geek
We're trying to reach 3000 New Supporters by the end of 2008!
BoardGameGeek Supporter Drive
300 600 900 1200 1500 1800 2100 2400 2700 3000 3300
   
563 New Supporters - Support BGG Now!
Recently Viewed
Hot Games
Dominion
Agricola
Axis & Allies Anniversary Edition
Android
Battlestar Galactica
Pandemic
Settlers of Catan, The
Race for the Galaxy
Le Havre
Titan
Puerto Rico
Power Grid
Ghost Stories
Lost Cities: The Board Game
Wasabi!
Apples to Apples
Conflict of Heroes: Awakening the Bear! - Russia 1941-1942
Arkham Horror
Carcassonne
Twilight Struggle
Stone Age
Exalted: War for the Throne
Ticket to Ride
Sorry! Sliders
Through the Ages: A Story of Civilization
Space Alert
War of the Ring
Red November
Descent: Journeys in the Dark
Last Night on Earth: The Zombie Game
Tigris & Euphrates
Risk
Mad Gab
Galaxy Trucker
BattleLore
Scrabble
Caylus
StarCraft: The Board Game
Formula D
Race for the Galaxy: The Gathering Storm
El Grande
Twilight Imperium 3rd Edition
Age of Empires III: The Age of Discovery
A Touch of Evil, The Supernatural Game
Munchkin Quest
World of WarCraft Miniatures Game
Hannibal: Rome vs. Carthage
Guess Who
Railroad Tycoon
Clue
Rules | Subscriptions | Bookmarks | Search | Account | Moderators
Recommend
8
4 Posts
New Thread | Printer Friendly | Subscribe | Bookmark
Your Tags: Login to Add Tags | View 
Popular Tags: [View All]
Tim K
flag
This is my first review of any of the Gipf-project games. I bought Yinsh at Christmas and it's the only one I've played very much before last weekend. A few weeks ago I bought Dvonn, Gipf, and Zertz.

Last weekend my bright nephew and I played more games than I can count, including standard Gipf, standard Gipf with one potential at a time, Yinsh, Dvonn, Zertz, and even Tzaar using the Gipf board, 15 basic pieces as Totts, 9 Zertz potentials as Tzarras, and 6 Tamsk potentials as Tzaars. I have now played all the currently official Gipf games, since I've played Punct on the internet. I have not played Tamsk, which of course Tzaar replaces.

Although I'm still sorting out my own preferences, I do think Yinsh deserves its highest rating at BGG among the Gipf project games. I haven't quite divined a solid strategy for it; I do well against Karl and others, but not against on-line bots. Yinsh has a chaotic quality that makes it exciting.

Dvonn is also quite good, for a completely different reason. I really like the three red Dvonn pieces. They are so important, and their range of placement at the beginning means that, so far, every Dvonn game I've played has been different.

I think Zertz has the most esthetic appeal. The marbles and rings have a very attractive appearance. My interest in its gameplay is qualified; others have described it to be a "puzzle to solve". I agree. I recently read that Chris Burm said a "perfect plan" has been determined for the smallest board if the first person places any color marble anywhere on the edge. Perfect plans obviously kill games, but fortunately one may play with more marbles and a larger board. I suspect it will be a long time before I figure out a "perfect plan" for the largest board.

Tzaar was great. Do not be fooled into thinking it is just a variation of Dvonn. Karl liked building the biggest stack. At first I tried to keep up, but he wouldn't let me. So I tried next to eliminate more of his pieces. Karl was best at this game, beating me three times before I beat him. I suspect we have much to explore with isolating pieces as another way to play effectively.

I understand Chris Burm likes Gipf best. I have mixed feelings. No doubt, the standard game (with the Gipf pieces) is far better than the basic game. But it still feels too scripted to me. I do think adding the potentials was incredibly interesting. We tried each one individually. Karl zinged me more than once because I was slow to pick up on the capabilities they offered. Incidentally, we just flipped a coin instead of linking the potentials to their associated games. Tamsk/Tzaar and Punct potentials do seem most powerful; neutralizing a Gipf piece may be even more valuable than having a second move. The Dvonn stacking ability seems more valuable than Zertz and Yinsh potentials, but all are quite useful with the right opportunity.

Thanks, Chris Burm, for these great games!
Russ Williams
flag
Avatar
0708
htjester wrote:
Although I'm still sorting out my own preferences, I do think Yinsh deserves its highest rating at BGG among the Gipf project games.
It's nice that none of the games are clunkers - for every one in the series, I've seen people say it is their favorite. (For me, Tzaar is definitely the best.)

Quote:
I recently read that Chris Burm said a "perfect plan" has been determined for the smallest board if the first person places any color marble anywhere on the edge. Perfect plans obviously kill games

Clarification: I believe a first player move on the edge loses for the first player against optimal play by the second player, right? So this is not really a "perfect plan". At least to me, a plan which depends on my opponent making a blunder is not a perfect plan. E.g. in Go, if one player puts their own 50-stone group into atari, then I have a "perfect plan" to win the game. :)

If the first player could force a win easily no matter how the second player responds, or if the second player could force a win easily no matter how the first player began, then I would agree that is a "perfect plan" which would kill the game.

Quote:
Tzaar was great. Do not be fooled into thinking it is just a variation of Dvonn. Karl liked building the biggest stack. At first I tried to keep up, but he wouldn't let me. So I tried next to eliminate more of his pieces. Karl was best at this game, beating me three times before I beat him. I suspect we have much to explore with isolating pieces as another way to play effectively.

For me Tzaar has the most strategic variety. Do I make a big stack? Do I make several big stacks? Do I try to kill their rare Tzaars or go after other pieces? 4 different ways to lose (run out of any of your 3 kinds of pieces, or be unable to move), and I have seen all 4 ways happen, multiple times. The game has a lot of variety.

Quote:
Thanks, Chris Burm, for these great games!
Indeed!
Michael Reitz
flag
Just a small remark: The author's name is Kris Burm (with K, not Ch).

And Russ is correct regarding the "perfect plan" for Zèrtz.
However, in the meantime further analysis shows that approx. 80% of all opening moves leads to "the lost opening" (i.e. loosing the game against a skilled second player). Anyway, that is only true for the small 37 rings board and 6+8+10 marbles.

Michael
Last edited on 2008-02-21 09:55:57 CST (Total Number of Edits: 1)
Tim K
flag
russ wrote:
Clarification: I believe a first player move on the edge loses for the first player against optimal play by the second player, right? So this is not really a "perfect plan".


To tell the truth, I'm intrigued to figure out how to respond to the poorly placed first marble - but once I do, the smaller board version of Zertz will be much less interesting. Clearly, a better game is not constrained by this limitation on the first player's play. Fortunately, I've got extra marbles and lots of extra rings.

Quote:
For me Tzaar has the most strategic variety.


I hope Karl and I were playing Tzaar correctly. The rules are not posted at BGG, but I divined what I could from previous reviews.

Here is how we played. We used the Gipf board with all points eligible, including those on the edge. The only exception is that the middle space is out of play. All edge spaces are considered to be connected by a line. We used 15 basic Gipf pieces as Totts, 9 Zertz potentials as Tzarras, and 6 Tamsk potentials as Tzaars.

1) Initial set-up like Dvonn with players alternating, white goes first. Any piece may be placed in any open space with no restrictions.

2) Play begins with white, who gets a capture move only on his first turn. Any friendly piece on the board is eligible for all moves (unlike Dvonn, where surrounded pieces may not move). Enemy pieces eligible for capture must be connected by a straight line to the piece that is moving, with no intervening pieces of either color. Also, one may not capture a stack of enemy pieces higher than the moving stack (a single piece may be considered a stack of one).

3) Black executes a capture move by the same rules as in 2). Black then has the option to pass, execute another capture move, or stack. Stacking on enemy pieces is not allowed. Friendly pieces eligible for stacking must be connected by a straight line to the piece that is moving, with no invervening pieces of either color. Once in a stack, only the top piece is considered to still be in play; e.g., a combination of different pieces topped by a Tzaar is considered one Tzaar.

4) Players alternate executing step 3 until either one player has no legal moves remaining or loses all of one of his three types of pieces. When any of these occurs, his opponent wins.

I'm waiting for someone to ask about Punct. I've played it twice on-line, and wasn't as engaged as with some of the other games. However, I got a good price from someone relatively local, and I'm picking up the game tomorrow! :-D So perhaps I'll have more to say about Punct soon.

Finally, thanks to the other poster for the clarification - thanks *Kris* Burm for these great games.
 
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
BoardGameGeek and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.