* Luthier - Worker placement game where you are creating instruments for patrons. There's a fair bit going on and while it all looks like it probably makes for a decent game loop (and I love the theme), my goodness is this game overproduced. I really want to like Paverson Games stuff but their approach to Kickstarter and game components is making it hard for me to give their games a chance.
This feels unfair. Their approach is buy to the level components that you want. There are base levels of both Distilled and Luthier. You can get all the game play stuff you want at base price. You only have to buy the extra bits if you want extra bits. So many KS force you to pay for extra game play in addition to bits and bobs. This has been Dave and Paverson's thing from the get go with Distilled. Maybe it it me repping a WI guy. It feels unfair to diss them for overproduction when they are not blocking game play and only charging for extras that people willingly pay for. Unless you think their base component prices are too high.
Apologies if I am missing something in your assessment.
Regarding Distilled:
I quite like it but I think there's a lot of extra stuff in there that detracts from the experience. I don't mean the components/production, but elements like the public scoring goals (which I see usually forgotten about), the different cards with different selections of recipes available (seems to add nothing to switch between these). These feel very much like "extra stuff we added to the kickstarter stretch goals because it's expected to have extra stuff" which doesn't contribute any more fun (not sure if that's actually how it happened as I didn't follow their crowdfund).
If there was a streamlined version available lacking all that extra stuff, I'd enjoy it more.
Dreaded Gazebo wrote:* Luthier - Worker placement game where you are creating instruments for patrons. There's a fair bit going on and while it all looks like it probably makes for a decent game loop (and I love the theme), my goodness is this game overproduced. I really want to like Paverson Games stuff but their approach to Kickstarter and game components is making it hard for me to give their games a chance.
This feels unfair. Their approach is buy to the level components that you want. There are base levels of both Distilled and Luthier. You can get all the game play stuff you want at base price. You only have to buy the extra bits if you want extra bits. So many KS force you to pay for extra game play in addition to bits and bobs. This has been Dave and Paverson's thing from the get go with Distilled. Maybe it it me repping a WI guy. It feels unfair to diss them for overproduction when they are not blocking game play and only charging for extras that people willingly pay for. Unless you think their base component prices are too high.
Apologies if I am missing something in your assessment.
I'm also a Wisconsinite so I'm rooting for Paverson, don't get me wrong 
Two things: yes, I think the base retail price for the standard edition is priced too high. Luthier's base price is a bit better aligned with the product than Distilled but I do think they are priced high for the game offered. I don't really fault a smaller publisher for having higher retail prices though.
The problem I faced is that at GenCon it was a real challenge to get them to talk about the mechanics of Luthier. Every question around a mechanic would maybe be briefly answered followed by "You roll these dice... that go in this dice tower! Go ahead, roll it yourself. Yeah, it makes music. How cool is that? That comes with the super ultra deluxe version!" Or "You put these tokens in the orchestra but if you get the deluxe version there's a mini specific to each instrument in the orchestra!" Which in my mind is the worst type of fiddlyness possible. Instead of putting down a simple general token you need to dig out the specific one for that spot on the board; that sound like a downgrade to me. There were also no demos on the show floor, just an overview. If I'm getting an overview I don't care what the components are, I need you to sell me on the mechanics.
Other publishers talk up their components as well, but out of all the vendors Paverson was easily the most aggressive with their component upsell. I get that it draws a crowd and is quite certainly a good source of revenue with higher margins on the upgraded components but you need to tailor your pitch to your audience. It just came across as if they didn't really care about the mechanics, they just wanted you to buy buy buy.
These feel very much like "extra stuff we added to the kickstarter stretch goals because it's expected to have extra stuff" which doesn't contribute any more fun (not sure if that's actually how it happened as I didn't follow their crowdfund).
If there was a streamlined version available lacking all that extra stuff, I'd enjoy it more.
Yeah, I think that is pretty closely aligned with my assessment as well. Distilled would be more fun as a shorter, more streamlined push your luck game. As it is it sits in this middle ground for me that doesn't hit the mark. Luthier looked like it was a chunkier euro but I walked away from that overview with too many questions to know if the game actually looked like it warranted a spot on my shelf.
In contrast we had a really interesting conversation around components with Dan Cassar, designer of Arboretum. He was showing off his newest game Mischief which looked quite good. He was explaining how torn he is on components where he knows that overproduction is what sells on Kickstarter but he really prefers minimalist design and was asking us on our preferences. It was a lot of fun digging into this with him.
Yesterday I got to play Red Dust Rebellion, the upcoming new COIN game from GMT, with the designer. Pretty cool to be there for the first game with his copy that was shipped to him in advance.
I also really enjoyed the game. The SF theme instead of a historical one is well done, the factions are really interesting, and balance seems good. Every faction was winning for a few turns during the game, and MarsGov won in the end (my Red Dust was close behind). Also the production is lovely, GMT seem to be knocking it out of the park at the moment.
Yesterday I got to play Red Dust Rebellion, the upcoming new COIN game from GMT, with the designer. Pretty cool to be there for the first game with his copy that was shipped to him in advance.
I also really enjoyed the game. The SF theme instead of a historical one is well done, the factions are really interesting, and balance seems good. Every faction was winning for a few turns during the game, and MarsGov won in the end (my Red Dust was close behind). Also the production is lovely, GMT seem to be knocking it out of the park at the moment.
I'm COIN-phobic, but I've recently enjoyed the "new COINs": Vijayanagara and Gest of Robin Hood. Conversely, I admire Fire in the Lake a lot but the heaviness of the ruleset can be a chore to wade through. Where do you think RDR sits between those games, if you had to guess?
Red Dust Rebellion is certainly a full COIN game, not a streamlined version of it like Vijayanagara or Robin Hood.
I’ve had limited experience of the series, but of those I’ve played it’s more to take in than Cuba Libre, probably on par with Gandhi or All Bridges Burning.
I suspect it’s a lot simpler than Fire In The Lake, but I’m judging that on reviews and a read of the rules rather than playing it.
I think the fictional factions make it easier than some of the historical games, as they each have a clear goal. Plus I feel like the GMT dev teams are getting better at building the rules and creating rulebooks. However, there’s some new weird stuff—in particular one of the factions has a totally new, unpredictable method of selecting actions based on a hand of cards.
I introduced COINs to my gaming group about 1.5 years ago via Cuba Libre. Sadly, it didn't go very well. We stopped about 45 minutes before our usual stopping time.
We had played through a decent chunk of rounds. I'd read that the Batista (Est'd Cuban gov't) is strongest at the beginning of the game and gets weaker as game goes on, and I think he was feeling it. The other two seemed to have been in a stalemate since the start of the game. I came back from a bathroom break and they had called the game and declared me the winner, as I was closest to my goal state of having flipped active casinos as The Syndicate.
I think we understood the rules; we had no downtime on rules questions. But perhaps we didn't quite grasp how to achieve our faction goals. That's not too surprising considering it was the first COIN exposure for all.
I think my friends had no personal attachment to the Cuban Revolution. Perhaps Liberty or Death, Fire in the Lake, Falling Sky, or Red Dust Rebellion would better capture their attention.
As it stands, I doubt COIN is making it back to the table any time soon, unless I can figure out what went wrong.
Open spots for a couple BGA games!
Viticulture 4 player - https://bga.li/t/555305810 - 1 slot remaining!
It's a Wonderful World 4 player - https://bga.li/t/555425176 - 1 slot remaining!
We tried out Gnome Hollow last night which a friend of mine picked up at Gencon this year. It's a good game and I enjoyed it. It's a tile laying game with some roll and write mechanics stuck on. Lay tiles, complete a circle, gain rewards. The rulebook is a complete mess and we struggled quite a bit with getting the game going, but once we macheted our way through that piece of junk and figured out the actual gameplay, we all had a good time with it.
Does it deserve all the fervor that surrounded it at gencon? I dunno.. it's not going to be my favorite game of all time, but it has some interesting ideas and some good choices to make while you are playing it. It's good! Just watch a "how to play" video before you open the rule book.
We played Dune: Imperium for the first time yesterday and it was a hit. The game combines mechanics of multiple games our group enjoys. Worker placement, light deckbuilding and surprise attacks were all well received. I think this will be a game in regular rotation in our group.
Got my copy in of Elizabeth Hargrave's Undergrove, the game in which you are trees competing to make the best environment for your seeds and saplings by trading resources with the nearby mushrooms. It's gorgeous! And I've read half the directions. That's it so far.
I know that board layout! I also played through the 4 turns of the "starter game" to see what it was like...
From that and reading the rules, Undergrove looks really interesting. I hope I can get a proper game of it in soon.
A couple of new games in the mail recently, both from designers who also live down here in New Zealand
Endeavor Deep Sea is really neat, the production is lovely and it's a nice worker placement/optimisation puzzle with a cool theme. Exploring deeper into the sea is neat, and there's enough contention for certain spots that it provides a good amount of interaction.
And yesterday Inventors of the South Tigris arrived. Looks great but just organising the box and reading the rulebook made me set it aside for a solo learning game over the weekend. It's really dense!
Played a full game of Undergrove yesterday, just myself and my 10-yr-old!
Really enjoyed it! There are so many different types of mushrooms and powers that figuring out what would be a good turn was a joy. Trying to build out a nice engine while keeping the endgame goals, too.
Totally can't wait to play again, probably tomorrow, with same kid and wife and maybe I can rope in another gamer friend from nearby.
BUT as good as it was to play, and as nice as the artwork and pieces all are--I have the deluxe "Mycologist" version with upgraded components--I came away from the game feeling less like I was engaging with mushroom stuff and ecology and more like I was just optimizing an Uwe Rosenberg puzzle. Could just be a me thing. Maybe I haven't played enough Wingspan to know Hargrave's design intent for nature games. But maybe this won't matter, as it's legitimately teaching my kid more mushroom science and he's getting some great practical exposure to using elements as resources; the currencies are carbon, nitrogen, potassium, and phosphorus!
So excited to play again, but at this point at least, not sure whether there is a weird schism between gameplay and mechanics on one hand, and theme on the other.
Regarding Hargrave's design sensibility:
Wingspan is a game that frequently is both criticized for a lack of mechanical resonance and praised for it's incredibly good resonance. Which you hear will depend on the audience. Folks who just have a casual knowledge of birds will get confused by things like the abstraction in the egg system (why am I spending a sparrow egg to hatch an eagle?). Folks who are really into birds will look at specific bird's card, read it's ability, and say "yeah! That is so what those birds do!" In other words, it's chock full of resonance that's easy for the average gamer to miss.
While I know neither the game nor fungi well enough to say for sure, it wouldn't surprise me if Undergrove has a similar issue.
I haven't heard much discussion about The Fox Experiment, but I do know just enough about genetics to be really impressed with the mechanical expression of the theme there.
Pages