Archiv der Kategorie: Spieleabende

Titicaca

Titicaca

Titicaca

Verlag: Cwali

Autor: Corné van Moorsel

Tester: Peter Riedlberger

getestete Ausgabe: Essen, 2001

Das Spiel: Titicaca ist ein Spiel der Déjà-vus: Vom Auspacken des Materials bis
zum Ende der Nachdiskussion fielen beständig Details auf, die frappant an bereits
Bekanntes erinnerten. So ließ das Spielmaterial – hexagonale Landschaftsfelder und
Holzhäuschen – rechtes Siedler-Feeling aufkommen. Bei einer ersten Durchsicht der Regeln
endeten diese Parallelitäten indes schlagartig: Titicaca ist ein Spiel von kniziahafter
Abstraktheit.

Titicaca Feld

Der Spielablauf ist ungefähr wie folgt: In der Hex-Landschaft sind 15 Sonderfelder
(“Seen”) eingestreut, die den 15 Spielrunden entsprechen. In jeder Spielrunde
werden die Anrainerhexe dieser Sonderfelder versteigert. Der Spieler bieten geheim
(dieser Mechanismus erinnert an zu viele Spiele) mit der Spielwährung
(“Waffen”). Der Höchstbieter darf als erstes sein Feld aussuchen und mit einem
seiner Marker (“Siedlung”) versehen, dann der zweite usw., bis alle Felder weg
sind. Die grundlegende Mechanik von Titcaca besteht darin, dass mehrere Felder unter
bestimmten Voraussetzungen zu Reichen zusammenwachsen können, in denen mehrere Spieler
koexistieren (heftige “Euphrat & Tigris”-Assoziationen). Der größte Teil
der Siegpunkte, die man sich in Titicaca verdienen kann, stammt aus zwei
Berechnungsprinzipien: 1. Es gibt fünf verschiedene Sorten von Hexen
(“Landschaften”). Für jede Sorte Hex pro Reich werden so viele Punkte
ausgeschüttet, wie Reich insgesamt Felder hat. Je größer ein Reich wird, desto wichtiger
wird es also, daran beteiligt zu sein, weil die ausgeschütteten Punkte für alle
beteiligten Parteien hoch werden (nicht beteiligt zu sein, ist so frustrierend wie in
“Kardinal & König” nicht in einem Land vertreten zu sein). 2. Zusätzlich
bekommt derjenige mit den meisten Markern pro Land einen Sonderbonus, der recht hoch
werden kann. Man kann bestimmte Bonus-Counter als Tie-Breaker platzieren, die man aber
nur wieder auf die Hand bekommt, wenn abgerechnet wird. Hier sind Irrtümer möglich: Z. B.
erwartet man, dass ein Feld zu einem Reich hinzuwächst, das in Runde 5 abgerechnet würde.
Das findet nicht statt, der Counter bleibt fixiert liegen, wie ein unglücklich
platzierter Räuber bei Carcassonne.

Abgerechnet wird nach Runde 5 und Runde 10 nur an den Anrainerreichen dieser Seen, in
Runde 15 dagegen alles. Will heißen: In der Endwertung werden rund die Hälfte aller
Punkte vergeben (man denke etwa an “Java”). Übrigens gibt es auch noch Punkte
für die längste “Straße” (Kette von Siedlungen), womit wir wieder
ringkompositorisch bei Siedler wären.

Spieldauer: Die Regeln sind in etwa 25 Minuten erklärt; die Spieldauer liegt
zwischen 60 und 90 Minuten.

Ähnliche Spiele: Java, Die Siedler von Catan, Euphrat und Tigris, El Caballero, Carcassonne

Kommentar der Westpark Gamers: Unsere Eindrücke waren gemischt. Moritz und
Aaron wiesen darauf hin, dass Titicaca ein frustrierendes Element mit 1830 gemein hat: Es
gibt zwar kein Würfelglück, aber aufgrund der Handlungen der anderen Spieler wird vieles
doch unsteuerbar. Walter hatte dagegen wirklich Spaß (kann damit zusammenhängen, dass er
gewann). Hans, der zweiter wurde, wohl auch, obwohl er weniger Titicaca-Apologie lieferte
als der Hausherr. Ich selbst bin vielleicht am skeptischten.

Titicaca Components

Man ist bei Titicaca zu sehr der Narretei der anderen ausgeliefert. Da bindet sich
jemand an ein Reich an, was ihm selbst vielleicht 3 Punkte bringt, einem anderen Spieler
dagegen ein Vielfaches dieser Punktzahl – verhindert lässt sich das von einem selbst
nicht. Spiele mit Versteigerungsmechanismus wirken nur vordergründig zufallsfrei: Wenn
man einfach nicht weiß, wie viel die anderen bieten, lässt sich nur mit einem geistigen
Würfelwurf entscheiden, wie viel man in die geschlossene Faust nimmt. War’s allzu
viel, während die Konkurrenz sparte, war’s das mit dem Vorsprung für immer.
Längerfristige Planungen sind praktisch unmöglich, weil man nie weiß, welche Verbindungen
in zwei Runden existieren oder aber unmöglich gemacht sein werden. Ein Spiel, das aber
die Hälfte seiner Punkte in der Endwertung ausschüttet, gleichzeitig langfristige
Planungen verunmöglicht, frustriert mich. Man spielt halt während der ersten Hälfte mit
und betet, dass die Handlungen der anderen Spieler etwas Luft für eigene Aktionen lassen.
Ich glaube nicht, dass man mit Taktik bei Titicaca groß etwas anrichten kann: Man kann
zwar mit größeren Dummheiten dafür sorgen, dass man sicher nicht gewinnt. Mit
ausgefeilter Taktik ist nichts zu machen, weil sich dafür das Brett zu unvorsehbar
ändert. Man spielt also nur für den Moment, flucht oder freut sich wegen des Ausgangs der
Versteigerungen und sieht mit Freude oder Verzweiflung, wie die sich die Marker auf dem
Spielplan verteilen.

Peter’s Wertung: 3 (von 10)

Westpark Gamers’ Wertung: 5.2

Links zu weiteren Informationen: Luding Link für Titicaca

Keytown

title

Keytown

Hersteller: R&D Games

Autor: Richard Breese

Getestet: limitierte Ausgabe (500 Stück)

Tester: Aaron Haag

Spieltyp: Strategiespiel für 2 bis 5 Spieler.

Das Spiel: Der Spielplan zeigt eine Stadt mit ihren drei wichtigen Gebäuden
Rathaus, Kirche und Marktplatz sowie umliegend vier Cottages und 5 Arten von
Ressourcenflächen (Hafen, Bergwerk, Wald, Brauerei und Farm. Jeder Spieler erhält 6
1er-Plättchen, die seinen Anfangsbestand an Bürgern in Keytown repräsentieren. Ziel ist
es, dies Bürger einerseits zu vermehren und andererseits in ihrer Klasse aufsteigen zu
lassen (bis zum höchsten, dem 5er-Plättchen). Am Spielende ermittelt jeder Spieler seine
Punktzahl durch Quadrieren und Aufsummieren seiner Plättchenwerte. Plättchen vermehren
sich in den Cottages, sobald dort beide Felder mit einem Plättchen belegt sind. Die
“Neugeborenen” haben die Klasse 1 und entsprechen der Farbe, der im Cottage
belegten Plättchen, d.h. es kann sich ein Spieler um 2 Plättchen oder 2 Spieler um je ein
Plättchen vermehren. Einen Aufstieg in die nächst höhere Klasse erfolgt in den drei
Gebäuden der Stadt. Hier steigen jeweils die rang-niedrigsten Plättchen auf, die
sich in einem der fünf Felder eines Gebäudes befinden. Dies muss nicht immer das
Plättchen mit der niedrigsten Klasse sein, da jedem Plättchen noch von jedem Spieler
Ressourcensteine zugeteilt werden können. Diese Steine erhöhen temporär den Wert eines
Plättchens. Ressourcensteine werden auf den Ressourcenflächen “abgebaut” wenn
dort in der ersten Phase einer Runde vom Spieler Plättchen gelegt wurden.

Spieldauer: ca. 1 Stunde.

Ähnliche Spiele: Keydom, Morgenland – beide vom selben Autor.

Kommentar der Westpark Gamers: Wie bei allen guten Spielen ist auch bei Keytown
der Spieler permanent in der Zwickmühle, mehr tun zu wollen, als er tun kann. Es gilt
also immer, das Optimum aus den momentan zur Verfügung stehenden Möglichkeiten
auszuwählen. Die wesentlichen Entscheidung sind: 1. wieviele Ressourcensteine welchere
Farbe “ernte” ich diese Runde, 2. wieviele Vermehrungen plane ich diese Runde
und 3. wieviele und welche meiner Plättchen möchte ich in ihrer Klasse erhöhen? Da das
Spiel nur über 4 Runden geht ist es recht schwierig ein 1er-Plättchen in ein
5er-Plättchen zu entwickeln, dafür zählt dieses eine Plättchen dann aber in der
Endabrechnung 25 Punkte! Das geschickte Spiel mit den (geheim gehaltenen)
Ressourcensteinen bestimmt über Sieg oder Niederlage. Unser größtes Problem war die
Spielregel. Einige Dinge sind dermaßen contra-intuitiv, dass man sie einfach beim Lesen
der Spielregel falsch interpretiert – obwohl das Regelheft alles deutlich beschreibt.
Erst nach unserer ersten Spielrunde erkannten wir, dass die 0er bzw. 2er-Counter
ausschliesslich auf Ressourcensteine der gleichen Farbe Farbe wirken (was sie deutlich
entschärft). Nach der zweiten Runde entdeckten wir, dass plazierte Ressourcensteine am
Ende der Runde nicht in den Vorrat zurück wandern, sondern dem Spieler gehören, gegen den
sie gespielt wurden (und von demjenigen in der nächsten Runde für groß angelegte
Rachefeldzüge genutzt werden können!). Nachdem auch beim zweiten Durchgang keiner so
recht um das Startspielerrecht bieten wollte (warum auch: Startspieler sein ist eher von
Nachteil) ergab ein genaues Regelstudium, dass man nicht um das Startspielerecht bietet,
sondern darum, den Startspieler bestimmen zu dürfen. Erst jetzt machte alles so richtig
Sinn. Inzwischen haben wir weitere Fehler in unserer Auslegung der Spielregeln bemerkt:
z.B. wirken Multiplikatorplättchen auf alle Ressourcenwürfel der gleichen
Farbe in einer Stadt. Trotz der Fehlinterpretationen der Regel hat Keytown bisher Spass
gemacht. Jeder ist zu jedem Zeitpunkt ins Spielgeschehen involviert und man hat nie das
Gefühl, gespielt zu werden.

Aarons Bewertung: 8 (von 10)

Westpark Gesamtbewertung: 7.25

weitere Informationen: Board
Game Geek Keytown Review
Keytown
Review bei Game Cabinet
Funagain mit Spieler-Kommentaren über Keytown
Luding Link zu Keytown

STAR WARS – The Queen’s Gambit

STAR WARS – The Queen’s Gambit

Star Wars

Hersteller: Avalon Hill/Hasbro (erhältlich)

Autor: C.Van Ness, A. Roach

Getestet: Englische Ausgabe, 2000

Tester: Moritz Eggert

Szenario: Der mit Abstand schlechteste aller Star Wars-Filme (“The Phantom
Menace”). Die Spieler sind entweder auf der Seite der bösen “Trade
Federation” (kontrolliert durch den zukünftigen Imperator) oder der Prinzessin und
den Jedi. Die 4 Kämpfe am Schluss des Films finden im Spiel gleichzeitig statt: Die
Schlacht auf den Ebenen von Naboo, der Kampf der 3 Jedi im Reaktorraum, der Anflug Anakin
Skywalkers auf die Raumstation und der Versuch, den Palast zurückzuerobern. Sehr viel
Action also!

Das Spiel: Mit Worten lässt sich das opulente Spielmaterial kaum beschreiben,
man muß es einfach gesehen haben! Auf jeden Fall gehört dieses Spiel zu den
platzintensivsten Spielen, die ich kenne. Die 2 Spieler (eine Team-Variante für 4 Spieler
wird vorgeschlagen, klingt aber meines Erachtens langweilig) ziehen Karten von 2
Kartenstapeln, einer betrifft die Schlacht von Naboo und Anakins Anflug, der andere die
Geschehnisse im Palast. Jeweils 4 Karten werden “programmiert”, wobei man mit
10 Handkarten immer reichlich Auswahl hat. Abwechselnd decken die Spieler die Karten in
der gewählten Reihenfolge auf (der “Startspieler” wechselt jede Runde), und
vollführen Aktionen mit den Figuren, die die Karten benennen (dies sind beileibe nie
alle!). Meistens gibt es eine Auswahl von mehreren Aktionen, so dass man auch auf
aktuelle Spielentwicklungen noch reagieren kann. Eine besondere Rolle spielen die
Bonuskarten – diese werden, wenn erhalten, blind gezogen, und zu den
“programmierten” Karten der nächsten Runde hinzugefügt. Diese Karten zu
erlangen ist der Kern des Spiels – denn wenn man zum Beispiel durch Bonuskarten 8 Karten
in einer Runde spielt, kommt man 4 mal mehr dran als ein Spieler ohne Bonuskarten –
dieser sieht dann sehr, sehr alt aus. Obwohl die Schlacht auf den Feldern von Naboo nur
eine Ablenkung darstellt, ist sie tatsächlich die wichtigste: denn hier gibt es am
meisten Bonuskarten zu holen. Weitere Bonuskarten gibt es für das Metzeln bestimmter
Charaktere, was aber schwierig zu bewerkstelligen ist (allein Darth Maul hat 15
Lebenspunkte). Die Kämpfe werden mit Würfeln entschieden, wobei alle Figuren
unterschiedliche Würfel verwenden, manche speziell zur Verteidigung, manche speziell zum
Angriff. Alle 4 “Schlachten” haben unterschiedliche Regeln, am simpelsten (und
taktisch uninteressantesten) ist das Laserschwertduell der Jedis geraten. Der
“Gute” muss für den Sieg die Droiden durch Anakins Raumangriff ausschalten,
danach muss der Thronraum im Palast besetzt werden. Der böse Spieler muss dies
verhindern, um zu gewinnen.

Spieldauer: Maximal eine halbe Stunde Regelerklärung, 10 Minuten Aufbau, danach
ca. 2 sehr spannende Stunden.

Ähnliche Spiele: Die Schlacht der Dinosaurier

Kommentar der Westpark Gamers: Beim Auspacken kommt eine ähnliche Stimmung auf
wie weiland als Kind bei gewissen MB-Spielen (Geisterschloss, Spiel des Lebens…). Das
Spielmaterial ist absolut fantastisch und von hoher Qualität. Alle Figuren sind
realistisch dargestellt, das reicht von den ATT-Panzern der Handelsföderation bis zur
Prinzessin Amidala. Die Schachtel ist prallvoll mit Hunderten von Figuren gefüllt. Der
Spielplan ist dazu genial designt, der Palast wird dreidimensional in 3 Stockwerken
aufgebaut (was an das kultige “U-Boot-Jagd” erinnert) und verbindet die beiden
riesigen Spielpläne, die die Felder von Naboo sowie den Reaktorraum und den Anflug
Anakins darstellen. Durch diese Materialmassen dauert der Aufbau etwas, das kann man aber
verkraften, denn es macht viel Spaß . Hier floss sehr viel professionelle Arbeit ein, da
leuchtet sogar der hohe Preis ein (wahrscheinlich macht Hasbro noch nicht mal viel Gewinn
pro verkauftem Spiel). Auch als Sammlerstück wird das Spiel sicherlich mal viel wert
sein. Die Regeln sind klar gegliedert und gut verständlich, auch die Karten sind vom
Design her sehr übersichtlich. Das Spiel selber spielt sich flott – es wird gewürfelt,
aber in immer neuen Konstellationen, so dass der Spaß erhalten bleibt. Die Hauptstrategie
liegt beim Planen der Aktionen: Wo setze ich am meisten Karten ein? Wo habe ich die
Überhand, wo baue ich sie aus? Wie bekomme ich diese Runde mehr Bonuskarten als der
andere? Es mag letztlich ein Glücksspiel sein, aber es ist eins, in dem man den Eindruck
hat, das Geschehen wirklich beeinflussen zu können. Das Design ist dem legendären
“Die Schlacht der Dinosaurier” so ähnlich, dass ich fast sicher war, es stamme
vom selben Designer. Dem ist aber erstaunlicherweise nicht so. Wer “Die Schlacht der
Dinosaurier” mag (ebenso opulentes Material, geniales Design), wird von diesem Spiel
noch begeisterter sein, denn die gleichzeitige Behandlung der 4 Schlachten steigert den
Spielspaß und die taktischen Möglichkeiten enorm. Und für noch etwas muss man die die
Designer loben: Sie haben auf eine Jar-Jar Binks und Anakin-Figur verzichtet, und damit
quasi ein Abbild des Films geschaffen, das besser als das Original ist. Eines der ganz
seltenen Beispiele einer gelungenen Filmumsetzung!

Moritz’ Bewertung: 8 von 10 (leichter Abzug wegen ungenannten Ideenklaus
von “Die Schlacht der Dinosaurier)

Westpark Gesamtbewertung: 8.5

Weiterführende Informationen: New Avalon Hill Homepage
Englisch
Link zum Eintrag “Queen’s Gambit” bei Web-Grognards, im Moment weiterer
Link zu Q&A sowie einer Kritik

Die Fürsten von Florenz

Fürsten von Florenz

Die Fürsten von Florenz

Hersteller: ALEA, Ravensburger

Autor: Richard Ulrich und Wolfgang Kramer

Getestet: Basisspiel (erschienen 2000)

Tester: Walter Sorger

Das Spiel: Die Spieler repräsentieren jeweils einen Fürstenhof (in Florenz oder
sonst irgendeinem mittelalterlichen Stadtstaat) und müssen durch herrschaftliche
Entscheidungen bürgerliche Qualität (“Prestige”) an ihren Hof bringen.
Entscheidungen sind zum einen das Ausbauen des Hofes durch Gebäude (von Universitäten bis
zu Kapellen) und Landschaften (Parks, Seen und Wälder), zum anderen das Herbeiholen von
Berufen (Baumeistern und Gauklern), die ein gedeihliches Leben am Hofe fördern. Dazu
gehört natürlich auch das Gewähren von bürgerlichen Freiheiten. Weiterhin kann der
Spieler durch den Erwerb von Prestige- und Bonuskarten direkt oder indirekt das Prestige
seines Hofes erhöhen. Den größten Prestige-Reibach bewirken schließlich die Künster und
Fürsten von Florenz Gelehrten des Hofes, die sich in dem ausgebauten Fürstenhof,
ausgestattet mit Geistesfreiheien, in Gesellschaft von angenehmen Personen, umgeben von
lieblichen Landschaften und unterhalten von Gauklern zu ihren Werken inspirieren lassen
und somit zum Prestige des Hofes beitragen. Die Entscheidungen der Spieler geschehen in
einer Spielphase in Konkurrenz zueinander (durch Versteigern), in der zweiten Phase
absolut autonom in fester Reihenfolge. Nach sieben Runden ist Schluß und wer dann die
meisten Prestigepunkte besitzt, ist Sieger. Das Spiel hat einen geschäftsmäßigen,
eifrigen, aber doch friedlichen Charakter. Zufälle und Schicksalsschläge werden
vermieden. Die Folgen der Versteigerungsaktionen sind gemäßigt, da hier jeder genau
einmal zum Zuge kommt, und jedes erworbene Objekt in einen Spielplan paßt. Die Wirkung
der Zusatzkarten ist überschaubar: alle weisen in etwa ein gleiches Quantum von
Nützlichkeit auf; noch dazu zieht man jeweils 5 Karten und kann sich davon die am besten
passende aussuchen.

Spieldauer: Regelerklärung ca. 10 Minuten, das Spiel 1 ½ Stunden

Ähnliche Spiele: Schoko & Co.

Kommentar der Westpark Gamers: Ein sehr ausgewogenes strategisches Spiel, ohne
chaotische Elemente, mit einer hübschen Spielidee und funktionell durchdachter
Ausstattung. Wie auch immer die anderen agieren, es ist immer möglich, “to have a
plan”. Ob man sich bauwütig auf das Errichten von Gebäuden stürzt, auf den
Landschaftsausbau seines Hofes, auf die Inspiration von Künstlern oder auf die Wirkung
von Zusatzkarten, hinter all diesen Aktionsrichtungen gibt es Gewinn-Stategien, und uns
ist noch nicht klar, welche davon die beste ist. (Unser Künstler Moritz hat die ganze
Nacht nach dem ersten Spiel im Traum unter dem Druck gestanden, noch mehr Werke zum
richtigen Zeitpunkt fertig zu bringen!). In der zweiten Spielphase mit den autonomen
Entscheidungen der einzelnen Spieler haben wir eine gewisse Interaktion vermißt. Jeder
wurstelt so vor sich hin und kalkuliert dabei nur, ob er die hohe Werkvorgabe eines
Spielers noch in dieser Runde überbieten zu will, oder ob er nicht besser die nächste
Runde abwartet.

Walters Bewertung: 8 von 10 (wegen der Planbarkeit)

Westpark Gesamtbewertung: 8.6

Weiterführenden Informationen: Board
Game Geek “Princes of Florence” Review
Funagain-Seite mit Spieler-Kommentaren über “Die Fürsten von
Florenz”
Luding Link zu “Die Fürsten von
Florenz”

Princes of Florence (Die Fürsten von Florenz)

Princes of Florence

Princes of Florence

(Die Fürsten von Florenz)

Publisher: ALEA, Ravensburger

Author: Richard Ulrich and Wolfgang Kramer

Tested: Basic rules (published 2000)

Tester: Walter Sorger (translation by Aaron Haag)

The game: Each player represents a prince (in Florence or any other medieval
city state) who has the task to bring civil quality (“prestige”) to their
court. On the one hand they can do this by developing buildings (from universities to
chapels) and landscapes (parks, lakes and forests), on the other hand by attracting
professionals (builders and jugglers), which foster a pleasant life at the court. Also
included is the granting of civil rights. Furthermore the player can increase the
prestige of their court directly or indirectly by the acquisition of prestige and bonus
cards. Princes of Florence Finally, the largest increase in prestige is
achieved by the artists and scholars of the court, which, in the pleasant
surroundings and equipped with rights, are inspired by the company of people and the
entertainment of jugglers to create works of art and science. In the first game
phase the decisions of the players are made in competition to each other (by
auctions), in the second phase absolutely autonomously in fixed order. After seven
rounds the game is over and the player who has gained the most points of prestige
wins. The game has a busy, eager, but nevertheless peaceful character. Coincidences
and strokes of fate are avoided. The consequences of the auctions are moderate,
since eventually everyone has a successful bid, and each acquired object can be made
to fit a plan. The effect of the cards is manageable: all have approximately the
same quality of usefulness and one may chose the most suitable card from the top
five of a deck.

Playing time: Rule explanation approx. 10 minutes, playing time about 1 ½
hours

Similar games: Schoko & Co.

Westpark Gamers’ opinion: A very balanced strategy game, without chaotic
elements, with a nice game idea and a functional design. Whatever the others choose to
do, it is always possible, “to have a plan”. Whether one decides to count on
eagerly established buildings, the development of ones landscape, or the inspiration of
artists or the effect of cards, from all of these decisions winning strategies can be
derived, and it is not yet clear to us which one is the best. (Our artist Moritz
confessed that after our first game in his dreams the following night he felt under
pressure to complete more works of art!). We missed some player interactions during the
second game phase where all players act autonomously. Everyone struggles by himself and
calculates whether is is worthwhile to outperform another players in terms of the number
of works of art or if it is better to wait for the next round.

Walter’s rating: 8 of 10 (because of the possibility to plan ahead)

Westpark Gamers’ rating: 8.6

Further information: Board
Game Geek ” Princes of Florence ” Review
Funagain page with player comments on ” The Princes of Florenz
Luding link to ” The Princes of Florenz “

BRITANNIA

britannia

BRITANNIA

Hersteller: Avalon Hill (vergriffen); deutsche Ausgabe: Welt der Spiele

Autor: Lewis Pulsipher

Getestet: Deutsche Ausgabe, Welt der Spiele

Spielerzahl: 3 – 5 (nur 4 ist empfehlenswert)

Tester: Moritz Eggert

Dieses legendäre historische Spiel ist bis heute populär und vielgespielt. Simuliert
wird die Geschichte Britanniens, vom Einfall der Römer bis zur Schlacht von Hastings.
Jeder Spieler verkörpert eine vorgegebene Auswahl von Völkern, die jeweils zu
unterschiedlichen Zeitpunkten unterschiedliche Spielziele haben, was sich wiederum in
Siegespunkten niederschlägt. So müssen die Römer zum Beispiel möglichst ganz Britannien
mit ihren Kastellen übersäen, die Waliser dagegen bekommen vor allem Punkte für das
Halten von Wales gegen die zahlreichen Eindringlinge. Natürlich ist dies vor allem ein
“Kampfwürfelspiel”, wie es der inzwischen schon legendäre
“Foto-Sauter-Man” (das ist jetzt sehr insiderig…) nennen würde, jedoch kommt
es anders als bei Risiko nicht auf die Eroberung der ganzen Karte an, sondern auf die
Abstimmung kurzfristiger und langfristiger Spielstrategien. So bringen bestimmte
Vorgehensweisen kurzfristig viele Punkte, gefährden jedoch längerfristig den Fortbestand
eines Volkes. Bei erfahrenen Spielern spielt auch das Verhandlungselement eine große
Rolle, so wird zum Beispiel ein Grossteil des Spiels durch die Weise bestimmt, wie die
Sachsen und Angeln sich gegen die Dänen abstimmen (oder auch nicht). Die Würfel bringen
weniger ein Glückselement als ein Unschärfeelement ins Spiel – mit einem eleganten
Kampfsystem wie bei Vinci würde der Spielablauf zum Beispiel zu vorhersehbar werden.

Die verschiedenen Farben sind traditionell etwas unausgewogen – so hat Lila (Römer) am
Anfang viel zu tun, bis zum Ende des Spieles dann eher weniger, Rot gewinnt meistens,
etc.. Dennoch hat das Spielprinzip bis heute nichts von seiner Faszination verloren.

Spieldauer: ca. 30 Minuten Regelerklärung, dann 6-7 Stunden

Ähnliche Spiele: History of the World, Vinci, Maharaja, Rus, Hispania, Rise and
Fall, Barbarian Kingsdom & Empire, etc., etc.

Moritz’ Bewertung: 10 (von 10)

Westpark Gesamtbewertung: noch nicht bewertet

Weiterführende Informationen:

MÜLL + MONEY (Industrial Waste)

MÜLL + MONEY (Industrial Waste)

Müll+Money

Publisher: Hans im Glück

Author: Dr. Jürgen Strohm

Tester: Aaron Haag

Game Tested: German edition 2001

Scenario: Resources, production, innovation, growth and profits and last but
not least Müll – the German word for waste – are the key ingredientes of this game. Each
player tries to max out the interlinked parameters of his production plant by applying
suitable strategies and tactics.

The Game: Each player starts with a production plant which needs five work
force units and five resources to produce and which generates 5 units of waste. The five
work forces and the first five resources are part of the start set-up. The products of
one production cycle sell for initially 14$ million.

At the beginning of each round the start player deals sets of three cards openly
taking care that a set only contains unique cards (i.e. no duplicate types). The number
of card sets is determined by the number of players plus one. The start player is the
first to select a set and the other players follow in clockwise order.

The cards are the motor of the game and when it is a player’s turn he plays one of
the cards of his set and executes the corresponding action.

Resource auction:
The player auctions off resources. The number of resources is determined by the
amount of resources his plant needs for production. The auction starts with the
player left to the auctioneer and the auctioneer is the last to bid. If he has the
highest bid he pays the money to the bank but if any other player bids highest the
auctioneer receives the money instead of the bank.

Production:
The plant produces and immediately sells if it has a sufficient amount of resources
and work force units available. The player receives the current production price and
increases the amount of waste in his waste store by the amount indicated by the waste
marker of his plant.

Productivity:
The player may improve one of his plants productivity indicators by one: work units
required to produce, resources required to produce or waste generated when producing.
Increasing productivity costs $5 million and also increases the number of victory points.

Work force:
The player may increase or decrease the number of work forces of his plant.

Income:
The player may increase the income of his plant when it produces by $1 million. As
soon as one player’s plant reaches an income per production of $20 million the game
finishes after completing the current round.

Waste removal:
The player may decrease the number of waste units in his plant’s store by one.

Waste trafficking:
The player removes one waste unit from his plant’s store and all other players
must increase their store by one waste unit.

Consultant:
The player may make a “double action” playing this card together with any
of his other cards. The corresponding action is performed twice, except for production,
which generates an additional profit of $5 million instead. Alternatively, the player may
use the consultant to repay $10 million of a loan.

Bribe:
This card can be used in case of an environmental catastrophe and decreases the
damages to be paid to $1 million.

A round continues until no player wants to play any of their cards – it is allowed
that a player keeps one of his cards for the next turn. This is particularly useful if
one has a bribe card. Playing this card only makes sense during an environmental
catastrophe which happens immediately once the respective card is drawn when the start
player creates the card sets. All player that have excessive waste in their plant’s
stores must pay damages between $5 million and $10 million. This can be reduced to $1
million by playing a bribe card at that point in time. At the end of a round players have
to pay for their work forces (irrespective of whether or not they produced in this round)
and the start player position shifts one position in clockwise direction.

Once the last round of the game has been completed players count their victory points.
Increases in productivity yield additional victory points as well as increases in the
plants income. Interestingly, the money in player’s hands only counts half but any
loans reduce the victory points by the full amount.

Playing Time: Rules are explained in about 15 minutes – playing time is about
75 minutes.

Similar Games: Schoko & Co. (Yves Hirschfeld, G. Monnet), McMulti (Crude), Modern Art (Reiner Knizia)

Westpark Gamers’ Opinion: When I played the game for the first time it
reminded me very much of “Schocko & Co.”, one of the finalists of the 1988
Spiel des Jahres award.
There you also had the task to optimize the various parameters of production so that
income is maximized. In “Müll + Money” I found it hard to time my actions right
though, because one’s options are very dependent on the set of cards available for
selection. If you are sitting right to the start player you are faced with the
“leftovers” of all the other players because you are the last to select and
there are only two remaining sets. On the other hand, next turn you will be the first to
select your set and you may want to prepare the next move now. Maybe your work force is
still high and you want to decrease it to save costs. If there is a “work
force” card still available this could be a good point in time to do so. However,
next round you will need to select a set of cards that contains a
“productivity” card in order to adjust your plant productivity accordingly.
Reducing the work force before improving productivity is a risky business and should only
be tried in situations like this unless you do want to become unable to produce.

Müll+Money

In my opinion the resource auctions are the key to winning the game. As with Reiner
Knizia’s “Modern Art” you can generate a lot of money by clever
auctioning. Many times I have seen situations where a player gets resources virtually for
free by first auctioning a set and cashing in and then buying the next set resources with
exactly the money received from the first auction. This can be exploited by two players
who work together in two subsequent auctions with one player selling to the other for a
previously agreed (too) high price. There is nothing the other players can do about this
other than avoiding the situation that these two players both receive auction cards in
their sets. So maybe you want to establish a house rule that disallows any negotiations
about resource prices.

It could be a sound strategy to go for the auctions and productivity cards only, with
the goal to generate cash and victory points by selling resources to other players and by
increasing productivity and plant income respectively, leaving production (and costly
waste generation) to the other players. As an additional benefit you are pushing for an
early end of the game by quickly moving the plant income marker to the $20 million area
harming those who took an early loan. A similar strategy worked in the first release of
“Dicke Kartoffeln” by Doris Matthäus & Frank Nestel
where the goal of the game was to generate money by growing and selling potatoes. Here
the alternative strategy was to grow lots of worms (normally used as fertilizer) and
selling them to the bank or the other players instead of using them on one’s
fields.

I believe this game has a lot of potential for a wide range of different tactics and
strategies and it’s replay value is correspondingly high. The web of interlinked
parameters is big enough to provide ample possibilities for people who like business
simulations. As usual for “Hans im Glück” games the components are of impeccable
quality.

The English version of the game has been published by Rio Grande Games under the name of
Industrial Waste“.

Aaron’s Rating: 7 (out of 10)

Westpark Gamers’ Rating: not yet rated

Links to further information:

Luding Link for Müll+Money

VOM KAP BIS KAIRO (From Cape To Cairo)

VOM KAP BIS KAIRO (From Cape To Cairo)

Kap bis Kairo

Publisher: Adlung

Author: Günter Burkhardt

Tester: Aaron Haag

Game Tested: German 2001 edition, 1st rule release

Scenario: Two to four players each try to build a railroad track through Africa
– from Cape to Cairo. The track needs to be built through different types of terrain –
from “easy” Savanna to “difficult” river crossings.

Kap

The Game: As with all Adlung games this one is a card game, too and as usual
comes with German, English and French rules. Each player receives a train card and a
treasury of 100 points which are later on used for bidding (there are no bills, tokens
etc. provided so each player needs a pen and a piece of paper to keep track of his
points). The second type of cards are the terrain cards which on their backside show a
piece of track.

The game is played in two types of turns: a terrain bidding turn and building turn.
Whenever a player begins his turn with no terrain card in front of his train he starts a
bidding turn: he draws as many terrain cards from the facedown draw pile as there are
players in the game and all players secretly bid points for the first choice. The highest
bidder chooses the first card, reduces his point tally accordingly and places the card in
front of his train (or at the end of a terrain card sequence should there be already
cards in front of the train). Terrain cards show the type of terrain, a point value and a
number of “bonus” tracks. Each type of terrain needs a different amount of
tracks to be covered starting with the Savanna requiring 6 tracks up to the river
requiring 10 tracks. Any bonus track printed on the terrain card(s) in front of the train
count towards that requirement. As a consequence terrain cards with three bonus tracks
(the highest bonus possible) usually go for a higher price than the ones with no track at
all.

Now Kapa building turn starts: the player who received the first card draws
another card from the draw pile. This time the terrain is not important but the
number of bonus tracks printed on the card. The player then decides if he takes that
card to cover the terrain immediately in front of his train. He may only do so if
the number of bonus tracks on terrain cards in front of his train plus the card he
just drew adds to at least the amount of track required for covering the card. Any
missing track may be made up by subtracting 10 points each from one’s point
tally – a very costly investment and only really worth it if one can finish (and
win) the game by doing so. If the player decides that the investment is just too
high he passes and the next player adds one additional card from the draw pile and
checks if he is able or willing to build using the set of both drawn cards. If not
the next player follows in clockwise order. Eventually, a player will build on his
terrain card by placing the terrain card in front of his train face down, moving the
train on top of that card and collecting the number of points printed on the card.
Any track cards used for building are discarded.

Once a player has moved his train on the eighth terrain card the game is over and that
player wins the game.

Playing Time: Rules are explained in about 5 minutes – playing time is about 30
minutes.

Similar Games: Don (Michael Schacht), Kuhhandel (Rüdiger Koltze)

Westpark Gamers’ Opinion: The game requires clever bidding tactics based on
ones own terrain “portfolio” and the other players’ terrain patterns. At
the same time one needs to keep a close eye on one’s point tally: its no good to save
on points because they are not used for determining the winner. On the other hand it is
all too easy to spend too much on that “easy” Savanna only to find oneself
short of points to be able to quickly build across the mountains or a river immediately
ahead of the train. As soon as you are two or more covered terrain cards behind it will
be very hard to win. More often than not I found myself in the unfortunate position to
have spent too many points in the early rounds leaving all those very valuable Savannas
with three bonus tracks that appeared later to other players.

As with many good card games one always has the feeling to be able to control
one’s fate in this game, however there is a good portion of luck involved here as
well. Nevertheless, the game is fun to play and since its very short playing time is an
ideal starter for an evening of gaming or a perfect “last game” after a long
evening of 1830 or alike.

Aaron’s Rating: 8 (out of 10)

Westpark Gamers’ Rating: 7.25

Links to further information:

Luding Link for Vom Kap bis Kairo

 

Adlung’s webpages about Vom Kap bis Kairo

 

Funagain’s link to Vom Kap bis Kairo

Urland

Urland

Urland

Publisher: Doris & Frank

Author: Doris Matthäus, Frank Nestel

Tester: Aaron Haag

Game Tested: 2001 Essen release

Scenario: 350 million years ago the ichtos (short for ichtyostega) prepared for
leaving the oceans and to populate the continents. Which ichtos will conquer the Urland
by clever propagation and the use of new genes?

The Game: This tenth game of Doris & Frank uses a similar setting as
Ursuppe published 1997. Again creatures controlled by 3 to 5 players try to survive and
make the best out of their genes. But this is the only similarity between the two games –
Urland uses completely different game mechanics and rules.

As with all Doris & Frank games the game components are very well done and of high
quality (e.g. 30 wooden Ichtos in 5 different color; three blank cards for creating own
genes) and as usual the gene cards and play aids come in an English and German
version.

board

The board is divided into 3 continents each separated into islands (three, four and
five, respectively) by little straits. The surrounding ocean is subdivided into 5 areas.
Players start their Ichtos in 4 randomly selected islands plus 3 Ichtos in each of the
ocean areas and their task is to propagate and move them to land trying to establish a
majority on the islands.

Each round starts with the distribution of 3 roles to the players: the start player
(“environment player”), the dummy and the ichto player(s). The environment
player secretly selects an island that will score this round by choosing one out of three
island chips he is randomly dealt. The remaining to chips are then passed on to the
“dummy” player who may have a look at them but who is not allowed to reveal
them to the ichto players. These actions conclude the turn of the environment player and
the dummy player for the complete round, i.e. they will not move any Ichtos on the board
in that round. Now it is the turn of the Ichto player(s) who are allowed to perform 2
Ichto actions. There are four actions types to chose from: propagation, move onto land,
move between water areas and retreat (i.e. take Ichtos from board back into stock). Genes
provide extra abilities which can be used during the action phase but they come into play
only after some rounds have been played.

Once the Ichto players performed their Ichto actions the environment player reveals
the number of the island that scores by placing the chip he kept on that island. Scoring
is straight forward: any minority Ichto colors are returned to its player. Of the
remaining Ichto colors the majority holder gets 3 points and the other(s) two points. In
case there are identical numbers of Ichtos of each color present all get 2 points. Points
are recorded on a score track similar to Ursuppe.

In the next round roles shift in clockwise order, the dummy player becomes the
environment player and gets one randomly selected island chip so that he can select the
next island to score again from a total of three chips (the two he received from the
environment player in the previous round plus the one he just drew). The round then
progresses as described above. Eventually, an environment player will not be able to draw
an island chip as all but the two he received in the previous round have been placed on
the board. This condition completes an epoch and volcanoes erupt on the two remaining
islands decreasing the Ichto population there to just one per color present. Immediately
before the volcanoes erupt one of the islands is randomly selected for final scoring in
this epoch. Each volcano cases the straight between two islands to disappear thereby
reducing the number of land areas available for the rest of the game.

genes

Genes come into play three times during the game when the first time a player reaches
12, 16 and 21 points, respectively. At the beginning of the game 4 genes out of the 11
available are placed face up for all players to see. Once the above condition occurs the
players start a bidding process for these genes. From the Ichtos not on the board players
secretly select a number they want to use for bidding. Players reveal their bid
simultaneously and the highest bidder must new select one of the genes on display and
remove the amount of Ichtos he used for bidding from the board plus one Ichto for
each gene he may already possess. The second highest bidder may now either select a gene
and pay or he may pass this right on to the next highest bidder. Once a maximum of three
genes have been acquired three new genes are drawn and put on display possibly increasing
the overall amount of genes to chose from.

The game ends as soon as one player reaches 30 points on the score track (the current
scoring round is however completed for all players). A final scoring round follows with
points awarded to the player with the most Ichtos an the board and to the player with the
most Ichtos on land areas.

Playing Time: The game can be explained in 10 minutes and played in about 60 to
90 minutes.

Similar Games: Ursuppe, El Grande, Evo, Vendetta (thanks Frank!).

Westpark Gamer’s Opinion: It was no surprise that the game plays completely
different than Ursuppe – the game mechanics are too different for that. The concept of
two players not taking an active part in the movement (i.e. Ichto action) phase is new to
me and it works surprisingly well. Being the dummy in a round may appear a bit boring as
there really isn’t anything you can do that round, hence the name. We first thought
that we misread the rules because this seemed so unusual but the rules state this quite
clearly (as does the German FAQ). Once we got used to this it seemed normal and one of the
mechanisms that make the game challenging.

Because of the ever changing roles during the game proper timing is the most
important factor for devising a sound strategy. Two consecutive Ichto action rounds in
which you have the possibility to rearrange your Ichtos on the board but have no
influence on where scoring takes place are following by two rounds in which you cannot
move your Ichtos but have control about the scoring location (environment player) or have
no control at all (dummy). Therefore most of the time one has to think ahead and consider
what one wants to do in the next round and prepare whatever is necessary to do this in
the current round. At the beginning of an epoch chaos is predominant as it is almost
impossible to judge which location will score. This chaos decreases round by round until
close to the end of an epoch certainty prevaeils and you are able to prepare your move
very precisely. Unfortunately, this is true for all players and again timing is in issue
here when it is necessary to consider which roles you are going to have in the last and
one but last round of an epoch.

Genes come into play very slowly, a lot slower than in Ursuppe. A maximum of nine
genes are in play (only six in a three player game) therefore having more than two genes
per player is clearly an exception. Again, careful planning is required to be able to
acquire genes because you need Ichtos off the board to be able to bid. On the other hand
these Ichtos are desperately needed on the board for propagation and scoring and even
worse, for paying for the genes! This results in a clever “self-regulation” in
so far as you cannot bid high even if you have a high number of Ichtos in stock because
this may result in near self-extinction on the board. On the other hand if you are strong
on the board you could pay a high price but you are unable to bid high as your Ichto
stock is depleted.

The genes themselves seem to be well balanced – so far we could not detect a
particularly strong one which would result in a certain victory. Gene combinations are
not as important as in Ursuppe and anyhow they occur rarely because of the low number of
genes in play. At times “Muscles” seemed a bit strong as well as “Warm
Blood” but we need to play more often to find if these really influence the game too
much.

Overall I really liked the game. The timing strategies are quite challenging and there
is still a lot for us to discover in terms of tactics. The game mechanisms are a bit
abstract but this is very well counterbalanced by the fun theme, the gene abilities and
last but not least the wonderful comic-style graphics of the game components.

I am still not sure whether or not I like the score track rule where positions
occupied by other players are not considered when moving forward. This clearly favors
players who are behind, yet not too far behind. This mechanism was also used in Ursuppe
and I found it a bit too strong there. In Urland the effect seems to be less obvious but
there may still be situations when this rule can only be regarded as a nuisance. There is
also an additional element of luck in the game in the form of a thirteenth land area
“Panic” chip which when drawn by the environment player requires that the land
area with the highest Ichto population must be completely abandoned and all Ichtos be
moved to adjacent water areas. This slightly favors the weakest player as he is the one
to chose the water area in case there is more than one.

Comparing Urland with Ursuppe, Urland can first of all be played in a shorter time. It
can also be explained in less time and playing seems to be not as difficult either.
However, winning the game is a different matter altogether: here I think that Ursuppe and
Urland hold an equal amount of challenges and both require experience and sound
strategies to win. To me Urland is a highlight of this year’s game releases and a
wonderful addition to what may become Doris & Frank’s “Ur” series.

Aaron’s Rating: not yet ranked

Westpark Gamers’ Rating: not yet ranked

Links to further information: Luding link to Urland
Doris&Frank’s English FAQ for Urland
Doris&Frank’s German FAQ for Urland
Doris&Frank’s
Homepage
Funagain Urland page

UR – 1830 BC

Ur 1830BC

UR – 1830 BC

Publisher: Splotter Spellen

Author: Joris Wiersinga, Jeroen Doumen

Tester: Aaron Haag

Game Tested: 2001 edition, German rules

Scenario: Splotter Spellen published this limited edition (1500 copies) game by
J. Doumen and J. Wiersinga for all those 18xx lovers that like the game principles of the
series but may want to play a game with a theme different from railroads (do they
exist?). Hence, the game is about owning land and building irrigation systems in
Mesopotamia.

The Game: The game components are very nicely done. Besides the map board there
are lots of tokens for indicating ownership of land and irrigation systems as well as
wooden tokens for distributing the amount of water flowing along the rivers and canals. I
have a minor quarrel about the state treasury cards, the equivalent of the 18xx corporate
charters: it would have been very nice if these had been printed using the same colors as
those used for the tokens. Instead, they are black and white with in indication of where
the state is on the map board (one needs to looks at the map board to find out which
state uses which token color). A nice little extra is the portraits of the game designers
(and the game’s illustrators) on the banknotes provided.


For all those familiar with the 18xx game system there should be no problem in
understanding the rules at first reading. The game components are actually bilingual
(English/German) and the game comes either with a German or an English rule book. I had a
look at both rule books in Essen and they seemed to be very well translated and I can
confirm this now for the German rules.

x

Following, I will provide a basic overview about the game by comparing the mechanics
to those of 1830.

States vs. Railroad Corporations

Instead of buying shares of railroad corporations player buy land areas in one of the
six states in Mesopotamia. Each state has between ten and twelve such areas which
actually came as a surprise to me as I expected to see ten areas per state similar to the
10% shares in the other 18xx games. Judging by a first look it seems that the states with
more than 10 areas have lower value terrain. As soon as six areas of a state are sold to
the players the states changes from “rising” to “founded” similar to
railroad corporations being floated. The owner holding the most shares of a state is the
king of the state who later on decides about the distribution of the states income.

Independent Nations vs. Minor Railroads

x

Similar to the minors in the 18xx series players acquire so-called “independent
nations” which provide a moderate income as well as some special attributes. Exactly
as in 1830 these nations are auctioned to the players in the equivalent of the first
stock round. Independent nations may be “assimilated” by states later on in the
game similar to corporations buying minors in 1830 thereby providing their ability to the
assimilating state. As in 1830 the independent nations cease to exist in a later era
(phase) of the game.

Land Areas vs. Shares

Land areas are offered to the players at a price depending on the terrain rather than
the states. This is one of the major differences to the 18xx series with the consequence
that selling land areas usually impacts more than one state. The four types of terrain
are: hills, forest, plains and dessert. A fifth type are cities, which have prices
depending on the terrain type they are in. Buying and selling of land areas and cities
follows similar rules as share buying and selling in the 1830 stock rounds, i.e. selling
of areas leads to a decrease in the corresponding terrain price (independently of the
state). In addition, players may bid on the “Primagenitur”, the equivalent of
the priority deal. Money bid on it is temporarily out of the game and cannot be used for
buying land areas or cities. At the end of the “stock round” the Primagenitur
is handed to the highest bidder and the money used for bidding is returned to the
bidder.

Irrigation Canals vs. Tracks

Here is another major difference between the 18xx series and Ur: instead of using
track tiles players “build” the irrigation system by drawing canals, starting
from the rivers land inwards using a felt pen with water soluble ink (Staedler Lumocolor,
provided with the game). The ink dries immediately and comes off equally easy using a
moist cloth leaving no traces on the board. For all of you who do not particularly like
the idea of drawing on the board I suggest you follow Mark’s
suggestion and buy little blue wooden sticks which can be used as canals instead. Canals
are build following a simple set of rules similar to the track laying rules but there is
no “upgrading” of canals.

Workers/Waterworks vs. Trains/Tokens

x

Canals are built by workers (diggers) which are bought from the bank similar to the
trains in 1830. Depending on the type of worker they can build canals of a particular
length per worker ranging from 1 hex to infinite length (the equivalent of the diesel).
The worker cards actually have two purposes: they either function as worker or as
waterworks (either reservoirs or pumps). Waterworks are required to pump the water
through the irrigation canals and again they can do this only for a particular amount of
water (reservoir) or a particular length of canal (pump). In comparison to 1830
waterworks also act similar to the station tokens there because the king of the owning
state decides in which directions water flows which reaches the works.

Independent of the type (worker or waterworks) the cards become obsolete similar to
trains in 18xx. And also similar to 1830 a state must own at least one worker at the end
of its “operation round”.

Harvest vs. Dividends

Once all states have performed their building actions the “rain season”
starts and water starts rushing down the three rivers of the map. There is a fixed amount
of water that actually flows through the rivers, depending on the era (equivalent to the
phase in 18xx games). The kings of the states owning the waterworks decide on the route
the water takes through the canals built similar to the president deciding about the
route of a train of his corporation. The owning state of the last waterworks pumping
water to a land area or city receives a share of the harvest for her services from the
bank. Additionally the owner of an irrigated area receives a small income, too. The kings
of the states then decide what happens to the harvest they received which can either be
distributed amongst the owners of the state’s land areas (the share holders in 18xx)
or be put in the state’s treasury. In the latter case the king must destroy one of
his lowest valued waterworks as a penalty.

Land Prices vs. Share Prices

Irrigating land areas or cities also has a positive effect on the land area’s
price: each region (i.e. adjacent land areas) of one terrain type which is irrigated is
counted and the respective terrain price is increased accordingly.

End of Game

The game ends if either one of the player causes a revolution (goes bankrupt) or if
all water flowing down the rivers is distributed to the land areas leaving no water
reaching the southern end of the river.

Playing Time: Explaining the rules to someone familiar with the 18xx series
should take about 15 minutes; for a newcomer to the series expect at least 30 minutes.
The game is played in about 3 to 4 hours depending on the number of players.

Similar Games: 1830 or any other game of the 18xx series

Westpark Gamers’ Opinion: The game intrigued me quite a bit when I saw it
in Essen. It has enough similarities to 1830, one of my all-time favorites. On the other
hand there are interesting new elements like the possibility to draw track, i.e. canals,
without being limited by the availability and layout of track tiles. Also the mechanics
of using the same cards form workers and waterworks sound challenging, leaving you with
the new tactical decision of either being able to build canals or to be able to pump
water through them.

Compared to 1830 the concept of buying land areas instead if shares generates a
completely new feeling and requires a change in strategies. In our first game I found it
difficult and challenging to decide which land areas to buy in which nations. First of
all there is the same dilemma as in 1830 that you do not want to invest in nations that
will not be founded (i.e. float). On the other hand since land prices are based on
terrain rather than nation the price of a land area bought may rise even if the nation it
belongs to has not been founded. Therefore, in Ur – 1830BC players may buy land based on
their assumptions about which type of terrain will be irrigated most.

It could even be a sound strategy to not help another player to found a
nation if that player will become king but rather invest in terrain elsewhere, because it
is not at all certain that the player in question will actually irrigate your areas. If
this strategy alone enables one to win the game is doubtful though, since the bulk of the
money is still earned by collecting the harvest of nations with many irrigated areas.

Becoming king of a nation early in the game seems to be even more important than being
president of a corporation in the early phase of 1830. Waterworks similar to station
markers cannot be changed after being placed but different to 1830 they are sold with
increasing capacities. Therefore, the first waterworks placed only have a very small
capacity and will hinder a nation building a wide-scale irrigation system later on in the
game. Nevertheless, similar to 1830, if these small works are placed strategically well
they will have a big impact on the later phases. In order to generate large harvest
incomes a king must select the river areas where to place reservoirs very carefully. You
need one or two larger reservoirs to be able to pump sufficient water to the fields of
your nation. Therefore, different to 1830 placing a small reservoir actually hinders
further development also of ones own nation.

Another subtle difference to 1830 is that waterworks may be placed by the king of a
nation anywhere on the board irrespective of whether the area is part of his
nation or not or if that area is already irrigated (i.e. if track has been laid in 1830).
The only condition is that if an area is owned by another player that player has to agree
to the placement. This seems to make being king early in the game even more important as
is enable one to strategically place waterworks almost anywhere.

After having played the game once I say that the similarities with 1830 or any 18xx
series game certainly exist. The different theme of the game however provides a different
feeling altogether – at least to me. At no time did I have the feeling to play just
another 18xx variant. This is even increased by the fact that the game – in my opinion –
needs completely different and new strategies than 1830. While playing I found an
enormous amount of decision making and choosing of different tactics and the game session
reminded me a lot of my first 1830 session in that respect. Playing the game was a lot of
fun then as well as playing Ur – 1830BC now and I am equally keen to find out the
possible strategies that lie in this gem of a game. To do so requires to play the game a
lot more and I am looking forward already to our next Ur session.

Aaron’s Rating: 7

Westpark Gamers’ Rating: 6.2

Links to further information:

Luding Link for Ur 1830BC

 

Nick Wedd’s
18xx Rules Differences List
(now also including 1830BC)

 

Splotter
Spellen’s Ur webpage