A game about standing in lines. First you stand in a line to see who gets to choose which line they want to stand in first, then you choose among different lines that will eventually let you do exciting things like discover a confined space (where you can later stand and get points), or buy buildings (which give you more people, meaning more opportunities to stand in more lines). Just make your selection and wait for your selection to arrive or be delayed, and then find another line to stand in.
Edit: played again with 4 (rather than 5), and it's more bearable. Raised rating from a 2.
Had a pretty good time playing it, but it's not something I'd like to play often. The asymmetric victory goals for each race was too much to keep up with on first play. Too much ganging up on the leader (or perceived leader). But the game went faster than I expected, so that's a plus.
new maps? Great! Forum cards? Fun! And I don't care that they may or may not be balanced. They add a bit of zing to the game. Salt? Eh, don't really care about it. Seems to take away some of the fun of struggling with limitations (whereas the forum cards do this as well but at least add zing!).
Lowered rating. Not sure why, but the expansion makes me care less about the game when I play it. I think I prefer the directness of knowing exactly the limitations of each other player, and how the players react to those limitations. With the expansion, it's harder to keep track of special powers and what other players may be planning to do. Thus, I stop caring about what the other players do do.
Also, the expansion does slow the game down about 20%, which doesn't sound like much, but I really like the speedy chugging along of the base game.
Hard game to judge. I like the mechanics and theme, but like Dipolomacy there's little in-game reason to ally with someone over someone else, so there's a lot of arguing and conjoling (where I'd prefer something like trading and bribing). Also, it didn't help that our game ended in a kingmaking situation, and that I was out of contention after the fourth round and left with little to do. Want to play again, but I'm liking these 'he who plays the personality game better' less and less.
One play. Had a nice time playing but felt the random elements had too much influence compared to how much fun they brought to the game. Would be cool if some elements could be turned into a proper boardgame with physical exploration and such, but now I'm dreaming. Will play again.
Edit: now had a second play a couple of years later. The random bits didn't bother me this time. I enjoyed the game more, even though the scores were extremely close (would have been 23, 23, 23 if not for a late game misunderstanding which brought one score down). Wondering if the game might be a bit *too* balanced. But I'm not really worry about that yet, since I had fun.
Played again. Brought rating back down. Just can't make up my mind on this one.
The game keeps insulting me. Collect cards for points? Well you're stupid. Collect cards in hand? Well you're stupid. Try to plan around what your opponent is doing? Well you're stupid. The game gives me a complex.
The Barry Manilow of worker placement. Mindlessly pleasant, yet vaguely irritating. Not too taxing. Strong branding. Will sell a lot. Ultimately forgettable. Edit: I was a little harsh, I see, now that I've played more. It's more of a Phil Collins of worker placement.
Bad points: you go to the wrong place and die through no fault of your own; you go to the right place but we decide to "vote" you to be eaten, through no fault of your own; someone wins, because everyone else was hurt through no fault of their own.
However, I want to play again in the hopes of changing my opinion about the game.
Felt like one playing was all I'd ever need. There just isn't much interesting to do, except a lot of busy work. The first 4/5ths of the game seemed to work on autopilot, and the ending came by way of luck of the draw.
Good points: it has a fun theme, but there wasn't enough 'game' for me.