{"id":3870,"date":"2003-05-21T12:00:00","date_gmt":"2003-05-21T10:00:00","guid":{"rendered":"https:\/\/www.westpark-gamers.de\/blog\/2003\/05\/21\/session-report-review-21-05-2003\/"},"modified":"2003-05-21T12:00:00","modified_gmt":"2003-05-21T10:00:00","slug":"session-report-review-21-05-2003","status":"publish","type":"post","link":"https:\/\/www.westpark-gamers.de\/blog\/2003\/05\/21\/session-report-review-21-05-2003\/","title":{"rendered":"Session Report & Review 21.05.2003"},"content":{"rendered":"

Session Report & Review 21.05.2003<\/h2>\n

Autor<\/b>: Moritz, Aaron<\/p>\n

am Tisch<\/b>: Loredana, G\u00fcnther, Peter, Moritz und Aaron<\/p>\n

auf dem Tisch<\/b>: Alhambra, Amun Re<\/p>\n

    \n
  1. <\/a>Alhambra<\/a><\/b>\"Alhambra\"\/\n

    This new offering is part of the selection for \u201eSpiel des Jahres\u201c, this is
    \nwhy Guenther nudged us gently to play it…<\/p>\n

    The game is similar to other German games (well, aren\u2019t ALL German games similar
    \nto other German games???) and immediately creates associations with \u201c    Princes of Florence<\/a>\u201d (each player builds his own
    \n\u201cAlhambra\u201d palace, in arabic Spain) and     Carcassonne<\/a> (Tiles have to be placed in a tricky way, you try to build
    \na \u201clong wall\u201d instead of a long road).<\/p>\n

    And of course the long list of games where you have to have the majority in a specific
    \nattribute (buildings in \u201cAlhambra\u201d).<\/p>\n

    Nothing new \u2013 how does it play?<\/p>\n

    Each player gets a hand of numbered cards in 4 colors (the different kinds of money used
    \nin arabic Spain), valued 1-9. The drawing mechanism brings a little luck into the game:
    \nEach player draws up to the exact limit of 20, if s\/he doesn\u2019t hit 20 exactly s\/he
    \nmay surpass the sum, resulting in different sized hands for each player.<\/p>\n

    On a small board 4 building tiles are placed at random (and constantly replaced). Each
    \ncan be acquired with only one specific kind of money, so the building next to the
    \n\u201cyellow\u201d money symbol can only be bought with \u201cyellow\u201d money.
    \nBuilding prices range from 3-13. There are seven kinds of buildings, some are very rare,
    \nsome are very common. Hidden in the money draw pile (and therefore functioning as a
    \nrandom scoring) are two scoring cards, a final scoring happens at the end of the game,
    \nwhen all buildings have been sold. The more common buildings give you more points, as it
    \nis more difficult to have the majority with them. The first scoring round only scores the
    \nleaders (with scores ranging from 1 to 7), the second scoring round scores the leaders
    \nand runner-up\u2019s (leaders now receive more than double the sum before, the runner-up
    \nthe basic sum), the final round includes a third place as well with equally raised
    \nstakes. If 2 or more players are tied, they receive the sums of both scores divided by
    \ntheir number and rounded down.<\/p>\n

    Each player has only one action (normally).<\/p>\n

    S\/he can:<\/p>\n

      \n
    1. Take any of the open and constantly replenished 4 money cards<\/li>\n
    2. Take a combination of money cards up to the value of 5 (rarely achieveable!)<\/li>\n
    3. Buy a building with the correct money cards<\/li>\n
    4. \u201cDestroy\u201d an already built building (goes to \u201creserve\u201d)<\/li>\n
    5. \u201cRebuild\u201d a destroyed building somewhere else<\/li>\n
    6. \u201cExchange\u201d a building with a building from the reserve that
      \nfits<\/li>\n<\/ol>\n

      \n One unique mechanism needs attention: You have to use the cards you have when buying
      \nbuildings (no change), so most of the time you have to overpay because your cards
      \ndon\u2019t match the exact price. If you however manage to EXACTLY pay the price, you
      \nget an ADDITIONAL action. Theoretically you can gain a string of actions in this way, so
      \nit very often makes sense to sit back and improve your card hand instead of building or
      \nbuying at all costs \u2013 It might pay off in later rounds when you suddenly have a lot
      \nof actions available!<\/p>\n

      \"Alhambra\"\/ Building buildings is not easy: they all have to be orientated in
      \n one direction, walls have to be next to walls (all square building tiles have none,
      \n one, two or even three walls), and you have to be able to access all placed tiles
      \n from your central \u201cstart\u201d tile. Your longest series of walls give extra
      \n points every scoring round. If you acquire a building that can\u2019t be placed
      \n right now, you have to put it in reserve, hoping to build it another time (which
      \n eats up one action, though). In my opinion it is mostly better to accumulate cards
      \n instead of buying a building you can\u2019t immediately build \u2013 cards
      \n INCREASE your options, whereas the reserve building takes away TWO actions. In fact
      \n our reserve space was rarely used in our first game.<\/p>\n

      All actions are very important, as the game is over pretty quickly, and very often you
      \nwon\u2019t be able to achieve what you wanted to. The final scoring round gives the most
      \npoints, and is therefore most important.<\/p>\n

      That\u2019s all there is \u2013 no surprises, really.<\/p>\n

      The sentence to sum up this game is: it works. It is not overly complicated and plays
      \nquickly because of limited options. The tension lies mostly in the management of your
      \ncard hand, or if another player gets a specific building before you can pay for it. It is
      \nsatyisfying to pull off a string of actions, but that\u2019s about it. There is very
      \nlittle to none player interaction (you look at what the others have built and plan your
      \nown buys based on that info, that\u2019s about it), and the excitement factor is not
      \nreally high.<\/p>\n

      Guenther was the only one of our group who reacted enthusiastically to this game (even
      \nsaying that it had a chance for \u201cSpiel des Jahres\u201d, the others liked it, but
      \nnot in a very \u201cemotional\u201d way.<\/p>\n\n\n
      View\/add comments\"\"\/