Game: Himalaya

Thread: Re: Himalaya now OOP?

thdizzy — 2008-08-13T01:39:02+00:00

I have this. It's a great game, so I hope that the channel remains open. I'm surprised that this hasn't been picked up by a U.S. game company such as Rio Grande or Z-man.

Image

thoia — 2008-06-24T16:49:06+00:00

When a game geneates this much fun...isn't that reason enough to keep it coming out again and again!?!

Image

thoia — 2008-06-24T16:45:40+00:00

I didn't think the little circular chit was intimidating enough of a Yeti to keep people from using a path so I added this one!

Image

tommih — 2008-06-08T17:43:08+00:00

Scandinavian edition rulebook cover

Image

tommih — 2008-06-08T17:42:24+00:00

Scandinavian edition (Marek Toy) box back

Image

Gibbo — 2008-05-25T21:45:52+00:00

Time to load up

Thread: Re: How is it with less than 6?

Tatsu — 2008-03-30T21:16:50+00:00

Having played with four I think that 5-6 is probably better. Its easy for one or two of the players to break away and not have much if any interaction with the other players - guess who has the advantage...

Thread: Re: Anybody like the optional Event Tokens?

Tatsu — 2008-03-30T21:12:23+00:00

After our first game, I am a bit on the fence. On the one hand, it lends a bit of control in what can be a bunch of chaos. On the other hand, its one more thing to think about that makes things that much longer.

Thread: Re: Advanced inventory with basic rules?

Isamoor — 2008-03-27T18:51:40+00:00

I've played with *many* variants for this game. Some written and some unwritten. The "Super Inventory" was not one I'd tried yet just because I thought it would add too many more rules. But it would probably help people get stupas out.

The only variant I think is almost mandatory is the inverted villages variant described in the 5-6 player expansion. It makes sure the big monetary's in the center of the board aren't so important.

I also play with my own inverted scoring mechanic:

http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/222146

It tries to make sure people don't feel eliminated before the scoring even happens. Unfortunately, if someone didn't manage to even get a single Stupa on the board, I fear they'd be eliminated no matter what method you would use.

Thread: Advanced inventory with basic rules?

KSensei — 2008-03-27T18:37:29+00:00

I was wondering if anyone has ever used just the advanced inventory rules with the basic rules or if anyone thinks that it might play ok.

In the basic rules a player receives 3 yaks for winning a particular good in the inventory phase.

In the advance roles the player has a choice of; 3 yaks, sending out 2 delegates, or placing a stupa on a level one village...

The reason I ask is I plan to introduce this game to some in our group that have never played it before and thus want to stick to the basic rules for tonight. However the last time we played it with basic rules one player was unable to get any of his stupas out and upon realizing that he would be the first to be eliminated in the final scoring stopped playing the game seriously and stopped having fun. I thought with the other options of the advanced inventory scoring that it might prevent this scenario from happening again.

Image

matthew.marquand — 2008-02-23T20:00:18+00:00

Gettin' The Goods While The Gettin's Good

Thread: Re: Variants for an Old Game

Isamoor — 2008-02-15T19:07:53+00:00

Okay, I now own the game and have played it as written and with my inverted scoring. I much, much prefer the inverted scoring. Everybody feels like they stand a chance of winning for the entire duration of the game. It's helped push Himalaya into my top 10 games.

Without this variant, getting locked out of Stupas is just too common and too severe. Playing without the balanced villages is even worse.

Thread: Re: Himalaya now OOP?

Emile — 2008-01-29T17:41:55+00:00

JeffyJeff wrote:
Do note that if you are willing to order from Germany and ship to the USA, it's in stock at www.playme.de

If you do so, make sure to make your order of this and other games (get friends to join you) large enough as otherwise small orders will cost a lot due to the cost of shipping just the first 2 kilograms (each additional kilogram is a small fraction of the cost for the 1st 2)

It is still available directly from Tilsit as well, so it may not be out of print, or perhaps all of the copies available for import to the US have been exhausted. I wonder if Tilsit would ever consider a joint distribution with Rio Grande or Z-Man or somebody? I think Himalaya has broad appeal, and would do well here if it were more generally available.

I'd also like to see someone box the 5-6 player expansion with the main game. As it stands now, that expansion is absurdly overpriced (and unavailable as well). Grr.

Thread: Re: Himalaya now OOP?

JeffyJeff — 2008-01-28T22:35:19+00:00

Do note that if you are willing to order from Germany and ship to the USA, it's in stock at www.playme.de

If you do so, make sure to make your order of this and other games (get friends to join you) large enough as otherwise small orders will cost a lot due to the cost of shipping just the first 2 kilograms (each additional kilogram is a small fraction of the cost for the 1st 2)

Thread: Re: Himalaya now OOP?

JeffyJeff — 2008-01-28T21:58:15+00:00

Maybe if it goes out of print the web published version "Merchants of the Empire" (same game different theme) will be generally available again?

I've been trying to find the files for that but archive.org no longer has them either

Thread: Himalaya now OOP?

Emile — 2008-01-19T18:50:25+00:00

Does anyone know if there is more stock or if this is still being printed by Tilsit? I just bought the last copy from TWS and none of the other main online retailers have it anymore. I asked a couple of them if they expected more copies, and they didn't know.

It would be a shame if this wasn't available anymore, I think it's a great gateway game.

Thread: Re: Folding the player screens...

fnord23 — 2008-01-10T09:21:30+00:00

There are supposed to be slits on the sides to tuck the tips of the bottom-side flaps into. They seem to have been left off of at least one run of the game.

If you get the expansion (which I highly recommend, as it addresses several issues with the base game), the slits are on the shields included, and you can use that as a template for slitting the ones that came with the base game.

Prior to getting the expansion, I used paper clips to hold the shields in the proper shape.

Edit: You can see examples of properly slit and folded shields in these pictures:

]]>]]>

Thread: Re: Folding the player screens...

gashlycrumb — 2007-12-29T21:05:32+00:00

Hmm, velcro it will have to be I think. I checked out the picture. The one fellow seems to have his screen folded properly. I guess I could use screens from another game as well.

Thread: Re: Folding the player screens...

slowcorner — 2007-12-29T05:33:27+00:00

Does this photo help?

]]>

I found that the screens, when folded, tip over easily. I affixed those little velcro buttons on the two sides, and they're quite sturdy now.

Thread: Folding the player screens...

gashlycrumb — 2007-12-29T05:06:43+00:00

I know I am dense at times...

How does one fold the player screens in this game? I assume you want the sacks of goods face up towards you.

It's sad that I haven't been able to figure this out.

Thread: Re: Five Reasons To Avoid Himalaya

ejohnson7 — 2007-12-10T04:28:14+00:00

Thank you, Rob, for your concise and pithy contrarian review of Himalaya. A dissenting opinion among many "I liked it too" reviews is very useful to me in my decision making process - I like to see the other side of the coin. Please keep up the good work.

Thread: Re: Variants for an Old Game

Isamoor — 2007-11-02T21:26:09+00:00

commandwolf wrote:
If this scoring system is to be adopted, then people will presumably go after Yaks first to prevent them from being eliminated first. As a result, more order rings will be "removed" from the game, (specifically the higher numbered ones) so that less will be available for "re-cycling". Could this potentially be a problem (i.e. reducing the order ring supply)? Just a thought.

I don't think this is any more of an issue than people racing to put Stupas on the Monasteries first in the base game. The real key is just the score obfuscation. Unless you track things very closely, you shouldn't know who is ahead in yaks.

Also, the inventory checks do a decent job of balancing the yak scores. If you land a few of the large orders that require multiple goods and pay good yaks, you probably aren't going to win the inventory bonuses.

I finally ordered this game, but I'm waiting until X-mas to open it. I'll let ya know how it goes.

Thread: Re: Variants for an Old Game

commandwolf — 2007-11-02T21:20:27+00:00

I like your idea of having the player with the smallest Yak total eliminated first. However, the only problem I can see so far is with the Order Rings.

If this scoring system is to be adopted, then people will presumably go after Yaks first to prevent them from being eliminated first. As a result, more order rings will be "removed" from the game, (specifically the higher numbered ones) so that less will be available for "re-cycling". Could this potentially be a problem (i.e. reducing the order ring supply)? Just a thought.

Also, in regards to the Balanced villages variant that came in the expansion, I think it does help even out the villages. However, Thematically it doesn't make much sense for the Monastery stupas to be only worth 1 point and the small houses to be worth 3!

It does make more sense (thematically) to have the Monasteries worth 3 stupa points but can only send out 1 envoy to the bordering regions (and inverse with the small villages - stupas worth 1 point but send out 3 envoys). Could this still work?

The small villages would then have enormous influence over their particular region (can send 3 envoys) but only have relatively small religious influence because of the 1 point stupas. However, the Monasteries would wield large religious influence (3 point stupas). They would also have lower political clout but greater political flexibility (as it can move that single envoy to more regions).

I have not tried this but I think this variant could still work. Opinions welcomed...

Thread: Re: Anybody like the Event Tokens?

joelee — 2007-11-02T21:18:49+00:00

Hi,

We play with the event tokens all the time. Depending on each players board position each of them has its advantage. There have been plenty of times where I wanted to pick up a specific good nearby that I couldn't get unless I played the chit that lets the player take the resource of his choice.

At other times if I feel that I'm going to be competing with another play for a specific delivery then I'll use whichever movement hindering token I can with the yeti being stronger than the snowstorm/fog.

We enjoy using the tokens and never play the game without them.

Thread: Anybody like the optional Event Tokens?

commandwolf — 2007-11-02T20:21:42+00:00

Just a question re: the Event Tokens (Yeti, Snowstorm and Market Day).

1) Do you like playing with these optional tokens? If not, why not.

2) Which one of the three is your most and least favorite?

Thanks in advance...

Thread: Variants for an Old Game

Isamoor — 2007-10-11T13:50:50+00:00

(Disclaimer: I haven't played this game, but I do plan on purchasing it soon. I've done enough game analyzing though to see some issues, so I thought I would address them.)

So I'm very intrigued by Himalaya and hope to pick up a copy pretty soon. I really like programming games and pick up and deliver games, so this sounds right up my alley. Unfortunately though, this game does seem to have some issues with it's end game scoring.

Issue #1 Super Villages - Under the original rules, certain villages give out large amounts of religious and political influence, while other villages give out small amounts of both. This obviously makes it very unbalanced. If one player secures a couple "super" villages, then they are going to be getting ahead in both religious and political power.

Variant #1 Balanced Villages - This is actually an official variant in the expansion. In this variant, monasteries give large political bonuses and small religious bonuses. Huts give the inverse, small political bonuses and large religious bonuses. Thematically, it would make more sense for the monasteries to lean towards religion, but the monasteries are in the center of the board and are connected to more political regions than the huts, so they need to retain the large political influence.

Issue #2 Effective Player Elimination - The three tiered scoring is cute, but not when the first elimination tier is perfectly traceable information. It's quite possible to be unable to win with only half of the game over. This is a very bad feature to have. There have been other proposed variants of giving values to advantages in each category, but those seem complicated and confusing to players.

Variant #2 Inverted Scoring - After much thought, I propose this scoring methodology. It is simple, prevents any effective elimination, and still demands balanced growth in the three categories.

(For 3-4 players)

Step 1 - The player with the smallest yak total is eliminated. If multiple players have the lowest yak total, they are all eliminated. All political envoys of these players are removed.

Step 2 - Each remaining player counts up the number of political regions that they have the most envoys in. If there is a tie in a region, neither player gets that majority. The number of regions is their political score.

Step 3 - Each remaining player may now score religious points for a number of their stupas up to their political score. If their political score was two, they may score up to two of their stupas. The player with the highest religious score from their scored stupas is the winner.

Tie Breaks - First tie break would be their political score. Second tie break would be their yak score.

So, what do you think? It would keep any elimination information completely hidden until the end game. It also brings an element of uncertainty to the stupa scoring that was missing from the original game. It brings the uncertainty from the yaks into the envoys and then into the stupas. At the same time, I tried to keep the scoring simple. And it still demands a balancing act between the 3 scoring methods.

Image

Mr Penguin — 2007-08-24T08:52:52+00:00

The original print and play version (Merchants of Empire) never had a 5-6 player expansion so I had to make my own player pieces. The purple and yellow pieces are the non-originals.

Thread: Re: Five Reasons To Avoid Himalaya

Sitnaltax — 2007-08-17T06:01:28+00:00

Barry Kendall wrote:
If I may make a friendly suggestion, though, it might be helpful to take the approach, "X Reasons Why Some Gamers Might Avoid Game Y."

This is a good suggestion and I'll take it to heart.

Thinking about the kind of reviews I would like to write--I don't want to bother writing one that goes along with the prevailing sentiment, because what use is that? And reviews seem to be generally positive--I suspect because a neutral or ambivalent experience doesn't really inspire a review. So phrasing the title as a non-absolute makes sense. On the other hand, I want to keep it punchy. So going forward I might choose a title like "Five Reasons You Might Not Like WXYZ" with a link to a positive review in the intro, so people can see whether their priorities align more with mine or the positive reviewers. As you mention and I think we'd generally agree, we can't successfully argue taste.

Thread: Re: Five Reasons To Avoid Himalaya

matthew.marquand — 2007-08-16T14:59:41+00:00

Ironically, this programming game is probably not a good game for actual programmers, for the reason the original poster mentioned. If we play Himalaya I'm going to wreck your program if I can.

I'm a programmer and love Himalaya. It's one of my favorites. Playing with the 5/6 expansion does take some of the randomness out of the game since you can better predict where the goods and orders will show up. Also, if you're not into memory games, play without the screens. Just a thought.

Thread: Re: Five Reasons To Avoid Himalaya

adso — 2007-08-16T14:55:14+00:00

Your most recent response to "e" was helpful in understanding your original intent and approach. Without that clarification I was inclined to write, somewhat uncharitably, "So . . . games are only good when you have absolute control and do not have to use reasoning to counter unforseen events?

I think what Rob was referring to when complaining about the unforeseen events problem is that there are many degrees of randomness in games. Even a game with a large random element can reward good planning. On the opposite end of the spectrum are games where the random element is "bloop-inducing" - that is, it hands a large advantage to a player with an event that can't be foreseen or prevented. In Himalaya's case, an awesome resource or great objective happens to pop up at your board location. You can sort of plan for this - it makes sense to head to open areas at the high end of consecutive numbered full areas. In practice, it feels very "bloopy."

My biggest complaint about Himalaya is the large difficulty in knowing what your objectives are. The scoring system is 'neat,' but it makes planning very slow. To summarize, there are three sub-scores in the game (religion, territory, yaks). At the end of the game, the player with the lowest religion sub-score is eliminated, and all his pieces removed from the board, which can change every other player's territory sub-score. Then the player with the lowest territory sub-score is eliminated. Finally, the player with the most Yaks wins.

The problem with this scoring is that in order to have a coherent plan as to what objectives you need to aim for to win, first you have to count every player's religion score. Then you have to count every player's territory. Then you have to figure out which player is likely to be eliminated in step 1, and how it effects the territory score. After you've considered three or variations of that, you have to consider how many yaks you'll probably need. You also need to know what objectives your opponents can fulfill, and what bonuses they'll get for having the majority in different types of goods at the end of the game - but goods held are secret, so you hope you've been able to memorize what everyone has been picking up whilst doing all this other calculating. It also really doesn't help that the components for the game are small and hard to distinguish - ie, is that a delegate, or a temple that got bumped?

If you can't do all this, or you can't do it without keeping everyone else waiting... then you can just sort of play randomly, but there's little feeling of control, and your decisions have little actual basis to them. There's no reasoning, just short-term optimization. For me at least, this is very unsatisfying.

Thread: Re: Five Reasons To Avoid Himalaya

Emile — 2007-08-16T14:18:29+00:00

Sitnaltax wrote:

Does that make sense?

Yes, perfectly. That's a great distinction you've made, which is probably helpful in understanding the appeal of the game. I can understand why you'd be put off by the luck and chaos if you saw this as a long game. For me, it is short and light, and great for new gamers and non-gamers.

Thread: Re: Five Reasons To Avoid Himalaya

Barry Kendall — 2007-08-16T12:52:35+00:00

Thread: Re: Five Reasons To Avoid Himalaya

Meerkat — 2007-08-16T07:45:46+00:00

Sitnaltax wrote:
Verdict
If you want programmed movement, play RoboRally. If you want area control, play El Grande. If you want to wander around a graph of lines and nodes, play Elfenland. If you want intricate mechanics with subtle interactions, play Puerto Rico.

If all four of those games are getting old for you and you want to try something different, play Himalaya, I guess; you'll probably find it an acceptably good time.

While I haven't played those other games enough to be tired of them because I don't get enough gaming time to get tired of any game I actually like.

So I find I loved Himalaya the couple of times I have gotten to play it, and perhaps to me it is because I get to play a lot of games I like all at once. =-)

Thread: Re: Five Reasons To Avoid Himalaya

Sitnaltax — 2007-08-16T05:54:52+00:00

It's all good, sir. No offense taken.

Looking at your profile I think I see where we are different, because my immediate reaction was to say "Hey! I love games where I'm flying by the seat of my pants!" I seem to prefer much shorter, lighter games in general--my favorites are mostly in the 15-60 minute range, while yours are in the 90-120 minute range. So to me, the chaotic feeling is a negative, because I want my longer games to be relatively heavy and analytical. Whereas for you, an hour-long game is relatively short, and so, oddly enough, it seems like you like Himalaya for the same reason I like 15-minute Coloretto.

Does that make sense?

Thread: Re: Five Reasons To Avoid Himalaya

Emile — 2007-08-16T05:26:34+00:00

I thought your review was perfectly fair Rob, and useful. I made my counter-argument as a way for people who are interested in the game to be able to read both sides and maybe feel more informed about whether to buy it.

I wasn't suggesting that you personally were such the caricatured inflexible game player that I described. It is interesting though that the things you mention as frustrations (not being sure which area you need to shore up, not being sure if you will be able to shore them up even if you do know), are the exact same things I love about Himalaya. There is a lot to think about, and if you had a lot of time to think about it, you might be discouraged by the luck. But since the game moves so quickly, you kind of fly by the seat of your pants and hope for the best. One's enjoyment is no doubt partly determined by how much you like using your trousers for aviation. It's definitely more of an intuitive game than an analytical one.

Also interestingly, I think the roadblocks are probably my favorite part of Elfenland. However, I have not used the advanced block/yeti rules for Himalaya and don't feel very interested in them, because it seems like it would add tactical play that isn't really welcome (maybe they fit better if you are playing with a small number of players, and therefore less interaction?).

Thread: Re: Five Reasons To Avoid Himalaya

Sitnaltax — 2007-08-16T05:06:57+00:00

You bring up good points as to why people would find the game enjoyable. For focus and brevity in the review, I did narrow in on the negatives, which otherwise can be a little bit hard to find in reviews.

I'd like to respond to the comment:

It's not really a great game for people who like to be able to analyze and effectuate every move and want to feel in control all the time.

I don't insist on that. What I would like is one of:

to know what I need, but to have to fight hard to get it;
to not be sure about what I need/what would be of most value;
or to have the make the most of what I have.

In Himalaya, I guess I feel like I don't know what I need to advance in the game. I don't know whether I'll need yaks because I don't know who will be eliminated before that; I don't even know whether I'll need more diplomats, because I don't know who will be eliminated in religious scoring. And even if I do realize that I need to shore up one of those areas, I might be totally unable to do so thanks to the locations of deliveries.

(I'm not an Elfenland fan either. And I felt like my least-favorite mechanic from Elfenland, the obstacle tiles, inspired the yeti and snowstorm chits in Himalaya.)

Thread: Re: Five Reasons To Avoid Himalaya

Emile — 2007-08-16T04:48:59+00:00

You're certainly not the only person to find fault with this game, but I personally think it's great, and far, far better than Elfenland.

What I like is that the programmed movement is extremely complementary with the strategy. You can't really play it tactically, because of the turn planning time limit, not completely predictable movements of the other players, and the randomness of the goods and orders. If it did play tactically, then the luck would be a big problem (as I think it is in Elfenland, which I find extremely tactical). But Himalaya, with its intricate winning conditions, allows for interesting long-term strategic possibilities without any downtime. Typically, I found that there were usually only a few reasonable business transactions that I might make each turn, but, like a pool shot, it was important to set up the next turn and think about which of the three scoring tracks I needed to worry about most in the turns beyond that. By the end of the game, I had discovered that my determination to get good stupa placements and political influence had been good enough to get me second place, but I lost to a player who just skated through in both of those categories. I filled a lot of small orders which gave me a lot of influence, but not nearly enough yaks to win.

It's not really a great game for people who like to be able to analyze and effectuate every move and want to feel in control all the time. I personally love simultaneous action because it is one of the only really thematic ways to derive turn order, plus its fun. And Himalaya has a clever movement system that makes it easy to record moves. Ironically, this programming game is probably not a good game for actual programmers, for the reason the original poster mentioned. If we play Himalaya I'm going to wreck your program if I can.

This was, amazingly, the first Euro I ever played. And it's still one of my favorites. Yes, the theme is a paste-up, but at least its not another Renaissance game or traveling on fairy clouds - and it has interesting pieces and engaging art. I give it an unqualified thumbs up, if you like this sort of mechanic.

Thread: Five Reasons To Avoid Himalaya

Sitnaltax — 2007-08-16T01:50:43+00:00

The Programmed Movement is Inappropriate
I don't like RoboRally because, well, I program for a living and I don't need to come home and see my programs still not do what I tell them to. But for its fans, the programmed movement of RoboRally means "chaotic fun." When that's the point of the game, great. In an area-control Euro? Not so great. The game would have been improved by turns, by shorter programming, or even by a "time lapse" mechanism a la Thebes.

For a Game Requiring So Much Thought, There Sure is a Lot of Luck
Resources appearing right next to you. Delivery opportunities appearing right next to you. Cheap delivery opportunities at the vital 3-point towns appearing closer to you than to anyone else, allowing you to pick up those vital religion points. I'm not opposed to a lot of luck in games, but in a game that seems to want to reward careful planning, it shouldn't also reward standing around at the right place at the right time so heavily.

Secret Resources Exacerbate the Other Problems
It's not like we can't see what you pick up, it's that we don't have eidetic memories and can't recall. Knowing what the other players have would reduce the chance of maddeningly arriving at a town after another player has delivered there.

The One-Time Use Chits Add Nothing
This game is more than complicated enough without having to worry about what the one best time all game to use your magic once-ever chits is, or worrying about others using theirs to harass you.

The Theme is Flimsy
The trading-in-the-mountains theme is so transparently pasted on it would make Reiner Knizia blush. The play of this game is intricate and the process of scoring and determining a victor is complicated. A good theme would not only make it easier to take in, but could also tighten up the mechanics as well.

Verdict
If you want programmed movement, play RoboRally. If you want area control, play El Grande. If you want to wander around a graph of lines and nodes, play Elfenland. If you want intricate mechanics with subtle interactions, play Puerto Rico.

If all four of those games are getting old for you and you want to try something different, play Himalaya, I guess; you'll probably find it an acceptably good time.

Image

Stas — 2007-08-03T16:18:30+00:00

The Goods

Image

Stas — 2007-08-03T16:02:53+00:00

Before the Buddhas and Bodhisattvas, To fully embrace the Land of Snows...

Image

Stas — 2007-08-03T15:57:58+00:00

The Rings

Thread: Himalaya: The Generally Favorable Review

slowcorner — 2007-07-05T20:43:22+00:00

Himalaya, a board game for 3-4 players, takes about 90 minutes to play. Himalaya - The 5-6 Player Expansion is also available.

]]>

Summary

Himalaya is a programming game with elements of area control, area majority, pick up and delivery, and set collection (see Category). The board art represents mountain passes in Nepal, and each player controls a caravaneer. The object is to guide your caravaneer from one village, where goods are picked up, to another, where orders are filled. Filling orders allows a player to leave behind influence in the region of the village. The major competition comes in the form of other players attempting to get goods or fill orders before you get to them. Victory is achieved by having sufficient religious, political, and economic influence to survive the game-ending elimination round.

Components

The game board is on glossy stock, and is mounted on standard, thick cardboard. Despite the European-style fold, there is a noticeable crease in the middle of the board. The orders are printed on nice, thick cardboard, and the goods are small, painted cubes like those in El Grande. The caravaneers and influence markers are colored plastic, and come in sprues. Removing these many small pieces takes a while, and requires some work with a razor cutter to clean up. The player screens are quite flimsy. The intention of the designer is to have the goods hold the screen down, but that doesn’t work. My fix is to get some Velcro self stick tabs to hold the shape of the screen. All in all, the components are original and well-conceived, and the art is well-done and clear.

Image of stupa and caravaneer

]]>

Gameplay

The Himalaya board depicts 20 villages of various sizes, connected by gravel roads, stone roads, or icy roads. At the start of each turn, players program their next six moves. This is accomplished using discs that have four colored regions on one face, each representing a different action. A player sets up the discs, in order, behind his screen, with the desired action facing outward. Action 1 is resolved first for all players, in player order, before moving on to Action 2, and so on. The five actions are to Travel by Gravel Path, Travel by Stone Path, Travel by Icy Path, Deal, or Rest. Taking a road means that you move your caravaneer along a road of the indicated type that is connected to the place from where the caravaneer starts. Dealing means that you take goods or fill orders. Resting means that your caravaneer stays put for that turn.

Image of a programming token

]]>

The board is pre-seeded with goods in certain villages and orders in others as determined by a die-roll. Anytime an order is filled or a village is emptied of goods, a die roll is employed to determine the next village to receive either goods or orders. To pick up goods, a player must travel to a village with goods and remove the lowest valued good from that village. To fill an order, a player must travel to a village that has an order ring, and spend the goods indicated on the ring.

After filling an order, a player may choose how to increase his influence. The order rings have variable numbers of yaks printed on their reverse. Yaks are the currency for determining a players economic influence, so a player may simply decide to pick up the order ring and keep it. Alternatively, a player may place ambassadors in the region of the village for political influence. If the player is the first one to fill an order in that village, he may place a stupa on that village, increasing his overall religious influence. The villages come in three different sizes, so the amount of political or religious influence that a player may gain from a village increases with the village size.

After three of the rounds, there are inventory phases in which players are rewarded for having the most of a certain good by receiving a token worth 3 yaks.

Finally, there is an optional rule where all players have three power tokens that can be played at the start of a turn. Only one of each type may be played at once, and only one per player may be in play. The three tokens are 1)Yeti Footprints: Place this on any path to render it unusable for that turn; 2) Snowstorm: Place this on any path to make it twice as hard to travel that path; and 3)Market Day: Place on any village so that anyone visiting that village to trade on that turn can select the good of their choice. Optional rules also allow for religious or political influence to be increased during the inventory phase.

Game end

4p game
After the 12th round, players are eliminated based on their respective influence in the three areas. First, the player with the least religious influence is eliminated. Then the player with the least political influence is eliminated. Finally, the player with the most economic influence is declared the winner.
3p game
The player with a majority of influence in two of the three areas is the winner. Economic influence is the tiebreaker.

Strategy

1) Timing is critical in Himalaya, and there’s a fair amount of gambling involved. The programs are activated in player order, so if an opponent appears to be heading for the same village as you to grab goods, you need to determine who will arrive first to know who will receive which goods. Remember, the first player takes the lowest valued good, so if two players reach a village with tea and gold on the same turn, the one who was first in turn order would take the tea, and the second player would get the gold. This is where the option to rest, or stall, comes in handy. By resting, you allow your opponent to arrive first, so you get the more highly valued good.

2) Based on the victory conditions, a player’s first, second, and third objectives are plainly laid out. There are a limited number of villages, so securing a reasonable amount of religious influence is the first priority. Aiming for larger villages is a good idea, as well, as you can maximize your distribution of influence.

3) Orders that require gold often provide a higher economic incentive (more yaks). It is tough to turn down the chance for religious or political influence, but economic influence wins the game. Take these order rings almost every time, as they let you increase your economic influence while wasting the least amount of religious and political opportunities.

4) Finally, there are often clusters of villages that contain goods and orders in the early game. It is not a bad idea to make your way toward the more far-flung villages after the first few turns, as the next goods/orders-containing villages may suddenly appear there, with little competition for you.

Parting Shots

Like RoboRally, the programming phase of the turn can take a while, as players assess their best moves and attempt to second-guess their opponents. I find the time spent waiting for other players to settle on a program to be annoying, and it is the main reason that I am reluctant to play programming games now.

A timer may help.

Also, like RoboRally, when you run your program, it is fun and satisfying. The groans and cheers of those who made mistakes and those who got lucky breaks are a big part of what make this a fun game. This is the main reason that I continue to talk myself into programming games now.

My biggest knock on the game is the elimination aspect, as you may know at the halfway point that you are going to be eliminated on the basis of religious influence. This can put a bit of a chill on the rest of your game, as you can not even attempt to improve your rank in the game – you are, and will remain, in last place. A fix (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/thread/14268) has been proposed, and I will use it next time we play.

So aside from game length and some questions about the victory conditions, I really like Himalaya, and I would recommend it for just about any group that likes strategy games with a fair amount of luck.

Thread: Re: How is it with less than 6?

Emile — 2007-06-11T18:43:18+00:00

It was interesting in the game I played, that one of the players was fairly adamant that six players was too many. I didn't really catch his reasoning, but perhaps he felt the map was too crowded.

For me, it seemed like just a perfect amount of interaction with still hardly any downtime - now that I've played more games and am aware of the six-player problem, Himalaya seems to me to be possibly among the best six-player games. In six-player Himalaya, pretty much anywhere you want to go, someone else is going to be close by.

Thread: Re: How is it with less than 6?

Eric Brosius — 2007-06-08T22:21:04+00:00

I have never been burdened by an overwhelming feeling of predictability when playing Himalaya with 4 players. Many times I have arrived at a village only to spend time breathing the cold, clear mountain air and admiring the stupa my opponent has just built.

I do feel that with only 3 players the game suffers a bit from a shortage of players to make the victory conditions interesting.

Thread: Re: How is it with less than 6?

loonling — 2007-06-08T20:55:11+00:00

This is one of my favorite games. I have only played with 4 players, and it feels like somebody is always scooping up my resources/orders. I can't imagine playing with 6 (though I have the expansion and am eager to try it out).
--mike

Thread: How is it with less than 6?

Emile — 2007-06-08T18:59:55+00:00

I imagine most have played with four, but I've only played with the 5-6 player expansion with six players and loved it. However, it struck me that with increasingly fewer players, the board might open up too much and you might lose some of the primary interaction in the game - the timing of the commodity acquisition and order filling. I believe the number of goods and orders stays the same, but with the players more spread out, it seems to me like you might lose opportunities to battle for orders. And with four, there will always be one more set of goods and one more order than players, so everybody can have a seperate target with one left over.

Is there anyone who has played both ways? I want to buy the game, but I need to decide if I have to get the 5-6 player expansion, as expensive as it is

Thread: Re: Strolling the snowy, Nepalese mountains

Hotntot — 2007-06-04T12:38:10+00:00

I really like your writing style. I'm looking forward to reading more reviews by you.

Thx!

Thread: Re: Strolling the snowy, Nepalese mountains

thdizzy — 2007-06-02T13:06:26+00:00

I really like your writing style. I'm looking forward to reading more reviews by you.

Thread: Re: Himalaya: Strolling the snowy, Nepalese mountains

Daddy-O — 2007-06-02T05:30:36+00:00

Just played my first full game this week. It is an excellent game. One of the best things about it is that it offers more than just area control. There is lots to keep an eye on, but is straight forward enough to learn quickly. The game's only downside is it's goofy player screens that do not stand up properly without either being taped or altered. Despite this, I heartily recommend the game.

Kevin

Thread: Strolling the snowy, Nepalese mountains

Hotntot — 2007-06-01T23:56:34+00:00

You can safely buy this game. Not because such a buy will make your most hard core geekfriends hail you; on the contrary - I think this game will NEVER make you conquer the supersized minds of your killer playmates with walls of wardrobes filled with wargames with names and places you've almost never heard of. "Himalaya? Is that where Rommel lost three thousand men in ... Ah! You mean that game with Tibetian cows...?"

But do not have doubts this game: You will play it with neighbours, with your classmates at school, with unexperienced friends, or perhaps with your 13 and 14 years old nieces, who perhaps one day will grow up to be gamers, just like you. This is the game for those light occations (it's not a childrens game) when you just want a game that is easy to learn, easy to teach and exiting to both experienced and to new (and younger) gamers.

The basic idea of the game is this: As the leader of a Yak pack, you travel paths in the Himalayan mountains, wandering from village to village. You pick up goods in some villages and deliver the same goods in others. When you deliver goods, you are rewarded. Be sure to pick up the best goods before someone else take it! And be the first to deliver in villages demanding what you carry - others may have the same load and target!

The game in more detail: The board is marked with 20 villages in three different sizes. Five of the villages (randomnly chosen) contain up to five different resources in increasing values (salt, orge, tea, jade, gold). Five other villages (randomly chosen) are markeds as receiving villages, i.e. they are marked with what they demand (for instance two salt and one tea).

The clue of the game is that when you enter a village containing resources, you are allowed to pick ONE - the least worth - resource. After, you keep strolling and collecting more resources (kept hidden) and even more resources - untill you decide to go to a village that demands resources (for instance two salt and one tea).

When you cash in your goods, you may be rewarded in two of three ways; political, religious and/or economical.

The size of the political and religious reward depends on the size of the village (they come in three different sizes). The size of the economical reward depends on the value of demand in the village.

Political: The roads between the villages divides the board into eight regions. If you choose the political reward, you may put 1/2/3 (depending on the village size) election men in freely chosen regions. The person with majorities of election men in most regions at the end of the game is the political winner.

Religious: You may choose to build a stupa in the village. Stupas in large villages give more points (3) than stupas in medium (2) or small (1) villages. There can only be built one stupa in each village. The player with most stupa points at the end of the game is the religious winner.

Economical: You may grab the demand marker, marking (in addition to what the village demanded) on it's back side a given number of yaks, to expand your flock and herd (this is only for points gathering, you do not travel faster across the cold terrain with more yaks). The player with most yaks at the end of the game is the economical winner.

The winner of the game is the player with at least two thematic wins (e.g. political and economic, or economic and religious). In case of a draw, the economic winner is the overall winner.

The game is basically about timing your pick-up and delivery - and about choosing your right awards. The game has slight paralells to Robo Rally, as the Yak routes are pre-programmed. The game is non-violent, contains a suitable amount of Euro-wood-pieces and is easily learnt and tought. Pick this game if you want someone you like very much to start boardgaming. I did, and it worked.

Thread: Re: Review - Himalya

Daddy-O — 2007-05-19T04:53:44+00:00

Clifford,

Regarding the screens: how exactly do you get them to stand up (without falling down and the goods going everywhere)? Is there a clip or something? I haven't actually played yet, but in trying out the screens I cannot seem to make head nor tail of them and their various creases for folding. I'm sure it must be something simple I am missing, but if you can point me in the right direction I would greatly appreciate it.

Thanks,
Kevin

Thread: Re: Breaking Ties

Crockerdile — 2007-05-19T04:30:34+00:00

My take on the final scoring is that it is about ELIMINATION. If no one has the fewest Stupas (a tie for the fewest), then they are still alive for the next step. Then if no one has the least amount of envoys (a tie for the fewest), then they are still alive for the next step , which is counting the yaks. If that is tied, then the game ends in a tie. I would say that if a player cannot clearly be eliminated in any of the first two elimanation steps, then he should be eligible to move on to the next scoring step.

So I guess I'm saying that if you tied for having the fewest Stupas, then tied for having the fewest Envoy points, you could still win the game by having the most Yaks...because you were never eliminated by the other criteria. It makes perfect "Eurogame sense" to me. I don't know if I'm correct, but this is how I would solve it.

I had never given this much thought, until I saw this thread. None of the games I've played had run into this endgame scoring problem. But it is clear, to me, that the first two steps in the final scoring, is about ELIMINATION.

Thread: Re: Breaking Ties

referee — 2007-05-19T03:14:03+00:00

How about resorting to the tie-breakers in the economic influence "final showdown?" ie, if economic influence is tied, then political influence is used. If still tied, religious influence... If all this is a tie... well, that's quite the coincidence, and any option that eliminates one of them is going to be unfair. If this is "for the title", you can have the rare shared victory... If this comes earlier, I'm at a loss.

Thread: Re: Expansion kills the luck?

danbar1963 — 2007-05-09T17:23:33+00:00

Profesor Mora wrote:
I'm interested in this game and I've read from Bruno Faidutti that the expansion: "it includes an almost luckless variant". Is it true?

Thank you in advance?

In Himalaya there will always be 5 villages where a player can get resource cubes, and 5 villages requesting a particular set of resource cubes. When a village is emptied of resources or a contract is fulfilled, a new village has to be selected.

In the original game this was done by a roll on a 20 sided die. There are twenty villages in the game so whichever village was rolled either had resources added to it or a contract placed there.

In the expansion there is the option of using 20 tiles, one for each village. The next five tiles are turned up and visible so the user's have an idea of where resources or contracts will apppear next.

The use of the tiles isn't required, it's just available for those who want to remove the randomness of the die rolls.

Edit: BTW, that does not totally remove the influence of luck from the game. The draw of resource cubes from the bag of resources is still a very significant source of luck and randomness. I would find it very hard to classify the game played with the tiles as being "luckless."

Dan

Thread: Expansion kills the luck?

Profesor Mora — 2007-05-09T12:20:08+00:00

I'm interested in this game and I've read from Bruno Faidutti that the expansion: "it includes an almost luckless variant". Is it true?

Thank you in advance!

Thread: Re: resource cubes after inventory count

dkeisen — 2007-05-08T06:48:45+00:00

You keep them. Back behind your screens.

Thread: resource cubes after inventory count

okaraburger — 2007-05-08T06:14:02+00:00

Hi. I will be playing my first game of Himalaya tonite with 3 other newbies. I've got a question that may seem rather obvious.

What happens to the resource cubes after we count them during the 4th and 8th turn? Do they go back behind the player screens, or are they (gasp!) thrown back into the bag?

Thanks,
C.

Thread: Re: Rock Paper Scissors

tanis — 2007-04-27T10:44:01+00:00

It's simply impossible to reply properly, not knowing each player style.

Beacuse Himalaya in those cases is a mind-reading game...

Personally, I take whatever is available if I am unsure of the other players choices.

Player D is in a tough situation because he doesn't have any safe choice.

As player D, I would have taken immediately, then leaving (hoping that one of A or B will be moving, 50% chance)

Thread: Himalaya session report

dedefortin — 2007-04-05T02:18:33+00:00

Himalaya is a favorite in our group, we don't have many games that are good with many players. Since the release of the expansion, we're using the rules that remove much of the random factor from the game since you know in advance the cities where the new good will appear. With this new addition the game is better and interaction is always great. Four players would compete tonight, Nathalie, Martin, Mario and Pierre.

Nathalie had a strong start in round 1 when she collected many goods and already made a delivery to a monastery. In the next rounds, Pierre, Mario and Martin followed each other in the North and accumulated many ressources even if they were competing hard. Martin had to wait until round 5 to make his first delivery and during this time Nathalie was making many deliveries. In round 6 many nice deliveries request appeared and Nathalie denied Martin any way to get to them by putting some obstacle tile before him. Pierre made 2 big deliveries on turn 7 and seemed on his way to catch him Nathalie. At this time there were 3 players in the east since there was many ngoods available. Martin was affected by another obstacle when Pierre placed a winterstorm in his way so Martin was stuck in the east while Pierre could go west to accumulate goods and make another nice delivery. Martin had a hard time and he was working hard to place more stupa so he wouldn't be eliminated at first. He was able to place some stupa for a tie that would be useful in the first elimination round.

Even if Martin had a great comeback he was eliminated in round 1 since he had less yach herd that Nathalie. But Nathalie was then eliminated in the second scoring. So Pierre and Mario would compete for the win and Pierre won since he had the most yach herd.

It was a long time since our last game of Himalaya and tonight's game was fun. It wasn't long to remember the rules and play went very fast when it was time to plan our moves. The game was already good but the expansion make it even better.

Final scoring:
1st place: Pierre
2nd place: Mario
3rd place: Nathalie
4th place: Martin

Thread: First run at Himalya

Gibbo — 2007-04-01T07:06:56+00:00

High up in the Himalyas I, Gibbo, set out to make my fortune. The villages, temples and monastaries all needed brave men to bring them the goods from other places. Soon I discovered that ther were other sherpas in the region try ing to horn in on my business. The first was Dobbs, a big, bold, bearded sherpa like my self. Next was Marko, a pale and cunning man. The last was the scrawney youth Benji.

We all started by building plans for the upcoming month. At first we just gathered a lot of resources. It did not seem like we were ever going to get the combinations of goods to satisfy any of these peoples' requests. In the second month the altitude got to young Benji and he halucinated that he was in charge of Marko's caravan and made plans accordingly. When he regained his senses he was back where he had started looking very confused.

Eventually the locals start rewarding us with yaks for having the most goods of various types. About this time orders started being filled too. Cunning Marko eschews the obvious wealth of yaks for controlling monastaries with bribes and sending his minions to various regions to build political power. While Dobbs and I appreciate the wealth that yaks inspire, we were soon forced to waste our rewards the same as Marko. Young Benji starts following suit when it appears to be a little too late.

As we close on the twelveth month, Marko begins to overwhelm Benji and my emmissaries in various regions, cowardly reducing our influence. Dobbs' weak influence with the local monastaries leads him to being chased from the mountains. My lack of political influence due to Marko's trechery leave me no choice but to move on despite my superior wealth in yaks. Marko's herd of twenty three yaks, compared to Benji's sixteen meant he had the money to make Benji move on too.

Marko hear my words: I will be back...