The Hotness
Games|People|Company
Dominion: Dark Ages
Fantastiqa
Mage Knight: Board Game
Total War
Descent: Journeys in the Dark (Second Edition)
Eclipse
Mice and Mystics
Dungeon Fighter
Collapsible D: The Final Minutes of the Titanic
Lords of Waterdeep
Agricola: All Creatures Big and Small
Libertalia
Android: Netrunner
Virgin Queen
The Lord of the Rings: Nazgul
A Game of Thrones: The Board Game (Second Edition)
Dominion
Star Wars: X-Wing Miniatures Game
Infiltration
The Lord of the Rings: The Card Game
Among the Stars
Twilight Struggle
The Swarm
Agricola
1989: Dawn of Freedom
Goa
7 Wonders
Glory to Rome
Arkham Horror
Village
Ora et Labora
Battles of Westeros: House Baratheon Army Expansion
Through the Ages: A Story of Civilization
Thunder Road
Trajan
Zombicide
The Castles of Burgundy
7 Wonders: Cities
Ace of Spies
War of the Ring
Skyline
Space Alert
Sherlock Holmes Consulting Detective
City of Horror
Race for the Galaxy
Dungeon Command: Sting of Lolth
Twilight Imperium (third edition)
Kingdom Builder
Le Havre
Battlestar Galactica

On Gamer's Games

Wherein I Discuss Those Games Described As Gamer's Games
Recommend
28 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Thumb up

Why I Don't Like Age of Empires III

Jesse Dean
United States
Orlando
Florida
Pound for pound, the amoeba is the most vicious predator on Earth!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
When done right, worker placement games are among my favorite games. Two of my Top 10 are worker placement games, and until recently Agricola was my favorite game period, with Race For the Galaxy only recently exceeding its position in my affections. Unfortunately, I have found most worker games to not be “done right.” Most are either innocuous without a lot of interesting decisions, simply have one good idea in them with everything else involved in the game, or are so fatally flawed that whatever interesting decisions that are in the game are overwhelmed, resulting in a game that is not really worth owning or playing. Age of Empires III falls in that last category for me, and is a game it is unlikely I will play again.


My Worker Placement Game Ratings

I first played Age of Empires III in January of 2010. At the time I had a pretty strong negative reaction to it, but even at the time I admitted that this could partially be due to a combination of a strong visceral reaction to the components. I found it to be difficult to tell the large swarms of monochromatic figures apart, and the game’s color palette was hard on my red-green colorblindness. The fact that some of the rules were explained incorrectly only added to this, and it ended up being a rather unpleasant gaming experience overall. Since then I have wanted to play it again, to confirm or refute my initial reaction, but not so much that I have gone out of my way to play it. I even left early at a game night a few weeks ago rather than play Age of Empires III with five players.

So last night I met with an out of town visitor for gaming, and he suggested we play Age of Empires III, with the yet to be released Builder Expansion. I didn’t remember my previous play of the game that well, but it quickly came back to me as he explained the rules so we were able to jump into the game pretty easily. During the first round I remembered my difficulty with red vs. green, and we were able to change out one of the colors for orange, and a greater degree of familiarity with the game allowed me to distinguish the figures from each other more effectively. This is not to say that I like the components any better; in fact I still think that they actively detract from the play experience, I just found them less annoying then the first time. This let me focus instead on the things that I dislike about Age of Empires III’s gameplay.

For the most part, Age of Empire’s design focuses on no-luck incremental action. Each player takes the action they like, with no randomness between their action and the resolution of said action. There are three main areas where this particular tendency is broken, and I find two of the three to be highly problematic both from their digression from the overall nature of the game as well as the impact they have on the overall flow of the game.

The first of these is the Age III capital buildings. While I don’t mind high victory point, late game bonuses as a general rule, the fact that not all of the Age III buildings will show up in the game makes there mere existence problematic. As the game goes on, players become increasingly specialized, thus making it so the bonus victory points provided by the Age III bonuses can be rather substantial. Unfortunately there is no way to determine either when a tile is going to come out or if a tile will come out. You can fight for first place in the final two rounds in order to ensure you have first shot at a tile, but this is going to only help you marginally if the tile you want never actually emerges. If a game is even remotely close, then the arrival of a particular Age III tile at the right time will be sufficient to give the game to a particular player. It is possible to buy a tile that only provides you with a marginal benefit in order to hurt someone else, but that is likely to only hurt the two effected players to the benefit of the other players, and is most likely not optimal.

The second item is the discovery tiles and cards. While it is possible to mitigate the luck of these items based on knowledge of their distribution, the mere fact that you can potentially turn a small investment of three workers into 4+ victory points, or, just as easily, lose three actions is problematic in a design that otherwise has very minimal action execution luck. This is not to say that I have any problem with luck, I just think that this luck is out of place in this game. I would like this better if there was more luck in general in the game, as then you would have to calculate the odds of success across multiple avenues of action resolution. Instead it is simply in Discovery where it is either costly or potentially devastating.

The expansion does not make either of these problems better. The builder just makes it so that discoveries are even less valuable relatively, and with more Age III buildings, there is an even greater chance that the particular high value Age III building that suits your strategy just won’t show up. There are a number of new tiles with powerful take that elements, allowing players to steal money or resource tiles, and one of the Age III tiles, Rewrite History, allows you to steal a Discovery tile from two different players, making attempts at Discoveries an even worse investment.

Even if I did not find these elements as problematic as I do, the mere fact that Dominant Species exists would probably relegate Age of Empires III to the “do not bother to play” list. The aspects of Age of Empires III that I like are implemented even more effectively in Dominant Species, and the added flourishes that Dominant Species adds to the genre are so enjoyable that I doubt I will ever play Age of Empires III again. This is too bad, because I do like the period presented in this game, and would like to own a good Age of Discovery with some real mechanical innovations and a tightly integrated theme. Luckily it looks like Colonial: Europe's Empires Overseas will allow me to achieve my desires, and will be my go-to game for gaming in the Age of Discovery in the future.
Twitter Facebook
30 Comments
Subscribe sub options Fri Oct 7, 2011 4:14 pm
Post Comment
Tim Seitz
United States
Glen Allen
VA
Like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be recovered, so we must die. But God does not take away life; instead, he devises ways so that a banished person may not remain estranged from him. 2 Sam 14:14
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I agree with most of your quibbles.

Not that I am suggesting you do so -- I don't really care for AOE III, either -- but these issues are not overly hard things to fix. Some things I have considered in the past.

1) The differences in the figures can be highlighted with a bit of touch up paint on the differences (bag of gold, guns, binoculars, etc.) this helps immensely. But yea, these were HORRIBLY designed.

2) Building tiles. There are ways to manipulate this so it varies, but will not cause randomness during the game. For example: You can fix the tile distribution and/or order at the start, making everyone aware of which tiles will or will not appear. Then you can plan for a particular tile, knowing it will appear. You still may not get it, but that would only be because someone took it before you.

3) Discoveries could be fixed by making the penalty for failure less devastating - just lose that action, lose X units, or lose some coin, etc.

This raises an interesting philosophical question. is it better to fix bad games and make them good, or just move on to find the ones that are good already?
11 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Oct 7, 2011 4:26 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Brent Gallmann
United States
Oshkosh
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
out4blood wrote:


3) Discoveries could be fixed by making the penalty for failure less devastating - just lose that action, lose X units, or lose some coin, etc.


Most of the time discoveries are never an issue because people tend to man up to have 100% or close to 100% success. Anyone willing to do it for less do it at their own risk. It adds a bit of gambling to the game, but most people tend to avoid taking the chance.
18 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Oct 7, 2011 4:34 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Carlos Lamas
United States
Minneapolis
Minnesota
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thanks for the review! Age of Empires III is my favorite game right now, and I disagree with your conclusion that these two elements break the game. However, your review does make me want to play Dominant Species, a game that has thus far eluded me.

Quote:
As the game goes on, players become increasingly specialized, thus making it so the bonus victory points provided by the Age III bonuses can be rather substantial. Unfortunately there is no way to determine either when a tile is going to come out or if a tile will come out. You can fight for first place in the final two rounds in order to ensure you have first shot at a tile, but this is going to only help you marginally if the tile you want never actually emerges.


I think it's a mistake to have a long-term strategy in this game that relies on getting a particular building. In fact, that's one of the things I like best about this game -- the situation is constantly in flux, forcing players to adapt their strategy turn by turn. In the situation you describe, even if there is no Age III building that gives you a lot of VPs, there is probably one that you want to prevent an opponent from having. For me, that weighs just as heavily as having one that benefits me a lot.

Quote:
...the mere fact that you can potentially turn a small investment of three workers into 4+ victory points, or, just as easily, lose three actions is problematic in a design that otherwise has very minimal action execution luck.


In my group, people rarely discover with less than the guaranteed victory amount (5 in tiles, 6 in cards, IIRC). Most of us agree that the cost of losing 3 or 4 workers for no reward greatly outweighs the benefit of saving 1 or 2. The only time we regularly see undermanned discovery expeditions is at the end of the game, as a last grasp for VPs. From that perspective, the luck factor of discovering is mitigated.

As far as discovery actions being a poor investment, I disagree again. They're the best non-resource way to make money, especially with a soldier. In fact, a player could spend every turn putting one worker in the Soldier specialist box, and the rest of them in Discovery, and make out pretty well. Money is usually very tight in AoEIII, and Discovery is an excellent way to get ahead financially.

I haven't played the Builder expansion, but I'm excited for it.
27 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Oct 7, 2011 4:36 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Jesse Dean
United States
Orlando
Florida
Pound for pound, the amoeba is the most vicious predator on Earth!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
out4blood wrote:

This raises an interesting philosophical question. is it better to fix bad games and make them good, or just move on to find the ones that are good already?


For me personally, it depends a lot on how valuable I find the initial design and how much effort it takes to fix the game. For Age of Empires III I am unlikely to bother simply because there are alternatives out there that I greatly prefer. (Dominant Species, for example). However, if A Few Acres of Snow is eventually fixed conclusively, then I would happily play it again with said fixes. I might even revise my rating upward, despite my extreme annoyance at the game being broken on release. A Few Acres of Snow is an innovative and interesting enough design that it is probably worth fixing.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Oct 7, 2011 4:41 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Bill Morgal
United States
Elkridge
Maryland
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think we will just have to agree to disagree about the game being 'broken'.

I can not refute anything you really said about the mechanics. The third age buildings are an important factor in determining the winner. Not having a building appear that will help your cause is part of the game. If you do not diversify when playing, you probably will not win. There is more than one way to get victory points and the third age buildings reflect this. If you made the decision to not evenly balance your gains in the game, then woe be to you if your desired building tile does not appear. And if you do concentrate in one area and your building tile appears and you are fortunate enough to get it, then good for you.

As for 'wasting' actions by having your settlers killed by performing a random colonization, then too bad for you. People experienced with the game will often send 1 unit to explore on the first turn so that they have a better idea of what is out there. The 'luck' probablities do not make for a broken mechanic. Is Stoneage broken if you do not roll the dice total you need to obtain something?

Yes, some of the pieces do appear to be the same on first glance. Many people paint them. I am not that talented a painter, but I did paint certain parts of the figures. The guns for the soldiers, the wood for the colonists, the purse and hat for the merchants, etc. It is not needed to play the game, but it does make the game look a lot neater.

I am not trying to convince you to like the game. It's plain that you do not. That's fine. But don't say the mechanics are broken because you do not like them.

I have no idea about how the new expansion works. I am eager to try it. Playing AOE with 2 people may not be the best way to experience it.

I also agree with everything you said about Dominant Species. Age of Wonders III was my favorite worker placement game until I played DS. Age of Empires is now my second favorite worker placement game.

I also quite understand what it is like to be taught a game and play it for the first time with many rules not explained correctly. It does tend to turn one off of playing the game. I will probably never like Power Grid because of this, even though it's obviously a well-liked and highly rated game.
10 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Oct 7, 2011 4:57 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Tim Seitz
United States
Glen Allen
VA
Like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be recovered, so we must die. But God does not take away life; instead, he devises ways so that a banished person may not remain estranged from him. 2 Sam 14:14
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
doubtofbuddha wrote:
out4blood wrote:

This raises an interesting philosophical question. is it better to fix bad games and make them good, or just move on to find the ones that are good already?

However, if A Few Acres of Snow is eventually fixed conclusively, then I would happily play it again with said fixes. I might even revise my rating upward, despite my extreme annoyance at the game being broken on release. A Few Acres of Snow is an innovative and interesting enough design that it is probably worth fixing.

I think AFAoS faces a more daunting challenge: Can a deck-building game with a static card assortment achieve sufficient variability?

Dominion with the same kingdom card set would cease to be interesting after a few plays. "Oh, so this is the best assortment." Players will learn, and then play, the path that has the best odds of success. You might knowingly choose something else, even if it has lower odds, and you might even win, but most players will end up gravitating towards the well-trodden path.

I am arriving at the opinion that the addition of a map does not bring enough to the table. Some other source of variability is probably required (e.g., random assignment of VP amounts at each location)
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Oct 7, 2011 5:01 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Charles Hasegawa
United States
Mesa
Arizona
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I love the game, but hate the two things you mentioned. I think it probably makes the game better if you :
* know in advance which buildings will not be in the game (at least for the third age.
* play with the discovery tiles face up. This takes away the gambling aspect and still keeps it interesting because you have to plan, knowing that people might grab the easy ones, or the ones that have a certain good.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Oct 7, 2011 5:04 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Jesse Dean
United States
Orlando
Florida
Pound for pound, the amoeba is the most vicious predator on Earth!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Myrdin T Sasnak wrote:
I think we will just have to agree to disagree about the game being 'broken'.


I don't think the game is broken. I just don't think the game works for me for the reasons stated. Where did you get the impression that I thought the game was broken? If I did so then I have clearly failed somewhere as a writer and should tighten things up a bit.

Also: Since I can tell that I was unclear about this, I did not play AoE with 2 either time I played. Both plays were with 4 people.

Generalization is obviously important, but there will always be some level of specialization in the game. Some people will get more discovery tiles, some people will end up in control of more regions, other people will have a better money accumulation engine. These are where the particular buildings matter.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Oct 7, 2011 5:11 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Tim Seitz
United States
Glen Allen
VA
Like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be recovered, so we must die. But God does not take away life; instead, he devises ways so that a banished person may not remain estranged from him. 2 Sam 14:14
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You can't fool us, jesse!

We can read between the lines!



Quote:
I first played Age of Empires III in January of 2010. At the time I had a pretty strong negative reaction to it, but even at the time I admitted that this could partially be due to a combination of a strong visceral reaction to the components. I found it to be difficult to tell the large swarms of monochromatic figures apart, and the game’s color palette was hard on my red-green colorblindness. The fact that some of the rules were explained incorrectly only added to this, and it ended up being a rather unpleasant gaming experience overall. Since then I have wanted to play it again, to confirm or refute my initial reaction, but not so much that I have gone out of my way to play it. I even left early at a game night a few weeks ago rather than play Age of Empires III with five players.

So last night I met with an out of town visitor for gaming, and he suggested we play Age of Empires III, with the yet to be released Builder Expansion.

39 
 Thumb up
1.13
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Edited Fri Oct 7, 2011 5:21 pm
  • Posted Fri Oct 7, 2011 5:21 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Jesse Dean
United States
Orlando
Florida
Pound for pound, the amoeba is the most vicious predator on Earth!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
losdelfuego wrote:

In my group, people rarely discover with less than the guaranteed victory amount (5 in tiles, 6 in cards, IIRC). Most of us agree that the cost of losing 3 or 4 workers for no reward greatly outweighs the benefit of saving 1 or 2. The only time we regularly see undermanned discovery expeditions is at the end of the game, as a last grasp for VPs. From that perspective, the luck factor of discovering is mitigated.

As far as discovery actions being a poor investment, I disagree again. They're the best non-resource way to make money, especially with a soldier. In fact, a player could spend every turn putting one worker in the Soldier specialist box, and the rest of them in Discovery, and make out pretty well. Money is usually very tight in AoEIII, and Discovery is an excellent way to get ahead financially.


I can't completely disagree with either of these items, as they confirm pretty exactly with what I did in my second game. I was the Spanish (+1 soldier a turn) so I took advantage of the soldier to get lots of cash from discovery tiles and made a reasonable amount of victory points from them over the course of the game, and had the second most cash flow behind the guy that had a large amount of merchant ships and resource tiles.

However, even with investing 5 (or 6) workers into Discovery you still end up with some variability in execution that seems out of character with the rest of the game thanks to the large differentials in cash income and smaller differentials in victory points. I think I would almost prefer for them simply be played face up, as it would add a bit more decisions to the Discovery proccess rather than just automatically going for 5 and hoping fo the best.

I don't think either item breaks the game, I just think they make it less interesting than it could be if they were pushed in slightly different directions.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Oct 7, 2011 5:22 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Surya Van Lierde is pure Eurosnoot and proud of it!
Belgium
Gijzegem
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Thank you for making clear I don't need the expansion. I don't buy a lot of expansions to start with, and I probably wasn't going to get this one, but now I'm sure I wont

By the way, putting Le Have on the worker placement list doesn't do the game justice
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Oct 7, 2011 5:22 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Jesse Dean
United States
Orlando
Florida
Pound for pound, the amoeba is the most vicious predator on Earth!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Tatsu wrote:
I love the game, but hate the two things you mentioned. I think it probably makes the game better if you :
* know in advance which buildings will not be in the game (at least for the third age.
* play with the discovery tiles face up. This takes away the gambling aspect and still keeps it interesting because you have to plan, knowing that people might grab the easy ones, or the ones that have a certain good.


Yeah, if I was interested in playing the game further I would almost certainly perform those two fixes. In fact playing with those two items would probably be sufficient to push the game up to a 5 or 6. Slightly different components would be worth another point on top of that. It still leaves the game as less interesting than Dominant Species though, which means it would not get played.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Oct 7, 2011 5:24 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Jesse Dean
United States
Orlando
Florida
Pound for pound, the amoeba is the most vicious predator on Earth!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
out4blood wrote:
You can't fool us, jesse!

We can read between the lines!



Quote:
I first played Age of Empires III in January of 2010. At the time I had a pretty strong negative reaction to it, but even at the time I admitted that this could partially be due to a combination of a strong visceral reaction to the components. I found it to be difficult to tell the large swarms of monochromatic figures apart, and the game’s color palette was hard on my red-green colorblindness. The fact that some of the rules were explained incorrectly only added to this, and it ended up being a rather unpleasant gaming experience overall. Since then I have wanted to play it again, to confirm or refute my initial reaction, but not so much that I have gone out of my way to play it. I even left early at a game night a few weeks ago rather than play Age of Empires III with five players.

So last night I met with an out of town visitor for gaming, and he suggested we play Age of Empires III, with the yet to be released Builder Expansion.



The truth is revealed!

Maybe it was when I said the tendancy was broken?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Oct 7, 2011 5:25 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Troy Adlington
Australia
Dallas
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Jesse.

The small amounts of randomness in tiles and cards make for a variety of plays.

There is plenty of reward for getting 4 ships. Getting the Capital building that nets you 4 VP per ship is simply cream!

Similarly, Discoveries need a random element as in the game (up until the expansion) other players were unable to interfere with a discovery strategy
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Oct 7, 2011 5:33 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Treacherous Cretin
United Kingdom
Unspecified
Hampshire
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Tatsu wrote:
I love the game, but hate the two things you mentioned. I think it probably makes the game better if you :
* know in advance which buildings will not be in the game (at least for the third age.
* play with the discovery tiles face up. This takes away the gambling aspect and still keeps it interesting because you have to plan, knowing that people might grab the easy ones, or the ones that have a certain good.


Part of the reason I like AoE III is these unknown factors. Even if you memorise ALL the buildings you will never know the order of arrival. Did Colombus set off KNOWING America was there ?? Did the Spanish have maps leading to the city of Gold ?? Discoveries were always a risk, countless lives have been lost over the years for asking "what is over there?".

The whole game has an edge to it, perfectly sitting with the exporation themed game it is, and its time in human history. The pieces are wonderfully sculpted, however I do concede that they can be difficult to tell apart mid game and colour blindness could be a problem.

Simply my 2p worth, feel free to disagree....its free ( until they figure out how to tax disagreement )

5 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Oct 7, 2011 5:42 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Jesse Dean
United States
Orlando
Florida
Pound for pound, the amoeba is the most vicious predator on Earth!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Right. I don't have a problem with the risk involved in settling, I have a problem is that this same sort of risk is inconsistent across the game. If you really wanted the game to reflect the randomness of the period, then war would have variable effects and colonization would have a chance to fail. As it is the game is thematically inconsistent. You automatically succeed at settling colonists and war is a straightforward cut-and-drive affair. The luck involved in Discovery is just very out of place in the overall mechanical framework of the game.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Oct 7, 2011 5:51 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Jason Farris
United States
Fair Oaks
California
flag msg tools
There is a duck in every game. You may not see it, but it's there.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
doubtofbuddha wrote:

I don't think the game is broken. I just don't think the game works for me for the reasons stated. Where did you get the impression that I thought the game was broken?


This is where I got that impression:

doubtofbuddha wrote:

or are so fatally flawed that whatever interesting decisions that are in the game are overwhelmed, resulting in a game that is not really worth owning or playing.


Fatal flaws and brokenness seem similar to me so I connected them, you obviously do not. But others may.

I too am one who loves this game to death and will play it any time. I think your objections are valid in that you are basically saying you do not like randomness in an otherwise deterministic game. Let's face, other than your dislike of bits, you picked on the only two random elements in the game.

What do you think of Through the Ages? I personally think the military cards ruin some of the game for the very reason you lament Capital buildings. You are never sure what will come up for that super end game scoring. So you try to prepare for all eventualities or as many as possible. so while I hate them, I prepare for them. The same thing applies for the age 3 buildings. You don't just prepare for one age 3 building, you make sure you qualify to score off of two or 3. Then you buy whichever one fits. I have never prepared to go first in age 3 and not found a good Age 3 building to use. Granted, I haven't always bought the "best" one for me, but there's always something good.

As for discoveries, I don't spend much time on them unless I end up with the two captain buildings. If I have those, discovery is a cynch and I spam it ruthlessly. You can easily win the game without discoveries and usually that box is where I stuff extra workers I don't need. what other people have not pointed out is that a worker placed in the discovery box is not "lost" between rounds. So the only way to "lose" 3 guys is to go out unprepared into the wilderness. That alone makes the box worth it as the only other way to save workers for a future round is to convert them into specialists.

I'm not here to convince you, but merely to offer an alternative view to someone reading this blog. You clearly don't like it. I hate Dominion which it seems everyone else loves. Your actual mileage may vary.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Oct 7, 2011 8:51 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Jesse Dean
United States
Orlando
Florida
Pound for pound, the amoeba is the most vicious predator on Earth!
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ah. Thanks for clarifying that! I do consider broken and fatally flawed to be the same thing. To me, broken means that the game does not mechanically work as a game, either due to mechanics that fail or some sort of auto-win strategy (see: A Few Acres of Snow). Fatally flawed simply means that there are parts of the game that fundamentally do not work for me and thus make the game not worth playing.

Yes, that is my fundamental problem with the design. That is what I meant when I said:

Quote:
For the most part, Age of Empire’s design focuses on no-luck incremental action. Each player takes the action they like, with no randomness between their action and the resolution of said action. There are three main areas where this particular tendency is broken, and I find two of the three to be highly problematic both from their digression from the overall nature of the game as well as the impact they have on the overall flow of the game.


No problem about explaining alternative views on the game. I would probably want to do the same if someone was negatively reviewing a game that I love. With the changes noted above (pre-determined capital buildings and face-up discovery tiles) there is not situation where I would choose to play it over Dominant Species if I wanted to play this style of game, so whether I think it is bad or merely "okay" is ultimately irrelevant to whether it ends up in my play rotation.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Oct 7, 2011 9:03 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
The root of all evil... but you can call me cookie.
United States
Gainesville
Florida
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
For the components I couldn't agree more. The models are very difficult to tell the difference between at simple glances across the rather large board and across what will be an even larger table bot the board to be on. I can only imagine that if the you are color blind it's only adds to the madness.

As for the AgeIII tiles? If you are playing the game with the hopes of getting one major scoring tile you aren't playing the game as it was intended...Sure you can put all your eggs into one basket if you like but when I play I tend to try and cover 2 or 3 bases so now matter what one of the tiles I need to score some points most likely will come out. Diversity is where this game pays off not specialization. After all too many ships really doesn't do much for you throughout the game but having a few can really bump your income quite a bit. I actually have found in games like this I enjoy when not all of the bonus point tiles come out in a game as it then forces you to not take the same path to victory every time. It's why I don't like playing The Castles of Burgundy with 4 players...in anything but 4 player not all the yellow tiles (the ones with end game points) do not come out and I like that much better.

As for the exploration I'm kind of on the fence with this one. Sort of with you but at the same time my style of play makes it not so rough on me. I see the exploration box as a last ditch to throw my straggling one or two guys each turn. I personally then only explore when I've got 5 or 6 guys down there. (This is another aspect of me trying to diversify and not specialize I just feel the need to have a few discovery tiles/cards at game's end.) As a result I'm never terribly hurt by the explorations. Now typically there is a player in the game who is investing more into explorations than myself and while they are usually raking in the points/money from it there is undoubtedly a turn where they send out 5 guys and get ganked big time losing them all for nothing in return.

While I LOVE Dominant Species, I do really enjoy AOEIII as well. To say I own both is not to say I won't play one over the other. One is an hour and half game and one is a three hour game. One can be easily taught in 10 mins. and one requires at least double that and probably longer. Just saying they are both good games and I personally am glad to own them both.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Oct 7, 2011 11:17 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Roland Wood
United States
Visalia
California
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
This:

Quote:
...and until recently Agricola was my favorite game period, with Race For the Galaxy only recently exceeding its position in my affections.


...and then this:

Quote:
While I don’t mind high victory point, late game bonuses as a general rule, the fact that not all of the Age III buildings will show up in the game makes there mere existence problematic. As the game goes on, players become increasingly specialized, thus making it so the bonus victory points provided by the Age III bonuses can be rather substantial. Unfortunately there is no way to determine either when a tile is going to come out or if a tile will come out. You can fight for first place in the final two rounds in order to ensure you have first shot at a tile, but this is going to only help you marginally if the tile you want never actually emerges. If a game is even remotely close, then the arrival of a particular Age III tile at the right time will be sufficient to give the game to a particular player. It is possible to buy a tile that only provides you with a marginal benefit in order to hurt someone else, but that is likely to only hurt the two effected players to the benefit of the other players, and is most likely not optimal.


...struck me as ironic and quite hilarious. Perhaps it is the time differential that makes it forgivable in one but not the other...
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Oct 7, 2011 11:36 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Bill Morgal
United States
Elkridge
Maryland
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
doubtofbuddha wrote:
I don't think the game is broken. I just don't think the game works for me for the reasons stated. Where did you get the impression that I thought the game was broken? If I did so then I have clearly failed somewhere as a writer and should tighten things up a bit.


I read too much into your introductory paragraph. I think it was the term 'fatally flawed' and your central critisism of the two mechanics mentioned that led me to reply to your blog entry. Semantics can be a funny thing, I suppose.

doubtofbuddha wrote:
Also: Since I can tell that I was unclear about this, I did not play AoE with 2 either time I played. Both plays were with 4 people.


Wasn't sure. I just wanted to say that in case you were playing a 2p game.

doubtofbuddha wrote:
Generalization is obviously important, but there will always be some level of specialization in the game. Some people will get more discovery tiles, some people will end up in control of more regions, other people will have a better money accumulation engine. These are where the particular buildings matter.


Exactly. But in those cases the player had to make a concious decision somewhere along the line to go down those paths.

I really like the ideas mentioned in this thread for optional variants where the order of building appearances are known at the outset of the game. Playing with the native tiles visible takes a bit of decision making out of the game, but certainly is worth trying.

I play Age of Empires a lot around the holidays with my two sons when they visit. You can see the outcome of the games by looking at my son's account (bill_morgal). I can't wait to introduce them to Dominant Species. I hope they like it as much as I do. I am interested in finding out if they want to play AOE with either of the two variants mentioned here and also trying the expansion (if it ever comes available).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Fri Oct 7, 2011 11:58 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Bill Morgal
United States
Elkridge
Maryland
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
thoia wrote:
While I LOVE Dominant Species, I do really enjoy AOEIII as well. To say I own both is not to say I won't play one over the other. One is an hour and half game and one is a three hour game. One can be easily taught in 10 mins. and one requires at least double that and probably longer. Just saying they are both good games and I personally am glad to own them both.


I could not agree more. AOE is worker placement introductory, the other is worker placement advanced. Almost like WP101 and WP201 if colleges offered degrees in gaming. Wouldn't that be neat?
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Sat Oct 8, 2011 12:09 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
alan beaumont
United Kingdom
LONDON
Unspecified
mbmbmbmb
I had a very similar experience with AoEIII, hard-to-tell-apart figures etc, but I also didn't really believe the tiles: You can't have a Militia, we got that, which just seemed wrong (if I remember correctly) and some silly stuff to do with missionaries didn't seem historic.

Quote:
I doubt I will ever play Age of Empires III again. This is too bad, because I do like the period presented in this game, and would like to own a good Age of Discovery with some real mechanical innovations and a tightly integrated theme.


Have you tried Endeavor? A perfect information game on the same theme, although some misguided souls haven't spotted the player interaction and you might consider the Attack options too limited.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Sat Oct 8, 2011 2:16 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Tim Seitz
United States
Glen Allen
VA
Like water spilled on the ground, which cannot be recovered, so we must die. But God does not take away life; instead, he devises ways so that a banished person may not remain estranged from him. 2 Sam 14:14
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Smilinbrax wrote:
doubtofbuddha wrote:

I don't think the game is broken. I just don't think the game works for me for the reasons stated. Where did you get the impression that I thought the game was broken?


This is where I got that impression:

doubtofbuddha wrote:

or are so fatally flawed that whatever interesting decisions that are in the game are overwhelmed, resulting in a game that is not really worth owning or playing.


...

What do you think of Through the Ages? I personally think the military cards ruin some of the game for the very reason you lament Capital buildings. You are never sure what will come up for that super end game scoring. So you try to prepare for all eventualities or as many as possible. so while I hate them, I prepare for them. The same thing applies for the age 3 buildings. You don't just prepare for one age 3 building, you make sure you qualify to score off of two or 3. Then you buy whichever one fits. I have never prepared to go first in age 3 and not found a good Age 3 building to use. Granted, I haven't always bought the "best" one for me, but there's always something good.

I'm no Buddha doubter, but I do not think scoring cards in TtA and the big VP building tiles in AOE III are in any way equivalent.

1) Events in TtA are not random; they are intentionally seeded by the players.

2) If you are good at reading players, you can generally predict the cards that they have seeded based on the structure of their civilization, so they should come as no shock.

3) You can directly affect the number of cards you draw in the game (up to a max of 3). Most players ignore this very important facet of the game and tend to undervalue military actions. You want to have at least 4, and possibly even more than that so that you can still draw 3 even when you use some of them during your turn.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Edited Sat Oct 8, 2011 6:45 am
  • Posted Sat Oct 8, 2011 6:45 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Jason Farris
United States
Fair Oaks
California
flag msg tools
There is a duck in every game. You may not see it, but it's there.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
out4blood wrote:

I'm no Buddha doubter, but I do not think scoring cards in TtA and the big VP building tiles in AOE III are in any way equivalent.

1) Events in TtA are not random; they are intentionally seeded by the players.

2) If you are good at reading players, you can generally predict the cards that they have seeded based on the structure of their civilization, so they should come as no shock.

3) You can directly affect the number of cards you draw in the game (up to a max of 3). Most players ignore this very important facet of the game and tend to undervalue military actions. You want to have at least 4, and possibly even more than that so that you can still draw 3 even when you use some of them during your turn.


Which to me is preparing for and dealing with the randomness of the draw. Also, you choose what to seed and what not to seed. if my three draws include end of game scoring cards that I can't do much with, then they never get seeded. my opponent who might really benefit, will never see them. sure, you may see your opponent surge ahead in food production, tipping you to a scoring card they have, but that doesn't mean you are always in a position to do anything about it. I actually think AOE III is the more egalitarian form of screwage.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Sun Oct 9, 2011 4:18 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
suPUR DUEper
United States
Villa Hills
Kentucky
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
It is odd that the many of the things that the OP doesn't like about AOEIII are common to DS

In AOEIII it is somewhat difficult (for some anyway) to tell the difference between a captain/soldier or merchant/colonist. In DS the problem is that the colors do not correspond to the species. Same problem just a different twist. The AOEIII confusion is annoying. The DS confusion is game affecting.
AOE III has some randomness in terms of buildings, discoveries and resources. DS has just as powerful forces at work in terms of cards and elements. The right Dominance card in DS carry tear you up every bit as much as a capital building in AOEIII. Also, the element distribution/timing can have a profound effect on the game but most players miss it because it is so subtle.
Both games have red/green color blindness issues.

DS and AOEIII are strikingly similar in many respects. The major difference is play time. AOEIII is 90 minutes whereas DS starts pushing the 4 hour mark.


And while we are at it, playing AOE III (or DS for that matter) with 2 players misses the sweet spot entirely.

2 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Edited Thu Oct 13, 2011 8:02 pm
  • Posted Mon Oct 10, 2011 4:23 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Troy Adlington
Australia
Dallas
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Jesse,

I also wanted to note that although Dominant Species is obviously a descendant of Empires I find it much more chaotic.

Your choices on an action by action basis have too many variables inherent in the play of the others as to make your choice approaching the meaningless. (what I mean by that is you will have 3-4 choices that could be good, but things beyond your control will determine their relative strength. So in effect you 'guess' )

Whereas while there IS randomness involved in Empires I find it manageable and actually ensures the game does not become stale, unlike the father of role/worker selection games Puerto Rico
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Thu Oct 13, 2011 3:20 pm
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Nomadic Gamer
United States
Palatine
Illinois
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb

The new buildings help with the 'wrong buildings at the wrong time"
problem.
Otherwise; a discovery game of the New World without luck?
Why bother?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Mon May 28, 2012 1:23 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Burster of Bubbles, Destroyer of Dreams.
United States
Sunnyvale
California
Just imagine the red offboard up here. I'll create it Real Soon Now...
badge
Yes, I know a proper 18XX tile should have a tile number.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
TedW wrote:
It is odd that the many of the things that the OP doesn't like about AOEIII are common to DS

In AOEIII it is somewhat difficult (for some anyway) to tell the difference between a captain/soldier or merchant/colonist. In DS the problem is that the colors do not correspond to the species. Same problem just a different twist. The AOEIII confusion is annoying. The DS confusion is game affecting.


Not to beat a dead horse, but they are completely different. Surely you've played Euros before where a player's color is completely arbitrary and has no in-game significance?
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue May 29, 2012 3:15 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
suPUR DUEper
United States
Villa Hills
Kentucky
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You are right that in many Euro's the color itself has no intrinsic meaning. In Agricola, Amun Re, Caylus Magna Carta, Tikal etc. color does not make a difference. Each faction represented by the color has the same traits/characteristics/abilities. All the pieces are generic.

DS is different. In DS, each species starts off with two unique elements and has a special ability. Therefore, the player's color communicates information of value. If I look at the board and can't easily tell that the Arachnids are green and the Mammals are white then there is an element of ambiguity equivalent to AOE III's merchant looking like colonist....



 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Thumb up
  • Posted Tue May 29, 2012 4:41 am
    • Choose your Dice
      • Roll
      • Comment (Optional)
    • Reply
    •  
    • Quote
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.