inconsequential ruminations

Last night I challenged the infamous Andy Daglish to a game on Vassal. He agreed and suggested Commands and Colors: Ancients. We have played Battle Cry before, which uses the same Commands and Colors system, so it was a natural progression.

I do not have it, but Andy has a copy and taught me the rules. He is one of those guys who gets very passionate about particular games. Telling him you do not like C&C:A or War of the Ring will get you an impassioned argument. He wrote a witty, insightful review at the Geek.

It is a sweet little game. I was thinking about buying Memoir ‘44 recently, the second in the C&C series, but that has gone right out of my mind. Commands and Colors: Ancients is definitely the better option for gamers. The rules are a little more elaborate, but the extra variation in tactics more than makes up for it. Thematically, ancient warfare suits this system far better.

I cannot remember who, but someone contrasted DBA against Commands and Colors: Ancients, which is a natural comparison. Commands and Colors: Ancients is far superior as the rules are comprehensible and simply because I dislike minis. Apparently people are thinking up schemes for converting DBA’s army lists to Commands and Colors: Ancients, which sounds like an excellent idea.

8/10 – I can see why this has shot to #5 at the Geek – despite the high price (£40).

Chris brought his set of Starfarers of Catan over with him this week and three of us played. Chris wrote it up at his blog.

I enjoyed it in an easy-going, freewheeling sort of way. It is more random and not as elegant as Settlers or Seafarers, but who can object to gold spaceships, used as randomisers, with lasers and boosters attached? The event deck also gets lots of laughs and there is direct confrontation between players.

Rick Heli gets it right as usual :

The result is a game which does an excellent job in terms of feeling fun and experience, but is altogether too random to be taken seriously. Everyone should play and enjoy it several times, but as the randomness becomes apparent, attraction eventually pales.

His variant to reduce luck will be worth trying.

For me, Settlers of the Stone Age is the better game, especially as the narrative flow in that game is so strong.

6/10 – Fun, but lacks replayability. I am glad I can play Chris’s copy.

Last week Rob came over and we tried my borrowed copy of Stephenson’s Rocket.

I have wanted to try this for years. When I started gaming again, the first reviews website I came to was The Game Report. The web was a very different place only five or six years ago, and there was nowhere else with such well-written and organised reviews.

Peter Sarrett wrote a very complimentary review, which really piqued my interest. The only thing that prevented me from getting my debit card out was that it got really conflicting comments with some, like Bruno Faidutti, disliking the complex scoring. The fact that it hardly got mentioned again reassured me that I had done the right thing.

After finally playing it, I have to agree that I am in the “disliking the convoluted scoring” camp. The theme of railways was redundant and the gameplay was just too dry. It is too clever for it’s own good. Maybe next time I should play with more players or someone without a Maths degree? I might enjoy it more…

4/10 – I might be persuaded to try it again.