Shameless board game podcast self promotion ahoy!

me me meThis is a tad overdue, but I’ve been on a couple of podcasts over recent months that I really should’ve given a plug – so here goes.

First up was my début appearance on The Game Pit, A UK show all about board games, card games and tabletop gaming.

It’s a great podcast which I hope to be on again in the not too distant future. I was on ‘Episode 40 – Council Chamber Mega Review of 2014‘ in February with hosts Sean and Ronan, plus contributors Teri, Nathan and Paul. We all picked our board gaming highs and lows of last year and I thought it all turned out pretty well.

Also in February I was honoured to be the first ‘special guest’ on relatively new podcast The Cardboard Console. I expect the fact I met hosts Matt and Andrew at my local game group probably helped, but it doesn’t take away from the fact its a really good show.

The usual format sees them cover both computer and board/card games, as well as a section on anything from TV shows to apps to weird fighting disciplines I’ve never heard of. Episode 15 was largely about the design and publication process of Empire Engine, but I did get to witter on about Deus, Divinity: Original Sin and Person of Interest too.

Both shows are on iTunes and if you like board game podcasts you should certainly check them out; its really nice to hear a growing podcast voice from the UK. Both shows are also covered in my ‘Guide to board game podcasts‘, which covers all the best shows out there (and some crappy ones too, just for balance).

If you’ve got your own podcast I’d love the chance to spout off on it. I’ve got the interwebs, Audacity installed, a reasonable mic and an opinion on everything – you know where I am!

Through the Ages: A four-sided game review

Through the Ages boxThrough the Ages is a civilisation building card game by Vlaada Chvatil that takes players on an epic ride from antiquity to the present day.

While war plays a large and important part in the game* there is no actual map, or dice – interaction is instead played out through card play.

There are three versions of the game in the rulebook, ranging from simple through to full, but the first two are really just warming you up (in terms of understanding the rules) for the main event. Through the Ages is a serious time investment (four-plus hours, even two-player) but if you’re willing to give it a try you’ll find a hugely rewarding tactical and strategic gem waiting for you.

While it’s not the biggest game box in the world, there’s a ton of game packed into it: there are more than 340 small-sized cards, 300 small wooden counters and cubes, plus boards and reference cards. It will set you back £45+, but I think it’s a fair price both in terms of components and play value. The art is pretty poor, but the card stock is great and the graphic design efficient and simple to understand.

It’s not for the feint of heart, but nor is it a war game – you’ll draft leader, wonder, building, government, technology, military and action cards and manage your resources as you advance your civilisation; all the time trying to score points while keeping your opponents in check by staying close to them in the race for military domination. It’s an impossible balancing act, giving the game a marvellous ebb and flow.

Teaching

TTA allAs mentioned earlier, the game has three versions which slowly introduce different rules and card types as you move forward. This makes it easy to teach experienced gamers, especially as the game concepts are pretty familiar.

Each round (after the first) players may use their political action to play a ‘future event’ for later, triggering a current event which will reward and/or punish players who are doing well/poorly in a particular way – for example the player with the strongest civilisation may get to produce extra goods. They can also use the political action to start an aggression or war, or offer a pact.

Players then use ‘civil’ actions to advance mining, science, farming and religion to increase building materials and technology (allowing building upgrades), population size and happiness (allowing population growth) and military might. Governments give extra actions, while leaders, technologies, ‘action’ cards and wonders give a variety of bonuses.

Civil actions are also used to increase population, lay technology, wonder and leader cards, put your population to work or upgrade them. Military actions – you guessed it – do the same with your military units.

TTA tracksEverything to do with civil and military actions is done openly, so it’s simple to watch and help new players through their turns.

Through the Ages has relatively little hidden information, so its simple for the teacher to explain cards as they come up.

New cards are ‘bought’ (with actions) from a shared conveyor belt-style track, with newly added cards costing more actions (from one to three). Military cards do go straight into your hand blind, but aren’t terribly varied and can be roughly explained before you begin.

Game concepts fit well into the theme, while the central game board lets you keep information on your military strength, science (for advancing technologies) and culture (victory) points. Each player also has a player aid listing all of the actions available in each phase of each round.

Player boards are well set out, and the wording on the cards leads to very few grey areas. The only real problem area is the Territory cards, which tend to contain rather obscure icons which aren’t explained in the rulebook. However there is a good Excel doc available from Board Game Geek which explains them in plain English.

The four sides

TTA eventsThese are me, plus three fictitious amalgams drawn from observing my friends, and their respective quirks and play styles.

  • The writer: Through the Ages is the board gaming equivalent of spinning plates; just as you get your science points going, you realise you’re running out of food – but by the time you have that back on track you’re falling behind on military – but getting that up to speed means you have to forgo a materials upgrade. It’s a delicious, epic and challenging balancing act that tells a different story every time.
  • The thinker: Its rare you find a game that has the perfect mix of tactics and strategy, but this is one of them. You’d think it impossible to create a ‘civ’ game without a board, but Vlada has managed it with aplomb. Specialise at your peril, but spread the wealth at your peril too – your long term plans are constantly being altered by both the actions of your competitors and the run of available cards.
  • The trasher: Through the Ages is a bit much for me, but is clearly a great game. I love the future events: you play cards, predicting the later game state and hoping you can be in the right position when they’re triggered. So satisfying when it works, but devastating when your own cards blow up in your face! But overall, the short game doesn’t offer enough military fun and the long game is simply too long for me.
  • The dabbler: no way! No no no. I tried it once – you can’t make me play it again! It has great flavour, carries the theme well, but I am not playing a game that takes longer than the entire games evening on its own!

Key observations

TTA player boardOf well over 3,000 Board Game Geek comments, Through the Ages has 500+ perfect 10 scores – which should be enough to convince you its a great game. Even by half way through the comments, people are still rating it 8. However, it’s certainly not for everyone. Not by a long chalk!

Game length is clearly an issue for many, but another problem is downtime – especially in a four-player game (which I wouldn’t attempt again). I enjoy a two-player game but three is definitely the sweet spot, which adds quite a bit to the play time. One plus side is the fantastic Through the Ages online version. Initially the layout looks troublesome and weak, but it actually plays really smoothly once you get to grips with it.

Another problem is the importance of the military aspect of the game*. Players who aren’t keen on confrontation need not apply, but its not just them: others think the military aspect is either tacked on as a balancing mechanism or is overpowered. It’s true that if someone falls behind on military and is picked on by the other players, it can be impossible for them to recover – particularly punishing in such a long game.

Finally, some describe Through the Ages as nothing more than  a spread sheet rather than a game – a dry, themeless affair that is way too fiddly for its own good. The fiddly criticism is true, and there is a lot of bookkeeping, but this can be done by a player at the end of their turn while the next player gets on with theirs, so it’s not so bad. But again, if you don’t like fiddly bookkeeping games you may want to avoid it.

Conclusion

TTA card trackThrough the Ages is the last game in my all-time top 10 that I’ve tackled for review and I’ve definitely been reluctant to do so.

It feels impossible to do such an epic game justice in 1,500 words – especially when you know many people simply won’t like it.

But if you like civ and/or engine building games – or more specifically ‘engine building and then maintaining aggh god I can’t do everything at once’ games – and are happy to be in for the long haul, this is a must-try.

I definitely lose more games of TtA than I win and I’m not sure I’ll ever be a good player. There’s so much to think about, so much to plan, so many options – and that’s before you’ve even started to think about what your opponents have planned for you. But even in defeat I tend to walk away from the table thoroughly gamed-out and satisfied.

Is downtime an issue? Sure, a bit. Is military overpowered? Probably. Are some combos simply too good to stop? Sometimes. Will this game be staying on my shelves for the foreseeable future, even if I only get to play once or twice a year and I lose every time?

Absolutely.

* There is a ‘peaceful’ variant of the game some people play, but personally I can’t see the point. It’s such a huge part of Through the Ages that to take it out seems ridiculous – if you don’t want any player conflict in your games, I’d highly advise you to look elsewhere.

Game design: In search of a half decent football (‘soccer’) game concept, Part 1

SubbuteoBeyond the flicking genius of Subbuteo (pictured), the collective game design minds of the world have so far failed to create a compelling football game. But it must be possible.

The reason oft trotted out is that its impossible to emulate the excitement and energy of a team sport in which so much individual flair and energy is played out; while retaining the higher level of strategic thought that pre-match planning and management bring to each match.

But computer games have got around both of these issues, making either football management sims or fast-paced action games such as FIFA. But we have nothing of either that have made a splash in the board and card game arena. And what about skirmish board games and battle card games? How are they not emulating an exciting tactical situation with an underlying strategic edge?

Then there are commercial concerns. Hobby gamers have for years been earmarked as nerds and geeks only interested in basement games of fantasy battles and space ship combat. But the hobby is throwing off those shackles at a pretty decent rate now; surely there would be a big publisher ready to take a punt on a game with such huge crossover potential into the mainstream?

Football simulation problems: The pitch

sensible soccerAny sensible (pun intended) design conversation needs to start with the ground itself.

Minds immediately turn to hexes or quadrants, with each player represented with a meeple, card, detailed plastic minis (Kickstarted, natch) etc.

And so we run into our first problem: 22 players on the pitch. Controlling 11 people seems too many – especially when you take into consideration that only two or maybe three people will ever be directly affecting play. Positioning will become way too much of the game, making this very much a manager-level sim and losing too much of that all important feeling of energy.

Designers have of course gotten around this but tend to do so in one of two ways (and often both); which I have dubbed the Nintendo and Dilithium approaches:

  • The Nintendo way: Chibify the game, set it in the ‘street’ or the jungle or a school playground, and make it five-a-side – immediately alienating the vast majority of your original target audience and losing any semblance of ‘proper’ football in the process.
  • The Dilithium way: Give them swords! Make them robots! We can set it in the future or the past to get around those awkward offside rules and allow full body contact to make it exciting!! And then add EVEN MORE EXCITEMENT!!!

Note: There is absolutely nothing wrong with doing these things – it’s just not football.

In my mind, this situation harkens back to my original analogy of squad combat. That tends to have fewer than 11 pieces per side, and they can of course interact with each other far more often: that damnable ball is the problem. For me, this rules out the idea of a pitch, or board, or minis – sorry (we shall briefly pause to let the Kickstarter publishers slope out of the room).

Football simulation problems: The players vs the manager

BergkampThe real joy of football – as with many team sports – is that while both teams head out onto the pitch with a plan, set out by the manager and coaches, this needs to be executed by human beings: and with another bunch of human being trying to stop them.

Football is a chaotic sporting mash up of strategy and tactics defined by flawed individuals: and fans have an opinion on every single one of them. Players have strengths and weaknesses, both physical and mental, which are the absolute essence of the game. You can’t have a ‘proper’ football game without them.

It’s not easy to create a game system where 22 individuals will be different enough on paper to have a significantly varied effect on the outcome of the game. Where do you draw the line with stats? You can have attack, defence, midfield, goalkeeping – but what about stamina, temperament, ‘special powers’ – free kicks, penalties, leadership, flair…?

And that’s just two teams. Any football game worth its salt will want a good 8 teams to start with – and if things went well, more like 20+. That’s more than 200 players now. And what about referees, linesmen, pitch conditions, the effect of the fans?

And of course the manager. Beyond picking the team the manager should be having an effect on the pitch – will they encourage long ball, wing play, 4-4-2 or 3-5-2 – and what about substitutions, or reshaping the team after a sending off, or an injury? Oh yeah, I forgot about injuries. And can we really give up on the pitch idea completely?

Football simulation ideas (so far)

Brady top trumpA card game seems the obvious way forward. While dice feel like a good idea, the idea of random on top of random always turns me off in a game that should be at least 30 minutes long – and I feel a proper football game should go that distance or more.

To take it one more step, a collectible/living card game again seems obvious. Building a deck of 11 players chosen from a larger pool (perhaps 20 for a squad) would give the individuality required. Attack and defence stats may well be enough, with individual player ‘powers’ adding the all-important individuality.

These player cards would be bolstered with manager cards: tactics and special plays learnt on the training ground. And finally there can be situation cards, used to represent those moments you just can’t legislate for: the terrible tackle, the ‘bobble’, the amazing drive from 30 yards. And of course those contentious refereeing decisions.

I’m aware these three types of card are falling easily into stereotypes made so popular by the hugely successful Magic: The Gathering card game: the players are the ‘creatures’, manager cards the ‘enchantments’ and situation cards the ‘instants’. Frankly I’m comfortable with that, as I feel there will be divergence enough from this starting point.

The real challenge will be the elephant in the room: that bloody pitch. I’m thinking it could be represented by a single card or play matt, split into three simple areas – the two ends and midfield. A marker will show where the game is currently being played, with each turn ending with a battle for supremacy in the current area: a midfield or defensive win moves you forwards, while a win at your opponent’s end results in a chance.

But how will chances be resolved? Will there be some kind of cost to put cards out? And once out, how will they be removed from play – if at all? How about weather, or home advantage? All decision for another day.

Kickstart me baby! (sorry, no minies)

uncle moneybagsI’m putting myself on Kickstarter*. I reckon a £20,000 target should do it. And you’re all going to back me. Why? Because I’ve got a plan.

About 90 per cent of the games you’ve bought on Kickstarter are crap. And worse they have no resell value, because everyone knows they’re crap. So what’s the solution to all this wastage? It’s not as if you can STOP spending money on Kickstarter now is it?

That’s where I come in. For a mere £20,000 I could, just about, give up the day job. Sure, I’d be on the poverty line, but maybe things such as ‘food’ and ‘clothing’ could be bought if stretch goals were reached. Not that there would be any stretch goal rewards.

So what’s in it for you, I hear you ask? Because that’s what board game related Kickstarters are about, right? They’re not about taking a risk and helping someone try and fulfil their dream (and who might possibly fail). No. They’re about cold. Hard. Gain. But let’s for one minute pretend we’re not board game Kickstarter people – let’s pretend we’re normal Kickstarter people, who see the potential in something and take a (cheap) punt.

Here’s the deal. For just £20,000 (one 73rd of what Zombicide 2 made on Kickstarter, or one 31st of Sedition Wars) I could become a full-time game designer for a year. Instead of spending a few tired evenings each week after work trying to work on prototypes I could spend 40 or 50 (maybe more) hours each week dedicating everything I’ve got to design.

Of course I’ve not got much in the way of credentials to back me up right now. I’ve got one published game, Empire Engine, which has been pretty well received (well, it’s currently ranked higher that Sedition Wars on Board Game Geek); and another game is with a published and should be out in 2016 (too early for more details, sorry). But that’s one or two more games than many of the designers you backed on Kickstarter had, right?

The games I design will be put in front or real publishers with genuine track records in getting high quality games to market; publishers with experienced rules writers, graphic designers, game developers and playtesters – as well as strong relationships with manufacturers and distributors. And while some may take the games to Kickstarter anyway, at least they’ll be companies you know you can trust.

Of course there’s a risk that none of the games I design within the year get publishing deals: I’m not arrogant enough to guarantee success, but I could guarantee that I’d put everything I’ve got into making it work – my heart and soul. If you go in knowing that, so not expecting a physical product, how could you be disappointed if I give my all?

I’d be happy to blog regularly on my progress, the process and involve people in testing. I could even put questions out to backers when I had interesting problems or decisions to make. And imagine how great you would feel if I did get some games published: you’d really be a part of it, rather than just backing a game that’s already (allegedly) finished.

I expect I could even sort our some sort of discount on the games that did (in theory) make it to stores: I could probably sell them at little over cost to backers. But then I wouldn’t want to guarantee that, because then it’s all slipping back to commerce; about expecting results; about capitalism over creativity. Which is why this will stay a dream, rather than a reality. And that’s a shame.

I genuinely think this could work. I think it would take a designer with more clout than me to pull it off, and I think it would need cast iron guarantees of physical results for backers if it games were published. But as the success of Patrion, and Kickstarters for publishers such as The Dice Tower have shown, paying creatives a monthly wage is something some people are willing to do (for an end result).

As there’s little money in it for the average board game designer, people who want to make a living from it are essentially forced into making their own company and self-publishing – that’s where the most potential profit is. I doubt most of these people want to be dealing with manufacturers in China and shipping games out of their garages, while trying to price cards and chits and dice. They want to design; they have to sell.

Maybe in a generation or so the hobby will be popular enough to sustain the full-time development of game designers – either through increased revenue through higher royalties on sales, or from game publishers becoming cash-rich enough to take more designers onto staff (as Plaid Hat is now successfully doing). Until then, I guess I’ll stick with the day job.

* I’m not really.

For Sale: A four-sided game review

For Sale boxFor Sale is a light family card game designer by Stefan Dorra. It takes 20-30 minutes to play, accommodates three to six players well and can be picked up for well under £20.

As the name and box suggest this a game about buying and selling properties but don’t worry – there’s nothing to be scared of here, even if you don’t usually like auction/bidding games. As the game length suggests it’s not a brain burner: instead it’s light, fun and fast.

Inside the box you’ll find two decks of cards (properties and cash) and a set of coin tokens. Everything is high quality, the cards linen-finish and the tokens chunky, while the cartoon art on the property cards is really charming.

Teaching

For Sale round 1For Sale is a game of two halves, but both are simple to teach and learn. Even better you can teach each half when you get to it, giving players less to process and remember.

Everyone starts with a handful of coins and during round one these are spent to buy properties. Once all properties have been bought (every one will finish with the same amount) they’re sold for money in round two. The aim is to finish with as much money as possible.

Before each turn of round one a number of properties equal to the number of players is placed face up on the table. From their secret stash of coins players choose in turn to either up the current bid or take the lowest value card on show (and taking back half of any coins they’d bid so far). The ‘winning’ bid pays full price, but gets the best card.

Once all properties are bought, round two begins. This time a number of money cards equal to the number of players is placed face up on the table; players bid for them with the properties bought in round one. There is an identical number of property and money cards; each round players bid one of their properties and everyone flips them over at once (called a ‘blind bid’). You take a money card in ascending order, the best property taking the highest value money card.

The system is extremely elegant. All the property cards are valued differently (1-30) and there are two of each money card (two of each valued $0-15), meaning there is never any confusion over bids – while all the players get something each round. When all the properties are spent, you add up your money cards and see who won.

The four sides

For Sale componentsThese are me, plus three fictitious amalgams drawn from observing my friends, and their respective quirks and play styles.

  • The writer: While this may look like an overly simplistic game with an uninspiring theme (pretending to be an estate agent isn’t my idea of fun), For Sale is actually one of the best ‘filler’ games I’ve played. It ticks all the boxes: good player range, easy to teach, plays fast and keeps everyone involved throughout.
  • The thinker: I’m not prone to enjoying filler games as by their nature they tend to lack depth and strategy. If it were my choice I’d play something a more challenging, such as Hive or Blokus, but there’s no escaping the fact this is a well designed game and I’m happy to play when the occasion arises.
  • The trasher: You mean I get to buy and sell houses?! Goodie! But seriously there is some fun to be had with For Sale, as any bidding game is an opportunity for table talk. You can also try and psyche people out a bit in the second half and I’ve seen some real silly card-slapping-the-table action when the mood is good.
  • The dabbler: While I don’t like auction games, I do quite like this one as it has a few things going for it. First it’s great that you get something every round so never feel out of it or under pressure. Also the art is cute and for a game that plays ages 8+ that’s important – they’ve even gone the extra mile adding a different animal to each card for the younger ones (and the young at heart!) to find and talk about as you go.

Key observations

The most important thing to note is  this is an extremely highly regarded game. With more than 3,300 players giving this a comment and an ‘out of 10′ rating on Board Game Geek you have to get past 3,150 before you find rankings below 6.

Criticisms from those who really don’t like it label For Sale as “too simple” or “uninteresting” with “no hard decisions”; “too light”, or as just a “simple auction game”. To the wrong player For Sale will be all of these things, but as the numbers above show these people are the minority. I’d suggest avoiding this game only if you have a very severe reaction to one of these gaming ailments!

My only real issue, and it’s a small one, is price. The current edition is well produced and nicely packaged, but at 60 cards and 72 cardboard coins the price tag seems a little steep. It has been put in quite a large box to fit into Gryphon Games’ ‘Bookshelf Series’ but could live in a box half the size (and has previously). However similar games (such as recent release Diamonds) have a similar price point and I don’t see it as a barrier to entry.

Conclusion

For Sale round 2I was introduced to For Sale at a London on Board gaming meetup and fell for it on my first play. It went into my collection soon after and had regular plays for a long time after.

But in 2013 it didn’t see a single play, as my regular gaming groups didn’t really do old fillers; then in 2014 it returned to the table with a bang when I got involved in a local group which includes a lot of less rabid gamers. It has gone down a storm with gamers and newbies alike, rekindling my own enthusiasm for the game.

No game is truly a ‘must have’, as opinions and tastes vary so much, but For Sale would certainly be a contender for a top 10 ‘Swiss army knife’ of titles that would meet all your gaming needs. I’ve played a lot of fillers before and after, but very few have the staying power of this classic.

For more filler and family games check out my board game ‘Where to start‘ guide.

Designer and critic: Does one have to give?

reality checkAs a journalist and all-round gobshite I’ve spent my career (and social life) ‘generously’ giving my opinion to anyone who would listen.

This is fine when you’re a third party; when I was reviewing music, for example, all I had to worry about after writing a scathing review was the occasional poorly spelt threat from the bass player. I wasn’t in a band, so reputation wasn’t an issue. If anything, writing something controversial was likely to get you noticed – often a good thing.

Of course nowadays I’m all about the board games. I’m 30+ reviews and lots of opinion pieces in; but now my first game design is out there, with hopefully more to come. So should I draw the line on reviews? Or what might I lose by carrying on?

Taking it on the chin

I was chatting with the Cardboard Console guys the other day (check them out of you like board and computer games) and they asked about reading the comments made about our game, Empire Engine, on Board Game Geek. They said, if it were them, bad reviews would make them super angry: did I read them all?

The truth is yes, I read them all – good and bad. and I watch the videos and listen to all the audio (which is tricky, as it might be a two-minute brush off in the middle of a poorly edited three-hour podcast). And do they make me mad? Nope, not at all.*

It would be contrary of me to criticise others for having an opinion when I’ve earned a living out of spouting mine; and having spent my working life in creative environments, I’m used to criticism. But any design process can be a hard, long and personal and its easy to see why some people find it hard to separate emotionally from that.

So lets say someone has a bad review and they’re pissed. Some will internalise it and have hurt feelings; but others will take that anger and run with it. This can take us back to our angry bass player, threatening scenarios you can just laugh off; but its the smart ones you have to worry about – especially when you’re starting to put some tentative paws into the very industry you’re biting the hand of.

There is no law

You’d think a well balanced review, explaining its reasoning while critiquing opposite opinions, would put you on safe ground. Don’t kid yourself. There are some vindictive, nasty bastards out there. I’ve seen people go on personal crusades to rubbish someone they’d heard criticise them, even if it was an unarguable truth.

One bad review can see you struck off the mailing list of a PR company or manufacturer. You’re then left with the dilemma of integrity versus acceptance; the right versus the easy way out. As a new member of the designers club, this comes even more into focus.

Let’s get hypothetical. I criticise Game A by Designer A, from publisher A – and both take vindictive exception. Designer A goes and gives all my games a 2 out of 10, writes bad reviews and starts to bad mouth me to his designer friends. Publisher A refuses any meetings with me to see my prototypes, while suggesting to other publishers I’m trouble. A bad rep can spread like wildfire in a small community; soon I’m pariah number one.

I’ve seen how friendly this industry is – and it genuinely is exceptional. But then I also listen when people have a few beers, and read between some of the 140 characters on Twitter. Yes it’s a nice industry, but the people in it are only human.

Right and wrong

So what of the moral side? Forget personal consequences – what’s the right thing to do? I mean, why would you want to upset someone in the first place? Especially your piers.

I’m probably not the right person to ask, as my moral compass has been called into question on occasion, but I believe if you think something sucks and people listen to you, you have a duty to say so. Alternatively, you can simply bow gracefully out of the game.

Personally I’m going to stick to writing nice reviews here, while writing pithy 20-word criticisms on BGG when something gets my goat. As I do about one review per month and haven’t been sent a single freebie (bastards) its hard to write a bad review – I don’t buy games blind and if I do play a crap game I tend to play it once then run for the hills.

But if free games start turning up (please!) I’d feel duty bound to review them all – and honestly. At that point, I’d have to think again; do I really want to be that guy?

* OK, maybe they do a bit; but ironically it’s only really the rating number that annoys me, not the words: every 3 or 4 rating brings the average down significantly right now and is hindering the game rising up the rankings. So stop it. Please 🙂

What does the rise and rise of Asmodee mean for the board game industry?

Logo_AsmodéeI listened to board game industry commentators largely gloss over the recent acquisitions of Days of Wonder and Fantasy Flight by Asmodee Group with interest.

The vast majority of responses seemed to be, “Well that’s good huh?” with very little actual thought put into the topic. Naysayers tended to be brushed off as fear mongers, seemingly due to the fact Asmodee is seen in the industry as a good egg.

On a superficial level, you can simply read the press release and agree with the publishers that this is purely a US/EU buyer/gamer win/win – everyone will benefit from increased resources, distribution channels etc etc on their opposite side of the pond.

Now I’m no expert, but I’d like to put a few things out there for debate. I don’t think this is something we should just accept and move along from without digging a little deeper into the possible ramifications.

Euraze-who?

While everyone and his meeple announced this as the gaming news story of 2014, very few spoke about the fact 2014 also saw French private equity firm Eurazeo buy an 83.5% stake in Asmodee for €98m – making it just another portfolio company in its €6bn stable of assets. While we were innocently talking about the possibility of slightly cheaper Star Wars minis on our local games store, the business press were talking about a possible new contender on the high street for Hasbro and Mattel.

I recently read an old article from the Harvard Business Review titled The Consolidation Curve. It looks at new or deregulated industries and how they have a “clear consolidation life cycle” with your average successful industry taking around 25 years to move through it fully. And this is every every industry, so there is no reason to suggest board (or should I say hobby) games will be any different.

Very briefly (I’m no business grad), this curve moves through four stages:

  1. Opening: After one or a few companies start the industry, their market share quickly drops to between 10-30% of the market as competitors arise – start-ups and spin-offs, plus consolidating companies from other industries.
  2. Scale: Major players emerge and buy competitors. The top three grow back to 15-45% market share as the industry consolidates. It’s all about protecting a core culture while taking and keeping the best people and products in the industry.
  3. Focus: Aggressive expansion sees the top three empires grow to control 35-70% of the industry, while there will generally be 5-12 players in the market. It’s now about global deals, profitability and the eradication of under performers.
  4. Balance and alliance: The big three now have 70-90% of the profit and concentrate on alliances, as there’s nothing left to grow into. It’s about defending their position, while looking for areas to branch out into – while avoiding regulation.

I think there’s an argument that says we have just moved into phase 2, ‘Scale’, and that our third industry ‘major player’ has begun to put its stall out.

Is it fair to say we now have Mattel, Hasbro and Asmodee?

The wrinkle point in these four stages, in terms of hobby games, is it was very much a cottage industry – but it has always been a little brother to a giant: high street toys and games. But now we can see the rising tide in terms of sales, boosted by a mainstream media softening towards nerds thanks to smartphones and tablets. It was only a matter of time before a big investment firm took a punt on the industry – and is it any surprise 2014 was also the year we saw Mattel dipping its toe back into euros at Essen with Bania?

Using the UK as an example, where Mattel and Hasbro had things sewn up was the high street; but even this has started to change. Non-traditional stores such as book shops have started to take hobby games seriously, while board game cafes and bars are starting to appear – let alone booming online sales. So where are people getting these games from? Well the UK hobby games distribution market has been sewn up by Esdevium, but don’t worry – it’s in safe hands of its owner, Asmodee.

The quote you hear all the time from the board game media is “you don’t go into the board game industry to make money” – but what they don’t add on the end is, “unless you’re going into manufacturing or distribution”. These firms employ creative people, of course, but they’re first and foremost businesses: just like film studios or record companies, they rely on exploiting (as in – making full use of) the talents they sign to make profit.

Mattel and Hasbro work in the same way. Designers are employees, not people worthy of having their names on game boxes. They work within the confines of a business remit for a product, rather than having total creative control, and work to deadlines. None of these things are intrinsically bad; they’re just not ideal for free spirited hobbyists, or people doing these things for the love rather than to pay the mortgage.

When will me move from ‘scale’ to ‘focus’?

There are so many questions. Will Asmodee work towards a similar structure to compete with these two gaming behemoths on an even footing? Will other conglomerates of gaming companies form to try and compete with them on a global distribution scale, creating the 5-12 ‘focus’ stage players? Is the upward trend of hobby games too slow to see this happen in the next five years – or is it actually a blip, that will see sales decline and enthusiasm wane from such big investors (which could of course have its own ramifications)?

From both a designer and customer perspective, these will be interesting times. An obvious move would be to see a smaller range of games being released each year from a shrinking number of players, but these games being released in bigger volumes as the popularity of the hobby increases.

This would drive price-per-unit down and force games on lower print runs into niches or bankruptcy – which, judging on the quality of many one-and-done Kickstarter projects, wouldn’t be a problem and will probably happen anyway as people come to their senses. But then of course there is the rise of the digital space and the possible love-love relationship that should blossom between 3D printing and print-and-play. There are just so many possibilities!

Of course I’m sure this article will be labelled naive, and I’ve already admitted I’m no expert – but if helps create a bit of debate on the subject that goes beyond giving this news a ‘Story of the Year’ award then I’m happy with that. I’m keen to learn more on the topic, and about the industry, so here’s to healthy debate.

Deus: A four-sided game review

Deus boxDeus is a civilisation building board/card game that mixes tableau building with a little bit of tactical play on a modular board.

The game is good for two to four players and only takes about an hour with two (up to two with more) which is impressive for a game that does give you that civ-building feel in a package much shorter than normal.

What it doesn’t do is span the generations. You’ll be firmly set in the classical era, building temples and academies while fighting barbarians. There is also limited player interaction in the form of military units, but they’re used to snipe small numbers of victory points and resources rather than take board position. Combat is certainly not essential.

While the quality of Deus’ art and design style are open to debate (see ‘key observations’ below) the card and board stock are good quality and the graphic design is clean (£35-40 seems a fair price). The modular board makes for a slightly different game experience each time, and while the cards are a little limited in terms of variety (I very much hope card expansions beckon) the way you can combo them still makes each game very interesting.

Teaching

Deus cardsMost gamers will soon pick up what’s going on in Deus, but that’s not to say it lacks originality. It uses familiar mechanisms but in ingenious ways, which seems to be at the heart of most of the best recent games. It’s a bit more than a gateway game, but I’d put it in the light-to-medium complexity range.

It’s very much a ‘cards with words’ game, but Deus has an elegance and simplicity that mean most cards only have about 10 words to read – and better still, I’ve had no one so far questioning the meaning of this text. In terms of teaching, it’s joyfully simple.

On your turn you have two choices: play a card to your tableau and matching building to the board (you have to have the correct building type to be able to play the card), or discard some/all of your cards to gain a special action (which is better the more cards you discard) and refill your hand with cards (usually five).

There are six colours of cards, each with its own light theme (boats tend to be good for trade, workshops for resources etc) – when you play a card into your tableau, you do its action. But what Deus really brings to the party is that when you later lay more cards in the same colour you get to do all of their actions, which rewards clever combo building. But you are limited to five cards per colour, so these clever combos don’t last forever.

Deus boardPlacing buildings is also simple in execution: you start from the edge of the board and subsequent placements move out from there (think Terra Mystica, not Small Worlds). You can place multiple of your own pieces in one space, but they must be of different types.

Scoring and resource/money gathering cards tend to reward you for having multiple buildings on the same tile, but spreading out is equally tempting tactically – to block opponents and destroy barbarian villages.

Far from being a booby prize for a bad hand, special actions can be essential and planning them well can win you the game. They are again simple to explain: a player simply discards as many cards as they wish and choose one of these cards to trigger its colour’s special action (taking either extra resources, victory points, money, cards or buildings).

The game ends when either all the barbarian villages are destroyed (done by surrounding them on the map) or all temples are placed (these are special buildings that reward you with end-game victory points).

The four sides

Deus full tableauThese are me, plus three fictitious amalgams drawn from observing my friends, and their respective quirks and play styles.

  • The writer: I love a good tableau-builder, as evidenced by 200+ plays of Race for the Galaxy, and after playing Deus once it was an insta-buy. While it lacks the vast range of cards that sets Race apart it makes up for it with the combos and board play – exactly the kind of extra elements San Juan was sadly lacking in.
  • The thinker: There was definitely enough here to have me both strategically and tactically engaged, while the option to discard a bad hand but also benefit soundly from it was a master stroke. However I’m unsure of its potential long term without expansions, as while fine so far I can see strategic options wearing thin over time.
  • The trasher: While it’s no Race, Deus is a solid game I’m happy to play. Much like Race, going military can make for a short tactical game that can surprise people, while who doesn’t like the satisfaction of a smart card combo going off – and then going off again a few more times for good measure?
  • The dabbler: While the game is a bit ‘heads down’ for me, as there’s lots of reading to do and plans to be hatched, I did enjoy my plays. Its simple, bright and colourful with a low barrier to entry, but offers something to the more wizened gamer. I won on my second play against experienced opponents, showing the game isn’t all about ‘best player wins’ – but as its only an hour-ish, you can just go again!

Key observations

Deus colour issueSeveral people have pointed out Deus’ solitary nature, describing it as a heads-down game with little interaction. This is largely fair comment and those looking for player versus player action need not apply. However you do need your head in the game as it doesn’t have a fixed end point – while board position can very much make a difference.

Another fair-ish comment is there’s too high a dependency on getting the right card combos, making the game too random. While I’ve certainly seen people get very lucky with their draws while others have floundered, this is not a long game and can very much be played back-to-back in a session – and its no more a problem than in your average card game. Also, I find the discard action does help mitigate this issue nicely.

Some claim the game is downright ugly, while others have complained about a component error. To clear the latter up, the game comes with brown discs for ‘wood’ while the wood symbol is green on the cards. This is apparently a good thing for the colour blind and for the rest of us its a mild inconvenience. As for the ugliness, I think its harsh. Be your own judge, but if its enough to make you walk away from a very good game then more fool you.

The final point, and in my mind the most serious one, is variability. Interesting that a game accused of being too random is also accused of lacking variable strategies, but there you go. Anyway, I too am concerned that over time the game may get repetitive. I intend to deal with this by not overplaying it, but if you’re someone with a small collection who plays each of their games a lot it may be worth waiting for expansion news – unless this sort of game is right in your ballpark, then I’d say go for it anyway.

Conclusion

Deus tableauDeus is an elegant, streamlined tableau building game that for me fires on all cylinders. It’s the best new game I played in 2014, feeling like a lighter Terra Mystica with added card combo action – which just about ticks all of my favourite boxes.

Having been pretty disappointed with the ‘alien orb’ part of the recent Race for the Galaxy expansion, it’s interesting to see a much better implementation of a board here.

And having got bored fast with San Juan, it’s also nice to see how this extension can add just enough to a simple card game to give it the extra legs it needs to hold my interest.

I’ll be waiting with baited breath for expansion news, but as Deus is already knocking on the door of the BGG top 500 I’m sure it will sell well enough to merit one. Until then I’ll do my best not to play it to death… but just one more game tonight can’t hurt, can it?

The best of 2014, part 2: My top board and card gaming experiences

Empire Engine AEG main picThere’s no doubt 2014 was another big board-gaming year for me. What I’d thought about as an obsession has just become the norm, but I’m comfortable with that. I’m loving and contributing to the hobby, so who cares? It’s a brilliant community and I’m proud to be part of it.

My 6 best gaming experiences of 2014

In no particular order:

  • Paros 2012 041Paros: Our second trip to board gaming paradise to this beautiful Greek island was very different to our first, but I found it equally enjoyable. There wasn’t the same sense of adventure and exploration, while some bad news leading to an absentee made it a little sombre, but t the same time we totally relaxed and just swam, gamed and ate/drank. Our hosts were again amazing, we played 20+ games (many off of my ‘to play’ wishlist) and I really hope we can go back again – hopefully in 2016.
  • Essen: I’ve written plenty about my third trip to Essen in previous posts, so won’t say much here. I certainly hope to get some kind of pass (press/exhibitor) again in future as it was a major advantage in traversing crowds; and with the promise of the Empire Engine German edition in 2015 I’ve already got my hotel booked for next year! I won’t stay beyond the Sunday though – it proved a bit much, even for me.
  • Oxford: Empire Engine also gave me, Zoe and Matt an excuse to go to Oxford for a weekend to try and promote the game at the UK’s premier board game cafe, Thirsty Meeples. While we didn’t do much with the game, it was Zoe and my first proper touristy trip to Oxford, which was lovely, and the cafe was amazing. We’ll definitely be back to both, hopefully next year some time.
  • France 2014 the gangFrance: LoB buddy Tom invited a group of fellow gamers to stay at his family’s cottage in the south of France for a few days of country air and gaming – and lovely it was too. I ended up playing 36 games in four days, which included plenty of breaks for great food, booze and a lovely walk to find a TV and watch some World Cup footie. Would be great to do this again one day soon (if you’re reading Tom…).
  • Home and away: While I failed to get much game evangelising in this year, we did at least have some really nice weekends of gaming with like-minded gaming couples – namely Karl & Ann and Paul & Donna. This proved to be a lovely blend of walking, boozing, eating and gaming both in St Ives and London and are they very much on the agenda for 2015. I only wish I’d thought about things earlier and arranged something for New Year’s Eve – again, it’s firmly in my mind for the end of next year.
  • Eastbourne: Once again, my two trips to Eastbourne for gaming weekends-on-sea with the London on board regulars were great fun. Zoe only came to the Easter one this year, leaving me to fend for myself in November. Both were great in different ways and I think the plan is now set for following Eastbourne trips, as long as we keep getting invited.
  • St Ives Board Game Group: While Zoe and me have enjoyed our first full year in St Ives, we haven’t exactly integrated into the community. Generally it’s your typical town and people seem to have known each other for years, so while friendly enough it never feels very open. So it was great when this board game group started up and I got to meet some like-minded individuals – and they’re the ‘normal’ kind of folk too, not the weirdy nerdy ones (well, mostly). Long may it continue.

My top individual game plays of 2014

Deus boxI stopped doing my gaming year blog on BGG in October as it was taking too much time; but I’m still recording my plays there and including a little bit of extra info on each play. Here are my choices of month-by-month playing highlights:

  • January: It’s nice to be reminded how much you like  game, and doing this list has brought Manhattan Project back into my mind through all those shiny new Essen releases. Andy, Carl and me had a great close and tense game back in January that I won on 62 points – but both the other guys would’ve won on their next turns.
  • February: It was a year liberally sprinkled with great couply games weekends, but the gaming highlight was a game of Concordia with Ann, Karl and Zoe at ours. I won a wonderfully tight game that saw the four of us separated by just 12 points.
  • March: Sci-fi behemoth Twilight Imperium, bought for Andy’s 50th, took the March crown. I somehow talked people out of beating me to a pulp while sneakily lining a few points up. Just when I thought the game was up I survived another round unmolested and walked into the last territory I needed. It won’t happen again.
  • April: Finally getting my own copy of Brass, getting it to the table, then Zoe enjoying it, was brilliant – but a more typical game of ours stood out: A really close two-player game of Castles of Burgundy on a quiet evening in with a bottle of wine. The new games, the holidays, the get-togethers – all awesome. But that’s what it’s all about.
  • May: Our trip to Paros was lovely, and we played plenty of thinky games, but the stand out experiences were silly games of Cash ‘n’ Guns and Tumblin’ Dice. The former was purely daft fun, while the latter shows that it’s not impossible for me to be good at the occasional dexterity game. 
  • June: Another title was knocked off my ‘classics I need to play’ list in Manhattan – a beautifully nasty and stripped down area control abstract that was the first board game in ages I demanded back-to-back goes at after loving it the first time. Honourable mention to outdoor game Molki, which I bought after falling in love with.
  • July: I’d wanted to play Lords of Vegas for years – and when I finally did, it blew my mind. I played against two seasoned vets (Martin and Rocky) who showed me the depth the game can go to; I was purely along for the ride. Luckily both helped me along, I’m sure to their own ends, but Martin won out. And a mention for a great game of Letters to Whitechapel at the St Ives Board Game Group, where we failed miserably to capture a very sneaky Dan but had great fun trying.
  • August: Two great début experiences, with Formula D just beating off Dead of Winter for top spot. I was down and out going into the big final corner, second last of seven. But as it transpired I was the only player who could get into the outside lane and had luckily got the gears just right, letting me sling shot around the outside for an unlikely win. Shake and bake!
  • September: The beauty of Ra is its unpredictability – and September saw the perfect example. I had a strong looking tile set going into the last round, but not much could make it better. I grabbed things early but thought the time left would let Carl and Andy prosper – only to see a crazy string of Ra tiles scupper them both.
  • October: Essen and Eastbourne – what a month and so hard to pick a winner. My first games of both Deus and Caverna were amazing, but it was my plays of ebbes and First to Fight that stole the show. Both were played wit the designers, both were both fun and funny, while both were also fantastically entertaining games that I subsequently bought. Absolutely what Essen is all about.
  • November: Two variants of games I’d looked forward to a lot shared November’s prize. Basari: Das Kartenspiel was everything I’d wanted it to be (Basari in a little box while losing nothing), while the finished version of Snowdonia: The Necropolis Railway was everything Zoe and me had helped make it become in testing. Mage Wars with LoB friend Paul was also a very close contender and if I hadn’t been counting the minutes before I’d had to go home, rather than enjoying a relaxing beer, this may have taken it.
  • December: Matt Dunstan does, compared to me, have a big fizzing brain and I think he expects to beat me at any strategy game we play. At Thirsty Meeples in Oxford I taught him and manager John Deus – a game I’d played twice before. Matt started getting pretty smug half way through as the points rolled in, but I had a pretty good engine of my own going. In the final tally I’d beaten him into second by three points and oh boy, was his face a picture. I just wish he’d said, “does not compute” in a robot voice. He was genuinely surprised and yes, sadly enough it made my day.

My most played games in 2014

Race for the GalaxyIt was another year of experiments, as out of more than 500 total game plays in 2014 more than 130 were games I only played once.

When you add more than 100 plays of unpublished prototypes, that’s almost half my plays.

Only a few games made double figures again this year, with two games holding their places in the top three – but being separated by one cheeky new entry…

  • 18 – Race for the Galaxy (22 in 2013 and ‘most played’ every year ever)
  • 16 – Empire Engine
  • 12 – Ticket to Ride (13 in 2013 and still my go-to gateway)
  • 10 – Can’t Stop 

While this looks a bit grim for my top titles, lots of my favourite euros games were on or around five plays including Deus, Snowdonia, Bora Bora, Copycat, Terra Mystica and Concordia. With such a big collection, it stands to reason I’m having to spread them thin! But no, it’s not something I’m totally happy with – especially when I look at some of the crap games I was subjected to in 2014!

I really don’t think this will look the same next year. I already feel as if I want to spend more time playing the games I really like, while I’ve got a lot of ‘must play’ titles off my wishlist in the last couple of years. I’ve also signed up to the ‘33×3 Challenge‘ on Board Game Geek, which aims to get you to play 33 games 3 times each during 2015. This will hopefully encourage me to get a bunch of my favourites to he table more often.

Looking back to 2013

Merchant of VenusAfter 10 plays of Kingdom Builder in 2013, I only played twice this year. Lost Valley again failed to hit the table in 2014, while Merchant of Venus and Tikal – two of my favourite new games last year – were played a lot less than I’d predicted. But these are all on the aforementioned ’33×3′ list, so should see some more love this year!

Cuba and Earth Reborn had also gone unplayed through 2013 and I’ve since traded Cuba, while Earth Reborn won’t be far behind. They’re both good games, but the former feels too much like work while the latter I simply can’t see myself playing – I’d need a regular partner and that’s simply not going to happen. At least I managed four games of For Sale – I still can’t quite believe I didn’t play it all in 2013.

Bring on 2015!

As I mentioned above, the German release of Empire Engine this year already has me excited about next year’s trip back to Essen. It may even arrive in another language or two, which would be amazing. Also, as we’re not off to Paros in 2015, I’m hoping to go to my first UK Games Expo in Birmingham in May – even if only for a day to check it out and maybe give Empire Engine a little push there too.

I also have a couple of 2014 prototypes still with publishers, so there’s also the chance  follow up may also be at Essen too – but that would probably be too much to ask for! I do intend to stick at  designing games though; but I’m not ramping that up at all, as much as I’d like to (although working on an expansion for someone else’s game is a distinct and exciting possibility). It just doesn’t seem financially viable right now.

I’m also hoping to leverage the ‘designer’ tag a little, especially in terms of getting myself onto some podcasts in 2015. I have spoken agreements to get on as a guest for two already and if they go well, who knows? Maybe I’ll look to start doing something a little more permanent. I’ve enjoyed radio when I’ve done it in the past, so why not?

As for new purchases I really am going to try and rein them in, but when I haven’t I said that? But I may actually keep the promise this year. If nothing else, this year has taught me that I have a lot of awesome games on my shelves that I don’t play enough and that i’d love not to be rubbish at!

Part 1 here!

* For previous entries, see my 2012 and 2013 posts.

The best of 2014, part 1: My best new (and ‘new to me’) games

Deus boxMy collection now stands at 150 games (up 20 or so), which I’m fine with. I’m not keen on it getting much bigger though; and the proof is having actually sold some this year, as well as trading some away.

December 7 saw my 500th game play of 2014 – 50+ more than 2013 and 100+ more than 2012. I mainly put that down to more chances to binge play (long weekends etc) rather than a general daily change in my activity (more on those trips below).

I don’t see 2014 as a vintage year for new releases, although there are of course a lot of titles I’ve not played (heavy euros like Panamax and Kanban spring to mind). But I’ve been happy with the ones I’ve bought and many others I’ve played that were new to me.

The best 12 not new but ‘new to me’ games of 2014

I always intend this list to be a top 10, but can never quite boil it down. Maybe next year – surely there can’t be that many old games I’m going to love I’m yet to discover? Bah, who am I kidding…

Bought

  • Navegador: As a fan of Mac Gerdts’ rondel games it was a crime I hadn’t played this title, considered by many to be his best. It took about about five minutes to fall for it, and it was in my collection a few weeks later.
  • Brass: I managed to pick this classic up in a trade and it was in perfect condition. I’ve only played it once since – which is the main reason I need to par down my buying. I have to get this game, and others, to the table more.
  • Bora Bora: This Feld passed me by in 2013 but has since become one of my favourites. While accusations of ‘point salad’ are true they’re also lazy; the underlying tensions here take it above many of his other complex titles.
  • That’s Life!: Roll and move! Who knew it could be fun for adults too? This is daft, light and fast while giving some shout/laugh out loud moments in every game. It hasn’t failed me yet with all kinds of groups.
  • Uptown (AKA Blockers): I grabbed this on a whim as it was cheap on Board Game Guru and it turned out to be a real winner. A light abstract that plays well with 2 or 4 players (I’ve not tried with 3 or 5), it packs a lot of decisions into 30 minutes.

Not bought (yet…)

CavernaThis is in order, top to bottom, of likeliness that I’ll have them before next year’s list:

  • Caverna: Like Agricola, but with much of the decision space moved away from the start of the game and the reliance on a food engine almost totally removed. It’s niggling away at my wallet and I’m unlikely to be able to resist…
  • Manhattan: This put my nose out of joint at Essen. This old classic was on secondhand stalls at 12 euros on day one – then went up! I held out to get it at 10 or less and blew it. Next year, I’ll bite the bullet for sure.
  • Age of Empires III: This was one of the best games I played in 2013 but is currently out of print. The new version should be landing in 2015 though; and if it does, I’ll either grab a cheap old one or buy the new edition.
  • Tumblin’ Dice: I have a great outdoor game in Molky, but no indoor dexterity game. I’ve played this twice now and have loved it both times – but it’s £50. Like Caverna, this one keeps reminding me it’s not on my shelves.
  • Africana: If I can find a reasonably priced copy of this, or grab it in a trade, I’ll snap it up. As much as I enjoyed it though, I’m not sure it’s worth the £30 price tag. It’s a light family pick-up-and-deliver building game, which I’m well covered for.
  • Lords of Vegas: Much like Africana, I’d love to have a copy of this but I don’t think I can justify the price for the amount of play it would get. So again, it’s going to be a lucky cheap copy find, or a trade.
  • Ticket to Ride – Marklin Edition: Talking of justifications – how do I justify getting another Ticket to Ride map; especially when it’s a full-price standalone version? I loved the passenger element, but would it get much play?

There were some games I really enjoyed in 2014 that I have no intention of buying, but hope to play more – the best being Le Havre, Tammany Hall and Twilight Imperium 3.

Of last year’s ‘not bought… yet’ list I have since been given Twilight Struggle as a fantastically generous gift (thanks Peter!), while picking up a copy of the new mini version of Basari at Essen. Both are real favourites and I’m chuffed to now own them.

I’ve cooled a little on Lady Alice and Dungeon Lords; the former because I’ve had a few duff games (where players have got info wrong, so ruined it) and the latter because I haven’t played it since and oddly haven’t been compelled to (maybe another play will put it back on the radar). Arabian Nights is great, but it seems like the kind of game I only need to play occasionally – and several people I know and enjoy gaming with own it.

Not much to say on expansions, but I think The Necropolis Line for Snowdonia is the best new version of this great game I’ve played so far.

My 5 favourite new releases of 2014

el gaucho gameI’m not going to be talking ‘best of’ here as there are many important 2014 releases I haven’t played: Five Tribes, Marvel Dice Masters, Abyss, Panamax, Alchemists. But then again, none of these really look like they’ll do it for me.

I was underwhelmed by diamonds, Istanbul and Splendor, although I’d happily play them again. I need more plays of Dead of Winter to really make my mind up, while Castles of Mad King Ludwig had some great elements but some misfiring ones too.

Instead, these are games I’ve bought (except Red7 – but I will soon) because they sounded right up my street and have proved to be so:

  1. Deus: Tableau building card games are right up my street and this one packs a lot of both tactical and strategic decisions into an hour of play. Opinions vary on its looks (I think it’s fine if unexceptional) and some of the components/colours are a bit dodgy, but as a quick civ-style game I think it ticks all the right boxes.
  2. El Gaucho: A Yahtzee-style dice mechanism meets set collection with a fun theme and lovely components, and at a cheap-ish price – great stuff. Again it plays out in about an hour but this works well as a gateway game, while still having something to offer more experienced players.
  3. Johari: This set collection game again plays out in an hour, is also OK as a gateway and offers a little more depth if you look for it. Unfortunately it has that slightly dull ‘gems’ theme (see Splendor, Istanbul) and people I’ve played with like it rather than love it, but I really like the clever use of turn order as a key mechanism.
  4. Red7: This is a very simple and cheap filler card game that can play as quickly as 10 minutes, but has some interesting and original mechanisms – you have to be winning by the end of your turn, or you’re out. Will it lose its lustre when the novelty runs thin? Possibly, but I’ve found it really engaging so far.
  5. Ancient Terrible Things: Another Yahtzee-style dice roller, this one has a Cthulhu theme and some lovely artwork alongside enough original ideas and decisions to make it interesting. There are certainly question marks over the price point for a game that’s essentially pretty light, but beyond that it’s a winner.

Best forgotten…

Last year I listed Race for the Galaxy: Alien Artefacts as a disappointment again after two years as a know-show. Unfortunately it is making the list here for a third and final time, as the actual ‘Alien Artefacts’ part of the expansion was a real disappointment. The extra cards were pretty good, making a very quick game when added to the base set, but overall – for something I’d waited years for – it was OK, but largely forgettable.

Camel Up was disappointing, but nothing compared to the dreadful mess that was Imperial Settlers – a game with a high BGG rating that leads me to believe people have either played it once and not realised its massive flaws; or that players are, frankly, stupid. Madame Ching was equally dreadful, but is at least getting the poor ratings it deserves.

Part 2 here!

* For previous entries, see my 2012 and 2013 posts.