Over the last week I was able to get in 2 different games of God’s Playground.  This is the Martin Wallace game about the invasions of Poland through its long history.  So in a minor way you might think of comparing it to Britannia – but that would be wrong.  There is no similarity in the play of these two games.

This is not a game I expected to like.  I don’t have any special interest in the history of Poland, and have never read the book the game takes its title from.  And in truth, this game is overly complicated.  The author chose to tie the game mechanics to the unique history of Poland (or so I assume, being ignorant of any details).  So while the rules around the enemies of Poland are largely the same for the Swedes and Russians, every other power has some special rules.  The Cossacks in Lithuania might fight with the Tartars.  The Ottomans will never accept a treaty, and will eventually attempt attack the Hapsburgs.  And the Hapsburgs… they induce so many special rules that I almost wish the author had not bothered.

But despite the heavy chrome, or maybe because of it, I really like this game.  It has a semi-cooperative feel to it.  In a minor way it reminds me of Red Empire, a card game from GDW years ago about the Soviet Union.  In that game players had to cooperate just enough to avoid having the game win.  The situation is different in God’s Playground.  You really can let Poland burn.  There is even a special rule where you can dissolve the parliamentary body (the Sejm), which would make it even harder to defend Poland.  But due to the unique rules around how enemies travel within Poland once they have a foothold, most of the time players will want to control enemy incursions due to enlightened self-interest!

The same day I played God’s Playground, I also tried Dominant Species.  Wow.  I kind of think there is a chance I will like Dominant Species.  But it was like trying to take just a small sip from the end of a fire hose.  There was way too much to process, and with three new players we were quickly aware the experienced player was going to wipe the floor with us.  Which I honestly don’t mind.  But it was clear to me that some of the players were not enjoying the game, which also limits my ability to enjoy a gaming experience.  So I will try again sometime.

But the dichotomy strikes me.  God’s Playground could honestly be described as overloaded with chrome.  Dominant Species is clearly a bigger, wider, deeper sort of game.  Is it simply my experience with GP that allows it to rise in my estimation, where my first impression of DS was a bit more shaky?

Recently I’ve been playing the online implementation of Memoir ’44.  And I gotta say that I’m enjoying it!  Despite our annual game of Memoir ’44 over Labor Day weekend, I have generally spent much more effort collecting this game set rather than playing it.

So it is nice to actually get to play some of these scenarios.  The implementation is very good, and the people I’ve had as opponents have ranged from friendly to polite.  I suspect I will keep playing this for a while.  If you decide to check it out I have the clever user name of  ”kevin_whitmore”.  Look me up and we’ll have a match!

Tuesday night Chester brought B&O back for another play at the game club.  I was pleased to get into the game, as I had missed it the other time he brought it.  I then proceeded to make a bone-headed first play.  So entirely stupid that I basically threw the game away.  I tried to be a good sport and just played to improve my position.  Which I did, but still finished a distant 5th in our game.  I’d be interested in trying again, but I sensed enthusiasm for this game has waned quickly.

In other news, I enjoyed my 10 minute game of Meander on Tuesday night.  I owned Meander back in 2001 thru 2004, but eventually removed it from my collection.  Seven years later I realized I missed it, so I now own it again.  I intend to hang on to it from now on.  It’s a remarkable game, for its chunky pieces, and that you end the game with a gravity test!  Check it out on BGG if you’ve never seen this one.

Chester and Alex came over today for a game of 18NEB, an 18xx game set in Nebraska.  As I have written before, 18xx games currently command the top spot in my gaming preferences these days.  But these games tend to be long, too long for a typical weeknight game session.  So I look forward to these occasional weekend sessions.

Chester and I had played 18NEB earlier this year with a visitor from out-of-state.  While I had won that game, I did not kid myself.  I had no strong recollection of being especially creative in that victory.  Indeed, Chester told me today he felt he had screwed the other player late in the game, which handed me that victory.

One nice feature of 18NEB is that is a compact 18xx game.  Generally speaking I seem to have some of the bigger and longer titles in the series.  We had holiday celebrations to conduct later in the day, so a shorter game of 18NEB fit our needs nicely.

Another feature of 18NEB is the brutal use of tokens.  I was the first to do this, but certainly not the last.  In this game small villages upgrade into single slot green cities.  I was operating the Misouri Pacific, which was stuffed away in a corner of the board.  To break out, I jumped on a small town stop of the Union Pacific’s route, upgrading it to green, and placing a token to ensure I had some additional liberties.  But this also meant I bisected the UP’s route, which I am sure did not please Alex.

The game has room for stock shenanigans, although we saw little of that.  The incremental capitalization of the railroads means everyone can easily launch a company.  I chose to launch 2 right from the start.  (I’m not sure that was the best decision, though.)  Despite the 2D stock market, I still found myself feeling this was much more of a route-planning game.  I like that aspect of the game.  With the more 1825-like tile upgrades for small towns, I feel there is a lot of room for creativity in the board-play.

I look forward to playing this nice title again!

I played Liberté for the first time back in 2004.  I didn’t much care for it, and I never got back to it.  I traded my copy away, and pursued other games.  As it happened, Liberté went out of print, but the author, Martin Wallace, began to build quite the oeuvre of games noted for their flavorsome themes, integrated mechanics and deep strategic replay values.  Liberté began to take on the status of a “grail game”.  (A game many people wanted but could not afford or find.)

Simultaneously I had developed an esteem for the games of Martin Wallace.  And with the passage of time, I realized my tastes in games had significantly shifted from where I was in 2004 when I had last tried Liberté.  So earlier this year, I was able to trade for a copy of this game.  As it turns out I ended up getting a first edition, which pleased me.  Apparently a second edition had come out, suddenly making this game no longer quite so valuable.  Whatever the circumstance, I was happy to get the Warfrog edition, as their spartan graphic style appeals to me.

So we played this game last week.  We struggled a bit to absorb the rules, but as is so often the case, we found the play of the game easier than expected.  Not surprisingly we did muff a couple of rules, but the game was largely played as intended, and if we play again I think we can correct our understanding of the rules going forward.

My original assessment was the game was a sea of color, and too much to process.  There are three faction colors and up to 6 player colors.  In our game we had just 4 players, which cut back on the amount to process.  For whatever reason, this time I was able to read the board much more easily.  So my chief complaint from before was not bothering me so much.  And thus I felt I was able to better assess what the game was trying to do.

My sense is that you are trying to ride a surfboard.  You want to be the chief backer of whichever political party is going to lead the government.  If that seems impossible, then you want to be the second honcho of the ruling party, or the head honcho of the opposition.  Seeing which party is likely to be on top means you have to assess the board.  Stacks of faction blocks topped with player markers quickly fill the board, creating a swath of color to decipher.  I would totally understand if a player declared they would not care to do this.

But I actually enjoyed myself a fair bit with this game, and hope to play again relatively soon to cement my understanding of how to play.