One quick thing I thought I'd mention is that the Hypnotism ability actually can be really punishing, because you could take a card someone has been working on pushing towards the five slot and knock it straight back down before they can use it. Since you're taking the action with their card, it gets shunted back to slot 1.
You're my favorite game designer/publisher. You seem so in touch with the community and culture, your transparent and how you like to engage with the community as you do live streams every week etc. You've also made some of my favorite board games I've ever played such as Scythe and Wingspan. You're a pretty clever guy. Thanks for being an awesome part of what we love, Board games.
31:08 yes! Call them plus tokens! The rulebook calling them “x tokens” is terrible and their explanation is that you’re changing the value “x” of the card. Plus makes sooo much more sense bc you’re literally adding +1 to the card’s power.
Played for the first time last night and fell in love. I can see why some reviewers are not enjoying the somewhat random nature of the card draw. This could make it hard to be competitive if you are not able to get the cards you need to pull out a victory. I'll need to play a lot more to see if this a real problem but I think I will enjoy the process of finding out!
One big strategy behind claiming conservation bonuses is if you decide to play it early although you get less conservation points you can claim a one time or every round conservation bonus from your game board early on. This could pay off in the long term if you do it early enough instead of waiting.
This is correct, though not all maps have the conversation point as an option to take (only Maps A and 0 have them as immediate and income). The other Income type bonuses can be very helpful though (2 size enclosure is especially nice when trying to fill the map or go for a small animal strategy).
Thanks Tony! I love a lot of games and learn so much from other designers. Hopefully I'm never really pushing our products, just sharing information about them. :)
The worker placement and player controlled round structure gel really well together. On more than one occasion I found myself torn between forcing an end to the round in order to get my workers back, or doing something more valuable and hoping someone else triggers it. On a higher level, there is a constant battle between needing to do things in a particular order, and it being more effective to play your actions in another order due to the action card system. Just really clever, makes the game full of interesting decision points and judgement calls. Its one of those games I've enjoyed regardless of whether I win or lose. I do think it suffers a little from too much luck of the draw. Some players by chance will draw cards that play off one another, and draw them in the right order. Other players will draw cards that don't mesh at all, or draw the difficult to play cards before the cards that would enable or ease their play. But in spite of this, I would never turn down a game, its fun to try and make things work no matter what.
Have played the game numerous times with my game group and my 9 year old son. Everyone loves the game. Think it is a big first bite, but once you understand the action items, the game play is very easy. The centergy in the game is creating actions that create multiple actions. Very challenging.
@@footsoldier1468 that’s the only way I’ll ever play it haha. There’s just certain games that are too long at 3-4 players. This is going to be one of those for me. I will probably only play this with me and my wife. It is a blast at 2 players though. We had so much fun
I like the idea of choosing your goal at midway game. I think I'll implement it in my next Wingspan game. At midgame you have to get rid of one of your objective (it can be one you've got during the game).
Just played this today for the first time in a 2-player game. I loved it. The way the cards were locked before having certain other icons present (or partnerships) mostly reminded me of Terraforming Mars. But that is obviously not a bad thing! And just like Jamie, I loved the 5 action card select system with each card cycling through being relatively powerful and relatively weak. Great game. (Of course it helps that I won too 😜.)
The first time I played it really tickled my brain and I could see how much potential there was in it, even though I had no idea how the scoring worked and got like -50 points or something like that.
Ive been sharing the swift start gospel, and the 5 action bar goes along with that. Wingspan is similar in its 4 part board. If designers want to make a move towards evergreen, I think they should learn that making a game easier to play will help players play their game more. Looking forward to the games you want to play at Geekway this year. I hope Innovation makes the cut 😈
you hit the nail with people's addiction and need for collections...even in computer games, I only played Anno 1800 and Everquest 2 MMO because it has collection quests I was addicted to lol, completing a collection of something gives a great feeling of achievement way more than just trying to have most points and win the game!
I played it several times already and me and my group love this game. We have noticed that there could be lot of room for expansions to make the game even better, but would like to see a 5th or 6th player addon. Like you said the art is great its what drew me to the game in the first place.
Regarding the worker placement, you can't use the same space 3 times as I think you only have 4 workers, and to be able to use the same space 3 times you would need 6 workers.
I couldn’t agree with you more. I always love what you create by the end of the game. I really enjoy that I can make a zoo for primates, small animals, large animals, reptiles. I really love how the upgrades to the action cards tie in thematically to the action you are taking. If I upgrade animals thematically I have got better at looking after them, so I gain reputation as well, allowing me also to play animals from within my reputation too. With association I’m able to take multiple actions to the sum of the position the card is at, I see this as thematically tying into the fact that I have made connections and networks that I can draw from. It really is a good game. It plays long, but time flies. Thanks for the video. 👍
Those 'mean' cards, we have found are more catch up mechanics. Even my group which is generally against anything aggressive plays are OK with them. We find the coffee token, and the ending of the game minor but awesome additions to the game that really impact your interactions with each other. The cards or the lack of the ability to move through them seem what upsets most players, though I am happy to take what I get. I have a LOT of other games that need extreme optimisation and little luck. It's also been great living in Australia (for once) for this board game, for some reason we seem to have heaps of copies around. Having a chess timer per player with 30 minutes is great, minus 1 point at the end of the game per minute your over works well with our group! Keeps the game fluid but lets you spend time where you think its important.
Ever since Agricola these kinds of "big deck, busy cards" games have been popular, haven't they? I think you're right about the collection instinct, and there's also the fun of watching combos and engines pop into play. Because you never see the whole deck, it's like drafting a CCG, where you chase those combos and there's the hope that even the least impressive card will find its circumstances to shine.
I think they're pretty rare even with Agricola setting the stage, as it's really difficult to design so many unique cards. I like the comparison to the feeling of CCGs!
I've only been able to play Ark Nova once but really enjoyed it and can't wait to try it again👍I love the way the elements of the game integrate so well together. It has a nice balance of long term strategy and turn-by-turn tactics.
One thing I find really nice about the game is the pacing. You mentioned how the Break progression gives players some malleability and control over how quickly the "rounds" progress, and you mentioned the action card rotation, but one of the design aspects I most enjoy about this game is how the action card rotation creates just enough tension and forced action variance without feeling too restrictive (especially with the X-token system to grease through sticky spots or power spike if saved up). This is sometimes an issue with medium-to-heavy euro games where specialization or engines can be built to optimize almost solely around one action or resource. It also incorporates planning and timing aspects that feel rewarding to execute as you cycle through your actions in an optimal fashion. In addition, the Break system not having a round counter really lends to the focusing on both your short- and long-term goals without a set number reminding you that you are currently 50% or 75% through the game. After playing so many euros that have a set number of rounds that lend themselves to a kind of metagame ("oh, it feels too late to play [x] card"), this flexibility and time ignorance while still maintaining structured cycles is such a joy of design to experience. I also enjoy that the "take that" interactions are forced to target the player(s) in the lead and are often only mild to moderate hindrances that have mitigation options (looking to get to a faster Break or burning a card action for an X-token that you weren't planning on using). Maybe not enjoyable for the more cutthroat players, but I like rubber band balancing as a way to maintain tension and also perhaps help alleviate experience, skill, or luck differences between players. At its core, I think the wealth of options and design consideration to almost always give you an alternate path forward if your plan A idea doesn't work out is the biggest strength of the game, and that gives players dopamine hits with every decision and action.
This is a great analysis of these mechanisms! I've never actually played with the take that mechanisms in Ark Nova--even though the non-interaction option is designed for solo mode, I think it works well for friendly multiplayer as well. :)
I wouldn’t say it’s really engine building as the sheer number of cards can make it difficult to find the cards you need to build an engine. It’s more about reacting and adapting to what you have.
@gavinbateman2203 i have never played Ark Nova, but love Terraforming Mars and played it a lot. If AN is not really engine building, why do so many equate it with Terraforming Mars which is pretty much exclusively engine building? (I am not disagreeing with you, I am actually curious since I right now AN is tentatively the next game on my wish list.)
One thing that I've realized about this game is that it gives me the same sort of anticipation I get when I think about playing the game Zelda: Breath of the Wild. I think this is because, while the openness and sense of exploration is very obvious in the physical exploration in Breath of the Wild, the same feelings come from the exploration of mechanics in Ark Nova. I'm not good at Ark Nova because I get distracted and pulled off course too much but all the branches you can explore in that game are what I love about it. I have the same problem in Breath of the Wild and it's what I love about that game. I set off to go see what that light in the distance is and see a building along the way that I decide to climb to the top of and jump off and forget what I was originally doing. Jamey, I thought I'd share this thought here since I know you've mentioned an open-world game inspired by Breath of the Wild. But I think capturing that physical exploration is very hard in board games and it might be interesting to explore mechanically.
If you like the income/conservation track you would like Rajas of the Ganges. It has a nearly identical mechanism; prestige vs income. When they cross the game end triggers, furthest across when the round ends wins.
Indeed, that's one of my favorite aspects of Rajas of the Ganges (a game I own and love): ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-2NYoJQD-B5c.html
20:35 I appreciate how you mentioned the importance of the thickness of the player mats. Warped cardboard components are so frustrating, and even if they managed to not warp, there's no real benefit to having them thicker. Publishers, please take note.
I like the Scythe style double boards because things stay put. For this game I bought the acrylic cover. I guess it's passing on the cost to the customer. To prevent warping put silica gel packets in the box.
If possible, I'd recommend trying it on Tabletop simulator. It's a really well made mod and that's how I've been enjoying it until I can get my hands on a physical copy!
Thank you for the vid. Can’t wait till my pre-order delivers. It looks like a great game in multiplayer and in the solo mode, which is very simple to run (just a timer) but very intense in the decisions you make. More than the multiplayer from what I have seen. Being mainly a solo gamer that is very important to me.
Great review. I have paled it twice and you pointed out a lot of things I was going like "ahh, how cool" when I was playing. Super fun game, but yes, definitely on the heavier side.
@12:15 No, you can't place three. Rules state you can only do the same Association action twice. Once for one, second for two workers. This IS a masterpiece game!
Like Ark Nova, keep bringing it out to the table, in fact just played a game a few hours ago (at 2 player), but I still like Terraforming Mars just a tiny bit better. I feel the enormous flow of cards, tag collecting and that central mars board appeal to me more. But will continue playing both. I am also in the camp of, give me as many cards as possible in a game, I like to deal with the hand thats dealt as opposed to imagining a perfect combo and hunting for it.
Hi, just to say thanks. You are obviously at one and the same time a creator and an fan. Board games are special for a number of reasons and one is that folks like you take the time to post like this. I would love to hear your view on an alternative question. Movies are considered to be "art". Because they are "examples of human creative skill and imagination." By that same definition are board games art and so can be considered comparable? Is Ark Nova art? Are board games art?
I believe this will take best game of the year. My question. When play a game like this, that you fall in love with and are inspired by, does that ever influence a game your currently working on? Or, do you save that inspiration for future projects?
Oh definitely, games like this always have an instant impact on me. Usually it just serves as a reminder to ask certain questions and pursue certain feelings I get from a great game like this.
As Tom Vassel said, you get little or big shots of dopamine every turn and that's why people keep wanting to play even those who don't like long games. Board game designers should try to find a way to bring that constant rewarding system in other games. Ark Nova is just complex enough to keep me tantalized and interested on improving my scores. One thing though: it's usually not worth it to stay the course on one strategy throughout the game. You need to pivot quickly when something isn't panning out. Unable to get that 3rd Asian icon to play that powerful animal? Move on and draw more cards for a more feasible option.
I can't respond about the game much other than I am fortunate to have it preordered. Man, the preorders went fast after the game got a lot of buzz. Hope to have my copy in April.
Having 2 Goals and decide later I would like to have in Wingspan too. Thinking of Houseruling it as currently its a bit of a luck factor whether or not you see the birds you require...
When I'm thinking about new games, I tend to follow old habits - I'm interested in games from Stonemaier, Garphill, Stefan Feld, and the so-called "T" series (Tascini and his collaborators). It's rare when I hear about a game outside of that which makes me convinced I want it - and Ark Nova is one of these. I don't have it yet - it seems to be in short supply (are they feeling the same thing you felt after Wingspan ended up being demanded 5x as much as you predicted?). But from the first play through I saw (probably on JonGetsGames) to Tom Vasel's enthusiasm to your enthusiasm, and given my own game preferences, I just can't wait to try this one.
Great video. Thanks. Question ... I've looked through videos and blogs, and while you mention art and art direction in several of them, do you happen to have a video on purely art direction? It's something I'm going through for the first time and don't see a ton of resources about it.
I have a dozen or so articles in the "Art and Graphic Design" section on this page where I talk about selecting and guiding artists, which is largely what I think about when I think about art direction: stonemaiergames.com/kickstarter/full-list-chronological/
I noticed when you do a conservation project and place a cube. What was revealed under the cube you gain something like in Scythe. Was this used in games before Scythe?
It was! I think it was first used in Hansa Teutonica and then in Terra Mystica. Here's a video on the topic: ru-vid.com/video/%D0%B2%D0%B8%D0%B4%D0%B5%D0%BE-B1eAqvc7k0Y.htmlsi=-MZj4duV5VnDR9FR
I found it impossible to actually achieve any particular goal because of the massive dilution of the deck. The goals (conservation projects) I was drawing were totally worthless given what animal cards I was drawing, and the animal cards I was drawing were so ridiculously expensive that I had no hope of placing them. This game could really have used a lot more time in the oven. I think people are enjoying it *in spite of* the flaws.
You need to build with what you get not what you want. I tried drawing Cards to get what i needed, but that never works , you need to adapt your Strategy and play with what you have, makes it way way easier and better.
I just played ark nova yesterday for first time. I loved the action selection system and agree it’s brilliant snd makes me enjoy a heavier game than I normally like, I’m a medium gamer too. BUT: I didn’t care about other players enough at all. Way too mono player solitaire for me. Even though milestones are races and worker placement to get bonuses and milestones are about timing. The solo player board and lack of draft of cards makes a huge difference in interactivity to me Vs terraforming mars imho. I personally think the terraforming theme is better too, esp the 3 end conditions raised cooperatively that impact each other. AN whips around, but felt lonely to me during play, a complaint I have about most euros. I’d rather play VP things that make other player choices matter more often to me? It’s not just that TfM has a shared board. Glen more and suburbia have solo boards but the common drafting and shared conditions make me care I’m playing with people more. So I think the design of AK is amazing, but I want to pare it down more and add interactivity, not play it a lot more. Too long for what it is, scoring not competitive enough feeling for weight, too solo focused even for a euro. I don’t like the trend AWAY from interaction in strategic games myself. Would love to see a video about that trend Vs old euros from you.
I appreciate you sharing your thoughts. In a game like this, are you really looking for player interaction? There are games in which I want lots of interaction and reasons to pay attention to other players, but this is a game when I'm entranced by what I'm working on--I don't want other players messing with me, and I don't want to mess with them.
@@jameystegmaier i dont want take that mechanisms and appreciate the friendly options, but i didnt feel like the games loose milestones and worker placement gave me much incentive to even care about what others were doing the vast majority of time, and endgame is more a fuzzy high score points race than a shared condition, which i think leads to a less satisfying or exciting feeling as the game ended. Everyone in the group agreed its clever, but drags a bit and is too solitaire for us, but we "appreciate it". When i play boardgames in person, i want it to be more interactive than this, yes. for sure. even euros. This is why i gave examples/comparisons to glen more and terraforming mars and suburbia, which i think are also very vp driven euros with little direct screw you driving the bulk of game (and id like to see TfM with the friendly option of AN tbh vs meteor strikes etc). and 2 of those 3 use a solo board you build alone, so a shared board isnt necessary to add tension necessarily. But i think those have more impactful card/tile drafting to both build or break up combos a bit than the snapping allows in AN, the shared endgame conditions of tfm tracks and glen more comparing who has most/smallest areas for scoring make the endgame jockeying involve others alot vs a solo high score race challenge. i felt the association milestones a bit loose, compared to many euros where end of round area/set majority scoring has me looking around table more down to the wire, but this IS the area where the interaction exists in AN, I just felt it wasnt too hard to find a plan B within 1 conservation point of other choice there? DIRECT interaction take that is NOT what i want in building games i totally agree, but something about snapping and worker placement felt like not enough incentives to me in a competitive game either. Felt more like something id play on a tablet quickly and enjoy more, but not great live for those solitaire reasons for my tastes? admittedly, I'm finding myself saying this about more and more vp point salad games, and think its a trend in general vs euros of old. This game played so fast it got back to me quickly, which is great, and turns so short its hard to even dwell on others turns as they are over fast. i learned a lot from it. but im more excited to see the refined games that use the action selection and delayed choice of endgame scoring for other things (those 2 mechanisms were awesome here, i agree) and streamline some of the experience to be shorter with a punchier endgame than wanting to play this alot myself. another (underrated) vp/build something game that is very "player interactive to me" while still building your own combos and fiefdoms: i LOVE winter kingdom for its stupid easy ruleset, but lots of blocking on board interaction while never destroying others work, but a clear sense of doing better on goals or getting there first driving your choices.
@@jamesabeleIn Ark Nova, I've found quite a bit of tension in the public sponsorship cards, and I think it's neat that you can add more of those cards for other players to consider. Terraforming Mars has too much take-that for me; when I play, I remove certain cards--honestly, in Euro games I don't want any direct screw-you elements (indirect is fine). I think Earth provides an Ark-Nova like experience in a much faster time (though with even less player interaction).
3 games i really like with solo player boards that i feel are a bit too solitaire too: Planet Unknown, Guilds of merchant explorers, cartographers. these are high score games mostly too, but those are shorter and less heavy than AN, AND the most/least competitive goals in PU DO drive choices. Would i like AN with some MOST/LEAST shared endgame goals like Suburbia and Wingspan have? probably.
@@jameystegmaier totally agreed in too much take that in TfM, AND it is a tad too long for me still too, but easy to toss out a few red cards. the friendly option IS an improvment. its all the other indirect but interactive stuff that i crave in euros. i can totally see public snapping of cards like sponsors being more key in games than i experienced in first play, great point. I still felt pretty lonely and cold playing though, for its length and crunchiness. im definitely a medium weight gamer, preferring elegance and simple turn structure and many small decisions, so the core action mechanism DID work for me alot, but the experience felt cold and lonely?
Hi Jamey, great video. I have played this solo and multi and am too enamoured by it. What are your thoughts on the sheer amount of cards and the luck factor of immediately getting/never getting the cards you need for your strategy?
I'm totally fine with it, as it encourages that you stay nimble, and it's easy to get lots and lots of cards--I go into it knowing that I'm never going to play some of those cards and that I need to stay flexible for the goals. There's so much agency otherwise that I think the quantity of the cards as the one unknown variable is worth it for the variability.
For your #8 Reason, Friendly Options.. I thought that effect was only available on solo play? I thought the same thing too until I looked it up in the manual.
When I play Wingspan next I am going to try and do the Ark Nova thing and at the start of round 3 (Wingpsan) it is *then* that you have to discard one of your 2 bonus cards you were dealt at the beginning.
@@jameystegmaier True enough. I guess the general rule might be to discard one card. Or you actually get dealt the two cards at the start of round three. Like a little Christmas present. In fact when I teach wingspan to new players it’s almost too much to have to deal with the bonus cards at the start anyway. is a lot to take in. Getting them in round three they would have some momentum with the gameAnd they would start to make a lot more sense given the tableau they have started to build in front of them. Anyway I’m going to give it a try! Thanks for the video.
I love to see your point of view about games. I haven't tried Ark Nova, but i am a bit morally conflicted. The Zoo theme pulls me back, even if it's a great game. You say that the designer made a great research about Zoos but does this game has any aproaches on the ethical dilemas about zoo's? If it does this may change my perception. I don't want to bring to the table a game about locking up animals. Thank you for your videos :)
I was conflicted about that as well, but I think the game does a really good job of focusing on conservation--it's essentially half the game. I think there's some information addressing your concern in the rulebook too (it's available on BoardGameGeek).
One specific way you might be able to get lots of conservation points is by releasing an animal back into the wild, which seems like a great nod to what zoos can accomplish when they are doing the job of actually caring for animals and ecology.
Point number 8 is actually incorrect. Those blue areas on cards are used only in the solo mode, since you can't interact with another player when there is no other player. Although you CAN choose to gain the rewards on the bottom right (appeal and possibly reputation and conservation points) BEFORE carrying out the other effects the animal provides. So if you play a venom animal that gives you 5 appeal and you are 4 appeal behind the person in front of you you could choose to gain the 5 appeal and then do the venom effect, meaning you won't affect any player (or the other way around so that you do affect them). These interactive effects all seem to be designed as a means of helping players catch up (they always target someone, or multiple people, that are ahead of you on one or more tracks). All of this said though I see no reason you couldn't house rule it so that you could choose the blue option if you so desire. Just FYI for point 6, you can't do a third action in the same spot. You can have at most 4 'workers' and you have to use 3 to do the one spot twice in one 'round'...so you only have 1 more worker and it requires at least 2 to do the action a third time.
@@septimustavi9352 It's on page 11 in an owl box in the latest rules you can find on the publisher's website. I think it became an official variant soon after the game was first released and they added it to later edition rules.
Ah, fair enough then and cheers. Thought I was going blind cos I couldn't find it, but it being a change made to later copies makes sense. You wouldn't happen to know of any other changes off hand would you?
@@ChadUrsoMcDaniel Thanks. It was really confusing. I've heard multiple reviews where they say you can play it like that, but when I told my wife that, she questioned it because we couldn't find it in the rulebook. We must have an older rule book in our copy.
My group are reglar heavy/euro gamers that love long games with lots of complexity. We played this for the first time last weekend and the gameplay was good but not great. We ran into a major issue with end of game scoring. After several hours of play 3/4 of players finished the game in negative points. We weren’t prepared for how truly terrible that would feel. It totally destroyed the experience for us and made this game an instant pass going forward. It felt insulting and like the designer was actively scorning the players that lost. It was a choice to have the scoring work this way and we feel it was a truly terrible choice. We didn’t care about losing the game but spending hours doing something to finish negative was a real bummer.
I can see where you're coming from, but it's easy to view the scoring from a glass-half-full angle: Instead of looking at the difference in scores, simply add together the scores of the two tracks.
@@goldintouch I would contend that it is the same game--it's just how you look at scoring. When I look at my Ark Nova games, it doesn't matter if my conservation and ticket tracks cross; rather, I look at how far I got on those tracks (and I'm happy for whoever is able to cross their tracks farther than anyone else).
I would forward that many in our hobby are huge game design fans and students of the craft. We love to decode the intentions and artistry in the choices that designers and publishers make. Why dice for this? What are the aesthetic and mechanical reason for a track that does that? What is the designer saying by having final scoring resolve this way? I also think that many of us enjoy a finely crafted set of rules and aren’t inherently comfortable or interested in modifying those design choices. Especially, on a first play. For instance, the way that money works in Scythe is (in my opinion) absolute genius. Making your score into a resource and allowing for MANY strategies to create and use that resource makes the game feel rewarding and that you’ve really earned your total at the end. I think you sent a clear message to your players with those choices that their efforts are valued and their ideas are valid. Ark Nova did the same for us. It told us that the zoo we spent a few hours building was valueless and we didn’t do a good job. I fully acknowledge I’m being (more than a little) pedantic but it was amazing to watch the mood at the table instantly change once we started final scoring.
Has anyone heard or seen an interview in English with Mathias? I would really like to learn more about his view on designing a super hit. Seems like a one time designer that basically comes from nowhere. No information on his BGG page. Pictures I could find was from an MtG event where one Mathias Wigge placed third. Could it be him? A pro Magic player. I listen to a German interview he gave on a podcast in January where he also announced the upcoming expansion Aquarius. There is also a report on German TV with him which I was not allowed to watch. Other than that, not so much information.
I thought it was a bit silly for them to have these great looking tiles for the enclosures, and for the pavilions and kiosks they put on... stark icons... 🙄
@@jameystegmaier yes, but they could have made it coalesce with the rest of the art and still stand out, in my opinion. Just makes the park feel incomplete.
I think it's pretty different than Terraforming Mars, as such a core feature of that game is how players are terraforming/impacting the same space (Mars) together--there's none of that in Ark Nova (nor is there drafting or paying to keep cards in hand in Ark Nova). There are a number of games with big batches of cards that are have good integrations of theme and mechanisms--that's the main connection between these two.
Are you referring to the "luck" of certain cards appearing that you're hoping to see? I would put that in the category of variability, not luck, and the game gives you the choice to have agency over which cards you draw (if you choose to snap) or to blind draw. The game is so generous with card draws that I've always had a wealth of viable cards to play.
