Friday Night Gaming: China, Tongiaki, Let's Kill
August 28, 2009
Ok, where was I? Right. I seem to have gotten a tad behind.
China
Merwin bailed on running Bones, so I asked if I could bring something over. Brian objected to Snow Tails, so I brought China. During the setup, Ian chose purple rather than his usual green and that started a cascade of people picking a color they normally don't use. For example, Robert is always red. Always. Well, except this time, when he was yellow and Brian was red. Damned if that didn't screw me up a couple of times. Fortunately, you usually don't have to worry about who is what color as much as what colors besides yours are in a given territory.
Given our past experiences (found here, but lacking details), I went in with a strategy to use the emissaries more. In China, there are 3 ways to score: place houses to get majorities in territories, place houses to get long roads, and place emissaries to get majorities in adjacent territories. So as you can see right away, placing houses has greater utility. Furthermore, while second, third, etc. house majorities can get you points, only the first majority (ties count) for emissaries get points and you have to get it in two territories (and you can only ever place pieces, houses or emissaries, in one territory per turn). So, emissaries can feel like an add-on, something you only do when placing more houses isn't an option. This is what our first games felt like.
To explore emissaries, I focused first on getting second majorities and a decent road, using my fortress to double my best scoring opportunity, and then shifted to emissaries. Because everyone else was mostly on a house-focused strategy, trying to get first majorities, I managed to score a hefty 20 points on emissaries, which shot me to an overwhelming victory.
We played again and I noticed something peculiar: my houses ended up in very similar locations and my fortress was on the exact same spot as before. I also spent many of my turns not using my cards optimally, using doubles as jokers rather than placing twice; I believe this might have been a mistake, but since I finished 2 points being Brian, maybe it wasn't so bad. I didn't go for emissaries, but kept my eye on preventing anyone from doing what I had done last game. It ended up being a very close close game, with Brian getting the edge (and he had the most emissaries).
Overall, I really enjoy this game. It has tough decisions, tactical maneuvering, controlled randomness, and plays quickly. Merwin seemed to have a hard time "wrapping his head around it," and I think he meant coming up with a winning strategy, so I'm not sure when we'll play again.
Tongiaki
Merwin pulled this out so that he could play it and decide whether or not to keep it. The game is about exploring and establishing colonies on Polynesian islands. Unfortunately, our first game was marred by a playing aid that implied we only got points for having one ship on an island tile and it failed to mention that the number on the tile (2 to 5) was its point value. Brian won the first game; Merwin won the second. Both times, I tied with someone and was either second or second-to-last.
The random tile draws make the early game, well, random. Once enough tiles get on the board, things become more predictable. In fact, it is so mechanistic to be almost abstract. But multi-player abstract games tend to be very chaotic, and this is no exception. There are plenty of opportunities for clever play, setting up move combinations and spreading your ships far and wide, but they can also be undone by your opponent's moves. Even if they didn't intend for it to happen that way.
During the game, I was reminded of Girl Genius, I game I own but have never played. But writing the above made me think of Mall of Horror, I game I don't own, but adore. The difference is that the simultaneous action selection of Mall of Horror brings a second-guessing element and mitigates the "my move will be negated by the 4 other players following me" aspect. As it is, Tongiaki is not without interest, but the lack of control (especially compared to China) bothers me.
Let's Kill
Speaking of lack of control... this is yet another cute, chaotic, humor-based card game without any strategic value. Even the tactics are boring because the card selection is so random and samey. Either you get the cards that let you win, or you don't. There's no room for clever play and the decisions aren't interesting. It's still better than Munchkin, though.
Ok, where was I? Right. I seem to have gotten a tad behind.
China
Merwin bailed on running Bones, so I asked if I could bring something over. Brian objected to Snow Tails, so I brought China. During the setup, Ian chose purple rather than his usual green and that started a cascade of people picking a color they normally don't use. For example, Robert is always red. Always. Well, except this time, when he was yellow and Brian was red. Damned if that didn't screw me up a couple of times. Fortunately, you usually don't have to worry about who is what color as much as what colors besides yours are in a given territory.
Given our past experiences (found here, but lacking details), I went in with a strategy to use the emissaries more. In China, there are 3 ways to score: place houses to get majorities in territories, place houses to get long roads, and place emissaries to get majorities in adjacent territories. So as you can see right away, placing houses has greater utility. Furthermore, while second, third, etc. house majorities can get you points, only the first majority (ties count) for emissaries get points and you have to get it in two territories (and you can only ever place pieces, houses or emissaries, in one territory per turn). So, emissaries can feel like an add-on, something you only do when placing more houses isn't an option. This is what our first games felt like.
To explore emissaries, I focused first on getting second majorities and a decent road, using my fortress to double my best scoring opportunity, and then shifted to emissaries. Because everyone else was mostly on a house-focused strategy, trying to get first majorities, I managed to score a hefty 20 points on emissaries, which shot me to an overwhelming victory.
We played again and I noticed something peculiar: my houses ended up in very similar locations and my fortress was on the exact same spot as before. I also spent many of my turns not using my cards optimally, using doubles as jokers rather than placing twice; I believe this might have been a mistake, but since I finished 2 points being Brian, maybe it wasn't so bad. I didn't go for emissaries, but kept my eye on preventing anyone from doing what I had done last game. It ended up being a very close close game, with Brian getting the edge (and he had the most emissaries).
Overall, I really enjoy this game. It has tough decisions, tactical maneuvering, controlled randomness, and plays quickly. Merwin seemed to have a hard time "wrapping his head around it," and I think he meant coming up with a winning strategy, so I'm not sure when we'll play again.
Tongiaki
Merwin pulled this out so that he could play it and decide whether or not to keep it. The game is about exploring and establishing colonies on Polynesian islands. Unfortunately, our first game was marred by a playing aid that implied we only got points for having one ship on an island tile and it failed to mention that the number on the tile (2 to 5) was its point value. Brian won the first game; Merwin won the second. Both times, I tied with someone and was either second or second-to-last.
The random tile draws make the early game, well, random. Once enough tiles get on the board, things become more predictable. In fact, it is so mechanistic to be almost abstract. But multi-player abstract games tend to be very chaotic, and this is no exception. There are plenty of opportunities for clever play, setting up move combinations and spreading your ships far and wide, but they can also be undone by your opponent's moves. Even if they didn't intend for it to happen that way.
During the game, I was reminded of Girl Genius, I game I own but have never played. But writing the above made me think of Mall of Horror, I game I don't own, but adore. The difference is that the simultaneous action selection of Mall of Horror brings a second-guessing element and mitigates the "my move will be negated by the 4 other players following me" aspect. As it is, Tongiaki is not without interest, but the lack of control (especially compared to China) bothers me.
Let's Kill
Speaking of lack of control... this is yet another cute, chaotic, humor-based card game without any strategic value. Even the tactics are boring because the card selection is so random and samey. Either you get the cards that let you win, or you don't. There's no room for clever play and the decisions aren't interesting. It's still better than Munchkin, though.
Labels: Other Games
posted by Patrick at 7:27 AM
<< Home