All posts by 5 Minutes

Top 10 Best Table Top Games (October 2015)

I recently scrolled through my top 10 table top games list from March of this year and came to a startling realization. Things have changed! Dramatically. In fact that list almost doesn’t make any sense at this points as there have been quite a few new additions and drop offs. This list needs an update so here we go!

1. Star Wars X-Wing

The undeniable king of the hill, X-Wing just gets better with time.
The undeniable king of the hill, X-Wing just gets better with time.

Ok this is the one thing that has not changed, in fact, X-Wing’s position on this list is strong than ever. I can’t think of a single game that could even be a contender at this point. Its fast, furious, star fighter combat in the Star Wars universe and FFG’s commitment to constantly push out new ships and improve the game is making this wonderful gem better and better. Which says a lot if your at all familiar with miniature games as a hobby, it is very typical for games to become bloated over time, unbalanced and in some cases a great game can be turned into a terrible game. Not so with X-Wing, it just keeps getting better and better. I don’t know what else to say other than when it comes to table top gaming, given the option I always rather play X-Wing than anything else.

2. Game of Thrones

Slowly but surely Game of Thrones has crawled up the ladder of this list proving it has legs. A Classic at this point.
Slowly but surely Game of Thrones has crawled up the ladder of this list proving it has legs. A Classic at this point.

Game of Thrones is one of those games that I have realized has surpassed all others in group play. It’s got strategy, diplomacy, resource management and above all else treachery. I didn’t find it difficult to edge out Twilight Imperium, which has been in my top 2 since release, most of that time in the number one spot. It would be dishonest at this point however to allow it to sit above Game of Thrones on the list. We play it more often and it’s far more engaging, far more approachable and frankly far more clever than Twilight Imperium. It’s earned it stripes through repeated plays as I constantly uncover more and more of its brilliance. It’s been a long time coming but Game of Thrones deserves to be up here with the best of the best.

3. Star Wars: Armada

It made my top 5 most anticipated games of 2015 and now it has crashed into my top 10 list. Yet another smash hit from Fantasy Flight Games.
It made my top 5 most anticipated games of 2015 and now it has crashed into my top 10 list. Yet another smash hit from Fantasy Flight Games.

This one has made a big splash on this list and made a big impression on me, in fact its without question the first game that I have played where after the first game I thought to myself, holy shit, I can’t believe how awesome this game was. I dare not compare it to my beloved X-Wing but in truth much of what appeals to me about Armada is the same as X-Wing, though the shock and awe of Star Wars Armada far outweighs the gradual appreciation I gained for X-Wing over time. In fact when I got my X-Wing core set I recall thinking to myself, this might be good if there was more variation and my prediction ultimately came true. In the case of Armada it was a big smash hit right out of the gate. Perhaps it’s because I got into it a little later when more toys are available for it, but regardless, it hit on every piston for me. I do find it a bit more complex and considerably less approachable which will probably prevent it from ousting X-Wing from the top spot. As a gamer, I tend to seek out games that I can actually put on the table, which is exactly what X-Wing is, but with Armada its really more of a self-contained hobby than a game, a more common way miniature games tend to be. Games that have a big splash on my list do have a tendency to slip as dramatically once the novelty wears off, but right, I’m super into it. Fantastic strategic and tactical game of capital ship warfare in the Star Wars universe, as a gamer I can only say “Fuck Yeah!”

4. War Of The Rings

As much a visual story experiance as a game, War of the Rings deserves every word of praise it has ever recieved.
As much a visual story experiance as a game, War of the Rings deserves every word of praise it has ever recieved.

When it comes to games on this list, no game sells its story better than War of the Rings. This has always been and always will be one of my favorite ways to spend an evening with a gaming buddy. It’s an intimate experience that win or lose always makes for an awesome night. Over time this has been a slow riser, much like Game of Thrones, its earning it stripes through repeated plays which is typically the type of game that holds on my top 10 list for extended periods of time. My only complaint about the game is that it is rather lengthy, not a huge problem given the company it keeps on this list. An amazing game that belongs in the collection of every gamer in my humble opinion.

5. Twilight Imperium

For nearly a decade this game has sat in the number 1 spot, to watch it slip now is almost like saying good bye to an old friend. I never thought I would see it dethroned let alone slip so far down on this list. Still an amazing game.
For nearly a decade this game has sat in the number 1 spot, to watch it slip now is almost like saying good bye to an old friend. I never thought I would see it dethroned let alone slip so far down on this list. Still an amazing game.

Ok so after nearly a decade of being in the top 2 on this list the great goliath that is Twilight Imperium has slipped from its grace. It had a great run and it’s certainly no push over in the number 5 spot, but TI3 is no longer resurfacing as often as it once did. I think it’s really largely due to the fact that while no specific game has replaced the epic space empire building genre of games for me, Twilight Imperium is becoming less and less approachable as an evening of entertainment by comparison to the many games out there. For example Game of Thrones might not have anything to do with space but it does share that big box game feel while being considerably more approachable and current. I still love Twilight Imperium and will gladly play it but over the years the group of gamers In my gaming group willing to slug it out in a 6+ hour complex strategy game is becoming smaller and smaller. I foresee an eventual slip from the list for Twilight Imperium, for the same reason games like Shogun (MB version), Axis and Allies or Fortress America eventually slipped. I love those games but the commitment they demand, pressed against the alternative options constantly being added in designer board game is making it less and less relevant. Still, looking at it from a pure fan perspective, despite alternatives, Twilight Imperium remains the best big box epic science-fiction game ever made.

6. Nations

I knew Nations would make this list the first time I played it. Its a niche game, but it rubs me the way I like.
I knew Nations would make this list the first time I played it. Its a niche game, but it rubs me the way I like.

Very few Euro’s grace my top 10 list but without reservation I add Nations. Most Euro games that make the list do so for relatively brief periods of time and this is largely due to the fact that Euro’s just lack the theme to really stick, they just don’t have those long term legs. Civilization building however is a theme I really love, but have watched fail in many’a’game, so I’m very happy to have finally found one I truly enjoy playing. I know this is a “Through The Ages Light” variant and truth be told I would love to be able to put Through The Ages on this list, but this list isn’t just about what I love, but what I actually get to play. Nations is one of the few Euro games I have brought to my gaming group that got their attention despite its Euroish roots. It’s got the interaction and the stressful intensity of a great game Euro or not. It also has a fun theme most gamers can get behind and fantastically fluid mechanics that are easy to understand, but impossible to master. It’s a brain teaser but I love it, a well-deserved addition to the list.

7. Star Trek: Fleet Captains

Definitly the biggest suprise of the year for me despite being released quite a while ago. I really didn't have high hopes for Fleet Captains as I very impulsevly hit the Buy button. Not only did it not disapoint me but it smashed into this list with a vengence.
Definitly the biggest suprise of the year for me despite being released quite a while ago. I really didn’t have high hopes for Fleet Captains as I very impulsevly hit the Buy button. Not only did it not disapoint me but it smashed into this list with a vengence.

When I first picked up Star Trek Fleet Captains I thought to myself, it looks great but there is a long line of board games in the Star Trek universe that suck balls. From the first test play I did with myself I was relieved to discover that this was a fantastically thematic adventure game, well designed, that represents the Star Trek universe beautifully. The real test would be introducing it to my gaming group who told me when I bought it and I quote “Dude we are never going to play that with you”. The reason is simple; my gaming group HATES all things Star Trek. It was going to be a hard sell at best with very little chance of success. Still I managed to twists some arms and in truth the game just sold itself. Despite not being fans of the franchise, Fleet Captains is such a fantastic game that every person I introduced it to, no matter how reluctant, ultimately liked and in some cases, like me loved the game. A game so good that even if you very specifically don’t like Star Trek you will still like, that’s amazing. For me personally as a Star Trek fan this was the game I have hoped someone would make for years and they did. Fantastic, love it!

8. Fury of Dracula

No doubt the oldest member of this list by a wide margin, Fury of Dracula is a classic that just refuses to go away. Soon to get a whole new fresh start with FFG releasing a new edition.
No doubt the oldest member of this list by a wide margin, Fury of Dracula is a classic that just refuses to go away. Soon to get a whole new fresh start with FFG releasing a new edition.

Sometimes I wonder if Fury of Dracula is on this list out of nostalgia. After all of all the game on this list, it’s one I play the least, in fact its been a long time since I played it and rightfully for that reason it has slipped on this list. Fortunately that is about to be remedied as Fantasy Flight is about to release a new version of the game which I’m eagerly anticipating. I’m hoping to rekindle my love for this one and add it to my collection. I can say however that if its nostalgia, it’s for good reason. I recall my games of Fur of Dracula as far back as five years ago with perfect clarity. It’s got a distinct storyteller like mechanic that just sings and creates unforgettable game sessions. For that reason it sits pretty on this top 10 list.

9. Kemet

The newest member to the family, perhaps I'm being impulsive here but I fell in love with this one the moment I laid eyes on it.
The newest member to the family, perhaps I’m being impulsive here but I fell in love with this one the moment I laid eyes on it.

Ok Kemet is a rising star, I got into this one a little late (2nd reprint) and have actually only had one play but I have had my eye on it for a long time, in fact it would have been number 6 on my top 5 most anticipated games had that list been a top 6 list (duh). It’s got an awesome theme, it’s a sort of cross between Euro mechanics and Ameri-Trash, yet it’s a pure wargame. There is so much going on in this game it’s amazing, especially considering how simple the concept and mechanics actually are. It is after all a very fast and furious war game, but it just hits on all pistons for me, scratching an itch that is often hard to scratch because so many games like it require a far bigger time commitment. Kemet does what many other games take 4 to 5 hours to do in just under 2 hours for your average game, yet it’s a very full bodied experiance. Fantastic mechanics, great theme, perfect balance, simple to teach , impossible to master … it’s got all the makings of a great game and I see it as a rising star on this list.

10. Shogun (Queen Games Version)

What can I say, I love that damn cube tower. Shogun is just fun in a box for me.
What can I say, I love that damn cube tower. Shogun is just fun in a box for me.

I’m always surprised about this one remaining on this list because it is so different than what usually makes the cut. The truth of it is, and this may be a bit childish of me but it’s simply fun to throw cubes into that chaotic tower. I mean I love the strategic, contemplative part of the game as well, but its icing on the cake. The combat is just so frantic and fun to execute that you can’t help but rise to your feet during play. It’s a game that creates great atmosphere at the table with this amazing blend of contemplative strategy and explosive anticipation. It’s a strategic game and I’m not going to deny it that honor but to me it falls in a line of games along with Galaxy Trucker and Zombicide where sometimes there is not real explicable reason why I like a game other than its simply fun to play. I especially like it with max players, the more you have the more chaotic it is. Great game, a worthy addition to the list, slipping to the bottom list is hardly a reflection of its quality and far more a tribute to its staying power.

A couple of notes on games that exit the list.

Dominion for me was a really easy removal, in fact, Dominion’s fall from grace was almost as dramatic as its rise, once sitting in the number 5 spot (long ago), not only was it removed from the list this time around its on the chopping block as a cannidate for being culled from my collection all together.  It just wore out its welcome, I haven’t played it in almost two years and have no desire to.  It just doesn’t have legs.

Tide of Irons, Lords of Waterdeep and Formula D all make their exists and frankly its less a reflection on them and more a reflection of the fact that so many new, great games are being made.  I still love all three and they are in no danger of collecting dust on the shelf.

Star Trek Fleet Captains by Wizkids 2011

Designers: Mike Elliott, Bryan Kinsella, Ethan Pasternack

Final Score: christmas_starchristmas_starchristmas_star3.9Stars (3.9 out 5 Stars)

Star Trek is undoubtedly one of the most easily recognized franchises in science-fiction and popular culture right along the likes of Star Wars. Unfortunately in the world of gaming, be it video games, board games or otherwise it just seems to be cursed. After nearly 50 years of Star Trek I don’t even need the use of my second hand to count the number of quality games made for the Star Trek franchise across all gaming platforms. In the world of board gaming I can’t even think of one. To put it plainly yet very accurately, Star Trek board games and card games suck.

Suffice to say when released in 2011 I barely even gave this game a glance, working on the standard and historically accurate presumption that if it has the Star Trek logo, it’s probably not going to be very good. Still, I am a fan of the franchise as a whole and find myself longing for a way to experience it as a game. Unlike most of my gaming purchases, against my own sound advice I impulsively picked up Star Trek: Fleet Captains recently. The only question that remains is, does the game stack up? or is it yet another disappointment to the seemingly hopeless string of games attempting to capture the Star Trek universe? Let’s find out.

Components

Verdict: christmas_starchristmas_star
Tilt: christmas_star

Pros: Sturdy miniatures that are made to last and look stunning on the table,.

Cons: Card stock quality is average with some components clearly needing to be thicker (system tiles), in contrast to the miniatures the cards are not made to last. Not the best application of the Clix gimmick.

I usually don’t complain about the price of games because typically there isn’t that much to complain about. Most modern designer games fly in around 20-50 dollars usually peeking at around 60ish or so. It’s really rare that a game is released that weighs in around 100 dollars (about 1,000 Swedish crowns for my Scandinavian friends).

When a game is that expensive, my expectation is that the components of the game better blow me the fuck out of the water, after all I paid dearly for them.

pic1091129_md
Fleet Captains looks great on the table, but the component quality leaves a lot to be desired.

In the case of Star Trek Fleet Captains certainly the thing that immediately captures your attention are the plastic heroclix miniatures and they do not disappoint. These are some solid mini’s, especially for board game standards and while unpainted with occasional blemishes, in board game terms I can’t think of any game that has done a better job. Naturally they aren’t comparable to miniature games and that isn’t a standard for comparison here, but I have seen the Attack Wing miniatures and they aren’t that far off here, some of them appear to be the same molds.

The ships are easily identifiable, in particular the many unique Federation vessels. The Klingon ships are less so due largely to the fact that there are fewer different types but they are no less spectacular looking. I can say that the clix components aren’t always easy to turn, some are a bit stickier than others adding to the fiddly nature of the game and its worth mentioning that in play, the Clix gimmick really doesn’t translate well. The font is very small and the information difficult to read on them. I don’t dislike the Clix concept, but perhaps this wasn’t the best application of it.

As for the rest of the game I think the components barely get a passing grade in terms of quality, the stock is quite flimsy even though I personally like a rough finish. The system tiles in particular are a thin stock given that the thinness makes them a bit difficult to pick up and even after a couple of plays clear marks and bends can be seen.

There is quite a bit of components here, hundreds of cards and plenty of counters to track everything with ample excess to ensure you aren’t going to run out of anything during play.

To conclude, aside from the Miniatures which are really great and alone would earn a very high component grade, the component quality is quite average everywhere else, well below expectations for such an expensive game. I’m thankful that while the cards are thin they are at least a rough finish which will help to hide the eventual blemishes on the cards. It was difficult to score it, on miniatures I would have given it 4 stars for components, but for the rest of the game it would be a hard 2 stars. The deciding factor for me was the price, at such a high cost, I really expected, no, demand, fantastic components from start to finish. You don’t get to charge me 100 bucks and give me a game that is already showing wear and tear after a couple of plays.

Theme

Verdict: christmas_starchristmas_starchristmas_starchristmas_star
Tilt: christmas_starchristmas_starchristmas_star

Pros: Every inch of the game is designed with the Star Trek theme in mind, delivering dynamic trekkie goodness from start to finish.

Cons: Photo art style is effective in inspiring nostalgia and portraying the games theme to Trekies but likely looks weird and low budget as the shows were to non-trekies. Photo Art is pretty much never a good idea for board games.

To me, first and foremost at the top of the list was that if this game was going to put the Star Trek logo on the cover and claim “Explore the galaxy with your own fleet!” it better feel like it. Thankfully the designers put their best foot forward and while not perhaps in a terribly artistic way as the games art style is largely screen shots from the TV shows and movies, for fans at the very least it might hit that nostalgic note. The presentation and thematic presence comes in small part due to the components, in particular the ship miniatures but overall where the game shines is within its connection between the mechanics and the Star Trek theme. I will discuss some of those mechanics in the gameplay section, but suffice to say there is no action in the game you can take, that doesn’t have an immediate and recognizable link to the show, all reflected in the art style and general presentation of the game. The Star Trek presence is unmistakable in this game, it’s exactly what you hope to find in a franchise board game.

Games with cropped photos rely heavily on the impact of those photo's on their audience.
Games with cropped photos rely heavily on the impact of those photo’s on their audience.

Now typically I don’t like “photo” art in games because while I might love the show or movie they are based on, when I play a game I love to experience new visuals rather than cropped photos from scenes I have already seen. Fleet Captains however does a great job of selection here, choosing some of the most iconic, funniest and cleverly nostalgic photos from the show, clearly a tribute to fans. I found myself smiling at the draw of every card, a clear sign that the designers got the desired effect out of this minimalist approach to art design, at least from a Trekkie.

I’m afraid however that if you don’t watch and know Star Trek, this art style is going to look quite weird to you. The costume and art design of the Star Trek shows was nothing if not rather low budget so there are some pretty outrageously cheesy men in rubber suites that might put a smile on your face for the wrong reasons.

That said, it’s crystal clear to me that the Star Trek theme is here in spades, it IS Star Trek in a box and it’s exactly what as a Trekkie I hoped I would find when I opened it. Fleet Captain delivers the connection between theme and gameplay in a nostalgically fantastic way.

Gameplay

Verdict: christmas_starchristmas_starchristmas_starchristmas_star
Tilt: christmas_starchristmas_starchristmas_starchristmas_star

Pros: Dynamic game-play offers tremendous variety in strategies in this very balanced, yet diverse game. Its connection between theme and mechanic is near perfect. It’s the first and only good Star Trek game on the market.

Cons: Card play timing and effects can sometime be confusing without much official clarification. As a 2 player game it’s great, but to get a proper multiplayer experience (3 or 4 players) you have to buy one or both expansions which are nearly as expensive as the core game and at this point difficult to find.

As usual in my reviews I typically don’t explain how to play the game, I find that most people when they read reviews, myself included, just want to get to the nuts and bolts in regards to what works and how well it works. We will do just that.

Fleet Captains is a multifaceted, dynamic and asymmetrical game, which are all buzz words but they actually do mean stuff In this case, I promise.

When I say multifaceted I’m talking about Fleet Captains merging of genres and game play elements. It’s a game that combines adventure gaming (player vs. environment) via encounter decks and system tiles creating that very familiar exploration element in Star Trek shows. It’s also a strategic game of area control, players influence system tiles, construct colonies and gain benefits from controlling these areas. This give you a sense of the Star Trek universe on a more global scale, where familiar science-fiction sounding stuff like Starbases, Nebulas and unique locations you most certainly remember from the shows take on strategic meaning and purpose in the game.

The game is also a strategic game of fleet combat, the primary way players interact with each other as they attempt to slow or halt each other’s progress in their pursuit for victory points through direct aggression. This of course is the most Star Trekkie thing of all as the Federation and Klingons clash in combat raising shields, overloading sensors, firing photon torpedoes, all driven by a variety of customizable mechanics and card play. Playing with the model ships is fun enough, but seeing that the mechanics that govern them are so in sync with the theme here makes this a wonderful experience for fans of Star Trek.

Ship to ship combat is an important part of the Star Trek universe, its no surprise that so many fans take the time to paint their ships in preparation for battle.
Ship to ship combat is an important part of the Star Trek universe, its no surprise that so many fans take the time to paint their ships in preparation for battle.

Finally it’s a strategic card game as players try to out play each other in back and forth of modification cards, combat cards, crew cards other advantageous card play. This is in a sense the finishing touch on the game, its where that personalized ownership of your game world comes into play. You have Captain Kirk and Bones on the Enterprise, exploring the galaxy, but you can also have sort of customized, alternative world where Picard actually captains the Runabout. It’s the essence of Trekkiness.

In on themselves individually the mechanics aren’t terribly original but what drives them is. Again, its that connection of mechanics and them, for example the encounter cards are effectively the central plot of an entire Star Trek episode from one of the tv shows or movies and the mechanics that define that encounter are represented in a manner that has an expected effect on the game. There are long lasting effects, some that redefine the terrain, others that create a unique risk for that game in a particular area. This is true of the command cards, the mission cards, the system tiles themselves and how all the ships function. Everything is in tune.

There is also a variety of ways these cards interact and create combinations of mechanics that create the diversity in the game as a whole. For example you might have a science vessel that doesn’t have much in the way of offensive military power but with the right command cards, that high sensor score can be turned into a lethal weapon. This sort of inventive element replicates the feel of the show as your clever Federation officers or Klingon Warriors find ways to turn disadvantages into advantages. There are many gotcha moments, last minute miracle moves and an ample surprises are fizzing with that Star Trek essence.

The “dynamics” (Buzzword) of how the game is setup, and ultimately reveals itself is also a major strength of the game. You start the game with a small fleet of the many possible ships each with unique abilities, strengths and weaknesses drawn randomly at the start of the game. The galaxy itself is built from a small portion of a fairly sizeable deck of system tiles constructed in any way you see fit which defines the length of the game and in a sense the type of game you will have. You get a small handful of mission cards for each game from a stack of many. You select 4 command decks of 10 cards each from 10 different command decks, cards that will define your strengths and weakness. Not to mention the encounter cards of which you may draw dozen in the course of the game, from a deck sizable deck.

While there is a standard configuration for the system tiles, creating uniquely shaped universes is one of many ways this game can be easily customized.
While there is a standard configuration for the system tiles, creating uniquely shaped universes is one of many ways this game can be easily customized.

Let’s just say that the amount of dynamic content is so large that even without the expansions the possibilities will take many games to explore fully. After six plays of the game I can say without reservation that not only was each game unique, but no clear strategies that carry over from game to game revealed themselves. It’s a game of reacting to what is available and in front of you, rather than theoryocrafting or analyzing the mechanics to “figure out” how to win the game. It’s my personal favorite style of design and you will find none of my top 10 games are games you can unravel the “how to win” puzzle which might explain why so few Euro games make the cut.

Finally the game is Asymmetrical but this isn’t just a subtle facade, there is an extremely distinct difference between playing as the Klingons or the Federation and again, like everything else in the game it’s thematically accurate down to a science in the broad Star Trek theme. Both the ships and command cards each have distinctly unique capabilities, each with their own benefits and drawbacks. Each race excels in certain areas, while flounders in others, yet there is a certain sense of equality even in this Asymmetrical balance. For example when a military Klingon ship faces of against a Federation science vessel you might expect that the military might of the Klingons means a sure, easy fight. Thanks to some interesting card play and mechanics, a science-vessel might overload and disable the Klingons shields and even with its limited fire-power could win the day. Every mechanic in the game combines to create unique opportunities for each player, using them wisely is the route to victory. The strategies deployed aren’t always driven by the strength of the Asymmetrical style for your race, often its opportunities and surprise card effects that make all the difference. Needless to say, this element can be found in Star Trek shows and movies, which brings that Star Trek feel to the game.

The races are unique and distinct in both appearance and abilities. It begs for more expansions.
The races are unique and distinct in both appearance and abilities. It begs for more expansions.

There are many nuances of gameplay in Star Trek Fleet Captains but what I think makes Fleet Captains special is how well thought out each nuance and mechanic is, how well balanced it is and how diverse it is. I can’t really point to a specific mechanic and say “hey that’s really unique”, most of these things we have seen in other Wizkids games or otherwise, but it’s the combination of mechanics with its unmistakable link to the theme that really separates Fleet Captains from other games and makes it shine.

Now I do have a couple of beefs with Fleet Captains as far as gameplay is concerned but these are mostly minor things that hardly detract from the experience as a whole. For one the effects of the combat cards can sometimes be a bit contradictory and sometimes timing of play can create some disputable effects most of which are neither defined in the rules or the FAQ’s. There are similar issues with some encounter cards. I also wish they added some way to track ongoing effects for encounter cards that stay in play, the official rule is to leave the card on the system tile but this covers it up and if you get a few of these cards on the table things can get very messy in particular if you are playing a larger game. Some simple numbered tokens that could be matched on the side of the table to the cards would have effectively resolved the issue (and doing that with dice is how we solved it).

I can say that the fiddly Clix components on the ship does detract a bit from the game, if for no other reason than that they are hard to see as the font on them is really small and blocky. This is more of a component issue, but it has impact on play as 8’s, 6’s and 9’s for example look almost indistinguishable from each other unless you put it under a microscope and that can lead to poorly thought out decisions or clerical errors. Playing the game in good lighting is a must.

The reference cards for the ship thankfully helps to alleviate some of the issues by the poorly chosen font on the clix themselves. Even under close inspection they are hard to see.
The reference cards for the ship thankfully helps to alleviate some of the issues by the poorly chosen font on the clix themselves. Even under close inspection they are hard to see.

Then there is the two player issue, now it does have an option for 4 players in teams of 2 which I found to be ok, but clearly, it’s a two player game. I accept that, but I certainly see this working as a 3 or 4 player game where everyone plays for their own faction if you get the expansions. Sadly those expansions are almost as expensive as the base game so it’s a pretty big investment to get this up and running at full capacity. I took the plunge with the dominion expansion and as expected the 3 player experience with 3 separate races was fantastic, but it cost me nearly 1800 Swedish crowns to put together (that’s about 200 dollars).

My conclusion despite these minor flaws is that Star Trek Fleet Captains game-play is outright amazing. It’s just a fantastic game that works on every level, it’s well balanced, easy to learn difficult to master, it’s dynamic, offers a wide range of strategies and possibilities. Above all else though is that wonderful connection between the mechanics and the theme, for a Trekkie fan, you just can’t ask for more out of a Star Trek game.

Longevity and Replay ability

Verdict: christmas_starchristmas_starchristmas_starchristmas_star
Tilt: christmas_starchristmas_star

Pros: The games dynamic nature, great variety of strategic options and engaging gameplay make this game a long term keeper in your collection. Two great expansions, if you can get a hold of them, give this game incredible expandability.

Cons: The Star Trek theme is often a love it or hate it type of thing with groups, if your group doesn’t like the theme it may be a hard to get it to the table. The game appears to be going out of print with expansions becoming increasingly difficult to find meaning long term support is unlikely.

This is always a simple part of the review, a game either has it or it doesn’t. Naturally I will elaborate a bit but the bottom line of Fleet Captains is that it has replay ability in spades, certain to ensure its longevity in my collection. In fact I was only compelled to pick up the expansions for the variety and expansion into the 3 and 4 player realm, but in terms of longevity and replay ability, the core game has such an incredible dynamic and diverse system that you can play it endlessly with each game guaranteed to be unique. It’s near perfect in this regard.

The question of longevity isn’t always about dynamic options however, in fact, the question of longevity is largely about whether or not repeated plays are fun and whether it will actually make your gaming groups table. The fact that it’s different every time you play is a good start but does the game have that umpf at the end where after playing it 20 times it remains fresh and fun. Talking about it is tough for reviewers because we typically don’t want to play a game for 2 years to see how it fairs over that much time before we write a review. We can only guestimate as to how the game will fair in our collections and in our gaming groups. That said, when you play a lot of games like I do yet maintain a very small collection you become very accustomed to recognizing the difference between that fresh new game novelty and wow factor and its ability to hold your interest over time.

Sadly the Romulan expansion at this point is nearly impossible to find, even if cost is no object. Here's hoping they reprint it.
Sadly the Romulan expansion at this point is nearly impossible to find, even if cost is no object. Here’s hoping they reprint it.

In that regard despite all of the potential of this game I don’t really see myself playing it often, not because of a lack of desire mind you. The reason is that the drawback of the game is the same as the benefit.

Simply put, it’s a theme heavy game in the Star Trek universe and it’s a 2 player game. That means it’s more likely to filter out of group gaming nights, and while the expansions fix this to some extent I still think I will largely play this as a two player game. I love 2 player games and I love Star Trek, these are positive things, but it’s precisely for those two reasons I suspect getting it to table with any regularity will be difficult. This is a pretty common problem among niche products like this one.

There is one minor hiccup in terms of longevity and that is the support for the game itself. I managed to pick up the Dominion expansion, but the Romulan expansion is not only out of print but nearly impossible to get a hold of at this point. From my understanding as well is that the game is going out of print, so a reprint of the Romulan expansion looks unlikely. Especially now that a new Star Trek game has been announced based on the Mage Knight system, the future of this product support wise from Wizkids look bleak. Now once you have the game, supported or not, this doesn’t really effect you but call it cult of the new if you like, but I love knowing that games I like and play are actively being supported.

Conclusion

This review has been overwhelmingly positive and looking back on it I think it suffices to say that Star Trek Fleet Captains is an excellent game, for science-fiction fans and especially Star Trek fans. Fleet Captains has great dynamic mechanics, with plenty of strategic diversity, Asymmetrical gameplay with immense re-playability and for the Star Trek fans it’s a game that tells a story through it’s richly, mechanically linked, theme. It’s everything you can hope for a game to be, niche as it may be. It certainly deserves its very high rating and I’m happy to see that the new rating system represents my sentiment about the games quality. The low score for components has minimal impact and rightfully so, it’s really not much of a detractor for me.

If there is any drawback to the game it must certainly be its price, for many a far larger problem than the games quality. It’s an expensive game in particular if you intend to include the two expansions into your collection. An investment that warrants caution, yet expediency as the game is clearly losing support in favor of Wizkids newly announced Star Trek Frontiers based on the Mage Knight system. If your considering Fleet Captains, I would suggest you think quickly before it disappears into obscurity.

This game certainly gets a stamp of excellence from me, it has all the makings for a permanent addition to my collection.

Rating System

People sometimes mention that I don’t give a full description of the game mechanics in my game reviews.  This is true and intentional.  For me personally, the best opinion I can get for a game is to find out what people think of it.  If I want to learn to play the game, I read the rules and always there are instructional videos and tutorials on the subject.  Hence my reviews focus mainly on my specific opinion about the game, how it feels, how it handles, what I like and don’t like etc.  I make the assumption that when the review is read, you have already done some preliminary research on the games mechanics.  I find explaining how a game works on a blog adds unnecessary word count for something ultimately that will still give you very little clue about how to actually play the game.

Regarding The Rating System

On a number of occasions I have received opinionated emails, mind you always respectfully, that mentioned that when I review games while the reader gets a picture of what the game is about and what I think about it, they don’t have a basis for comparison. In other words if I speak highly of two games, there is no way to tell which I might like better, nor is there a way to know how the component quality effects the overall experience or how gameplay compensate for the lack luster adherence to theme. In a sense I think the complaint is that I don’t have a rating system that governs my judgement in reviews. I think it’s a valid complaint and one I intend to rectify. The truth is that I have given a lot of thought to this but never came to any conclusions until now.

Part of the reason is that I think rating systems can limit or force a certain score even when the reviewer actually thinks far higher of the game. For example the component quality might be terrible and the game might not have any theme to speak of yet the gameplay is so awesome that I love the game despite all its flaws and it would be unfairly graded if I simply scored each component and tallied it up.

I have looked at many different systems and really haven’t found one I liked in its entirety but I did find enough inspiration and ideas that I could use to create my own. Consider the following an explanation of the rating system that I will implement for all future reviews (I won’t be going back on old reviews to apply the system).

How it all works
I think it’s fair to give some background as to how the system developed as I explain it, I think might give the system a bit more credibility.

I began with determining what I think are the most important elements of a good board game, another words, what I think is worth judging. The list is as followed.

Components: It’s important to note that I’m speaking directly to the quality of the components rather than the quality of art work or style or thematic correctness. It think this often gets mixed up and I never really liked that a games components are judged on the quality of the art, rather than the quality of components. As a gamer I want my games to last and I want to know if cards are flimsy, miss printed or missing for example. Wonderful art is hardly compensation for bad component quality. For me personally, that goes more to theme and it’s their art work is judged. So in terms of components I’m speaking strictly to quality of the physical components.

Gameplay: The bread and butter of a games core mechanic and a judgement of how well it plays, how balanced it is and how complete it feels. Reviews are opinions of course, but when it comes to some things like components and replay ability you can decipher some objective facts, for example card quality is either sturdy and will last long or it might be flimsy and tear easily. Those aren’t opinions, they are observations. Gameplay leans far more towards the opinion side but the goal here is to judge it objectively, point our benefits and flaws of the gameplay and discuss balance and fun factor.

Longevity & Replay ability: Not all games are designed with longevity and replay ability in mind and to me this often a deal breaker. In this section I judge a game based on multiple plays and whether the fun and excitement of the original play is holds up over repeated plays. I also judge the game on its expandability and longevity as a product which I also think is vital to the success of a game in the long term.

Theme: When I look at a games theme I typical judge it on its fulfillment of a promise. For example if the game is about running a train company in Russia, do I have a sense of that as I play? Theme is often realized through artwork and judgement is made here as well but great games are a merging of art work and gameplay to realize the presence of the theme, so judgement is passed more on an overall look at a games thematic presence. It’s an important aspect of gaming that a games theme comes through gameplay and in this section we judge a games ability to do just that.

Giving the games different a score becomes important to come up with a final verdict and I settled on a simple 1 to 5 stars system. Each star represents an increasing level of quality.

0 Stars : FAILURE This represents an abysmal failure in the game. It simply means that for this part of the game has failed on every conceivable level.

1 Stars: POOR This game is well below a reasonably expected standard of quality. While its not an outright failure, its lacking far outweigh its success.

2 Stars: FAIR There are redeeming qualities here but still below a standard of quality that is worthy of note. A 2 star score means that the section is passable if you can overlook some flaws but far from good.

3 Stars: AVERAGE This simply means that the game has met the minimum requirements for standards, the section is passable or great, its simply right in the middle with an equilibrium of shortcomings and success.

4 Stars: VERY GOOD: This means that the section has exceeded expectation, its impressive and there few flaws hardly worth mentioning.

5 Stars: PERFECT: Simply put, a perfect score for this section. It means that there are no flaws, the game has over exceeded expectation and pleasantly surprised the judge.

Now for me personally it’s simply not enough to judge a game on a 1 to 5 scale even if it is sectioned out because every game is unique. For example a game might have very simple components that aren’t terribly impressive and this might ordinarily lower its overall score, but the games designer or even the intent of the game might not be to impress with components but rather gameplay. As such, I feel strongly that I need to have some sort of tilt for myself where I can consider the weight of a particular section to its overall score for any given game. After all an awesome euro might be compromised of nothing but wooden cubes, yet it may have awesome gameplay.

As such I have lovingly called this part of the system “Tilt”. The tilt is simply a reference to the importance of the section. The tilt is a categorization of importance hence each section will be given a 1 to 4 tilt score (one for each section) which identifies how important that score is to the game. The tilt is than used to calculate the final score of the game.

4 Tilt: This is the most important score and is responsible for 50% of the game’s final score.
3 Tilt: This is also vital but considerably less so 30% of the score
2 Tilt: Even less important. 15% of the score
1 Tilt: Hardly worth mentioning, tilt weight barely effects the score 5%

Example
Lets imagine I just reviewed a game and gave it the following scores for each section

2 Stars – Components
4 Stars – Gameplay
3 Stars – Longevity and Replay-ability
2 Stars – Theme

Not a terrible good score for a game. However when I consider the game I come to the realization that the gameplay of the game is first and most paramount. The longevity and replay ability of the game are very important as well but the theme and components of the game are really kind of unimportant to the games quality.

So I assign the tilt to each score.

Gameplay – 4 Tilt
Longevity/Replaybility – 3 Tilt
Components – 2 Tilt
Theme – 1 Tilt

Mathematically the final score works out as followed.

Gameplay 4 stars is 50% of the score
Longevity/Replayability is 30% of the score
Components is 15% of the score
Theme is 5% of the score.

The score is calculated.

50% of 4 is 2 Stars
30% of 3 is .9 Stars
15% of 2 is .3 Stars
5% of 2 is .1 Stars

The total is score for this game is 3.3 Stars making this an average game.

Lets imagine however that the tilt was different. Let’s say that for this was supposed to be an awesome thematic game about conquering space full of awesome miniatures that fly around on a tactical game-board. Lets say that Theme and components carry more weight in this version.

Gameplay – 2 Tilt
Longevity/Replaybility – 1 Tilt
Components – 3 Tilt
Theme – 4 Tilt

How does that effect the score?

50% of 2 Stars is 1 Stars
30% of 2 Stars is .6 Stars
15% of 4 Stars is .6 Stars
5% of 3 Stars is .1 Stars (rounded up)

The total is now 2.3 Stars. A lot more disappointing given the new tilt. You can see that while in order to get a high total score you not only have to score well, but you have to score well where I place the tilt. The tilt is a vital component of the scoring system, but one I believe is important in order for games to be judged appropriately. After all, a Euro game might not have a lot of theme, but if the tilt is a 1 for that game identify that clearly theme was never intended to be a priority it will minimize any negative score it would get in that department and likely will still get a great final score it if did well in more important sections.

I might find reason to adjust the system in the future, but for now I believe this is at least as fair as I can get a rating system and over time I will hopefully get better and better at doing more concise reviews with a platform for comparison.

Enjoy!

Nations A Comparative Review to Through The Ages

Nations the board game is a perfect example of what I like to call board game evolution design, not to be confused with expansion or revolution, sometimes not even really innovation design. It takes a board game that is already beloved by many and applies modern, established design methods and mechanics to it, to create a new, more efficient more streamlined board game. This is often reflected in 2nd edition versions of games, for example Descent and Descent 2nd edition are clearly the result of evolution based design. Often however the original license holders never takes it upon themselves to re-invent their games, or in some cases they do but they make too many changes to call in a 2nd edition. This method of board game design we have seen quite a bit of in recent years. Some good examples are games like Agricola which evolved into Caverna, or RISK evolving into RISK legacy. There are countless examples of this and there is no question in my mind that Nations is an evolution design of Through The Ages, another Civilization building game. To write a review without comparing it to Through The Ages would be silly.

Nations isn't exactly a thematically overwhelming visual experience, in fact considering the price the components are quite weak, but what it lacks in sensory eye candy it makes up for it great gameplay.
Nations isn’t exactly a thematically overwhelming visual experience, in fact considering the price the components are quite weak, but what it lacks in sensory eye candy it makes up for it great gameplay.

The thing about evolution design is that it’s not always a positive step forward, sometimes the newer design methods manage to create a more streamlined experience, but result is a lesser game. We are going to take a look at Nations today, compare it to Through The Ages and see how its evolutionary design fares. It’s not going to be easy, Through the Ages is a beloved game, sitting pretty on BoardGameGeeks top 10 list for a very long time and for good reason. It is a really great game, perhaps a bit niche but for lovers of complex civilization building games, Through The Ages represents the ultimate experience in the genre.

Nations is a board game of Civilization building using a variety of clever resource management, worker placement and card mechanics. There is no map, so like Through The Ages it is a very abstract experience. It’s really about who can manage their resources and respond to the dynamics of the game the best in the chase for victory points.

At its core, aside from resource management it's all about the improvement cards.  There are so many and at best half of them will make it into any game so there is massive variety and re-playability in Nations as a result.
At its core, aside from resource management it’s all about the improvement cards. There are so many and at best half of them will make it into any game so there is massive variety and re-playability in Nations as a result.

In Nations each player takes on the role of a Civilization during the age of Antiquity and manages It through four ages all the way to the Industrial age (roughly world war I). During the game you will purchase improvement cards for your civilization, manage your military strength, stability, heritage (think culture) and your population (your workers). You will build Wonders of The World, fight battles, conquer colonies, construct buildings and acquire great historical figures all through the heavy abstraction of card play. If that sounds familiar it’s because that is the exact same premise as Through the Ages and while many of the mechanics of the game actually differ, conceptually the two games are identical.

What’s Different
First and foremost we must note that as expected given the complexity of Through The Ages mechanics, Nations is a much simpler game, as it intends to be. One of the biggest complaints about Through The Ages is its complexity. Nations is easier to learn and teach, far easier to remember the rules and in as a whole very streamlined by comparison to the often clunky and rules heavy Through the Ages. The real question here is what is lost by this change and the simple answer is not much other than exactly what the intention of the changes are, that sometimes overwhelming complexity that Through The Ages is famous for.

I love Through The Ages don’t get me wrong but no matter how often I play it, I can never fully remember the rules and during a typical game of Through The Ages consulting the very heavy manual is so constant its really almost part of the game.

Through the Ages visual appeal is nothing to throw your panties on stage for and as seen here, its a game so long that it actually makes a far better two player experience because of its extensive time requirements to play it.
Through the Ages visual appeal is nothing to throw your panties on stage for and as seen here, it makes a far better two player experience because of its extensive time requirements to play it.

From a stand point of strategy, tactics and dynamics Nations is as infinite as it is subtle, same as Through The Ages is. If Through The Ages is difficult to learn, impossible to master, Nations is easy to learn but impossible to master. Nations manages to remove the rules complexity, without affecting that deep strategic, often mind melting experience of Civilization management that we got in Through The Ages. From this perspective alone, Nations gets an A+ in terms of achievement of its objective, which was to create a less complex version of Through The Ages.

The next big change is the addition of Asymmetrical play, now Through The Ages also had this but Nations takes it a step further by creating two key mechanics that allow for a wider variation of play. The first is that each Civilization has an A and a B side, the A sides are all the same so it allows for a game where everyone begins the game with the exact same starting conditions. While the B-side is unique to each Civilization representing a sort of historically presumed strength of that nation creating Asymmetrical play. This in itself allows a wider variation of play styles, you can have that “we all start even game” which is great, but offers that asymmetrical style if you so desire.

The other element is the dynamics of the improvement cards themselves. In Through The Ages, while the cards that come up would do so in different order, they would always all come up. This in a sense meant that while there was some dynamics, there was a fixed strategic element you could count on each game. In Nations there are far more cards available than will ever come up, so you cannot reliably align yourself to a single long term strategy, you really have to see what comes up and adapt accordingly. This does wonders for replay ability and creates different types of games where in some Military will be vital, while others stability or money will reign supreme. Sometimes there will be horrible food shortages across the board, other times there will heavy competition for Ore or Heritage. The point here is that you don’t know what to expect and you play the game that is in front of you not one that is theoretical and pre-planned. This change in Nations can be a bit frustrating for those coming from Through The Ages accustomed to building long term pre-planned strategies but for me personally this was a welcome addition to the game. It makes the game more dynamic with a far greater replay value.

Nations is a heavy Euro game there is no denying it, but it has considerably more interactivity and meanness than most Euros.  Wars can be nasty, especially if you are caught unprepared.
Nations is a heavy Euro game there is no denying it, but it has considerably more interactivity and meanness than most Euros. Wars can be nasty, especially if you are caught unprepared.

It doesn’t stop there and this next part is where I think Nations really shines over Through The Ages. You have to figure that Nations like Through The Ages has a lot of strategic decisions you are constantly making. Over the course of many games you are going to get better and better at making those decisions, which creates a problem when playing against new players. Simply put, the first time you play you’re not going to be as good as the 2nd or 3rd time you play. So what do you do when you have 2 players who have a lot of experience, one that is a self-proclaimed master and one that has never played the game before? Nations answers this question with a mechanic that sets the level of each player, kind of a handy cap built into the game to help level the playing field. I love this addition and while you can certainly house rule such a mechanic into Through The Ages, its addition is an example of the evolution of Through The Ages design. It creates balance not just in the game itself but between the skill levels of the players.

Now anyone who has ever played Through The Ages knows that if you try to play a 3 or a 4 player game, you are settling in for a very long haul. We are talking 5+ hours minimum, far more if any of the players are new. In fact to make Through the Ages a game playable in a reasonable amount of time you really have to go two player which is a shame, since part of the fun of Civilization building is having lots of Civilizations. Nations again proves that with clever and streamlined mechanics you can create an epic experience without the epic time overhead as even with a 5 player game you aren’t likely to go over 3 hours. This is a HUGE boon for Nations, in particular that its precisely the length of time it takes to play Through The Ages that it almost never hits the table. No game in my collection has ever collected as much dust as Through The Ages does, even though everyone who has ever played the game at my house loved the experience. In fact the most common sentiment about Through The Ages is “I loved it, let’s never play it again”. More than that however Nations is a far more interactive game, there is virtually no downtime for anyone at any time. Each player takes one action, than the game moves forward. In Through The Ages a single players turn can take upwards of 10 minutes if you sprinkle in some Analysis Paralysis, so downtimes in a 3 or 4 player game can be excruciatingly long. In Nations things can move almost too fast sometimes, your constantly watching the board and anticipating your next action. It has a good flow and feels great.

There is no denying the sexiness of map based Civilization games like FFG's version, but for all its glory to represent moving units most of the time the game is about resource management and building anyway.  The map, is really almost unnecessary and this wonderful discovery as presented in Through The Ages is simplified and streamlined in Nations.
There is no denying the sexiness of map based Civilization games like FFG’s version, but for all its glory to represent moving units most of the time the game is about resource management and building anyway. The map, is really almost unnecessary and this wonderful discovery as presented in Through The Ages is simplified and streamlined in Nations.

The main result here is that these two games have two very different very distinct forms of re-playability. You have the dynamics of the improvement deck and the order in which they might come up in Nations, but you also have this element where you don’t know what strategies will be viable. You will have to determine that in the course of the play and even potentially change that strategy in response to what is going on, but not just game to game or round to round, but action to action as the actions of the players leading to yours can turn things upside down for you.

The result is a game that forces you to constantly re-evaluate the table, re-think, plan and execute strategies. This is a far cry from the much more predictable and stable Through The Ages and while some might actually not like this aspect of Nations because it can come off as random, it does present a game that is more opportunistic in nature. More importantly it creates a feeling of distinctively memorable ages in the course of the game as Military might be the big thing in the Antiquity age, but by the Medieval age building wonders becomes the THING to do. It’s just a more responsive experience, one that makes the game more thematic but even more importantly less predictable and more dynamic. This leads this very abstract game to feeling less abstract and more thematic.

Again Nations scores an A+ from me in the department of re-playbility, this subtle yet very important change pushes Nations into a more tactical and strategic game. To win you have to adapt your strategies for each game, each round and each action as opposed to adopting a strategy you apply to every game because it’s effective, a problem Through The Ages suffers from terribly.

The improvement cards have iconography that is immediately recognizable and understood making complex resource tracking a snap, yet there is a tremendous variety here which triggers far more excitement than you might expect from a Civilization building game.
The improvement cards have iconography that is immediately recognizable and understood making complex resource tracking a snap, yet there is a tremendous variety here which triggers far more excitement than you might expect from a Civilization building game.

Conclusion
Overall I think Nations beats Through The Ages in every single category you could use as a comparison. Its more streamlined, easier to learn, it has more strategic depth and far more varied tactical play, there is more interaction between players and that interaction is constant. There is less downtime, there is more replay ability, the game is faster and it can accommodate more players in a far shorter time.

I still think Through The Ages is a great game, very much deserving its praise and a home in your collection. I think however you will have a hard time introducing Through The Ages to a group that has played Nations. Nations is a game that feels right and brings to the forefront that same depth and harmonized Civilization building experience without all the overhead of Through The Ages and is far more thematic to boot.

In the end its about gameplay and experience. Nations is the clear winner here, because as much as I love Through The Ages epicenes, that epicenes sours a great deal when its enormity and complexity coupled with its excessive demands on your time result in a game that you love but never play. Nations fixes this problem and its designer has created a more approachable and viable game for your gaming group. Sure we could nit pick at nations and point out some of the interesting albeit complex mechanics that have been removed that are part of what gave Through The Age’s feel. I certainly understand people who notice and recognize that, but again, if no one wants to play a game in your group because it takes too long and its too complex, even if it’s a great game it doesn’t do anyone any good.

Nations is a winner, one that I think will land on my top 10 games list in the future. I give it my highest recommendation with the caveat that like Through The Ages it is still a very niche game. Its still a heavy Euro and that is something you really need to be into in order to enjoy it.

The Witcher by Fantasy Flight Games 2014

Designer: Ignacy Trzewiczek
From the mind of a Pol that gave us the rather complex 51st State and the humorous civilization builder Imperial Settlers, after playing the Witcher its clear to me that Ignacy Trzewiczek is a designer with a bright future. Whether you love or hate his games, there is no denying that he aspires to be inventive, creating the line rather than towing it. I might not be a huge fan of his games as they don’t really rub the genre of board games I prefer, but there is no question regarding his fresh approach to game design.

The Witcher board game is an attempt at a quasi-semi cooperative, semi competitive adventure game based on the PC game that bares its name. Now right of the bat, if you have ever played any of the Witcher PC games you will note that there was a very dedicated and concentrated effort to bring the Witcher universe to life in this board game through the art style and flavor text. It burst with Witcher themes, backstory and art. It’s clear, whoever made this game is obviously well researched or big fan of the Witcher games. The attention to detail here is uncanny. I say this here at the start before I get into the review because whatever can be said about the game play, there is no denying that this IS a Witcher game and for that alone the publisher (Fantasy Flight Games) deserves a node from Witcher fans for making sure that when you make a themed game that the theme comes through and in Witcher the board game the theme is most certainly center stage.

In the Witcher each player takes on the role of one of the main characters from the Witcher PC games story, for Witcher fans you can probably guess who those characters are. These characters each have their own special abilities, combined with a special die(dice) that reflect those abilities which they add to a pool of common dice when facing various challenges. In addition there is a development deck which represents the various items and abilities of that character, each being unique and asymmetrical. The designer did a great job of making sure that not only do the characters in the game play and feel like their PC equivalents, but that each is well balanced and offers a unique way in which the game is approached from that characters perspective. The goal of the game is to complete three main quests, this is done by going around the map collecting clue tokens to qualify for completion of these quests. Relatively simple premise but in the world of the Witcher, this seemingly simple task is a daunting one because around every corner there are very unforgiving encounters that will do everything in their power to stop you. The game ends when any one player completes his third main quest, but the winner of the game is the player with the most

Its all about the characters and while there are only four you can bet with Fantasy Flight behind the game there will be expansions that will add more.
Its all about the characters and while there are only four you can bet with Fantasy Flight behind the game there will be expansions that will add more.

victory points at the end, so while it’s a kind of a race to complete quests you have to make sure that you are actually winning the game by having the most points.

It’s really a game of playing to your strengths, without question it’s all about the characters. For example if you are playing as Geralt, you are the definitive warrior able to take on the game’s most fierce monsters very early, even before you start gaining development cards. He is a bad ass and appropriately you feel like a bad ass throughout the game. While in the same token Dandelion is not particularly well equipped to fight, instead his approach is more subtle, able to gain great success through subtle plays and stealing the thunder from the success of other hero’s. The point here is that whichever hero you play, you will approach the game in a very different way and in its own way this creates significant replay ability, but above all else it empowers the thematic presence of the characters in this adventure game.

In the course of play each player will take two actions from a pool of five actions, four of which are the same for everyone and one which is unique to the character. Players can travel, which allows them to move on the board to new locations on the map. Something you have to do to track down clue tokens necessary to complete your quests and deal with different threats at those locations like misfortune cards or monsters. You can also investigate, which is essentially the act of drawing from one of three investigation decks. These can be positive or negative, but in general you can make gains through these cards and many of the cards you keep which can later be used in combination with other investigation cards. It’s kind of a gamble, but one you can prepare for by developing your character. It’s a dangerous endeavor but it is one of the many ways you can get one up on the competition as investigation can yield extra clue tokens, gold, victory points and sometimes even the much sought after and very powerful fortune cards.

Standard for Fantasy Flight Games the miniatures are amazing.
Standard for Fantasy Flight Games the miniatures are amazing.

You can also develop, now this is perhaps the only risk free thing in the game you can do. You get to draw two development cards from the unique development deck for your specific character and keep one card. These very potent cards make your character more powerful in some way by imbuing you with powers or representing special equipment. Absolutely necessary to gain developments throughout the game, the more you have the better chance you stand against the many threats you will face in the game.

Finally there is resting, simply put, during the game you are going to sustain injuries and the trouble with taking damage is that you place the damage tokens over one of the actions for your character. When you have an injury on an action you can’t take that action, so over time gaining too many injuries results in you having fewer options. If you take enough damage the only action you might be able to take is rest. Resting simply allows you to remove one of your critical wounds or two of your regular wounds.

The final type of action you can take depends on your character but effectively this action will allow you to gain some special character advantage. Geralt can recharge his potions, Triss can recharge her spells, Dandelion gains much needed gold and Yarpen can make use of his companion cards. In a sense characters power up their ability, sort of recharging them and getting them ready for whatever dangers lay ahead.

The sequence of play is that each character takes his two actions and deals with any encounters as a result which is typically through the drawing of misfortune cards, investigation cards or monsters. You continue around the table taking actions until a winner is determined.

Each character has a unique die (dice) that reflect special abilities and actions they can take.  A simple but clever touch to give each character a unique feel.
Each character has a unique die (dice) that reflect special abilities and actions they can take. A simple but clever touch to give each character a unique feel.

All and all the Witcher is a very easy game to learn to play and while there are a few special rules and effects, largely anything you need to do is written on the various cards you draw, most of which are very thematically laid out so that the card and the activity are decisively linked. There really is a lot of common sense in the game and the instructions are clear ensuring your focusing on the game rather than trying to figure out the game.

The question is does all this amount to a good game and my first instinct is to say yes, for an adventure game it really does exactly what you hope it would do and it does it in a streamlined and organized fashion. It’s entertaining to suffer at the hands of the Witchers very tough world almost as much fun as it is to watch your friends suffer. Unfortunately the Witcher suffers from three problems that make this largely a pass for me and I think unless you are a hardcore adventure board gamer and huge fan of the Witcher you will feel the same.

The first issue is the length of the game. Now when you first start to play the game, after a couple of hour’s players will be finishing their first main quests and really if at that point the game ended the length would be near perfect. At this point however you are only 1/3rd through the game. By the time someone finishes their 3rd quest not only will you be well into your 4th or 5th hour of the game (depending how fast players take their actions) but you will have known who is going to win the game a couple of hours back.

In every game that I played the winner was pretty much determined about midway through the game and while the game is well balanced (each time it was a different character), it was quite decisive. It was one of those situations where you are playing a board game for 2 more hours after you already know you lost and that really takes the steam out of the game.

Simply put, the game just overstays its welcome, it’s too long and the gaps between the clear winner and the losers comes way too soon in that process resulting in you playing a game you have already lost for far too long.

The second problem with the game is that there really is very little strategy in how the winner is determined. All the players are going to be doing pretty much the same thing and while I will grant you the how of it differs, ultiamtly its all about collecting clues, finishing quests and scoring points. There are different approaches to this, but while the methods differ, the strategies are identical.

The winner will be the player who has the fewest set backs and about 90% of the time when you draw a card with a negative effect it’s an effect you have no control over. You draw the card and it says “this bad thing happens to you”. There is no opportunity or chance to do anything about it in most cases, you simply suffer the effects for drawing the card, an element of the game made worse as you typically have no say or control or opportunity to avoid drawing the card in the first place.

In a sense, it’s a game of drawing cards and seeing what happens to you and while there are some decisions that will effect when you draw cards, to win you must push forward so drawing them is inevitable and since you can’t influence most effects it’s really just a question of how many bad affects you suffer compared to the other players, or more specifically which bad effects. Drawing a misfortune card that causes you to lose a couple of clues, or hits you with a bunch of misfortune tokens can delay your progress by 2 to 3 rounds. If that happens a couple of times, your chances of winning will slip away very quickly and catching up is very difficult. I played a game in which I gave no thought to strategy at all, I just moved around collecting clues as fast as I could and I won simply because I didn’t get hit as hard or as often as the other players with negative effects.

The moment you realize that the few decisions you actually make have very little impact on what does and doesn’t happen to you, the game really derails. It maintains some level of excitement because drawing a card to see what happens has its own fun element to it, but doing it for 5 hours is far too long.

The third and final problem is that although it’s an adventure game it’s neither cooperative nor competitive, even though it really does try its best to be. There really is very little you can do to help your friends, for example you always fight monsters alone, no one can help you and since it’s a competitive game of victory points, I’m not sure there would be any reason to do so. Cooperation comes in only one form which is trading gold or clues, something I found is seldom done, again because your so called allies are your main competition in the game so helping them is not something you want to do. In fact in 3 games only once did anyone actually ever trade anything. On the flip side while the game is a competitive race to victory points there is almost nothing you can do to other players in the scope of that competition to hinder them. There are no actions you can do to stop or slow them down in any way, really much like the rest of the game aside from drawing a random card that has an effect that impacts one or more players by chance there is nothing you can actively do to anyone.

In a sense everyone plays their own game and while it’s entertaining to watch people try and fail miserably at the hands of the many set back type cards, It’s really just a waiting game for your turn. The wait for your turn however can be excruciatingly long, in particular by the time you reach the mid-point of the game because by than players have many cards and effects they can use which triggers more card drawing and subsequent resolution. At first players might take the time to embellish their plays by reading flavor text, but that gets really old really quick. The downtime is extremely long in this game which again, combined with the length of the game as a whole makes this a very painful and often frustrating wait.

Conclusion
The Witcher is a very well designed and illustrated game, it’s streamlined and modern and there is no denying that Ignacy is a great designer that got great support from Fantasy Flight Games to make the Witcher. I think for hardcore fans of adventure games in particular if you love the Witcher universe you might be willing to overlook the drawbacks of the Witcher. For the average gamer however, the Witcher is far too long, with too much randomness and far too little interaction between players.

I think the Witcher might be a far better game if completing the main quests happened faster, for example if this was a game that took 2 hours to finish, I think I might be more willing to play it. At a 4-5 hour experience however this game is just way too bloody long and it’s not something I want to do again.

Final Verdict: Give this one a pass.