The game is simple and fun enough to be good for newbies or kids.
COMPONENTS:
There are 64 cards, divided into 8 copies of 8 bugs. (Impressively the art is unique on each card, e.g. 8 different pictures of cockroaches.) The art and physical quality of the cards is good. The style of art is cool and atypical for card games, a bit more dark and abstract than normal, and not so cartoonish as one might expect.
The bugs include: roach, fly, spider, scorpion, toad, rat, and some kind of green beetle (whose name seems to be unclear to players in various languages). And for some reason bats are considered a kind of bug.
RULES:
The gameplay is simple. All the cards are deal out equally to the players, and then a series of rounds begins. (If the cards don't divide equally, so that it's slightly unfair, who cares; this is not a serious tournament game, and if such things bother you, this may not be a game for you anyway.)
The first player picks a card from their hand and gives it to another player (any other player), saying what it is but not showing the card. They may lie. The player receiving the card has a choice:
1. State whether they believe the claim or not, and reveal the card. If receiver is right, the giver must take the card back and lay it on the table in front of them. If the receiver is wrong, then they must keep the card and lay it in front of them.
or
2. Look at the card and pass it to another player, saying what it is. They can lie. They can agree with the giver or say a different bug.
Obviously if everyone has seen the card, then the last person receiving it does not have #2 as an option.
Whoever ends up collecting and laying the card begins the next round, giving a card from their hand to a player and saying what it is.
The game continues until somebody loses by having collected 4 of the same kind of bug, or by having to play a card when their hand has no more cards. Interestingly, Bug Bluff has a unique loser, and everyone else wins!
STRATEGY:
A lot of this game consists of the fun of psyching out other people. It's common to see Alf give Bert a card, saying "It's a roach", Bert says "No it's not" and flips the card, revealing a fly, and sends it back to Alf, and Alf stubbornly gives Bert another card, again saying "It's a roach!" Sometimes such brinksmanship continues 3 or 4 times. It's particularly fun when the receiver confidently says "No it's not" and contemptuously tosses the card back, but in fact it was a roach.
Logic and tactics sometimes matter as well. E.g. once a player has collected 3 of a given type of bug, they become an interesting target for a 4th, and the question arises whether to give them the 4th roach and say "It's a roach" or to lie - which is better, if they decide to call your bluff? If you say "It's a roach", then they will really have no choice but to say "I believe you" - if it is a roach, then it will bounce back to you, and if it's not, they can afford to collect a non-roach. But if they say "No it's not" then if it is a roach, they collect it and lose, while if it's indeed not a roach, then it goes back to you. Thus it seems rational play by the receiver with 3 roaches, when given a so-called roach, is to say "I believe you", and so knowing that, you should give them a non-roach and say it's a roach, but then knowing that, they can use double-secret psychology and say "No it's not"...
Also, this analysis supposed that they can afford to collect a non-roach. If they have 3 roaches AND 3 flies, then if you give them a fly and say "It's a roach", the stakes are higher for them to say "I believe you"...
In addition to these tactical considerations about a player holding 3 of a bug, another tactical consideration arises from knowing that there are 8 of each bug in the game. If you can see 7 spiders laid in front of players, and you hold the 8th spider in your hand, then when someone hands you a card and says "It's a spider", you can confidently say "No it's not".
Sometimes all 8 of a card are in fact visible on the table (all 8 having been collected by various players already), and someone brain-farts and hands a card asserting that it is that clearly impossible kind of bug. This should lead to much well-deserved mocking and laughter...
GAMEPLAY EXPERIENCE:
The game rewards some attention to logic (as discussed above - avoid saying "It's a roach" when 8 roaches are visible on table) but primarily is about bluffing and reading your opponent. If you think you know if the giver is bluffing, then call their bluff. If you're really not sure, and you're not the last player in the round, then cool, just give the card to someone else and hope they don't successfully call your bluff.
Because losing depends on how many cards you collect, which depends on how many times you receive cards, there is a possible "unfairness" that if people all tend to give Bob cards, Bob will be more likely to lose. I have not noticed this being a serious problem, but it is possible that a cutthroat group could implicitly or explicitly collude (all but one of the players can assure they win as a group if they all ensure that the last player loses). Given that the spirit of the game is a fun fast short game, I don't consider this to be a problem in theory or practice. I've seen a few times where one player was getting a lot more cards, and whined about it, and the group self-corrected and started balancing where they gave cards.
I have played this game with several different groups of people. For some reason every time I've played it in Poland, it has been very fast-moving, lasting 20 minutes or so, with smack talk and laughter and cards flying back and forth. Every time I played it in Austin, it was slower, lasting almost an hour, with a lot of analysis and pondering and discussion about possibilities and options. I hesitate to generalize about Polish vs US gamers from this.
I think that some of my Austin group are just very analysis paralysis-prone, and it may take longer in a larger group. Even with AP the game is fun and interesting, although it's best when played with a spirit of fast bluffing fun.RECOMMENDATION:
The first time I played it, I was impressed by the simple clever elegant rules, the novelty of having a loser instead of a winner, and the strong bluffing/psychology aspect. It's got more luck than I normally like, but for some reason I enjoy this game a lot. Having played it more, the charm has not worn off. I recommend it to any fans of bluffing card games.
If you only like long strategic games with complex rules, or logical games with minimal luck and chaos, it's not for you. Or if you're afraid of pictures of bugs (like some people who complain about the bug theme of Hive), it might not be for you!
Posted Sun Feb 17, 2008 10:58 am
