Stephensons Rocket is game by Reiner Knizia, my favourite game designer. My favourite
game of his is Euphrat & Tigris. At the first glance, you might think that those
games resemble each other. At least, that’s what I thought. In fact, they don’t
(at least, that’s what I think now). I do adore Euphrat & Tigris, but I am not
too fond of Stephensons Rocket. I’ll expound this.

As Euphrat & Tigris, Stephensons Rocket is highly cybernetic, i. e. there are lots
of different gaming mechanism that interlock like gears in a sophisticated device.
I’ll try to explain some of them so that you might get an idea what I’m thinking
of.

There are different railroad lines. Whenever you build one tile for them (like in 1830
or most other railroad games), you get one share (yes, shares are recompenses for
building – you don’t buy them). Whenever you try to build other players might contest
the direction you’re trying to build to. The decision is which the railroad advances
is determined by bidding shares. This means two things: Whoever has done most building
work on the railroad has better odds to determine its further course. But when you force
your will, you pay with your shares, and this will make things easier for other players
with shares.

However, shares are not only used for determining the direction of the railroad line.
Whenever two lines merge into one big line, players with shares for the lesser lines get
winning points (called “dollars” in the game, and available in sets of 1.000 –
this reminds of arcades game times when shooting an alien spaceship gave you 10 or 100
points, never 1). Players count the cities connected by the lesser railroad, and the
player with most shares immediately scores as many (multiplied by 1.000 of course)
victory points, the second player half of that. This means: Force your way, and you
won’t get victory points.

There are three kinds of cities: Those that act as
starting points of the different railroad lines and which have no further meaning.
Then those that trigger a scoring when reached. You get as many points as in the
case of a merger (i. e., number of cities x 1.000), but first and second are
determined otherwise: This time, its not about the number of shares but about the
number of railroad stations of your colour which are on the track. Stations are
built in your turn instead of advancing a railroad line. Of course, you’ll try
to merge your line with many of your stations in the biggest line available in order
to get a majority there (or, if not possible, try to avoid such a merger at all
costs). More and more railroad lines merge and whoever has the majority in the big
lines has good chances to win the game. This resembles of course the growing
kingdoms of Euphrat & Tigris.

And things are even more complicated than this. The third kind of city has three markers
each. Those markers have two meaning: First, whenever such a city is reached by a
railroad line the players with markers score a modest amount of victory points. Second,
those markers represent different goods. At the end scoring, players get rather many
victory points for majorities in the different types of goods.

Things intertwine at such a rate that every single action has more impacts than anyone
could probably track. At least, I cannot. I am not a bad Euphrat & Tigris player, and
I could always tell you how the other players are doing. In all Stephensos Rocket games
we had so far, no-one was right about the approximate winning order. The rules say that
players don’t show their money (i. e. points scored so far) to the others. But even
if you do, this won’t change much since players get so many points in the final
scoring that the intermediate results don’t matter that much. In every game we had so
far the player taking the last move decided who wins, not because of malice but because
of necessity. Things get crowded at the end, and finally it’s your turn and you
either merge line A to line B, or line C, or avoid the merger. This might have hardly any
impact to your personal score but it decides the game.

Just one example: In a game I played at a boardgame club, I was the only player who knew
the game and had a plan. One player understood what I was doing and did his best to
thwart my schemes. He was last. I was third. And I was the one to decide with my very
last turn which of the other two players should win. Both of them did not have any
discernable strategy for the first third (or half) of the game but were lucky enough to
have their lines advanced by others.

Verdict: There is no dice rolled, no card drawn yet the game hardly controllable. You
(or at least, I) cannot even approximately keep track of how you and others are doing.
The final scoring submerges all previous game play like a deluge. Since its result
depends on mergers which are decided at the very last moment, it can hardly be predicted.
Stephensons Rocket is highly recommended to any player who complains about luck in board
games. There is no random factor at all yet experience won’t improve your chances of
winning the game very much.

View/add comments

This new offering is part of the selection for „Spiel des Jahres“, this is
why Guenther nudged us gently to play it…

The game is similar to other German games (well, aren’t ALL German games similar
to other German games???) and immediately creates associations with “Princes of Florence” (each player builds his own
“Alhambra” palace, in arabic Spain) and Carcassonne (Tiles have to be placed in a tricky way, you try to build
a “long wall” instead of a long road).

And of course the long list of games where you have to have the majority in a specific
attribute (buildings in “Alhambra”).

Nothing new – how does it play?

Each player gets a hand of numbered cards in 4 colors (the different kinds of money used
in arabic Spain), valued 1-9. The drawing mechanism brings a little luck into the game:
Each player draws up to the exact limit of 20, if s/he doesn’t hit 20 exactly s/he
may surpass the sum, resulting in different sized hands for each player.

On a small board 4 building tiles are placed at random (and constantly replaced). Each
can be acquired with only one specific kind of money, so the building next to the
“yellow” money symbol can only be bought with “yellow” money.
Building prices range from 3-13. There are seven kinds of buildings, some are very rare,
some are very common. Hidden in the money draw pile (and therefore functioning as a
random scoring) are two scoring cards, a final scoring happens at the end of the game,
when all buildings have been sold. The more common buildings give you more points, as it
is more difficult to have the majority with them. The first scoring round only scores the
leaders (with scores ranging from 1 to 7), the second scoring round scores the leaders
and runner-up’s (leaders now receive more than double the sum before, the runner-up
the basic sum), the final round includes a third place as well with equally raised
stakes. If 2 or more players are tied, they receive the sums of both scores divided by
their number and rounded down.

Each player has only one action (normally).

S/he can:

1. Take any of the open and constantly replenished 4 money cards
2. Take a combination of money cards up to the value of 5 (rarely achieveable!)
3. Buy a building with the correct money cards
4. “Destroy” an already built building (goes to “reserve”)
5. “Rebuild” a destroyed building somewhere else
6. “Exchange” a building with a building from the reserve that
   fits

One unique mechanism needs attention: You have to use the cards you have when buying
buildings (no change), so most of the time you have to overpay because your cards
don’t match the exact price. If you however manage to EXACTLY pay the price, you
get an ADDITIONAL action. Theoretically you can gain a string of actions in this way, so
it very often makes sense to sit back and improve your card hand instead of building or
buying at all costs – It might pay off in later rounds when you suddenly have a lot
of actions available!

Building buildings is not easy: they all have to be orientated in
one direction, walls have to be next to walls (all square building tiles have none,
one, two or even three walls), and you have to be able to access all placed tiles
from your central “start” tile. Your longest series of walls give extra
points every scoring round. If you acquire a building that can’t be placed
right now, you have to put it in reserve, hoping to build it another time (which
eats up one action, though). In my opinion it is mostly better to accumulate cards
instead of buying a building you can’t immediately build – cards
INCREASE your options, whereas the reserve building takes away TWO actions. In fact
our reserve space was rarely used in our first game.

All actions are very important, as the game is over pretty quickly, and very often you
won’t be able to achieve what you wanted to. The final scoring round gives the most
points, and is therefore most important.

That’s all there is – no surprises, really.

The sentence to sum up this game is: it works. It is not overly complicated and plays
quickly because of limited options. The tension lies mostly in the management of your
card hand, or if another player gets a specific building before you can pay for it. It is
satyisfying to pull off a string of actions, but that’s about it. There is very
little to none player interaction (you look at what the others have built and plan your
own buys based on that info, that’s about it), and the excitement factor is not
really high.

Guenther was the only one of our group who reacted enthusiastically to this game (even
saying that it had a chance for “Spiel des Jahres”, the others liked it, but
not in a very “emotional” way.

View/add comments

Our rating for this session: 6.2

Moritz Eggert

The game board is an abstract map of 15 provinces in Egypt, divided into
“lower” and “upper” Egypt indicated by a horizontal line that
separates the board into a “south” and a “north” section. The board
is further divided by the river Nile, creating four separate areas on the map. These four
sections take an important role in the scoring phases of the game as certain sets of
provinces may grand extra victory points. The main source of victory points however are
pyramids built in provinces; hence the objective of the game is to acquire provinces and
to build pyramids in them. Both require income which is earned by selling crops. On the
other hand, growing crops requires farmers, which can be hired for money – and we are
right in the middle of this great resource management game.

The game is divided into two halves – the old and the new kingdom, and each kingdom is
played in three rounds with each round having 5 phases:

Phase 1: Revealing the province cards

As many provinces as there are players are randomly selected in order to be put up for
auction in phase 2. Since each province has different properties players already now have
some input for making up their minds about the strategy they will follow during the game:
provinces have different amounts of farmer spaces or they allow different amounts of
power cards to be purchased, some provide free gold or power cards and others provide
free building material.

Phase 2: Acquisition of provinces

One by one the provinces are now put up for auction: beginning with the start player
each player selects a province and bids the amount of money s/he will pay if successful.
Once all players have made their bid any player having been outbid must select a new
province and bid again. This continues until each player has won a province. Here, and
throughout the rest of the game prices increase in distinct steps: 0, 1, 3, 6, 10 and so
on.

Phase 3: Buying resources

Players now acquire resources for their provinces. There are three types of resources:
power cards, farmers and building material. For each type of resource the complete number
of resources must be bought at once making large numbers prohibitively expensive (e.g. 2
farmers cost 3 gold, 3 farmers cost 6 (1+2+3) gold. The amount of resources a player may
buy is limited by the numbers depicted on the provinces.

While the power cards are maintained by the player (no hand limit) the farmers and
building material must be distributed amongst the provinces. As soon as a province
contains three building materials these are converted to a pyramid.

Phase 4: Offering to Amun-Re

Players now secretly select a number of gold cards and simultaneously
reveal them. The sum of all gold cards played amended by the possible “-3”
cards (each player gets one of these at the start of the game) is then used to determine
the value of the offer and the appropriate position of the temple marker on the temple
track. This marker indicates the amount of gold paid for farmers and pyramids in phase 5
(the higher the sacrifice the higher the income paid).

The player who offered the highest amount to Amun-Re is rewarded with three resources of
his choice – power cards, farmers and/or building stones. The player who offered the
second-highest amount receives two items, while everyone who sacrificed at least one gold
receives one item. Any player who played a -3 card “steals” 3 gold from the
treasury, but does not receive a free gift from Amun-Re due to his affront. All gold
sacrificed is returned to the bank, while -3 cards are retrieved by the players having
played them.

Phase 5: Harvest and other income

Now players receive income based on the number of farmers they have in their provinces
and the position of the temple marker. In addition players receive gold for some of the
provinces, indicated by a corresponding symbol. Some power cards which can be played in
this phase grand an extra income, too.

Phase 6: Scoring

This phase is only played at the end of turn 3 (end of the old kingdom) and at the end
of turn 6 (end of the new kingdom and end of the game).

Each player now receives victory points based on the status of their provinces:

• 1 point for every pyramid built
• 3 points for each set of pyramids (a set of pyramids is equal to one pyramid in each
  of the 3 provinces)
• 5 points for the province with the most pyramids on either side of the Nile
• bonus points for temples in provinces
• bonus points for certain power cards (if played)

At the end of the old kingdom all resources except for the temples and the building
stones are removed from the board and the game continues with playing the new kingdom.

At the end of the game – when the new kingdom has been played and scored – extra victory
points are granted to the three players holding the most gold.

And how does it play?

Amun-Re is a resource managing game par excellence and in some respects it
“feels” slightly familiar with Reiner Knizia’s “Euphrat &
Tigris”. Money is the most important resource with respect to flexibility of actions
while VPs are generated by provinces, temples and power cards, all of which need money
for their acquisition. Therefore, players find themselves in a permanent dilemma of
spending money on farmers to generate more money or to spend money on building stones and
power cards to generate VPs. Although the rules are clear and strait forward this dilemma
makes the game rather complex – another resemblance to “Euphrat & Tigris”.
That’s why we don’t give it a high chance of receiving the “Spiel des Jahres
2003” prize but it is my personal favourite for “Deutscher Spielepreis
2003”.

Here are some hints for good resource management in Amun-Re:

Go for the money

During the first half of the game (when playing the old kingdom) it is a good idea to
generate money with high priority – especially in a five player game, where all provinces
will be played. This is because the old kingdom will generate far less VPs than the new
kingdom (only about 1/3) and you need money to bid on the “good” provinces of
the new kingdom. Which provinces are good for you is determined by the number of pyramids
having been built in any one province. Don’t get nervous if you are behind in VPs
when the old kingdom dies – chances are that your fellow players are short of money now.

Get those Power Cards

Acquiring power cards early has a lot of benefits. On the one hand you might get one or
more of those cards which yield special bonuses for certain sets of provinces. If you
have the fortune to receive these cards during the old kingdom you can follow a matching
strategy during the new kingdom. And secondly, it is a lot better to have e.g. a Master
Builder card in your hand that you cannot play (you are only allowed to play one type of
card per turn) than letting another player have it who may be able to play it. And
remember: prices increase depending on the number of cards you buy, so buying small
numbers regularly saves money!

Watch those sets

Distribute your pyramids equally between your provinces as this will pay extra VPs for
complete sets at the end of a kingdom. A safe set of pyramids (yielding 3 VPs) is better
than an insecure “most pyramids” bonus of 5 points, so consider carefully where
you place your building stones.

View/add comments

Our current rating: 7.9

Aaron Haag

Dieses kleine Spielchen wurde quasi von der Spielewelt unbemerkt von der inzwischen mit
Rollenspielen und Comics sehr erfolgreichen Firma Kenzer&Co. herausgegeben. Dies geschah in einer Winzausgabe, die
die meisten Brettspieler direkt übersehen würden, bestand sie doch nur aus einem winzigen
Pappspielplan und einer Seite Counter zum Ausschneiden (was ohnehin sehr unbeliebt ist!).
Die Regeln nehmen gerade mal eine halbe Seite ein, dennoch hat es dieses Spiel durchaus
in sich.

Wer weiss, wie bekannt dieses Spiel jetzt wäre, hätte man es in ähnlich edler Form wie
zum Beispiel „Gipf“ herausgebracht? Auf jeden Fall gehört es nicht in die
Gattung der Fantasyspiele, sondern in die Gattung der abstrakten Setzspiele.

In „Elemental“ setzt jeder Spieler abwechselnd einen Stein auf einem recht
kleinen Spielplan mit Viereckraster. Ziel des Spiels ist es, entweder am Spielende am
meisten Steine auf dem Brett zu haben (wenn niemand mehr setzen kann), oder eine
„Rose“ zu vollenden, ein grosses sternförmiges Gebilde aus mehreren Steinen.
Dazu ist sehr wenig Platz, und die anderen Steine meistens im Weg. Wo jetzt der Clou des
Spieles liegt, ist die Tatsache, das bestimmte Steinkombinationen
„elementare“ Effekte verursachen, die das Spielgeschehen ganz schön
aufmischen. So wird zum Beispiel eine freie Zickzacklinie von eigenen Steinen zur
„Flutwelle“ die sich jede Runde um eins in eine einmal gewählte Richtung
bewegt, und alle Steine auf dem Weg zerstört.

Eine andere Möglichkeit ist ein Feuerball (ein kleines Dreieck), das alle Steine in
einer bestimmten Richtung zerstört. Sicher dagegen ist ein „Berg“ (4 Steine
im Quadrat), der ist unzerstörbar und bildet eventuell später die Basis für eine Rose.
Schließlich kann man noch, ähnlich wie bei „Reversi“, gegnerische Steine
umwandeln, indem man jeweils links und rechts 2 Steine in eine Linie bringt. Schließlich
kann man Gebilde auch kombinieren, zum Beispiel ist der Vulkan beliebt, eine Kombination
aus Berg und Feuerball, oder auch der Todesstern, 4 Steine als Kreuz, also in alle
Richtungen Feuerbälle feuernd.

Wie spielt sich das Ganze nun?

Zuerst einmal ist man sehr verwirrt von den vielen Möglichkeiten, die sich in einem Zug
ergeben können, und man muß sich erst langsam an das Spielprinzip gewöhnen. Jede Runde
ist irgendwas überraschendes los, und das Spielfeld ändert sich schnell und unerbittlich.
Durch den Chaosfaktor ist es jedoch auch kein ödes Denkspiel, in dem Alle stundenlang
grübeln (obwohl tatsächlich keinerlei Glückselement vorhanden ist!). Unser Spiel war
recht schnell, nach einer halben Stunde vorbei, und das zur allgemeinen Überraschung (ich
glaube Günther war selber überrascht, daß er seine Rose vollenden konnte). Durch die
Geschwindigkeit ist das Spiel sehr kurzweilig, darüberhinaus ist es schnell erklärt, und
macht als Mehrspielerspiel wirklich Spass, weil es kein wirkliches Gegeneinanderspielen
ist, mehr ein Suchen nach dem grösstmöglichen Chaosfaktor, und da trifft es halt mal den
einen und mal den anderen. Auch ist kein Spieler wirklich aus dem Spiel – irgendwo
ist nach grossem Steineverlust wieder ein Eckchen frei, wo man wieder neu beginnen kann,
und man kann dann auch immer noch das Spiel beeinflussen, sogar gewinnen!

Wer also abstrakte Setzspiele mag, wird dies Spiel sicherlich auch mögen. Darüberhinaus
ist eigentlich kein besonderes Spielmaterial nötig, jede Spielesammlung gibt genügend
Steine her, die das „edlere“ Spielen ohne Pappcounter ermöglicht.

Wer weiß, vielleicht hat das Spiel ein längeres Leben, als man vermutet – Es
bleibt abzusehen…

Kommentare anschauen/eingeben

Kein absoluter Klassiker, aber einen Versuch wert.

Unsere momentane Wertung: 6.5

Moritz Eggert

Eine lauschige Mai-Nacht auf der Terrasse am Westpark bedeutet schon eine deutlich
erhöhte Lebensqualität. Wenn dazu noch alle WPGs versammelt sind und wir mit Lust und
Laune unsere Spielsession durchziehen können, kann ich nur konstatieren: “La vita e
bella!” Auch wenn die hohe Teilnehmerzahl eine Einschränkung in der Spieleauswahl
mit sich bringt.

Mit Outpost fing der Abend an. Zu Einzelheiten der Spielregeln verweise ich auf unseren
Session-Report vom 29.1.2003 oder auf die Literatur im
Internet. Hier will ich zunächst mal ein paar Tips abgeben, die aufzeigen, dass dieses
Spiel in jedem Fall sehr stark strategisch orientiert ist und nicht so sehr vom Zufall
abhängt, der einem bei der Zuteilung der Gewinn-Scheine innerhalb gewisser
Schwankungsbreiten bevorzugen oder benachteiligen kann.

1. Verachtet mir die kleinen Karten nicht. Leistet euch bei jeder Gelegenheit auch
   Mitarbeiter für die Erz-Gruben. Die jeweiligen Einnahmen zwischen 1 und 5 Dollar sind
   besser als gar nichts. Und wenn dieser Betrag jede Runde ausgeschüttet wird, summiert er
   sich schnell weit über die zehn Dollar hinaus, die für einen Arbeiter ausgegeben werden
   müssen.

   Auch in der Endphase sind die kleinen braunen Erz-Karten nützlich, dienen sie doch
   vorzüglich dazu, die geforderten runden Summen für alle Arten von Anschaffungen exakt
   aufzubringen, ohne unnötige Überzahlungen machen zu müssen.

2. Spart kein Geld! Bis auf die Schlußrunden lohnt sich das in den seltensten Fällen.
   Jeder ist in der Lage, mit seinen laufenden Runden-Einnahmen die für ihn notwendigen
   Investitionen zu tätigen. Dann lieber mit dem übrigen Geld noch einen Mitarbeiter (vor
   allem!) oder noch ein Wasserwerk kaufen. Die tragen bereits in der nächsten Runde Früchte
   und haben sich in kürzester Zeit amortisiert.

3. Kauft immer die teuersten Fabriken, die ihr euch von euerem aktuellen
   Runden-Einkommen leisten könnt. (Spart aber nicht darauf; siehe oben.) Je teurer die
   Fabriken, desto höher der relative Ertrag. Eine Erzgrube kostet einschließlich Arbeiter
   20 Dollar und bringt durchschnittlich 3 Dollar, das sind 15% Rendite. Ein Wasserwerk
   bringt bei 7 Dollar Einnahmen rund 21% Rendite, eine Titanfabrik bei 10 Dollar Einnahmen
   etwa 23%. So steigt das immer weiter, auch wenn die Kosten für die notwendige
   Infrastruktur (Sonderkarten) anteilig berücksichtigt werden müssen.

4. Geht nicht zu früh auf Titan aus, denn dazu müßt ihr vorher noch die notwendige Heavy
   Machinery Investition tätigen, die euch finanziell bemerkbar zurückwirft. Wenn man diese
   Anschaffung nämlich voll in die Renditenrechnung der ersten Titan-Fabrik eingehen läßt,
   so wirft diese nur gut 15% ab, dafür steht dieser Wert für jede weitere Titan-Fabriken
   dann bei 25%.

5. Kauft die frühen Sonderkarten genau in der Reihenfolge, wie ihr sie braucht. Nodule
   geht vor Warehouse, denn die Mitarbeiterzahl müßt Ihr konsequent nach oben fahren können.
   Dagegen bringt ein erweitertes Handlimit gar nichts, da ihr eure Einnahmen sowieso
   konsequent wieder reinvestiert.

6. Achtet in jedem Fall auf die gerade im Handel befindlichen, und auf die jeweils noch
   verfügbaren Sonderkarten. Ihr braucht unbedingt eine Möglichkeit, eure Mitarbeiter-Anzahl
   zu erhöhen, d.h. ihr braucht ein Nodule. Überlaßt diese nicht eueren Konkurrenten für
   billiges Geld. Oder deckt euch damit ein, sobald sie wohlfeil sind.

7. Es gibt für jeden Spieler genau einen optimalen Zeitpunkt für den Erwerb eines
   Nodules: Ihr müßt schon am oberen Mitarbeiter-Limit sein und solltet über gute Einkünfte
   verfügen, d.h. 3 Wasserwerke und 2 Titan-Fabriken besitzen. Ist das allgemeine Interesse
   an den Nodules sehr hoch und sie gehen weg wie warme Semmeln, müßt auch ihr schneller
   zugreifen. Dann sind simple 4-5 Wasserwerke eine ausreichende Finanz-Basis. Man sollte
   sie leicht nach 5 Runden erreicht haben können, während die Titanisten dazu mindestens 2
   Runden länger brauchen.

8. Sind euch aus wohl kalkulierten Finanzbetrachtungen aber alle Nodules durch die
   Lappen gegangen, dann müßt ihr schleunigst Robots anstreben, um die fehlenden Arbeiter
   durch Roboter ersetzen zu können. Liegen keine Robots vor, dann hilft nur noch die
   Outpost-Karte.

9. Ein kleiner psychologischer Trick beim Versteigern der Sonderkarten: Seid ihr erste
   in der Spielerreihenfolge, dann bietet auf Karten, die ihr zwar gebrauchen könntet, die
   aber nicht unbedingt eurer vorrangiges Wunschobjekt sind. Der Mensch ist auf nichts so
   gierig wie auf das, was die anderen haben wollen. Wenn er einem etwas Wegschnappen kann,
   verliert er dabei leicht die rationale Kontrolle über sein Handeln. Ergebnis: der gierige
   Erwerber hat erstens erhöhte Summen ausgegeben und scheidet zweitens auf grund seiner
   geschwächten Finanzkraft als Konkurrent für das wahre Objekt euerer Begierde aus. (Aber
   das wissen sicherlich schon alle!)

In den fortgeschrittenen Runden gibt es dann mehr Finanzkämpfe um die Art zu
ersteigernder Karten, um die taktische Beteiligung daran, um den Preis, auf den man
hochtreibt und dergleichen trockene Überlegungen. Dazu sind die üblichen
Versteigerungstechniken zu beachten. Das ist eigentlich alles. Wenig? ZU wenig?

Selten hat ein Spiel in unseren Reihen so gravierende Fronten gezogen zwischen
Befürwortern und Gegnern. Moritz war bereits in der Anfangsphase ins Hintertreffen
geraten und ließ mit wachsendem Rückstand keinen guten Faden an dem Spiel. 3 vergebene
Punkte drücken seine tiefste Verachtung aus. Aaron war auch nicht gnädiger. Da er der
einzige Neuling war, entzogen sich notwendigerweise viele spielentscheidende Feinheiten
seiner Aufmerksamkeit. Aus diesem Grunde sind seine 3 Punkte noch verständlich. Günther
ist ein erfahrener Stratege und deutlichster Propagandist für dieses Spiel. Obwohl er nur
auf einem Mittelplatz landete, vergab er hervorragende 8 Punkte. Dem schloß ich mich auch
an, obwohl oder weil wir noch in der Lernphase sind. Wenn wir es alle im Detail
verstanden haben, wird es für mich sicherlich einen Teil seines Reizes verlieren.

Es gab hinterher eine erbitterte Diskussion unter den verschiedenen Parteien, die ich
hier unbedingt subjektiv kommentieren möchte. Stellvertretend für die Gegner steht der
Name Moritz.

1. Moritz behauptet, das Spiel sei in den ersten drei Runden entschieden. An der dann
   erzielten Reihenfolge werde sich bis zum Ende nichts entscheidendes mehr ändern,
   insbesondere ist der Führende nicht mehr von seiner Spitzenposition zu vertreiben.

   Stellungnahme: Dies ist nur bedingt richtig. Natürlich hat das Spiel exponentiell
   steigende Umsätze, wer schon früh vorne ist, kann seine Vorteile leicht immer weiter
   ausbauen. Aber:

2. 1. Normalerweise sind die Unterschiede in den ersten Runden keineswegs gravierend. Wie
      fängt denn eine zielgerichtete Outpost-Session unumstößlich an?

      In der ersten Runde passiert nichts, die Einnahmen zwischen 10 und 15 Dollar reichen für
      jeden weder zu einem neuen Wasserwerk noch zu einer Erz-Grube plus benötigtem Arbeiter.
      In der zweiten Runde reicht es für jeden genau zu einem Wasserwerk und für einige weinige
      Glückliche noch zu einem Arbeiter. Bei allen Spielern erlösen jetzt die 2 Wasserwerke und
      die 1-2 Erzgruben ca. 20 Dollar. Normalerweise kann sich jeder noch ein drittes
      Wasserwerk leisten. Aber keinen weiteren Mitarbeiter. Er wirtschaftet in der vierten
      Runde mit genau 3 Wasserwerken. Wer extrem Pech hat, erzielt in der dritten Runde nur 13
      Dollar und kann sich kein weiteres Wasserwerk mehr leisten. Dafür aber einen zusätzlichen
      Mitarbeiter. Er wirtschaftet dann mit 2 Wasserwerken, 2 Erzgruben und 4 Mitarbeitern.
      Diese Differenz kann nicht sehr groß sein, alle Spieler liegen nach der vierten Runde
      immer noch sehr dicht beieinander.

   2. Deutliche Positions-Unterschiede in den ersten Runden sind nicht zufallsbedingt,
      sondern resultieren aus deutlichen Fehlern. Nur wer hier gegen elementare Grundsätze
      verstößt, gerät ins Hintertreffen. Das ist ein allgemeines Prinzip bei streng
      strategischen Spielen, daran kann ich nichts Anrüchiges finden.

   3. Strategische Spiele sind immer so, dass Anfangsvorteile ins Ziel gebracht
      werden können, und sich nicht irgendwann im Spielablauf in Luft auflösen. Das ist doch
      klar! Nur bei stark zufallsabhängigen Spielen oder bei Kingmaker-Spielen ist die
      Anfangsposition nicht von Belang. Da versteckt man sich auch mal gerne hinter einer
      schwach-erscheinenden Maske, nur um die Neider und Kämpfer auf andere Kriegsschaupätze zu
      locken.

      Ich finde es gut so, daß eine erfolgreich erkämpfte Spitzenposition auch mit Geschick
      gehalten werden kann. Wohlgemerkt: mit Geschick! Nicht quasi von alleine. Auch bei
      Outpost muß der Spitzenreiter immer höllisch aufpassen, um auf die gerade anstehenden
      Herausforderungen auch angemessen zu reagieren. Seine Konkurrenten können ihn bei
      Versteigerungen durchaus auch mal bluten lassen. Geschenkt bekommt er nichts. Aber auch
      nicht von Spells, Orcs, Würfeln oder Kingmakern weggenommen. Das spricht eher für das
      Spiel.

   4. Output hat die schöne Spielregel, daß nach jeder Runde die Gewinnposition der Spieler
      ermittelt wird und damit die Spielreihenfolge der Spieler bestimmt. Bei uns hat die
      Reihenfolge unter den ersten 3 Spielern bis zum Schluß oft genug gewechselt. Auch
      Kommentare anderer Spielgruppen berichten von diesem Phänomen. Da kann doch an der obigen
      Behauptung nicht viel dran sein.

3. Moritz findet, daß das Spiel zu “solitär” abläuft, d.h. jeder Spieler
   wurstelt so vor sich hin, und unter den Spielern findet zu wenig Interaktion statt.

   Stellungnahme: Natürlich kennt das Spiel keine Koalitionen, keine Kämpfe (außer bei
   Versteigerungen), man kann niemandem berauben, erobern oder totschießen. Und wenn es um
   den Erwerb von Fabriken und Belegschaften geht, kann jeder unabhängig vom andren für sich
   seinen Zug zu Ende führen. Aber:

4. 1. Sind Versteigerungen nicht a priori ein Spielelement mit Interaktion, das keineswegs
      “solitär” abläuft? Bis der allerletzte Spieler seinen Zug abgeschlossen hat,
      kann man bei Outpost an allen Versteigerungen mitmischen (es sei denn, man hat frühzeitig
      sein Pulver verschossen), die Preise hochtreiben und versuchen, sich selbst noch ein
      Schnäppchen zu erwerben. Das läuft durchaus eine gehörige Portion Interaction ab.

      Mein lieber Moritz, ich kann sogar bösartig feststellen, gerade weil Du dich
      “solitär” mit mir über die Qualitäten dieses Spieles gestritten hast, hast Du
      es verpaßt, in die Versteigerung zwischen Aaron und Andrea einzugreifen. Das war eine
      schlichte Fehleinschätzung. (Daß Du dabei regelwidrig ganz übergangen wurdest, steht auf
      einem anderen Blatt!)

   2. Auch wenn man nichts mehr erwerben kann, muß man immer ein Auge darauf werfen,
      welcher Spieler welche Karten für wieviel Geld ersteigert oder nicht bekommen hat. Daraus
      kann man ungefähr ihre nächsten taktischen Maßnahmen ableiten, wieviel Geld sie haben und
      welche von den übrig gebliebenen Karten einen immer höheren Beliebtheitsgrad, sprich
      Versteigerungswert haben.

Das ist zwar nicht so viel Interaktion, wie wenn ich mit körperlichen und geistigen
Drohgebärden, mit Verlockungen, Versprechungen oder Jammerei die Mitspieler zu meinen
Gunsten beeinflussen kann. Aber es ist trockene, strategische Selbstverständlichkeit.

Kommentare anschauen/eingeben

Die unterschiedlichen Meinungen prallten unvermittelt aufeinander. Wenn die laue
Mai-Nacht die Gemüter nicht so euphorisch gestimmt hätte, wären unschönen Szenen nicht
ausgeblieben. So aber standen immer die gemeinsame Spielfreude und der Wille zur
konstruktiven Auseinandersetzung im Vordergrund. Hans konnte am nächsten Tag sogar das
Resümee ziehen: “Ich fand es einen schönen Abend, gerade weil wir so lebhaft
diskutierten”.

Eine sehr gute Analyse dazu, die sich absolut mit unseren Erfahrungen deckt, findet man
bei Fairplay.

Bei 7 Spielern läßt es sich nicht vermeiden, daß sich das Feld gleich in der zweiten
Runde auseinanderzieht. Mindestens 3 Spieler stehen nebeneinander auf dem gleichen Feld,
und wem es gelingt, mit einen großen Satz auf dieses Feld zu gelangen, der wird gleich
nochmals um das Dreifache seines Einsatzes weiterbefördert. Das reicht für die erste
Sprint-Wertung und manchmal auch noch für die zweite. Dann aber muß man sparen. Alleine
schafft man das Ziel nicht. Hoffentlich kann sich noch ein weiterer Mitfahrer auf eine
ähnliche Höhe katapultieren, so daß man dann gemeinsam das Ziel anvisieren kann.

Mir gelang der erste große Satz über insgesamt 21 Felder. Dann kam, o Glück, sogar noch
Günther in meine Nähe und wir hätten uns gemeinsam absetzen können. Ich war aber etwas zu
geizig. Die gemeinsame Fortbewegungsgeschwindigkeit hängt nämlich vom Abstand der beiden
Fahrer ab, den ich diesmal einstellen konnte. Weil ich Günther nicht die zweite
Sprint-Wertung gönnte, wählte ich nur einen Abstand von drei Feldern, die uns gemeinsam
zu langsam vorwärts brachte; die Meute holte uns wieder ein.

Was ist das Fazit? Das Ergebnis hängt stark von der Reihenfolge an, in der man antritt.
Und auch von der Gutmütigkeit eines Mitspielers, einem anderen einen super Zug zu
ermöglichen. Wer tut das schon?

Kommentare anschauen/eingeben

Der Rest ist für mich ziemlich undurchsichtig, zumindest unkalkulierbar. Ganz anders als
ein richtiges 6-Tage-Rennen.

Ansonsten gab es einige enttäuschte Gesichter bei Spielern mit glücklichen Würfen, die
ihrem Wurf entsprechend hohe Vorgaben machten, die der Nachfolger aber nicht akzeptierte.
Das übrige Feld lag auch statistisch ziemlich daneben und als “glücklicher”
Startspieler mußte man gleich drei Würfel abgeben.

Kommentare anschauen/eingeben

Moritz kam dabei die Idee, Strategie-Vorschläge zu Bluff zu verfassen! Der Tenor geht in
folgende Richtung: die eigenen freiwilligen Vorgaben müssen so positioniert werden, daß
der Nachfolger sie noch für plausibel hält, der Rest der Runde aber nicht. Das erstere
ist leicht, das letztere hingegen nicht. Schaun mer mal.

It’s 2500 B.C. in southern Italy and we are Greek settlers busily trying to develop
Magna Grecia – the cradle of civilization as the game’s subtitle puts it. In front of
us lies a map of the area with a number of already established small settlements and our
task is it to develop these villages to flourishing cities: cities with markets and roads
to other cities.

The more road connections a city has to other cities the more trade its markets will
generate and hence the more valuable the markets are at the end of the game. However,
only active markets can generate points. To become active, a market must be either in a
player’s own city or in a city which has a direct road to one of that player’s
cities. Besides markets cities themselves can generate points at the end of the game if
they connect to any of the randomly placed oracles on the map.

Player sequence is determined by twelve cards, each representing a complete round of the
game. Each card show the players’ turn sequence and the actions which may be
performed by the players in that round. The principle actions are a) to place road tiles,
b) to establish or expand cities by placing city tiles and c) to re-supply tiles from
stock. Each card shows how many tiles of a kind a player may place or take.

The card system is fair and only “semi random”: all players are three times
each first, second, third or fourth player in a round and the quantity of tiles available
is one each of high, medium and low. The cards are arranged in three sets of four with
each player receiving each turn sequence once per set. The cards are placed face up and
the card for the current round is handed to the players in sequence. This provides some
limited possibility for planning ahead as both the quantity of tiles and the players’
sequence of the next rounds are visible, too.

Development of Magna Grecia starts at the edge of the board and the road and city system
develops towards the center of the map. It is obvious that cities located in the center
of the map will most likely end up with a lot more connections to other cities than those
at the edge of the map. That’s why players will quickly try to build roads towards
the center and at the same time they will start to place markets in villages at the
center of the map hoping that these villages will be come proliferating cities towards
the end of the game.

This sounds easier than it is because in order to
become an active (i.e. point generating) market it must be in the immediate vicinity
of one’s own city. And in order to establish a city anywhere on the map one must
build a road to the corresponding village. By mid-game the center of the board
usually becomes rather crowed and building the required road system to interconnect
the desired cities becomes increasingly difficult. The more so as there is ample
possibility of roads being cut off by other players.

While road building is free players must pay points for establishing or expanding cities
as well as for placing markets on villages or “foreign” cities. This makes it
necessary that players “cash in” some of their markets already in mid-game by
deactivating them (turning them sideways). This immediately generated the market’s
value in points for the player. Of course players will try to make sure that they only
cash in those markets that are in cities which will not increase their number of road
connections.

Careful consideration is required here as not only may a possible growth in connections
be overlooked but also does this allow other players to build markets in that city at a
lower price (the price to be paid for placing a market depends on the city size and the
number of markets active in a city).

“Magna Grecia” requires tough strategic and tactical decisions by its players
and is hardly influenced by random “luck factor”. Starting with the decision to
either go for a “market focused” or an “oracle focused” strategy up
to the decisions about which markets to establish and how to develop one’s road
system makes the game very challenging.

Interestingly, the final score in our game was very close for the top three scorers
(within 5 points) and all scores were in the 40’s and lower 50’s on a
“Kramer track” which ends at 49! My interpretation is that we did not play
offensive enough to exploit the full scope of the game’s possibilities. Only in
retrospect did I discover the true depth of the game.

All of this suggests that “Magna Grecia” is one of the highlights of this
year’s games. And in fact our score for the game suggest this, too. However, there
was one low score of 5 (out of 10) and it is mine, the reason of which I want to briefly
describe:

Playing “Magna Grecia” involves a lot of counting (road connections, markets,
city tiles, and distances) in order to determine one’s “best possible
move”. While I find this acceptable in a two player game I dislike this in
multi-player games, since it tends to create a lot of idle time for the non-active
players. It took us 150 minutes to play the twelve rounds – this is 12 minutes per round
or 9 minutes of idle time for each player per round. However I must admit that we played
the game not quite to the rules as we accidentally did not place the turn cards face up and
therefore it was not possible for us to precisely plan ahead for the next round. This
would have provided the idle players with some food for thought but might also have
increased the average turn duration of the active player as this additional bit of
information must be taken into account as well when executing one’s turn.

View/add comments here

If idle time doesn’t bother you too much and if you like strategy games based on
tile placing “Magna Grecia” is definitely to be recommended – not as a family
game but as a game for serious gamers.

Westpark Gamers score: 7.0

Aaron Haag

01-05-2003

Forget the Native-American theme (which is a nice flavour, but not in any way necessary
for the game)- this plays like a kind of 3D-boardgame-Tetris (remember the good
ol’days?).

A square board is divided into 4 smaller squares, surrounded by a track for the
“shaman”, who is in fact a fancily named scoring pawn. Another board is purely
for scoring (slightly confusing, as it uses wild colors, and the direction of the track
is inside out. Actually it happens easily that you move the pawn in the wrong direction,
and not all the spaces are numbered, so you might not realize your mistake!).

Each player owns 4 ½ double blocks of “3D-Tetris blocks” (more with less than
4 players), one in her/his own color, another in a “neutral” color. Together
these two build a “pair” which form a perfect cube, and you can only
“open” a new block after you have finished the old one. This means that you
have to take turns playing your own and the neutral color.

The blocks themselves are all the same, each the exact half of a cube. They can be
placed on the ground of the board, or atop each other. But no “Villa Paletti”
or “Bausack” shenanigans here, this isn’t a dexterity game! Each placed
piece has to rest completely on 3 sides, so there can never be any
“overhanging” parts. This limits the choice of playable spaces somewhat, a
variety of forms could have made the game more interesting, but also even more intense.
Even in this simple form one can spend quite a while thinking about the best placement.

The basic idea of the game is this: Each player first plays a piece, THEN moves the
shaman 1-4 spaces. The shaman always looks down the row where he is placed after
movement, towards the middle of the board. Each color he sees is NEGATIVE for the player,
the higher it is when seen the worse. Seeing a first level color gives 1 negative point,
2nd level 2, etc.. As the game follows the three dimensional laws of obstruction the
shaman can only see one color per level, the others will be obstructed.

When the shaman ends his move on the exact corner space of the surrounding
track, he looks at the “pueblo” from ABOVE, but only at one of the 4
corresponding squares. Now each color space gives 1 negative point for the respective
player.

And that’s it -after all players have played all their pieces, the shaman makes his
final (and most deadly) round – now EACH square of the surrounding track is counted
(takes quite a while), so the final position of the pieces is of utmost importance.

It is obvious that this is an advanced game of hide and seek: You want to play your
color pieces in a way which makes them “invisible” by hiding them behind other
or neutral pieces – more difficult than it sounds!

Also the present position of the shaman has to be taken into account – If you place a
prominent colored piece close to the future spaces of the shaman’s movement, you can
bet your tipi on the fact that other players will make use of this and give you lots of
negative points.

The problem is that this can not always be avoided….

This is the basic game, easy, but challenging enough. We were of course foolish enough
to try the “professional” version, which brings two new rules to the game.

First: now there are “holy” spaces, designated by 1-4 counters, which can
never be used for building upon. This limits the building option severely, and makes for
a high rise pueblo with noticeably higher negative scores, as there are fewer
possibilities to hide.

Second: Two times in the game, there is bidding (with negative points) for the turn
order, highest bidder selects first. Usually you want to go earlier, so your pieces have
a better chance of being built upon and thus being hidden later on.

I personally like the second option with the bidding, the first option simply heightens
the hidden luck element in the game – the movement of the shaman! With the limited
building option you will be forced to take risks with your building, if the other players
now conspire against you (and they often will!), you will lose many more points than in
the basic version. Also, the reduced space actually limits your playing possibilities
severely, so having more options in the basic game is actually the TRUE professional
version. Strange that the game designer didn’t reflect on that…The corner
spaces are also now totally unimportant, as this kind of scoring will now be much less
effective in comparison to the high-rise scoring.

But our opinions differ on that, Walter preferred the “advanced” version, but
than he hasn’t played the basic version. I would certainly only play without holy
spaces but with turn bidding if I ever replay this game.

All in all this is a very decent offering – The game is abstract without being dry, the
building element is fun, and the game is easily explained without lacking tactical depth.
It would also certainly appeal to non-gamers, and family gamers.

I could have imagined a more interesting game with different building parts, but that
might have been a cost decision – more forms for the plastic pieces would have cost more.
Also the game might get old more quickly than other games with replays, I’m pretty
sure that there is only “one right way” to play, and once you have found that,
it becomes repetitive.

View/add comments here

Decide for yourself and have fun building your very own plastic politically correct
pueblo!

Westpark Gamers score: 6.75

Moritz Eggert

30-4-2003

Jede Runde ist man also vor einem kleinen Dilemma, das manchmal wie eine Rätselaufgabe
scheint (“wenn ich mit diesen Einheiten das Feld erobere, erobere ich gleich danach
mit den anderen Einheiten dasselbe Feld noch mal, woraufhin ich dann wiederum mit den
eigenen Einheiten….”). Am Ende entscheidet aber weniger das Glück beim Ziehen
(erstaunlicherweise) sondern eine komplexe Gruppendynamik, wer aufs Siegertreppchen
kommt.

In diesem Spiel dominierte Hans von Anfang an durch eine brilliante Anfangskombination,
ganz zum Schluss konnte aber Andrea ihn noch um ein paar Punkte überholen. Thomas meinte
nur: Das müssen wir noch mal spielen! Und sprach damit der Gruppe aus der Seele (was auch
die gestiegene Punktwertung dieses Spiels erklärt).

Strategie-Tipps zum Spiel gibt’s hier.

Westpark-Wertung: 7.5

Westpark-Wertung: 7.73

Moritz packte mal wieder eine Neuerwerbung aus, und mit der ihn auszeichnenden Genialität
ging er daran, uns die englischen Spielregeln aus dem Stegreif heraus in verständliches
Deutsch zu übersetzen. Bei den üblichen WPG-Rückfragen zu Regel-Details musste er leider
immer passen, da er sich erst selbst durch die Beschreibungen hindurchkämpfen musste, und
die Antworten selbst noch gar nicht kannte. Nach 20 Minuten waren wir durch die vier
Druckseiten Regelwerk hindurchgekommen und hatten eine vage Vorstellung davon, was uns
jetzt erwartete.

In einer amerikanischen Großstadtszenerie (aus welchem Jahrzehnt auch immer) wird die
ungebrochene Dominanz der Verbrechersyndikate nachgespielt: alle Mitspieler sind
Gangster; jeder muss seine Beute, ausgedrückt als Geldsumme, vom Ort seines Verbrechens
bis zu seinem Unterschlupf transportieren. Jeder zieht zufällig eine Karte, auf dem die
Lage seines Unterschlupfes vorgegeben ist. Das ist der Zielort. Jeder zieht zufällig drei
weitere Karten, auf denen die möglichen Positionen seines Verbrechens eingetragen sind.
Eine davon darf er als Startposition für seinen Auftrag auswählen. Natürlich sollte er
diejenige auswählen, die am günstigsten zu seinem Ziel liegt. Für den Transport der Beute
bekommt jeder ein Fahrzeug, mit dem er sich für alle sichtbar auf den Straßen des
Stadtplans vorwärts bewegt. Maximal zehn Felder pro Zug.

Reihum abwechselnd spielt jeweils einer der Mitspieler den Polizeikommissar und ist
damit Chef über eine Flotte von zehn Polizeieinsatzfahrzeugen, mit denen er die Gangster
am Einfahren der Beute hindern soll. Jedes Polizeifahrzeug darf sich pro Zug um acht
Felder bewegen. Die Gangster bekommen also in bezug auf die Reichweite ihrer Fahrzeuge
einen kleinen Vorteil, dafür liegt der Vorteil in bezug auf Masse klar auf Seiten der
Polizei.

Allerdings ist ein einzelnes Polizeifahrzeug
noch kein Hindernis für einen Kriminellen, er kann ohne jegliche Einschränkung daran
vorbeifahren. Erst zwei Polizeiautos, auf einem einzigen Feld übereinander
gestapelt, bilden eine Sperre, die nicht passiert werden darf. Um einen Gangster
aber ganz unschädlich zu machen, bedarf es schon vier Polizeifahrzeuge, die bis in
unmittelbare Nähe des Betroffenen vorrücken müssen. Da tut sich ein Gesetzeshüter
schon schwer, alle Verbrecher zur Strecke zu bringen. Kurz gesagt, durchschnittlich
drei Viertel der Kriminellen können ihre Beute ungehindert nach Hause bringen.

Wen es aber erwischen soll, das hängt zum einen von der Ausgangslage ab, die war ja mehr
oder weniger zufällig über das Stadtgebiet plaziert ist, zum anderen aber auch von den
persönlichen Beziehungen zur Polizei: diese ist nämlich bestechlich. Vor jeder Runde kann
jeder Gangster einen Betrag spendieren, mit dem er sich das Wohlwollen des Gendarmen
erkaufen kann. Damit kann sich der Wachtmeister darüber hinwegtrösten, dass er in dieser
Runde mittels Verbrechen keinen Gewinn erzielen kann. Leben und leben lassen. Eine
Garatie für Straffreiheit ist die Bestechung aber nicht. Soweit klingt alles gut und das
Spiel scheint vernünftig. Überdurchschnittliche Bewertung.

Jetzt aber kommt der Knackpunkt.

Die Fahrstrecke, die ein jeder Gangster vom Tatort bis zu seinem Unterschlupf
zurücklegen muss, ist von der Länge und von der Stadtlage rein zufällig. Wenn man die
richtigen Karten gezogen hat, muss man gerade mal drei Felder weiter ziehen und ist nach
seinem ersten Zug bereits zuhause. Wenn man Pech hat, muss man quer durch die Stadt
fahren, und hat evtl. keine Chance gegen zehn Polizeifahrzeuge. Die Beute, die ein jeder
als Siegesprämie einsteckt, ist auch zufällig. Wer Glück hat, bekommt für seine
unbehinderte 3-Felder-Fahrt 25.000 Dollar, wer Pech hat, kämpft um den zehnten Teil
dieser Summe gegen den gesamten Polizeiapparat in der Innenstadt. Was hat sich der Autor
bei diesem Prinzip gedacht?

Damit das ganze aber nicht so offensichtlich unlogisch über die Bühne geht, hat jeder
Spieler noch zwei Ereigniskarten, mit denen er das Ergebnis der Beutezüge beeinflussen
kann. Z.B. kann er kostenlos aus dem Gefängnis freikommen, falls ihn die Polizei erwischt
haben sollte. Dies ist mindestens 1.000 Dollar wert, aber nur, wenn man im Gefängnis
gelandet ist. Oder er darf ein Polizeiauto aus dem Weg räumen. Das kann etwas wert sein,
wenn einem die Polizei dicht auf den Fersen ist. Für die Mehrheit der erfolgreichen
Verbrecher bringt diese Karte aber nichts. Nach einer Super-Karte aber kassiert man am
Ende der Runde die Beute eines Mitspielers, die dieser gerade sicher nach Hause gebracht
hat. Das kann dann schon 25.000 Dollar wert sein. Und den überraschten Mitspieler kostet
es auch nochmal 25.000 Dollar, macht insgesamt 50.000 Dollar Unterschied, oder? Das ist
ca. zehn Prozent der insgesamt zur Verfügung stehenden Geldsumme oder die Gesamtausbeute
von sieben Runden biederer Kriminalität!

Macht es Sinn, einem mitspielenden Gangster, der sich vielleicht durch ein geschicktes
Täuschungsmanöver erfolgreich zu seinem Unterschlupf durchgekämpft hat, die verdiente
Beute abnehmen zu dürfen, nur weil man zufällig die richtige Ereigniskarte auf der Hand
hat? Und weil der Gegenspieler nicht zufällig eine Karte gezogen hat, mit der er dieses
Hijacking abwehren kann? Ist das nicht ziemlich frustrierend für einen von beiden? Meint
der Spieleautor wirklich, dass allein unberechenbares Chaos eine gute Spielidee abgibt?

Hier geht es um die prinzipielle Frage, warum wir spielen und welches für jeden
Mitspieler der Erwartungshorizont eines Spielabends ist. Ich sehe das unverzichtbar so:

Wenn ich ein kluges Spiel spiele, dann möchte ich für mich Vorteile sehen, wenn ich
klüger bin als die anderen. Bei einem Gedächtnisspiel möchte ich aus meinem Gedächtnis
Kapital schlagen, bei einem Verhandlungsspiel aus meinem Diplomatiegeschick, bei einem
reinen Glücksspiel aus Fortunas Begünstigung und bei einem Kampfspiel aus meiner
Kampferfahrung, aus meinem Löwenmut oder aus meiner Fähigkeit zu taktischem Jammern. Wann
immer ich mich auf ein Spiel einlasse, möchte ich von vorneherein taxieren können, ob und
welche Spielereigenschaften jetzt gefragt sind.

Was bietet diesbezüglich “The Roaring 20’s”? Ungerechtigkeit in der
Schwierigkeit der gestellten Aufgabe, Unlogik beim jeweilige erzielbaren Erlös, Willkür
in der staatlichen Verbrechensbekämpfung, Unberechenbarkeit bei den asynchronen
Einflußmöglichkeiten der Mitspieler. Was lernen wir denn aus diesem Spiel? Die Welt ist
bösartig und korrupt, Verbrechen zahlen sich in der Regel aus, Planung und Geschick
zeitigen keinerlei Früchte und die Polizei ist immer auf der Seite der größeren
Dollarbeträge.

Weil wir im Formum der
WPG nun mal gerade dieses Thema diskutieren: Dieses Spiel ist in höchstem Grade
“politically incorrect”. Auch weil der Autor in der begleitenden Beschreibung
zur jeweiligen Aufgabenstellung bedenkenlos zu jeglicher Art von Einbruch- und
Diebstahls-Deliken vorgibt und zynisch dazu auffordert, dabei das Wachpersonal umzulegen
oder die Konkurrenten aufzuhängen.

View/add comments here

Nach anderthalb Runden Spiel verloren wir die Lust und brachen ohne Einspruch eines
einzigen Spielers ab. Nur Moritz bedauerte, dass seine Neuerwerbung keinen Blumentopf
gewinnen konnte.

Die Westpark-Gamers vergaben die mäßige Wertungsnote von 2,5.

Walter Sorger, 25.4.2003

Some tips for winning strategies

Of course “Tal der Mammuts” is not a clear-cut strategy game. Luck plays a
huge factor in being successful in building a huge and prosperous tribe. Many an event
card can ruin your best laid plans. But because there are some wargame elements in this
game (very light ones, by the way), some tested strategies which work in games of this
kind will better your chances in surviving the stone-age battle. And if you are already
dependent on luck, why not better your chances by playing well?

1) Choosing your starting space

This might well decide if you win or lose, so it is a decision you should not make
lightly. Many factors have to be taken into account. Of course it is preferable to be as
far away of other players as possible (but see “my best friend is my
neighbour” below), so spaces close to the rim of the board are more interesting
than central ones, where everybody will be your enemy. You should always choose a plain
hex as a starting space, chances are good it will see a crop if you use the initial
planting rule. Later in the game it will be much more difficult to see your crop grow,
actually I’ve yet to see a game with many high-yielding crops, it just
doesn’t happen. Food is MOST IMPORTANT (see below), so use the chance.The actual
rim spaces are not good, this is were animals will appear, and they WILL appear. With 4
animals drawn each round (and many more through event cards) it is nearly certain that at
some point they will appear in your rim village and trample your crop. On the other hand
you want to be close to the animals, so you can hunt them. So I would suggest a space
which is close to the rim, but not directly at the rim. If you play with the
(recommended) fire rule, you might want to be close to the volcano as well (but not
necessarily directly next to it). Being close to a river is a two-edged sword –
your village should not be far away from river spaces, so you can send your people
foraging, but being next to the river has a 33.3% chance that your village will be
destroyed at some point in the game. But at some point a village of yours will be
destroyed by SOMETHING anyway, it might as well be this one- after you milked it of
it’s benefits.

If you take all these factors in account, there will be VERY FEW spaces that are
interesting on the board. If you can, take one of them, most likely they will be taken
already.

If you have to place a village close to another player, make sure that your direct
neighbour is a good friend (this game has many “Diplomacy” elements). Be good
to your neighbour, never attack him (only if it is necessary for YOUR victory, at the end
of the game). You might even consider leaving him the one or other space you desire for
harvest or hunting. But see below…..

2) “My best friend is my neighbour”

Oh yes, your neighbour is your best ally. Be soooo
good to him. He wants the space closer to the center of the board? Well, let him
have it! It simply means that your enemies will have to attack his units first
before they get to you! Your neighbour is your “wonder wall” who
protects your crop and your villages. You might lose a man or two to starvation
because you leave him the better spaces. Look vulnerable, just not too much. Wait
for the right moment. Attack your former friend when he is the most exposed.
Isn’t this game mean?

But seriously, the real reason for being friendly to your neighbour is that waging a war
early on in the game can mean certain defeat. I have often seen grudge battles fought
with masses of warriors (nyah, nyah, you abducted my lonely woman, nyah, nyah, so I know
eradicate your village). Very often these battles will be fought against bad odds,
thereby risking extinction of your tribe. You have so little units, so little resources,
that any war which doesn’t possibly bring you INSTANT victory is silly. A skirmish
here and there (see “food”) doesn’t hurt, but don’t overdo it. Be
weaker than the leader, but stay much stronger than the weakest, and you will fare well
for your “ end move” (again, see below)

3) The scourge of the event cards

“Das Tal der Mammuts” has horribly devastating event cards. There are so
many ways to kill units, drown them, raze them by fire, bury them under stones, that
there simply is no way to avoid them. You WILL suffer, one way or the other. But if your
micromanagement of cards and manpower is ok, your chances of survival will rise.

Some basic things to ponder about:

1. Keep those strong combat cards. The various booster cards for combat are the most
   valuable cards in the game. Keep them for the moments when the going gets tough – if you
   have one or two for the endgame, even better! Don’t waste them on skirmishes or
   grudge combats!
2. USE the cards that devastate your enemies, they will do the same to you. But leave
   your CLOSE neighbour(s) alone!
3. The “canoe” card that lets you cross rivers is better used as a defense
   against the flood, if you have an exposed village. Many other cards have defensive and
   offensive qualities, the defensive are the ones to look out for!

4) Gang up on the animals… or don’t…

Sometimes it looks wise to have as many warriors as possible attack that mammoth, while
leaving the bear grazing next to it in peace.

If there is no other animal around, the gang tactic is of course good, but if you can
reach more animals in one turn, it is actually wiser to distribute your attacks to raise
your chances. The combat system is unforgiving, and even a big majority can lose a fight
if the dice roll the wrong way. Why not try your luck?

Distributing is good – see it that way: If you lose one of these battles, you only
lose one or two warriors – AND YOU HAVE TWO MOUTHS LESS TO FEED. You might even
risk them on purpose – if they are successful they have “earned their meal”,
and the whole tribe will profit, if not, these weak and feeble warriors will not endanger
your food resources anymore. This truly is “survival of the fittest”!

5) Food – the overlooked problem

The game is most realistic in one point – winter is unforgiving and hard. Most
players, especially in games with larger groups of people, underestimate the scarcity of
food in winter. Having your people die of starvation is never elegant – these are
wasted opportunities. They better had killed something before (or given birth, which is
much, much more important than killing things – this is a moral game after all!).

It is possible to calculate roughly how much food you will probably get, so you can
pretty much calculate how many of your tribe might die. If you begin the winter with only
4 food you’re in for many, many deaths. Better have them attack a strategic hex
before they die anyway, don’t you think? You might even launch a stupid attack that
will most probably fail miserably on purpose. It makes you look weaker for the moment,
and you get rid of these hungry mouths. And if you DO suceed – even better! Just
don’t overdo it – you want to have a considerable portion of your tribe
survive for the next summer round. The earlier you send your warriors on suicide missions
the better, they save more lives if they die early in the season, as strange as that
sounds.

6) The end move

This game never lasts too long – I guess an average playing time is two years
(game time, not REAL time, in case the casual reader wonders). When players have 2
villages and enough people the end move can happen any turn, and will happen. The player
who is strong but vulnerable WILL be attacked at this point, and might have to forfeit a
victory after such an attack. As in many games that mix “economics” and war,
neither being the most aggressive attacker nor being the most busy defender will be good
for winning the game.

Set up your final move carefully – Try to be behind in villages so you don’t
have to move first and then suffer the consequences with all sorts of nasty cards and
moves played against you. If possible an ideal end move could look like this: You have 2
villages that are well defended, because they are in reach of other players. Sneakily you
move two “couples” (perhaps a “gay” couple among them, even
sneakier!) in far away places in which nobody would usually build villages, like volcano
spaces or rim spaces. It is important that other players can NOT reach these spaces in
one move. They might be on to you immediately, but now all they can do is attack your
well defended cities (for which you have hoarded combat cards, hehe) in the next round,
if you survive, you’ll win!. If they get TWO moves against you, the far away
villages will not have much hope, but if you moved last or second to last in the round
BEFORE the final round this won’t happen. If your neighbour still loves you, s/he
might actually be in the way of the attackers as well, but this is rare, because then
s/he can also attack YOU!

View/add comments here

Nothing is certain in the “Valley of the Mammoths”, and especially not
victory, but following these guidelines will certainly better your chances the next time
you step into this cursed but strangely endearing valley.

And don’t ask me about the best strategy to get “the fire” if
you’re not close to the volcano – there isn’t one!

Have fun!

Moritz Eggert, 26.4.2003

Once again Moritz unwrapped a new
acquisition, and with his own special talent he began to translate the rules of the
game from English into understandable German off the cuff. Unfortunately he did not
know the answers to the usual detailed WPG questions about the rules and had himself
to struggle through the description. After 20 minutes we had all made our way
through the four printed pages of rules and had a vague notion of what was in store
for us.

The game is set in an American city – the decade is of no great consequence – where crime
syndicates are in full control. All the players are crime bosses; each one must transport
his loot, expressed as a sum of money, from the scene of the crime to his own hideout.
Each player draws a card at random, which gives the site of his hideout: this is his
destination. Each one draws three more cards, which give the possible locations for his
crime. He can choose which one of these is the starting point for his assignment. He
should of course choose the one most convenient for his destination.

Each player has a car to transport the haul: he can drive this across the map of the
city in full view of all the others, with a maximum of ten squares per move.

Each player in turn takes over the role of Police Chief and is thus in charge of a fleet
of ten police cars with which he should prevent the mobsters from bringing home their
loot. Each police car can move up to eight squares in one turn. The mobsters thus have a
small advantage regarding how far their vehicles can travel, whereas the police clearly
have the weight of numbers on their side.

Admittedly one police car alone does not pose
a problem to a criminal: he can drive past it without any restrictions. It takes two
police cars, piled up together on one single square, to create a barrier which can
not be passed. To put a mobster completely out of action requires as many as four
police cars which have to be moved to the area immediately surrounding their target.
The law enforcers thus have a very hard time in putting all the criminals out of
action. In short, three quarters of the mobsters will on average be able to bring
home the loot without problems.

But which ones are going to get caught? That depends on the one hand on the starting
positions, which are scattered across the area of the city more or less at random, but on
the other hand also on the personal relationships with the police, who are not above
taking bribes. Before each round, each crime boss can donate an amount with which he can
obtain the goodwill of the police force. This provides the Police Chief with some
consolation for the fact that he will not be making a profit from crime in this round –
live and let live. This bribery does not however provide a guarantee of freedom from
punishment.

So far, so good: it sounds like a reasonable game, worth a rating above average.

But we now come to the decisive point.

The journey, which each mobster must drive from the location of the crime to his hideout,
is completely random, in terms both of length and of the circumstances in the city.
Someone who has drawn the right cards needs only to move along three squares and has
reached home on his first move. Someone who is less fortunate must drive right across the
city and has quite possibly no chance against ten police cars. The reward earned for
success, that is, the value of the spoils, is also random. With good luck an untroubled
3-square journey can bring in 25,000 dollars; but with bad luck a player must struggle
against the entire police force of the city for the sake of a sum only one tenth as big.
What was the author thinking of when he dreamed up this principle?

In order to cover up to some extent the lack of logic in these developments, each player
also has two event cards, with which he can influence the result of the plundering. For
example, you can get out of jail for free, should you have been caught by the police.
This is worth at least 1000 dollars, but only if you have landed in jail. Or you can
clear a police car out of your way. This is worth something, should the police be hot on
your heels, but the card is worthless for the majority of successful criminals. However,
with the aid of a super-card at the end of the round you can carry off from an opponent
his complete booty which he has just brought home safely. This can be worth as much as
25,000 dollars. This means the rival who has been taken by surprise also loses 25,000
dollars, making a net difference of 50,000 dollars. This is around ten percent of the
total amount of money in circulation, or the entire proceeds from seven rounds of average
criminal activity!

Does it make sense to be able to take a hard-earned prize away form a competing crime
boss – a haul which perhaps he has successfully brought home by means of clever deceptive
tactics – just because one happens to hold the right event card? And also because the
opponent has not happened to draw a card with which he can ward off this hijack?
Isn’t this completely frustrating for one of the two of them? Does the author of the
game really think that unpredictable chaos can on its own generate a good basis for a
game?

These are questions of principle: what are the reasons for playing and what expectations
does each player have when he sits down for an evening of games? I have my own decided
point of view on this, which goes as follows:

If I am playing a game of intelligence, then, should I act more intelligently than the
others, I want to see an advantage. In a memory game I want to be able to make capital
out of my powers of memory, in a game of negotiations out of my diplomatic skills, in a
game of pure luck out of the favour of fortune, and in a game of combat out of my
experience in battle, my lion-hearted bravery or my aptitude for tactical lamentation.
Whenever I decide to play a game, I want before I start to be able to assess which of my
qualities as a player are going to be in demand.

What does “The Roaring 20’s” have to offer in this respect? Unfairness in
the difficulty of the task to be accomplished, a lack of logic in the respective prizes
to be won, randomness in the fight against crime on behalf of the authorities,
unpredictability in the asynchronous way one’s competitors can have an effect. What
does the game teach us? That the world is malicious and corrupt, that crime usually does
pay, that neither planning nor skill are rewarded, and that the police are always on the
side of those who have the most dollars.

As we now happen to be discussing this subject in the forum of the
WPG: this game is “politically incorrect” in the extreme – this is also
apparent in the accompanying description of the various assignments to be undertaken, in
the way the author without any scruples suggests all kinds of crimes of burglary and
theft, and cynically encourages bumping off security guards or stringing up one’s
rivals.

View/add comments here

After one and a half rounds of play we had had enough and called it a day without a
single objection. Only Moritz had regrets: he would not be winning any prizes with his
new acquisition.

The rating awarded by the Westpark-Gamers was a mediocre 2.5.

Walter Sorger, 25.4.2003 (translated by Mike Eggleton)

Some tips for winning strategies

Of course “Tal der Mammuts” is not a clear-cut strategy game. Luck plays a
huge factor in being successful in building a huge and prosperous tribe. Many an event
card can ruin your best laid plans. But because there are some wargame elements in this
game (very light ones, by the way), some tested strategies which work in games of this
kind will better your chances in surviving the stone-age battle. And if you are already
dependent on luck, why not better your chances by playing well?

1) Choosing your starting space

This might well decide if you win or lose, so it is a decision you should not make
lightly. Many factors have to be taken into account. Of course it is preferable to be as
far away of other players as possible (but see “my best friend is my
neighbour” below), so spaces close to the rim of the board are more interesting
than central ones, where everybody will be your enemy. You should always choose a plain
hex as a starting space, chances are good it will see a crop if you use the initial
planting rule. Later in the game it will be much more difficult to see your crop grow,
actually I’ve yet to see a game with many high-yielding crops, it just
doesn’t happen. Food is MOST IMPORTANT (see below), so use the chance.The actual
rim spaces are not good, this is were animals will appear, and they WILL appear. With 4
animals drawn each round (and many more through event cards) it is nearly certain that at
some point they will appear in your rim village and trample your crop. On the other hand
you want to be close to the animals, so you can hunt them. So I would suggest a space
which is close to the rim, but not directly at the rim. If you play with the
(recommended) fire rule, you might want to be close to the volcano as well (but not
necessarily directly next to it). Being close to a river is a two-edged sword –
your village should not be far away from river spaces, so you can send your people
foraging, but being next to the river has a 33.3% chance that your village will be
destroyed at some point in the game. But at some point a village of yours will be
destroyed by SOMETHING anyway, it might as well be this one- after you milked it of
it’s benefits.

If you take all these factors in account, there will be VERY FEW spaces that are
interesting on the board. If you can, take one of them, most likely they will be taken
already.

If you have to place a village close to another player, make sure that your direct
neighbour is a good friend (this game has many “Diplomacy” elements). Be good
to your neighbour, never attack him (only if it is necessary for YOUR victory, at the end
of the game). You might even consider leaving him the one or other space you desire for
harvest or hunting. But see below…..

2) “My best friend is my neighbour”

Oh yes, your neighbour is your best ally. Be soooo
good to him. He wants the space closer to the center of the board? Well, let him
have it! It simply means that your enemies will have to attack his units first
before they get to you! Your neighbour is your “wonder wall” who
protects your crop and your villages. You might lose a man or two to starvation
because you leave him the better spaces. Look vulnerable, just not too much. Wait
for the right moment. Attack your former friend when he is the most exposed.
Isn’t this game mean?

But seriously, the real reason for being friendly to your neighbour is that waging a war
early on in the game can mean certain defeat. I have often seen grudge battles fought
with masses of warriors (nyah, nyah, you abducted my lonely woman, nyah, nyah, so I know
eradicate your village). Very often these battles will be fought against bad odds,
thereby risking extinction of your tribe. You have so little units, so little resources,
that any war which doesn’t possibly bring you INSTANT victory is silly. A skirmish
here and there (see “food”) doesn’t hurt, but don’t overdo it. Be
weaker than the leader, but stay much stronger than the weakest, and you will fare well
for your “ end move” (again, see below)

3) The scourge of the event cards

“Das Tal der Mammuts” has horribly devastating event cards. There are so
many ways to kill units, drown them, raze them by fire, bury them under stones, that
there simply is no way to avoid them. You WILL suffer, one way or the other. But if your
micromanagement of cards and manpower is ok, your chances of survival will rise.

Some basic things to ponder about:

1. Keep those strong combat cards. The various booster cards for combat are the most
   valuable cards in the game. Keep them for the moments when the going gets tough – if you
   have one or two for the endgame, even better! Don’t waste them on skirmishes or
   grudge combats!
2. USE the cards that devastate your enemies, they will do the same to you. But leave
   your CLOSE neighbour(s) alone!
3. The “canoe” card that lets you cross rivers is better used as a defense
   against the flood, if you have an exposed village. Many other cards have defensive and
   offensive qualities, the defensive are the ones to look out for!

4) Gang up on the animals… or don’t…

Sometimes it looks wise to have as many warriors as possible attack that mammoth, while
leaving the bear grazing next to it in peace.

If there is no other animal around, the gang tactic is of course good, but if you can
reach more animals in one turn, it is actually wiser to distribute your attacks to raise
your chances. The combat system is unforgiving, and even a big majority can lose a fight
if the dice roll the wrong way. Why not try your luck?

Distributing is good – see it that way: If you lose one of these battles, you only
lose one or two warriors – AND YOU HAVE TWO MOUTHS LESS TO FEED. You might even
risk them on purpose – if they are successful they have “earned their meal”,
and the whole tribe will profit, if not, these weak and feeble warriors will not endanger
your food resources anymore. This truly is “survival of the fittest”!

5) Food – the overlooked problem

The game is most realistic in one point – winter is unforgiving and hard. Most
players, especially in games with larger groups of people, underestimate the scarcity of
food in winter. Having your people die of starvation is never elegant – these are
wasted opportunities. They better had killed something before (or given birth, which is
much, much more important than killing things – this is a moral game after all!).

It is possible to calculate roughly how much food you will probably get, so you can
pretty much calculate how many of your tribe might die. If you begin the winter with only
4 food you’re in for many, many deaths. Better have them attack a strategic hex
before they die anyway, don’t you think? You might even launch a stupid attack that
will most probably fail miserably on purpose. It makes you look weaker for the moment,
and you get rid of these hungry mouths. And if you DO suceed – even better! Just
don’t overdo it – you want to have a considerable portion of your tribe
survive for the next summer round. The earlier you send your warriors on suicide missions
the better, they save more lives if they die early in the season, as strange as that
sounds.

6) The end move

This game never lasts too long – I guess an average playing time is two years
(game time, not REAL time, in case the casual reader wonders). When players have 2
villages and enough people the end move can happen any turn, and will happen. The player
who is strong but vulnerable WILL be attacked at this point, and might have to forfeit a
victory after such an attack. As in many games that mix “economics” and war,
neither being the most aggressive attacker nor being the most busy defender will be good
for winning the game.

Set up your final move carefully – Try to be behind in villages so you don’t
have to move first and then suffer the consequences with all sorts of nasty cards and
moves played against you. If possible an ideal end move could look like this: You have 2
villages that are well defended, because they are in reach of other players. Sneakily you
move two “couples” (perhaps a “gay” couple among them, even
sneakier!) in far away places in which nobody would usually build villages, like volcano
spaces or rim spaces. It is important that other players can NOT reach these spaces in
one move. They might be on to you immediately, but now all they can do is attack your
well defended cities (for which you have hoarded combat cards, hehe) in the next round,
if you survive, you’ll win!. If they get TWO moves against you, the far away
villages will not have much hope, but if you moved last or second to last in the round
BEFORE the final round this won’t happen. If your neighbour still loves you, s/he
might actually be in the way of the attackers as well, but this is rare, because then
s/he can also attack YOU!

View/add comments here

Nothing is certain in the “Valley of the Mammoths”, and especially not
victory, but following these guidelines will certainly better your chances the next time
you step into this cursed but strangely endearing valley.

And don’t ask me about the best strategy to get “the fire” if
you’re not close to the volcano – there isn’t one!

Have fun!

Moritz Eggert, 26.4.2003

Moritz packte mal wieder eine Neuerwerbung aus, und mit der ihn auszeichnenden Genialität
ging er daran, uns die englischen Spielregeln aus dem Stegreif heraus in verständliches
Deutsch zu übersetzen. Bei den üblichen WPG-Rückfragen zu Regel-Details musste er leider
immer passen, da er sich erst selbst durch die Beschreibungen hindurchkämpfen musste, und
die Antworten selbst noch gar nicht kannte. Nach 20 Minuten waren wir durch die vier
Druckseiten Regelwerk hindurchgekommen und hatten eine vage Vorstellung davon, was uns
jetzt erwartete.

In einer amerikanischen Großstadtszenerie (aus welchem Jahrzehnt auch immer) wird die
ungebrochene Dominanz der Verbrechersyndikate nachgespielt: alle Mitspieler sind
Gangster; jeder muss seine Beute, ausgedrückt als Geldsumme, vom Ort seines Verbrechens
bis zu seinem Unterschlupf transportieren. Jeder zieht zufällig eine Karte, auf dem die
Lage seines Unterschlupfes vorgegeben ist. Das ist der Zielort. Jeder zieht zufällig drei
weitere Karten, auf denen die möglichen Positionen seines Verbrechens eingetragen sind.
Eine davon darf er als Startposition für seinen Auftrag auswählen. Natürlich sollte er
diejenige auswählen, die am günstigsten zu seinem Ziel liegt. Für den Transport der Beute
bekommt jeder ein Fahrzeug, mit dem er sich für alle sichtbar auf den Straßen des
Stadtplans vorwärts bewegt. Maximal zehn Felder pro Zug.

Reihum abwechselnd spielt jeweils einer der Mitspieler den Polizeikommissar und ist
damit Chef über eine Flotte von zehn Polizeieinsatzfahrzeugen, mit denen er die Gangster
am Einfahren der Beute hindern soll. Jedes Polizeifahrzeug darf sich pro Zug um acht
Felder bewegen. Die Gangster bekommen also in bezug auf die Reichweite ihrer Fahrzeuge
einen kleinen Vorteil, dafür liegt der Vorteil in bezug auf Masse klar auf Seiten der
Polizei.

Allerdings ist ein einzelnes Polizeifahrzeug
noch kein Hindernis für einen Kriminellen, er kann ohne jegliche Einschränkung daran
vorbeifahren. Erst zwei Polizeiautos, auf einem einzigen Feld übereinander
gestapelt, bilden eine Sperre, die nicht passiert werden darf. Um einen Gangster
aber ganz unschädlich zu machen, bedarf es schon vier Polizeifahrzeuge, die bis in
unmittelbare Nähe des Betroffenen vorrücken müssen. Da tut sich ein Gesetzeshüter
schon schwer, alle Verbrecher zur Strecke zu bringen. Kurz gesagt, durchschnittlich
drei Viertel der Kriminellen können ihre Beute ungehindert nach Hause bringen.

Wen es aber erwischen soll, das hängt zum einen von der Ausgangslage ab, die war ja mehr
oder weniger zufällig über das Stadtgebiet plaziert ist, zum anderen aber auch von den
persönlichen Beziehungen zur Polizei: diese ist nämlich bestechlich. Vor jeder Runde kann
jeder Gangster einen Betrag spendieren, mit dem er sich das Wohlwollen des Gendarmen
erkaufen kann. Damit kann sich der Wachtmeister darüber hinwegtrösten, dass er in dieser
Runde mittels Verbrechen keinen Gewinn erzielen kann. Leben und leben lassen. Eine
Garatie für Straffreiheit ist die Bestechung aber nicht. Soweit klingt alles gut und das
Spiel scheint vernünftig. Überdurchschnittliche Bewertung.

Jetzt aber kommt der Knackpunkt.

Die Fahrstrecke, die ein jeder Gangster vom Tatort bis zu seinem Unterschlupf
zurücklegen muss, ist von der Länge und von der Stadtlage rein zufällig. Wenn man die
richtigen Karten gezogen hat, muss man gerade mal drei Felder weiter ziehen und ist nach
seinem ersten Zug bereits zuhause. Wenn man Pech hat, muss man quer durch die Stadt
fahren, und hat evtl. keine Chance gegen zehn Polizeifahrzeuge. Die Beute, die ein jeder
als Siegesprämie einsteckt, ist auch zufällig. Wer Glück hat, bekommt für seine
unbehinderte 3-Felder-Fahrt 25.000 Dollar, wer Pech hat, kämpft um den zehnten Teil
dieser Summe gegen den gesamten Polizeiapparat in der Innenstadt. Was hat sich der Autor
bei diesem Prinzip gedacht?

Damit das ganze aber nicht so offensichtlich unlogisch über die Bühne geht, hat jeder
Spieler noch zwei Ereigniskarten, mit denen er das Ergebnis der Beutezüge beeinflussen
kann. Z.B. kann er kostenlos aus dem Gefängnis freikommen, falls ihn die Polizei erwischt
haben sollte. Dies ist mindestens 1.000 Dollar wert, aber nur, wenn man im Gefängnis
gelandet ist. Oder er darf ein Polizeiauto aus dem Weg räumen. Das kann etwas wert sein,
wenn einem die Polizei dicht auf den Fersen ist. Für die Mehrheit der erfolgreichen
Verbrecher bringt diese Karte aber nichts. Nach einer Super-Karte aber kassiert man am
Ende der Runde die Beute eines Mitspielers, die dieser gerade sicher nach Hause gebracht
hat. Das kann dann schon 25.000 Dollar wert sein. Und den überraschten Mitspieler kostet
es auch nochmal 25.000 Dollar, macht insgesamt 50.000 Dollar Unterschied, oder? Das ist
ca. zehn Prozent der insgesamt zur Verfügung stehenden Geldsumme oder die Gesamtausbeute
von sieben Runden biederer Kriminalität!

Macht es Sinn, einem mitspielenden Gangster, der sich vielleicht durch ein geschicktes
Täuschungsmanöver erfolgreich zu seinem Unterschlupf durchgekämpft hat, die verdiente
Beute abnehmen zu dürfen, nur weil man zufällig die richtige Ereigniskarte auf der Hand
hat? Und weil der Gegenspieler nicht zufällig eine Karte gezogen hat, mit der er dieses
Hijacking abwehren kann? Ist das nicht ziemlich frustrierend für einen von beiden? Meint
der Spieleautor wirklich, dass allein unberechenbares Chaos eine gute Spielidee abgibt?

Hier geht es um die prinzipielle Frage, warum wir spielen und welches für jeden
Mitspieler der Erwartungshorizont eines Spielabends ist. Ich sehe das unverzichtbar so:

Wenn ich ein kluges Spiel spiele, dann möchte ich für mich Vorteile sehen, wenn ich
klüger bin als die anderen. Bei einem Gedächtnisspiel möchte ich aus meinem Gedächtnis
Kapital schlagen, bei einem Verhandlungsspiel aus meinem Diplomatiegeschick, bei einem
reinen Glücksspiel aus Fortunas Begünstigung und bei einem Kampfspiel aus meiner
Kampferfahrung, aus meinem Löwenmut oder aus meiner Fähigkeit zu taktischem Jammern. Wann
immer ich mich auf ein Spiel einlasse, möchte ich von vorneherein taxieren können, ob und
welche Spielereigenschaften jetzt gefragt sind.

Was bietet diesbezüglich “The Roaring 20’s”? Ungerechtigkeit in der
Schwierigkeit der gestellten Aufgabe, Unlogik beim jeweilige erzielbaren Erlös, Willkür
in der staatlichen Verbrechensbekämpfung, Unberechenbarkeit bei den asynchronen
Einflußmöglichkeiten der Mitspieler. Was lernen wir denn aus diesem Spiel? Die Welt ist
bösartig und korrupt, Verbrechen zahlen sich in der Regel aus, Planung und Geschick
zeitigen keinerlei Früchte und die Polizei ist immer auf der Seite der größeren
Dollarbeträge.

Weil wir im Formum der
WPG nun mal gerade dieses Thema diskutieren: Dieses Spiel ist in höchstem Grade
“politically incorrect”. Auch weil der Autor in der begleitenden Beschreibung
zur jeweiligen Aufgabenstellung bedenkenlos zu jeglicher Art von Einbruch- und
Diebstahls-Deliken vorgibt und zynisch dazu auffordert, dabei das Wachpersonal umzulegen
oder die Konkurrenten aufzuhängen.

View/add comments here

Nach anderthalb Runden Spiel verloren wir die Lust und brachen ohne Einspruch eines
einzigen Spielers ab. Nur Moritz bedauerte, dass seine Neuerwerbung keinen Blumentopf
gewinnen konnte.

Die Westpark-Gamers vergaben die mäßige Wertungsnote von 2,5.

Walter Sorger, 25.4.2003

Some tips for winning strategies

Of course “Tal der Mammuts” is not a clear-cut strategy game. Luck plays a
huge factor in being successful in building a huge and prosperous tribe. Many an event
card can ruin your best laid plans. But because there are some wargame elements in this
game (very light ones, by the way), some tested strategies which work in games of this
kind will better your chances in surviving the stone-age battle. And if you are already
dependent on luck, why not better your chances by playing well?

1) Choosing your starting space

This might well decide if you win or lose, so it is a decision you should not make
lightly. Many factors have to be taken into account. Of course it is preferable to be as
far away of other players as possible (but see “my best friend is my
neighbour” below), so spaces close to the rim of the board are more interesting
than central ones, where everybody will be your enemy. You should always choose a plain
hex as a starting space, chances are good it will see a crop if you use the initial
planting rule. Later in the game it will be much more difficult to see your crop grow,
actually I’ve yet to see a game with many high-yielding crops, it just
doesn’t happen. Food is MOST IMPORTANT (see below), so use the chance.The actual
rim spaces are not good, this is were animals will appear, and they WILL appear. With 4
animals drawn each round (and many more through event cards) it is nearly certain that at
some point they will appear in your rim village and trample your crop. On the other hand
you want to be close to the animals, so you can hunt them. So I would suggest a space
which is close to the rim, but not directly at the rim. If you play with the
(recommended) fire rule, you might want to be close to the volcano as well (but not
necessarily directly next to it). Being close to a river is a two-edged sword –
your village should not be far away from river spaces, so you can send your people
foraging, but being next to the river has a 33.3% chance that your village will be
destroyed at some point in the game. But at some point a village of yours will be
destroyed by SOMETHING anyway, it might as well be this one- after you milked it of
it’s benefits.

If you take all these factors in account, there will be VERY FEW spaces that are
interesting on the board. If you can, take one of them, most likely they will be taken
already.

If you have to place a village close to another player, make sure that your direct
neighbour is a good friend (this game has many “Diplomacy” elements). Be good
to your neighbour, never attack him (only if it is necessary for YOUR victory, at the end
of the game). You might even consider leaving him the one or other space you desire for
harvest or hunting. But see below…..

2) “My best friend is my neighbour”

Oh yes, your neighbour is your best ally. Be soooo
good to him. He wants the space closer to the center of the board? Well, let him
have it! It simply means that your enemies will have to attack his units first
before they get to you! Your neighbour is your “wonder wall” who
protects your crop and your villages. You might lose a man or two to starvation
because you leave him the better spaces. Look vulnerable, just not too much. Wait
for the right moment. Attack your former friend when he is the most exposed.
Isn’t this game mean?

But seriously, the real reason for being friendly to your neighbour is that waging a war
early on in the game can mean certain defeat. I have often seen grudge battles fought
with masses of warriors (nyah, nyah, you abducted my lonely woman, nyah, nyah, so I know
eradicate your village). Very often these battles will be fought against bad odds,
thereby risking extinction of your tribe. You have so little units, so little resources,
that any war which doesn’t possibly bring you INSTANT victory is silly. A skirmish
here and there (see “food”) doesn’t hurt, but don’t overdo it. Be
weaker than the leader, but stay much stronger than the weakest, and you will fare well
for your “ end move” (again, see below)

3) The scourge of the event cards

“Das Tal der Mammuts” has horribly devastating event cards. There are so
many ways to kill units, drown them, raze them by fire, bury them under stones, that
there simply is no way to avoid them. You WILL suffer, one way or the other. But if your
micromanagement of cards and manpower is ok, your chances of survival will rise.

Some basic things to ponder about:

1. Keep those strong combat cards. The various booster cards for combat are the most
   valuable cards in the game. Keep them for the moments when the going gets tough – if you
   have one or two for the endgame, even better! Don’t waste them on skirmishes or
   grudge combats!
2. USE the cards that devastate your enemies, they will do the same to you. But leave
   your CLOSE neighbour(s) alone!
3. The “canoe” card that lets you cross rivers is better used as a defense
   against the flood, if you have an exposed village. Many other cards have defensive and
   offensive qualities, the defensive are the ones to look out for!

4) Gang up on the animals… or don’t…

Sometimes it looks wise to have as many warriors as possible attack that mammoth, while
leaving the bear grazing next to it in peace.

If there is no other animal around, the gang tactic is of course good, but if you can
reach more animals in one turn, it is actually wiser to distribute your attacks to raise
your chances. The combat system is unforgiving, and even a big majority can lose a fight
if the dice roll the wrong way. Why not try your luck?

Distributing is good – see it that way: If you lose one of these battles, you only
lose one or two warriors – AND YOU HAVE TWO MOUTHS LESS TO FEED. You might even
risk them on purpose – if they are successful they have “earned their meal”,
and the whole tribe will profit, if not, these weak and feeble warriors will not endanger
your food resources anymore. This truly is “survival of the fittest”!

5) Food – the overlooked problem

The game is most realistic in one point – winter is unforgiving and hard. Most
players, especially in games with larger groups of people, underestimate the scarcity of
food in winter. Having your people die of starvation is never elegant – these are
wasted opportunities. They better had killed something before (or given birth, which is
much, much more important than killing things – this is a moral game after all!).

It is possible to calculate roughly how much food you will probably get, so you can
pretty much calculate how many of your tribe might die. If you begin the winter with only
4 food you’re in for many, many deaths. Better have them attack a strategic hex
before they die anyway, don’t you think? You might even launch a stupid attack that
will most probably fail miserably on purpose. It makes you look weaker for the moment,
and you get rid of these hungry mouths. And if you DO suceed – even better! Just
don’t overdo it – you want to have a considerable portion of your tribe
survive for the next summer round. The earlier you send your warriors on suicide missions
the better, they save more lives if they die early in the season, as strange as that
sounds.

6) The end move

This game never lasts too long – I guess an average playing time is two years
(game time, not REAL time, in case the casual reader wonders). When players have 2
villages and enough people the end move can happen any turn, and will happen. The player
who is strong but vulnerable WILL be attacked at this point, and might have to forfeit a
victory after such an attack. As in many games that mix “economics” and war,
neither being the most aggressive attacker nor being the most busy defender will be good
for winning the game.

Set up your final move carefully – Try to be behind in villages so you don’t
have to move first and then suffer the consequences with all sorts of nasty cards and
moves played against you. If possible an ideal end move could look like this: You have 2
villages that are well defended, because they are in reach of other players. Sneakily you
move two “couples” (perhaps a “gay” couple among them, even
sneakier!) in far away places in which nobody would usually build villages, like volcano
spaces or rim spaces. It is important that other players can NOT reach these spaces in
one move. They might be on to you immediately, but now all they can do is attack your
well defended cities (for which you have hoarded combat cards, hehe) in the next round,
if you survive, you’ll win!. If they get TWO moves against you, the far away
villages will not have much hope, but if you moved last or second to last in the round
BEFORE the final round this won’t happen. If your neighbour still loves you, s/he
might actually be in the way of the attackers as well, but this is rare, because then
s/he can also attack YOU!

View/add comments here

Nothing is certain in the “Valley of the Mammoths”, and especially not
victory, but following these guidelines will certainly better your chances the next time
you step into this cursed but strangely endearing valley.

And don’t ask me about the best strategy to get “the fire” if
you’re not close to the volcano – there isn’t one!

Have fun!

Moritz Eggert, 26.4.2003

Once again Moritz unwrapped a new
acquisition, and with his own special talent he began to translate the rules of the
game from English into understandable German off the cuff. Unfortunately he did not
know the answers to the usual detailed WPG questions about the rules and had himself
to struggle through the description. After 20 minutes we had all made our way
through the four printed pages of rules and had a vague notion of what was in store
for us.

The game is set in an American city – the decade is of no great consequence – where crime
syndicates are in full control. All the players are crime bosses; each one must transport
his loot, expressed as a sum of money, from the scene of the crime to his own hideout.
Each player draws a card at random, which gives the site of his hideout: this is his
destination. Each one draws three more cards, which give the possible locations for his
crime. He can choose which one of these is the starting point for his assignment. He
should of course choose the one most convenient for his destination.

Each player has a car to transport the haul: he can drive this across the map of the
city in full view of all the others, with a maximum of ten squares per move.

Each player in turn takes over the role of Police Chief and is thus in charge of a fleet
of ten police cars with which he should prevent the mobsters from bringing home their
loot. Each police car can move up to eight squares in one turn. The mobsters thus have a
small advantage regarding how far their vehicles can travel, whereas the police clearly
have the weight of numbers on their side.

Admittedly one police car alone does not pose
a problem to a criminal: he can drive past it without any restrictions. It takes two
police cars, piled up together on one single square, to create a barrier which can
not be passed. To put a mobster completely out of action requires as many as four
police cars which have to be moved to the area immediately surrounding their target.
The law enforcers thus have a very hard time in putting all the criminals out of
action. In short, three quarters of the mobsters will on average be able to bring
home the loot without problems.

But which ones are going to get caught? That depends on the one hand on the starting
positions, which are scattered across the area of the city more or less at random, but on
the other hand also on the personal relationships with the police, who are not above
taking bribes. Before each round, each crime boss can donate an amount with which he can
obtain the goodwill of the police force. This provides the Police Chief with some
consolation for the fact that he will not be making a profit from crime in this round –
live and let live. This bribery does not however provide a guarantee of freedom from
punishment.

So far, so good: it sounds like a reasonable game, worth a rating above average.

But we now come to the decisive point.

The journey, which each mobster must drive from the location of the crime to his hideout,
is completely random, in terms both of length and of the circumstances in the city.
Someone who has drawn the right cards needs only to move along three squares and has
reached home on his first move. Someone who is less fortunate must drive right across the
city and has quite possibly no chance against ten police cars. The reward earned for
success, that is, the value of the spoils, is also random. With good luck an untroubled
3-square journey can bring in 25,000 dollars; but with bad luck a player must struggle
against the entire police force of the city for the sake of a sum only one tenth as big.
What was the author thinking of when he dreamed up this principle?

In order to cover up to some extent the lack of logic in these developments, each player
also has two event cards, with which he can influence the result of the plundering. For
example, you can get out of jail for free, should you have been caught by the police.
This is worth at least 1000 dollars, but only if you have landed in jail. Or you can
clear a police car out of your way. This is worth something, should the police be hot on
your heels, but the card is worthless for the majority of successful criminals. However,
with the aid of a super-card at the end of the round you can carry off from an opponent
his complete booty which he has just brought home safely. This can be worth as much as
25,000 dollars. This means the rival who has been taken by surprise also loses 25,000
dollars, making a net difference of 50,000 dollars. This is around ten percent of the
total amount of money in circulation, or the entire proceeds from seven rounds of average
criminal activity!

Does it make sense to be able to take a hard-earned prize away form a competing crime
boss – a haul which perhaps he has successfully brought home by means of clever deceptive
tactics – just because one happens to hold the right event card? And also because the
opponent has not happened to draw a card with which he can ward off this hijack?
Isn’t this completely frustrating for one of the two of them? Does the author of the
game really think that unpredictable chaos can on its own generate a good basis for a
game?

These are questions of principle: what are the reasons for playing and what expectations
does each player have when he sits down for an evening of games? I have my own decided
point of view on this, which goes as follows:

If I am playing a game of intelligence, then, should I act more intelligently than the
others, I want to see an advantage. In a memory game I want to be able to make capital
out of my powers of memory, in a game of negotiations out of my diplomatic skills, in a
game of pure luck out of the favour of fortune, and in a game of combat out of my
experience in battle, my lion-hearted bravery or my aptitude for tactical lamentation.
Whenever I decide to play a game, I want before I start to be able to assess which of my
qualities as a player are going to be in demand.

What does “The Roaring 20’s” have to offer in this respect? Unfairness in
the difficulty of the task to be accomplished, a lack of logic in the respective prizes
to be won, randomness in the fight against crime on behalf of the authorities,
unpredictability in the asynchronous way one’s competitors can have an effect. What
does the game teach us? That the world is malicious and corrupt, that crime usually does
pay, that neither planning nor skill are rewarded, and that the police are always on the
side of those who have the most dollars.

As we now happen to be discussing this subject in the forum of the
WPG: this game is “politically incorrect” in the extreme – this is also
apparent in the accompanying description of the various assignments to be undertaken, in
the way the author without any scruples suggests all kinds of crimes of burglary and
theft, and cynically encourages bumping off security guards or stringing up one’s
rivals.

View/add comments here

After one and a half rounds of play we had had enough and called it a day without a
single objection. Only Moritz had regrets: he would not be winning any prizes with his
new acquisition.

The rating awarded by the Westpark-Gamers was a mediocre 2.5.

Walter Sorger, 25.4.2003 (translated by Mike Eggleton)

Some tips for winning strategies

Of course “Tal der Mammuts” is not a clear-cut strategy game. Luck plays a
huge factor in being successful in building a huge and prosperous tribe. Many an event
card can ruin your best laid plans. But because there are some wargame elements in this
game (very light ones, by the way), some tested strategies which work in games of this
kind will better your chances in surviving the stone-age battle. And if you are already
dependent on luck, why not better your chances by playing well?

1) Choosing your starting space

This might well decide if you win or lose, so it is a decision you should not make
lightly. Many factors have to be taken into account. Of course it is preferable to be as
far away of other players as possible (but see “my best friend is my
neighbour” below), so spaces close to the rim of the board are more interesting
than central ones, where everybody will be your enemy. You should always choose a plain
hex as a starting space, chances are good it will see a crop if you use the initial
planting rule. Later in the game it will be much more difficult to see your crop grow,
actually I’ve yet to see a game with many high-yielding crops, it just
doesn’t happen. Food is MOST IMPORTANT (see below), so use the chance.The actual
rim spaces are not good, this is were animals will appear, and they WILL appear. With 4
animals drawn each round (and many more through event cards) it is nearly certain that at
some point they will appear in your rim village and trample your crop. On the other hand
you want to be close to the animals, so you can hunt them. So I would suggest a space
which is close to the rim, but not directly at the rim. If you play with the
(recommended) fire rule, you might want to be close to the volcano as well (but not
necessarily directly next to it). Being close to a river is a two-edged sword –
your village should not be far away from river spaces, so you can send your people
foraging, but being next to the river has a 33.3% chance that your village will be
destroyed at some point in the game. But at some point a village of yours will be
destroyed by SOMETHING anyway, it might as well be this one- after you milked it of
it’s benefits.

If you take all these factors in account, there will be VERY FEW spaces that are
interesting on the board. If you can, take one of them, most likely they will be taken
already.

If you have to place a village close to another player, make sure that your direct
neighbour is a good friend (this game has many “Diplomacy” elements). Be good
to your neighbour, never attack him (only if it is necessary for YOUR victory, at the end
of the game). You might even consider leaving him the one or other space you desire for
harvest or hunting. But see below…..

2) “My best friend is my neighbour”

Oh yes, your neighbour is your best ally. Be soooo
good to him. He wants the space closer to the center of the board? Well, let him
have it! It simply means that your enemies will have to attack his units first
before they get to you! Your neighbour is your “wonder wall” who
protects your crop and your villages. You might lose a man or two to starvation
because you leave him the better spaces. Look vulnerable, just not too much. Wait
for the right moment. Attack your former friend when he is the most exposed.
Isn’t this game mean?

But seriously, the real reason for being friendly to your neighbour is that waging a war
early on in the game can mean certain defeat. I have often seen grudge battles fought
with masses of warriors (nyah, nyah, you abducted my lonely woman, nyah, nyah, so I know
eradicate your village). Very often these battles will be fought against bad odds,
thereby risking extinction of your tribe. You have so little units, so little resources,
that any war which doesn’t possibly bring you INSTANT victory is silly. A skirmish
here and there (see “food”) doesn’t hurt, but don’t overdo it. Be
weaker than the leader, but stay much stronger than the weakest, and you will fare well
for your “ end move” (again, see below)

3) The scourge of the event cards

“Das Tal der Mammuts” has horribly devastating event cards. There are so
many ways to kill units, drown them, raze them by fire, bury them under stones, that
there simply is no way to avoid them. You WILL suffer, one way or the other. But if your
micromanagement of cards and manpower is ok, your chances of survival will rise.

Some basic things to ponder about:

1. Keep those strong combat cards. The various booster cards for combat are the most
   valuable cards in the game. Keep them for the moments when the going gets tough – if you
   have one or two for the endgame, even better! Don’t waste them on skirmishes or
   grudge combats!
2. USE the cards that devastate your enemies, they will do the same to you. But leave
   your CLOSE neighbour(s) alone!
3. The “canoe” card that lets you cross rivers is better used as a defense
   against the flood, if you have an exposed village. Many other cards have defensive and
   offensive qualities, the defensive are the ones to look out for!

4) Gang up on the animals… or don’t…

Sometimes it looks wise to have as many warriors as possible attack that mammoth, while
leaving the bear grazing next to it in peace.

If there is no other animal around, the gang tactic is of course good, but if you can
reach more animals in one turn, it is actually wiser to distribute your attacks to raise
your chances. The combat system is unforgiving, and even a big majority can lose a fight
if the dice roll the wrong way. Why not try your luck?

Distributing is good – see it that way: If you lose one of these battles, you only
lose one or two warriors – AND YOU HAVE TWO MOUTHS LESS TO FEED. You might even
risk them on purpose – if they are successful they have “earned their meal”,
and the whole tribe will profit, if not, these weak and feeble warriors will not endanger
your food resources anymore. This truly is “survival of the fittest”!

5) Food – the overlooked problem

The game is most realistic in one point – winter is unforgiving and hard. Most
players, especially in games with larger groups of people, underestimate the scarcity of
food in winter. Having your people die of starvation is never elegant – these are
wasted opportunities. They better had killed something before (or given birth, which is
much, much more important than killing things – this is a moral game after all!).

It is possible to calculate roughly how much food you will probably get, so you can
pretty much calculate how many of your tribe might die. If you begin the winter with only
4 food you’re in for many, many deaths. Better have them attack a strategic hex
before they die anyway, don’t you think? You might even launch a stupid attack that
will most probably fail miserably on purpose. It makes you look weaker for the moment,
and you get rid of these hungry mouths. And if you DO suceed – even better! Just
don’t overdo it – you want to have a considerable portion of your tribe
survive for the next summer round. The earlier you send your warriors on suicide missions
the better, they save more lives if they die early in the season, as strange as that
sounds.

6) The end move

This game never lasts too long – I guess an average playing time is two years
(game time, not REAL time, in case the casual reader wonders). When players have 2
villages and enough people the end move can happen any turn, and will happen. The player
who is strong but vulnerable WILL be attacked at this point, and might have to forfeit a
victory after such an attack. As in many games that mix “economics” and war,
neither being the most aggressive attacker nor being the most busy defender will be good
for winning the game.

Set up your final move carefully – Try to be behind in villages so you don’t
have to move first and then suffer the consequences with all sorts of nasty cards and
moves played against you. If possible an ideal end move could look like this: You have 2
villages that are well defended, because they are in reach of other players. Sneakily you
move two “couples” (perhaps a “gay” couple among them, even
sneakier!) in far away places in which nobody would usually build villages, like volcano
spaces or rim spaces. It is important that other players can NOT reach these spaces in
one move. They might be on to you immediately, but now all they can do is attack your
well defended cities (for which you have hoarded combat cards, hehe) in the next round,
if you survive, you’ll win!. If they get TWO moves against you, the far away
villages will not have much hope, but if you moved last or second to last in the round
BEFORE the final round this won’t happen. If your neighbour still loves you, s/he
might actually be in the way of the attackers as well, but this is rare, because then
s/he can also attack YOU!

View/add comments here

Nothing is certain in the “Valley of the Mammoths”, and especially not
victory, but following these guidelines will certainly better your chances the next time
you step into this cursed but strangely endearing valley.

And don’t ask me about the best strategy to get “the fire” if
you’re not close to the volcano – there isn’t one!

Have fun!

Moritz Eggert, 26.4.2003