GAME NIGHT

Last night, I spent the evening in the lovely home (and the well-appointed basement thereof) of Jay Little, in the good company of Jorge, Eva, and Phil. We played three recent favorites of mine, which is always good.

First up was Hansa. My opinion of this game is improving; the fact that I won last night probably helps. I had two "rules" I mostly tried to follow: Keep your marketplaces towards the center, and never sell fewer than three goods in any port. It worked, I guess. While I'm warming to it, I'm beginning to wonder how much depth may lay within. I'm not sure that there are multiple good or viable strategies. There are all kinds of ways you can play Go, Chess, Taj Mahal, and a few other games and have a reasonable chance of winning (particularly depending on what others do); part of the interest of the game is seeing the interplay of strategic and tactical ideas. Hansa may be a touch more straightforward. A game can still be pretty good and be less strategically deep than Go, I'm just saying that Hansa may be peaking for me at the "pretty good, in the right crowd" category.

Next up was Wallenstein. My lesson from this game: Do not lead at the half. This doomed Eva in the first game we played, it doomed Jay in a game on Saturday (which I missed), and it doomed me last night. Well, that and having my harvest territory taken over before I could get the grain. That sucked. I would have finished in dead frickin' last, but the tower smiled upon me when Jorge attacked one of my less-defended territories with a good-sized handful...and I won! It was a great moment. The order of finish depended, in large part, on how the turn order shook out the last season; a lot of times there's a three-cornered conflict for a particular territory, and whoever gets to attack it last will probably get it.

I enjoyed the game, and I foresee enjoying it for some time, but those two events bring home the luck element in the game, which is quite high for a "serious" Euro. Again, as a longtime wargamer I see chance as being part of the "story" that I play such games for, but I can see how this would be a big turnoff for many. We flew through this game; we were all pretty familiar with it and it took well under two hours. The first season took eight minutes!

It seems like a possible strategy in Wallenstein would be to keep one's territorial holdings small--a core of six, and then maybe just one or two others. Three territories to tax, two or three to farm, and small enough to keep your armies concentrated and hard to attack, and strong enough to have in reserve in case a nearby leader needs a smacking. You can build up your territories in peace and get some good bonuses. It seems to me that the alternate idea--let development slide, build up your armies and sweep across the board--is too risky. Attacking can be pretty risky, particularly if you're seen to be building up for an attack. This is a game that, from what I can perceive, can have a lot of strategies working in it.

Finally there was Goa. Summary: I didn't suck nearly as much as I did in my first game of it. I finished last, though. My "prize" play was when I was up to bid on the Swap tile, which is typically quite powerful. I wanted it, I knew I had the most money, but I didn't really know precisely how much more money I had than anyone else, particularly Jorge (who was the last to bid). I was next to last; it was 12 to me, and I bid something retarded like 18. If I had bothered to look over at Jorge's position, I'd have seen that he had like two money cards. So that was five dollars I could have spent later just handed over to Jorge.

It's wierd. In Through the Desert, I've mastered the art of tracking exactly everyone's point differential. I sat down one afternoon and came up with a mnemonic device for it. Let me tell you: Get a system of your own if you like this game. It can be a powerful weapon. I have a pretty good memory, but I just completely space out on counting money in most games. This just kills me, oftentimes. Now, I wouldn't have won if I bid 13 instead of 18, but it's galling to make an elementary mistake like that.

I have a slightly better idea what things are worth, and how to time my actions (I never found myself an "action short;" I was always able to plan out everything I wanted to do...granted, sometimes it was bad). I still haven't figured out the true value of special action cards, or what action tracks to focus on. Plenty to learn, but I think I'm up for it.

A great night was had by all, methinks.