Polyhedral Underground - Wisconsin Gaming Group ~ Wisconsin Gaming Group - Oshkosh

January - 2012

Upcoming Events

Welcome to Polyhedral Underground!

For those of you new to our little group of geeks, we are a hobby board game group located in Winnebago county in east central Wisconsin, with many interests. If you're here that means that some of them are your interests too. Board games, computer games, rpg, miniatures, sci-fi, fantasy, and probably other such things. Even with all our interests board gaming remains primary for us.

We always like having new players around so introduce yourself on the forums and get comfortable. And if you find that we're your type of gamers, well, invite yourself to a game night or day that we frequently have.

So take a look around and let us know what you think.

And welcome again to: Polyhedral Underground!

Regular Thursday Game Nights are on hiatus for a few weeks.

Poster:

darthgamer
Forum: Game Nights / Meet Ups

Fri Jan 27, 2012 6:10 pm

Sorry to hear that GT.

My lair is open on the 9th if people are interested.
I will confirm it that week.

Later

Comments: 8 • Write comments • Views: 92

Half Day Game Day February 11 at House of Heroes In Oshkosh

Poster:

darthgamer
Forum: Gameapaloozas / All Day Events

Sat Jan 21, 2012 5:56 pm

Sounds fun. We will mark it on the calendar.

Comments: 1 • Write comments • Views: 45

Poll: GotM February 2012 Poll

Poster:

Eric Holdridge
Forum: Game Nights / Meet Ups

Fri Jan 20, 2012 10:37 am

What game should be GotM for February 2012?

When I heard Barbarossa I thought immediately of the old clay game (http://www.boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/550/barbarossa)
but that is not the game Serimav nominated. So due to possible confusion on that or the similarly named Hansa & Hansa Teut ...

[ Read all ] Comments: 0 • Write comments • Views: 40

GameSpot Previews

Latest updates from Gamespot.com

SSX makes its return after a five-year vacation. We highlight what makes it different from previous games in the series.

Five Ways SSX Reinvents Itself [Xbox 360]

We pick up our scythe and get harvesting with a look at the role-playing elements in Darksiders II.

Darksiders II: Putting the Action Into Action RPG [PlayStation 3]

By incorporating sandbox level designs, varied weapons, and other tricks, Rebellion looks to deliver a different action experience with Sniper Elite V2

Sniper Elite V2 - I Can Wait All Day [Xbox 360]

Pit's new adventure comes with no fewer than three different ways to play--one includes a stand for the 3DS.

Kid Icarus' Last Stand [3DS]

Dynamic AI highlights some of what baseball fans can expect later this year with MLB 2K12.

Major League Baseball 2K12 - Being That Perfect Pitcher [PlayStation 2]

Mass Effect 3's Kinect integration works great when you're talking to squadmates. When you're talking to yourself, it gets a little weird.

Commander Shepard's Kinect-Enabled Descent Into Madness [Xbox 360]

A varied training regiment and more expansive career path make the dream of becoming the next great virtual UFC champion possible.

UFC Undisputed 3 - Being the Next Great Fighter [Xbox 360]

Cooperative play in EA's new first-person shooter may win over even its biggest naysayers.

It's OK to Like the New Syndicate [PC]

The Gamer Dome

Sorry, no RSS items found in the cache file.

BGG Latest Reviews

<p>by <a href='http://boardgamegeek.com/user/markjanderson86'>markjanderson86</a></p>
I picked up this game last week off of Amazon.com. I bought this game because I am really looking forward to the Star Wars LCG, and I figured that this game would give me a similar experience (with both games being solo/co-op). <br/><br/>Just a bit of information on my experience with this type of game. I played Magic the Gathering through High School and I got into the Game of Thrones LCG when it first came out and played it through the first few chapter packs. I really enjoy the LCG model because it allows me to do two things: <br/><br/> 1) Rope my wife and friends into playing without an initial cost to them.<br/> 2) Have all of the possible options for deckbuilding without spending a fortune.<br/><br/>I've now played three cooperative games (with my wife) and one solo game. <br/><br/>The first game my wife and I played went very poorly. We played the introductory "Passage Through Mirkwood" scenario. I read the rules and decided that we should each play with two heroes. Only have two heroes each left us with few options each turn and the encounter deck overwhelmed us. <br/><br/>The second game, I built us two dual-sphere decks with three heroes each, and we easily handled the first adventure.<br/><br/>The third game, we played the "Journey Down the Anduin" scenario with the same decks. This adventure has a difficulty rating of 4, which is right in the middle of the range (1-7). We struggled through it, and were able to beat the adventure barely, with each of us losing a hero and our other heroes all having significant damage.<br/><br/>The solo game had my one dual-sphere deck (Leadership/Spirit) go against the introductory adventure, and I handled it very well.<br/><br/><b>The Pros:</b><br/><br/>This game seems very well balanced. Once we got the hang of it, we beat the "easy" scenario handily and struggled through but won the "medium" scenario. We were forced to make crucial tactical decisions on almost every turn on the "medium" scenario. <br/><br/>As with everything Fantasy Flight Games produces, the quality is top notch. <br/><br/>The adventures are very distinct. I was afraid that all of the scenarios would be the same type of adventure, with different enemies or a higher quest progress required, but each adventure seems to have a different objective. This helps diversify your game sessions so it doesn't feel like we're doing the same thing over and over again.<br/><br/>The mechanics of the encounter decks is very smart. When I bought the game, I thought that it might become overly complicated, but once you play a couple games it becomes pretty simple. <br/><br/>The thematic element is well done. Lord of the Rings is a story were danger and darkness wait behind every corner, and the mechanics of this game reflect that. You don't know when a Hill Troll is going to come out of the Encounter deck, and you're going to end up setting other objectives aside to deal with him. <br/><br/><b>The Cons:</b><br/><br/>The only real problem I have with this game is the lack of card variety at this point. I've purchased the first few adventure packs, and I still have trouble building a deck (with two spheres) with the required 50 cards. The main issue here is that each adventure pack only comes with two new types of cards for each sphere. This problem will be remedied in time, but it will take a couple cycles before there is a truly diverse card pool.<br/><br/><b>In Conclusion</b><br/><br/>I would suggest this game to anyone who enjoys Lord of the Rings, Cooperative Games, or Living Card Games. I'm always looking for good cooperative games (like Pandemic) to play with my wife because we enjoy them more than competitive games.

Review: The Lord of the Rings: The Card Game:: First Impressions of a solid and unique game.

<p>by <a href='http://boardgamegeek.com/user/Serj_Ukr'>Serj_Ukr</a></p>
<br/><b>Translation into English: [user=nadgamgee]Nadia Sadovnyk-Chuchvaha[/user].</b><br/><br/><b>1. Setup.</b><br/>Before the game starts, players get 4 army units (round tokens with swords) and 3 talents (gold coins). A d6 is rolled to determine the first player. The Barbarian gets to take his turn first. He places his capital in the central bordering territory (an aggressive, but risky choice) and places his army units. The Paladin places her capital at the rear and also places her army units. Then the players must choose their sovereigns and put their tokens / minis on the feat of arms track, but this part is omitted in this tutorial, as it is focused on the main aspects of gameplay. Now the game begins.<br/><center><div><img border=0 src="http://www.ef-games.kiev.ua/foto/faq/1.jpg"></div></center><br/><br/><b>2. Turn 1.</b><br/>Comments: First the Barbarian draws the top card from the deck of Ages. This is the Paladin card "No time for waiting", it shows 4 coins of gold. The Barbarian gets 4 talents and gives the card to the Paladin. Then the Barbarian gives his first order. This order mobilizes a troll unit in the territory with The Hall of Chiefs (Barbarian capital). The Barbarian spends 1 talent to do this. Now it is the Paladin's turn. She draws the next card from the deck of Ages. It is the Barbarian card "Invincible hordes", it shows 3 coins of gold. The Paladin gets 3 talents and gives the card to the Barbarian. Then the Paladin gives her order to mobilize 1 army unit for 1 talent in the rightmost territory.<br/>It is important to remember that the cards from the deck of Ages are always drawn openly.<br/><center><div><img border=0 src="http://www.ef-games.kiev.ua/foto/faq/2.jpg"></div></center><br/><br/><b>3. Turn 2.</b><br/>Comments: The Barbarian gives his second order in the leftmost territory. This is another mobilization order and the Barbarian mobilizes his common army unit for 1 talent. Then the Paladin gives her tax collection order in the leftmost territory and receives 1 gold.<br/><center><div><img border=0 src="http://www.ef-games.kiev.ua/foto/faq/3.jpg"></div></center><br/><br/><b>4. Turn 3.</b><br/>Comments: The Barbarian gives his third order in the central inner territory. This is a combat planning order, so he draws a combat card. This is the "Bribe" card, which allows the Barbarian to bribe enemy army before the battle. Then the Paladin gives her third order. This is a construction order in the central inner territory. The Paladin builds the first-level "Treasure House" for 1 talent. <br/>It is important to remember that combat cards are drawn secretly.<br/><center><div><img border=0 src="http://www.ef-games.kiev.ua/foto/faq/4.jpg"></div></center><br/><br/><b>5. Turn 4.</b><br/>Comments: The Barbarian gives his last order in this age. This is a construction order in the rightmost territory and he builds the first-level "Warrior Marquees" for 1 talent. Now the limit of army units in this territory increases by 1 (4 units now). Then the Paladin gives her order to mobilize 1 army unit for 1 talent in the central outer territory. This was also her last order in this age.<br/><center><div><img border=0 src="http://www.ef-games.kiev.ua/foto/faq/5.jpg"></div></center><br/><br/><b>6. Declare attack.</b><br/>Comments: The Barbarian proceeds with the combat and regrouping phase. If he wishes, he may skip it, but then he'll defile the ashes of his forefathers! He attacks the Paladin adjacent territory from his leftmost territory. All army units of the attacking and defending territories take part in the battle. The Barbarian plays his combat card (he may also play the top card from the deck instead). The Paladin has no card, so she has to draw the top card from the deck. The strength of this card is reduced by 1. The Paladin got the "Neutralizing" card. The card of the defender is resolved first (though the "Neutralizing" card is always resolved first anyway), then the attacker's card is resolved. Thus, the Barbarian cannot bribe the Paladin's army. The strength of the Barbarian army is 3 (the total strength of his army units) + 2 (the strength of the combat card), and the strength of the Paladin army is 2 (the total strength of her army units) + 0 (the strength of the combat card with reduction). 3-point difference allows the Barbarian to destroy up to 3 common army units. Since there are only 2, the whole Paladin army perishes valiantly.<br/><center><div><img border=0 src="http://www.ef-games.kiev.ua/foto/faq/6.jpg"></div></center><br/> <br/><b>7. Results of the attack.</b><br/>Comments: The territory is conquered. The Barbarian moves his sovereign token / mini from 1 to 4 on the feat of arms track, and the Paladin moves hers from 1 to 2. After the victory the Barbarian moves 1 of his army units to the conquered territory. Since he had only 1 attack, he may perform regrouping, but he sees no need to. Now the Paladin proceeds with her combat and regrouping phase. What would you do in her place? Would you claim your own lands back, or would you occupy the rich central territory, which brings 1 talent and 1 victory point for feat of arms at the beginning of an age? Or would you start the new age?<br/><center><div><img border=0 src="http://www.ef-games.kiev.ua/foto/faq/7.jpg"></div></center>

Review: Age of Sovereigns:: An example of the first age (the 15th chapter of the rules) . For those who want to get the basic notion of the gameplay.

<p>by <a href='http://boardgamegeek.com/user/chansen2794'>chansen2794</a></p>
This review is part of my series reviewing games that were entered in the 2011 <a href="http://boardgamegeek.com/thread/644090/solitaire-print-and-play-contest" >Solitaire Print and Play Contest</a>. All reviews in the series are available on this <a href="http://boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/73348/the-2011-print-and-play-solitaire-contest-reviews" >geeklist</a>. Inspector Moss 2 won first place in the contest.<br/><br/><b>Game Summary</b><br/>Inspector Moss 2: House Arrest is a mystery/puzzle solitaire game. The game begins with Inspector Moss discovering a murder scene at a dinner party. The player must discover and arrest the killer before a temporary injunction that prevents the guests from leaving expires. Unlike other games in this genre such as <a href="http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/1294/clue" >Clue</a> or <a href="http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/915/mystery-of-the-abbey" >Mystery of the Abbey</a>, the killer isn’t assigned at the start of the game. Rather, you can determine who it is by strategically placing evidence that clears everyone else. The challenge is not to solve the case through process of elimination, but to arrange the evidence in such a way that only one person can be proven guilty.<br/><br/><![CDATA[<div style=''><a href=

]]>The game set up and ready to play. The game is a sequel to <a href="http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgamedesigner/11842/jonathan-warren" >Jonathan Warren</a>'s <a href="http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/57983/inspector-moss-investigates" >Inspector Moss Investigates</a> but this time adds the design talents of <a href="http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgamedesigner/11921/rebekah-bissell" >Rebekah Bissell</a> and abandons the rummy style of play. Despite this being a sequel, there is nothing from the first game that you need to know to enjoy this one. Game Play The game begins with most of the board face down. As you explore the house, tiles will be turned face up and reveal suspects, evidence, or items that can assist your investigation. Evidence doesn’t relate to specific suspects but rather clears everyone in specific rooms. Each evidence token features one or more arrows. All suspects in the rooms they point to are exonerated.

]]>All the suspects in the path of the arrow (Teresa Green, Tom Morrow, and Hollie Wood) have been found innocent. The game uses a dice based action point style system. At the start of the turn, the player rolls eight dice (seven of one color and one of another) up to three times and plans out their actions for the turn. Each action has a cost in dice and only six dice can be used per turn. For example, examining evidence is done by rolling four numbers in a sequence and picking up an assistance token requires rolling a three of a kind. The killer must be caught and arrested within a certain amount of time, which is tracked on a table. (Depending on the difficulty you choose, this is 60, 45, or 30 minutes.) The die that is a different color can be used for any regular action but is also used to determine how long the actions take. For example, If a two is rolled, the actions of that turn take only two minutes to complete. In addition, a six rolled on any of the dice is wild and can be used as any number but costs one minute of time for each time it’s used. The killer has to be identified and arrested before the clock runs out.

]]>A completed game with the villainous Hollie Wood safely arrested. Quality of Components The components in this game are top notch. The artwork is not only awesome, it also does a great job at conveying information. You can tell at a glance if a room tile contains a suspect, an assistance token, or evidence. The Inspector Moss Player Board and Time Track Board also do a great job at presenting information in a clear yet visually appealing way. The rulebook is very concise, well written, and easy to understand. There are several examples throughout which further illustrate the game’s mechanics. A summary of available actions (with the exception of movement) is printed on the Inspector Moss Player Board so you won’t need to refer to the rules very much once you start playing. You will however probably need to occasionally look up the explanation of the assistance tokens since you won’t get the the same ones in each game but even those are pretty easily learned. Theme For a murder mystery game, the theme is very light. The <a href="http://boardgamegeek.com/geeklist/69713/dicing-with-death-introducing-the-characters-of" >characters names</a> are all puns, which are appropriately terrible. (Thankfully, as a fan of the <a href="http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=kRxTkvwpacY" target="_blank" class="postlink" rel="nofollow">Crypt Keeper</a>, I can appreciate a good slay on words.) The lighthearted nature of the game fits well though since unlike several other murder mystery games, there are no weapons or motives in the game and the murder itself actually doesn’t factor into the game play at all. The game’s artwork is cheerful and bright and evokes a fun atmosphere. Inspector Moss 2 does a great job at incorporating the game components into the theme. Most of the assistance tokens are things that the inspector might find while exploring the house, such as a flashlight, a key, and an informant. Although a few of the items don’t make as much sense. For example, why is the inspector’s search warrant randomly lying around the house? Why exactly did John Doe keep a bomb in his home and how does Inspector Moss justify using it to blow a hole in the wall? (That particular part of the game may be replaced with a more sensible solution such as a <a href="http://boardgamegeek.com/blogpost/4666?commentid=2415544#comment2415544" >revolving bookshelf</a> in future versions.) These are minor nitpicks though since overall the items work with and enhance the theme of the game.

]]>The Assistance Tokens work brilliantly with the theme of the game. Print and Play Section How Much Time to Make? How Difficult is it to Make? And What Components Will You Need? Inspector Moss 2 is a medium sized print and play project. There are 25 room tiles, two player boards, and an assortment of smaller pieces that need to be cut. That being said, the game is pretty easy to make. There are several pages of room tiles but they are big pieces and easy to cut. There are no backs for them or the two player boards so you don’t have to worry about alignment issues. The assistance, suspect, and evidence tokens are double sided but only one side has cutting lines and there is lots of white space buffer so you don’t have to worry about getting the two sides perfectly aligned. I’d recommend printing this game on heavy cardstock and then mounting the tiles and player board to thin cardboard or foamcore. There’s a lot of flipping pieces in the game so you’ll want them to be fairly sturdy. I did not mount the other pieces in my copy but rather just glued the two sides together. This method works okay if the paper is stiff enough but I wish in retrospect that I would have mounted them to cardboard as well just so they would be easier to pick up and move around. Most pieces in the game have strait lines and can be cut with an X-acto and strait edge. The eight suspect tokens are round so I cut those by hand. If you have a circle punch, these pieces will probably be a little bit easier to assemble. Overall, the game should take around 30 to 45 minutes to build.

]]>Cutting with scissors is not the best way to achieve perfect circles. What’s the Ink Damage? This game has terrific artwork but that does come at a high ink premium. The pieces are all in full color and most don’t have a lot of white space. The room tiles alone use over four full pages of ink. Even the rules are heavily illustrated and will use a lot more ink than a plain text document would. However, I think the ink is well used in this game. The game looks like a professionally produced product and you are definitely getting a quality game for your ink investment.

]]>The tiles are beautifully illustrated but will eat your ink cartridge. Final Comments and Rating I enjoyed this game when it was first released but I initially thought it was perhaps a little too simplistic. However, my esteem for this game has grown significantly with repeated plays as I’ve grown to appreciate its incredibly smart design. While tile based exploration games aren’t anything new (i.e. <a href="http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/33468/zombie-in-my-pocket" >Zombie in my Pocket</a>), Inspector Moss 2 brings several new elements to the genre. One of the ways this game really stands out is through the cleverly designed Assistance Tokens, which each provide a unique special ability. These are very well balanced and none of them feel more powerful than the others (with the possible exception of the flashlight which can potentially save huge amounts of time). There are ten Assistance Tokens but only six of them will be available in a game so each play will have a lot of variety. Because each Assistance Token is equally valuable, there are a lot of hard decisions about which ones to pick up since you can only use three at a time. Each combination of Assistance Tokens offers unique pros and cons. Some reduce the time or difficulty associated with movement, others make examining evidence simpler, and others let you move suspects around. I’ve yet to find a magic combination that guarantees victory. This is a dice game and so the game can occasionally feel a little luck dependent. While such scenarios are rare, an unlucky roll can severely hamper your plans and chances of victory. The game tempers this very well with the use of wild sixes, but it can nonetheless sometimes be impossible to examine evidence, pick up assistance tokens, or even move. Conversely, since wild sixes cost extra time to use, rolling too many will enable you to do whatever you want but will cost you dearly in time, especially if one of the sixes is on the colored die. Nonetheless, such problems are rare since you are rolling eight dice but only using a max of six and you can reroll up to three times.

]]>The Chessmaster has been arrested but the turn took five minutes (four on the time die and one for the wild six) and there were only four minutes left in the game. Is this game worth the time to print, assemble, and play? Definitely! Inspector Moss 2 is an excellent game. The game is fun, challenging, and has enough variety to keep replay interest high. Because of the random set up for rooms and assistance tokens, your strategy will never be the same two games in a row. I'm giving it a rating of 8.5." /> Review: Inspector Moss 2: House Arrest:: Half Puzzle, Half Murder Mystery, All Fun! A Review of Inspector Moss 2: House Arrest

<p>by <a href='http://boardgamegeek.com/user/cordeiro'>cordeiro</a></p>
This review series is a joint effort between my wife and me and will incorporate both of our opinions.<br/><br/>In the summer of 2010, we were flying out to Michigan to visit family and show off our new baby. I wanted to bring a game with me, and preferably a new one. (Vacations are a great excuse to buy a new game.) We were only taking carry ons (we thought traveling with both a 4-month-old and checked baggage would be a logistical nightmare), so the game had to fit in my backpack along with everything else I was bringing. I visited the local game store a few days before the trip to purchase said vacation game (and also to get out of the house - I was watching our son and going stir-crazy) and walked out of the store with Dominion (and a screaming child). I immediately packed Dominion into a 500-count box without even playing it. So, there’s a pre-review check in the "pros" column - it’s very portable. (until you get sucked into the expansions) I should also note that I had done a ton of research on Dominion and that it was on my radar for a few months prior to this purchase. My wife knew nothing about the game prior to playing it for the first time. Dominion saw a lot of play time during that one week in Michigan. It was an instant hit with both of us and her family. (As a frame of reference, these same people were used to playing games like Settlers, Carcassonne, Alhambra, Zooloretto, and Bohnanza.)<br/><br/>Dominion is very easy to learn, and the games move fast enough that you can play two or three games in an hour. If anything, my wife thinks it plays too fast. The seemingly infinite combination of kingdom decks means the game has a lot of replayability and looks different each time, with different strategies will prevail in different setups.<br/><br/>In Dominion, each player builds their own deck of cards. This deck building mechanic doesn’t lend itself to a whole lot of direct player interaction. The handful of cards that do create interaction fall into two categories - friendly (council room - all other players draw a card) and attacks. The great thing about the attack cards is that they affect all opponents the same. They don’t single out one person. This is really a big deal for us and is a deal breaker for my wife. ("That’s a deal breaker!" - my wife and Liz Lemon) We don’t like playing games where one person is specifically attacking another person.<br/><br/>For Dominion games of three or four players, this attack mechanic is perfect. For two-player games, this is a bit of a problem. You’re still attacking every player the same, except every player is now one player. So, an indirect attack becomes a direct attack. I’m perfectly fine with attacks in a two player game. You’re not singling someone out. You’re not playing favorites. You’re not throwing off the game balance by attacking the wrong person. It’s just player 1 vs. player 2. For my wife, this is still a problem. She tolerates it. She doesn’t like rounds where I’m attacking her and she’s attacking me, and whoever comes out of it the least beat-up when three piles run out is the winner. That’s not her idea of a fun game of Dominion, or anything else for that matter. If the attacks merely slow us down, but we’re still able to achieve some reasonably-working deck engine, that’s okay in her books.<br/><br/>Some people have labeled Dominion as multiplayer solitaire, but that’s misleading. Not only do you have the interactive cards mentioned above, but you have to pay attention to what the other players are doing because it can affect what you decide to do on your turn. Some cards counter other cards. Some strategies end the game quicker than others. If you’re not paying attention to the deck your opponents are building, you’re putting yourself at a disadvantage.<br/><br/>It’s important to know that Dominion has a good number of expansions and was originally designed with those expansions in mind. Dominion is essentially the basic set in a larger family of sets with different themes and mechanics. We played the base set maybe a hundred times before we were ready for an expansion. We’ve played very few games a hundred times, let alone playing that many times and still wanting to keep playing it. While the base set is great on its own merits, it really shines when combined with other sets. The Dominion system is definitely a situation where the sum is greater than its parts.<br/><br/>It’s been almost two years since that Michigan trip, and Dominion is one of our top five games. Exactly where in that top five depends on which one of us you ask (and how many attack cards were played in the last round). We’ve introduced the game to about a dozen people. Most of them loved it, some liked it enough to play again, and one found it just okay. No one we’ve played with has flat out disliked it. Hundreds of plays later, it’s still our most frequently played game and spends more time on our dining room table than on the game shelf. All things considered, that’s a great track record for a box of cards I stuffed in my backpack a couple years ago.<br/>

Review: Dominion:: A Couple's Review

<p>by <a href='http://boardgamegeek.com/user/MyParadox'>MyParadox</a></p>
Over the past few weeks, I’ve been able to play Core Worlds with two different gaming groups and the Wife. Partly I did so for review purposes. But also because I’m loving the gameplay behind this late 2011 release by Stronghold Games. Though the box clearly says deck builder, this game has so much more going on. In fact, I don’t think that deck building is really even the dominant mechanic.<br/><br/>In the game, the civilization of the core worlds has gotten soft, weak, and bloated. The players are outlying raiders and empire builders who invade gradually from the outer, barbaric worlds into the core worlds themselves. All along the way, they conquer the territory they move through and adopt the greater technology they find.<br/><br/><b>The Basics</b>. Players randomly select starting planets and every starting planet comes with a pre-made starting deck of cards. The decks are identical except for the hero the leads each nation. Other than that one difference, all the players start identically.<br/><br/>One aspect that makes Core Worlds distinct from the majority of deck builders is the way cards are acquired. Rather than having a static pool of cards throughout the game, the available cards change. The cards are divided into five sectors: Barbaric Worlds, Frontier Worlds, Industrial Worlds, Luxury Worlds, and Core Worlds. On turns one and two, only the Barbaric Worlds and technologies are available. But, on turn three, the players have passed through that zone and enter, instead, the Frontier Worlds. Now, those technologies are played for the next two turns. And so on.<br/><br/>Each turn, a set number of cards (based on number of players) from the appropriate stack are played into the Central Zone. Players can acquire tactics and planets from the zone, but there is usually only one copy of each card available. So once a player has nabbed it, his or her opponents are unlikely to acquire it.<br/><br/>But, there is much more than just amassing a deck or building an engine. To play the units and tactics that they have drafted from their hand, players must pay a specific energy cost. At the beginning of the game, the players are eking out a meager existence at three energy production per turn. By game end, eleven to fifteen energy is more common. And that energy is a precious resource. It is all too easy to run out of energy and not be able to acquire desired cards, attach planets, or play necessary tactics. At game end, you may be producing much more energy, but your super powerful units now require much more.<br/><br/>Planets, however, are not acquired by merely spending energy. They must be conquered. Each planet has a defensive fleet and ground forces that must be overcome by the player. So, as the player lays down grunts and fighters, they amass into an army. Once his army is big enough, he can attack a planet and add it permanently to his warzone. Most planets also produce energy. Some are worth points.<br/><br/>And, on top of that, players have limited actions during each round. Usually limited to five, the players have to plan their troops, attacks, and card buys around this restrictive scheme. As a result, though deck building is an important aspect to the game, the game really centers around managing your actions and energy, and knowing when to attack a planet and when to build up a larger army to fight on the next turn.<br/><br/><b>The Feel</b>. One of the best aspects of this game is the restrictive action requirement. Often, you feel like if you had more turns, you’d get everything you want done. But that’s not the way Core Worlds works. This game forces difficult choices which require you to make sacrifices and often walk a razor thin line between acquiring a world and missing it by that much.<br/><br/>Plus, while direct attacks are virtually unavailable in Core Worlds, the indirect competition is fierce. With only one copy of a given planet, it’s first come, first serve. This creates extreme tension. Nearly every turn, I look around to see the strength of the other armies. Do I have time to amass and get my preferred planet before anyone else can? Or must I instead use this turn to plan on getting my second choice - which requires different troops. And, you have to take into consideration turn order (which rotates each round). It’s an exciting and riveting experience.<br/><br/>Because the game is played over only ten rounds, you ultimately shuffle your discards into your deck only about four to six times over the course of the game. That’s another reason why the deck building aspect feels a bit muted. Still, it provides a lot of the same strategy as a typical deck builder (including ways to remove starting cards and drafting potentially powerful combos), while layering on other exciting elements.<br/><br/>With ten rounds, you might think some players are at a disadvantage in three and four player games. After all, the first player will get to go first more often. Core Worlds addresses this by providing "energy surge" tokens to the other players. While it would seem that a one time boost of energy is not worth missing out on first choice of cards, in practice it works remarkably well. In one four player game, I was player four. The most disadvantaged, but receiving two energy surge tokens as compensation. Those tokens, which I used about mid game, allowed me enough energy to buy up some powerful cards, or to get a last ditch attack on a planet accomplished. Effectively, it allowed me to secure another card in each round and that definitely made up for the turn order.<br/><br/>I spent a few minutes trying to come up with negative aspects of the game. And, really, there are none. Maybe I could say its a little fiddly in that you have to monitor your actions and your energy. But, the player boards do an excellent job of simplifying it. So it is not an issue at all. I could castigate the game for including icons on the cards intended for an expansion but which are now currently meaningless. After all, if the expansion is ready to go, why hold it back? But then, I’m just picking on Core Worlds for being smart enough to plan ahead, rather than back engineering the expansion later.<br/><br/>I suppose that if you want a lot of player versus player combat, this game would disappoint. This is not an attack-your-neighbor type game. However, the scramble for cards and worlds is tight and cut throat. So interaction is maintained in watching your opponents’ moves and playing against them.<br/><br/><b>Components: 4.5 of 5</b>. This game is solid. The cards are of a good thickness to withstand multiple shuffles. This is so important in a deck builder since the cards will be shuffled and reshuffled many times in every game. And Stronghold has made sure that these things seem up to the task. Player boards have all the information needed, even if they are a bit on the ugly side. The card art, on the other hand, is fantastic and often (though not always) maintains a retro boxy-future look. And the few necessary punchout pieces are all on fantastic stock.<br/><br/><b>Strategy/Luck Balance: 4.5 of 5</b>. As a card game, there will be luck and variation. Sometimes you’ll draw what you need right when you need it. Sometimes not. But, the game really comes down to managing energy, actions, and the Central Zone. Calculating out exactly how much you can get away with given your current resources is all within player control. Since all the Core Worlds come out each game, you can also develop a long term strategy that maximizes points from an end world.<br/><br/><b>Mechanics: 5 of 5</b>. Core Worlds is mechanically brilliant. While I wouldn’t exactly call its system "elegant," it provides complex and entertaining gameplay with comparatively few rules. And, not only is the system wonderful - allowing players to build up their armies from weak to strong over the course of the game - but it is thematically very appropriate. As you, the barbarian tribes, slowly move closer to the Core Worlds, it only makes sense that the planets would be better defended, but more lucrative to hold. And that your access to technology and weapons would improve.<br/><br/><b>Replayability: 4 of 5</b>. Unlike other deck builders, you do not use a defined subset of cards in any given game. True, there are more cards in each stack than will be dealt into the game. So, by default, a subset will be used. But it is not one that the players are aware of at the beginning. Instead, players may hope to see a particular card, but whether it appears or not will ultimately be determined during the game, not before. This random mix, especially as it is resolved during the game, helps make each game an original experience.<br/><br/>Plus, Core Worlds also includes, a beginning (round zero) draft mechanic for experienced conquerors. Each player can remove two cards from their starting deck. Then, in turn order, they select one of the unique round zero cards to add to their start deck. Then do the same in reverse turn order. This gives each player a different deck right off the bat and allows for early customization.<br/><br/><b>Spite: 1 of 5</b>. Core Worlds has very, very low spite. In my plays, I’ve found only one other card that directly harms another player - and even then only by costing them a single energy. While indirect competition is high and cut-throat, there are no explicit "take that" elements that would allow any player to feel picked on.<br/><br/><b>Overall: 5 of 5</b>. Core Worlds is fun. And that’s all there is to say about it. It is thematic, it is strategic, it is not difficult to learn, it has tons of replayability, it provides an "empire building" feel, and the components are solid and built to last. The game box reads sixty to one hundred twenty minutes. None of my games have exceeded ninety minutes and, frankly, I never noticed the passage of time anyway. Core Worlds just engrosses you. I highly recommend that you find a way to get in a play of Core Worlds.<br/><br/><i>(A special thanks to Stronghold Games for providing a reduced cost copy of Core Worlds)<br/><br/>(Originally posted, with pictures, at the Giant Fire Breathing Robot)</i>

Review: Core Worlds:: A GFBR Review: Best Deckbuilder Yet?

<p>by <a href='http://boardgamegeek.com/user/stpauler'>stpauler</a></p>
We travel a lot, almost too much. So we wanted some good travel games, especially for an upcoming trip on a cruise ship. The criteria were: solid in the wind, good for two players, and fun. Blokus-to-go was a suggestion and from all of the great reviews of the game, we thought we'd give it a go. <br/><br/>Neither of us had played standard Blokus prior, so this is our only reference point to its kith and kin. I'm going to review this based on those three criteria up above.<br/><br/><u>Criterion the first: Solid in the wind.</u><br/>Yes, yes it is. This edition with the holes in the 42 see-through plastic pieces would hold up well to not just the wind, but also a bump, a car ride, or relocation. The game board has the main playing area as well as two fly-away boards to hold the opponent's pieces. The fly-aways are hinged on by a small spring and are good now, but might not hold after repeated or abusive use. This could be problematic as this is where the pieces are held, lose one piece and the game's value diminishes to unusable. Also, while most pieces will pop on and off of the pegs with little issue, the 1 piece (with one hole) was a terror for both colors. Finally, the side boards have nice patterns that show where the pieces are stored when not in play. The problem with those patterns is that it's difficult to discern piece shapes while playing because the pieces are almost right next to each other. A black outline may help and I'm going to take a Sharpie to our edition to make it easier.<br/><br/><u>Criterion el Segundo: Good for two players</u><br/>It's a two-player game. So, that's almost a non-point. But yes, it's good for two-players.<br/><br/><u>The ultimate criterion: Fun</u><br/>Well, before getting to try this game out with my partner, I read through the simple to understand instructions and the learning curve was quite short. We were both up and playing with no problems. This game is not good for those with spatial recognization issues. My partner, while a wonderful person, has no concept of spatial reasoning and spent a lot of time seeing if pieces would fit in places that they would never come close. So, if you or your opponent has this inability, this is a looooong game. Ever watch someone play Solitaire and want to point out something that they are missing. That was this game over and over. So it quickly became banal and uninteresting. After 3 matches, we stopped.<br/><br/>So while I liked it with about a 6.0 enthusiasm, my partner's rating was about a 3. <br/><br/><u>Epilogue</u><br/>The regular game was a bust. For us anyways. So for playing together, we'll look towards other pastures. I, however, thought that there might be one more trick up its sleeve, and for that I needed a bag. So I got one. I put all of the pieces inside and played against myself pulling out each piece one by one and playing them in that order. The same rules about only corners touch was still in play, but the order between colors was ignored. I played this house version 6 times and had a great time going solo and seeing if I could better my previous score. That bumped the game up to a 7 for me. If you haven't tried it, it's worth it.

Review: Blokus Duo:: Bought Blokus, but banality busts big balloon.

<p>by <a href='http://boardgamegeek.com/user/doubtofbuddha'>doubtofbuddha</a></p>
Most games put up on Kickstarter to date have not impressed me. Only two have been sufficiently interesting to cause me to actually support them, and one of those was the reprint of Glory to Rome, which is a tried and tested game that I have played numerous times before. The other game, the one that I am talking about today is the Manhattan Project, a worker placement game published by Minion Games and designed by Brandon Tibbetts, a name I was previously unfamiliar with. The reasons for this were twofold: the first was that I found the game to be thematically appealing and the second is that I have an inescapable attraction to heavier worker placement games. Reading the rulebook indicated that the game had some mechanically interesting aspects and the combination of the two was enough to push me over the edge into supporting it. <br/><br/><![CDATA[<div style=''><a href=

]]> Components For a smaller publisher Minion Games has done a phenomenal job on their components in general and graphic design in particular. It may, in fact be one of my favorite graphic designs period, marred only by all too typical color issues. The first excellent choice comes in the form of board size. While it would have been very easy for them to make the cards and workers unnecessarily large and increase the size of the board to the point where it is equivalent to that of most euro-games they instead used smaller, but still clear, cards and decreased the board size such that it will fit even on smaller or narrower tables. While I have no problem with a larger board, if it is useful or necessary, I appreciate the fact they were willing to go smaller; I am sure it will help keep down the cost for the final retail price of the game too.

]]> The cardboard components are also very good, with the workers counters being extra thick and everything else being of suitably sturdy construction. I was mildly disappointed at first that we did not get wooden workers (meeples!) but that disappointment quickly passed, as they would not have been able to accomplish what they did graphically with wood.

]]> The second truly excellent choice they made for The Manhattan Project was in the overall art and style of the game. It is very evocative, bringing to mind 1940’s era propaganda posters highlighting the industrial and research capabilities of the nations involved or perhaps the Fallout series of video games. The artwork for the worker themselves is cartoonish, but pleasantly so. Each one has full and easily identifiable clothing but lack physically features making it easy to imagine the individual workers as members of any particular nation. This freshness in the face of high-quality but graphically unimaginative styles of many other games is enough to really cause this game to stand out.

]]> Unfortunately, the Manhattan Project, like many other games, will cause issues for those who are red-green colorblind. However one of the typical problem pairs, red and green, are not an issue for me with the Manhattan Project; I had very little difficulty telling them apart. The purple and blue however, were pretty tough to distinguish, but the design of the game is such that it resulted in very little game state confusion, as I only had to occasionally ask which color was which in order to identify how much uranium or plutonium a player had. Still considering the number of other color options that are easier to distinguish it is a shame that they had to go with two colors that are easily confused. What Is Important On a player’s turn they may either lay a single worker down on the main board and any number of workers on their personal boards or they may recover all of their workers. As this general structure implies, tempo management is the key to The Manhattan Project, and while tempo management is important to many other worker placement games, I am not quite sure I have ever seen its importance be on quite the same scale. Other things are important in the game, and there are plenty of interesting decisions that do not involve when you are going to place vs. recall your workers, but most of them directly affect or are affected by that decision. Two prime examples of this are some of the more interactive elements of the game: bombing strikes and espionage. Since the game is set at a period when most of the world is at war, it is possible to use fighters to destroy other player’s fighters and then launch bombing strikes at the target players’ undefended buildings. Do these attacks permanently destroy the targets buildings? No, instead they damage the building requiring both actions and money to replace, thus requiring them to slow down their own momentum in order to regain access to their buildings or construct alternate paths to the games ultimate victory condition: setting off atomic bombs. Similarly the espionage action lets you accelerate your own momentum at a cost to other people. It is the only action on the board that lets you use, and thus block off, other people’s buildings and give you access to capabilities that you do not currently have for yourself. This is such a momentum enhancer for you, and a drain on other players that once an engine gets running it is typical to see the espionage passed from player to player, as individuals start to see it as being too powerful to let one player get twice in a row. It also tends to be more commonly used than air strikes, at least in our games. Espionage will usually directly benefit you, air strikes may not. The bomb cards are another aspect that highlights the centrality that tempo management has in The Manhattan Project. The Manhattan Project’s end condition is hitting a victory point threshold that varies depending on the number of players. In order for bomb cards to enter the game, a player needs to take an action that gives them two bombs, their first choice and whatever is left over after all of the other players have picked one of the bombs. So it is quite possible for you to get the bomb cards you need without ever taking a main board action to do so, but only at the cost of having a lower degree of control over which bomb card you can get. Since there are usually multiple ways to get to the required victory points, it seems like it would be possible to win the game without ever taking the action, and thus the momentum hit, but having control over your victory point sources seems strong enough that this will probably only happen rarely. The Buildings and Their Queue The available buildings are based on a card draw and generally perform the same function as those on the main board, with anywhere from a slight to large increase in overall efficiency. The variable power of these buildings is based on two factors. The first of these is that, much like Through the Ages, buildings are more expensive when they first come out but become increasingly less so as earlier buildings are constructed, so if you want to have a particularly powerful building you may have to pay a large amount of money for it. The second mitigating factor is the previously mentioned espionage action. If you get a building that is particularly desirable then you will find that other players use it for espionage almost every time they get an opportunity, meaning that you may end up paying a great deal of money for a building that is used by other players more than yourself. All but one of the initial buildings are seeded, but after that there is no particular order in which they come out. This can result in some interesting streaks, as there can be a low number of buildings that produce money, yellowcake, or uranium and plutonium. This variability in the emerging buildings, and who gets the more scarce buildings results in some fairly interesting dynamics. First of all can increase the value of the board spots that produce these resources, making it so spots that are normally taken only occasionally suddenly become much more valuable, and it makes it so whomever does have buildings that produce the desired resources will become a much more frequent espionage target, decreasing the value of the building for that player. Being able to gauge when it is important to start taking advantage of the generally available locations for these materials rather than hoping the correct building comes out is an important skill in the Manhattan Project. What You Do So what sort of things are you doing with your workers besides spying on each other, bombing each other, and constructing buildings? Mostly they serve to produce and convert resources as is typical in eurogames. The primary resource of the Manhattan Project is those previously mentioned workers (engineers, laborers, and scientists) that are produced by universities. You start the game with four laborers, and can gain up to four more permanent engineers and scientists throughout the game. Additionally, players can gain up to four of each of the temporary versions of the permanent workers, from a common pool, ensuring that universities can continue to be useful after a certain point and allowing you to perform various tempo enhancing or sapping maneuvers based on manipulation of the presence of these temporary workers in the supply. Each building requires the use of a different combination of quantity and type of workers, meaning that it is important your tailor your worker configuration to the requirements of your buildings. Doing otherwise can reduce your ability to use your own buildings, which may be acceptable based on how disrupted other player’s tempos are, but can be ensure your defeat otherwise. The next type of building is factories, which produce some combination of money, bombers, and fighters. Money is probably the most generally useful of these items because of the flexibility it provides; it lets you use the espionage buildings, buy buildings that are not available with just an engineer , or allow you to access actions that require money. One of the two types of nuclear fuel, uranium, is also very expensive and it can be difficult to set up an efficient way to get uranium unless you effectively manage your money. Fighters are used exclusively for stripping away other player’s defenses in order to be able to open them up for bombing runs, but bombers have an additional use beyond damaging buildings; they can be combined with money to provide a 5 point bump in the value of any given bomb when you detonate it. Mines are probably the most straightforward of the buildings, as they simply produce variable quantities of yellowcake, which is the basis for producing both uranium and plutonium. There are certainly some mines that are more efficient than others, but the bigger ones are particularly useful in that they produce large quantities of yellowcake while also sucking up your workers, allowing you to use your workers more efficiently without damaging your tempo. Of course the ones that require smaller amounts of workers are good, because you can always used them and they are thus much more flexible to changing game state and are much less likely to be used by players taking advantage of the espionage action. Enrichment Plants and Reactors allow for the production of uranium and plutonium, turning large amounts of yellowcake into plutonium, or smaller amounts of yellowcake and money into uranium, or turning yellowcake or uranium into plutonium. The shortness of the overall resource conversion chains allow for a great deal of flexibility in getting the right combination of victory points to win; it is very possible to switch between Uranium and Plutonium bombs in the middle of the game if necessary, particularly if you think that the costs of taking another design bomb action are not worth the potential risks of one of the other players to get designs on their own. Potential Flaws On the whole I like The Manhattan Project, but I see a few ways that it could potentially end up not working in the end, both for me and for others. I do not think any of these are truly fatal flaws, but they do keep them The Manhattan Project in my second tier of worker placement games (Caylus, Dungeon Petz, Key Market, or Le Havre) rather than my top tier (Agricola, Dominant Species, and Ora et Labora). My biggest problem with The Manhattan Project is how incredibly focused the design is. There are no enjoyable explorations of the various different ways to win. With my favorite worker placement games the design is broad enough that there are usually numerous different ways where I can attempt to manipulate the system in order to try to win. The Manhattan Project is much more focused than that, and while there are plenty of different ways you can get to the victory condition, the game’s overall focus on tempo management is such that most such items directly feed into that. This lack of strategic variability is somewhat disappointing, but not ultimately something I can really hold against the game too much. It accomplishes its objectives very well, and should work very well for those who like very focused designs. As it is I still enjoy it and appreciate its uniqueness in my collection, I just am concerned that after 20 or 30 plays I may grow to tire of it. The game is interactive enough that an inexperienced player among those who are more seasoned can disrupt The Manhattan Project’s play experience. Because of how focused the game is on tempo and the ease in which players can effect others tempo either indirectly, through leaving actions open that they should not have, or more directly through air strikes or espionage, there is great potential for those who are less experienced at the game or who are unable to maintain the required amount of attention to disrupt the game and throw it to one player or another. The fairly strong left-right binding is a secondary contributing factor to this, as someone to the immediate left of a player who makes a mistake will usually be the one to benefit from it. There is some potential for the luck of the card draw, mostly from the bomb deck but also from the building queue, in having a negative impact on your ability to win. Being able to gain victory in fewer bombs is usually worthwhile, and it is possible that revealed bombs could leave you without any viable alternatives, particularly if you choose to specialize early in either Plutonium or Uranium production. However, I think a lot of this can be resolved by choices in the game. Taking the design bomb action rather than just waiting for whatever comes to you can help ensure you get the bombs you need, and waiting to produce uranium or plutonium until after you have your path to victory can mitigate the potential for the wrong bomb types coming out after you have produced your material; of course someone who is willing to take a slight chance in this regard might end up beating you anyway, but making these sort of judgment calls is simply part of the game. The play time of The Manhattan Project can potentially drag if people are particularly slow in their decision making or if enough reactors/enrichment plans do not come out. There seems to be a significant enough numbers of these buildings to prevent this from occurring, however, and players can resolve this lack by simply buying more buildings, and thus pushing out new buildings at a faster rate. My games, even with new players, have generally lasted 70 to 90 minutes, and the Manhattan Project is one of the few games where the time listed on the box is a conservative estimate. I suspect that if The Manhattan Project lasted much more than 120 minutes I would find it less entertaining. Final Thoughts I like the Manhattan Project and am pleased that I chose to back it. While it is a very tempo focused game, it is short enough and is nuanced enough within that focus that I think it is definitely worth owning, if only to explore the limits of the entertaining system that Mr. Tibbetts has put together. While it is not my favorite worker placement game, it is still a good one, and one that I can definitely recommend both for fans of more interactive worker placement games and people who like games focused on tempo management in general. " /> Review: The Manhattan Project:: Atomic Tempo