Game Session Report 12.02.2003

Authors: Moritz, Walter, Hans

at the table: Andrea, Björn, Hans, Moritz, Peter und Walter

on the table: Sticheln, Hare & Tortoise, Bluff

1. How to win Sticheln
   

   Some tips for card management by Moritz Eggert

   “Sticheln” is a simple but strangely addictive trick-taking card game. The
   special trait of this game is that ALL card suits other than the one played are trumps,
   the highest valued trump will win the trick. Another, even more important trait is that
   each player takes one of his cards (all players do this at the same time, secretly) and
   declares this suit his “pain” colour. This means that all tricks that include
   cards of his pain colour taken as a trick during the game count as negative point values
   (in the value of the card, so a “pain” 14 will hurt you a lot! And yes, of
   course there can be several of your pain cards in the trick!). The cards of other suits
   in a trick count as only 1 positive point, regardless of the card value, so
   avoiding tricks is the main issue here.

   It will be clear to everyone that earning negative points will be easier than making
   positive points, so good card management and well-executed play make the day in this
   “more-difficult-than-it-sounds” game…

   Here are some approved strategic tips:

   1. Selecting your pain-colour

      The rules state correctly that it is not good to select a “short” colour
      as your pain colour. I’d say that 3 cards is the absolute minimum for your pain
      colour. Of course you want to take a suit that is rich in low cards (the lowest
      card you play at the beginning as the “pain” card will already count in
      negative points, so you don’t want to select a set that has, say, a “5”
      as the lowest card). And you DO want to have your pain colour available throughout the
      game. A mistake that players commonly do is getting rid of your pain cards as quickly as
      possible. This will leave you in dire straits if your fellow players suddenly decide to
      play a round consisting only of your pain suit, where even the meekest card of another
      suit will take the trick with the “always trump” rule. You want to have a
      lower card of your pain colour available in this case to “undercut” the suit,
      don’t you think?

      Take the longest possible suit that has the lowest possible cards in
      average. One or two high cards won’t hurt you, you might just be able to get away
      even with a “14” late in the game, if you play carefully. 

      If the suit is too long, you might end up being the only one with that particilar pain
      suit, and that is not always good. Still, it has it’s advantages, as the other
      players might quickly use up your high pain suit cards to get tricks. I think it is good
      to have the knowledge of at least one high card in your pain suit early on, this will
      make your end game easier (see below).

   2. Knowing your (pain) suit

      And we don’t mean your tailor…Know your suit – at ALL costs. Memorize
      all the cards that are missing, deducted from the info you have on your own pain cards.
      You might make a mental note like: “ok, I know 2,3,4,6,9,11,13 of my pain suit are
      still in the game”. If the “2” is played, scratch it, and memorize the
      rest, again! Always momorize which cards are still left. Constantly know which cards
      of your pain suit are still in the game!

      I leave it to you to devise your own memory tricks to achieve this, but believe me,
      knowing the cards left exactly will improve your game 100%. Why? See “The
      end game” below….

      And now to the tactics:

      If you have to play your pain card early in the game

      So your first, huh? What card do you play? If you have a long suit of your pain card,
      you might want to get rid of some (the constant challenge in “Sticheln” is:
      you never want to have too many pain cards, but also not too few). It is clear that you
      MUST play a low card, to avoid other players forcing awful pain cards on you immediately
      (and believe me, they will have them readily available in abundance in the first rounds).
      The highest value you can play depends on the number of players. With 4 players you
      should play a “2” maximum, for example. A “3” might be dangerous
      already (imagine the other players playing a 1 and a 2 plus a zero, you will end up with
      minus 2 points!).  Of course your possibilities will improve when you know exactly
      what cards are left of your pain suit. 5,4,3,1,0 are gone? Of course you can play a 6
      then!

      I have seen disastrous plays in which the players thought: hey, the chances are really
      LOW that the others will play this and that card, so I can get away with playing this and
      that card….DON’T! Murphy’s Law applies here throughout: always assume the
      worst can happen and make the safest play possible!

   3. The early game

      Again, again, and again: Always make the safest play possible! Make the play
      that has the least chance of earning you pain cards. You will most likely always have
      this choice. The game is not won by many tricks, but by one or two safe tricks during the
      end of the game (and the occasional “Round End” trick taken by the player who
      comes last in the round, when one can fully judge what cards one will get and how).
      Follow this rule until you know that all the pain cards of your suit are gone or in your
      hand, period. If a trick comes along that is absolutely safe to take, take it of course,
      but with the least effort possible. Wait, wait, wait, and the win will be yours. You
      might even push this end game in “forcing” a pain suit play. For example:
      you play an 8 in your pain suit, and you know the only lower cards left in your pain suit
      are 6 and 4. The other players will happily play these cards in an attempt to give you
      negative points, but one of them (if you play with at least 3 other players) will just
      HAVE to play the trump card and gain the trick. Voilà – problem solved. Now you
      will dominate!

   4. What card do I play?

      Follow these guidelines:

      1. you want to have as many suits available as possible, to be always able to
         “undercut” and avoid taking tricks you don’t want. Having as many suits
         as possible in your hand means you can always avoid the nasty trick by playing the suit
         of the first played card. So play all suits equally, always keeping them equally
         distributed in your hand. If you have only two cards left in a suit, play the higher card
         – just to be on the safe side. Even if you don’t take a single trick in the
         game, you will be on the winning side with 0 victory points, especially if you play a
         series of games.

      2. play the middle card of a suit, after deciding which suit to play. Why?
         You win the game by playing either low cards (avoiding tricks), or high cards (taking
         tricks when it’s safe). So you want high and low cards, not medium cards.
         Therefore, if you have a 5, a 7, and an 11 to play, play the 7. Always follow this rule
         and you will win the end game.

      3. always keep some cards of your pain suit for the end game. Of course the
         difference with the pain suit is that you don’t want to keep the high cards, so if
         you have many of them, get rid of them early on. But the high cards can be handy in
         playing destructively (if another player has the same pain suit), so this is not always a
         clear decision. But with the pain suit, you want to have only low cards in the end game.
         Why is it not dangerous to have pain cards left at the end of the game? It is extremely
         unlikely that the last tricks played will only contain one suit, because it would involve
         a mutual secret pact by all players to reserve only one and only this one suit for the
         end game. Extremely unlikely….Chances are that many colours will be depleted, and
         therefore cannot be played by everybody anymore. I could write a long statistical essay
         on this, but I guess you can trust me that normal stochastic laws apply. If you start a
         round, and you know your trick suit is depleted, you can always play any card of
         your pain suit, even the highest ones This is usually the best way to get rid of them,
         especially when you can “force” a play (see above). The other players will
         not keep track of your pain suit as well as you do, so they will always try in
         vain to force their pain cards on you, when you smugly know that they can’t hurt
         you in fact because of the value of the card you played (=”haha, there are only 2
         lower cards than this left, and you have to play the trump card, if you want it or
         not because you are three other players…”)

   5. When to begin the end game?

      The perfect end game begins with you having only high cards in many different suits
      with your pain suit either completely depleted or in your hand. Now you try to take
      every trick possible. When you then begin a round, your own pain suit cards, now
      safe, come in handy, as taking a trick is easier when you react, not when you begin a
      round. So switch: Gain a trick, let somebody else take the next trick, gain a trick
      again. 1 or 2 tricks will suffice – you’ll win!

      Of course there is rarely a perfect end game with only high and low cards, but you
      can, as described already, force the end game for you with playing your pain suit cards
      tauntingly. If there is still a “15” out there in your pain suit, don’t
      fret. You can go pretty high in attempting a trick then, just be carefully not to play a
      “15” card yourself, so the pain “15” can be used to undercut your
      own trick.

      Full knowledge of the depletion of your pain suit is, as you can imagine, absolute
      paramount, so I state it again here.

   6. Make life hard for other players

      If you can give negative points to any player – do it! Even if you waste
      cards you think are valuable later on. Always go for maximum damage, give them the
      highest card in their pain suit you have! The only difference is when you’re the
      last one to play a card and could gain a trick with only positive points for you. The
      other players might groan when you foil their plans, but taking four positive points for
      yourself means giving ALL the other players negative 4 points (in comparison to you), so
      that’s ok.

   View/add comment

   And that’s it. Follow these simple rules, and you’ll be much more
   successful in playing this sometimes very confusing game.

   Have fun!

   Deutsche Version

2. Hare & Tortoise
   
   This game has made history – in my own family as well. We played it as long ago as
   Christmas 1978, that was even before it had won the title “game of the year” –
   the first winner of this newly instituted award. As evidence of this prehistoric
   acquaintance you can examine the lid of the box, where the famous Logo is missing.

   At that time my 8 year old niece Kerstin had been given the game as a present and had to
   fight with her hands and her feet (and tears as well) to convince her mother to let her
   bring the game along to the Christmas visit at her grandparents’. This was the first
   time that our family circle played the game … every day … with ever increasing
   enthusiasm … and the game always took new a course … and was good for surprises …
   right up until today.

   The game is a race which must be run along a given course from a common starting point
   with the objective of becoming the first to reach the finish. It all takes place without
   dice – this was in its time a complete novelty in the structure of a game. At his or her
   turn each player can move as far forward as he wishes, provided that he can afford such a
   move: each move towards the finish must be paid for in carrots, and these are strictly
   limited in number. At the same time the price does not increase linearly with the
   distance, but relates to the square of the number of squares one jumps. The exact formula
   is:

   Price = number of squares times (number of squares + 1) / 2.

   Using this formula it can be seen that to move forward one square costs just 1 carrot,
   but 20 squares cost as many as 210 carrots.

   When there are 5 or 6 players each one is issued with 98 carrots as starting capital.
   No-one can make much progress under these conditions, so everyone is always on the
   look-out for new sources of carrots.

   Wasn’t it – in those days of Monopoly millionaires – very daring to try to introduce
   a game in which trifling numbers of carrots formed the currency? Nor was the underlying
   ecological principle at all in line with the predominant public opinion of the time. Such
   views were subscribed to then by at the most an intellectual elite consisting of freaks
   and anarchists. Even today “old Europe” is fortunately still capable of
   providing new impulses which can further the cause of humanity, whether this a matter of
   moderation, or lack of arrogance or in the appropriateness of the means …

   I don’t want to describe the rules of the game in
   any further detail. I will assume that the reader knows what this game is all about.
   There is in addition enough literature on the subject. And anyone who does want to
   know more should simply buy a copy of the game. I am prepared to guarantee that this
   will be a very wise decision.

   The outward presentation of the game suggests an image of “child’s play”.
   The German name “Hase und Igel”, or “Hare and Hedgehog”, comes from
   one of the well loved tales of the Grimm brothers, while the original English title
   “Hare and Tortoise” refers to one of Aesop’s fables. This is less well
   known in Germany but the story corresponds better to the idea of the game: the course of
   the race must be run once only, the winner reaches the goal with his own efforts alone
   and without the aid of trickery; instead he wins by applying his speed to the appropriate
   extent.

   The underlying principle of this game is absolutely a matter of strategy, which requires
   more planning and foresight than is apparent at the first glance. Brian Bankler writes in
   his review:
   “With good players, the game is tense, but predictable.” I can not in
   any way confirm this predictability. Of course there are situations in which the right
   move is self-evident, and of course there are sequences of moves which are inevitably
   favourable or unfavourable and call for certain defined tactical measures. What however
   Bankler recommends as strategic tips, such as:

   • use every opportunity to get rid of a lettuce
   • pay attention to the order of play ahead of lettuce squares
   • your profit in carrots whenever possible
   • never let carrots fall into the lap of your rivals

   seem to me rather trivial, and following them is a matter of course.

   I consider the right choice of speed in the various phases of the game to be much more
   decisive and strategic. The sequence in which the players begin the game plays an
   important part here. As the starting player I have no choice but to go straight to the
   first lettuce square, sit out one round there and, when it’s my turn again, to
   evaluate the moves of the other players. I don’t like being the starting player,
   whatever the number of players. One doesn’t earn enough on the first lettuce square,
   and there also aren’t enough lucrative regeneration squares until the second lettuce
   square and one stays hungry for the duration of the game.

   Even as the second player one obtains at least 10 more carrots for the first lettuce
   square, usually as many as 30 or 40 (I am now assuming there are 6 players), as several
   competitors – very reasonably – are not going to wait until the lettuce square is free
   again and move on into the “area of no return”, that is, beyond the first
   tortoise square, from where one can not get back to the first lettuce square.

   Starting third is my favourite position. Here I move to one of the first lettuce squares
   and sit it out there of my own free will until the first and second players have reached
   and then left the first lettuce square. While waiting I pick up 10 carrots for each
   missed turn, and when I then give up my lettuce I usually get another 50 or 60 carrots. I
   have thus more than doubled my original number of carrots, when I hurry after the pack
   which has pulled ahead by four moves.

   Those players who start fourth, fifth or even sixth have to weigh up carefully whether
   they should still wait for the first lettuce square or whether they should head at once
   for the second lettuce square by taking advantage of other profitable squares – but there
   aren’t very many of these. Should this succeed, you are now almost broke, and
   you’ve got to fall backwards. You gain on the relatively long stretches up to the
   respective tortoise squares, and while doing this should naturally consider the suitable
   numbered squares when you are next moving forwards. Above all however you must keep an
   eye on the second lettuce square which has been left behind, in order to enter this
   square once more when the order of the players is more favourable, with a considerably
   higher profit in carrots this time. By this time the other players are scattered more
   widely around the board, and it is now perhaps possible to get through the back straight
   fairly economically by exploiting the 2 and 3 squares.

   The back straight demands a very well considered approach. Whoever is the first one to
   pass along it is simply paving the way for the others. There are hardly any squares on
   which the leader can collect carrots. The pioneer – someone must after all make a start –
   ought in any case consider dropping back again from the leading position, above all when
   by doing this he can spoil the chances of the others’ picking up the appropriate
   amounts from the numbered squares.

   The third lettuce square marks the beginning of the end-game. If you arrive here soon
   enough – even with no carrots in your wallet – you can attempt to reach the finish from
   here by means of short but steady forward moves. Should this lettuce square however be
   occupied, and some other competitors who are interested in the lettuce have their turns
   before you, you should not stand around here too long missing turns. It’s then better
   to fall back again to pick up more swing, in order to aim after that at a slightly higher
   speed for one of the two lettuce squares near the finish. But you must take careful aim:
   you must have the right number of carrots remaining in your hand! Im Vorfeld sind
   Zwischenfelder viel besser kalkulierbar als am Ende. Anyone who makes a mistake here and
   is forced to move to a hare square as an emergency case is in for a nasty surprise.
   Either with “Your last move cost nothing” or with “You must fall back one
   position immediately” you have at a stroke lost the lead that you had built up with
   so much concentrated effort.

   There is also a major difficulty with the last lettuce squares: ones competitors can –
   either by overtaking or by not doing so – alter ones expected reward of carrots. The
   effect is either that one has either too many carrots and must sit out to get rid of
   them, or that one has too few and must obtain some more by moving backwards. In both
   cases one loses 3-4 moves on the way to winning.

   In the history of the Westpark-Gamers we have played this game only once, and then
   without any great sense of purpose. At the time – about one year ago – I had to promote
   it vigorously. This time it was an emergency solution, as Moritz had brought games with
   him only for the expected 5 players, but Björn was there as a surprise guest to make 6.
   So we went through my repertoire of 6 person games and finished up with “Hare and
   Tortoise” again.

   Not exactly to my delight I was the starting player. Naturally I went immediately to the
   first lettuce square; none of my competitors overtook me and I was not very happy with
   the 10 carrot reward. By now four players had overtaken me, just enough to make the
   following free numbered squares hold out little chance of success. The 2 to 4 positions
   were hopeless and the questionable 1/5/6 flag square a long way off. I moved to a hare
   square and promptly drew “Miss a turn”. In this phase this card is almost
   fatal: I could say goodbye to the lettuce squares, and goodbye to the main bunch of the
   competitors.

   I let myself drop back to the last tortoise square, improved my finances again a couple
   of times on the flag squares in the back area of the board, was able to get rid of a
   lettuce at a good profit on each of the second and third lettuce squares and reached
   third place without any further setbacks.

   Peter was the last player to start. He was also the only one who remained behind me when
   I ate my first lettuce. (To my dear fellow competitors, in particular to the dear players
   who started second and third: that was a big mistake on your part, the bitter effects of
   which you came to feel later!) In this way he earned 60 carrots with his first lettuce,
   could then leave the next flag square for 50 carrots (missing a turn, I was the only one
   remaining behind him), had to struggle a bit to dispose of his remaining two lettuce, and
   was the pioneer on the back straight, for which he got little thanks. Perhaps it was here
   that he lost his advantage in carrots again – but not completely, for he managed to come
   in second.

   Moritz was the fourth player to enter the race. He somehow chose a deliberately
   inconspicuous role – but one entirely appropriate to the game. He ate his first lettuce
   on the second lettuce square He was able to dispose of the second one by drawing the card
   “Eat a lettuce at once”. (This is – regrettably – almost the winning card!) In
   Peter’s wind-shadow – that means cashing in on the 2-squares – he was able to
   negotiate the back straight. He calculated his run-in exactly and thus won the game.

   Deservedly so? Well, to some extent! Suppose for once we exchange your
   “lettuce” card with my “miss a turn” card. But that is just the envy
   of the dispossessed …

   One word to the other three also-rans (or better, also-hopped): you also had the honour
   of taking part! I don’t want to add anything else.

   View/add comment

   Bankler puts the game in the category of those “that are better remembered than
   played”. Here again I can not agree with him. I will sit down to play the game over
   and over again and I will enjoy playing it each time anew, not just reminisce over great
   games in the past. I am looking forward to playing the game with my grandchildren some
   day soon – they aren’t born yet. And should I ever turn up in Paradise, then I will
   have a copy of this game under my arm there as well. (see Westpark-Gamers Desert Island Games).

3. Bluff
   
   Nothing to report this time.

Spielbericht vom 05.02.2003

Autor: Moritz

am Tisch: Hans, Aaron, Andrea, Peter, Walter, Moritz

auf dem Tisch: Cosmic Encounter, Heimlich & Co., Bluff

1. Cosmic Encounter
   
   Es ist bekannt, daß dies eines meiner Lieblingsspiele ist, leider kann ich die Kollegen
   selten zu einer Partie überreden. Der Versuch mit der neuen und sehr schicken Avalon
   Hill-Edition neue Spieler zu gewinnen scheiterte an der Tatsache, daß diese nur bis zu 4
   Spieler versorgt, und das ist für Cosmic einfach zu wenig (das versprochene Expansion Set
   für 5-6 Spieler ist nie erschienen).

   Cosmic Encounter ist ein Chaos-Spiel – “the more
   the merrier” ist sicherlich die Devise. Worum geht es?

   Jeder Spieler verkörpert eine außerirdische Macht, die 5 Planeten und 20 Raumschiffe (4
   pro Planet) ihr eigen nennt. Jeder Spieler hat ein Planetensystem der eigenen Farbe, der
   Spielplan wird modular zusammengesetzt, je nach Anzahl der Spieler. In der Mitte ist der
   “Warp”, eine Art großes schwarzes Loch, in dem vernichtete Raumschiffe landen.
   Wenn ein Spieler dran ist, dreht er eine Karte des “Destiny”-Decks um – diese
   hat nun entweder die Farbe eines fremden Planetensystems, oder des eigenen. Wenn es ein
   fremdes System ist, muss er mittels des “Cone” (eine Spielhilfe, auf der
   angreifende und verteidigende Raumschiffe platziert werden) den Spieler dieser Farbe in
   seinem eigenen System angreifen, und zwar mit 1-4 Raumschiffen die beliebig von anderen
   Planeten abgezogen werden. Zeigt die “Destiny”-Karte seine eigene Farbe, darf
   er Planeten, die in seinem eigenen System von anderen Spielern besetzt sind, angreifen.

   Nun lädt der Angreifer bestimmte Spieler zum Angriff mit
   ein, danach darf der Verteidiger dasselbe für die Verteidigung tun. Jetzt entscheidet
   sich jeder Spieler reihum, ob er (wenn eingeladen), angreifen will (ebenfalls mit 1-4
   Raumschiffen), oder verteidigen will (auch 1-4). Nachdem alle Spieler ihre Raumschiffe
   gesetzt haben, spielen der angreifende und verteidigende Hauptspieler jeweils eine
   verdeckte Zahlenkarte (Werte von 6-40, mit Mittelwerten um 12 herum). Diese werden
   aufgedeckt und zu der Zahl der Angreifer bzw. Verteidiger (Raumschiffe) hinzugezählt –
   die höhere Summe gewinnt! Wenn der Angreifer gewonnen hat, erhalten er/sie und alle
   Mitangreifer das Recht, auf dem Planeten zu landen, die Raumschiffe verwandeln sich dann
   quasi in eine “Basis”. Die Verteidiger gehen mit all ihren Schiffen in den
   Warp. Gewinnen die Verteidiger, erhält der Hauptspieler nichts außer der Ehre, seinen
   Planeten verteidigt zu haben, die Mitverteidiger jedoch erhalten für jedes
   “riskierte” Raumschiff eine zusätzliche Handkarte. Auch hier müssen die
   Verlierer in den Orkus, sprich Warp. Da es keinen Spielmechanismus gibt, der einem Karten
   “schenkt”, ist letzteres eine der wenigen Möglichkeiten, an Karten zu kommen!

   Bei einem Kampf können auch “Compromise”-Karten gespielt werden – der
   Spielende verzichtet hierbei auf den Sieg, zieht aber für jedes seiner verlorenen
   Raumschiffe dem Gegner eine Karte aus der Hand. Spielen beide eine
   “Compromise”-Karte, müssen die Verbündeten nach Hause und die beiden
   Hauptspieler müssen einen “Deal” aushandeln (meistens Basentausch). Wird das
   Zeitlimit von 1 Minute für die Verhandlungen überschritten droht eine drakonische Strafe
   (Verlust von Raumschiffen und Karten).

   War der Spieler am Zug mit seinem Angriff erfolgreich, darf er gleich noch mal eine
   “Destiny”-Karte aufdecken, nach dem 2. Zug ist aber Schluss.

   So geht es reihum, bis ein (oder mehrere) Spieler 5 Basen erreichen (der Gruppensieg ist
   möglich, wenn mehrere zusammen angreifen), woraufhin mit “sudden death” der
   Sieg folgt.

   Dies ist die Basis von “Cosmic” –
   allerdings liegt hierin nicht der Spielspass. Dieser ergibt sich aus den knapp 100 (mit
   allen Expansion-Sets) außerirdischen Spezialkräften, von denen jeder Spieler eine hat. In
   unserem Spiel waren dies zum Beispiel der “Zombie” (verliert nie Raumschiffe,
   ist also quasi immun gegen den Warp), oder der “Mirror” (vertauscht die Zahlen
   auf den gespielten Zahlenkarten – aus 16 wird also 61), oder auch der “Filth”
   (vertreibt durch seinen eigenen Gestank alle anderen Raumschiffe von seinem Planeten).
   Diese Kräfte setzen immer bestimmte Regeln außer Kraft, und sind meist sehr mächtig.
   Jeder Figur hat also ihre eigene Strategie, und die immer neuen Kombinationen erzeugen
   immer neue, meist sehr lustige Situationen. Man kann “Cosmic” hundertmal
   spielen, und dennoch immer wieder überrascht werden – sicherlich ein großer Reiz.

   Natürlich gibt es auch Ereigniskarten – die wichtigste hiervon sicherlich “Cosmic
   Zap”, die für eine bestimmte Spielsituation die Macht eines anderen Spielers
   negiert, aber auch Karten die allen Spielern nützen, wie z.B. “Mobius Tubes”
   (Alle Raumschiffe werden aus dem Warp befreit).

   Schon an der Spielbeschreibung sieht man, dass Glück eine große Rolle spielt, eine
   Kenntnis des Spiels und seiner Karten ist dennoch sehr nützlich und erhöht die
   Siegchancen beträchtlich, man wird also schon mit der Zeit zum “besseren”
   Cosmic-Spieler, eine Gewinngarantie ist das allerdings nicht. Dennoch macht es Spaß,
   verschiedene Aliens auszuprobieren, und das meiste herauszuholen. Man muss auch die
   Anwendung der Fähigkeiten der anderen Spieler quasi vorausberechnen. Dennoch sollte man
   hier ehrlich sein: es ist kein Spiel für gewiefte Taktiker, sondern ein sehr
   unterhaltsames und kommunikatives Gruppen-Erlebnis, das manche begeistern, manche
   abstoßen wird. Ein Problem des Spiels ist sicherlich, dass recht schnell eine
   “Deadlock”-Situation entsteht, in der die meisten Spieler 4 Basen haben, und
   Zug um Zug das Erlangen der 5. verhindert wird…bis halt einer die besseren Karten hat
   (ein Problem, das z.B. auch das Spiel “Kill Dr.
   Lucky” hat).

   Gerne wird aber auch die historische Bedeutung von “Cosmic” unterschätzt –
   immerhin war es das erste Spiel, das variable Spielerkräfte einsetzte. In den 70er Jahren
   war dies eine neue Idee, heute ist es uns aus Spielen wie “Ohne
   Furcht und Adel” oder “Puerto Rico”
   wohlbekannt (das Neue bei letzteren Spielen ist natürlich, dass die Rollen jede Runde neu
   gewählt werden können).

   Auch muss man feststellen, dass “Cosmic” bis heute gespielt wird, obwohl das
   Spiel fast immer vergriffen und schwer zu bekommen ist. An diesem Abend haben wir
   übrigens die “Mayfair”-Edition gespielt, die in 2 Schachteln alle bis dahin
   beim Urverleger “EON” erschienenen Expansionen zusammenfasst und erweitert (wir
   spielten die Basisversion, ohne “Flares” und Monde). Die Mayfair-Version ist
   verdienstvoll, aber nicht besonders schön (Hellblau UND Dunkelblau als Spielerfarben zu
   nehmen ist auch nicht unbedingt eine gute Designentscheidung), immerhin ist sie die
   vollständigste aller Cosmic-Versionen, und daher auch sehr gesucht.

   EON verarbeitete die Grundideen von “Cosmic” in “Dune”
   weiter, sicherlich ist “Dune” auch das perfektere Spiel, denn hier kommt
   tatsächlich der “Skill” der einzelnen Spieler mehr zur Geltung.

   EON ist sicherlich eine der einflussreichsten unabhängigen Spielefirmen gewesen – fast
   jedes ihrer Spiele ist ein Klassiker, so eben auch “Cosmic”. Wer es gerne
   ausprobieren möchte, kann auch bald eine erneuerte Online-Version spielen, die von den
   Söhnen der alten Erfinder programmiert wurde (Link). Es steht auf jeden Fall fest, daß
   dieses Spiel nicht totzukriegen ist, ich selber werde es sicherlich immer wieder gerne
   aus meinem Spieleschrank auf den Tisch bringen.

2. Heimlich & Co.
   
   This always enjoyable game has already been reviewed by us (Link), so this
   is only a short report. It was interesting to watch the different tactics used by the
   players this time. Hans went for a very open strategy, exposing his yellow pawn very
   early in the game (he was promptly giving EVERYBODY else 5 points for guessing this
   correctly), but accumulating enough points by brash “cash-in” moves to get to
   third place in the end. Everybody else accomplished to hide his/her identity pretty well,
   and so little points were gained through guesswork. In the end Andrea fared best and won
   convincingly.

   It might be interesting to play an additional variant – every incorrect guess on other
   players makes you LOSE points, so hiding your identity would be tactically more
   important. Or having the player which identity was revealed successfully lose points
   instead of giving points to the ones who guessed right. Has anybody ever tried that?

3. Bluff
   
   Our usual “ender”. No special occurrences here, but it was interesting to see
   the players winning the last game always come last in the next game. (proven in 3
   successive games).

Spielbericht vom 29.01.2003

English version

Autor: Walter

am Tisch: Hans, Günther, Andrea, Moritz, Peter, Walter

auf dem Tisch: Outpost, Bluff

1. Outpost
   
   Um mit dem Ende anzufangen: Als nach vier Stunden Spielzeit gegen Mitternacht der Sieger
   feststand, war die Stimmung immer noch genauso sachorientiert und aggressionslos wie am
   Anfang. Peter verzichtete auf Kostproben seiner gesammelten Antinomien und ohne
   Abschweifungen konnten wir das Spiel über die Bühne bringen. Etwas wohlwollend vergaben
   wir die Gesamtnote 6,8.

   Was ist Outpost für ein Spiel? Der ganzen blumigen Sprache in der Spielanleitung zum
   Trotz ist es lediglich ein ganz normales Wirtschafts- und Auktionsspiel. Dass die
   Szenerie in den Weltraum verlegt wird, und wir zu Kommandeuren einer Außenstation im
   Weltraum ernannt werden, ändert nichts am Spielprinzip: Jeder bietet um Aufbaukarten
   (AK), kauft Fabriken, macht damit Erlöse und reinvestiert seine Einnahmen solange, bis
   der ersten Spieler eine bestimmte Menge an Produktionsmitteln erworben und damit das
   Spiel gewonnen hat.

   Die AKs besitzen natürlich (wie bei Civilization) eine gewisse interne Abhängigkeit: Sie
   geben Bonuspunkte beim Erwerb bestimmter weiterer AKs, sind Voraussetzung zum Kauf von
   bestimmten Fabriken oder erweitern den Spielraum von Restriktionen, denen jeder Spieler
   unterliegt, z.B. die maximale Anzahl der in den Fabriken beschäftigten Mitarbeiter oder
   die maximale Anzahl der in der Hand zurückbehaltenen Geldscheine.

   Die Geldscheine stellen den Gewinn dar, den eine Fabrik erwirtschaftet, d.h. pro Fabrik
   erhält der Besitzer einen Geldschein. Je teurer eine Fabrik ist, desto höher ist der
   Betrag auf den zugeordneten Geldscheinen. Allerdings ist dieser Betrag nicht jeweils
   feste Zahl, sondern er streut um einen Durchschnittswert herum. Wer Glück hat, zieht für
   seine Fabriken hohe Geldscheine, wer Pech hat, eben nicht. Dieses Zufallsprinzip als
   “clever mechanic” zu bezeichnen (wie es Mark Green
   tut), ist schon eine sehr freundliche Kommentierung. In meinen Augen fördert es lediglich
   etwas Chaos.

   Auch sonst sind der totalen Berechenbarkeit ein paar Riegel
   vorgeschoben; z.B. stehen pro Spielrunde nicht alle AKs zur Verfügung, sondern sie
   werden in einer bestimmten Spielphase jeweils erst ausgewürfelt. Wer in seinem
   Spielplan auf das falsche Pferd setzt, kann seine anvisierten AKs evtl. mehrere
   Runden lang nicht kaufen.

   In welcher Reihenfolge die AKs und die Fabriken optimal ersteigert bzw. gekauft werden
   müssen, ist noch nicht ermittelt. Gott-sei-Dank. Wenn es anders wäre, könnte man das
   ganze Spiel ja sofort vergessen. So kann jeder immer noch nach seiner eigenen besten
   Gewinnstrategie suchen. Peter sparte von Anfang an eisern auf die Titan-Fabrik. Als er
   sie sich dann leisten konnte, war er in bezug auf Anzahl seiner Produktionsmittel schon
   soweit im Hintertreffen, dass er die braven Wasserwerker nicht mehr wesentlich ausstechen
   konnte. Auch Brian Bankler schreibt in seiner Analyse, dass diese Strategie sich nicht auszahlt. Immerhin wurde Peter noch
   Dritter.

   Moritz hatte auf die AK Scientist spekuliert. Diese Karte ist nicht sehr teuer und
   bringt seinem Besitzer pro Spielrunde einen Extra-Geldschein ein. Leider kamen in unserer
   Runde die Scientists nur sehr spärlich auf den Markt. Moritz landete mit den anderen
   Newcomers Andrea und Walter auf den hinteren Plätzen.

   Ich hatte gemeinsam mit Günther und
   Hans die naheliegende Wasserwerk-Strategie eingeschlagen, d.h. wir bauten für
   erschwingliche Investitionen unsere Wasser-Produktionsanlagen aus und konnten damit
   schon bald recht gut verdienen. Irgendwie habe ich einmal vergessen einen Bonus
   nicht in Anspruch zu nehmen und einmal habe ich mich beim Bezahlen zu meinen
   Ungunsten geirrt. Schließlich habe ich mich dann auch noch beim prophylaktischen
   Ausweiten der Restriktionen verzettelt und es verpasst, mich um höherwertige
   Fabriken zu kümmern. Zu viele Fehler, um auf der Siegesstraße zu bleiben. Hans wurde
   immerhin Zweiter.

   Günther – der das Spiel am besten kannte – konnte im Endeffekt unangefochten den Sieg
   für sich verbuchen. Er fing mit den Wasserwerken an, übersprang dann die Titan-Phase und
   war mir-nichts-dir-nichts im Besitz von mehreren New Chemicals, die ihm soviel Einnahmen
   gewährten, dass er schon mehrere Runden vor Schluss als Sieger feststand. Green’s
   Behauptung, “the game is remarkably well balanced with the lead changing hands every
   turn” triff absolut nicht unsere Erfahrung. Exponentiell steigern sich die Einnahmen
   und wer vorne ist, kann auch mit vereinten Kräften nicht mehr eingeholt werden.
   Problemlos konnte Günther beide Moon-Bases ersteigern, sobald sie ausgewürfelt wurden und
   mit 84 Victory Points das Spiel gewinnen.

   Westpark Gamers Bewertung: 6,8

2. Bluff
   
   Zum Ausklang gab es noch zwei Runden Bluff. Keine spektakulären Details, Hans konnte sich
   zweimal mit relativ viel Masse im Endspiel durchsetzen, einmal gegen Andrea und einmal
   gegen mich.

   Bemerkenswert ist nur, dass unser Dauersieger Moritz sich nicht mehr so leicht tut, seit
   Andrea nicht mehr unmittelbar hinter ihm sitzt. Kann er seine Frau etwa leichter
   beeinflussen als den Rest der Westpark-Gamers? Schaun mer mal!

Game Session Report – 29.01.2003

Deutsche Version

Author: Walter

at the table: Hans, Günther, Andrea, Moritz, Peter, Walter

on the table: Outpost, Bluff

1. Outpost
   
   To begin at the end: around midnight, when after four hours’ play it was clear who
   had won, the atmosphere was just as objective and free from aggression as it had been at
   the beginning. Peter spared us a sample of his collected paradoxes and we were able to
   get on with the game without any diversions. We rather generously gave the game an
   overall rating of 6.8.

   What sort of a game is Outpost? Despite the flowery language in the playing instructions
   it is just an ordinary business and auction game. The fact that the scenario has been
   transferred to outer space, and that we are made the commanders of a space station,
   doesn’t change the basic principle of the game: each player bids for Upgrade Cards
   (UCs), buys factories with which he makes a profit, and reinvests his income until the
   first player has acquired a certain quantity of the means of production and thus has won
   the game.

   Of course there are certain interdependencies between the UCs (just as in Civilization):
   they award bonus points for the acquisition of certain additional UCs, they are
   conditions for buying certain factories or else they reduce the restrictions which each
   player is subject to (eg. the maximum number of workers employed in the factories, or the
   maximum number of production cards retained in the hand).

   The production cards represent the profit that a factory produces, that is, the owner
   gets one production card per factory – the more expensive the factory, the higher the
   value of the corresponding production card. This value is however not in each case a
   fixed amount, but is distributed around an average value. If you are lucky you draw
   production cards with high values, if you are unlucky then you don’t. To call this
   random factor a “clever mechanic” (as Mark Green
   does) is a very friendly remark. In my opinion the effect is simply somewhat chaotic.

   There are some more obstacles in the way of total
   predictability, eg. not all the UCs are available in any given round of play.
   Instead this is determined by a throw of the dice in a particular phase of the game.
   If someone backs the wrong horse when making his game plan, he can quite easily be
   unable to buy his intended UCs for the duration of several rounds.

   It has not yet been established what the optimal order is in which one should bid for or
   buy the UCs and the factories – and thank heaven for that. If this were the case we could
   forget the game entirely. As it is each player can still search for his own best winning
   strategy. From the start Peter saved up determinedly for the titanium factory. When he
   was able to afford it, he was already so far behind the field regarding the amount of his
   means of production that he was in no position to seriously hinder the modest
   water-workers. In his analysis Brian Bankler confirms that this strategy does not pay off.
   Nevertheless Peter finished in third place.

   Moritz based his speculations on the scientist UC. This card is not very expensive and
   provides its owner with an additional production card in each round of play.
   Unfortunately the scientists very seldom came on to the market in our game. Moritz
   finished up among the also-rans, along with the other newcomers Andrea und Walter.

   Together with Günther and Hans I
   decided upon the more obvious waterworks strategy, that is, we built up our water
   production facilities for an affordable price and so were able to start earning
   fairly well fairly quickly. Somehow I managed once to forget to claim a bonus and
   another time I made a mistake in payment to my own disadvantage. Finally I wasted
   time by reducing my restrictions as a precautionary measure, instead of
   concentrating on more valuable factories – just too many mistakes to keep me on the
   road to victory. Hans however managed to finish in second place.

   Günther, who knew the game the best, was able to chalk up a win without any effective
   challenge. He began with the waterworks, then skipped over the titanium phase and then
   before anyone could blink an eye he was in possession of several New Chemicals. These
   provided him with so much income that it was clear he was going to be the winner several
   rounds before the end. Green’s claim that “the game is remarkably well balanced
   with the lead changing hands every turn” does not correspond at all to our
   experience. The income increases exponentially and whoever is in the lead can’t be
   caught by the others even if they join forces. With no problems Günther was able to win
   the auction for both the Moon-Bases as soon as the throw of the dice made them available
   and won the game with 84 Victory Points.

   Westpark Gamers’ Rating: 6.8

2. Bluff
   
   To complete the evening we played two rounds of Bluff. There were no spectacular details.
   Twice Hans started the final with an preponderance of 4 vs 1 dices, once against Andrea
   und once against me. He had no problems to bear the palm.

   What seems remarkable is that Moritz, who used to win continually, doesn’t have such
   a clear run now that Andrea no longer sits in the position immediately following his.
   Could it perhaps be that he can influence his wife more easily than the other
   Westpark-Gamers? We will just have to wait and see!

Emmerlaüs

Hersteller: Creations Chaos (erhältlich)

Autor: J.-F. Hamel

Getestet: Basisspiel (erschienen 2000)

Tester: Moritz Eggert

Szenario: In einer nicht näher definierten Fantasy-Welt stoßen mächtige Magier
und ihre Zaubersprüche aufeinander. Wer als letzter übrigbleibt, gewinnt!

Das Spiel: Jeder Spieler repräsentiert einen Magier, und versucht die anderen
Spieler aus der Arena (oder wo auch immer dieses Gemetzel stattfindet) zu werfen. Ein
Spiel zu zweit ist möglich, der Autor empfiehlt jedoch 3-10 (!) Spieler. Jeder Spieler
hat immer 5 Karten auf der Hand (mehr, falls die verschiedenen Expansion-Sets verwendet
werden), die mit zum Teil etwas konfusen Computergrafiken recht aufwendig gestaltet sind
(bei schlechtem Licht oder schlechten Augen nicht gut zu lesen, allein in unserem Spiel
schaffte es Walter mehrmals, die falschen Karten zu spielen, oder wichtige Karten zu
übersehen – was allerdings seinen Erfolg nicht beeinträchtigte!). Alles Fantasy-übliche
ist vertreten: magische Ringe, Zaubertränke, Feuerbälle, etc.. Es gibt 10 Kategorien von
Karten – auf jeder Karte ist angegeben, welche Gegensprüche oder Rettungswürfe verwendet
werden können. Apropos Würfe: Es wird unglaublich viel gewürfelt – Jeder Zauberspruch hat
seinen eigenen Schaden, der anhand verschiedener “polyhedral dice” ausgewürfelt
wird, meist mit dem “Power-Level” des Magiers multipliziert. Also ist es
vorrangig wichtig, diesen anhand bestimmter Karten so schnell wie möglich zu erhöhen. Der
Schaden wird immer von den Lebenspunkten abgezogen (deren Anzahl ständig, zum Teil
dramatisch wechselt). Wer 0 Lebenspunkte hat, ist draußen, und spielt nicht mehr mit
…und kann gelegentlich stundenlang warten, bis die anderen sich auch endlich
massakriert haben.

Spieldauer: Regelerklärung ca. 10 Minuten (das Spiel wird nur durch die Wirkung
der Karten kompliziert, der Spielablauf ist ansonsten extrem simpel), Spieldauer: Nun ja,
wir brachen nach 2 Stunden ab. Es hätte noch eine weitere Stunde dauern können, denn es
waren noch 3 Magier übrig, die sich verbissen bekämpften…

Ähnliche Spiele: MagBlast, Plague & Pestilence, Honour of the Samurai,
Lunch Money

Kommentar der Westpark Gamers: Dies ist eins der Spiele, in denen viel gelacht
wird, viel Schadenfreude aufkommt…und die letztendlich doch nicht wirklich gefallen
oder gar zum Wiederspielen anregen. Das Glückselement ist sicherlich hoch, wäre aber bei
einem Spiel dieser Art nicht so schlimm, wenn nicht auch die Entscheidungsmöglichkeiten
so gering wären. Im Grunde ist die Auswahl der zu spielenden Karten gering, und das Spiel
wird schnell repetitiv, denn obwohl die Karten unterschiedliche Namen haben, ist die
Wirkung doch ähnlich (“wie viele Würfel soll ich jetzt nehmen?”). Das größte
Problem ist jedoch der willkürliche Charakter des Spielverlaufs – Wer durch irgendwelche
Aktionen auffällt (meist ist man gezwungen, irgendjemanden anzugreifen, weil man halt
keine anderen Karten hatte), wird sofort von allen anderen angegriffen. Wenn man dann
erst einmal kurz vor dem “Ende” ist, gibt einem schnell jemand den Rest.
Angriffe entstehen meist spontan, ohne tiefere Strategie. Für ein kurzes Spiel wäre dies
noch ok, “Emmerlaüs” ist jedoch einfach viel zu lang….Lustig war’s aber
dennoch!

Moritz’ Bewertung: 5 von 10 (wegen der “Lustigkeit”)

Westpark Gesamtbewertung: 4.0

Session Report 22.01.2003

Author: Moritz

at the table: Walter, Aaron, Günther, Andrea, Moritz

on the table: Emerald, Puerto Rico, Bluff

1. Emerald
   
   This game has been around for some time, but gets additional exposure in German gaming
   circles right now as it is part of the 4 games to be mastered for the German championship
   in boardgaming 2003 (the other games are “Sticheln“,
   “Medina” and – what else could it be – “Puerto Rico“).

   Inclusion of this game has been a matter of discussion, as it is a very light family
   game with only very shallow tactical elements, also dependent on luck a lot (usually the
   games in the selection are less luck oriented). The game board consists of a single track
   starting in a city and leading to a dungeon of sorts, occupied by the unavoidable dragon.
   Players get a number of knight pawns dependent on the number of players (with 5 players 4
   for example), and try to collect gem (worth 1 VP each, 4 extra points if you are the
   first to collect all 4 colours, 4 VPs for each majority in a colour at the end of the
   game) and gold cards (1 to 5 VPs) on the way to the inner sanctum. Movement is very
   simple and known from other games as a routine: The number of spaces you can move is
   determined by the number of pawns in your space, including your own. This means that you
   try to reach populated spaces to advance quickly, making your way alone will take a long
   time.

   At some point you reach the dungeon – landing on a dungeon space
   gives you the choice to take one of either the open gold or gem cards (or none, if the
   stacks are empty). But beware of the dragon – its movement is actually one of the
   ingenious mechanics of the game. There is a “dragon stick” which marks the 4
   spaces the dragon is searching at the moment. Every time a player lands a pawn in one of
   these spaces, the dragon moves by means of a die roll (1,2 or 3 spaces), and is
   “reflected” by the border of the stick if it would go beyond it. At the same
   time the stick is moved one space to the right until it reaches the end of the track,
   where the dragon will guard the entrance to the treasure hoard. After the dragon moves,
   it will “eat” one of the knights that are standing on the space it lands on (if
   there are several the moving player decides which), but if the knight sacrifices a
   treasure card (gems don’t interest the dragon for some reason) he will survive. As
   the game is basically about gaining VPs through cards it sometimes absolutely okay if you
   let your knight die – giving up your 5 VP card might be worse. Therefore it is also good
   to have low VP cards handy- each player will encounter the dragon at some point or
   another!

   The first 4 pawns that reach the treasure hoard get 5 bonus points each, the fourth one
   to reach it ends the game. Another possibility for sudden death is that one player loses
   all knights but one – if you have many VP cards you can enforce the end in this way a
   little: “let them be eaten!”.

   We played the game 2 times to get some feeling for the strategy, or what little there
   is. As you have only 4 pawns in a 5 player game, you make 2 choices out of 4, sometimes
   less if choices might be obviously awful and to be avoided, and also because taking cards
   always ends your turn – you can never take two cards in a row! Movement is mandatory, you
   cannot go less spaces than you have to. Usually you will try to concentrate on 3 knights
   and get them to the good cards as quickly as possible. The other knights will wither away
   at the starting space.

   It doesn’t make much sense to avoid the dragon – although there are moves which put
   you at higher risk than other moves at some point you will have to face the danger
   of being eaten, and whether that happens or not is pure luck, not skill. Of course you
   will be safer when travelling in numbers and having a low score on hand, as the dragon
   moving player will then gobble up the weightier player (in points, not pounds). To a
   certain extent you can foresee the moves of the other players and make your decisions
   based on that, but basically you are played by the turn order and the moves of the other
   players. We found that the starting player always won, and always was the first to cash
   in the extra VP cards of the treasury.

   Although this is a fun game for the whole family and even for “non-gamers” I
   don’t think it will hold the attention of any true freak for a long time. The big
   plus is that games are very short, around 45 minutes, and can be played out of the box,
   with little preparation.

   View/add comment

   Slightly recommended – forget the fantasy theme, though, the game could also be a about
   making your way through Camden Town, the dragon then being a bobby searching you for
   illicit drugs or something.

2. Puerto Rico
   
   Some strategy tips

   P.R. is one the best documented new games on the web right now – we have already
   reviewed it, so I will try to give some strategic advice based on my now considerable
   experience with the game. Hopefully I can add a grain of wisdom to the immense material
   out there!

   I have become a bit disillusioned with the game recently. Although I still think it is
   great, I have my doubts about how much of a “strategy” can be applied
   successfully (like in “Princes of Florence” or even
   “Settlers” where you basically follow a semi-solitaire strategy). But on
   the other hand this is one of the charms of the game, and adds to its replay value,
   whereas games of “Princes of Florence” have recently turned into clashes of
   pre-set strategies. I haven’t yet decided which I like better.

   What every player of P.R. must learn is that there is no valid
   “building” strategy, for example. No combination of buildings that you
   plan ahead is of any use, even if they are ingeniously devised. I have seen each strategy
   win and fail in equal measures, but what you want is a strategy that gives you a good
   chance to win, not one that you simply think is clever. In fact, I would argue that there
   should be no strategy in P.R. at all, rather “advanced tactics” depending on
   turn order, strategies deployed by other players and sometimes even luck (selection of
   plantations is a huge luck factor).

   P.R. is totally dependent on the choices that other players make. It is therefore in
   nature a very chaotic and unpredictable game. The other players make the game and they
   ruin your plans… usually. The beauty is that they can also help you, if you foresee
   what they will do.

   Here are some tactical rules that will definitely help you win:

   1) Don’t come into the game with ANY strategy.
   
   It won’t work, believe me. Watch what the other players do, and act accordingly.
   Be constantly on the watch for their strategy – basically you want to
   be in the middle of it: If the player to your right goes for quick victory points you
   should do the same. For example, leaving one player alone with a certain strategy is
   usually a bad idea, especially if it’s the “end the game quickly with as many
   VPs as possible” strategy. If you follow a similar tactic and succeed this
   particular player might think twice about ending the game quickly as you might have an
   equal or even bigger number of VPs. On the other hand, if the player is already
   “imitated”, don’t do it – three players following the same route will
   usually cancel each other out. Any combination of buildings can be the winner in a
   certain game, it just depends on the players and their actions.

   2) The LEFT PLAYER RULE
   
   Rick Heli brings it down to a simple point in his excellent short description of the
   game at “spotlightongames.com
   “…When deciding what crops to grow, the workings of the ship and the trader make
   it wise to avoid what your right hand neighbour grows and to strongly consider growing
   what your left hand neighbour does….”

   I would call this most important advice. Why? Growing the same crops as your left
   neighbour is one of the few ways in which you can actually play aggressively against a
   player, and your left neighbour is your best victim. This is because of the turn order,
   which is always 1,2,3,4, then 2,3,4,1, then 3,4,1,2 then 4,1,2,3 for example. If you are
   player number two you will be ahead of player number 3 (your left neighbour) 3
   times out of 4 when roles are selected, which means you have a pretty good chance of
   shipping/selling goods before her or him.

   This of course also explains why you should avoid the plantations of the right
   player – who is of course possibly after you as you are after your left neighbour.

   Try to copy your left neighbour as closely as possible, but only in plantations
   and factories. Apart from that your tactics should be the absolute opposite of the left
   player. Why? See the “RIGHT PLAYER RULE” below!

   3) The RIGHT PLAYER RULE
   
   The right player will go before you ¾ of the time (in a 4 player game). Which gives you
   the possibility to see what s/he does, and then somehow imitate it (not the
   plantations, see above). With somehow I mean “not exactly”. Of course you
   should rule out imitating dumb moves, for a start (I have seen weak players win games of
   P.R. against the top-pro’s because they had an equally weak right neighbour).
   But the buildings the right player builds should be closely watched. If your
   right neighbour buys a building that is triggered by the “settler”
   phase, you should consider building it as well (if possible), or another building that is
   triggered by the same phase. Chances are s/he bought it for a reason, and will possibly
   play this role on her/his turn – and you will profit from it as well! I have closely
   followed this rule in my last experimental games, even sometimes buying buildings I
   thought I had little use for, or which seemed weird in my specific setup (getting the
   right feel for this is the closest this game comes to “skill”). I never
   regretted it – sure enough I always profited from my right player taking certain roles
   which I also benefited from, and then I was free to take roles that only benefited me
   afterwards! The game usually rewards the second player, especially when shipping
   for VPs!

   Watch closely, and most importantly: be flexible!

   4) The SAVINGS RULE
   
   This is a more obscure tactic that doesn’t seem obvious at first. The rule is:
   “When you buy buildings in the builder phase, already consider what you are able
   (not what you “want”) to buy in the next phase – it might come sooner
   than you think!”. This means sometimes buying “cheap” buildings when you
   could actually buy more expensive ones. I see it happening very often that good players
   trigger phases that as few as possible other players can benefit from (a basic rule of
   thumb that is mostly followed). Usually it happens that one player triggers the builder
   phase, all players dump their money into expensive buildings, and then the player who has
   the most money will immediately become builder again next turn (this might even happen
   directly afterwards, when the turn ended with the builder phase) to buy another
   building with his savings, whereas the other players just dumbly stare. Don’t let
   that happen – try to always buy a building in the builder phase. Even the meagre
   “1” building might be worth many more points with certain large buildings. If
   only buildings are available that you don’t think fit into your strategy,
   change your strategy. When you are always able to buy buildings and never miss out
   a phase, you will have an edge on other players, believe me!

   Always save some money, if possible! Always consider taking the gold digger, even if
   it’s only worth one buck.

   5) The FIRST TURN
   
   What should you do when you’re first? It’s not easy to “imitate” when
   there is nothing there to imitate. I personally think there is only one answer: take the
   settler and take a free quarry. Quarries always come in handy in any game
   (although one might argue how many you need – I think you’ll be fine with no more
   than two, personally), nobody else will be able to get one, and you will have an edge
   when “imitating” a quarry strategy of your right player later on. If
   there are too many maize plantations lying around you might consider taking the gold
   digger instead, though, but that case will be rare. Also, if you’re lucky, somebody
   might play the “mayor” and give you the possibility to populate the quarry
   before the first builder phase, therefore giving you the same edge that the builder role
   would have brought you at the start.

   View/add comment

   These tactics can form the basis for a more serious delving into the game. Guenther, our
   most successful P.R. player certainly knows them well – he always uses them and wins 80
   percent of the time!

   Good gaming.

3. Bluff
   
   Strange that the two gaming groups “Westbank” and “Westpark”-gamers
   have one affliction in common: the call of the dice (or, shall we say, the SCOURGE of the
   dice?). Since we experimented with different seating orders (usually we always sit at the
   same places of the table) results have varied wildly, this time Andrea won twice in a
   row, whereas Walter, who very often wins, came always in last.

   PETER, IF YOU READ THIS…..COME BACK!

Session Report 15.01.2003

Author: Aaron

at the table: Walter, Peter, Moritz, Andrea, Aaron

on the table: T-Rex, Linie 1, Bluff

1. T-Rex
   
   After some debate about the first game of the evening Peter finally succeeded in
   convincing us to agree to T-Rex. Peter had played the game several time before and
   enjoyed it a lot whereas especially Moritz didn’t like it too much on his first try.

   T-Rex is a card game where all players use an identical set of 17 cards and try to win
   dinosaur eggs. These eggs come in 4 different colors and each egg is worth the total
   number of eggs a player owns of that color at the end of the game, resulting in a
   possible exponential growth of victory points.

   The player cards come in five colors with 3 cards of each color numbered from 1 to 15
   plus 2 special cards. Before the first (of a total of 12) round of the game commences
   each player shuffles his/her deck and draws 7 hand cards to start with. Additionally, 2
   dino eggs are revealed from the dino egg draw pile and two color cards are placed on the
   table to indicate the highest and lowest ranking card color for this round.

   Players in sequence play one of their hand cards placing it in front of them – there is
   no need to follow suit. Each card carries a symbol (cards or a comet) which either
   enables the player to draw additional cards from the draw pile or it signals the
   beginning of the “end sequence” of that round. When the first comet card has
   been played the round immediately ends once that player has played another turn and no
   other player has played a higher ranking comet card. Card ranking goes by the card’s
   color followed by the number on the card.

   Whoever has the highest ranking card in front of him/her selects one of the two dino
   eggs; the second egg goes to the player with the second highest card. As a small, but
   important, bonus the player having the lowest ranking card may replace one of the two
   color cards that indicate the color rank for the next round. Then each player permanently
   discards either the top card from his/her draw pile or the card last played in this
   round. Then the remainder of the cards played this round are placed under the draw pile.

   The first two or three rounds of T-Rex are usually heavily luck based as it
   is completely unknown which cards are held by the other players. After a while most
   players have gone through their draw pile at least once and usually have collected a set
   of cards that suits their tactics. Especially players with a good memory now have an
   advantage if they remember which cards are permanently out of the game and which cards or
   at the bottom of the draw piles.

   Once a comet card is played in a round this type of information can be vital for winning
   a dino egg because at that point it is important to be able to judge which player is able
   to play higher ranking comet cards thereby extending the round. Exact timing is what make
   winners here as it is important to play the highest ranking card in the last turn of a
   round and in fact it can be very annoying if a round is extended by another comet card
   and one has to play another card, which more often than not is a lower ranking card,
   destroying any hope for winning an egg.

   For my liking T-Rex rewards good memory too much (old age, I guess). This combined with
   the usual uncertainties of what tactic another player will apply provides me with too
   many unpredictability. Interestingly, Moritz, who said he didn’t like the game
   because of the strong memory effect won the game by far and Walter, our Bridge playing
   card game wizard came in last.

2. Linie 1
   
   Linie 1 – or Streetcars as the English version published by Mayfair is called – was our
   second game of the evening. We played this already once a couple of years ago with not
   too enthusiastic memories and we wanted to give it another try.

   The task of the (up to five) players is to connect the terminal stops of their streetcar
   line which are located at opposite borders of the game board by building tracks between
   them, a principle which was employed already by Twixt may years ago. To make things not
   too easy players get their streetcar line dealt secretly out of the six available lines
   and additionally they have to include two (or three in games with less than 4 players) of
   the many intermediate stops that are placed throughout the board. Also these stops are
   dealt secretly.

   The game is played in two phases. During the track building phase a player places two
   new track tiles anywhere on the board or upgrades already existing tiles. Tiles may only
   be placed if they legally connect to tiles already placed and can only be upgraded if
   existing track is maintained. As soon as a track tile is placed next to a stop location a
   stop sign is placed on that tile. No additional stops are possible at this location.

   Players therefore are faced with the difficult task of making sure that the stops they
   must pass are located in such a way that they caneasily be integrated into their own
   network and on the other hand they must try and avoid revealing their intentions and line
   identity too early. Line 1 allows all sorts of nasty track laying making it possible to
   create long detours for other players once one knows their intentions. Even endless loops
   are possible (see the left terminal of line 4 on the photo) making it impossible to use a
   piece of track in both directions.

   The second phase of the game begins once a player has completed the
   required route. The player announces this to the other players and indicates the route on
   the board. The rules state that this must be done so that all players are able to verify
   that a valid route exists. And in fact, it happened twice during our game that a player
   announced a valid route which in fact did not exist! Once the route has been verified the
   player starts travelling with a streetcar starting at one terminal, along the two (three)
   intermediate stops to the terminal at the opposite side of the board. The
   “motor” of the streetcar is a die with numbers 1 to 4 and two “H”
   signs. The player rolls the die once per turn and moves the streetcar the number of track
   tiles indicated on the die or to the next stop if an “H” has been rolled. Here
   it becomes obvious why a short route is so important.

   While some players have already started their streetcar other players may still be
   building their route. The point in time when to start the streetcar needs to be carefully
   judged because sometimes it can pay to optimize a route further rather than starting the
   car on a hopelessly long route.

   Moritz came in first closely followed by Walter, who in fact had the shortest route of
   all players. My chances of winning came to an abrupt end when Andrea
   (“unintentionally”, as she said, believe it or not) blocked my intended
   starting location by a loop construction.

   Line 1 in my opinion is a strange mixture of a game: on the one hand there is the rather
   complex track building race amongst the players followed by a dice rolling war in the
   second phase. My feeling is that the players who like the track building will not be too
   happy with the second phase and vice versa.

3. Bluff
   
   This evening we had sufficient time left to try some experiments with our usual final
   game of the evening: Bluff. After Moritz had won the first game of Bluff (making this a
   very good evening for him) we decided to change player position at the table to find out
   if that has any influence on the game results. Doing so we managed to achieve a clear win
   for each player – a result we never had before. Which leaves us with the question: does
   the seating order really have in influence on the Bluff results? If so, what exactly is
   the cause of this influence?

Session Report 08.01.2003

Author: Moritz

at the table: Hans, Walter, Aaron, Peter, Moritz

on the table: La Città, Bluff

1. La Città
   
   For some reason we hadn’t had a games evening for quite a while – this is
   why the general mood was especially friendly. In fact, we never had a games evening with
   so little bickering and quarreling in a long time. Might it have been the bottles of wine
   that Walter and Aaron freely distributed (it was a belated celebration of Aaron’s
   xx^th birthday – I’m not allowed to say, which…[Did I say
   that? Looking at Marcus Barnick’s “Who’s Who” website my age appears to be public knowledge!
   Aaron])?

   We decided to play “La Città” – Walter had been given this game as a
   present, and had apparently completely forgotten that we had already played this game
   ages ago, when it was newly published. Back then the game hadn’t impressed us
   greatly, but this time we really had to admit that this is a great game (which shows,
   that the good game reviewer “always has to play twice”).

   Kosmos published this game as a planned successor to “Siedler”
   – it is a lush edition, with absolutely fabulous game material, even for German
   standards. It probably wasn’t the big commercial success they hoped for, but this
   is a “gamer’s game”, like “Puerto
   Rico”, a treat for addicts like us.

   The huge map depicts an empty Tuscany landscape, that players hope to fill with
   prosperous cities. Certain landmarks are placed on the map before play (the setup
   described in the rules gives each player about the same starting position, and is highly
   recommended for the first games). There are “farming” (adjacent cities and
   farms get food markers, they range from “1” food to “3” food
   – a city/farm can touch a maximum of two of these tiles and earn the sum of the
   tiles they touch), “water” (give the possibility to build the all-important
   “fountain” tiles that hugely increase population capacity) and
   “mountain” tiles (each mine touching them gives money, it is very important
   that you build them early, like in “Puerto Rico”).

   Players start with two cities each, hoping to expand them and to achieve a huge
   population.

   For this it is important to know the “will of the people” – people are
   interested in 3 traits: “culture”, “education” and
   “hygiene”, each symbolized through a colour. Each round 4 “will of the
   people” cards are drawn: one open, the other three are secret. At the end of the
   round the dominating colour will be found out by looking at the hidden cards (in case of
   a draw, both traits are “prominent” and the players can choose which one to
   activate with each of their cities). Now all cities within a certain distance (2 hexes)
   of each other will compete for the extremely fickle and easily bored population. If the
   neighbouring has city more cultural buildings than you, and culture is “in”
   at the moment, it will draw away one population figure (which look suspiciously like
   hobbits, by the way). You usually want as many people in your city as people –
   first they bring points at the end of the game, second city expansion tiles need people
   to work- if they have no people on them, they are “torn down” – the
   city shrinks!

   But there is also a drawback: people need to be fed, and if you have more people than
   food markers (described above) the game system will punish you heavily with having you
   miss out a turn next round, and also reducing your victory score in the final round
   severely. Peter, who has played this game more often than us, had warned as about this
   fact, and we all played very carefully in this respect, but still people starved, as the
   board and the expanding neighbours limit your access to food tiles severely.

   A round consists of 5 actions – you have 3 cards that you can always play, they
   allow you to build basic buildings, get gold or start new cities. If you want to build
   the larger coloured buildings (that give you more of an edge in the populace competition)
   you need money and the abundant “open” row of action cards, that is
   constantly renewed from the deck. This means you can have a maximum of 3
   “self-decided actions” , the other actions come from the deck – with a
   selection. Some of these cards have other functions – they give you free extra food
   for the round, or strengthen your “traits” for the competition. The most
   important card is certainly the one that allows you to predict to or more of the hidden
   cards “will of the people” – played early this will give you an edge in
   planning your turn!

   Cities are limited to 5 citizens and therefore tiles. A “market place” gives
   you one “gift” citizen and the possibility to reach the populace of 8, a
   “fountain” removes even this limit (this is why the water spaces are
   extremely important – the winner needs two large cities, possibly more, no doubt
   about that). Each round ends with the mutual removal of citizens from the cities, then
   you check if you can actually nourish them.

   The game rewards good planning – If you pump up the traits of the cities (the
   symbols for these traits look suspiciously like “McDonalds”-M’s, by the
   way :-), you might get a larger population than you hoped for – starving is bad
   news, as you lose an action next turn.

   You also want diverse cities – cities with all traits present get bonus points. It
   is also a good idea to build last ditch cities in the final round (although there is very
   little room on the board for additional cities) – each citizen gives you one
   victory point – and new cities come with 3 “free” citizens!

   Turns are quick as the decisions are limited but important, very similar to Puerto Rico.
   Watching the board and planning your expansion is strategically very demanding –
   when will you cross the safe border of 2 hexes to other cities by building new buildings?
   Can you be sure to beat them in traits this round? If not you might lose more than you
   get.

   Cities can actually be completely destroyed by draining them of all cities, so beware!

   If you have farming land close by you should build as many farms as possible, they come
   in very handy for the end game, when you suddenly build new cities to garner VP’s.
   The same is to be said for mines – the good buildings can be very expensive, and
   money is very rare. A tactic that usually works is to have a “money city” and
   a “farming” city, both with different goals.

   All in all this is a very nice game – not too complicated, but with lots of
   nail-biting decisions to make. Although it is – like “Princes of Florence” and “Puerto
   Rico” essentially a solitaire game played by a group, the competition between
   the cities is THE all-important element of the game. The board is small, and the
   competition is not sleeping. The game time is longer than the usual German game, I would
   say around 3 hours for newbies.

   Thumbs up to “La città”!

2. Bluff
   
   After a “perfect” victory in “La Città” my strange lucky streak
   didn’t stop – the two “Bluff” games we played were won with
   almost no problem, the dice rolled where they should, and twice I beat Walter with
   extremely lucky rolls that he just couldn’t believe.

   That this was a lucky streak was proven 2 days later at the “Spuiratzn”
   – I lost every game, and always came last!

Session Report 18.12.2002

Author: Aaron/Walter

at the table: Peter, Günther Walter, Aaron

on the table: Fische Fluppen Frikadellen, Mogul, Imperium

1. Fische Fluppen Frikadellen
   
   “Fische Fluppen Frikadellen” is this year’s Essen release of the man with
   the green hair and creator of the F games: Friedeman Friese. This time players have the
   task to acquire goods (fish, fags and French fries would be a good translation although
   Frikadellen are in fact hamburgers, and in addition to the title: fusel and fennel) and
   trade them in for fetishes. The player who acquires his/her third fetish wins the game.

   The game board is set up by randomly placing 12 kiosks on the designated spaces. Kiosks
   come in three types: one type sells one of the F goods or buys another type of goods. The
   next kiosk type trades a type of good into another type of good and the last type is the
   kiosk trading in goods for fetishes.

   Kiosks are connected with pathways and waterways and players have three movement points
   per turn to negotiate their route to the kiosks of their liking. Waterways usually
   provide shortcuts between distant corners of the board but they require the usage of a
   raft which sometimes needs to be called to the footbridge which costs movement points and
   money.

   Players start with a defined amount of money (now guess what the currency is: Florints of
   course) which they mainly use for buying goods at the kiosks. Once a player lands on the
   field of a kiosk that sells/buys goods s/he may buy any amount of goods that the kiosk
   has in stock at the current market price (there’s a rebate for buying more than one
   unit). At the start of the game each such kiosk has 2 goods in stock. Alternatively, a
   player may sell any amount of the good the kiosk can buy. These goods are returned to the
   bank. A consequence of selling goods is a decrease of the market price of that good.

   If a player arrives at a kiosk which trades goods s/he can trade in up to two goods of
   the kind kiosk accepts and receives 2 other goods for every good turned in. These 2 for 1
   deals are very important in the course of the game.

   Each transaction at a kiosk triggers up to three secondary actions indicated on the
   kiosk’s tile: either the market price of a good is increased or the player may
   exchange the stock of two kiosks or a particular type of good is being produced and the
   stock of the appropriate kiosk is increased.

   Players also have tokens which they can use during their turn. A token provides a one
   time special ability like having more movement points or being able to exchange a good of
   one type for another type, and, very nasty, closing a kiosk for one complete round. Each
   time a player acquires a fetish s/he get an additional token.

   The game started rather fast paced with all players rushing to kiosks which have goods
   for sale. Unfortunately, I was the fourth player in the first turn and was faced with the
   situation that no such kiosk was in easy reach. In fact it took me quite some time to be
   able to acquire my first goods as I was not willing to spend money on calling rafts for a
   faster access to far away kiosks. Not a good tactic, I soon realized. At the time I had
   reached a kiosk with goods, prices had already gone up and I had to spend too much money
   for too few goods. Walter at that time was already far ahead with 4 or 5 goods and in
   reach of his first fetish.

   Günther seemed to follow a strategy of acquiring lots of goods at low prices and only
   exchanging them for a fetish once he reached the holding limit of 7 goods. Peter’s
   strategy was to go for optimal good runs and to exchange/sell goods at favorable prices.
   Soon I found myself left with very little money and only a few goods because all too
   often were kiosks sold out or prices had gone up to prohibitive levels before I could
   reach them. I therefore had to revert to an exchange strategy changing goods on a 2 for 1
   basis. Luckily, I was able to find a good run between kiosks for this to work.

   Walter was the first to have two fetishes as well as sufficient goods to exchange them
   for the third one and we thought that this would end in a clear win for him. Quite to my
   surprise Günther was able to play one of his special ability tokens that allowed him to
   buy a good from Walter leaving him one good short for his final exchange. At that point
   it became clear that by cleverly playing against Walter we would most likely have a
   chance to steal victory from him. This in fact left me with a slight chance to win the
   game myself: in the meantime I, too had acquired two fetishes and had sufficient goods to
   get the third one. However, my goods mix was not right (you need 5 goods in total, 3 of
   one kind and 2 of the other) which prevented me from becoming a target for
   countermeasures of my fellow players. The one thing they did not know was that I had a
   special ability token which would allow me at any time during my turn to exchange one
   good for another type and that would yield the required combination for my third fetish.
   So I moved forward to the fetish kiosk and only needed one more turn when Peter decided
   to stop playing aggressively against Walter and allowing him to make his final winning
   move. That was close…

   I think that “Fische Fluppen Frikadellen” is one of the better games of
   Friedemann Friese. It provides a lot of scope for different strategies. On the other
   hand, in our game I felt that most of the time I was playing with minimal interaction
   with other players. Once you have found out what strategy the other players are following
   you can adopt you strategy accordingly and do your thing. There is also this effect of
   bashing the leader close to the end which I do not like so much as you do not have
   sufficient time (moves) to prepare for this appropriately.

   One thing I did not mention about the game: it is a 3 to 5 player game but can be played
   with up to 15 players if you buy the complete set of three games (type A, B and C). They
   differ in board layout and tile mix as well as providing different colored pawns and
   players are able to move their pawns between board. Provided you have sufficient table
   space and players this is certainly worth a try.

   Westpark Gamers’ Score: 7.0

2. Mogul
   
   Mogul is a stock trading and auctioning card game. Players start the game with one share
   and 6 money and their goal is to acquire victory points by selling shares.

   Auctioning is done in a very interesting though sometimes nerve wrecking way: the top
   share is drawn from the draw pile, revealed and put up for auction. The start player (the
   player who acquired a share in the previous turn) starts the auction by placing one coin
   in the middle of the table. The next player has the choice of continuing the bidding by
   also placing one coin or to drop out of the auction. Here the interesting bit starts:
   whenever a player drops out s/he collects the coins in the middle of the table into
   his/her own pocket. The next player then bids again (1 coin) to stay in or drops out as
   well (collecting 0 coins!).

   The last remaining bidder has the choice of either taking the share or to sell shares of
   the color indicated by the border color of the share currently up for auction. The last
   but one bidder then executes the option not taken by the last bidder.

   Selling shares is the only way to receive victory points and there is one victory point
   granted for every share of that stock on the table at the time of the sale, including the
   shares of the other players. Since at the end of the game unsold shares count no VPs at
   all and money is exchanged 5 coins for 1 point it is absolutely necessary to sell shares
   at the best possible time. The game ends immediately when the CRASH card is being drawn
   which has been shuffled into the draw pile among the last four cards.

   The bidding mechanism is so unusual that it does need some time to get used to it.
   Already in the first round I found myself in the position that Günther sitting in front
   of me decided to drop out and take the money and I had the choice to also drop out (for
   nothing) or placing the first coin again. I decided for the latter only to be faced with
   the situation that now Walter dropped out (now in front of me). Again I placed a coin and
   Peter dropped out and I decided to take the share since there was no possibility to sell
   shares. The result of the first round was that I owned two share now but only 4 coins,
   all others had one share with Peter owning 5 coins, Walter 7 coins and Günther 8 coins.
   Günther seemed to have liked the possibility to make easy money and he decided to drop
   out again when it was his turn in the second round, leaving him with 11 coins! Only too
   late did I realize that I would end up in the unfortunate situation that I had to drop
   out of the auction because of lack of money at a point in time when there where no coins
   in the pot!

   Fortunately, there is a rule which allows a player to exchange 2 victory points for 2
   coins at the beginning of a round. Since I was broke I had to take that option which, in
   the end, turned out to be so devastating that who ever has to do this will almost
   certainly lose the game. This insight came to late for me and I did not have a chance to
   even come close to the leader throughout the rest of the game.

   Although very much based on luck elements the game is full of suspense: will there be
   coins in the pot when it’s my turn to drop out of an auction? What is the right time
   to sell shares? Will there be another possibility at all to sell shares of a particular
   stock? Some of these questions can be answered by closely observing the number of shares
   of stock still in play. Other, like the possible reaction of the other players are much
   harder to determine or predict.

   As a fast paced, short (45 mins.) game with elements of “Schadenfreude” Mogul
   can be highly recommended.

   Westpark Gamers’ Score: 7.0

3. Imperium
   
   Anstatt den Spielabend mit 6-nimmt oder Bluff ausklingen zu lassen, nahmen wir uns auf
   Günthers Empfehlung noch eine Runde Imperium vor. Angeblich dauert ein Spiel 20 Minuten.
   Das war dreimal soviel Zeit, wie Peter bis zu seiner letzten U-Bahn übrig hatte. Bei den
   Westparkern geht aber auch ein triviales Auktionsspiel nicht so schnell über die Bühne.
   Peter hatte Glück, daß er sich nach 50 Minuten Spielzeit – als Sieger – auf den Weg
   machen konnte.

   Das Spielbrett läßt zunächst mal eine überlange Spieldauer befürchten: es ähnelt ganz
   dem klassischen “Civilisation”, das wir noch nie unter 4 Stunden beendet
   hatten. Auf einer Landkarte rund um das Mittelmeer sind Länder und Provinzen
   eingezeichnet, die von ferne ein bißchen die Vision des Geographieunterrichts in einer
   altrömischen Grundschule aufkommen lassen. Daß Athen ohne “h” geschrieben
   wurde, und daß das Dörflein “Cannae” zu einer ganz Unteritalien umfassenden
   Provinz aufgewertet wurde, ganz zu schweigen von der Plazierung Ägyptens an der lybischen
   Küste und ähnlichen Unschärfen, sollte einen großen Geist natürlich nicht stören.

   Das Spielgeschehen hätte man auch viel einfacher plazieren können, und es damit sogar
   noch durchsichtiger gemacht. Denn das geohistorische Brimborium verdeckt nur das doch
   recht lineare Spielprinzip. Man denke sich die Zahlen 1 bis 8 irgendwie zufällig in einem
   Kreis auf dem Tisch verteilt, und schon hat man die Aufgabenstellung hundertprozentig
   adaptiert. Es geht darum, möglichst viele, möglichst hohe und möglichst
   nebeneinanderliegende Zahlen (Länder) in Besitz zu bringen.

   Wie macht man das?

   Ganz einfach: Jeder Spieler ist mit einem Kartensatz mit den Zahlen 1 bis 8
   ausgestattet. Davon wählt jeder jeweils drei Karten, sprich Zahlen, aus und bestimmt
   damit die Zahlen im Kreis, auf die er einen Spielstein der eigenen Farbe zu legen
   gedenkt. Alle Spieler decken gleichzeitig die gewählten Karten auf und legen dann die
   entsprechenden Spielsteine auf die Zahlen im Kreis. Das wird bis zum Spielende wiederholt
   und so verteilen sich allmählich die Spielsteine der Mitspieler je nach Vorliebe oder
   Taktik unterschiedlich auf den Zahlen im Kreis.

   Nach jedem Setzenvorgang wird eine Zahl gewertet: Der Spieler mit den meisten
   Spielsteinen auf der Zahl im Kreis hat die Zahl in seinen Besitz gebracht, d.h. er erhält
   den Zahlenwert als Siegpunkte gutgeschrieben. Der Spieler mit den zweitmeisten
   Spielsteinen erhält, je nach Zahl, die es zu werten gilt, 1 bis 2 Punkte weniger, der
   dritte 2 bis 4 Punkte weniger und der vierte und letzte 3 bis 6 Punkte weniger. Es gilt
   also, auf der Zahl, die gerade gewertet wird, eine Mehrheit zu erringen. Das geht
   natürlich nur beschränkt. Jeder Spieler muß seine Auswahl auf bestimmte
   Zahlenkombinationen konzentrieren, um wenigstens dort dominieren zu können.

   Nach der Wertung wird das Zahlenfeld geräumt: alle Spieler müssen ihre Spielsteine
   wieder an sich nehmen. Nur der Spieler mit der Mehrheit darf einen Spielstein als
   “Prokonsul” auf der Zahl stehen lassen. Der steht dann schon mal für die
   nächste Wertung da, denn nachdem alle 8 Zahlenfelder gewertet wurden fängt die Wertung
   wieder bei der ersten Zahl an.

   Der “Prokonsul” hat aber noch eine weitere “einnehmende” Bedeutung.
   Der Spieler, der bei einer Zahlenwertung die Mehrheit errungen hat, bekommt zusätzlich
   noch einen Siegpunkt für jeden eigenen Prokonsul in einer benachbarten Provinz (Zahl).
   Dies ist ein Grund, warum man zusammenhängende Zahlen (Provinzen) favorisieren sollte.

   Peter hatte sofort erkannt, daß das unattraktive Zahlenfeld 1 neben dem maximal
   lukrativen Zahlenfeld 8 etwas unscheinbar an der afrikanischen Küste lag und so dem
   Blickpunkt der Mitspieler entgehen könnte. Er spekulierte darauf, daß er relativ
   unbehelligt die 1 belegen und sich mit Körpereinsatz dann auch noch die 8 aneignen könne.
   So kam es dann auch: Er konnte das 8er Feld dreimal erobern bzw. behalten und kassierte
   dafür noch zweimal mit seinen lausigen Prokonsul auf der 1 einen zusätzlich Siegpunkt.
   Das reichte insgesamt zum Sieg.

   Ich hatte mir die Zahlenreihe 3-7-2 an der illyrischen Küste ausgesucht. Es gelang auch,
   auf der 3 Fuß zu fassen und dann noch die 7 zu erobern. In den nächsten Runden mußte ich
   aber sehr viel zur Verteidigung der 7 investieren. Als ich dann noch mit Störmanövern auf
   der 8 versuchte, den Kriegsschauplatz auf Peters Besitztümer zu verlagen, hatte ich
   unnötig Pulver verschossen. Aaron machte mir mein 3er Feld wieder abspenstig und es
   reichte in der Endabwertung nur zum zweiten Platz.

   Obwohl Imperium im Grunde ein einfaches Auktionsspiel ist, hatten wird doch deutlich
   unsere Freude daran. Vielleicht lag es auch allgemein an der – durchaus nicht
   selbstverständlichen – allgemeinen Harmonie in unserer kleinen Vierer-Runde.

   Westpark Gamers Wertung: 5,5 (von 10)

Spielbericht 13.12.2002

Autor: Moritz

am Tisch: Andrea, Hans, Aaron, Basti, Moritz

auf dem Tisch: Advanced D&D First Edition: „The Tomb of
Horrors“

1. The Tomb of Horrors
   
   Nach dem Erfolg der letzten Rollenspielrunde war es diesmal relativ leicht, die
   Gruppenmitglieder zu einem weiteren Besuch in der Gruft der Schrecken zu bewegen. Diesmal
   sollte die Erforschung allerdings nicht so glatt vonstatten gehen wie letztesmal…

   Die Gruppe befand sich nach wie vor in einer langen Halle mit Wandmalereien, von denen
   einige als Geheimtür zu verschiedenen Gängen führten. Den einen Weg wollte man erst
   einmal nicht einschlagen – irgendwie machten einen die aus der Wand schiessenden
   Energiepfeile nervös. Den anderen hatte man schon erforscht (die 3 Truhen) und beim
   dritten war man misstrauisch (die Pforte der magischen Nebel). Blieb also nur der lange
   Gang, der in einer Wand endete – Bastis Magier Rizarden vermutete nicht zu Unrecht
   dort eine Geheimtür. Da man zu faul war, danach zu suchen, wurde wieder einmal kurzerhand
   die Wand in Schlamm verwandelt, dies riss jedoch Rizarden gleich selber durch die
   Schlammmassen in den nächsten Raum, ein mysteriöses Heiligtum mit Zombieszenen an den
   Wänden, jedoch auch guten Symbolen hier und dort. Ein Skelett wies mit der Hand auf ein
   weiteres Nebelportal, ausserdem lockte ein grosser Altar. Man machte sich allerdings
   zuerst an die Erforschung von zwei vollkommen langweiligen Urnen, so langweilig, daß
   Aarons Borsac sich kurzerhand auf den Altar schwang (warum, wissen nur die Götter). Dies
   löste einen Energieblitz von beträchtlichem Ausmass aus, der Borsac leicht versengte, für
   die 2 im Weg stehenden Fackelträger Kaspar und Bully jedoch den Desintegrationstod
   bedeutete.

   Die Gruppe war aber immer noch nicht vorsichtig genug geworden – man öffnete
   fröhlich die Betbänke und wurde von einer schwächenden Giftwolke überrascht. Hierauf
   sprangen Elrican und Darriell erst einmal vor Schreck in das Nebelportal….und tauchten
   geschlechtsumwandelt und böse wieder daraus auf!

   Das war erst mal wieder zuviel, die Gruppe musste erst einmal 2 Tage
   verschnaufen…weiteres Experimentieren mit dem Nebelportal ergab, das die
   Ausrichtungsänderung rückgängig zu machen war, die Geschlechtsänderung jedoch nicht.
   Elrican blieb also Elricana, konnte dafür aber wieder heilen (als gute Priesterin).
   Darriell(a) dagegen blieb lieber böse…und nervte fortan mit äusserst chaotischem
   Verhalten!

   Nach der Rast entdeckte man durch Andreas stets gut gezielte Suchsprüche einen Schlitz
   in der Wand – Hans war der Erste, der auf die Idee kam, diesen mittels des vorher
   gefundenen Ringes in eine zu öffnende Geheimtür umwandelte. Vorsichtig stieg man eine
   tiefe Treppe herab, und stiess auf eine Folge von drei Türen, jeweils mit einer fiesen
   Falltüre dahinter. Andrea misstraute dem langen, um die Ecke führenden Gang, und suchte
   die Gruben erst einmal ab- Bingo: Ein weiterer Geheimgang! In diesem stiess man zuerst
   auf einen recht ereignislosen Gang, der mittels einer weiteren Türe zu einem
   ereignislosen Raum mit 3 grossen Fässern führte. Nun, sieht man mal von der Riesenamöbe
   in einem der Fässer ab! Ausserdem fand man 2 Teile eines Schlüssels, die auch gleich
   zusammenpassten.

   Da man irgendetwas von ZWEI Schlüsseln ahnte (siehe Acereraks Gedicht vom letzten Mal),
   nahm man an, doch in dem langen Gang eventuell etwas zu verpassen. Dieser führte zu eine
   Tür, die Borsac kurzerhand zerhackte. Leichtfüssig schritt die Gruppe einem schrecklichen
   Schicksal entgegen, auf einem in einen Lavastrom kippenden Fussboden! Nicht alle konnten
   sich schnell retten – Wurgan kämpfte sich mühsam mit mehreren
   Geschicklichkeitswürfen wieder zum Eingang, während er den Tod hinter sich wusste!

   Nun, dann doch lieber den anderen Gang entlang!

   Hier stiess man ersteinmal auf unpenetrierbaren Nebel, der lustigerweise mit
   „Springerstiefeln“ (im wahrsten Sinne des Wortes) erforscht wurde. Eine Tür
   führte wiederum zu unpenetrierbaren Spinnweben, die nur durch Bastis Feuermagie
   vernichtet werden konnten (zusammen mit dem daranhängenden „10-foot-pole“,
   der vorher bei der Fallenerkennung gute Dienste geleistet hatte). In einer kleinen Kammer
   stiess man auf eine merkwürdige brüllende Mumie, die auch gleich angriff. War dies
   Acererak, das Lich? Die Mumie war auf jeden Fall schnell erledigt, sofort stürzte auch
   gleich JamesBond-mäßig die Decke ein. Alles Illusion, wie Andrea gleich darauf
   herausfand! Na, so leicht war man nicht von der Suche nach Acererak abzubringen. Sich
   erst in einer weiteren Sackgasse wähnend, fand man doch noch eine Geheimtür im
   Fässerraum. Wieder ein langer Gang – eine weite Fallgrube mit Speeren wurde recht
   locker mit den Spring(er)stiefeln überquert (man reichte diese ingeniös jeweils an den
   nächsten mit einem Seil weiter). Eine weitere Geheimtür (die einzige Fortbewegungsmethode
   in dem Dungeon), und man stand in einer kleinen Grabvorkammer. Diese hatte die
   unangenehme Eigenschaft alle paar Minuten zu wackeln, was in eine Art lustiges
   Zwergenkegeln ausartete. Dutzende von kleinen Truhen waren schnell durchsucht (ihr Inhalt
   immer Schlangen oder kleine Schätze). Andrea untersuchte mutig die seltsamen Vorhänge,
   als der Raum wiede mal wackelte. „Hältst Du Dich fest?“ „Ja“.
   „Wo?“ „Am Vorhang“. „Wirklich? Bist Du sicher?“.
   „Ja, ganz sicher“. Nun, der Vorhang riss, verwandelte sich in grünen Schleim
   und begrub Andreas arme Elricana unter sich. Erst Geschlechtsumwandlung, dann Schleimtod
   – wahrlich ein Freitag der 13.!

   Das war so shocking, daß die Gruppe von einer seltsamen Depression befallen wurde.
   Lustlos beschäftigte man sich mit dem Schleim, der sich auch gleich in wärmesaugenden
   Schimmel verwandelte, nachdem man mit Fackeln darin herumstocherte. Traurig suchte man
   das Verlies mal hier, mal da ab – es schien keinen Ausweg mehr zu geben! Fast
   stoisch begegnete Basti den Todesspeeren, die aus der untersuchten länglichen Fallgrube
   schossen, als er sie zum Durchsuchen betrat…

   Endlich entschloss man sich aber doch, doch der Serie von Geheimräumen mit
   Energiepfeilen nachzugehen, und voilà, es gab doch einen Ausweg! Schade nur, daß da auch
   ein ziemlich fieses Gargoyle stand – das bisher am schwersten zu besiegende
   Monster! Um den Hals herum hatte es eine Edelsteinkette…Edelsteine? Moment, da war doch
   noch das ANDERE Gargoyle, aus Stein, mit den seltsamen Dellen in den Händen. Ein paar
   statuenzerquetschte Edelsteine später war man in Besitz eines Magischen Auges, mit dem
   fröhlich alles abgesucht werden konnte. So stiess man auch endlich auf den Ausgang des
   Verlieses, direkt neben dem Gargoyleraum. Frühmorgens müde an die frische Luft stolpernd,
   war die Gruppe nun doch zu einer Art Happy End gelangt!

   Wie mag es wohl weitergehen?