Got Brass Birmingham on sale and owned it a year before tabling it. Instant top 10 game for me. Love the historical context for everything, the art, the different avenues to points, etc. and the games usually end up being quite close. Played it 5 times so far and three games were decided by three points or less.
As primarily a 2p gamer, I think both of these are great. I can see how they are probably better at 3p/4p, but they're still great at 2p. My research made me think Birmingham would be better, but we ended up preferring Lancashire. The extra stuff in Birmingham is mostly bloat that doesn't add as much meaningful variability as it looks like it would. Lancashire's port tiles and Distant Market make it more interesting & thinky than Birmingham, IMO.
I played Birmingham first and loved it but preferred Lancashire as I was glad to have the restriction of needing beer all the time removed. Beer always felt in short supply in my group and not being able to finish my plans because there wasn't a beer barrel around was not as satisfying.
We had a similar beer shortage in my group until someone laid down all their breweries (getting crazy looks) and flipped them all and crushed us in points. Now beer is rarely short. Seriously huge amount of points available flipping your breweries.
I also played Birmingham first and loved it---so much so that we eventually tried Lancashire, and we instantly preferred it over Birmingham. Lancashire's tightness, port tiles & Distant Market just make selling more interesting. The beer in Birmingham sounds cool, but ends up being more of a routine, going-through-the-motions requirement. Most of the "extra" stuff in Birmingham just feels like bloat that doesn't really add any meaningful variability. Before I tried Lancashire I was worried it wouldn't be as interesting, but I actually found it to be more interesting and "thinky" than Birmingham.
@@ModernPlague Exactly this experience for me also. Both great games but the updated original game in Lancashire is the better game IMO. Beer is too important for too many actions is the problem.
I own both and I prefer Lancashire just a little bit more as it plays better with 4 people. However, in a 3 player game I’d choose Birmingham. Brass is my favorite game of all time and I’d never refuse to play it.
I agree with all, except the decision to get rid of Lancashire and keep only one. You can always get a bigger home or lose a kid! Seriously, I agree with everything there. Both of the kids that I have met (however briefly) are lovely, On another note - Brass is set up as a historical simulation, and that affects the variability just as you said, although as you said, it's not a deal breaker. I wonder what the potential is for adding variability through expansion "maps," say to capture industrialization in other nations/regions (USA, Germany). It's easier to add maps if the differentiating game is more abstract (Power Grid, Age of Steam) than for the more historically accurate games (Brass). Still... Wallace is a genius, and I think he's capable. Whether there is a market for other boards/maps is another question.
I wanted to own one of the two without a chance to try them before. I decided Lancashire after watching a lot of videos. It looked cleaner/tighter which I usually enjoy. Unfortunately I have not had the chance to table it yet!
@@aminzarei8078 In Birmingham, you always go for the BIC strategy and that's it. This is the meta and once all players knows about it, it is less of a fun game.
I think a good analogy for the "low variability, but still having to pivot/account for what the other player(s) is doing" (paraphrasing of course) is Chess (or any great abstract, like Go). Chess will always have relatively low variability re. openings, mid game, and late game, and very much embedded strategies for each phase; however, it nonetheless requires constantly reacting/accounting for and/or predicting what the opponent is doing/will do. There are no "player powers" or "different maps" or "randomized event deck" etc. in most abstract games, but they can still be great game play experiences. Not saying Brass is an abstract game, of course, just analogizing.
It is common that Lancashire fans represent the game as a chess like boardgame. But Chess is chess There is absolutely no luck in chess And no matter how bad your situation is, you can almost always fix your mistakes and win a chess game, if you are wise enough. On the other hand there is tons of luck in Lancashire and its too tight that if you make mistakes you already know that there is no hope for a win.
I love both of these games but struggle to get them to the table. Every experience is so enjoyable for me but most of the people I play games with either don't like the heavy experience or the time commitment. Even if I only get them to the table once in a year, the experience is so good that I see both games staying in my collection for a the foreseeable future. If I had to pick one to keep it would be Birmingham and for the same reasons you listed. Thanks for your opinions!
Lancashire on the reverse side of the board is way better for 2 players than Birmingham. The market is shorter (more options for overbuilding when no resources), the board is tighter and the race for key spots more fierce ;).
The rule book is short - but I read it through 5 times and watched several videos before I felt comfortable to teach this to my game group. Learning this game was grueling! Every rule has an exception - or 2 - or 3! It drives me nuts, I compensated by making 3x5 cards noting all the intricate exceptions. 😢 BUT, in the end, this game is a lot of fun. I've played through it now just 5 times and am looking forward to more plays. It isn't my #1 game, but I totally get that it is currently #1 on BGG.
Τhe mere fact that in Birmingham you don't get to convert money into points is indicative of the main difference of the two games and why Birmingham is more popular. Because it's more generous and lenient, it gives you so much more money and flexibility that they felt they had to subtract the money points because it would have been absurd. And that's a trend we've been seeing for a quite a few years. The more the industry grows the more and more people get into the hobby and, as such, the average IQ drops so games have to be watered down a bit in complexity if they are to be successful in this new era. We've seen it with Caverna over Agricola, Gaia Project over Terra Mystica, Dune uprising over original Imperium etc...
Interesting that you namedropped Anno and not Tinners Trail. Since I believe TT is more similar to brass? Never got TT myself because it looked like Brass junior though so its only an assumption.
For me it was really fun to play, and I see my liking would increase with further plays. However it seems like it has really minute rules that could have been streamlined or more clearly delineated graphically (at the expense of some historical accuracy that I know the designer really likes).
My only reason for picking Birmingham over Lancashire is because I do live in Birmingham and I've been to most of those locations 😊. By any chance have you watched Peaky Blinders? It's base in Birmingham, it's worth a watch
I didn't find the rules of the game "easy"! Maybe if you'd played the game often enough the rules seem to be "easy". But when you play Brass Birmingham for the first time it seems to be complicated, complex and not very easy to lern!
I picked up Brass Birmingham about a week ago and it has skyrocketed on my list of personal favorite games. I need to deluxify my retail copy with the better bits and metal coins because it is here to stay.
My upgrade of Brass was to use copper metal cubes and black volcanic cubes for the coal. That way they fit but still look/feel premium. I LOVE Brass Birmingham, but its soo hard to get to the table. I have Lancashire but have never played it, maybe its time to let go.
I own both and like them a lot but my friends don't like them so I rarely get to play them 😢 I agree on the distant market being strangely random and it can be house ruled out.
I read your comment before I got to that part in the video and I thought you were just pointing out that the art isn't as cute and vibrant as the art style in Everdell. 😂
Brass is the largest disappointment I have ever played. I rate it 5 out of 10. I feel it creates too much limitation without good reason. I'd probably like the game more if there was no card system at all and no hard reset / transition between ship and rail ages. These are points of complexity that for me seem badly designed. No matter how many times I hear why people enjoy the game - the fun conceptually just doesn't click (unlike many top games where I may not enjoy it, but understand why they are liked). There are two alternative games that I'd point anyone to for giving the kind of board interaction found in Brass in a better form. Hansa Tuetanica as one that is more streamlined and where you can really focus on both your own strategy and what other players are doing with clear goals you are able to achieve (but at what cost?). Food Chain Magnate as one where the multiple strategic paths to victory are so much more rewarding instead of the transactional nature in Brass. I have a friend who just got Anno and will get a play in of it soon. I'm hoping I feel better about it.
Hansa and Food Chain are perfect information games with no randomness (input or output) if I'm not mistaken. Some people (like me) like having hidden information which enables mind games (trying to deduce your opponent's plans with imperfect knowledge). In Brass for example you don't see what cards your opponent is saving in their hand. If players start to memorize the discarded cards I'd play with a variant where the cards are discarded face-down whenever a non-build action is taken.
@@lastburning But the hand randomness is 4 out of 5 times isn't even a hinderance - it's just a way of adding an occasional barrier to a plan. Ultimately, just an added complexity without a positive aspect. The point is that it should just be about guessing the player's intent on what to block or exploit next. The randomness should be in this style of game only about how players decide to play - the table meta. Those two other games are better at doing that IMO. If you want card based goals, games there are many other titles that have good end game objective cards to guess at during play. Blood Rage is the first that comes to mind.
@@johnathanrhoades7751 Hansa Tuetanica is one of those that would benefit from updated production quality just as Brass got. I feel that's the main thing holding it back
