Legacy: Gears of Time Review

So, when I asked about time travel games on Twitter, my feed instantly became the Legacy: Gears of Time fan club. So... well, so I decided that I needed to try it!

In Legacy: Gears of Time, each player represents a time architect that is attempting to invent and influence various technologies.  The caveat is that many technologies depend on other technologies existing - for example, you cannot have the Internet without having Electricity.  And so, influencing a technology that cannot possibly exist due to a historical contradiction is useless.  The game consists of four rounds, with each round consisting of four turns per player.  On each turn, you are allowed to take three actions.  The actions can be moving back in time, drawing a card (you actually draw two and keep one), inventing a new technology, or adding influence to an existing technology.  At the end of the round, everyone checks to see what historical contradictions occur - which technologies were "invented" multiple times, which ones are missing dependencies, and which ones have no influence.  After checking this (and removing technologies as appropriate), players score points for each technology in which they have the most influence.  And, each technology that is an immediate prerequisite for another technology scores again if the dependent technology scores.  (For example, if the Internet scores, then the person that has the most influence on Electricity gets to score Electricity again.)  Then, the influence on the technologies deteriorates, all the players go back to the "present" time, and you play another round.  Whoever has the most points at the end of the fourth round wins the game!

One of those Basic Tools is a fake!

The first pro that I found for Legacy: Gears of Time are the historical contradictions.  And, more specifically, how you are able to "affect" other players with these.  (Yes, "affect" is the polite way of saying that you smack them in the face, steal their points, and then laugh.  Laugh!!!)  For example, if someone decides to invent Flight, then they are going to get several points of influence.  And, if Space Flight is also invented, then Flight is suddenly one of the most valuable technologies in the game.  However, if the player that invented Flight was not careful, then they might have inadvertently stolen credit!  Because, really, I invented Flight in the era right before you "invented" Flight!  And so your "Flight" is a fake!  Ok, so I may have gotten a bit side-tracked reliving some memories.  Either way, it is really fun to play an invention in an era earlier than where that invention currently exists - thus forcing the other invention to be destroyed.  And (something I didn't mention earlier) after each round the eras are all allowed to hold one more invention.  So, the game encourages you to do this.

The next pro that I have for Legacy is that the influence on inventions (or "technologies" if you listen to the rule book) deteriorates.  And, most fundamental inventions don't have much influence on them when you build them.  This combination normally results in a mass chaos around round three in which most of the prerequisite inventions exist but without influence - and so, if nobody places influence on these inventions, then all of the better inventions are going to fail.  This makes for some very interesting choices as you decide which of your inventions are most important, and thus which prerequisites are vital to your success.  Or, if you don't have any of the later inventions, then you have to decide whether you want to influence some of the prerequisites (thus scoring a decent number of points but helping other players) or whether you want to use large piles of influence to steal credit for later inventions.

Speaking of influence, my third pro for Legacy is how the Influence Pool works.  To start the game, you have two influence in your pool.  These are the only influence that you can spend on the "place influence on an existing technology" action.  However, at the end of each round, when influence deteriorates, the player with the most influence on each successful technology puts the deteriorated influence in his Influence Pool.  (Only the person with the most influence has one removed, and influence from contradictions and from failed technologies don't go to the Influence Pool.)  Having a lot of influence available in your Influence Pool is very helpful, as it gives you flexibility with your actions - to steal credit for technologies, or to claim all of the useful prerequisites.  So, you are further rewarded for controlling successful technologies.  And, building a lot of fundamental technologies (instead of just a few advanced technologies) helps you in more than just total points.  I thought that this was a really nice mechanic that made the game play very smoothly.

The final pro that I will mention about Legacy is that I like that you can only move backwards on the timeline.  (And then, at the end of the round, you return to Present Day.)  At first, I was really uncertain about this mechanic, but as I played the game more, I really saw why it was very important.  It forces you to plan out what you intend to do in the round before actually performing any actions.  And, if you don't plan this out, then you generally won't be able to build any of the more advanced technologies.  And yet, never being able to move forward adds an element of "chicken" to the game, where several players might stay in the present and draw cards, waiting to see who will move first - and what era they will move to.  After all, you don't want to move back two eras and build Flight, just to see another time architect move back three eras and invent the same thing!

A general timeline

With all that is right with Legacy: Gears of Time, one element of the game I'm still a bit uncertain about - so I will list it as a "point of note."  This would be fate cards.  Fate cards can be incredibly powerful.  Many of them can be worth around 10-15 points if they are played correctly.  One fate card allows a technology to ignore a specific prerequisite.  This can make it much easier to score one of the advanced technologies like Space Flight or Genetics.  Another fate card can move a time architect backwards or forwards one era on the timeline; this can be used to prevent an architect from adding influence to a critical technology - potentially costing them that technology and the one it depends on.  (This can be over 20 points total!)  So, the fate cards are incredibly powerful, and they add a bit of a "randomness" factor to the game.  I think that if there were more of them, then the game might grow a bit too chaotic - whereas less of them might make the game a bit too rigid.  But, overall, I'm not really sure how I feel about this element.

And, now that I've convinced you that Legacy: Gears of Time is a great game, I guess it's time to balance that out a bit with some cons.  First, if someone in your game really wants to calculate the best move at all times, then the game will slow down to a crawl.  There are a lot of decisions to be made, and there is enough open information that, if someone wanted to, they could generally determine the best choice.  For example, you can determine if it is more valuable to take credit for one of the specific prerequisites, and if so, which one.  Or, should you add a new technology.  Should you re-invent a prerequisite earlier in the timeline in order to take control of it?  And, with all of this - which one?  If you want to calculate this, then you have to look through all of the cards in the timeline, calculate up how many of them depend on that technology, and then repeat for the next one.  And, while doing this, you have to factor in how many points you are giving to other players by allowing their advanced technology (or technologies) to score.  Basically, there is enough going on that it can cause someone to unwittingly take drastically long turns if they are not intentionally trying to keep the game moving.

Some sweet technology!

The next con is somewhat similar.  With all that is going on, scoring can be a bit fiddly.  First, you have to determine which technologies are successful.  Then, you have to check which ones are duplicated and remove them.  Then, when scoring, you have to remember who controls each of the prerequisites, so that they can get points also.  Then you have to deteriorate influence on everything, and make sure that those influence go back to the supply or to their owner's Influence Pool as appropriate.  With practice, this element of the game will become a bit easier.  But, some beginner advice will be - have only one person sticking their hand into the timeline.  Have that person take off all of the duplicate technologies, then take all the Influence off of the failed technologies, and then off of the successful ones.  This will help avoid questions like "did <my technology that I'm point to> get its influence removed yet?"

Overall, I give Legacy: Gears of Time an 8.5/10.  I was quite pleasantly surprised with this game, and, with multiple plays, I think that the cons will shrink, just leaving a bunch of pros.  If you're looking for a game with interesting time travel mechanics, then you should definitely check it out.

If Legacy: Gears of Time sounds interesting, you might also check out ARC and Innovation.

I would like to thank Floodgate Games for providing me with a review copy of Legacy: Gears of Time.

ARC Review

An interesting little game about time travel is called (I believe) ARC (yes, admittedly, I'm not 100% sure of this name; more specifically, I'm not sure if it is called "ARC" or "ARC: The Game", and I believe it used to have a different name).

In ARC, each player controls an Aeon (time traveler), and your goal is to kill (or "knock unconscious" if you want to have a PG-13 rating) your opponent's Aeon.  Each turn you draw one card and then play or exhaust as many cards as you want.  However, when playing a card, you must meet the Arc Energy requirements.  Arc Energy consists of the number of cards in your hand in addition to any cards (such as your Aeon) that give you bonus Arc.  When playing cards, you can find Relics, attach Trinkets and Armaments to your Aeon, encounter Events, or even lay Traps to spring on your opponent.  Many of these cards are attached to a given era on the timeline, and if your Aeon "Rifts" between eras, the cards that are attached to the previous era will be left behind.  Each card, when exhausted, can no longer be used - with the exception that each Aeon can be exhausted twice.  Players alternate turns attacking each other until only one player remains standing.

There are really a lot of interesting concepts in ARC.  First, I really like how Arc Energy works.  Since your Arc Energy is calculated based on the number of cards in your hand, you won't want to play everything that you can every turn.  Some turns, you will need to save up to play an expensive item.  However, once you play that expensive item, you have two options - unload the rest of your hand in a furious flurry of attacks against your enemy, or keep most of your hand intact in order to have enough Arc to play another massive card the next turn (assuming you draw another one).  Overall, the balancing of these energies is critical for the game.  Unfortunately, this balance isn't quite as difficult as I would like - your Aeon always adds Arc (unless you are using the Mercenary), some Trinkets add Arc, you draw a card at the start of each turn, and your Aeon can draw a card as an action (once per turn), so you can pretty quickly accumulate the necessary Arc to play almost anything.  That is, assuming that you are patient enough to wait the 1-2 turns needed to build up.  Plus, since there is no penalty for playing your entire hand in a turn, you aren't actually losing out on anything by building up your Arc - you're simply stalling when all of the cards in your hand are played.

Currently available sets

My second pro for ARC is that I like Traps.  Basically, you can play a Trap in your era, but it comes into play exhausted (and facedown so that your opponent can't see it - otherwise it wouldn't be a very good Trap).  So, on your next turn, the Trap becomes refreshed (and ready to spring).  I thought that this was a nice element to the game.  And, though it's a bit confusing to me that you're not able to set a Trap without your enemy knowing that it's there, it still makes sense to me that you have to wait a turn for the Trap to be ready.  And, since your opponent does get to know what's there, simply having a Trap might discourage them from attacking you; regardless of how potent the Trap is.

Another thing that I thought was interesting about ARC was that your Aeons can exhaust twice.  However, this is really a tricky thing.  If your Aeon could only exhaust once, then the game simply wouldn't work - each turn one Aeon could run away, and the other Aeon wouldn't ever be able to catch up and attack (with their Aeon; they would still be able to attack with cards).  But, because you can exhaust twice, this means you can't ever run far enough away - your opponent can always just rift to your era and then attack you.  (I said "run far enough away" and, to be fair, this is assuming that I played the game correctly.  I was unclear on whether, when rifting, you had to go to an adjacent era or if you could go to any territory.  Really, though - if I am able to travel through time, it better not be in a linear fashion.  Otherwise, I need a better time travel machine.  And, yes, I did just complain about a machine that lets me travel through time!)

However, with all the things that I like about ARC, there are a few things that are definite cons.  The first one is the rulebook.  The rulebook was designed to look pretty - not to be functional.  This game desperately needs an FAQ before you even play the game!  (And, I'm not sure if one even exists.)  I've already mentioned one rule that is unclear.  Here's another one - when playing a card from your hand, do you count it towards your Arc Energy total?  No idea.  Can you play the same Trinket or Armament on your Aeon multiple times?  (On this one, at least the example image of what the game should look like implies that you can.)  But, if you play the game, expect to be house ruling various situations and rules, because the rulebook simply won't answer them - and if it does answer your question, you might spend a bit of timing looking and flipping the rules over back and forth until you find it.

Aeons in their respective eras

My next con is that the time travel theme, though exciting, seemed a bit artificial.  There is really nothing unique about the fact that you are traveling "through time" that wouldn't work exactly the same if you were traveling to different locations on a map.  You can only attack someone if you're in the same era?  This would be true if you are in different places on a map.  When you leave, you have to leave Traps and Relics behind?  I don't see people bringing Stonehenge with them when they go home.  Now, theme isn't really much of a requirement in games that I play.  Gameplay is much more important to me.  With that said, the biggest draw for ARC will probably be that it is about Aeons fighting through time - so I wanted you to be aware that the theme isn't really interwoven throughout the mechanics before you decided if this game is right for you.

Finally, I really didn't like the effects of some of the eras.  Specifically, the "Future" causes the game to be artificially lengthened.  If you end your turn in the Future era, then you gain two health.  Most attacks do around three damage - some actually do only one.  So, if most of your game occurs in the Future, then the game will be much longer than it should be, simply because both players are healing at the end of each round.  And, unfortunately, you can't force an opponent's Aeon out of a given era - so if they aren't willing to leave the Future, then there is nothing that you can do to avoid fighting in this era.

Overall, I give ARC a 7.0/10.  The game works, and I really don't mind playing it.  Additionally, it is using the Living Card Game model that allows you to customize decks, but without having to buy randomized packs, which I appreciate.  However, though I think that ARC is a solid game, there isn't really anything that pulls me in and makes me want to play it repeatedly.  I would be willing to play it more, but it probably won't be a game that I suggest.

If you like card games like ARC, you might also enjoy Game of Thrones: Living Card Game, Nightfall, and Star Wars: Customizable Card Game.

I would like to thank Tech Lab Games for providing me with a review copy of ARC.

Back to the Future: The Card Game Review

In case you haven't read enough reviews on Back to the Future: The Card Game, I will now finally get around to writing my thoughts on it, but since I've personally seen several reviews of it floating around, I probably won't be as in-depth as I would on some other games.

In Back to the Future (which is a re-implementation of Chrononauts, which I never played and thus will not mention again in this review), the timeline is laid out in front of all of the players. From there, each player represents a potential descendant of some of the characters from the Back to the Future movies. The goal of the game is to set the timeline up correctly so that your character will be born, and then to go back in time and ensure that time travel is never invented. To do this, there are different "linchpins" and "ripple points" in the timeline. Various cards allow you to change what happens in a linchpin event, and this causes a "ripple" through the timeline - thus flipping cards onto their opposite side to reflect the new outcome of the linchpin event. Once all of your correct events happens, you must go back in time and keep Doc from hitting his head when hanging his bathroom clock and getting the idea for time travel.

The main thing that I liked about Back to the Future was the concept of the timeline. If you assume that time travel is possible, then it makes sense that changing an important event in the past would then ripple through other events and cause different outcomes. This concept was reflected well and was well executed in the game.

The next thing to mention about Back to the Future that many people would consider a "pro" (though not necessarily for me) is the amount of flavor in the game. If you really enjoyed the Back to the Future movies (and watch them often enough to remember what happened in each of them) then you will really enjoy looking through the cards, the timeline, the characters, etc.  (As an added bonus, you will probably also get to go first when you play, as this is decided by whoever has watched them most recently). However, as I have not watched them in quite some time, I wound up ignoring most of this flavor text and simply paying attention to things like "C-3 flips C-5".

Now to the cons... the first thing that I didn't like about the timeline was that it was difficult for me to follow by looking at it. Whereas I said that I like the timeline mechanic in the "pros" section, and I stick to that, I still had some concerns with it.  I think that a lot of this was because I ignored the actual flavor text and only paid attention to which linchpin number flipped which ripple effect numbers, but it was something that I felt was difficult to follow visually. In general, I'm not sure that there is a better way of laying out a timeline, however, so this is a fairly minor complaint.

The main thing that I did not like about Back to the Future was how the victory mechanic worked. Once you had all of your character's events setup, you had to go flip the linchpin trying to get Doc not to get the idea of time travel. There are 5 linchpin cards in the corresponding pile, and you flip over the top one - if it is the card that says that he successfully hangs his clock, then time travel never occurs and you win the game. If it is one of the 4 other cards, then the game continues. I do not like that whether you win or not is random. I understand not wanting to guarantee that a player wins the game (though I don't necessarily agree with it), but I would like that player to at least get some kind of advantage by flipping over an unsuccessful card. This would mean that at least their turn is not a total waste, and they also didn't waste whatever card allowed them to flip the linchpin in the first place.

Overall, I give Back to the Future a 7.0/10. It is a playable game, and I would not mind playing it more. If you're a big fan of the movies, then you should definitely check it out, but if you are just a gamer looking for something to play, you may want to try it before you buy.