Cita de: Zanbar Bone en 30 de Enero de 2020, 10:41:05 Imagino que ese tablero de mierda es del prototipo, no? Porque si te gastas 200 pavos en un kikstarter de la hostia para un juego de minis, espectacular y que visualmente ha de ser la leche y luego tienes que poner esas minis en ese tablero de mierda es para morirse jajajaj¿Tú qué crees? Es más, ya no recuerdo el video entero pese a haberlo visto pero... me juego el prepucio a que Lang abre su charleta diciendo "ey mozos, no preocuparsen ustedes que esto lo he recortado yo en mi casa para probar cosicas pero CMON os lo va a poner bien pimpollete lleno de colorines"
Imagino que ese tablero de mierda es del prototipo, no? Porque si te gastas 200 pavos en un kikstarter de la hostia para un juego de minis, espectacular y que visualmente ha de ser la leche y luego tienes que poner esas minis en ese tablero de mierda es para morirse jajajaj
I have already tried Ankh. Can't speak for Kemet.But, Ankh is way too impressive to pass. Just reading the rules, I was worried about a few things, but playing clarified it, and it was even better than expected.-Haven't tried Kemet or Cyclades.-I have tried INIS. Way too convoluted despite having potential. I prefer BR much more.-I liked Blood Rage a lot, very fun but the cards had some balance issues. A few monsters were useless, others broken. Shallow depth.-Rising Sun was until a week ago my favorite area control game. Less imbalanced than Blood Rage, and one season in excess, but overall the mechanisms and the freedom of play made it unique. Problem was actually not the game, but that it demands a lot from people to enjoy it the most: 99% of people keep stuck in the (excellent) mechanisms but don't explore the negotiation and diplomacy layer. It is way too hardcore for even most lifelong gamers.-Ankh is in essence, a fusion between Chess, Blood Rage's pace and Rising Sun's depth. Like BR took from Risk, RS took from diplomacy, this one took from Chess and both previous titles.-Ankh is good at 2-5 players because the player elimination and fusion means the playtesting has tended to touch on more player count variance (playtesting at 3 means playtesting at 3 player AND 2 player count). It has mechanisms for dealing with the usual pitfalls of multiplayer games: kingmaking and runaway leaders (so it works well at 3-5p). Its abstract qualities make it suitable for the lower player counts where BR/RS had trouble (2). The fact that 3 player games MUST become 2 player games means it works well. Yes, played already 2 times at 3p and it works very well. The caveat is that we don't know any scenarios, but I made my own and the game is robust enough to handle that, so I only expect it to become better with the more extensively playtested official scenarios.Why is Ankh unique?-The mechanisms are way better than the best of euro games. Better than Concordia, Black Angel, Gaia Project or any Lacerda. If you appreciate euros, that is a big statement. Like, you don't normally expect to have hair pulling choices just to decide which 1-2 of 4 action(s) to take or which of your 2-3 viable cards to play in combat, and have every little decision have tactical and long term impact.-The map leads to an abstract level of depth. Think of euros that try to mash some abstract spatial element like Kingdom Builder or Gaia Project, but way deeper.-The rules are simple but it has enormous depth.-The whole game is fun and tense, and fast. Not a wasted moment.-Whenever I tried to find a fault in the system or in the balance, and trust me, I'm quite good at finding faults, there were none. Actually there are a few minor inconveniences, but it is like 98% flawless balance and 100% flawless design, maybe more faults in art and layout.-I haven't been as impressed with any game, including any game that has been my favorite at some point, and I have been appreciating and enjoying all sorts of games for decades.-Games are tight and end when they need to end. After the fact, you can easily recognize each player's faults, and good moves by the winning player.-While it may be a bit too much for casual players, it is enough for regular players and yet it still has enormous depth for hardcore players.Things that people may be mistaking for bad when they are perfectly good:-It is more euro than any other area control game (in its action and upgrade mechanisms). There is some resemblance to Blood Rage and Rising Sun combat, but turned into a Concordia style of hand management. It still has a lot of combat, but there is a gap between each combat phase. There is more combat than RS and it may feel like less than BR, but it actually has more combat than BR. Thing is that there is a lot more than combat, so it apprears to be less.-Monuments (all the buildings) and variable regions give it a lot of depth. For me, depth is not bad, but others expecting 100% combat and nothing else may not like it (note that even BR has its downtime). You can steal monuments if you don't feel like building them, though 😆.-One monster per level. It may seem constraining, but it works well. And trust me, without monster choices there are still a lot of choices and you won't be missing extra monsters one bit.-The 'same' as Blood Rage or Rising Sun? Nope. This game is the most different and innovative area control game since King of Tokyo (hey don't diss a simple game, its area control mechanism is genius, and it has introduced a lot of people into the board game hobby).-Most area control games try to be asymmetric by making factions different (Root) or giving different objectives (any COIN game). This one doesn't push asymmetry where useless, even gives most players the same upgrades, monsters and even the same actions and cards. But the way and order in which players end up choosing their moves makes the game state itself evolve asymmetrically (and replayable by consequence), reducing every unnecessary complexity (like the aforementioned games).-Every setup element is very important, the minimum and no more required to give the game a lot of depth. 1 monster of each level means you will have thousands of monster combinations. Then, multiply by combinations of gods, number of players, scenarios (where and which type of monument goes where, how are regions divided, where figues go), starting player order, and each gameplay decision. You get infinite replayability, with each game being substantially different that others. IMO each game differs more from each other compared to other highly modular games like Gaia Project, Aeon's End, Marvel Champions LCG or Arkham LCG.Why it may not be something you expect?-I think it may be too good for most people to appreciate its true depth, but unlike Rising Sun, the bare minimum it asks the player is quite deep and people may enjoy it purely at the evident tactical level. The problem here would be that it may be a bit too overwhelming for someone used to 'casual' area control games (aka anything that is not a wargame, abstract, a heavy euro, Rising Sun or Ankh). BR's draft may be confusing for newbies, but Ankh just throws you in the middle of the desert, literally. Note that the rules are very simple and the game can be explained in like 5 minutes, but it is like Go, simple but deep. If you don't tell the newbies to build monuments early game, they are going to be lost. After you explain the rules, most likely people won't have any idea of what to do (long term).-It may cause AP, because the game state, choices and consequences are complex.In the end:-Comparing Ankh to Kemet is like comparing Kemet to Imhotep (a casual 15 min game). Ankh is very different from other area control games. There would be no problem in you having another 'traditional' area control game. Instead of viewing the theme as a barrier, If you like the theme why not have more of the same? You know Lang and Smith have their own peculiar visions of myths, it wouldn't hurt to have their unique theme and another more traditional one.
Citar-The mechanisms are way better than the best of euro games. Better than Concordia, Black Angel, Gaia Project or any Lacerda. If you appreciate euros, that is a big statement. Like, you don't normally expect to have hair pulling choices just to decide which 1-2 of 4 action(s) to take or which of your 2-3 viable cards to play in combat, and have every little decision have tactical and long term impact.Citar-The 'same' as Blood Rage or Rising Sun? Nope. This game is the most different and innovative area control game since King of Tokyo (hey don't diss a simple game, its area control mechanism is genius, and it has introduced a lot of people into the board game hobby).
-The mechanisms are way better than the best of euro games. Better than Concordia, Black Angel, Gaia Project or any Lacerda. If you appreciate euros, that is a big statement. Like, you don't normally expect to have hair pulling choices just to decide which 1-2 of 4 action(s) to take or which of your 2-3 viable cards to play in combat, and have every little decision have tactical and long term impact.
-The 'same' as Blood Rage or Rising Sun? Nope. This game is the most different and innovative area control game since King of Tokyo (hey don't diss a simple game, its area control mechanism is genius, and it has introduced a lot of people into the board game hobby).