Category Archives: Board Game Reviews

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.

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.

Libertalia by Asmodee 2012

Designer: Paolo Mori

Libertalia is really a big surprise to me, it’s a game from a designer who’s games have not really hit with me in the past. I found Paolo Mori’s previous games to always come up short in the fun department even though games like Rise of Augustus and Vasco Da Gama featured interesting topics and mechanics, they were a bit of a drag. Libertalia is clearly Paolo Mori’s best game to date and has gained a fair amount of popularity and praise from some respected reviewers. I got an opportunity to finally try this little card game and while I went into it with limited expectations and a “sure let’s try it” attitude, after a single turn of the game it immediately got my attention.

In Libertalia you are a pirate captain who along with other captains (other players) has just captured and plundered a ship. Now it’s time to split up the loot and the game-play is a sort of card driven negotiation of that activity where you try to get the most amount of treasure from the plunder for yourself by playing pirate theme character cards with a wide variety of special powers.

This game is all about prediction and special character powers.  What will your opponents play and if can predict it, what card do you need to play to get the edge.
This game is all about prediction and special character powers. What will your opponents play and if can predict it, what card do you need to play to get the edge.

The game-play is broken down into three days, presumably three separate ships that you capture as a group. During each day players will negotiate for treasure on that ship, broken down further into 6 turns, effectively 6 plays of cards. Each player will receive 9 identical cards from a deck of 30 cards numbered from 1 to 30. For each turn random bounty tokens are drawn for that turn of play, these bounty tokens are treasure from the plunder each with its own value, but also includes cursed treasure, treasure maps and a few specialty tokens. This is what your negotiating for. The goal of the game is to claim as many doubloons (victory points) at the end of the day as possible, the player with the most victory points at the end of 3 rounds (3 days of play) wins the game.

Claiming bounty tokens is very simple. Each player selects a card represented by a pirate themed character from his hand of 9 cards and plays it face down. When everyone has chosen a card, the cards are revealed and put in ascending order. Than starting from the player with the highest number, you take 1 treasure of your choice. Simple right!

Once the cards are revealed you need to put that information in the vault as any card played by a player cannot be played again by that player.  It's like poker, any information you have is a clue to help you predict what will happen in future rounds.
Once the cards are revealed you need to put that information in the vault as any card played by a player cannot be played again by that player. It’s like blackjack, any information you have is a clue to help you predict what will happen in future rounds.

The catch is that each of these cards are actually characters, each with unique special powers. These powers vary is strength, but in those powers lays the bulk of the strategy. The trick to the game is that powers are executed in reverse order (from lowest numbered card to highest), so while playing the highest numbered card will yield you first pick at the treasure, the lowest card numbers have their abilities triggered first. These abilities can impact characters, victory point earnings and have all manner of special effects so by the time all the powers are executed some of the characters may have been removed, players may have already scored points or taken a variety of special actions that shift things in their favor.

The game is really about trying to guess what cards other players will play and playing your cards in a manner that will benefit you and screw everyone else the most. It’s also knowing which cards to save for later, a lot of this game is about timing. You know what the nine cards everyone has (at least in the first round) so it’s really about just trying to guestimate how your opponents will approach each of the turns in a 1 day round. You can only play any card one time and that card will either be added to your Den (your play area) which coincidently can result in added effects as some cards have effects that take place from the Den or they will be removed. In either case you will only play them once (in most cases) so you must choose wisely.

Now you will only play 6 of the 9 cards in your hand and in the next round (the next day) players will get a new set of 6 identical cards. Hence by the second round of the 9 cards only 6 of those cards in the players hands are identical. This happens again in the 3rd round so things become a bit more chaotic as players not only consider what cards to play in any given turn, but what cards to save for future rounds.

There are many effects that transpire during the course of a round, characters will be eliminated, resurrected, create lasting effects, help players score points, put curses on other players (minus victory points). All of these effects are based on the cards so certainly anyone familiar with the game has a clear advantage but it doesn’t take more than one or two plays of the game to get a grip around what is possible so the game goes from “learning how to play” and “playing with strategy” for any given player after a game or two.

There is an online version of the game where you can "practice", but Libertalia is a social game first and foremost, a lot is lost in the online version and I don't recommend it.
There is an online version of the game where you can “practice”, but Libertalia is a social game first and foremost, a lot is lost in the online version and I don’t recommend it.

Libertalia is a game that is very simple to learn to play but nearly impossible to master. The complexity of the moving parts and trying to make predictions is very rewarding when you succeed and heartbreaking when you fail, but it’s not a game of guessing, it really is a mind game of prediction and reaction to what has already been played and what can be played in the future. There are a lot of surprises and “oh shit” moments in the game, it has that spark a lot of great strategy games I love have like Dirk Henn’s shogun where there is a period of quiet contemplation with a sudden burst of energy and chaos after a revelation. The more players the more chaotic and difficult it is to make predictions, but to me this really makes the game more fun. The game plays 2 to 6 players, but I think the sweet spot is 4 to 6 players.

It’s a fast, relatively short game, the box says 45 minutes and that is quite accurate and once everyone knows how to play I think it can be even faster than that. (the first game might take a little longer).

Libertalia is a game that scratches that hard core gamer in me, it’s got the depth of a very solid and thinky strategy game, but is so simple and social enough with a familiar theme (pirates) to be welcomed as a after dinner party game you can pull out with none gamers. It has energy and excitement built into that moment of revelation of the cards and I think this does wonders for the atmosphere it creates. It really has those longevity legs as well, it’s a game that gets better with repeated plays and is just short enough that in can almost be used as a filler. I was really surprised on how quickly I became enamored with it, in particular given that this designer’s games have landed so flat with me in the past. Now some might say this game is a kind of watered down Caylus, which I suppose one could make that argument but I personally never cared for Caylus so the fact that I really like this one says to me that the games are distinctively different enough.

I’m not sure one could say the game is thematic, it has a solid theme which really comes through in the art work which is nothing short of amazing, but you’re not really doing much piracy stuff. It really is just a kind of estimation, logic card game which could easily be layered with any sort of theme you like. I think choosing a pirate theme for this game was a smart idea though because pirates are kind of that universal theme that gamer or not you can get behind. Fantasy themes and science fiction themes typically don’t land well with none gamers, but pirate themes in my personal experience don’t have that “we are nerds playing a board game” social stigma.

I highly recommend Libertalia in particular for any gamers out there trying to get non-gamers into the fold. It’s a really clever yet simple game that can function really well as a gateway game, but it has the muscle and depth of a solid game for hardcore gamers. I honestly believe this to be one of the best games to be released in 2012, a solid contender for my top 10 entry level games, I’m certain if I did the list today it would find placement there. It might even breach my top 10 best games in the future, I really like it that much.

Pillars Of The Earth by Mayfair Games 2006

Designer: Michael Rieneck, Stefan Stadler

Pillars of the Earth is one of those games that is touted as a classic or a gateway game into the world of designer board games by many. Released in 2006 it comes from that golden age of Euro games period where a tremendous amount of modern game design comes from and while I agree the game is simple enough to be a gateway game, I find it highly unlikely I would introduce this game to brand new would be gamers, there are just far better games than this one to do that with and the theme is a bit of a hard sell. I actually didn’t play the game until it was reprinted not too long ago, In fact, you could say I largely skipped the golden age of Euro games and I’m now kind of going back and playing some of these older games like Pillars of the Earth. This gives me a unique perspective because I have played games that use mechanics that where based on some of these originals. Interestingly enough though, I find that in in some rare cases the so called classics actually play a lot more like modern (recent) releases and Pillars of the Earth is definitely one of those.

The art style and the mechanics blend well to present and sell the theme, but convincing people to play a board game about 12th century architects building a cathedral is a tough sell.
The art style and the mechanics blend well to present and sell the theme, but convincing people to play a board game about 12th century architects building a cathedral is a tough sell.

Pillars of the Earth is a uniquely designed game and one of those rare Euro games with a theme that fits the mechanics even though being architects of a cathedral in the 12th century is not exactly what I would call an exciting theme, at least it doesn’t sound like it when I describe it. I don’t want to come off sounding negative however as Pillars of the Earth is a very interesting, very well paced and very challenging game and for a Euro game, very thematic.

In Pillars of the Earth you are grand master builders (Architects) in the 12th century contributing to the building a massive construction project (a cathedral). It’s a game based on a book by Ken Follet that you have probably never read as well as a TV show that comes highly recommended and acclaimed that no one has seen. I’m not entirely sure the theme of the book or the show come through, but you certainly feel like the manager of a construction project in the game and in the end that is far more important to the theme than the actual literature it’s based on.

In this worker placement game you compete via management of a variety of resources including workers, gold and various other building resources (wood, stone etc..) on a tight game board with limited spots all in the typical Euro style battle for victory points. This is not the part of the game that makes it unique, though I would point out that from an artistic point of view the game board is nothing short of beautiful and it’s a joy to play on. What does make the game unique is that the game is pleasantly balanced, has a number of random elements (that don’t make the game random) and puts players to tough choices that go beyond simply “where to place the workers”.

I love it when game designers understand that game pieces can be functional and cool at the same time.  The use of a cathedral made out of wooden blocks to act as a turn counter is thematic and fun.
I love it when game designers understand that game pieces can be functional and cool at the same time. The use of a cathedral made out of wooden blocks to act as a turn counter is thematic and fun.

In fact, even worker placement itself is two prong as you first choose where to place your “worker units” to collect resources but later you also place your master builders on spots with various beneficial effects. The master builders are put into play using a really clever mechanic of pulling random master builders out of a bag and placing them on a roundel where the player who’s master builder is pulled must decide whether he will pay in gold the fee to put the builder into play, or pass so he can place the builder later in the round for free. This combined with other tough decisions like which resource cards or builder cards you pick all combine to create really an almost overwhelming amount of choices. Each choice has to serve a purpose and be planned, but the random elements to the game like when your master builder will be pulled out of the bag for example and how much he will cost to put into play create tension and management problems you have to solve as you go. It’s quite easy to mismanage yourself or manage yourself into a corner, so while newbie friendly rules wise, the game can be quite unforgiving at times and you can see your victory slipping away from you because of a couple of bad decisions early in the game.

I suppose the issue I have with most worker placement games is that they tend to become kind of predictable, it might explain why I like Lords of Waterdeep and Kingsburg. In Lords of Waterdeep you have quest cards and secret missions on your lords cards that force you to adapt your strategies for each game while in Kingsburg your rolling dice to determine where you CAN go. The randomness in Pillars of the Earth don’t force results upon you but rather put you to tough decisions, unlike Kingsburg for example where the dice limit what you can do as a mechanic. This is the sort of randomness I really like where it can be mitigated a great deal with smart decisions.

The art work on the game board is amazing, functional and clear.
The art work on the game board is amazing, functional and clear.

In either case the mechanic works very well, it creates tensions, opens paths to strategies and varies each game sufficiently so that you really can’t repeat the same strategies with each play. More than that though Pillars of the Earth has a lot of sections of decisions, the choices aren’t simple and they have long term effects. Which builder and resource cards you claim in one part of the round, which resources you claim with your workers in another part of the round, when to put out your master builders and subsequently where to put them in the last part of the round all form the events of a single round that has lasting effects for this and future rounds. Than you have to deal with the event cards, worry about your limited resources like gold for example all the while trying to squeeze as many points out as you can. There are a lot of moving parts yet the games sequence is fast paced and keeps everyone involved at all times so there is virtually no downtime in the game. You’re constantly making decisions and the game rewards you for those decisions and punishes you for mistakes. The pacing feels just right, the tension is just right and while I prefer the game with 4 players, it plays fine with 3 (skip it as a two player game).

I think as far as worker placement games go the tough sell here is the rather bland theme and again, I say bland more because it sounds bland, in practice the game is actually very engaging and interesting, with a theme that really fits the mechanics and kind of settles naturally into the games flow. The hurdle is trying to explain to your friends that a game about 12th century architects building a cathedral can be exciting, strategic and fun. When I describe Lords of Waterdeep for example, I tell them that they will be noble lords of a fantasy city vying for power and control, suffice to say, it’s a much easier sell.

There is an online version of the game that you can play at http://www.brettspielwelt.de .   I really don't care for playing board games online, I think almost all of the experience is lost and Pillars of the Earth is no exception.  Bottle that excitement until you can play it with people.
There is an online version of the game that you can play at http://www.brettspielwelt.de . I really don’t care for playing board games online, I think almost all of the experience is lost and Pillars of the Earth is no exception. Bottle that excitement until you can play it with people.

Pillars of the Earth is a very good game, in fact, dare I say it may actually be a better game than Lords of Waterdeep which I consider the premiere worker placement game because it’s a got considerably more depth (in particular if you compare Pillars of the Earth to Lords of Waterdeep without the corruption expansion). It’s more gamey, even if it boasts relatively simple rules depth and I find that the many strategies and approaches to the game, coupled with some of its randomness give this game a very high replay ability value. It may in the future appear on my top 10 list, I like it that much.

I would put this one into the worker placement game for people who want to take a couple steps above the pure worker placement games. Lords of Waterdeep and Kingsburg are good example of very simple and straightforward worker placement games. You put your worker down, collect resources, score points. Rinse and repeat. These games are fun for various reasons and I will happily play them both, but for me, Pillars of the Earth really brings it up a notch above the standard worker placement affair. There is more umpf to it and I really think if you like worker placement games this is one you definitely should not miss.

I highly recommend it.