Pyramix Review

Gamewright isn't exactly known for strategy games. They make wonderful, family friendly games with fun themes and simple but entertaining gameplay. Pyramix keeps with the Gamewright tradition of beautiful components with simple, family friendly gameplay.

Pyramix is an abstract strategy game with a light Egyptian theme. Gameplay starts with the cubes being randomly set up on the board in the shape of a pyramid. A player's turn consists only of selecting a cube from the pyramid and adding it to her collection. Cubes can only be taken from the pyramid if they have at least two sides showing, are not touching a serpent cube, and taking the cube will not result in the board being exposed.

The game ends when there are not legal moves left - usually when there is a single layer of cubes laying on top of the board. Players score 1 point for each ankh, 2 points for each crane, 3 points for each Eye of Horus, and 0 points for each serpent. Additionally, if a player has the most ankhs in a color, they will receive all of the remaining cubes that math their color and score those as well.

In this situation, if any player takes the teal crane of ankh,
the next player will be able to take the orange Eye.

The one thing that I don't love about the game is the "dots" feeling that can develop. There will be many times, especially in a two player game, where there is a cube that is two moves away from being able to get taken, so it is in no player's interest to make that first move. The interesting thing about this is because the game happens in 3 dimensions, players will have to keep all of these moves in mind as they spin the board and look for moves that won't set up the next player.

As I said in my introduction, Pyramix is a very simple game. But subtle and interesting strategies present themselves as you play the game. As the game progresses it may become clear to you which color you will have the most ankhs in. This could mean that you might want to take cubes so that other cubes of that color do reach the bottom of the board. If this happens, you'll receive the cube anyhow, so you might as well get a different cube and secure the first cube as well!

Pyramix is a great abstract game. Gamewright has put out another quality product that is attractive, fun, and quite thinky! And with a $20 price point, I think picking up a copy of Pyramix is a no brainer. There is randomness, and this isn't the next chess, but I was pleasantly surprised by the amount of depth I found in Pyramix. I'd rate it a solid 7.5/10.

Quantum Review

Quantum set up for two players. Wine and GoT coasters not included.

I love Star Wars. I really enjoy science fiction movies, books, and TV shows. I would love to love science fiction themed games...but my main gaming partner, my lovely wife, does not care for the "space" theme at all. So it is rare that any "space games" make it into our home. With this big factor going against it, does Quantum make the "Flartner" cut?

Quantum is the latest from publisher FunForge and designer Eric Zimmerman. Quantum is a lighter space civilization and combat game where the players' ships are represented by dice. The goal of the game is for each player to construct all of her quantum cubes on empty planets.

Players construct their cubes on planets by having ships in orbit around a planet that are exactly equal to the planet's number.

On a turn a player gets 3 actions. Players can Reconfigure a ship by rerolling it, Deploy a destroyed ship to the board, Construct a Quantum Cube (which costs 2 actions), Research (which can help a player get powerful Advance Cards). The last option is to have a ship Move/Attack. A ship can move as many spaces as it has pips on its face - so a ship represented by a die showing a 5 could move 5 spaces.

In this combat example, blue's Destroyer narrowly defeats yellow's Interceptor.

Ships attack by moving into a space containing an enemy ship. Each player involved rolls one combat die and adds this to the value of the ship in combat. The player with the lower total wins. This means the game asks players to strike an interesting balance between their ships' mobility against their ships' effectiveness in combat.

All civilizations play exactly the same - aside from color and name.
...that rhyme was an accident...I promise.

Additionally, each type of ship has a special ability that can be used once per turn and that does not cost an action. The Frigate (4), for instance, can modify itself to be either a 3 or a 5.

There are also 6 Advance Cards available for players to take. The cards come in two varieties, gambit cards (which trigger instant effects) and command cards (which are ongoing effects). These can be acquired in any of 3 ways: by constructing a quantum cube, by destroying an enemy ship, or by getting your research die up to 6.

I play a lot of games with my wife. She will try almost anything once, but I avoid bringing home games that are set in outer space because of how much she does not like the theme. After our first game of Quantum, she said, "Ok, that was a really good space game."

As with any game with cards and dice, there is a good amount of randomness included in the game. This might push some players the wrong way. The randomness of Reconfiguring a ship can be frustrating if a player gets exactly the ship they want, and some of the cards in the game do seem much stronger than others. Both of these issues are mitigated somewhat by the game's relatively short playing time and fairly abstracted rule set. Speaking of abstraction, that is another possible issue for Quantum. The game is about space ships warring and colonizing planets, but some ships can swap place with each other? And any ship can randomly change into another kind of ship? These make for exciting and interesting game play elements, but go a long way to making the game feel more abstract and themeless.

I think that Quantum overcomes these few shortcomings and is ultimately a very fun, very engaging game. I have always thought that many strong games have one thing in common - a small number of simple rules but a great number of interesting decisions. Quantum is a prime example of this type of game. The rules are fairly limited, but the way the rules come together and interact with each other create a fairly deep play space which is quite fun for players to explore. The most basic concept of the game - that the stronger a ship is, the slower it is, and vice versa - is a perfect distillation of this idea. Quantum seems to take many things that make space games fun, and reintroduces them with the old K.I.S.S. principle, very much to it's benefit.

Overall, I would give Quantum a 7.0/10. It is a very fun little space game that would fit well in many a collection. There will be frustrating randomness at times, and there is definitely some theme wonkiness, but these are both reduced as negative factors by the game's shorter length and relatively broad strategic play space. This may not be the next Eclipse, but it was never trying to be. Quantum is one of those creative endeavors that doesn't overreach, but absolutely nails what it was going for - quick gameplay, simple but difficult decisions, all wrapped up in a pretty space package. I recommend you check it out.

Tamsk Review

 
The last game from the original Gipf project that I've been able to try is Tamsk. (The link is to Board Game Geek, since Tamsk is out of print and not on Amazon. Plus, Tamsk was originally part of the Gipf project, but was later replaced by Tzaar; hence it being out of print.)

In Tamsk, your goal is to get rid of as many rings as possible.  Players take turns moving timers along a hexagonal shaped board, and after each move, they drop a ring around their new location.  Timers can only move to locations that still have room for another ring on them, and depending on where the location lives on the board, each location can hold anywhere from one to four rings.  Players alternate turns until no more legal moves exist, at which point the player with the least number of rings is the winner.  To add more challenge to the game, you may also play where each turn you must flip the timer that is being moved - and if a timer ever runs out of sand, then it is no longer legally allowed to move.  Finally, if you want to add even more challenge, a 15-second timer is included which you can flip over on your opponent's turn.  If they do not complete their move before that timer expires, then they lose their turn, and you are allowed to place an extra ring.

Jockying for position

Though I have now reviewed many different abstract strategy games, I still haven't developed a good vocabulary for describing what I like and dislike about the games.  I often feel like my review consists of "I thought it was a good game," or "it was fun."  Basically, this is like reviewer caveman talk - "Josh like that round piece moves!"  Regardless, I will try to describe my thoughts about Tamsk.  The crux of the game is in positioning your timers to leave a maximum number of options, while limiting your opponent.  One of the interesting elements that Tamsk adds to the formula, however, is that the closer you move to the middle, the more times that a specific location can be used (the center spot can hold four rings, but the outer edge can only hold one).  This element forces players to decide whether they want to move towards the center of the board, where they will be able to move around, but will have a lot of moves blocked by other timers, or whether they should stay along the exterior of the board where each move might eliminate a location, but where there will be less conflict over each location.

The next pro that I found for Tamsk is that there are interesting choices that you have to make about when to un-block an opponent's timer.  Generally, you want to block your opponent's timers.  This prevents them from moving, and thus it allows you to take extra turns - thus playing more of your rings.  However, because the locations can be used more than once, if you are blocking an opponent with one of your timers, they will quite likely be allowed to take your vacated space as soon as you leave it.  Therefore, you have the upper hand since you have temporarily blocked your opponent, but if you don't take advantage of this by positioning your other timers while they are blocked, then this advantage might only be temporary.

Showing off a red timer that has died

However, though these elements are interesting, I had some definitely cons with Tamsk.  First, I hated playing it while actually flipping the timers.  Instead of trying to optimize your movements, this changes the game so that you are simply making a game of when you flip each timer.  The rules specify that as a "gentleman's agreement" you should move quickly.  However, if you start moving quickly (as you're "supposed" to), and don't alternate turns between your different timers, then you might wind up flipping  a timer that you have just flipped - causing it's time to be almost completely expired.  So, you aren't even necessarily always waiting on your opponent's timer to expire - you might be waiting on your own timer to run down so that it will have more sand in it on your opponent's turn.  Ultimately, I felt like this element of the game encouraged sitting around and waiting for timers to be close to expiring more than it encouraged playing the strategic part of the game. 

The second con that I had for Tamsk was that it simply felt too simplistic.  There didn't seem to be all that many strategic elements to it.  Like I said before, I don't have a good vocabulary for how to explain this better.  Essentially, it felt like in Tamsk, there are just not many choices - do I move towards the center, or along the edge?  Do I unblock my opponent yet?  That really seemed like about it.  Without the timer element (which I hated), you are left with a fairly basic and generic abstract game.

Overall, I give Tamsk a 6.5/10.  Part of my disappointment in the game may be that it took me a long time to track down a copy to play, but the game wasn't phenomenal, like I was hoping.  However, since I truly dislike the timer element to the game, I will probably move my copy along to someone new.

If you enjoy abstract strategy games, then you might want to check out the other games (that I've reviewed) from the Gipf project - Gipf, Dvonn, Punct, Yinsh, and Zertz.

Quarto Review

A little while back, I ranked my top ten abstract games. After I made that post, you all (my readers) suggested a few more that I should try. Notably, Quarto and Arimaa. Well, I listened and traded for a copy of each of them. And, though Arimaa is yet to hit my table, it is time to give Quarto a review.

Quarto is a simple game (read: "this review will be short") of piece placement.  The game is played on a 4x4 grid, and there are 16 total pieces.  Each piece has four different attributes - color, height, shape (square or round), and hollow or filled-in.  On each turn, one player selects a piece and hands it to his opponent.  That player then places the piece on the board.  When placing a piece, if you successfully create a line of four pieces in a row that all share an attribute (and realize it), then you win the game!  If you didn't notice it, but your opponent does, then he can claim it and win.  Play continues until either all of the pieces have been played and there are nobody noticed a four-in-a-row's (you tie), or until one person has won.

The most brilliant pro about Quarto is that you select which piece your opponent plays.  If each person got to pick their own piece, there would be half as much strategy (maybe even less) and the game simply would not be fun.  However, since you get to pick your opponent's piece, you can give him pieces to try to force him into setting you up for a victory on your turn.  You also have to be much more aware of how your opponent is trying to win - if you give him the piece he needs, then you will inadvertently give him the victory! I was very impressed with the strategic depth that this presented.  I found myself thinking about which pieces would win the game, how I could setup more pieces to be "winning" pieces, and how to stage it so that I could give my opponent the last possible non-winning piece.  (And yet, with all this thinking, I still lost!)

There are only so many things to take pictures of in Quarto.

The next pro that I have for Quarto is that the game is easily visible.  In many of these "get a bunch of things in a row" games, there is something that either makes it hard to visualize what is going to happen, or makes it hard to actually physically see what is going on (Quadrago is a good example of this).  However, in Quarto, you can easily see all of the pieces, and each attribute is distinct enough that, though you may miss what your opponent is trying to do, it won't be because your vision was blocked.

My third pro for Quarto is that it is a great combination of fast and replayable.  Since the game can only take up to 16 turns (and each turn only consists of placing a single piece), it goes fairly quickly.  However, when you win the game (especially if you lose), you will find yourself wanting to play a rematch.  This makes Quarto a really good game to play when are looking to fill an indeterminate amount of time (when you're waiting on someone to show up, for example).  I also see Quarto being a great game to play while simply hanging out with friends to socialize - a coffee shop type of game.

The only real con that I have with Quarto is that each game seems to have a bit of a ramping up element early on.  What I mean by this is that the first few piece selections and placements probably will not have very much strategy.  After all, when there's nothing on the board, there's nothing that you really have to watch out for.  So, at least when I have played, the first few turns are somewhat like, "here, take this one - throw it on the board somewhere; then, randomly pick another piece, and I'll do the same."  I'm sure that people who have played Quarto a lot more than I have will find much deeper strategies, and will start executing them from the beginning of the game.  But, I still think that the first few turns (though necessary to make the game work) don't really matter very much strategically.

Overall, I give Quarto an 8.5/10.  I really like the game, and I will continue playing it.  However, I will play it as a time-filler or as a game to play when I'm wanting to chat while playing, not a game that I will get together with a friend specifically to play.

If you like abstract games, you should also check out Quoridor, Brandubh, and Dvonn.

Arimaa Review

A while back, I did a top ten abstract board games list. One of the comments spoke incredibly highly of an abstract that I hadn't tried yet - Arimaa.  So, of course, I hunted down a copy and tried it out!

In Arimaa, the goal of the game is to get one of your rabbits onto your opponent's edge of the board.  To start the game, you have an elephant, camel, two horses, two dogs, two cats, and eight rabbits (listed in order of power).  Each player can set these pieces up however they choose along the two rows closest to them.  Then, on each turn, players can make up to four total moves.  A move is always orthogonal (not diagonal), and these moves can be split up among as many pieces as you would like.  There are two special moves (that require two movement points) - you can push or pull an opponent's piece.  To do either of these moves, your piece must be stronger than your opponent's.  To push, you simply move your opponent into any unoccupied space adjacent to their current position and place your piece where they just vacated.  To pull, you move your piece to an adjacent vacant space and move their piece to the spot you just vacated.  These moves are especially important, as there are four black hole spaces on the board - if you push your opponent onto one of them, then they lose that piece.  Two more special rules - rabbits cannot move backwards, and a piece adjacent to an opponent's stronger piece is "frozen" and cannot move (unless the piece is also adjacent to a friendly piece).  Players alternate turns of four moves until one rabbit has crossed the finish line!  Or, until one person has made so much rabbit stew that their opponent no longer has any rabbits to attempt to win with.

Elephant getting ready to cause havoc

The first thing that I think is interesting about Arimaa is the elephant piece.  This is somewhat like the King in Chess - but at the same time, the complete opposite.  In Arimaa, the elephant is your most important piece (hence like the King), but your opponent cannot capture it (thus the complete opposite).  Your elephant is the strongest piece on the board, and so how you choose to use it will alter the game significantly.  Do you use it offensively or defensively?  You can use it offensively to attempt to slaughter as many of their pieces as possible, forcing them to simply run away with whichever piece they want to keep.  Alternatively, you can use it defensively to help guard a path for your rabbit to sprint across the board.  Since any piece that is adjacent to an opponent's stronger piece is frozen, you can set up your elephant so that it will freeze your opponent if they try to attack your rabbit.  (Of course, they can still attack it with their elephant, but you can counter that by putting your elephant in their way - they will be forced to use several moves to go around your piece, since your elephant is the only piece that they cannot push.)

The next element of Arimaa that I enjoyed was the black hole spaces.  I really thought that this was a nice way of capturing pieces.  Again, I will compare this to Chess, as Arimaa naturally gets that comparison (you play it on the same sized board, and with the same number and breakdown of pieces - in fact, you can use an Arimaa set as a Chess set if you prefer).  In Chess, you simply have to land on an opponent's piece to capture them.  I like that in Arimaa, it requires a bit more effort.  The push or pull requires two movement points each.  Plus, if the target is not adjacent to the black hole to begin with, it may require two push/pull maneuvers to capture a piece.  However, even with that extra effort, it still does not necessarily cost your entire turn to capture a single piece - you may be able to push a piece into the black hole, and then still have two movement points remaining that you can use elsewhere.  I really liked how the capturing worked here.  Another reason that this worked so well is that the black hole spaces are positioned on the board so that a piece is never very far away from one.  So, if you're not paying attention, you can lose a piece on almost any turn.

Pieces in order of power

My third pro for Arimaa is the mechanic that stronger pieces freeze weaker pieces.  Just as much as capturing your opponent's pieces, freezing them is an equally important component to master.  Yet, having a piece frozen isn't all bad, as you can unfreeze them with any of your other pieces - a lowly rabbit can unfreeze a piece that is adjacent to an opponent's elephant.  (I'm not really sure how this works thematically (granted, abstract games don't have theme) - are they planning to attack the elephant together?  That reminds me of some of the handicap matches that Andre the Giant used to fight.  Andre always won.)  This ability to unfreeze is especially important when trying to get your rabbit across the finish line.  Many times a player will leave their cat pieces behind (mainly because they're not very strong and would get slaughtered if they charged ahead), and these pieces can be positioned to freeze a rabbit that is attempting to cross.  It's easy enough to get around this by moving another piece along with your rabbit.  However, unfreezing the rabbit requires you to move the escorting piece as well, which costs extra movement points.  And, if you run out of movement at the wrong time, their cat might throw your rabbit into a black hole and force you to start over with another one.  Overall - freezing is really a beautiful mechanic in this game that adds a lot of depth to strategy.

My fourth pro for Arimaa is that I like the freedom that the game allows.  I like that you can setup your pieces however you want, and that you can split your movement points up among different pieces.  However, possibly due to this freedom, I must share my sole con for the game: players that are prone to think for long periods of time can make the game drag.  This is true in a lot of abstract strategy games (since the entire game is visible in front of you, if you can outthink your opponent, there is nothing that can stop you).  However, I have discovered that the more a game resembles chess, the longer that players will sit around and think.  And, Arimaa resembles Chess a lot (in looks, not in gameplay).  So, this is just something that you should be aware of - if your opponent likes to sit and think, then be prepared to have quite a bit of down time.

Overall, I give Arimaa a 9.0/10.  I really enjoyed the game, and I think that it is a beautiful example of an abstract strategy.  The motto of the game is "intuitively simple… intellectually challenging", and I would have to agree with this.  I would highly recommend that anyone that enjoys abstract strategy games try out Arimaa.

If Arimaa sound interesting, you might also want to check out Ploy, Gipf, and Brandubh.

Zendo Review

One of the first games that I was introduced to once I moved to Philadelphia was Zendo. (As a note, you can't buy Zendo anymore as a standalone game, but it utilizes the "Icehouse Pieces", so you can easily make your own version of the game, as I intend to do.)

Zendo is a game all about patterns and rules. Yet, there are very few rules to actually playing the game. To start each round, one player determines a "rule" (pattern) that all of the other players are attempting to discover. He then creates two examples - one that matches the rule (or the "Buddha nature") and one that does not. After this, each other player builds a structure and either says "master" or "mondo". "Master" simply asks the moderator (rule creator) to tell everyone whether that structure matches the pattern. "Mondo" allows all of the players to guess whether or not the structure matches the rule - and each player that is right gets a guessing stone. On your turn, if you have a guessing stone, you are allowed to guess what the rule is (and if you're wrong the moderator will create an example that disproves your guess). The first person to guess it correctly is the winner, and they get to make up a rule for the next round. That's the whole game - you keep playing as many or as few rounds as you want, and you make the rules as simple or as complicated as you want (and your group is willing to put up with; if you came up with a 5-part rule, I would probably never play with you again. Especially since it would take us hours to figure it all out.)

What's the rule?

So.... you know how sometimes you just feel like you're going to hate a game, before you even try it? Zendo was like that for me. It was explained as a game "of figuring out the rules", and so I immediately thought of the atrocious card game "Mau." (I absolutely hate Mau. If you don't know what it is then: 1) consider yourself lucky, and 2) you can find more information about it on Wikipedia.) However, since I claim I'm willing to try any game (and to be a good sport since I had just met these people), I tried it. I was wrong - Zendo actually wound up being a very fun, laid back game. Therefore, my first pro is this: Zendo is a relaxing game. Most games that I play are fairly intense. This is because I'm (hyper-)competitive. I like to win. I'm willing to lose, but while I'm playing a game I'm doing everything I can to win. Zendo for whatever reason doesn't matter as much. Sure, I'd like to win, but it's also just fun to try to figure out the pattern.

Secondly, I like that the difficulty of Zendo is scalable based on the group. I'm not incredibly dedicated to the game, so I probably won't ever play where there are complex rules (such as there has to be a red pyramid and there must be a small pyramid). However, for those people that do enjoy more complicated patterns, this is perfectly legal. You can make the pattern as complicated as the other players are willing to accept.

Can you figure out this one?

My third pro is that the game is very inviting. It's something that could be played by most anybody (it might be problematic if you're color-blind). It can be enjoyed by both gamers and non-gamers alike, and it could even be a decent ice-breaking game. You could start playing it with 3-4 people, and before you know it there would be people around watching it that you could include in the next round (or if you're willing, you could even let them jump into that round). It's a very fluid and inviting game and is great for playing just to enjoy the experience.

I don't really have any direct cons for Zendo, but at the same time I realize that this isn't a game that I'm going to get together specifically to play. This keeps it out of my upper echelon of games. However, this doesn't mean that Zendo isn't something that everyone can enjoy. I could easily see this being played at coffee shops, or any other gathering of friends.

Overall, I give Zendo an 8.5/10. I try to reserve 9+ for games that I would get together specifically to play, and that's really the only thing that keeps Zendo from scoring quite a bit higher!  If you somehow find a copy, or if you happen to have Icehouse Pieces (or were thinking about buying them for a different reason), I would definitely recommend that you try it out.

It's hard to recommend games "like" Zendo. But, you might check out Tsuro, Jin Li, and Blue Moon City.

Brandubh Review

A classic game that has lasted for centuries is Brandubh.  Brandubh is one of twelve games of Bibelot Games' "Reliquary Collection."  This collection has taken many ancient board games and is re-printing them with very high quality components and packaging that provide you with a very easily portable, nice, yet ancient feel.  Brandubh specifically, is from Ireland around 600 AD.  If you're interested in learning more about the Reliquary Collection, check out their Kickstarter project - I think that they're worth backing.  Also, as a final note, the pictures that I have provided in this review are of a prototype of the game, so the final product may look slightly different - but Bibelot has told me that they are not intending to change the look or feel. 

As I said, Brandbudh is a classic game like Chess or Go.  It is from Ireland around 600, and Bibelot Games didn't have to change or adjust any of the rules.  Brandubh is the game of the Kings and the Ravens.  All of the pieces are setup in a cross, with the High King in the center.  The Kings have a total of five pieces, whereas the Ravens have eight.  The Ravens are attempting to capture the High King by surrounding him on all four sides, whereas the Kings win if the High King successfully moves to one of the corners of the board.  Each turn, the active player moves a single piece as far as he wants in a straight line.  If, by doing this, he flanks one of his opponent's pieces (other than the High King) on opposite sides, then that piece is captured.  Also, the High King is the only piece that is allowed to move into the corners or through the center.  Players alternate turns back and forth until the High King has either escaped or been captured.

I love the suede pouch

The biggest pro that I have for Brandubh (specifically the Bibelot edition of it) is that the packaging is amazing.  It is packaged in a suede pouch that also lays flat to serve as the board.  In addition, the pieces (they claim that they are marble, but I have no idea) fit very well with the age of the game and the ancient feel presented by the suede pouch.  Overall, when playing the game, you really feel like this could have been how it felt to play this game hundreds of years ago, and it is just amazing that the game has survived for so long.  I really hope that one of the things that Bibelot does with their project is to provide the history of each of the games, but I don't know how far along they are in the publishing, and so I don't know if this is feasible for the first printing.

The next thing that I like about Brandubh is that it is actually a solid game.  It is balanced, but not symmetric.  The Kings have a much easier victory condition, since all they have to do is escape.  However, the Ravens have a significantly larger force.  I have seen both sides win, and whenever I have played it, I felt like the side I wasn't using always had the advantage - which I think means that the game is balanced well (and that I'm not very good at it).

The game itself is fairly simple, so instead of more pros and cons, now I will just cover the basic strategy for both sides.  With the Kings, the goal is to escape at all costs.  It doesn't matter if any of your Kings other than your High King survives.  You should use your Kings as blockers, setting up a section of the board for your High King to quickly be able to move through.  Basically, just get your Kings in the way of the Ravens.  In addition, since the High King is the only piece able to move through the center, don't be afraid to quickly switch directions.  If the Ravens are blocking you on one side, it might be good to switch to the other side of the board, and try to get some of your opponents blocked by the center piece.

The components fit the vintage (ancient) feel of the game

With the Ravens, you have to capture the High King.  Unfortunately, he has a lot of lackeys.  Well, he has a whole lot less of them if you start capturing them.  You probably won't win with the Ravens if the Kings still have all of their pieces - so capture them as often as possible.  But, when doing this, make sure that the High King doesn't slip through your fingers.  You have to strike a careful balance between capitalizing on every opportunity to capture a piece, but also being attentive to what the High King might be setting up as an escape route.

Overall, I give Brandubh an 8.5/10.  When talking to the people at Bibelot, they told me something along the lines of "we think the world is better with these games in it," and I would have to say that I agree.  Not only the world, but my game collection is better with these games in it.  It may not come as a surprise to many of you that I have "a few" games (I think it was around 300 last time I looked), and so many of the games that I play for this site wind up being traded after I review them.  Brandubh I think will stay in my collection for quite a while, and I'm very eager to try the other games from the Reliquary Collection, so I wish Bibelot all the success in the world with their Kickstarter project.  And, as a reminder, you can check them out here if you are interested in backing them in order to get a copy of Brandubh or any of the other 11 games in the Reliquary Collection.

If you like Brandubh, you might also like Atlanteon, Hive, and Abalone.

I would like to thank Bibelot Games for providing me with a prototype review copy of Brandubh.

Epigo Review

A game that I've been wanting to review for quite a while is Epigo.

Epigo truly strikes me as the love child of Robo Rally, Abalone, and Yomi. The basic game is fairly simple. You have pieces numbered 1-7, and they are setup in a line (along with an X) in whatever order you would like. Your opponent does the same thing, and at the same time, you reveal your pieces. Now, on each turn, you and your opponent select three pieces to move (and a direction) and you reveal them the same time (Robo Rally). The higher numbered piece goes first, and you execute all of the moves. If both players show the same number in the same move (for example, if you both are trying to move the 5 as your second move) the orders cancel and do not occur (Yomi). If when trying to move your piece, but there are more of your opponent's pieces in front of you than your own pieces (at any point on the line), then you cannot make your move (Abalone). The goal of the game is to push three of your opponents tiles off of the board (More Abalone).

Whereas I mentioned that Epigo has elements of other games that I have played, it really melds them together into a fresh and unique gaming experience. Each turn you are trying to figure out how to move your pieces to successfully push your opponent off the board - or set it up so that you can do it later. At the same time, you have to balance preventing your opponent from pushing yours off - and sometimes the only way to do that is by successfully canceling their order! Sometimes, however, if you can out-think your opponent, you might be able to even move out of the way just in time and get him to push his own piece off the board! I like that the game is very simple, and yet can really make you think (and overthink) your moves. It truly strikes me as an elegant design and gameplay that works remarkably well.

21 variants!

The next pro for Epigo is the replayability. Even in the base game, because of the element of out-thinking your opponent, there is significant replayability. However, in case you are one of those people that likes to play something new every time (I'm like that), Epigo has 21 two-player variants included with the base game. 21! And, that's not including the four-player variants!! I have definitely not played all of these, but I played around with some of them, and I enjoyed what they added. Some of them seem a bit confusing, but some of the others do interesting things. One of the ones that I really enjoyed has you setup the board a bit differently, but also has you leave your "X" marker on the board after setup - and this piece acts like a black hole and any pieces that are pushed into it are lost, just as if they were pushed off of the board. I would say that more than anything else, the greatly varied options of Epigo are it's greatest strength.

There's really not that much to Epigo, so I will go ahead and move to the cons now. Really, I only had one con. For whatever reason, Epigo didn't grab me and leave me wanting to play it more. I enjoyed the game every time that I played it, but I still didn't find myself wanting to pull it off the shelf. I think that this might simply be because I'm not very good at pre-planned movement games (like Robo Rally and duck, duck, Go!). I'm willing to admit that I'm not good at these games - and I'd bet that if I were better at them, then I would enjoy them all quite a bit more.  Either way, though, I can only base my opinions of a game on my experiences - and Epigo isn't one that I run to the closet to grab.

Overall, I give Epigo an 8.0/10. If you like Robo Rally, then you will really enjoy Epigo. If you like Abalone, you will probably enjoy Epigo. If you like the out-thinking your opponent aspect of Yomi, then you might like Epigo. If you like planning movement in advance, or really like games with variants, then you will love Epigo!

If you like Epigo, you might also check out Yinsh, Stratum, and Quoridor.

I would like to thank Masquerade Games for providing me with a review copy of Epigo.

Hive Review

Ok, we need to start this review off with a confession: I've already reviewed Hive here. In fact, it was one of my first reviews. Unfortunately, in my early reviews I was very eager to write as many reviews as I could (and did so on most of the really popular games), but I wasn't very good at diving into what made a game good or bad (of course, this is good or bad in my opinion).  Hopefully in the year or more that I've been writing this blog now, I've developed a better writing style.  Because of this, I'm going to start occasionally "archiving" some of these older reviews; starting with Hive. This essentially means that I'm going to rename the old post to have "Archive" in the title instead of Review, and will remove it from the alphabetical review list.  I will also make a note on the original post linking it to the newer review. With all that said, let me start telling you about how great of a game Hive is!

In Hive, each player takes on the role of an insect swarm attempting to capture their opponent's queen (who, obviously, must be a usurper to their queen's throne). To do this, you alternate taking turns - which consist of placing new insects (you cannot touch your opponent's pieces with the newly placed insect) or moving an existing piece. And, so that you don't hide your queen forever, she must be placed in one of your first three turns. Now to the insects. Your insect horde consists of grasshoppers, spiders (yes, yes, they're not "officially" insects, but you'll have to ignore that), beetles, ants, and (of course) the queen bee. Grasshoppers jump directly across a line, spiders move exactly three spaces, beetles move one space (but can move on top of other pieces), ants can move to any space along the outside of the game, and the queen can move exactly one space. Play continues back and forth until one queen is surrounded.

The first thing that I like about Hive is the way that you can trap your opponent's pieces. Specifically, one of the movement rules restricts anyone from splitting the hive into two disconnected sections. This allows a shrewd player to move a piece (such as an ant) to where it is only touching one single piece - the piece he doesn't want his opponent to move. Once you have moved your piece into position, your opponent will no longer be able to move that piece because he would split the hive; he at least cannot move it until he brings other pieces along to reshape the hive.

The next thing that I like about Hive is the fact that the queen can move. She is often hindered by one of the other movement rules - you cannot move any pieces except the beetle and the grasshopper into a place that they cannot slide into. Hive is played with hexagonal shaped tiles, and thus you can create "choke points" where a piece is not able to slide in (by surrounding most of the sides of the position you want to block). This rule will often prevent the queen (who is normally at least partially surrounded... after all, that is the point of the game) from moving. However, when she is able to move, you can often completely throw your opponent's strategy into disarray. They will be stuck desperately trying to reposition their units while you capitalize by (hopefully) surrounding their queen!

The next thing I like about Hive is related to the actual components of the game itself. The game is incredibly portable and also a great tactile experience - and all with no setup time. The game (at least the edition I purchased) comes with a travel bag, which allows for the game to be thrown into a backpack and carried with you. If you also factor in the fact that there is no board, the game can be easily setup anywhere ("coffee shop") and play can begin as soon as the pieces are separated. Finally, the high quality tiles themselves make the game feel classy.

The final pro that I will mention about Hive is that I like the differences in the insects. Each piece is useful, but in very different ways. The person who wins the game will be the person who is best able to capitalize on the strengths of each piece. The easiest strategy to grasp is the ants, as it's fairly apparent that their speed allows them to move quickly to trap enemy pieces or to fill some of the spaces around an opposing queen. However, once you master some of the more subtle strategies such as moving a beetle on top of an opponent's piece so that you can start placing next to it, your play of Hive will advance to another level. I cannot say that I am incredibly skilled at Hive, but I do enjoy getting to challenge myself by finding new strategies and watching my opponents counter me at every move.

Now one thing that you need to be aware of with Hive is that there is no random element to the game. There is no dice rolling, nor is there any shuffling and random draw. Similar to chess (and many abstract strategy games like Yinsh and Pentago), every facet of the game is completely visible to both players and so Hive is a challenge to see which player can out-think the other - not which player can out-roll the other. I personally like some element of random chance in games, but I can also appreciate games like Hive which are completely strategy based; as long as they are fast paced, which Hive is.

Overall, I give Hive an 8.5/10. I think that it is a masterful game that you should look to try out (if you haven't already).

If you want another opinion on this game, check out this Hive Review from the Board Game Family. Or if you have already decided that you like Hive, you might also be interested in checking out Atlanteon, Abalone, Gipf, and Rise!

Top Ten Abstract Strategy Board Games - January 2012

So recently I have been debating what I want to do with this site. I enjoy writing reviews, and I still intend for that to be the bulk of my posts. However, one thing that I've heard from some of my readers is that they like when I compare games to each other. Also, I got to spend some time with Jason from Play Board Games recently, and he encouraged me to start writing "Top Ten" lists - he said that they're both fun to write and engaging to readers. So, why not? Feel free to add comments to my Top Ten, missed games, and whether you like the addition of Top Tens to the site!

Some of these games I have reviewed, and some I haven't. If I've reviewed it, I'll give you the link to my review (instead of the normal link to Amazon, but feel free to use this Amazon link and search for any of these games in the search bar).  If I haven't reviewed some of these yet, I'll try to get around to writing one for you! And, since I just completed my self proclaimed "Abstract Strategy Month" of December, what better place to start than...

Top Ten Abstract Strategy Games!!

 

10. Tsuro

Simple but enjoyable. This may be the only abstract strategy game that I know of that can support up to 8 players!

 

9. Stomple

Gorgeous and engaging. This game is perfect for anyone with children, but the amount of luck involved in your initial setup keeps it from placing higher.

 

8. Abalone

This is basically sumo wrestling as an abstract strategy game. It can be incredible fun, but can also become tedious if you and your opponent are too experienced at it, if you are both able to avoid getting any pieces knocked off the board.

 

7. Jin Li

One of my surprise finds of 2011 was Jin Li. Having never heard of the game before I was given a copy, I quickly fell in love. Surprising depth with very brief rules, I wound up buying the iPhone version so that I could play it when I needed a 3-minute break.

 

6. Hive

One of my very first reviews, Hive is the game on this list closest to having a theme, but it's paper thinness allows it to still land on the list. Simply a brilliant game (another one that I've bought for my iPhone) of attempting to surround your opponent's queen.

 

5. Yinsh

The Gipf project finally cracks the list with what many believe to be the best game in the series. Unfortunately, it's up against some brilliant competition both from other games in the Gipf project, and some outsiders. Still, Yinsh combines some beautiful gameplay elements to make for a great experience!

 

4. Hey, That's My Fish!

A game that can be enjoyed by everyone, I would recommend that everyone buy a copy of Hey, That's My Fish since you can currently buy it for around $12 from Fantasy Flight. The setup time (especially in comparison to the actual gameplay time) is the biggest downside, which is why I have converted most of my time with this game to playing it on the iPad. However, anyone with children take note - this is a great game that you can play with kids, and I've played it with kids as young as 4, who were still able to understand and enjoy the game.

 

3. Pentago

Mindtwister USA's flagship game really is a prototypical example of what I look for in an abstract strategy game - easy to teach, easy to transport, and many levels of strategic depth. "Play one, twist one, try to get five in a row." It's much deeper than it initially appears.

 

2. Gipf

Yes, I should post a review about this one. The original game from the Gipf project, Gipf is an amazing game. It combines elements of pushing and matching pieces into a brilliant, amazing, and exciting game. (I'm running out of adjectives - I love all of the games on this list!)

 

1. Dvonn

A game that I gave a score of 8.5 to tops the list? Yeah - I always say to read the text and not to focus on scores, and this is a perfect example. I love Dvonn. Love it. What's more, the setup and the teardown of the game are the game allowing for essentially no downtime with either of these activities. Some people disagree, but I think that the ever-collapsing board makes for a great play experience!

Honorable Mention

Rise, Tzaar, Ingenious, Multiplayer Pentago, Cityscape.

Any of these could have easily made the list, as they are all solid titles, but the real question would be - what do I take off of it in their place?


I hope you enjoyed my inaugural Top Ten list. Feel free to leave comments and let me know what you think I got right, and where you think I was way off! (As a note, I've never actually played Go, if you're wondering how it got completely left off of the list.)

Ingenious Review

A game that I initially tried because there was an iPhone app for it was Ingenious (and if you notice from the picture, I actually had the Travel Edition).

Ingenious is an abstract spatial reasoning game. The game is played on a hexagonal shaped board in which players alternate placing pieces that are two hexes put together (like hex dominoes). After the first placement (in which players must place next to the symbols built into the board), the pieces can be placed anywhere on the board, but will primarily be placed next to other pieces with matching symbols. Once a piece is placed, you score points based on how many of the corresponding symbol are connected to the newly placed piece in each of the five lines beginning at the new tile (not going through the other half of the tile). If the newly placed tile causes the active player to score 18 in any of his colors, he can immediately place again. If not, he draws a new tile and then the other player takes his turn. Play goes on like this until no more tiles can be laid; at this point, whichever player has the highest number of points in his lowest scoring color/symbol is the winner (yes, it is by Reiner Knizia, in case you were wondering by this mechanic).

Let's begin with the paragraph that is in each of my spatial reasoning reviews: I don't really know how to express what I like about these games. I think other people had this issue, too, which is why they termed these games "abstract". So, if the rest of this review seems more like "rambling" (even more than normal) than it does "concise thoughts", you'll just have to get over that.

I really like how the placement of pieces works in the game. Especially because you can use pieces both offensively and defensively (and I imagine if I get better at the game, I'll be able to use them as both at the same time). You can use the pieces offensively by placing a color next to pre-existing tiles of the same color - this scores points and continuing the line of colors, but this also leaves it open for your opponent (or you on a future turn) to be able to score even more points. You can also play defensively by cutting off a long line of a single color by placing a different color at the end of it. However, then nobody will be able to score that line anymore. The ideal situation is to be able to place your tile in such a way as to be able to score the long line and then have the second half of your tile block off any future scoring of this line (preferably while scoring it's color, too). That would prevent your opponent from being able to easily earn points in one of the colors - which would then probably turn out to be his lowest scoring color.

Another thing that I like about Ingenious is the "Ingenious bonus". This is where you get to place two tiles in a row if the first tile caused one of your colors to finally be 18 points (the highest score on a specific color). Having 18 points in a color doesn't really help you in the game - after all, if a color has it's maximum number of points, then it won't be your lowest, and so it won't be the one that scores. However, with the Ingenious bonus, it is just rewarding enough to tempt you into scoring extra in that color. If I have a color that is around 15, I will start looking to get the Ingenious bonus in order to be able to go again - I'm not convinced it helps me very much strategically, I just really like getting to go twice in a row.

A final pro that I will mention is that I really like scoring based on your least valuable color.  Whereas I have seen this mechanic in other games, it seems to work the best in Ingenious.  Because of this mechanic, each player must make sure that they don't simply ignore one color.  More specifically (since each tile only has two colors on it) they must make sure that they don't ignore one color for too long.  You will probably not evenly place your colors throughout the game - you just have to make sure that as you place them you are planning ahead to where you will be able to score points on your other colors.  And one thing that helps in this (that I haven't mentioned yet) is that if you don't have any tiles matching the color that you have the least points in, you can discard all of your tiles and draw six new ones at the end of your turn.  This helps prevent the "score based on your lowest value" mechanic from causing you to lose simply because of what you draw.

I can't really think of any specific cons for Ingenious. I enjoy the game, but not quite as much as some other spatial reasoning games. I think this is really when my inability to speak in a very intelligent manner about the genre comes into play. I like the game, but there is just something about it that I didn't like quite as much as some of the others; and that's why it won't get quite as good of a score. However, don't hear me saying that it's not a good game, because it definitely is.

I'm sure that there's a lot more that I should say about the game, and that I'm not doing it justice by any means, but honestly I don't really have much more to add to this review. One thing that I will note is that I'm not a fan of the Travel Edition - I don't recommend buying it unless you actually intend to play it while traveling. The pieces are very small and it is a nuisance to try to pick them up. I didn't factor this into the score, though, since it is about the edition that I have and not about the game itself.

Overall, I give Ingenious an 8.0/10. It is a very solid abstract spatial reasoning game that I will continue to play. I still prefer Dvonn (which is growing on me more all the time), Yinsh, and Abalone, but Ingenious is a very solid title that I plan to continue playing for quite a while (though I did go ahead and replace my Travel Edition with the full-sized version).