1. Australia

Das neue Ravensburger-Spiel. Phantastisch schnell erklärt. Spannendes Spiel um Positionen und Mehrheiten mit stetig steigender Spannung bis zum Ende.

Bewertungen: Basti: 8, Michi: 8, Aaron: 7

2. Popeln

Noch ein Versuch in anderer Gruppe. Kam wieder nicht an. Zu viel Glück. Abbruch nach 2/3 der Popel.

Bewertungen: Basti: 2, Michi: 3 (wegen der Grafik ein Extrapunkt), Aaron: 2

Fairy
Tale

reviewed by Moritz Eggert

After we had lots of fun with last year’s mysterious card game
“Masquerade” by the same company (part of the fun was trying to understand the
weird English translations), we were eager to test this new, simpler offering by the same
company.

“Masquerade” turned out to be a pretty complex fantasy card game that packed
a lot of story and flair into a deck of cards. “Fairy Tale” uses similar
manga-like graphics for the cards, but plays much simpler, more like a collective
patience game, and is certainly more of a family game than “Masquerade”.

Each player tries to build a VP rich row of 12 cards. Cards come in various forms,
some of them are valuable cards, some of them are only valuable if they come in great
numbers, some of the cards have “friends” (this is how the rules call it – very
droll) and multiply their value if their friends are present. Some cards are evil, and
turn over cards bearing certain symbols, also of other players.

The game uses an interesting “round-robin” principle of card distribution.
There are four “drafts” in the game, and each draft consists of collecting five
cards by passing one’s hand continuously to the right or to the left each time you
select a card. This means that you not only have a certain freedom in selecting the cards
you want but also that you learn a lot about the collections of other players. It is also
possible to take away cards from them without hurting your own collection (because one
only plays 3 of the selected 5 cards). Therefore, if you see the player who gets your
card next collecting dragons for example, it might make sense to keep them for
yourself.

The symbols on the cards are very confusing at first (although they make perfect
sense) and use tiny drawings of manga dragons and nymphs, which are barely discernible to
the unaccustomed eye and some of us were completely baffled by their exact meaning. In
addition, although the rules are translated much better this time, there are still
confusions. For example the rules say that “close all (symbol)” means that all
cards bearing a certain symbol are turned over, but the cards also bear the number
“1” on the symbol, which would only make sense if each player only
“closes” one card of this type (which is already bad enough). We couldn’t
fathom which was correct.

Regardless of these aspects, “Fairytale” is still an enjoyable strange
little game, perhaps not as involved as “Masquerade”, but with a certain
Japanese charm.

Explanation time: 5 minutes (and 30 minutes trying to understand the symbols)

Game time: 20-40 minutes

Flaschenteufel

reviewed by Moritz Eggert

Günter Cornett has a great talent for inventing interesting trick-taking games with a
twist, and “Bottle Imp” is no exception.

In this game, each player gets a distribution of 36 cards (numbered 1-18 and 20-37) in
three colours. The trick is won by the player who played the highest card of the same
colour (or any colour if he is out of the colour) which is the highest lower card as the
current “bottle imp”, or, if nobody played a card below the imp’s number,
simply the highest card. The bottle imp starts at “19” (for which there is no
card), so the player playing the only 18 in the game would win the trick, but also a
player playing 17 or lower if he was the highest “below-the-imp” player.
However, that also means that the bottle imp is now placed on the 18 (or the highest
lowest card that was played), and the next trick-taking play has to be 17 or lower. The
player who is stuck with the bottle imp after the last card is played gets the imp’s
cards (see below) counted in the negative, all the other players get positive points.

Of course this is not as simple as it sounds. At the beginning of a round players pass
two of their cards to their neighbours, and one card into the “imp’s pile”.
So there is never any absolute certainty about which cards are actually in the game. Of
course it is not a good tactic to keep your 1’s and 2’s for the last trick,
because this usually means you get the bottle imp. Therefore it is common that if a
player plays an imp trick (for example the 15) all other players will get rid of their
lowest cards, because they won’t win the trick for certain and don’t end up with
the imp (represented as a little wooden bottle) either. If you play a low card as a
starter, other players might deliberately play their higher cards so you end up with a
low imp early in the game, and the other players simply win the tricks by playing higher
cards than your imp, in effect the game will pass you by with an evil grin of everybody
involved.

“The Bottle Imp” is not only a clever game, but also lovingly crafted around
a famous short story of Robert Louis Stevenson, which, as an additional bonus, is fully included
with the game, in German AND English (as are the rules). Luck of the draw might play a
role, as if you have many very low cards in your initial draw it will be very difficult
to get rid of all of them at the right time. Still this is a very enjoyable card game
that doesn’t leave the brain out of work and also has a high “fun through
torture of other players” factor. Recommended!

Explanation time: 5 minutes

Playing time:1 round 5 minutes, full game 1 hour

Casanova

reviewed by Moritz Eggert

This game is not, as one would expect from the title, about beds, but rather about
BETS (apparently real-life Casanova’s second obsession).

This is a deceivingly simple game, that actually turns the intrepid gamer a little off
when he reads the rules, as there doesn’t seem to be much of a game in it.

Each player has 13 cards (numbered 1-13). Each round consists of the starting player
declaring if he is going to roll 1, 2 or 3 dice, then each player selects one of his
cards secretly. Then the dice are rolled, and each player places one coin as a bet. The
starting player now has the possibility to either “declare” and reveal all
cards (in this case the player who played the highest card that is either equal to or
below the actual dice roll wins the bet) or to “raise”, which works like in
poker, with each player either passing or raising. This is done 12 times, and then the
game ends.

And that’s it!

Strangely enough, the game is much more tactical as the first impression suggests. The
fact that you only play 12 of your 13 cards, and that the cards the players already
played are open creates some second-guessing, and can even result in “sure”
bets, if the dice do not roll too far from the average outcome. But even though this
results in slightly amusing little game this is not more than VERY slight fare for the
family crowd, even if the cards’ graphics are nice and unusually elaborate. I wonder
if beds wouldn’t have been a better theme, and if some players felt cheated after
buying this game because of the promising title.

Explanation time: 1 minute

Playing time: 20 minutes

Piranha Pedro

reviewed by Moritz Eggert

Piranha Pedro (with a sombrero-are there piranhas in Mexico, I wonder???) sits on his
little island and wants to leave it. Problem is: There are piranhas out there, and LOTS
of water, which can only be overcome with stepping stones. Basically Piranha Pedro is
like Sisyphos, as his journey from the island always ultimately ends in failure (= end of
a round). Poor s.o.b.!

Each player has 12 cards with 1-3 stone symbols, 3 for West, North, South, East
direction. They also have a pile of stepping stones in front of them (four at the
beginning, more are less after each round depending on what cards you played). Each
player plays his/her card secretly and after that, they are revealed in changing turn
order. If a player played a 3 East card for example, Piranha Pedro would move 3 spaces in
an eastern direction (actually N,W,S,E are shown as symbols corresponding to game board
sides), if he passed water spaces the player playing the card would have to expand
stepping stones. If the player runs out of them or if Piranha Pedro steps on the
eponymous Piranha, the round is over and a new round begins. If the same player fails
twice, the game ends immediately and ALL other players win, so this is a good game to
build up your self-esteem after a long series of lost “St. Petersburg” games,
for example.

“Piranha Pedro” is a bit like a very simple “Robo Rallye” – you
can never be sure what the other players are up to with poor ol’ Pedro, and where
exactly he is going to end up. The beginning spaces of the island are safe havens, and
you might try to move Pedro around in circles a little to avoid spending stones. A
beloved tactic is to unexpectedly move Pedro to the edge of the gameboard, because then
the chance rises that one of the players accidentally moves him over the edge (another
death for Pedro – I guess he drowns in a glass of wine or falls from the table).

“Piranha Pedro” is lovingly crafted: The stepping stones are real pebbles,
and Pedro stands proud as a little wooded figure. The rules are explained in comic book
form, which is certainly an innovation (but not the first game to do so – see
“Snit’s Revenge”). It is a simple game with good player interaction, and it
equally works when playing together with kids. One might get tired of Pedro’s
shenanigans after a while (because there is not really a lot to it), but as a quick break
game this certainly serves its purpose.

Explanation: 2 minutes (or read the comic)

Playing time: 20 minutes

Betrayal at House on the Hill

This game works relatively well as a traditional exploration/character advancement game, but really kicks into gear when it comes to the second part, where one player will be the evil traitor and the other players fight together to overcome one of 50 totally different evil scenarios. Some of them play like little wargames, others demand deduction and skill. Great fun for everybody involved, as the game really depicts the theme well, and the scenarios have been lovingly crafted to represent every imagineable haunted house story/cliché.The replay value is high, as the endgame is always different, but the exploration stays a bit samey. The game would profit from expansions, which could easily be integrated. Great design with wonderful atmosphere, easy to pick up, relatively short playing time – what doth the geek wanteth more?

WPG ranking: Basti: 8, Andrea: 9, Moritz: 9, Aaron: 8

Paladin

What might have been a mildly interesting game is ruined by the fact that the paladin cards are drawn at random, and that there is no game mechanic that can overcome the malady of drawing low cards. Imagine playing “Corruption” (a similar, much superior game) with randomly drawn money cards instead of equal hands for each player. Players place their cards trying to overcome adventures, but this is handeld in a totally abstract and uninspired way. What is essentially a very boring game is not saved by the fact that it is also very simple and easy to explain.

WPG ranking: Basti: 3, Andrea: 3, Moritz: 3, Aaron: 3

Windschatten

Amazingly good as an advertising game (that came free with a certain brand of mineral water), but if you had bought it you probably wouldn't have been wowed. This is a solid racing game design that takes elements from many similar games and weaves them together to form a relatively satisfying little game. But don't expect anything radically new here. Might lure some health freaks to become gamer geeks.

WPG ranking: Basti: 4, Andrea: 4, Moritz: 5, Aaron: 5

1) Piranha Pedro
Jeder Spieler zieht verdeckt eine Karte, gemäß der eine gemeinsame Spielfigur jeweils in eine der 4 Himmelsrichtungen um 1 bis 3 Spielfelder weit gezogen wird. Solange die Spielfigur auf Land bleibt, ist es gut, wenn sie ins Wasser gerät, muß der Spieler Steine aus seinem Vorrat unterlegen. Wer als erster alle seine Steine losgeworden ist, beendet als Verlierer das Spiel.
Die meiste Spielqualität (äächt!) bringt hier die Schadenfreude, wenn man seinen Nachfolger durch eine unerwartete Vorlage weit ins Wasser schicken konnte.

WPG-Wertung: Andrea , Günther , Moritz ,Walter: unisono 6 Punkte
Ich werde einen Report schreiben.

2) Flaschenteufel
Gelungenes Stichspiel mit vielen antagonistischen Elementen. Einen (Siegpunkt-)Stich gewinnt einerseits die absolut höchste Karte, andererseits (falls vorhanden, dann mit Priorität) die relativ höchste Karte unter einem definierten Limit. Das definierte Limit sinkt immer weiter nach unten.
Wer wegen des Limits gewonnen hat, bekommt den “Flaschenteufel”; wenn er ihn bis Spielende nicht wieder loswerden konnte, zählen alle seine Stiche überhaupt nicht.
Lustig, auch ein bißchen taktisch, zum überwiegenden Teil aber abhängig von einer glücklichen Kartenausteilung.
Ein Nachfolge-Kandidat von “6 nimmt” für die Wochenend-Ausflüge mit meinem Schwager.

WPG-Wertung: Andrea 7, Günther 7, Moritz 7,Walter 6.
Motiz wird einen Report schreiben.

3) Casanova
Reihum bestimmt jeder Spieler, ob mit 1, 2 oder 3 Würfeln gewürfelt wird. Vor dem Würfeln zieht jeder Spieler verdeckt eine Karte aus seinem Kartensatz (Zahlen 1-13), mit der er das Würfelergebnis möglichst gut erreichen, aber nicht überschreiten möchte. Der beste Rater bekommt den Einsatz.
Moritz war unglaublich gut: in mehr als 50% aller Fälle landete er einen Volltreffer. (Trotz Glück in der Liebe!)

WPG-Wertung: Andrea 3, Günther 4, Moritz 5,Walter 4.
Moritz wird einen Report schreiben.

Nach dem Spiel wurde für ein Foto noch schnell eine Spielsituation zusammengetürkt. Das Foto enthält 2 Fehler:
a) Auf einer der Spielkarten liegen 2 statt nur 1 Wetteinsatz.
b) Unser Arpad steht neben MIR.
Günther hatte die Idee, als nächstes WPG-Rätsel Fotos mit Spielsituationen zu veröffentlichen, die eine Reihe von sachlichen Unrichtigkeiten enthalten, und die es zu entdecken gilt. (Aber erst nach der St. Petersburg-Serie!)

4) Fairy Tale
Ein japanisches Karten-Sammelspiel aus dem Hause “Masquerade”. Neuartiges und bemerkenswertes Karten-Verteil-Prinzip. Etwas undurchsichtig, welche Kartenkombinationen möglich sind und am Ende die meisten Punkte bringen. Hier kam uns das Spiel in der ersten Begegnung noch ziemlich Spanisch vor.
Moritz meinte abschließend, mit den Expansion Rules wäre es noch bedeutend interessanter …

WPG-Wertung: Andrea 3, Günther 5, Moritz 6 (will noch mal eine außerordentlich freundliche japanische Begrüßung wie bei “Masquerade” erleben), Walter 3 (Gedächtnis- und Übersichts-Probleme!)
Motiz wird einen Report schreiben.

5) Bluff
Zum ersten (?) Mal ein Endspiel von 4 Spielern mit je einem Würfel. Moritz legte zwei Vierer vor. Günther hätte mit zwei Fünfen das Spiel für sich alleine entscheiden können. Er wollte das natürliche Alles-oder-Nichts aber nicht riskieren sondern lieber mit ein paar Freunden gemeinsam untergehen: er zweifelte an und schickte damit sich und alle anderen, außer Moritz, zur Hölle.
Höhepunkt eines schon allein durch unsere eigene gute Stimmung gelungenen Abends.

Frantic Frankfurt

reviewed by Moritz Eggert

From time to time, a game comes along that tries to approach “real time”
gaming, i.e. games that play in a frantic hurry, like the early “Zaster” or
“Falling” by Cheapass Games. In these games there is not a strict turn order in
which each player patiently awaits what the others are doing, instead everybody plays at
once.

This is especially true of “Frantic Frankfurt”, a new offering of
“Kronberger Spiele”. The game plays like a collective patience, each player has
to get rid of his/her cards as quickly as possible. Each player has 4 decks of various
cards in front of him/her of which only the upper one can be seen. One important element
is that each player plays with only ONE hand (the other presumably holding a mobile phone
to buy stocks), so one has to play a card before looking at the next card. Players play
on open decks on the table, with only two rules: if you play a different coloured card,
it has to be higher than the card you play it on, and if you play an equal coloured card
it has to be even if the card below is odd, or vice versa.

One would be astonished how difficult it is to follow these two easy rules during
actual play. In fact, each player experiences what I would call a
“player’s” block often, being completely paralyzed for the moment because
the others hectic play foils all your plans or simply overwhelms you. As the first four
cards in front of you are open, the first plays can be planned pretty well, but after
that chaos reigns.

Players will fall in two categories: Those who are slow and play their cards
correctly, or those who simply play the cards as they come without correcting mistakes.
And herein lies the big problem of the game – as everything happens simultaneously (to
the extent that cards AND hands might get damaged in the process) mistakes do happen and
it cannot always be reconstructed who the culprit was. In fact it is a valid, even
successful strategy to play your cards very quickly without any care before anybody can
react. In the worst case, somebody else notices it and then both you and s/he spend some
time arguing while somebody else wins instead. This would work as a computer game if
their is an infallible neutral instance, but as a multiplayer game this game mechanic
might be questionable at best, especially because the game doesn’t really use any
kind of punishment for discovered mistakes (like stopping the game and drawing an extra
card, for example).

In Essen the person who presented the game simply said to me “The moment you
think about playing a card wrongly you already lose time”. In our experience sloppy
play was thoroughly rewarded, as the game played so quickly (one round can last under a
minute) that it is nigh impossible to keep track of the mistakes of your fellow
players.

Nevertheless, the game created some enjoyment and excitement at the game table,
although one simply gives up after a while, as it is too much for the brain to handle.
The unsuccessful graphics evoke some kind of stock market frenzy, but luckily, the game
plays too fast for you to really bother looking at the cards. After one play the cards
already showed some sign of damage, although one should think that for a game like this
they should have been designed sturdier.

“Frantic Frankfurt” can be frantically explained in under 5 minutes, a
series of games (several rounds) plays in 10-15 minutes.

Die
Gärten der Alhambra

reviewed by Moritz Eggert

This game has been published under the title “Karat” a couple of years ago,
and Queen Games has used the recent success of “Alhambra” to
publish this game again with beautiful artwork reminiscent of its “sister”
game. But game wise this has little to do with “Alhambra”, in fact “Die
Gärten…” is a truly abstract tile laying game.

The large game board is filled with empty, semi-octagonal spaces that surround square
building spaces of different numerical (VP) value. These buildings are placed at random,
but the values are open from the start. Each player now in turn plays one of the
octagonal tiles that are designed in a way that 4 of them surround a building space.

Each octagon has flowers on each side, in equal quantity, but in different orders. The
flowers represent the player’s “influence” on the various buildings. If a
building is surrounded by 4 octagons it is immediately scored, and the player with the
highest number of flowers adjacent to the building wins the points. In the (often
occurring) situation that two players have the same amount of flowers present, the player
with the next highest number of flowers gets full points, and the others nothing. This
can even mean that a player with NO flowers present can get points (if the three other
players cancel each other out that is).

These are, not even in a nutshell, the complete rules of “Die Gärten der
Alhambra”. Game play is not as easy, as the board becomes cluttered very quickly,
and it is easily overlooked what repercussions each play has. The buildings at the rim of
the board are attractive as they can be quickly scored, but these plans are also easily
foiled by making playing a matching numbered tile easier. You can have two kinds of tiles
in your hand – if you draw a high one you will try to bolster your expected scoring
buildings, if you have a low one you might use it to score a building by making a play
safe for you but bad for the other players. Rarely you’ll have the exact tile that
you need or want!

The game ends after all tiles have been placed, a running score is tallied and one
player wins.

The game, although physically attractive, holds one big caveat for the ambitious
player, and that lies in the fact that you are “played” by the placement of the
other players. In fact up to three quaters of your VP will be achieved through actions no
at all your doing!. As each player first of all cares for him/herself, the placement of
your own coloured flowers will very often be what you want. However, in which order the
OTHER 3 flower colours are placed on the tile and which players will profit from their
placement is very often a result of pure chance, even if you might achieve one or two
naughty and damaging plays. This is especially true in the endgame, when open spaces
become rare and tiles are simply played as they come. In the several games we played the
winner was always the player who profited most from this undirected placement, in fact
you could have thrown the dice instead of playing the game in a way. But it is probably
easy to devise variants. The game offers two: In the first variant each player has three
available tiles (which gives your play a bit more of direction), in the second two
players play with each having TWO colours. The latter variant can actually be very
challenging and can be full heartedly recommended to the pro-gamer, whereas the
“normal” game is probably more fit as a “relaxed” family game, for
which it’s easy rules make it work well.

The game can be explained in less than 5 minutes, actual playing time is 45 minutes to
an hour.

1) 1860
5 Stunden lang vergnügten wir uns in einer Dreierrunde (Aaron, Günther und ich) mit uns und mit einem der jüngsten Enkelkinder aus der 18xx -Familie: “1860”.
Neue Regeln, neue Herausforderungen, aber wie bei jedem Mitglied der Familie: – alles logisch, alles stimmig, alles gekonnt zusammengebraut.
Wir kämpfen alle noch mit der richtigen Einstellung zu den unvermeidlichen Insolvenzen. Jeder besitzt noch zuviel Skrupel, einen Offenbarungseid normal wie einen warmen Regen über sich ergehen zu lassen.
Günther konnte seine unerreichte Erfahrung und Übersicht auf dem 18xx-Sektor auch hier zu einem unangefochtenen Sieg umsetzen.

Keine WPG-Wertung, wird aber wohl bei allen zwischen 9 und 10 Punkten liegen.