Just tell your opponent you were merely denying them victory points. ;)
I was pleased to see that the rules accommodated scaling from two to five players. I am curious what its like at different player counts. I’d imagine three gets interesting or maybe four if one player is the sole Restorationist/Loyalist. The lonely player could get teamed up on. But, they would only need to not be in last place.
It’s interesting to think about but I haven’t had the opportunity to see it actually played. Hopefully tonight or tomorrow.
So I’ve played this game twice now. I’m really into it, but oh man is reading the rules, and explaining the game to new people torturous! I’d probably recommend it to people that have a core group they will be playing the game over and over with because I don’t know if I would have it in me to try and keep explaining how to play the game to people…
That being said, it’s exactly what I want out of a modern board game, and it gets semi-cooperative play right (unlike that horrid Archipelago game that a lot of people seem to be enamored with…) by having two different teams working on different types of objectives, and having a mix of VP that is awarded to team members and VP that goes to individuals. The decision of when to signal which side you’re on is a really interesting one I think, and in a 5 player game it can drive you nuts when well into the game one or two of the players still hasn’t taken any actions that would tip their hand about which side they’re on.
This thing is sooooo good. I’ve gotten a few more games in, and I’m pretty sure I’ve wrapped my head around what Martin Wallace is doing here (the rule book definitely needs a v2.0). It can be a tough game to learn (and teach!), but it all fits together so neatly, even with the various systems that intentionally break the rules. I love that the zombies, vampires, Cthulhu, Bismark, and Mi Go cards are in there!
A big part of the learning curve is understand the asymmetry of being an invulnerable loyalist or a frail restorationist. I feel its balanced enough for how the loyalists get all the best Lovecraftian toys – at least they benefit most from all the Lovecraftian toys – but the restorationists have an easier time grabbing permanent victory points with the assassinations. My initial concern was that it might be skewed towards loyalists, but I think aggressively violent restorationists are the way to go. This is, after all, a revolution. Grab those infernal machines, recruit those Irish thugs, and snag a hired assassin or two for extra bombs in your deck. Then agent up and wreck havoc. You can end the game quickly by killing the monsters in, say, less secure cities like Cairo, Constantinople, and Madrid while everyone else is trading control of London, Paris, and Berlin. Restorationists can count on three assassinations before they go mad. You draw a sanity token after each assassination, and the game ends – you don’t, however, lose! – when you draw a third mad token. There’s a 16/8 mad/sane split, so an aggressive restorationist pretty much controls the game clock. Once you get that second token, you’re sitting on the “game over” switch. The loyalists don’t have any such luxury.
I’ve also played a few two-player games, and I think it works as well as A Few Acres of Snow. It loses the weird jockeying for position you have to do with 3+ players given the scoring system, but it still totally holds up as a kind of focused arms race. And I think it’s a short game. At least it can be. I love how much control players have over when and whether the game ends.
By the way, this is a terrible thread title! “Anarchy in R’lyeh”? The game takes place entirely in Victorian Europe, with visits to Pluto if you use the Mi Go card to put some of your agents brains in a jar and fly them there.
I wasn’t able to get this played yet and now I’m even more anxious.
It couldn’t be anarchy in the UK people would think its a game about the sex pistols ;) maybe when Cthulhu shows up he drags R’lyeh with him. Oh don’t forget about, “He who Presides in the New World” so there is at least one out of Europe / North Africa location. Although any Mythos scholar will tell you R’lyeh is in the pacific so you got me there ;)
I’m really glad that it seems to have held up for you. Even if it doesn’t get played a lot in the long term, If I get the play you seem to have gotten i’ll be satisfied.
I haven’t gotten the game in actual play but I have read through the rules and done some digging through FAQ threads and such. I don’t think it’s that complex at all. The actions seem few and pretty basic. It seems to be more of Wallace’s talent for cramming a lot of consequences into a few simple actions. Now, the rules are a little wonky and vague in some areas. Tom is spot on when he said that it could use a rewrite but he’s also linked to a good resource on Board Game Geek where a lot of questions have been answered.
I think people who think deeply and take very measured moves will be satisfied as well as people who approach it more casually and use lighter strategies. I will of course defer to those that have actually played but I am hoping to expose this to players that I don’t play Andean Abyss, a deeply strategic game, with.
I wouldn’t recommend it to a group who normally plays Days of Wonder games, for instance. It’s about as hardcore as A Few Acres of Snow. And while you don’t have to be super analytical, it does throw a lot of choice at you at any give time. The actions are simple, but the breadth of choices is wide.
But if you’re self-identifying as a Cthulhu/Victorian enthusiast, you really don’t have any choice. You must play this game. The trick is getting someone who’s good at teaching games to understand it fully. More so than a lot of games, I can see this going terribly south with a group of people fumbling through a first poorly-taught game. :(
You just hit on another thing I love about the game, and something you don’t see in enough strategy games - having the end point be a variable that a player needs to consider strategically.
Yes. It’s cute. Even at three players it is possible to be all on the same side. You still compete for individual achievement and if all players are on the same side the rule about team elimination doesn’t apply.
Consider too the dynamics of a four player game. You could have three players of one faction and a single player of the other faction. The rule for scoring is that whoever is in last place sinks everyone on his team; that faction flat-out loses the game. So all the lone player has to do to win is not come in last place. I think this might be the ideal situation for keeping your identity close to your vest.
Isn’t that a factor of the shipping you specified when you ordered it? Or is that not what you’re asking?
If you mean the turnaround time from placing an order, I can’t say for sure, but I know they were having some issues with the order fulfillment company they were using. A lot of folks were grumbling about not getting the game earlier. I suspect that might all be ironed out by now.
I don’t recall specifying anything about shipping method when placing the order, it was just a flat $10 above the price of the game. I’m not worried or anything; I just ordered it on the 31st and was curious about how long I should expect it to take before it arrives.
If you don’t want to order it direct, and you’re in the USA, I did get an email the other day that coolstuffinc.com has it in stock now. Still at full price ($80), but if you add a bit to your order you can get free shipping…
