Madison Board Gamers Session Report,
November 13, 2002
written by Everett E. Proctor

Games Played:
Fightball, Samarkand, Wallenstein, Citadels

Players:
Bill, Ben, Todd, Everett, Mike, and Tim

I received my game order from Boulder Games this week, so I was really looking forward to game night this week. Unfortunately, I knew before hand that due to time consideration that I'd only get to play one of them (all three are 2-hour games: Wallenstein, Funkenschlag, and Die Handler). We ended up in the Plaza Room again, but at least this week there was no lecture going on next door to us.

Fightball: Bill, Everett

Bill and I were the first ones there, so time for a quick 2-player game. I had been carrying Fightball around since I bought it, about a month ago. I'm a sucker for any Cheap Ass game. And even though I usually don't think that their game-play is that good, they are usually worth their cost for the humor value. I was not expecting much from this one, especially considering that I'm not a big fan of real-time games. I got what I expected. The game is supposed to represent a fictional future sport (which is very similar to basketball). Before play begins, you use cards to lay out a field. The field has three different zones: red, blue, and green. Then each player takes their own deck, representing their team, and starts playing their cards. You take the top card of either your deck or discard pile and then play it to either the field or to the discard pile. As soon as someone plays all of their cards, that quarter is over and you add up your points. Your cards represent your players, the ball, your shot, and your plays. The first type of card that can be played to any spot on the field has to be a player. Then in order for it to be worth points, you need to also have a ball and a shot. Each card is worth a certain value, depending on which zone it was played, and if the total value of your cards is 10 or more (minus any blockers your opponent played on the pile) you score: 2 points in red or blue zone, 3 points in the green zone. High score after 4 quarters win. Neither Bill nor myself liked this game enough to continue after the first round. I would play it again, but only if someone else really wanted to.

Score: Everett 18, Bill 7

Ratings: Everett 4, Bill 2

Samarkand: Bill, Todd, Everett

Todd had arrived, but we wanted to wait for at least another person to arrive before we started any of the meatier games, so Samarkand was the only game we had on hand that would be a quick 3-player game. I was the only one who had played before, so I did a quick run-down on the rules for Todd and Bill. Despite having not heard the quasi hand-limit rule (discard down to 12 cards when the draw deck runs out), Bill was the shrewdest trader and won a close game (I would have won on my next turn).

Score: Bill $600, Everett $385, Todd $235

Ratings: Bill 7, Todd 7, Everett 5

Wallenstein: Bill, Ben, Todd, Everett, and Tim

Wallenstein ended up being the new game from my order that we played tonight. In these session reports, I try to summarize the game mechanics for the games that are new to our group. However, there is just too much to Wallenstein to do this justice, so if you are interested in the mechanics of this game, I suggest you take a look at the rules at BoardgameGeek. It feels like a cross between a german-style game (like El Grande) and and american-style game (like Risk). In this respect, it is similar to one of my favorite games: Vinci. However, there is much more to consider in Wallenstein than in Vinci. In Wallenstein, not only do you get victory points for the provinces you control, but also for buildings you have, and for having the most of each type of building in each large region. There is also a lot more that you need to keep track of in Wallenstein: you need to tax provinces to get gold to buy troops or buildings, you need to harvest grain to feed you provinces, and you need to watch out for peasant revolts. Wallenstein also has a unique randomizing mechanic. During a battle, all troops in the fight are dropped into a Dice Tower. This Dice Tower has ledges inside it that will catch some of the troops, but let the rest of the troops drop out of the bottom. Whoever has the most troops drop out of the base of the tower wins. This game got a very high rating from everyone, except from Bill. In fact, my rating for this game may go up after I've played it a few more times. It definitely has top ten list potential.
Bill did not like this game at all. He said that it was just like Risk, but with more randomness. He did not like how the dice tower worked. Also, Bill said that he prefers wargames that include diplomacy, so that you can make alliances and coordinate your attacks.
We did miss one rule: when you tax a province (for gold or grain) and there is already a revolt marker in that province, there is immediately an automatic revolt in that province. This would have happened a couple of times in our game, but I don't really think that it changed too much.

Scores: Everett 47, Todd 42, Ben 37, Bill 30, Tim 21

Ratings: Everett 8, Todd 8, Ben 8, Tim 7.7, Bill 1

Citadels: Bill, Ben, Todd, Everett, Mike, 1/2 Tim

We had 6 players, so Citadels was chosen as it's one of the few games that handles 6 players nicely and doesn't take forever. Tim was the only person who had never played before, and due to a cell phone call in the middle of the game, he disappeared before he ever played a single building. Ben reached 8 buildings first, but Todd won with his Dragon's Gate. (Aside: I have played Ohne Furcht und Adel so many times, that I still call the character cards by their german names.)

Scores: Todd 31, Ben 29, Bill 23, Everett 23, Mike 20, Tim 0

Ratings: Everett 9, Mike 8, Todd 7, Ben 7, Bill 6, Tim 3