1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 Next » [15]
-
sean johnson
United States
avon
Indiana
-
I played this game at Gen Con in 2010, and I had a blast. That play was an incredibly fun and exciting experience. In 2011 at Indy Con this was one of the games available in the raffle. I put several of my tickets in to win it, and I was fortunate enough to do so. So is this game fun and exciting or was my initial play not as good as I remembered it being?
Game Overview
In this game the majority of players play a novice nun who has a secret wish they want to fulfill (an item of some sort). These players need to sneak out of their cell, get a key, get their wish, and then make it back to their room. One player though will be controlling the Abbess and Prioress who are trying to enforce discipline and catch the naughty novices.
Each turn the players playing novices will pick how they move. They either stand still, sneak, walk, or run. Running moves faster than sneaking, but it also makes more noise. They will have to secretly move and then record where on the board they end their movement.
After everyone has done this, they must then roll a six sided die. If they are within the number of spaces rolled from either the Abbess or Prioress figures then they are heard.
Next comes the Abbess and Prioress turn. The player controlling these two will pick a pre-planned route for them to patrol. These routes are public and they are printed on the board. When they reach their destination, they may choose a new route. This player also decides if they are walking or running. If they run then they can move up to six spaces (this is one more than the novice players). If they walk, then then they move less but after moving they may roll the dice to see if they hear anyone from their new location. While walking it is possible to see one of the novices by having their current space be within the abbess or prioress' line of sight.
If the Abbess or prioress hears a noise or sees a novice then they may deviate and try to catch them by landing on the same space. If caught the novice loses their secret wish if they had it, and must begin moving back to their room, but they can go on the run again later. The Abbess/Prioress player wins if the makes catches equal to the number of players +1 or 15 turns expire. A novice player wins if they makes it back to their room with their secret wish.
The Game We Played
We played a six player game, and my wife and I were both novices. This game was actually fairly quiet and for most of the game most people went undetected. The turn I made it to my secret wish, I was detected. Fortunately, I was detected at the end of the Abbess turn when the second listening roll was made. I took off and ducked through a door to avoid the Abbess. The Abbess ran, and stopped right in front of the door I ducked into. I found out at the end of the game, that there was actually another player in that space with me. I also tipped off the Prioress at this point, but again I was able to run away. However, this change of paths, led to another player being caught. This was the first and only time that happened in the game. At this point I had my secret wish, and both the abbess and prioress were on the other side, so I hightailed it back to my cell. I made it the same turn as another player, so we shared victory.
Our Thoughts
My Rating: 3 (It's OK)
My Thoughts: I have played this game several times now. Every time, the game ends with people comparing stories about how they almost got caught, or just how close they were to being able to win. This game does create a fun experience, but I am not sure if that makes it a good game. It is very hard for the Abbess/Prioress player to win, and it seems like this player is mostly just fulfilling the role of ensuring that everyone else has fun. Plus, the line of sight stuff in the big open spaces gets a little fiddly and bogs things down.
Her Rating: 2.5 (do not care for)
Her Thoughts: This is too much of a multiplayer solitare game, where everyone does their own thing. Honestly, I find it a little boring.
Verdict
Combined Rating: 5.5
It has not been mentioned yet, but this is a terrible two player game. For the game to really have any excitement, and for the Abbess/Prioress to have even a fighting chance this game really requires at least five players, and seven is the best. We rarely get that many people together, and if we do it is probably for a special occasion of some sort. I am not sure how often that occasion will be to play Nuns on the Run, so I think we will be looking to trade this one.
-
sean johnson
United States
avon
Indiana
-
In 2010 we bought this game. I think at the time it was the top game here, and we had previously discovered that we really liked worker placement games. We were really interested in getting the game, so I made sure to seek the game out and play it at Indy Con that year. That play was enough to put the game on the must buy list. So a couple of years later, is this one of our favorite games?
Game Overview
Agricola is a fairly complicated game so this will be a very basic explanation. Players begin the game with two workers, though they can increase it to more. There are basic resources such as wood, clay, reed, and stone which are needed to build a whole lot of things such as new rooms for a house (which are needed for more workers), fences, and improvements. Players will also need to actually build their farm, which involves plowing fields, planting crops and raising animals (sheep, hogs, and cattle). Players will need to build up a farm to score points, but to also feed their family. Several times during the game there is a harvest and during the harvest two food is needed per family member.
To add diversity to the game, each player is dealt out seven occupation cards. These cards give the player special abilities. To play an occupation requires a worker action and usually cost a food. Players also get seven minor improvements. Minor improvements cost resources, and also give the player special abilities. The occupations often help a player form a strategy, while the minor improvements can augment that strategy.
To do anything in the game a player must place one of their workers on one of the available action locations, and the number of these locations increases through out the game. Each round only one player can use one location. So for example, there is a location that provides 3 wood each turn, and only one player can place a worker and take that wood. This leads to multiple people wanting the same space often. One of the hallmarks of Agricola is that there are never enough actions to do everything.
There are multiple categories where players will score points, and if a player has zero in any of these categories it is negative points. Players also lose points for open spaces they have in their farm. Which ever player scores the most points wins.
The Game We Played
I found myself having several good occupations that worked well together, and played a fairly heavy occupation strategy. By the first harvest phase I had three occupations in play. These worked well because one allowed me to plow extra fields. The second allowed me to take the day labor action (which provides two food) and get an additional grain. The final action allowed me to take grain and brew beer for food. To top it off I had a minor improvement that gave bonus points for having fields. The max was four bonus points for nine fields (there are only fifteen possible spots on the player board). I pursued this heavy farming strategy. I met my food needs mostly from cooking vegetables and brewing beer. I also dabbled some in sheep and pigs. My wife struggled a lot early on, because she needed to use so many actions to meet her food requirements. However, she finally got a bread baking strategy up and going. From there she used a lot of wood to fill up her board with a lot of fenced in pastures. She had fences for all of the animal types, but was especially strong in cows.
We both ended the game with four family members, and we both had upgraded to stone houses. I managed to get several bonus points from cards. Along with the four bonus points from the minor improvement, I also received three more points from an occupation. I won with a final score of 38 to 32.
Our Thoughts
My Rating: 4.5 (like it)
My Thoughts: The different occupations and improvements give this game a lot of variety, and every turn offers tough, interesting decisions. What I like most about this game is the emotional arc that goes with this game. Inevitably, somewhere in the first third of the game I feel like I am going to lose and get crushed because I can not get everything done. However, every time by the end my little farm is up and working. I may not win the game, but I feel like I accomplished something because I made the farm work. This is may be the only game I play where losing is still a completely satisfying experience.
Her Rating: 2 (Do not care for)
Her Thoughts: I like the mechanics of this game, but I do not like playing it. This game is so stressful, and I know my blood pressure goes up when I play it. I always feel like I am on the verge of losing and failure. The emotional up and down of this game is too much; to the point that I do not have any fun actually playing the game.
Verdict
Combined Rating: 6.5
I am a little shocked. We used to consider this one of our favorite games to play together. I know the past couple of times we have played it the game had diminished a bit in my wife's view, but I am surprised at how fall it has fallen. While I find the stress and tension of the game enjoyable, I do understand my wife's frustration with the game. However, I like this game a good deal and I am not sure if I want to give it up quite yet. However, I am open to finding a replacement. I need a game that has a similar feel to Agricola but is not quite as stressful or tense. I wonder if At the Gates of Loyang or even Agricola: All Creatures Big and Small would be a good fit?
-
sean johnson
United States
avon
Indiana
-
UNO, like Monopoly, is one of those games that everyone seems to just have. The back of my copy of UNO tells me that there are half a billion UNO cards printed every year, so no wonder it is everywhere. I think we ended up with this game back when my wife was really big into extreme couponing and rolling over CVS extra care bucks. There was a system, that as long as people were not picky with what they got they could get all kinds of free stuff from CVS. At one point or another, UNO fell into this. We have had this copy of the game for a year or two, but we had to "break the shrink" for our play through on our quest to play through all of our games. So is there any fun to be had in UNO?
Game Overview
In UNO, the goal of the game is to be the first player to play all of their cards. In the deck there are four different colors numbered 0-9. There are also special cards such as draw 2, skip, reverse, wild, and the powerful draw 4 wild. On a player's turn they can play a card to the center stack. The card played must either be the same color or number as the previously played card. If a player can not play a card then they draw one card. If that card can be played, they play it immediately. If not, they keep the card and their turn ends. When a player is down to one card in their hand they must say UNO! Once a player plays their last card, they will get points for the cards left in other player's hands. cards give points equal to their numeric value. Special cards are worth 20 points, and wilds are worth 50 points. According to the rules the first one to 500 points wins.
The Game We Played
We played a four player game, and we agreed up front that we would only play to 300 points. For the first four rounds a different person won, and I was in the lead with 124 points. For the next two rounds my wife's mom went out first and this bumped her all the way up to 285 points. I then went out again to get a few more points. Fortunately, My wife's mom went out first again and got more than enough points to win. She blew us all away with a final score of 422. I finished second with a score of 197.
Our Thoughts
My Rating: 1.5 (Do not like)
My Thoughts: Occasionally UNO offers a decision, such as I do play out my last color or do I follow the number and switch to a color I have a lot of. However, the majority of the time this game practically plays itself and is devoid of meaningful decision. As a time waster, to do while spending time with people then I am "whatever" about the game. However, when keeping score I get frustrated. The game does not give negative points, but it is close.
Her Rating: 2.5 (Do not care for)
Her Thoughts: As a game, this is not the best and we have so many others that are better. But it is very easy to play and anyone can play it so it is still a good game to play with people who do not play a lot of games.
Verdict
Combined Rating: 4
Despite not really liking the game, we will keep this game to play with our son. He knows his colors and is beginning to learn number identification, so this will be a great game for him. I think if we take the special cards out, he can play it now with assistance. There are better games, but UNO can be good training wheels to learn the basics of following the rules before we move him on to the better games.
-
sean johnson
United States
avon
Indiana
-
My wife and I have a now, well established tradition that over the summer we spend an afternoon to go and buy a game that we know nothing about but looks intriguing enough to try. We then spend a few hours playing the game in a public place. I have an extremely busy summer this year, and we had the chance to sneak away for an evening so we go a jump start on this "summer" tradition. Wacky Wacky West was the game we went with this year. The price for the game was right, it looked interesting, and my wife liked that it was published by Mayfair Games. Every other year, when we have done this we have selected a game we like, so did we keep the streak alive?
Game Overview
Wacky Wacky West, as the name implies is a wacky game that mixes elements of tile laying, deduction, and social interaction. The board comes with several buildings printed on it in various colors with different point values. Each player will secretly be given one of these building colors as their color. At the end of the game they will score points for each of those buildings still on the board.
Players will also be given multiple tiles that take up 1,2, or 3 spaces. These tiles will either further the railroad, the road, or the river. On a player's turn they will play one of their tiles. The tile must be played adjacent to the "worker" that is already on that tile type. After placing the tile, the player then moves the worker to the end of the just placed tile.
Throughout the game these tiles will be covering up building on the board. However, sometimes a tile will be placed over an outhouse, at which point a vote is required. Each player gets a set of voting cards that range from 1-3 postive and 1-3 negative votes per card. Each voting card can only be used once. If there are more no votes than yes votes, then the tile is not placed, and the player's turn ends. Eventually each worker is going to reach a spot where it makes new tile placement impossible. When that happens the worker is removed, once it is not possible to place any more tiles everyone reveals their secret building. Players count up the point value of building left on the board and whoever has the most wins.
The Game We Played
It did not take long into our first game for my wife to discover my secret color. I had red, and she proposed to place a tile that covered up the five point red building. To do this also covered up an outhouse and a vote was needed. I played my 3 value no card, and she placed her 3 value yes card. In the event of a tie, the tile is still played. It turns out to be much harder to save buildings from being covered up than it is to cover them up. Meanwhile, I was still trying to figure out my wife's color. I thought it might be green but I was not terribly sure.
At the end of the game, she revealed orange to be her color. I was thrown off because the very first building she covered up was an orange one. However, after doing that the color was mostly left alone. She had multiple orange buildings on the board, while I only had a couple of red buildings. I do not remember the score but she won by a lot.
Our Thoughts
My Rating: 3 (It's OK)
My Thoughts: It is kind of hard to properly rate this game. I like the mechanics and the way the game plays, but it is clear that this game is not really meant for two players. The box technically says two, but I think three is needed to really get the social dynamic of the voting that is suppose to be so core to this game.
Her Rating: 3 (It's OK)
Her Thoughts: This game is not really for two people. It is silly, but it is OK.
Verdict
Combined Rating: 6
My wife thought of a variant where we both have two buildings that score. We played that way, and we both liked the game so much more. The variant added a lot more intrigue back into the game. We also both want to play this game with more players. I do not consider the game a bust, but of the four games we have gotten so far through this tradition, this is our least favorite.
-
sean johnson
United States
avon
Indiana
-
I was recently given a gift card to a local game store. Like most game stores, Magic: The Gatheringand miniatures were their main business, but they do have a board game selection. It turned out though that I either had most of the games, was not interested (looking at you multiple variants of Fluxx and Munchkin, or was a little out of my price range (sorry Combat Commander: Europe). In the end I picked up this little card game, mostly for the title alone.
As a disclaimer: Looking at the forum threads on this game, it is apparently very controversial and some people are really up in arms. The dark juxtaposition of adorable and horrifying, when firmly removed from a real context, is a brand of humor that I can find funny. I do not see this game as an endorsement of animal cruelty or a general condemnation on the depraved state of humanity. I find this game to be in good fun and not offensive or tasteless. If you disagree with that statement, that is fine. Let's agree to disagree instead of tell each other why the other is wrong. Thanks!
Theme aside, is the game fun?
Game Overview
In this game each player has sixteen adorable (and even more adorably named) kittens. Players try to score points by getting their cats safe in the box, while throwing their opponent's cats in the blender. On a player's turn they will play two cards. If they play a cat card they may put the cat in the box, on the counter (in between the box and blender), or in the blender. There are several other types of cards. Movement cards allow a player to move kittens from one location to an adjacent location. Some cards will move all kittens in play to one location, and other cards switch hands. There are also Blend cards. These are the cards that do the dark deed. When a Blend card is played, it may be stopped by another player playing a Blend/Pulse card. The Blend/Pulse cards may also be used as a regular Blend card. When a Blend card is not canceled. All kittens in the blender are lost and go under the blender, all kittens in the box are saved and go under the box. Then all kittens on the counter are put in the blender.
Once a player has played two cards, they will draw back to six cards and it is the next player's turn. There are eight blend cards and eight blend/pulse cards. Once all sixteen of these cards have been played the game ends. Kittens saved in the box are worth two points each, while kittens lost in the blender are worth -1 point. Whoever scores the most points wins.
The Game We Played
As it turned out, my wife had a lot of my kittens to begin with and she kept throwing them into the blender. She tried to blend, but I stopped it with a blend/pulse. I had several kittens out, so I played an all kittens in the box card, and then followed that up with a blend which caused all of the kittens to be saved. A few turns later, when my wife had the most kittens out I was able to pull off the opposite, and put all kittens in the blender before playing a blend card.
There was a little more back and forth, with many more kittens being saved than lost. When it was all over we counted up the score and I won 23 to 12.
Our Thoughts
My Rating: 3.5 (It's OK)
My Thoughts: This is a light "take that game", there can be some subtle strategy in timing and holding back cards but it is mostly luck. With the right group, it is also a blast to play. This is not the kind of game where people stare solemnly at cubes or a player board. There will be hooting, hollering, and most importantly lots of laughter. The only time people playing this game is when they take a moment of silence for Paco and Mr. Snuggles. The art work is fantastic and absolutely fits the game perfectly.
Her Rating: 3 (it's OK)
Her Thoughts: This is not a great two player game, but I could see it being a lot of fun with a group. The theme is silly but amusing.
Verdict
Combined Rating: 6.5
Given all of our other games, this is probably not one we will pull out for just the two of us very often. However, for an end of the night filler when playing with friends or at game night, then it is a perfect fit. That is a niche that we do not have many games for, and that makes this one a keeper.
-
sean johnson
United States
avon
Indiana
-
We received this game last year in a math trade. That is not entirely accurate. It might be better to say we ended up with this game last year in a math trade. It came packed with another game, and it was the other game that we were trading for. Despite not being a game we were seeking we have still played it some. Instead of attempting a witty lead in question, I am going to ask the question that puzzles me the most about this game: Why is George W. Bush on the cover?
Game Overview
Executive Decision is an economic game where players buy resources and then convert those resources into goods to make money. The game is played over a course of 12 months. Each month has a buy phase and a sell phase. During the buy phase players will be looking to buy either X-Fine, Fine, or standard goods. Each good has a starting price, but the market will change the price of these goods. Each player secretly writes down how much of each good they want and how much they want to pay for it. Based on the amount of players there is a cap of how many goods a player can buy a turn.
All players will reveal their orders, and the prices will be adjusted. If a large quantity of a good between all players is ordered then the price increases. If a small quantity is ordered then the price is decreased. A chart on the board is used to determine these changes. Players then spend money to purchase their goods. If a player wrote down they were wanted to pay less than the current market price, then they are unable to buy those goods. If a player wrote down more they have to still buy the goods at their higher price.
Next players will use these goods to make goods. They make make Good A, Good B, or Good C. Good A starts with the higher price and requires 2 X-Fine and 1 Fine. Good B requires one of each, and the good that pays the least is Good C that requires 1 fine and 2 standard. It is possible to substitute down. So a X-Fine can be used in place of a Fine and a Fine can be used in place of a Standard resource. Players will write down how much of each good they are going to sell and how much they wish to sell it for.
Like before, players reveal their totals. If the market is flooded by a large quantity of one type of good then the sell price decreases. If a good is scarce the sell price increases. Again, if a player tries to sell a good for higher than the current market price they can not sell it. If they sell it for lower then they must sell at the lower price. If a player sells, they discard the required resources and collects their money.
Whoever makes the most money at the end of the game wins.
The Game We Played
My wife began by buying six of everything, where I was a bit more conservative the first round. I also did not produce any goods the first round because I wanted the sell prices to be driven up, and that is what happened. Since I had saved more of my starting money, I was able to buy more goods and I had a rather large pay out.
We had agreed up front to only play half a year. With two months to go, I realized that I had a decent lead over my wife. She also appeared to have very few resources stockpiled. I decided I would try a different strategy and perfectly ordered large quantities of Fine (the middle good) to drive the price up. It worked and my wife did not get any of the goods. However, a mistake and some shenanigans then occurred. My plan was to prevent her from building goods by chocking the resource supply with high prices. My mistake is that I forgot about the substitution rule. The shenanigans is that my wife materialized resources that she was keeping under the table in the chair next to her. She claimed she had been keeping them there the whole game, but still Shenanigans!
I had no resources and the prices were now to high for me to do much of anything, so I doubled down on my strategy but I could not drive the price up on everything because of the order limits. This means my wife grabbed a few more resources. Since I had none, she was able to calculate the way to maximize her prophet. We played the game five days ago, so I do not remember the final score. She won but it was fairly close. Only $200-300 separated us.
Our Thoughts
My Rating: 2 (do not care for)
My Thoughts: I respect the simulation aspect of this game, but that does not mean I find it fun. The game is dry and boring. The game is almost literally buying resources 1,2, and 3, to turn into goods a,b, and c. The fact that the game requires a calculator and a spreadsheet also detracts from it.
Her Rating: 1.5 (do not like)
Her Thoughts: This game might be good for learning economics, but playing it feels less like a game and more like work.
Verdict
Combined Rating: 3.5
I know there is a segment of gamers who this is a good game for because this game is getting a reprint. This game is a snoozer for us, and that might be more than figurative. My wife has some AP tendencies and this game is EXTREMELY AP inducing. I am going to see if the local Economics teach wants it, and if not then it will go to Goodwill.
-
sean johnson
United States
avon
Indiana
-
Back in March at a local con, we participated in a math trade and we were able to trade many of the games that we had identified in January and the first part of February as games we wanted to trade. We traded several games but came back with about a dozen. This is one of the games that we got in the trade. I did not know much about it other than it is a Bible themed game, and Tom Vasel gave it a good review. Sadly, "good" and "bible themed" do not end up in a sentence together very often, so that was enough to make me go for the trade. Being a pastor, it is a given that I like the subject matter but is it a good game?
Game Overview
Technically, this game is about creating churches on a missionary journey. However, it is really a race game. Players start at Jerusalem. They must build three churches and after doing that be the first one to reach Rome.
On a player's turn the first thing they do is declare which action they wish to take, and they have three choices. They may travel by land. Under normal conditions a player may move 1-3 spaces. The second option is to travel by boat. To travel by boat a player needs to play a boat Opportunity card. The third option is build a church. To build a church a player needs to get seven cell groups together in the city they are in. On a normal turn they may add two cells.
Next, players draw an event card. This card may effect their action. For example some cards limit movement, while others make it impossible to build during the turn. Once the event card is drawn, its effect is applied if applicable and then the player takes their chosen action if possible.
Finally, players draw an opportunity card. Many opportunity cards can be used to cancel certain event cards. Others can be used to gain additional followers, and the power deacon cards place a deacon at a church location to protect the church from future disasters.
Other rules are the city cards. Each player starts with three city cards and if they try to start a church at this city they can get three extra cells in that city. Also, at the end of each round players may trade anything with each other. The only rule that really governs trading is that all trades agreed upon must be honored. As mentioned, the first one to build three churches and reach Rome wins.
The Game We Played
My wife started by moving one space from Jerusalem, and going to Caesaria to start building a church. Meanwhile, I huffed it up to the black sea to build a church at Tomis. I traded my wife a boat card for the Aquiliea city card. I already had the Salona city card, which was just south, so it worked well for me. My wife used the boat to sail for Athens. She had a lot of trouble with event cards that prevented building, but she finally got it built right after I had finished building at Salona. Now it was my turn for trouble in building at Aquilia. My wife moved onto Actum and built the church up quickly there. She looked sure to win, and was set to take a boat to Rome. However, a ship wrecked event card sent her down to Leptis Magna in Africa. She was stranded there and hoped to draw a ship card. I quickly built my third church at Genua, and then moved on to Rome to win the game.
Our Thoughts
My Rating: 3.5 (It's OK)
My Thoughts: This game is fairly easy, and while there are some tactical choices, it is not a deep game. However, this game has a lot of tension. The race aspect combined with the luck of the card flip ups the tensions (and occasional frustration). I think this game would be more interesting with more people. I will admit my bias, the biggest draw of this game to me is the Christian theme that I think comes through very well. The fact that it has this theme and manages to still be a competent game is an achievement. Finally, as someone who will be ordained a deacon in the UMC in a month I did rather like how powerful the deacon cards are in this game.
Her Rating: 2.5 (do not care for)
Her Thoughts: This game is really easy and too luck based. The Christian theme works OK, but I still found the game kind of boring.
Verdict
Combined Rating: 6
After reading the rules and setting the game up, I had kind of hoped this game would fare a bit better than it did for the two of us. We have a growing pile of games that would be good for a future family game night when our son gets older, and I think this would be another good candidate. However, as a youth pastor my biggest reason for keeping this game is that it is a bible based game that is actually fun to play. I am already thinking about how I can use this game in a Sunday School study on the book of Acts.
-
sean johnson
United States
avon
Indiana
-
Last year someone very kindly gave us this game. I was initially excited because it looked like a light war game that my wife would really enjoy. We played it a few times, and in doing so I realized that other than the highlights I really did not know/remember a lot about the civil war. So this game actually inspired me to watch Ken Burn's The Civil War documentary series. So despite positive side effects, is this a good game?
Game Overview
As the name makes clear, this game is about the first battle of Bull Run. One side plays the confederacy and the other side plays the union. The board has the river in the center of the board, and the rest of it is divided into various sections. Units start on specific spaces as indicated on the board. AT the beginning of each turn, a player rolls dice (four for union and three for confederate) to find out what actions they take. For each 1 rolled they draw a card. For each two or three rolled they may fire an artillery piece. Fours and fives allow moves, and sixes activate leaders.
The cards allow a whole variety of things. Some cards give extra actions, extra combat dice, or disrupt an opponent's turn. Both players begin with two artillery pieces and they may fire at adjacent spaces. To fire a player rolls a six sided die and they hit on a roll of 5 or 6. If hit, the firing player rolls again. A roll of 1-5 causes a retreat and 6 causes a wound. When wounded, units are flipped. If a wounded unit is hit, then it is eliminated.
Each move order can move units from one space to another. The amount of units moved depend on the space. To move from clear spaces to clear space, two units can move. On roads three units can move, and across woods or the river only one unit can move per move order. There are a couple of river spaces where two units can move if the moving into space is unoccupied. If movement puts opposing units in the same space a fight begins. For combat, players will roll two dice for each unit they have to a max of six. Each 5,6 is a hit (4-6 for defender if on a hill). For each hit rolled the rolling player rolls again. A 1-3 roll causes a retreat and a 4-6 roll causes a wound. The defender rolls first and all retreats/wounds are resolved before the attacker rolls. At this point, if there are any defending units left then the attacker must retreat.
A leader roll, allows a player to draw a card or activate units (infantry or artillery) in the same space as them. There are several ways the game can end. If a player's deck is expended and they have to draw a card the game ends. At this point, the union player wins if they capture two of three specially marked spaces (all three along the river). If they fail to do this then confederacy wins. If the union occupies the confederate headquarters then it is an auto-win (and vice versa). Finally, both players have rout cards. To rout a player rolls two dice, and if they roll equal to or less than the amount of units they have killed then they win.
The Game We Played
I played the Union and my wife played the confederacy. I got several movement rolls early, and began moving units around my right flank to surround Henry House Hill (one of three locations I needed to win). Artillery fire weakened the defensive position, and I successfully took it. I then moved even more units into the position, and repelled a counter attack. From there I moved several units to an adjacent position that was also adjacent to the second of three positions I needed to take. At this point, my movement rolls just completely dried up. My wife began moving reinforcements to this position and a couple of successful bombardments weakened my attack position. Seeing my window closing, I attacked one turn to late since my wife had already fortified the position. She also rolled extremely well, and I rolled very poorly. This completely broke my attack and these units were soon eliminated. My units on Henry Hill were wounded, but my wife could not break the defensive position. However, I could not break out. I had units across from the third position, and I tried probing there hoping for a streak of good luck, but that did not go well either. By this point, my wife worked to end the game by card draw by using her six rolls to draw cards. This tactic succeeded, and she won because I had only captured two of the three locations.
Our Thoughts
My Rating: 2.5 (do not care for)
My Thoughts: I really like the mechanics of this game. I just do not find it much fun. This game is stacked against the union player. I have tried something different each time I have played the union, and each time the result is the same. I can capture one location and that is it. The Union has not won any of the games we have played. To succeed the Union needs A LOT of movement. If the rolls for movement are not there it can be very annoying. I realize the game being favored to the confederacy may be historical, but this game does not have the depth to really capture the feel of a historical simulation. It feels more like a game and the imbalance is very aggravating.
Her Rating: 3.5 (It's OK)
Her Thoughts: I like the dice system in this game. I like not knowing what I am doing at the beginning of a turn, and I have to figure out each turn what to do. I also like that turns play quickly.
Verdict
Combined Rating: 6
I never, ever would have thought that my wife would rate a wargame higher than me, but that just happened. Despite that, my wife is still willing to trade it. As she says there are other wargames that we BOTH like, so we should play those more. It is disappointing this game falls short, but hearing her say that makes it all good 
-
sean johnson
United States
avon
Indiana
-
We recently traded for this game at our local, no-ship math trade last month. I first ran across this game about two years ago in a math trade geeklist. I looked in to it, and it seemed like the kind of game my wife might enjoy. I have tried to acquire it in multiple math trades since then, and I actually failed in this one. I only made the trade after the fact when people contacted each other to work out side deals for untraded games. So was I right about my wife liking this game or did I miss the mark?
Game Overview
The goal of this game is to score the most points from placing house and then properly irrigating them. Players have tiles that are played on the board in 20 different areas. Between these tiles, wooden pieces will be placed to build canals.
On a player's turn they can do one of three actions. First they may place a water source. These are little blue markers that go at any crossroads between two tile spaces. Each water source must be five spaces away from another, and there is a limited number of sources. Second, a player may place two canal pieces. These pieces go in between the tile spaces. A canal must be connected to a water source, and must be a continuous line (the canal can not split). Each water source can support two different canals. It is possible to make these double canals as well. A canal provides water to the tile spaces to their left and right.
Finally, a player may place houses. Players have house tiles with 1-4 houses on them. The number of houses on the tile is how many points it is worth. A player may place 1 to 3 tiles. To place a tile, they will roll a twenty sided dice, and then place a house tile in an open spot within that section on the board. If the spot is already supplied with water, then the player must place their lowest value tile. If placing a tile fills up the area, then all house tiles not supplied with water (possibly including the one just placed) are removed from the game.
The game ends when the last canal piece has been placed. At that point all unsupplied house tiles are also removed. Players add up the total number of houses they have on the board, and the most wins.
The Game We Played
I get the feeling that a 2 player game is a little bit less crowded and less mean than a three or four player game. We both began by placing houses. Even though the roll is random, we both had are starting houses clustered together. This meant we both placed a water source and began building canals to our placed houses. The game did become a little bit more contentious as it went on, and we both tried to steer canals towards our houses and away from the other. I managed to get more tiles played than my wife but I lost more due to filling up an area before it was watered. At the end of the game we added up our houses and my wife won 50 to 49.
Our Thoughts
My Rating: 3 (It's OK)
My Thoughts: With more than two, I think this game could get mean. This is not a bad game, but it is not a great game either. It kind of feels like just "another euro."
Her Rating: 3 (It's OK)
Her Thoughts: This game is very thinky. The mechanics are simple and straight forward. I kind of feel like this game is to simple and basic for me.
Verdict
Combined Rating: 6
My wife did say that a couple of years ago, she could see herself really liking this game because the rules are so simple. However, she now thinks that she has moved on to like games with a bit more rule depth. So it turns out, I was right about my wife liking this game. I just took to long to trade for it. This is a competent game, but it is not a game that "wow's" us. We already have too many games that do "wow" us that we do not play enough. For that reason, we will probably be looking to trade Aquaduckt already.
-
sean johnson
United States
avon
Indiana
-
I pre-ordered this game last year after seeing an ad for it on this website. I clicked the link and I really liked what I saw. The P500 price was set to expire in a couple of days at that point, so I pulled the trigger and jumped into get it at the cheaper price. We first got the game right at a year ago, and with in that first month I played it several times. However, it has been sitting on the shelf, unplayed, for a good while now. So is it worth deploying Boots on the Ground?
Game Overview
Boots on the Ground is unique in that it can be played in four different ways. The game can be played solo, 2 player co-op, 2 player competitive, or three player (2 vs. 1). No matter how the game is played, the basic game play is the same. A mission will be chosen and the game board will be set up according to the instructions. The game board looks like a satellite shot of city streets, and different missions use different parts of the board. Despite the board being static, each mission feels unique.
Usually players will control a squad of six soldiers. Each of these soldiers fulfills a specific role in the squad such as sniper, medic, or demo expert. On a player’s turn they have a choice to either activate an individual, or activate a team. Each individual solider has their own movement rating, attack modifier, and special ability. The only way to access these skills is by activating the individual. A team consist of two or more units adjacent to each other. When a team is activated all members of a team can move 3 and fire with a zero attack modifier. Attack rules are loose. A unit can move part of it’s move, fire up to five spaces away, and then continue to move. To attack a die is rolled for the attacking force and the defending force. The numbers are compared and the differential is applied to a simple Combat Results Table. Combat is asymmetrical. It is much easier for a soldier to wound or kill an insurgent.
After a player finishes their turn, a card is drawn to activate the insurgents. In a co-op or competitive two player game, the other player resolves this card. In a three player game, one of the players has control of the insurgents. These cards often cause insurgents to move to attack, or to "spawn" in unexpected places. All insurgents attack in the same way by rolling and comparing dice. Soldiers can take three hits before they become KIA, but it is possible for a big enough of a differential in the rolls to get a one shot kill.
Play continues in this way until a group of soldiers completes the objective, or they all die trying.
The Game We Played
We played the "Hot LZ" scenario. In this set up we both deployed on the board at a cross roads surrounded by insurgents. We each had to make it to a different safe LZ. We both had an insurgent that gave us difficulty, but I ended the opening fire fight with more injuries. Luckily, one of the card draws gave me reinforcements. Overall, this mission was not to hard, as almost all of the cards drawn failed to provide insurrection reinforcements. This mean that once we cleared the initial set of enemies we moved unimpeded.
I drew more cards to have insurrectionists move to fight my wife, but she rolled much better than I did so that did not harm her much. At one point to get her team to safety she needed to move several of them adjacent to a car that could be rigged to blow. If her demo expert was near, the bomb could be defused. However, her demo soldier could not reach the car. She waited a turn to move the demo guy up. It turned out the car was save cover and not an I.E.D. Meanwhile, I left my injured guys behind, while the rest of my reinforced squad moved on. I got the required four guys into the safe zone first, and we ended the game with not a single allied K.I.A.
Our Thoughts
My Rating: 4 (like it)
My Thoughts: I really like how this game plays very simply, but really delivers the theme of the game so well. This does not simulate a particular battle, but as a civilian with zero combat training I feel like this captures the feel of modern combat as best as a board game can. Every game is varied, unique, and tense. In a lot of way this feels like a board game adaptation of a tactical FPS video game like Tom Clancy's Rainbow Six or Tom Clancy's Ghost Recon: Advanced Warfighter.
Her Rating: 3 (It's OK)
Her Thoughts: I like that this game is quick and easy. I also like how we do not directly fight each other but take turns using the insurgents against each other.
Verdict
Combined Rating: 7
This is a very clever game that plays differently than just about anything else. The game only has 49 ratings, so I think it is very much a hidden gem type of game. It is also another game that gets added to the war games my wife will play list, which means it is a keeper.
1 , 2 , 3 , 4 , 5 Next » [15]
|
|
