Billabong Boardgamers - 3rd October, 2000
Present: Doug, Janet, Craig, Debbie, Andrew Steve, Alan, Asher, Roger
Doug Adams writes:
GALAXY: THE DARK AGES
After various mix-ups with GMT, we seemed to be flooded with copies of Galaxy this week. Having learnt the game on the weekend, I taught the others.
Galaxy is very, very similar to Titan: The Arena, with just a couple fo extra rules. The theme is now eight worlds fighting for survival, each turn one world will surrender, etc. The cards you play are ships, and the ships have abilities. Low value ships have an action that typically affects the governer of that world (ie. the backer) or bases (ie. bets) in that column. High value ships can attack, under strict conditions, other ships in the current row and remove them if successful. Bases (bets) can now change value based on card play and attacks.
We had a mix of gamers, some who'd played Titan the Arena before, and some who hadn't. Teaching the newbies Galaxy was a bit like jumping in the deep end of the pool for your first swimming lesson, but they coped well.
GAME 1
Janet, Doug, Andrew, Alan, Roger
This game was dominated by "Darth Roger", who spent 30 minutes after the game pleading innocence! :) Apparently Roger was dealt a hand of zero cards, and brutally crushed worlds influenced by Doug, Janet and Alan (the preceding players to Roger) over three turns. Andrew, sitting on Roger's left, cashed in and closed the round several times with himself in a dominant position. The scores are a good indication of the devastation!
Andrew: 13
Roger: 10
Alan: 8
Doug: 7
Janet: 3
GAME 2
Janet, Steve, Craig, Debbie, Doug
First off, never play this when El Caballero is being played on the adjacent table. All the talk about Governers and Ships can get very confusing!
Steve was the new player to the system, while Craig and Debbie were new to Galaxy. This seemed a much more intense game than the first, with several ship combats started to prolong the round. The combat rules are a nice addition, if that makes sense, as the round can be prolonged, weak cards can be removed, etc.
This was a close game, with Craig and Debbie doing well early. After the second round, Debbie's worlds began wilting away as the game progressed. As Debbie became less of a threat, the game seemed to be between Craig and Doug. Debbie's final world went on the last round, and it came down to surviving secret bases to determine the winner.
Scores, as taken by Debbie:
Doug: 15
Steve: 12
Janet: 11
Craig: 9
Debbie: 0! (Debbie, zero factorial is still zero)
Andrew Harding writes:
EL CABALLERO
Asher, Roger, Andrew, Alan
After a few inconculsive rounds of What shall we play next? we settled on El Caballero, which although marketed as a follow on from El Grande is a tile placing game with an 'exploration of the new world' theme. We played the expanded game with Grandes and Governors, but ended after only two scoring rounds due to time constraints. We had one really large land mass, which Roger and I tussled for first place in (both placing our Grandes there); Alan and then Asher overtook me in the second largest land mass while I was concentrating on holding the first. Asher had boats everywhere; Roger and Asher made extensive use of Governors. I had an anxious moment near the end when Roger overtook my position in the main island even though I was counting three facings of my Grande, but with the last tile placement of the game I forced the removal of one of his Caballero tiles to regain the lead.
I've now played the basic game and the expanded game once each. Although my Grande pretty much won the game for me, I think that I prefer the basic game because the permanence of Governors and the Grande makes a lot of tile placement decisions easier. I'll be looking to play this game again.
Final scores
Andrew 78
Roger 66
Asher 51
Alan 41
Craig Macbride writes:
MEDICI
At the end of the first round, I had only filled four spaces in my ship, got no bonus for cargo amount, and was way behind. Janet was way ahead, with Steve, who'd never played before, second. However, in the second round, I managed to consolidate on the two types of goods I was ahead in and avoid dreck. Positions after round 2 were a bit closer. Early on, I was given the chance to buy goods cheaply which made me a clear leader on those two types of goods and gave me the 10 bonus on one and the 20 bonus in the other. I thought that either Janet or Steve might have been able to get what they needed cheaply or that Deb or Doug might get to catch up. However, a number of gloriously crappy sets of cards went into the drink unwanted and the good ones were bid on quite aggressively.
Scores:
Craig 109
Deb 102
Doug 102
Janet 89
Steve 85
HIGH SOCIETY
I bid low early, so as to have some cash and flexibility left towards the end. It was looking dangerous about half way through, as Doug and Janet both had a number of items and Steve was close to them. Everyone except Steve accepted a negative card at some stage (Doug the 1/2, Janet the -5 and myself the "lose next item"), which might be part of why Steve used up the most money.
Craig 12
Doug 9.5
Janet 8
Steve - (lost due to having least money left)
Asher Kirby writes:
WAS STICHT?
Asher, Alan, Andrew, Roger.
My first game of Was Sticht?, as it was for Andrew. The basic elements were familiar, having played many hands of Oh, Hell! over the years.
Not a great deal to report. Alan and Roger both were unable to stop the rest of us from scoring while they were dealer, so when I was able to do so next round I was immediately off to a good start. We continued to fumble along with Roger and myself scoring on most hands, until I eventually claimed victory by achieving my MIN tile (winning no tricks).
I selected a range of medium to low value chips at the start of the game, with only one high value. I was able to discard this after winning as the dealer and so didn't have to work too hard on the whole.
Asher - 5 chips
Roger - 4
Andrew - 2
Alan - 1
TIGRIS & EUPHRATES
Asher, Craig, Debbie, Steve.
When nothing else was suggested, Steve (or Mr T&E :-) ) offered this one up. The rest of us agreed to join him (which was lucky, 'cause he would have been playing solitaire if we hadn't).
The game proceeded in a rather friendly manner, with us all working on our own little kingdoms. This was a little against the grain considering the recent games at BBG, which have involved a deal of conflict.
I built the first monument on the four river squares early on. I thought that this was likely to bring the hounds down upon me, but I was left alone for one round, which gave Steve time to build a monument. This diluted some of the attention being directed at me. Debbie then brought things to a head when she merged Steve's monument kingdom with a large kingdom dominated by Craig, forcing three external conflicts between them. Craig came off best from these, effectively winning two of the three, and gaining control of the monument. The game proceeded reasonably quickly, with Debbie instigating a couple more battles, often between two other players. I plodded along collecting points, being left pretty much to my own devices, which was very nice. I eventually saw an opportunity to take the third last treasure, and feeling that I was in a strong position, decided to end the game.
Asher - 10 Bla, 8 Blu (1T), 7 G (1T), 7 R (1T).
Craig - 11 Bla, 7 Blu (2T), 6 G, 6 R.
Steve - 8 Blu, 6 G, 5 R, 4 Bla (1T).
Debbie - 5 Blu, 4 R, 4 G, 4 Bla (2T).