I've found with games that generally speaking the cheaper options don't tend to stand the test of time. There are exceptions of course, but for every No Thanks there are plenty like Sabateur and Archeology who get one play then are quietly traded away. So that was what was going through my head on my periodic visits to Area 51 as I eyed up Agricola: All Creatures Great and Small. Basically Agricola for two, this game leered at me with it's "look, only £25" price tag and the fact it was like Agricola, but simpler, shorter, and seemingly well-received on the geek. But I guess what finally clinched it for me was realising that at £25 it wasn't actually that cheap after all. Sold!
Andrew and I played tonight and I think we would both declare it a hit. Partly because you get the Agricola flavour without monopolising the evening, but also because without the worry of feeding your family the strategy shifts to a less complex but still engaging battle of wits - that involves the usual worker placement and building purchases but the pattern-forming aspect of how to utilise your farm to a greater degree than it's big brother.
The aim of the game in fact is to maximise your farm's animal population - as many as you can of the four available options. So all the buildings bar one are about animal storage and there's no corn or vegetables to been seen. It's Agricola-light to be sure, but rather than simply feel dilute there's a genuine shift here to a game that stands alone on its own merit.
Our game was closer than the score suggests, as Andrew's building specialising and early farm expansion looked to have put him in the box seat, only for a dearth of cows and pigs to count against him in the final reckoning:
Sam 42
Andrew 35.5
Then we played Biblios! Andrew had his revenge in another testosterone-fuelled battle.
Andrew 9
Sam7
We called our deciding arm-wrestle a draw and I high-fived my way into the night.
Games! What kids do when they're not sniffing glue.
It's a bit like two people doing a puzzle at the same time. Maybe we were new, but there wasn't a great deal of opportunity to block each other. At the end, I was faced with the choice of renovating my cottage, filling in the last of my spaces in the feilds, or keeping my building materials for the bonus it would bring. But only one move in which to do them. This much, at least, is like the multi-player version: you'll find yourself with fewer turns than you need.
ReplyDeleteSounds like fun - how long did it take?
ReplyDeleteI have played 3 solo games of Castles of Burgundy (I prefer to call it by its german name Die Burgen Von Burgund, because it makes me sound more of a twat) this weekend - it makes a great solo game with a couple of very simple tweaks. My best score so far is 173, with some pretty jammy luck.
I think it was a shade under an hour, including learning the rules. There are only 8 rounds and you have 3 workers throughout.
ReplyDeleteSounds good. DBVB is only 45 mins for a single player, but I would say that would scale to 45mins per player, making it a 3 hour game for four people . . . shame really, I think it would outstay it's welcome at that length. Great game though, look forward to a two (or three) player game soon.
ReplyDeleteI'm playing my copy with Paul tonight! I'll have to think of an interesting angle to talk about it now.
ReplyDelete