Sumatra takes you to what is most likely an unfamiliar area - the largest island in Indonesia - and asks you to do a probably familiar activity: while traveling around the area, make notes about what you see in a notebook. Below is my notebook at the end of a five-player game. So, I saw a few people, a couple of crafts, three flora and fauna each, and (most impressively) two volcanoes, along with various equipment. I ignored Wi-Fi, GPS, and villages in this batch because it doesn't matter how much land you explore during your journey, since you still can't encounter everything.  There are nine types of tiles in the game, most of which allow you to accumulate points in different ways: people reward the player who saw the most (and punish the introvert who met the fewest locals), crafts give points for volume, flora and fauna give points only for the highest scores by species (and vice versa, for the lowest indicators there are no points at all), and so on. The game begins with randomly drawn tiles, so players have a stake in one or more areas of exploration, then you head off to wander the island - and then the game really begins. Your tokens are joined by a tour guide on the island, and as your group moves to the first location, you choose a tile number from the briefcase. When you're with a guide, you can either stay with them and explore the current location and take a tile into your notebook if you want, or you can leave the group and run headlong to the next location. You won't get to take anything this turn since you're traveling alone, but next turn the guide will join you and any remaining tiles from the previous location will be moved to the side and replaced with new ones, and you'll have a chance to choose the first Hey, you get rewarded for your adventure. I hope something interesting came out...  If someone has moved to the next location, you know the guide is going to join that player on the next turn and you don't have much time left in the current location. Will you also advance to a new location, skipping a tile now to make a choice later? Or will you stay, picking up one of the remaining tiles before they are taken, all the while knowing that the next turn you'll need to run forward without picking anything up? It's a dilemma you'll face all the time: is the known bird better in the hand or the unknown and perhaps the bird better in the bush? As you collect tiles, you begin to focus your attention along certain paths, both to earn points at the end of the game and to build bonus tile combos to accomplish certain things. The fewer players in the game, the more you can do, although of course everyone is trying to do it, so you'll still be elbowing for this bonus or the other and just as eager to make the first move, possibly giving up to the opponent what they left behind.  A two-player game is very different from a 3-5 player game because you're using the reverse side of the board with fewer tiles for each location, which means that not all one hundred tiles will be played. This also means that there is no guarantee that you will be able to finish collecting your collection or find the same Wi-Fi token that you need out of the box. The decision to stay or go can become even trickier, because if your opponent goes ahead and you don't, you give him a chance to choose the first two tokens of the next lot. At heart, Sumatra is more than a series of choices, because it involves calculating the probability of what might fall and predicting what others might take. So this game is a compelling model of both vacation tours and real life, which also poses the question of whether to stay or move on, and that question comes up again and again. And every choice you make means you choose not to do a thousand other things at the same time...

 I played 2 test games (dueling in the Monk's Retreat scenario and 3-player co-op in the Unholy Quest scenario) and decided to share my impressions. BOX There are many components here. I would even say too much. Lots of cards, tokens, fields... a lot of fiddling. Yes, black cubes turned out to be too much for us and we played without them, it is good to remember which locations I have already visited on a small map. The layout in the first batch took us about an hour - and this despite the fact that the owner of the game has already laid out most of the components by category. The game itself lasted about two hours. Some components look frozen (for example, the Income tablet), although as far as I understand, they have a different appearance in the final version. RULES What I dislike most is the rule book. In my opinion, it needs to be revised a lot. Example 1: In points 9-11 of the layout, you must lay out the stats, spells, and skill cards "on the deck of cards to the left of your hero's card." However, it does not specify that one deck should come out, and not 3 different ones. Worst of all, the exploded view of the game on page 7 shows them separately. So when point 12 told me to "shuffle the deck of cards to the left of your hero card", I didn't know which one to shuffle. In the first game, we made a mistake and did not mix our hero's specialization into the Might and Magic deck. We later noticed the bug, but less experienced boarders will have a harder time. Example 2: When we were looking for battle rules, like any sane person, we looked at the battle rules section of the rule book. Page 33: "Unit Actions in Battle": "When a player activates a card from one of their units in battle, they can do one of the following actions when activating the unit: Movement - ... Attack - ... Retaliatory attack - ..." However, counterattacking is not an action. This is a reaction that is not performed during the player's turn, but after an enemy unit attacks. But we were more confused that the "attack" section only describes when you can attack the enemy. And how to actually carry out the attack? It's on page 27 under "Units" in the example. Admittedly, the attack is very simple and intuitive, but the rulebook shouldn't rely on players to intuitively understand everything. Example 3: Neither the "Recruitment Action" section, nor the "Recruitment Cost" section clearly states how many units can be recruited with one action. One? How many as you like, if there are enough funds? it should be based on that. In order to build advanced creature houses, you must build low-level creature dwellings. This is not indicated on the houses themselves, nor in the "Construction" section, but in the "Recruitment cost" section. Example 4: On token cards, the ankh symbol (artifact symbol) means "draw an artifact card." And in the rulebook, the same symbol means "A hero visiting a location with an artifact symbol draws 2 cards from the artifact deck, chooses one, puts it in his hand, and puts the second card face up in the discard pile." So which option is correct? And what to do if the location has 2 artifact symbols? Pull 2, drop one and repeat? Or draw 4 and drop 2? Or just pull 2? Some locations have 1 treasure chest symbol, some "2 chest symbols -> 1". What to do in this case? We assumed that 1 chest symbol = roll 1 die, and "2 -> 1" = roll 2 dice, pick 1. However, enough problems with the rules. Let's go to the gameplay. RESEARCH OF THE LOCATION  The map is made quite conveniently. Everything would be clear at first glance, if it were not for the problems with the interpretation of rules and symbols mentioned above. Some buildings seem redundant. Yes, the observatory allows you to open a new tile, but you can do the same thing by simply moving and not spending an action west to the location of the observatory. Stables can be considered an empty tile, since their only purpose is to give you 1 movement: as much as you spend to get there. The maps look pretty small, you're playing with a small amount of tiles, so I almost never had to choose where to go next. I think the game lacks more large-scale scenarios with a large number of tiles. Perhaps the "All for one" mode is better in this regard, but it is designed for three. BATTLES  On easy difficulty, fights with neutrals are practically pointless. Even on hard difficulty, we usually beat neutrals without losing. Tier 1-3 armies are especially neutral since they are only a few units. In the second game, on the second turn, my level 1.5 hero defeated the level 4 neutrals on normal difficulty, spending only 1 movement point to continue the battle, and damaging only one of his units (the number changed from "crowded" to "a few"). There can be a decent amount of downtime in 3 player battles. You can fight 2-3 neutrals in one turn (especially if you have logistics or artifacts/tiles that give extra movement). Most are easily won, but battles still take time. I believe that with experience the battles will become much shorter.  Battles between heroes are rare; basically you beat neutrals controlled by another player. After all, defeating the enemy hero will practically take him out of the game: in late you will have an income of about 20-30 gold per turn (10-15 from the start, 5-10 from the mines, 5 from the town hall), which is only enough for " few" units of low-medium level. In addition, if you lose, you have to pay the winner with gold, so he can hire an even bigger army. CITY BUILDING  In my opinion, this aspect of the game is done so-so. Creature dwellings, town hall, mage guild and citadel are practically the same for all factions. You only have 1 unique building (in my opinion, add-on factions have 2), and the effects of some unique buildings are boring or of little use. The Town Hall costs 10 gold and 4 stones and generates 5 gold per turn, so it will only take 3 turns to pay for itself, and substantial income will start in 4 turns. Scenarios last 7-11 turns (Unholy Quest on Impossible difficulty lasts a maximum of 14 turns). There's nothing to buy a town hall, it's smarter to just hire units. And in half of the scenarios, you already have 3 buildings at the start. I built only one building in both parties and saw no point in building more. DECK BUILDING  The most interesting aspect of the game in my opinion, but also flawless. Getting rid of unnecessary cards in your deck isn't easy - it usually involves morale - so it's often best to just not draw new cards. The fewer parameter cards, the bigger the hero, because the deck becomes thinner. Spell cards are hit or miss: they can be useless, they can be really powerful. This is especially true of high-level spells like chain lightning, blast, and respawn. Similarly with skills: attack, sorcery and intelligence are probably the strongest, while artillery, eagle eye and first aid are useless. I think it is logical, because in the PC game they were trash too, but that's bad design. Artifacts are, as it should be, really strong. It is wise to build a deck mostly from artifacts. BALANCE  The game looks generally balanced right now, but after only a few games it's hard to judge the balance. The only difference between factions in heroes and units, because buildings are almost identical, and skills, spells and artifacts are completely random. Jeddite from "Mysterious Sorcerer" makes the mage guild both useless and harmful, because your deck is likely to be littered with weak spells (Jeddite can pick 1 out of 5 spells for free, and with a mage guild you have to pay more with less random control). Minotaurs are too strong for their price. Fat, fast, deal a lot of damage and most importantly bring a bunch of cards. CONCLUSIONS I got a fan from Heroes, but the game as it stands is really underdeveloped. It faithfully transfers the mechanics and spirit of the computer game to the table, but in my opinion, it would be better to deviate from the original source, throwing out some elements of the computer game and adding more original ones. In its current form, I can recommend the game only to those who adore both boards and "Heroes". If you haven't played board games, then the rulebook can be a very serious obstacle (although once you get to know the rules, the gameplay is quite simple and understandable), and if you are not a fan of "Heroes", there is much better...

 A unique solo game about the first ten centuries of Christianity. In November 2021, the results of the Charles S. Roberts Awards, awarded among tabletop wargames, were published. It was in this list that the name of one of the nominees caught my eye - The Mission: Early Christianity from the Crucifixion to the Crusades. Incredible theme! I couldn't pass. PLAYING WITH OURSELVES So, today I have on my desk The Mission from White Dog Games. It's a solo game: the player creates his own difficulty on the map by handling game sequences and distributing random events, such as the appearance of heresies or schisms. I will say right away that this format of games seems to me to be a big disadvantage. The element of human communication is removed from the game, which (in my opinion) is the most important thing in any board game. On the other hand, if this game was made as a confrontation between churches or communities (conventional Catholics against Orthodox), then, most likely, the game would acquire a sarcastic tone. In this regard, it seems appropriate to me to play even solo games together with someone, consulting and discussing game situations. Here it is all the more appropriate, as the game provides a good reason for an excursion into the history of Christianity and even demonstrates some authorial attitude to the processes inside the church (more on this below). According to the author, the game is Tower Defense. In the center of the map is Jerusalem, six paths lead to it, consisting of squares of cities or regions. We send apostles (and later bishops) to preach in these areas and create new communities. The behavior of pagans is decided by a roll of the dice, each community has its own "difficulty" of appeal. In addition, each region is under one of the political controls. First it is the Roman Empire, then Byzantium, which begins to be tormented by barbarians, and then Muslim troops. This political situation imposes its own complexity: it is more difficult for us to eliminate heresies and convert communities outside of political influence, but we can try to convert some barbarians or send a preacher to these regions, or translate the Bible into the local language. In general, the player has several levers of influence on communities. The bigger and more cohesive your church is, the more resources you can gather to further expand it and solve current problems. GAIT STRUCTURE Historical Phase: Here, new elements are introduced into the game every few turns. Secular Phase: This is where you gather resources, move armies and battles, heresies, epidemics or local kings arise. All actions in this phase are automated - this is "game flow". Religious Phase: This is already the "player's turn", when we make all the decisions, spend resources and move the chips. SMOOTH DIFFICULTY CURVE The wording in the game is very clean, written concisely on the one hand, and with attention to detail on the other. I really liked that the author even discusses the nuances of the design of the tokens, if, for example, they act the same, but are designed a little differently for the relevance of the story (like, for example, the Gentile community with a sun and pre-Christian Jews with a menorah). Another nice solution is the smooth introduction of new elements into the game. You start the first two turns with the command of apostles (sounds!) and only have a couple of rules in place. Then bishops and patriarchs are added, it becomes possible to build monasteries and translate the Bible. Then nomads appear, the fall of the Roman Empire takes place. There are only two modes in the game: the full campaign and the Jihad scenario, which is equivalent to the final part of the game, the most intense. I think that replayability is enough for 2-4 games, especially if you still play with someone. It took me two nights to play an introductory game, and I stopped on turn 16 (out of 27). DIVING IN HISTORY The game has a kind of narrative at the junction of design and rules. A short reference explains in two lines who the Manichaeans are or what Opanas the Great is famous for. There are even examples of the main languages of the ancient world. In the mechanics of the game, as it seemed to me, you can see a Protestant accent. The fathers of the Church, preachers and theologians are presented here as great ascetics who are a kind of "super-weapon" against heresies and paganism, but if they fail, they can raise the counter of the "dark ages". The author explains that such people often raised topics that the hierarchy would like to keep quiet about, and this in turn led to discord in the church. A similar approach to church councils: according to the rules, each of them shares a single church at first, literally making life difficult for the player (although in Orthodoxy there are even days of commemoration of such councils as definitely good events). CONCLUSIONS Pros: unique theme; clean, comprehensive and clear rules. Cons solo games are the first step to schizophrenia) at the first meeting it seemed too easy. If you can find a fellow religious scholar who is either passionate about the subject, or if you're having fun with yourself, then for a night or two, this game will be a fascinating immersion into the ancient world of faith and struggle. It is especially nice that the game can be officially bought digitally for further independent PnP printing...

 Kingdom Rush is one of the most accurate transfers of franchises to the table. Conversions of well-known franchises to board games do not always turn out to be successful (it's not for nothing that no one discusses Batman: Arkham City Escape...). But in this case, it turned out to be a masterful adaptation that preserved the atmosphere of the original. All the mechanics make you think, "Well, of course, this is how it should work on the table!" The conversion is not one hundred percent, but fans of the series will certainly not be disappointed with the work done by the authors. Explanation for those unfamiliar with the franchise: a real-time tower defense game for PC and mobile. You build towers along the road filled with hordes of mobs. The more you kill, the more money you get, which you can use to build new towers and improve existing ones, which in turn will help you deal with even tougher enemies.  In the co-op Kingdom Rush: Rift in Time, players also build towers along a fixed route, destroy hordes of mobs, control powerful heroes and upgrade towers. The game is designed for 2-4 players, the games take about an hour. The action of the board takes place after the end of the events of the computer original. In peacetime, the towers were dismantled, which gave the Time Mage the opportunity to gather the forces of evil and tear through the very fabric of space-time. The engineers and mages of the kingdom, which was left defenseless, quickly learned to cope with the magic of time and call towers from the past to the battlefield. During the player's turn, they place towers along the road so that they shoot at hordes of minions walking along it. On each tile of the horde, a grid is drawn, in which several minions are placed in a certain order. To defeat the horde, you need to cover with polymino attacks all the cells of the tile on which minions are drawn. At the end of each turn, the hordes advance, and if they reach the end of the road, each minion left uncovered by an attack will take away one HP from you. If there is no HP left, it's game over.  Cool feature: You decide which towers to place where based on what polymino attacks they fire. For example, an archer tower shoots an L-shaped polymino that covers 4 cells - but only in the direction in which it is placed. Improved turrets can rotate. Some turrets can also fire in multiple directions, attack multiple times, or fire from afar. This puzzle is the essence of the gameplay; its most wonderful part. Attacks cannot overlap each other or hang from horde tiles. So, should we place a wizard's tower here? It will cover only 2 horde cells with 4 uncovered. Is this too ineffective a move? Or maybe detain it with a movement-blocking militia and destroy it in the next round? If the red player places an archer tower in front of my artillery, can we coordinate attacks? How to optimally solve the puzzle and arrange the Tetris pieces in their places is a difficult and exciting challenge.  Yes, about partners: Another feature of Kingdom Rush is how you upgrade towers. To upgrade it to the next level, you don't play the tower card, but pass it to the player to your left. At the end of the round, they will return this card to the stockpile and instead take into hand an improved version of it, which will become available for placement in the next round. A simple and brilliant mechanic that forces you to plan ahead, taking into account not only whether you can afford not to play this tower on your turn, but also the fact that your partner will only be able to place it in themselves (unless they give it to you to re-improve ). Each player has a limited number of empty spaces under towers along the road. If played recklessly, a player may not have enough cards (or mismatched cards) to fill their rook slots. Another nice feature that greatly increases replayability is heroes. Everyone chooses a hero; he is your avatar (fans of the franchise will immediately recognize Malik and Aleria, for example). The hero is represented by a miniature occupying 2 by 2 cells. They can move along the road to the tail horde to attack them or use special abilities. Having lost HP, the hero will respawn on the next turn; sometimes it is advantageous to send them in a suicide attack. Also, each hero has his own abilities and his own style of play.  To win, you need to destroy the portals opened by the Time Mage. Special cards in the horde deck are responsible for them. Portals appear at certain times. Not only are they hard to attack (only with upgraded turrets), but they also deal damage to heroes on engagement and destroy turrets that attack them. In short, you should be ready for them. The game feels well balanced. In every scenario, we felt tension and challenge, but we didn't feel like we were being pushed into a hopeless situation. Each time we won, but barely. You can't do without cooperation here, and planning ahead as well. The only downside to this mind-bogglingly large number of available puzzle options and combinations is analysis paralysis. Yes, one of our players experienced information overload while trying to find the optimal solution. In other cooperatives, there are usually moments: "Obviously, you have to do this and that," but here you can easily fall into a stupor due to the commotion with polymino.  So, this puzzle with a cute cartoon drawing style (just like the original) can interest both children and adults. It is very cool and pleasant to find a way to optimally place the rows of your towers, annihilating hordes of attacking mobs. I recommend taking a closer look at Kingdom Rush...

 It all started with a book series. Reckoners ("Avengers") is a trilogy by the American writer Brandon Sanderson: "Heart of Steel" (2013), "Avenger of Fire" (2015) and "Star of Scourge" (2016) plus the story "Mitosis". Sanderson did an interesting twist on the superhero template, turning them from humanity's saviors into humanity's worst nightmare. The action takes place in the near future in Newcago, ten years after the appearance of a comet that turned many ordinary people into superheroes... or rather, superhumans - because superheroes only have special abilities. The strongest of the superhumans have divided the world among themselves, and ordinary people do not dare to challenge their tyranny. The so-called epics gave free rein to their baser instincts. Newkago maintains some semblance of order as it is ruled by one of the strongest epics in the world: Iron Heart. He has invulnerability and doesn't seem to have any weaknesses. He rules the city with an iron fist. No one dares to oppose him, except for a handful of rebels - avengers. The Avengers are a small group of people who secretly study the weak points of the epics. Obsessed with hatred for epics in general and Steel Heart in particular, David Charleston dreams of revenge for his father's murder. Armed only with bravery and one of the world's most closely guarded secrets, he tries to join the ranks of the Avengers. And together they try to achieve justice...  So, the Reckoners deck takes place during the first book. David joined the Avengers, and together they fight Steelheart and his henchmen. Here you can play as David, Megan, Abraham, Tia, Cody or Prof. Each character has its own ability and its own set of custom dice: three special (corresponding to the color of the character) and three standard. The difference between special and standard dice is the ratio of the different symbols on the faces. For example, Abraham prefers to openly attack epics, Tia - to do research, etc. Armed with dice, you go on a mission to save Newcago.  There is no single field. It consists of tablets of the city's districts, which mark the characteristics of its guardian epic (HP, number of research points needed to find its weakness, etc.). And there is not much space for miniatures of those who are in the area. In total, there are as many as thirty different epics in the game. The steel heart has a separate tablet and unique abilities (more on that later).  After the layout, the course of the heroes begins. There is no strict order, everyone can act when they want - at least after each action of a comrade. However, it is worth noting that the game is hardcore. It is necessary to carefully cooperate with comrades, a mistake can become fatal. The mechanics tied to the cubes are quite simple. You can roll your dice pool up to three times, after each roll one of the dice is blocked; it is no longer possible to throw it over. When all cubes are blocked, the actions that fell on them are played. As already mentioned, there is no turn order, so players must negotiate to play out chains of actions as efficiently as possible. From the outside, such a system may seem strange, but it is completely thought out.  With rare exceptions, the player can do something only in the area where he is. Possible actions include: earning money (a dollar for each matching symbol); activation of abilities or items (effects are indicated on the cards); research (each symbol accelerates finding the epic's weakness); henchman attack (each symbol - minus one policeman); attack of epics (each symbol damages an epic); weakening of epics (each symbol reduces the power of the epic by one: shift to the left of the power track on the tablet); developing abilities (each symbol will give one talent for the next turn; these are wildcards that can be applied as any symbol). In addition to basic actions, you can sacrifice a die to affect nearby areas where you are not: destroy the established barricade (they do not allow entering or leaving the area); move to a neighboring district.  As in the book, all epics have their own superpowers. Some are even invulnerable... until you find their weakness. Every epic has a weak spot. The action of research allows you to advance along the appropriate track; when you reach the end, the epic will become vulnerable. The choice is yours - to quickly "saw" the track (it's faster, but more dangerous and sometimes useless) or to operate in "observation" mode (slower, but more effective). Every decision is important. Thus, each player has six actions per turn (sometimes more, sometimes less). How to maximize their effectiveness is up to you. But manipulating the results of the dice is not the only difficulty in the game. Newcago is dangerous. You will have to pay for everything, and sometimes a very expensive price. After the end of the course of players, you can get useful bonuses. Killing epics isn't just about letting off steam and showing off your power. Each dead epic is usually valuable information about the Heart of Steel, that is, progress along the research track of its weakness (more on this later). Also, in this phase, you can spend a small amount of money to buy items and other necessities. Then comes the course of epics.  At the beginning of the epic turn, Steelheart checks to see if each district has its own "guardian angel". If someone is killed, they are replaced by new random epics from the reserve - each of them has a small strength indicator at the start. Then all epics are activated and in order, starting with the one in the same area as the Steel Heart, apply their abilities from left to right. Some help the Steelheart by strengthening his abilities, others call for police reinforcements, others are treated... After its activation, the epic becomes stronger: the power track moves to the right by one (or more, if there are policemen nearby). The stronger the epic, the more damage it will do if left alone. There are always epics on the field equal to the number of players plus one, so it is impossible to deal with all of them. It is necessary to act optimally and deal with the most dangerous ones, not forgetting about other things.  After the servants' turn comes the turn of their leader. The steel heart plays a special role in the game; he is at the epicenter of what is happening. Has a separate tablet. And he is invulnerable. This is a harsh reality – at least in the early game for sure. Then, as you investigate, you discover that there is a vulnerability in his defenses. In the game, this is represented by the research track on the steel heart tablet. Of course, it is much more important than the research tracks of other epics, and it is desirable to collect information about it in the first place. The more time passes, the more dangerous the Heart of Steel will become. You can dig for information about him in two ways: by using research symbols or by killing epics. Once his secret is revealed, you can try to kill him. His HP depends on the number of players. However, the Steelheart will not humbly stand and wait for death, but will deal devastating blows. He will terrorize the population, reducing their numbers, then organize raids to find out where you are hiding (if successful, you will lose an action die for each shelter opened; these can be recovered in the procurement phase). Having released a couple, he will arrange additional obstacles for you: new policemen, new barricades, and not only in the area where he himself is. All this may seem excessive, but do not worry: there are chances of victory. And, finally, the Steel Heart will move to a new location depending on the dice dropped (however, the old location can also become the "new" one). Heroes cannot do anything to Steelheart unless they are in the same location as him.  How to win? It's simple: kill Steelheart. How to lose? Even simpler: defeat occurs if the population of the city reaches zero. And it falls quickly. I repeat, it is difficult to win. As in books, there is a sense of overwhelming power of epics. There are more of them, they are better organized and more powerful than you can dream. However, desperate heroes enter into an unequal struggle. Yes, the game is difficult, but the victory is all the sweeter. From a thematic point of view, the game is an undisputed success. The authors perfectly brought the book universe to power. Everything is like the original: both the behavior and the abilities of the epics. However, to enjoy the game it is not necessary to know the original, and there are no spoilers in the game. It is also worth noting the excellent work of the illustrators, who created a wonderful atmosphere even without a playing field. Fans of the universe will appreciate the little references to the books.  In terms of gameplay, the game is not revolutionary at all. Nothing important new, but the metal turned out to be successful. Despite the massive box, the gameplay is very easy to explain and get involved in. The layout, if you are not playing for the first time, happens quite quickly. The moves are also fast, but the decisions made are important, sometimes critically important. Every mistake can be costly, the key to success in co-op. Of course, the typical co-op problem of alpha can occur, but it is smoothed out a bit with randomness and a lot of epics and items with various abilities. In addition, by default, the dice are rolled simultaneously, and the alpha cannot keep track of them all (unless, of course, he is a hidden epic).  As for the difficulty level, many may be put off by how hard Heart of Steel is to beat. It seems that the more you work, the worse the situation on the field becomes, and the negative effects can add up in devastating chains, which is especially unpleasant when playing together. But is the difficulty of the game such an evil? Given its length, you can easily..

We are glad to inform you about new products and renewal of goods in our store Meet the fresh arrival and what's new in our store :) Hurry up, the games are great and for all tastes, be the first to buy :)..

 I thought for a long time whether to write this review because Destinies is a popular new game, praised by almost all reviewers. And I do not understand at all what is happening and whether these commentators went through the campaign to the end. Reviews of games with a campaign mode are always difficult. If I were to write a review after the first or maybe second scenario, I would probably call Destinies the best new tabletop game. However, after a full run, many flaws were revealed, so my opinion changed a lot. We played the base campaign and Sea of Sands together, so I can't comment on how it's played in three or solo. Let's start with the pros and cons. PROS OF THE GAME  Quality of components. Some of the highest quality components for this price range. Two-layer player boards, dozens of minions, thick tokens, heavy dice, a great cardboard organizer and very high quality cards. You couldn't wish for anything better.  It's very easy to learn. Anyone can be taught to play in a matter of minutes. A significant plus.  Skills test An unusual method of testing skills for the genre - and, in my opinion, one of the most interesting. There are elements of push your luck when you decide how many dice to use. There are interesting decisions about which skills to improve when pumping: which is better to have 1 almost guaranteed success, or 2-3 increased chances of success? However, the results of the rolls vary greatly, so it is advisable to level up to 2-3 successes, as 1 is rarely enough. Because of this, the pumping is not as flexible as it seems, but still the mechanics are excellent.  Application of items. All items have their own abilities, as well as various uses. For example, lighting a room with a lamp. Or autosuccess when digging if you have a shovel. Most items are useful in more than one situation, not just one. Some can also find interesting uses if you read the dialogue carefully or ask a certain NPC about their functions. Very conducive to the atmosphere of adventure.  Fan While I have my fair share of criticisms of the game, overall exploring and trying to solve puzzles and problems in the most efficient way possible is really fun.  The mechanics of Destinies are probably the best games for storytelling. In my opinion, the authors managed to create the best basis for storytelling of all existing decks. Based on these mechanics, you can create any plot, and at the same time it will be very easy to learn and play. CONS OF THE GAME  Plot I expected from a story-oriented game interesting stories and characters... which Destinies, unfortunately, cannot boast of. There aren't any developed characters here; your alter egos are not even nameless heroes, but simply the embodiment of a certain concept or profession. NPCs are a bit better - they all have 3-4 interactions/dialogue and that's usually it. The campaign plot is very weak, and the scenarios are usually uninteresting and chaotic. We often asked what was going on. In addition, the stories told are usually dark and full of hopelessness due to the setting chosen by the authors, in most scenarios there is a theme of fanaticism/religion/witchcraft, which does not fit well with the cardboard world. There are, however, a few pleasant surprises: yes, the first scenario of the base managed to surprise me. The last two scenarios of the Sea of Sands expansion are very well developed.  Poorly developed competitive aspect. As you probably know, this is not a cooperative game, but a competitive one. Which in itself isn't a problem... However, after the second game we made sure we understood how each scenario worked - and we weren't wrong. WARNING!! SPOILERS FOR THE FIRST FEW SCENARIOS There are exactly 3 objectives in each scenario. Each player is given 2, so that everyone has overlapping goals (in a three-way game, one intersects with the player on the left, the other with the player on the right). After realizing this fact, intense competition largely disappears. Usually after the first round, when the competitors ask questions about their fate, you will know what your general quest is, so you can just go ahead and do another one. I understand why the authors did this, but because of this, all scenarios become the same in terms of gameplay. The Sea of Sands has the same scheme, but at least there are more fan goals in some scenarios. END OF SPOILERS  Final tasks. Authors are very bad with final assignments. The bottom line is that after completing all of your objectives, you can begin the final task. That is, to do something epic or to put into action prepared cunning plans. Sounds great in theory, but in practice... All final challenges are the same: while others play as usual, you are presented with a series of skill tests. With successful rolls, you can perform 2-3 pieces per round. If not, it will be slower, but that is not the point; you grimly pass test after test while others enjoy a full game. Except for the fact that others realize they most likely won't make it in time to complete their goals and win, so everyone's unhappy. Sometimes you can choose between a test of strength or wisdom, but the choice is obvious: see what your character is stronger in. In "Sea of Sands" some of the final tasks are better developed, but most of them are the same. It would have been much better if the final challenge placed some new objectives on the map.  Bad balance (at least in a party of two). Both campaigns featured highly unbalanced scenarios. I think the problem is how the objectives are distributed among the players. Some are very easy to complete, but if such an objective falls to both players, then both will be engaged in the same objective, and the game will noticeably slow down. If an easy goal fell to one of the players, and the other got a difficult one, then the winner is predictable. A couple of examples: ATTENTION SPOILERS FOR THE LAST MISSION OF THE CAMPAIGN My goal was to kill three monsters. My wife got two other goals. On the first turn, she went west, where she found an NPC and a rat swarm. I moved on the first turn and killed the rats, getting a bloody trophy. On my next turn, new monsters appeared on new unexplored tiles, so I went to the northeast tile where the blacksmith and the second monster were. I talked to the blacksmith and for just 2 successes - helping the blacksmith in his work - I got an epic sword to kill the boss. The next turn I attacked a monster that was vulnerable just to the sword I had just received. Total minus 2 monsters. I then moved one tile to the west where the third monster was waiting. He was vulnerable to my bloody fang, so I killed the 3 placed monsters and proceeded to the final challenge with a weapon in stock to kill the boss before the wife could complete even 1 of her 3 objectives. END OF SPOILERS  Game breaking bug. Fortunately, we encountered only one such bug. During the second Sea of Sand scenario, the wife completed her objective, after which the game indicated that she could start the final task, but when she reached the right point, nothing happened. We tried another way (a tunnel also leads there), but without success. And when we tried to ask someone about her fate, the program crashed every time. I understand that apps often have bugs, but when you buy a game for 30 euros with 3 disposable scenarios, not being able to complete even one of them is a big downside.  Miniatures. They are really mini: the scale of most is about 1 cm. Not sure if they are needed here. They raise the price, on the field they look just like pieces of gray plastic, which you can't distinguish by appearance. I'm aware that the game was originally intended as a spinoff to Joan of Arc - hence the tiny miniatures, and then it was too late to give up the minions. But still tokens would be better. In addition, it is inconvenient that sometimes the application marks NPCs with location tokens (for example, a city scribe), and sometimes vice versa (a church is marked with a priest miniature).  Is this a board game at all? Yes, I know, all games with applications raise such questions, but... Pay attention to the playing card: as the game progresses, it will usually be filled with identical miniatures and identical purple tokens. Where is the NPC you are looking for? Which of these 6 matching tokens represents the tavern? You will not understand this from a physical map, you will have to turn to the program, where there are text signatures for everything. Actually, the application displays all objects, except for your character and the belonging of the goods (to which seller they belong). If in other games with applications at least part of the important information remains on the field (for example, enemies), then here almost everything is in the application, which is much more informative. There is also the problem of the media: what to run the program on. You can, of course, display the program on a phone or tablet, but in this case, either someone reads everything out loud, which slows down the game and is not very fan-like, or everyone constantly bends over to look at the screen. It is better to output to a laptop or TV by running steam. We preferred this method; so the information and the map are clearly visible to everyone. And the last couple of scenarios were played without a physical map at all, limited to the one displayed on the TV. It's much more convenient there: you don't have to look for the right tiny miniature or tile number 43. This made most of the components irrelevant - enough player tablets, cards and some tokens. Everything else just adds to the fuss. To me, Destinies is practically a computer game on the table. The following minus follows from this:  Redundancy of components. The game could have been essentially a deck of..

 The World of SMOG: Rise of Moloch is a 1vs game: skirmish game with puzzle elements from CMON. The action takes place in a whimsical steampunk setting: gentlemen and women protect the Empire itself and the world as a whole from strange monsters from another dimension, controlled by an evil nemesis. This review covers the basics. There are many more buns in the kickstarter version, but I haven't gotten my hands on them yet. First of all, I would like to note that the game looks great. Beautiful, creative drawing style, very detailed miniatures. It is not surprising, because it is a game from CMON. This company has a lot of experience in the production of quality parts and components thanks to the line of "Zombicides", which has raised millions. The rules of Rise of Moloch resemble Zombicide in some ways, but there's nothing shameful about leaning on the shoulders of titans, so to speak. Rise of Moloch is not at all a Zombicide clone in a different setting. COMPONENTS  There is enough content in the database: about 60 miniatures, a dozen tablets, 6 maps, a dozen room tiles, etc., many cards and tokens. This is all without taking into account kickstarter bonuses and add-ons. Everything looks great: high-quality illustrations, nice design. Spectacular miniatures in the style of steampunk fantasy, where metal, flesh and magic grow, are the product of whimsical fantasy. Like straight out of a Tim Powers novel or the Quicksilver books. There are links to Jumping Jack, Anubis, IT, The League of Gentlemen and more. The illustrations are in no way inferior to the miniatures in processing and atmosphere: the spirit of the Victorian era is perfectly transferred to the game. Of course, all the components are of high quality as you would expect from CMON: thick tiles and tokens, thick cards, etc.  I only have a few small comments. First, the cards are a bit shiny and slippery, so they don't hold well on tablets. Secondly, if you lay out the tokens on the tablets in the designated places, then there will be a lot of them, they can cover some of the key indicators and icons. Thirdly, why was it necessary to paint the figures in pale blue and bright yellow colors?! A very strange decision. Both colors look off-topic. Figures really need painting. Even if you are not an artist, it is worth at least grounding them so that the details become visible. However, these are all trailers. The game is very good. RULES The rulebook isn't the best, but it's far from the worst. Surprisingly for CMON, their rulebooks are usually well laid out. But for some reason, this one is not very clear in places and suffers from typographical errors in the description of the layout. More developed sights would not have hurt. Not that they are bad, but they miss a couple of important points. Also, clearer examples, including ambiguous moments, would not hurt. There are no such problems in the "Zombicide" rulebooks. Overall not the level expected from CMON. Of course, it doesn't particularly interfere with playing, just minor flaws. PREPARATION FOR THE GAME Rise of Moloch has two modes - single player quests and campaign. In the campaign book, you will find a large plot insert before each scenario, a description of the layout, special rules and an image of the field in an exploded view. In solo quest mode, you simply play one of these scenarios with a fixed set of bonuses. In the campaign mode, the received bonuses are saved from mission to mission. They themselves are very different: from straightforward skirmishes to tricky puzzles, key item transfers, NPC rescues, etc. The field consists of several large tiles, on top of which are placed small rooms that reflect and other locations, providing a very diverse field. Next, the starting location of the characters and the victory condition are indicated. As a rule, gentlemen need to complete some task to win, and nemeses need to bring their HP to zero several times. GAME PROCESS  Since this is a 1 vs. all game, one player always takes on the role of nemesis (bad guy) and the rest 1 through 4 play the role of gentlemen, of which there are always four. One player can easily handle all four. As a nemesis, the player usually also has to manage agents (essentially full-fledged characters, just for evil) and a horde of henchmen. Both sides secretly determine the turn order of their characters and then activate them in turn. This encourages strategic planning and creates intrigue and interesting surprises during the game. Full-fledged characters are gentlemen and agents. Everyone has their strengths and weaknesses. You can roughly classify them as a warrior, healer, etc., but you can pump them differently. Characters can take 2 actions each: move, attack, heal, or use special abilities.  There are still henchmen: just cannon fodder, but if you start the situation and do not reduce their herd, then there will be so many of them that they will not only be annoying, but also pose a real threat. Minions have 1 action per turn: move, attack... Or (depending on the scenario) explode something. Or arson. Or... In general, now you understand why they are not only annoying. The nemesis also has several nemesis special ability cards visible to everyone and several chaos cards hidden from the gentlemen. Their effects can reactivate characters, start fires, explode, and more. In combat, dice are rolled in a number equal to the attack values for the attacker and the defense values for the defender. The difference in the number of successes rolled = damage done. Nemesis agents die when their HP is reduced to zero, while Gentlemen are only temporarily incapacitated and can proceed to the next turn. However, they will receive a torment card (similarity of injury). It is also worth noting that gentlemen use their special abilities not just like that, but by spending ether points. These points immediately fall into the clutches of the nemesis, who can spend them on their own crime cards. An interesting mechanic that encourages players to think twice before launching special moves. The layout takes 15 minutes, the batch takes about 2 hours. REPLAYABILITY I'm not sure yet, but the regrabability seems pretty high. There are 6 scenarios in the campaign mode. After completing it, you can play individual scenarios or go through the campaign again, this time pumping the characters in a different way. In addition, although Rise of Moloch is essentially a skirmish game, different scenarios offer different challenges and different gameplay. CONCLUSIONS Although I've mentioned Zombicide many times, Rise of Moloch reminds me more of Ancient Horror. The atmosphere is also felt, approximately the same level of difficulty. I really liked the leveling of the characters and the balance between strategy and tactics. Yes, dice bring randomness to the game, but they also provide memorable moments. In addition, it is difficult not to enjoy the adventures of quirky, strange and one-of-a-kind characters in an unusual, atmospheric and well-crafted setting...

Chronicles of Drunagor is one of the newcomers in the dungeon crawler camp. It's a co-op game for 1-5 players that differs from other members of the genre with some unique mechanics. 3D terrain, various enemies and darkness mechanics that threaten to gradually fill the map. From the first games, the game impressed me, despite some overload. There is a great narrative here for story lovers. There are tactical battles for those who like to plan. And there are innovations that will surely be appreciated by many fans of the genre. A monster slasher, an epic quest to fight evil, and depth all in one box. And, of course, gorgeous miniatures. And a built-in organizer. The eye has something to catch. WHAT IS A GAME So what is this game? At first, "Chronicles of Drunagor" look quite standard. Character classes, skill leveling, various monsters (divided into weak, medium and elite enemies) on which heroes test these skills. In general, a familiar structure. However, the first deviation from the standard soon becomes apparent. Not only monsters await the heroes, but there is also another danger: the darkness seeping into this world (on the game map), which strengthens nearby monsters and drains the life force of nearby heroes. To overcome this obstacle, you will have to be cunning and think a little. If ignored, the darkness can decide the outcome of the battle in favor of the monsters and greatly reduce the chances of the heroes. Another feature of "Chronicle of Drunagora" is the three-dimensional terrain. Not that this is the only game with 3D tiles, but they stand out because they give heroes and monsters additional tactical options.  Personally, I really liked the 3D terrain: it helps to bypass dangerous areas of the field, lead monsters away from the growing darkness, and thus get rid of buffs, save a wounded hero... In addition, it adds atmosphere to both the gameplay and the narrative. Nevertheless, the three-dimensional terrain, fortunately, is not the main and not the best feature of "Chronicle of Drunagora". The main distinguishing feature is the unique mechanics of managing the actions of the heroes, which nicely add depth to the game. GAME PROCESS  At the heart of the gameplay is a chain of small scenarios that form a single story. As many as two books are dedicated to the narrative: one gradually reveals the plot, and the other is dedicated to the findings that the players will come across in the course of the scenario and with which they can interact, in the process receiving new items, information, stumbling upon traps, etc.  But this is all macro level, so to speak. Decisions made based on plot, narrative, character progression, and so on. I was more attracted by the micro level, namely the need to make painful and very important decisions on which the hero's life depends. Everything is related to the mechanics of action cubes. Each hero has skills in the Melee Talent, Shooting Talent, Dexterity, and Wisdom categories. To access them, you need to place action cubes on them. At the beginning of each adventure, almost all of them are available for selection, but as the game progresses, the hero will receive curse and injury cubes: when resting to re-pool the spent cubes, or when receiving curses from enemies or injuries in battle. Cubes of curses and injuries gradually fill the slots, blocking access to skills.  What does this lead to? To the point that the tension is felt from the start of the game. Each chosen combination of actions gives the heroes a feeling of overwhelming power as they burst into the ranks of monsters and begin to destroy evil. Until they are cursed and injured, which leads to the need to make difficult decisions.  Is it worth parting with the ability to "ignore part of the losses"? Sacrificing access to ranged attacks for the rest of the arsenal? If I block dexterity-based skills now, will I be able to avoid the monster's attack later? As a result, the combat mechanics are much more interesting and thoughtful than just inflicting losses. It is like a crooked mirror, in which the reverse side of the hero's development is reflected - the decline of strength. The longer the battle lasts, the more your character loses effectiveness: confronting the darkness face-to-face takes away mental strength, and a fierce fight takes away physical strength. And as a result, after the battle, the character remains a pale shadow. This is, without a doubt, the best find of the Chronicle of Drunagor. How long you can continue to fight and how exactly depends entirely on your decision. If you sacrifice the wrong skill, you can then find yourself in a situation of complete helplessness. Plan your actions in advance and maybe you will be able to reach the final. "Chronicles of Drunagor" is strict and demanding of the players: fight competently, even when you are pressed against the wall and you are forced to fight not at full strength. If you managed to pass the scenario with exhausted and bleeding characters, then you have earned the victory. Basically, the game is a big puzzle that you really want to keep exploring. WHAT YOU MIGHT LIKE If you are a fan of dungeon crawlers with campaigns, then you will definitely like the game. It has all the features typical of the genre, as well as some unique features that set it apart from its peers. If you haven't been interested in this genre before, maybe the mechanics of placing action cubes will make you change your mind. This feature, like the map management in Bleak Harbor, makes the game deep and strategic. WHAT CAN REFUSE "Chronicles of Drunagor" is very frozen. A lot of tokens - and, in my opinion, not everything fits well in the built-in organizer. Many components need to be moved. Opening doors can bring new rules into play, forcing you to adapt to a changed environment. In general, there is really a lot of congestion in places. In addition, the game is massive and in a massive box. If you're looking for a game that can be easily laid out and played quickly, Chronicles of Drunagor is definitely not for you. The rule book is huge and bloated. Getting used to the gameplay is also not easy. CONCLUSIONS  I have definitely become a fan of this game. I've always been interested in story-focused decks because I like to feel connected to the characters and their adventures, so all themed narrative games immediately appeal to me. However, I want to keep playing, not for the sake of the story, not for the sake of the miniatures, and not for the sake of the 3D terrain. All of these elements are good in their own way, but what keeps me interested in the game is the tactical depth of the action cube mechanics. The process of regressing the character in the process of the script is great. This makes you want to test all the characters, because everyone will have to play in their own way: fight differently and assess risk differently. This is not just a nice find, but a really great one that positively affects all aspects of the game. Gear and skill upgrades are nice, but choosing between them becomes really important because you have to keep in mind the limitations imposed by action cubes. Mechanics of darkness, various enemies, plot, deep combat... "Chronicles of Drunagor" has something to interest me. Moreover, fan and puzzlingness are mixed here in the right proportions. After the games, I started thinking about what adventure to play next and what approach I would have to take in that scenario. If the flooring evokes such thoughts, it means that it is made for conscience. I hope that many of you will also find something interesting for yourself in "Chronicles of Drunagor"...

 In short: the game is very, very fan-friendly. A little unpolished in places. Many interesting ideas, but unfinished. I think it wouldn't hurt the developers to test Company of Heroes for a few more weeks. They obviously tried to make it easier to get into the game by splitting one rulebook into two: basic and advanced rules, but there are so few advanced rules that it would have been better to include them in the first book and just make sense of it. And now you have to flip through one or another book, finding out what these symbols mean.  The gameplay is basically very simple: move-attack-supply. But the rules are structured and described in such a way that they are very difficult to digest. For example, movement mechanics: movement is divided into 3 movement actions, each of which uses 3 cubes. These cubes represent how many hexes your unit can move; the maximum is always equal to 3. Excessive freezing. Once you digest them, it becomes clear that these rules lead to unnecessary fuss. You place 1, 2, 3 cubes next to each unit you want to move, then almost immediately remove them from the field at the end of the movement phase. Of course, this is not the end of the world, but the gameplay is too boring. But the attack phase is much more puzzling: because of the symbols chosen by the developers. On the dice there are symbols of infantry, symbols of equipment, symbols of explosions and fire. Intuitively, it seems like infantry symbols would trigger when an infantryman attacks, but they don't; they only mean that this attack damages the infantry. In my opinion, a strange reverse logic. Plus, a surprisingly working defense mechanic. You will have to check the chart, match the dropped symbol with the symbol of the attacked unit to know if it is defending or not. Then roll the dice as many times as the required symbols have fallen out. Then match the cards of the attacker and the unit being attacked... The developers should have ditched all those reference sheets and reworked the combat mechanics. Completely unintuitive. I'm more than sure I've played them wrong on more than one occasion. That said, overall I enjoyed the game enough that I already have thoughts on home rules that simplify the mechanics. Cubes are also used frozen. You use the same dice for attacks, unit HP display, and hit rolls. I really dislike this mechanic; it wouldn't hurt to simplify it either. As a rule, you first place the attack dice with the corresponding symbol next to the unit being attacked. The defender then checks the results against the chart to see if he can defend with the dice. If not, it's an automatic hit, otherwise the defender rolls the dice in turn. If red faces fall out, the hits go through, otherwise they are blocked. All of this adds a lot of hemorrhaging to the game as players attack each other at the same time. They must keep dice close at hand at all times, roll them almost constantly, and remember that dice are only rolled for defense, not attack. In short, Company of Heroes has a lot of weird moments. Another problem is determining the sequence of attacks. Although the attacks are simultaneous, keeping track of who, what and what attacked, especially when there are large armies on both sides or if you are playing in team mode, is a nightmare.  The last thing I want to say about the attack phase is that it would be great if the dice that track damage to buildings and equipment were red instead of gray and white. A trailer, for sure, but the gray and white do not look like a loss indicator at all and also blend in with the surrounding components and the map. Far better would be bright red, which stand out against the background of another. In the supply phase, you replenish ammunition and fuel units, capture key points, purchase units and upgrades, and deploy them on the battlefield. This phase is fun for the most part, but (which is more of a team game than a duel) also gets pretty stilted, especially if you don't have the Terrain Pack flagpoles handy. Basically, they are replaced by tiny tokens that you place on a captured position and that are easy to overlook. In my opinion, this addition is essential so that you can properly consider the situation on the field. But even with flagpoles there is a lot of fuss. You start with +1 income from each type of resource (except victory points), and at the end of the round you increase your income by the number of flagpoles (key points) captured in that round. In a team game, you need to carefully monitor that no one gives themselves bonus income. And so that the adversaries reduce their income after capturing their key point.  Although I complained a lot above, I have a lot to praise Company of Heroes for, as I adore the game. First, component fuss aside, I really like the step-by-step movement. Let's say I roll my light T-70 into position and see an enemy Sherman hide behind an alert building in response. Later, I bring the mortars forward to engage a couple of units from afar, but in the meantime, the Sherman sneaks up behind my T-70. Fortunately, I had enough momentum left to back up and put my barrel on his exposed side. In general, the mechanics of movement in Company of Heroes are very good and generate a kind of push-pull. The design of the field helps reveal the tactical depth of the game. The walls, buildings, and bridges not only look stunning (very, very beautiful artwork), but also provide food for thought. Attempting to cross the bridge, at the other end of which are soldiers holed up in buildings and a machine gun nest, is suicidal. It's better to find a detour... or buy mortars and shell the area until the enemies are destroyed or forced to retreat. The game presents you with complex tactical tasks.  At the same time, Company of Heroes is very thematic. The combat phase generates (with dice, of course) entire stories, without sacrificing depth. For example, it is undesirable to interfere with the Flak installation in a firefight with heavy tanks, since it is intended for the destruction of infantry. The same goes for Jeeps (although they are my favorite); even after a 50 caliber cannon upgrade from one of the commanders, they don't stand a chance against a heavily armored monster. But the infantry squad is a completely different thing. And when you have to roll the dice for defense (for example, during mortar fire) the result is very intriguing. Because much, as in a real war, depends on the case. It remains to dig in and hope that the god of war will have mercy on you. Once one of my T-70s drove right into the center of the map and found itself surrounded by enemy mortars, gunners and light tanks. They diligently shot him, but by some miracle the tank survived (although at the end of the round the enemy won). Very cinematic. And sometimes the fear of an enemy unit is enough for the enemy to retreat. Another time I rolled a Panzer IV into an adjacent hex with a squad of infantry guarding a key point. The next move he retreated, and I took the dot without firing a single shot. And in the supply phase, it's just nice to see your income grow due to captured points and spend the prizes you get. Upgrade buildings to open access to new units. Think about, buy the unit that you need now, or the one that you want. Will survey the battlefield, emphasizing how much the situation has changed since the last round, and make strategic decisions. In addition, you will have a choice between several commanders, which are significantly different from each other, which will open access to particularly powerful special abilities, if you accumulate enough experience points for attacking and destroying enemies. In general, Company of Heroes left a very pleasant impression, despite even a bunch of frozen elements and confusing rules. Loved the game so much that I'm thinking about homerules that make it friendlier, Free for All, and homemade units. The core mechanics are well thought out, very fan and themed. If the game was polished it would be a 10 out of 10. Now I'll give it an 8 out of 10...