Are you the publisher? Claim or contact us about this channel


Embed this content in your HTML

Search

Report adult content:

click to rate:

Account: (login)

More Channels


Channel Catalog


Channel Description:

BoardGameGeek features information related to the board gaming hobby

older | 1 | .... | 64 | 65 | (Page 66) | 67 | 68 | .... | 183 | newer

    0 0

    by gillum

    ayedub wrote:

    There is pressure to feed your workers in Le Havre.

    That's partly because, in Le Havre, you always have only one worker!
    :)

    0 0

    by Halfinger

    Just to chime in but my experience is similar to the others here. Our first full game today took us 2 1/2 hours but I can easily see that halving. Le Havre is not pressured as Agricola is but I suspect when you get experienced at the game the pressure will mount as small mistakes may lead to bigger score differences between players.

    0 0

    by ayedub

    gillum wrote:


    That's partly because, in Le Havre, you always have only one worker!
    :)


    That's true, but that one worker is still a jerk that gets hungrier and HUNGRIER as the game goes on :D

    0 0

    by puppetmaster53

    Ok thanks for the responses. Would you guys feel that the game drags on at all since it takes that long or are you engaged most the time.

    0 0

    by integrase

    I don't think that the game drags, but I like the game; YMMV! :D In between turns you need to scout what building offers are available, what goods likely will be available on the offer spaces, and how the availability meshes with your long-term strategy. It is likely that you won't get to do exactly what you want on your turn, but there will be other moves that will be almost as good (and perhaps better). The trick is being able to adjust your short term strategy on-the-fly.

    0 0

    by ayedub

    puppetmaster53 wrote:

    Ok thanks for the responses. Would you guys feel that the game drags on at all since it takes that long or are you engaged most the time.


    Well, compared to Agricola, maybe…

    In Agricola I always feel that there is so much to do that I freak out a little when we get close to the end because I don't think there's anyway I'll get done everything I need to (and often I'm right). I never feel like there is enough rounds in Agricola to do what I want to do. As a result, even though Agricola can take a relatively long time to play it (to me) always FEELS shorter than it really is because I personally want more rounds.

    Conversely I feel Le Havre has enough rounds and you get enough actions that you can really form and execute strategies…you have time to get done what you need. As an aside this is another reason I prefer Le Havre to Agricola, I like feeling I've got enough time to do everything I want…So I suppose for some people that could possibly make the game feel as though it "drags" especially compared to Agricola, but not for me I always find myself engaged to the end.

    0 0

    by lostphd

    puppetmaster53 wrote:

    Ok thanks for the responses. Would you guys feel that the game drags on at all since it takes that long or are you engaged most the time.


    It depends who you play with. Analysis Paralysis can be a problem in the mid to late game because the "decision matrix" (as I call it) gets a little complex. I have found moments when I have my next move all planned out but I have to wait while the other player dithers - and then does the move I was planning to!

    But I find the act of watching another player think pretty engaging, so even I wouldn't consider this a "drag" on play.

    0 0

    by Stephen Cappello

    I realize that we have pushed into January, and into 2014 itself. For that, and for my delay in posting these Performance Reviews, I do apologize.

    2013 ended, and thus has begun 2014. Perhaps in a different post I may do a post mortem of 2013, and its gamerly goodnesses and badnesses, but I'll hold off on that for another day, and another post.

    Today, we are going to talk about Tuesday, December 17th, and the games that we played. Both games in general, and games we played specifically for the purpose of Performance Review.

    As is per usual, Jeff and I arrived at Chris' a bit before John, so we turned to lighter fair to fill in the gap. Chris brings over Pirate Versus Pirate. I still haven't decided if these "unscripted" games will count towards completion of our objective, or if they will be forced to the luck of the "random draw". Discussion will be needed here, but I log the plays anyway and present to you feelings about these games none the less.

    Anyway, Pirate Versus Pirate, from 2010. It's not a bad game. I'm not so comfortable even saying it's a good game. It definitely is, however, a game, which puts it ahead of many other offerings from our hobby. While Pirate Versus Pirate would not occupy space on my gaming shelf, I can appreciate why it does on Chris'. Chris has children that enjoy it. I do not. Sometimes that is really all that matters.

    Game play is simple. You roll a couple of specialty 4-siders, move your allocated movement, and attempt to return coins to your home boat. Things get mildly interesting when you add in the ability to eliminate enemy pieces by landing on them by exact count. The set up of the board and possible movements make things kind of interesting as well, as your moves are not completely linear, and you have some degree of control over where your pieces end up. There isn't much strategy here, and the potential for tactical decisions doesn't present itself as much as I'd like to see.

    I can see where this game deserves to be included in certain people's gaming collections, just not mine. I have other "gateway" games that I like to introduce to new or budding gamers, and I don't typically play with younger gamers who would enjoy this games novelty.

    Still waiting for John to show up, we went ahead and started on our list of games up for Performance Reviews this week.

    First up was Cartagena from 2000. We have a different version that the one shown, but that is of little consequence. First up, let me say, I love this game. It is very simple, has only a few rules, and doesn't take very long to play at all.

    Cartagena is a game themed around Pirates breaking out of the fortress of Cartegena. The object is to help your six pirates escape from one end of the tunnel map to the waiting ship at the other end by playing cards from your hand that move your pirates to spaces that match the card. You "leap-frog" any spaces that already have a pirate piece. But the game isn't just about moving forward. You'll often have to have a pirate "drop-back" to a space with one or two pirates in order to draw cards. You draw cards based on the number of pirates that were on the space when you fell back. A space can contain at most three pirates. What you end up with is a game with some excellent decisions to be made, with just enough opportunities to "screw-your-neighbor" to keep things interesting. The board is also modular, which is a nice touch to add re-playability.

    It provides plenty of tactical choices, and is A Grade Filler Material™. Our game took 20 minutes, and I believe that Chris ended up the victor. For a game that is 14! years old, you can't go wrong. In my mind, Cartagena deserves to be one of those games that every gamer has access to.

    Verdict:Cartagena gets two big thumbs up from me, and always will. If Chris ever decides to cull this one, I will gladly take it off his hands.

    John had finally shown up, and we had Imperial 2030, from 2009, already set up and ready to go. John had been bringing this one to game nights for a while, hoping to entice us into a game, but it wasn't until him and I broke it out on the coffee table one night to do a rules run-through that the game grabbed anyone's attention. Sometimes all it takes for the map to be set up and the pieces laid out to get that spark going. For a while after that, we played Imperial 2030 a few times, and Jeff even purchased his own copy to play with the guys in the church's game group. Then it disappeared into obscurity, as other cult-of-the-new took what little time we had for gaming.

    Which is sad. I really like Imperial 2030. As far as economical games go, it's in my top tier. I'm also a fan of the unconventional way you have to regard the national powers. Most global warfare games have a "these-are-mine, and those-are-yours" mentality, which is perfectly fine. I, however, enjoy the shifting control and powers that Imperial 2030 has to offer. Granted, once I get into China, I'll ride China all the way through to the end (hey, it might not be the best strategy, but it is the way I play), but other countries, such as Brazil and India, I'll milk what I need out of them and let the next player deal with the left overs. Another interesting thing about Imperial 2030, it's not the players that take turns, but the countries those players control. It is entirely possible, although highly unlikely, for one player to run every turn in a round, while the other players milk off those efforts!

    Imperial 2030 is a much too complex game for me to try to give any kind of brief synopsis. There is just so much going on for it. But I'll try!
    In Imperial 2030, you are an independent global power, trying to set yourself up to make the most money by investing in various world powers as they struggle through war in the year 2030. As this independent global power, you'll seize control over various countries by owning controlling shares, war with them, tax them, and even invest in them to get that which you ultimately want: more power and money!

    You can start the game and follow a planned strategy. And there are tons of tactical choices as well. Off the top of my head, as I write this, I can't think of many games that match Imperial 2030 in terms of Tactical and Strategic choice.

    Our game took nearly 3 and a half hours, and I was the eventual winner. I'm always happy to give this one a go, and always wish we had more time to play games.

    Verdict:Imperial 2030 is another game that gets two big thumbs up for me. If Jeff or John ever decide to cull this one, it will be going home with me.

    With our monster game of Imperial 2030 finally done, we didn't have time for PitchCar, so that one gets bumped to the next week. We pulled another card, and thus next times lineup!

    Next time: PitchCar&Le Havre

    0 0

    by cyclone85

    puppetmaster53 wrote:

    Ok thanks for the responses. Would you guys feel that the game drags on at all since it takes that long or are you engaged most the time.


    Decisions are made relatively quickly. I don't find the game dragging at all.

    0 0
  • 01/09/14--09:37: New Image for Le Havre
  • by srokaplotkara

    English components

    0 0

    by Anarchosyn

    puppetmaster53 wrote:

    Ok thanks for the responses. Would you guys feel that the game drags on at all since it takes that long or are you engaged most the time.


    No. Actions are snappy, though decisions might not be. Thankfully, you can plan while others take their actions, adjusting your strategy based on the options they deny you.

    You always need to have two or three routes to take through the "decision matrix," else you might find yourself reconfiguring at length.

    0 0

    by Neo42

    My friend and I are annoyed by building lockdown in 4/5 player. Would it make sense to allow up to 2 player tokens on a building during 4/5 player? Would food requirements need to change?

    0 0

    by Jasonbartfast

    My first thought is that it would make high-demand buildings, like the Wharves, shipping line, colliery, cokery, iron & steel works, worth more because they will be visited twice as often thus giving twice the entry fees.

    0 0

    by davypi

    With more buildings available in a 4/5P game, other (non-shipping) strategies become more viable. I don't really see that double use of a building is needed. Even so, making the Harbor Watch a start building is the standard variant in our group. It prevents the blocking problem, but the second player in incurs a penalty.

    0 0

    by lostphd

    Hello all,

    This may have been mentioned before in these fora, but Lookout Games continues to offer excellent support of their editions of Le Havre.

    I recently noticed that my Australian edition set had lost the "Coal Trader" special building card, when discussing special buildings with a friend. I have a theory where the card was lost (on the floor at a TABSCON over a year ago.) but that is no matter. I contacted Lookout Games and offered to pay for a replacement card.

    They sent it for free, no questions asked, and added in the "Tablet with Ap" special card. It arrived with remarkable speed from Germany. Great company, great game.

    - Charles

    0 0

    by LSMB

    Very cool....

    0 0

    by Herbz

    Hi fellow geeks,

    I recently purchased the 2013 Edition of Le Havre in Australia.

    It didn't seem to come with the Le Grand Hameau expansion as advertised on the box cover (and back). Can I confirm with someone that has this edition whether the small orange expansion box should have been enclosed?

    If so any tips on where to from here would be great

    Cheers,

    Dan

    0 0

    by KappyDK

    Hi there.

    Same problem here.
    Just received it, and there's no Grand Hameau enclosed, even though it's printed on the box.

    Going to contact my FLGS, but otherwise I assume Z-Man will help.

    Kasper

    0 0

    by enoon

    I think you'll find the cards from the expansion are included, just not in the separate tuckbox.

    0 0

    by Herbz

    enoon wrote:

    I think you'll find the cards from the expansion are included, just not in the separate tuckbox.


    Hi there, I'm afraid this isn't the case, I just confirmed that the cards are indeed missing. All of the standard cards are included but the "33 'Le Grand Hameau' Special Building cards" as per the back of the box are missing.



    Cheers,

    Dan

older | 1 | .... | 64 | 65 | (Page 66) | 67 | 68 | .... | 183 | newer