geek
Recently Viewed
Hot Games
Agricola
Age of Conan: The Strategy Board Game
Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm
Name of the Rose, The
Sturm Europa!
Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear! - Russia 1941-1942
A Touch of Evil, The Supernatural Game
Race for the Galaxy
Der Hexer von Salem
Axis & Allies Anniversary Edition
Arkham Horror
Settlers of Catan, The
Battlestar Galactica
Galaxy Trucker
Power Grid
Pandemic
Puerto Rico
Stone Age
War of the Ring
Carcassonne
Risk
Jericho
Dominion
#58
Last Night on Earth: The Zombie Game
Twilight Struggle
Le Havre
Endeavor
StarCraft: The Board Game
Tigris & Euphrates
Descent: Journeys in the Dark
Through the Ages: A Story of Civilization
Scrabble
Wabash Cannonball
BattleLore
Clue
Agricola - Im Wandel der Jahreszeiten
Commands & Colors: Ancients
Chinatown
Age of Steam
Bakugan Battle Brawlers
Tomb
Age of Empires III: The Age of Discovery
Agricola X-Deck
Twilight Imperium 3rd Edition
Dragon Chess
Hannibal: Rome vs. Carthage
Space Alert
Railroad Tycoon
Caylus
Rules | Subscriptions | Bookmarks | Search | Account | Moderators
Recommend
19
6 Posts
New Thread | Printer Friendly | Subscribe | Bookmark
Your Tags: Login to Add Tags | View 
Popular Tags: [View All]
Roland Wood
flag
Avatar
My reviews are based upon my own experiences with the games in question and although I do state my opinions as fact they are purely anecdotal. The wonderful aspect of my review format is that people may respond and add alternative experiences in the specific points. I highly encourage this as my goal is to help people decide if this is the type of game that will drive them crazy-good or crazy-bad.

For a complete explanation of my ratings and the points: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/article/1658869#1658869



Random Factors: (Low - None) Depending on what version you play. We play with all cards face up on the table and when used each player simply removes them from the game. Random Factors = none.
Strategy: (Trace) If you play with a Master card there will be a perfunctory plan you might carry throughout the game.
Tactics: (Complete) This game is pure tactical joy. The fun comes from reacting to the changing board and taking actions that benefit you more than any other.
Tension: (Low) Some tough decisions but most of the time it is pretty clear what you need to do. Some angst on whether to use a card now or later. Lots of blocking but also lots of ways to overcome.
Brainburn: (High) Five action points each turn with lots of ways to spend them means lots of brain power going into optimization.
Analysis Paralysis: (High) Do not play this game with people who suffer from this or you will suffer for it.
Interaction: (High) Lots of blocking and even some alliances. You get in each other's way and try not to benefit anyone but yourself.
Confrontation: (Moderate) Other than the occasional block you usually spend your points to help you rather than hinder an opponent. Only when a move does both do you really make a "take-that" move.
Downtime: (Moderate) The game design lends itself to downtime since the board changes so much by time your turn comes around again. You have five action points you must allocate so others are waiting while you think it through.
Rules: (Moderate) Some vague spots. Thank goodness for BGG.
Components: (High) This game looks awesome on the table starting about midgame
Theme: (Trace) This is an abstract strategy game pure and simple.
Gateway Suitability: (Moderate) The game is easy and as long as you take it easy on the newbies they tend to like building the castles and getting into it. It is a Spiel de Jahres after all....
Spouse Suitability: (Moderate) She likes it.
Fun Factor: (High) Great if you like abstract strategy games.
Replayablity: (Moderate) Variable setups and master cards help to keep this one fresh but it mostly depends on whether you like abstract strategy games.
Setup Pain: (Low) This game is quick to setup. You will be spending action points within 5 minutes of opening the box.

2-players: Good. More chess-like and serious.
3 players: Good
4 players: Best. I like lots of players getting in each other's way.
Last edited on 2007-08-12 03:25:04 CST (Total Number of Edits: 1)
Corin Friesen
flag
I disagree about the strategy and tactics points. I believe this game is mostly strategy, but then again, I probably take this game more seriously than most people.
Jim Cote
flag
Avatar
05060708
I agree with Roland on Tactics and Strategy. I base almost all of my decisions on the current board situation, rather than focus on some grand plan which is more than likely to fall apart after the next player takes his/her turn.
Corin Friesen
flag
What you do personally in a game doesn't necessarily convey the characteristics of that game.
I give the example of a beginner to Go. He doesn't know what the crap is going on, and almost always makes a decision in one part of the board (tactics) without looking at the whole board (strategy). And as we all know, Go is thoroughly strategy-dominant.
So what you do in Torres may not convey which is dominant: strategy or tactics. In my experience (again, I take this game pretty seriously), this game is strategy-dominant (but with more tactics than Go).
Roland Wood
flag
Avatar
Ambrose wrote:
What you do personally in a game doesn't necessarily convey the characteristics of that game.
I give the example of a beginner to Go. He doesn't know what the crap is going on, and almost always makes a decision in one part of the board (tactics) without looking at the whole board (strategy). And as we all know, Go is thoroughly strategy-dominant.
So what you do in Torres may not convey which is dominant: strategy or tactics. In my experience (again, I take this game pretty seriously), this game is strategy-dominant (but with more tactics than Go).


Exactly why my reviews are all prefaced by my disclaimer that although I present my analysis as fact it really is anecdotally-based and only reflects my own experience.

It is also precisely why I review in this format which easily allows other Geeks to target specific points they disagree on and sound off on it. Thanks to you, when prospective buyers look at this review they will see that at least one other gamer (and a self-described serious Torres fan to boot!) considers the game to be strategically rich. :)

I will grant that 2-player Torres is going to be much more strategic than how I painted it. (although I did mention in my review that the 2-player version was much more serious and chess-like). I also believe that if you were to play a 4-player game of Go it would be much less strategic than it is in its pure 2-player format. (Through the Desert, anyone?). I like Torres best with 4-players and usually play it that way which is probably why it seems much more tactical to me and why whole-board game-spanning strategic play doesn't work too well due to the added chaos and loss of control inherent in any game with more than 2 players.
Last edited on 2008-07-10 16:47:01 CST (Total Number of Edits: 1)
Corin Friesen
flag
Any 2-4 player game without too much chance will be more strategic with only 2 as opposed to more. Very good comments!

So now the question is: What is the most strategic game versus tactical with more than 2 players? I'm guessing Princes of Florence, but I should probably start that discussion somewhere else. ;)

Oh, and did you know that 4 player Go is possible, and even played sometimes? :surprise: Don't ask me about details, since I've never played it that way before.
 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
BoardGameGeek and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.