Game: On the Underground

Thread: Re: Does the passenger move even if not on a line?

papahoth — 2008-11-30T10:05:58+00:00

To be more specific, the passenger always goes to an express station (if there is one showing) and regular station after your turn. The passenger is lazy so it goes whatever way requires the least amount of walking. If that puts him on a line or more, that is what happens. If it means just walking, then that is what happens.

Thread: Re: Does the passenger move even if not on a line?

RPardoe — 2008-11-29T18:46:37+00:00

If that is the shortest path; yes, he just walks. But if taking your track saves some steps, he will take your lines.

Thread: Does the passenger move even if not on a line?

badfish20 — 2008-11-29T18:41:00+00:00

I didnt see this posted anywhere, but basically, on the very first turn, I placed my four tracks (the only four tracks on the board so far), so do I still move the passenger to an express and normal line even if he doesnt use my track? meaning he walks the whole way.
Thanks.

Thread: Re: I'm Sorry I Haven't a Clue why anybody would come up with this variant

Odinsday — 2008-10-27T05:28:09+00:00

EricRJ wrote:
It's a reference to a famous BBC radio show, "I'm Sorry I Haven't a Clue", in which a game called "Mornington Crescent" is played.

I am amused it is a an American player telling the British player about Mornington Crescent.

Anyways, wouldn't you also need a daily travelcard, or being Huffing to have a game winning Mornington Crescent? (I assume the Cambridge 2002 annex rules, not the Kingston 1997 conclave rules).

Image

Grimwold — 2008-10-18T17:28:21+00:00

Box Dimensions - 30.5cm x 20.5cm x 5.2cm

Thread: Pretty good game, but definitely not for everyone.

BrenoK — 2008-08-24T22:35:52+00:00

So, I got "On the Undergound" on a whim. Small box, supposedly thinky game, and suddenly someone here in Brazil offers his copy for sale. I decided to trade my copy of Ys and Razzia for this and "Colossal Arena", and I really don't regret doing it so. Even though this isn't one of my favorite games, it does have its place in my (sadly limited) collection.

Had I read the manual before deciding I probably wouldn't have bought the game. I'm just unable to read the rules of a game unless I've purchased it (yes, this can lead to some mistakes). I usually don't have an opinion on the game from just reading the rules, but in this case the game seemed terribly boring and uneventful.

The rules were very simple, but the game can be quite thinky. The movement of the passenger is very tricky and can be wildly manipulated by the placement of the four tracks you have in a turn. You have many, many different options in this game, which makes me mention the first negative aspect of this game: never play with an AP player. Ever. Out of the 150 games I've played to date this is probably the one most prone to AP out of them all.

You have a lot you can do in your turn, and most of your actions don't score a lot, so you're pretty much managing options that differ in one or two VP between them. If you're not patient to sort out from all those the one that is the best, this game is not for you.

This is quite the thinky game, and thus the player whose turn it is will probably keep quiet until he makes his decisions. My brother even said "this game is good, but it isn't much fun"; he meant that this is not a game that will produce memorable plays or matches that are terribly interesting. Some of the passenger manipulations during the game will seem a bit crazy, but you'll be too busy thinking about what you will do after that to even laugh. Out of all the games I own this is probably the most "serious" one, and by that I mean that matches of this usually are very silent and joke-free (something rare in my game group).

One thing that bears mentioning is that I think one should only play this game with 2 or 3 players. With 4 or 5, the downtime would be monstrous, since every turn a player is bouncing between many different options and trying to imagine from which ones of the high-scoring options leave him a better situation in the long-term. So if there are many players between your turns, bring a Gameboy or an interesting book, because the wait will be long.

I mentioned long-term because, unlike many other euros, this one asks for quite a bit of long-term thinking. One cannot start all his lines in the same place of the map, one should always try to cover as much ground as possible (while making his lines intersect), and so on. Since out of all the destinations only 3 or 4 won't be visited, you have to think not only of where he's going right now, but also were he hasn't gone YET.

Matches of this game are usually very tight. Since one usually scores every turn, and always little by little (if you get 4 points in a turn, it's a lot), the game can be cruel if you fall behind. However, most of the matches end up with very few points between the winner and the loser. There's no big end-game bonus, so sometimes you'll have a completely superfluous last turn.

So, all in all, I rate this game an 8, which could drop to 7.5 or maybe even 7 after 10 or 20 more plays. The mechanics are quite tight, the game "works" perfectly, but the silence of a match of this can be somewhat off-putting, I think. It takes quite the eurogamer to endure such a "serious" game. The tactics and the strategy of it can be quite subtle and engaging, but the dryness of it can make even some abstracts seem flashy. I've read it somewhere that the game is based on a mathematical problem, and I can definitely believe in that.

(Funny how negative this review sounds for an 8/10 rating, but I think this game takes a very special kind of gamer to enjoy, and even though I'm one of them, I definitely think that one should be "careful" before suggesting this game in a game group)

Thread: JKLM Interactive is down

DavidNorman99 — 2008-07-22T14:43:34+00:00

Hi All,

JKLM Interactive is currently down, due to a server failure. I'm currently sourcing a replacement computer, and hope to have it up by the middle of next week (30th or 31st July).

www.jklminteractive.co.uk will shortly be redirected to a different server, and will have news of progress on.

David.

Thread: We need a tuckbox!

Salamon — 2008-06-08T01:40:16+00:00

Anyone creative enough to make a fancy tuckbox for this awesome game? I am sadly deficient in the image manipulation necessary to make it nice and shiny. I'll send a few your way if you do it. I just printed out boxes for Blackbeard and Pandemic and now I need them for all my favorite games.

mark

Thread: Re: OTU Compared to...

Guantanamo — 2008-05-20T11:44:53+00:00

asmiles wrote:
Guantanamo wrote:
I guess it depends on your play style.

I love having to 'beat' people to the best lines. With some lines allowing two or three side by side, that tension is not as great with 3 people.

I really love games where you have to react to what everyone is doing.

Therefore, I prefer OtU with 5 people fighting for routes and cutting people off and find 3 people to be just calculating the best routes.

With 2 players, there are 4 lines per player for 8 total.
With 3 players, there are 3 lines per player for 9 total
With 4 and 5 players, there are 2 lines per player for a total of 8 or 10 lines total.

So there should be roughly the same chance to block a specific line from a certain route, although not necessarily a certain player (as each player has a larger percentage of the lines in play).

Also the game timer is the deck of cards. So with 5 players, you're only able to lay track on 20% of the scoring turns. Compared with 33% in the 3 player game.

For most people, the downtime, and lack of control far out-weigh the increased opportunities for player screwage.

Sure you have more lines, but you normally have better things to do then lay track next to something you already have.

We've never experienced significant down time in the game.

Thread: Re: OTU Compared to...

DavidNorman99 — 2008-05-20T11:41:56+00:00

Jim K wrote:
TTR Marklin??

Transamerica??

I am trying to figure out if On the Underground is worth the buy. How is it compared to the above titles?

If you're still not sure after all the useful replies people have posted, you can try it out on http://www.jklminteractive.co.uk before you buy it. Requires a Windows PC.

David.

Thread: Re: OTU Compared to...

unixrevolution — 2008-05-19T20:00:28+00:00

Jim K wrote:
TTR Marklin??

Transamerica??

I am trying to figure out if On the Underground is worth the buy. How is it compared to the above titles?

I've never played TtR Marklin, but compared to the original TtR On the Underground is definitely meatier, and I think a bit more interesting. TransAmerica is almost a different type of game....it's a lighter, more fillery sort of affair. Please be advised that like TtR, you can't use another person's track to extend your network, but the passenger can move between lines. Like TransAmerica, you DO have to build out from your network (though that doesn't include connected networks of other players.)

Thread: Re: OTU Compared to...

Meat — 2008-05-19T18:24:08+00:00

DarrellKH wrote:
("Meat" has posted a very nicely done board for NYC
Thank you!

DarrellKH wrote:
but I still hold out hope for ones printed by JKLM.)
Me too. Even NYC. Mine needs much work still...

Thread: Re: OTU Compared to...

asmiles — 2008-05-19T17:56:40+00:00

Guantanamo wrote:
I guess it depends on your play style.

I love having to 'beat' people to the best lines. With some lines allowing two or three side by side, that tension is not as great with 3 people.

I really love games where you have to react to what everyone is doing.

Therefore, I prefer OtU with 5 people fighting for routes and cutting people off and find 3 people to be just calculating the best routes.

With 2 players, there are 4 lines per player for 8 total.
With 3 players, there are 3 lines per player for 9 total
With 4 and 5 players, there are 2 lines per player for a total of 8 or 10 lines total.

So there should be roughly the same chance to block a specific line from a certain route, although not necessarily a certain player (as each player has a larger percentage of the lines in play).

Also the game timer is the deck of cards. So with 5 players, you're only able to lay track on 20% of the scoring turns. Compared with 33% in the 3 player game.

For most people, the downtime, and lack of control far out-weigh the increased opportunities for player screwage.

Thread: Re: OTU Compared to...

raynovich — 2008-05-19T17:53:05+00:00

asmiles wrote:
Mechanically it is very similiar to Trans America. On your turn you play a colored track piece to extended you network of trains. you score points by where you route goes. Obviously there's a lot more to OtU than TransAmerica.

It is much closer to TtR: Marklin when you factor in length of time to play the game, the depth/meatiness of the game, and the amount of player interaction.

As far as it being worth the buy, I guess it depends on your group size. OtU plays much better with fewer players that it does with more. If your group is normally 3 players, go for it. If you're looking for a 5 player game, you might want to look elsewhere.

Agreed mostly. However, I think OtU is terrible with only two players whereas in Marklin, it is fine as a two player game.

Thread: Re: OTU Compared to...

Guantanamo — 2008-05-19T17:23:08+00:00

I guess it depends on your play style.

I love having to 'beat' people to the best lines. With some lines allowing two or three side by side, that tension is not as great with 3 people.

I really love games where you have to react to what everyone is doing.

Therefore, I prefer OtU with 5 people fighting for routes and cutting people off and find 3 people to be just calculating the best routes.

I have not play TtR Marklin, but own and enjoy Transamerica and On the Underground. I think they are so different in play.

Transamerica is a race to connect 5 points using the same track grid as everyone else. OtU you are laying track but it is all your track. Transamerica (without vexation) you are aren't able to mess with other people's plans through laying of track. OtU has a blocking part to the game. The connection points are a 'moving' target. Although all the targets are going to come up, you still have to gamble on when they will come up.

Thread: Re: OTU Compared to...

ssmooth — 2008-05-19T16:36:22+00:00

Better.

Its charms are a little elusive if you have the full table of five players, so you might learn the rules that way, but you wouldn't want to judge the game on that basis. My first three games were with five and left me lukewarm about On the Underground; my next three were with three and made me a fan.

Thread: Re: OTU Compared to...

DarrellKH — 2008-05-19T16:05:20+00:00

I personally find OtU more interesting than both of the games to which you compare it. The chaos element with more than 3 players, however, is not to everyone's liking. I would like it if JKLM would come out with more boards for the same system (Paris, New York, etc.), with matching card decks. ("Meat" has posted a very nicely done board for NYC, but I still hold out hope for ones printed by JKLM.)

Thread: Re: OTU Compared to...

BrenoK — 2008-05-19T16:03:08+00:00

Yeah, I wouldn't play this with 4 or 5 players.

Pretty simple rules, nice and meaty gameplay. I recommend it.

Thread: Re: OTU Compared to...

drunkenKOALA — 2008-05-19T15:29:51+00:00

It's a good game. I like it more than Transamerica, about equal to Ticket to Ride.

Thread: Re: OTU Compared to...

asmiles — 2008-05-19T15:24:23+00:00

Mechanically it is very similiar to Trans America. On your turn you play a colored track piece to extended you network of trains. you score points by where you route goes. Obviously there's a lot more to OtU than TransAmerica.

It is much closer to TtR: Marklin when you factor in length of time to play the game, the depth/meatiness of the game, and the amount of player interaction.

As far as it being worth the buy, I guess it depends on your group size. OtU plays much better with fewer players that it does with more. If your group is normally 3 players, go for it. If you're looking for a 5 player game, you might want to look elsewhere.

Thread: OTU Compared to...

Jim K — 2008-05-19T15:08:15+00:00

TTR Marklin??

Transamerica??

I am trying to figure out if On the Underground is worth the buy. How is it compared to the above titles?

Thread: On the Underground Tournament

rdenning — 2008-05-18T20:23:44+00:00

On the weekend of 31st May and 1st June have a Tournament with this game as part of the Grand Board Game Tournament at UK Games expo in Birmingham UK run by David Norman.

See www.UKGamesexpo.co.uk

Thread: Re: Track and Line Question

PaleHorseRider — 2008-04-26T21:40:51+00:00

Never thought such a simple comment/question would turn into such Troll bait. Chill out people.

Thread: Re: Track and Line Question

Kevin Bracey — 2008-04-25T15:53:50+00:00

Why would there be 11 colours of track in the box, if each player had a single uber-line? They'd only supply 5 colours if that's the way it was played.

Thread: Re: Question...

Gecko3D — 2008-04-24T12:59:19+00:00

...and if it connects Marylebone and Paddington National Rail stations, you score 2 points

Thread: Re: Track and Line Question

Gecko3D — 2008-04-24T12:56:53+00:00

Also, being a game about the Underground, it becomes more clear if you've actually experienced the Underground! I played with my wife tonight and she, having never experienced the London Underground, also had some trouble becoming accustomed to the difference between the references to "track" and "line".

Ernie was right to stress the distinction made in the rules - the different colours definitely represent separate lines, as they do on the real underground map.

Image

zefquaavius — 2008-04-24T01:28:22+00:00

End of a 3-player game.

Thread: Re: bottlenecks

papahoth — 2008-04-21T04:37:27+00:00

Agree, in fact worrying about the passenger does not seem to be the way to win this game in the multiple times that we have played it. Especially in the two player game.

Thread: JKLM Interactive now supports turn based play

DavidNorman99 — 2008-04-02T21:30:59+00:00

JKLM Interactive now supports Turn Based play of On the Underground as well as Real Time play. Sign up for a game, and when it's your turn, the server will e-mail you. Fire up the client and play your turn.

David.

Thread: Re: I'm Sorry I Haven't a Clue why anybody would come up with this variant

EricRJ — 2008-04-02T02:46:06+00:00

It's a reference to a famous BBC radio show, "I'm Sorry I Haven't a Clue", in which a game called "Mornington Crescent" is played.

Thread: Re: Track and Line Question

freduk — 2008-04-01T12:27:18+00:00

PaleHorseRider wrote:
"...a player may play up to 4 lengths of his track. These lengths of track may be from the same, or from different colored lines." (I dropped the extraneous 'u').
ok, I'll bite
It's a British game about a British transport system. The "U" is definately required. The game loses both colour and flavour without it.

Thread: Re: I'm Sorry I Haven't a Clue why anybody would come up with this variant

freduk — 2008-04-01T12:22:09+00:00

I like Sebastian's variant for randomising the game-end condition.

However, your suggestion of whoever moves the passenger there, wins, completely nullifies every other aspect of the game. What you're saying is whoever draws this card wins, regardless of anything else that happens in the game. Is this what you meant?

Thread: I'm Sorry I Haven't a Clue why anybody would come up with this variant

EricRJ — 2008-04-01T04:51:13+00:00

Last year, I wrote Sebastian Bleasdale whether this game should have a variant like this:

When a player moves the passenger to Mornington Crescent, the game ends, and that player has won.

He replied to me that he chose Mornington Crescent to be in the game instead of other nearby stations for similar reasons, and he suggested the following:

Before setting up the game, remove the Mornington Crescent card from the deck. Shuffle the deck, draw four cards face down, add the M.C. card to them, shuffle the five cards, and place them at the bottom of the deck. When a player moves the passenger to Mornington Crescent, immediately remove the passenger and the cards, and the final round of the game starts.

I hope Mrs. Trellis would approve.

Thread: Re: Track and Line Question

RPardoe — 2008-03-28T20:10:33+00:00

Actually, it does state that under set-up: In a two player game the score markers should show colours corresponding to four lines.
indicating to me that the player controls four rail lines each of a different colour. Furthermore, under Aim of the Game, You gain points by connecting your lines again plural, again associating players with multiple lines.

It never occured to me that the different colours would be mixed together to form a single uber-line. But then again, having seen Underground maps with all the individual lines in unique colours (instead of mixed together) perhaps I came in with an expectation how I thought the finished map might look.

Thread: Re: Track and Line Question

PaleHorseRider — 2008-03-28T19:17:18+00:00

Where its not clear (to me and the person I was playing with) is then under "Building Track" on the same page it says "...a player may play up to 4 lengths of his track. These lengths of track may be from the same, or from different colored lines." (I dropped the extraneous 'u'). To me and the person I was playing with this made it seem like a player could play any of his colored pieces together as a single unit. Its just that "line" and "lines" are used all over the place without explicitly stating a single color is to be played as a single continuous sequence of track (line) no matter the number of colors a player controls.

I'll just chalk this up to a situation where if you know how the game is supposed to be played the rules seem unequivocally crystal clear but if you are reading the rules for the first time then this part of the rules is about as clear as muddy water (not real muddy just a little bit). But I have it now. Thanks.

(We screwed up the scoring too to get those high numbers in that first game).

Thread: Re: Track and Line Question

laiernie — 2008-03-28T17:26:14+00:00

it is stated explicitly in the rules on the top of p.2:

In a two player game the score markers should show colours corresponding to four lines, in a three player game the score markers should show colours corresponding to three lines, and in a four or five player game the score markers should show colours corresponding to two lines.

(bold added by me) so each color is a line. if all colors were 1 line, there would be no distinction of # of lines for different # of players.

Thread: Re: Track and Line Question

PaleHorseRider — 2008-03-28T17:13:25+00:00

DarrellKH wrote:
No, they are treated as separate lines for scoring purposes, and I think that the examples (if not specific references in the rules, proper) make that clear.

* To add, as clarification, you have one scoring marker for all your colors, yes, but you do not combine, say, your red line and pink line to determine whether or not you have connected the two suitcase markers. Each line has to do that with its own pieces (and thus you can score it twice - once for each line).

Thanks. Its not in the rules explicitly that each color a player controls is to be treated separately. Its alluded to in a few places like in the last paragraph on page 3 of the the v8 rules when it talks about a player can score the same station with each of his lines that connects to it. However, my partner for the first game said that since it wasn't explicitly mentioned and the score marker has all 4 colors then they should be treated as one line.

Thread: Re: Track and Line Question

DarrellKH — 2008-03-28T16:51:59+00:00

No, they are treated as separate lines for scoring purposes, and I think that the examples (if not specific references in the rules, proper) make that clear.

* To add, as clarification, you have one scoring marker for all your colors, yes, but you do not combine, say, your red line and pink line to determine whether or not you have connected the two suitcase markers. Each line has to do that with its own pieces (and thus you can score it twice - once for each line).

Thread: Track and Line Question

PaleHorseRider — 2008-03-28T16:35:52+00:00

Got in my first game (and liked it BTW) but there was something that didn't seem clear in the rules. I couldn't find it in the rules, here at BGG, or on the games website.

We played a 2 player game and each player gets 4 colors. Do the 4 colors represent a single unified line for that player or 4 separate lines each owned by that player?

It seems like it should be 4 separate lines but we played it as one single uber-line and the scores got quite ridiculous (we passed the 100 pt mark halfway through the deck).

Thread: Re: Question...

jearles — 2008-03-11T22:52:48+00:00

If this track is connected to a National Rail Station you will score 1 point.

If this track is connected to a Terminus Station you will score 2 points.

Thread: Re: Question...

jearles — 2008-03-11T22:49:51+00:00

If this track is connected to a National Rail Station you will score 1 point.

If this track is connected to a Terminus Station you will score 2 points.

Thread: Question...

collezionista — 2008-03-11T22:32:31+00:00

When you lay down the first track lenght of a line, do you score any point?!

Thread: Question...

collezionista — 2008-03-11T22:32:29+00:00

When you lay down the first track lenght of a line, do you score any point?!

Thread: Re: Running out of track

danbuster35 — 2008-03-11T18:28:14+00:00

Now this makes sense. Thanks for clarifying this!

Thread: Re: Running out of track

luckyjim — 2008-03-11T08:51:54+00:00

I think this is where you went wrong.
The passenger always gets to his destinations. First a gold(express) then a silver. So if there are 2 different colours of cards showing he always goes to 2 places.
Therefore at least 1 and usually 2 cards will change every turn.

He prefers to walk less, and change lines less, but if he has to, the passenger will use any combination of walking and train lines to get to the destination. So can can go walk - train - walk provided the train line saves him some walking distance. Or he can take a train as far as possible and then walk the rest.

eg in the first few turns, the passenger will sometimes walk all the way, scoring no points for anyone.

Thread: Re: Running out of track

danbuster35 — 2008-03-11T03:42:51+00:00

We had 4 players so each person had 2 color tracks. We did move the passenger after each player laid their track so the passenger moved with each player.

This is where I think we were doing something wrong. A couple of more ?'s.

1. Does the passenger move to every destination or does he stop at some point? When does the passenger stop? This is not clear in the rules so this is what we did - First we moved the passenger to the express station based on the rules (walking first, least amount then ride least amount of the lines). At this point we stopped if there was not another line that was connected to the next destination.

2. Is it possible to walk, ride a line then walk again? Does walking always have to take place first? We assumed this so there were destinations that, based on where the passenger was currently, had a line already coming out of that station (where the passenger was) but did not connect to the next destination. Would the passenger take the line to wherever it ended and then walk?

Sorry for all the questions but some reason none of us could figure out what was supposed to be done. Thanks for the replies.

Thread: Re: Running out of track

Friendless — 2008-03-09T12:00:31+00:00

I've seen some players run out of one colour, but never all players run out of all colours. You know you get 2, 3 or 4 colours each depending on how many players you have?

Thread: Re: Running out of track

luckyjim — 2008-03-09T10:00:16+00:00

Also, the passenger moves after each player's turn, not after a whole round. I got that wrong the first time.

Thread: Re: Running out of track

BettyEgan — 2008-03-09T09:53:40+00:00

Did you have each player moving the passenger twice on their turn, first to an express station then to a normal station?

Thread: Running out of track

danbuster35 — 2008-03-09T07:43:18+00:00

Has anyone had a situation where they ran out of track before the destination cards were depleted? I played this for the 1st time tonight and each player ran out of track. Once that happened we kept taking turns moving the passenger until the destination cards were depleted. Was there something we were doing incorrectly?

Thread: Re: Tokyo Underground fan expansion a good idea?

KillerB — 2008-03-09T02:48:07+00:00

This was exactly my thought when I was introduced to the game. I'm far more familiar with the Tokyo system than London.

Maru no uchi ka Hibiya sen dochira deshou ka?

Thread: Re: Moving the passenger first

DavidNorman99 — 2008-02-25T20:03:50+00:00

Steve,

Steve Cox wrote:
I read somewhere (in Counter magazine, I think) that the designer originally intended that the passenger should move at the beginning of a player’s turn, not at the end, and this certainly sounds like a variant that would be worth trying.

Apparently that is correct (he says having just asked the Publisher...).

Steve Cox wrote:
However, it is not clear what would happen on the first player’s turn, since there will be no track on the board yet.

No, the passenger moves before the first player's turn as usual. Hence the location of the passenger when the first track is built is no longer fixed at Euston.

Steve Cox wrote:
Does anyone know how this variant should be played, or have any experience of playing it?

The main difference is, you build and then the player on your left decides where the passenger moves. Hence simply tying for best route is not enough, as you don't get to make the decision as to who wins ties. Of course, if you can predict that the player on your left will favour you to win the ties that you set up, then you can take advantage of this.

The extra factor of having to predict how the player on your left will move the passenger in the situation after your builds causes more down-time, since there is more to think about - which is why this was switched around in the published game. But it's perfectly playable.

David.

Image

matthew.marquand — 2007-09-25T04:01:26+00:00

Shadows On the Underground

Image

kilroy_locke — 2007-08-09T03:07:20+00:00

Game in progress...

Image

mtiller — 2007-07-30T15:27:18+00:00

"On the Underground" at the Emmeskay Company Picnic

Image

durak60 — 2007-07-14T14:32:40+00:00

In play at Origins 2007

Image

ArtEmiSa64 — 2007-07-04T01:00:40+00:00

flat sticker sheet

Image

Von Cougar — 2007-06-29T12:43:26+00:00

Heather liked the "Rasta Route"

Image

sikeospi — 2007-06-24T07:02:14+00:00

On the Underground at Geekway to the West 2007 with map in background

Image

sikeospi — 2007-06-24T06:48:34+00:00

On the Underground at Geekway to the West 2007