Thunderstone: Wrath of the Elements Review

So, this will be my first review of an expansion to a game that I have not bundled with the base game's review. There hasn't really been a reason that I've always previously bundled them except that at the time that I chose to write about the expansion, I hadn't written about the base game yet, so I killed two birds with one stone. Anyway, if you're interested in my review of the base game of Thunderstone, feel free to check it out here (or you can also navigate to it with the right-hand widget where the reviews are listed alphabetically). With all that said, it's time to review Thunderstone Wrath of the Elements.

Instead of talking about how Wrath of the Elements works (which would be a complete repeat of how Thunderstone works), I'll point out a few highlights and then get right to the pros and cons. The main things that Wrath did was 1) improved the box/storage layout 2) added "traps" and "guardians" 3) added several gameplay variants and 4) added lots of new cards of all kinds.

The first pro of Wrath of the Elements is the improved storage. Now, I realize that you are all incredibly concerned and think the game must not have been good if this is my biggest pro, but that's not at all true! Instead, it's important to realize how much I hated the storage of the original game. In fact, I believe it was my biggest con when I reviewed Thunderstone. Not only has AEG fixed this problem with Wrath of the Elements, they have also fixed my biggest complaint with Dominion. Both at the same time! I won't really discuss the pitifulness of the original Thunderstone storage, because there's really no need, but I will mention my complaint with Dominion - I liked the game and so I bought a ton of expansions. And then I had a ton of big, bulky boxes. Finally I stopped bothering to play it because it was a pain to carry around. Well, in Wrath of the Elements, the box (as seen in the picture) is wide enough to hold two rows of cards and has file cabinet style labeled separator cards to distinguish the different piles of cards. The separators are even color and symbol coded. And both the original game and Wrath fit in the box (except the original instruction book is a bit too big, so you have to fold it over the top or leave it at home), and they even left room for several more expansions so that I can carry it all around in a single (heavy) box. This made me incredibly happy before I even played the game.

Now that I have gotten off my soap box about storage, here are some gameplay pros. I really liked the traps, and my only complaint is that there weren't enough different kinds of them (I'm sure they'll fix this with more expansions). Whereas in the original version of the game monsters would come out and you never really had to worry about them unless they had breach (and then you were still safe unless they reached the first rank), the traps can occur when replenishing the dungeon cards, and can affect one or many players. I liked how this played out in practice.

The next significant pro (this may have been the big one if it weren't for the storage) is the different variants. I believe there were about 5 different variants on how to play the game. Whereas most of the variants were pretty similar, there were a couple that I deemed worthy of mentioning. First, there is a single player variant. Honestly, I haven't played this variant yet as I prefer to play multiplayer, but this variant looked interesting enough to me that I will probably try it out in the "near" future. Secondly, they added a variant in which the monsters don't just sit still in the dungeon waiting on you. We did try this variant out, and I will say I'm hooked. In the original, each player can wait out the other players before going to the dungeon - unless another player goes, there's no real need to go to the dungeon early when you can build up your deck in the village. This is no longer the case; if everyone starts going to the village, the monsters will escape from the dungeon and players will gain negative victory points (and others might breach, and traps might come out....).

Aside from those points, there were also new cards of every type. I am yet to play with all of them, but from what I have seen there are some that I like and some that I am indifferent about - just like in every deck building game. I would like to point out that we did try all the new monsters and I really liked them; they seem nastier than the monsters in the base set. Especially when paired with the variant rules about monsters escaping (a lot of the new monsters have breach).

Really, the only "con" is that the game is still Thunderstone. If you didn't like Thunderstone in the first place, you're obviously not going to like the expansion. Fortunately, I thought the base Thunderstone game was solid, and so this didn't bother me.

Overall, I give Thunderstone: Wrath of the Elements an 8.5/10. I very rarely give expansions a higher score than the base game, because they often don't add very much, but I really thought that Wrath added a lot to the basic game and now that I have it, I can't imagine going back to just the basic game. If you are a Thunderstone fan, I can honestly say that I think you should check this expansion out. (And if you're not a Thunderstone fan, and you read this far into the review.... why did you read this far? You knew a long time ago that you weren't going to play this game.)

I would like to thank AEG for providing me with a demo copy of Thunderstone: Wrath of the Elements to review.

Dvonn Review

The latest game in the GIPF project that I was able to check out was Dvonn.

In Dvonn, each of the players takes a stack of discs and is attempting to control the most discs at the end of the game. To start, three red "Dvonn" discs are placed on the board. After this, players take turns placing discs one at a time until all of the discs have been placed and all of the spots on the board are covered (when placing discs, they must each be connected in some way to the "dvonn" disc - either directly or through other discs). Once all of the discs have been placed, the players begin to "jump" their discs into stacks. The distance that each stack must jump is dependent on the size of the stack - if it is a single disc, it jumps exactly one space; if it is a stack of 6 discs, it must jump exactly 6 spaces. The two special rules here are that the stacks cannot jump to an empty space and any pieces that become disconnected from a "dvonn" disc are immediately discarded. Once no legal moves are left, each of the players takes the stacks that they control (the ones with their color of disc on top) and stacks them on top of each other (this is to make counting the discs faster). Whoever controls the highest stack wins.

Pros and cons of all of the games from the GIPF project are very difficult for me to write (and thus wind up sounding very similar). This is because I am not accustomed to spatial reasoning games, and so they challenge my traditional way of thinking about games. With that said, this is the first pro for both Dvonn and the project as a whole. The strategy of these games always makes me think using areas of my brain that have become rusty. They challenge me to not think financially and militaristically (like most games) but to think spatially.

The next pro about Dvonn is the number of strategic elements in the game. Whereas I felt that Zertz occasionally struggled with depth of strategies, I feel like Dvonn exceeded my expectations. Players must strategize where to place their discs initially, which stacks to jump, when to jump them, how to stay connected to the dvonn discs, when to remove connections from the dvonn disc, etc. This depth allows players of Dvonn to keep coming back and to continue being challenged.

The first con that I have found with Dvonn was related to some of the levels of strategy that I just mentioned. Some aspects of the game that I'm convinced are very strategic I have a difficult time determining what that strategy should be. Specifically, when placing initial discs, I have no idea what good "strategic" placement of discs entails. All of the games that I have played consisted of both players placing these semi-randomly and very quickly in order to get to the "meatier" part of the game (the part where thought we could have a decent strategy). Whereas this depth level of the game is good, it is still somewhat frustrating to have this part be so abstract that I have no idea if I did it well or not.

Overall, I give Dvonn an 8.5/10. I still think that I like Yinsh just a touch better, but in a very close race. I would highly recommend Dvonn to anybody that likes abstract spatial reasoning games, and I would warn off everybody that does not.

Heroscape Review

One of the games that I have lost the most money because of is Heroscape. (Note: Heroscape is at this point a game system more than a single product. The link is to one of the 4 master sets that was produced. Hasbro/Wizards of the Coast has discontinued the entire line, but it all started with Heroscape: Rise of the Valkyrie.)

Heroscape is a miniatures based war game. Before the game can be played, one (or several) of the players must build a map out of plastic interlocking hex-based terrain. The terrain pieces available include rock, sand, grass, ice, lava, water, trees, roads, ruins, castles, etc. After the map has been built, each of the players picks an army of approximately equal value (each hero or squadron is given a certain value in points for this purpose). Once the board is set and armies are made, at the start of each round all of the players place order markers on their army cards (ranging from 1-3 with an "X" for a decoy). Next, the players each role a 20-sided die to determine "initiative" (who goes first), and the first player starts by taking his turn using his "1" army card (an army card can represent either a single hero figure or a 2-4 unit squadron). For each figure on his army card, the player can move a designated number of hexes and then attack any figure(s) within range. This continues until whatever game objective is being used has been met. (You can play elimination, capture the flag, king of the mountain, or just about anything else.)

Now for the pros of Heroscape. First of all, Heroscape is incredibly replayable. With the sheer number of figures that Hasbro created, and the fact that the maps can be custom made each time through, the only reason that a game should feel the same way twice is due to a lack of imagination on the part of the people playing (or if they have favorite figures that they use too often).

The second aspect of Heroscape that counts definitively in its favor is that it is simple enough to play with and teach anybody, but deep enough to keep most people's interest. As opposed to most miniatures games, Heroscape has no measuring (with rulers). To determine whether a unit is in range, you count the number of hexes in between them for distance. To move a unit, you simply move a certain number of hexes. To go up to higher elevation, each extra hex of height costs a movement point. To attack, you roll a number of attack dice (and defend the same way). However, each unit has special abilities - some units fly, some get to attack twice, counter attack, scale walls, etc. This allows the basics of the game to be incredibly simple to teach, and new players only need to worry about special abilities that are on army cards that are in their current game.  However, since each army card has unique abilities, it gives the game enough flavor and diversity that it will keep even seasoned gamers interested in playing again.

The third pro for Heroscape is that the terrain can easily be adapted to many other miniatures games.  Whereas I do not really play other miniatures games (this is a pro that was pointed out to me by other gamers), it seems to be sized appropriately for figures from Heroclix, Warhammer, and possibly even Axis and Allies Miniatures and Dungeons and Dragons Miniatures.  This would allow you to have more three dimensional terrain in those games (and more easily measurable in Warhamer) if that is something in which you are interested.

Now that the pros have been highlighted, here's the biggest con: dice. This is one of the most frustrating games I have ever played when it comes to dice (along with The Settlers of Catan). All of your best laid plans and strategies can be destroyed when your figure with 9 dice for defense gets killed by a figure with 2 dice on attack. I cannot say how frustrating that is. (And yet, this has not deterred me from playing the game. Maybe I'm a glutton for punishment, and maybe I just really like the pros that much).

Now for the next con: dice. Yeah, I really hate that part, so it counts twice.

Now for the second (actual) con: setup time. This will not be a con to many people, and so I suppose I should've listed it more as a point of note. The setup of the map can take quite a long time. With that said, many people will enjoy setting up the map as much or more than they enjoy playing the game (the same kind of people who are attracted to Warhammer because they enjoy painting the miniatures). I personally enjoy the game more than the setup, but my wife seems to truly enjoy building maps. Either way, the time required to setup and tear down the maps for Heroscape have limited my ability to play it for the last couple of years, and so it is something that you should definitely be aware of.

Overall, I give Heroscape an 8.0/10. It is a very fun, very addictive game that (I think) I have played in excess of 100 times. Unfortunately, it will be pretty hard for new players to get in, as the game is no longer in production. If this is a title you're interested in, I recommend trying to pick it up as quickly as possibly, because I'm guessing that prices will go up before they go back down (if ever). Your best bet will probably be to try to pick it up on Craig's list or at a garage sale.

Inca Empire Review

Another game that crossed my gaming table was Inca Empire.

In Inca Empire, each of the player takes on the role of an Incan leader attempting to gain the most victory points. They can do this by building roads that connect their center of power to cities, temples, garrisons, etc. They can also do this by building the previously mentioned buildings and by conquering neighboring cities. Specifically, there will be different "phases" of the game that will occur within each "round" of the game, which will occur within the "era"s of the game. (Lost yet? It's not as confusing as it sounds.) Essentially, there will be parts of the game where each player will get new workers based on what civilizations they've conquered and what they have build (workers are the currency in the game), there will be times that players will play star cards (I have no idea what the actual term was but these are cards that affect the players abilities to build stuff), and there will be times when the players build roads and either build buildings or conquer peaceful neighbors. At the end of a prescribed number of these phases, the players will get extra points for buildings that their civilization connects to. This will continue through the different "eras" of the game, and at the end of the game, whoever has the most victory will win.

Now for the pros. The main thing that I liked about Inca Empire how the star cards worked. There was a 2x2 grid where each player's color was a divider between two quadrants (so that each player's color was adjacent to two quadrants and not adjacent to the other two quadrants). Each player was allowed to play a star card in turn order on one of the quadrants that had not yet received a card (face down). Once all 4 quadrants had received cards, they were all flipped over, and the cards in the 2 quadrants adjacent to your color affected you for the rest of that round. This worked really well, because you had to decide whether to help yourself and one of your opponents or whether to mess up two of your opponents. Since you only were allowed to play one card, you knew that playing a card on your opponents would probably cause you to have bad cards played back at you since that may be the only quadrant they would be allowed to play in.  Also, trying to play detrimental cards against an opponent you shared a quadrant with could also significantly impact your own play. This is a new mechanic to me, and I really enjoyed this part of the game.

The second major pro for Inca Empire is that the game is balanced very well among the players. We played with 4 players, and the game was a pretty consistent see-saw battle between the different players on who was in what place. This is a difficult balance to master in games, so I am glad that Inca Empire was able to achieve it.

The next element of the game that I don't know if I consider a pro or a con is the amount of road building. You were able to score a lot of points in Inca Empire based on connecting to various buildings through your roads. This means that the main thing you are doing is building roads. However, there are certain star cards that allow players to build roads on the same path as your roads, thus preventing you from truly being able to block anyone's path. The roads aspect of the game is neat in that you are able to score victory points by connecting to what the other players have done, but is also frustrating because it seems like everything winds up being connected, so you basically wonder to yourself why you bothered having to build roads in the first place.

Now for the first major con: Inca Empire was very long and repetitive. There were not very many different things that you could do on your turn, so you wound up performing the same actions over and over. Each turn, you would look around to see where you should best place your roads. That was one of the main elements and this element became boring after doing it 10 times. Unfortunately, I think that shortening the game (removing rounds) would skew the balance of the game, so I don't really see a way around this.

The second major con in Inca Empire was that it was very difficult to quickly see what was going on in the game. The pieces are very small and clustered all over the board because of the sheer number of roads and the symbols on the star cards are not very intuitive, so you must really concentrate and double check things to see what is going on. I much prefer being able to quickly see how I am doing in a game, and what different things are affecting my ability to play.

Overall, I give Inca Empire a 6.5/10. I could play the game again, but due to the length of time it takes, and the repetitiveness of it, I probably will not. If you enjoy road building games, then this would be one to check out because the pros that I mentioned truly are good things, but overall there are a lot of other games out there that I would rather play instead.