I played four 18xx games at Manorcon this year. 1848 (Australia) , 1865 (Sardinia) and 1817 were all new to me, while 18Ardennes I had played in a prototype version two years ago and not since. I had read the rules to 1817, as I was interested in the short-selling mechanism, and those of 1865, as it has a new mechanic for abstracting train operations.
Of these, the game I enjoyed most was 1848. This is a straightforward 18xx: you buy shares and run trains. It took us three hours on the Friday evening (playing more rapidly than my usual group).
The other three titles all had some form of mergers (18Ardennes), acquisitions (1865) or both (1817). I find these mechanisms harder to play. I can handle the simple minor companies and mergers in 18EU. When minors have share prices as well, as in 1861 and 18Ardennes, I don't have a handle on the best way to play. Acquisitions are entirely new to me and I'm not at all sure how to play them. I need more practice: fortunately I have another PBM game of 1861 due to start.
These games were more involved and took longer than 1848. 1817 took much longer - I think we played for 10 hours. I'm glad that I've seen these new mechanisms in actual play and I'll have a think about whether I want to adopt them, but the key lesson I take from this the weekend is to remember that simplicity is a virtue.
Thursday, 21 July 2011
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
No comments:
Post a Comment