I thought Tom would comment how every option feels like it gives you lots of stuff. Unless you simply take some resources, everything you do allows you to move, get stuff and trigger combo stuff, etc. Each option feels like a great option. I really liked this game!
Really good game. One of my favourites of the year. Lot of possibilites and depth. Fun tatical wheel & great engine building. Grows on you the more you play. Nice 3d flavor structures. Lots of variety in setup. Loved it.
One of my favorite games from last year, but I agree with Tom's negatives. The board is busy (but you get used to it), the moving up the road/ castle/cathedral is just moving up on tracks (but I enjoy that nonetheless) and yes the 3d models are not necessary and can get in the way (but I love them).
I don’t understand why people say a game has no theme. The only games that don’t have a theme to me are abstract games. Granted, the theme is more of a setting in this case. Perhaps we should start adding setting to reviews. The setting (theme) in this game is very interesting and I have added Prague to my list of places I want to visit.
If you do a very good job visually presenting a historical city and have mechanics that all relate to the business of that city, people will say the game is unthematic. When people say "theme" they really mean it has to have magic or superheroes.
Themes and settings are distinct. By theme, what is typically meant is how much does the setting determine the specifics of the puzzle. By not having a theme (note, distinct from unthematic), it is meant that the puzzle itself could easily be translated to a different one with minimal changes. Something can have a cool setting but not be thematic.
@@KissellMissile I genuinely believe all games can have their setting changed to something else. Mariposas could be about any journey and return, but it happens to be about butterfly migration. And when I play it I think about butterflies because of the mechanics. So it's a good theme. Evolution could be about dueling industrialists building competing machines, but is a thematic game about evolution. Fort is praised as a thematic card game (it is) even though it's literally a reskin of an old game. This is just me glancing at one of my shelves.
I (used to) sit through a dozen or more game pitches a year, plus interact with designers, so I feel I know a thing or two about the process. In general, I would say the "Euro" sensibility is to focus on the puzzle and give the game a setting that informs the game a little to a moderate amount. These games the setting could be changed with little modification. The question is not can you change the theme, but how many gymnastics would you have to go through to do so. Evolution would require a great deal of backstory (see Dungeon Petz) to inform the game play. Fort got praised for a fun setting, not necessarily being thematic. The confusion comes from using terms carelessly.
Truly "thematic" games tend towards simulation, so you can not easily change the setting. This is the impulse of American designs. The settings in conflict games, war games, train games, and adventure games dictate design decisions. But yes, Euro games will always have a tenuous relationship with setting, which is why a setting/theme terminological distinction is helpful.
I think the comment Tom's referring to is the reddit thread "Praga is the Euroest Euro that ever Euroed". I'm honestly put off a bit by the board, and I don't mean the busyness but the color saturation (I love the very busy Teotihuacan board for reference). It's like the person who designed the new Castles of Burgundy board designed this just after, and forgot to lower the color saturation from 97%. Sure, you might "get used to it", but that's not setting the bar very high, imo.
This was my favorite game from last year. You can have some truly spectacular combo turns in this game: build a building, get a window to gain a new turn, build another building, complete a region and score it... so much fun. I do hate the ugly, busy board, though.
I agree with most of Tom's opinion, I will rate it higher than him though. It's definitely a huge point salad game (like many Feld games), and that can be a bit much for some. The theme is definitely there, and it has some really clever mechanisms.
This game plays quite nicely solo - you get to do your AP without anyone bothering you. It feels great when you string a couple of combos together. Earth game I try to go in with a particular strategy (e.g. walls, cities or road) only to quickly deviate (and never make full use of my upgrades). I like it.
I have played this game twice and visited Prague once. The game is nice and eyes kind of adapts into it. (First time i saw it, it looked way too busy.) The theme is about building the city. (A bit like in computer games SimCity or Cities Skylines.) There is a lot going on the table and you cannot do everything you want. I like Euro games so I give it 4/5. One of the better games from last couple of years but not in my top 10.
I liked this game, but I was still a little disappointed in it, and I think it's because there's just a little too much going on. The adjacency bonuses and the Charles University track, in particular, feel like they were added to keep upgrades viable throughout the game, and the upgrade action is pretty fiddly as a result (and it's really easy to forget to advance the Charles U track). And the Special tiles mostly don't really "pop," though there are some exceptions. There's a lot of cool stuff going on, though, and the idea of letting the components help remind players of things will be with us for a while. Also, I'm predicting this will be far from the last game where we get to make our own double-layer player boards, since we love them so much. Overall, it's a very good game, but I was hoping for another Underwater Cities, and this doesn't quite reach those heights.
I agree the action wheel is a bit of a letdown. What I like about this game is that it feels very relaxing to play. There's not a lot of tension, you can just explore the mechanics and set yourself some goals. I don't think this is a true sandbox game, but it's as close I can really tolerate. I prefer tighter games but this is one I'll keep for the lackadaisical mood it invokes.
What didn't you like about the wheel? Tom only had praise for it, and certainly for me it seems like the perfect way to provide balance and interesting choices in one mechanic.
@@moocowp4970 I didn't think it was bad, but I just mainly take whatever is free. I don't really watch the wheel and anticipate what actions will be available. Almost all the actions are good and the game is very loose, so the order you take actions in doesn't matter as much as other games. Though I haven't played with the "advanced" sides of the tiles yet, hopefully those will make the wheel a more central part of the decision space.
Personally really like this game but the way the turns are counted sees very convoluted. I understand it now but first time I played the game just ended and I was like oh... Crap lol
I was also wondering why his positive is the replay value. I thought after the 2nd play that there should be more changes to make it feel more varied from game to game. For me the mechanics are ~9 and the replay value is at 4-5.
Was really looking forward to this game. Then I played it. It doesn’t feel completed to me, if that makes sense. Was pretty let down by the experience, tbh.
