I recently received a parcel. I wanted to buy "Neuroshima Hex!" for a long time, and it finally happened. But now it's not about this masterpiece of Polish play building. And about the fact that the same person also sold Empires of the Void, which I seem to have heard something about once. I thought about the purchase, decided to read... and found nothing. Almost. Next, BGG and the game site were studied, which turned out to be richer in information. As a result, the game has already been on the table twice, acquired a bunch of printed components and managed to like it, although it did not overshadow Eclipse. But about everything in order. I will admit right away that I played only Eclipse among 4X-cosmostrategies, which I will compare with it in the course of the story.  So what is Empires of the Void? 4X? So! However, the main reference of the author of the game, in my opinion, is an attempt to speed up the gameplay as much as possible by adding his own "spices" to the classic recipe. Let's start with something simple - there is practically no space exploration as such. The galaxy consists of 7 tiles, which are laid out openly right from the start of the game. At the same time, the central tile is always the same, the others are spread around randomly. There are only 7 tiles in the box, i.e. they participate in every game, except for the option for 2 players. At the same time, they are large and bilateral. The meaning of the latter escapes me, as both sides are completely identical. The 3 fattest planets are located in the central part of space, and 2 in the rest. Actually, the planets and options for interacting with them are the main feature of the game. Unlike "Eclipse", all the planets here are unique and have their own completely intelligent and different inhabitants. In addition, they are pathologically peaceful - they will not respond with fire even to repeated attempts to seize by force, they will easily obey after the first hit. They will give resources, but they will not help, having gone to the edge of their Oikumena offended. Neither influence in the galactic council, nor secret knowledge. But if you offer them friendship, collect information about them (diplomacy cards that match a potential ally's worldview), and send a diplomatic ship with a delegation to them, they can even tell you how to build a local analogue of the "Death Star" that shoots at 3 times per attack, or teach how to make friends with other worlds more effectively. One world - one special. a trait only available to native race allies. And also: they will not betray you until the end of the game, they will not reveal the secrets of their alien invaders. Most likely.  Next moment. The turn here is divided into a pre-round, in which all players choose one technology to study and build ships at the same time, and the turns of players that go sequentially clockwise. There is an advanced version with a variable order of movement. A few words about ships and technology. There are 14 (fourteen!) types of ships: 5 available to each player (but mostly requiring the appropriate technology), 5 aliens that can be accessed by allies, and 4 more unique to certain races. Schemes of ships, like in "Eclipse", are not here. They differ in range, accuracy and initiative, most have special properties, some can be improved with technology. The battles here are very similar to those in Nexus Ops: all ships fire in order of initiative once, all have one hit and one shot (with rare exceptions). Can there be more attacks in one turn? Technologies are fully available from the start of the game. Some require only payment in money, some require access to one of 5 resources (infinite), others require prior learning of any technology. However, there are not many chains here. When everyone has learned the technology and built a fleet, the first player's turn begins. He can perform 3 primary actions and one secondary action of his choice. The choice is not very large, but quite sufficient: movement, attack, production (mine), culture and diplomacy. Movement initially allows you to move one ship, technology makes this process more massive and efficient. The attack is what it is. Unlike Eclipse, battles take place immediately after the announcement in a certain place, but not until victory, but only one round. However, if necessary, you can always repeat. Mining is just +2 credits, you can do it once per turn. Culture - taking the appropriate cards into the hand. Diplomacy - their use in order to acquire an ally. The more correct cards, the easier it will be to succeed. 3 cubes will determine the result.  After the main ones, you can perform one additional action. This opportunity appeared with the release of a free PnP add-on from the game developer. Moreover, he positions it rather as a patch, recommending to play even your first game taking into account all the changes. Secondary actions are not much more complicated: attack, a slightly modified movement, the ability to increase the income from one of the planets, buy a one-time "+" to military and diplomatic rolls for subsequent rounds, and the ability to learn another technology even if you do not have the corresponding resource, but there is a place to steal it. That's how the game goes. A random event is read before the start of the round. Points are counted every 3 turns. After the 9th round, the game ends with a final count (we have already seen this somewhere). Points are awarded for controlled planets, technology and friendship with the aborigines. And three times per batch. This means that you have to capture as many planets as possible by a certain point, even if you lose some of them in the next round. As a result, we have a wave-like increase in confrontation and a decrease in the role of a single mistake at one of the stages. Now about the first impressions. The first game on the 4th blew everyone's brains. The rules are not that complicated, but there is far from one version. The Key to the Universe expansions are rewritten and expanded rules of the base game. Among them, the number of components changes, the technology tree and the form of its presentation change (separate cards for each - one self-print page on which you need to mark the learned), new actions, goals, races, criteria for obtaining victory points, etc. are added. Changes are mostly small, which are always noticeable, but have a significant impact on the process as a result. In short, all this must be thought through. In addition, when you receive a letter with almost 3 dozen technologies, most of which can be learned almost immediately, the eyes frankly go wide. I see the potential of the fastest 4X strategy in the game. But not in the first batch. And, most likely, not in the second.  By the way, the next game for two was much faster and more meaningful. Ships scurried back and forth, the leader changed with each scoring, planets passed from hand to hand. Different starting races entailed a specific play style. In short, it was fun. PROS OF THE GAME small batch time (potentially); a large number of starting races, types of ships, aborigines with their specials. properties; the possibility of choosing: befriend/capture/release (if captured by the opponent). CONS OF THE GAME the feeling that the game is still in the testing phase, hopefully the final one; the feeling that the last player in the last move has an advantage - he does not defend his worlds and throws the entire fleet into an attack on foreign ones, while others must either leave part of the ships on their home planets, or completely go on the defensive; it is not particularly difficult to fly to the neighbor's planets here, there is always someone nearby; there are several options for determining the turn order, but the basic one is clockwise with/without eliminating the first player each round. AMBIGUOUS MOMENTS controversial cartoon art: some people think it's genius, others it hurts the eye; a large number of interpretations of the rules gives rise to a desire for experiments and home rules, the last game was played with a fanatic tree of technologies - I liked it; there is no clarity, but there is room for creativity. ..

 Hi to all! Over the past few days, we've received a ton of great games. Therefore, it is with great pleasure that we want to inform you about fresh arrivals and product updates in our store. Get acquainted with the novelties and what's new in Lelekan-chiku. Hurry up, the games are great and will satisfy all tastes, be the first in time)..

 A game I've never heard of. Not that I care much about the games over the hill, just what reaches my ears through the hype of the saint. I have enough new products on the Russian market, I would have time to buy them, but trying new things in online areas is completely out of bounds for me. But thanks to friends, this also happens... So, the game is a variation of one against all. Only here everything is the opposite: one hero and several lords. The hero supposedly woke up somewhere, and the villains are trying to send the poor guy to the other world. According to reviews and rules, I got the impression that it is better to play dueling than we actually did. We played two games in a row, with a change of sides. Actually, let's take a closer look at them... HERO The owner places the hero figure on one tile of the field and chases away. You can look into the distance, or you can just take a step into the unknown. Playing for this side, you don't know the map and you don't even have an idea in which part you are. And to give you motivation - the game comes with missions that you need to find and do. The research element in all its glory. Moreover, the ruler breeds all kinds of animals that the hero meets on his way. If the animal jumped out unexpectedly or out of nowhere, then you lose self-control, and if you saw it from afar, then everything is normal. And now you are climbing through the tunnels, having absolutely no idea where you are going, fighting back every step. The game has a lot of tools that help you cope with hardships and wanderings. These are the mechanics of light, where you firmly fix the status of these rooms, plus the monsters there are weaker (after all, in the light it is easier to plant any chthon in the eye), and a clock with echo location, where the owner can answer what is the distance to the object, about which you ask Separately, I want to emphasize the mechanics of noise. If the owner moved a monster that the hero cannot see, he must say the direction of the light from which the sound came. On the way you find all sorts of things, Andrii just found a fur suit in which he cut out monsters left and right. On the one hand, you feel like a blind kitten staring from side to side, on the other hand, you crush monsters without much trouble, and a bunch of items and a mechanic help you in this. RULER Here you are king and god. But God is like that, weak, but cunning. You know the whole map, and it is also two-level. You give birth to animals (you can't stand right next to the hero: the stronger the monster, the further it appears from the hero), lure it into traps. Monsters are not that strong, but when there are a lot of them, there is enough trouble. There are laconic rules that will not allow you to create an army in every room, so you have to connect tactics and set up networks. In our party, Andriy easily passed the first level and said that it was necessary on a different level of difficulty (in the game of 4, we played on the second). But when I got to the second level, I realized that I prepared most of the manipulations for him precisely at the end of the game. IMPRESSION The general atmosphere of the game reminded me of Claustraphobia, but I only have one game before it, and that was a long time ago. I liked the action mechanics. You take an action, after which the other party has a chance to react. Thanks to this, you do not wait for each other's moves for 10 minutes. For the hero, all actions are performed from the standard set plus item cards. And the owner operates with cards from the deck that he chose for the game. (A total of 4 half-decks, of which you choose two per game; hello, "Tyrants"). Each deck focuses on something different: attack, movement, traps, control. We watched all 4 - and it's interesting! You are like the king and god of locations, but you have limitations in implementation. It plays very lively and the game time is comfortable - we played 2 games in one evening and it took about 4 hours, considering that it was the first games for both of us. Simplicity. I like games where the actual implementation of actions is not complicated by a lot of factors, but how to win is another matter. The same is true here: the rules are concise and clear, there is a good video with the rules on YouTube, after which questions remain at least. There are also few exceptions. CONCLUSIONS I was impressed and liked the toy. It is interesting to sit on both sides, but probably the owner is closer to me. There you don't feel like an imboy, but you develop a plan to steadily bite the hero and lead him the wrong way. You run monsters where you don't need it, creating the illusion of protecting the area with noise, you lure in the network and play from the cards that came to you. The threshold for entering the game is low, the table is small, because the map is constantly removed between rounds, the language on the maps is primitive, although, of course, it would be more comfortable in localization. I would like to get such a box for my collection...

 Mythic Battles is targeting an already pretty tight niche: its competitors will be games like Summoner Wars, the Commands and Colors series (BattleLore, Battles of Westeros), Heroscape, and games based on the Clix system (in particular, Mage Knight... no, that's another Mage Knight). The game bills itself as an estate of miniatures wargames, card games, and board games—apparently trying to appeal to several different tabletop groups at once. Why three categories at once? Wargames with miniatures: As far as I understand, the similarity is that here, too, players recruit armies from units with various abilities before battle. Like in Heroscape, for example. Card Games: Mythic Battles was clearly inspired by Summoner Wars. On a large table, you can even lay out squad cards, like in Summoner Wars, and not be limited to tiny round tokens... But the main similarity is in command cards, which add an element of hand management to the game a la Commands and Colors, only with less randomness. Board games: well... because it is played on a table. So, how is the gameplay and how good is it? The following will mainly cover the game in standard mode, not the scenario. Because even in the training campaign, the army recruitment mechanics and victory conditions are so different from the standard mode that the base game cannot be judged by the scenarios. RECRUITMENT OF ARMIES Army recruiting is pretty simple and straightforward: you have 100 points, you need to spend a minimum of 95, you need to have at least 5 and a maximum of 10 units. Given that the game has big, badass monsters, this helps a bit to eliminate the problem common to some miniatures games where a player puts all their points into one or more super monsters, and then their opponent either can't do anything with that monster (besides gnawing on it HP slowly), or the monster will move away from one successful dice roll.  Command cards also help balance the sides of a conflict. By the way, speaking of them, let's move on to... GAME PROCESS The gameplay boils down to "draw cards, activate units you have cards for"? No, not really. Each maneuver card has three uses: the actual maneuver, a counterattack, or a discard for energy. Each Art of War card also has three uses: an extra move, an extra card, or a discard for energy. Considering that the first two options for using maneuver cards require the presence of the corresponding squads of cards, it can be concluded that this gives an advantage to the player who has fewer squads: the deck is smaller, the chances of drawing the right card are higher. Right?  This is where one of the beautifully thought-out nuances of the rules comes into play that balances the game: discard decks are only shuffled after both players' decks have been exhausted. That is, if Mr. Hades spent all his points on 5 Stone Monsters, then after the fifth turn he will have to miss at least one more turn, waiting for hordes of Miss Athena's soldiers to walk around the field and poke his soldiers with sharp sticks. So you'll have to manage your deck smartly so that your advancing mobile troops don't get stuck in place, actively use the art of war cards and special abilities so that you have the right cards at hand when you're on the offensive. And also to discard unnecessary cards for energy, which can be used to strengthen squads. The strategy is dictated partly by the composition of the army, partly by the cards drawn and the terrain, but you still have enough freedom of action to make competent moves, while at the same time there is a chance to fail at the mercy of the cards that did not come. As for combat, when I first saw the exploding cubes, I thought combat would be a random swing back and forth with frequent oneshots, but thankfully the game has a cap on maximum damage per shot. Exploding cubes increase the chance to hit, but do no damage. And thank God. You get energy by discarding cards that you choose not to use this turn. For energy, you can activate interesting and cool abilities. It may seem that the balance is shifted in the direction of large armies - because you can discard more cards and turn your hordes into superhordes for energy... But only under the increased ability of the hordes of ordinary soldiers, they did not stand close to the impressive capabilities of large monsters. No amount of energy will save your slingers when the Infernal Judge comes upon their souls. COMPONENTS  The art is stunning, seeing the soldiers immediately brings to mind "This is Sparta!". However, the color scheme is quite pale, and in less than ideal lighting, the pens are difficult to distinguish. And although the round discs are cute, they are not as impressive as full-fledged miniatures. However, they are quite functional. What is really annoying is that the abilities of the units are not described directly on them - and they have to be memorized. And I don't really want to remember the difference between the aura of power, godless power and experience in close combat. However, all the descriptions would not fit even on the large and functional squad cards... Well, even though there is an official monument. By the way, when units receive losses, their parameters decrease, and abilities change. Everything is described in a surprisingly clear way in the campaign book. It's nice to be introduced to more and more rules throughout the campaign. True, the first battles are so primitive that even our 14-year-old son complained that he would like to play Heroscape and Summoner Wars. Getting really cool stuff like Cerberus eating three Spartans at once will take time and patience. FACTIONS There are only two of them - Hades and Athena. Hades is a bad guy with all kinds of creatures, Athena is a nice woman with people. If you dig deeper, Hades emphasizes air units and cavalry (as well as large monster air cavalry and even larger monster artillery), while Athena emphasizes hordes of soldiers with sharp sticks that they poke and throw at you from over the hill ( after which Hades whines that it is not fair: you cannot respond to shooting with a counterattack). And Athena has, for example, Spartans, who not only counterattack in close combat, but can also fire from afar. Hades' soldiers can't do that, because their weapons are probably part of a limb or nailed to their hands, because it's Hades. In general, both factions have a very different approach to tactics and hand management. And it pleases. CONCLUSIONS I really like Mythic Battles. Well-thought-out game design balances both the strength and the number of armies. The depth is decent, the games are not long, there is room for strategy and tactics, and at the same time there is enough randomness to be interesting for all but the most hardcore players. Thanks to the card engine, you can easily manage armies, and at the same time it is more realistic than in many games with much more complicated mechanics of unit control (the closest analog in terms of convenience is Warmachine; WH40K against its background looks like a dinosaur stuck in the 80s). Highly recommended for fans of Summoner Wars, BattleLore, Battles of Westeros, Heroscape, and even fans of miniatures wargames who are more interested in mechanics than minions...

IS ALEXANDER THE GREAT AS BEFORE OR HAVE WAR GAMES PASSED HIM AWAY? Most of the war games that have been part of the series for more than twenty years have tended to get more and more difficult in an effort to offer more opportunities and challenges to dedicated fans. Sometimes such games become almost unrecognizable compared to the original games of the series. So I was more than slightly thrilled when I heard about the new gift edition of Alexander the Great's Battles. You see, I smile when I remember the excited Mark Herman and Richard Berg presenting a prototype of the very first version of Alexander, the game that launched the great History's Great Battles series, more than a decade ago at a convention. Me and my wargamer friends Berg and Hermann were "treated" to a drawing of the battle with "Alexander"; Can you imagine a game designer doing that these days? And although I never found out who won that game, I consoled myself with a new box set of The Great Battles of Alexander. At the time, Alexander had its flaws, including more concise rules than were really necessary, but the game was a revelation—it simply changed the way most players viewed ancient warfare, emphasizing the quality of troops rather than their quantity. So, when I picked up the new version of Deluxe Alexander, I had to wonder: After the changes made to the game system in recent games like Devil's Horsemen, could there be a re-release of the original game in the Great Battles series? Was I, like many wargamers raised on hexes and counters, just nostalgic? MY SUMMER IN CAPPADOCIA Certainly, the new Alexander components are worthy of the name Deluxe. Double-sided battle maps are printed on thick paper and aesthetically look much better compared to previous versions. While the terrain is still generally sparse—after all, ancient armies preferred flat plains for maneuvering their troops—a few trees, bushes, and the occasional flowing river liven up the surroundings, a nice contrast to the desert terrain of some of the other Great Battles, especially Devil '. The counters prepared by Roger McGowan for various armies are of the usual excellent GMT standard and do a great job of putting a lot of information into a small space in an easily readable form - very important during the night battles that decided the fate of Persia. If you've never played any of the previous versions of Alexander, the first thing you'll notice are the huge counters representing the Greek and Macedonian phalanxes, which take up two hexes instead of one on the battle map. While Alexander isn't the first game to use double-sized counters (Murfreesboro was another R. Berg game made in the late 1970s), it's still an elegant way to correctly simulate these units without many additional rules. WHY STAY IN THRACIA? The battles themselves give you the opportunity to follow Alexander the Great and conquer the entire "known world" from Greece and Egypt to Persia, ending the campaign in India. Some of the battles, such as Chaeronea, where the young Alexander fought side by side with his father Philip, are mainly useful for understanding the stages of Alexander's rise to fame or for learning the game system. Overall, however, the scenarios offer surprisingly asymmetric challenges, pitting the combined arms and unit cohesion of the Macedonians against larger armies (Persia), different military systems (Greek hoplites), and military equipment both old (chariots) and new (elephants). Thus, Alexander Deluxe offers a journey through military history, as you can easily see in-game how the Macedonian 'art of war' evolved and adapted over time. However, Alexander Deluxe has changed enough battle maps and unit rankings from previous versions to give cabinet historians something to argue about. It seems to me that in general the Persian and Indian armies now have a slightly better chance in some of the updated scenarios, especially in Issa and Samarkand, than they did in the original Alexander version. This is partly because the new rules have removed many loopholes related to movement, grouping, elephant attacks, etc. COLLISION OF COPIES However, at its core, Alexander Deluxe is a fairly simple game. Basically, each player in turn activates the commander. The commander gives orders to fire, moves units and sends them into close combat with the enemy. The fun part is that when troops enter battle, they must pass a troop quality check, and each troop type is compared to its opponent in the aptly named Clash of Cops table. Then the squads converge in melee. Casualties are as much actual troop deaths as receiving 'cohesion hits', the unit's cohesion decreases - and ultimately these troops retreat or flee the battlefield. The rest of the game involves trying to rally routed / retreating troops, chasing cavalry, removing cohesion hits, personal combat of commanders, elephant attacks, etc. However, the most interesting gameplay mechanic, which remains largely unchanged from the original Alexander game, is the idea of continuing your turn with momentum, or even "intercepting" your opponent's turn, allowing one of your commanders to activate troops instead of your opponent. If you take the risk and try to intercept and fail, your commander will be practically useless for the entire turn and may even suffer a "crisis of confidence" that will force his troops to withdraw from the battle. So, to put it mildly, the interception and momentum system makes for a wild game as it puts you and your opponent into a tense situation that few other turn-based games can match; you can never be completely sure when your next move will come. Best of all, especially in a head-to-head game, there are ample opportunities to bluff and talk while the fate of the momentum roll is decided. The original Alexander volume will always hold a special place in the Great Battles of History. But any fan will want to pick up the new Alexander Deluxe—new maps breathe new life into old favorite battles, and changes to scenarios and unit rankings make the game more tactically challenging. While all the Great Battles games are moderately difficult, Alexander Deluxe is more accessible than most games in the series, and the momentum system makes the game very replayable; it's also one of the few war games in recent memory that's fun to play solo. If you're at all interested in the time period, or if you've ever just wanted to see if you could match the exploits of Alexander the Great, then this game is for you. And if you want more fun with less complexity, I've found that Alexander Deluxe pairs well with the simple Great Battles of History rules, which are also available in GMT. Overall, this is a great example of how to update a classic while still keeping the essence of what made The Great Battles of Alexander such a successful game years ago. My guess is that Berg and Hermann would be just as excited to see this version shown off as the original, although I still can't say who would win if they went head-to-head…..

After a couple of games of Perseverance: Castaway Chronicles played in Tabletop Simulator, I decided to share my impressions of the game and the solo mode. GAME DESCRIPTION Perseverance takes place in a setting reminiscent of "Stay Alive": a cruise ship is shipwrecked on a mysterious island inhabited by dinosaurs (?!). The game consists of several scenario episodes (there are 2 so far) that tell what happened to the involuntary settlers. In Episode 1, you fend off rampaging dinosaurs while trying to settle on an island. You act as leaders who simultaneously participate in collective defense and try to recruit as many followers as possible (bring victory points). In the plan, the Perseverance mechanic is a worker placement game with an admixture of area control. The action takes place mainly in two zones - the community zone and the defense zone. In the first, you increase influence by placing cubes and settlements, and in the second, you participate in semi-cooperative tower defense, placing soldiers and fortifications. There is also a small third area where players can influence the ship's officers to gain some bonuses and followers. GAME PROCESS The player's turn consists of: draft dice from the general pool, consisting of neutral dice and dice of the main action players; its placement in one of the four community zones; appearance of new dinosaurs; choosing a secondary action; dinosaur attacks (as well as a breakthrough if the defense is not strong enough).  When the dice pool runs out, it's assembly time: in each of the community zones, who has the most influence (cubes, settlements, and leadership) is tallied, and the winners are rewarded with followers and resources. After three gatherings (or two in a party for two), the game is over. Whoever has more followers wins. As with other Mindclash games, the rules are hard to digest. There is no simple central mechanic that ties together myriads of nuanced rules, unlike Lacerda's games. Mindclash games consist of loosely connected groups of mechanics of varying difficulty, sprinkled with a bunch of icons. But once you get the hang of it and start to understand how well-rounded the game's core is, it's impressive, whether it's performing tricks in Trickerion, building infrastructure in Anachrony, public and private objectives in Cerebria, or fighting for an area majority in two zones here. According to Turczi, one of the authors, the complexity of episode 1 is about the level of basic Anachrony, and episode 2 is slightly less than Trickerion. While I haven't gotten around to episode 2 yet, I'm inclined to agree with the first statement; the only thing is that mechanics in a fantasy setting are easier to digest than here. For example, the resources food/debris/stories are less intuitive than the resources water/generator power/building materials. The situation is saved by a generally excellently developed rule book.  Your main task is to ensure that the community zones have as much influence as possible, while at the same time spending enough on defense so that settlements (primarily your own) are not destroyed by dinosaurs. Their attacks are very predictable (it is Euro after all) and the timing of when each zone will be attacked adds interest to the game. In general, imagine something similar to the fire mechanic from IKI, only there are still soldiers, traps and walls. The game doesn't put much emphasis on worker placement - more emphasis is placed on interaction, and that's a good thing, because the worker placement genre is already crowded. However, there are a lot of rules here. Not only does the game have several ways to mine resources (including soldiers), but there are also tons of ways to use them. You can easily get distracted and disperse your forces with too thin a layer. It is much more effective to focus on your strengths, focus on certain areas and try to win the meeting. There are also many small nuances; not that they are difficult to remember individually, but because of their huge number, the first games will certainly be played with mistakes. However, when I finally mastered the rules, the gameplay became noticeably more fluid and understandable. SOLO MODE In solo mode, there are Discords, two NPCs who can't win the game, but can be enough of a hindrance to prevent you from becoming a colony leader. There are four possible endings here; all require achieving a certain number of points and avoiding instant defeat (if N settlements are destroyed). If you're familiar with solo modes other than Turks, you'll find this very useful. Before you is a hybrid of AI with Cerebria and Kanban. In terms of complexity, it is somewhere between them; luckily a bit closer to Kanban than Cerebria. As intended by the author, when playing solo you have to take into account the same factors as when playing with live people. Two dissenters use the same deck of cards and behave only partially predictably. I lost because I relaxed too much in the beginning and allowed myself to destroy too many settlements. For almost two-thirds of the next game, everything hung in the balance (1 settlement before defeat). As a result, I managed to get enough followers, but not enough authority (the number of followers + modifiers received). In general, solo mode is much easier to play than two-player, and I was able to delve much deeper into the mechanics of the game. Looking forward to the arrival of the box, especially the "Chronicles" mode, which gives you bonuses that will be reflected in the next batches. EPISODE 2 Episode 2 takes place a few months later, when the colony has stabilized, the dinosaur invasion is over, and you start going deeper into the jungle (and somewhere deep in the jungle, there's a... temple waiting for you?!). The mechanics of placing cubes are almost changed, and instead of tower defense, the mechanics of research appear. Players can create new cube slots by clearing the jungle (while approaching the mysterious temple). You can also now capture and tame dinosaurs to protect your growing colony and its expanding territory... and then what? I don't know yet, but episodes 3 and 4 should be released on Gamefound in the fall of 2023. So far, I'm moderately optimistic...

 The Sylla board game is a crisis strategy game. For 2-4 people, although the optimal composition for the game is 4 people. The game consists of five rounds, 7 phases in each. The compact field is a kind of organizer for the placement of components and is very informative, reminding us what and in what phase we need to do.  "Sylla" is a unique game to some extent - here you do not start with zero points, but with ten, although this is done with a completely prosaic purpose - so that you do not have to immediately drop below zero, you will not only get points here, but also receive them. and lose At the very beginning, you have a choice of 10 characters, two of each type (total of five types), and the merchant, slave and senator have both a simple version and a version with the Christian faith, in addition to them there are legionnaires and vestals. At the top of the characters, the colors that will be useful to us in the construction phase are drawn, in the lower left corner there is a feature of the character, indicating the number of the phase when this feature is used. Everything is very convenient and informative.  Each year begins with the election of the first consul. Our senators vote for us, and if there are not enough votes, others can be bribed. The chosen one will solve controversial issues all this year, will be the first to put the buildings up for auction and will even have the right to the first night, sorry, the first round of hiring. The first consul, in addition to resolving disputes and having the advantage of choice, receives as a reward one of the tokens of the republic, which are one of the main ways of obtaining points in the game. There are three types of them: civic pride, health and leisure. One of the most interesting mechanics is that the "winning" value of each of these tokens changes constantly throughout the game depending on our actions. And if the base rate of points per token is two, then by the end of the game, when the calculation will take place, it can be from one to four. In addition, the duties of the first consul include moving the hunger marker, increasing the city's need for food.  After the election of the first consul, we are looking for new followers. Unfortunately, the gift of oratory in Rome is not very much appreciated in these times, and all our efforts are enough only to attract one more associate once a year. An interesting point is that we have to choose from those characters that we rejected at the beginning of the game, and by the fifth round we only have a choice of those characters that we rejected in the first three rounds.  Having received a new associate, we go to help the city in construction. For which we receive a modest reward. When all the constructions are finished this year, the treasurer gives us all some dinars, so that we have something to bribe the senators with during the voting, and if the slaves are released, it will not chivalrously drive them out into the street without money to live on, even if they are free. . Players in the construction phase bid their price for the construction in a circle. This price is revealed in the number of people we will send to build, and the color of the deal shows who can be sent to build and who cannot. The main problem is that when we send characters to build a building, we return them and they become unavailable to us until the start of the next round, and with them all their abilities - so it is worth carefully considering whether to send your allies to build what you need. building or use their features later. In the fourth phase, we receive our income.  Closer to the end of the year, according to a strange Roman tradition, the city gets an ass. Persecution of Christians is arranged, epidemics and famine come to the city, slave revolts and purges in the senate take place, and at the end, for complete happiness, barbarians come to the half-flooded city. Of course, I, as a knight, could not remain indifferent and tried to cope with all the troubles with the help of legionaries and vestals loyal to me, but it is worth saving the city from one, as another came, there was not enough strength for everything. Not to mention the fact that it was impossible to save this city from decadence, as they call decline, only to slightly slow down its destructive effect. In the fifth phase, we will have to face various troubles that provide the main regrabability of "Sulla". In one game, we protect the city from flood and famine, and the raid of the barbarians at the end of the game does not bother us anymore, another time the game begins with a slave revolt and persecution of Christians, and we are already thinking about how to save ourselves from it. Interestingly, some events have a cumulative effect, so if we lose, for example, a Christian senator in the Senate purge, we can't get him back into play until we also get rid of Christian persecution if that event is on the field. In total, players can, no matter how hard they try, prevent two events, one of which leaves the game forever. But all your efforts to prevent trouble, even if it does happen, will still be rewarded with a republic token or a victory point.  In the sixth round, players are given the opportunity to act together - and build one of six large buildings. Depending on the votes and money invested, players will receive victory points, although they may not receive anything, but will now move one of the republic markers, increasing its value. The round ends with starvation penalty points, which pushes everyone back significantly, and possible riots that occur if one of the republic markers reaches the far left value. Riots are interesting because the player with the fewest Republic tokens gets a penalty, and the player with the most, on the contrary, gets extra points, so it's worth thinking twice before doing abominations to an opponent who collects unpopular Republic tokens.  And my five years flew by in such troubles. But it ended all right. The inhabitants of Rome have accepted our Christian faith and are building a temple that is more beautiful than the light has yet seen. They arranged a great feast in honor of this, and at the same time granted freedom to all the slaves, providing them with a couple of denarii as a farewell. This is the end of my story. And this is what I will say to you in farewell, brother knights, this is a troublesome business, to save a city mired in debauchery, troublesome, but worthy and very interesting. Summing up, I would like to say that "Sulla" is a very worthy representative of serious strategies, and more precisely, of their crisis direction. If you are ready for a constant lack of resources, slow progress along the points track and the need to think a lot, then this game is for you. The best way to get to know the game is, of course, with a trial game - be prepared for it to take up to several hours, and the victory points you get at the end will be disappointing. Instead, subsequent games will be much more dynamic (for four it takes about an hour, but the time flies quickly) and will allow you to try out many strategies. Well, I will put a spoonful of tar in this barrel of honey in the final article of the short summary. Personally, in our company, in games for four, it is among the top favorite games, second only to "Burgundy Castles"...

 I did the training missions in Tanares Adventures and I really enjoyed it. The game is really cool, despite the obvious similarities to "Frozen..." / "Bleak Harbor" (tactical battles, settlement construction, etc.). After defeating the gray enemies (gray, because I haven't painted them yet) and the city phase, I was left with very pleasant impressions. There are tons of NPCs on the giant map that you can recruit to your side (since you represent the rebellion) and take on your next mission at will (so each of the four must-play heroes now also has an additional ability from a companion- NPC). I haven't gotten to the jester yet, but I already know that the materials from the jester can be used to improve buildings and attract even more NPCs. Moreover, later some NPCs will leave the settlement, others will come, which gives the feeling of a living world.  Overall, Tanares is a great adventure game. It surprised me, to say the least: in the 3-4 years since the kickstarter campaign, my enthusiasm had died down, and when the box finally arrived, I sat down to try it without much hunting, thinking, "Well, why do I need this cliched fantasy dungeon crawler on based on skyr games when I have such great original campaign games like Aeon Trespass: Odyssey, Oathsworn: Into the Deepwood, ISS Vanguard, Trudvang Legends.” And then he got involved. Dragori Games did not disappoint; it is clear that they put their heart into the game.  Arena the Contest is nothing more than a good skirmish game, but its descendant Tanares Adventures is an outstanding game. Not only is there a lot of content here - as many as 100 missions (as in "Gloomy Harbor") - Tanares also borrows the best elements from Oathsworn (a "choose your own adventure" story phase before each battle), Wild Assent (interesting AI enemies ) ), "Frozen Harbor" (use of loot to build settlements, tactical battles with map management - even better than in "Havana")... There is also an interesting plot (atmosphere of sensations almost like RPG Dragonlance: War of Lance), a lot characters as befits a dungeon crawler, giant scary bosses (and dragon vs dragon mode!), skill trees (much like Chronicles of Drunagor: Age of Darkness), events and faction abilities that change your skills for battle... Oh, there's so much here. WHO WILL LIKE THE GAME ‣ If you're into large-scale campaigns with clever puzzle tactical combat with high replayability and minimal luck (even failed D20 rolls still deal some damage and give you bonuses). ‣ If you like epic storylines that significantly affect the gameplay depending on the decisions you make. ‣ If you are interested in character crossovers with other boards (Oathsworn, Middara: Unintentional Malum - Act 1, Drunagor, Aeon Trespass: Odyssey, etc.). ‣ If you're looking for a balanced, varied dungeon crawler with simple mechanics, but a challenge (with difficulty depending on your performance), then this is the  game for you. WHO DOESN'T LIKE THE GAME ‣ If you are not ready for a dungeon crawler with a large-scale story campaign, then Tanares is unlikely to suit you. ‣ If you already have "Gloomy..." or "Frozen Haven", then Tanares is its close counterpart; not the fact that it makes sense to take a game of approximately the same level. ‣ If you don't want a game where the layout and management of components takes up a lot of space and time, and where the tutorial mode can take up to 20 hours (including flipping through a bunch of books, reading art, learning the rules, and a lot of fiddling), then stay away to Tanares. ‣ If you prefer non-classical fantasy (Agemonia, Kingdom Death: Monster, Bloodborne: The Board Game, The Grail Despised, etc.), you won't find it here. The game is closer to a classic fantasy setting like "Descent: Journeys in the Dark", "Blade and Sorcery", Dungeon Universalis. ‣ If you absolutely do not like rolling D20 (even considering that the role of randomness is minimized here) or if you start to panic when a monster destroys half the HP of your 50-hit hero in one hit. CONCLUSIONS So far I'm giving it a solid 4 out of 5 with the caveat that I'm still waiting for the second wave to arrive; so far I only have the base, not even the much needed Arena Box. But when the rest comes (and I'm silent about the RPG components in the second wave), then the rating may increase to 5, given how Trudvang Legends and HEXplore It: The Valley of the Dead King - Klik's Madness Campaign Book went to me. waiting for Tidal Blades 2: Rise of the Unfolders. Note to board game designers: add more RPG elements to your games. The more such games, the more interesting...

 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...

 The plot of the game unfolds in the American Wild West of the XIX century. You are a simple cattle breeder who needs to feed your family in this difficult time. You won't find a lot of money and chances for development in your place of residence. Finally, having collected the last savings, you decide to take a risk and go with your herd to a large station in Kansas, where you can profitably transport it by rail for sale in other cities. Among other things, rare breeds of cows will be needed, and you have a serious task of how to get them. Unfortunately, this thought occurred not only to you. Other racers were not afraid to take risks and entered this race. The fight will be great, the path is full of bandits and other dangers, but when has that stopped you?  The essence of the game. "Great Western Road" (VZP) is primarily an economic strategy. Our task is to build our engine so that the path brings more money and victory points than competitors. For this, the game simply provides a lot of opportunities that you must use competently. The game has a log-building mechanic - you need to select your herd so that not only the value of each cow is high, but also breeds are not repeated. In Kansas, each breed is paid only once. The way to get rich is to bring a diverse herd with rare species of cattle to the city. The cows themselves bring both money and victory points at the end of the game. One of the first tactics to achieve success opens before you — to be the best in the market and have enough cows, for which, of course, you will have to pay a lot of money.  How can we manage to bring different and expensive breeds of cows to Kansas, if our path lies through sparsely populated areas, full of obstacles and dangers? That's right, develop infrastructure. The game gives us another way to develop - contributing to the infrastructure on a large map with winding paths. You can construct buildings that allow you to perform additional actions, hire workers and livestock, clean your deck, move around the field more, even charge other players to pass. You are given a wide choice of what to build and how. You can place your buildings without thinking, but it will bring minimal benefit. You have to design everything to move around the field, collecting all the necessary bonuses and actions that allow you to saturate your deck. But do not forget that you are not alone on this path, someone can overtake you and take a favorable place. Building in the game is an important part of the gameplay, but it is not the only one. It is not necessary to invest all the money, you can limit yourself to a narrow circle of buildings necessary for you and direct your finances in another direction.  When you get to Kansas with the cows, you put them on the train. Here, in addition to the main one, a new field of struggle opens up. The further you can advance your train (each player has his own), the more profitable it will be for you to sell livestock. Railroad tracks are another way to score victory points. You need to move your train, stop at stations, overtake rivals and occupy advantageous seats. All this is possible thanks to the structures on the field and additional actions of the player. Every player will want to get profitable stations with bonuses, so you should hurry.  Game components and details. I suggest you look at their number and variety:  Impressive, isn't it? When showing this game to newbies, they may be horrified, but it's in vain, everything is not as scary as it seems at first glance. Design. As you might have noticed, the game is colorful and looks stunning. A variety of details, easy to understand infographics, great art on the cards, which depict the same cows, the setting of which scared me off at the introductory stage, even the box itself is made of high quality and I want to put it in a prominent place. In the process of immersion, you get pleasure from the design of the game. Just look at how it looks on the table:  Random Any modern game should have an element of randomness that gives a unique note to each game. But many people do not like that sometimes it affects the outcome of the game too much. The WZP provided for this and gave players the opportunity to influence it. We can hire engineers, builders and shepherds from the labor market, which we put out of the bags ourselves, but not directly, but through a special "forecast" department. By filling out the "forecast", we can predict exactly who your competitor will send to the market, and who it is more profitable to send to you. It's a very interesting mechanic that adds that necessary randomness without making it all-powerful.  Players' tablets. A big plus is that they are double-layered, this adds ergonomics (in the first edition, the games were single-layered, which brought a lot of inconvenience). In addition, your tablet is the tool through which you tune your engine. It stores your employees, certificates, displayed additional actions and reminders. When developing a tablet, you will find new opportunities, you should not forget about this.  Other details and subtleties of the game: Objective maps. They allow you to choose a direction for development, bring bonuses, as well as victory points. But don't be in a rush to get too many of them, they'll wind up in your deck and clutter up your hand throughout the game. Robbers A monetary reward is given for their capture. The more robbers on the field, the bigger the reward. Don't miss your chance to be the first to claim the prize. Badge of station chiefs. To grab them first, you have to push your train to the station as fast as possible, pay some amount and replace them with your workers (until the end of the game) to get bonuses instead. This can only be done on the first visit to the station, be careful.  Disadvantages Despite all of the above, the game also has disadvantages: Difficult to learn rules. The actions in the game are simple, but there are many of them, and the amount of nuance will make you go back to the rulebook for the first two or three games. I recommend watching the let's play, it's much easier to understand. The time per game is higher than average. When playing together, taking into account the average level of experience of the participants, the game can last more than two hours. Subsequently, parties will enter the time limit from 1.5 to 2 hours. When playing with a large number of participants, the game can take up to 3-4 hours. Average downtime. It all depends on the players. If those who like to think for a long time play, you will be forced to wait. But this time should be spent with benefit, working out your next steps. Bad organizer. In fact, it is in the box, but it is very inconvenient. Personally, I immediately removed it, there is no more useful space without it. Thin cards. It may seem to many that they will eventually begin to deteriorate. Protectors can solve the problem. Impression. "The Great Western Way" is a game that is incredible in terms of scale, elaboration, replayability, variability, and design. It intertwines many favorite mechanics that closely interact with each other. The game has no "proven tactics" and no imbalance. Each batch is individual. How the market of workers and cows will develop, the starting positions of standard buildings, on which path there will be more obstacles and dangers, when your rivals will overtake you, and when you will overtake them, who will choose some development tactics - no one knows. Thanks to this, you want to return to it again and again. And thoughts about the same "dubious setting" disappeared without a trace. Moreover, he began to like it. You look at the cards in your hand with delight during the journey, and when you receive your well-deserved reward for them, it brings double pleasure...