|
|
|
|
|
EUROPA TOUR a review by Greg J. Schloesser
Don’t let this be a hindrance, however. Europe Tour is quick, light fun that can be picked-up and learned by even the most geographically-challenged. This Alan Moon & Aaron Weissblum creation is a geographical variant on the familiar game of Rack-O. Instead of attempting to get numbers in the correct sequence, players must plan a cohesive and logical vacation through the countries of Europe. This vacation will be planned by each player on their private plastic rack, into which they will place the country and transportation cards in attempts to form a logical path for their whirlwind tour of Europe. The central map displays all (well, most) of the countries of Europe. The countries are divided into various groups by color and each depicts a small picture which is somehow related to that particular country. For instance, Spain depicts Don Quixote and a Pablo Picasso painting, while Turkey depicts the Taj Mahal and a flying carpet. It is quite amusing to attempt to decipher the relationship of each of these small pictures to the particular countries. Countries can be connected in one of three ways: Land: If countries are geographically adjacent and share a common land border, then they are considered adjacent. Air: If two countries have the same color, then they can be connected by an air route provided a player places an airplane card of the same color between the two countries on their rack. Sea: Various sea routes are depicted
by dashed-lines on the board. These sea lines connect various countries.
A player must play a boat card on their rack between two such connected
countries. From the remaining tiles, five are revealed and form the ‘draw’ pile. On a turn, a player may take one of the five face-up tiles, or take the top card from the draw pile. He must then discard a tile from his rack and replace it with the newly drawn tile. Or, if he so chooses, he may simply discard the tile he just drew. The idea is to form a connected network
of countries. Countries that share a land boundary need no intervening
form of transportation between them. However, if a The first player to complete his vacation by logically connecting all ten tiles on his rack is victorious and enjoys the fruits of a well-planned vacation. The game is certainly not rocket-science. There are no deep levels of strategy or numerous tactics to be employed. That doesn’t mean, however, that it is completely bereft of strategy. One should place tiles so as to keep as many options available as possible. For instance, placing Deutschland (Germany) near the center of your rack is usually a wise move since it is connected by land to eight different countries, has two sea routes and six air routes. Portugal, on the other hand, is more restrictive, with only one land connection, three sea connections and six air connections. So, spot the countries that give you the most options and try to utilize these in your rack. Further, when discarding a tile from your rack, you are usually free to discard it atop any of the five revealed stacks of tiles. Try to cover tiles that you don’t wish to use but which may be beneficial to your opponents. This will thwart their plans and often force them to completely rearrange their itinerary. There certainly is a degree of frustration involved in the game. It can be quite maddening to never have the tile or tiles you need surface, or to have them scooped by an opponent before you have the opportunity to grab them. Often, you find yourself being forced to re-plan your itinerary, which is time consuming and fraught with its own perils. And, there is always this nagging feeling that your opponents are one step ahead of you in the rush to complete their vacation plans. These elements are what make the game “click”, however, and helps make the game enjoyable and moderately tense. That being said, one must fully understand
that Europa Tour is a light, family game. Don’t enter it expecting
it to rise to the same level as games such as Princess of Florence,
Puerto Rico or Euphrat & Tigris. Rather, the game is one that
will likely be utilized in family gaming situations or as a light
filler between more meaty games. Further, there’s a healthy
dose of luck involved, so some folks might find this aspect not
to their tastes. I’ve always enjoyed Rack-O, however, so I
can enjoy Europa Tour for what it is: Rack-O with a geography lesson.
Greg Schloesser hosts the “Westbank Gamers,” is a founder of “Gulf Games” and is the president of “Strategy Gaming Society.”
Age of Steam I have had a special love for railroad games since I purchased Mayfair’s Empire Builder, back in 1983. A few years later, I bought 1830, but its cold and calculating feel never inspired me like the grand sweep of tracks from, say, New York to Los Angeles that one could find in Empire Builder. Somewhere in there, Rail Baron had a brief heyday, too, bit its similarity to Monopoly and painful payoff chart made sure that its appeal would be limited. But after those initial thrusts across the country – closer to game’s end than beginning – Empire Builder always seemed to fade in its attraction, as players simply built shortcuts, upgraded trains, traded in for sugar runs, and tried to reach that magic money goal. A couple of lesser-known rail games
added new dimensions to the genre for me. John Luecke’s Rails
through the Rockies forced players to dwell upon grading for Trainsport Austria found a spot on our gaming tables for a while, too. It’s level of abstraction made its play almost chess-like, but that in turn detracts from its appeal, too. There is a thing about abstract games – one can stay amused while ferreting out the first, few layers of play-optimization, only to see the game lose some of its appeal because of over-analysis. But that’s not to say that there isn’t room for other takes on the railroad theme. Age of Steam is another take, albeit one that owes a great deal to other rail games, including previous efforts by designer Martin Wallace, himself, such as Volldampf. The placement of track tiles can trace back to the venerable 1830, and through Knizia’s recent Stephenson’s Rocket. Fortunately, the quality of these tiles is on par with those found in the latter, and not the former. And a large number of track tiles there are - one hundred and forty-four, all told. These are broken down into roughly four categories. “Simple” track tiles have one rail going from one hex side to another. “Complex” track tiles permit two tracks to coexist in the same hex, so long as the endpoints of each exit different hexsides. (That is to say, there are no junctions, turnouts, or “wyes”.) The third category is “Dedicated Town” track tiles, and the fourth is “New City” tiles. In addition to the track tiles, there
6 sets of 25 wooden, Track Ownership discs (used to indicate who
owns what segments of tracks), 96 wooden Goods cubes in The overall quality of the components is outstanding. The two display cards (both letter-sized) could have been made of heavier stock, and could have done with some color, but are otherwise functional and easy to read. The game board is a depiction of the
Midwest, from Toronto in the northeast, to Kansas City in the southwest.
Each of the twelve cities is color-coded to match one of the goods
colors, with the only two yellow cities along the eastern edge (Toronto
and Wheeling), and the only two purple cities near or on the west
edge ( Duluth and Kansas City). The remaining eight cities are blue
or red. Each city also has a number, ranging from one to six, with
one of each number on the western and eastern half of the board.
Detroit is numbered incorrectly, and needs to be changed to be a
“3”. (You can either make the correction yourself, or
download a small graphic of the number from boardgamegeek.com.)
There are also fourteen town hexes, for locales such as Buffalo,
Cleveland, and Milwaukee. Towns are a uniform gray. Twenty-six goods cubes of random types will be placed on the cities, at the beginning of the game. They must be moved to cities that match their colors, in order to generate income. Basically, players will take turns building track to connect towns and cities, and then take turns moving goods across these tracks, in order to increase their income. The single, largest contributor to victory points in the game is the final income level of the player, at the end of the game. What Mr. Wallace has capture nicely is the shoestring finances of starting a railroad. The players each start with ten dollars, from the issue of two shares at five dollars each. During the game, a player can issue additional shares – up to three per turn – for an additional five dollars each, but there are three catches. First, a player will pay a dollar every turn for each share he has outstanding. Second, there is no method to reduce the number of outstanding shares. Third, a player will lose victory points at the end of the game equal to three times the number of shares he has issued. This last catch is the real shin-kicker, and can easily be the difference between victory and second place, or worse. It forces the players to make the most out of their finances. Each turn starts with players announcing, in player order, how many new shares they will issue and collecting the revenue generated from doing so. Players then bid for actual player order, starting with the first player of the previous turn. The player who first passes in the bid will go last this turn, and pays nothing. The player with the winning bid will go first this turn, and pays the full amount of his bid to the bank, as does the second highest bidder. All other players fall into the player order – from second-to-last to second-from-first – in the order that they pass, and pay half of their last bid to the bank. In the next phase, each player –
in the new player turn order – selects a special action to
perform. The special actions are: Which special action you pick during this phase will have a lot to do with what your intentions are during the turn, and what you anticipate other players will do. Your choice will be a crucial element in your strategy for the turn, and if you don't get to pick what you want, you may find yourself adopting a completely different strategy for the turn, so it’s important to be flexible. The next phase is Build Track. Starting
with the player who selected First Build (if anyone did), and then
proceeding in player turn order for the other players, each person
has the option of placing up to three new track tiles. (The Engineer
is able to place up to four new track tiles.) There are restrictions
and costs, of A simple track tile will only permit one rail to run through a given hex. A complex track tile (which can replace a previously played simple track tile) allows two tracks to run through a given hex (both tracks could be owned by the same player, or by different players), but can only be played if it leaves the original track pattern unaffected. Under no circumstances will two tracks travel through the same hexside, and that’s important to remember while becoming familiar with the game. Following the building of track comes the Move Goods phase. This phase is played in two rounds. During each round (starting with the player who picked First Move, if anyone did) each player is permitted to move any, one good on the board a number of Links equal to or less than his Link limit. This Link limit is initially one for all players. One way to increase your Link limit is to select the Locomotive action, and the other way is to skip moving a good during one of the two rounds of moving goods. For each Link across which a good is moved, the player owning that Link has his income increased by one. Obviously, increasing your Link limit is very important. It not only increases the rate of your income increase, but also gives you more options in moving goods. When a good is moved, it must end its move at a city matching the good’s color, or it cannot be moved. Once it reaches any city of its color, its move is over, and it is returned to the cup holding unassigned goods cubes. So, the difference between minimum and maximum income growth during a turn is eleven dollars – the minimum being the movement of one good one link in one of the rounds, and the maximum being the move of two goods, six links each, during the two rounds. The next phase is Collect Income. Each player collects money equal to his current Income level. Since a player scores victory points at the end of the game equal to three times his income level, increasing your Link level and being able to take advantage of that increase is crucial to success. Since the Locomotive special action allows you to increase your Link level without forgoing the move of a good during one of the Move Goods rounds, this is the means by which your income level obtains the highest, potential growth rate – “potential”, because you’ll still have to find goods moves twice each turn that take full advantage of your Link level. The next phase is Pay Expenses. Your expenses are equal to one dollar for every share you have issued, plus one dollar times your Link level. So, if you have, say, five shares issued, and a Link level of four, then you’ll have to pay nine dollars. If a plyaer does not have sufficient funds to pay expenses, then that player reduces his or her income level by one for every dollar they are short. If this causes their income level to go in the negative, then that player is out of the game. Ouch. So, as you may have already figured out, this means a player really needs to have a handle on all their expenses for the turn in that very first phase, Issue Shares. If, for instance, you have five dollars going into the turn, plan on building three track tiles on the plains during the turn (cost – 6 dollars), will have expenses equaling 9 dollars, want to bid up to four dollars during the turn, and anticipate have an income level of ten during the Collect Income phase, then you’ll need to issue at least one, new share. Now for the bad news. Ready? Following the Pay Expenses phase comes the dreaded, dastardly Income Reduction Phase. This either represents taxes, inflation, corruption, or devaluation. Who knows, and who cares? If a player’s income level is ten or less (veritable poverty, that), there is no income reduction. If a player’s income level is between eleven and twenty, their income level is reduced by two. Between twenty-one and thirty, it is reduced by four. Between thirty-one and forty, you go down six. Forty-one and up, it goes down by eight. The Income Reduction mechanism strikes
me as being nothing more than a bald-faced attempt at hobbling the
more successful entrepreneurs in the game. Come to think of it,
it must represent taxation, right? The Turn Marker is then advanced, and the next turn begins. With six players, there will be six turns. With five players, there will be seven turns, four players eight turns, and three players ten turns. Victory Points are totaled thusly: three times the player’s final Income Level, minus three times the player’s number of Shares issued, plus the total number of track tiles in a player’s Link (not to include unfinished track segments). While it seems to be tactically prudent to assemble a tight collection of short, small runs between neighboring cities (thereby maximizing the potential for fast income level growth), this last victory point criteria at least mitigates the effect of this expedient. Possibly the most interesting phase of the game – and certainly the phase consistently most pivotal – is the Select Actions phase. Since these Action choices are selected in player order, this in turn makes bidding very important. In the last game I played with my group, I made it my highest priority to win the bids, which I proceeded to do on six of the eight turns. This permitted me to grab the Locomotive option as often as I wanted, and having picked a section of the board that the other players ignored, I was able to consistently keep my income level growing faster than the other players. This resulted in increasing my ability to bid more, which allowed me to keep the initiative. The overall effect was that I was comfortably ahead for most of the game, relenting only on the last two turns when I felt confident that nobody could catch me. But I’m pretty sure I’ll only get away with that particular path to victory once – my regular gaming group will not let me win that many bids from now on, nor will they leave me so unmolested on one side of the board again. In fact, I’d say that amongst equally skilled and alert players, the ability to stay in the game will be directly proportional to how much havoc players can inflict on each other’s perceived advantages. You cannot let one player win the lion’s share of the bids. You cannot let one player dominate one part of the board (certainly not in the East, anyway, where the cities and towns are too close to each other). And you cannot let one player have uncontested access to a pile of goods cubes. If Age of Steam has any failing at all, it is that is seems best suited to four players. Five players is still enjoyable, but six players suffers somewhat from early track congestion (easily elbowing at least one player out of the competition, despite his best efforts), and using up the available new goods too quickly. The track congestion problem can be minimized by adroit, initial placement, however, and the goods issue can be ameliorated by the expedient of putting more goods on the Goods Display. If you place an additional row of goods on the numbered boxes for starting cities, and the lettered boxes for new cities, this helps. Still, the game board size seems optimized for four players. Having said that, it would be fascinating to see a version of this system applied to a map of the entire United States, North America, or Europe, any of which should easily support six players. A commensurate increase in the number of track tiles, though, would probably increase the cost of the game by at least another fifty percent. I, for one, would be happy to pay it. Age of Steam is easily my most favorite
game since Puerto Rico, and has more interaction. This one is not
going to collect dust anytime soon. There is a bevy of decisions
to make, and long-range planning is crucial, as is keeping a close
eye on your expenses and your opponent’s actions. Age of Steam
possesses that rare ability to make every decision seem absolutely
crucial, which keeps all the players focused for the duration. Martin
Wallace has designed other games which I enjoy very much, such as
Way Out West, and Tyros, but this is easily my favorite of his designs
to date. It is a game of ebb-and-flow, give-and-take, and subtle
interaction, and should be a strong candidate for any strategy game
of the year award. I can strongly endorse Age of Steam for any gaming
group. Darrell Hanning is a network engineer for a government entity, and lives in Jacksonville, Florida. When he isn't working or sleeping, he can often be found playing a strategy game or designing one, with much more success at playing than designing.
You
Know You’re Playing a Knizia Game When… 1. Generic Ancient Egyptian art graces
the box cover
The Dogma of Dice an interview with Plenary Games' Angela Gaalema Tell us a little about the history of and the inspiration for your company. I don't know that Plenary Games is really
old enough to have actual After being unemployed for six months,
and during that six months So what do I call this thing? I took
my cue from my favorite movie, Why did you decide to make Fresh Fish your first game? Honestly, I wanted to play the game,
and wasn't willing to pay for one How has your first effort been received by the gaming community? I don't know what anyone else thinks,
but I think it has been You are certainly one of the only game publishers to feature a mission statement so prominently on your web site. I hadn't noticed that. Why do you feel this is so important? The mission statement is important to
keep me focussed. There are We are very interested in your next games. What are they and when can we expect them? I have several games lined up. The first
two are original games by
Do you get involved with playtesting the games you publish? If so, could you discuss this process? I expect games to be pretty thoroughly
playtested by the time they Will Plenary get involved in publishing new games or do you plan to stick to "re-publishing" older gems? Believe it or not, there aren't that
many older gems which are ready
AN OVERVIEW OF THE NOMINEES FOR 2003 INTERNATIONAL GAMERS AWARDS an article by Greg J. Schloesser
Multi-Player Category
AD ACTA.
This was one of the very first games I played at the Essen Spiele AGE OF STEAM. Simply outstanding. Martin Wallace has merged elements of various train games – including his own LANCASHIRE RAILS – into a game rich with tough choices and tight finances. Superior play is required as the system is rather unforgiving, but for a gamer who desires a challenging, thought-provoking experience, he need look no further. The best Warfrog and Wallace title to date. ALHAMBRA. When I first heard that STIMMT SO was being revamped and re-released as ALHAMBRA, I wasn’t terribly interested. I owned STIMMT SO and although I found the game enjoyable, a re-worked version simply wasn’t all that enticing. However, after having the opportunity to play it during Alan Moon’s Gathering of Friends, I was smitten and immediately purchased a copy. I also promptly sold my copy of STIMMT SO, as I saw no reason to play the original ever again. The additions to the game system introduced in ALHAMBRA elevate this game to a new level and make it more challenging and enjoyable. It is certainly a rare case of the sequel being better than the original.
COLORETTO. For me, this is the one aberration on the list of finalists. I find this game of collecting sets of cards to be very light and very random. For me, it simply isn’t all that much fun. I could list a dozen other games that I would have preferred to see as a finalist than this one. But, hey … I’m just one voice out of 17 on the committee, so I sometimes have to accept that my tastes don’t always match those of the other committee members. DOMAINE. When word reached me that a
lighter, easier version of LOWENHERZ was going to be released, I
wasn’t the slight bit interested. EDEL, STEIN & REICH. Another re-working of a previously released game … this time the game being BASARI. Gone are the board and dice rolling. They have been replaced by several decks of cards and more bidding options. Plus, the game now accommodates up to five players, which makes it even more accessible. Although the central mechanism is the same, the game has a decadently different feel to it, warranting keeping both in my collection.
MAGNA GRECIA. I feel as though I can’t adequately comment on this Clementoni release. I played only once and the rules were very unclear. I somehow managed to win that game, but still am not exactly sure what I did to best my opponents. I’m intrigued by the game, but have been waiting (and waiting, and waiting …) for the English release before purchasing a copy. MARE NOSTRUM. Although I will admit that this is a decent game, I’m still somewhat disappointed by it. The game was being touted as a 2-hour version of Avalon Hill’s classic CIVILIZATION, so my expectations were high. Sadly, the game doesn’t measure up to this comparison. Although it does contain some interesting mechanisms, particularly the trading aspect (which is reminiscent of ANDROMEDA), there are some aspects of the game that can force it to drag on and on. I guess the world will be forced to continue to wait for the holy grail of a shorter version of CIVILIZATION. NEW ENGLAND. Every now and then a game comes along that has a revolutionary new mechanism that is nothing short of brilliant. For me, NEW ENGLAND is just such a game. The mechanism of choosing the turn order, which also dictates the amount the player must pay for each action he undertakes, is ground-breaking and incredibly clever. Fortunately, the rest of the game is also extremely good, so the mechanism is not lost in a poor game. I’d venture a guess that we’ll see this same mechanism used in many games in the future. PARIS PARIS.
Here’s another case of first impressions not being accurate.
I AVALON. I’m ashamed to admit it, but I haven’t yet played this Leo Colovini release. I’ve been waiting for the Rio Grande version, since I understand the cards have a considerable amount of text on them. Looks like I’ll have to get it played prior to the final voting.
HIVE. This was all the rage as the Spiele Faire in Essen in 2002 and for the life of me, I just can’t figure out why. Several gamers whose opinions I greatly respect are enamored by it, but my numerous playings fell flat. I found the game very “chess-like”, with pieces having pre-set movement capabilities. I failed to garner any excitement or tension from the game and subsequently sold my copy. Different tastes, I guess. LORD OF THE RINGS - THE CONFRONTATION. Another in the growing line of Lord of the Rings games … and this is one of, if not THE best of the lot. The fellowship tries to get Frodo to Mt. Doom so he can destroy the ring, while the Dark Lord maneuvers his forces to thwart this goal. The comparison to STRATEGO is obvious, with the identity of a player’s pieces being hidden from his opponent. Fortunately, the game is far superior to STRATEGO, with the strategies being much deeper. The only think marring this game is a set of less-than-thorough rules which has caused a considerable amount of errata and internet-based controversy. ODIN'S RAVENS. I just can’t say enough good things about this game. Yes, it is a ‘race’ game as players attempt to get their raven across the landscape quicker than their opponent. However, it is MUCH more than that. The game is filled with the potential for clever moves and tactics, which can enhance your position and/or hinder your opponent. I simply love the thinking and creativity this game requires in order to play well. STREET SOCCER. Another one of those
“I just don’t get it” games for me. I won Stay tuned for the final outcome of the voting, which will be announced in late September!
A Response to our Ulysses Review in Game Notes #13 by ULYSSES Creators Andrea Angiolino and Pier Giorgio Paglia We have read the review of ULYSSES in Game Notes 13. Thanks to the attention you devoted to our game. Since the designers' intentions are quoted here and there, we would only like to point out a couple of things. Mr. Hanning's guesses are good as long
as they are applied to what the editors of the game - not the designers
- had in mind. The game that we proposed to the publisher was quite
a different one, more strategic and less random. In our original
version of the game: 2 - You could not change goals during the game. 3 - Only half of the places on the board were goals. If you moved Ulysses on a goal you knew that you could make a gift to another player, but you could always avoid it and move to a safe place. 4 - The game ended either when somebody reached his fourth goal, or when a player decided to move the ship to the Hercules' Columns (according to the other myth that Ulysses sailed for knowledge toward the end of the world and never came back). Since goals had different victory values, in this second case the winner would be the player scoring most. ULYSSES has been published after a heavy editing in which - surprisingly indeed - we have not been involved. The final result is a game that we still enjoy, but which is quite different from the one we intended. We played it quite a lot and we never experienced a 4 hour stalemate as you did, but we agree that the game can become difficult to close among 5 experienced players (by the way, our original version was for 2/4 people). We are still proud of our ULYSSES but we feel that, after the contract expires, we should consider creating "ULYSSES - The Authors' Cut" as some Hollywood directors do with their movies... Please have a look at our next game, WINGS OF WAR, a card game about WWI air duels coming out soon by Nexus. English rules are included. As all the other games we did with Nexus (such as a WARHAMMER ADVENTURES boardgame and a collection of three different DRAGONBALL games for the Italian market) they have been edited together with the authors. So if you have problems with WINGS OF WAR, you can definitely blame us for every detail. Thanks again and best regards! Andrea Angiolino and Pier Giorgio Paglia
Call for Submissions Boulder Games is looking for submissions for future issues of Game Notes (believe it or not, we’re trying to come out with a new “issue” more than once a year). Please consider the following before you submit an article: 1. If at all possible, we prefer reviews of recently released games. An occasional article or review of a long forgotten game will be published, but we are mostly interested in what has gamers excited in the here and now. 2. Keep your reviews/articles between 1,000 and 1,500 words. 3. Payment for reviews is modest – usually $20 in Boulder Games credit per review used. Obviously if you submit an unusable review or article you’ll receive no compensation for it. Them’s the breaks! 4. Our space is limited, so make certain your writing is strong, eloquent and original. See any Darrell Hanning review for a good idea of what we consider effective writing. 5. Be opinionated! Boulder Games is known for telling it like it is. Heck, just look at many of our product descriptions. If we don’t like a game, we let you know it. So, whether you love or hate a game doesn’t matter as long as you clearly convey WHY you love or hate it. 6. Ease off of the game mechanic descriptions. We want a critique of the game, not three pages of detailed instructions about how the game works. Mechanic descriptions certainly have their place but don’t let them become the “meat” of your review. That’s it! If you have any questions, or if you want to submit an article or review, just contact chriskirby@bouldergames.com.
|
the
location of states such as Nebraska or Iowa on a map of the United
States. Ask us to pick out various countries in Europe, especially
countries such as Lithuania, Estonia or Bulgaria, and you’d
likely be met with a dumb stare. So, the thought of playing a game
which requires players to have a passing knowledge of European geography
is likely anathema to some.
player wishes to travel by air between two countries, these countries
must be of the same color AND a player must play a plane card of
the same color in his rack between those two tiles. There are only
two planes of each color in the mix, so this can be tricky. If a
player wishes to travel by sea between two countries that are connected
by a sea line, then a ship tile must be played in the rack between
those two countries. Ship tiles are not color-sensitive and can
be used to provide a link along any sea route.
rail,
pouring vast amounts of resources into passes and tunnels, and deciding
upon narrow-gauge or standard-gauge track. And the fickle production
of Colorado’s mines, combined with the brutal nature of winter,
served to make the players tight-fisted with their monetary reserves.
Phillip Smith’s Silverton simplified the matters of laying
track, while staying in the Rockies and keeping the mines every
bit as fickle, but as often as not left players feeling that much
of what happened in the five hours they would spend playing the
game to completion could be summarized in a few “roll-offs”
in competing for a certain section of rail, or an early poor decision
in which direction to focus their attention. But the die rolls for
competing surveyors and prospectors could be easily replaced with
bids (or other methods), and repeated playing would show which paths
were usually most prudent. All in all, Silverton has proven for
me, at least, to be something of a definitive railroad game. 
five different colors, 90 plastic, the game board, a Goods/Action
display card, an Income Track display card, a Turn marker, 6 dice,
and the rules book. The rules are seven pages long – seven
in English, and seven in German - with several illustrations for
examples. I think the plastic coins are a particularly nice touch,
and wish the rest of the game publishing world would, once and for
all, give up on the fiddly, fumbly, slippery paper currency that
has dogged gamers since the dawn of gaming. 
course.
Placing track on an empty plains hex costs two dollars. Placing
it on a river hex costs three, and placing it on a mountain hex
costs four. Replacing a “simple” track tile with a “complex”
track tile costs three, and placing a track tile on a town hex costs
one dollar, plus one dollar for each track leading out of the hex.
The restrictions are as follows: A player can place track tiles
to connect only to one of his existing track segments, or to the
vacant hexside of a city hex. A series of track tiles running between
one city or town and another city or town is considered a “Link”.
One or more track tiles that do connect to such an endpoint is considered
an Unfinished Track Section. Players place an ownership disk on
each Link or Unfinished Track Section they have built. If an Unfinished
Track Section goes through a Build Track phase without any new track
being added to it, ownership of the section is lost (the player
is considered to have abandoned the branch), and any other player
can build off it, thereby gaining ownership of it.
I
have another reprint lined up, the fabulously fun Lunatix Loop by
Matt Leacock. There are two other originals currently under contract:
awards in the General Strategy category. In order for a game to
be eligible for the award, it must have been released between the
dates of July 1st – June 30th. 
ABENTEUER
MENSHEIT (SETTLERS OF THE STONE AGE). The Settlers of Catan series
seems to have more spin-offs than a popular American sit-com. Most
of the spin-offs were good, but didn’t depart too much from
the original, so had a very familiar feel to them. Although this
latest version maintains the core mechanics of Settlers, there is
a lot new here and the game has a ‘different’ feel to
it. There are also numerous paths to pursue victory, which makes
each game fresh. In my opinion, this is the best of the Settlers
spin-offs.
Faire in 2002 and I immediately purchased a copy. The theme of government
bureaucrats shuffling files didn’t seem very exciting, but
the game was very refreshing and quite good. It also leads itself
to some wonderful role-playing, which enhances my enjoyment of the
game even more. I was hoping a major publisher would produce the
game in larger quantities, but so far that doesn’t seem to
be the case. A shame.
AMUN-RE.
At last, another “meaty” Reiner Knizia title. Clearly,
the good Doktor has been concentrating on lighter, more family-friendly
games over the past few years. Although many of those games have
been entertaining, I pined for his return to more substantial games.
AMUN-RE marks this return and is a fine game filled with tense auctions
and interesting choices. These choices do become more limited in
the latter stages of the game, but the game in its entirety is a
fine piece of work.
LOWENHERZ
is one of my favorite games and a “dumbed-down” version
was the last thing I wanted to play. Boy, was I ever wrong. Although
the rules to DOMAINE are certainly simplified and the game shaves
about an hour off the playing time of LOWENHERZ, it is every bit
as tense and exciting to play. The choices are very agonizing and
each play has significant ramifications, especially in light of
the quick playing time. Due to this short playing time, I now see
DOMAINE being played much more frequently than its predecessor …
and my enjoyment will be at about the same level. 
EISZEIT
(MAMMOTH HUNTERS). This was a surprise release from Alea. Why? Although
MAMMOTH HUNTERS is a fine game filled with some interesting choices,
it has a much lighter feel to it than most other games in the Alea
line, including the venerated PRINCES OF FLORENCE and PUERTO RICO.
My first playing lasted too long and tempered my enthusiasm, but
a subsequent playing restored that enthusiasm. Although quite chaotic,
there are enough significant choices and decisions to suit my tastes.
didn’t much care for this new Michael Schacht release after
my first playing it, finding it abstract and very dry. Subsequent
playings, however, have revealed a game filled with interesting
choices and strategies. Yes, it remains abstract, but is also quite
enjoyable. The fact that it can be played in 30 – 40 minutes
is a bonus that will help insure that it will be played with regularity.
BALLOON
CUP. It’s exciting to see
the first release from my good friend Stephen Glenn secure a nomination.
Friendship aside, however, I’m pleased to report that the
game is quite good and entertaining. I find it very comparable to
such games as LOST CITIES and SCHOTTEN TOTTEN in terms of complexity
and the type of “thinking” involved. That’s mighty
fine company to be in. Now, if I could convince my wife to play
it, it just might become part of our regular rotation of 2-player
games!
my one and only playing by simply getting lucky with the dice. My
opponent kept rolling low numbers, which severely limited his options,
while I kept rolling high numbers, which allowed me to score at
will. Perhaps there is more here than lucky dice rolls, but it is
obvious that lucky rolls can skewer the game. This is just not for
me.