geek
Rules | Subscriptions | Bookmarks | Search | Account | Moderators
Recommend
81
19 Posts
New Thread | Printer Friendly | Subscribe  | Bookmark
Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Marshall P.
flag
Avatar
040506070809
Taluva » Forums » Reviews
The Bottom Line Review


The Bottom Line

Taluva is a tile placement game with original mechanics that nevertheless manages to feel reminiscent of other Euros, and, as such, the game suffers from a bit of Euro-fatigue. If you can get past this, however, you will discover an excellent medium weight game that plays in less than an hour with beautiful components. I highly recommend it.

The Rules

In Taluva players represent either Gods or Chieftains, who are trying to spread their people across the island and to erect temples and towers. Players start the game with a pool of three different types of structures: Towers (2), Temples (3), and Huts (many). The winner of the game is the one who plays the most Temples with ties broken by most Towers, then by most Huts. A player can also win immediately by getting rid of all structures of any two kinds from his pool. A player can also be eliminated if he or she cannot make a legal play, however, it seems like this will be a very rare occurance.

The gameplay is as follows:

1) Place Tile – The player draws a tile from the face down supply and places it on the island. Each tile consists of three hexagons arranged in a triangular pattern.



One of the hexagons will always be a volcano. The other two will be randomly distributed between lakes, forest, mountain, plain, and dessert. A tile may be placed in one of two ways:

1a) A tile may be added onto the periphery of the island. All a tile has to do is touch another tile and it is a legal play. Landscapes do not need to match up.

1b) A tile may be played on top of other tiles so long as the volcano on the tile is played on top of another volcano, and “flows in a different direction” (which just means the tile must be played on top of portions of two tiles, it can’t just overlap one tile.) And so long as it does not cover up a Temple or a Tower, or completely cover up a settlement (see below for definition of a settlement). Huts can be covered up, and when they are they are removed from the game and set aside. They do not go back to the controlling player.

2) Place Structures – One type of structure may be placed from the player's pool according to the following rules.

2a) Huts – A hut can be placed on any none volcano hex on the first level of the island. If a hut is placed in isolation then it begins a new settlement. A settlement is any set of adjacent structures all of the same color. Instead of beginning a new settlement a hut can also be used to expand an existing settlement. When expanding, a particular terrain type is chosen, and huts are placed on all hexes of that terrain which border on the settlement to be expanded. When huts are placed on the second level of the island then two huts can occupy a hex and similarly for the third level.

2b) Temples – One temple may be placed per settlement. A temple may only be placed once the settlement reaches a size equal to three structures or greater. Temples can be placed on any level and cannot be covered by volcanoes.

2c) Towers – One tower may be placed per settlement. A tower may only be placed on the third level of the island. Towers cannot be covered by volcanoes.

The Components

The components to this game are first rate, truly beautiful. Seriously, I haven’t seen better components made out of wood and cardboard in a game. The cardboard tiles are THICK and durable. The artwork on an individual tile is attractive. The wooden structures are intricate, much more so than the usual 2D shapes we see in euro games.



The only possible complaint is that the emergent board tends to look pretty busy. It doesn’t have the large scale beauty of a Tikal board for example. However, this is an aesthetic complaint only. It does NOT detract from gameplay. When playing the game it is always easy to extract the information you need from the board.



Overall the components are top shelf. You could not ask for better. Plus, I personally find the box front to be an attractive and engaging design.

The Theme to Mechanics Integration

This is where the “Euroness” of the game comes through. There is simply not much integration between the theme and the mechanics. Why can’t temples or towers be volcanoed? Or why would a volcano spare the last hut in a village? Why can you expand onto, for example, three forests but only one plain? And why can more huts be built higher up?

None of these things make much sense given the theme, but to me that’s ok. The mechanics of the game are highly developed and balanced. It’s clear that a lot of testing went into the design. The final product is certainly not a simulation, but you can tell every rule exists for a gameplay reason.

If you must have highly integrated themes in your games then this one isn’t for you. But if you value tested and balanced mechanics then you won’t be disappointed. If you insist on both theme and mechanics then this might not be your game but then probably very few games are.

The Random Element

Taluva is very nearly a perfect information game. The only random bit is which two landscapes you will get on your tile in addition to the volcano. And believe it or not, it’s not really that critically important which ones you get. It may be nice to get a certain landscape rather than others but it’s rarely a turn breaker if you don’t. Tiles that aren’t immediately useful to you can often be played offensively to destroy your opponents settlements.

Strategy vs. Tactics

Taluva is one of those games where the ratio of strategy to tactics will vary with the number of players. I expect the strategy is at a maximum with two players and a minimum with four. With four players your turns are more tactical as you look for the move which maximizes your current situation. You can’t worry too much about setting up future moves because of the amount of chaos introduced by three other players taking their turns before your next turn. It simply becomes too unpredictable.

That being said, in general, I would say that Taluva offers a fair balance of strategy vs. tactics. It is possible to look ahead and try to create situations where you can build up to the second or third level, or where you can split your own settlement into two pieces to quickly play more temples.

The decision tree seems to be of a pretty reasonable size. There’s not so many possible moves and you can’t look so far in the future that you should become paralyzed, but there is often more than one move which merits serious consideration.

My Opinion

My opinion is that Taluva is very good game. Not quite great, or timeless, but definitely top tier. While it doesn’t share mechanics with any of these games, to me it occupies the same gameplay niche as China, Samurai, and Hansa to name a few medium weight, under an hour games. That’s a niche in which you want to own several games and Taluva should go straight to the top of your consideration.

Gameplay is cerebral but interactive. You can play a friendly game where you concentrate on maximizing your own position or you can play it more cut throat where you deliberately try to set back your opponents. There are two basic paths to victory but it doesn’t make much sense to pick one before the game starts, you’re better off reacting as the game develops.

The endgame can get a bit calculational so players should commit to playing out the end at the same pace they played out the rest of the game. This is also a game where kingmaking issues can arise when one player cannot win but can decide between two other players for the victory. To me this is less of an issue given how short the game is, but it’s there.

While I’m at a loss to think of another game with similar mechanics (Carcassonne doesn’t really come close because you’re not placing meeples to score them and get them back you’re placing them to get rid of them, and you’re not trying to complete features with the map tiles.) it still manages to feel a bit reminiscent. Of what, I’m not sure. It’s like it’s so Euro that I’ve played it before, even though I’ve never played it before, if that makes any sense.

The bottom line is that Taluva is a beautiful game with solid mechanics, one that I highly recommend.



For more in the "Bottom Line" series of reviews see:
Palazzo
Last edited on 2007-09-17 22:22:49 CST (Total Number of Edits: 2)
Betty Egan
flag
0608
I recently acquired this game and I agree that the components are very nice. However, I do find the huts difficult to pick up if you try to lift them by the roof - they are too slippery. You have to grab them front and back on the flat sides. A very minor complaint. I wonder if anyone else has this problem?
Jonas Fowler
flag
Avatar
I would have to say that your review explains exactly my feelings of this game, which I love by the way. One mistake a lot of people make is to try and compare it to other games such as Tikal or unfortunately to Carcassonne, but when they play with that in mind they tend to be disappointed. I make sure to explain to everyone I introduce this game to, that it may seem at first like carcassonne however it is not even close.
Great Review.
Neil Cook
flag
Avatar
06070809
BettyEgan wrote:
I recently acquired this game and I agree that the components are very nice. However, I do find the huts difficult to pick up if you try to lift them by the roof - they are too slippery. You have to grab them front and back on the flat sides. A very minor complaint. I wonder if anyone else has this problem?


Yes - I wholeheartedly agree. It's my only complaint with an otherwise excellent game.
Giles Pritchard
flag
Avatar
06070809
A highly intelligent review - thank you for this Marshall!

Cheers.

Giles.
Bruno Valerio
flag
Avatar
070809
It is without any doubt a very good game.
Matt Cobb
flag
Avatar
0507
Quote:
the game suffers from a bit of Euro-fatigue.

I tend to suffer from this. In fact, I hardly play true Euros anymore, but I still think this is a great game!
Bill Eldard
flag
I agree that this is an excellent game. There's more to it than initially meets the eye.

For great aesthetics, play the game on top of a blue tablecoth to bring out the beauty of the tiles and bits.
Last edited on 2007-05-08 12:07:04 CST (Total Number of Edits: 1)
Peter Marchlewitz
flag
Game Designer
Avatar
050708
I like this game a lot. It is one where I immediately want to play again after the game, especially if I lost.
:p
Gary Averett
flag
Avatar
05060708
Mmmmmm.....dessert tiles! I consider this an abstract game with a hint of theme. It is very fun nonetheless. Thanks for the review.
Chris & Vesla
flag
Avatar
Many thanks for the review. This game has been on our radar and we've never been quite sure what to make of it - we feared that it might be too derivative. It's nice to hear a competent opinion inform us otherwise.
Joel B
flag
Avatar
07
Nice review, I appreciate not having to read through line after line of single spaced text...

A couple of things we have noticed in our games:

- Open information: in a couple of games it was apparent a couple of turns from the end who would win based solely on the number of tiles left for each player, and the layout of the settlements. Sort of like a checkmate position.

- Theme: the rulebook doesn't try to give any sort of background story on what is going on, it's 'BOOM' straight into the rules. Why do you put 2 huts on a level 2 hex when expanding for instance..why?

- Terrain: it would have been interesting to have some advantages for building on different terrain types.

Even with all that, our group still enjoys playing the game, if for no other reason than the attractiveness of the final board layout.
Mike Adams
flag
Avatar
05
Bubba wrote:

- Open information: in a couple of games it was apparent a couple of turns from the end who would win based solely on the number of tiles left for each player, and the layout of the settlements. Sort of like a checkmate position.


Which is great if you are the player in the winning position. I have found that even when I feel like it would be difficult for me to lose, it's generally still possible that I can be beaten. It generally feels pretty tight.

Bubba wrote:

- Theme: the rulebook doesn't try to give any sort of background story on what is going on, it's 'BOOM' straight into the rules. Why do you put 2 huts on a level 2 hex when expanding for instance..why?


Since I like making up non-existent reasons for options in games, here's my rationalization: you can't put two huts on the first level because the ground is too weak. If you did, they would collapse through the ground into the volcano. However, it is thicker at higher levels so more huts can be built. More must be built because the demand for higher building plots is insatiable - everyone on the island wants to move up in the world for the better views, more stable terrain (less chance of giant tiles of land suddenly crushing your home), and better proximity to potential tower building sites which increase property values significantly. Since everyone wants to move up and there are so few prime sites, of course they would be filled with the maximum number of huts the land thickness can support as soon as new land appears.

How's that for back story?
Mark Herreras
Mike A wrote:

Bubba wrote:

- Theme: the rulebook doesn't try to give any sort of background story on what is going on, it's 'BOOM' straight into the rules. Why do you put 2 huts on a level 2 hex when expanding for instance..why?


Since I like making up non-existent reasons for options in games, here's my rationalization: you can't put two huts on the first level because the ground is too weak. If you did, they would collapse through the ground into the volcano. However, it is thicker at higher levels so more huts can be built. More must be built because the demand for higher building plots is insatiable - everyone on the island wants to move up in the world for the better views, more stable terrain (less chance of giant tiles of land suddenly crushing your home), and better proximity to potential tower building sites which increase property values significantly. Since everyone wants to move up and there are so few prime sites, of course they would be filled with the maximum number of huts the land thickness can support as soon as new land appears.

How's that for back story?


Great back story.
I would also add that, as stated in the first PC Civilization game, temples prevent the gods' anger, avoiding earthquakes and/or volcanic eruptions, and thus saving the ground...

Great review, thanks!
Gordon Yu
flag
Avatar
070809
As beautiful a review as the game itself. It is one of my favorite games due to how it changes as you scale from 2 to 4 players.
Randall Bart
flag
Avatar
08
mdp4828 wrote:
The winner of the game is the one who plays the most Temples with ties broken by most Towers, then by most Huts. A player can also win immediately by getting rid of all structures of any two kinds from his pool.

Actually the premature end is the usual end. I think victory is presented the way it is so that newbies aren't frustrated.
mdp4828 wrote:
A player can also be eliminated if he or she cannot make a legal play, however, it seems like this will be a very rare occurance.

I see this rather like capture in Go. Amongst experienced players, you hardly ever see more than one stone captured at a time, but the threat of capture is an ever present concern. Similarly in Taluva, the threat of being unable to build forces you to conserve your Huts until you build all your Towers or Temples.
mdp4828 wrote:
1b) A tile may be played on top of other tiles so long as the volcano on the tile is played on top of another volcano, and “flows in a different direction” (which just means the tile must be played on top of portions of two tiles, it can’t just overlap one tile.)

I found it interesitng that they used this "flow" rule to implement a "span two (or three) tiles" rule.
mdp4828 wrote:
2a) Huts – A hut can be placed on any none volcano hex on the first level of the island. If a hut is placed in isolation then it begins a new settlement. A settlement is any set of adjacent structures all of the same color. Instead of beginning a new settlement a hut can also be used to expand an existing settlement. When expanding, a particular terrain type is chosen, and huts are placed on all hexes of that terrain which border on the settlement to be expanded. When huts are placed on the second level of the island then two huts can occupy a hex and similarly for the third level.

You've run together the A build and the D build. The A build is place a single Hut on a first level tile, whether it's isolated (starting a new settlement) or not. The D rule is expand a Settlement into all adjacent spaces of a given terrain type, placing a number of Huts equal to the altitude.
mdp4828 wrote:
The Theme to Mechanics Integration
This is where the “Euroness” of the game comes through. There is simply not much integration between the theme and the mechanics.

The volcanoes erupting and expanding the island and covering up existing huts are all logical theme. The rules saying you get to choose where the volcanoe rupts, but you can't cover a Tower, Temple, or the last Hut of a Settlement have no basis in the theme.
mdp4828 wrote:
The Random Element
Taluva is very nearly a perfect information game. The only random bit is which two landscapes you will get on your tile in addition to the volcano. And believe it or not, it’s not really that critically important which ones you get.

Rarely important. Toward the end when you're trying to play your last Hut it becomes slightly important, but the randomness is a very small factor in this game.
mdp4828 wrote:

This is also a game where kingmaking issues can arise when one player cannot win but can decide between two other players for the victory. To me this is less of an issue given how short the game is, but it’s there.

It's hard to design a game like this without kingmaking. The same mechanics which allow players to gang up on the leader inevitably allow kingmaking when used at the end. But as you said, it's a short game. We usually finish in half an hour. Kingmaking is much more bothersome in a long game.
mdp4828 wrote:

While I’m at a loss to think of another game with similar mechanics (Carcassonne doesn’t really come close because you’re not placing meeples to score them and get them back you’re placing them to get rid of them, and you’re not trying to complete features with the map tiles.) it still manages to feel a bit reminiscent.

It's a whole new game; there's no other game at all like it. It is closest to Carcassonne, but it's quite different.
Roger Magnusson
flag
I dont think its unfortunate that this is getting compared to carcassone, i think its natural. Infact, they are similar in many ways.

I would say, if you enjoy carcassone you will enjoy this. This is the game you pick up when you and your friends have played carcassone just a little to much and want a similar but diffrent challenge for a bit.

And I dont know if its just me, but I find this game to be a step up in complexity compared to carcassone, so its the next natural step to take.
Corin Friesen
flag
Avatar
s031720 wrote:
I dont think its unfortunate that this is getting compared to carcassone, i think its natural. Infact, they are similar in many ways.

I would say, if you enjoy carcassone you will enjoy this. This is the game you pick up when you and your friends have played carcassone just a little to much and want a similar but diffrent challenge for a bit.

And I dont know if its just me, but I find this game to be a step up in complexity compared to carcassone, so its the next natural step to take.

All of the above.
David Witzany
0809
mdp4828, the game this may remind you of is Fjords: Place terrain tiles for a different map each game, and put a farmhouse on a tile from time to time. There are plenty of differences between the games, of course--In Fjords you need to match terrain types between the existing map and the new tile, plus adding the discs after the map's been built. Still, the two games complement each other.

Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
BoardGameGeek and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.