Friday Night Gaming: Antike & Family Business
June 26, 2009
During the week, four of us made characters for an rpg, Bones, that Merwin was going to run. Only, Merwin didn't think he was running this week. :/
So, we played board games instead.
Antike
Coming off our game last week, it seemed like a good idea to play again while the rules were still fresh. We turned over the board and used the Mediterranean map this time. As Rome, I had Merwin's Germany to the north and Brian's Carthage to the south. Figuring that I had to move quickly ahead of Brian, I moved into the Iberian peninsula and took Sardinia. This boxed Brian in, who did manage to take Sicily-slash-Southern Italy. Meanwhile, as predicted, Merwin simply developed without expanding and we had a defacto demilitarized zone between us. Robert, as Greece, expanded to the north and east until he ran into Ian's Phoenicians.
Because of the rondel, Antike makes it very difficult to take swift military action. And even when forces are finally built up toward the end game, the brutal one-for-one combat system takes a heavy toll on any aggressor. So, like last time, there was little conflict until the end. By then, Ian in his safe corner was able to amass a slight lead and good momentum. Brian went after him, but it was too little, too late. In fact, as predicted, it meant I attacked him a little while later. We were able to put off Ian's victory by buying up the last temples, but Ian sacked one of Robert's temples for a much needed victory point, and then it was just a matter of waiting a few turns to buy up his missing technologies.
Two weeks in a row, there was significant end-game calculations and king making. Once someone gets within striking distance of winning, the end game becomes calculable. This time, we didn't even play out the last round because we couldn't stop Ian.* We've seen similar endings to Vinci and Mare Nostrum (though we've had a few surprise, sneaky wins there). I don't think it's fair to complain about this element of the game. You see it in racing games (most recently, Snow Tails) and abstract games ("mate in 5"). And it's our own damn fault for how we played in the early and mid-game anyway. But given the personal sacrifice that one or two players have to make (there was no way Merwin or I could stop Ian, except when we built temples) to try to stop a leader, it can lead to bad feelings, king making, and not an enjoyable end to the game.
Part of the problem is that since you can't lose vp in Antike, bashing the leader isn't an option the way it is in other games. You might slow them down. A bit. But it's probably not worth it. But not doing anything--not even trying to go after the leader--doesn't seem like a good option, either. I don't know if there is a good solution of even if a solution should be sought.
*: For the record, I could have won a turn later, and it would have taken Robert two turns.
Family Business
We desperately needed a filler, and Merwin pulled out this game from his achives. It was a favorite of his from college. But as a game design, I don't think it has stood the test of time.
My first issue was with the "pre-Magic" card design. Like Fluxx, this is a card game in which all the cards have special functions. There are attacks that send your mobsters to the "to be killed line" (an inspiration for Guillotine, perhaps?), defense cards, which don't work against some attacks, cards that remove your guys from the "to be killed line," and counters for those cards as well. Unfortunately, the cards only list the name of the card--not what they do. For that, you have to look them up in the rule book. Which meant that as newbies, we didn't know what the cards did and made several mistakes. Experienced players wouldn't have a problem (though even Merwin made a mistake or two) and the reference card at least makes a stab at explaining what can or can't be countered. I see that the 2008 edition seems to address this issue, thankfully.
But really, my biggest problem with the game is that it is an early-eighties design that hasn't aged well. The only tactic is "attack people you think can't counter it," and the only strategy is "draw good cards."
The shining moments of the game is when we ganged up on Ian, eliminating him first as payback for Antike. And later, Robert eliminated both himself and Merwin with one play. And perhaps that's really the point of this lightweight, back-stabbing game. Brian and I were left to fight it out, but we didn't remember a crucial rule (essentially sending the game into "sudden death") and so we don't know who should have won. But I lost.
Like Red Dragon Inn, it's all about attacking and eliminating other players. But it lacks the humor and mixed card play of that more recent game. Bang! has hidden roles and special powers. Hell, even Guillotine has set collection to liven up the strategy. I simply can't recommend it over those other games.
During the week, four of us made characters for an rpg, Bones, that Merwin was going to run. Only, Merwin didn't think he was running this week. :/
So, we played board games instead.
Antike
Coming off our game last week, it seemed like a good idea to play again while the rules were still fresh. We turned over the board and used the Mediterranean map this time. As Rome, I had Merwin's Germany to the north and Brian's Carthage to the south. Figuring that I had to move quickly ahead of Brian, I moved into the Iberian peninsula and took Sardinia. This boxed Brian in, who did manage to take Sicily-slash-Southern Italy. Meanwhile, as predicted, Merwin simply developed without expanding and we had a defacto demilitarized zone between us. Robert, as Greece, expanded to the north and east until he ran into Ian's Phoenicians.
Because of the rondel, Antike makes it very difficult to take swift military action. And even when forces are finally built up toward the end game, the brutal one-for-one combat system takes a heavy toll on any aggressor. So, like last time, there was little conflict until the end. By then, Ian in his safe corner was able to amass a slight lead and good momentum. Brian went after him, but it was too little, too late. In fact, as predicted, it meant I attacked him a little while later. We were able to put off Ian's victory by buying up the last temples, but Ian sacked one of Robert's temples for a much needed victory point, and then it was just a matter of waiting a few turns to buy up his missing technologies.
Two weeks in a row, there was significant end-game calculations and king making. Once someone gets within striking distance of winning, the end game becomes calculable. This time, we didn't even play out the last round because we couldn't stop Ian.* We've seen similar endings to Vinci and Mare Nostrum (though we've had a few surprise, sneaky wins there). I don't think it's fair to complain about this element of the game. You see it in racing games (most recently, Snow Tails) and abstract games ("mate in 5"). And it's our own damn fault for how we played in the early and mid-game anyway. But given the personal sacrifice that one or two players have to make (there was no way Merwin or I could stop Ian, except when we built temples) to try to stop a leader, it can lead to bad feelings, king making, and not an enjoyable end to the game.
Part of the problem is that since you can't lose vp in Antike, bashing the leader isn't an option the way it is in other games. You might slow them down. A bit. But it's probably not worth it. But not doing anything--not even trying to go after the leader--doesn't seem like a good option, either. I don't know if there is a good solution of even if a solution should be sought.
*: For the record, I could have won a turn later, and it would have taken Robert two turns.
Family Business
We desperately needed a filler, and Merwin pulled out this game from his achives. It was a favorite of his from college. But as a game design, I don't think it has stood the test of time.
My first issue was with the "pre-Magic" card design. Like Fluxx, this is a card game in which all the cards have special functions. There are attacks that send your mobsters to the "to be killed line" (an inspiration for Guillotine, perhaps?), defense cards, which don't work against some attacks, cards that remove your guys from the "to be killed line," and counters for those cards as well. Unfortunately, the cards only list the name of the card--not what they do. For that, you have to look them up in the rule book. Which meant that as newbies, we didn't know what the cards did and made several mistakes. Experienced players wouldn't have a problem (though even Merwin made a mistake or two) and the reference card at least makes a stab at explaining what can or can't be countered. I see that the 2008 edition seems to address this issue, thankfully.
But really, my biggest problem with the game is that it is an early-eighties design that hasn't aged well. The only tactic is "attack people you think can't counter it," and the only strategy is "draw good cards."
The shining moments of the game is when we ganged up on Ian, eliminating him first as payback for Antike. And later, Robert eliminated both himself and Merwin with one play. And perhaps that's really the point of this lightweight, back-stabbing game. Brian and I were left to fight it out, but we didn't remember a crucial rule (essentially sending the game into "sudden death") and so we don't know who should have won. But I lost.
Like Red Dragon Inn, it's all about attacking and eliminating other players. But it lacks the humor and mixed card play of that more recent game. Bang! has hidden roles and special powers. Hell, even Guillotine has set collection to liven up the strategy. I simply can't recommend it over those other games.
Labels: Other Games
posted by Patrick at 7:47 AM
