Good articulation of your disappointment in the game! My experience has not been similar at all regarding the stagnant board state, especially in the 4 player game. This is probably my favorite game of the year, but I respect your willingness to express honest criticism of what is being widely praised. Keep up the great reviews!

@clumsydad7158

7 жыл бұрын

I agree. This year is funny, it's hard to find hardly any game everyone agrees on.

@omnitheus5442

5 жыл бұрын

@@clumsydad7158 problem is the best way to play it is with 4 players and not two. his loss as this game is a masterpiece.

Jon, I've always appreciated how you've done your best to respond to people's comments that are asking for a response. You may not always be able to do this as your subscribers continue to grow (here's to getting to 10k+ in 2017!), but it's one of the many reasons that your channel is one of the best for board gamers. Merry Christmas and a Happy New Year!

Really glad to see you not afraid to neg a game. This is, sadly, very rare among reviewer's, who like to call everything 'phenomenal'. We liked the game, but also think the craftsmen are weak. Three two player games so far. No one went over two craftsmen, 3 buildings max. This could be the 'book track' of this Pfister game, which was an overly thinky aspect of Mombasa I didn't like, meaning there is a hidden strategy there that we haven't discovered yet, or it is simply weak compared to buying cowboys and engineers. The run time is also too long, starting at 4 hrs, going down to, at best, 2.5 for a two player game. The point of the 4 hazard trails eludes us. We still don't know why they are there. No one has used them. If the trail stayed empty, I could see the benefits of building a house there, but the hazards are coming out fast and they are very expensive to remove. Very odd, but I have yet to see anyone complaining about this aspect of the game, or explain how building on a busy hazard trail is a good strategy. In my third game I built a building on an empty trail just to try it out and within five minutes the trail was full of hazard tiles again, and I never used that building for the rest of the game.

@JonGetsGames

7 жыл бұрын

Sounds like your experiences come very close to matching my own. I never meant to infer that no buildings came out, just that most people got 1-3 of the super cheap ones, maybe 1 or 2 of the next level ones and thats where every game seemed to stall out building wise.

@lucidious4353

7 жыл бұрын

The foresight track has everything to do with how you one may build on the hazard tracks. Building here rewards you with an additional action to your building. Some of these are for extra certs which can come in handy and are often times worth the $1-4 money the hazards may cost on movement. 2.5 for a 2 player game, yeah definitely running too long on your end. 1.5 for a 2 player game here. 2.5 for a 4 player game with 3 newbies just the other day. But it all depends on the players and how the grasp the concepts. It can definitely vary the first few games. The book track in Mombasa has no trickery, it is simply a harder track to workout a plan but it rewards those who can use it to their advantage as it can be a slower track but each book you accomplish gives you a bonus that the diamond track does not. It definitely rewards more in the end in spades.Going back to the hazards, with many objectives requiring these and with the variable staggering of the 3 hazard types and teepees it can be a risky area to build, but with an additional reward and using the foresight can help gauge how often one might use that space. There is also the reward for some of the objectives that allow you to skip paying any fees, and properly timed play of one of these can definitely help make those additional rewards much more appealing.

you know what helps against hazards? .. not having any money! in that case you pass them for free. and the bonus on those "risky" spots can be great. i found that you can sometimes cheat your way up the train track, but jumping opponents trains a lot. As for the buildings, have you really tried to go for those big buildings? against your "better" jugdement that you need cowboys and train guys more?

I think this game is easily the best of the year. I've never had trouble getting buildings onto the board when I've dedicated resources to them, but that being said, I will concede that it's easier to grab a Texas Longhorn than it is to build a high value building. Still, it's not impossible, and should they specialize in craftsmen hires, players can get some bonus cheap building actions which are invaluable. Additionally, the mid-range buildings have proven to be game changers with my group. Their actions -- the chance to hire at a discount; the opportunity to draw cards per cowboy; the ability to earn certificates for teepee pairs -- are super strong. Even more importantly, buildings allow for engine building (especially if you can chain buildings next to each other). My friend recently used his buildings to power a hazard-clearing machine, which afforded him a huge amount of points -- both from the hazards and the objective cards. It wouldn't have worked for the rest of us, but he tailored his actions and resources to make it work. And that's the beauty of the game for me. It may be a deckbuilder, but it's not a card game. The difficult choices come from using resources -- whether they be cows, money, or movement. It's not so much a question of what to do but rather when to do it. I also think there's a sly amount of user interaction. It wouldn't seem to be a very interactive game, but the tolls on the board, the race for cheap workers, the posturing on the train track, the escalating Native American market, the dwindling cows -- these things force players to be aware of their competition. Plus, there's strong interaction when it comes to claiming empty spots for buildings (after all, placing your building in the proper spot in the rondel could be what makes or breaks your engine). I've often encountered pretty stiff competition for coveted land spaces. Nevertheless, thanks for the articulate and thoughtful review. Maybe play one more time and mess around with the buildings?

I do agree with you that the craftsman are undervalued which does lead to less buildings coming out. However, I still find the board state to be volatile enough to keep the game interesting the whole way through. The randomization of the starting neutral buildings can really make for tougher trips to Kansas City. I would also like to note that, although seemingly undervalued, I don't think anyone could ever do well and completely ignore buildings (especially in the 3-4 player counts). I think the problem with the tough decision making isn't in which buildings to use or what to do when you land there (which can be pretty straight forward based on the cards in your hand). It's in thinking about passing up those buildings with possible good options for you in order to deliver faster to KC. The 1.5-2 hrs this game normally takes seems to go by pretty quickly. The fact that you get to delivery to KC so often really gives the players a frequent sense of accomplishment instead of a long drawn out grind for 1 VP that some other euro games can feel like. I appreciate the review and respect your opinions. Actually, it was your playthrough that convinced me to get this game... and I LOVE it... a lot! My best of the year by a long haul. Thank you so much and keep up the good work.

Thanks for a well thought through and brave review Jon. I firmly believe that it's the negative reviews that are more helpful, and also give us more insight into the reviewer and whether or not their tastes are similar to ours. Expecting reviewers to be emotionless robots is unrealistic so knowing their tastes are close to yours can be an important filter. It seems a little odd to me that there are so many people trying to convince you a) that you're 'wrong' and b) that you just need a different play group or more plays before you like the game. You're entitled to not like a game. It doesn't mean that the game is not good. It just means it is not for you. Out of interest, what are your three favourite games right now?

@JonGetsGames

7 жыл бұрын

I suppose my three favorite games of the moment (so not all time, just the ones I"m most excited to play again right now) are Railroad Revolution, Solarius Mission, and Feast for Odin.

I didn't find the cost of building that high. We built many, including some that needed to be built upon other existing buildings. And we had cash left over to count at the end. You have to go to the discarding spaces to get cash, which makes the hand management even more challenging. It's a balance of holding unique cards and getting cash that makes this work so well. And the length seemed just about perfect. My two cents. #goty

@ScampSign

7 жыл бұрын

Joel Stout Yeah he mentioned that in negative point #1.

@gregdeutschlander4054

7 жыл бұрын

He shows this in his video that you can upgrade for the difference. I did not see him make any mistakes with the rules.

Thanks for your honest comments. I rely on your reviews to make my buying decisions. I think the long playtime is the deal breaker for me.

By the way, your playthroughs and final thougts are the best on KZread. Your video are so well explained that there is no need to read any rulebook. Grat job! I also like Dice Tower videos, but they present games in a faster way, without going so deep. On the other side, I don't like Rhado's reviews, as he never judge any game negatively, so it looks like he wants to be the "good guy for everyone". Thanks for your videos and keep up the good work..

I was late to the party and have played this game for the first time this year. I loved it!! :) I respect Jon's opinion but I don't agree with the negatives. I immediately ordered my own copy after playing it. It has been a while since I liked a game so much.

I am very happy with your in depth review. I feel like you were able to grab very good points and weren't afraid to be honest. I"m honestly surprised that people have been mostly in disagreement. I think this is one of those games that seems so fun and that has a lot of potential, but so much of the game seems going through the motions. The choices are obvious and it becomes a simple solitaire where you aren't making many choices. It seems like it is an intricate solitaire with a lot of intelligent design, but in the end of the day still a solitaire where you make your big decisions and play 90% in the first ten minutes and spend the next two hours finishing out the final 10%. It reminds me of Seasons in that way.

This was my favorite game last year. In your review of Railroad Revolution, you talk about how the Western Union strategy dominates. In this game, cow diversity dominates (The cowboy route). In fact, one person I know never moves their train at all. They sit it in Kansas City the ENTIRE game and they do nothing but buy cowboys and cows and this person wins a large number of games. Another element to his strategy is rushing to KC as fast as he can. He just rushes and buys cows as much as possible and wants the game to end fast.Interestingly enough the strategy that "counters" him and beats him is to go the craftsman route and to put as many buildings as you can onto the board. It also helps to put a building with both sets of hands to force that player to pay as he passes over your building to get to the cow purchase building.It is for that reason...the craftsman route being crucial for game balance...that I ultimately love this game. I did, however, like your idea of making it so you can just put a building out as part of your KC set of actions. I feel it would work quite well. I find buying nothing but cows and rushing to KC to be a boring strategy and it is similar to the Western Union problem...but, thankfully, it can be countered. And a four player game is BETTER simply for that reason...more buildings on the board slow that boring strategy down.

I agree with many of your points, though I don't agree with your ultimate conclusion, which I think might be affected by your particular play group. In our group, a lot of buildings come out and the board changes radically over the course of the game, and the people who have built buildings have done very well, not so much because of the action value of the buildings, but also in the way they slow up other players and force their route to be sub-optimal through having to take minor actions on your buildings or pay tolls. At the same time, I do agree there's a ton of luck in the card draw, and if you just can't make a good hand after multiple draws you really can get screwed. I also agree that hazard paths and hazard area buildings are underutilized, which is somewhat of a missed opportunity in terms of gameplay space.

@ShelleyDanielle

7 жыл бұрын

I've only played once so far, a 2P game and my opponent got a lot of buildings out, upgraded a couple of times and got out some good buildings, 1 of which was his high VP building.

Good review, but the negative points in particular seem to be a result of a bad groupthink. As someone below already said, putting a building which forwards you further is huge, since it essentially provides you with a freebie action. However, this is something which is not obvious but rather needs to be discovered, similar to a huge number of other tiny yet surprisingly impactful tricks. This game has lots of depth, but it requires time and patience to even figure out it's there.

Interessant points. I can definitely understand your criticism, although I disagree with much of it. I love everything about GWT and find that it has plenty of interesting decisions. Without a doubt the game of the year for me. Different strokes for different folks, I suppose :-)

I agree with you that you can have games where you haven’t time to build many buildings however in the guide they recommend that you can increase game length by choosing the next column in the employee area. This is a fantastic game.

@petec3250

6 жыл бұрын

where does it say that? i don't remember reading it. i wonder if that would make the game too long. anyway, what page of the rules can you find that on?

I haven't played it yet, but it looks so good already! Reminds me of Carson City and Russian Railroads, looks awesome!

Thank you

our first play we had about 80% of the building spots filled up with 4 players and 1 player got out there 13 point building. even tho I came in last place the point spread was only by 20 points between 1st and 4th so it was very close

I haven't had the same issue with buildings nor do I agree with hazards issues. WRT hazards people do buy them for victory points. I really enjoy this game and agree with most of the review. I wonder if a cheaper building variant would make it better for me.

Thanks for this review. The game was a big disappointment for me and you hit upon my major issues well - luck of the card draw, repetitive/stagnant gameplay, and buildings being difficult to execute on. Just wanted to say keep up the good work and I love that you're able to say both the positives and negatives for a game.

So, I checked out this thread after listening to the Last Place podcast. I came expecting toxicity, but it seems commenters are overall respectful and frequently supportive. Wish there had been some more discussion and debate of likes and dislikes. I'm on the fence as to whether this is a game for me.

Never felt it stagnate or hard to get buildings out. And that's playing it 2 players mostly. Exactly how would you fix the building high cost?

@JonGetsGames

4 жыл бұрын

Honestly it's been so long since I played that I can't really answer your question. Many people love the game and haven't had the problems with it that we did and that just shows how different groups can react to the same thing.

@yugihoo

4 жыл бұрын

@@JonGetsGames That makes sense. It's my wife favorite game and she had never won. Not sure if the expansion would change your mind, but I hope you could around to giving it another shot

I think this is the first time I've disagreed with you. The reason why people suffer in this game is because they visit Kansas City too often. You should be buying buildings with the extra step to give you multiple actions on your turn. I understand that there's a limit on how much you can play a game, but there's so much more depth than what you seem to have experienced. You should be aiming to have at least 80 points per game. PS. love the new podcast. keep up the good work.

@JonGetsGames

7 жыл бұрын

In our games we had people visiting Kansas City an average of 6 times, when you play do you see even less than that?

@arw20

7 жыл бұрын

JonGetsGames usually about 4/5 times. You want to use the 2 coins action a lot. Buildings make for a great income. especially if you specialise in it. Then you can catch up with cowboys.

@lucidious4353

7 жыл бұрын

The avg is about 5 to 7 depending on the strategies used, but that is about the number of times needed to keep the worker market moving and heading towards the end of the game. When more buildings are being put out an avg of 5 is usually the norm, 6 or 7 and that means there was at least one person flying through the board which could also affect the timing of the end game. The timing is the biggest factor in the game.

@KissellMissile

7 жыл бұрын

He said he played the game 4 times. Personally, I don't feel that arguments of "you didn't play the game enough to understand the depth" really hold. You should be able to understand a game enough to have fun with it before 4 plays.

@lucidious4353

7 жыл бұрын

Ian Kissell That is exactly what most comments are saying, that he basically mentions not knowing how to properly get buildings out fast enough or how buildings can be used effectively in the game and how expensive they are. It doesnt appear it was fully grasped within those 4 games so comments are discussing how they can be used and what the current general consensus has found regarding the effectiveness of buildings.

D'aaaaw, I just got this one. Any idea how you would improve the board stagnation issue? Anyway, I'll still try to play some games of it and see for myself.

John, do you think a variant where all players start with an extra Craftsman would help this game?

@JonGetsGames

7 жыл бұрын

It would likely help me and my playgroup out, but it's not something I'd suggest others do unless they have been equally dissatisfied with the game as us.

@ricke1732

7 жыл бұрын

JonGetsGames Thanks! This game is at the top of my most wanted games from Essen, and I LOVE Pfister's other games (especially Mombasa), but I'm concerned my wife and I will have the same issues you did. After watching some reviews, it's good to know that simple house rule could be added if we feel the same way after playing a couple times.

@samiamagainagain

7 жыл бұрын

JonGetsGames Would placing some lower cost buildings from the start help with some of the issues? In a 2 player game, each player could put 2 buildings down: starting player places 1, 2nd player places 2, then starting player places one more. What do you think about this alternative setup idea for 2 players?

@JonGetsGames

7 жыл бұрын

I suppose it wouldn't be be a bad variant, though I'm not really sure how it'd affect many of the thoughts I had. I say, give it a shot :)

@samiamagainagain

7 жыл бұрын

JonGetsGames Thanks for replying. I'm wondering if it would take away some of the advantage of just running through as fast as possible because it would slow it down a bit. Anyway, I'll try it and if it seems to work I'll let you know. Thanks again!

Well that pretty much summarizes how I felt after one play. There are a lot of different strategies you can employ, but the game just felt flat to me and I never wanted to put out buildings. I did really well by achieving the bonus goal cards, I only picked up 2 cows and dropped off craftsmen on the train route. Being 3rd player felt punishing with how workers came out for our game...craftsmen were my only choice after 3 trips through KC. So, I made the same stops every time

This is the best channel for honest reviews... Assuming there is a limited number of hours per day you can dedicate to your channel, I wished you focused more on reviews and not on playthroughs (tough to beat Rahdo on playthroughs)... Reviews are really your strength... I would can here every time I wanted to buy a game.... I just wished your you had more reviews... Even noticed some games you did playthroughs and not reviews...

@JonGetsGames

7 жыл бұрын

I'm glad you've enjoyed my reviews! The biggest issue here is that with a playthrough I can make a video after never having played it before vs a review requires at a minimum 3 plays of the game and often times many more then that. I in general only get to play games once or twice a week and I refuse to force a review schedule on my friends so it can often take a long time (many weeks or even months) before I get a game played enough times that I feel comfortable reviewing it. This is the reason you have seen many games I've done playthroughs for and not reviews. Reviews will keep coming, but playthroughs allow me to put out content I enjoy making when I don't actually have a reviewable game at that moment :)

@dddmmm21

7 жыл бұрын

Get it... Keep up with the good work!

Our group is about 50-50 if whether we think this game or Maracaibo is better.

@JonGetsGames

4 жыл бұрын

I have really been enjoying Maracaibo, so it's no surprise that's the side I fall on.

I think you were overwhelmed by the tension which comes from min/maxing and sacrificing. This game looks like a point salad at first glance (get points for everything; choosing the best of two or more good things), and the artwork and theme can deceive you too. I know that you don't mind that kind of tension at times, since your favorite game is Through the Ages. But maybe Great Western Trail teases at being a point salad when the tension of this game is closer to Ora et Labora, or Le Havre. You feel like you are just a few steps from pulling off something big. You are soooo close to having the perfect action that will bring you tons of points. But you just have to do one more thing. Then you have to sacrifice something. And another thing. Is it worth it? Uh oh. Look at the game clock! You thought you were going to have enough time to pull off your awesome action at least three times. But you still don't have your stuff in order. Are you going to have enough time to pull it off at least once?!?! I love that feeling. But it's not for everyone. And I can see why someone would be disappointed if they were expecting something different. When people hear deck-building, perhaps they get excited because they expect the Dominion feel in a heavy eurogame. But that's not the experience that GWT delivers. -I feel it s an oversimplification to say that your hand base based on luck. That "luck" is highly manageable with good planning and using auxiliary actions well. GWT rewards good deck management. But people may be surprised at how difficult that planning may be. -Buildings? Maybe your problems are from group think? Most of my games see us scoring at least in the mid teens (but often over 20) for building points. You might think we are sacrificing points with cattle then, right? Nope. 20-30 points for cattle is average for us. My wife and I played last night, and I delivered to San Francisco 3 times. After our first game, I wondered it were even possible to do well with cattle, deliveries, train stations and buildings - or if doing well in one category made you severely and frustratingly deficient in other areas. I think that is where you were with this game when you reviewed it.. However, I really appreciate how GWT is deceptively deep. It is possible to do well in most areas of the game, but that really involves a 'mixed' strategy that is flexible. Bonuses you get in one area of the game can help you advance in other areas. And yes, it does involve sacrificing workers you just paid money for. Is the sacrifice worth it right now, or will it hurt me? Should I wait until next time around? I only have about 6 times around, so I can't wait forever to decide. Anyway, those are my two cents. I always enjoy your reviews.

@JonGetsGames

6 жыл бұрын

Good write up, I fully admit that I never got particularly good at the game and I'm happy that it has worked out so well for so many other people :)

Pretty much as everyone else has said so far, buildings are not that cost intensive (in my opinion). Sure when you have other players buildings out it can cost you fees to move and make it harder for you to build but those players got their buildings out so they just took advantage of building early. I have yet to have a game where buildings weren't laid out all over the board. My last game with 4 players I think we only had 3 empty spots. Also, upgrading buildings also help keep costs low and increase your VP. If you look at each increasing level of building you will see the jump in VP which entices upgrading as you lose the building but you gain much more VP and only have to pay the difference between the levels of craftsmen. There is a huge incentive to build certain buildings in a certain pattern, I have had a few games where players were able to combo off several actions with just three of 4 of their buildings in a certain pattern, which also helped create a choke point for fees. Cattle are a huge part of the game...but not the only part, as I have even played a game using the strategy of never buying any new cattle, it is definitely risky but it paid off. With an avg of 5-7 visits to KC, the more you can slow your pace the better so you don't have to stick with the negative point slots in the cities and you can concentrate on placing buildings, grabbing hazards, completing Objective cards, etc. And when talking about pace and timing this is where you see the biggest and toughest part of the game, how to and when to use your actions through each pass to KC. Timing places a huge role in how successful your strategy can be.

@lucidious4353

7 жыл бұрын

And yes, everyone was able to do a bit of everything at the same time... ie. move trains, buy cattle, cull their deck, place buildings, achieve objectives. If you had an issue with the building part of it why not play a game where you just concentrate on building and another aspect and see how it feels. It sounds like you were too phased by the deck building part, which I agree is a big part of the game, but every building, neutral, other players, yours, allows for you to at least do an auxiliary action that can help with you deck building and such. But all in all I respect your viewpoint as always.

I commend you for putting forth a well argued negative review. I agree that very occasionally luck of the draw can wreak havoc to well-laid plans. However, I disagree with some of your criticisms. In my experience the board is very rarely stagnant and building at least 2-3 buildings has been crucial to carrying out any successful strategy. Climbing to the really high level buildings is difficult and requires commitment to that particular strategy but it is a viable winning strategy. I have also had success building beyond hazards and utilizing those buildings. There is no way to explore all the game has to offer on each play. But, it does present interesting challenges every game. There are also some implicit goals that seem impossible but because of their perceived difficulty spur me to meet the challenge. I'm referring to challenges such as can the end of the railroad be reached, can all tokens be places, can the biggest building be built, and others. Makes me play repeatedly.

Most of the responses to your review seemed to have a pretty neutral or positive tone even though most people seemed to disagree. At least you backed up your opinion with valid information. I am also glad that you did not feel you had to give a positive review because so many others have felt differently. That speaks to your credibility. I have not played the game myself, but watching you review and play through will definitely give me an idea if I will in the future. Again keep up the good work and keep on gaming.

Great review, Jon about my probably all-time favorite game. About Negative #1 : Buildings do not seem very costly to me , because you can use the "upgrade" building action instead of building new ones.

I totally agree with your negative #2, I felt the same, the first part of the game was fun, because the board changed in every round, but after a while, nobody built anything so we just used the same "engine" again and again. In this aspect the game felt too long for me, because after an hour barely anything changed, yes, we earned bigger points and our trains leapfrogged each other, but we was doing the same...the last two round was like "okaaaay, end thiiiiis". Don`t get me wrong, I like the game, but I don`t love it, it`s a great experience once in every month, but I couldn`t play it every week.

@JonGetsGames

5 жыл бұрын

Most people I know still love this game, so I think they just don't see this as an issue as much as we do. I haven't played this one in a year or two at this point and honestly I'm ok with that. I would play it again if it's what people wanted to do, but I've gone for other heavy euro options in its stead.

@Hunszi

5 жыл бұрын

@@JonGetsGames for example? I'm still searching for my go to heavy euro, currently I'm with Marco Polo, Pulsar, Agricola.

@JonGetsGames

5 жыл бұрын

@@Hunszi I know it's not readily avaliable yet, but Underwater Cities is exceptional (as long as you never play with 4p). Lately I have really been into Brass (lancashire is a slight preference for me over birmingham), and I always love coming back to Feast for Odin as a few examples.

@Hunszi

5 жыл бұрын

Thanks, I really need to try Feast for Odin and Brass, I heard a lot of positive comments.

While I must say that for me this, along with A Feast for Odin and Terraforming Mars is one of my faves of 2016, it's always refreshing to see the other side of the coin. My own experiences with this game have been different and I've found the craftsmen to be useful and you can score heavily with upgrading buildings. The issue I did find was that you spend so much time getting them out that you don't have enough time to use those buildings. I've got the final building out and never gone to it as the job clock has ticked away. I'm surprised you have spent so long playing it, as I've taught this in a four player where two were new and it took around two and a half hours. I can see this being a staple of our game nights for some time to come as it has gone over very well.

Great review, as always, although i disagree with most of what you said. The thing that strikes me the most is the fact that you said multiple times that this is a "heavy euro deckbuilder". To me, the deckbuilding is an aspect, just not the main aspect. That "issue" comes trough very clearly when you talked about engineers, which sounded like something "useful to the deckbuilding" (e.g. giving up less money when delivering), not on their own. To me, the cowboy, craftsman and engineer path are very disconnected. For example in the last game i wanted to play an engineer strategy and won the (3 player) game at 132 points by covering a lot of the stations. I only bought 3 (3 valued) cows during the whole game, to accomplish an objective, just removed 1 cow from my deck, and just built 1 building. Of course i had to do a lot of "hand and certificate juggling" to gain something once i arrived in Kansas City, but i even managed to touch San Francisco (6 certificates + 3 + 3 + 2 + 2 + 2), and man was that fun! Admittedly i haven't tried a strategy solely focused on the Craftsman so i can't touch on that, but yeah; i guess the point is that, to me, the fact that you can focus 100% on Engineers and have the same winning chances of one who does only buy Cowboys, is kind of amazing. PS: sorry for my english, it's kinda early in the morning here in Italy. :D

@JonGetsGames

7 жыл бұрын

I see what you are saying, and I tried to cover this in the video though maybe I wasn't as clear as I wanted. In your example of playing a game where you went engineer and barely bought cows or buildings I would have been very unsatisfied with the decisions avaliable due to my board state never changing due to putting only 1 building out. A friend of mine did exactly what you are saying and did pretty well, but was pretty bored while actually playing it out. So I don't mean to say that strategies ignoring buildings or deckbuilding aren't viable, they have just seemed to me to be much less interesting than I wanted them to be. In the end this simply wasn't the game I wanted it to be, and what it is didn't satisfy almost anyone I played it with. I wish the game had been designed to get every player in every single play of the game into moderate amounts of deck building, moderate amounts of building construction, and moderate amounts of train pushing and then allowed players to adapt and go heavy on perhaps one while not being forced to ignore others.

@lucidious4353

7 жыл бұрын

JonGetsGames That's just it, you are hitting on the "design" of the game because you weren't able to find the balance between doing what you hoped the game would allow you to do which the game actually does allow you to do. You can dabble in all strategies and focus more on one and still doing well in the others. Buildings have several actions that can add to many of the strategies by just going to them. It's quite telling that a majority (as far as the comments and what I have come across) have been able to see the ability to do this. You have a great playthrough of this game, a great channel and I will always watch, but I think the comments are flowing in because you basically mentioned not being able to find the balance but are directing the negative towards thw design of the game or how it could have had a few tweaks to make it work when what is currently there will do what you wanted it to do but you haven't found it. I respect the amount of times you played it and your review of it, not your cup of tea, no sweat off my back, but after how you mention your possible shortcomings playing the game it's hard to hear the kick to the design. Of course this is an open forum and how things you say come out is hard to sensor or manipulate when you are just being you, especially when there are many personalities out there listening to you I get the struggle. Just hard to swallow the "design" aspect on this one

@JonGetsGames

7 жыл бұрын

I knew I would be in the vast minority from long before I recorded this review, it is true that most people here seem to have found lots of fun in this game and I'm glad for that. I tried to strike a tone of non-hostility towards the game, this is why I said it disappointed me instead of saying that it is bad or has definite flaws. It's possible that it is group think, but all but 4 other people I've played this with feel the same way I do and this was before they heard my opinion on it. We aren't alone either, while still in the minority I have seen many people have the same issues as I through threads on BGG and even a couple here. It seems the fun and interesting decisions in this game aren't obvious to all groups and in the end we don't want to have to work towards finding it if it doesn't come naturally to us.

I really disagree with your review, as I was able to build up to some high-level buildings and I found it a nice decision of choosing between replacing a building to get a high level building, or just building more buildings.

The game definitely has an issue with putting buildings out. If you get 2 people racing through the game the other players will never get their building out. The other players have even less of a chance of winning because while they are spending time and money chasing buildings the people racing are just doing what they need to purchase cows.

@lucidious4353

7 жыл бұрын

I would not say "definitely" at all, especially based on playtesting and views of a majority of players. And "doing what they need to purchase cows" seems to suggest this is the only viable strategy, which isn't. All players have an even chance to put whatever amount of buildings they want put, the only true variable is when and how many craftsmen come out in the market, will it be earlier or later in the game, and when this happens players need to be able to adjust, that is why the variable market and the 1, 2 & 3 chits are split that way to balance the variance in the game and keep it a game where players must adjust. If you were to do the same thing every game it would be less satisfying.

@gregdeutschlander4054

7 жыл бұрын

Anytime I am in a game where a player races to Kansas it has caused the game to end quickly and the other players never got their engine built to counter this. I am not an expert on this game as I have only played 8 times but with different groups. I really like this game but it feels like we almost have to agree at the start to not race to Kansas. I almost think the first level buildings should be free to put out allowing enough spots in between to slow down the game. Not sure as I have not played enough but after 8 games it does feel like an issue and I agree definitely is probably not the right word in this case.

@lucidious4353

7 жыл бұрын

Greg Deutschlander What I don't get are people trying to offer a variant of additional craftsmen at beginning of game because they couldnt grasp nature of buildings. Just think about it, everyone starts with a craftsmen, and each player can put out 3 individual buildings and upgrade another building with that one craftsmen. in a 4 player game those 3 initial buildings have the ability to have 12 buildings put out by the end of the 3rd trip around the board. That is a heck of a lot of buildings causing longer travel times and this is usually before playets are able to remove disks increasing their movement and such. And some of the starting buildings do have fees to be paid when opponents go over them, so well placed buildings can easily slow down players trying to shoot to KC. But even using a strategy of shooting towards KC as many times as you can isnt n overpowered way to win, it is dependent on card draw, hand management and using the buildings that you can. Making it to KC more times then the other players doesnt assure a win, in fact many times if specific players are speeding up the game they are usually concentrating on hand management and the cities which ia a bulk of points but you have to dabble in other things to really get that win. I have had games where a player slow rolled around, only got to KC 5 times, completed objectives, picked up hazards and won by a few points over 2 other players who went to KC 7 times. Timing is huge in the game.

@gregdeutschlander4054

7 жыл бұрын

I agree with you in a 4 player game we have never had the issue in fact I would say it is impossible to pull off a win by just rushing to sell cows. In a 3 player game it only happens if 2 players do it. In a 2 player game it happens all the time and just makes the game no fun at all. I am really enjoying the game with 4 players and that is how I will play it from now on unless someone house rules or expands the 2 player game to slow down the cattle drive.

@lucidious4353

7 жыл бұрын

In a 2 player game, against a cattle strategy trying using a train push/station laying strategy while trying to make the best of the station tiles.

I have only played it once so far but I have to disagree on the tiles/building. I think the brilliance of the game is every time you play you can play different ways and focused on buildings and cows. I have 6 tiles out and even upgraded a couple. It's the part of the game I loved. I used move rail road option to get me 3/4 of the way. Watching your walk through I think you could have gotten to 3/4 builders and then got 4/5 tiles out and upgraded them as you needed later in the game. I did this on my last turn and swapped out a three for a 9 because I had 6 builders. That moved me from 3 vp for that tile to 13. So there is a strategy with them. But what I find brilliant is based on what other players are doing you can adjust your strategy to try to win. Now if no one is focusing on buildings then it can get stagnant but that's when I would I change the strategy to focus on them. Also I think placing the base building randomly will force people to use more buildings. But someone could focus on all trains and get all the stops for VP, others can focus on cows and deck building. That's what makes it fun each game could be different

hi jon, i think you should see this video kzread.info/dash/bejne/Z2iK3LKKksbcY7w.html the yellow player built all of his buildings! blue player bought many cows and scored 53 points only for cows! and green player played engineer strategy and see his train! this game has very depth and is very hard to master. i love it!

I think the point of the game was that you could not do all 3 worker types in the game. You could not chase all three. So I think your opinion is quite mute. This is not a game where you can't and shouldn't do everything.

I was expecting a good review, but I personally have not been drawn to this game nor Mombasa, just feel homeworky for me, maybe i'm heavy euroed out.

You probably should play it more than 4 times and with different groups to see how different people use different strategies. You may find it more interesting.

@soren123

7 жыл бұрын

That SOUNDS like a good idea, but teaching this game is such a chore, plus it usually takes a couple of games for people to properly formulate strategies. That would be really tough for a reviewer to do. Normal guys like us, on the other hand...

@BGBarbarian

7 жыл бұрын

soren123 I meant with people that know how to play and play well.

@JonGetsGames

7 жыл бұрын

You are likely right, but with so many great games on my shelf I don't see the benefit of spending more time playing a game just to try and figure out why it isn't working for me or anyone else I've played it with so far.

@BGBarbarian

7 жыл бұрын

JonGetsGames I guess it's weird to me to play a heavier game only 4 times with one group and then trash it online.

@lucidious4353

7 жыл бұрын

Not sure I would say it's trying to figure out why it isn't working, but should be more of the mindset of trying it to figure out the many different strategies and how you can improve on them to make it a better experience for you. You sound like you got hung up on the building part, which for many is an easier task then it seemed to come across for you. The game has many viable strategies, and it really rewards players that can adapt to the variables. But as they say, different strokes for different folks. Not everyone can be comfortable with a game after so few plays but I definitely understand how only a small number of plays can still affect your appeal to play the game again.

I disagree with you. In my opinion 4 plays are not enough. You play very bad or don't see opportunity. Also you are playing too long... strange.

@JonGetsGames

7 жыл бұрын

I felt that 4 plays was enough because it's likely I won't play the game a 5th. I have quite a few opinions about the game and this is my avenue for expressing them. The number of times I've played a game feels like a valid datapoint for my viewers to know and if this invalidates all of my arguments for some then there's nothing I can do about that :)

@jaygraffious

7 жыл бұрын

I almost always know if a game is going on the shelf or trade pile after four plays, and can pin point why. Also I heard the same criticism regarding high build expense with Oh My Goods, perhaps Mr. Pfister and his play testers really focus on this aspect, and skew it to costly. I've had only one play of GWT so far and enjoyed it enough to want a few more goes, but probably only as a two player experience. Cheers!

@KristoVaher

7 жыл бұрын

Amadeusz Michajłowicz What? Even a couple of plays is enough to know that the game isn't for you.