Ruthless Review

Ruthless, from Alley Cat Games is very much like a firework.  Not the type of firework that goes off randomly at 11:36pm on a Thursday night in March, waking the dog up, and thus you.  No, Ruthless is like a firework in that despite the fact you’ve played many other deck builders, this one will make you go “Ooohhh”, like you do when watching fireworks, despite having seen many fireworks go off before.

I mean yes, it is very, very, very pretty to look at and let’s face it, the incredible box art is one of the reasons you picked it from the shelf, it’s the reason you had a look for a review to help validate your choice in-game purchase.  Rest assured the Ooohhing only starts with the artwork.

Simply put, you’ll win if you have the most notoriety after a number of rounds.  You’ll claim these Notoriety Points after each round if you have the strongest crew, the strongest crew being the best poker-style hand of cards.

You’ll play doubloons from your hand to trade them in for coins, use the coins to hire pirates from the Tavern to add to your play area and then your deck (or if you want to be thematic to your Deck and your deck).   You can use your Powder Monkeys (part of your starting hand) to bury those cards you don’t want anymore or use them to explore for Treasure, or even just send them to have a punch-up in the Tavern and get rid of the card you know your opponent wants.  So far, so deck builder.

Once all players have used their hand of cards, the pirates are mustered.  The new ones that have now been fully initiated into your crew, and those that you played throughout your turn, are now all arranged to be the meanest bunch of salty sea dogs to ever take to the waves…and by this, I mean arranged neatly into pairs, or straights or flushes, because pirates always look scarier when they are colour coordinated with the one another #TrueStory

From the outset, it all seems so simple, so straightforward, but each pirate card is not only going to be part of a rank system, nor part of a suit, but the pirates, when played or recruited will spring into action.  These actions make the main body of the game, adding both an internal conflict and to the player interaction: you’ll be able to attack your opponent, forcing them to lose cards; you’ll be able to retrieve cards lost to your discard; pick up extra coins or treasure; basically, loads of stuff.  It is this combination of rank, suit, and ability that makes Ruthless so enjoyable.

With every card played you’ll have to think about the long and short-term tactics, and in a slightly uncharacteristic fashion, these pirates are ushering you to think that way each time they are played. Their worth is only realised in the company they keep, their individual ability, although very “powerful” can only become a strategy if you have others of the same suit or rank, as ultimately it is the scoring that matters.

The final scoring naturally matters most, but noteworthy here that it isn’t necessarily the round winners that win the game. You know that saying about losing a battle to win the war?  Each game can be littered with winners.  In the end, you can lose, but not feel robbed, remembering that round where you scored 25 points with that mega flush.  With this comes a sense of achievement, of knowing that for at least one round your deck worked!  Just not often enough.

With any deck builder, there is the opportunity for optimisation, for finding the combinations of cards that just work well together, so if that is your cup of tea then Ruthless certainly won’t disappoint. But as cards of the same rank don’t all have the same ability, you’ll realise quickly that your plans need to be able to pivot, twist and parry like any good swashbuckler.  There is no card that is universally better than another, sure the higher ranking cards often offer some more powerful actions, and the Captain and Quartermaster also come with their own Notoriety Points, but—just as with poker—ace high is a rubbish hand.

I rarely find myself hunting and hoping for that one elusive card, Ruthless gives you options hand over hook, which cards to play and in which order, how to best use the pirate cards in your hand and how quickly can you buy that one you need.  Each round is made up of these tiny little choices, tiny little costs and that’s how this game will get under your skin.  From the outset, the plan is simple, but each step along that path is paved with seemingly innocuous choices.  Even the flipping treasure cards have a choice!  This all contributes to an overarching structure of action for the game, which despite all these little decisions you’ll be making, the pace never slows, the drama of the game builds turn by turn.

There’s a pseudo-narrative here, with the first two rounds being all set-up as players need to recruit quickly and heavily, and as you move into the middle of the game, the action and interaction heats up.  Now your recruiting, treasure hunting and blocking is more focused, more deliberate.  This all builds (hopefully) for the final act, as all those loose strands are pulled together, tightly bound in fortune and planning to create a concrete tactic and well-balanced deck, but it’s one that has grown naturally with you in the game.

Ruthless manages to feel familiar and new all at once, deftly dodging that games-ja-vu feeling and instead hits that sweet spot of familiarity without drowning in its theme or core mechanic.  It has an exciting and engaging arc as you turn a bunch of Powder Monkeys and a few doubloons into a dynamic and rollicking band of pirates with enough variety to grant a multitude of options for any play style.  The familiarity makes the game very easy to teach, the artwork makes it look great on the table and the mix of mechanics will convince you that next game your deck will be that little bit better.

Ruthless is available to pre-order now through the publisher’s website (or designer’s for non-English versions of the game as well as some extra bling for your copy of it) and will be available at Essen in October.

This review is based on a prototype copy of the game provided by the publisher, as such the final contents may vary – in fact they certainly will.

This review was first seen on Polyhedron Collider

 

Cave-In Review

Boardgames are not like chocolates. They have very few things in common, however. However, much like that familiar Gumpism; with some boardgames, you never know what you’re going to get. Thus, a new boardgame term is coined: The Chocolate Box Game. Star Scrappers: Cave-In from Hexy Studios is my first Chocolate Box Game.

The box art features a surly looking sci-fi bloke reaching for a sci-fi glowing thing, while typical sci-fi looking robots are in the background doing sci-fi stuff. Flip the box over and you’ll see it’s a modular board and with cards, and the description will tell you that you’ll be mining crystals (the board) using mercenaries (the cards) and also that you’ll have to be mindful about being attacked/raided by other players. The premise of the game is very simple, in fact, the game itself is pretty straightforward. Your goal is to collect as many crystals and in as great an array as possible. You’ll do this by playing cards that colour match those crystals and where their combined total power equals or exceeds the value of the token you’re after.

This is much like the back of a chocolate box telling you that the ingredients are cocoa, milk and sugar.

As a Chocolate Box Game (look, I’m making it a thing ok, #ChocolateBoxGame) what you get inside the box is far more than this. Cave-In, on my first play, caused lots of the those “Oh that’s interesting” moments. There is a deck drafting element to this game, a set collection angle and a sort-of programming thing going on too. But, these are all just small parts of the bigger whole and it does each of these things just ever-so-slightly different to what is “normal” and to what I was expecting. For one thing, the crystals are really the reward, mining them is actually very easy, getting to the point where you can do that, well, that’s different.

“So how do we get new cards?” was the first question asked after player one had taken their turn.  Well, there are two ways. The “Nice and Slow” or “Fast and Nasty”. One of the actions a player can take is to recruit just one mercenary from the docks, paying the cost by a card in hand that is one rank lower. But as you can only do this action once, and for the biggest crystals you’ll need to equal 10, this is a very arduous way of drafting your “deck”. The faster, more erratic way is to Raid your opponents. This method wins you all but the top card of their discard pile. But, it’s the only thing you can do that turn, and because you didn’t draft/choose the cards yourself, it means you are essentially playing out of someone else’s pocket.

The rulebook calls it a ‘Raid’, invariably, we were calling it ‘Attack’, but actually it’s more like ‘Head Hunting’. Why bother regaling you with this distinction, well, because there is an interesting (and slightly masochistic) twist in that you can ‘Raid’ yourself, re-circling those spent cards back into your hand, which sounds great if you’ve got loads of good cards, but, timing, or rather; the sequence, is everything. Cards played don’t go into your discard pile straight away. They go from hand to table, and then once everyone has taken their turn, they are then added to the discard pile. This is important because in the turn you play all your good cards, you are basically advertising your wares to your opponents: those cards will be in your discard pile next turn and be ripe for the picking. Turn order comes into play here, but so does the hand limit.

I’ve called it a deck drafting, but really it’s just a hand of seven cards, with up to another seven in your discard pile. Hardly a deck, by any stretch of the definition because of this re-circling aspect to the cards; Cave-In creates this “collective deck” between all players, which will be completely unique each game, even if the same factions are used, as it will depend upon how players recruit and interact with one another. The cascading cards means that the concept of ownership is smudged and muddied too. You can recruit the merc you know an opponent wants, but unless you plan on keeping it in your hand, they’ll be able to pinch it in a turn or two. This creates a sense of movement, of fleeting fluidity, that you’ll have to work with what you’ve got now because it could all change very quickly.

There is also something rather brilliant going on with the discard pile, the phase of a turn is to put all played cards in your discard pile, once you hit 7 cards, those on the bottom of the pile are removed from the game – which is a nice way of thinning out those starting weaker cards without having to spend an action or time doing it. The last card on the deck is your Leader, this means that their special ability kicks in at the start of your next turn. Low-level cards will let grab the appropriate coloured crystal, but the higher-ups, they can play a pivot role in your tactics. It feels like the natural order of board games has been subverted, “But, but, I’ve used it. I’ve discarded it. What do you mean I use it…again?” I know, I know, calm down, it’s okay. This double whammy of programming style card-play was a standout feature of the game for me, it really caused every player to stop and really think, not just about their short-term goal of this term, but their next, and the one after that. Weighing up the potential reactions of their opponents. The ability to plan ahead in any strategy game is vital to success but rarely does a game guide you on the process like this does.

You’ve mined, recruited and even picked up a useful artefact or two but now the mine rumbles its imminent collapse. In short, the endgame is brought about by the mine collapsing – hence the name of the game. You’ll advance along the Cave-In track each time any resource deck or pile is depleted, with some crystals adding to it too. This rather nicely pulls the game together, creating a funnel of action as, to begin with there seems no threat, but soon, that treat of collapse is all too real.

You’ll gain victory points in various ways; mostly through mining crystals but it feels a little more fiddly than it may need to be, especially given the flow of the game, the allocation of points seems jarring; each time I’ve played we’ve resorted to grabbing a piece of paper and pen to tally everything up. One of the best ways to score points though is by collecting crystals with symbols markings, collecting a full set of six will seriously bolster your score, if you are fortunate enough to get a few partial sets too and you are laughing. However, the scoring of these sets seems so big that it forces play in that direction and only that direction, to the point where it doesn’t seem to matter what else you have collected en-route to this finale, as long as you have a set or two, this also devalues the “normal” crystals somewhat too, making them feel more like an inconvenience that they are there instead of their higher point scoring kin.

This #ChocolateBoxGame surprised me when it first hit the table, the novel approach to the discard deck and the lingering power held within it, the cascading and collaborative pool of cards used really caught my attention and these aspects of the game that will still be there next time it comes down from the shelf. I love the way this game encourages you to think and plan, how you can play this game either defensively, aggressively or very fluidly and still get a lot out of each experience.

This review was based on a retail edition of the game provided by the publisher.

So Long, My World Review

There are but a few hours left, then, and then it’s all over. Everything. No more light, or dark, or time. Just the end. No one knows why. Or how. So before all the questions are gone too, all we have left is “what”. What are you going to do in the last moments of your life?

Game: So Long, My World

Designers: Enrica Fincati, Francesco Simioni

Publishers: Axis Mundi

Artist: Enrica Fincati, Francesco Simioni, Lorinda Tomko

Player Count:1 - 5

Runtime: 30 - 40 mins

[caption id="attachment_2806" align="alignnone" width="1920"] A chain of cards, this time I'm going to lead a good life[/caption]

So Long, My World from Axis Mundi, is a game bleak in concept, bleak in theme, and yes, you guessed it, bleak in art. It is the theme, rather than its execution that will get under your skin, that will leave a taste in your mouth after the game is done and put away. In it, you’ll find a little bit of deck drafting, bidding and a sort of tableau building that all coalesce over a Matrix-esque end-of-the-world story that isn’t quite a story.

The game revolves around the idea that the world we live in is an artificial construct, and somehow the code that binds us to the world and to our identities has become corrupted. This means that not only is The End of all Ends happening, no one is really sure who or what type of person they are. Each turn, as the clock marches forward, an Event card is drawn and read aloud—these cards are wonderfully, terribly rich, often giving the reader (the first player) a choice that will affect that round. Based upon the event, resources are doled out to their respective locations, these locations being the Visions players will experience and the resources are the Feeling Tokens that are attached to, and quantify the emotions and experiences of the drawn Event card.

[caption id="attachment_2802" align="alignnone" width="1920"] Even the clock face is bleak and daunting[/caption]

From here, players will secretly bid on which Vision they wish to visit and Drain, a simple choice of gaining a new Remnant card, the Vision’s inherent feeling, or some of the emotions that have become attached to it from past events. This simple choice forms the basis of your game, with the outcome of it you will then play cards from your hand, paying their emotional cost and gaining their benefit and Insight points which you’ll score at the game end.

[caption id="attachment_2804" align="alignnone" width="1920"] Feelings. Nothing more than Feelings! I quite want to listen to the Offspring now[/caption]

There are five types of emotions, two are positive, two are negative and the final one is neutral. Early game you’ll need to decide which way you want your final hours and your alignment to go, as there is a little quirk with the end game scoring by means of a Kama Chain.

The ‘NET’ feeling of the card-where a positive cancels a negative-gives the card a Kama score, so if you’ve explicitly, exclusively played cards towards one alignment you’ll get a Kama Chain Bonus; and it is a massive game swinging bonus: an extra point per card in the chain. The term dominant strategy springs to mind.

After my first game, it left me wondering “Why wouldn’t you do that in every single game?” After my second game I had to ask “What is the point of the neutral cards”...and then it all twigged: Bauhaus!

[caption id="attachment_2808" align="alignnone" width="1920"] This kama chain is full of despair[/caption]

Talking of memories and past experiences; a memory I personally have difficulty shifting is that of art history module on the Bauhaus Movement. Why bring this up? Well, the central principle behind this artistic movement was ‘Function over Form’, and with, So Long, My World you couldn’t get further from it.

Theme trumps mechanic, time and time again in this game and for added flavour, there are two themes vying for control over the game. On the one hand, you have this chilling end of the world thing going on, and it is brilliantly executed. But on the other hand, you have Reboot cards and these seemingly random remnant cards which when I first opened my copy I thought were test or errors in printing.

[caption id="attachment_2807" align="alignnone" width="1920"] The Reboot cards are a hard and harsh reset of the game state[/caption]

The artificial existence aspect of the game feels like a different game entirely, like I’ve somehow mixed the components of two games together that just happen to use the same typeface and iconography. Perhaps there is a bigger picture here that I simply don’t know about; I know that all the games from Axis Mundi are somehow connected and exist in the same universe, but as the first contact with that ‘universe’ I’m left utterly baffled.

For me, a game about the end of all existence is interesting, engaging and different enough to grab my attention, I don’t want these silly frills—and that’s just how they feel. In this game, things happen that from a mechanical, nuts and bolts, point of view left me thinking “erm…”.

Lots of things.

[caption id="attachment_2810" align="alignnone" width="1920"] Some Vision are dark and sinister,others quaint and charming, and at some point in a game you'll need each[/caption]

But, this game wants you to get involved, to emotionally commit to it, and the mechanics don’t all need to make sense for that to happen. It wants to shock you, send shivers up your spine, and at points, it does exactly this; other people overhearing some of the cards that are being read out are at once fascinated and terrified by this game.

I would like some player interaction, I would like to have more winning conditions and a more even scoring system, and hell I would like more in-game choices and some crunchy tactical decisions, but So Long, My World isn’t that game. It is chilling, interesting and quirky and I think can best be summed up by one photo of one component. Look at this and ask yourself this question: “Is this an interesting choice?”

If your answer is yes, then it would be worth checking this game out on Kickstarter now.

This review first appeared on the Polyhedron Collider Website but thanks for reading it here too :)

This review was based on a prototype version of the game provided by the publisher, as such the final version may differ from what is seen here.

 

Assembly Review

Personal log: “I don’t know for certain what happened. there was a meteor shower; fiercer than we anticipated. It was carrying some kind of virus that somehow breached the station and killed the crew. Well, almost. There’s just two of us left. We have to get off, the computer is shutting everything down, including life support, we don’t have much time to do what this station was designed for; build a ship and then get back to Earth.”

Game: Assembly

Designers: Janice & Stu Turner

Publisher: Wren Games

Artist: Mike Jessup

Player count: 1 - 2

Runtime: 10 -20 minutes

Part of me is tempted to write this entire review in the style of the game, mainly because the setting for this little 2 player game is both wonderfully simple and rich. But, I fear that would get old very fast, so I shall just wax lyrical in my typical rambling fashion.

[caption id="attachment_2766" align="alignnone" width="1920"] The final version will look very different, but I find the small bow and cards to be very functional.[/caption]

You’re the last two crew members alive on a space station that just about survived a meteor shower, the computer is essentially trying to kill you, but not in a Hal type of way, more like an “I’m sorry, but it’s you or the entire population of planet Earth.” But, you’ve got a little time before all the oxygen runs out to realign all the systems, build a space-faring vessel and set a course for home. I know what you’re thinking: “Smoke me a kipper. I’ll be back for breakfast.”

But, you have only limited access to commands and each command needs to be verified by the only other survivor.

Who is stuck on the other side of the airlock.

And, because of the damage done to the station (or because the station has gone Hal crazy), the communication network is glitchy as hell.

And the station is starting to malfunction. A lot.

This compelling sci-fi backdrop sits behind a puzzling abstract micro-game which is, quite simply, pretty damn great. I especially enjoy playing this game solo, due largely to the fact that I repeatedly Ace Rimmer the smeg out of it. Whereas playing it two player “someone” keeps letting the side down.

[caption id="attachment_2768" align="alignnone" width="1920"] I got very lucky on the first module, but do we lock doen just the one bay?[/caption]

The goal of the game is to realign each of the 12 Bay cards with their connected Room Modules tokens which players will draw and place randomly throughout the game. To do this you have your Command cards, a deck 16 cards, but with only 6 different commands, allowing you to add new tokens, rotate, switch and most importantly, lock them in. You’ll need to lock down all 12 before the deck circles through twice to beat the game. Mechanically that's it, but the mechanics of the game are only part of it.

[caption id="attachment_2764" align="alignnone" width="1920"] Each command is useful at the right time, but you need to not only plan ahead but anticipate what the support player will do[/caption]

The crux of the game in the two-player mode comes down to communication, each player must work autonomously - despite this being a co-operative game, where the cooperation comes from a shared goal and an intersection of individual actions. The game centres around the idea that players don’t discuss their plans, or share what their cards are, all that information is and remains secret. The active player chooses a command from their hand of three cards, the support player then must verify that command with a simple ‘yes’ or ‘no’, in other words; do they have the same card - in essence; can that crew member also enter that command into their terminal.

If it’s a “yes”, everything is peachy, the command is executed and, all being well you’re now one step closer to getting back to Earth. But a “no” doesn’t necessarily halt the progress, it means that if the active player wants to commit that action, the support player must discard a card to “override’ the system. This can be heart-breaking, plan-destroying and really, REALLY annoying. The active player switches but now, now, because of that smeghead on the other side of the airlock, you’ve got fewer choices. And fewer choices is bad.

[caption id="attachment_2765" align="alignnone" width="1920"] These are all half size prototypes, where the final version will have bridge sized cards[/caption]

Co-op games can suffer from quarterbacking; where one player takes charge, essentially taking everyone's turn for them. Assembly not only makes that tricky but it actually punishes the quarterback if they rear their head. It challenges players to become telepathic, which is no bad thing if gaining superpowers was that easy, or perhaps more realistically, it challenges players to synchronize their thinking and plans. You’ll very quickly realise how alike you are in your pattern of thinking to your support player in how you deal with your train of thought, how your problem solves and how good your memory is.

It’s quite an unusual sensation mentally screaming at the other player to perform a switch command, because you can verify it, and then in your turn lock that bay down. Normally, when you see a perfect solution to your problem in a game, your screaming “Don’t do it, anything but that one.” You do that thing where you try not to look at the card you want. That is flipped on its head here which makes for quite a unique feeling. Obviously, they never do what you want them to do, invariably, they have their own plan. Smegheads.

[caption id="attachment_2772" align="alignnone" width="1920"] Every problem has multiple solutions in this game, it's just a case of know which one you are both working towards[/caption]

If, however, you are sick of being let down by your support player you can very quickly and easily play this game alone - by just removing a few cards. To be honest, I prefer Assembly as a solo game, having to tease out the puzzle solo presents enough of an engaging, puzzling challenge, and with such a short play time I can bash a game out while there's a pizza in the oven. Also, no-one lets you down.

Once you’ve mastered the simple version of this game you can throw in the malfunction cards - where the station starts to break down and fights you back. These will only affect 4 bays (those at 12,3,6, and 9) and ramp up the difficulty and frustration nicely. After that there are more ways to make the game more of a challenging...but I haven’t go there yet, but it’s a comfort to know they are there...sort of.

[caption id="attachment_2770" align="alignnone" width="1920"] These add an extra twist, an extra consideration and ramp the difficulty up quite nicely.[/caption]

One issue that can creep into games though is players “bending” the rules. Now I take my rules and gaming very, very seriously (look, I’m a nice guy but once those cards have been dealt and the dice rolled I don’t give a monkey’s about your dog/kids/wife/husband/job/parents/garden/car - just shut the hell up and play). There are three modes of play that relate to communication ranging from a general discussion on what players should focus on - to absolutely no verbal communication at all - the rulebook comes with a sign language section that covers all the command words you’ll need to play it. How you choose to play is in your remit, but one slip, one moment of frustration can reveal important information that can steal some of the fun of this game, but, it is all in how strictly you choose to follow the rules.

What you’ll get with Assembly is a neat puzzle game, but more than that, this strikes a great co-op chord. Not only does a victory feel especially shared and equally achieved, but in playing this game you’ll create a muster point of thought, where there is a degree of pleasure and alarm (in almost equal measure) when both players are on the same page. I find myself often impressed by microgames, the austere and economic design is something I can really appreciate, it also means that you can get a great game without too much damage to the wallet.

Assembly is on Kickstarter now for £16 and for that, you’d be a smeghead for missing out.

Disclaimer:

This review was based on a prototype version of the game provided by the publisher, as such the final version may differ from what is seen here.

Villagers Review

“If we build it, they will come.”

“But we need them to come so we can build it.”

“Good point. If we make some delicious food, they will come, and then we’ll build it.”

“Do you know anyone who can make ‘delicious’ food?”

“I do a pretty decent Spaghetti bolognese?”

“...”

Game: Villagers

Designer: Haakon Gaarder

Publisher: Sinister Fish Games

Artist: Haakon Gaarder

Player Count: 1 - 5

Run Time: 30 - 60 mins

This review first appeared on the Polyhedron Collider website, but if you didn’t catch it there you can enjoy it here now.



The plague has run rampant across the land, devastating and ruining lives in its wake, but we humans are nothing but resilient, and so we pick ourselves up, dust ourselves down and begin again. This is where you start, at the very beginning, you’ve found a suitable patch of land to build upon, and so construction can get underway. As people flee their old lives, or search out a better way to scratch out their livings they come across your blossoming village. If they have the right stuff you’ll offer them food and lodgings in return for their contribution to the greater good (the greater good).

Villagers is a smooth, uncomplicated engine builder. Your goal is simple; become the most prosperous village, achieved by attracting the most skilled and industrious villagers who in turn will generate the most gold. You need to not only feed and house them but you’ve got to be able to supply them with the materials and tools they need to do their job also. Not forgetting that you need to draft them into your own personal pool of villagers before any of your neighbours do so; which is the first phase of the game:



Players draft villagers in turn from a central ‘market row’ or is this game the Road, where there will be 6 face-up cards and 6 face-down stacks; I like to think of this as the face-up cards being those who are close enough to be able to identify, and those that are a little further away so you know roughly their trade. These six stacks also represent the general populace of the land, and the game ends once they have all been emptied. At the bottom of the second and the final stack is the Market Round, which is where you inhabitants will sell their wares and make the all-important, game-winning gold.



There are 10 different types or suits of villagers, ranging from Ore to Lumber to Grapes. You’ll draft as many villages up to the amount of food your fledgeling settlement produces, food being one of the two basic resources you’ll need to manage.

The build phase is where you’ll take those drafted villagers up into your hand and start adding them to the village proper. Naturally, this is also limited, this time by the number of builders you have. In short, to get people into your village you need food, then before they can start contributing to the village they need a house. Simple.

Now, to the nuts and bolts of you engine building village: it’s all based upon simple supply chains, to do G you F, which needs E, but if you had D then E is free, D obviously needs C, and if you have B then you’ll make more from G, but that also requires A. Which is very typical of this type of game, what Villagers does though is it takes this pseudo-algebraic nonsense and distills it in to a very accessible, very intuitive setting of 14th Century Europe…ish.

In the above gibberish what I really want is a Wine Trader – because on Market day the Wine Trader rakes in a pretty decent amount of gold, but before he can sell his wares a Vintner must first make it, and a Graper has to gather the choice grapes before that. But the Wine Trader also needs bottles from the Glass Blower, and the Vintner also needs barrels from the Cooper….and so on.



Villagers tricks you into believing you only have two resources to worry about; Food and Buildings, and that with its cute minimalist artwork style it’s a simple game. Whereas what you actually have is essentially two little engine builders that overlap one another creating rich, if not occasionally crippling decisions each turn. Each villager is a resource in themselves, providing a service or goods for anywhere between 1 and 10 other villagers (indicated by the keychain symbol). This includes neighbouring villages, meaning if you don’t have the required villager, but your opponent does, you have to pay them.



It isn’t always the largest village that prospers, it’s the most economical, and there are multiple ways to achieve this. A few of the direct supply chains end in very high-value cards, such as the Jeweller and Tailor, but an Ore Muler, Log Rafter, or Freemason can dish out plenty gold based upon who else is in your village during the final Market Round. Also, by just having those root villagers that everyone else will need you can gain a huge income from the other players like the Blacksmith and Carpenter.

Villagers does exactly what is said on the box, it’s a game about people building villages. You’re not juggling the raw materials that make a village; laying down roads and building up houses, your only concern is the people who will do this. You’ll be crafting a complex web of individuals, probably across other villages and players, to achieve your goals. Each card played branches out creating a new route and a new possibility. Above all Villagers presents a great engine builder but with a very accessible, and easily understandable theme, the links and chains between any two cards just makes sense.



I’ve walked away from this game each time thinking that I could have done it better, I could have built it more efficiently and I convince myself that next time I will. If you want to know more, or if this has been enough to convince you to get involved you can back this project on Kickstarter right now!

Disclaimer:

This review was based on a prototype version of the game provided by the publisher, as such the final version may differ from what is seen here.

Pocket Mars Review

This review originally appeared on the Polyhedron Collider website, but if you didn't read it there, you can now enjoy it here too!

Game: Pocket Mars

Designer: Michał Jagodziński

Artist: Jarosław Wajs

Publisher: Board & Dice

Player Count: 1 - 4

Runtime: 15 - 30 minutes

“Mars is there, waiting to be reached.” - Buzz Aldrin



Mars. The Red Planet. The Roman God of War has hung in the night sky capturing the imagination of man, and drawing the creative mind to it like gravity since it was first gazed upon. In the last few years, the fiction was left behind as science began to catch up, and we now know more about this baron and hostile planet than ever before. Yet, the more we know, it seems the more our imagination runs rampant and so the notion of the colonisation of Mars seeps into our consciousness, filling our screens, bookshelves and of course, our boardgames. It is in this vein that we explore Pocket Mars.

 

[caption id="attachment_2653" align="alignnone" width="4032"] Getting an even spread of your colonists is one of the methods of winning[/caption]

 

This is a fairly simple, quick, micro hand management game from those multi-use-card-aficionados at Board & Dice who have brought us SUPERHOT, Multiversum, and InBetween. Pocket Mars sits very comfortably in the mix with those games, which although all have very different themes and even mechanics, they all, to echo Mr Tudor (Mr Tudor Mr Tudor Mr Tudor), share a tonality that’s hard not to notice. So, if you like those previous games, just stop reading and go buy Pocket Mars, you’ll probably like it too. If, on the other hand, you want to know more about a game whose marketing campaign was based on growing potatoes in shit* then read on.

Pocket Mars pits up to four rival companies vying to be the first to establish a safe, successful, and secure colony on Mars. To do this you’ll need to transport your scientists from earth, via your shuttle to the Red Planet, and to one of the four pre-established buildings. Through the use of a series of project cards, you’ll upgrade the buildings to become more efficient and thus setting up the necessary infrastructure to support a mass colonisation. You’ll do this with a bunch of cards, some cubes and all within about 30 minutes. Which is pretty flippin’ impressive.

[caption id="attachment_2659" align="alignnone" width="4032"] Enter / Prize classic....[/caption]

Each player begins the game with a joke-poking named shuttle with one colonist aboard and six further colonists back on Earth. The five main buildings needed to conquer the barren red landscape are in situ, so all you need to do is get them working properly. Queue the Project Cards that will do just that. These cards can be used in one of two ways, from the two cards in your hand, or from the two face-down cards in front of you known as the Prep Module.

In short, this is a game of hand management and set collecting, you’ll want to shift cards from your hand - where they have a weaker, but more immediate action - I like to think of this as maintenance your colonists are making - to your Prep Module. From here you’ll play them against one of the buildings on Mars. This is the chunkier, multi-faceted action that you’ll need to do to shift colonists from your shuttle and into a building - I like to think of this as “Installing” you are putting new equipment into the building that it needs, thus one of your colonists needs to be there.

Now, this action makes up the bulk of the game, as the game ends when one player gets all of their colonists on to Mars, but it is also the most interesting process in the game. The Project cards are numbered (or ranked if you want to follow my analogy) from one to seven. You’ll install your card against the existing one (or the building itself), and, if your Project card has a higher score - thus a better upgrade you put your colonist in that building.

[caption id="attachment_2658" align="alignnone" width="4032"] Stark, austere graphic art with vibrant colours[/caption]

You’ll then get to trigger the card’s actual ability - the thing that your Project actually does, then; because, you used the building, the building’s ability also triggers. This happens even if the Project you installed is not as good as the previous version, like Windows 10, but these buildings don't use a Microsoft operating system, so it’s all good. The other, interesting, little used, action you can do that is very similar to this, is play a card from another player’s Prep Module. This doesn’t allow you to shift any colonists, and they get the card ability, but you get the building ability AND you get to stop them placing a colonist. It is very sneaky, and feels a little off theme, but is a very worthwhile action and adds a devious hint of player interaction.

So, what makes Pocket Mars interesting, different and worthy of your time, and/or money. Well, it’s because of what this game is really about, and that is area control. It just doesn’t really look like it, or rather, the bit that looks like area control - the cubes - isn’t the interesting area control bit of this game. Still with me?

[caption id="attachment_2652" align="alignnone" width="4032"] The Water Building allows you to easily recycle the project cards you don't want[/caption]

Pocket Mars is more about controlling the cost associated with the buildings, about planning and playing ahead. By inflating, or artificially lowering the cost against a building in one turn, and with the knowledge of what type of cards the other players have in their Prep Modules you can take advantage of this supply of information. What the card can do is only one small part of the information you need to be able to counter or block other players. What type of card and more importantly where that card is, is actually more important. And you can see all of this at a glance.

It is the almost perfect information that makes this game so quick, but not at the expense of strategy. To score well, you need to have an even spread of colonists across Mars, you’ll want to get some of them into the “office” of each building too. So, control the costs and you’ll control a piece of Mars, but really you need to control lots of different pieces at different times.

[caption id="attachment_2655" align="alignnone" width="4032"] I'd love to see little astronaut meeples, I understand why they are cubes, but I'd still like to see them...[/caption]

That’s not to say that this game isn’t without its flaws, and despite being a self-confessed Board & Dice fan, this game does fall particularly foul of a recurring ‘issue’ I have with their games, namely; abstraction. Theme and the implementation of the mechanics are abstracted from what they’re “meant to be”, this does make this game a little less accessible I find, and when introducing this game to people, as I have done so in this review, I feel I have to add the character and descriptions/context to actions. This is amplified by the condensed rulebook which is almost completely bereft of flavour, reducing this game of celestial colonisation down to little more than its bare bones. The austere un-named cards with their stark graphic ‘art’, the buildings are only named on the last page of the rulebook and Matt Damon is indistinguishable from his fellow scientists. All of this leads to a fairly abstract game of layering cards and shifting cubes. But...

[caption id="attachment_2656" align="alignnone" width="4032"] A mini space adventure[/caption]

But, all of that is okay when you step away from the telescope and look at what you have with a little bit of distance. You’ve got a very small, cheap, four-player game which has some interesting mechanics, choices and interactions. It even has a solo mode. It is a perfect little thinker of a game for lunch breaks, to travel with and for the damage, it’ll do to your wallet and game shelf this game provides a mini exploration to mars in half an hour. Pocket Mars may not be the slice of Mars game you’ve been waiting to try, but it is still a short, worthwhile game.

Disclaimer:  This review was based on a full priced retail edition paid for out of my own money from my own pocket.

*Just go watch the brilliant Martian and it will all make sense.

 

Inbetween Review

Game: Inbetween

Designer: Adam Kwapiński

Publisher: Board & Dice

Artist: Seweryn Borkowski, et al

Player Count: 2

Runtime: 30 - 60 minutes

Upsideville is the quintessential little US town (probably somewhere in Maine), it has all the staples you’d expect of a good town, a decent High School, a great drive-thru, and your atypical friendly neighbourhood police sheriff. Yes, living in Upsideville is pretty great. Or at least it used to be, there is something else there now too. The veneer of the American dream is being slowly scratched away, eroded by some indeterminate malevolent force. A darkness, a Creature if you will, is warping, twisting and turning that white picket fence into a dark splinter of its former self. It’s happening to the Townsfolk too.

[caption id="attachment_2619" width="3647"] Full box art, front and back. It's all about the flipside[/caption]

If that sounds like Stranger Things the board game you’d be 99% right, you’d be a hair’s breadth away from being IP infringing right. If you love that show and love board games look no further (put down the Stranger Things Monopoly and step well away from that Eggo monstrosity). If you’ve not heard of or had time to binge watch that show, then you’ll be glad to hear that no prior knowledge of it is needed to fully enjoy this game - you’ll just notice all the little nods to it while you play if you are familiar.

[caption id="attachment_2621" width="4032"] Thanks to having 2 icons, Maggie is almost Secure...[/caption]

So, Inbetween; it’s a game of good versus evil, of the Townsfolk of Upsideville rallying against an insidious menace that is trying to destroy the very fabric of reality. On the flipside of that, it is a game of a Creature from another plane of existence, that is trying to reach through and conquer ours, and in doing so, it will pollute and twist our world to fit its own. And that is the key point in this game, the flipside, the other version, the duality, it rings out in theme and mechanics. It is a game of direct conflict, take that style mechanics and is ultimately a tug of war, not just for the town on the whole, but for the people that make it.

[caption id="attachment_2624" width="4032"] Everybody is just going about their daily lives as if nothing is wrong.[/caption]

The game starts with ten of the townsfolk, five in each dimension; Town and Creature - this does not mean that those individuals are safe or lost, far from it, it is simply their starting state; an Inbetween (see what they did there?). A player’s turn is denoted by the Activity Marker, a wooden cylinder where the ends indicate the player’s turn, it moves and flips at the end of each player’s turn, and it is really important, as sometimes, sometimes you’ll play out of sequence, depending on how the game progresses. On your turn, you’ll play a card from your hand, and matching the symbol on that card allows you to shift the Safety Marker one space. Each Townsperson has four spaces, four levels of safety, from Alert to Secure, or Nervous to Devoured. Getting three characters secured or devoured is one of the possible victory conditions.

[caption id="attachment_2618" width="4032"] When there is something very much going on, it is just a matter of time[/caption]

Alternatively, you can clone the symbol type on the card and add that to any Character; so I can make Rodney both a Sheriff type and a Community type - making him far easier to secure in subsequent turns. This is a really interesting, and clever way of balancing out the character mix.

[caption id="attachment_2622" width="3904"] With two icons, there are now more opportunities to Secure Rodney[/caption]

Now, when the Activity Marker is on any character where the Safety Marker is anywhere but the top space, it will trigger the character's ability. And these are really quite special, forming a large part of any strategy, and it is here that the twist comes, and it is this twist that makes this game for me. Firstly, the player whose dimension the Activity Marker is in gets to increase their (potentially game-ending) Awareness - which also grants a terrific one-shot ability for use at the beginning of the player’s turn. After this, the Character ability kicks in - regardless of whose turn it is. The effects vary from character to character, but they are all very worthwhile, and many a game I spent my time struggling to keep Timmy Guarded (spots 2 or 3) just so I can use his ability.

The combination of Activity Marker movement and character ability require a degree of planning, of orchestration, ensuring you have the cards and energy to dish out some much-needed damage to your opponent, or that they manipulate the game state to your advantage. These manoeuvres have a sense of a plot twist, or a major beat in the story you are unravelling.

Something I particularly appreciate in this game is duality, it seeps through from the theme into the mechanics, forming two very different player roles and styles. All the cards have multiple abilities, all the character cards are dual sided. Inbetween is a duel between two forces that are equally, and reflectively matched, but are different, it tricks you into thinking it is a classic Tug-of-War game, but that implies a fundamental equality between the two sides. The fairness in this game stems from the differences between to two roles, not their similarities. There is a subtle asymmetry to Inbetween making the two roles noticeably different, and interesting.

[caption id="attachment_2626" width="3224"] A birds-eye view of the game[/caption]

Inbetween utilizes multiple Game End/Victory Conditions which is something I love in my board games as it opens up gaming strategy and variability. Not only does this make each game potentially very different, but in a tug of war game, this system can result in some fantastic surprises. Rather splendidly, these conditions all work in tandem for at least the first half of the game, and depending upon how the game progresses you will often have at least two of the three options remaining open as viable victory methods, and it is, as I can personally attest to, very easy to switch between strategies and have your ass kicked.

I really like the art in this game, it would have been all too easy (and dangerous) to duplicate the Stranger Things pencil style artwork, instead Board & Dice call upon Seweryn Borkowski and gang to produce something that reminds me a lot of Todd McFarlane’s Spawn series - which is no bad thing at all! And the box! It has to be one of my favourites on the shelf, mainly because of how different it is - no logos, no text, not even the game name. Front and back are full art - and I love it.

[caption id="attachment_2627" width="3740"] This box really stands out on the shelf by how different it is[/caption]

One thing I would like to see tweaked, however; is the abstraction of the components, blue, red, and purple cubes look at odds within the theme and art style, and the little counters are unnamed which when playing takes you out of the game, more so for the Creature: “I’m going to play this little cloud thing, and Terrify Jamey.” Maybe not all players use all the in-game terminology all the time, but its absence means that I can’t. A very simple thing, but the lack of names, in a game which is otherwise very on point with its theme, stands out.

[caption id="attachment_2623" width="3576"] The Tokens of no names...[/caption]

Every turn is valuable, with each action that you do something you are also not doing something else. There are interesting choices in this game, and as the game progresses those choices become weightier. It encapsulates the tug-of-war rather brilliantly, with an attitude of it is better to win the game rather than Secure/Devour that character. It is a game of pivoting possibilities, where your luck or your tactics can change quickly, and with dynamic effect, but the game never feels out of control. It is a game that can be a little tricky, or maybe finickity to teach, as each Phase has sub-sections to it, and cards and actions have multiple ‘moving’ parts, but it is a game I feel really rewards repeated plays. Inbetween it is one of my favourite two-player experiences, giving me everything I want in a game in a very small package.

Disclaimer:

This review was based on a full priced retail edition that I pre-ordered and paid for out of my own money from my own pocket.

Onitama Review

Review: Onitama

Designer: Shimpei Sato

Publisher: Arcane Wonders

Artist: Jun Kondo and Mariusz Szmerdt

Player count: 2

Runtime: 10 minutes

“Legend tells of a legendary warrior whose kung fu skills were the stuff of legend.”

― Po from Kung Fu Panda

Onitama roughly translates as “Awesome Kung Fu themed abstract game”, which, like a tin of Ronseal, it does exactly as it says on the tin, or in this case, box. This game also graciously offers you the opportunity to constantly refer to your opponent as “Young Grasshopper”, to say things like, “Your Kung Fu is strong”, and of course, “Stop trying to hit me, and hit me”. There is such a thing as being a poor winner, so watch it, as the tide of battle can turn very quickly in Onitama.

[caption id="attachment_2592" align="alignnone" width="2776"] Say it with me now...TIGER UPPERCUT![/caption]

One cannot but notice the similarities between Onitama and Chess on first impressions, and although this is true, it is only fleetingly so, it is much like comparing a Harley Davidson to a BMX, more on this later, first bow into the dojo and we shall begin.

You and your opponent are rival Kung Fu dojos, who are battling it out for supremacy, and to the field of this great battle, you take four of your most skilled warriors. Facing off against one another across the tranquil arena you stretch and shake off that nervous pre-fight excitement, bow first to your master, and then respectfully to your opponent and go.

[gallery ids="2597,2588" type="rectangular"]

Fight!

Fight!

Fight!

Not quite, Onitama is a game of skilful, precise strikes, of calculated risks, and of considered judgement. Of knowing your opponent, and predicting their attacks and retreats. It is Kung Fu (well, as much as a board game can be Kung Fu). Unlike a game of chess, of near countless openings, strategies and moves, Onitama, deftly, and simply imposes restrictions and limits on your form and creativity. And it does this with a handful of cards. These cards are your movements, all of your attacks and retreats, all with an appropriately Kung Fu-ey related animal names, like Frog or Crab.

[caption id="attachment_2590" align="alignnone" width="4032"] Love the stylised Chinese writing here depicting the animal[/caption]

Each card further abstracts the game board and depicts it as a simple grid, with a number of the squares shaded, with one being darker than the others. This darkest square is your warrior, any of them, and the shaded cells are all the possible squares they can move to. Should you land on an opponent you take them and they are removed from the game. It is that simple, and yes, up to this point, the game may sound a little linear, and you’d be right, but obviously, that isn’t the game.

You see, you only get five cards per game, randomly drawn from the deck. These are the only moves any player can make. Five cards. Five attacks, five prescribed movements that both players can see, predict and plan for. Again, that may sound a lot more interesting, and it is, but that still isn’t the game.

[caption id="attachment_2595" align="alignnone" width="4032"] The Reds are making full use of the arena width[/caption]

These five cards total all the cards you’ll use, and you will share them with your opponent in a manner that makes this game very, very interesting. Two will be dealt to you, two to your opponent and the remaining card placed between you both. Any of your pieces can move as either of your cards show, but then you’ll place that card to one side and take the card that was previously left out of the game. Now your opponent does the same, sifting one card at a time between the cards in front, to the card at the side.

This mechanic creates a flow, almost a sense of a dance across the play area as you and your opponent/partner sway back and forth. It creates a harmony and a balance which sits right at home with the theme. One of the things I love about this game is how quick and accessible it is, there is no text to read, its a case of pattern recognition in the moves you can make now, what your opponent can make and what move you can make later. A game of Onitama is so very quick, I don’t think I’ve played a game longer than ten minutes, and in that way the game too feels very kinetic. Although Onitama is an abstract game, the production and these notes of energy and flow really capture and encapsulate that Hollywood-stylised essence of Kung Fu.

[caption id="attachment_2593" align="alignnone" width="4032"] That's a strong defensive opening from the Blue Guys[/caption]

So, how much like a game of chess is Onitama? You do move pieces back and forth across a board in varying patterns, the win condition is very similar, it is a greatly abstracted view f a battle, and here, I would say the similarities end. Chess can be “mastered”, there are opening moves that are better than others, someone who has played many games will have little difficulty besting a newbie. Onitama, on the other hand, has such a degree of variability that a “perfect” opening doesn’t exist, as it can’t exist every game. Likewise, chess is often considered a battle above the board as much as it is on it, and Onitama isn’t that. Each of your opponents pieces can only move in two ways, and you can see those two ways, the difference is in this joy of pattern recognition, of building up your opponents move now, and move next and layering that against what you want to do, and the cards/moves you do not want to give them.

[caption id="attachment_2596" align="alignnone" width="4032"] The luxurious, fancy-pants playmat[/caption]

The production of this game, heck, even the box screams “Hey, pay attention to me!”, it has a cool magnetic closed box that looks more like a fancy bottle of whiskey than a board game, the insert is moulded perfectly to fit everything nice and tidy, and of course, you have the neoprene plat mat and the gorgeous oversized cards. However, and it's sizeable, however, it feels overproduced. The moulds on the figures aren’t what I’d expect from a game made in 2014, but even then I think there is a degree of charm, the impression of ancient skill and strategy that this game wants to have is well overshot with plastic models instead of something more solid, timeless and classical. The playmat tough great and functional is, I can’t help but feel is a half inch too narrow, those oversized cards don’t align neatly with my compulsion towards the neat and parallel.

Am I being picky? Yes.

Am I acting like a teenager at a house party dissecting the latest arrival?

(what an odd analogy) Well, yes, I am. But, in my defence, the game is crying out for attention about how it looks more so than how it plays.

And that is the main point, isn’t it? How good is this game? In short, it is a great, quick game that offers an interesting array of game restrictions each time you play. Each game feels noticeably different, and yet fundamentally the same. Part of that greatness stems from its shortness, its brevity, but also for its ‘feel’, it is an abstract game that wears its theme like a well-tailored suit, you’ll see it on the board and the pawns, you’ll see it scrawled across the cards, but you feel it in the game with the flow and sway of combat. Onitama isn’t the type of game you'll play for hours on end, it is the type of game you play between games, while you’re waiting for your dinner, and it’s perfect to travel with or for lunch break games, and at around £25 you’ll get a lot of mileage out of this little gem.