ATTIKA (Eric, Bill, Anton, Charlie)Games that MVGA owns are titled in red. Most of our session reports are provided by Eric Brosius. Thanks for your hard work, Eric!
1 January 8 January 15
January 22 January 29 January
5 February 12 February 19
February 26 February
4 March 11 March 18
March 25 March
1 April 8 April Gathering
2004 22 April 29 April
6 May 13 May 20
May 27 May
3 June 10 June 17
June 24 June
1 July 8 July 15
July 22 July 29 July
5 August 12 August 19
August 26 August
2 September 9 September 16
September 23 September 30 September
7 October 14 October 21
October 28 October
4 November 11 November 18 November
2 December 9 December 16 December 23 December 30 December
Roll Call: Rich, Jeff, Roland, Paul, Mike
We had our second first-time visitor in less than a month. Roland read about MVGA on the Internet and decided to come. Of course, he didn't pay the $3.00. We also had Mike visiting from Virginia for the first time in a long while. This gave us 9 gamers, the largest attendance since August. Dave Bernazzani will be happy to hear that I have 3 pre-pays for UG7 ready for him.
ATTIKA (Eric, Bill, Anton, Charlie)
Although January 1 was New Years Day, we had agreed at our previous session to meet. Most of us thought it would be more fun to play than to watch college bowl games all evening. We met an hour early because none of us had to work that day.
Eric and Bill arrived promptly at 6:00 and chose Attika as the first game. We played two games of Attika in December and it works well for 2, 3 or 4. As it turned out, Anton and Charlie arrived as we were setting up, so there was a full complement. Only Eric had played before, so he explained the rules to the 3 new players. The object of the game is to place all 30 of your buildings on the board first (or, as a more dramatic but relatively unlikely option, to connect two shrines with an unbroken chain of your buildings.) Shrine connection serves more as a threat than as an actual way to win, but if you miscalculate, someone may be able to pull it off.
This game began with a quick connection threat on the part of Bill, who played first and got about 5 buildings in a string across the map. Charlie drew his main city tile at the start, and this gave him the firepower he needed to block Bill, as his subsequent white tile draws were full of white city tiles and he was able to draw and place for free a few times. Eric played in the middle of the board and got hemmed in quickly, while Anton focused on one corner and had plenty of room, but no immediate connection threat.
The initial rush of placements left us card-poor, so we paused to replenish our hands, placing buildings here and there as our settlements grew. We started to deplete stacks, giving us the right to place new game board tiles and opening up fresh connection threats. The extra room allowed Bill to make a fresh attempt at a connection win, and he came within 1 hex at his high water mark, needing only to draw his one remaining road from a set of about 10 tiles, but Charlie held him off and blocked the move for good. Normally a player who is forced to block as much as Charlie winds up wasting cards and falling behind, but Charlie used space and resources on the board well, and was well ahead of us at this point. We tried half-heartedly to stop him, but the best we could do was delay him for a turn or two before he placed his last building.
Winner: Charlie (there are no second and third places, just a winner)
Eric's rating: 7. It's obvious that luck and skill are both critical in this game; what's not clear yet is where one leaves off and the other begins. Charlie had some good luck, but he also had bad luck in having to stop Bill twice, and he won convincingly. This game took almost two hours; it moved more slowly than the two games we played in December.
WYATT
EARP (Rich, Jeff, Mike, Paul)
While Attika was underway, the 7:00 shift arrived, with Rich and his son Jeff and Mike who was visiting from Virginia. We asked Mike whether it was his first time and he said he was here 16 or 17 years ago, so we took his $3.00. Wyatt Earp is a top filler for us, and this game proved to be close. Paul arrived after the first hand and joined in to fill out the table.
Final scores: Mike $22K, Jeff $21K, Rich $19K, Paul incomplete.
Eric's rating: 9. I played Wyatt Earp 29 times in 2003, more often than any other game.
AMUN-RE (Charlie, Rich, Jeff, Mike, Paul)
Both games ended at roughly the same time, so we had 9 gamers looking for two games. Rich suggested Amun-Re, one of his favorites, and 5 of us sat down (the ideal number for Amun-Re.) After a rules review for the new players, the game started off, and it was a close one the whole way. Rich has had a lot of success with his "favorite of Amun-Re" strategy, but in this game he kept being outbid by small margins. You can win by bidding high or by bidding low, but it's hard to win by bidding high and getting meager gifts. The top three players finished in a pack; the other two did not divulge their scores. Charlie completed his sweep with two wins in two games for the evening.
Final scores: Charlie 46, Rich 44, Mike 43, Jeff less, and Paul even less.
Eric's rating: 6. This was an ideal night; Rich got to play Amun-Re and I didn't have to help!
MAGNA GRECIA
(Anton, Bill, Roland, Eric)
Roland arrived in time for the second set of games, and after we all introduced ourselves, we chose Magna Grecia for the remaining 4 players. Eric got this game as a Christmas gift and had read through the rules, but it was a first-time playing for all of us. The rules are quite straight-forward and logical, but it's almost impossible to get your head around them the first time you play. One key thing to remember is that the cost of a market is the number of hexes in the city or village plus the number of opponents' markets, while the value of a market is based on the number of things the city or village connects to. We played the 8-turn version (which is more like a supermarket sweep in that you try to grab as much as you can) rather than the longer 12-turn version that involves more head butting. The rules suggest 8-turn games for beginners.
The first tile was poor for roads and cities but good for restocking. Bill, Anton and Roland started cities and began road networks, but Eric simply restocked 7 tiles (before even laying a tile.) On the second turn, he hooked onto Anton's city and struck out for the center of the board, which was ripe with possible connections. We kept asking questions as we played in an attempt to figure out what we were doing. Roland started a large city on one side of the board, while Bill speculated by placing a few markets in villages that looked like they'd develop into important hubs.
Halfway through the game Eric was touted as the runaway leader given his central cities and temporary oracle dominance, but this was a bit of an illusion. Bill and Roland had some key markets in Eric's cities, and as Eric connected, he drove up the value of those markets. The game seemed to fly by, and in fact took a little under two hours. When we added up the final scores, the victory points and the tiebreaker were both even, so the result was a tie. Bill missed an oracle connection on Turn 8 that would have won it for him, and Roland ran out of roads and had no time to restock or he could have won as well.
Final scores: Bill 40 with 1 extra tile, Eric 40 with 1 extra tile, Roland 38, Anton 34.
Eric's rating: 8 at this point for a game that moved nicely, had a lot of interesting decisions and that was close at the end. Next time I'll have to watch more carefully to make sure my connections aren't helping my opponents (through their markets) more than they help me.
PUERTO RICO (Bill, Anton, Eric, Roland)
The other game was still going, so Bill suggested Puerto Rico, which he learned only recently and wanted to try again. We've played a few dozen times now at MVGA and we have a good feel for the game, though we are by no means sharks. Interestingly enough, Roland had played on BSW but the face-to-face version was new to him. He protested that his record was 0 for 13 lifetime, but that's not an unusual result for someone playing on BSW.
Bill took Builder as Governor, building a free Small Indigo. Anton also built Small Indigo, Eric Small Market and Roland Construction Hut. Anton then snarfed a Quarry, making him the early favorite, and Eric mayored. There were several instances of loose Crafting in the early going, and Eric profited with several good Trades. Anton took the first Factory and Roland the second, leaving Eric to build Harbor and then Wharf from the proceeds of his Trades. By mid-game Anton was a money machine as the rest of us tried to ship around him, but quite a few large production buildings were bought and the resulting colonist shortage ended the game, leaving Anton with over 10 doubloons in unspent cash compared with only a few coins for the others. This was a quick game of Puerto Rico and the scores were relatively low. Bill was cash poor but had 12 VPs before anyone else had 5, and Roland got moving just a little bit too late.
Final scores:
VP Bldg Bonus Total Eric (seat 3) 20 + 19 + 5 = 44 Bill (seat 1) 23 + 15 + = 38 Anton (seat 2) 15 + 16 + 6 = 37 Roland (seat 4) 11 + 14 = 25
Eric's rating: 10. I played Puerto Rico 50 times in 2002-2003 and I enjoyed my first playing in 2004 just as much.
ATLANTIC
STAR (Rich, Jeff, Mike)
Paul and Charlie had to leave, but the other three decided on Atlantic Star as a closer. When you play with fewer players there are dummy players that fill in the gaps. I don't have the details, but Jeff proved he can hold his own with anyone.
Final scores: Jeff 56, Rich 50, Mike 35. The players made sure to tell me that one of the dummy players scored 43, leaving Mike in fourth place in a 3-player game!
Eric's rating: 7. My rating is 8 for Showmanager, the earlier of Atlantic Star with rules that are identical, but I don't like the theme of Atlantic Star nearly as much.
Roll Call: Dan, Eric B., Dave, Walt, Eric-4, Russ, Rich, Mike, Evan, Anton, Scott
It was a banner day for MVGA as we welcomed three first-timers. When combined with the eight regulars who made it, this made eleven gamers in total. We had three multi-player games going at once partway through the evening, and we finished with two simultaneous five-player games. The extra attendance we've been enjoying recently gives us welcome flexibility; someone who has a less-well-known favorite game can find a group that is willing to give it a shot.
I've been writing session reports for about six months now, and it seems like a good time to include some general comments on the character of MVGA. The group has been meeting regularly since 1965; you don't last that long unless you have some resilience and adaptability. We're not playing the same games we were playing in 1965, but we do embrace a wider range of games than some groups. We have the unique asset of a permanent location with a game closet. The club's collection is listed on the Game Library page but we also have a number of older Avalon Hill and SPI wargames from the old days that aren't shown on the website.
We take ourselves less seriously than some gaming groups, although we have some strong players and we try hard to win. We achieve social cohesion through cheerful trash-talking; this seems to keep us on good terms without leading to bad feelings. There's a strong sense of community; players recognize that they need to consider the needs of the group, and not only their own personal desires. Walter Hunt serves as the honorary father figure, collecting the weekly fees for the Masonic Hall and providing gentle reminders when one of us gets out of line (and he seems to get slightly more than his share of the trash-talking as a result.)
We play a wide range of games and are willing to try new ones. Even if a new game isn't at the top of the recent Essen list, we'll give it a shot if someone asks for it. We aren't limited to short games; we'll play a multi-hour game every so often (in recent months we've played El Grande, Age of Steam, Lunar Rails, Funkenschlag, Age of Mythology and History of the World.) Come visit us some Thursday. We're easy to find on Route 16 in Holliston.
MAGNA GRECIA
(Dan, Eric B., Dave)
We had 3 players at 7:00, so we decided to try Magna Grecia. Eric B. had played for the first time at MVGA last week, but it was brand-new to Dan and Dave. We were delighted to welcome Dave as a first-timer. As Eric B. was reviewing the rules, Walt came in, followed by first-timers Russ and Eric-4 (we've had a lot of Erics at Unity Games groups recently, so it seems that numbers have been assigned. I think Eric B. is actually Eric-2, with Eric-1 being Eric Schultz, but I'm not absolutely sure. When your name is Eric, you don't get a lot of practice dealing with multiple Erics; it's not like being a Bill or a Mike.) We decided to stick with 3 players for Magna Grecia and let the 3 more recent arrivals choose a different game.
The random set-up left oracles in some awkward spots, so that there was no obvious green town to start in. Eric B. had explained that players who work together are likely to outperform those who remain isolated, but despite this warning, we all started in separate areas. After the first few turns, however, Eric B. and Dan had managed to link up, while Dave took an additional turn or two to join us. One of the tricks in Magna Grecia is selecting places to buy markets. If you are too conservative, you'll buy a market you could have had for free later when you founded a city, but if you're too aggressive, you won't be able to activate your market (and you'll lose any points for it.) I don't know how much the 3-player game differs from the 4-player game (we played with 4 last week,) but in this week's game none of us had to sell a market, and none of us had an inactive market at the end. We played to 8 turns rather than to 12; it seems you'd only go to 12 if you become dissatisfied with the shorter game.
Although the game provides opportunities to restock your road and city tiles, it's hard to resist pressing your luck just once more and putting the restock off until next time. This problem was aggravated by the fact that we had only one 5-tile restock in the 8 turns, and that occurred on Turn 1. As a result, we all ran our stock down close to zero by the end. Eric and Dan's tempo advantage gave them an edge over Dave.
Final scores: Eric 39, Dan 37, Dave 24.
Eric's rating: 8. Some people have complained that this is a dry game, but I am enjoying it. It moves quickly and it's fun to discover that the game has lured you into running out of tiles even when you told yourself you'd resist (it feels a little like Union Pacific in this respect.)
PUERTO RICO (Walt, Russ, Eric-4)
As Magna Grecia was starting up, the three newer arrivals pulled out Puerto Rico, a game that has become a lingua franca for Euro gamers. Walt was looking good, but slipped at the end when he failed to populate his large building and the game ended before he could fix the problem. This allowed Eric-4 to nip in at the wire for a close-fought victory.
Final scores:
Final scores:
VP Bldg Bonus Total Eric-4 (seat 1) 20 + 22 + 7 = 49 Walt (seat 2) 22 + 25 = 47 Russ (seat 3) 17 + 28 = 45
Eric's rating: 10. This is not only a great game, but one that you can play with people you haven't played with before. It's almost sure to be a good way to get to know each other.
WYATT
EARP (Dan, Eric B., Dave)
Puerto Rico hadn't finished yet, so we pulled out Wyatt Earp, one of our favorite fillers. Dave had played before, so we started right in without a rules review. The first hand was fairly quiet, though Eric B. wasn't able to get many useful cards down, and after we scored it was Dan 6, Dave 5, Eric B. 2. Oddly enough, few outlaws were captured, but there was quite a bit of money left on the cards. During the second hand, Dan took off like a rocket, with huge melds on some of the outlaws that had leftover money from before. Eric B. tried a Hideout which Dan foiled with a Wyatt Earp. Late in the hand, Eric B. dropped a photo on an outlaw meld and Dave said "you aren't allowed to play a photo except during your own turn."
This made Eric B. and Dan figuratively smack their foreheads ("duh!") We've always played Wyatt Earp at MVGA using the variant that allows you to play a photo out of turn when another player makes an initial meld for that outlaw. This makes the game a little less predictable and makes it easier and quicker to get the sheriff cards out of your hand. But it's not in the rulebook. I understand that this was the original rule used by Mike Fitzgerald, the designer; I don't know why it was left out of the rulebook. When we sat down with Dave, who'd never been to MVGA before, we didn't even think to talk about this issue. Dan and Eric B. pointed out that we had already dropped about six photos using this rule before the one Dave noticed. Dave explained that he prefers the more uniform pace of the game without the variant. It was hard to figure out what to do to fix the problem. We decided to finish the hand using the variant and eliminate the variant for the final hand. This was not completely fair, because Dave could have dropped some photos during the first hand if he had known we were using that rule. In any case, Dan scooped up 16 in cash for the hand, leaving the scores Dan 22, Dave 17, Eric B. 16.
The final hand saw further mastery by Dan. Eric B. played two Hideouts on him, but neither shot was a hit.
Final scores: Dan 36, Dave 28, Eric B. 20. Remember that Dave missed out on some photos in the first hand.
Eric's rating: 9. I can understand Dave's point of view, but I still like the photo variant.
INDUSTRIA
(Rich, Mike, Evan, Anton)
Just as we were feeling excited about the arrival of three first-timers, we had four more regulars come in the door, bringing the total up to 11. The live steam group was meeting downstairs, so we had to move up to the back room; we carried a long table up the stairs so we'd have the space to play three games at once. Mike hadn't been at MVGA for a few months, so it was especially good to see him again; keep coming, Mike!
We seem to be playing Industria almost every week at MVGA recently, though I haven't gotten into any of the MVGA games. The auctions are fascinating given the tightness of money, and strategies are still being identified and tweaked. In some cases a player will focus on a resource strategy or a connection strategy or an innovation strategy or a bonus strategy, but in this game each of the players played a mixed strategy to some extent.
Final scores: Rich 42, Mike 39, Evan 36, Anton 29.
Eric's rating: 8.
AMUN-RE (Rich, Dave, Eric-4, Russ, Evan)
All three games had ended and we now had 11 gamers with the arrival of Scott, another regular. Anton could only stay for a short game, and the rest of us wanted to player longer games, so he left, leaving us with two 5-player games. A sizeable contingent wanted to play Amun-Re, including some who had not played before, so we set that game up at one end of the table. Amun-Re is a bidding game with the tough trade-offs typical in a Reiner Knizia game. Rich won with the "triple pyramids" strategy, though Evan made a rush from far back by obtaining all four temples in the second epoch.
Final scores: Rich 48, Dave 43, Evan 40 (up from 6 after the first epoch,) Eric-4 39, Russ 26. Dave asked me to record his opinion that this was a "kick-ass game".
Eric's rating: 6.
AGE OF STEAM
(Southern England) (Mike, Scott, Walt, Dan, Eric B.)
We hadn't played Age of Steam for a few months, and Walt had the new expansion with Ireland and Southern England, so the other five players set it up. We had all played before, so we weren't exposing any rookies to this more-difficult map. The Ireland side of the map uses some very different rules, but Southern England is played in much the same way as the original map. London is the only red city on the board (and there is no red option available for Urbanization,) so it is bound to attract more attention than any other city.
We set the starting cubes out on the map, and it was clear that there were going to be few easy deliveries in this game. There was a red cube in Dover and a few purple cubes in the southwest, but nothing else could possibly be delivered on the first turn. Early deliveries are valuable not only for future victory points, but to ease the cash flow crunch. We sat in silence for a few moments, each player convincing himself that money was going to be tight, and we then issued shares. Everyone but Mike took out 3 shares, more than usual. We wanted the opportunity to bid to be early in the turn order.
As it turned out, Dan and Mike bid 3 and 4 right away, leaving Eric B., Walt and Scott the option of bidding 5 for turn order or dropping out. None of us had the nerve to go for it in this game, given the tough placements ("winter is coming,") so we dropped in turn. If we had realized this was going to happen, we could have gotten away with fewer shares (but then again, maybe this was part of what Dan and Mike were thinking when they bid so aggressively.) Mike grabbed Locomotive, Dan Urbanization, Scott First Build, Walt Engineer and Eric B. Turn Order (an investment for Turn 2.)
Scott built the Cardiff-Bristol link, a quasi-monopoly given the terrain, and one that looked promising given the purple cubes in the area. Mike hooked up London and Dover and built one hex northwest from London. Dan dropped a new city down in Reading and hooked to Southampton for some delivery options. Walt used his extra build to connect Exeter to Bristol via Taunton. Eric B. had no way to build so as to deliver even a single cube, so he connected London to Northampton, preparing to compete with Mike for the London & Northwestern line. After one turn, Scott had income of 2, Eric B. 0, and everyone else 1. Three of us skipped deliveries to upgrade our locomotives; it was not much of a sacrifice given the cube placement.
Now that the short-term opportunities had been taken and the first Goods Growth phase was completed, it was still not clear what could be done. Dan won the bid on Turn 2, taking Locomotive, and Eric was second, taking Urbanization. This allowed Dan to deliver a cube from Southampton to London for 2, and Eric B. used a city build in Coventry to stretch his line all the way to Birmingham, stealing a march on Mike. We used Urbanization more as a cheaper version of Engineer in this game than as a delivery opportunity; this was a clear difference from the original map. Mike decided not to compete further for the line to the Northwest and headed to Nottingham. Walt's turn came, and he rearranged his builds several times before announcing that he had made a blunder; he was counting on using Scott's link to Cardiff, but had forgotten that Scott and not Walt would get the income. Walt played on, but did have to give income to a number of others during the game, ruining his chances. Dan was ready to expand north on Turn 3, but he too miscounted (when Dan cried "I just did a Walt!" we weren't sure Walt was amused.)
In the end, North West wound up with seven cubes, including one red cube from London, and Eric B. started delivering them for 4 income a load. This pulled him ahead to the extent that by the end of Turn 5 the other players agreed to end the game two turns early. Order of finish: 1 Eric B., 2 Mike, 3 Scott, 4 Walt, 5 Dan (though it's possible some of the places could have shifted in the final rounds.) Mike took out 12 shares in 5 turns, Eric 14 and everyone else the maximum of 15. The London to Northwest route has a lot of power if one player can get a monopoly on it.
We're showing evidence of more sophisticated strategies in Age of Steam. Bidding for turn order was spirited, and Locomotive was chosen early in each round (not surprising given the paucity of short deliveries.) I'm looking forward to trying this map again to see whether it's always as brutal as it was this time.
Eric's rating: 9. I've played quite a few games of Age of Steam on the original map; it was a lot of fun to work out the possibilities on this new map.
Roll Call: Dan, Eric, Evan, Dave, Mike, (plus Rich, Walt, Bruce and Ray who spent the whole evening playing two tabletop baseball playoff series.)
Many MVGA members belong to an APBA tabletop baseball league that has been running for more than twenty years. During the season, most games are played by mail. The visiting manager sends instructions to the home manager, who plays both teams. Every so often, two managers will show up at MVGA to play a series live. During the playoffs, however, an effort is made to play live. Rich and Walt were playing against Bruce and Ray in the conference semifinals.
INDUSTRIA
(Dan, Eric, Evan)
By 7:00, when Dan, Eric and Evan arrived at the Masonic Hall in Holliston, both baseball series were well underway. Eric requested Industria, a game he had missed each time it was played at MVGA. Industria works well for 3 or 4 players, so we had room to add a fourth player if one were to arrive while we were setting up. According to the rules, you don't use all the tiles in a 3-player game, but the designer has agreed that there's no reason you can't, and we did. Some people believe that the 4-player game handicaps the fourth player (who does not get to be first auctioneer in the first epoch,) but this is clearly not a problem in a 3-player game.
Last week's Industria game involved mixed strategies for everyone, but this week brought out some specialization. Dan got the three left-hand buildings in the first round, with 6 in connection bonuses. Eric got less stuff, but more money. Dan then bought the Bank and started accumulating bonus tiles, while Eric bought the Iron Foundry and Coal Mine. Evan got the Steam Engine, but Eric didn't build the Iron Foundry, and the Steam Engine was useless with no Iron. On the next round, it happened again! Evan got the Automobile, but Eric didn't build his Steel Mill, and Evan had to throw away his second technology.
At the end, Dan had 16 bonus points and 5 cash points, all fueled by his Bank purchase, while Eric had 21 points for connections, including the Iron Foundry/Coal Mine/Coking Works/Steel Mill quadrilateral for 12, and none for cash. Evan lost a whopping 19 points for Technologies and the related connections as a result of his inability to build the Steam Engine and Automobile; this was more than the gap between his last place finish and first place.
Final scores: Eric 59, Dan 51, Evan 44.
Eric's rating: 8. There seems to be less luck in the 3-player game; I have played the 4-player game outside of MVGA and at this point I believe Industria is best for 3.
PUERTO RICO (Eric, Dan, Mike, Evan, Dave)
As we were finishing up, Mike and Dave showed up. Dave was a first-time visitor last week who returned, and we were happy to welcome Mike back; he's a regular we haven't seen for a while. Dave and Mike work in the same place, so Dave was able to follow Mike's car and find an easier way from Norwood. The baseballers were still in game 2, so we decided on Puerto Rico. There are few gaming groups where Puerto Rico isn't a satisfying option.
We drew plantation tiles at random to determine starting positions, as we usually do, and Eric started us off with a Quarry. Dan scooped up a Tobacco, Mike Corn, and Evan and Dave took Indigo, leaving two Coffee as discards. Dan Built for a Tobacco facility, Mike took an Indigo plant, and Evan and Dave took Small Markets while Eric saved his money.
Normally you'd expect an early Tobacco producer to be forced to ship, but Dave got Sugar going, and the first three boats were the cheaper goods. Eric used his stash to get Coffee going before Dan could sell, and Eric and Dan were early money leaders. However, Dave sold Sugar to raise cash for his own Tobacco, and this hurt Dan while Eric continued to enjoy a Coffee monopoly for a while. Evan became the Corn lord and shipped like mad, and Dave and Eric benefited from the fallout. Many large production buildings were built, increasing the colonist drain, and the game ended on a colonist shortage. Mike and Dave each had two large buildings while Eric had one.
Final scores:
VP Bldg Bonus Total Eric 28 + 25 + 9 = 62 Dave 21 + 23 + 10 = 54 Evan 34 + 17 = 51 Mike 16 + 18 + 11 = 45 Dan 17 + 17 = 34
Dan finished the game with a huge pile of Indigo and Tobacco which he was never able to convert into points. Eric finished with six Corn that had been sitting in a Small Warehouse for several turns; he didn't get the points, but he did slow down the Corn shippers both by hoarding Corn and by discouraging the creation of Corn boats. This game was notable for a lack of defense; there were a number of cases where a player had a chance to make a play that benefited him and another player; Eric got to be on the other side of those transactions more than anyone else, and that made the difference.
Eric's rating: 10. This game moves along even more quickly now that so many people are familiar with it. A year ago we still needed a rules refresher before many games, but that's no longer the case. Of course, if you haven't played Puerto Rico, you're welcome to visit MVGA and try it; we're a good group for learners.
HIGH SOCIETY
(Eric, Dan, Mike, Evan, Dave)
High Society has long been a favorite hard-to-get game. It's #86 on Aaron Fuegi's Internet Top 100 Games list, which you can view online (the full list of 4,269 rated games is also available on Aaron's site.) It has recently come out in a new English-language edition from Uberplay, and Eric brought a copy to MVGA. It's a bidding game in which you spend money either to get good tiles or to avoid getting bad ones. The "hook" is the victory conditions: Any player or players who spent the most money is a loser, regardless of how many points he or she obtained. The winner is the remaining player with the most points. This makes for a tough challenge: if you bid too much, you're out, but if you don't bid enough, you won't get points. In some sense, your goal is to be the second most aggressive player, but when everyone's trying to be the second most aggressive, there's a lot of jockeying for position.
Dave and Mike started out as the aggressive bidders, with Eric and Evan being more cautious. The early cards were good ones. Dave paid $28 for a "10" and Dan scooped up a "9". Mike dropped out of the bidding and took a "1/2" multiplier card, while Eric dropped out and took a Thief, which would wipe out his next number card. His plan was to bid fairly high on a low card that his thief could wipe out, but that wasn't worth much to anyone else. Unfortunately, this failed as only one small card came out, a "2", and Evan took it. Evan dropped out and got stuck with a "-5" card, and the game ended as soon as the fourth red card came up. Dan, who played quietly throughout the entire game, stepped up for the win.
Final scores:
Dan 9 ($47 left)
Mike 6.5 ($36 left)
Evan 5 ($55 left)
Eric 0 ($67 left)
Dave 20 ($20 left) so he lost no matter how many points he had.
Eric's rating: 8. This is a quick game that forces you to make a plan, but that also forces you to modify your plan on the fly based on the cards that come out and the bidding of your opponents.
COLORETTO
(Eric, Dan, Mike, Evan, Dave)
The baseball was nearing its conclusion, so we looked for a short game that would allow the baseball players to join us for a final game if they wanted to afterward. Evan suggested Coloretto, a quick game that got a lot of airplay at MVGA last summer, but that we haven't played recently. It's a card game with seven colored suits of nine cards each and some "+2" and "wild" cards. Play goes around the table; on your turn you have two options. You can take a card from the draw pile, look at it and add it to a stack, or you can take a stack, ending your participation for the round. You can't take a stack unless it has at least one card, and you can't add a card to a stack that already has three cards. Your goal is to get a lot of cards in three suits and few cards in the other four. The trick is to build stacks that are good for you, but are bad for everyone else (if you build a stack that's good for you and for another player, the other player will take it before play comes around to you again.)
The first round was fairly uneventful, except that Eric got a wild card to go with his starting brown card. Many people argue that wild cards are too powerful, though we haven't felt that way at MVGA. On the next round, players began to specialize in certain colors. Evan and Mike were building large collections, but were forced to spread out in more than three colors. This situation can be managed, but it does give opponents an opportunity to hurt you by clever plays.
The key turn saw Eric as the last remaining player with only a "+2" in the final stack. He turned over two random cards and both were brown, adding to his long suit. This made the difference, as Eric's "small stack" strategy resulted in no negative points and a close win over Evan's larger piles offset by negatives, even though Eric had fewer cards than any other player.
Final scores: Eric 25, Evan 23, Dan 22, Mike 21, Dave 16.
Eric's rating: 8. This is one of my favorite fillers.
ATTIKA
(Evan, Dave, Mike, Eric)
Dan left at this point, and the baseball players were emotionally drained after close series. Rich and Walt won, setting up a divisional final between their two teams, Walt's Maracaibo Rumrunners and Rich's Elders of Zion. Rich's team seems to have a hex over Walt's team, almost like the Yankees have over the Red Sox (dare I say it?) so tension will be high for the upcoming series.
We've played a few games of Attika at MVGA, but Mike and Dave were new to the game. After a rules explanation we set off. Mike got a great position down the middle of the board and threatened connection almost immediately. Dave started one settlement, and then another across the board, but he was hemmed in early and ran out of room for expansion. Eric started slowly, obtaining building room, but was in a position that offered no conceivable connection opportunities. Evan played a quiet game, placing relatively few buildings, but gathering several amphorae (which allow an extra action.) Evan, Dave and Eric worked together to block Mike, and by midgame Eric was the clear leader in the race to 30, but the others were all conspiring to win by connection. Eric had about 18 buildings on the board when the others started saving cards (always an ominous development.) The game ended when Evan drew the last tile in a stack, placed it, added a new landscape tile, and used amphorae together with his huge card stash to complete a connection for the win.
Eric's rating: 7 at this point. The game is fun and requires planning, but the strategies are fairly simple for us at this point. I can see that this rating may go up as I gain familiarity; we'll have to see.
Roll Call: Rich, Evan, Eric, Walt, Anton, Dan, Mike, Scott
After several weeks with new visitors, we had only regulars this week, but the 8 in attendance still represent a solid group of gamers. We're regularly getting enough people to play two games at once.
ALHAMBRA
(Rich, Evan, Dan)
At 7:00 we had four players, and we began setting up Alhambra. Before we could start, two more came in. Alhambra will take 6, but you have to wait twice as long between turns as with 3. The ideal number of players is 3 or 4. We decided to split into two groups, with 3 playing Alhambra.
At the first scoring, Rich had already amassed an impressive long wall. Evan had a number of exterior wall tiles, but in several disconnected stretches. Dan did not manage to buy even a single tile with a wall; as a result, he scored zero for walls at the first scoring. Since wall-free tiles are more expensive than the ones with walls, this not only hurt his score, but used up his cash.
By the second scoring, Evan had managed to connect up his walls more effectively, but he couldn't gain ground on Rich. Dan still had almost no walls. This pattern consisted through the end of the game with Dan scoring only 5 or 6 wall points in total for all three rounds. Scoring for color majorities was fairly even, so the wall points made the difference.
Final scores: Rich 149, Evan 121, Dan 111.
Dan had horrible luck in this game, as he often does, and he wonders whether there's some different approach he could take to adjust for the problem.
Eric's rating: 8. This is by no means a brain-burner, but there are real decisions to make. The fact that wall-bound tiles are cheaper than wall-free tiles is an important strategic theme.
ATTIKA
(Walt, Eric, Anton)
While 3 of us were playing Alhambra, the other 3 set up Attika. Walt was new to the game, so we explained the rules before we started. The normal way to win is to place all 30 of your building tiles on the board first, but it's also possible to win by connecting two shrines with an unbroken chain of your own buildings (and this could take as few as 7 or 8 buildings.) It's almost impossible to achieve a connection win if your opponents really try to stop you, but it takes resources to stop someone, so people often take risks that allow connections.
Eric played first, building his Harbor (his initial main building draw) in a likely spot and drawing two cards. Walt started a settlement in the center of the board, and it was soon a thriving metropolis that included his Thebes tile. Anton began on the other side, snaking his way between two shrines. Walt blocked him partly on one end, and then Eric started a new Street settlement on the other end, blocking Anton off completely. This forced Anton toward Walt, reducing the amount of room each had to expand. Eric made moves toward connecting his two settlements and achieving a connection win, but Walt placed the first new terrain tile in such a way as to eliminate that possibility. The game then settled down to a straightforward race to 30 for a while as we drew and built and began to collect amphorae.
In the late mid-game, with 15 to 20 buildings on the board for each player, Eric emptied out a stack, opening up a new potential connection route (on another side of the board from the connection Walt had ruined earlier.) Eric used several amphorae to reach partway toward the vital shrine and threaten a victory. Walt and Anton were both a bit card short at this point, so neither could quite complete a block, and Eric was able to finish his connection on the next turn with a placement and a free build from his mat to win the game.
Eric's rating: 7. This is an enjoyable game that shares with Settlers of Catan or Puerto Rico the feeling that every player is making progress in building a civilization. Even if you don't win, you made progress toward your goal. No one is wiped out, which makes it a good family game. In this particular game, Eric benefited from some good tile draws, so it's not clear how much the result was driven by luck. We'll keep playing it as we explore the luck-skill balance and the tension between 30-tile wins and connection wins.
BATTLE CRY
(Walt, Eric)
The first two games finished at almost the same time, and Mike arrived to give us 7 players (we were disappointed to see that Dave, who works with Mike, didn't come this week.) It seemed logical to split into a 3-player game and a 4-player game, but Walt had brought his copy of Battle Cry, a 2-player game, and wanted to give it a try. Eric volunteered to play Battle Cry with Walt; the others would have no trouble finding a 5-player game.
Battle Cry is a "wargame lite" with a Civil War theme and a whole collection of plastic miniatures. Battles are resolved not by a complex combat results table, but with the help of lots of six-sided dice that have infantry, cavalry, artillery, wild-card and retreat symbols. To hit an infantry unit you need to roll infantry or wild-card symbols. A retreat symbol doesn't cause casualties, but does force a retreat. Movement and combat is governed by action cards. A player has a hand of action cards, each permitting some action. Each turn consists of playing a card, carrying out the action, and drawing a new card. Some cards allow you to move troops on the right side of your line; others allow movement on the left or in the center. Some permit major offensives while others only allow probes. The challenge of the game lies in adapting your plans to fit the cards you draw. Walt and Eric had both played Avalon Hill and other wargames decades ago (before Euro games were widely available,) and both had played at least a few games of Battle Cry in the past.
We randomly selected a scenario from the rule book; we chose Antietam, the principal battle of Lee's 1862 invasion of the north. In real life the Confederates won a bloody tactical victory, but were then forced to retreat back to Virginia, halting their move toward Pennsylvania. We randomly chose sides, with Walt taking the Union and Eric the Confederates. The Union has superior forces, including artillery that can be placed on hilltops to sweep the battlefield, but the left flank is confined behind Antietam creek. In addition, the Confederate command advantage is reflected by the fact that the Confederates can hold a 5-card hand while the Union can hold only 3 cards. This means the Confederates typically have a wider range of options on any turn.
As the game began, Walt started to cross the creek on his left. The Confederates advanced toward the Sunken Road, a defensive position in the center, but despite his 5-card hand, Eric soon had nothing but right flank cards available. Given the Union advantage in that area, the Confederates best strategy is to let the creek slow down the Union and play a defensive game. Eric made the mistake of letting his cards lure him into an attack. This simply made him a target for the superior Union forces, which were delighted to find enemies they could attack without crossing the creek. Each unit destroyed gives the victor a flag, and six flags win the game. Walt was soon ahead 4 flags to 1.
At this point the game changed, as Walt's supply of useful attack cards dried up and Eric began to draw attack cards for the left and center. Eric's forces in the Sunken Road raked Walt's forces across from them, and Walt didn't have the cards to fight back. Walt retreated out of range, but Eric's infantry climbed out of the Sunken Road and chased them, gambling that Walt would not draw the card he needed to make them pay. This proved to be the game-winner as Eric captured 5 flags in a row to win, 6 flags to 4.
Eric's rating: 7. The game moves quickly and the card system makes it impossible to devise a "perfect plan." You have to make soup with whatever you draw. In this game, the Confederates' 5 to 3 card advantage was of no help early, but became overwhelming at the end. Walt was reduced to discarding useless cards as his center and right collapsed. You shouldn't play this game if lucky breaks bother you, but it does seem like an attractive option for teen-agers because of the visual charm and the thrill of rolling those dice.
AMUN-RE (Rich, Evan, Dan, Anton, Mike)
It seems we've been playing Amun-Re every week at MVGA recently, so it was an obvious choice for the 5-players who were not involved in Battle Cry. There's an undercurrent of opinion that Rich has been winning a large share of the Amun-Re games, but each game is a new start and you never know until you play the game. There was a wide array of strategies in this game, as Evan scooped up Thebes and built four pyramids there while Mike saved his money, building little. Evan scored 5 points for most pyramids on one side of the Nile for Thebes. After the Old Kingdom, the scores stood Dan 14, Evan 12, Rich 11, Anton 9 and Mike only 1.
As the New Kingdom opened, Evan bid 21 for Thebes with a bidding blockade. The 4-pyramid province was a tempting target, but no one could see that bidding 36 for it was a winning move. Thebes served as a deterrent to building on that side of the river, so Evan was able to take the 5-point bonus again without adding a single block to Thebes. This allowed him to concentrate on completing pyramid sets. The pyramid race on the other side of the Nile was more intense, consuming resources and holding down set formation. Evan's exploitation of Thebes made the difference. Mike was not able to convert his frugality into points and finished far off the pack.
Final scores: Evan 43, Rich 37, Dan 34, Anton 27, Mike 17.
Eric's rating: 6.
WYATT
EARP (Walt, Eric, Scott)
Battle Cry finished while Amun-Re was still in the Old Kingdom, so we added Scott, who had just arrived. We decided to play a few quick games and pulled out Wyatt Earp, Carcassonne, Through the Desert and Web of Power. After some discussion, we started with Wyatt Earp. Our Wyatt Earp games have become more varied recently as Most Wanted and Hideout are used creatively and players hold cards in an attempt to go out suddenly. This was the most unusual Wyatt Earp game I've ever been involved in.
On the first hand, Walt began with several large lay-downs, supported by Scott's timely photography. Walt and Eric played hideouts on each others' largest stacks, but Walt had other arrows in his quiver, and he jumped out to a big lead. Scores at this point: Walt $10K, Scott $7K, Eric $2K.
On the second hand, Eric noted the pile of money on Billy the Kid and used two consecutive Most Wanted cards to pull Billy the Kid cards from Walt and lay down a lucrative meld. Walt then played a Hideout on that meld which Eric was not able to remove. Eric's reprisal Hideout missed its shot and Walt maintained his lead. Scores: Walt $15K, Scott $12K, Eric $6K.
The final hand started with a huge hoard on Billy the Kid and a smaller stack on Wes Hardin. Eric was fortunate to draw cards for both outlaws, but he expended two Wyatt Earps doing so. Walt was in position to end the hand, but calculated that Eric would make enough to win if the game ended, so Walt continued the game. Walt drew two Hideouts and played them on Eric's two stacks, eliminating the threat and going out for the win. (See this picture to show what was facing Eric at the end of the game!) Scott continued to get the largest share of the photos, giving him points for second places but never enough to catch Walt.
Final scores: Walt $27K, Scott $19K, Eric $12K. The game ended with Billy the Kid uncaptured despite a reward of $15K left on him, and Wes Hardin also uncaptured with a reward of $12K. Eric took a risk in using up his Wyatt Earp cards, leaving him defenseless against the Hideouts (but it was the use of the Wyatt Earp cards that gave him the outlaw cards in the first place.) This game was thrilling all the way through, but especially during the third hand.
Eric's rating: 9. If you come to MVGA to play Wyatt Earp, watch your back! We have some real sharpshooters in the group.
THROUGH
THE DESERT (Walt, Eric, Scott)
Amun-Re was still plugging along, so we set up Through the Desert. Eric's reputation in Through the Desert is similar to Rich's in Amun-Re, so when the random draw left him as third player (and the first to be able to play two camels) there was dark muttering from Walt and Scott.
Through the Desert has a light appearance, with adorable sherbet-colored camels, but it has multiple ways to gain points, and it's not easy to keep track of all of them at once. You score for connecting to water holes and oases. You also score for fencing off an area with a single herd of camels; if an opponent threatens to do so, you must be alert to stop it. Finally, there is a 10-point bonus for largest herd in each of the five colors. If you place 10 or 15 camels to earn this bonus, it's a fair reward, but if you scoop a 10-point chip for a small herd, it can be highway robbery.
We placed our initial camels and started grabbing 3-point water holes, but Eric soon placed 2 camels that blocked one of Walt's chains and set Eric up to begin enclosing a huge area. There's only two ways to stop such a threat. One way is to invade the area with your own chain, but the prior blocking move made that impossible. The other way is to end the game before the enclosure is complete. The game ends when the last camel in any of the five colors is taken. Walt and Scott began grabbing purple camels, and Eric had to chop the size of his enclosure drastically lest it be left hanging open at the end for no score. However, the side effect of all the purple camel draws were that Walt and Scott's heavy concentration in that color made 10-point bonuses in the other colors extremely cheap. Eric won three of the 10-point bonuses, two with herds only five camels in size.
Final scores: Eric 73, Walt 64, Scott 46.
COLORETTO
(Rich, Evan, Eric, Dan, Mike, Scott)
Walt and Anton had to leave, and it was already 11:00, so we looked for a short 6-player game. We decided on Coloretto, even though the maximum number of players is supposedly only 5. We used six stacks and placed the ending card 18 cards up from the bottom. With 6 players we hypothesized that "+2" cards would be worth a little more and wild cards a little less.
The color distributions came out in such a way that it was not easy for anyone to concentrate in one color. Defensive play all around didn't help either. Eric turned over two wild cards early, and both were scooped up immediately by Mike. Some people say the wild cards are a game-breaker, so we watched Mike carefully. Rich got the third wild card a little later, but he didn't have the long suit that would bring the most benefit from a wild card. Dan had started off with a yellow card, and he kept pecking away, grabbing one here and one there, assisted by the fact that no one else was making a try for yellow. In the end this made the difference.
Final scores: Dan 18, Mike 16, Eric 16, Rich 15, Evan 11, Scott 8.
Eric's rating: 8. There's even less control with 6, and the game goes very quickly, but it still works.
BAKSCHISCH
(Rich, Evan, Eric, Mike)
Dan and Scott left, as it was now 11:30, but 4 die-hards stayed on for one final game. Eric proposed Bakschisch, a quick blind-bidding game he recently purchased from Funagain. This game could be described as "Candyland on steroids," a description that is also sometimes used of Cartagena. The goal is to be first to move your token to the Caliph's seat through successful bids for advancement cards. The board is reminiscent of Aladdin's Dragons, with a winding path from the bottom to the top and a palace representing the top row. Each round, four advancement cards are put up for auction, one after the other, with a card granting the right to advance to the next space of a specific color. The fifth card in each round is a fall-back card; players bid to avoid falling back to the next space of that color.
Players bid using coins, with the high bidder(s) moving forward. You must pay the amount of your bid, win or lose. This is a mechanism that is annoying in many games, but Bakschisch is so simple and quick that it works here. Each player also has a thief that can be used once a round. It's a big help if you can scoop up multiple juicy bids with a single thief, and it's a disappointment if you play your thief only to find other thieves at work, leaving only a miserable amount to split up. After each round, all money bid and not stolen is divided up equally among all players, Traumfabrik-style.
Eric and Mike bid aggressively early on, leaving Rich and Evan richer but well behind on the track. Rich then made his move, spending cash to catch up as Evan continued his frugal ways. Eric and Mike bid their way into the palace (losing their thieves, which aren't admitted to the palace) as Rich scored big with his thief. Evan finally made his move, bidding high and draining cash from unsuccessful bidders, but falling short as first Rich and then Eric made it to the Caliph's seat. With only the fall-back card left to play, the question was who would still be on the throne when the round ended for the victory. Rich bid 4 and Eric bid 3, while Evan, impoverished by his late push, could bid only 2. Evan fell back, leaving Rich and Eric still on the seat. The first tie-break is cash, but Rich and Eric had both spent all their cash. The second tie-break is order of arrival, and since Rich arrived on the Caliph's seat one card before Eric did, he was the winner.
Eric's rating: 8. This game plays quickly; we finished in 20 minutes, including the rules explanation (of course, our motto at MVGA is "play fast, make mistakes.") There's some luck, but it doesn't seem as overwhelming as it can be in Cartagena. The "pay your bid, win or lose" blind-bidding mechanism works better in a 20-minute game than in a longer game, and there are real, tense decisions to make. If only the box weren't so big!
Roll Call: Anton, Dan, Mark, Eric, Dave, Mike, Evan, Walt, Rich, Paul
It was another big night at MVGA. Mark, an MVGA old-timer who moved away ten
years ago, is back visiting for two weeks. Dave, who attended for the first
time earlier in January, made his third visit, arriving with Mike as they drove
together from work, and we welcomed Paul for his first visit in several weeks.
With ten for the final week of the month, we averaged nine gamers a week
in January.
ALHAMBRA
(Anton, Dan, Mark, Eric)
The Masonic Hall was already bustling at 7:00. The first four to arrive sat down to Alhambra, SdJ winner for 2003 (with an expansion announced for 2004) and a current MVGA favorite. Mark was new to the game, but he clearly had experience with games and was up to speed immediately. Dan was happy to be selected as first to play, as his luck has been awful in Alhambra recently.
This game represented a break in the pattern as Dan was able to purchase a
number of tiles in the early going for exact change,
with Mark keeping up tile for tile. Anton and Eric did not find the pickings
as attractive and by the time of the first scoring card,
Dan and Mark were tied for the lead with Anton and Eric in the last two places.
During the middle part of the game, Dan continued to obtain free actions through
exact purchases, but this was a mixed blessing as almost every tile he could
buy was either a green
garden or a white workshop. Dan was clearly going to be first in these colors,
but without supporting holdings in other colors, it would be hard to win. Mark
kept pace, extending his wall, and Eric and Anton began to make comebacks, overpaying
for critical tiles and starting work on walls.
The second scoring preserved the relative positions of the players, distributing
the points evenly. Dan was ahead of Mark by a single
point, with Anton and Eric continuing to trail behind. At this point Dan's position
started to run out of steam, as second and even third places in colors other
than green and white were out of reach. Mark grabbed a tie in purple towers,
the most valuable color in the game, and finished an almost perfect wall to
take the victory away from three experienced players in his rookie game. Eric
and Anton scored respectably but lost further ground in the final scoring. Although
Dan did not win, he was relieved to have finished second after a string of poor
results in Alhambra.
Final scores: Mark 119, Dan 102, Eric 94, Anton 85.
Eric's rating: 8. This game is pleasant and has a level of competitiveness that I enjoy.
WYATT
EARP (Mike, Dave)
Mike and Dave came in together and played a hand of Wyatt Earp while they awaited further arrivals. The two-player game differs from the 3- or 4-player versions in that each player has a larger share of the card-playing opportunities and thus more opportunity to control the result. Each player controlled several long suits when Mike tried to go out, but unfortunately his final play of one outlaw on an existing three-outlaw meld together with an initial three-outlaw meld for another outlaw was illegal; he had no discard and you may not go out without a discard if it's your turn. He could not afford to forgo the points from the four-outlaw suit, so he played on. Only after several additional turns was Dave able to go out. By this time more players had arrived, so the game ended after a single hand.
Final scores: Dave $13K, Mike $9K.
Eric's rating: 9. We're still developing our strategies in this game. I have played mainly 3- and 4-player games; it's ideal for 3, but it works fine for 2 or for 4.
INDUSTRIA
(Evan, Walt, Rich, Paul)
By this time four more players had arrived and we were up to 10. We considered playing two 5-player games, but decided to play three games instead.
Industria is a bidding game with a unique mechanism. Each turn a set of tiles are turned up for distribution, with one player selected as first auctioneer. The auctioneer can simply take the tile of his or her choice (allowing the next player to become auctioneer,) or can instead sell the tile to the high bidder (and remain auctioneer.) The trick is to choose the best order in which to hold the auctions. You would prefer to auction off several tiles for money, while taking your first choice at the end, but this is hard to accomplish. If you auction lesser tiles first, the other players may pass, ending your turn as auctioneer. On the other hand, if you auction the best tile first, it will go to an opponent if you wish to keep your job as auctioneer.
In this game, Evan bought quite a few production buildings, assuring him of a steady cash source. Rich bought both the Bank and the Stock Market, reducing his cash need. This left Walt and Paul at a disadvantage. Evan waited his time to put his cash to use, but in the end his production beat out Rich's diversified approach.
Final scores: Evan 45, Rich 44, Walt 26, Paul 16.
Eric's rating: 8. The auction system is ingenious, but the order of play is also important. Many purchases require a key resource to build, and by delaying the construction of a production tile, you can damage your opponents' plans. This is especially true of the technologies, which are worthless if they are not built in the epoch in which they are purchased. There's more to this game than I'm able to understand at the moment.
ATTIKA
(Dave, Mike, Anton)
The second group played Attika, a game each had played once or twice before.
With less-experienced players connection wins are
common, so each player was eyeing his neighbors warily in the early going. Things
settled down after a while, and the business of getting tiles out on the board
and collecting amphorae for connected groups proceeded. As stacks shrink, offering
the potential for new map tiles, and as amphorae extend the range of options,
new connection threats develop later in the game, and this is where Dave struck.
He emptied a stack by drawing the last tile, placed it on the board, and used
the new map tile to open a new route to a shrine. He then used an amphora to
connect up to the shrine, winning the game.
Eric's rating: 7 for a game that plays well and has a bit of a potato chip quality to it (it's hard to play just one.) This is a slightly higher "7" than it was a few weeks ago; I can see this game moving up to "8" if it continues to provide interest.
PUERTO RICO (Eric, Mark, Dan)
With Industria and Attika underway, Dan and Eric decided we just had to teach Mark Puerto Rico, a game he had not yet played. The game works extremely well for three, and while we warned Mark that it can be a bit confusing for a new player, we could see from his earlier victory in Alhambra that he would not be an easy mark, even in a game he had just learned.
We drew randomly for seating order, and Eric drew the first slot, with Mark second and Dan third. The second slot is often thought to be the most difficult in 3- and 4-player Puerto Rico, so Mark had an extra handicap. Eric began with a Quarry, Mark took Coffee and Dan took Tobacco. Mark then Mayored and Dan Built, giving free Small Markets to him and Eric while Mark took a Construction Hut. This left Mark in a difficult position cash-wise, and he struggled with the problem for the first part of the game. Eric got an early Factory, and later picked up his own Coffee, while Dan benefited from a Tobacco monopoly that lasted the entire game (Dan wound up with at least four Tobacco plantations, more than he could work, but this made it hard for Eric to get one.)
Dan got the other Factory, and not long after, Dan and Mark scooped up the Harbors. Mark and Dan had accumulated a number of Corn plantations and began to ship as Eric tried to end the game quickly. On the final turn, Mark got 8 VP from a single Corn loading to finish a furious comeback attempt, but he wound up just a little bit short.
Final scores:
VP Bldg Bonus Total Dan 23 + 21 + 7 = 51 Eric 13 + 24 + 10 = 47 Mark 24 + 21 = 45
Eric's rating: 10. As usual, an interesting and close game.
STEPHENSONS
ROCKET (Evan, Walt, Rich, Paul)
Industria finished off with a close win for Evan, and the other two games
were still in progress, so the four players set up Walt's
copy of Stephensons Rocket (it's hard to remember that the title has no apostrophe!)
This Knizia game of railroad investment in England has no luck at all. This
feature can cause stilted play if a group plays the game over and over, but
it's not a problem at MVGA because none of us has memorized "best"
moves.
Stephensons Rocket, like many Knizia games, offers multiple avenues to victory. You get points for owning stations on important rail lines, for owning shares in important rail companies, and for obtaining majorities in different commodities. You'd prefer to get a lot of points easily by concentrating on something no one else wants, but they can see what you're doing and provide competition to prevent a runaway in any one area.
This game saw a lot of discussion among the players as shares were voted to
direct rail building in one direction or another, and as
the players weighed the relative values of stations, shares and commodities.
It's hard to know who's winning before the end, so everyone was eager to see
the final scores. When we had finished counting the money, Rich had nipped Evan
by a single point and Walt was not far behind.
Final scores: Rich 79, Evan 78, Walt 76, Paul 37.
URSUPPE
(Dan, Eric, Evan, Walt)
Walt brought a number of less-common games to the session, and after the success of Stephensons Rocket we went right on to Ursuppe. This fascinating game casts each player as the commander of a species of amoeba, reproducing and gaining favorable mutations in an attempt to be more successful than any other species of amoeba. (It's interesting that most games on the topic of evolution seem to present Lamarckian evolution, in which you mutate because you want to mutate!) Many gamers have played Evo from EuroGames. A number of EuroGames products are simplified versions of other games; Vinci is a simplified version of History of the World or Civilization, while Evo is a simplified version of Ursuppe.
The game begins in a cheerful state, with food plentifully spread across the board, but it's not long before the pickings are thin. New food comes from only two sources: amoeba poop and dead amoebas (you can see that this game would be a hit with middle schoolers!) The amoebas do not possess much control over their movement at the start of the game; they mainly drift to and fro with the current. Each species gets 10 points a turn to spend on reproduction, buying new genes and movement; for 1 point an amoeba can roll a die and move accordingly instead of drifting. This laughable improvement in mobility can be upgraded by the purchase of the right genes, but you never have as many points as you need.
Strategies differed in the early going, as Dan focused on obtaining control over his movement, Walt on improving his reproduction rate, and Eric and Evan played more balanced strategies. Dan and Eric were the early leaders, with Walt a few points behind and Evan in last place. The level of cosmic rays varies from turn to turn, and when they are bad, they can force players to discard those dearly-won genes if they cannot pay to keep them. Dan's movement strategy was one he was able to focus on steadily, while Eric's stalled with no clear way to move forward. Walt kept in it with his clouds of new amoeba, and Evan purchased a valuable gene, Struggle for Survival, that enabled him to eat another amoeba when food was short. Evan proceeded to swallow four of Eric's healthy amoeba in a single turn, catapulting Evan into competition and dropping Eric's depleted species into last place.
Final scores: Dan 45, Evan 43, Walt 37, Eric 35.
Eric's rating: 8. This game is extremely cute; it's fun to play and it makes sense. There are real decisions to make. In the short term your decisions are tactical, but in the long term your choice of gene purchases will determine the outcome. I strongly prefer Ursuppe to Evo and Urland, two games it is often compared with, because there is a much stronger strategic element to Ursuppe.
PUERTO RICO (Rich, Anton, Dave, Mike, Mark)
Paul had to leave for work, and with four playing Ursuppe, this left five for another game. Mark had enjoyed his first game of Puerto Rico so much that he asked for an immediate replay. He had finished well despite making some moves he later realized could have been improved, and he didn't want to wait to try again. The other four players, each of whom had experience with the game, went over the differences between the 3-player game and the 5-player game, and the game began.
Mark once again played a shipping strategy effectively, supported by Rich, who focused on shipping, but Dave's building strategy won by a few points.
Final scores:
VP Bldg Bonus Total Dave 21 + 23 + 11 = 55 Mark 30 + 15 + 8 = 53 Rich 37 + 16 = 53 Anton 20 + 18 + 12 = 50 Mike 24 + 16 = 40
Eric's rating: 10.
Roll call: Eric, Rich, Mark, Dan, Walt, Evan.
Mark, an MVGA old-timer and a transplanted Patriots' fan who'll be headed back home to Carolina after a few weeks in Massachusetts, came to MVGA again this week.
HICK HACK IN
GACKELWACK (Eric, Rich, Mark, Dan, Walt)
Five gamers were fired up and ready to go as MVGA swung into gear for another Thursday evening of gaming. We looked for a quick filler game to play while we waited to see whether any more players would arrive (there's nothing worse than coming in a few minutes late and finding everyone already engaged in long games.) Walt had some brand-new games under his arm, but we exhibited an unexpected capacity for delayed gratification and laid out six large barnyard tiles and a handful of chicken feed as we set up Hick Hack in Gackelwack.
Each player received six cards (some foxes and some chickens) and Walt went over the rules. In each of the 13 rounds of this game, each player simultaneously plays a card face-down. When the cards are exposed, each fox or chicken goes to the barnyard of that color, the foxes eat the chickens, and the chickens that survive eat the chicken feed. If several foxes or several chickens visit the same barnyard, they roll dice or negotiate to determine who gets the loot. It's partly a game of outguessing your opponents and partly one of playing the hand you are dealt. After the loot is divided, any uneaten chicken feed remains in place, each player gets a new card, and six new chicken feed cubes are laid out. The game started out evenly, but Richard soon began to display an uncanny ability to bring his foxes out at just the right time. Whenever several chickens flocked to the same barnyard, Rich was there with a fox. The table in front of Rich soon had more dead chickens than the entire state of Delaware. Each of the rest of us tried to out-think and double-think Rich's strategy, but it only resulted in a hungry foxes' convention that we forgot to invite the chickens to attend.
Final scores: Rich 46, Dan 31, Mark 31, Eric 31, Walt 24.
Eric's rating: 6. Hick Hack in Gackelwack is a silly quick game with some skill and a lot of luck. If you like to laugh, you'll have plenty of opportunities.
KOGGE
(Rich, Mark, Dan)
Evan arrived as we finished our first game, and with 6 in attendance we decided to split into two threes. Everyone was eager to play Kogge, a new game Walt brought to MVGA, but it's designed for 2 to 4 players and we didn't want to leave two players out, so we decided to let Rich, Mark and Dan give it a try. Kogge is a desktop-published game of trading in the Baltic Sea area (a popular topic recently.) Some reviews have commented on the amateurish appearance and poor print quality of the components, but the print quality of Walt's copy was reasonably good for desktop publishing (though the box had so much of the color worn off that it looked like it had been in someone's game bin for ten years.)
In Kogge, players trade in Ore, Fur, Salt and Amber, establishing trading offices in the Hanseatic cities. The trade routes between cities are governed by "route markers," with two route markers placed for each city. For example, if city #4 has route markers #2 and #5, your Kogge (ship) in city #4 can move either to city #2 or city #5. Each player has a supply of route markers that can be used to shift the routes or to bid for player order. The game can end in either of two different ways. If a player gets to 5 development points at any time, that player wins immediately. Alternatively, if the Guild Master completes two circuits of the board, the game is over and the player with the most victory points wins. Victory points are not the same as development points; for example, although offices count both for development points and victory points, goods on board your ship count for victory points but not development points. This dual victory system (somewhat reminiscent of Liberte or Nur Peanuts) adds interest to the game.
All three players were new to the game, and rules although fairly straightforward take a while to internalize, so play started slowly. However, as the guild master traversed his second circuit, it became clear that the game could easily end in either of the two ways. Rich had an advantage if the guild master completed the second circuit because of his large stash of goods, but Dan was threatening to grab 5 development points first. As it turned out, Dan raced over to the key city to get to 5 just one turn before the guild master made it back.
Final scores: Dan 5, Mark 4, Rich 3.
Eric's rating: I have not yet played the game, but I'd like to try it.
MAYA (Eric,
Evan, Walt)
While three players began Kogge, the other three decided to try Maya. Evan had brought Maya with him to MVGA the past few weeks, so we wanted to make sure he got a chance to teach it. The game was new to Eric and Walt, and Evan had only played it with more than 3, so no one really knew what to expect. Maya is a block-placing game, in the same broad category as El Grande or San Marco, though the rules are a lot simpler than either of those games. The game lasts three rounds, and each round is composed of an auction in which you place cards to bid for cubes and special actions followed by a cube-placing phase and end-of-round scoring. The auction is tricky in that you must save some of your bidding cards to transport the cubes won to the building site. If you save too many cards you won't win many cubes, but if you save too few cards you won't be able to transport cubes to the building site (as it turned out, no one lost cubes due to transportation problems in this game.)
We felt our way through the first round. Each player spread his bids around during the auction, and we finished with a 3-way tie for number of cubes won. We then moved to the building site, where Walt concentrated primarily on one pyramid, Evan spread his cubes evenly, and Eric ignored Walt's pyramid and divided his cubes among the other three pyramids. Placement is partly a matter of sheer numbers and partly a matter of timing; if you have a majority on one level it's possible to get a free cube on the next level if you time things right. After the first round Walt scored heavily for his one pyramid, Eric scored fairly well for each of the others, and Evan trailed due to the fact that he was so spread out. Scores after one round: Eric 11, Walt 8, Evan 6.
In the second round, Eric took the largest number of cubes in the auction by spreading his bidding around while Walt and Evan focused their bidding, winning the special actions but gaining fewer cubes. Eric's numerical advantage proved critical as he was able to outlast his opponents and gain some unchallenged placements at the end of the round. Scores after two rounds: Eric 26, Walt 18, Evan 16.
In the third round, Walt and Evan again concentrated to gain all the special actions, but there was again a 3-way tie for most cubes, so that Eric came out the loser in the auction. Unfortunately for Walt and Evan, Eric's strong existing position in the pyramids could not be overcome in the final cube placement.
Final scores: Eric 52, Walt 40, Evan 36.
Eric's rating: 6. The game plays very well, but it's not clear from the first playing how much scope there is for strategic play. This rating is just a first estimate based on a single play. The game also works and would have a different feel for 4 or 5 players; it's hard to predict what the differences would be.
WEB
OF POWER (Eric, Walt, Evan)
The Kogge game was nowhere near completion, so we looked for a shortish game that works well for 3. We went to the MVGA games closet and pulled out Web of Power, a quick game that we've played often over the years. Web of Power is a game that requires patience and the ability to seize an opportunity when it presents itself. In order to make your move you need not only the right board position, but also the right cards. If you don't have an opportunity, it's often best to resist the temptation to make a splashy but unsound move and play a small waiting move instead. A splash can help an opponent far more than it helps you.
The game started with the usual rush into Frankreich, the largest country on the board. Walt played several double moves while Eric and Evan were restricted by the cards available to single moves, but they had learned their lessons and waited patiently. Eric and Walt began to compete for advisors in the west while Evan focused on cloisters, filling every spot in Burgund and attaining a 5-cloister chain. Walt and Eric pussy-footed around in Italy with 2 cloisters and an advisor each, neither wanting to give the other the critical third advisor and neither able to draw the right double. This let Evan snatch the rest of the Italian cloister spaces to close the country. The first scoring found the players fairly even, but soon after that the wheels came off for Walt, who not only stopped drawing useful doubles, but also missed a couple of obvious must-play situations. Eric grabbed advisor majorities in England, Frankreich, Aragon, Italy, and Lothringen, cutting Walt out of the action. At this point only Evan had advisors left to place, and he snapped up the east. By the end of the game, Eric had 35 advisor points, Evan had 21 and Walt had none. Walt was exhausted and left after this game.
Final scores: Eric 94, Evan 81, Walt 42.
Eric's rating: 7. This game plays quickly and has important decisions. It requires a good sense of timing. I was happy to win this game, even though it was partly a result of luck, because I've lost badly almost every time I played in the past.
BALLOON
CUP (Eric, Evan)
Walt had left, and Kogge was still grinding along, so Eric and Evan looked for a 2-player game. Evan had not yet played Balloon Cup, so he asked Eric to teach it. Balloon Cup, by local designer Stephen Glenn, is a card game in which you win cubes and use the cubes to buytrophies. The first player to buy three of the five trophies wins. Each player has an 8-card hand, but you can only play cards of colors matching the cubes that are drawn, and not all the cards in those colors will benefit you. As a result, Balloon Cup is a game of hand management, remembering what has been discarded and controlling the discard pile to your own advantage.
Experience tends to be important because some features of the game are not immediately apparent. Although it was Evan's first game and Eric's tenth, Evan displayed impressive technique. Eric won the first trophy (the gray one,) but we soon entered a stage in which neither player had the cards he wanted, so that it was a question of playing the least painful card. Evan won a trophy of his own, then another, and finally won a hop that gave him the cards he needed to pick up two more trophies to win 4 to 1.
Eric's rating: 7. The game plays smoothly. It feels like a traditional card game, even though the mechanics are new. It's a little bit irritating to have to reshuffle the discard pile so often, but this means your discards are soon available again (possibly for your opponent) so you have to watch each one.
TAJ
MAHAL (Eric, Rich, Mark, Dan, Evan)
Kogge finished, and with Walt leaving we had 5 players. Many games work best for 5, and we decided on one of the best, Taj Mahal. Mark had never played Taj Mahal, but given his success last week with Alhambra and Puerto Rico we were confident he would enjoy it. Taj Mahal is a game with an unusual multi-dimensional bidding mechanic in which the cards you bid are lost forever, even if you fail to win anything. Unfortunately, you must take the risk of entering an auction and putting those cards at risk if you want a chance to win. Taj Mahal feels something like poker as you sweat each "visit" out, wondering whether your opponents will stay in or fold, and whether the ones who stay in will have the cards to beat your cards. The game isn't usually won by being the last to stay in all the time, but by folding for a small win at a small cost much of the time.
There are several main strategies in Taj Mahal. You can focus on elephants, gaining a large share of commodities; each commodity you win makes the next commodity of that type more valuable. The problem with the elephant strategy is that there are almost always several players using it, hurting each other's chances. You can focus on connections, a strategy that offers a little more flexibility, but it's easy to be blocked by one or two unfortunate placements. Finally, you can seize control of the +2 special card; this is not likely to win the game by itself, but can be an important component of a victory. When left unopposed, the elephant strategy tends to be dominant, but experienced players generally don't let that happen.
There are a number of superb Taj Mahal players in the Boston gaming community, and Rich is one of the best. He was fresh off a win over Terry and Kyle in late January, and we all watched him carefully as the game started. In the early going, Rich and Eric pursued elephants, as the other three pursued connections, with Dan grabbing the +2 card and playing it several visits in a row. During Round 2, Eric started with 3 elephants (using a wild elephant) and Rich placed a green and a purple with an elephant. Eric could have withdrawn for elephants, but he chose to be greedy and go for purple as well, hoping to take the special elephant card. This drew Eric and Rich into a costly early battle in which each spent six cards (and in the end, Eric got the elephants and Rich the green and purple, a distribution the two of them could have achieved at much less cost earlier.) Both were unlucky to be so concentrated in green, purple and elephants.
Many people complain that conflicts in Taj Mahal are a matter of luck, but if you pay attention you can usually see it coming (the first two or three rounds are the exception, because you haven't had time to learn enough about your opponents' hands.) In the middle of the game, players took a number of opportunities to fold immediately, gaining three cards instead of two. Dan's chain was choked off and he lost the +2 card to Eric as Mark and Evan made a comeback to tie for the lead by a small margin. Rich folded for three cards a few times but had poor luck on the draw. The final part of the game saw Dan back in possession of the +2 card, Eric and Rich dividing up most of the remaining elephants, Evan collecting a huge stack of cards, and Eric building a respectable late connection. In Round 12, Rich folded for the +4 in Agra, Evan grabbed several palaces, and Eric got both the elephant tile and a 5-point connection. Eric was in the lead before we counted points for longest suit, but the huge card stacks assured tension until the end.
Final scores: Eric 48, Dan 43, Rich 38, Evan 36, Mark 32. Eric had 6 cards, Dan 11, Rich 7, Evan 18 (!) and Mark 8.
Eric's rating: 10. No other game gets my heart pounding like Taj Mahal when I decide to stay in and risk a huge card loss with the possibility of no gain. I've done reasonably well at Taj Mahal in the past, but I had never won at a Boston gaming group, so I was thrilled to win this game.
Roll call: Evan, Walt, Dan, Paul, Eric, Mike, Dave, Bob
We had eight gamers for the night; this is an example of the solid attendance we've enjoyed recently, since we made it to eight without Anton and Rich (two regulars.) Mike and Dave both came to MVGA again, and we had a rare visit from Bob, who is a Boston-area gaming fixture, but an unusual sight at MVGA.
SAN FRANCISCO
(Evan, Walt, Dan, Paul, Eric)
The live steam group was meeting at the Masonic Hall, as they do about once a month. When they meet, MVGA moves upstairs to the room at the back of the hall. If you see a large group with railroad paraphernalia in the main hall, come around to the back or go through the kitchen and up the stairs to find us. Walt brought two games to MVGA this week, one old (San Francisco) and one new (Kogge.) We had 5 players, so with Kogge limited to 4 we chose San Francisco as our first game. We had played a 4-player game of San Francisco back on October 2, and everyone was more or less familiar with the game.
San Francisco is an abstract game in which players bid for the right to surround squares and score points, but the graphics provide local color (if only it were more clear which "4" tiles are which, and similarly for the "5" and "6" tiles.) Bids are sometimes made with money (in the form of bank notes that do not allow change) and sometimes with "influence," an alternate form of currency. Influence bids have the annoying feature that two identical bids cancel each other out, possibly allowing a lower but unique bid to win. For this reason, it can be difficult to spend those influence points, even if you're willing to bid high. As the game began, Paul and Eric butted heads, each placing sticks of their own colors around the same corner square as Dan and Walt began roping off solo areas. A number of influence auctions came up, and Dan was pleased to see that his low bids were often winners as his four opponents managed to cancel each other's bids out. Dan's resulting lead drew some attention and allowed Evan to place sticks in a "+" shape, threatening to surround four squares in a single area. The difficulty in making successful influence bids left us with an influence glut, and the relative scarcity of money auctions kept us all clear of bankruptcy. At one point Eric was in danger of being shut out entirely, but he finally managed a single four-point tile to avoid the humiliation of a goose egg. It was way too late, however, as Evan's surge had given him an insurmountable lead.
Final scores: Evan 28, Walt 22, Dan 18, Paul 5, Eric 4.
Eric's rating: 6. I've lowered my rating for San Francisco down from 7 now that I've played two games. The fact that neither money nor influence points seemed to be in short supply made the bidding a little pointless. There's nothing wrong with the game, but there are many other bidding games I prefer over San Francisco.
WEB
OF POWER (Mike, Dave, Bob)
Mike and Dave work at the same place, and we were happy to see both of them arrive together, with Bob close behind. I've played with Bob at Unity Games get-togethers, but this is the first time I've seen him at MVGA. The San Francisco game was well underway, so the three later arrivals chose Web of Power, a short game that works well for 3. Web of Power offers three routes to scoring: getting the right number of cloisters in a country, getting advisor majorities in adjacent country pairs, and getting long chains of cloisters. Chains are easy to block, so cloisters and advisors are the most common routes to victory. In this game, Mike managed to do well both in cloisters and in advisors to pull out the victory.
Final scores: Mike won, Bob behind by 5, Dave third (I don't have the exact scores.)
Eric's rating: 7. This game is simple, quick and requires solid judgment and timing.
KOGGE
(Evan, Walt, Dan, Eric)
The first two games finished at about the same time, so we looked for two new 4-player games. Neither Walt nor Eric had been part of the 3-player Kogge game on February 5, and both wanted a shot, so we chose Kogge as one of the two games. Dan (who had won the previous game) joined us, and Evan made 4. Kogge is a trading game in which players visit nine cities ranged around the Baltic Sea, trading commodities and founding trading houses.
The commodity trading is a familiar gaming mechanism, but what makes Kogge distinctive is the "route markers," which are cardboard chits numbered "0" through "8" that have multiple uses. >From any city a player's Kogge (ship) can sail to two other cities, as defined by two route markers placed near the city. If you'd like to sail from city "6" to city "4", you can remove one of the route markers currently near city "6", put it in your hand, and play a route marker "4" from your hand upside down to the board (where only you know what it is.) You also use route markers (together with the appropriate commodities) to found new trading offices (one marker of the same number as the city for the first trading office at the city and two markers of that same number for the second and final trading office at that city.) Finally, you use route markers to bid for turn order, with two identical markers beating any set without two identical markers, three identical markers beating two, and so on. Each marker used for bidding generates new commodities at the corresponding city. Ideally you'd play a "4" to establish a route to city "4" followed by several "4"s to win first bid and generate multiple commodities at city "4" and then one or two "4"s to set up a trading office there. Of course, it's almost impossible to gather so many route markers all with the same number, so you must decide what's most important to you.
As we started off, Eric built the first office, but at the cost of his entire commodity supply. It's not easy to get back into the commodity business once you've spent your whole supply, so he was out of the action for a while as he tried to restock. Walt then used his "Raid" tile to sack a city (making him unwelcome there for the rest of the game but gaining a fine haul of goods,) only to be raided in turn by Dan, who used the spoils to set up in the office business. Evan traded well and raided a city of his own to become a clear leader with three trading offices, but Eric raided Evan in turn to make it to three trading offices himself. The game has two alternate (and only partly similar) sets of victory criteria. If one player makes it to 5 development points (trading offices or bonus tiles) before the wooden guild master figure completes two circuits of the board, that player wins instantly. Commodities are worthless in this case. On the other hand, if the guild master completes two circuits, the victor is determined based on victory points and not development points, and commodities can be an important component of victory points. The previous week's game ended when Dan made it to 5 development points, but raids make the guild master move faster, and he completed his tour before anyone could make it to 5 this week.
Final scores: Eric 55 VP (3 trading offices + 25 in commodities) Evan 41 VP (3 trading offices + 11 in commodities) Dan 35 VP (3 trading offices + 5 in commodities) Walt 35 VP (2 trading offices + 15 in commodities) None of us obtained any bonus tiles or had a "Raid" tile left.
Eric's rating: 8. This game is a brain-burner, at least for the first several playings. The most complex aspect is determining how to make best use of your route markers. There's no single obvious winning strategy, at least not for new players. I really enjoyed this game.
WYATT
EARP (Mike, Dave, Bob, Paul)
Bob and Paul had to leave early, so the group selected Wyatt Earp, a quick game that has become an MVGA favorite. Dave prefers to play without the variant that allows you to drop a photo on an opponent's turn, but he agreed to play with it this time because the others all preferred the game with it. In Wyatt Earp, one can seek to score big on a few outlaws by outstripping competing scores by 5 or more capture points, but this approach invites attention from Hideout cards. The other way to win is to diversify with a hand in every pie. This is the route Mike took to victory. The game ended with $9K uncashed on Bob Dalton. This fell far short of the $27K uncashed in a recent MVGA game, but it would have given either Bob or Paul the win if they could have scooped it up.
Final scores: Mike $26K, Bob $21K, Paul $19K, Dave $16K.
Eric's rating: 9.
BALLOON
CUP (Mike, Dave)
Bob and Paul left, and Kogge was not near completion, so Mike taught Dave Balloon Cup, a 2-player game from local designer Stephen Glenn. The key to the game is timing and hand management, and though it seems like a luck-driven game, the stronger player will win a substantial majority of the games. Dave had never played before, and experience won out. Mike showed Dave why it's not usually a good idea to leave a "hop" that can be won hanging too long (your opponent will eventually get the winning card.)
Final scores: Mike 3, Dave 2.
Eric's rating: 7. I've been playing this game quite a bit recently and I'm enjoying the process of learning the tricks of the trade.
We've benefitted from quite a few visitors in recent months, but the eight gamers who turned out this week were all regulars.
SANTIAGO
(Rich, Anton, Evan, Eric)
With 8 gamers all ready to go from the start of the evening, we talked briefly about what games to choose. Eric had received Santiago in a recent order, so he asked to play and began to set up. The game works for 3 to 5 players, but because we had 8 at MVGA, we wanted to play two 4-player games. Santiago is a bidding game and a game that involves getting cube majorities in the right areas. Rich is a master of bidding games and cube majority games, and it's right up his alley. Rich had played a few times before and Eric had played once, but Anton and Evan were brand-new to the game, so we began by explaining the rules.
Santiago is an arid island in the Cape Verde island chain. Players win by having large shares in extensive plantations and by amassing cash at the end of the game. Plantations are the main key to victory, but cash will make the difference in a close game. A plantation is a contiguous grouping of tiles showing a single crop (potatoes, sugar cane, bananas, peas or paprika) and can be shared by multiple players (as long as each player has his or her crop markers on different tiles in the plantation.) However, a tile is only viable if it has access to water, and water comes only from a single spring (or actually from canals emanating from the spring.) Each round, four tiles are turned up (in a 4-player game) and players bid for turn order, with the high bidder getting first choice of tile and location. No two players may bid the same amount, but you may bid more or less than a previous player. This part of the game is reminiscent of New England. The low bidder (or first passer) gets last choice of tile and placement, but obtains the right to be the canal digger, an important job when water is highly sought after. After the tiles are selected and placed, the canal digger receives bribes from other players to place the canal in this location or that. A player need not offer a bribe, but if you want water for your tiles, you'd better get into the action. The canal digger can take any bribe (even a smaller one,) or can place a new canal in a totally different place by paying one more than the highest bribe. Each player has one emergency canal that can be placed without the intervention of the canal digger, but it's not much in an 11-turn game.
We started the game off with two large plantations, one with potatoes and another with paprika. Anton got a banana plantation off to a promising start, but he was the only investor in bananas, and as a result he found his plantation mysteriously hemmed in. We found that the last bidder has the choice either to top the highest bid by 1 or to bid low, while the early bidders (if they don't choose to be canal digger) have less control. It was fascinating to see many of our canal diggers spurn a bribe of 4 or 5 to take a bribe of 1 (when taking the smaller bribe would also help the canal digger's tile.) Rich played a cagey game, bidding $1 several times and even getting to be canal digger on bids of $1. Eric matched him tile for tile, but Eric spent quite a bit more money to do it.
Final scores: Rich $133, Eric $127, Evan $115, Anton $90.
Eric's rating: 7. This game feels very much like New England. The rules are simple and it's never necessary to consult the rule book, but there are interesting decisions. I'm eager to play again, and I can see that my rating may go up over time.
SETTLERS OF CATAN (Dan, Walt, Paul, Scott)
The MVGA crowd enjoys the Settlers series, even though we haven't been playing all that often recently. Four players decided to try the Seafarers variant with the Cities and Knights rules folded in. The board was set up with one central continent surrounded by smaller islands. The die-rolling began. Victory requires 12 victory points (as opposed to 10 in regular Settlers,) but there are additional ways to score, so the additional points are not so hard to obtain. Dan placed his initial pieces in such a way as to benefit from rolls of 8, 9 and 10, and he demonstrated considerable skill in making sure these numbers came up again and again. The resulting haul made him a runaway winner.
Final scores: Dan 12, Paul 9, Walt 6, Scott 6.
Eric's rating: I haven't played Seafarers with Cities and Knights. I do tend to prefer the regular version of Settlers or Seafarers with no added chrome.
TAJ
MAHAL (Dan, Walt, Paul, Scott)
We played Taj Mahal for the first time in quite a while on February 5, and it was such a success that we pulled it out again for a 4-player game. Taj Mahal is a game of planning, timing and brinksmanship. The one thing you must do is watch to make sure no opponent runs away with the commodities (though the connection strategy is stronger in a 4-player game because there are fewer opponents trying to block connections.) In this game, Walt managed to scoop up exactly the cards he needed, and he had minimal opposition for commodities. Paul had to leave after only nine visits, so the game was called at that point.
Final scores: Walt 38, Scott 30, Dan 28, Paul 12.
PUERTO RICO (Rich, Anton, Evan, Eric)
The Santiago game had finished, and Anton requested that we play Puerto Rico next. We discussed using the new buildings, but we decided in the end to stick to the old familiar ones. We drew plantations for turn order and Anton was first, followed by Rich, Evan and Eric in that order. Anton began by Building for a Small Indigo plant, followed by Rich and Evan with Small Markets. Eric, deprived of a Small Market, chose to save his money. Rich Settled for a Quarry, an option he was happy to seize with no Corn visible, and Evan took Coffee, Eric Tobacco and Anton another Coffee. Evan filled the Corn and the Market with the Mayor and Eric grabbed a doubloon off the Prospector.
As we moved through the early game, Evan got Coffee going early, followed by Eric with Tobacco, but Evan's Small Market and turn order directly ahead of Eric gave him a key edge at the Trading House, although Evan's lack of Quarries offset this advantage somewhat. The "target" buildings were scooped up quickly, with Evan and Anton buying out the Factories in one turn and Eric and Rich buying Harbors to try and keep up on the next turn. Evan and Anton then bought Wharfs as Eric's cash shortage forced him to live with a Small Warehouse (the only warehouse bought in the game!) and Rich's even more severe cash shortage forced him to pass a few times.
As we moved through the middle game, Evan sported a wide lead, but the others worked to keep Evan's commodities off the boats. Evan was producing only Corn, Coffee and Tobacco, so the rest of us were pleased to see Corn, Indigo and Sugar on the boats for a while. Eric got a Coffee plantation but was shut out of the Coffee Roasters, but he bought the Guild Hall at the end of the middle game anyway, hoping to grab some valuable Indigo and Sugar Plants. Each of the other players took his own large building soon thereafter, but Eric and Rich crept back into contention using their Harbors. Eric threatened to end the game through a colonist shortage, but Rich and Evan stripped their plantations to populate their cities and keep the game going (at a cost in production.) On the final turn, Evan Buildered to take a final large building that would never be populated, leaving Eric to Captain, gaining 5 VP for shipping two barrels while Anton gained one and the others gained none (an earlier Captain and a Trader had cleaned the goods out.) This was just enough to make the difference.
Final scores:
VP Bldg Bonus Total Eric 28 + 19 + 8 = 55 Evan 25 + 23 + 6 = 54 Rich 20 + 25 + 6 = 51 Anton 19 + 22 + 7 = 48
Eric's rating: 10.
This was one of the tensest Puerto Rico games we've played for quite a while. It was up in the air until the last role was taken.
INDUSTRIA
(Rich, Evan, Eric, Dan)
It was still early, and even though Walt, Scott and Anton had to leave, we had 4 left with time for one more game. Rich suggested Industria, a new game that has become a favorite, and the rest of us were happy to join in. Industria is a bidding game with multiple sources of victory points. You can build buildings, buy technologies (which are riskier but potentially lucrative,) make connections or gather the right bonus tiles. Money is a source of victory points at the end of the game, but you're better off spending it to gain victory points by other means if you can.
We drew for player order, and Rich received the dangerous fourth spot in the first round. Money is tight for the fourth players, so you must bid cautiously to avoid being shut out for several rounds. Dan bid aggressively to obtain both the Sawmill and the Quarry, easy sources of cash, together with Mechanization, while Eric got the Well, the Brickworks and Construction (better for points but not as good for money) and Evan and Rich saved their money.
Some of our games have featured overwhelming chains of Technologies, but with the exception of Rich (who avoided Technology altogether but collected a lot of bonus tiles,) we dueled fiercely over them and limited the gains of any one player. Eric's purchases of the Well and Construction made it impossible for him to build the Brickworks, and it wasn't until the third epoch that he got it up. As a result, he lost out on $3 as his opponents bought bricks from the bank. However, he did get 3 VP for a connection to the Well and managed to sell several late loads of bricks. Dan recovered from his early poverty to purchase both the Bank and the Stock Market (with the resulting connection) and two more Technologies that connected to his Mechanization.
As we approached the final epoch, Rich trailed on the scoreboard, but had a worrying pile of bonus tiles. Dan and Eric were well off, but Rich and Evan were poor. Dan turned over a lot containing three Technologies. He really wanted Nanotechnology (worth 7 VP with the connection) so had to take Eric's $2 bid for Telecommunications (worth 6 VP to Eric.) Even after the final auction we had no idea who would win, so we counted the final points on tenterhooks. Eric had 12 points for connections, as did Rich, and Rich had 12 points for bonuses as opposed to only 6 for Eric. This left Rich ahead by 1 VP, but Eric had cash of $4 for 1 VP while Rich's cash was only $2. The tiebreaker is number of tiles built, and it made the difference.
Final scores: Eric 43 (with 14 tiles) Rich 43 (with 11 tiles) Dan 37 (with 12 tiles) Evan 37 (with 11 tiles)
Eric's rating: 8. This game offers both tactical and strategic challenges. A winning strategy requires maneuvering yourself into a position in which your opponents will help you as they're helping themselves. I've played a number of games now, and this was the closest yet.
Roll call: Anton, Dan, Rich, Paul, Eric, Mike, Dave. We were happy to see Mike and Dave back again; Dave has now learned the route from the place they work and he arrived a little before Dave.
RA (Anton,
Dan, Rich, Paul)
The 4 gamers that were ready to go at 7:00 decided to start with Ra, a game that doesn't take too long, and that also would let them add a fifth player if one were to arrive before they finished setting up. Ra is a bidding game in which each player has three "suns" (lovely wooden pieces shaped like suns) to bid with. When you have bid three times you're done for the epoch, and when everyone had bid three time, the epoch ends. The epoch can also end when the "Ra" tiles finish crossing the sky; if you haven't used your sun by then, too bad. In the first of the three epochs, the players are given carefully balanced sets of suns, but in the second and third epoch you play with whatever you picked up in the prior epoch, so that one consideration in bidding is what sun you'll get for next time. As the game started, Anton and Rich scooped up the first few lots while Dan and Paul awaited better fare.
You're always conscious of time in Ra. If you use your suns early, you wait helplessly as your opponents scoop up valuable lots cheaply and the "Ra" tiles seem to creep across the sky. On the other hand, if you save your suns, the "Ra" tiles seem to race across the sky, and you're tempted to bid for anything at all lest you lose your chance. One key source of luck in Ra is the rate at which "Ra" tiles are drawn; a rapid rate favors those who bid early, while a slow rate favors those who wait. Of course, you can evaluate the probabilities based on what has been drawn so far, but it's still a random draw. In this game. a flurry of suns ended the first epoch quickly, leaving Dan and Paul with almost no tiles purchased (Dan had nothing but two unflooded Nile tiles.) However, Dan had amassed good tiles for the second epoch.
In the second epoch, the players drew juicy sets, benefiting those with the large suns capable of winning hotly-contested auctions, only to spoil them time and time again by adding "killers" to the sets (the funeral that kills Pharoahs, the drought that kills floods and Niles, the earthquake that kills monuments, and the anarchy that kills civilizations. It just wasn't Dan's game as his suns failed to pay off as expected. The third epoch went fairly quickly again, with a number of quick strikes by Rich, who picked up all eight monument types and all five of one monument for 30 monument points. Rich's ability to get five of a type not only gave him 15 points, but also made it impossible for anyone else to get eight types. Anton gathered 20 monument points to come in second.
Final scores: Rich 61, Anton 57, Dan 34, Paul 24
Eric's rating: 9. Ra is a great game that plays quickly and works well for 3, 4 or 5 players. My rating is 9 and not 10 only because luck is so prominent, but the game is short enough that it's not much of a problem; if you lose because of bad luck you can always play again immediately afterward. It's too bad this game is out of print; someone should pick it up and reprint it.
BALLOON
CUP (Dave, Mike)
Eric came in soon after Ra started and watched the action. Dave came in and watched as he ate his sub, but when Mike arrived, he and Dave sat down to play Balloon Cup. Dave has played before, but Mike has more experience. At one point in the game, the players drew a total of four gray cubes, but they knew of the rules fix that directs you to redraw in this situation. Mike got some lucky draws and knew where to use them, and this gave him a comfortable win.
Final scores: Mike 3, Dave 1
Eric's rating: 7. A little more than a filler, but a game that doesn't take long and is fairly easy to teach.
SANTIAGO
(Anton, Dan, Rich, Paul, Eric)
Dave and Mike were still battling over hops, so we chose another short game. We wanted to avoid making them wait for our game to finish. Santiago is remarkably quick (only nine rounds with 5 players) and when you live by our MVGA motto ("play fast, make mistakes") it finishes in well under an hour. We played a 4-player game of Santiago last week, with Rich pulling a close victory out of the hat by bidding carefully and taking the Canal Digger role more than his share. This game had 5 players, so we knew it would be even harder to attract that pesky canal network to water our plantations, and with only nine rounds we knew we'd have to start using those emergency canals early or some of us would lose the opportunity.
In this game, Eric stole Rich's approach from last week, getting to be Canal Digger four times, twice for a bid of 1 that allowed him to place a tile with a full complement of crop markers. The Canal Digger role pays off not only in bribes, but also in giving the holder the last bid in the following round. Eric twice held the Canal Digger as a single extremely valuable tile was turned up. This puts the other players on the horns of a dilemma, as a high bid can be topped, leaving one to pay a lot for the second best tile. In the end, Eric concentrated his crop markers on a large banana plantation and a large pea plantation while also gathering about $20 in cash to win by a wide margin. Paul had six crop markers on a sugar cane plantation of size 7 or 8, but he found it impossible to gain access to water and a large part of the spread was sadly abandoned to the encroaching desert.
Final scores: Eric $104, Rich $83, Anton $74, Dan $66, Paul $43.
Eric's rating: 7. This game is fun to play, but it seems random at this point. On Monday I lost a game by $30, while in this game I won by $20, and it's not clear exactly what I did to make the difference. Further play may prove that there's more control than is apparent at first; if so, my rating will go up.
SAN MARCO
(Anton, Rich, Dave)
Paul had to leave, and Dave had wanted to learn San Marco, a game that works best for 3, so we split into two groups. Not only is Rich an expert at San Marco, he is also happy to play it at any opportunity, so he joined to teach the game, and Anton sat down to fill the game out. San Marco is a cube-placement, area-scoring game with a unique mechanism. One player divides a randomly chosen set of six good cards and four bad cards into three stacks. The other players each choose and play one of the three stacks, and the "divider" takes the third, unchosen, stack and plays it. It's important to divide fairly evenly lest one be stuck with the worst stack, but an expert player will take advantage of the differences in the player's positions to divide in a way that helps the divider more than it helps the "choosers."
Dave took to the game right away and was in contention all the way through (first-timers often find themselves hopelessly behind in San Marco.) In the final round, Anton went over 10 limit points first, leaving Dave to split a final set made up of three "3" cards, two area cards, two Doges, and a bridge. At this point Dave had 9 limit points and Rich had 6. If Dave put all the "3"s in one stack Rich could take the other, scoring 12, while if Dave split them, Rich could take the stack with one "3", scoring 6, or the other stack, allowing no one to score. It was an extremely tough decision, and in the end Dave put a bridge, one "3" and one area card in the stack Rich took, while Dave got two Doges, an area card, and two "3"s. Dave thought about which area or areas to score with his Doges. He could score Castello and San Marco, gaining ground on both opponents, or San Marco twice (first place for Anton and second for Dave,) gaining a lot of ground on Rich but losing ground to Anton. He chose the split scoring, and when Rich rolled a "1" on his final banishment, it was a close game, with Rich winning by 2. As it turned out, if Dave had scored San Marco twice, he would have tied Rich for the win, just ahead of Anton.
Final scores: Rich 58, Dave 56, Anton 42.
Eric's rating: 7. I have never won San Marco, but I can see that the 3-player game is a great gaming challenge. Don't play with anyone who's prone to analysis paralysis, and be careful about playing with 4, but for 3 players who can make decisions quickly, it's a fine game.
INDUSTRIA
(Dan, Eric, Mike)
As 3 players sat down to San Marco, the others decided on Industria, a game we've played quite a bit recently. In our initial playings of Industria we tended to focus on gaining points for ourselves, but we're now keeping our eyes on each other and playing defensively. Cheap connections can be such a source of points (especially in the technologies area) that sometimes you just have to take that tile yourself unless the amount offered is exorbitant. Dan was chosen as first player, with Mike second and Eric third. In the 4-player game it's difficult to be last, but we haven't found this to be true with 3. Dan turned up the first set of three tiles and got two resources and a bonus. This miserable lot didn't bring much cash in, and when Eric later got the Sawmill, the Quarry and the Brickworks, we were reminded that there certainly is luck in Industria. Eric sold the Sawmill to Mike and the Quarry to Dan before taking the Brickworks for himself. The Brickworks is perhaps the least valuable of the three, but considering that he got paid nicely for the other two, Eric made out very well. Eric used the cash to obtain the Clay Pit and both technologies, and Mike only kept the Well (with another connection) out of Eric's hands by ignoring a big bid.
As we continued on to the next era, Eric had to pause to rebuild his money supply, and Dan got some roads in the quadrangle while Mike got a Bank he couldn't afford to build for a while. Technologies were more evenly spread for the remainder of the game, but Eric's early acquisitions gained him several connections. Dan got the Stock Exchange and proceeded to use it effectively on multiple builds while Eric backfilled with a few bonuses after ignoring them in the early going. At the end of the game, it's often difficult to spend money as players realize that money isn't worth much compared to other options. Dan was stuck with a pile of money, and this together with his first-round bust cost him the win. Mike paid the price of stepping up too many times to swallow a tile that was worth a lot to Eric or Dan but not worth much to Mike.
Final scores:
Bldg Road Bonus $ Total
---- ---- ---- ---- ----
Eric 37 + 18 + 10 + 1 = 66
Dan 24 + 9 + 22 + 4 = 59
Mike 27 + 3 + 8 + 2 = 38
Eric's rating: 8. There are plenty of tactical tricks in Industria, and you can suffer from poor tile draws, but it's a lot of fun to play. If you're just learning, stick to the 3-player version.
WEB
OF POWER (Rich, Eric, Dave, Mike)
Anton and Dan had to leave, but the 4 of us who remained weren't ready to call it a night. Web of Power fills a useful niche as a full-scale game that offers tough decisions and plays in less than an hour. There's luck in the card draws, and you can gain from poor play on the part of the player who precedes you in the turn order, but the experts win a lot more than their share of games. Dave is still fairly new to Web of Power, and he found it more difficult than San Marco. There are three scoring routes in Web of Power: cloister majorities, cloister chains and advisor majorities. The cloister majorities are scored halfway through the game, and all three are scored at the end. It looks like a simple game, but you don't always get the cards you'd like (in fact, you usually seem to have the wrong cards,) so you have to make do. For new players there's a temptation to force things, but that usually results in helping someone else more than it helps you.
It was a defensive struggle, but oddly enough no advisors were placed in Aragon until Mike dropped one in, and then Eric finally got one on his very last turn. Eric shared advisor majorities in Italy, England and France, so this single placement was worth 12 VP, and it was just enough to beat Rich by a nose.
Final scores: Eric 72, Rich 71, Mike 62, Dave 58
Eric's rating: 7. One of the best 45-minute games around.
Roll call: Eric, Dan, Rich, Evan, Anton, Dave
We were without Walt for a second week as he continued his U.S. tour. We remembered to collect the $3.00 last week, but we forgot this week (don't worry, Walt; we'll catch up next time!) Dave came for the second straight week, but Mike didn't make it.
LIARS DICE
(Eric, Dan, Rich, Evan)
Rich arrived this week with two games under his arm. One of them was the new MVGA copy of Liar's Dice. We haven't played Liar's Dice at MVGA since I started coming, but it's a standard at many gaming groups, and we decided to keep a copy on hand. There were 4 of us ready to go soon after 7:00, and it seemed only fitting to break the new game in.
We opened up with a juggernaut, as the bidding started in 6's, with help from a lot of *'s, and soon shot up to 13 6's for 20 dice (where any *'s can be counted as a number of your choice.) Eric had to make a decision: should he call, raise to 14 6's, or go to 7 *'s? There were already a lot of hits on the table, so he decided to raise, and with 5 *'s showing he raised to 7 *'s. Dan called and there were no hidden *'s, so Eric lost 2 dice.
After this start, the bidding was much more restrained, as each of the other players lost a die or two (with Eric making a comeback by hitting exactly on a challenge.) Evan then suffered a few losses and soon went out, leaving 3 players. Ric