EXCURSION INTO THE HISTORY OF CARDS Nobody knows where and when cards and card games appeared. The earliest references to maps date back to the 12th century and are associated with Asian countries. China is mentioned, where cards were played with some long strips, India, where the cards were round (!), and Korea. According to other sources, cards allegedly existed in China as early as the 8th century, when some stick games were invented, which were later replaced by the predecessors of modern cards - strips of paper with symbols printed on them. There is another version according to which cards appeared in Ancient Egypt.  It is reliably known that maps reached Europe before 1367. More precisely, they appeared in Europe, probably before that, and by 1367 they had become quite widespread, because it was in this year that card games were banned in the city of Bern. Little is known about the history of card games in Russia. Cards entered our country somewhere in the middle of the last millennium, and in 1817 industrial production was established in St. Petersburg at the Imperial Card Factory. Card games are usually divided into commercial and gambling. Commercial include games that require more or less significant intellectual effort from players  ("bridge", "preference", "whist", etc.), and gambling includes games where chance plays a decisive role ("blackjack", "storm" ») ). There are other classifications of card games, for example, there are games for discarding cards ("witch"), games for knockback ("fool"), games for collecting bribes ("splash"), games for collecting points on bribes ("thousand"), games for seniority of combinations ("poker").  All these are so-called traditional card games, known to probably everyone. After all, literally the whole country plays "fool", "witch" and "drunkard" in our country (I wonder why the most popular games in our country have exclusively negative names?). But, of course, we are more interested in other card games - board games. Actually, board games (sometimes called board-printed games) in Russia also include traditional games with fields, chips and cards, which are denoted in the West by the term Board Games (literally - "games with a field"), and games consisting entirely of cards - Card Games (card games). However, recently the terms "board game" and "board game" can be found more and more often in our country. Several varieties can also be distinguished among board games. These are collectible card games, live card games, regular board games, deck building card games, and card games where cards replace figures. COLLECTIBLE CARD GAMES Collectible card games (Collectible Card Games or ККИ) are probably the most famous subtype of card games. The name of the most successful and popular KKI game in our country is Magic: The Gathering. And this is only the tip of the iceberg, because there are a lot of collectible games.  The history of KKI originated in the United States of America and goes back to the 19th century. At that time, a new hobby appeared in the United States, which later became traditional - collecting baseball cards. The cards were a piece of cardboard about the size of a standard playing card with a photo of a famous baseball player accompanied by a small text about him. The main feature was the method of distribution of the cards - they were packed in opaque bags in small quantities and sold in this form. The buyer had only to open the package and find out which cards he got. However, there was one trick here - some cards were printed more and some less. Accordingly, some cards were considered more valuable because of their rarity, some less valuable because there were so many of them. These cards were collected, traded, sold and hunted. In 1904, the Allegheny Card Company issued a special set of 112 baseball cards that included not only the cards but also the rules for playing them. This game did not become famous and did not gain popularity, but, in fact, it was a prototype of modern KKI.  The history of KKI began again in 1993, when a little-known mathematician Richard Garfield invented the game Magic: The Gathering, and his friend Peter Adkison's small company called Wizards of the Coast published it. Magic: The Gathering (aka "Magic") is a card game in which each player plays with his own deck. The cards in the deck are territories, creatures, events, and spells. The game is built on the fact that players introduce territory cards into the game that act as resources, and then use them to pay for the draw of other cards, mostly creatures and spells. The goal of the game is to defeat your opponent by attacking them with magic or your creatures. The lion's share of the appeal of "Magic" is that each player has his own deck of cards, which is drawn up in advance. In fact, it allows you to play "Magic" even before meeting with an opponent, choosing cards that combine with each other and allow you to implement one or another strategy. Thanks to the talent of the developers, MtG allows you to play completely different games and, very importantly, the variety of cards always leaves the opportunity to surprise your opponent by playing a card or combination of cards that he is completely unprepared for.  And, of course, the game distribution model played its role. The cards were sold in starter sets, which presented a certain list of cards, and in so-called "boosters" - opaque bags containing 15 random cards (just as baseball cards were distributed a hundred years before). This decision turned out to be beneficial both for the publishers, who thus increased sales, and for the players. Fans of "Magic" could not only play the game, but also collect cards from a certain issue, exchange them with friends, and simply satisfy their passion for learning the unknown, revealing new and new boosters. The success of the game was overwhelming. Within six weeks, 2.5 million cards were sold, although the publishers believed that this circulation would last six months. Immediately after, WotC printed another 7.5 million cards, while Richard Garfield designed the next set of cards, released in late 1993, called Arabian Nights. Since then, new issues of "Magic" have been released every year, and every year 600-700 new cards appear. The game takes the world by storm, regional tournaments and world championships are held, Richard Garfield gains worldwide popularity, and Wizards of the Coast says goodbye to the status of a "small publisher" forever. After MtG, other collectible games appear on the market: Babylon-5, Yu-Gi-Oh!, Pokemon, Legend of the Five Rings, Naruto. CCIs were even published based on the A Song of Ice and Fire series, the Harry Potter books, the works of Howard Lovecraft, and the computer game Heroes of Might & Magic IV. KKI appeared in Russia as well: "War", "Heavens", "Kozyablo", "Commander's Way", and the most famous domestic KKI - "Berserk". Unfortunately, repeating the success of "Magic" turned out to be within the power of few. Today in our country, World of Warcraft TCG, Berserk, and of course MtG itself are popular. LIVE CARD GAMES Over time, traditional methods of spreading "Magic" have been criticized. Someone gives up the game, realizing that they are firmly "hooked" on buying new and new cards, someone understands that the pursuit of boosters and rare cards requires too much financial investment, and someone is simply tired of endlessly exchanging cards with friends. All this led to the appearance in 2008 of a new type of game called "living card games".  In essence, ZHCI are still those collectible card games with different editions and sets of cards, but the method of distribution of cards in ZHCI is fundamentally different from KKI. There are no boosters and there is no random distribution of cards in the housing complex. When buying a set of RKI, the buyer always knows which cards he will get. For the game, it is enough to purchase the basic set, which contains all the cards of the basic edition. Then, if you wish, you can purchase an additional edition of cards that also includes all the cards in that edition. Do you understand? No more randomness, no more boosters, no more rare and ultra-rare cards. We owe the appearance of the term "Living Card Game" to the publisher Fantasy Flight Games. TABLE CARD GAMES Well, now it's time to move on to board games with cards, which are called Card Games abroad. The history of these games is inseparable from the general history of board games, which begins in the fourth millennium BC, when the Senet game appeared in Ancient Egypt. The exact appearance of board card games is unknown, so we will consider the same game with collectible baseball cards from 1904 (it was called the Allegheny Game, by the way) as one of the first games. Then the history of board games froze to be revived again in 1996, when three years after MtG took off, the Settlers of Catan toy appeared in our country under the name "Colonizers". Since then, board games and board card games have also experienced their heyday.  There are many such games today. There are easy company games (Uno), fast-paced dueling games (Blue Moon), complex multiplayer games (Caylus Magna Carta). There are games that practically do not require mastering (No Thanks!), Difficult games (Race for the Galaxy), in short, there are no number of them. A separate type of card games are games where cards actually replace chips or tokens. For example, in the same KKI "Berserk" or in "Black Prince" miniatures could be used instead of cards. There are games where the playing field is actually formed from the cards (Dungeoneer, Meuterer). In my opinion, it is possible to make the following classification of board card games: original and derivatives. Original - these are all card games that were conceived and created precisely as games (Saboteur). Derivatives are..

 I bought "Galerist" at a time when the wow effect from the variety of board games and mechanics had already subsided, and I no longer wrote reviews for everything in a row. However, "Galerist" is still worth mentioning, since this game is distinguished by a good overlay of mechanics on the theme and without unnecessary conventions. Players appear as competing gallerists with empty galleries, two assistants, and a dozen follower profiles. The task of each player is to fill his gallery with works of art, invite visitors who have nowhere to spend money, and sell canvases and sculptures at a reasonable price. The most successful gallerist wins. Success is determined by earned money, which is more pleasant than a counter of abstract software around the perimeter of the playing field. And since you have to spend a lot of this money during the game, you have to use it wisely. "Galerist" does not pretend to be hardcore. On the contrary, its rules are so simple that people without desktop experience can easily learn them; tested on relatives who did not follow Rummikub. But our party was in some sense phenomenal: we managed to increase the popularity of five artists as much as possible. The endgame trigger is a popularity boost of at least two. The game does not have a fixed number of rounds, but there are three events that mark the approaching end of the game. As soon as two of them are triggered, the game is over. The second trigger is visitors who gradually enter the field and at some point run out. The third is tickets to the box office, which are needed to attract these visitors. Visitors are divided into VIPs, investors and collectors. VIPs increase the gallerist's influence, collectors help popularize artists, and investors bring money. And the fact that the gallery is filled with them increases the capabilities of the gallerist many times over.  There are only eight actions in the game, divided in pairs between four locations. In "Artists' Settlement", players buy works of art or search for unknown talents in order to promote them. With the latter players, they make a kind of agreement, according to which the artist will sell his first painting at a starting price, regardless of the level of popularity, the price of an entrance ticket to the world of great art. His further works will be available at the current price. With each purchase, the artist's works become more and more popular, and when he reaches his peak, the artist becomes a celebrity, and his works become masterpieces. And then he stops creating. And it is very important to have time to purchase it before this moment. Sales contracts are concluded in the "Sales Office" and, in fact, the sales of paintings themselves are carried out. Sold paintings leave the gallery together with one of the visitors of the player's choice and are stacked next to each other. At the end of the game, you can get extra money for a certain set of sold paintings. In the Media Center, gallerists use their influence to advertise their artists in the media, increasing their popularity, and also hire new assistants to help them in this difficult business. The more famous the artist, the more influence units are needed to "rock" him forward. But it easily pays off with bonuses for these actions and the selling price of the painting. Assistants are needed to be in several places at the same time. They work on contracts, promote the player at the international level, help to make more actions on the playing field. "International market", where gallerists earn a reputation by sending their assistants or participate in an international auction for world masterpieces. Reputation is revealed in Reputation Tokens, which provide extra money at the end of the game. For example, a coin for each visitor to the gallery or two for each sold work. At the auction, there is a fight for works that you can add to the gallery and thus collect a set (it is also available here). Or add to the pool of sold paintings to collect a set there. The works for auction are randomly selected at the start of the game and are placed next to the field on cute little wooden easels, but there is one oddity about the auction. In fact, this is a bet on the possibility of taking an additional picture at the end of the game first. Only one can lose in it. Others will get it for one work. And every time it turns out that their value is approximately the same, when the players' investments can differ by almost half.  Players perform their actions by placing a gallerist token on a location that interests them. They then call out one of the two actions available in that location and perform it. Point by point, according to the memo. By the way, the monuments are made very well: all the actions are briefly but comprehensively described and an explanation is given for all the iconography that is found on the field and on the game tablets. In "Galerist", the player who performs more actions per unit of time wins. This is facilitated by Vital's very interesting idea as "kick-outs" (kick-out action in the original), or "action-compensation", as translated by the localizer. The point is that a player gets the opportunity to perform a location action out of turn if his chip is knocked out by an opponent's chip. And during the game it will happen constantly. But on such kick-outs you need to spend influence, which may not be there, or which should be saved for a more effective move. Moreover, when the player leaves the location, he can leave his assistant there, and if he is knocked out, this will also be an opportunity to perform an out-of-turn move. And "if" is because the assistant can be taken at any moment and used in another place, if he suddenly "stuck" in the location or there are no other options. When I say influence, I mean an influence track. This is the most important element of the game and another amazing find of Lacerda. The impact track is versatile and elegant. It can be spent on performing actions, on additional "infusions" into the popularity of artists, it can simply be used as additional money if suddenly there is not enough to buy a painting. The main thing is to monitor the occupancy of the track.  I fell in love with this game precisely because it explains how and why it works and what it interacts with. And there are no artificial restrictions, which are, for example, in "On Mars", where you can build buildings strictly across the cell from previously built ones, or in "Vignos", where the player is obliged to buy vineyards from different regions in one move. Everything works well at "Galerista" and you don't wonder why. The design of the game is also at a height. Capacious organizer, thick cardboard, colored soaps. The field is decorated in calm tones, but not pale. It perfectly contrasts with the bright elements of the players. Assistants on the field will not get lost and you can always quickly list the visitors in the gallery. For me, this standard design in terms of ergonomics. You can find something similar only in "Lisbon".  The game, of course, is not fast. With a full team, taking into account the knowledge of the rules, 1.5-2 hours will go. Despite the visible triggers, it will be possible to accelerate the progress of the game only with joint efforts. However, it will be a most interesting watch...

 At high speed, the Formula 1 car is approaching the pit stop. Stop or drive? Driving into the pits is lost seconds, during which rivals rush forward. But will the tires last to the finish line if you rush past? Drive or stop? Why am I? I just remembered the games where you have to make a similar decision. I have two such games in my collection. And if the first one is quite well-known, then few people have probably heard of the second one... CAN'T STOP You don't need to be a smart board or probability expert to figure out that two dice can only add up to a number between 2 and 12, with the middle values more often than the extremes. The playing field for Can't Stop is not a regular octagon, as it may seem at first glance, but eleven independent tracks of different lengths, numbered from 2 to 12. The outer tracks consist of only three cells, but the central one, corresponding to the seven, is almost in five times longer. The task is simple - to be the first to run the track to the end. It actually looks like this. During his turn, the player receives four cubes and three chips of neutral (white) color - they are shared by everyone who plays. He throws the dice and at his own discretion divides them into pairs, thereby determining the numbers of the two tracks that he has the right to move. Now he has two moves, one for each pair of dice. If the corresponding track already has a white chip, it moves forward one space; if not - the player is obliged to place a white chip on the appropriate track (even if he does not want to). Of course, for this he must have this white chip - and there are only three of them...  Yes, we must say about the forbidden tracks. Where someone (perhaps you yourself) has already reached the end, you cannot place another white chip. If movement on one of the tracks is impossible (the track is prohibited or there is no free white chip) - no problem, instead of two moves, one move will be made. Moreover, sometimes it is advantageous to combine the dice in such a way as to advance only in one place (for example, in order to save a white piece). It is much worse if - no matter how you form pairs - you cannot make a single move. Then you must forget about all your progress, remove the white pieces and pass them, the dice and the right of move to the next player. In order not to lose what he gained by hard work, the player has the right at any moment not to roll the dice, but to stop and voluntarily end his turn. Then the place of white chips is taken by chips of his color, and the next time he will go along this track not from the start, but from the stop point. If, of course, he manages to get on the same track...  According to the basic rules of the game, the winner is the one who reaches the end of the three tracks first. However, it is good with four participants, but with three and especially two it impoverishes the game. (And if you still carelessly read the rules and skip everything related to the forbidden tracks, as we managed to do at first, it's so boring.) Therefore, lately we prefer modified rules, when when playing together you need to complete five chips, and when playing with three - four. By the way, this is not home rule, but an official version. With this refinement, the game becomes less predictable and therefore more interesting: I once managed to win after my wife was on the finish line on four (!) tracks before I finished on at least one. It's just that usually the easiest paths are the first to become forbidden, and the rest still need to be accessed before reaching the end. Of course, there is no strategy in Can't Stop, instead there are enough tactical solutions. What to choose — to go the long way to values that often fall out, or to risk starting with a short track? Stop when you reach, say, the middle of the path, or risk continuing to move, hoping to reach the finish line in one move? All the time the choice between a more relaxed and a more risky game; it is no coincidence that many years ago this game was released by one of the domestic manufacturers under the name "Risk". By the way, observations show that it is possible to go all the way from start to finish without stopping either through the central (6, 7, 8) tracks, or - in case of some luck - through the outer ones (2 and 12). On the rest, it is an exceptional rarity, possible only in cases where the situation requires action. The name Can't Stop translates as "Impossible to stop". In my opinion, these words better characterize not the course of a single game, but the game in general. It is like a seed: it started to bite, and it is impossible to stop until it is finished. We had a period where we played Can't Stop several times a day. But it was worth taking a forced break - and it became clear that we were bored with completely other games. To some, Can't Stop will seem like a game that depends entirely on dice. I won't argue, although it's not "roll-walks" and not even dice poker. Are you not satisfied? Then I am ready to offer you "Ovija". OUIJA This game was brought to me from Canada. Probably, it is more correct to pronounce it as "Ouija" or - if we believe the hypothesis that the name consists of the word "yes" in French (oui) and German (ja) - in general as "Vi-ya". "Ovija" is a card game. It is based on 50 cards, each of which is characterized by three parameters: value (from 1 to 13), color (white or black) and "answer" ("yes" or "no"). There is also a letter on each card, but this is a separate conversation. Although there are equal white and black cards in the deck, as well as "yes"/"no" values, they are unevenly distributed: yes, all "threes" are white, and if out of four "fives" all three blacks have the answer "no". Since there are two fewer cards than traditional 52s, the values 1 and 12 are missing (inexplicably to me). It's hard to say whether this unevenness improves the game. The fact is that the participant's task is to predict what the next card from the deck will be. He can try to guess the color or the answer or make a prediction on the value of the card relative to the previous one (more less). At the same time, in the latter case, regardless of the bet made, the appearance of a card with the same denomination means "didn't guess". Theoretically, the probability of guessing can be increased if you remember the cards that came out, practically - taking into account the mentioned unevenness of the distribution of values - it is extremely difficult. Yes, the game still has semi-jokers (stars) - cards that do not have a numerical value. If such a card is revealed at the moment when the "over/under" prediction is made, the player is considered to have guessed. As a "payoff", the next prediction can only be on the color or on the answer, but not on the denomination.  The following is the same principle as in Can't Stop: at any moment you can stop and turn the guessed cards into the "unburnt amount" of scored points, which is marked with a special Stop card. Or risk further... The round ends when someone guesses 11 cards correctly. The winner receives 15 points (11 + 4 bonus points), the losers - according to the number of recorded cards. It is recommended to play five rounds. And now about the unusual feature of "Oviji". The thing is, it's a magic game. (By the way, according to the dictionary, ouija (English) is a board for spiritual sessions.) To use magical possibilities, before the start of the game, each player asks his question to the Higher Powers. The winner of each round has the right to know the answer. If the question was formulated in such a way that it involves an assertion or a denial, then it is quite simple to count your 11 cards: which one is more - this is the answer given by Heaven. In other cases, the answer must be composed of 11 letters that are on hand. As in all such games, the "star" replaces any...  For those who, like me, are far from occult entertainment, there are two ways. You can just ignore the letters. And you can use home rule for those who know a foreign language or, better, are studying it. Then the winner has to make a word from his letters, the longer the better. And instead of the traditional 4 bonus points, get 1 point for each letter used. In general, "Ovija", despite the greater influence of the player on the situation, which seems to be more primitive than Can't Stop. And even (taking into account 5 rounds) not faster. Therefore, if you make a choice between these two games, "Ovija" I recommend in two cases: if you need to somehow force the child to learn foreign words and if you play in derivative conditions. Because there is no doubt: a deck of cards on the go is more convenient than a rather large plastic one (that is, a field that does not shrink in size). Otherwise, both toys are easy fillers for luck, risk and a little knowledge of the basics of probability theory...

 "Each step becomes more and more difficult. My feet hardly leave the ground. We have been wandering through this inhospitable area for the third day. At the end of the journey, we are likely to face a difficult and bloody battle. I don't know if I can fight in this condition. They say the strength of an army is the strength of each soldier in its ranks; if this is correct, then our chances of victory are slim. I'm afraid we will be defeated." — The last entry in the diary found among the bloody orc corpses. Fortunately, players don't have to worry about that: the Warhammer: Diskwars board game puts them right into the thick of the battle. The game was released in 2013 in the setting of Warhammer Fantasy - one of the most popular gaming universes. But unlike its big brother, known for its miniatures and hours-long battles, this game fits into one surprisingly small box. However, there are as many as 62 units inside. This became possible because the units are not displayed as miniatures, but as double-sided discs made of thick cardboard in three sizes: small, medium and large.  All disks are arranged in the same way: at the top are 4 numbers indicating the unit's movement, attack, counterattack and health. Most of the disk is occupied by the image, below it is the name and three icons: these are the price, race and belonging to a certain set (in this case, the basic one). Some units also have a durability option.  In addition, players will find terrain tiles of various shapes and sizes in the box, which add variety to the playing field. There are also a bunch of tokens (injuries, activations, wounds, corners of the field, etc.) plus three custom cubes and one standard one, as well as almost 50 cards: decks of formation, terrain, scenarios and orders. And a constant companion of Warhammer games is a ruler (here it is needed only for remote combat). At the beginning of the game, you should make sure that the surface of the table is not slippery. Ideally, it should be lined with green or brown (the color of the real battlefield) fabric. Meanwhile, players choose factions and assemble an army to their liking on the points provided by the chosen heroes, or use the ready-made set offered by the game. In addition to units, you need to choose battle order cards. The dimensions of the battlefield are defined by four cardboard corners: the standard size is 3 by 3 feet (approx. 90 by 90 cm), which is three times as long as the ruler from the set. The ruler, in turn, is divided by colors into three ranges for shooting in a small, medium and large radius.  Players decide which side of the field they start from, determine the initiative, and randomly draw a scenario card from the deck, which determines the special conditions in that battle. Her lower half is the player's secret goal, for the fulfillment of which he will receive victory points. Also, each player randomly draws starting position cards. Each type of start provides certain advantages.  Then 4 terrain cards are selected, and players take turns placing the corresponding tiles on the field. Even before the start, the actual units are placed on the field. They can be placed only in the starting zone (within the middle range of the ruler from the edge of the field on your side) in front of the starting position cards. The number of deployed units is also determined by these cards, others will go into reserve. After that, the players draw order cards into their hands. At the beginning of each round, a player secretly chooses the order they want to use first and places it face down on the table. Orders are opened simultaneously. Each of them belongs to strategy 1 of 4 types (from "decisive" to "slow"), their interaction determines whose order will be executed first. The number in the upper left corner shows how many disks can be activated with this command. Many orders also give passive or one-time bonuses at the time of activation.  Each disk can only be activated once per round. Available actions are movement, special abilities (in some discs) and ranged combat. Movement points determine how many times in a row a player can flip the disc: this is how they move around the field. If the disc covers at least part of the enemy disc, then the enemy is considered attacked in melee and can move; the activation of the attacking disk is completed at this point (activated disks are marked with the appropriate tokens to avoid confusion). The result of the battle will be decided in the battle phase of the same round. Colliding disks exchange blows (attack power - number in black circle, counterattack power - number in white circle), receiving the corresponding number of wounds. As soon as the number of wounds becomes equal to the health of the disc, it dies and is removed from the game, moving to the destroyed pile. The exception is discs with durability: they need to deal damage equal to their health more than once. Unlike hand-to-hand combat, distance combat is less deterministic — cubes are used there. For shooting, the enemy must be within the shooting radius (different for different disks). The result on the cube can be a hit, a critical hit (for the rest of the round, the disc is considered already activated), a miss, or the result jumping to the disc closest to the target. Some terrain types block the firing line. Both sides continue to play order cards until they run out of order cards or until all discs are activated. This ends the round: the activation tokens are removed, the order cards are returned to the hand and a new round begins. The game lasts 5 rounds, after which everyone counts their victory points, the number of which depends on the success of the secret objectives. Whoever has more points becomes the winner.  Warhammer: Diskwars does a great job of porting the atmosphere and tactics of miniatures wargames to the tabletop, while simplifying it (primarily due to the lack of a movement ruler) and reducing game time. The simplicity of the game and the freedom of maneuvers cannot fail to fascinate. Beginners will especially appreciate the offered ready-made sets for each hero. With the additions Hammer and Hold and Legions of Darkness, the variability of armies will increase even more; with one basic set, the room for customization is very limited. Armies consist of 1-3 units. The number of units on each side determines both the duration of the game and the tactics, since each unit must be led by one hero. There are also certain restrictions on the construction of armies, in particular on belonging to the alliance of factions, the number of copies and unique units.  However, the game is not only about units. Order cards in the hands of players, if used correctly, can change the course of the battle. Other elements also add tactics and depth; first of all, it is the selection of terrain maps and the disposition of troops. Players will occasionally have to take risks when betting on dice in ranged combat — sometimes with success, sometimes not, which contrasts interestingly with some melee.  Warhammer: Diskwars is an exciting tactical game that encourages thoughtful actions, maneuvers and thoughtful battle plans. The player must constantly remember his secret goal, try to surprise the opponent and find a weak point in his disposition. And about the special abilities of the units, which are indicated directly on the discs with sets of keywords. However, the latter can be a problem for a beginner: until he has mastered the game, he will have to regularly consult the rulebook. It is for beginners that the rulebook contains a training scenario. In general, the game today is extremely friendly by the standards of the genre: the rules are simple, not voluminous, and the game is based on a few very simple mechanics. In terms of game time, a standard game with two units per player can only be played in about an hour. You can, of course, increase the number of units: then the variety and time of the party will increase. There is an option of a battle with the participation of more than 2 players in the rules; however, we tested this option only once with one base, and there may be a problem with downtime. The discs are beautifully illustrated, so you will hardly miss the missing miniatures. The cardboard is dense, the terrain tiles are clearly visible, and the activation tokens make it easy to navigate during the round. The only problem (for some table-toppers) is where to find a table of the appropriate size. You shouldn't judge by our photos, because we specially compressed it to make it easier to take photos. Overall, Warhammer: Diskwars is a very fan-friendly and easy alternative to miniatures wargames. The mechanics are well thought out, the game has enough tactical depth. And with additions, everything becomes more interesting. Diskwars is a great way to pass the time...

 Tiny Epic Zombies has as many as 5 game modes: Co-op, Competitive, 1 Player Zombie vs Human Co-op, 1 Player Zombie vs Human Competitive, and Solo. In co-op and solo modes, people simply try to complete 3 tasks before time runs out or zombies eat too many characters. In competitive modes, people are busy with the same thing, but each player tries to complete 3 tasks before the others. In modes with a player as a zombie, their king gets some control over the zombies and access to unique zombie abilities.  The character's moves in all modes are practically the same: he can move three times through the shopping center, killing zombies along the way, completing tasks and interacting with the premises in which he is, after which the zombie's turn begins. Each character has a special ability, a wound counter, and an ammo counter. People die when their wound and ammo counters meet on the same distribution or bypass each other. If a character dies, their items stay in the room, their card flips over to the zombie side (which gives zombies new abilities), and you take a new one. You also remove one survivor token. If there are no such tokens left in the supply, people lose. Humans kill zombies mostly with melee or ranged attacks. Melee attacks can be carried out on zombies in the same room as you, and long-range attacks on zombies in neighboring rooms. Melee attacks are guaranteed to kill zombies, but you have to leave a die and possibly get extra ones. effects such as a wound or free movement. Ranged attacks do not have this side effect, but they do consume ammunition.  At the end of the turn, you search the room you are in and place the card of the item you found in it. The find card also indicates where the next group of zombies will appear; you pass a "noise check" by placing zombies in rooms with the corresponding symbol on the card. And if this symbol corresponds to the room in which you are, then even more zombies will come out. The main difference between AI zombie modes and zombie player modes is how zombies appear on the field. The zombie player can choose which find card the human players get, so he has some control over the zombies' movements. Additionally, on each noise check, he can apply a special ability from one of his zombie cards.  When the find deck runs out, all human players can go down again. If they manage to complete 3 tasks, they immediately win. Zombies win if people fail to complete the task in time or if too many people die. PROS  - Tiny Epic Zombies has some truly epic moments. The most memorable situations were when the character managed to kill 4+ zombies in one turn due to the drop of the overkill symbol on the melee die. - Meeples can be armed with plastic weapons; it's easy to do and looks cool. Adds a lot of atmosphere. Also, the abilities of some items make you very powerful - a nice touch as well. - All game modes are fully playable, which is an impressive achievement. True, the differences in mechanics are small, but it is nice that there are modes for every taste. - The tasks are well thought out. Personally, I like the task where you need to bring 4 tanks to the middle of the shopping center, preventing zombies from being in the same room with them on the way. - The parties, regardless of the number of participants, are fast, but at the same time do not leave the feeling that you played in an inferior crowd. - Redrawability is high. The layout of the shopping center is random, you have different tasks and different combinations of characters every time, plus many game modes to choose from. CONS  — Some people like playing zombies, but I found it boring. Although your task is to make life difficult for the human players, you will hardly have to make interesting decisions. — I would like the location and character cards to be a little thicker. They can easily shift and move important items/characters with them. — The font on the location cards is very small. After a few games you get used to it, but in the first few games someone will have to look at them almost with a magnifying glass and read them so that everyone knows which rooms have some features. - I don't know if this is a general problem or if I'm just unlucky, but my zombie meeples have paint coming off and splattering everywhere. CONCLUSIONS  Although there are no zombie fans in our group, everyone enjoyed playing Tiny Epic Zombies, so maybe the game will appeal to those who are indifferent to zombie settings. I've tried all modes except solo and zombie vs human competitive. They were all fans. Although I don't really enjoy playing as a zombie, this game was the most intense. If you like a zombie setting or like the idea of a compact board with a bunch of different modes, I recommend giving Tiny Epic Zombies a try...

 After the game Pillars of the Earth ("Pillars of the Earth"), developed by the German duo of Michael Rinek and Stefan Stadler based on Ken Follett's novel of the same name, was swept off the shelves at the Essen exhibition and won many awards, the authors created World With. . The place of action remained the same - a typical English town of Kingsbridge - only since the construction of the local cathedral, the clock has turned its hands for several centuries. Let's see what the authors came up with this time and how World Without End differs from Pillars of the Earth. At the heart of Pillars of the Earth is the mechanic of placing chips on the field, "maple placement". At the beginning of the game, the "executives" put the players in a bag and then blindly take them out of it. The sooner your "executive" appears from the bag, the more expensive you will have to pay to the bank in order to put this chip on the field, thus occupying the zone the player needs. On the other hand, it is also bad to be at the tail end of the process: you will have to pay a minimum, but most areas of the field will already be occupied by representatives of other players. You can pay nothing at all and leave the finished product pulled out of the bag for the second round. These losers will be placed in the remaining field zones at the very end of the round. Then the zones of the field are activated in order, and the chips standing on them allow you to perform various actions: collect resources, "mow" from taxes, trade, replenish the squad of artisans (cards that allow you to convert between resources, money and victory points)...  World Without End is based on action cards - players have identical sets of 12 pieces. During the main phase of the round, players choose two such cards from their hand: they play one by performing the action attached to it, and discard the other. Discarded cards will return to the hand only at the end of the round, which lasts 6 rounds. Thus, out of 12 action cards, each player plays only 6. Correct and timely selection of cards to be played and discarded is the key to success. Action cards allow you to get resources, participate in construction or cure residents from the plague (receiving victory points for this good activity), build personal houses that bring additional income in the form of resources, trade in wool and cloth. As you can see, the central ideas of the games we are considering are completely different. Perhaps, at this stage, it seems that Pillars of the Earth is a more random and competitive game, because it has a canvas bag and frequent cases when one player "crosses the path" of another player with his chips, occupying the right area of the field. However, let's not rush to conclusions and see what the central mechanics of the games in question are tied to. In Pillars of the Earth, before placing "executive workers", players deal with order cards, which essentially give the right to send a certain number of workers to a mining zone for a specific resource. These cards are dealt in turn order, one card at a time. Once the artisans are placed and the field zones are activated, players distribute the resources they receive between their artisan cards, converting them into victory points and/or money.  In World Without End, choosing two action cards from your hand precedes the reveal and triggering of a square event card. This card contains a textual description of an effect that changes the game in any way, or even directly cancels or adds a rule. These cards come in both instant and long-lasting effects, but none of the effects can carry over from one turn of the game to another. Icons of resources (money, victory points) are indicated on each corner of the open map. The first player is given the opportunity to orient this card on the field in one of 4 possible ways. After that, each player takes from the bank the resource whose image is on the corner of the map facing the player. An arrow on one of the sides of the card square also indicates an additional bonus that the first player receives. After the event card's effect is executed and resources are drawn from it, the action card phase described above begins and it all starts over. However, at the end of a round (which lasts 6 rounds), the game requires players to drop a certain set of resources. If a player fails to do so, fines and penalties apply. This "Sword of Damocles" mechanic strongly resembles Agricola or the same Le Havre, and as a result, World Without End turns into a rather tough strategy in the key of crisis management. So, Pillars of the Earth is a highly competitive, yet still family-friendly game. In World Without End, despite clearly stronger solitaire (due to identical sets of action cards, players still interact with each other much less than in PotE), there is too strong a vein of crisis management, which is further strengthened by the will of chance at the moment of revealing the event cards at the beginning of each round. Among experienced players who are accustomed to planning, both strategic and tactical, PotE ranks slightly higher than WWE because in the latter there is no getting around the relentless effect of the newly revealed event map. Sometimes it could be softened - if I hadn't sent the right action card to reset a couple of rounds ago. Event cards in WWE work like an inexorable fate, and in such conditions it is difficult to plan development. And yet, despite this, there is something attractive in World Without End. Fate in the form of event cards often strikes a chord, but planning to use your own action cards is very interesting. "Infinite World" is unlikely to collect a bunch of prizes, like its older sister, it will not become as popular. The games are completely different, but there is a lot of good in both, and I can't clearly prefer one of them. May they both remain in my collection. After all, these two boxes look good on the shelf next to each other...

TECHNOLOGIES IN BOARD GAMES Today, within the framework of this article, I would like to discuss the integration of technologies in board games, namely virtual and augmented reality, neural networks and artificial intelligence. The market of board games is quite conservative regarding the use of IT technologies. Yes, there have been talks about their use for a long time, and at exhibitions you can meet smart gaming tables and similar things, but there is still no full-scale use of information technology. So let's figure it out - what are the pros and cons of such integrations and do the world need new technologies so much? CONS Well, I would like to start with the disadvantages of using technology and, probably, the key one of them: Due to the use of technology, the user loses the feeling of playing a board game. Yes, such a problem can really occur, because when using new technologies, the user is forced to use some gadget. This distracts him from the game process, unfocusses his attention on the game table and, as a result, instead of a warm and pleasant evening, he is constantly stuck in the "number". As an excuse, I can say that such a problem can occur in the case of not quite correct game design. If the program or site is made in the same color design as the game (that is, completely omniscient), then the transition of the user will be perceived seamlessly and will not cause discomfort. The main thing here is not to overdo it, so that you don't get a video game at the end. A good example is the game from the company FFG called "The Lord of the Rings: Journeys in Middle-earth". They managed to make the program in such a way that it integrates into the gameplay as succinctly as possible. Using technology makes the game more expensive And this is absolutely true, because now the publishing house must also pay for the work of developers, website support and bear other costs that are also included in the price. The following minus follows from the second minus: Such games cannot last forever This is due to the need to maintain the functionality of the program/site, for which the publishing house will have to spend money from year to year. As soon as the game becomes irrelevant for users, the manufacturer will want to close the electronic part because it will cause losses. At some point, this can simply turn the game into a brick that can no longer be used. Of course, you can finance the work through the release of re-releases or add-ons, but this option still does not mean that one day your favorite game will stop working, unlike standard games, which never lose functionality. In addition, you need to take into account the possibility of bugs, technical problems and similar things, which can also leave a negative impression on players. PROS Well, now let's move on to the positive points and the first of them: New technologies allow you to create new, previously unavailable mechanics In my opinion, this is one of the key tasks for which technology in general needs to be integrated into games. So, for example, AR allows you to interact with the surrounding space during a board game, which gives developers and game designers a lot of imagination. In the "Crime Scene" game, which I wrote about above, it consists in finding evidence at the crime scene. Artificial intelligence and neural networks allow you to generate and create anything at all, from game elements (cards or fields) to various plot twists or enemy actions. These technologies are now mainly used for drawing illustrations and cards in games. The only question is the desire to use VR technologies, because as you know, they require special equipment that costs a lot. And it's impossible to keep the feeling of a board game when you're sitting in a helmet. Such games are easier to play An application or site can simplify the rules of the game, because algorithms can calculate various outcomes of events, tell you what to do or where to go. This is especially valuable in games with a gigantic number of different rules. Yes, all in the same "Crime Scene", the algorithm gives hints and at the end tells whether the players solved the case correctly. This can be very valuable for players who don't like to read too much into the rules and just go and try. The game becomes more varied and replayable The electronic part of the game is also good in that it allows you to add more action options to the game, because if earlier the player had a field drawn on cardboard with which nothing could be done, now it may well be digital and dynamically change as the players progress. The same can be said about other elements - cards, indicators, moves of enemies, random phenomena, and everything else. This also has a positive effect on replayability, because it is impossible to learn all the cards and moves, there are simply an infinite number of them. And if you connect artificial intelligence to the opponents, everything will play in completely different colors. CONCLUSIONS The use of new technologies is quite controversial. On the one hand, it goes against the very concept of board games, which should be physical, which is why they are loved. On the other hand, they allow you to invent new mechanics and make games more diverse. Here we can even say that their mass use is able to start a new era in the development of tabletop game design and the industry as a whole. My prediction for the future is this - I believe and believe that in the near future AR and AI will be very tightly integrated into the use of board game manufacturers, but it is still too early for that Well, you can express your opinion in the comments, I will always be happy to discuss this topic there)..

 Today, many thousands of people play flash games dedicated to the development of personal virtual farms in various social Internet networks. They grow virtual crops, sell them, earning virtual money for the purchase of virtual equipment, seeds or elements of the exterior. Uwe Rosenberg's "Harvest Trilogy" (Agricola, Le Havre, At the Gates of Loyang) allows board game lovers to do almost the same thing. Agricola, as you know, was the #1 game in BoardGameGeek's overall tabletop rankings for a long time, until it lost the honorable "gold" to good old Puerto Rico, falling to second place. Le Havre ("Havre"), which came out a year later, firmly established itself in the top ten and is currently in 6th place in the overall standings. The third part of the trilogy - At the Gates of Loyang (hereinafter simply "Loyang") - in my opinion, is greatly underestimated and is now in 113th place. Despite the fact that these games are very different, they also have undeniable similarities, which we will talk about. According to Rosenberg himself, "Loyan" was created even before "Agricola" and, in fact, the first part of the trilogy took a lot from this prototype. Therefore, it makes sense to consider "Loyan" as a prequel rather than as the final part. Perhaps that is why Le Havre stands out somewhat among the games of the trilogy, even by the parameter that gave the trilogy its name. The mechanics of crop harvesting in Agricola and Loyana are identical: the player sows the field and removes a resource unit from the field each round. In Havre, everything is done more mechanistically and abstractly from reality. Everything is simple there: the player has at least one unit of wheat - get one more, has at least two cows - get one more. There is no need to sow fields and build pens, resources multiply by themselves. And what did you want? A game about a port city, not a farm. After all, many of the city dwellers do not even know about how the harvest actually turns out! :-) Now let's talk about the interaction of players. "Agricola" and "Loyan" are games with a high value of the "solitaire" parameter. Each player boils in his cauldron, on his personal field. And only in a certain separate phase of the round do the players' interests intersect. In "Agricola" these are the moments when the members of the farming family are sent for day work to the common playing field. In "Luoyang" there is a drawing of cards according to certain tricky rules in order to get clientele for sales, new fields, markets or one-time assistants. In Havre, this "solitaire" is significantly less. At the personal disposal of the player is only some set of buildings/ships and resources built or bought by him. At the same time, the action phase is full of moments of activation of someone else's building. Players always use the capabilities of other people's buildings, often paying the owner of the building a penalty for doing so. And the main nuance is that such actions can greatly damage the plans of other players, because for now there is a chip on a specific building, it cannot be used. In fact, a good half of every player's moves in Le Havre are interactions with other people's personal zones. Food as a payment for development occurs at the end of each round in Agricola and Le Havre. The sword of Damocles hangs over the players for not being diligent enough in this matter. This forces you to divide your tactics into two fronts: get food and try to do it as efficiently as possible, so that more actions are left for the direct development of the farm (construction of buildings/ships). By this factor, Luoyang's gameplay is distinguished by a simpler formula of the player's goal: more money and no additional aspirations. Perhaps that is why this game did not reach the top ranks among experienced and experienced players: it is too simple. Winning points (PZ) and methods of obtaining them. Here, all the games of the trilogy demonstrate different approaches, and the most complex scheme is observed in "Agricola". Here you need to try to set all lines of development in motion so as not to catch fines. The farm should be self-sufficient, it should have fields with wheat and vegetables, and pens with different types of livestock. The state of each line of development will result in a certain amount of points, which are added up. Calculating software in Le Havre is almost identical to the same process in Race for the Galaxy: the values of each building/ship constructed plus the cash remaining on the balance are added up. "Loyan" flaunts a unique software acquisition system. The main difference is that here the SPs are calculated at the end of each turn, and not just at the end of the game. Accumulation occurs by spending the money earned by the player, that is, points are simply bought. For a small fixed price, a player can advance his chip only one position per round. Each additional move costs a lot of money, and the higher the player's position on the software line, the more expensive the additional steps. The very fact that Luoyang buys points every round might also knock this game off the list of veteran players' favors: again, too easy. Finally, I want to say the main thing: all the games of the trilogy, despite their commonality in some areas and belonging to the same class of eurogames based on resource management, play completely differently, so it is quite normal to have all of them in your collection. I will only stop those who are looking for a family game to spend time with their children from blind buying. A child under the age of 12 is unlikely to be able to draw up rules and seriously plan their own development strategy...

 Today, a pilot game was played in "Roboral". Impressions from the game are the most positive. It turned out to be extremely fun to chase robots around a strange room, breaking down every minute and arriving at a completely different place than you planned! The essence of the game is simple. There are works, there is a map with numbered flags. The goal of the game is to go around all the flags on the map in order. Whoever is first, well done. The difficulty is that the track is covered with a network of conveyor belts, here and there lasers stick out from the walls, gears are spinning on the floor, etc. Players play the role of operator-programmers, and the success of the "racers" depends only on their ability to navigate the complex industrial environment. And also from the cards in the hand... This is where the main trick lies. A lot really depends on the program cards in the hand. There are no turns - you drive straight. Acceleration did not come - you spin in place. And there's nothing you can do about it... We've had moves several times, during which robots simply turned left and right. Obviously, a situation may also arise when the robot will be forced to go beyond the edge of the map simply because there are no cards other than "gas, Seryogo!" did not sleep in the hand. And still a lot of fun to play. The inscription on the box with the game says: "A frenzied race filled with computer-driven chaos!". And so it is, hell take it and eat it! But to make your way to the cherished flag through a crowd of scrap metal that has come to life, or to accurately shine a laser in the back of the enemy is terribly pleasant. What is characteristic, despite the conflict of the game, that it seems that there were no quarrels at the table even once! Everyone jostled, shot at each other, flew off the field, dumbfounded and cursed at bad cards. There was an atmosphere of silly fun over the table, like a game of water pistol war. The game was liked by almost everyone, although at the end some complained about their brains being melted by the game. The game is designed quite nicely. Robots' disguises are so generally amazing. Cardboard components are thin in places, but this is not critical. It is strongly recommended to wear protectors on the deck of cards. During our game, she mixed up every move. Yes, I almost forgot. We were not able to finish even the first - the simplest - track in any way. In an hour and a half of the game, we mastered the rules "excellently", passed one or two flags and determined the winner by voting. Everyone was satisfied, because the main thing in Roboral is not the victory, but the exciting gameplay. PS People who can't distinguish between "right" and "left" better not even look at this game to avoid a migraine...

 Town is a 2-4 player board game by Shun and Aya Taguchi. Since I've played Glenmore, one of my favorite mechanics has been tile activation. I just really like it. The game itself is played over four rounds. Everything is fine with the design, it is more than suitable. The picture on the box is good, the buildings are a bit cartoonish. The playing field is two-sided with three types of resources: stone, fish and wood - pre-printed on the map. The box is nice and small, with a great organizer that has enough room for more tiles or additions. The game is very simple. Each turn, players will either place a worker on a square on the map, activating the eight squares around it, or build a building. There are twelve buildings to choose from plus five cornfields. Every time you build a house, you get victory points. At the end of the round you need to feed your workers (at which point everyone sighed). This was already seen in Agricola or Tsolkin, but here feeding is not burdensome: only one fish or corn per worker, and this is easily achieved, especially if you are building a field. If you want, you can exchange three coins for a resource of your choice.  There are several interesting buildings available. Fields produce wheat and stand one tree, and also yield 3 WP. Other buildings give you software or money for resources. The Pawn allows you to trade two resources for two others, while the statue gives you 10 programs. The bar and the well just bring VP, and the bookstore and gold mine produce coins. There are four more special buildings: cathedral, residence, castle and watchtower, which give you VP at the end of the round/game depending on the surrounding tiles - for workers that activate buildings, constructed buildings and empty squares. Players need to think carefully about where to place their workers in order to get the resources needed to build the right buildings to get the bonuses. As the game progresses, the tile placement area becomes more and more crowded, so it becomes more and more difficult to use the buildings. And money is also tight. Finding combinations from buildings and pre-printed resources is where the game shines. The object of the game is to score as many victory points as possible, and the scoring track is located at the bottom of the playing field. There is an extra token for each player if they score more than 60 points. COMPONENTS The game features cards, cardboard tiles, and wooden dice and tokens, as well as a wooden mallet for the first player, point markers, and a round marker. The course is small which is a bonus for me as I mostly play in pubs with small tables. Bonus cards are also small. The tiles are thick, with rounded corners. Preparation is simple. Places for tiles are clearly marked. The number of workers and buildings depends on the number of players. There is variability in the preparation, which is that there are more buildings (29) than are needed for the game (12) and more objective cards. The goals are easily achievable and bring 2-3 points. As such, they don't have much impact. I wish the goals were a little more difficult to achieve. GAME PROCESS The gameplay is smooth and fast. There is active interaction between players because you can use your opponent's buildings by paying them a coin. Also, as more buildings are placed, a sense of development appears. Towards the end of the game, you can activate four or five squares on your turn. With only twelve buildings, you compete to build the building you want. By the fourth round, most buildings will usually be built, so you'll be looking for opportunities to activate buildings to score victory points. DESIGN AND SUBJECT The design in this game is suitable. The subject feels weak. There has been some criticism from my band about the definition of the grid lines on the playing field. As with any game with resource cubes, you want to upgrade these cubes to more realistic resources and coins to metal ones. But what I like is that it's a cheap and fast game. CALCULATION OF POINTS This is an entry-level game - a simple game with tile activation, the engine here is also simple. The game lasts from 20 to 30 minutes. It's quick and easy to teach her. But there's still some depth for die-hard gamers. The overwhelming thought after the party was that I want more. More bonus cards, more buildings. I want to be able to rebuild! The game includes a promo with four additional buildings. Overall a great game that will remain in my collection. Fingers crossed for new buildings or additions. POSTSCRIPT Since I wrote this, my cell has broken down this game a few more times, and it's even better than I first thought. Each batch was radically different depending on the buildings chosen and the places where people built them. If you have a bank or other building that generates income, this means that there will be much more interaction in the party as players activate other players' houses. If you have a building that makes two fish, then foraging becomes easier and you build more buildings quickly. A building that allows you to exchange two goods for two others allows you to build houses more strategically. Buildings that give points for empty squares or people around them are always tactically blocked. Buildings that generate VP will be used more often unless specific resources (usually food) are rare. Every time we play I see different little chains/combinations of buildings. As I said in another post, we played Town with four workers instead of three, which makes the field more crowded. But we don't mind! Blocking each other just adds to the fun and interaction in this game. As a result, this small, fast-paced game gives you the opportunity to make great decisions!..