Game: Java

Thread: Re: Is the german edition out of print also?

EulerPi — 2008-08-17T18:31:18+00:00

Java is the one game of the mask triliogy I'm the most interested in. I love games with a 3-D component of some sorts. And it drives me BONKERS that so many of the 2000ish Rio Grande Games have a booklet advertising Java

Thread: Re: Will my friends want to play Java?

wytefang — 2008-08-05T03:07:47+00:00

Fantastic review and I think everyone should close out their reviews the way you did, Nick. I loved the star rating for the different gamer "mindsets."

Thumbs up!

Thread: Re: Is Java Like Tikal?

celt619 — 2008-06-19T21:13:19+00:00

I think I am in the same boat as Nick (original questioner). Played Tikal once (a long time ago) and as I recall in the first 3 turns or so, only one player drew any useful tiles (and they did so every draw) and had more or less won the game before anyone else did anything. As I say, haven't played since the game was new, so my recollections are probably off a bit, but the result was a total disregard for the game and it's designers. To the extent that when someone gave me Java, it has sat on the shelf unplayed simply for looking like Tikal.

Based on Tom's assessment "no random tiles draws, no volcanoes, just the actions of other players. This makes for a more strategic game, and a lot less luck/randomness" I may give Java a chance to redeem it's creators.

Thread: Re: Placing Overhanging Tiles

cymric — 2008-06-05T06:31:12+00:00

aPilgrim wrote:
Are you allowed to place tiles so that they overhang?
Definitely not.

Thread: Re: Placing Overhanging Tiles

kopje koffie — 2008-06-05T02:58:17+00:00

The English rules definitely say that this is NOT legal but I don't have them in front of me right now to give you the exact quote.

Thread: Placing Overhanging Tiles

aPilgrim — 2008-06-05T02:30:51+00:00

Are you allowed to place tiles so that they overhang? (this is different from placing tiles that are outside the playing area at a cost of 1 AP).

There seems to be a suggesting that you can place tiles as you please (provided you follow the specific rules) as long as they remain horizontal. Does that mean you can place overhanging tiles and then (potentially) not be allowed to build on the overhanging tiles if this causes the bottom overhanging tiles to lose its balance by tipping at the overhang?

I don't have the English rules just the translation provided here.

Thread: Re: Scoring 1st and 2nd in Final Round & Irrigation Tile rules

tmredden — 2008-05-23T15:09:38+00:00

After rereading the rules I've confirmed that the final scoring uses the same highest ranking and second highest ranking rules as per building and enlarging palaces, and there is no way to be both 1st and 2nd rank, therefor you can only achieve one or the other for each city, not both. If you have the only developer in a city you get 1st rank (full points,) not 2nd rank also.

I agree you can place more than 1 irrigation tile per turn.

Thread: Re: Is Java Like Tikal?

tomski — 2008-05-01T13:49:26+00:00

Thanks Nathan - I'd agree entirely.

Nick - well? How'd it go?

Thread: main field

Nakeshi — 2008-04-28T16:07:10+00:00

if anyone have good pure scan of the main field ? i will very - very happy if somebody post a scan.

many-many thnx !

Thread: Re: Is Java Like Tikal?

Amnese — 2008-04-26T09:52:15+00:00

Tom,
To address your questions of 12 April:

AP System: In Tikal you have 10 pts, in Java you have 6 pts. The actions you take are different (some similarities), but the general feel of the system is almost identical.

Eg:
Place a tile - 1 dot/AP
Move a person from rice to town - 1 dot/AP
Upgrade a palace - 1 dot/AP
etc etc.

Player downtime: Is about the same, perhaps a little longer in Java. In my opinion, it is a little easier to plan ahead in Java, then it is in Tikal. So this 'downtime' doesn't feel as bad - it may be a little longer, but you're thinking the whole time.

Treasures: There are no treasures, no random tiles draws, no volcanoes, just the actions of other players. This makes for a more strategic game, and a lot less luck/randomness.

Thread: Re: Is Java Like Tikal?

volnon — 2008-04-25T18:30:21+00:00

Is bacon like ham?

I would buy Tikal or Mexica first. If they seem pretty easy (and fun), you really need to buy Java.

Same or not, Java is a wonderful game, and judging from your game likes and dislikes, it belongs in your collection.

Thread: Re: Will my friends want to play Java?

volnon — 2008-04-25T18:05:09+00:00

Great review and very well thought out. Love the stars!

This is one of my very first games as well- I played it a bit, then it went into hibernation.

It came out again for a while after I gave a copy to my grown kids who seemed to really enjoy it. We played it at least 2 or 3 times, and it was popular.

Why does this game have a kind of love-hate thing going on? Who knows. The rules are a bit hard to figure out, and if someone in the group has AP, you can count on a lot of down time.

But what a game! Beautiful, and with wonderful tiles! So thick and chunky, like Taluva. One of the prettiest games ever when it is finished. This game is a MUST HAVE in my book!
]]>
To answer your question: Yes, your friends will want to play Java!

Thread: Will my friends want to play Java?

Nikku — 2008-04-25T11:47:47+00:00

Introduction

I play games with a lot of different groups of people. In almost all groups, I'm the one responsible for supplying and explaining the games. Because of this I have to think carefully which games I bring to which groups. These considerations for, in this case, Java will be the heart of this review. Hopefully this will give you some insight in whether Java is suitable for your specific group.

Information

]]> ]]> ]]> ]]> ]]> ]]>
Images courtesy of their respective BGG owners.

Java, part of the Mask Trilogy, is a 2-4 player game set on it's namesake island in pre-colonial Indonesia. As Javanese rulers, the players have to cultivate an undeveloped part of the island. They can do this by building villages and turning them into cities, or by organizing festivals. By stacking different shaped hex-based tiles the board takes an unique shape in which player's vie for the highest physical points.

The rules are moderately elaborate, but littered with good examples, which makes the game easy to teach. However, knowing what actions are possible, and knowing what right action to play, is quite a difference. New players will have some difficulty deciding on how to play their limited small tiles, and may easily be outmaneuvered by more experienced players. Easy to teach, easy to learn, but difficult to master. On the other hand, after one game played, when certain "tricks" have been used, it will be a lot easier to grasp for the newer players. A nice touch on the rules/gameplay-interaction is that there's no text anywhere in the game, which make the game itself completely language-agnostic. I can imagine this might be of help to people who suffer from dyslexia.

The components are fabulous. The Indonesian theme is nicely integrated in the gameplay and the components. From the beautiful board, to the cards, and the player aids, to the tiles, you actually feel like a Javanese ruler competing for cultural supremacy.

What will "they" think of Java?
Note that the stars indicate preference/attitude and not quantity, i.e. 1 star for playing time for a eurogamer means a dislike for duration for this game (i.e. too long). More stars equals more positive on a given subject. Of course caveat emptor and YMMV, because this classification is highly subjective. This means that these ratings are based on my opinion and experiences and may not correspond with others. Please leave some constructive feedback and I'll adjust the ratings accordingly.

1) Euro-gamers
overall
learning curve
playing time
strategy & tactics
luck
participation & downtime
fun-factor
look & feel
chance to hit the table

2) War-gamers
overall
learning curve
playing time
strategy & tactics
luck
participation & downtime
fun-factor
look & feel
chance to hit the table

3) Ameritrashers
overall
learning curve
playing time
strategy & tactics
luck
participation & downtime
fun-factor
look & feel
chance to hit the table

4) Non-gamers
overall
learning curve
playing time
strategy & tactics
luck
participation & downtime
fun-factor
look & feel
chance to hit the table

My $0.02 on Java

Java is one of my first games, and, unfortunately, on of my least played games. I'm still not quite sure why, because it is a lovely dynamic game with great looks. That's why I have vowed to bring it to game nights from now on, hoping it will see some table time in the near future.

The game can be quite the brain burner. Taking turns placing differently shaped tiles, guessing other players intentions, taking over eachother's turf, there's plenty afoot the keep the mind occupied. This makes the game feel pretty heavy, although it will leave you quite satisfied. Although the rules are simple, new players often struggle to come up with "first time" strategies, and will likely be outplayed by the more experienced players. The eye-candy of the entire game combined with the slim rules-footprint make this an ideal game for the "boardgame-pusher". It's pretty easy to convince people to try it ("First one's always for free, kid!").

Unfortunately this paradoxical heavy low entry game has been out of print for a while, which has had an impact on it's price tag. If you can find this for a reasonable price though, it'll be definately worth your time and money. But, you will actively have to endorse this game to people, because even though it looks and feels light, it can play quite heavy.

Image

jeffwiles — 2008-04-23T21:57:31+00:00

Fighting over a '10' palace

Image

jeffwiles — 2008-04-23T21:55:45+00:00

Near the end of a 3-player game

Image

jeffwiles — 2008-04-20T19:45:45+00:00

Thread: Re: Is Java Like Tikal?

tomski — 2008-04-12T17:14:28+00:00

I'm going to rephrase the question...

"If I don't like Tikal, because, rightly or wrongly, I find the AP system dull, too much player downtime, and the randomness of the treasures too, er, random, then what are the odds of me liking Java?"

That should be more helpful...

I'd say "pretty low"... but that's just me...

Thread: Re: Is Java Like Tikal?

Friendless — 2008-04-10T02:36:24+00:00

I find Tikal noticeably easier than Java. In Tikal you draw a tile and then try to exploit it better than your opponents can. In Java there is no such cue - you just do whatever you want with your APs. At the beginning of a game of Java you've got no idea what to do, and then the board will develop in you have no idea what way, so it's a very tactical game trying to make sure you're keeping up with the score. At the end of Java the points you score are a reward for your overall strategy which you didn't even really have. The Tikal board changes more slowly so it's possible to strategise, and you spend much less time feeling confused.

Thread: Re: Is Java Like Tikal?

tonksey — 2008-04-09T11:44:59+00:00

Thematically, no. There are similarities with Action Points & tile-laying though.

I prefer Java to Tikal in any case.

Cheers,

Matt...

Thread: Re: Is Java Like Tikal?

Philip Thomas — 2008-04-09T11:39:49+00:00

Java is at its heart a tile placement game. Players have their own personal stacks of tiles, as well as a general supply, and the tile placement has a genuine 3-D aspect to it. Sure, you are moving pieces around to get to the tiles, but that is very much secondary to the main focus.

Tikal on the other hand has a secondary tile placement mechanic and a primary focus on moving pieces around and doing stuff with them.

Thread: Re: Is Java Like Tikal?

cymric — 2008-04-09T11:39:38+00:00

It would've helped if you indicated what you consider to be 'like' . That said, yes and no. They share the basic AP mechanism, although Java introduces a few oddities---holding a party for example doesn't consume AP. Tikal has more variety in its AP prices which sit better with the feel of things being 'harder to do'. In Java, the AP to me feel more like a bookkeeping shorthand.

Gamewise, Tikal is the simpler game because it lacks the third dimension which gives Java its cerebral bite. To make up, Java makes you spend less AP on a given turn. That said, being able to lay tiles in the third dimension is a pleasant change from the usual fare of tile laying games, and with a bit of practice you can become quite creative in setting up good point scores for yourself, while making it difficult for others. It can be a source of frustration that someone else takes advantage of 'obvious' features your hard work produced, though---something which still happens to me on occasion.

That said, both games hold their own with ease. They share certain characteristics, but I never have the feeling that when I'm playing Tikal I'm actually playing a watered-down Java, or vice versa.

Thread: Re: Is Java Like Tikal?

Zalasta — 2008-04-09T11:27:01+00:00

Besides the mechanisms of action points allotment and majority control, I would say no.

Thread: Is Java Like Tikal?

Big Bad Lex — 2008-04-09T11:19:20+00:00

Like the heading says...is it?

Thread: Re: Is it possible to set a palace tile....

yunjeongz — 2008-03-21T16:15:15+00:00

That's what I want to know.
Thank you!!!!

Thread: Re: Is it possible to set a palace tile....

Drew1365 — 2008-03-21T15:53:46+00:00

I'm not sure if this is what you mean, but the height of the city tiles don't matter. As long as the city has an area of at least 2 hexes, (and you have a developer in the city,) you can put at least the 2-Palace in it.

The largest numbered palace you can put in the city must be the same or lower than the number of hexes that make up the city. So if your city is 6 or 7 hexes, you can put the 2, 4, or 6-palace in it. You can't put the 8 palace in it until the city gets larger.

The height of your developer doesn't matter if you have the only developer in the city.

Thread: Is it possible to set a palace tile....

yunjeongz — 2008-03-21T15:34:15+00:00

At my first turn, I made a city with one-tile height, then moved my developer to the city. Of course, there was no developer of other players. Is it possible to set a palace tile on the city with one-tile height, only if my developer is on the city ?

Thanks

Image

MariHo — 2008-03-07T15:52:59+00:00

Image

Capitaine Grappin — 2008-02-29T04:36:13+00:00

Game in progress

Image

Capitaine Grappin — 2008-02-29T04:33:33+00:00

Opponent is making too much AP? Play Java Palletti!

Image

Capitaine Grappin — 2008-02-29T04:31:50+00:00

Close-up Extra action token

Thread: Re: Grand Final Reckoning

CortexBomb — 2008-02-14T14:56:31+00:00

The Java tie-break system works the same in both parts of the game: the normal game, and in the grand final scoring...the thing you're looking for happens to be different in the final.

Essentially, in each city (or around each group of water hexes that just was surrounded) you look and see if someone has a piece higher than anyone else. If they do, they are the controller of that area. If two people are tied, then you look and see if those two players each have an additional piece in that area (next to that water), if only one of them does, then that person is the leader. If they both have pieces there, and one of them is on the higher terrain, than the person with the second piece on the higher terrain is the leader.

This is actually much harder to describe here than it is to demonstrate.

The basic idea is fairly simple though:

1) Highest

If two or more people are tied:

2) Check to see who has a second piece present. If only one person, that person is the leader. If 2 or more people, see whose second piece is highest. If still tied, check for a third piece. And so forth.

As I said above though, the implications of this vary in the different phases of the game. For palace expansion, someone MUST be the leader to be able to expand. In the grand final scoring, being tied for first when you do your reckoning is as good as being in absolute first, as you would score the full value of the palace. I don't remember the implications for the water right now (sorry, it's been a while since I played), but I'm sure you can find that in the rules.

Hopefully this helped a bit.

Thread: Re: Is the german edition out of print also?

cymric — 2008-02-14T11:42:07+00:00

Yes, the game was axed a few years ago. I had a devil of a time finding a copy even then.

Thread: Re: Is the german edition out of print also?

tonksey — 2008-02-14T11:40:17+00:00

pitris wrote:
The game is language independent, right? So I thought I'd try to get the German edition but I can't find it anywhere...

Funny - I found one easily on the Marketplace for Java. Got it imported from Italy; perhaps cost me more than a similar game would do in the Uk, but it's worth it.

And yes, the game is language independent; no components are covered in German, but you'll need to download Portguese rules if you don't know German/Italian/Dutch/French.

Cheers,

Matt...

Thread: Is the german edition out of print also?

pitris — 2008-02-14T11:21:26+00:00

The game is language independent, right? So I thought I'd try to get the German edition but I can't find it anywhere...

Thread: Grand Final Reckoning

tonksey — 2008-02-14T10:25:04+00:00

Hi,

Played my new copy of this last night - definitely worth the premium I paid for it !

One question sprang to mind about the Grand Final Reckoning at the end of the game; the rules confused us a little.

During the game, when you determine who has the right to build/expand palaces, you look at who occupies the highest level in the village/town. If there's a tie for top spot, you go the next level down and so on - if still tied then no-one can build/expand in that town. Sounds simple enough.

But with the GFR, the way the rules were stated was a bit confusing... you only score points if you occupy the highest or second highest position, if there's a tie for the top you look at the second highest player piece to determine it (ties results in full points)? For the 2nd highest spot, you look at the second highest pieces for half the points?

The scenario we had last night was in a town with an '8' temple, I had a single piece 2 levels high & he had 2 pieces, both 2 levels high. I interpreted the rules to say I would get all 8 points in the GFR since I tied for top spot, also that the number of pieces we had a each level was irrelevant. But he interpreted it that I should get 4 since it was a tie for top spot & since he he a 2nd piece on the top level & I had no others in the town.

If you can clarify, that'd be great.

Thanks

Matt...

Thread: Re: Copy of English rules?

tonksey — 2008-01-31T14:39:38+00:00

David,

Thanks for the suggestion. However, I was really after such a copy which has the pretty front page & pictures/illustrations as I would find on a Rio Grande edition.

Hopefully someone is able to scan the pages & e-mail them to me, please?

Ta,

Matt...

Thread: Re: Copy of English rules?

DKahnt — 2008-01-31T14:00:41+00:00

tonksey wrote:
Hi,

I have just bought a Ravensburger shrink-wrapped edition of Java. However, this is an international edition & has no English rules inside (language-independent components though) - although I know there are English rules in the files section.

What I would like is if someone has a copy of the Rio Grande Java & is able to scan the pages of the rulebook as I'd love to have the original look of the rulebook as well!

Even better; if anyone a physical copy of the English rulebook they no longer need and/or is happy to let me have, then please let me know!

Thanks,

Matt...

~~http://www.boardgamegeek.com/file/download/1056/Java_English...~~

wait apparently this one is better: http://www.boardgamegeek.com/file/download/7000/java.doc

There you go.

-DK

Thread: Copy of English rules?

tonksey — 2008-01-31T13:49:05+00:00

Hi,

I have just bought a Ravensburger shrink-wrapped edition of Java. However, this is an international edition & has no English rules inside (language-independent components though) - although I know there are English rules in the files section.

What I would like is if someone has a copy of the Rio Grande Java & is able to scan the pages of the rulebook as I'd love to have the original look of the rulebook as well!

Even better; if anyone a physical copy of the English rulebook they no longer need and/or is happy to let me have, then please let me know!

Thanks,

Matt...

Thread: Re: Moving through a palace tile?

swiftcorp — 2008-01-27T22:01:37+00:00

We also play that you cannot move through a Palace tile, although I have a feeling that more Developers would be brought onto the board if you could. We never seem to come anywhere close to using our quota of 12 developers during the game.

Thread: Re: Scoring 1st and 2nd in Final Round & Irrigation Tile rul

GSReis — 2008-01-02T19:00:05+00:00

Despite the thorough 10-page set of rules, we had to agree on two house rules in favor of the vague clarification in the Rio Grande Rules.
You definitely need to read the rules better. There is nothing vague about them. On the contrary, I think they are very clear and precise. And the game is excellent as it is, with no need for house rules.

1.) Can a player score both first and second place in the final scoring round? Our house rule is YES.
I see where you are coming from, but it is not possible to be in first and second places. The rank is determined by a sort of majority, except that higher levels count first.

2.) Can a player place more than one irrigation tile? Our house rule is NO.
From the action chart on page 4: "A player may place several irrigation tiles on the board in a single turn." (Emphasis also in the rules.)

Thread: Re: Scoring 1st and 2nd in Final Round & Irrigation Tile rul

cymric — 2008-01-02T18:30:56+00:00

I disagree with both interpretations. If you score first and second place, you are simply the first to begin with. Therefore you do not ever get points for being second in that case. As for the water tiles: the original Dutch, French, Italian and German rules explicitly mention that you can place more than one water tile. The maximum is therefore 6 on your turn, with the 7th action being a regular land tile, placed with the aid of a free action-token.

Thread: Scoring 1st and 2nd in Final Round & Irrigation Tile rules

TheSchmotz — 2008-01-02T16:41:49+00:00

We played an intense 4-player game of Java over the Holiday Season; definitely the most challenging game from the KieslingKramer collection of Tikal, Torres, Java and Mexica. After the sufficient time necessary is invested to learn the rules, Java rewards you with a mind-burning, intellectually stimulating gaming experience. The final board is quite something to see. No ordinary game!

Despite the thorough 10-page set of rules, we had to agree on two house rules in favor of the vague clarification in the Rio Grande Rules.

1.) Can a player score both first and second place in the final scoring round? Our house rule is YES. If a player wants to use the developers necessary to secure first and second, the player should be awarded both sets of points. The RGG rules do not state the same player is not permitted first and second place Palace Fame points.

2.) Can a player place more than one irrigation tile? Our house rule is NO. The RGG rules do not state a player may place more than one Irrigation Tile. The RGG rules state a player may place an Irrigation Tile on his turn; even connecting more than one to create one large irrigation area, but placing more than one Irrigation Tile in the same turn is not stated. The RGG rules clearly state a player may place more than one Landscape Tile, but the same statements are not made for Irrigation Tiles.

Does anyone have comments on these House Rules? Even better, does anyone know of any "official" rule clarification?

Thanks,
Sean

Image

Thommy8 — 2008-01-02T05:56:13+00:00

White towers over Orange on the last turn to control this 10-point palace, despite Orange's use of the precious single hex city tile.

Thread: Re: Java Reprint

Partizan242 — 2008-01-01T16:59:39+00:00

It's interesting that there is no news yet on a Java reprint, considering the fact that Java is being advertised in Rio Grande's little product promotion inserts they include inside their other games.

Thread: Re: Moving through a palace tile?

rayito2702 — 2007-12-26T06:42:28+00:00

You have to move on to a space in order to move off of it.

Thread: Moving through a palace tile?

dangrant88 — 2007-12-26T06:36:05+00:00

I know that you cannot move onto a palace tile, but the rules aren't exactly clear on whether you can move THROUGH a palace tile. Here's what the rules say:

"A player may only move his developers and only on land tiles, not on empty spaces, palace tiles, or irrigation tiles."

Since you obviously could not move through empty spaces or irrigation tiles, I've always played that you also cannot move through palace tiles.
What are your thoughts?

Thread: Fixing the last player problem in a 4-player game

cymric — 2007-12-15T16:59:49+00:00

I have always wondered about the 'injustice' doled out to the last player in a 4-player game. With some large scores being amassed in the final turn, the last player faces the near-impossible task of getting points of his own: most palaces are occupied by then and there are no more large 3-tile pieces to easily split up existing palaces while providing 'scaffolding' for new ones. Now of course that player could see this coming and therefore could attempt some form of pre-positioning to set up a little area of his own other players could not get into, but it still implies an imbalance of sorts: one player will have to spend AP to secure points later, while others can still use those same AP to score points now without worrying about the future all that much.

I was therefore thinking of setting aside one or two 3-piece tiles and playing the game as normal. The last turn begins when all but those set-aside tiles are on the board; the very last player gets these to use as he sees fit. This increases his movement options so that he still has a chance of attaining a competitive score. Of course, it needn't just be the 4th player who gets a 'bonus': it's easy to give the 3rd player an extra tile as well (say 1, with the 4th player getting 2). Alternatively, it is possible to change the amount of available action points on the last turn to something like 6 - 6 - 7 - 8 (or perhaps even 9), or even more elaborate, combine the two suggestions. Something more complex is neither required nor desired, in my opinion.

I haven't playtested these ideas---finding opponents who manage Java without too much trouble isn't easy in these parts---but I am quite interested in some feedback from grizzled experts before I give them a go. Of course, if people think these fixes aew not necessary, I would be most interested in learning how to proceed as the last player in this game: someone has to place the final tile, after all.

Thread: Re: Why 180th ?

beckeykevin — 2007-12-07T00:14:13+00:00

I think that Java's ranking is fantastic all things considered! Most games in the top 200 have a much broader appeal than Java. I rate Java a 10, but that is only because I choose to play against players who can make intelligent decisions in a timely manner.

I currently play Java against a select group of players, which is sadly less than five. In contrast to the current BBG Top Ten, I can pull out and play any of those games with a wider range of players. For example, I have played Puerto Rico and Princes of Florence against 30-50 different opponents in my gaming circle. I doubt I would be able to do the same with Java.

Image

mjtuell — 2007-12-05T03:30:02+00:00

Get some colorful and/or reflective card sleeves and it really doesn't matter if the cards don't fit perfectly. These look, handle and shuffle very well -- and the cards remain in perfect shape!

Thread: Re: Festival competition

beckeykevin — 2007-11-28T07:19:44+00:00

minordemon wrote:
Does it really matter in what order you raise? As long as you ask the others if they are finished raising.

I usually play as Mike does. But I don't think that you really drop out. You pass this turn, but I see no rule that says that you cannot join again later. Not that this has even happened, but I wouldn't object if somebody would play that way.

The rules specifically state that you cannot pass. You either remain in the bidding or drop out.

Thread: Re: English rules

Tim Synge — 2007-11-21T20:33:46+00:00

I used to be a critic of Jay Tummelson's policy of not publishing pdf files of English rules on the Rio Grande website. My reaction to the new website was therefore overwhelmingly positive, principally because he has placed all the rules files on there for download. Oddly, though, Mexica and Tikal are there, but not Java.

Thread: English rules

jpkapps — 2007-11-21T20:14:15+00:00

Didn't they release an official version of the English rules? I was surprised to only find a "home-made" translations of the rules in the files. Can anyone help? Many thanks.

Thread: Re: The four-hour game

moonmood — 2007-10-24T22:06:14+00:00

Tried it for the first time this evening with four people. 1 experienced player introducing the rules. The game took 4 hours! We did a bit of socializing while we played, and we had one extremely long round - ironically, the most experienced player spend 20 minutes on one move, once! :-)

And yes, we will probably introduce a timer next game... :-)

Anyways, I find this to be typical in all games we try for the first time. The game package say it will only take 2-3 hours, but ALL games that has more than 2 players take 4 hours! (or more!) E.g. I have played Vampire prince of the city with one or more new players each time. I've played the game a total of six times, and yet we haven't been able to complete it once ! And, we haven't gone further than setting the game for 6-10 turns... And the playing time has been around 4-6 hours!

Maybe we are just slow... :-) But we have fun anyways!

Thread: Re: Wow! Even When Playing it Wrong...It's Pretty Cool!

moonmood — 2007-10-24T21:56:23+00:00

Good review of what I believe can be typical errors in Java. I tried it for the first time this evening and I must say it was a great experience! Even one of the players that sort of didn't get the idea of the game in the start loved it in the end. :-)

The possibilities in the game are very interesting and I did the same error as you did - I did not move enough developers in... I lost a lot of points this way. I guess the score ended up something around 47, 54, 73 and 74. I came third. And the game took - for our first try - 4 hours!

It is true as I read in another review that Java is a game where you need to focus on the tricks of the trade to get the game-speed up. Not for socializing, which we did quite a bit of.

Anyways, fun game since it adds a creative twist to the gameplay with new opportunities each round, but somewhat difficult to get all the rules at once.

Really worth the buy!

Thread: Re: Why 180th ?

Pyjam — 2007-10-08T07:54:22+00:00

Thanks for your answers.

I don't feel that Java is drier than most of the games in the top 10. The game requires a lot of thought, but that's part of what I look for in a game. I don't understand why Java would be drier or more complexe than T&E or... Die Macher.

I suspect that a lot of people have problems with 3D games. I played with a guy who needs to put the tiles onto the board to try different placements. He said he can't play otherwise.

Pyjam

Thread: Re: Why 180th ?

Kimball Bent — 2007-10-08T07:18:27+00:00

Well Java is in my Top Ten. It is nice to see someone that shares my enthusiasm. I've always thought that a coffee table version of this game would be great - even thicker land tiles, made of wood that interlock, etc. It is the most beautiful game I have seen.

From past grievances that I have read, the main issue is what some folks call 'analysis paralysis'. This tells me that a lot of people are happier playing games that play themselves and don't require too much thinking. It is really a shame that Java doesn't get the notoriety it deserves.

Thread: Re: Why 180th ?

cymric — 2007-10-07T19:06:42+00:00

No, Torres is not 'just as 3D'. More precisely, in Torres you add single elements to stacks. In Arkadia, the game is really on the board, with the tower adding just a minor 3D-aspect---the 'foundations' of the building are just a simple rectangle which does not change. In Java, the elements can overlap to produce the sawah-effect. In addition, the large elements are not rotation-symmetric (apart from 2*pi-rotation-symmetric), so that more possibilities present themselves: it's both orientation as well as stacking. Also, it is an AP-game with quite a lot of options to chose from. Torres is also an AP-game, but has less options, and makes do with one AP less per player round. Java is simply much more of a puzzle, and if you have trouble visualising your moves, you won't like it much.

That is IMO the reason why Java is ranked lower than Torres and Arkadia.

Thread: Re: Why 180th ?

thatmarkguy — 2007-10-07T18:37:45+00:00

cymric wrote:
Pyjam wrote:
I just discovered this game and I'm blown. I wonder why this game vegetates at the 180th rank. IMHO he deserves to be in the top 10. Any opinion ?
It's the 3D-aspect.

Torres is just as 3D and it's in the top 100.

Arkadia also holds a higher rank than Java.

Thread: Re: Why 180th ?

cymric — 2007-10-06T13:29:28+00:00

Pyjam wrote:
I just discovered this game and I'm blown. I wonder why this game vegetates at the 180th rank. IMHO he deserves to be in the top 10. Any opinion ?
It's the 3D-aspect.

Image

spearjr — 2007-08-13T02:14:34+00:00

The players concentrated on water points early, but black now has a majority of workers on the board.