Game: Nautilus

Thread: Re: Rules in pdf?

Filippos — 2008-07-22T08:37:44+00:00

Bad for them, IMHO. It looks like "their games are so bad that they dont't want anybody to know the rules before buying". It is not the best PR.

Thread: Re: Rules in pdf?

GaryP — 2008-07-21T21:37:48+00:00

Mayfair does not release their rulebooks in PDF format, unfortunately.

Thread: Re: Rules in pdf?

Filippos — 2008-07-21T13:51:03+00:00

Karlsen wrote:
They're not in PDF, but there's two .doc versions of the rules in the files section.

I know Fraser. Thanks.
The .doc versions has no images and ilustrations.
I am looking for the official rules in pdf.

Thread: Re: Rules in pdf?

Karlsen — 2008-07-21T13:15:15+00:00

They're not in PDF, but there's two .doc versions of the rules in the files section.

Thread: Rules in pdf?

Filippos — 2008-07-21T12:19:10+00:00

Did anyone found anywhere the official english rules in a pdf format online?

Thread: Re: NAUTILUS: sudden drop! (ideas for a shorter variant)

matildadad — 2008-07-14T21:11:07+00:00

how many times have you tried it and with what number of players?

I played with these house rules twice with 3 players, and once with 4. They seemed to work OK for my group (the tricky part was tuning the starting amounts of money).

Would be great to get your feedback, should you wish to try the rules in your group.

Thread: Re: NAUTILUS: sudden drop! (ideas for a shorter variant)

GaryP — 2008-07-14T17:30:12+00:00

Interesting idea. I'm curious, how many times have you tried it and with what number of players?

I've been tempted to try stuff like allowing expenditure of Nemos for extra submarine movement or the like, but never got around to trying it out.

Thread: Re: NAUTILUS: sudden drop! (ideas for a shorter variant)

matildadad — 2008-06-10T23:31:05+00:00

(I edited the variant to reflect the correct english version names of the various sea areas)

Thread: Re: NAUTILUS: sudden drop! (ideas for a shorter variant)

GSReis — 2008-05-25T03:32:08+00:00

sorry, I have the german edition of the game and I am using the following definitions found in the downloadable english translation by Bob Scherer-Hoock:
OK. I think the terms in the English edition are lagoon, slope, deep sea and abyss. Anyway, I've never seen the word "canyon" used in that sense, but English is not my first language.

These house rules eliminate the zone called 'deep sea', turning it into the 'canyon' (or abyss).
All right, now I got it.

I really like this game, and if it were a bit shorter it would be played more often in my group.
I like it, too, but I still prefer to play it not very often than to play a downgraded version.

thanks for this suggestion, I will give it a try. Do you mean remove some of the discovery tokens, right?
Yes, right.

Thread: Re: NAUTILUS: sudden drop! (ideas for a shorter variant)

matildadad — 2008-05-24T21:38:24+00:00

Why this "canyon" stuff?sorry, I have the german edition of the game and I am using the following definitions found in the downloadable english translation by Bob Scherer-Hoock:
- Lagoon (the light area in the middle)
- Incline (the somewhat darker area around the Lagoon)
- Deep Sea (the even darker area around the Incline and in 2 corners)
- Canyon (the very dark ditch)These house rules eliminate the zone called 'deep sea', turning it into the 'canyon' (or abyss). I thought that shrinking the area of the game (and especially removing the purple discovery chits) would shorten the game quite a lot, but I didn't want to lose the high costs of the 'canyon' (or abyss). So the 'sudden drop' is from 'Incline' to 'Canyon/abyss' (i.e. construction costs in the 3 areas used in the house rules would now be -from shallowest to deepest-: 1 Nemo, 2 Nemos, 4 Nemos).

I only find the game 'long' because of the gaming time we usually have available in my gaming group. I really like this game, and if it were a bit shorter it would be played more often in my group.

a less intrusive solution might be removing a number of tokens in all colors and increasing the movement of submarines.thanks for this suggestion, I will give it a try. Do you mean remove some of the discovery tokens, right?

Thread: Re: NAUTILUS: sudden drop! (ideas for a shorter variant)

GSReis — 2008-05-23T18:44:18+00:00

With all the negative comments about this game's lengthy duration, I was surprised that nobody tried to fix the problem with some house rules.
Probably because there is no conceivable way to do that without significantly reducing the flavor of the game. Besides, it takes about two hours - not among the shortest euros, but a pretty reasonable time. Your variant basically mutilates the game.

They are based around the idea that the seabed where the underwater station is being built drops suddenly in depth, from 'Slope' to 'Canyon'. Effectively, the 'Deep Sea' area of the board is used as a'Canyon' area for all purposes.
Why this "canyon" stuff? The darkest area is called abyss, and it is a sudden drop in depth. Deep sea is the second darkest area.

Anyway, if you are really concerned about the duration, a less intrusive solution might be removing a number of tokens in all colors and increasing the movement of submarines.

Thread: NAUTILUS: sudden drop! (ideas for a shorter variant)

matildadad — 2008-05-23T15:04:05+00:00

With all the negative comments about this game's lengthy duration, I was surprised that nobody tried to fix the problem with some house rules.

Here is my humble offering, posted for revision and comments. I am no game designer, these are just some rule ideas that seem to shorten the game somewhat. Please give feedback!
__________________________________________________________________

NAUTILUS: SUDDEN DROP! v. 1.0
variant for a shorter game.

OVERVIEW
These house rules attempt to adjust the game to a shorter time length. They are based around the idea that the seabed where the underwater station is being built drops suddenly in depth, going directly from 'Slope' to 'Abyss'. Effectively, the 'Deep Sea' area of the board is used as an 'Abyss' area for all purposes, while the darkest area of the board is not used at all.

GAME SETUP
As per base game, with the following exceptions:

-players starting money:
2 players 50 Nemos
3 players 45 Nemos
4 players 40 Nemos

-remove from the game all the PURPLE discovery tiles (canyon discoveries). No discovery tiles are placed in the 'canyon' area of the board.

-remove from the game the following two RED discovery tiles: 1x'+3' speed chit; 1x'treasure' chit

-Now shuffle all the remaining face down RED discovery chits and place one chit on each red space in the 'Deep Sea' area, EXCEPT for the two red spaces at the far corners of the map (in the two separated 'Deep Sea' areas only reachable by crossing the 'Abyss'), that will remain empty.

-shuffle all the face down ORANGE discovery chits and place as normal, in the orange spaces of the 'Slope' area.

GAMEPLAY
As per base game, with the following exceptions:

-The darkest area of the board ('Abyss') is not used. It is not accessible to submarines and players cannot build stations in it.

-The 'Deep Sea' area of the map represents a canyon-like drop in the seabed, and is treated as the 'Abyss' area of the base game:
--->Building stations here costs 4 Nemos
--->Sonar scans in 'Deep Sea' spaces can only be performed from submarines already in a 'Deep Sea' space
--->Submarines can only enter this area if at least one player has built all 5 types of Research Station
--->Blue Discovery chits cost 2 Nemos to be retrieved

GAME END
The game end is triggered as soon as the last of the Atlantis chips '2','10' and '14' is recovered by one of the players (As in the base game, the round is completed and a whole further round is played before scoring takes place). Scoring then takes place as normal.

Thread: Re: How Language-dependant is this game?

matildadad — 2008-05-22T12:45:04+00:00

thanks everybody, just received this game today in a trade (german edition). All your feedback was much appreciated

Image

f-p-p-m — 2008-03-29T12:33:35+00:00

Image

f-p-p-m — 2008-03-29T12:29:56+00:00

Image

f-p-p-m — 2008-03-29T12:26:29+00:00

Image

duchamp — 2008-03-13T13:29:26+00:00

German box back

Image

duchamp — 2008-03-13T13:28:12+00:00

German box front

Image

matthew.marquand — 2008-03-08T01:03:35+00:00

Atlantis Treasures Revealed

Thread: Re: How Language-dependant is this game?

Musti — 2008-03-07T07:15:33+00:00

But are easy to make yourself after reading the rules

Thread: Re: How Language-dependant is this game?

amacleod — 2008-03-04T13:51:14+00:00

Mind you, the Game Turn Overview cards (EXTREMELY useful, but not essential) ARE language dependent.

Thread: Re: How Language-dependant is this game?

matildadad — 2008-03-04T12:26:40+00:00

Thanks for the speed-of-light reply Anthony!

Thread: Re: How Language-dependant is this game?

fellonmyhead — 2008-03-04T11:42:28+00:00

Yes; Nautilus is very language independent, with no text anywhere only numbers and symbols.

Thread: How Language-dependant is this game?

matildadad — 2008-03-04T11:32:19+00:00

I see the German edition going really cheap on eBay.de and various German online sellers.
From the pictures it seems like the components don't have any text on them, so am I right in thinking I could play this as a non-German speaker, just with the translated rules?

Thanks!

Image

matthew.marquand — 2008-02-02T04:34:14+00:00

Heading to the Abyss

Thread: Re: Nautilus...Nautilus...Nautilus. It's only a model....shh

GaryP — 2008-01-25T15:00:31+00:00

amacleod wrote:
There's a great soundtrack that you should use with Nautilus by Vangelis; what was that called, Vince, if you're reading this?
I'm not familiar with the album, but based on the name and listening to samples on Amazon, Oceanic seems a likely choice. =) (Although I might have to skip "Siren's Whispering" if the whole seven-plus minutes are like that sample... yeesh.)

Thread: Re: Nautilus...Nautilus...Nautilus. It's only a model....shh

amacleod — 2008-01-25T12:47:43+00:00

I think it took me several gameplays before I noticed that I was giving sound effects for the submersibles; you just can't help it! It is a bit of a long game, but I love it. There's a great soundtrack that you should use with Nautilus by Vangelis; what was that called, Vince, if you're reading this?

Thread: Re: Nautilus...Nautilus...Nautilus. It's only a model....shh

GaryP — 2008-01-24T19:29:09+00:00

Glad to see a good review from another fan. I would never have thought to compare this with an RTS game, but I see the comparison.

It is not my favorite game, and there are some easy-to-miss rules, but overall I love the combination of tile placement, exploration, and maximizing a very tight budget. My only complaint is that it tends to go a bit too long, but that seems to be more about players counting (and recounting) spaces on their turn instead of planning ahead. The main trouble is that placing 4 or 5 tiles at once makes for many possible layouts. Still, I love the pressure of building now or adding one more module to your set.

Okay, now I think this needs to go in the tub for my next game session. =)

Thread: Nautilus...Nautilus...Nautilus. It's only a model....shhh!

Skythian — 2008-01-24T14:17:40+00:00

After reading the rules, I pretty much explained this one initially to the wife as a Real Time Strategy (RTS) turned board game. Playing it did not change this opinion but reinforced it, this being the most ‘true’ to the feel of an RTS of any board game I’ve played (I haven't tried Space Dealer yet). The only twist to typical RTS games is that, while there is competition for space and resources, there is no actual combat in the game. This worked out just fine though.

Nautilus is a game about building, exploring and budgeting resources. You start out with a limited amount of money that you have to spend bit by bit for nearly everything you do. The trick it, getting money back is not that easy and as the game progresses, it becomes more and more expensive to do things.

Overall you are trying to build and man an undersea base with researchers while sending out subs to uncover treasures and Atlantean artifacts. Perhaps the closest game we have to it is Starfarers of Catan, but the similarities are very thin.

During the building phase players can buy either habitation or research modules. The former allow the player to add researchers to the base while the latter, once manned by researchers, act to improve that player’s technology in areas such as sub range, sonar, recovery, etc.

An interesting thing here is that it costs to both buy and place modules. If a player wants to save a little money, he can hold off until after buying several modules and lower them all at once (while only paying the same placement costs he would’ve for placing 1…basically building a ‘wing’ of the base before lowering it). This also has benefits in that, if timed right, he’ll get first dibs on the tech upgrades as well. However, the drawback is you can’t use anything until it’s actually placed. While you’re waiting anther player could get ahead by getting subs out faster.

Second is researcher movement. You have a certain amount of movement you can use to move researchers around the base. Once a player’s researchers reach a research module he doesn’t have anyone in, the researcher activate that module, improving that player’s tech and staying there for the rest of the game. Activating multiple modules of the same type raises your tech level higher, resulting in competitive bonuses somewhat like ‘the longest road’ or ‘the largest army’ from Catan. It’s VERY important to ‘keep up with the Joneses’ here as allowing someone to get too many of the tech bonuses will drastically improve their end-game score.

Lastly, submarines. If you have two or more researchers in a research module (remember one has to stay permanent), you can replace one with a sub launched from an available airlock. Subs move around and uncover items on the board. You can also choose to use sonar to take a peek at object in range before going to them. Recovery costs money, more money the deeper the item is. Using sonar costs money as well, so it’s a trade off on using the sonar to locate object worth getting before you possibly waste money getting them.

At the end of the game you get a score for recovering objects and a separate score for technological advancements. These scores are multiplied together. More emphasis on ‘keeping up’…you really can’t afford to slack in either areas since multiples add up quickly.

Again, we both liked this one. It played very originally and had a nice mix of placement and resource allocation strategy. Plus there were little subs that you could make sound effects for while roaming around for sunken treasure!

* * *

Several plays later with varying numbers of people has not changed our opinion. Great game. Lots of opportunites to screw your opponents with convoluted base building and 'best tech' grabbing. I suppose my only word of warning here would be that the scoring is overly convoluted. We rarely have any idea who's winning until we add up the scores at the end because of all the end game 'secret' point multipliers.

Image

matthew.marquand — 2007-10-08T11:04:39+00:00

Close up and an octagonal overall shot

Thread: Re: How is it for 2 players?

jondxs — 2007-09-05T12:41:55+00:00

I bought this game some time ago on the basis of the production - it is a very nice looking game, as mentioned above.

For a while I only ever played 2-player games and whilst it worked it did seem as if there was not much interaction involved. It was hard to imagine this being any different with more players.

Recently I played a game with 3 players and I was amazed at the level of strategy that we used! The fact that the base grew much faster combined with more subs around made it critical to make the right decisions throughout. I'd imagine that 3 is the best number for this game, 4 might mean that the space gets taken up too fast and it would become a massive chase for items.

Before now, I would have rated this game lower than its value in BGG, now I'd put it higher, I enjoyed it much better with 3

Thread: Exploring the abyss - a 3 player game

LA_Ken — 2007-09-04T07:56:02+00:00

Nautilus came out in 2002, but has never gotten much press or
publicity. It's a good game with a lot of depth, though it suffers
from some major flaws. For one, the rules are too long and contain
many easily-forgotten nuances. Also, at about 2 hours, it's much
longer than most Euros. But it has a fun theme, cool minis, and a
2-tiered gameplay (building/research and exploration) that I don't
think I've seen in any other game.

We had a 3 player game, all experienced players, with Candy, Dave, and
myself. I started out aggressively, taking the lead in 2 research
categories and getting all 3 of my subs out exploring. However, my
opponents quickly wised up and started competing more aggressively in
research. By midgame Candy and I had each locked up a research
category, though Dave was languishing. This was mostly because he'd
tried building off on his own rather than building close to the other
players to benefit from their research modules. It seemed that a lot
of his researchers were standing around unemployed most of the time.

In the exploration part of the game, Candy and I both had our subs out
making lots of discoveries. Mine were mostly ruins of Atlantis, which
put me in the lead for the bonus there. However, Candy's discoveries
wound up being worth more points. We wound up tied in research at 9
points, though her 16 points in discoveries beat my 11. Dave had 7 in
research and 8 or 9 in discoveries. The 2 scores are multiplied
together, plus any remaining money, to get the final score.

Thread: Re: How is it for 2 players?

Cross_ — 2007-05-14T17:55:00+00:00

We have played it exclusively with 2 players and I have to agree with the blah statement made by others. There's nothing inherently wrong with playing it as two players, it seems like it's a general shortcoming of the game mechanics. Because of the separate categories and multipliers it is not easy to keep track of current score and once you disregard the score this turns into a 2 player solitaire game where you wander around in your subs and occasionally build stuff, only finding out who won when the game is over.

Image

Hummasti — 2007-05-10T17:19:48+00:00

Early in a 2-player game

Thread: TVB - 4P - Experience and balance pay off for the win....

RPardoe — 2007-04-27T05:35:28+00:00

Ben, Lawrence, and Dave arrived to games tonight. As Ben seemed to have had the worst of it last week, we let him choose the game for the evening and he spotted Nautilus.

This was last played during "N" week of our gaming through the alphabet back in April 2005. So you might want to read Dave's notes: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/61806 for an overview of the game. The key is that Nautilus is a game with 2 halves that are played at the same time. One half of the game is activating research modules for an undersea research structure gaining points. This is essentially an area majority game with the majority garnering more points. The other half of the game is discovering treasures buried in the sea. These also gain points. And through a "hidden objective" mechanism, not necessarily the same points for all. The final score is the product of the points from both halves.

As we built out the research station underwater, the shape was cluttered, but closer examination revealed that it really was 4 fingers of research stations twisting in proximity, but not really connecting. Therefore, it was a long path to move from one end of the station to the other. Rich managed to achieve the absolute majority in the Testing Stations early. Dave followed shortly thereafter with majorities in both the Training and Engineering stations. Rich and Lawrence found themselves in a race for the Sonar majority, but Lawrence moved his researcher into the fourth station first gaining that majority. Lawrence also gained the Analysis station majority and kept it with only 3 stations as the others had by this time shifted to recovering treasure from the ocean.

Lawrence was first to the submarines picking up the shallow treasures. Rich soon followed. The two entered into a race for Atlantis treasures that seemed to be neck and neck. Lawrence would find a piece, then Rich, then Lawrence. (Of course, we forgot about the rule where a researcher can move two spaces "spreading the news" for every piece of Atlantis treasure discovered.) Rich did find the "14" Atlantis treasure, so if tied with Lawrence would gain the higher bonus points, but Lawrence then managed to find two more pieces to gain (and keep the lead.)

Ben was doing a good job of finding snails as he explored. If they were his hidden objective they would be worth 1 point each...but they were not, so lots of wasted efforts there. We didn't really use sonar to scope the treasures until closer to the end when we had a choice between A or B and no time to get both.

The game end was triggered by the discovery of the "15" atlantis tile so we all made our last moves which didn't really change the outcome significantly:

[c]Research Station:

Rich Ben Dave Lawr
Training : 1 1 3 1
Engineering: 1 1 3 1
Sonar : 1 1 1 3
Testing : 3 1 0 1
Analysis : 1 1 1 3
===================================
7 5 8 9

Treasures (Points):
Rich Ben Dave Lawr
Atlantis : 4 0 2 5
Gold (2): 2 0 4 0
HS Crab (1): 2* 0* 1 3
Anenome (1): 0 2 4* 0*
Shell (0): 0(1) 0* 3* 0
Snail (0): 0* 0(5) 0(1) 2*
===================================
8 2 12 10[/c]

(The blue * indicate hidden objectives which increase the value of that trease by 1 (from 0 to 1, or 1 to 2), the yellow number in parentheses is the number of treasures found, but with a value of 0 for each.)

So multiplying the two sets of points and adding in final money in hand:

Rich: 7 * 8 = 56 + 9 = 65
Ben : 5 * 2 = 10 + 27 = 37
Dave: 8 * 12 = 96 + 3 = 99
Lawr: 9 * 10 = 90 + 1 = 91

So what to say to summarize our game? I had focused too much on the research stations and didn't get more subs out in time to explore more of the ocean depths. Ben did manage to do so, but kept finding the wrong things. But he did delay his engineering research, so was limited to moving only 4 for much of the game. Perhaps a bit more speed to move the subs to other areas might have yielded better finds. Of course, sonar would have helped, but at a price.

Dave/Lawrence did a good job balancing the two halves of the game. Dave for the majority early then exploring the ocean. Lawrence went to the ocean fast, and then tried to move his reasearched in the station as others played the research location. Of course, these are the two that played this game the last time we played it also. Rich and Ben were the newcomers to the game. So multiple ways to get to the points needed to do well, and a bit of experience helps at least according to our scores above.

Thread: Re: How is it for 2 players?

alkaiser — 2007-04-06T15:00:48+00:00

I'll agree with Gary here. I've played this a couple times and once with 2 players. It is an exploration game so there is going to be a random element like all exploration games (Tikal, Goldland, Lost Valley, Entdecker etc etc). The exploration part is actually closest to Giganten in many ways. The game is better with more players since you have more competition in the exploration and building aspect of the game. I also like that you are forced to put some effort into both the exploration aspect as well as the building/research part of the game since your final score is the product of both. And balancing which research items to focus on based on what other players are doing is a fun challenge. The game does last a little longer than I'd like and most of that is probably related to building and manning the research station which can be a challenge to manage well. It's also a fabulous looking looking game but for some odd reason it does lack a certain wow factor after you've finished the game.

Thread: Re: How is it for 2 players?

GaryP — 2007-04-06T14:35:29+00:00

sisteray wrote:
Passable with more although the multiplier was painful when you randomly find points to multiply your hard earned points. Feels imbalanced.

I certainly like this game better than most. I don't think I've played 2P, so I can't address the topic at hand. I did, however, want to temper Morgan's comment a bit. Yes, like any exploration game there is a significant random element. And yes, your total score is the product of your non-random building points and your *somewhat* random exploration points. But that "somewhat" is key. By investing in the development and use of sonar (especially if coupled with faster subs), you can greatly affect your exploration score.

I think the building element would be a bit too tit-for-tat for 2P, although the exploration part might balance that. I like that you have to focus on both halves of the game, but I can appreciate that it is a bit much, especially in duration, for some. There's so many great 2P games out there, I am happy saving this one for 3 or 4.

Thread: Re: How is it for 2 players?

Karlsen — 2007-04-06T09:47:50+00:00

I think it would play OK for two players, better for three or four though. It is too long for what it is though. It would be quite good if it went for about an hour, the problem is that it goes for about two hours.

Thread: Re: How is it for 2 players?

sisteray — 2007-04-06T01:01:55+00:00

I thought it dreadful with two.

Passable with more although the multiplier was painful when you randomly find points to multiply your hard earned points. Feels imbalanced.

Thread: Re: How is it for 2 players?

Tall_Walt — 2007-04-06T00:24:07+00:00

It seems to play fine with two. However, I agree that it's kind of a blah game despite the great production value. It's been a long time since I played it, but my recollection is that the game seemed to have a lot of "friction", by which I mean that too much time was spent moving stuff around instead of progressing toward goals.

Thread: Re: How is it for 2 players?

rootbeer — 2007-04-05T21:32:00+00:00

Thanks, Jeremy. I don't own Nautilus. I'm not even really interested in it. I just saw a nice pic of a cool-looking submarine bit today, and I wondered if I should be interested in it.

And I think every game should have a "How is it for 2 players?" thread. At least, every game that says it plays 2-x should.

Thread: Re: How is it for 2 players?

hughthehand — 2007-04-05T21:24:45+00:00

More people will chime in that are better informed than I am on this, as I own the game, but only played it with 3 & 4 players. I think it would probably play ok, but I have a weird view on this game anyway.

The production is beautiful. One of the best I've seen...but I just find the game to be just OK. What is even more irritating, is that I am not sure why. When I'm done with it, I never have the wow, or cool feeling. I'm saying this because I looked at your profile, and you don't have this rated yet, so I am assuming that you haven't played it yet.

For me, its not even a game I would look at for 2. I would never suggest this for 3 or 4...BUT I also wouldn't turn down a game if someone wanted to play it.

Thread: How is it for 2 players?

rootbeer — 2007-04-05T20:42:54+00:00

Does this game work well for 2 players?

Image

Legomancer — 2007-04-05T19:44:22+00:00

A submarine token

Thread: Re: Into the Abyss, yet again!

amacleod — 2007-03-15T20:07:15+00:00

Sound advice, Stephen! I also find that it can help just not to plant non-living quarters modules: let the other blokes shell out the nemo, and then move your intrepid researchers in to their modules to activate them.

Thread: Review

Shade_Jon — 2006-12-03T21:21:45+00:00

Nautilus is a beautiful looking game with deep sea colors reminiscent of Nexus Ops. It is both a tile laying game, a resource management game, and an exploration game. In the end, however, it is a racing game. The theme is about building an exploratory sub-sea station, placing your guys into each module (think Carcassonne), and launching subs to explore and collect sunken treasures and curiosities.

The object of the game is to have the most victory points, which is roughly the product of the number of modules upon which you've placed your guys times the number of treasure chips you have collected from the board. You also add your leftover cash, but it seems unlikely that anyone is going to have much leftover, or even if they did, that it will swing the score.

Like Princes of Florence, cash is extremely tight. Unlike PoF, however, it is hard to get any back. In a four player game, each player starts with 45 cash, but you ideally need about 60 during the game. The only way to get cash is a) for others to land on the tiles you placed and pay you, but that only gives you 1 cash, once per tile per player, and you are just as often going to have to give it back to another players when you land on theirs; and b) collect one of the nine sunken treasure chips, for which you collect 2 to 4 cash depending on if you have progressed in the treasure collecting track (think Goa).

You have fifteen guys to place on tiles and five progression tracks that go from 0 to 4. You progress on a track for placing a guy on the right tile, and once placed it can't be moved. So you will have to forgo at least some of the track progression. But that doesn't matter much.

For each track, you score either 0, 1, or 3 points, 1 if you've reached space 2 on the track, and 3 if you've reached space 4 first and no one else reached space 5, or space 5 first (think Cities and Knights of Catan). Only one person can get the 3 points on each track. But it's not too hard to get to at least 1 on each track, so the odds are very likely that you will be scoring either 5, 7, or 9 for your track progression multiplier. Once in a while you may have to forgo one of the tracks. Suffice to say, the person with the highest score on the progression tracks is going to win, barring extremely bad luck with his discoveries.

The treasure chips are placed face down on specific locations on the board, so you don't have to figure out where they are. They generally yield either 0, 1, or 2 points with which to multiply against your progression track score), or they yield treasure which provides cash. At the end of the game, you can use remaining cash to bump up half of your treasures one point each. Each person is randomly assigned as to which two out of four basic treasures he will be able to so bump up at the beginning of the game. The net result of this is that you need to keep some cash in reserve for the end of the game, and roughly half of what you collect won't be bumpable, so you would prefer to recover the ones that are better for you.

Two mechanics are added to assist you with this. The first one is that the lowest valued treasures allow you to look at some of the face down treasures on the board, but only if you've progressed in the "look at face down treasures" track. The other is that you can spend one cash before moving any sub to look at the face down treasures within your sonar range, typically the nearest 2, 3, or 4 treasures. After a single round of the game, and having not used the sonar ability even once, I decided that this is a colossal waste of resources, as the precious cash that you use just to look at the nearest treasures is better off being used to place more guys on the modules. The odds are very high that you will get something valuable regardless of what you pick up, and all you will have done is thrown out the money which is one less you have to bump up treasures at the end of the game, anyway. That was my impression, anyway.

There are three methods of annoying other players: a) placing modules far away from their guys, so that they have to take a long time to walk their guys over to them (and in fact, may not be able to), b) taking treasures before they can, and c) progressing in the chart and taking the 3 points for that track before they can. Other than that, it's just a matter of counting action points.

I have to say, I don't ever recall playing a game where I really wished for more explosions and combat. Adding a few undersea mines would boost the value of sonar greatly. And adding some missiles and a sixth track for missile/defense ability would made for a much for tense, interactive, and adventurous game. You sometimes wonder if Euro-designers believe that they can't add this as it would violate some unwritten rule.

In my opinion, the game is very nice and should generally play very quickly. The calculations are light, and like any other game with a score based on a product, a square number is the goal you're aiming for.

Thread: Into the Abyss, yet again!

Steve99 — 2006-11-20T11:46:10+00:00

I bought the game 4 years ago and we had a dire experience on our first play. My recollection was that as everything found was useful, it was pointless targetting anything in particlar and building was as much an advantage to your competitors that we felt: why bother? In fact our first play was so poor that the game has been gathering dust until recently.

However, I'm pleased to say that has all changed for the better.

Recently, my kids had taken a shine to the components and they convinced me that there was nothing to better to do on a cold wet Saturday evening but to resurrect the Nautilus. Oh hum!

Well thirty minutes into the game and my opinion of the game was utterly transformed. Everything about the game had suddenly come to life. The intensity of the game came from the following.

Firstly, re building, players were strategising carefully over which building to build and whether it was better to build but not place this turn. By doing so, more of your modules could be added with more men and at the same building cost next turn. It was critical to take note of the turn order so that you didn't place your buildings, if your closest competitor in that technology would have the opportunity to move into your building before you. (Preventing your opponents from gaining 3 points in the 5 technological developments is critical to success). There's usually somewhere where you can place a technology building so that your opponents can't access it before you do and it may that you have to pay one or two more nemo to build in deeper waters to achieve this. If your main rival can only move 3 hexes, then just find somewhere to build it 4 away from them. Also use the solid walls to block the access from connecting rooms where other players are located or at least play the tile in such a way that they can't play a tile to connect to your lab. Once you have reached the lab first, you are likely to be well on your way to gaining 3 points in that technology. Let your opponents use up valuable moves getting to your lab and pay you rent for the privilege.

Next in the area of discovery, the aim is clearly to target the 1 point tiles over the 0 point tiles and espicially the ones that you know you can promote to 2 points at the end of the game. In fact, gaining the 0 point tile that can be promoted to 1 point at the end of the game is also valuable as it helps you detect the 3 gold tiles (worth 2 points each) that are hidden in the abyss and where excavation costs are doubled. Gaining a number of these 2 point Gold tiles can add significantly to your score and contribute to a win.

Another factor that adds to the suspense is the competition for gathering the most Atlantis artifacts. Here competition was close to get the maximum number of artifacts or at least get the highest valued artifact which would settle a tie. Finding a 14 in the deep or a 15 in the Abyss is a cause for celebration. The leader in this area gains a factor 5. In fact, it is at the end of the game that radar comes into play big time. There are major costs and major rewards for excavating in the abyss and the radar can help get you to the Gold and number 15 Atlantis artifact ahead of the competition.

So in the end we experienced an intensely close game having to manage 3 areas: do I build and or place and if so, where to guarantee a lead in the technology; where do I find the Krill/Urchin that I can promote to 2 points at the end of the game, the treasure chests that offer 4 Nemo and the 4 Gold worth 2 points each and the 14 and 15 point Atlantis tiles. Moreover, you really want to avoid the more common Conch or Scallop that cannot be promoted and will be worth nothing at the end of the game.

If you can, its best to balance your efforts between Building and discovery as a score of 20 points split 10 x 10 yielding 100 points is a much better total than the same score split 6x14 = 84 points. Scoring for buildings is much harder and more limited than scoring for discoveries for which there are many opportunities. So targetting the 3 point Technology leads is critical to success.

So the bottom line is don't give up on this game if you have one bad experience. The strategies are there and the game does offerplenty of suspense and intensity of competition to those willing to re-explore it's depths.

Thread: User Reviews

Shijuro — 2006-11-20T10:51:46+00:00

First, excellent review rkuffler.

Steve99, this should have been a new session report, it was very descriptive and helpful! I'd recomment cutting and pasting it in so it will be easier to find for people seeking session reports.

Thread: Re: How are ties resolved?

GSReis — 2006-09-11T06:15:22+00:00

Any remaining money (after you have paid to increase the value of tiles in your special orders cards) is added to the total score. So, it already is a sort of tie-breaker. In the unlikely event that two players with different amounts of money tie after adding them to their scores, using it as tie-breaker is totally arbitrary. Why would money be more important than the research and discoveries?

Thread: Re: How are ties resolved?

acorns — 2006-08-08T23:22:28+00:00

We had the same situation this evening - 90,90,84 and 60. We went with money as the tie breaker - given that money is earned from discovery and other players using your research labs.

Thread: Re: How are ties resolved?

acorns — 2006-08-08T23:21:50+00:00

We had the same situation this evening - 90,90,84 and 60. We went with money as the tie breaker - given that money is earned from discovery and other players using your research labs.

Thread: Re: Accidental Game Ending Scenario

Karlsen — 2006-06-24T05:00:21+00:00

Mr_Six wrote:
Just to clarify, the reason this is an Accidental Game Ending Scenario is because the board got bumped rather severely about an hour into the game and neither of us could remember enough to reset it....hence this story.

Thread: Re: Accidental Game Ending Scenario

Mr_Six — 2006-05-29T19:54:49+00:00

Just to clarify, the reason this is an Accidental Game Ending Scenario is because the board got bumped rather severely about an hour into the game and neither of us could remember enough to reset it....hence this story.

I hope that doesn't detract from your enjoyment of the story.

Thread: Re: Accidental Game Ending Scenario

nextinline — 2006-05-28T05:02:58+00:00

Oh man... same thing almost happened to us 'bout two years ago! All I remember was this monster sized ginormous set of grinnin' choppers headed straight for us an' I don' remember no ears, though. Have to ask Billy if he remembers ears. He remembers more than me and I won't talk to him about it. I'm telling you - I was so scared I almost had Brangelina's baby down there I was so scared.
Nothin's been the same since.

One day at a time, Mr. Six.
One day at a time.

Thread: Accidental Game Ending Scenario

Mr_Six — 2006-05-27T02:04:32+00:00

Number of players: 2
Game time: Nearly an hour

Come with me now to the bottom of the sea. Here, a few hundred yards from the yawning chasm of the Great Abyss, a rare opportunity for science has emerged. Brave researchers have begun setting up the first in a series of underwater habitation and research stations. They will live and work here beneath the ocean waves in two teams, designated Purple Team and Orange Team for as long as their Federal Funding lasts.

Both teams hope that living and working in such an environment can lead to discoveries that will better the entirety of mankind. Hope remains high and both teams are optimistic that they will provide the ultimate understanding for mankind about his relationship with the sea. We here at BGGN have been given the exclusive rights to cover this momentous occasion in human history.

For several weeks prior to building the first of the underwater pods the researchers will be living in both teams have been making preparations. Sites were scouted out with an eye towards selecting the most bio-diverse and geologically interesting location. Site off the coast of Florida, the Bahamas, and even deep beneath the ice in the Arctic were considered. In the end a location several miles out of Tokyo harbor along the continental shelf was selected. While the specific location itself must be kept secret, we here a BGGN can tell you that one of the major contributing factors to the decision was the ease of access to shipping for major components.

Now that both teams knew where they would be they began oceanographic surveys of the area. Early reports indicated that the area would include a high likelihood of recovery of important historical data as well as providing necessary self-sufficiency resources such as native fish and other foodstuffs. There was some early divisiveness among the two teams: Purple Team wanted to locate the initial pod closer to the abyss, feeling that the more important discoveries were waiting for them there while Orange Team felt that getting the research pods in place first, so as to make full use of the discoveries to be made was a much more sound idea. Little did anyone know at the time that this would become a major dividing point between the two teams.

Preparations continued and finally the great day arrived. A fleet of magnificent military and scientific ships were gathered at the appointed coordinates and the initial base station pod was lowered majestically into the sea. Divers secured it to the sea floor at a depth of two hundred feet. The crystal clear waters and smooth seas allowed all assembled to look down on this new monument to man. And yet this reporter could not help but note that somewhere to our south, a few hundred yards away, the yawning blackness that is the Abyss lurked, waiting to swallow anyone foolish enough to venture there unprepared.

As the final pilings were secured to the base station we became aware of an argument ensuing among the two teams. Orange Team would not allow members of Purple Team to occupy the same habitation pod as they. Clearly tempers were rising.

Preparation were made to lower two Habitation pods to accommodate both teams. Each team felt it necessary to be in charge of their own pods, even though highly skilled, well practiced crews were available and on hand to take care of matters. After another hour of petty bickering, both Habitation pods were sunk into position.

Senior members of both research teams could be seen to be exchanging looks of bewilderment at the behavior of their respective teams. Tension was palpable as both Orange and Purple suited up to dive. “We think they're just under a lot of stress at the moment and hopefully things will smooth out once they are below,” said a psychologist for the Purple team.

As the water closed above their heads we all waved cheerfully to the first members of both teams to go below. Backup crews were on alert and additional team members waited nearby while the sun set and both teams spent their first night below.

Purple team was the first to radio in the next morning. Looking out from the windows of their Habitation pod late the previous night they had observed several 'glowing' locations nearby. Anxious to explore these glows, they requested an engineering module be dropped to them so they could begin launching the now famous one man submersibles known as Nautilus'. Soon after the initial request Orange team asked for the same thing. “We just want to get out an look around a bit,” said the Orange team leader, “we can't see why Purple team should get all the early glory.” Both pods were assembled by mid-afternoon and attached to their sister pods below. Reports came in that both teams were bringing systems online and prepping for the next days activities.

Citing the need for 'more exploration before those !expletive deleted! Purple !expletive deleted! take all the important discoveries', the Orange team ordered another exploration pod. Purple team asked to have a Training module sunk to 'their side' of the underwater facility. The message was somewhat garbled but the words “....!expletive deleted! are everywhere....” could be made out. Later in the afternoon, as the new pods were being sunk, Purple team radioed the research ship that they had made “The most amazing discovery ever. Plato was right.” Cheers could be heard in the background of the broadcast and excitement ran high topside. Researchers could be seen everywhere above decks, huddled together in small groups discussing the new findings and potential implications.

The atmosphere as the day drew to a close shifted from one of joy and elation to one of whispers and secrecy. No more information was forthcoming from below and we were all left to our own devices . At midnight we were awakened by the radio operator. Communications had been abruptly cut off from below and could not be restored. Panic set in topside, as no one was able, by any means, to contact the researchers below. Technicians checked all equipment and no fault was found at our end. We could only assume that technical difficulties had somehow effected those beneath.
Near dawn communication was finally restored. Apparently a deep sea tremor of unknown origin had shaken the research pods beneath us and knocked out the radio gear. The two teams had both suffered damage to their respective pods as they had all shifted on their foundations. Micro-tremors had continued for several hours afterwards but eventually Purple and Orange were able to reseal their pod airlocks, make such repairs as necessary and restore communications. We sent down a team of emergency divers to make sure things were realigned and when they reported back that all was well, we continued with our days activities.

Perhaps something about the near catastrophe of the previous evenings events had renewed both teams sense of purpose or perhaps they had reconciled their differences in the face of danger. In either case both teams began the day with increased vigor. Both teams requested new Habitation modules and these were both assembled and sent down. Radio reports came in throughout the day as new finds were made on the sea floor. Orange team reported two more of the 'Plato Finds' while purple discovered the remains of an old sailing ship and the goods it had carried.

Researchers topside were once again huddled about the decks, talking in low whispers. Eventually BGGN approached one of them and inquired about the Plato Finds. “It's truly extraordinary,” he said, “I would never have suspected such a thing here. Without going into too much detail, I can only tell you that we seem to have discovered the remains of the lost city of Atlantis.” His excitement and desire to tell us more was apparent, but we could elicit no further response from him on this topic.

The lost city of Atlantis. Could this be believed? If so, then centuries of thought about the rise of mankind, its basic development, and what it considered to be myth and fact, would have to be re-examined. Who knew what further surprises the deep and the Abyss held for us.

The following morning dawned dark and gray. Fog arose from the waters and hung about the ships to such a degree that only a handful of the 40 ships in the fleet could be seen. The weather seemed to effect even the teams below. Sporadic reports came in from both teams telling of half glimpsed activity in the depths.

“Something big is out there. I think Purple team woke something up when they took the Plato Finds aboard,” said an unnamed representative of Orange team.

“That's ridiculous,” responded Purple teams lead researcher. “Yeah, we saw something out there as well, and yes it was big. But it could have been just whale ... or maybe a .... no, just whale. It was too dark to tell what it was. One of the other guys said he thought it was green and scaly looking, but we're not sure about anything at this point. It's all just speculation. I'm sure we're perfectly fine.”

“I don't care what they say,” said the Orange team spokesman. “It was huge and it kept circling the station. It's still out there waiting. They did something they shouldn't have down there and now this things angry.”

When word of the 'something' below reached the rest of the crew several of our Japanese crew members became highly agitated and even began to seem quite fearful. Although they would tell no one what was upsetting them, they were overheard several times repeating a word that sounded like 'jiro'. For the remainder of the day it became extremely difficult to get any further work out of them and many were seen packing their equipment as if they were preparing to leave.

Had we known then what we do now, perhaps many of us would have followed their example.

No further unusual activity was reported for the remainder of the day.

At approximately 10 p.m. Purple teams head researcher radioed us that he was taking a Nautilus out. He said he wanted to put to rest this rumor that was spreading below about the Plato Finds awakening some sort of 'monster' as he put it. He said he knew where to find one and was going to retrieve it and take it back to the research pod to 'prove to those Oranges that they're a bunch of superstitious losers who wouldn't know scientific inquiry if it ran up and bit them.” He then radio off and launched his Nautilus.

The radio room was crowded with scientists and equipment specialist and additional researchers as Purple Nautilus #1 made its way towards the Abyss. Telemetric data, sonar soundings, and voice communication was being recorded live as they came in. What follows is a true transcript of events as they transpired:

PN #1: I'm heading out, things look pretty clear. The sub lights aren't reaching very far, but they'll do.

Purple Team Senior Scientist: Roger PN#1. Take it slow and careful. Don't get too far ahead of yourself.

PN#1: Don't worry. I'm just going to show those Orange's what it means to be a real researcher. I'm should be coming up on the Abyss in 30 seconds.

PTSS: Roger PN#1. Keep us updated.

PN#1: 20 seconds.....15......10.....5.....I'm over the Abyss....

PTSS: Roger PN#1. Hows it look?

PN#1: Too dark to really tell. I can see the Plato Find I want. It's just off to starboard. Heading over.

PTSS: Roger.

PN#1: Ok, I've got it nearby.....extending grappler......grappler locked on....retracting.......hmm, seems like its wedged in pretty good.....upping power...

PTSS: Careful PN#1, don't over stress the motors.

PN#1: No problem, it's coming now.....that's it baby....come to daddy....nice and HOLY JESUS CHRIST! What the hell is..... !static!

PTSS: COME IN PN#1. Do you read? What's going on? PN#1 respond! Respond!

PN#1: !continued static!

At this point panic had set in in the radio room. People were running everywhere. We were just on the verge of regaining control when the ship suddenly lurched sideways. Everyone ran to a window.

What we saw was punctuated by the screams coming in over the radio from the research pods below. Outside the sea was churning into a rising froth. Orange team was screaming about the return of the monster. They'd lost two Engineering modules in the initial attack already. We could see a head appearing from the water. A nose. An eyeball stared back at us. Habitation pods one and three were crushed. Bodies were rising up around a massive fang filled mouth. Purple team was wiped out. Two more modules were crushed. Orange team with heavy casualties. “We've lost pod 12!” And still the creature rose from the waters. A short snout, two little ears, but massive beyond belief. A long neck with heavy dark green scales. The Japanese crew began screaming, “Gojiro! Gojiro!” Then an ominous staticy silence from the Orange team as radio communication was shut off. The fleet in total disarray. And still the creature, Gojiro rising from the waters. The waves of turbulence washed over our boat and capsized it.

Two days later we were fished out of the sea by rescue boats. 'Gojiro' made land fall at Ohara, Japan, crossed Chiba province and Tokyo bay and utterly destroyed most of Tokyo before being stopped by a giant moth, somehow. Of the research station and mankinds hopes for the future, nothing remained.

Thread: Re: User Review

Steve99 — 2006-05-15T12:58:08+00:00

Excellent review.

I bought the game 4 years ago and we had a dire experience on our first play. My recollection was that as everything found was useful, it was pointless targetting anything in particlar and building was as much an advantage to your competitors that we felt: why bother? In fact our first play was so poor that the game has been gathering dust until recently.

However, I'm pleased to say that has all changed for the better.

Recently, my kids had taken a shine to the components and they convinced me that there was nothing to better to do on a cold wet Saturday evening but to resurrect the Nautilus. Oh hum!

Well thirty minutes into the game and my opinion of the game was utterly transformed. Everything about the game had suddenly come to life. The intensity of the game came from the following.

Firstly, re building, players were strategising carefully over which building to build and whether it was better to build but not place this turn. By doing so, more of your modules could be added with more men and at the same building cost next turn. It was critical to take note of the turn order so that you didn't place your buildings, if your closest competitor in that technology would have the opportunity to move into your building before you. (Preventing your opponents from gaining 3 points in the 5 technological developments is critical to success). There's usually somewhere where you can place a technology building so that your opponents can't access it before you do and it may that you have to pay one or two more nemo to build in deeper waters to achieve this. If your main rival can only move 3 hexes, then just find somewhere to build it 4 away from them. Also use the solid walls to block the access from connecting rooms where other players are located or at least play the tile in such a way that they can't play a tile to connect to your lab. Once you have reached the lab first, you are likely to be well on your way to gaining 3 points in that technology. Let your opponents use up valuable moves getting to your lab and pay you rent for the privilege.

Next in the area of discovery, the aim is clearly to target the 1 point tiles over the 0 point tiles and espicially the ones that you know you can promote to 2 points at the end of the game. In fact, gaining the 0 point tile that can be promoted to 1 point at the end of the game is also valuable as it helps you detect the 3 gold tiles (worth 2 points each) that are hidden in the abyss and where excavation costs are doubled. Gaining a number of these 2 point Gold tiles can add significantly to your score and contribute to a win.

Another factor that adds to the suspense is the competition for gathering the most Atlantis artifacts. Here competition was close to get the maximum number of artifacts or at least get the highest valued artifact which would settle a tie. Finding a 14 in the deep or a 15 in the Abyss is a cause for celebration. The leader in this area gains a factor 5. In fact, it is at the end of the game that radar comes into play big time. There are major costs and major rewards for excavating in the abyss and the radar can help get you to the Gold and number 15 Atlantis artifact ahead of the competition.

So in the end we experienced an intensely close game having to manage 3 areas: do I build and or place and if so, where to guarantee a lead in the technology; where do I find the Krill/Urchin that I can promote to 2 points at the end of the game, the treasure chests that offer 4 Nemo and the 4 Gold worth 2 points each and the 14 and 15 point Atlantis tiles. Moreover, you really want to avoid the more common Conch or Scallop that cannot be promoted and will be worth nothing at the end of the game.

If you can, its best to balance your efforts between Building and discovery as a score of 20 points split 10 x 10 yielding 100 points is a much better total than the same score split 6x14 = 84 points. Scoring for buildings is much harder and more limited than scoring for discoveries for which there are many opportunities. So targetting the 3 point Technology leads is critical to success.

So the bottom line is don't give up on this game if you have one bad experience. The strategies are there and the game does offerplenty of suspense and intensity of competition to those willing to re-explore it's depths.

Thread: Re: User Review

amacleod — 2006-04-03T17:54:08+00:00

I must disagree with Mr. Di Bartolo's statement that the multiplication of discoveries and research modules at game end makes the separation between players worse. I recently played a two player game with my wife where, in the final stages of play, I seemed to be hopelessly sunk with no chance of recovery. Imagine my surprise when we tallied our scores, and I actually won by 6 VP!

Thread: Re: Session Report

WBRP — 2006-01-26T23:50:44+00:00

Amen - stomping on chits is fun.

It's subs you can't build on, although they can move onto & over modules.

Thread: Re: User Review

kristopherjwolff — 2006-01-26T16:30:02+00:00

manowarplayer wrote:

WIFE: 5.0
SISTER: 6.5

Wow... I've never seen anyone rate their game, rate their wife, and rate their sister at the same time (too bad you rated your sister above your wife...)

Thread: Re: Adding Researchers

pmboos — 2006-01-12T17:31:59+00:00

Thanks - that makes sense... I just was uncertain.

Paul