Pacific Rim: Extinction review

 This review will not be about the basic game mechanics, but rather about the dynamics and design.

 For those unfamiliar with Pacific Rim, it's more of a miniatures wargame than a tabletop game, and with a small number of models. Thanks to this, each model is given a lot of attention, which allows you to achieve a decent depth of gameplay, while not forcing players to command huge armies.

 The game is fast and easy to learn. If you're looking to dive into a themed miniatures wargame that requires no assembly, no painting, no special terrain, and if you've wanted to try a miniatures game but been put off by the huge investment of time, money, and effort, Pacific Rim is a great choice. However, for veterans of wargames with miniatures, it will also be suitable, as the gameplay is exciting and deep. Just keep in mind that the Starter Box is just a starter: it lets you familiarize yourself with the game, nothing more. A full immersion will require at least one additional hunter and one kaiju.

 Let's move on to the gameplay...

 At first glance, Pacific Rim: Extinction is a standard batch of miniatures, the depth of which is measured by the number of parameters and abilities of the models. While the models are indeed very different from each other in terms of gameplay, if Pacific Rim: Extinction had nothing else to boast about, it would be lost among the many other games about giant robots and/or monsters. It stands out for its depth, which comes from fairly simple basic mechanics, and asymmetry.

 The asymmetry is that the initiative is in the hands of the kaiju player, and the hunter player is forced to react from his action. The game does not teach the kaiju player how important it is to take initiative; he has to guess it himself. The kaiju advantage on the momentum die prompts active action: the chance of success-failure is 2:1, and there is a high chance of a critical success. As such, the basic mechanics imply that the kaiju player must command the initiative.

 This is also reflected in another, less obvious aspect of the game - the mechanics of scoring victory points. It is noticeably more difficult for a hunter player to collect software, since a kaiju player can get it not only for fighting with hunters, but also for other activities, for example, destroying buildings. The hunter player gets almost all the software just for the battles with the kaiju. In addition, for destroying buildings, a kaiju receives twice as much software as a hunter for protecting them. Therefore, the kaiju player can follow the strategy of destroying buildings from the start, knowing that the game can end after the third turn (and then the counting of victory points will begin). It is difficult to say whether this is the optimal strategy, but it is quite viable.

 Asymmetric mechanics lead to asymmetric dynamics. While kaiju have the advantage of greater freedom of action, hunters have the advantage of being single-minded. From the first turn, the player cares about the hunters only one thing - how to kill the kaiju. Again, the victory point mechanics contribute to the asymmetry, with a kaiju always getting a fixed number of points for killing a hunter, and a hunter for killing a kaiju based on level. In addition, killing all kaiju results in the player winning for the hunters regardless of the ratio of the dialed programs. So regardless of whether the hunter player is going to win with SW or by eliminating the opponent, he will always kill the kaiju.

 Another important aspect of asymmetry is movement restrictions. What is logical, the hunters are obliged to protect civilians and are therefore forced to move through residential areas with caution. But the main thing is that hunters can only return after moving, unlike kaiju. Therefore, hunters can find themselves in an unfortunate position and/or be outplayed by kaiju. Interestingly, this means that the player's relative passivity for hunters (reacting to kaiju actions) is not a bad thing: being overly active and trying to seize the initiative can leave hunters in a vulnerable position. And this is another example of how the game forces the hunter player to watch the initiative more closely than their opponent.

 And finally, asymmetry manifests itself in different degrees of vulnerability of the parties. Hunters have pilots. Piloted by a single pilot, a Hunter can be disabled by a single point of loss if it kills the pilot. But even hunters with 2-3 pilots are significantly weakened if one of them dies: the neural compatibility bonus is lost, which gives hunters a slight advantage over kaiju - otherwise they are roughly comparable in terms of parameters. In addition, the pilot's skills can make the hunter significantly more dangerous, making the strategy of killing pilots one possible course of action for the kaiju player.

 All this makes every move exciting and interesting. First, the mechanic of hidden action selection (while you try to guess what actions your opponent has chosen). Second, momentum dice rolls can drastically affect the outcome of these actions. It's very interesting to watch the result, especially after both players have spent their rollovers from the leaders. Also, rollovers make killing leaders an important strategic goal, especially for a hunter player at the start.

 Thanks to its asymmetric structure, PR:E can boast extreme thematics. There is a real sense of an epic battle between titans hundreds of meters tall, clashing in the middle of a fragile city of people. And playing as robots is very different from playing as monsters. Hunters are not only clumsier, being robots weighing thousands of tons, piloted by frail, albeit ardent humans. When playing for them, there is a feeling that you are trying to catch up, corner and eventually destroy the monsters that threaten humanity. Not quite the same as a fun kaiju frenzy. It's hard to even say which side is more interesting to play for.

 It is also worth noting that each model has its own style of play. They all play very differently and bring their own unique abilities to the game. For example, Saber Athena has an upgrade that allows her to return before moving, which greatly changes the aforementioned asymmetric spread. Additionally, she has an action that allows her to activate another hunter that hasn't been activated this turn immediately after her turn, which partially offsets the kaiju's initiative advantage.

 However, the core mechanics are what make the game so good in the first place. It's no exaggeration to say that PR:E's rules are some of the most elegant, well-thought-out, and interesting of any game I've tried.