EDIT: After subsequent plays and reviewing rules again, I realised we misinterpreted the river scoring set for placed fishermen. Please read the following with that in mind.

We just purchased Hunters and Gatherers, and broke it out that very night. This is my first ever attempt at a session report, and did not take notes during play. Ergo, this will not be a tile by tile report, nor a rule breakdown, as plenty of reviews already do that. However, I am going to comment on the flow of the game and a few pleasant surprises in this version we found verses the standard Carcassonne we normally play.

First thing I did, was read the rules completely to see what the basic differences were from this to standard Carcassonne. Being familiar with it's parent, made this game very easy to pick up and start quickly.

Since I play more games, I let my girlfriend, Kellie, go first. Also as a first play threw we were not quite as competitive as seasoned players would be, still I couldn't resist throwing some tigers into her meadows. She quickly started returning the favor.

The general flow of the game seemed to be going to my favor, especially in the first third of the game. I scored early with a four segment forest with gold nugget, giving me a bonus tile with mushrooms. I added this and a meeple to start building on another forest immediately. I had quickly seized on the strategy of placing as many forests as possible to score and cycle my meeples quickly. Theoretically, this was where all the points were to be had. How quickly theory can be disproved.

On the other hand, Kellie started building a large and complex river system with many lakes. She placed her first hut early, leaving me to place my first hut much later in the game when a new river system started. My first hut/river system burned out too quickly however, as she placed a lake tile to cap my river system that still had no branches. Therefore, I was stuck with a short system of two lakes worth only 3 points.

I began to get concerned at the ever increasing size of this river system she was on, but could not draw the tiles to shut it down as the rivers seem to branch much more quickly than roads do in Carc. I think because the lakes do not act as ends to complete a road, as intersections do in Carc. Perhaps we misinterpreted this rule? It sure made for a large network, worth 12 points for her at the end.

While she built her rivers (and subsequently large meadows within), I continued to finish large forests, and was easily 25 or more points ahead before she scored her first forest.

The downside to her river strategy was that she also was placing meeples on different rivers to try and score them. She ended up with two meeples with never completed rivers, and thus never scoring anything for her.

I finally started a meadow and placed a meeple on the outskirts about just past halfway through the game. thinking this would help me keep some parity on the hunting side. She had already monopolized the two largest meadows with large numbers of critters in each, but managed to place no tigers within them with good placement. I was too long over looking this strategy. I started dumping tiles with tigers near her hunting grounds to trim down her count of deer, but she picked up two good bonus tiles, one with a bull on it (immune to tigers) and her last bonus tile was the fire, running all my tigers away from her now huge hunting area. Sadly, my single hunting ground, while fertile with animals was by this time saddled with two, maybe three competing tigers, with nothing I could do to remove them.

All in I all I was still very comfortably ahead, and managed to score several more forests, and at least two small rivers before game end. My final hut was on a decent river system far up north on the board (placed late in the game). I did manage several lakes before game end on this system, including one with four fish from a generous bonus tile. I finished my scoring first, so we could both understand the system. That is, I had less to score at game end, because I was focusing on completing elements in game and scoring then. My two river systems game me 13 points, and my single hunting ground yielded me only eight with several last minute mammoth placements. I just couldn't compensate for the 3 tigers.

We then scored her rivers and meadows. I was still quite confident as I was probably a good 50 points ahead. Then I started to appreciate the sizes of her meadows, and got concerned. She had a full ten in each of two meadows, by the time we traced around all the land features and got a full count. Thanks to her bonus fire tile, none of my tigers I dumped on her would be having dinner. With the animals she jumped another 40 points! Uh, oh! Then we started scoring that large river and the lesser river and it was over by ~5 points. It came down to that fire tile, I believe. I can't remember if I had 2 or 3 tigers in her meadows, but if I did, the fire put her over the edge to victory.

She went for the long term scoring, while I went generally for the short term scoring. It was a tortoise and hare scenario, if you will. Since the scoring came down so close, even after only one play, I came away feeling the game was quite balanced.

Parting impressions:
I even really enjoyed the whole affair, even though I lost! We both enjoyed the artwork, especially me, as I felt there was much more personality to the game with the different animals, and the pouncing tigers on the prowl. Game play wise, I almost think I prefer standard Carcassonne, though. It's too early to tell, as we've only played HnG once. We just didn't have time for another play or we would have. The reasons for my play preference might just be familiarity, but I in particular didn't like the scoring or placement of the huts. Perhaps, because I didn't use them as effectively, to be honest. Also, I didn't like the shortage of meeples, though I did seem to be using them more often than she did. Another observation is the rivers seem to be more expansive and important in end game than roads are in Carcassone, but more difficult to complete and score in HnG.

The breakdown for me, is I enjoyed HnG enough to keep copies of both this and Carc. For style and visual appeal, I pick HnG, also I think this will be more appealing to my younger cousins when they visit. For actual play, I think I like Carc just a hair more. Perhaps subsequent plays (especially if I win!) will recalibrate my preferences.

If you have regular Carc, you probably don't need HnG, but if it's a favorite game of yours like it is of mine, you should really consider it for a different flavor to your games.