Game: Gheos

Thread: Re: Game can end too fast

asfhgwt — 2008-06-25T00:38:54+00:00

There are plenty of ways to address this. Example, just pull out 20 tiles and mix all the Epoch tiles in with the rest. Use the 20 Epoch-less tiles first.

Image

Typse2Fsat — 2008-05-18T22:17:22+00:00

Box Back in much higher resolution

Image

Typse2Fsat — 2008-05-18T22:15:36+00:00

Box Front in much higher resolution

Image

Typse2Fsat — 2008-05-14T20:33:59+00:00

Six Epoch cards, more or less neatly arranged. Draw enough of them and the game ends.

Image

Typse2Fsat — 2008-05-14T12:49:44+00:00

Board Game Geek!

Thread: Behold, the power of a god!

Skythian — 2008-01-24T14:09:28+00:00

I picked this one up because it looked a little like an abstract puzzle game mixed with elements of Carcassonne. The pieces were quite fun, being geomorphic triangular tiles that depicted either shorelines or land masses. Putting a bunch of them together randomly would give you a very nice looking, if convoluted, organic tapestry of islands and continents.

The game reminded us of Carcassone in a way, except the tiles were truly geomorphic and there was no question about ‘matching’ them (they always fit in anyway you put them). As with Carcassone, after placing a new tile you could also place a civilization on one of the existent, unoccupied continents (you couldn’t deliberately a civilization on a continent already containing one), the key difference being that in Gheos you could place on any continent, not just on your newly placed tile. This is pretty much where any semblence of similarity came to a screeching halt.

In Gheos, the players are Gods and, if you remember the old computer game Populous, have the ability not only create new lands (placing tiles) but to raise and lower mountains, basically by replacing a tile already in play with one in their hand. This can have the effect of shearing continents in half or joining two of more suddenly together.

Players don’t have set a color; there are 6 civilizations with 5 followers each. Any player can place any civilization into play and take followers from existing civilization. The trick here is in the scoring. Every land piece can have a number of symbols on it representing wheat, weapons, cups, temples and/or pyramids. Let’s use cups as an example. When cups are scored every follower of a civilization that is on a continent containing cup symbols gets victory points; one point per cup per follower. So for instance, if the red civilization is on a continent with 2 cups when cups are scored, every player that has a red follower gets 2 victory points per follower (likewise for other symbols when scored).

War and Migration. These are the fun after-effects of ripping continents apart and joining them together. If you divide a civilization’s continent you force that civilization to migrate to one of the new areas, usually the one with the more wheat symbols. This can be a good way to minimize another player possible scoring a lot of points when they have a lot of followers from a civilization on a big continent with, say, lots of cup symbols. War happens when two continents with civilizations are thrown together, the winner being the civilization that originally had the most sword symbols. The loser is forced to remove his defeated followers from the map.

Overall, the wife and I both really liked this game. Because you can not only add land but alter the existing land, play was very fluid and it would take several tries to get a better idea of all the various tactics for building up you scoring possibilities while protecting yourself from other players. Scoring itself is a little odd and will take a bit to get used to as well, but overall fairly straightforward.

Thread: Re: The longest 2-player game of Gheos EVAR!

dead jawa — 2007-11-28T07:34:08+00:00

Actually, I currently have the game rated an 8. It intrigued me, so I am eager to play more. I just don't know yet if that score will hold up after repeated playings.

The game itself didn't take too long, time-wise. Towards the end we were playing quickly, but I don't recall the time when we started or when we finished. Although I assume most 2 player games aren't going to last until only 7 face-down tiles are left, and I probably won't encounter one again now that I know the correct rules.

Thread: Re: The longest 2-player game of Gheos EVAR!

Peter The Rat — 2007-11-27T15:45:03+00:00

So you kept playing and playing...and this has been the longest game of Gheos EVAR!
So how long did you actually play?

Thread: Re: The longest 2-player game of Gheos EVAR!

Isamoor — 2007-11-27T12:37:45+00:00

I hope you give the game another try. In general, the game only lasts 30-45 minutes max in my experience, usually much shorter for 2-player affairs.

Once you've played it a couple times, you'll see that it's pretty easy to keep continent sizes down. If one gets too big, just split it and start a new civie on the ripe un-inhabited half.

The cup scoring is important, but sometimes the pyramid scoring will at least get in the same ballpark. If a lot of pyramids come out early, controlling some investments in them can make a big difference.

Anyway, hope you enjoyed yourself!

Thread: The longest 2-player game of Gheos EVAR!

dead jawa — 2007-11-27T09:50:18+00:00

I was looking for a tile-playing game somewhere between Tigris & Euphrates (great! but not easy to get new players and semi-gamers into) and Carcassonne: Hunters and Gatherers (also great! but I was itching for some more confrontation). I wasn't interested in a whole new "game system" like regular Carcassonne with all its expansions to tweak the game, so I picked up Gheos after reading that it might fit the niche.

It's a tile playing game with civilizations (always a plus). But rather than playing the civilizations, you are a god "invested" in various civilizations. This sounded great, because it might even work as a gateway into Tigris and Euphrates. Appearantly the title Gheos is meant to be a cross between Gaia and Chaos, although to me it seemed to make more sense as a cross between Geo (earth) and Theos (religion/gods), since the players are gods controlling the face of the earth.

Anyway, I bought the game at Gnome Games in Green Bay (plug!), got home and punched out all the triangular land tiles, and the supporting scoring tiles. I read the rules, which did seem a bit scattered but nothing problematic. Then I packed it up and brought it to Lisa's house for a 2-player game.

Explaining a game I did not have a firm grasp of myself, I meandered through the rules a bit. I pointed out that all land tiles have land along all three edges, and have water at all three points, and so any tile can connect to any tile. I also suggested imagining it as a map of the world, but with all the oceans shrunk down to water strips since they play no real role in the game, and rivers would actually be imperceptable features of the land portions.

At this point, we didn't know what the big scorers would be in the game, temples, cups tokens, or Epoch tiles, but wondered if the 50 point markers would even be used. Lisa started, creating the Red civilization, but without grain and so didn't gain a follower. I played without forming a civilization and took a red, and essentially insured a 3-2 dominance of the Red civilization Lisa started.

We raced for red followers and Lisa started a Blue civilization, and got 2 blue followers. Without much to do in the begining of the game, we had both been building up the red continent. Since whatever benefitted red benefitted me more (with my 3-2 lead) and whatever benefitted blue benefitted Lisa more, I was able to join their continents after a few turns (and sacrificed a blue follower) and the Red people consumed the Blue. Red now seemed to have enough cups to warrant a cup token throw down, for which I received 18 points.

Now the 50 point tokens didn't seem so ridiculous, and the chief source of points seemed to be your 3 cup tokens. By now enough land had appeared so there were several civilizations on the board, and tossing out "worthless" followers became quite usefull in attempts to pull the most cups into a civilization for which you had the most followers.

I burned through all 3 of my cups tokens rather quickly, leaving Lisa trying to put together a cup-wealthy civilization, and me with nothing better to do than interfere. We had gone through 3 Epoch tiles, and so the game was about half over. We had a whole 3 Pyramids on the board, so it seemed like all Temples and Pyramids allowed you to do was work for a few nickel-and-dime points, if you had nothing better to do.

The continents started to become a little unwieldly, allowing huge tracts of land to be swapped between civilizations. Unable to retake a "chunk" of land Lisa's Blue civilization (she had the most followers) had taken from my Red civilization, I instead saw an opportunity to slice it off all-together.

This is where I realized I didn't have the migration rules right. I thought a civilization was where its round token was, and migration only occured when you split that land tile. Lisa guessed it correctly, and I wasn't able to slice off the larger part of her continent and strand the blues on the worth-less smaller slice.

So here I realized how migration was perhaps even more powerful than war, and it opened up a new dimension to the game. Although, this should have been the endgame. I already used all my cups tokens. Lisa was in a position to use her last two tokens on her large blue civilization/continent, which was locked in war with my large red civilization/continent. One smallish civilization was off to the side, and 4 Epoch tiles had been drawn.

Only later did I realize I had another rule wrong. I thought the game ONLY ended with the 6th Epoch tile (2 player game) being drawn.

So Lisa used up her last cups tokens, and we continued to fight (mainly) migration battles to hold onto the most cups until the end, for the final scoring round. And we kept playing, and playing, and playing, and playing...

Seriously. Face down in the box there were 4 Epoch tiles and 8 regular tiles. We knew at any turn the game might end, but we just kept drawing land tiles. We were actually down to 4 Epoch and only 3 land tiles when Lisa drew another Epoch, then followed it up with the Epoch that ended the game.

In the end I won. I had a strong start from which Lisa never fully recovered. The game seemed to drag on at the end, but that was just because we played the end wrong! No fault with the game there. Lisa would have liked more of a chance to use the Pyramid's unremovable/blocking aspect, to shelter a new civilization. Only 4 Pyramids were ever played in our game.

I understood the Temples and Pyramids intended purpose, of offering other ways of getting points, but felt they offered too few to be worth pursuing. Points in Gheos are all about the cups. If you earn a few points from Temples and Pyramids, great; but they don't seem to be enough to shift your focus.

Thread: Re: Sorting out the chaos - "Gheos: Ages"

dead jawa — 2007-11-24T22:36:53+00:00

I like these suggestions. I'm not sure about having to lose a surviving follower, but the others seemed right on the money.

I definitely thought the Temples played too little a role in the game. All they did is allow you to nickel-and-dime a few points that barely matter. Plus, I'm generally more interested in adding a Cups symbol to a civilization and potentially scoring 3-4 times the new number of Cups, and just dump the Cups Temple giving me the option of scoring 1 times the number of Cups (minus one!).

The variants I had been mulling over for this were to maybe make the Temples also count as a symbol, and/or causing the Epoch scoring rounds to be for the number of Pyramids and Temples in a civilization.

Thread: Re: A summary of the Gheos rules threads

zaiga — 2007-11-24T16:03:03+00:00

dead jawa wrote:
The tentative decision I've read from Z-Man is that this should still cost a cube (I.E. whenever your tile placement/replacement causes a civilization to be eliminated it costs a cube), but supposedly an official faq is still forthcoming.

Designer here. What you describe is indeed a situation that isn't explicitly covered by the current rules. If there will ever be a reprint I'll make sure this situation will be described in the rules as a type of migration. So yes, the civilization is removed and causing this costs a follower.

I don't know if an official FAQ is forthcoming. It seems that there aren't that many questions that aren't answered by the rulebook, and for more general queries these threads on BGG provide good feedback. If anyone does crave for an offical FAQ, let me know, and I'll see what I can do.

Thread: Re: A summary of the Gheos rules threads

dead jawa — 2007-11-23T10:51:45+00:00

There is still the special "Isolation" Migration situation that isn't addressed here, and doesn't seem to have an official ruling (just a tentative one) from Z-Man yet.

You have a civilization on a small (2-tile) continent. It's composed of a 3-shore tile, with one shore connected to the occupied continent and the other two shores connected to the rest of the map (what the two other shores connect to doesn't matter). The other tile is an all-landmass tile (no shores). It connects to the 3-shore tile on one side, but the other two sides don't touch any other tiles.

Now suppose the all-landmass tile is replaced with another 3-shore tile. The continent is now reduced to an island. The remaining portions of the continent are now just unconnected shores, and so aren't even considered for migration. Since there were no other land areas (not on the replaced tile) that the civilization was on, except for just the one shore that wasn't replaced, there is no migration -- and yet the civilization is eliminated due to winding up on just an island.

The tentative decision I've read from Z-Man is that this should still cost a cube (I.E. whenever your tile placement/replacement causes a civilization to be eliminated it costs a cube), but supposedly an official faq is still forthcoming.

Thread: Temples and Triangles? Wait a minute, this isn't Carcassonne

DKahnt — 2007-11-19T01:12:09+00:00

To be a god... ehh... too much responsibility... but hey, make a game of it and it could be fun, no? Yes.

Theme:
The theme of Gheos is an interesting one, not unseen before though. You and your opponents are gods developing the landscape to suit your needs. Civilizations are created and developed by you. And you as a god develop the land to produce migrations and war.

The theme is there. You don't really have to look for it much. While its basically an abstract type game (but hey, which game isn't) the flow and idea of the theme is congruent with the way the game plays.

Components:
The components of Gheos are nice too. The game comes with 60 triangle tiles. 52 are landscape and 8 are Epoch tiles. It also comes with circular civilzation markers and cubes to denote followers, victory point chits, and scoring tokens.

They are nice components and work relatively well together. The table is not, and does not get cluttered with useless items which makes the game look very clean.

The only issue I have are that the triangle land tiles are all very similar... of course there are differences, but not too many different types.

Mechanics:
The mechanics are simple. On your turn you place a triangle land tile. You can expand the existing landscape or you can replace any tile out there. You start the game with two tiles and you choose on to place.

After you place a landscape tile or replace an existing one, you can start a new civilization or take a follower of an existing one. You cannot start a civilization on a continent where there is already one.

After that you may if you choose to play a scoring token.

You then replenish your hand.

If you divide a continent into two or more new continents the civilization goes to the continent where there's more wheat. If you combine two or more continents each having a civilization, they battle and one is taken off. The rules are easy to follow.

Gameplay:
The Gamplay is rather smooth. It really is a thinking game. I can understand why it was up for a Mensa award. At the outset you may think it is very much like Carcassonne, but you soon find out that it can certainly be more nasty a game.

There are many different ways to score points. For instance if you draw an Epoch tile, everybody scores points based on temples and number of followers.

The follower cubes play an interesting role. Their stock changes throughout the game so you have to be careful sometimes.

The game ends when a certain number of Epoch tiles (based on the number of players) is reached.

Overall:
I personally like this game quite a bit. While I don't get to play it very often, I do like it. I don't mind a little nasty game here and there and this game certainly has that components. If you don't like games where you can get screwed easily then you won't like this game.

Rating 8/10

-DK

Thread: Re: Gheos featured in GAMES Magazine 100 Best of 2008

melissa — 2007-11-12T09:22:35+00:00

Fantastic

It took me a few plays to warm to Gheos, but I do like it.

Thread: Gheos featured in GAMES Magazine 100 Best of 2008

Outside Lime — 2007-11-09T15:54:05+00:00

Congratulations to René and Zev, as Gheos has found a place in GAMES Magazine's Traditional Games 100 2008, in the Family Strategy category.

Added congratulations to Zev, as Z-Man's Duel In The Dark and End Of The Triumvirate are also featured on the list. Nice work, boys!

~Josh

Thread: Re: Under Cerulean Skies

Isamoor — 2007-11-05T14:29:32+00:00

thesedarkdice wrote:
Nice review :-) I appreciate the comparisons, but I've got a question. How do you think it compares to Taluva?

I also forgot to mention:

I do think Taluva and Gheos share one more aspect pretty closesly: In both games you can do pretty much any move with any tile. There's very little puzzle aspect in either game, unlike Carcassonne.

Thread: Re: Under Cerulean Skies

Isamoor — 2007-11-05T14:24:56+00:00

thesedarkdice wrote:
Nice review :-) I appreciate the comparisons, but I've got a question. How do you think it compares to Taluva?

Thnx for the comment.

As far as Taluva goes, there are some similarities, but they don't run as deep as the other comparisons I made above.

In both Taluva and Gheos, you've got the whole "lay a tile then place some wood" game play going. Also, the tiles are roughly triangle shaped in both Gheos and Taluva.

Both games give some room for really ingenious plays, but I think Gheos takes the edge there. Gheos is a bit more tactical. With one play you can migrate a civilization to obscurity, start a new civilization from their ashes, and then score the bounty from that new civilization. In Taluva, the biggest surprise might be smashing some huts.

Taluva is probably better for long term strategy though. You definitely have more ability to come up with a plan and follow through with it. The board is going to change between your turns, but not greatly.

In the end though, my biggest problem with Taluva was the kingmaker issues. Most of my Taluva games came down to "stop the leader". I really don't like this kind of game play, and it turned me off heavily to Taluva. Also, Taluva has some really annoying turn order bias. It's too easy to get handed towers by the player that went right before you. These things just add up to an un-enjoyable experience for me. In fact, I haven't even gone back to try Attika because I hear it shares many traits with Taluva (Same designer, same style.)

In Gheos, there is a little leader bashing, but it's not the outright "stop the leader from winning immediately" found in Taluva. I also find after playing a few games of Gheos, it's not hard to damage someone else while furthering your own goals at the same time. That seems much more improbable to achieve in Taluva. I believe the whole "civilization investing" layer is what adds the needed depth to Gheos. Taluva just has nothing that compares.

In Taluva's defense, I think everyone will agree that Taluva just looks cooler. Those tiles are really gorgeous.

So in summary my biggest complaint probably comes back to Score Obfuscation.

Score Obfuscation: In Taluva, it's open knowledge and it's reasonably easy to asses current board positions. In Gheos, VPs are hidden *and* it's hard to asses the relative strength of the current board position. Due to this, Taluva developes a "prevent the winner" metagame and Gheos doesn't.

Also, I love the push-your-luck game end in Gheos. Taluva just doesn't generate the same level of tension at all.

To each their own though. I like Gheos more than the average geek obviously, so your mileage may vary.

Thread: Re: A summary of the Gheos rules threads

kuhrusty — 2007-11-05T12:59:10+00:00

Nice summary. I'm surprised that a lot of these questions were posted in the first place, though!

Thread: Re: A summary of the Gheos rules threads

Phoenixgeek — 2007-11-05T09:39:42+00:00

Good suggestion - I'll look to do this shortly.

Thread: Re: Under Cerulean Skies

thesedarkdice — 2007-11-05T04:12:55+00:00

Nice review :-) I appreciate the comparisons, but I've got a question. How do you think it compares to Taluva?

Thread: Re: A summary of the Gheos rules threads

metalchorus — 2007-11-05T03:54:53+00:00

It would be great to have links to each one.

Thread: A summary of the Gheos rules threads

Phoenixgeek — 2007-11-04T23:54:49+00:00

Here is a summary of the 13 rules threads for Gheos which I hope some of you will find useful.

Epoch Tiles – If playing with 2 or 3 players all epoch tiles should still be left in the tile draw pile.

Scoring – The rules do not state whether scoring should be open or not.

Final Scoring Marker – Given that there is a final score at the end of the game, if the end is triggered by a player playing the final scoring marker that player will have his round score counted twice.

Is a Player Required to Start a New Civilisation? – The rules state that you must either start a new civilisation or take a follower from an existing civilisation. The designer posted to add that if a player can do neither the step is skipped.

Start a Civilisation – A player may start a civilisation on a continent where there are no wheat markers but, in doing so the player will not receive a follower that turn.

Start a New Civilisation after Migration – If a player’s migration action breaks a continent into two separate continents they may start a new civilisation in the newly formed empty continent in the same turn.

Select a Follower – The follower may be selected from any of the civilisations currently represented on the board.

Replacing Landlocked Tiles – This is permitted.

Replacing Tiles – A player does not have to pay a follower cube if replacing a tile does not cause either a war or a migration.

Migration – A tile replacement that causes a continent to break up into islands and shores is classed as a migration.

A Civilisation moving to an Island – The rules state that any civilisation moving to an island is deemed insignificant and is moved from the game. The designer posted to say that this is the case even if technically it was not a migration that caused the occurance but that , in all cases the player responsible for the move to an island will have to pay one follower cube.

Migration – Replacing a tile that does not alter the landscape is not a migration.

War or Migration – When discarding a follower the player may choose any colour follower to discard.

Migration – A tile replacement that shrinks a continent is not a migration. If you do not have to evaluate where a civilisation goes after a tile replacement it is not a migration.

Migration – If a civilisation moves to an area where another civilisation exists then the migrating civilisation is removed.

Thread: Re: Under Cerulean Skies

Isamoor — 2007-09-18T18:25:29+00:00

stormseeker75 wrote:
Do you really feel Carcassonne is multi-player solitaire?

How about this simpler reply:

The rules of Gheos have 2-3 pages specifically on war. Carcassonne doesn't.

However, as stated above, all players are free to play any game in any style they want.

Thread: Re: Under Cerulean Skies

Isamoor — 2007-09-18T18:23:52+00:00

stormseeker75 wrote:
Do you really feel Carcassonne is multi-player solitaire?

Nope. In my opinion, both Carcassonne and Ticket to Ride have as much player interaction as the current players desire.

If you want to steal farms or sabotage cities, then you can. If you prefer to just see who can make the biggest city, then you can.

If you want to see just how many players you can block out of Chicago, you can. If you want to see just how many tickets everyone can finish, you can.

As for Gheos, I think it's much more on the screwage side. I suppose you could play it never replacing a tile and never killing a single civilization, but I don't think the game encourages that. In particular, I think you have to have the screwage or you would have bad runaway leaders. If all players just took followers in "their" civilization, then the player who drew more cups and pyramids would probably be the winner. When played with some screwage, it doesn't really matter who draws what, it comes down more to who makes the killer moves.

(Now, all that analysis aside, I actual prefer Carcassonne when played as multi-player solitaire. It's rather refreshing after a hard day's work. To each their own though.)

Thread: Re: Under Cerulean Skies

stormseeker75 — 2007-09-18T18:03:13+00:00

Do you really feel Carcassonne is multi-player solitaire?

Thread: Under Cerulean Skies

Isamoor — 2007-09-18T14:03:35+00:00

Gheos is a relatively new game that is most often described in it's relationships to other games. When viewed on it's own, it's a quick civilization game where players act as gods and convert followers of the civilizations created. There's a lot more to it than that, but it all plays well under an hour. I've been happy with the purchase and decided to share my thoughts.

Description

Players take on the role of gods and try to convert followers of rich civilizations. On your turn, you:
1. Play a tile. The tiles are unique, but all tile sides are identical, so a tile can be placed anywhere.
2. Convert a follower. You can start a new civilization on the board or invest in one already created.

When you play a tile, you can cause:
1. Migration - Shrink a civilization's board presence by splitting up it's continent (Possibly killing it.)
2. War - Merge two occupied continents together and kill the weaker civilization.
If a civilization is killed, all players must return all of the followers of that civilization to the supply.

Civilizations pay their patron gods through the wealth of their continents. They pay out for cups and pyramids in particular. The timing of cup scoring is controlled by the players while the timing of pyramid scoring is triggered through a random Epoch tile draw.

The game ends when enough Epoch tiles are drawn or all players have used all of their cup scoring opportunities.

Comparisons
Just to get this part out of the way, here are at least the common comparisons to other games:

1. Carcassonne - You are laying tiles to form a landscape and placing wooden pieces on them. Unlike Carc, there is very direct conflict and a deeper rules set.
2. T&E - You are laying tiles to create civilizations and then watching their power ebb and flow. Unlike T&E, Gheos is a much more chaotic affair and the "board" fluctuates at a *much* faster rate. Also, even more so than T&E, multiple players can easily have investments in a single civilization.
3. Acquire - Converting followers in a civilization is very similar to purchasing stocks in a company. Scoring in Gheos is easily explained as each of your "stocks" paying dividends based on their current cup and pyramid pricing. Unlike Acquire, the actual board is a much more fluid affair instead of a drab grid. Also, if someone kills off a civilization, your followers are lost without being able to recoup your investment.
4. Ra - The drawing of Epoch tiles feels very similar to the drawing of the Ra tiles. They serve as an internal game clock to give you a random yet definite game end. The rest of the games are drastically different, but this component is very similar.

Review Criteria

1. Analysis Paralysis / Downtime

And right of the bat, we come to a hiccup in Gheos. All tiles have identical sides, so there is no worry about matching up roads or cities; any tile can be placed next to any other tile. To compound this, almost any tile can also be replaced in Gheos. (The rules mention actually removing tiles; it's much easier to just stack the replacement on top of the old.) This means that on your turn, you have an absolutely astounding number of possible tile placements. Unlike basic Carcassonne, you are given a hand of two tiles so you can do some planning during other players' turns. On the downside though, the board can fluctuate greatly in between your turns, so it's not really possible to plan multiple turns at a time.

Having said all of this, I have never experienced a game of Gheos lasting longer than an hour. I find that if you convince people to stop looking at all the places they could stick their tile, and instead get them to answer:

A. Can I add value to the civilizations I am invested in?
B. Can I devastate civilizations others are more heavily invested in?

The game play goes much faster. If you approach your turn just deciding what civilization to hurt or help, the decision tree becomes manageable. Even though, if you are solidly AP+, you might not enjoy this game.

2. Multiplayer Solitaire / Player Interaction / (Competitive / Casual)

And here's where we quickly break away from Carcassonne. Gheos is definitely not multiplayer solitaire. You can easily migrate a civilization right into the ocean and kill all of their followers. I usually advise new players to never invest too heavily in a single civilization, because I will gladly kill that civilization at the earliest opportunity. Due to this cut throat nature, Gheos doesn't always go over well with the highly casual crowd.

On top of the basic rules, a general metagame usually forms during a game of Gheos. If multiple players invest in a civilization, they will have a shared interest in it prospering. Table talk and informal alliances are not uncommon at all.

In a 2-player setting, Gheos is at it's dirtiest. If either player gets more followers in any civilization, then it's in the other player's best interest to see it killed. I find that with 2 players, the board doesn't expand very much with the tiles stacking high through replacements. If you're favorite 2-player game is Lost Cities, then Gheos probably isn't a good fit.

3. Skill / Luck / (Competitive / Casual)

It's true you draw tiles from a bag, but I still find Gheos not to be a luck driven affair. Some people complain about the tile draws, but I still believe pretty much any hand of 2 tiles can accomplish almost anything you desire. New players often just often have their heart set on a certain tile instead of playing what they have. In the last game I taught, the two players with experience came out comfortably on top. If that's not a sign of some skill involved, I don't know what is. I have had newbies win a game or two as well, but that was generally when they were encouraged to gang up on the experienced player.

Of course there are the Epoch tiles. The same people that complain about Ra tiles are going to complain about Epoch tiles. That's just the way it is. I personally think it's a great mechanic in both games that adds tension through uncertainty. As long as you don't let one player get a monopoly on Pyramids, then the Epoch tiles do not benefit any one player too greatly (Epoch tiles give points for Pyramids). Of course, if you're in the lead, you just keep rooting for the Epoch tiles to keep flowing just to end the game.

I don't want to get into a big "randomness vs. chaos" debate here, but I will say that Gheos has a very high level of Chaos. A single turn can cause large shifts in the landscape. This can cause a bit of a rub to many gamers. It often just isn't possible to plan multiple turns in advance. The competitive gamers will often enjoy the direct player interaction, but be driven away by the high level of chaos. The casual players will enjoy the fluctuating board, but might be put off by the screwage. I personally enjoy both aspects and find that many other players do as well.

4. Runaway Leader / Effective Elimination / Catch-Up Mechanics / Score Obfuscation

In this aspect Gheos is a very interesting beast. I think the oddest part of Gheos is the scoring distribution. First of all, the push-your-luck game end can cause high variability in final scores. I've seen winning scores in the 30s and winning scores in the 80s. Also, your points tend to come in large chunks of variable sizes. During the course of the game, you might score around 15 points 2-3 times and around 5 points 7-8 times. Your score doesn't follow a fluid progression from 0 to 80.

We play with victory points quasi-open. You can stack your victory point chits, but you have to make change a lot and people can easily judge the size of your stack. So you don't know what each player's exact score is, but you have an idea of who's potentially leading.

It the games I have played, I have never seen a real runaway leader. In fact, almost all second place finishers have been at least within 10 points of first. I've also seen multiple games come down to a mere point or two. Some beginners think that if a player gets majority control of a super powerful civilization, then there is no way to beat them. I usually help them out and show how one or two well placed migrations will split the leader's civilization down to meritocracy. There really is no way to have a "safe" civilization in Gheos.

Now, this does mean that there are bash-the-leader capabilities in Gheos. I still find that these whack the leader symptoms don't come out in full force with Gheos. In a game like Taluva, you may have to team up just to do everything possible to stop a player from winning. In Gheos, you just adjust your strategy to benefit yourself a little less and hurt the leader a little more.

Now, there can however be some Effective Elimination. Over the course of a game of Gheos, your personal supply of followers should be growing at a steady rate. You only lose followers during wars and migrations, and you should gain at least 1 follower every turn. Some players can plan poorly and invest too heavily in a single civilization. If that civilization dies, then they will be left with a much lower number of followers than the other players. It's quite common for a single player to only have half the number of followers as everyone else towards the end game. Generally, that player just won't be able to catch up since they won't be gaining the same quantity of dividends as the other players. I have seen some real killer moves to bring them back in the running, but they aren't overly common.

5. Fiddliness / Elegance

I consider Gheos to earn the dubious title of "elegant". The rules are very well laid out and the game play has a very unique and fluid feel about it. The rules do a good job of getting out of the way and letting you live the life of the gods. You can visually see how the civilizations you care about are fairing on their world that is your tabletop.

There are only a few things that could send the "fiddly" label towards Gheos:

A. They included *just* enough victory point chits to make a four player game work. During the course of a game, you are going to be making a lot of change. With 2 and 3 player games, this goes away. You could just make the point totals open information and record them on paper, but I much prefer the score obfuscation.

B. There is no tile bag included, and triangle tiles do not make for great shuffling and stacking. I highly recommend acquiring a draw bag before attempting to play Gheos. Now, it ZMan's defense, I believe the limited victory point chits and lack of a bag are the main reason this game is so affordable.

C. The rules mention removing tiles you want to replace, but this can be cumbersome if the original tile is already surrounded. We always just stack the tiles and it works fine. In a 2-player game, you may get some tall stacks, but you can just discard some of the middle tiles easily.

These are really only minor complaints though. You really shouldn't be shuffling many bits on your turn. Also, after the first game, you shouldn't ever need to reference the rules again. I'll state again that the rules and the bits step aside and let you just play the game. The symbols on the tiles are clear and easy to distinguish. The pictures on the symbols even make thematic sense. Sword symbols assist a civilization during war. Wheat symbols feed a civilization and control where a civilization migrates. The Epoch tiles have large pictures of pyramids that remind you that they score pyramids.

6. Theme / Enjoyment

I personally find the theme very well done. It's not a simulation by any means, but the mechanics do match the theme. Sure, I compare converting followers to taking stocks, but those civilizations have little lives on the board so you can see how the fates will treat them. The symbols on the tiles also make thematic sense. I think the biggest positive I can give is that if you use the theme to explain the mechanics, they do a great job of helping people remember the rules.

Having said that, certain people will point out that Gheos is an abstract. And yes, it does include victory points being given for civilizations having "cups" and it does have some "gamey" rules such as not being able to replace pyramid tiles.

I also find Gheos to be highly enjoyable. Killing off civilizations and watching the other players moan is just bliss at times. Also, the palpable tension when there's only one more Epoch tile waiting to be drawn to end the game is great fun. The whole game wraps up in less than an hour and generally begs to be played again.

The only thing that can hurt my enjoyment is the occasional player that just cannot decide where to place his tile. A player with a bad case of Analysis Paralysis can just kill any tension created by the game.

7. Tactical / Strategic

For the most part, Gheos is a highly tactical game. On your turn, you make the best use of the tiles and board presence you already have. Generally, you don't want to assume that anything will be the same for your next turn. However, this does mean that you can have a very large impact on the board in each and every one of your turns. Very few games let you affect so many civilizations and players with a single move.

And there are some long term decisions. Trying to judge how long the game will last and deciding when to use your scoring opportunities is a difficult but pleasing process. Still though, if you are wanting to set up a long term strategy and watch it play out to completion, this is not the game for you.

8. Age and Player Ranges

The rules are very well laid out and understandable, if you have some Eurogame experience. Some of the concepts are bit abstract though, so I wouldn't try the game with anyone younger than a teenager.

The game plays well with any number of players, but I find the 2 player experience to be noticeably different. There is more control, but there is also more confrontation. For my own tastes, the more players the merrier.

Conclusion

I find Gheos to be a highly enjoyable game. It packs a whole lot of punch into a very short playing time. Certain people may be turned off by specific aspects of the game. Competitive analytical people may dislike the high level of chaos, but I encourage them to see how much tension and excitement it can add to each turn. Casual people may be turned off by the screwage, but I encourage them to diversify for protection and show them the joy of tossing helpless civilizations to their doom. I believe all of the design choices in Gheos were made for a purpose, and if you see what they add instead of what they take away, you too will enjoy this gem of a game. It also has a very affordable price tag, so I recommend giving it a try if you get a chance.

Thread: Re: We Played As Gods

kuhrusty — 2007-09-01T07:07:36+00:00

Isamoor wrote:
I gave us each only 2 cup scoring tiles instead of 3. This made the games go faster, but it definitely isn't balanced. You can force the game end too easily with only 2 scoring tiles
Well, nuts. I was going to say, "what do the cup scoring tokens have to do with the end of the game? I think you're doing something wrong!" but, uhh, rereading the rules, I see it is not you who has been playing incorrectly.

I hate it when that happens!

(My friends still claim I intentionally overlooked the bit about everyone scoring again at the end of the game as if they had just played a scoring token.)

Thread: We Played As Gods

Isamoor — 2007-08-28T15:20:01+00:00

We have just gotten Gheos in our hands thanks to a friendly group order sponsored by Adam. It seemed to feature a lot of ideas that my Wife and I enjoy, so we thought we'd give it a spin. I'd read up on the rules a bunch before hand, but *still* managed to screw up a moderately important one. I gave us each only 2 cup scoring tiles instead of 3. This made the games go faster, but it definitely isn't balanced. You can force the game end too easily with only 2 scoring tiles, so definitely play as the designer intended with 3.

Teaching

I knew the rules pretty well (Except for the 2 vs 3 cup tokens), and my wife picked up on the concepts really quickly. It's pretty easy to relate this game to other games we already play:

1. It has the tile laying and countryside building of Carc.
2. It has the rise and fall of civilizations of T&E.
3. It has the investment mechanics of Acquire or Imperial.
4. It has the Epoch parsing and game end conditions of Ra.

Also of note, when replacing tiles, we just stacked them higher so we didn't have to try and remove the old one if it were surrounded. Additionally, if we started a war or migration, we placed our sacrificial follower on the placed tile temporarily to remind us to pay a follower and to help resolve the conflict.

The only rule that is tricky to remember while playing is the fact that you score for all your followers, not just one civilization. I understood this, and so did my wife, but we repeatedly tried scoring just our largest investment. We were still playing a learning game so we made sure and reminded each other when we caught ourselves.

Game One - In which the rules mistake bites me in the butt

And we're off! Look out little denizens, your days are numbered! We built three civilizations up pretty quickly, and we stayed pretty balanced in investment in them. The pyramid tiles and the epoch tiles were pretty much nowhere to be seen. Instead, we had oodles of cup tiles. So, we made some really wealthy civilizations. I cashed out pretty early for 10-15 points per cup scoring. Unfortunately, this left it up to my wife to dictate the game end. She slapped down a couple temples to put herself in range (and reduce the wealth of the civilizations I was wealthiest in). Then she did some quick math and cashed out her scoring tokens in back to back turns to end the game and vault herself into first. The meeples smiled upon her as her favorite god.

Okay, again, *don't* play with only 2 scoring tokens. You can dictate the game *way* too easily. Of course, I didn't re-read the rules until today, so our next game was still with the wrong rules. Heck, this game went so fast we only had a single migration.

Game Two - War turns meeples into weeples.

And so we played as gods again. This time the game came into a much better balance. We had a mix of pretty much everything. 3 civilizations made their presence known, but this time, I was a very vengeful god. The sword icons had a pretty even spread on the board, so wars were often decided by the god who instigated them. Any time my wife got more followers of a civilization than I had: WAR!!!! I also used the very mean trick of migrating a civilization onto an island and watching it drown in the waters. The epoch tiles flowed at a steady pace and they trickled some points in my direction each time. By the game end, I had 6-7 followers in my camp to my wife's 3-4. This was enough to cause a 20 point score difference. You might think this would cause the end of our saga as gods, but no, she grasped the ideas of conflict and said she had devious ideas for the next time we play.

Impressions

I like this game a lot. I am most impressed by how much it packs into such a small package. It doesn't have a large number of components or rules and it plays in well under an hour. We were even interested in trying it out with more than 2 players.

Pros:
Multiple viable sources of points available. (Although the temples seem weak on the points, they can be used to hurt opposing civilizations.)
Lots of Options - These tiles all can go almost anywhere. If you want to make war, chances are you can make war.
Innovative Feel - It doesn't feel like a rehash of any other game.

Cons:
I could see this dragging with 4 people if they take awhile to choose.
There is utterly direct conflict. I realize that multiple investors carve up the loses, but this seems like as much a war game as Imperial.

Anyway, I look forward to more playings!

Thread: Re: Epoch tiles for each player

quozl — 2007-08-24T21:32:50+00:00

The point of them would be to get more pyramid points than everyone else.

Thread: Re: Epoch tiles for each player

dkeisen — 2007-08-24T21:28:10+00:00

I don't really see the point of the epoch tiles with this rule change. There is no particular need to have two kinds of objects scoring at different times, the point really is two different scorings one under player control and one random. Remove the epoch tiles if you don't like them.

Thread: Re: Epoch tiles for each player

Isamoor — 2007-08-24T19:14:24+00:00

Yea, when you get down to it, it sounds like Gheos has a touch of everything:

Carcassonne's World Building
T&E's civilization evolutions
Acquire's share holding
Ra's push-your-luck ending

Pretty cool stuff.

Thread: Re: Epoch tiles for each player

Isamoor — 2007-08-24T19:11:38+00:00

At first, I didn't like Ra due to the uncertainty (better known as its "Push-your-luck" aspect).

But then I stopped to actually think about what it does for the game. If you really don't know when the game is going to end, then it makes sure you play each turn as if it were your last. It takes an otherwise very mathematical game with cold calculations and adds some edge of your seat tension to it. There's no last turn optimization, because you really don't know when the last turn is going to happen. Think back to how the final turns of Goa or PoF can drag, and compare that to the end game of Ra. Tiles are still flying and people are chanting right until the end of Ra.

When I concentrate on what the uncertainty adds, I find that I enjoy the game much more. Maybe if you change your perspective you can reach the same viewpoint. Maybe not.

Thread: Re: Epoch tiles for each player

quozl — 2007-08-24T18:48:01+00:00

The game still ends when either all cup scoring tokens are played or all epoch tiles are played. Otherwise, it would end when there are no more tiles.

Interesting comparison to Ra. I don't like Ra because of the uncertainty there.

Thread: Re: Epoch tiles for each player

Isamoor — 2007-08-24T18:35:44+00:00

Well, how would you be sure the game would end? I suppose you could just end the game when the last tile is drawn.

I think you need to just approach the game a bit like Ra. The complete uncertainty of game length is just a strong handed way of making each turn count.

I would consider playing with the "no immediately consecutive epochs". If you draw 1 epoch, and then draw another when replacing it, toss it back until you draw a non-epoch.

Either way, go have some fun!

Thread: Epoch tiles for each player

quozl — 2007-08-20T03:21:55+00:00

I haven't tried this yet but I really like the scoring cup tokens that each player gets and was wondering how the game would play if each player also got two epoch tiles (three for a 2-player game) that they could play at any time during their turn. They would still score for every player as they do now. The only change is that the players control when the epochs come.

What do you think?

Image

KSensei — 2007-07-31T16:06:28+00:00

A god connects the continent. Only one civilization may stand...

Image

KSensei — 2007-07-31T16:05:31+00:00

Red prepares for war!

Thread: Unite and divide

duvalmont — 2007-07-07T22:18:52+00:00

Yesterday I brought Gheos to our weekly board game club session. Because it wasn’t known at all among them, I had no problem in finding 4 players willing to give it a try. It was the first one for me too, so no player was more experienced and we could enjoy the same level of unconsciousness concerning available strategies. It’s my game and I was the only one to read the rules so it was my duty to present them to other players.
After drawing the picture concerning rules we started our first session. I started with the creation of the new civilization with 2 blue followers. Very promptly there were 3 civilizations in play, unfortunately the one were I had some followers had the least swords. I tried to improve the situation and made it to the draw, but unfortunately the player on my right started the war, which I wanted to start, removing my civilization from the board. What was I to do? Shortly afterwards I started another civilization, giving it a pyramid hoping for some Epoch tiles to come out. To my amusement no one attacked it while it was fairly weak. The other players focused on the 2 other stronger civilizations. I gathered 3 followers in “my” civilization and consecutively played 3 scoring tokens, gathering 10-12 points for each of them. My fellow players gave me the opportunity so I took it, knowing that sooner or later “my civilization” have to fall, because no one else had as strong involvement in it as me. The dreadful moment came at last and the civilization lost the war against strong in wheat and swords blue civilization. Shortly afterwards I managed to migrate blue civilization to the pyramidless continent, creating the new civilization with 3 pyramids. Again to my amusement the other players allowed me to have 5 followers in that civilization (there was a lot of food on the continent when I was creating it). I do not understand while they let me keep it for whole 4 rounds, and gathering tone of points for 2 Epoch tiles. Finally it had to fall but unfortunately for the other players it was a bit too late. The game was finalized with play of the last scoring token. The final scoring was as follows:
Me – 76 VPs
Sztefan – 57 VPs
Guy I don’t know – 52 VPs
Pancho – 20 and something
I’m not exactly sure if my fellow players caught the importance of migrating civilizations they had no interest in into weak spots and causing war when they had great strength. I know that I would cut my advantage very fast if I played on their place. Of course it was the first play, but you can see it from the start that the civilization with all 5 followers in one hand and with 3 pyramids is a disaster when Epoch tile comes out.

Thread: Re: About replacing tiles....

Thomas_de_Monet — 2007-07-02T09:19:21+00:00

Thanks all!

I just KNEW that I was doing it right!

Thread: Re: About replacing tiles....

EvanMinn — 2007-06-29T17:40:01+00:00

sedjtroll wrote:
Yes, it's any tile. I too put the new tile on top. I think it makes a nice topography of the board... but sometimes the stacks get a little tall, in which case sometimes we take out all but the top and bottom ones or something.

That's how I do it too.

If its completely surrounded, I just put the new tile on top.

If its on the edge, I actually take it out and put the new tile down. That goes for the second layer too. Doing it that way, the highest stack I have seen is 3 tiles and that has been pretty rare.

Thread: Re: About replacing tiles....

locusshifter — 2007-06-29T17:16:22+00:00

You are 100% right. You can replace any tile without a pyramid. In terms of replacing, since the tile supply is finite, you can just "stack" the tiles. You can replace the same location any number of times.

It's not always advantageous to replace tile, but it's one of the core mechanics of the game. Gheos is NOT a nice game.

On a side note: Another game that uses this sort of mechanic (though it's covering the tiles below) is Taluva; and Taluva also takes advantage of the stacking of tiles with other game mechanics.

Thread: Re: About replacing tiles....

sedjtroll — 2007-06-29T17:11:58+00:00

Yes, it's any tile. I too put the new tile on top. I think it makes a nice topography of the board... but sometimes the stacks get a little tall, in which case sometimes we take out all but the top and bottom ones or something.

Thread: About replacing tiles....

Thomas_de_Monet — 2007-06-29T17:04:58+00:00

Hey all,

I have played this now about 7 times and every time I play, someone asks: "So you can replace ANY tile? Not just the ones at the edge of the map?"

To which I say: "Yes, it says ANY tile."

To which I usually get the response: "That's stupid/dumb/weird/odd/not right/hard to do/messes up the map/etc. Tiles that are landlocked (surrounded by other tiles) should be safe."

"But", says I, "all it says in the rules is you can't replace the tiles with a Pyramid, any other tile is fair game."

So, after being questioned every time I have played, I started to think to myself: "Am I right or am I missing something in the rules?"

Oh yeah, for the landlocked tiles, we just place the new tile on top. No muss, no fuss.

Any thoughts?

Thread: I feel the earth move

Paul Mackie — 2007-06-28T12:39:22+00:00

On my first playing of this at Albury last week I felt I had little idea of what I was doing, so this was very much a learning game for me, Nick and Alex. The ebb and flow of continents and civilisations was quite intriguing, making for a much deeper game than I recalled from the previous one.

As civilisation monopolies formed, there were a lot of tile replacement plays to cause migrations and wars, and Alex was convinced that it was one key migration that I played that pushed him back into final second place.
All of us learned quickly not to form emotional attachments to our civilisation cubes, as nice little collections of these would suddenly disappear when the next player would replace a critical segment of land to bring them into a losing war with another civilisation. Some diversification in this is therefore important, if you can manage it.

The other guys played their cup scoring tokens quicker than me, but with plenty of land tiles left in the stack I found I had the freedom to pick optimal times for playing mine. The last was played at the right moment to result in a score that pushed me comfortably past Alex.
15 mins rules; 45 mins game time.
Results: Paul: 61. Alex. 53. Nick: 45.

(Originally posted in The Mine Shaft Gap.)

Image

greatsage — 2007-06-13T08:39:06+00:00

A conflict arising between Blue and Green Civilisations

Image

greatsage — 2007-06-13T05:25:58+00:00

A rather amiable beginning to a two-player game

Thread: Sorting out the chaos - "Gheos: Ages"

RantingRodent — 2007-06-09T21:30:40+00:00

After playing some rounds of Gheos, I have to agree with the general comment that the gameplay doesn't quite "click". Something is amiss. Taking my cue from some other games, this variant tries to reduce the influence of luck on the average game of Gheos, as well as providing a bit more depth of strategy in tile placement.

I have had a hard time getting my regular play groups to play Gheos frequently, so I would really appreciate any help I can get in playtesting this variant.

One thing I have to say first off is that Gheos is lighter on accessories that it should be. There are three main issues that are absent. First is a bag. Putting tiles into stacks as a randomization method is poor enough to begin with, nevermind having to shuffle triangles. I use the bag from Carcassonne whenever I play, and it cuts out 90% of the game's setup time. The second is some kind of scoring board to keep track of the Wealth, Military, and Pyramids for each Civilization. Scoring rounds interrupt gameplay a bit too much right now, considering that a 4 player game has a total of 20 of them. Having a scoring board would eliminate a lot of the mental math the game needs right now. Finally, the use of a score track for players, instead of VP tokens would speed things up quite a bit as well. Once again, I'm using the score track from Carcassonne in this case. So much time is spent cashing in low value VP tokens for high level VP tokens.

I strongly advise finding these accessories. The bag alone noticeably improved my experience with the game.

Problem #1 - Free Wars
By default, it is legal to start a war by losing a follower from the losing civilization. This essentially allows players to wipe out civilizations at no cost to themselves.

Solution - Survivors Only
The follower expended to start a war must come from the winning civilization, if the player controls any.

Problem #2 - Too Chaotic
While there are many, many options on a person's turn, there is usually only a few moves a player can make which are advantageous at all. In most cases, these moves are fairly obvious. There are only two types of moves in Gheos; attack and develop. There are no defensive moves. I think that this is a contributing factor to the chaotic nature of the game. It's as if you took Carcassonne and removed the rule that you can't "claim" something directly that has already been claimed by another player. You wouldn't be able to defend any important asset.

Solution - Sacred Ground
By standard rules, Pyramids cannot be replaced at all. This is the only available defense against migrations and wars. As there are only 5 of these tiles out of 52, they do not really factor too heavily into strategic planning. To really bring defensive manoevers into the game, Temples are now a defensive move as well. In order to replace a temple tile, a player must lose one follower, in addition to any other followers the replacement action requires. Why not make them unreplaceable, like Pyramids? Allowing players to replace the tiles at additional cost makes it a strategic decision, rather than simply an obstacle to plan around.

Problem #3 - Too Much Luck
Because there are 8 Epoch tiles that can be drawn at any time, the game suffers from significant luck-of-the-draw issues. In a 4 player game, it's possible (and I've seen it happen) for there to be 3 epochs before one of the player's gets their next turn. Even worse, multiple epochs can be drawn by the same player on their turn, allowing one lucky player to stretch out their lead simply by being in the right place at the right time.

Solution - Minimum Epoch Length
Epochs may not occur more than once per full round. That is to say that if an Epoch is drawn in a four player game by player A, players B, C, and D must get a turn before the next Epoch can occur. If an Epoch is drawn during this time, it is set aside and returned to the tile pool for the Age once all players have taken their required turn. However, all tiles for a particular Age must be used up before the next Age begins. This means that if the only tile left in the current Age is the Epoch tile which has been set aside, then that Epoch tile must be drawn and scored, even if it breaks the Minimum Epoch Length rule.

Solution - Ages
Tikal uses a system of tile groups to ensure that certain types of tiles appear during specific portions of the game. This system allows players to plan for these tiles to appear during these periods, and also prevents large numbers of powerful tiles from showing up too early, or in bunches, which can disturb balance significantly in some cases.

The following is the Ages I am currently working with for each number of players. This is very much a work-in-progress system. Detailed feedback on this would be greatly appreciated. For number of player variations, whenever a tile is moved from one Age to another, a Basic Tiles should replace it in the Age it came from. For the purposes of this list, a "Basic Tile" is one which does not have a Pyramid or a Temple on it.

4 Players
The Age of Discovery - Early expansion. Fighting should be scattered and infrequent until all civilizations are on the board.
- 2 Epoch Tiles
- 14 Basic Tiles

The Age of Enlightenment - Civilizations grow and mature.
- 4 Epoch Tiles
- 10 Basic Tiles
- 2 of each Temple
- 4 Pyramid tiles

The Age of War - Heaviest conflict should be confined to the endgame.
- 2 Epoch Tiles
- 14 Basic Tiles
- 1 of each Temple

3 Players - With fewer players, there needs to be more of a prod towards conflict early on.
- Remove one Epoch tile from the Age of Enlightenment
- 1 Pyramids moves to the Age of Discovery

2 Players - Much harder to balance. Tends to polarize between two major civilizations, very early on. Early pyramids and Temples allow the players to constrain avenues of attack.
- Remove one Epoch tile from the Age of Enlightenment
- Remove one Epoch tile from the Age of Discovery
- All Pyramids move to the Age of Disovery
- All Temples move to the Age of Enlightenment

Image

SubtlyArtistic — 2007-06-09T19:01:41+00:00

scores for the fourth epoch-- three player.

Thread: Re: Winning the Hearts of Mortals

RantingRodent — 2007-06-05T17:48:05+00:00

Thanks Eric. That's what I get for proofreading at 4 in the morning. Fixing now.

Thread: Re: Winning the Hearts of Mortals

Numskull — 2007-06-05T13:55:15+00:00

Andrew, based on the first and third paragraphs in your "Game Mechanics" section, I think you were short-changed the white civilization. The wooden bits come in six colors, not five.

Thread: Re: Winning the Hearts of Mortals

RantingRodent — 2007-06-04T22:00:46+00:00

There hasn't been much though put behind the idea of tiles with more water, so I'll just concede that point to you right off. Could quite possibly be pointless.

No, there's nothing wrong with gunning for an early advantage. In fact, that's how I tend to play. What I am trying to say is that I don't think the game mechanics stand up to this situation very well. Maintaining that early lead is too easy once you've gotten there. Even if you've played smarter and get out of the gates quickly in a game, there should be a certain level of effort require to stay in the lead.

I don't even care about it from the perspective of "fairness". I just think it gets boring quickly for both the player in the lead and those trying to catch up.

Thread: Re: Winning the Hearts of Mortals

dcorban — 2007-06-04T15:51:28+00:00

I can imagine the groans players would have if they drew an all-water tile. Whee, a tile that gives zero points! How fair!

In regards to players using their scoring tile early to gain an early lead: if there was no benefit to using them early, then everyone would just save them until the predicted final rounds. Zzzzz. Maybe the groupthink needs to move toward playing the scoring tiles early.

Thread: Re: Winning the Hearts of Mortals

RantingRodent — 2007-06-04T15:09:32+00:00

Asa: Thanks. I am still playtesting the house rules, but here's what I've been working on. These are not necessarily meant to be used together, and I haven't tried them in enough sessions to comment on their effectiveness yet.

1. Not all tiles in circuilatoin at once. This worked VERY well for Tikal; dividing the tiles into groups to control the flow of resources into the game. I'm not sure I'll be able to find a balance that works for Gheos with the tiles available. If I get it nailed down, I will post a Variant for it.

2. Cannot take a follower if you started a war or caused a migration. This one is designed to make it weighty decision; you're not going to be able to just take your follower back after instigation, like you can now.

3. When instigating a war, a follower from the victorious civilization must be expended, if possible, not the losing civilization.

4. We're actually taking the Epoch tile rule one step further. When an epoch tile is drawn, another cannot legally be drawn until all players have taken another turn. We may eventually fall back to the softer rule, but I've seen someone get hammered a couple of times because two epochs triggered before they got another turn.

I'm also investigating a 5 player variant, adding one more civilization and two more followers per civilization.

C&V: I know what you mean about the gameplay not clicking. I am putting some effort into house rules at the moment because I can foresee the game dropping out of our rotation for the same reason. The basic mechanic is too good to pass up, though.

It might be a matter of the lighting in the room. I can definitely see the colours fatiguing the eyes if you were playing in a very brightly lit space. The dining room I use for gaming has softer, slightly yellow lighting. This has probably influenced my perception of the game.

I think you're right about the confusing landscape, to an extent. Our group has talked a bit about the game, and the consensus is that some all-water tiles would help break up the world a little more, and make it look more like an island chain and less like a debris field.

Thread: Re: Winning the Hearts of Mortals

quartex — 2007-06-04T15:06:05+00:00

Earth tones to bring out the rivers? Huh, I don't remember any rivers in Gheos. I didn't find the color scheme confusing myself, but I understand what you mean.

Thread: Re: Winning the Hearts of Mortals

cvlw — 2007-06-04T14:30:34+00:00

Nice review - you seemed to have really internalized the synergy between the theme and the gameplay. We owned Gheos for a while for the simple reason that something in the actual gameplay just never quite clicked for us. We wanted to like it - we really did. The potential was obvious. One thing that turned us off, and an aspect of your review with which I disagree, is the clarity of the playing area. The color palette used for the game is not optimal for long-term view. After a while, teh blues and greens begin to meld and the changing landscape becomes more confusing than inviting. This alone ruined the fun for us. A second edition would do well to introduce contrasting earth-tones to bring out the rivers - this would also lend greater weight to the feel of being a god over lands.

Thread: Re: Winning the Hearts of Mortals

quartex — 2007-06-04T14:28:43+00:00

Nice review. I agree that the randomness of the game can make some games more satisfying than others, luck of the draw sometimes makes one player have a clear advantage, but usually the others can gang up and take him down. I enjoy the backstabbing and take-that mechanics of the game. It's fun to watch empires rise and fall and war with each other.

You mentioned preferring certain house rules when you play the game. Which ones do you use. I like the one that says if you draw a second epoch tile in one turn, put it back randomly into the stack and draw another until you draw a non-epoch tile.

Thread: Winning the Hearts of Mortals

RantingRodent — 2007-06-04T11:35:42+00:00

First Impressions
In the Beginning, the Gods didst say "Drawest thou 2 tiles". And it was good.

The first thing you notice when you start with Gheos is that the whole game is beautiful. Everything is rendered with vibrant, eye-catching colours, from the box art down to the bits. The choice of triangular tiles also means that the terrain created in the course of an average game appears both organic and convincing. There's never a case where a terrain formation looks odd, like the pointlessly looped roads that made us chuckle at Carcassonne. All of the graphics are clear, and you never have to struggle to figure out what you're looking at.

I was very impressed by the production value accorded to the game, in general. The tiles and scoring chips are printed on a very sturdy stock, and all of the bits are solid wood. The only presentation issue I had with the game is that the box insert is plain white, which stands out particularly in the case of Gheos due to the intense nature of the box artwork.

On the subject of the box insert, it provides no appropriate receptacles for the tiles or bits, despite having plenty of space to do so. This means that after every game, everything winds up in a messy pile in the single compartment provided by the box. Another great addition to the package would be a bag for tile selection. Currently I use the bag from Carcassonne, and it makes randomizing the tiles much easier.

The manual is very clear, and presents an illustration for every case. One read through should get any player acquainted with the game well enough to play. My main complaint about the manual is that, for a game which manages to capture the feel of its theme so well in the mechanics, the manual is incredibly dry. Injecting a bit of thematic wording into the explanations would actually make the initial learning process more intuitive. Stone-tablet style reference cards would also have been a nice touch.

Another thing I really appreciated about Gheos was that the setup time is quite short.

Game Mechanics
And the Red didst war upon the Blue, and the Yellow, and the Green, an the White, and the Black. So it came to pass.

The players in Gheos are each a God, with the power to shape the landscape of the world. Each player has a hand of 2 tiles, with a new tile being drawn after each turn. This helps to reduce the element of randomness inherent in tile-drawing games.

First and foremost, Gheos is a game of civilizations. There are 6 different civilizations, denoted by colour. Any player may start a civilization on an uninhabited continent on their turn. This is where Gheos applies the twist that makes the game truly engaging. A player does not actually own a particular civilization. Instead, each player may have their own religious faction within each civilization. There are 5 total followers accorded to each civilization, and on a player's turn, they may choose to indoctrinate one follower from an existing civilization instead of creating a new one. The end result is that all civilizations on the board have a certain level of shared ownership.

The founder of a new civilization may assert an advantage by starting the civilization on a continent which is fertile (many "Grain" tokens). In gratitude for the gift of fertility, a follower joins the player's faction when it is founded for each Grain token on the continent. Because a civilization cannot be founded where there is no food, the founding player will always start with at least one follower. Also, in a 4-player game, the founder is guaranteed to have more followers if they choose; with 5 possible followers, the other players can only take 3 before it is the founder's turn again.

In this lies the potential for a certain amount of Kingmaking. If any one of the other players fails to take a follower from the new civilization, it leaves the founder with a strong majority of followers. If this civilization has significant military power, it requires a concerted effort from the other players to take them down a peg, usually with a one-two punch of migration and war. This becomes an issue when the only player(s) with minority interest in the civilization refuse to sacrifice their main scoring opportunity to cause a migration and bring the civilization down to size.

Unlike most tile-laying games, tiles in Gheos may be replaced after they have been laid down. This provides the vehicle of change that keeps civilizations evolving. If the continents of two civilizations are merged, they go to war, and the victor claims the unified continent. This godly act requires the support of a follower in one of the two nations involved. Once the cost of the war is realized by the people, they are less inclined to worship your greatness. One follower is lost.

Unfortunately, wars are often started by sacrificing a follower from the losing civilization, which effectively makes it a free action. This problem is one of the primary ways that a single dominant civilization can arise.

The other possibility is that a continent can be divided. This forces the civilization in question to migrate one way or the other. Naturally, they migrate towards the most food, to sustain their people. Much like causing a war, this action requires support within the civilization in question. Obviously they are not too happy about being forced into a smaller area, and a follower is lost. If the civilization migrates onto an island (a landmass composed of only two shoreline pieces), it is considered to be insignificant and disappears from the annals of history. All of its bits are returned to the stock.

Overall the game does an excellent job of imparting a sense of epic scale. It really feels like you are witnessing the rise and fall of civilizations. The shared ownership concept creates a political landscape in Gheos which is as dynamic as the physical landscape. Rivalries tend to flare up while playing this game, and it tends to be best balanced with a cutthroat group as opposed to more pacifist players. If your gaming group is primarily composed of trash talkers or backstabbers, this game is a guaranteed hit.

Scoring and Endgame
"And lo', in the eighth Epoch, the Gods didst look down upon the mortals, and took they the sum of them."

Winning in Gheos is a matter of amassing the greatest number of victory points. A scoring track would have been a nice way to work in more of that wonderful art, but they chose to go with victory point tokens instead.

Gheos successfully employs a variety of scoring opportunities. The mixture of Player Choice, Semi-Random, and Random scoring events makes the game unpredictable without significantly reducing the importance of strategic thinking. The inverse relationship between randomness and average point value ensures that the element of chance mainly influences close battles.

The first, and potentially most valuable, is to collect an offering from all of your followers across the globe. Each God has a stock of Scoring Chips, and they can expend one on their turn to trigger an offering. Each follower contributes victory points equal to the Wealth value of their civilization. Scoring Chips cannot be recovered after they are used. Scoring Chips which are not used before game end are wasted.

This can sometimes create a Runaway Leader problem. If a player manages to use their scoring chips up early, they can maintain their lead by harassing the other players and causing general chaos. It is difficult to retaliate effectively, because the leading player no longer has a strong interest in maintaining a superior position on the board, only in thwarting the efforts of other players to score.

The second way points are scored is if the world progresses to a new Epoch. This event occurs immediately when a player draws an Epoch tile instead of a terrain tile. All religious factions gather at Pyramids to worship their respective Gods. Players score for each follower according to the number of Pyramids in that follower's civilization.

The game ends when the last Epoch tile is revealed. While the end of the game is foreseeable, and the tension rises as more Epochs are triggered, the end is not actually predictable. Everyone knows roughly when to prepare for the end, but nobody is granted the opportunity to make a last minute grab for power.

The third and final way to score completely bypasses civilization ownership. Temples found on certain tiles can be used to score according to the number of symbols matching the one on the temple itself. These points are scored immediately, and only by the player who is placing the tiles, regardless of civilization ownership. This provides an effective means for a comeback, as a trailing player can leech off of a powerful civilization. Unfortunately, this is a double-edged sword, as the leading player could just as easily take advantage of this.

Overall Rating 7.5

Summary

I'm very fond of this game already, and a few house rules can really clean it up. This is mainly where it loses points in my books. With appropriate rules modifications, I would raise the rating to at least an 8.

+ Art
+ Quick setup
+ Social Interaction
+ Varied scoring
+ Theme
+ Unpredictable endgame
+ Building tension
- Box Insert
- No bag for tiles
- Kingmaking
- Runaway Leader
- scoring rounds in rapid succession
- Game state may occasionally become irrelevant to point leader

Thread: Gheos: A quick overview

caradoc — 2007-05-18T07:27:03+00:00

Game name: Gheos

Author/s: René Wiersma

Players: 2-4

Playing time: 40 min

Key elements:

Spatial skills, logic skills, math skills.

Key Ratings:
= Low
= High

Depth
Strategy
Luck
Player Interaction

This is a strange game in that it plays quickly, is quite simple, and yet is deep and involving.

Short Description:

In Gheos players build up continents (or divide them up), each continent piece may have different symbols on it – representing various attributes: food supply, military might, and wealth. Players try and build up civilisations that are strong in one or more of these characteristics, but no civilisation belongs to one or other player, all players may have a ‘share’ in the civilisation.

On a players turn they place a tile (neat and well-produced triangular tiles), seeking to build up and advance civilisations in which they have a share. They may also on thier turn either begin a new civilisation (of which there are a limited amount), or take a ‘follower’ from one civilisation already on the board.

Players may also initiate ‘migrations’ (by dividing continents and forcing civilisations to move to one of the divided parts, or ‘wars’ (by connecting two or more civilisations). Either of these may be utilised to limit civilisations you have little interest in, or to benefit civilisations you have a large share in.

The ways in which players may end up in semi-alliances or ‘in each others pockets’ is a fascinating aspect of this intelligent game. Many considerations must be taken into account when planning a move and playing the game, should I build up the food tokens on 'unsettled' continents, should i build up the military might of my continent to either defend or attack (neat 'cold war' situations can eventuate here), should I add more points knowing this could attract the undesired attention of other players who don't have a share in this civilisation. One key aspect to the game - which is accentuated in the three or four player game is that all of those choices are also being made about many of the same civilisations, but by other players who have a share in them (or don't). All this means that the interplay between players is a fascinating and deep aspect of game play.

Gheos sounds like it has a lot of elements, and indeed it does – but it manages to fit these many elements into a neat package that seems simple – even when it offers depth. It really is a big game in a small package!

By: Giles Pritchard

Image

hederj — 2007-05-14T01:11:44+00:00

Sign of the times - 8 Epoch tiles