Game: Mall World

Image

gmcnish — 2007-06-14T03:48:06+00:00

Board (english edition)

Image

gmcnish — 2007-06-14T03:44:08+00:00

Box cover (english edition)

Thread: Re: any 2 player variant out there?

jgrundy — 2007-02-14T09:49:10+00:00

I hope so. I just got this as a present from my wife... and then we notice it's 3-5 players.

Thread: Mall World - Session Report

gschloesser — 2006-01-18T14:11:34+00:00

Tis the season … to shop! Well, at least that is what capitalism wants us to do! So, doing our part, we opted to play a game that deals with establishing a shopping mall: Andrea Meyer’s Mall World.

Players secure contracts, then try to arrange shops in the mall to fulfill the contracts. As the game progresses, these shops are rented, with player attempting to align the proper individuals and shops to fulfill the contracts they possess. Big points are scored for succeeding in these tasks.

Money is very tight, with the bidding for the right to secure cards sapping most of the players’ funds. Money is recouped by offering cards for auction, but this is risky as your opponents may scoop the card you hoped to keep.

The game has a strong puzzle aspect, as players must attempt to arrange shops in the proper alignment, then rent them to the correct people in order to fulfill the goal cards they possess. This can be quite a mind-bender, as there are often numerous options and potentialities. Of course, one’s opponents are also trying to arrange shops to meet their own goals, which are usually the opposite of your own.

Jim, Gail, Ray, Byron and I developed the mall, leasing shops and luring customers. I made several blunders, and had numerous scoring opportunities dashed by the placements of my opponents. Jim and Gail, however, seemed to grasp the placement strategies, and proved quite adept at reaching their goals. Jim edged Gail for the victory.

Finals: Jim 75, Gail 69, Ray 61, Byron 53, Greg 45

Ratings: Gail 8, Ray 8, Jim 7, Byron 7, Greg 6.5

Thread: a few comments/questions

ropearoni4 — 2005-10-23T06:35:00+00:00

So, I understand the point that in a 3-player game the active player bids as well, sending their bid into the slush fun as well. So, in the English rules it states that a player that does not bid in the auction, does not participate in the auction. Now, if only 3 players are in the auction because the others didn't want to participate, do we refer to the 3-player auction rule where the active player participates?

And what if only 2 players are in the auction do to others unwillingness to participate?

It does appear also that the 5-player game I played ran out of a good supply of cards shortly after the game started, and stayed that way (about 10 cards in the draw deck, always having to reshuffle the discards every-other turn. More cards would be worthwhile or I suggest it will only be a 4 player game for me with the current stock of cards.

Thread: Re: Review: Mall World

DougOrleans — 2005-09-28T22:13:47+00:00

And the third phase nearly ended before it started!

I just realized that I missed one rule when I played this last night, and you might have also: there are more bribe chips in the third phase (twice the number of players) than in the first two phases (number of players plus one). We played with the same number of bribe chips in each phase which made the third phase end way too quickly-- everyone confirmed an order each turn, so it was over after 5 turns (4 player game) when it should have gone 8. Oops!

Thread: Re: User Review

Miss Panda — 2005-08-31T21:22:41+00:00

Jimmy's just not happy that I came from last place on the final move of the game to win! It was great winning but I thought the game was about SHOPPING, not building

Great review.
Miss Panda

Thread: Re: User Review

Jimzik — 2005-08-31T05:22:06+00:00

You hit the nail right on the head with this review so let me be the 1st to give you a "thumbs-up". Unlike GOA (which is fun) this game makes you work very hard to try and figure out the many combos on the cards because of all the color combinations. Keeping track of the various color combinations is draining and you really can't slow someone else down for fear of losing your opportunities, there's just not enough time to do everything you want to do.
I thought I played the game right and was winning in the 3rd round with 2 orders confirmed when Miss Panda confirmed her "special" order tile to end the game. That tile score 3 TIMES and won the game for her!
I'd play again but it's not a game I would buy.

Thread: any 2 player variant out there?

ropearoni4 — 2005-08-25T00:59:08+00:00

Wondering if a 2 player variant would be feasible, and keep the play much like the 3+ game does.

Image

JeffyJeff — 2005-08-16T13:35:56+00:00

Thread: Re: 3 Player auction question

Zambo — 2005-08-11T01:32:10+00:00

The only rule that's missing (in the RGG rulebook) is the one explaining that in a 3-player game, if the active player has the highest bid it's paid into the slush fund as well.

I think all of the other rules are present and accounted for.

Thread: Re: 3 Player auction question

ropearoni4 — 2005-08-10T18:42:55+00:00

Which translation of the rulesbook is missing parts of the rules? Do they all come missing the few sentences about the slush fund for 3 player auction? So I don't get all screwed up playing it first round, which rules are missing in the English RGG rulebook?

Thread: Review: Mall World

SteveBl — 2005-08-09T04:50:04+00:00

Note: This review was originally posted on my web site (http://housefullofgames.com) back in January, 2005. Hence the references to Essen, 2004 as being something recent.

One of the new games to come out of Essen this year is Mall World. This game supports three to five players and it plays in about ninety minutes.

Mall World is supposedly about building and maintaining a shopping mall. I say "supposedly" because in reality, Mall World is a very abstract game that has about as much to do with shopping malls as it does with cheese making. The theme is completely pasted on and it really adds very little to the game. Still, once you get past the odd, ill-fitting outer covering, there is an interesting game underneath.

Inside the box you'll find a bunch of sturdy tiles, some counters, some cards and the game board which looks attractive enough but there were some odd choices made here. For instance, the game play area, which represents a mall blueprint, is an oddly shaped affair whose spaces are all rhombus shaped in order to present the "mall floor plan" in an isometric perspective. (That means you're viewing the floor plan a bit from the side instead of from straight above.) The tiles that go on this board are reasonably attractive but they are also shaped like squished squares to match the board, which makes them a little difficult to place. Where things really go awry is with the circular customer tokens that get placed on the tiles. The artwork on these tokens is truly ugly. I think they went for a certain look and it somehow got away from them. Also, the color choices are a bit odd. Dark, over-saturated colors of purple, blue, green and red are not exactly traditional colors (and color blind players may want to steer clear as distinguishing between the colors is vital). Oh well. Beauty is skin deep.

Game play is an interesting mix of play styles. Players select "order cards" using a mechanism very similar to the civilization selection process in Vinci. Several cards are available. The first is cheap but each subsequent card is incrementally more expensive. Order cards are used to determine what color combinations you will score points for on the board. It's not enough to bring one of these cards into your hand though, you need to play it in order to score it, and playing requires giving up an action. Early in the game, these cards reward placing square tiles of a certain color next to square tiles of another color. For instance, you might get 2 points for each red square placed next to a blue square. Later in the game they reward putting circles of a certain color on squares of another color. Each player also has a "special order" that rewards a specific color combination of two circles on two squares. Special orders are secret so at the beginning of the game, each player has a goal that's unknown to the other players. Of course it won't take too long to figure out what people are going for but then that's all part of the game.

Placing tiles on the board requires playing "approval cards". On each turn you can take a certain number of approval cards into your hand. You can play up to three of these cards on your turn and each card lets you choose from among a couple of placement actions. The trick here is that when you play more than one card, you may not get to carry out the action on the card yourself, that's because the actions on the cards get auctioned off to the highest bidder. Depending on how many cards are put up for auction, winning bidders might have to pay the auctioning player or they might deposit their bid in the slush fund, a pool of coins that gets redistributed among the players at the end of the turn once enough coins accumulate there to distribute evenly.

There's a lot of interesting tension created between trying to maintain enough cards in your hand to do what you want, keeping your hand size under the hand limit (the consequences for violating this can be disastrous), managing your limited coins, bidding to control tile placement, deciding which approval cards to invest in, and deciding when to play your approval cards.

If all of this seems a little confusing, well it can be. And unfortunately the rule book, with its poor organization and occasional typos, sometimes doesn't help. Fortunately, the rules aren't that long and there are some handy quick reference sheets that help out. Still, it may take you a couple of rounds before you really get the hang of it. I'd recommend that you play a couple of practice rounds to familiarize yourself with the play and then start over once it's understood. You should also be warned that there is one important rule that somehow didn't make it into Rio Grande Game's English translation: in a three player game, if a player wins their own three card auction, they pay the slush fund, not themselves or another player.

One issue that came up in one of our games had to do with the pacing. The game is played in three distinct scoring phases. We initially expected each phase to last roughly an equal amount of turns but when we played the game this turned out not to be the case. Instead, the first phase was significantly longer than the rest, as everyone deliberately avoided triggering the end of phase scoring while they jockeyed for position in the hopes of getting a high score. The second phase went significantly faster since by then the board was mostly developed. And the third phase nearly ended before it started! That caught everyone by surprise. With subsequent playings, once people get the hang of how the game works, things should be a little more even.

I rather liked Mall World and I'll happily play it again but there were definitely some interesting design choices here. From the odd colors, to the unattractive artwork, to the oddly shaped tiles, to the poorly designed rulebook, this game's production didn't quite live up to the standards that I've come to expect from Rio Grande Games. The components are sturdy but the game would have probably gone over better with a more straight-forward presentation. Still, once I got beyond the production, and managed to wrap my head around the rules, I found the game itself to be quite enjoyable and I look forward to playing again. In the end, it gets a thumbs up. Don't let the minor cosmetic issues scare you away, there's a pretty darn good game here.

Thread: Re:Session Report

Alan Kwan — 2005-04-27T01:52:56+00:00

garrylloyd (#474838),

There is an error in your description. Rent orders simply reward the existence of either specified store type; it is one's special order which rewards specified adjacent shop combinations. Perhaps your group has got this rule wrong, and that is why the game didn't work?

Sometimes I do play an order just for the bribe, but in fact that is not necessarily the best way to earn money. One can earn money by offering 3 approval cards.

One thing which some newbies overlook is that, the game actually discourages one from playing the last order to end the round. Not only is one often getting a minus bribe chip for the play, but also this gives your lower seat (on your left) the first chance to get the best bribe chip next round. Assuming that the players like to hurry to play orders for the bribes, ending a round will typically cost one several k's in bribe chips in the next round.

Thread: Session Report

garrylloyd — 2005-04-16T10:38:02+00:00

This week, I was back from Essen with a stack of new games to play. One of the games getting good initial reports was the latest from Andrea Meyer, about developing a shopping mall. Five of us met at John's house to give it a try.

The idea of the game is to make money by building stores within the mall in the best positions, as dictated by the order cards. These orders are either Use orders which state that certain store types need to be adjacent to other types (such as clothing shops next to hobby shops) or Rent orders. Each store type can be rented to a vendor who targets one type of consumer (men, women, teenagers or kids) - so Belt & Button sets up clothing stores targeted at men. The Rent orders then reward setting particular vendors next to each other (Belt & Button next to Skateman - a sports store targeted at teenagers). The gameplay involves taking an order card from four available; then either confirming an order by placing it on the table in front of you or offering up to 3 Approval cards for auction. These cards allow the winning bidders to reserve a site within the mall for a particular store type or buy up a site of the correct type for a particular vendor. The cash paid for these cards will either go to the auctioning player or the slush fund. Once this has been dealt with, players can change cards no longer playable, restock their hand by two cards (up to a maximum of 8) and, distribute the content of the slush fund if sufficient money has been paid into it.

Play continues in each round until a certain number of orders have been confirmed, at which point players receive income from the confirmed orders they have in front of them. The game ends after three rounds or earlier if all the vendors have been placed in stores within the mall. Whoever has the most cash wins.

The game looked pretty good but our attempt fell a bit flat. Nige decided confirming an order on every turn was the winning strategy (where possible) and this was repeated by everyone else except me. Consequently, while I was trying to place store types and vendors to best suit my order cards later in the game, other players had their order cards down quickly, ending the round before I could get mine down. Now I'm sure if everyone had not followed the Nige strategy, the rounds would have lasted longer, enabling longer term strategies to work, but it certainly hampered my position in the first two rounds. I caught up a bit in the third round but not enough to catch Nige and Mark G. I hope this isn't a killer strategy and, on hearing some of the favourable comments from those at Essen, I suspect it's not but it certainly dampened our ratings of the game. This was a shame because the theme certainly appealed to me. We'll have to try again soon.

Players Result Ratings
Nige 46 6
Mark G 41 6
Mark K 38 5
John 38 6
Garry 38 6

Thread: Session Report

Alan Kwan — 2005-04-04T02:42:24+00:00

King bought Mall World yesterday, and today he came back and asked me to run a demo game for him. We waited a while, and Sunshine came, so we started playing.

Players: Alan (me), Sunshine, King

I started the game by playing a random order for the bribe. But then I picked up the order which matched my special order (i.e. same sponser), and proceeded to play cards to build a "magic square" (i.e. 4 tiles in a square formation which would count as 4 times towards the order) for it. So the first order paid off nothing at the end of the round (because I was not working on it). Meanwhile, Sunshine was working solidly towards his use order. Sunshine played a second order to close the round, just after I have completed the magic square and was going to play the order next. At the end of the first round, Sunshine shot ahead while I was a little bit behind King in last place.

In the second round, I played the use order but then rented out some shops in the magic square in preperation for my special order. Since rented shops don't count for a use order, I didn't get much payoff for the second round either. Sunshine again got good payoff for his orders, so after the second round he was leading more.

The rules of the game imply that, the third round will usually last exactly twice around the table. On my first turn, I seized the opportunity to play two cards at once, with which I could place two shops to fill in the magic square for my special order! Because at that time I had more liquid capital than anyone else, they could not stop me. I paid my bid of $5000 into the slash fund, and completed the magic square.

In the final tallying, both Sunshine and King scored twice for their special orders, but I scored mine 4 times thanks to the magic square. This put me just several thousand bucks ahead of Sunshine for an impressive come-from-behind win.

Had Sunshine or King blocked my magic square (before I played the two cards), Sunshine could have easily won the game with his lead from the first two rounds. Of course I needed to play the two cards at once; otherwise, someone could easily block me by filling in the last space.

Though Mall World is a hardcore gamer's game which is tough to get into, I like it more and more after each playing. With each playing, I learn more and more about the game.

The "magic square" strategy is common for use orders, but it would be very difficult to pull off for the special order except in a 3-player game, in which one can execute two approval cards at the same time by bidding on them himself. With this playing, I realize the importance of defensive playing and blocking the others' special orders.

Image

EJKemp — 2005-03-15T19:43:32+00:00

Thread: User Review

Jonathan Degann — 2005-01-30T16:31:24+00:00

It does come off very abstract, and I had hoped it would feel more like a business game. Players are engaged in two general actions. On the one hand they are acquiring contracts which will pay off when certain combinations of tiles are played on the central board. On the other hand they are playing and auctioning cards which enable those tiles to be played. The cards that enable play of tiles have very limited choices, so it is up to you to acquire contracts and cards which work well together. This is especially the case if you can maneuver into getting cards which must help you no matter how they are played - because then you can auction them off and let someone else do your dirty work.

In some ways, though all the abstract patterning takes a back seat to timing - as even the game's author has hinted at. There are incentives to play contracts early (bonuses) which collide with the incentive to play them late, so as to avoid revealing your intentions. And play them too late - and you won't get to play them at all. This tension was the best part of the game - deciding when to play tiles and when to play contracts.

I've written in the past the value of having some high stake goals in a game, and this game provides them in the form of special contracts - ones which are hard to achieve but which pay off very well. These contracts - each player has exactly one of them - do work well to give a player some strategic structure to his game, even though it is possible to win without them.

Mall World has gotten tepid reviews by many - and enthusiastic reviews by some. This is not going to be a classic of my collection, but I'll be happy to play it for the forseeable future, and see how well it wears.

Thread: User Review

Basilius — 2005-01-25T13:38:59+00:00

I got Mall World for my birthday (thanks, Jodie!) and finally got a chance to play it at Salishan with Chris, Mike, and Dave.

The game is rather dry - the theme is sort of tacked on in much the same way Goa has a tacked on theme. However, you have to give almost any game that has a Swiss bank account, slush fund, and bribe chips a chance

First off: the rule writing absolutely sucks. I had to read through them twice, and even then I really didn’t understand what was going on until halfway through our game Saturday. It didn’t help that none of us had played before.

I think this game suffers in that it was hyped before release, and some of the early reports were from games where the rules were played incorrectly and the reviews suffered accordingly. Also, this is definitely a game that takes some understanding to appreciate - I’ve only played once, but I definitely feel like I don’t fully “get” what’s happening. I think the game will improve as I come to understand it. However, this is a strike against the game - if you only play this game once or twice, I don’t think you’ll like it. At this point, some people would question whether to cut and run, or keep trying. I think the persistence will be rewarded for most, but it’s not a guarantee. Many people would probably just move on to something else.

The gist of the game is that you’re trying to build different types of buildings in a mall and rent them out to different types of people. How you want to go about this depends on the orders you acquire as the game progresses.

There are six primary moving parts to the game. The mall itself is a grid that is filled with four different types of buildings. There are four different types of people the buildings can be rented to. The buildings and renters are placed via action cards. The action cards let you place one type of building next to another, or rent a certain type of building to a certain person. How you use the action cards is dictated by the order cards you acquire. There are three types - special orders (dealt one each at the beginning of the game), rent orders, and construction (?) orders. Confirming an order gains you a bribe chip. The slush fund is used to bid on action cards, and whatever you have left at the end of the game translates 1:1 into your Swiss bank account (which is what the actual victory points are.)

The game is played in three rounds. Each round ends when all the bribe chips are gone. Players take turns in sequence, and the turn goes like this:

Optionally buy an order card using your Swiss bank account. Then, either put 1-3 action cards up for auction OR confirm an order. Finally, draw up to two action cards (up to a maximum of eight cards of any type in your hand.)

What you’re trying to do is create certain combinations of things on the board. Every occurance of this combination at the end of the round gains you points - construction orders are 3000 francs, rent orders 4000, and the special order (which is a combination of the two others) is worth 12,000. Orders are scored at the end of a round, then discarded. The cost to acquire these order cards is between 1000 and 7000 depending on where in the Dutch auction you buy them. The bribe chips you get for confirming an order are worth between 4000 and -3000. This acts as an incentive to get orders out early to avoid negative bribes. The drawback to getting an order out early is that someone can play an action card sabotaging your order. Lots of give and take here. All the construction orders come into play before the rent orders - and if a building is rented out, it doesn’t count towards construction orders.

The action cards are put into play via auction - each turn you can put between 1 and 3 cards into the auction - if it’s just one, you put a chip into the slush fund and play the card yourself. If it’s more, people make a blind, simultaneous bid of chips, and depending on the number of cards auctioned and the number of bids, winners pay either the active player or the slush fund. The active player doesn’t get to bid, but always gets to play last remaining card for free. When you play a card, you can either put a building next to another building as specified on the card, or rent a certain type of building out to a certain type of person. This option is only available after somebody buys a rent order, however. This allows construction orders to have value for a while, but probably not after the first round.

Finally, you can draw up to two action cards into your hand subject to the hard cap of 8 total cards in your hand of any type. Be careful of drawing up to 8 cards, though, as that means you can’t buy an order on your next turn. I caught myself doing this twice during my first play.

Once an order card is confirmed that takes the last bribe chip, the orders are scored and discarded. If this is the first round, any construction orders remaining to be bought are also discarded, and the lobby refilled. New bribe chips are put out, and the next round begins.

In the third round, the game changes - more bribe chips come out, and you can both auction cards AND confirm an order on your turn.

The part that takes a little getting used to is the end of the round - in the four player game, there are only five bribe chips in the first two rounds, and eight in the third - this means that only 18 orders, in total, will be confirmed. Less than five per player. So you really have to watch what other people are trying to do and balance slowing them down against what you’re trying to accomplish. And time things right (sort of like Union Pacific) so that you can get your order out before the end of the round.

This will never be a top ten game. However, I think it’s much better than the initial reviews have been implying. It’s very thought provoking, and you always want to do more than you’re able to do - prioritizing your actions and trying to disguise your goals from your opponents are key.

As I’ve only managed to play the game once to this point, I’m not going to give a final review/score. However, the scale is starting around 7, and may go up or down depending on how the game ages. I think, in the end, this will end up getting one or two plays a year for me. It would probably be better received if someone would just rewrite the rule book…

Thread: Session Report

Jonathan Degann — 2005-01-24T17:23:43+00:00

I feel that this game did not go down well, and that there was a general desire to get it over with. Fortunately, a subsequent playing worked much better.

I'd attribute some of the problem to my own rules explanation, which caused some strategies to crash and burn once the correct rule was revealed (that any lot with a customer on it can't be used to score the first type of
contract). Related to that indirectly was the fact that we played an overly conservative game, which caused the first round to stretch on. Had players realized that there was more of a ticking time bomb to score those contracts, they would have come out sooner.

I put out a good number of smaller contracts which scored well, but Lincoln managed to get his secret contract scored double. We tied on base scoring, but when coins were added, he was a few thousand ahead of me.

The game seemed cerebral and plodding - but having seen marked improvement on the second go round, I'd like to run it up the flagpole again soon.
Winner(s): Lincoln
Ratings: Jonathan D. (5.5)

Thread: Session Report

Henry Rhombus — 2005-01-24T14:10:58+00:00

Tami, Brian, Paul, and Eric set up Mall World, the new Andrea Meyer title that's received a lot of so-so reviews, often from people who say the theme is boring or the rules are confusing or that you have no control. I can half-endorse these views -- the English rules do use unusual terms ("accept" instead of "draw" or "buy," "confirm" instead of "play"), the cards do provide an element of luck and frustration, and the graphic design does nothing to make the game more appealing -- but the merits of the game outweigh these nits, stomping them to paste under weighty feet.

Brian and Tami issued similar complaints about lack of control after finishing, but Paul and I (who had both played before) disagreed. We both had plans and did what we could to execute them. I blocked Paul a few times because I guessed what his special order was, then took approval cards or played customers to try to keep it from happening.

Andrea Meyer, in her FAQ for the game, said that a player can win even without completing the special order, and I can almost see it happening. Brian, who completed his special order only once compared to twice for the rest of us, came in fourth place, but was only $6,000 behind the winner, me, at $77,000. Paul had $76K, and Tami was at $73. And this was even after Brian had made a couple of mistakes, such as playing a customer in the space *adjacent* to the one he really wanted to play in and not noticing the mistake until later.

Brian had also played a rent order in the first round and took a -$3,000 hit, despite the rent order giving him nothing in return; he just wanted the round to end so that he wouldn't lose any more rent. (The previous turn I had wiped out a potential $6K for both him and Tami in one move.) If he had instead offered an approval card that would have spanked Paul (assuming he had one that could do so), I would have bid everything to make it happen, giving Brian a lot of bidding power for future rounds.

In any case, after my second visit to Mall World, I see a lot to like in this game, a nice combination of puzzle-solving, hand-management, tile-laying, second-guessing, and bluffing. I think we were all too obvious in working towards the special orders, which let other players play around certain cards.

The game might allow someone with a good memory to get ahead since everything but the special order is public knowledge before being hidden in hands, but the thought of trying to track every piece of color-on-color info is likely way too much for most people.

Thread: Re:Phase 2 ending : how ?

Alan Kwan — 2005-01-23T01:13:30+00:00

warlock wrote:
You have a number of rent cards which you want to play and suspect that you may not have the opportunity to play them all in phase 3.

More precisely,

As there are 2xN (N= # of players) bribe chips in phase 3, and one can play both approval cards and an order in phase 3, you can expect that phase 3 is likely to last exactly 2 rounds, with everyone playing an order card every turn. Thus you cannot expect to be allowed to play more than 2 orders (including your special order) in phase 3. If you want to play a third order, you need to play it in phase 2.

Thread: Re:Impressions

fellonmyhead — 2005-01-21T06:34:23+00:00

I found the rules very laborious; especially when trying to explain them to others.

However, once this barrier was passed, the game was a very tense one indeed. I look forward to playing it again.

The stated goal (rather thematic) is to accumulate money in your Swiss bank account - so in essence Dave is absolutely correct about the goal in so far as money=points.

This doesn't stop the game being about as dry as, say, Torres; but like Torres I don't feel the theme is inappropriate to the point we can call the game an abstract (even though quite obviously in both cases the theme could have been almost anything).

Thread: Re:Impressions

GeoMan — 2005-01-16T13:28:22+00:00

Jonathan Degann (#77744),

Just be sure that you read the rules carefully before playing. It is very easy to get some rules wrong and ruin the game:

In our first game for example we thought that the rent orders neeeded both combinations to score, which was a mistake and made their execution extremely difficult...

Thread: Re:Impressions

Jonathan Degann — 2005-01-16T03:53:09+00:00

Interesting about Geoman defending it as a "good *gamer's* game". I have a set of about 40 Geek Buddies that I selected solely on the correlation of their game ratings with my own. Almost always, the average rating of a game is about the same with my GB's as with the BGG community at large. But in the case of Mall World, the average rating is about 6.2, but for my GB's it's 7.5! Very unusual. On that basis, I recently traded for a copy - and I look forward to trying it soon.

Thread: Re:3 Player auction question

Andrea Meyer — 2005-01-02T09:21:33+00:00

With three players playing the player auctioning cards takes part in the auction. If he has the highest bid, he gets the first pick AND the remaining card.

His highest bid has to be paid to the slush fund - not to himself (unfortunately, this last rule is missing in the rules book - sorry).

Thread: 3 Player auction question

MWChapel — 2004-12-31T04:54:24+00:00

It states in a three player game the active player also partakes in the auction. If he is the highest bid does he get the first selection and a free card? I figured he pays the slush fund if he wins, but it isn't stated. however, if he doesn't get the high bid card AND a free last card, what would be the advantage of him bidding at all? He could just bid one to get any card he has.

Thread: Re:User Review

GeoMan — 2004-12-30T02:38:54+00:00

lexen (#73045),

(example red tile with green token next to purple tile)

The Rent orders display two scoring combinations of shop/people. Example:

Green shop/Blue token and Red shop/Red token

Each of these combinations scores (you don't have to achieve both combinations to score).

The Special orders also display two scoring combinations of shop/people. Both must be achieved and must be adjacent to score these orders. Example:

Purple shop/Purple token next to Green shop/Blue token.

Thread: Re:Impressions

dkeisen — 2004-12-29T23:57:19+00:00

cfarrell (#73617),

Right. I ignored that unfortunate first playing in my comment. The game still didn't hang together well for me despite having a couple of mechanics I did like.

Thread: Re:Impressions

cfarrell — 2004-12-29T22:54:13+00:00

I should say, Dave and I were in the same first game and it was tough. I screwed up a significant rule which required restarting the game, and the crowd got a little restless.

I enjoyed my second game a lot more than my first, and in general it went over quite well. Not a long-term keeper probably, but fun. I have a follow-up writeup here that you can get to from the links section.

I also think it might be best with 4. To me, the 4-player game felt better-balanced than the 5-player version, but being much comfortable with the game now I want to give the 5-player version a try again.

Thread: User Review

lexen — 2004-12-29T17:39:32+00:00

players try to build a mall in this game.
And just for those folks out there that think they could lure their female family members into this one beware!!!
this game is not a game our meta enjoyed, but i figured to write a review anyway since noone else did! and i'm broke GG wise! I'll try to be as objective as possible.
The game is all about making the most money. The really neat thing about the money is that it's the score track on the board and you just move your pion up and down instead of passing paper money back and forth!
the game consist of 3 rounds,
first round is all about building the shops. there're 4 kinds, red (hobby), green (food), blue (sport) and purple (food). you place the tiles and then get to take a bribe (really couldn't they come up with some other term!) from the office. a certain amount is in the office depending on the amount of players and turn ends when the last one is taken.
while building the mall you try to fullfill orders, some are dealt at the beginning while others are taking during the game!
orders are 2 certain types of store next to one another in the beginning. You can only play a tile from what a card tells you what color to play next to wich other color. those cards are played one by the current player or bid over by all players when you play more than one! (bidding has tokens and moeny is not used! you have a limited amount and will have to put some up for auction since you try to get more tokens and cards out of your hand (handlimit is 8)!
so when you have an order and that order is on the table by the turns end you receive money for it by the amount of times it is on the board.
round 2 and 3 are basicly the same and is all about the targeting groups (these are tokens placed on the tiles (4 different colors children, teens, men and woman). The orders that come out have those combos on them. (example red tile with green token next to purple tile) these orders are harder to fill out and also get you more money when completed! you still score for tiles from the first round if they still occur (if there would be no tokens on the tiles) these rounds could overlap depending on when players do place the orders from hand!
This is the game in a nutshell! you try to complete as many orders as possible while opposing the opposition! the orders get cycled in and keep getting cheaper if noone buys them. also when all players pass on taking any orders the lowest is discarded and new ones are fed in to keep the game moving. tiles and tokens are placed with cards and these go out for auction.
The game has some nice mechanics but it just didn't feel right... I would suggest to try before you buy if you have a chance!

Thread: Re:Impressions

lexen — 2004-12-27T04:09:25+00:00

dkeisen (#73002),
I agree, I do not like this game and felt lost most of the time although i usually like this type of game...
the design is pretty good but the gameplay is where you get lost, it just doesn't feel right.
just my 2 cents
Cheers
Lexen

Thread: Re:Impressions

dkeisen — 2004-12-27T01:28:54+00:00

GeoMan (#72985),

I didn't much enjoy my first time playing it.

I didn't feel like I had a goal in the game, I felt like I was trying to accumulate "points". I surely don't need an exciting theme to enjoy a game, but something where it all ties togeter into a unified whole really helps me.

I did like the decision mechanic where you can auction off 1, 2, or 3 cards each of which led to you getting an action but more or less control over it leading to you earning less or more money.

Thread: Impressions

GeoMan — 2004-12-26T23:41:22+00:00

Mall World is a good gamer's game that doesn't deserve such a low rating...

Sure, the rules are badly written and it is a serious "calculating" game that may not appeal to some, but it is still a good game with many options that plays smoothly as soon as you figure out the rules.

Image

GeoMan — 2004-12-23T02:30:56+00:00

Image

GeoMan — 2004-12-23T00:47:31+00:00

Thread: Re:Phase 2 ending : how ?

Alan Kwan — 2004-12-17T01:20:47+00:00

warlock (#64638),

And two more:

1. If you still have a "use order" in your hand you want to play. If you play it in phase 3, you'll score less for it.

2. If you already have a "use order" in play, and you want to prevent your opponents from reducing its value by renting out your shops.

Thread: Re:?Blind Bidding

Carver — 2004-12-07T14:31:18+00:00

Andrea Meyer (#69275),
Thanks for the reply, Andrea.

Certainly the placing of the Corruption Chips face-up as Bob has pointed out from the English rules would make a difference to the game.

Derek

Thread: Mall World

skeletodoc — 2004-12-07T14:04:44+00:00

French translation.............http://www.ludoviel.de/download/ggfrz.pdf

Thread: Re:?Blind Bidding

vosos102 — 2004-12-06T13:04:12+00:00

Carver (#69208),

I just double checked the english rules and the chips are placed face up. This way there is an incentive to play an order card earlier--grabbing a high valued positive chip. I can see how playing with them face down would deter from the game.

Bob

Thread: Re:?Blind Bidding

Andrea Meyer — 2004-12-06T10:44:13+00:00

Carver wrote:
But nowhere in the French rules could I find reference to the much criticised 'Blind Bidding', which I assume involves placing the cards offered for auction face-down. Players should be aware of this apparent change (maybe an official one for all I know - it certainly seemed to be a crazy rule).

Also, for something this complexity I'd do away with the plus and minus sums on the Corruption Chits, which have all the hall-marks of "Go to Jail . . ." and trivialise the game.
DEREK CARVER

There is no blind bidding as described in your post (offering face-down cards). "Blind bidding" here means you see the 1-3 approval cards offered and then bid for the right to build one of them by taking zero to x coins in your hand with everybody opening their hands at the same time. The point is to judge if anybody else will bid and if the person offering the cards needs them himself.

I believe the mixture of bribe chips drawn each round influences quite a bit how long a round takes. So I'd say it's a bit more than "Go to Jail" - but if you prefer to skip this rather intuitive mechanism - fine with me. I like it, though.

Best,
Andrea Meyer

Thread: Re:?Blind Bidding

Carver — 2004-12-06T10:15:41+00:00

vosos102 (#69228),

The more I think about it Bob, I'm sure you're right. I've now struggled my way through the German and 'blind' bidding as I understand it (bidding for something but not knowing precisely what) isn't mentioned.

But I can't quite follow your comment about the Corruption Chips. From what you said it would imply that these chips are turned face-up when placed on the board, thus enabling players who confirmed their orders early in the round to pick the most favourable. But the rules we are working to don't imply that these are turned. (In our first game, which was pretty grim as we struggled to get to grips with the rules, there was a 14,000 CHF difference between two players, solely as a result of the luck of these chips.

Derek

Thread: Re:?Blind Bidding

vosos102 — 2004-12-06T03:15:12+00:00

Carver (#69208),
I think the blind bidding is in reference to having the amounts of the bids kept secret, so you are not sure if the amount you bid is enough to win, and by how much.

Also the negative chips give an incentive to play an order card earlier, when most everything else would lead one to hold onto it longer.

Bob

Thread: ?Blind Bidding

Carver — 2004-12-06T00:25:53+00:00

On this site there were for a time the rules in French. I worked from these. (There is now a set of English rules, which claim to be translated from the French rules. We both agree I was pleased to note.) But nowhere in the French rules could I find reference to the much criticised 'Blind Bidding', which I assume involves placing the cards offered for auction face-down. Players should be aware of this apparent change (maybe an official one for all I know - it certainly seemed to be a crazy rule).

Also, for something this complexity I'd do away with the plus and minus sums on the Corruption Chits, which have all the hall-marks of "Go to Jail . . ." and trivialise the game.
DEREK CARVER

Image

gonzo104 — 2004-11-29T12:58:50+00:00

German edition

Thread: Re:Phase 2 ending : how ?

warlock — 2004-11-10T13:54:44+00:00

Here's a couple which spring to mind.

You wish to trigger the end before an opponent can lay one of the simple contract cards (from phase 1) as his chances of scoring with it in phase 3 are much lower.

You wish to trigger the end before an opponent can increase his score on a contract/rent card which he has already played

You have a number of rent cards which you want to play and suspect that you may not have the opportunity to play them all in phase 3.

Thread: Phase 2 ending : how ?

ReiXou — 2004-11-10T11:14:27+00:00

Could someone who has played please give ONE (good, if possible ) reason to take a (-3000) corruption marker to end phase 2 ?

(it seems to me that I always will prefer to wait for phase 3 to play my contract)

Image

Wardo — 2004-11-02T03:09:29+00:00

German version at Essen Fair

Image

EYE of NiGHT — 2004-10-29T15:14:57+00:00

Andrea Meyer - the designer

Thread: Re:Rules Clarification

b0ardgamer — 2004-10-29T07:14:34+00:00

I had a reply from Andrea in response to my comment. Posted here for clarification.

"I saw your comment and found one necessary sentence to be missing, which I also posted on my website. On page 7 of the rules the rule saying "If with three players playing the active player has the highest bid, he pays his bid into the slush fund, too." has to be added. "

Thread: Rules Clarification

Akke — 2004-10-27T10:35:53+00:00

Robert Jones (as seen in the comment section) played the game with incorrect auction rules: each player can only win one action: high bidder can choose only one of the cards. Also, the amount bid (and other expenses paid in a player's turn) is divided between all players at the end of that turn (if possible).

Image

warlock — 2004-10-26T20:00:45+00:00