine what kind of question you must answer. You also roll a third die to determine the difficulty level of your question. Questions are divided into categories (People, Places, Arts, Sports, etc.) as well as eras (ranging, in our edition, from the 1920's to the 1980's). The third die determines whether you get a true/false question (worth 10 points), a multiple choice (20 points), or a fill-in-the-blank (worth 30 points). Thus, you could get a true/false question on People of the 1960's, or a multiple choice question on Sports from the 1920's, and so on.
The questions, and their answers, are found in four "magazines" - booklets designed to look like a very thin copy of Time magazine. To ask your opponent a question, you simply skip to the proper era, then find the appropriate category, then find the right column for the question's difficulty. Sound clunky? It is, and it adds a significant amount of time to the game play.
If you get the answer right, you get the appropriate amount of points for that era. If you're lucky and landed on a double points space... well you can guess what happens then. Points are doled out in slips of colored paper that closely resemble Monopoly money. The goal of the game is to earn a total of 60 points in each era (it doesn't matter what categories you answered, just to have earned enough points in each era). The person or team that does so is declared the Supreme Grand Master of the Esoteric, and everyone else thanks them for finally ending the game.
Just kidding! It's unlikely that you'll actually find someone that can actually answer enough questions correctly to get to an end, so you'll more likely do what we had to do - put the fate of the game on "whoever gets the next question right", which still took four tries before anyone hit on a right answer.
To be fair, the true/false questions actually are pretty easy - but not because they center on knowledge that people might actually possess. They are easy because they are all posed in a pattern that tells you the answer:
- If there are fewer than 2 variable parameters, the answer is likely true.
- If there are more than 2 variable parameters, the answer is likely false by reason of one or more false variables.
- If there are only 2 parameters, the answer hinges on how outrageous the statement is - more outrageous means highly likely true, reasonable means highly likely false.
For example: Herbert Schmollenoller was elected to the New York State Senate in 1928. True or false? You don't have to know the answer. You simply note that there are four variables: "Herbert Schmollenoller," "New York", "State Senate", and "1928." The answer is therefore false, because at least one of those parameters has been altered to render the entire statement false. (That is, maybe he was elected to that post in 1923, or it was 1928 but a different office, or it wasn't New York but New Hampshire, or it was his half-brother Frank Schmollenoller, etc. etc.)
The multiple choice questions are trickier because they don't fall into a predictable pattern. They do, however, generally have at least one answer that you can eliminate reasonably, leaving you with a 50/50 shot at the right answer. Which leaves the tougher fill-in-the-blank questions... for which, you just have to hope either a) you never get that roll, or b) if you do, you actually happen to know the answer because no amount of guessing will help you.
The edition we encountered was obviously not from 1979 because it included questions on the 1980's. To give you an idea of just how far out and esoteric the questions are: every one of us at the game table had lived through and grown up in the 1980's. We collectively struggled to bat .300 for this era.
On the BGG scale, I would have to rate this a 3/10. It does not defy the definition of a game, and there are possibly a handful of other "games" that would provide a more excruciating experience than this. But not many that leap to mind immediately.
You're likely to only ever find this at thrift shops, garage sales, and maybe eBay or craigslist. Don't even bother paying $1 for it. If you do pick it up, say for 50 cents, you're likely to get more use out of the box to store components for other games, or to prop up the leg of a wobbly table.
If you do play it, you now cannot say that you weren't warned in advance by the only review of the game in existence.
-
Thud - Thud: my view.
Preamble.
This game was something of a rare treat for me: I usually read lots of reviews and session reports before I decide whether to buy a game or not, but Thud was given to me as a birthday present so I knew nothing about it. My initial joy was somewhat tempered by the fact that I’m not a fan of Discworld. My fears grew when I opened the box and saw something reminiscent of chess because I’m not a fan of that either.
Components.
The game comes in a square box that is roughly the same size as the standard box used for Zooloretto etc, albeit not as deep. Inside is a very nice velvety insert that houses the components. There are 8 trolls, 32 dwarves and a couple of stone obelisks (in case you lose one?), all made from some kind of resin or synthetic stone. They are nicely moulded and have a dark grey/black appearance a little reminiscent of coal, which gives them table presence. The board is like a chess board, but with the corners cut off. It is too shiny and it has a tendency to warp because the card that it is mounted on card is not thick enough. The square rulebook is reasonably well written and illustrated.
Overall then, the components are okay. The pieces are very nice but the board could be better.
Gameplay
This is a two player game that lasts roughly an hour (sometimes less, but sometimes much longer). Game play takes place as a pair of battles. Each player uses either the trolls or dwarves first, and then swaps over. Set up involves placing a stone in the centre square and surrounding it with the 8 trolls. The Dwarves are then placed around the periphery of the board, with gaps in the centre space on each of the north, south, east and west edges.
Dwarves move first. They move any number of squares in a line (forwards, backwards, orthogonally or diagonally). They can’t move through other pieces. Dwarves capture trolls by forming unbroken lines and hurling the front dwarf at the troll. The number of dwarves in the line dictates the range of the attack e.g. if there are 3 dwarves in a line, they can attack a troll up to 3 squares away. The troll is removed and the dwarf that was hurled at it is placed in the vacated square.
Trolls move only one square in any direction. They capture one or more Dwarves by moving into any square adjacent to them (note: they must move in order to capture). Trolls can also capture by shoving, which is where they make a line of trolls and then move the front troll up to a number of squares equal to the number of trolls in a line. The front troll captures any dwarves that it lands next to.
Play continues until both players agree that they can’t make any more captures, at which point scores are tallied. Dwarves count as 1 point, trolls as 4 points. The players then swap sides and play again, and the winner is the player with most cumulative points after this second game.
There are also a couple of variants included. Koom Valley Thud involves the dwarves trying to steal the central rock. It starts with one dwarf next to this rock and then 15 other dwarves on one side of the board and the 8 trolls on the other. Dwarves move first and move as normal, except that if a dwarf is next to the rock, the dwarf player can elect to move the rock one square instead of moving a dwarf. Dwarves capture trolls by moving so that a troll is trapped between two dwarves in a straight line. Trolls move up to three squares in a straight line. They now capture dwarves by trampling over them i.e. starting adjacent to a dwarf, moving over it and landing the square beyond. Crucially, if a troll captures a dwarf it is allowed to keep moving (even with a change of direction) if a further move would allow it to trample another dwarf. As before, captures require pieces to move.
The Kings Game is a specific set up shown in the rulebook where players must work out the winning move for the dwarves.
So, What Do I Think?
Sadly, although it was a nice surprise to receive this game ‘unseen’, my initial fears were well-founded. I really dislike this game, and find it tedious in the extreme. I just don’t get enough fun in return for the time and brain power invested. Its only saving grace is that it looks nice when set up on the table! Once play begins, I either get frustrated, bored, or (usually) both. I’m terrible at seeing patterns and consequently I’m rubbish at Chess. Playing Thud becomes an exercise in seeing how long I can last out before I lose. I have played it about a dozen times in the hope that I might get into it or start to see patterns and strategies, but I just can’t! Not only is it frustrating, but it is also really boring. It takes much too long to play, partly because of the horrible ‘stop when you both agree’ ending condition, and partly because most of my opponents seem to take an age working out their best move. I just can’t be bothered to sit and analyse it to try and work out what to do. I usually end up finishing the first round so far behind that the second round is a moot point or so bored that just don’t want to keep playing. In short, it is just not a gaming experience that I want to invest any of my time or brain-power in.
Overall then, I give this game a paltry 3 out of 10. I don’t think it is broken, it is just not for me! If you like Discworld and you like Chess, then you will probably enjoy this game, and no doubt you’ll rate it higher than I do. If like me, you aren’t a fan of either and you’re not particularly good at recognising patterns and planning moves accordingly, then do yourself a favour and steer well clear.
-
Dixie - Bull Run - Reviewing collectible games from a wargamer's perspective -- Dixe Bull Run
Columbia Games was actually one of the first companies to jump on the Collectible Game bandwagon, publishing Dixie" Shiloh in 1994.
On the other hand, Dixie wasn't a whole-hearted CCG in the form we've become accustomed to over the years.
For one thing, the game eschews the whole rarity thing. While randomly sorted for packaging, all the cards are equally rare (or common). This made collecting a full set somewhat less daunting. In addition, there aren't really a lot of different kinds of cards. The vast majority of the cards are infantry with "combat values" of 1 to 4. Most of the balance of the cards are leaders and artillery, with a handful of cavalry units. There are a few terrain cards and 23 "special" cards, which are the only ones "played" to affect various game functions. All the generals, infantry, artillery and cavalry cards are used to maneuver and fight on a notional battlefield divided into left, center and right sectors for each army.
Indeed, the combat system is basically a copy of the tactical battle board system used in Bobby Lee and similar to the tactical system of Napoleon.
As such this game is very familiar territory for wargamers. Deck construction is fairly straightforward. There are no killer card combos or any such considerations. Instead the player uses the available battle points to select a mix of cards. Both sides deploy their initial "muster" on the board with any additional cards arriving as reinforcements.
Players can "fire" their guns cross the "middle ground at the op[posing array and send infantry and cavalry units across the "middle ground" in an attempt to seize the enemy's home sectors. If an army captures two out of the three enemy home sectors they win.
Combat in all cases involves rolling as many dice as the unit;s combat value, with the effectiveness of that fire depending upon the type of unit. For example, infantry units fire at "F2" which means a die roll of 1 or 2 hits. For every hit a unit has taken it has to make a morale check at the beginning of its next turn If it rolls more than its CV, modified for any leadership, then it "routs" and is removed from play.
As one can see, larger CV units are doubly powerful, rolling more dice and having a greater chance of passing a morale check. On the other hand, they are also somewhat fragile, in a case of having all ones eggs in a single basket. A single hit followed by a bad die roll can make a 4CV unit run away, wheres it would take 4 hits to clear out four 1 CV units (with a chance that a lucky roll may save one.) Leaders tend to benefit poorer units more. A single 0/1 leader can double the chances that 1CV units will hold their ground defending a position.
Compared to most card games there is very little card interaction between players. Only a couple of special cards can be played to directly affect the opponent's cards (Uniform Confusion, Rebel Yell). No, this is very definitely a wargame, albeit on the abstract side.
One of the more interesting things from a wargamers point of view is the OB and uniform information contained in the game. The entire order of battle of both armies is included in the game, with illustrations of all the regimental uniforms. Bull Run was the first battle of the war and both armies were much more colorful than they would be later on.
There are federal units in gray, rebels in blue and other combinations galore.
Dixie is definitely a wargamers kind of collectible game. It's got the kind of collectibility that should appeal to wargamers -- uniforms and OB while avoiding the kind of annoying collectibility found in many other CCGs such as promo cards, ultra rares and the like.
And if you don't want to do it the hard way, Columbia also offers a one-with-everything set that skips the whole random box scene.
The basic game is a good, introductory level tactical battle game that may appeal to the non-wargaming friends. The large cards highlight the kind of visual attractiveness usually seen in miniatures game and it avoid hexes and other wargamey conventions in favor of a very intuitive right-center-left battlefield.
From my game blog at http://pawnderings.blogspot.com
|
The News 
Bad_Calvin's Hex Based Battle Board
