Performance Reviews - Feb 11 - Well, It Has Been a While

Well, it has been two months. Some of you may be wondering, where have I been? What have I been doing? Where are the Performance Reviews? Ok, probably no one but me is saying any of these things. But one day you will!

January was an interesting month. I was sick. A lot. The Flu. Nasty stuff, led to pneumonia, bronchitis, and a sinus infection. I like to get all of my respiratory infections out of the way early, so I can enjoy the rest of the year (if only it were so simple). We also do Role Playing on the first Tuesdays, and Chris has church obligations on the second Tuesdays, which make second Tuesdays questionable. February brought illness to Chris, then tons of ice and snow befell the Northeast, making traveling and game playing difficult at best.

But we did get one(!) night of gaming in during the month of January. We played a handful of filler games such as Slide 5, Maximum Throwdown, and Excape. We even got in a game of Die Säulen von Venedig, with 6, with which I have a strong opinion on. I'll share that, and the opinions of all the other games mentioned with my next post. I like to time travel like that.

As mentioned before, second Tuesdays are questionable due to Chris' church obligations (Chris provides us a place to gather and play games). So John and I decided to throw our own little get-together. These supplemental gatherings (we usually do these on Thursday) are nice because it gives John and me the opportunity to play those two-player, war and war-ish games that no one else ever wants to play.

 We started the night with a couple games of Pixel Tactics, which came out in 2013. It's a fun little tactical card game that plays pretty quick. The rules took a little bit to noodle, simply because of the way turns are broken down. Each Game is broken down into Rounds, each Round broken into Waves, each Wave into Turns, and each Turn a player has two Actions. Had it been broken down like this to begin with we probably wouldn't have had many issues. The other big rule we missed the first game was concerning damage and heroes dying. Heroes die at the end of a Wave, we missed that and were killing them (or healing them) at the end of each Round.

We really liked how each card had different abilities based on where the card was placed. There were also a lot of really neat synergies to be discovered, my favorite being a Dragon Mage in the Vanguard, and an Overlord in the Rear. Very powerful. John had a good combo going with his Leader and another guy that made his Vanguard attackers absolute beasts.

The second game didn't favor me so well. All my cards came up in a terrible order, while John had the benefit of a great opening hand and a Leader that could take advantage of it.

Verdict: I very much enjoyed Pixel Tactics. It is a light, quick, tactical card game that gives some of the same feelings as one of my all-time favorites, Summoner Wars. There are a lot of card synergies to be discovered, and a very large number of match-up possibilities. I also love how each player has an identical deck of cards, but the different combinations of Leaders, and putting Heroes in different ranks makes each deck play out so different.

 Hold the Line: Frederick's War was the other game that hit the table. Here we have what I call a "Tactical Skirmish War Game". This might not be the correct thing to call it, but I must confess ignorance concerning wargaming. Perhaps John has a better name for it.

Some other games that I consider "Tactical Skirmish War Game" would be Memoir '44 or Manoeuvre. Where both of those games use cards to kinda dictate which units you can move and order, Hold the Line: Frederick's War does not. You have the freedom to make any moves that you wish, but you get a variable amount of orders per turn, which is a bit different.

It could very well have been the scenario that we were playing (one with a famous general historically getting beat by a inferior army sitting on a hill (not a history person, John can correct me)), but I did not enjoy Hold the Line: Frederick's War as much as I enjoyedMemoir '44 or Manoeuvre, and not because it didn't start with the letter "M". Even though I was free to choose which units I was activating, I was not a huge fan of the odds I was having to hit units. Leaders seemed unimpressive. Artillery seemed very unimpressive. Needing a natural 6 to hit in nearly every regular situation proved frustrating, especially when most of John's units were on hills or in towns providing them with essentially +1 to defense (making their to-hit a 7, on 3*1d6). In my mind, this combat resolution did not reward tactical play, and an overall strategy is almost moot (other than "sit on a hill and don't move").

Verdict: I didn't hate the game, but I definitely didn't love it. If I want to play a "Tactical Skirmish War Game", I'd much rather playMemoir '44, Manoeuvre, or Commands & Colors: Ancients (I can't believe I forgot about C&C:A!) I'd much rather own one of these three than Hold the Line: Frederick's War. Maybe I'm not playing it right, or maybe it was the scenario's fault. Either way, I doubt I'll give this one another chance on my own doing.

We are now up to something like 310 games with 47 expansions. Slowly but surely will will make it through. Hopefully, we can outpace new acquisitions.

Next week: Le Havre & PitchCar, for real this time.

Cross-posted on BoardGameGeek @ the Board Room on 17 Feb, 2014

Performace Reviews - Dec 17 - Better Late than Never

I realize that we have pushed into January, and into 2014 itself. For that, and for my delay in posting these Performance Reviews, I do apologize.

2013 ended, and thus has begun 2014. Perhaps in a different post I may do a post mortem of 2013, and its gamerly goodnesses and badnesses, but I'll hold off on that for another day, and another post.

Today, we are going to talk about Tuesday, December 17th, and the games that we played. Both games in general, and games we played specifically for the purpose of Performance Review.

As is per usual, Jeff and I arrived at Chris' a bit before John, so we turned to lighter fair to fill in the gap. Chris brings over Pirate Versus Pirate. I still haven't decided if these "unscripted" games will count towards completion of our objective, or if they will be forced to the luck of the "random draw". Discussion will be needed here, but I log the plays anyway and present to you feelings about these games none the less.

Anyway, Pirate Versus Pirate, from 2010. It's not a bad game. I'm not so comfortable even saying it's a good game. It definitely is, however, a game, which puts it ahead of many other offerings from our hobby. While Pirate Versus Pirate would not occupy space on my gaming shelf, I can appreciate why it does on Chris'. Chris has children that enjoy it. I do not. Sometimes that is really all that matters.

Game play is simple. You roll a couple of specialty 4-siders, move your allocated movement, and attempt to return coins to your home boat. Things get mildly interesting when you add in the ability to eliminate enemy pieces by landing on them by exact count. The set up of the board and possible movements make things kind of interesting as well, as your moves are not completely linear, and you have some degree of control over where your pieces end up. There isn't much strategy here, and the potential for tactical decisions doesn't present itself as much as I'd like to see.

I can see where this game deserves to be included in certain people's gaming collections, just not mine. I have other "gateway" games that I like to introduce to new or budding gamers, and I don't typically play with younger gamers who would enjoy this games novelty.

Still waiting for John to show up, we went ahead and started on our list of games up for Performance Reviews this week.

First up was Cartagena from 2000. We have a different version that the one shown, but that is of little consequence. First up, let me say, I love this game. It is very simple, has only a few rules, and doesn't take very long to play at all.

Cartagena is a game themed around Pirates breaking out of the fortress of Cartegena. The object is to help your six pirates escape from one end of the tunnel map to the waiting ship at the other end by playing cards from your hand that move your pirates to spaces that match the card. You "leap-frog" any spaces that already have a pirate piece. But the game isn't just about moving forward. You'll often have to have a pirate "drop-back" to a space with one or two pirates in order to draw cards. You draw cards based on the number of pirates that were on the space when you fell back. A space can contain at most three pirates. What you end up with is a game with some excellent decisions to be made, with just enough opportunities to "screw-your-neighbor" to keep things interesting. The board is also modular, which is a nice touch to add re-playability.

It provides plenty of tactical choices, and is A Grade Filler Material™. Our game took 20 minutes, and I believe that Chris ended up the victor. For a game that is 14! years old, you can't go wrong. In my mind, Cartagena deserves to be one of those games that every gamer has access to.

Verdict: Cartagena gets two big thumbs up from me, and always will. If Chris ever decides to cull this one, I will gladly take it off his hands.

John had finally shown up, and we had Imperial 2030, from 2009, already set up and ready to go. John had been bringing this one to game nights for a while, hoping to entice us into a game, but it wasn't until him and I broke it out on the coffee table one night to do a rules run-through that the game grabbed anyone's attention. Sometimes all it takes for the map to be set up and the pieces laid out to get that spark going. For a while after that, we played Imperial 2030 a few times, and Jeff even purchased his own copy to play with the guys in the church's game group. Then it disappeared into obscurity, as other cult-of-the-new took what little time we had for gaming.

Which is sad. I really like Imperial 2030. As far as economical games go, it's in my top tier. I'm also a fan of the unconventional way you have to regard the national powers. Most global warfare games have a "these-are-mine, and those-are-yours" mentality, which is perfectly fine. I, however, enjoy the shifting control and powers that Imperial 2030 has to offer. Granted, once I get into China, I'll ride China all the way through to the end (hey, it might not be the best strategy, but it is the way I play), but other countries, such as Brazil and India, I'll milk what I need out of them and let the next player deal with the left overs. Another interesting thing about Imperial 2030, it's not the players that take turns, but the countries those players control. It is entirely possible, although highly unlikely, for one player to run every turn in a round, while the other players milk off those efforts!

Imperial 2030 is a much too complex game for me to try to give any kind of brief synopsis. There is just so much going on for it. But I'll try!
In Imperial 2030, you are an independent global power, trying to set yourself up to make the most money by investing in various world powers as they struggle through war in the year 2030. As this independent global power, you'll seize control over various countries by owning controlling shares, war with them, tax them, and even invest in them to get that which you ultimately want: more power and money!

You can start the game and follow a planned strategy. And there are tons of tactical choices as well. Off the top of my head, as I write this, I can't think of many games that match Imperial 2030 in terms of Tactical and Strategic choice.

Our game took nearly 3 and a half hours, and I was the eventual winner. I'm always happy to give this one a go, and always wish we had more time to play games.

Verdict: Imperial 2030 is another game that gets two big thumbs up for me. If Jeff or John ever decide to cull this one, it will be going home with me.

With our monster game of Imperial 2030 finally done, we didn't have time for PitchCar, so that one gets bumped to the next week. We pulled another card, and thus next times lineup!

Next time: PitchCar & Le Havre

  Cross-posted on BoardGameGeek @ the Board Room on 9 Jan, 2014

Performance Reviews - Nov 26

Tonight was a pretty rad game night. Even with me showing up nearly an hour late, we had a pretty good turnout. Chris, Jeff, John had The Adventurers: The Temple of Chac set up and ready to go as Jeremy and myself walked in the door.

The Adventurers: The Temple of Chac is an amazing little game that works very well in small doses. The lava room can be "gamed" if played to often, so infrequent doses of the Adventurers keep this game a hit in our group. Sadly, there were no spectacular deaths like the last time we played, ten months ago:

@sippisteve wrote:

Not my night at all. The Walls got me this time. Then the boulder sealed me and @Sagrilarus in. #Adventurers hates me. pic.twitter.com/O1LVGaFb

@sippisteve wrote:

Poor me. @Sagrilarus and @01999operator looking on as the boulder smashes me into jelly. @alderac #Adventurers pic.twitter.com/canMe8UG

Chris did manage to die a hot fiery death, so that's something.

Speaking of Chris and hot fiery death, we finished off the night with FIVE games of Ogre. I am so glad I backed the Designer's Edition of Ogre on Kickstarter. It's a game I vaguely remember from my early days of gaming, and we've been having a blast with it since I got it two weeks ago. We've only messed around with the very basic Mark III scenario. The Mark III has won every game so far, which I'm not really too surprised about. We haven't had much chance to dive into any of the other scenarios yet, but that's coming.

Chris, being the glutton for punishment that he is, "allowed" me to steamroll him three times tonight.

We've also instituted the house rule that every Ogre must be named.

Anyhow, on to the Performance Reviews!

First game up was Hive. Chris and Jeff played the first game, while Jeremy and I watched and refreshed ourselves of the rules. Jeff and Chris are old Backgammon buddies, so the know how to get in each others heads while playing abstracts. Chris ended up winning their round.
Jeremy and I then played two games, which we split at a win apiece. Having actually purchased Hive back in 2008, this was actually the very first time I have ever played it. I loved it. Hive is such a great little abstract, that scratches that thinky itch without taking forever like Chess or other abstracts. I'd definitely play this one regularly.
Verdict: Hive gets to keep its place on the shelf.

After a few games of Hive, Chris and Kyle broke off and played Pizza Box Baseball. I received this copy from Erik Smith himself at Origins in 2009. I played a handful of games there, and at home. I was able to introduce it to some people at our board game night we used to do at the local game store, and I know they still play it rather regularly still.
It took Chris and Kyle a few innings to get into the game, but by the 5th or 6th inning we could hear them cheering over their various victories and defeats... They seemed to enjoy it.
Verdict: Pizza Box Baseball also gets to keep its place on the shelf. John requested it show up at our next session so him and I could give it a go.

John, Jeff, Jeremy, and I were left with Infinite City. In Jeff's words "It's a good game, but not a great one." I think I feel "meh" about it because I demo'ed the mess out of it for AEG for a couple years at GenCon and might have burned out on it a bit. It actually wasn't bad at all. I seemed to remember it being a bit more cutthroat in the past, but everyone managed to have one massive district in the end. It could have the tile draw. I feel like there is definitely a game here, but I'm still a bit lukewarm on it.
Verdict: Infinite City will need further review. We will have to revisit it in the future.

So, thus ended the first night of our little project. John assures me that he finished up his list, so our stack of 3 x 5 cards will grow again. John has a lot of war games and other games that are different from our normal fare, which I never mind playing. However, they rarely saw table time due to other folks' taste. I'm hoping our project gets them the table time they deserve.

Chris, Kyle and I drew games after Jeff, Jeremy and John left, but I think they will be happy with next sessions selections.

Next time: Cartagena, PitchCar, and Imperial 2030

 Cross-posted on BoardGameGeek.com @ the Board Room on 27 Nov, 2013

Performance Reviews - the General Idea

Welcome to the Board Room, my new blog where we discuss various gaming topics (board games, card games, and role playing games; pretty much any game that can be played on a table top). The focus for the Board Room, in addition to general discussion about games, will be our "Performance Reviews."


Performance Reviews will look something like this: At the end of each game night, we will randomly draw one or more games from the stack of 3 x 5 note cards. We have all agreed that the games drawn will be played during the next gaming session. After the games are played we will conduct discussions, ultimately deciding if the game says in our collections or goes.

At this time, we have cataloged Chris' and my (Stephen's) collections onto 3 x 5 note cards. We are currently sitting at a little over 220 games between the two of us. I hope to add Jeff's and John's collections in the coming weeks.

The idea is to bring out those games that haven't hit the table in a while, that would otherwise linger in board game collection limbo. Hopefully, the couple plays that these Performance Reviews facilitate will help us get rid of games we no longer should keep, and find those hidden gems that we forgot were collecting dust on our bookshelves.

Next weeks games up for Performance Reviews: Hive, Infinite City, & Pizza Box Baseball

Cross-posted on BoardGameGeek.com @ the Board Room on 20 Nov, 2013