Arcs ►►► What did we think? 

The leaders and lore give the game so much replay-ability. One of my favorite parts of the game

I’m obsessed with Arcs currently. Love it! Agree it’s not for everyone.

Thank you for being upfront about it. ❤ I backed this; it's what I expected. I don't think I've seen as many people who haven't played a game feel the need to have strong opinions/inflate on BGG in a small while, as this. And I think that does a disservice, to which this upfront impression helps combat and helps inform buying preferences. So again, thanks.

Really good review thanks. I would hate this game but I can appreciate the design. But I'd still willing to try this over Root or Oath.

Love this game a whole lot!! But my goodness. If you are conflict averse, risk averse, luck averse, like being in full control, don’t like the luck of trick taking…you may not like this game. It has blown my mind personally.

If root is for 5% of boardgamer, this is open up for 40-50% of people i reckon. I enjoy ARCS because every games makes you better player and there is deepth and replayability with simplicity. The game is smooth! This game is about creating!

Arcs has a hold of my entire brain right now. No other board games exist. Only Arcs.

I was hooked after the first game; really looking forward to getting at the campaign (not ready for it yet lol)

We fired our first play through this past weekend. We played without leaders and despite having what we deemed was a major flaw in the game on our first try - it is on the 'play again' list for sure. Our 4 player group (We'll call them D, T, J and JR) had no problem with conflict games, as a matter of fact, the over aggressiveness between 2 players caused what we saw as an issue. Conflict started at the end of Chapter 1. By Player D - a small ship on ship skirmish and worth noting, Player J played the Vox card that cause everyone to Outrage one resource - Materials was chosen (taking away building). Chapter 2, player T decided he was going for warlord. During Chapter 1 and 2, he got some Vox and council cards that let his put down extra ships - so he went aggressive on Player D with early Chapter 2 ship on ship combat to build up his Trophies and in the end of Chapter 2, destroyed one of Player D's cities. Player T easily won Warlord. Player J was focused at the other end of the board doing some Relic and Psionic stuff. Player JR was consolidating ships, had a couple of trophies for destroying ships, but was looking at securing more resources for next chapter Tycoon scoring. At the before last turn of the chapter 2. Player T had about 12 ships (3-4 damaged) on the board, 2 cities, 2 space ports. Player D had 4 ships (2 damaged), 1 city and 1 space port (on the same planet) Player J had 5 Ships, 3 cities and 1 spaceport (and had already cornered the Relic market to score that round). Player JR had 10 ships, 2 cities, 1 spaceport Player T was first player end of Chapter 2 and going into Chapter 3 Looking at the board, it was all obvious that Player T or JR, which would both play before Player D. Were in a position to destroy Player D's last city and\or starport. They both had a weaspons resource on hand and a fresh draw which very likely had a card that gave them access to Moving. We all discussed and without saying as much, since this was our first play through, there was a bit of a truce done so that Player D is not eliminated. Then as we were looking at Player D's options to optimize - the cards he drew really made it impossible to ever be able to catch up on the board. The council and vox draws were not really helpful for him to look at. He did not have a build card in his hand on Chapter 3... He did have one material, but couldn't use it because of outrage from chapter 1. His remaining city produced weapons, which with his half destroyed 4 ship fleet, is barely worth it even to steal. By end of chapter 3, Player T, J and JR were into bonus points since they all had 3 cities down, and Player D still only had 1 city. T, J and JR each split one 1st place so they all scored the points +2. At the very very best, Player D could try to claim an Ambition - which he could not likely win, but he would slow down one of the other 3 players. Which is effectively being reduced to a kingmaker role in the game. Not that fun. So, as mentioned, this sounds like it was a bit a of wild card game. We'll give it another go. But it really showed the biggest flaw in the lack of a rubber band mechanism - it really boils down to the cards your draw. In order to get an taxation OR combat economy going - he needed to build in Chapter 3 and he had 0 way of doing this (1st issue is he had no control over a planet with an open space, 2nd issue was no card he had had the build action, materials were outraged for everyone. His only chance was hoping someone would play a construction card he could clone late in the round once he would have moved his 2 remaining full ships into an empty system - which, well, didn't come to fruition).

Tactics is basically “your opponent cant know your next step if you dont know your next step either”

How fitting he looks like Emanuel Zorg while reviewing a space game

Looking forward to my copy of Arcs. Love Oath and can’t wait for this!

I love it. I can totally attest to the don't play if you don't like mean games thing though lol. I was playing with my family and my mom was about to win the game if she was able to complete the chapter with the keeper ambition. I had one last aggression card and Hail Mary'ed her with raid dice and stole her relics at the last minute thus winning keeper and stealing her victory. She was so mad at me. Like I've never seen her get mad at me and she was like this close to flipping a board game for the first time in her life. lol She doesn't want to play me anymore though there's totally a part of her that wants to play for vengeance but is like no you're too smart you'll win! lol I introduced my brother to it today and he got dominated by only scoring like 3-4 power. But he said he liked it. And definitely thought it was interesting. So yeah it's a good game. It will divide people but good games generally do. And generally speaking Cole Wehrle games tend to do that. You either LOVE his games or really hate them.

Vicious is the right word!

Haaa another great review for Arcs 👍can’t wait to get it excited😊

Another Cole Wehrle design

Is this the type of game that everyone at the table needs to have played a bunch and know what they’re doing for it to be fun?

Does it work at 2 players? There are some people who think it doesn’t. Hope they are just not usual 2 player gamers. Thanks!

I think I have this solidly in "love to play somebody else's copy"

How many times does he run his fingers though his hair ? 😂 jj good video!

To me, after demoing once at GenCon, it reminds me of Dune Imperium. COMPLETELY DIFFERENT game, but has the similarity of a medium Euro with simplified combat making it slightly heavier.

Playing with Leader cards and Lore cards is overrated. The base game without it gives plenty for people to think about for a dozen games, and the games will be faster and tighter. I have seen many a new player throw their game away trying to get value from Gate Ports or fumbled with Feastbringer. Leave those cards in the box. And for the love of god steer clear of the L&L expansion product. It's chock full of honeypot trap cards for new players.

Hard pass from me. I think there’s a ton of hype for this one.

While I don’t disagree that Arcs “isn’t for everybody”, I have a really hard time grasping why can’t it be. I really don’t understand people who are conflict averse in games - when most games and even sports have been modeled after conflict for millennia. Suddenly we can’t handle it anymore? Why? Also not on board with people who treat depth as a flaw. Games are expensive and, from a certain point of view, super wasteful; and now you’re telling me it’s a problem that it will take you a few tries to get good at a game? Feels like being coddled, to me. You want to be good at the game immediately, without practice, and you want it to not be mean to you if you lose. Are we in kindergarten?

is this a paid review? because you'd be the first non paid reviewer to say its a very good game

Arcs. What do we think?