Game: Pueblo

Thread: Re: Light (re)view [VIDEO]

Mosse — 2008-12-02T06:02:41+00:00

Wulf Corbett wrote:
Considering I just don't like abstracts...
gesa wrote:
...I'm not usually a big fan of abstracts
I hear that a lot about this game... Personally I do enjoy some abstracts, like YINSH, for example - but this actually doesn't feel too abstract... The theme seems more than just pasted on for show.

Thread: Re: Light (re)view [VIDEO]

gesa — 2008-12-02T02:54:37+00:00

We like this game quite a lot and I'm not usually a big fan of abstracts.

We don't need the spinner thing because our board has just a slight amount of warp to it, so that it is slightly rounded, making it quite easy to spin around on a smooth table top.

At first I was a little put off by the warp, but then discovered it was just what was needed. Made me wonder if they planned it that way. Guess not.

Mosse wrote:
Milarky wrote:
i assume the cakey spinner thingy doesn't come with the game
That's right, it didn't. It came from IKEA. It even had one of those silly names like SNURRA, but I can't remember what anymore...

But I can't even imagine playing this game without either a spinner thingy, or playing it on a small coffee table so that you could easily walk around it - you really need to be able to see around the Pueblo to spot where to move the Chieftain.

Thread: Re: Light (re)view [VIDEO]

Mosse — 2008-12-01T04:51:36+00:00

Milarky wrote:
i assume the cakey spinner thingy doesn't come with the game
That's right, it didn't. It came from IKEA. It even had one of those silly names like SNURRA, but I can't remember what anymore...

But I can't even imagine playing this game without either a spinner thingy, or playing it on a small coffee table so that you could easily walk around it - you really need to be able to see around the Pueblo to spot where to move the Chieftain.

Thread: Re: Light (re)view [VIDEO]

jearles — 2008-11-30T23:15:17+00:00

Milarky wrote:
i assume the cakey spinner thingy doesn't come with the game.

No, the Lazy Susan (a.k.a. cakey spinner thingy) doesn't come with Pueblo. One does come with Rumis, though...

Thread: Re: Light (re)view [VIDEO]

Milarky — 2008-11-30T22:45:21+00:00

dizzy so dizzy... i assume the cakey spinner thingy doesn't come with the game.. volume broken so don't here it but i looks good if some what spinny

Thread: Re: Light (re)view [VIDEO]

Wulf Corbett — 2008-11-30T20:54:42+00:00

Considering I just don't like abstracts (regardless of pasted-on theme), this actually looks quite playable and interesting. Good job on the video!

Thread: Re: Light (re)view [VIDEO]

jearles — 2008-11-29T19:33:46+00:00

Awesome job, Mosse!

A short review that was still full of content and humour. I look forward to many more reviews from you. Keep having fun with your video camera and editing software.

For this review, I cannot give out any Points of Shame!

Thread: Re: Light (re)view [VIDEO]

Bolger — 2008-11-29T19:32:34+00:00

Congratulations on some great reviews Mosse. Please keep them coming!

Thread: Light (re)view [VIDEO]

Mosse — 2008-11-29T18:08:06+00:00

I'm finding you can have a lot of fun with a cheap videocamera and cheap video editing software. I'm trying to combine experimenting with video editing (I have no previous experience whatsoever) and boardgames I enjoy, so after Crokinole and Polarity, here's my short (re)view of Pueblo:

Youtube Video

Hope you enjoy... I certainly enjoyed making it.

Image

rober — 2008-11-18T14:58:54+00:00

overview

Thread: Re: For 2 players?

fatso — 2008-10-16T00:25:22+00:00

I'm new to the game but I've really enjoyed it two player.

Thread: Re: Placement question

Windopaene — 2008-08-31T00:48:51+00:00

I have to agree, this is really terribly worded. I kept reading it and reading it, and it would seem that in many cases, such as on the first block played in a game, it's totally impossible. I had to quit playing and come look this up to know what to do. Downward facing actually makes sense.

Thread: Re: Pueblo vs. Rumis

Jeneki — 2008-06-13T19:32:45+00:00

1) I would say Pueblo is less brain burning than Rumis. All of the pieces are the same shape in Pueblo, so if one piece doesn't fit how you want it none of them will. Also, piece placement does not limit your future actions in Pueblo, so there is less thinking about getting eliminated or boxed into a corner.

2) Pueblo limits the number of pieces based on the number of players. No matter how many players you have, it should always be around the same length with the final structure around the same size. In Pueblo, you often have to choose which player to give points to, so it can be a king-maker game with 3-4 players.

3) I would say Pueblo is less cutthroat than Rumis. The worst screwage in Pueblo is "Aha! Gave you some points!" (points are bad), while the worst screwage in Rumis is "Aha! This eliminates you from the game!". You can still go after someone in Pueblo, but that player will always have a chance to get you back.

Have fun. If you like one, you'll probably like the other.

Thread: Re: Pueblo vs. Rumis

Angry Duck — 2008-06-13T17:28:29+00:00

SABATAI wrote:
Is Pueblo available?

Not really, but I'm in the midst of a trade.

Thread: Re: Pueblo vs. Rumis

ddyer — 2008-06-13T17:21:45+00:00

I would rate pueblo as lighter and easier to appreciate, because
the immediate scoring after each turn gives players an immediate
sens of who is winning. Rumis is more difficult because it's
very hard to determine until near the end who is doing well and
who is not. In the early stages of Rumis, there's very little to
go on what is a good or bad play.

Thread: Re: Pueblo vs. Rumis

SABATAI — 2008-06-13T17:16:37+00:00

Is Pueblo available?

Thread: Pueblo vs. Rumis

Angry Duck — 2008-06-13T16:58:07+00:00

From what BBG'ers have reported, it seems that Rumis is a lighter game. However, the mechanics seems somewhat similar, but maybe opposite in the way it's scored. You're trying to hide your pieces in Pueblo instead of making them visible like Rumis. I have a few questions.

1) Does Pueblo have more downtime b/c it's more brain burning? And does that lead to less player interactions?
2) Most abstracts are best w/ 2 players, which of these two games play better as 2, and which is better as 3 or 4 players?
3) Rumis can be cutthroat, is Publo even more so? Or is that the whole point of Pueblo in order to win?
4) Bottm line, which game is more fun?
5) If I already own Rumis, should I get Pueblo?

Thanks. I appreciate any kind of feedback to any of my questions.

Image

xtrovurt — 2008-06-05T21:03:33+00:00

That's not baby food - my wife's brain leaked

Thread: Re: What's the white tiddly wink for?

Axelfudge — 2008-04-04T20:01:08+00:00

So is it an "inspector", "chieftain" or "overseer"?

Thread: Re: Placement question

alaskandevil — 2008-03-27T15:41:18+00:00

This is what my friend and I are trying to figure out. That makes sense. But, the rules says

"All 3 square surfaces in A SIDE of a building block must be in contact with others, either on the game board and/or on other building blocks."

Its says a side, not the bottom. Really, there is only one scenarios that could happen and the block would still stand. Am I misinterpreting this rule or is it somewhere else? Thanks for helping.

Thread: Re: Placement question

rayito2702 — 2008-03-27T03:30:31+00:00

If you look at a block from any face-on direction you will see three squares.

When you place a piece. All three of the faces that face the board must physically be in contact with another piece or the board.

Thread: Re: Placement question

alaskandevil — 2008-03-27T03:09:15+00:00

Where does it say every downward surface must touch. All it says is that "all 3 surfaces" on the same side must touch something.

Image

patchwerq — 2007-12-18T19:14:43+00:00

Handmade bag for Pueblo blocks!

Image

Toynan — 2007-10-27T12:16:29+00:00

Image

Toynan — 2007-10-27T12:12:14+00:00

Variant pieces

Image

Toynan — 2007-10-27T12:11:10+00:00

Thread: Re: For 2 players?

Vitriool — 2007-10-08T11:11:07+00:00

I've experienced a "big" difference between a 2player and a 4player game in the level of strategy.
As you have to move the architect 1-4 spaces, the scoring in a 4player is much more random. In a 2player, I always "develop" a strategy that is based on a 5spaces movement of the architect.
Actually, this means that it is quite easy to avoid penalty points, which is much less the case in a 4player.

Thread: Re: K&K's inventive, highly interactive abstract (7 of 10)

rayito2702 — 2007-08-09T18:47:23+00:00

One thing I love about Kramer games is they often include a bunch of variants. Some variants even require additional pieces (like Torres or Maharaja) which are included in the box rather than sold as expansions.

Pueblo has several variant options that look like they would change up the somewhat repetitive nature of play. Have you played these much to find if that is the case?

Edit:
Oh, and I feel compelled to add that in Santa Fe, NM there is a city ordinance requiring buildings to look like they are made out of brown adobe.

Thread: Re: K&K's inventive, highly interactive abstract (7 of 10)

volnon — 2007-08-09T13:50:46+00:00

I have to agree that this game does tend to feel like the last if you play it too often. That is why Rumis came with various map boards to shake it up a bit and keep the game fresher. The best thing to do is play it a bit then throw it in the closet and play it again in a few months. Rinse and repeat.

Still, you have to give Kramer credit for a really different kind of game- love it or hate it, at least he tries a variety of ideas to make his games quite different- this guy goes from El Grande to Pueblo to Tikal to Sunken City to Gold Land (not in that order).... WOW!

-unlike a certain good doctor who has a tendancy to slap a quick theme on a mathematic equation and say "Ta-Da! Look! Two games released by ME this week!"

Dr Livingston, I presume????

Great review! Love the inserted photos!

Thread: K&K's inventive, highly interactive abstract (7 of 10)

topherr — 2007-08-09T07:36:42+00:00

GAME REVIEW CHECKLIST
Thanks to Fawkes, LuXo and seppo21 for the borrowed photos

OVERVIEW
Highly original, intriguing 3D puzzle game in which you try to hide your color of blocks behind neutral and rival blocks.

A non-random brain burner (not at all a gateway game), and fares only so-so on repeated plays. Still an essential for my collection.

]]>

RULES
Each player starts with 5 oddly shaped blocks in their color and 4 in the neutral (tan) color. All the blocks are the same size, and 2 together make a square.

]]>

You take turns playing blocks, then moving the Chieftain 1-4 spaces around the board perimeter. The Chieftain then looks at the Pueblo in a straight line and awards negative points for all the players' blocks he can see. You can play your block anywhere so long as it doesn't leave an overhang.

The trick is that you get 1 point for the level of each visible block, so a 3rd level block is thrice as bad as a visible 1st level block. Once the players run out of pieces the Chieftain goes around the board again, stopping at every square. Golf scoring.

1. DEPTH/COMPLEXITY 7 of 10
"How many and how compelling are the decisions you make per minute?"

When to play your neutrals, how to force your opponents to build up while you stay low, who to "tag" with the Chieftain, all the while struggling to understand just how these oddly shaped pieces fit. Almost each turn presents a new challenge, and the mixture of neutral and colored pieces gives the game a real beginning, middle and end game.

Only real down side is that with no random elements one game doesn't feel tremendously different from another. That's what keeps this from being an 8 of 10.

]]>

- Analysis Paralysis/Downtime?
Not bad, but could be a nightmare with a spacially-challenged perfectionist!

2. MECHANICS 8 of 10
"How intuitive, elegant and flowing are the moves that bring your tactics to life?"
Amazingly simple rules. Minimalism reigns.

3. INTERACTION 7 of 10
"To what degree does it facilitate a rich social experience?"
Good for a euro, especially a euro puzzler - because unlike many puzzle games, your play directly impacts your opponents in a clear and direct way.

Also a great game for kibbitzers to watch while waiting to play another game.

4. ORIGINALITY 9 of 10
"How fresh and unique are the strategy, mechanics and theme?"
The design of the pieces alone is genius. And there just aren't many good 3D games.

- What's the freshest part of the game?
As CurtC put it, "It's like an area control game where you DON'T want area. And in 3-space."

5. AMBIENCE 9 of 10
"How much do the theme, aesthetics and bits add the overall experience?"
Though an abstract, the art is a beautiful southwest style - a little-used motif in euros.

The way in which board grows gives you a real feel of a a pueblo being built, similar to how Torres (another K&K design) shows you a town being built, but even more satisfying.

And the blocks, as Greg Schloesser said, will "last a lifetime." No kidding. Probably the best-made plastic pieces in any game I own. I'd actually love to let my toddler play with them, but of course he'd lose them and ruin the game

6. AUDIENCE
"Who would love this game?"
- Fans of X may love this game, but fans of Y may not.
People who don't like puzzle games may not enjoy it - though I don't like many puzzle games myself. People who like some random elements may not like it.

But if you like the chess-like feel of forcing your opponent into an impossible situation, and the satisfaction of seeing a multi-color Pueblo form, block by block, it may be for you.

- Does it hit a sweet spot? Which one?
Oh yeah. 3D highly interactive puzzler with beautiful aesthetics.

- Luck (& Chaos) : Player Control
High player control, no luck, very little chaos. The only real chaotic element is the "take that" scoring where a player essentially chooses who to hose (do I hit A for 4 points, or A and C for 2 points each, or B for just 2 points b/c I think B is winning?, etc.)

SUMMARY 7 of 10

]]>

Pueblo is a great game - and a highly original one - that probably doesn't come out of the box enough. But the reason for this is the disconnect between a beautiful game that feels like it should be light but plays a little like 4-player chess. (I'm not saying it has the endless strategy levels of chess.)

Also, the games do feel quite similar after a while. Random elements are frankly important to me, in games as diverse as La Città, Ticket to Ride, and Nexus Ops.

There are reasons why people play euros instead of Chess and Go - and one is to engage in problem-solving that is satisfying and does not require intense focus to the exclusion of socializing. The required focus in Pueblo, for whatever reason, outweighs the payoff you feel (similar to another K&K invention, Java).

I don't know if it would make for a better game, but if you took Pueblo and added just a little bit (not all) of the random element of say, Downfall of Pompeii, it would get out of its box more often. For example, I showed it to my non-gamer wife because I thought she would dig the aesthetics, but it felt too much "like work" to her - not a gateway game.

That said, I love having it in my collection, and can't wait to teach it to my kids, even though it will probably never get the number of plays as games that are less original.

Hacienda, Category 5, and Detroit-Cleveland Grand Prix, for example - all games Wolfgang Kramer designed alone - all inject highly varying degrees of random elements, require less intense focus than Pueblo - and are each more pure fun.

Edits: typos, photo credits

Thread: Re: What's the white tiddly wink for?

Kwyjibo — 2007-04-13T05:33:11+00:00

Perfect sense. Thank you.

Thread: Re: DEMOLITION GAME VARIANT

quozl — 2007-04-12T18:11:08+00:00

I just tried the demolition variant last night and I was far away in last place but after the demolition, I still came in last place but only by a few points. I think you don't need to reset the scores because it seems that those are in the worst place for the building game benefit the most in the demolition part of the game.

Thread: Re: What's the white tiddly wink for?

EvilTimmy — 2007-04-12T16:49:10+00:00

Wow. Four simultaneous posts! Must be a busy work day

Thread: Re: What's the white tiddly wink for?

asmiles — 2007-04-12T16:38:23+00:00

If I remeber correctly, it's so you can mark the spot where final scoring started, so that you don't count a scoring space more than once.

Thread: Re: What's the white tiddly wink for?

seandavidross — 2007-04-12T16:37:48+00:00

It's to mark the origin of the overseer during the final scoring round: you walk the overseer around the board one final time, scoring as you go, until he returns to the tiddly wink at which point the game ends.

Thread: Re: What's the white tiddly wink for?

EvilTimmy — 2007-04-12T16:37:20+00:00

IIRC it's an aid for marking where the inspector (or whatever the fictional character is called) is as it moves around the track to figure out who scores what.

Thread: Re: What's the white tiddly wink for?

artfuldodge2 — 2007-04-12T16:37:16+00:00

The white pawn represents the 'Chieftain', who travels around the board inspecting the Pueblo. Moved by the players variable distances for turn by turn scoring, and then making a 'lap' at the end of the game for final scoring.

The little round white piece is used to mark the starting point for the Chieftain for the final round of scoring.

Thread: What's the white tiddly wink for?

Kwyjibo — 2007-04-12T16:31:18+00:00

Anyone?

Thread: Re: Pueblo---A League of Untouchable American Gamers Review

dyfrgi — 2007-03-24T16:23:23+00:00

Steve,

Do you also think of Blokus as a PDAG? How about Go?

Thread: Re: Pueblo---A League of Untouchable American Gamers Review

bohemian — 2007-03-24T03:11:24+00:00

Many Kivas are above ground. It depends on the Pueblo.

Thread: Re: Pueblo---A League of Untouchable American Gamers Review

artfuldodge2 — 2007-03-23T22:54:43+00:00

the*mad*gamer wrote:
The box art on this game really fools you.

Tricked by that damn box. Sneaky box. I hate it when I'm out smarted by a box.

edited for kindness

Thread: Re: Pueblo---A League of Untouchable American Gamers Review

rayito2702 — 2007-03-23T20:43:02+00:00

While I don't know the inspiration for the architectural design of the NM state capitOl I was always struck how much this:
http://tinyurl.com/yw83ss

looked like this:
http://tinyurl.com/36uab8

I've never been to a kiva that was in use so they may be completely buried. I always assumed they extended above ground as in the second picture.

Thread: Re: Pueblo---A League of Untouchable American Gamers Review

rayito2702 — 2007-03-23T20:00:28+00:00

I mean, Pueblo doesn't make any sense at all. Honestly, what type of society zones construction based on wall color?

Have you ever been to Sante Fe, NM? Everything down town is adobe colored. The state capital looks like an enormous kiva. I believe it is a city ordinance that everything has to look like it's made out of brown mud.

Thread: Re: Pueblo---A League of Untouchable American Gamers Review

rayito2702 — 2007-03-23T19:48:28+00:00

The box art on this game really fools you. It shows a great picture of an Indian with beautiful southwestern design. Gazing upon the art it certainly puts you in the mood for a wild west experience but the experience is polar opposite from wild, it is just plain dull!

These are Pueblo Indians. They excelled at defense and agrarian lifestyles. Spicing up the Pueblo theme would require adding some squash growing and irrigation planning.

I will occasional enjoy an abstract game but this one has many many problems with it. The first being it is not a game at all! This is a PDAG!!!

PDAG—Puzzle Disguised AS Game

This statement makes me think that you haven't played the game very much. Admittedly the first game or two is more about figuring out how to fit the pieces together, but all the pieces have the same shape and it quickly becomes apparent the few ways they can fit together.

Once you figure that out it is more of a placement game to force your opponents into bad positions or keep them from being able to conceal offending colors all the while keeping your own pieces out of sight. In fact the lack of variety in the pieces makes it pretty weak as a puzzle in my opinion. If it didn't have the player interaction it wouldn't be either a game or a puzzle.

In my opinion it's a simple game with a simple puzzle element that succeeds only because of the extensive player interaction and the uniqueness of game play.

To play this game right you really need a “lazy susan” because you are constantly turning the game board at many different angles to analyze your possible placement options.

My board is actually slightly dish shaped. Not enough to get in the way of game play, but just enough to make spinning it around easy. But this isn't really a sit down game. Players need to get up and walk around the board to get an idea of what's going on or lean over the table to look down on in, or even get down to eye the game at the level of the table. I could see how some one who just wanted to sit down and stare contemplatively at a game could find this awkward.

The one factor of the game I do like is the chieftain handing out points. You can move him in to really nail your opponent with penalties but this weak attempt at confrontation does very little to enhance the overall enjoyment of the game.

This is the game. Without the chieftain it would be the PDAG you describe.

The scoring track is terrible. It is a confusing spiral. Like golf, low score wins in this game and the purpose of the scoring track is to instantly show who is winning and this one fails in that purpose.

Agree. It's especially annoying the way the design of the spaces change periodically and tricks you into thinking you should move to a different loop than the one you should be moving to.

What is really disturbing about this game is the blatant pasted on theme.

Have you ever seen a Pueblo? They were all about square shapes and altitude, crawling up canyon walls or building up on top of mesas. The focus on height and rectangular shapes is appropriate to the theme even if it's not a simulation. And at least the theme is fairly unique.

the tedium of the last round of play

While Kramer excels at throwing fiddly scoring rounds into his games, the final scoring round in Pueblo has always gone by pretty quick for me.

One small positive factor of this game is that the box lid seems to come off without any problem, although I did get some slight resistance in the bottom right corner of the box.( Kudos go out to the "Chairman of the Board" for making this a mandatory review point)

I'll defer this type of discussion to you two aesthetes of box opening. Perhaps you and Tom can discuss such intricacies on a future pod-cast.

induces ... “cube confusion”

If, as your review implies, you haven't played this game much perhaps ignorance is the source of your confusion and you're unjustly blaming those poor little cubes.

Thread: Re: Pueblo---A League of Untouchable American Gamers Review

docreason — 2007-03-23T19:41:09+00:00

itsmarty wrote:
habermanm wrote:
Why on earth do you keep playing Euro games if you hate them so much!

So that we don't have to

Better give that 5 s pp

If you do listen to them, then you will seriously miss on a great segment of games. While I would argue some Euros get tiresome, Pueblo is a different beast. It has puzzle elements to it, but this is no Riccochet Robot, it is an actual game. It is a rare game that is a symbol of humility to me. It also, believe it or not, as a "screw you" factor to it. The point is to set person up to score a LOT of points and lose the game. It is a game like hearts where you try not to score and stands out uniquely.

It does lay straight in the Euro camp, unashamedly so. If the game seems of interest, do consider getting it, or at least trying it. I find the game real good, and a Euro. And this is coming from someone who is burnt out on Euros.

Thread: Re: Pueblo---A League of Untouchable American Gamers Review

dkearns — 2007-03-23T16:49:43+00:00

Finally, someone takes on this old chestnut and tells it like it is.

I mean, Pueblo doesn't make any sense at all. Honestly, what type of society zones construction based on wall color? Why would the chief hate colored buildings so much? What is his "motivation"? Did he catch his woman cheatin' or is he just a jerk? Other important character traits are conveniently (deliberately?) omitted like how many hit points does the chief have? Cause I bet we could take him out and then build whatever we feel like. Now that would provide some story. Some THEME. But no, this game blows. I'm not giving this one another go until the Pueblo: Action Card Expansion comes out.

Sorry all, this review was too fun and I had to give it a try.

Thread: Re: Pueblo---A League of Untouchable American Gamers Review

Samuraicat — 2007-03-23T16:36:00+00:00

I have played Pueblo a couple of times and have determined that at this point, I play it very poorly. Note, I say play, because I do see it as a game rather than simply a puzzle. For something to be a puzzle implies that there is a solution...a Rubik's Cube is a puzzle, a 500 piece jigsaw is a puzzle. Both have specific end states to be achieved and are solvable. Pueblo does not have a single specifc solution as I see it.

In Pueblo, there are a number of decision points that must be made. Obviously the first is how to arrange your piece to best advantage (or least disadvantage.) Sometimes this means knowingly placing a piece that will garner points early on with the expectation that you can correct the situation later or at least minimize the potential scoring. With a puzzle you don't have that luxury since each piece has a specific placement.

A second decision is how to move the chieftan. Fast, slow, move to a corner, hit a specific player and so on. How you move the cheiftan relative to your placements is an important part of the game.

When I play there is quite a bit of table talk, most often around how to drag a leader back to the pack. This social interaction is a large part of the game and with the right group can make the game much more engaging.

As for the theme, if you don't like it as written then maybe you would prefer the peeping tom theme better (it might be more in line with your Untouchable Gamer credo.) Instead of a chief its a peeping tom trying to see your scantily clad women and its your job to deny him his carnal pleasure. I believe someone posted this alternate theme here on BGG.

In regard to downtime, I found it to be minimal. I and the others I have played with are evaluating the board between turns, talking about the consequences of moves and so on. By the time my turn comes around I usually have a good idea of where I want to place my piece but this can be modified by the last play. For my group, downtime isn't an issue with this game.

I can see where you might find final scoring to be tedious. In my last game, however, the lead player smoked me and the third player so badly that we didn't even bother. Just looking at the final layout is was readily apparent that he won by a mile. The winner has played the game many more times than I have and has developed some skill at the game as evidenced by his convincing victory.

In the end, I think it comes down to a fundamental disagreement about Pueblo. You see it as a puzzle, I don't. The game is not your cup of tea (or can of beer as the case may be) and I certainly understand that. I respectfully disagree with your assessment and give the game a recommended.

Thread: Re: Pueblo---A League of Untouchable American Gamers Review

itsmarty — 2007-03-23T16:32:20+00:00

habermanm wrote:
Why on earth do you keep playing Euro games if you hate them so much!

So that we don't have to

Thread: Re: Pueblo---A League of Untouchable American Gamers Review

habermanm — 2007-03-23T15:44:38+00:00

Why on earth do you keep playing Euro games if you hate them so much!

I stopped playing Ameritrash games very quickly after I realized they weren't for me.

(disclaimer: I'm not saying one is better than the other, just that I have a very strong preference for euros)

Thread: My take on Pueblo - A trip to Sky City

rayito2702 — 2007-03-21T20:22:33+00:00

Pueblo by Wolfgang Kramer and Michael Kiesling

While hiking through the high deserts in Northern New Mexico it is hard not to trip over centuries old Anasazi artifacts or find cliffs honeycombed with ancient cave dwellings. I love the US South West and the Native American Pueblo cultures are a prominent part of New Mexico history. When I went to public schools in Texas they made sure every kid new about the Alamo. In New Mexico they made sure we knew all about the Acoma Pueblo rebellion which consisted of the Acoma Indians throwing a corrupt monk out of town. Of course, when your Pueblo is built on a mesa surrounded on all sides by three hundred foot drop-offs, getting thrown out of town kinda kills you.

The thing about Pueblo cultures is their three dimensional implementations. The villages always seemed to be built up as much as out. As such, it makes for a great theme of the game Pueblo. Though the cover of the box depicts the workers wearing blue jeans, which is a jarring anachronism in my opinion. Perhaps someone can provide evidence that this is not the case.

Players each have a set of plastic pieces. The pieces are shaped such that two pieces together will form a 2x2x2 space cube. Each player has two different colors of pieces, some are their own color and some are a neutral color. In fact you have to make cubes with one of your own color pieces and one neutral color piece at the start of the game. Both pieces in a cube have to be played before you can move on to the next cube.

The board is 10x10 spaces with the spaces around the edge forming a track for the Chief to walk on, leaving an 8x8 space grid for players to play their pieces on. The 8x8 grid is divided into four equal quadrants.

On a player’s turn they place a piece, the only limitation is that there can be no overhangs. Then the player moves the Chief 1 to 4 spaces. On the space he stops on he looks down the row he’s on and any non neutral color he sees gives the owning player points for pridefully displaying their own colors. The higher the piece is the more points it’s worth. If the Chief lands on a corner space he looks down on the quadrant and gives points for any visible spaces. Oh, yeah, and points are BAD.

Repeat until every piece is played. Then the Chief takes one more tour around the pueblo stopping on every space and doling out points. The player with the least points wins.

The game is very simple mechanically and doesn’t take that long to play. But it is quite fun trying to get your pieces where it not only helps you but forces your opponents into unsavory positions. Basically you want your pieces all to be as low as possible and as close to the center of the board as possible because this makes them easier to hide and worth few points if seen. But you will soon be faced with the dilemma of placing in the center but high up or placing low but on the outside.

Sometimes I think the game is almost too simple. All the pieces are the same shape so once you’re familiar with the standard geometric form you’re dealing with the game becomes more a contest with the other players than with the puzzle of finding just the right spot. On the plus side, this player interaction is what makes this game more than a one trick pony.

While I’m talking about simplicity, I should mention there are a number of advanced rules included, none of which I’ve played. But I feel like they need to be included to spice things up. (I love it when board games include these options. One style of play won’t appeal to everyone so it’s nice to have options. Plus it’s like the game comes with free expansions.)

In the case of Pueblo there are rules for taking the Pueblo apart and ending the game when the board is empty (unthematic?), bidding points for turn order and even playing with Cult Sites. The Cult Sites block off parts of the board from play.

A bonus feature of my copy of Pueblo is that the board is ever so slightly warped such that it’s lower in the middle than on the edges. This doesn’t affect game play, but makes it easy to spin the board around so the players don’t have to get up and walk around the table to see where they should play. Your mileage may vary.

Pueblo is a simple 3D puzzle game that is much better once all the players have a few games under their belts. I like playing it because it’s short and makes you think in ways that most board games don’t. And no one has to get thrown off of anything.

Image

KSensei — 2007-03-04T22:51:43+00:00

Image

KSensei — 2007-03-04T22:51:10+00:00

Thread: Re: DEMOLITION GAME VARIANT

kristopherjwolff — 2007-03-02T14:39:46+00:00

There is nothing in the rules to indicate that it would be a new game at that point. And since they tell you do to the demolition AFTER building it all up, it sounds like it's all part of the same game. Might be fun to make it a separate game when you play it at your house though!

Thread: Re: Pueblo: Review

gschloesser — 2007-02-26T05:05:41+00:00

Thanks for the kind words, Ray!

I do tend to enjoy Kramer & Kiesling's "meatier" games. More than any other design team, they seem to incorporate various mechanisms that hit my "sweet spot".

That being said, I don't give every game they design high marks. There have been a few that have fallen flat with me.

Thread: Re: Pueblo: Review

rayito2702 — 2007-02-21T20:47:39+00:00

Great review, particularly with regard to the description of play. I like getting a feel for what game play is like more than an exacting description of the rules.

I did notice quite a few lauditory comments however. In one review we get:

Ahh, - Kramer & Kiesling! Just the thought of another game designed by this dynamic duo is enough to get me woozy!

Now, if they would ever throw Ulrich into the mix and release a Kramer, Kiesling & Ulrich design, then that would be bliss!

[I]t was designed by Kramer & Kiesling, so there was no way I wasn't going to give it a try.

Vintage Kramer & Kiesling!

and

I get those wonderful `butterflies' in my stomach while playing ... Kramer & Kiesling have done it again!

One would almost think you were being partial.

Image

Artax — 2007-01-01T14:12:48+00:00

Image

Artax — 2007-01-01T14:11:24+00:00

Pueblo macro

Thread: First session with my five year old daughter

beezwax — 2006-11-09T05:40:26+00:00

We started out by introducing her to the components; building the individual color blocks and explaining the basics. When then ran through a couple of quick examples to show her how scoring works.

For the most part, I allowed her to play her own game with just a few reminders that pieces need to be played on block (beige and color) at a time. I was actually quite impressed with her comprehension of the rules. I only had to correct her a couple times for making an illegal move. Occasionally I'd provide a bit of advice when she was passing up an opportunity to give me penalty points or when she was making it too easy for me to get points; but for the most part she did quite well.

In the end, I think I've managed to sell this one (even thouth I won by a huge margin). Really, the score was reasonably close until the final scoring pass. Now all I have to do is get the rest of the family sold

Thread: Re: The chieftain in a corner

marioaguila — 2006-10-19T11:36:17+00:00

Thinking about this mistake, I thought that the chieftain could fly only in his corner (following the same pattern used in the others rows). I didn't realize that he needs to go to the zenith of the quadrant.

Thread: Re: The chieftain in a corner

marioaguila — 2006-10-19T03:43:33+00:00

Sorry...the last image was taken from BGG In our next game, my 4th game, I'll try this variant.
The fisst 3 plays we counted in the wrong way the corners. Like I put in a previous pictures. The corners were a terrible thing in that mistaken form.