As well as thoughts on sandboxes and salt pans from the genres behind this game. Warning: This is not a Dead Reckoning review  So, we have a conditional sandbox on the conditional deckbuilder engine. Build a hand of cards that will evolve over the course of the game, growing new abilities on a pack of translucent upgrades in one protector. See what symbols are available on the cards and have fun on the whole reel. Ride the sea, discover new lands, buy upgrades, capture islands, carry barrels, trade, produce, loot, fire at your neighbor, pump your deck and your ship.  Immediately about the best. Feature with pumping cards in deckbuilding is a direct killer feature. After training on the cool Mystic Vale and the obscure Edge of Darkness (didn't try), John D. Clare released a unique system. Each of the 12 starting characters can be pumped up to level 4 and hung up to 3 different upgrades to your liking. In TTS, it is implemented a little crookedly, but in real life, it is probably much more fun to stuff these translucent cards, creating a super soldier. And try to scroll the deck faster so that the favorites return to the hand again. Moreover, instead of a traditional game tablet, all strategies were put into this deck. Whom you caress, this is the direction you strengthen, it's all up to you. In short, this is what I liked the most. Fortunately, the hand mechanics here are normal (and not like in "Dune"). You can keep any cards in your hand between turns, and save one upgrade to wait for your perfect carrier. Because when a combo is stubbornly not a combo, it is the scourge of many deckbuilders.  Attacking another player or innocent merchants at sea requires a black flag symbol and a certain number of cannon icons. According to the amount of guns, you collect a bunch of cubes of your color and fall asleep in the miracle tower. Not dais, simple wooden ones. If there is a duel, then both collect and pour into this shaytan machine. I'll say it straight: I don't like the cube tower for combat. But that's because, in principle, I don't like cube launchers. And here is the same cube thrower in a different format: you throw a handful of wooden cubes into the tower, and they fall on one of the 14 faces. Yes, it's faster, easier and, what's more, funnier than traditional American-Cubans, but still a wildly random event. But the fact that I don't like it does not cancel the fact that it is a really cool and cool find. I wouldn't refuse to see it in other projects, just not for the randomization of combat, but, say, for the response of monsters or something else. Next, about the structure of the move. I like it less and less when games have huge moves with a bunch of options. Yes, in "Knight-Mage" you can think for 15 minutes about how two clearings are better to pass, but that's why it's a solo game. In Dead Reckoning, you can charge a bunch of sails, swim there, scout here, buy a map here, buy a map there, and during the break you can still control the island. And you sit and consider how and for what your cards will be enough. The potential for downtime is huge, I'm afraid to even imagine. It was not very noticeable on two. While one walks, the other upgrades between turns. I prefer to trust a party member and not control his every step. Yes, I am half listening to what he got and where he went. So it was adequate. But I know there are suffocators to whom show and tell everything, but don't deceive them, but here you have a speed not of 6, but of 5. I'm afraid, for four it would be hell and burning ephedrone. The most common scourge of many sandbox games like Runbound, Outer Ring, or Xia is huge downtime between turns, little interaction, and inadequate duration. Everyone plays their own role or fantasy in this world, rarely conflicts with others, and it is generally unclear why we are sitting at the same table together. On the one hand, I understand the desire of players to have many ways of development, so that everyone chooses something for himself. On the other hand, in some games it turns out that everyone evaporates into something different, and there is no great competition in the "enemy" area. Why other players? For example, in Dead Reckoning I mostly bought cards, captured islands and carried barrels. Because I don't like to rely on randomness, and these are obvious classes. And Lyosha explored, pumped up the ship and sometimes fought. And now, if it weren't for his principled attempt to sink me with full holds, we would hardly have crossed paths the entire game. Everyone cares for themselves, and that's fine. Let's say, a frequent complaint against "Agricola" is that the game forces you to do little by little, and you can't specialize. But this is where the main conflict comes from! Everyone needs food and wood, and that's what they grab first, until the war for the first player. It's not like you went to monuments, I went to adventures, and the third one went to collecting crystals, and we don't really get along. It comes to an absurdity like "Traders' Bay", where everyone plays giga-super-asymmetry, but you have no business with the opponent's tablet. Again, I'm not saying it's wrong. It's just that I like to play solo and try to find game-mechanical reasons to be in the games of other live players other than for a nice chat.  Further, unlike Agricola, in the same "Caverna" I choose arbitrarily whether I want to build sheepfolds, deep caves or gather a gang of armed adventurers. Nothing in the layout leads to anything, the initial room market is inadequately huge, and jumping to another strategy later can be problematic. And you choose a bit at random, rather because you decided to express yourself that way today, and not because the situation on the field demands it. Therefore, in my opinion, one or two people are optimal there, and the third one is useless. And from Dead Reckoning, the feelings are similar. The rules clearly spell out 4 conventional roles with tips on how to play them and what cards to pump for them: pirate, privateer, merchant and explorer. By the way, I didn't get into any of them, I was tormented by something of my own. It looks like a European sandbox. Choose who you are today and play with your imagination. But I don't really understand this desire to put everything into one game at once: engine optimization, and to be able to punch a neighbor's face with a cube. I'm curious when a game does some of its ideas that sell really well, and not all at once. Hence the cool attitude to many modern hybridizations (Dwellings of Eldervale, "Dune. Empire"), and in general to 4X-gigantism ("Sickle", "Eclipse", Dark Ages). But such games are very popular now, so I have no business judging people's preferences. Never been a fan of pirate romance (or any gangster, mafia, etc. themes). Robberies, murders, rapes, slave trade, torture, unsanitary conditions, drunkenness - cool, cheerful mischief from fairy tales for children, yes. That's why I didn't bother with the setting. No, everything is adequate with the theme, but I did not find a lot of adventure and atmosphere. Even in such a rusk as "Maracaibo" there is enough soulfulness for me, but here it is not radically juicier or wetter. "Sickle about pirates" is a little humiliating, but not so far from the truth. Although someone, hearing this, on the contrary, will rush to buy. In this mincemeat of familiar Euro mechanisms, "everyone will be able to find something for themselves" is a trite and well-worn phrase. I've seen reviews like it's an epic ultimate pirate game and... well, I haven't seen that.  No, I won't say that all of the above makes Dead Reckoning exactly a bad game. But all these symptoms are characteristic of her. Yes, if you wish, you can directly destroy the neighbor's cabin, and the interaction will appear for you. And there is no desire, then it will not be. But this is my traditional problem with projects where three games were crammed into one. Someone is playing Eurooptimization, and cubes fly into his face. Or someone is looking for sea adventures and atmosphere, while another is suffocating for every point. Again, not a specific game complaint, rather this type of game. In general, it's cool. Deckbuilding fire, and the rest of the brine seems to be working. Just not mine. The solo deck was not brought to TTS, so the traditional consolidation of impressions in solo mode will not work. Therefore, most likely, I will not play anymore. But I would sit down for real in the future. After 3-4 years, "Kramnychka" will decide that it's time to finish what was promised (yes, it's a trick). I would touch the transparent maps, put a handful of Kubans to sleep in the tower - that's all...

Hello, received a batch of great games today, And we will immediately hurry to share the news with you!..

A cube metal co-op fantasy skirmish/dungeon crawler of sorts from Chip Theory Games (creators of Cloudspire and Hoplomachus) with a variety of scenarios and final bosses. Personally, I prefer the expansion (which can be played as a full game) of Undertow, because there is more variety - admittedly, and more rules. I LIKE + Setting (not a particularly serious fantasy with dwarves) + Components (custom dice pile, neoprene game mats, dice tray, poker chips, waterproof) + A bunch of different characters, each with their own abilities (some characters from the add-on are especially original). Each character has a unique tree of skill cubes that can be unlocked during the adventure. + It is important to properly adapt/level up characters based on the current game situation, group composition, enemies and tyrant + Monsters have different sensations, and players have to change tactics, adapting to them + Predictable and easily calculated enemy AI + Battles are not as random as it might seem at first glance, since the spread of values on the dice is small and they are quite "predictable". + The backup plan track on the player's tablet helps to eliminate failure (unsuccessful dice rolls) + Diverse encounters and characters provide high variety and replayability. The random selection of enemies also contributes to replayability, offering new challenges to players each time + Creative meeting cards; they offer several options for action that make you think about the risk-benefit ratio. Sometimes you will encounter mini-games or new game rules. TMB is not limited to the "kill all monsters" framework. + Battles take place in an abstract arena made of cells. Competent positioning is very important. Players are placed on the field after enemies, which adds tactical depth. + Units and their health are represented by stacks of poker chips, which is convenient. However, it can fall with careless handling + Loot cards with various effects - equipment and disposable items + The difficulty and duration of the game can be adjusted. True, the balance swings here and there, and sometimes it is difficult to choose the right difficulty Ambiguous = The illustrations are made in a not particularly serious style = The game requires knowledge of the language = Sometimes the game is very random. Randomness is especially evident in the initiative roll, drawn enemies (although you can find out who is waiting for you), the encounter deck and loot cards = TMB resembles a roguelike in places with a random difficulty that swings back and forth due to random sets of enemies and encounters. This unpredictability can create a tense atmosphere or almost eliminate the chance of victory. A snowball effect has also been noticed: if you lose battles, it becomes more and more difficult to play further = Basically single scenarios. Additionally, you can play in the campaign mode. The "plot" is random, formed from encounter cards = The game has a lot of add-ons, but some add-ons are either very mediocre or look like chopped off pieces of the base = 2/3 of the edition with clarified rules and reworked cards was released to the game. You can purchase an upgrade pack = Each new game element (encounter, character, enemy, item) brings new rules/keywords. The latest version of the rulebook is pretty well done, but it's still inconvenient to constantly consult it = The party can be very long. Up to 4 hours, depending on the number of players and the selected scenario = A large box of non-standard sizes. And in the boxes of additions there is more air than content = The game is literally heavyweight. If you have a bunch of add-ons and deluxe hp tokens, the weight of all this goodies reaches 5 kg. = Each unit's initiative is represented by colored poker chips, but blue and purple are too similar = Characters are difficult to master. Everyone needs an individual approach = The game is quite abstract. The setting and story on the encounter cards are quite banal, I pay much more attention to the parameters of the enemies. And different bosses have little effect on the course of the campaign. = Cooperation between mouths is reduced to a minimum = Enemies' AI is very simple, predictable and sometimes dull. He can be abused = Battles are a bit static. Ranged units have unlimited range, they do not have to move at all I DO NOT LIKE - The game is expensive, with overproduction - Too many bones or an imbalance?.. For most ghouls (for example, Boomer, Ghillie, Tantrum), it is optimal to pump basic parameters (HP, agility, attack and defense), and not to pump skills at all. Many skills can only be used once per battle, and you can attack every round. And most skills don't do much more damage than a basic attack. If you pump attack and agility, you can often vanshot enemies, which is much more effective than, for example, stun skills. Some skills still make sense, including companions (especially Tink) and true damage, but other skills can be safely ignored. This strategy makes the passage easier, but makes the game more boring. - strong random on dice. There are few possibilities of their overturning. The randomness is especially strong in initiative rolls, which can lead to a one-shot one of your ghouls in the first round. - Some mouths are not very interesting. Their abilities are either situational, reactive-passive, or require extensive training to effectively apply the skills. Also, if you don't roll the right face of the die, you probably won't be able to use your ability. - The game does not scale well. Difficulty jumps dramatically from 1 to 4 players. The best option is 3 players. - a long layout (especially if you have many additions), because you have to sort a bunch of components - Special encounters at the beginning of each (in the base) game are somewhat monotonous and drawn out. However, the quick start option allows you to skip them, get loot and random damage. Basically, there are only three special meetings, which leads to monotony. New ones appear in Age of Tyranny, but they should have been included in the base - You will have to check the rules often because of a bunch of keywords; dazed, equipment, assault, etc. - When several game effects interact, it is often not clear how to solve them - I don't like plastic cards and letters. They don't smell very good to the touch and they smell a little. And the art on them is not so clear - Apparently, TMB has a problem with plastic. On the other hand, your game is waterproof, yay! After some time, the rugs may begin to wear out, and the paint on the poker chips may wear off. IMPRESSION I rarely use home rules, but in the case of Too Many Bones they are necessary in my opinion to keep the game fan friendly. In particular, the home rule is that the mouthpiece must take a skill die every second upgrade, and that the mouthpiece may gain an additional initiative die (or reroll as an option) for 3 hp. Despite the criticisms above, I generally like the game and its mechanics. Especially the variety and the fact that every fight is a new puzzle. The need to learn new rules with each new encounter, boss and mouthpiece does not bother me. But I don't like that the skill dice are less effective than the base dice, and that the AI is very primitive (the only difficulty is a lot of keywords). If it weren't for the long layouts and games, I would still be playing TMB to this day. ..

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

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

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

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

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

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

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