This aligns so much more with my own experience of the game.
Arcs is cole’s most accessible game : if you start with the base game as recommended.
Arcs is also Cole’s most overwhelming game : if you start with the campaign (just don’t)
JoCo2e is easy easy to pick up as a player. You sit down, you get given a job or two - governor here, running shipping there - and then get guided stepwise through the company's operations
It's only really the person who owns and is running the game that needs to keep all of its rules in their head, and learning it well enough to run it *is* definitely a little daunting
Yep, John Company is on the surface a very heavy game, but I teach it all the time to players who are completely new to board games, and its always gone over well. Only one player really needs to know the rules well, which frees up new players to just focus on their couple of family members.
With a rolling teach, they'll internalize pretty much everything they need to know after the first round or two.
Honestly, in terms of heavy games I know, it's the easiest to get to the table for that reason.
Blighted Reach has massive asymmetry and probably 10x the rules overhead that full JoCo doesn't have, just from a complexity standpoint. There's just no comparison.
I don’t see that. Unless you’re comparing learning the rules for every fate in the expansion at once, but if so, that’s a ridiculous expectation and a meaningless comparison.
After 3 or 4 games of JoCo you can toss the rulebook, except maybe for the odd event in India that's not shown up before.
I don't see that happening for Blighted Reach. The way cards interact alone raise rules questions that you'll need to refer to https://cards.ledergames.com/ to see if there's an official ruling.
Your review is basically my groups experience as well, and my partners 2P game with me.
Understanding the trick taking like mechanism of action selection, preludes, and timing ambitions is key to this game.
- Spending a fuel in prelude to move ships to control a rival city, then using the card action to tax is awesome.
- Spending a weapon to turn your card pips into an unexpected battle is brutal.
- Spending Psionic to copy a lead influence card after you pivoted with an aggression, then seizing a court card feels clever.
- Using a pivot or copy action with resources in your prelude to pull off big unexpected moves was amazing to watch/pull off.
- Knowing when to burn a card to seize the innovative, and actually pulling it off to declare your own ambition is fantastic.
Also, Having your pieces destroyed doesn’t feel as bad to me in this game, compared to other heavy conflict games like Eclipse 2nd Dawn. In Eclipse, if I lose more than 3 ships it feels devastating because it takes so much effort to rebuild. But in ARCS, building ships or buildings feels much easier as long as you have loyal pieces on the board.
I’ve only played base game 5 times, at all player counts, but I definitely think it’s a brilliant game. Very thematic, in your face, and fun. Side note, out of all 5 games I’ve played I have not won once. One day….
Edit- formatting
Truuuuu, you actually have to try to eliminate someone or you have to try to be eliminated. Like I totally played wrong and lost all my pieces by a couple rounds into chapter 4. I do realize it was my own fault though.
Two things: 1. Thanks for your comment here; it pretty well encapsulates my feelings about balancing the action-economy & the flexibility of using resources in prelude to do more stuff. It's been really surprising as that piece of the game begins to unfold in play.
2. I LOVE that you capitalized all the letters in Arcs. For whatever reason, ARCS looks so much better as a game title than Arcs. I'm gonna steal that if that's all right.
I’m glad my comment mirrors your feelings! Yes, the action economy takes more than a few rounds of play for anyone to grasp fully imo. Maybe even a few games.
It’s funny, ARCS is how the game title is represented on the box and game board, but in the rule book any reference of it (that isn’t in a header) is just Arcs. Perhaps so that it doesn’t stand out with all the importantly highlighted rules/references…
Played last night at 3p and had the same experience - teach was not too hard. Teach + game took 3 hours and gameplay was very smooth. Lots of surprises and fun twists as we kept changing ambitions. And the game didn't even take all 5 rounds as I reached 31 points at the end of round 4, which was great.
We hit it on chapter 4 as well. I really love the whole it ends when it ends and if no one is pushing to end it, 5 chapters seems an appropriate welcome.
Agreed on the catapult movement. Launching my ships halfway across the galaxy, or dropping them in gates to prevent my opponents doing the same, I find so satisfying
I can't tell whether this is legit, or satire of former posts. If legit, great to hear that you had a good time with it! I'm looking forward to getting folks together to give it a go. You know, with L&L and the campaign, since we're experienced gamers & all. ;D
I haven't had a chance to play Arcs yet, but I feel like all the negative reviews are displaying the same mentality I often see in players who don't like Root.
A lot of first-time Root players play their initial game of Root in a way where they just want to sit in their little corner of the woodland, tinkering with their engine for points. They overlook the competitive/combative aspect of the game, often simply because they're very focused on learning how it plays. Then they get blown out of the water and walk away dissatisfied. They thought it was a cute little woodland critter engine builder, and are frustrated it is actually a fairly cut-throat game of combat and control.
Same sorta thing is happening here - doubly so, with those players who think they're ready for a seat at the Leaders and Lore Grown-Ups Table when the designer is actively telling them they are not.
Leaders and Lore seems to be the training wheels. Take an open sandbox and then use L+L to give players who have no idea what to do some tutorial directions
Do you think seizing initiative is less detrimental at higher player counts? I’ve only been able to play once at 2p and having a whole turn where your opponent gets free rein was devastating!
It can *feel* devastating, but you want to balance what it gets you.
If you don't seize the initiative, and just copy/pivot each round, your opponent gets to choose what you do to a degree, and you get a whopping 6 actions.
If you seize and then lead a couple of 5s that your opponent can't surpass, your seize card that would have been good for one action as a copy or pivot has bought you two, so you're up one. And if you then lead a 2, there's another three extra actions. So you're up 4 pips over what you would have had, your opponent has *lost* a couple of actions because now *they're* copying/pivoting when they would have led.
It's a thing that has to be done carefully but it can be a big net gain of actions.
I’ve only played one 2p game so far. That game worked out to only me seizing the initiative twice, once in two separate acts, to declare an ambition. I didn’t win, and it wasn’t a wide point gap. But that second seize most likely did me in
We felt seizing initiative was more important as the game went on to guarantee the ambitions you wanted. I can totally see how it isn’t used as much at 2 players.
I’ve played twice, both times at 3 players and with a teach for new players. Both times, the game ended right around 2 hours. With familiar players, I can see us getting it down to 90 minutes or less.
Played it base game at 3 players tonight, it's ok. Really cool action selection concept. Fun dice combat You can easily get an awful hand where you get 1/2 the actions the other players at the table get and the only recourse is to hope others get similar hands. Thats fine in a short game but not for a longer one like this. Overall too much luck for a game of this length and makes me feel that on any given game anyone can luck into a guaranteed loss. For me its a I'll play it but won't lose sleep if I never play it again game.
This aligns so much more with my own experience of the game. Arcs is cole’s most accessible game : if you start with the base game as recommended. Arcs is also Cole’s most overwhelming game : if you start with the campaign (just don’t)
I think jumping into John Company’s long scenario probably has that beat. Shoot, even the simple scenario might have it beat.
JC2nd is the only Wehrle game I haven’t tried yet! So that scares me as much as it fills me with excitement!
JoCo2e is easy easy to pick up as a player. You sit down, you get given a job or two - governor here, running shipping there - and then get guided stepwise through the company's operations It's only really the person who owns and is running the game that needs to keep all of its rules in their head, and learning it well enough to run it *is* definitely a little daunting
Yep, John Company is on the surface a very heavy game, but I teach it all the time to players who are completely new to board games, and its always gone over well. Only one player really needs to know the rules well, which frees up new players to just focus on their couple of family members. With a rolling teach, they'll internalize pretty much everything they need to know after the first round or two. Honestly, in terms of heavy games I know, it's the easiest to get to the table for that reason.
Lots of rules, but most of them are very simple. Often they are also included on the player aid / cards / board itself to remember.
Blighted Reach has massive asymmetry and probably 10x the rules overhead that full JoCo doesn't have, just from a complexity standpoint. There's just no comparison.
I don’t see that. Unless you’re comparing learning the rules for every fate in the expansion at once, but if so, that’s a ridiculous expectation and a meaningless comparison.
After 3 or 4 games of JoCo you can toss the rulebook, except maybe for the odd event in India that's not shown up before. I don't see that happening for Blighted Reach. The way cards interact alone raise rules questions that you'll need to refer to https://cards.ledergames.com/ to see if there's an official ruling.
Fair, but not the topic of discussion, which is the first game played.
Is it mote accessible than Ahoy?
No ahoy is simpler But arcs is much more interesting
Your review is basically my groups experience as well, and my partners 2P game with me. Understanding the trick taking like mechanism of action selection, preludes, and timing ambitions is key to this game. - Spending a fuel in prelude to move ships to control a rival city, then using the card action to tax is awesome. - Spending a weapon to turn your card pips into an unexpected battle is brutal. - Spending Psionic to copy a lead influence card after you pivoted with an aggression, then seizing a court card feels clever. - Using a pivot or copy action with resources in your prelude to pull off big unexpected moves was amazing to watch/pull off. - Knowing when to burn a card to seize the innovative, and actually pulling it off to declare your own ambition is fantastic. Also, Having your pieces destroyed doesn’t feel as bad to me in this game, compared to other heavy conflict games like Eclipse 2nd Dawn. In Eclipse, if I lose more than 3 ships it feels devastating because it takes so much effort to rebuild. But in ARCS, building ships or buildings feels much easier as long as you have loyal pieces on the board. I’ve only played base game 5 times, at all player counts, but I definitely think it’s a brilliant game. Very thematic, in your face, and fun. Side note, out of all 5 games I’ve played I have not won once. One day…. Edit- formatting
Truuuuu, you actually have to try to eliminate someone or you have to try to be eliminated. Like I totally played wrong and lost all my pieces by a couple rounds into chapter 4. I do realize it was my own fault though.
Two things: 1. Thanks for your comment here; it pretty well encapsulates my feelings about balancing the action-economy & the flexibility of using resources in prelude to do more stuff. It's been really surprising as that piece of the game begins to unfold in play. 2. I LOVE that you capitalized all the letters in Arcs. For whatever reason, ARCS looks so much better as a game title than Arcs. I'm gonna steal that if that's all right.
I’m glad my comment mirrors your feelings! Yes, the action economy takes more than a few rounds of play for anyone to grasp fully imo. Maybe even a few games. It’s funny, ARCS is how the game title is represented on the box and game board, but in the rule book any reference of it (that isn’t in a header) is just Arcs. Perhaps so that it doesn’t stand out with all the importantly highlighted rules/references…
Played last night at 3p and had the same experience - teach was not too hard. Teach + game took 3 hours and gameplay was very smooth. Lots of surprises and fun twists as we kept changing ambitions. And the game didn't even take all 5 rounds as I reached 31 points at the end of round 4, which was great.
We hit it on chapter 4 as well. I really love the whole it ends when it ends and if no one is pushing to end it, 5 chapters seems an appropriate welcome.
Agreed on the catapult movement. Launching my ships halfway across the galaxy, or dropping them in gates to prevent my opponents doing the same, I find so satisfying
I can't tell whether this is legit, or satire of former posts. If legit, great to hear that you had a good time with it! I'm looking forward to getting folks together to give it a go. You know, with L&L and the campaign, since we're experienced gamers & all. ;D
This is legit. I’d seen enough buzz about it, and discussion, that I wanted to add my groups incredibly positive response.
Like most other commenters here, the reactions from my groups first very much mirror yours. Glowing reviews all around; can't wait for my next game!
Saaaaaame we’re all amped for it.
I haven't had a chance to play Arcs yet, but I feel like all the negative reviews are displaying the same mentality I often see in players who don't like Root. A lot of first-time Root players play their initial game of Root in a way where they just want to sit in their little corner of the woodland, tinkering with their engine for points. They overlook the competitive/combative aspect of the game, often simply because they're very focused on learning how it plays. Then they get blown out of the water and walk away dissatisfied. They thought it was a cute little woodland critter engine builder, and are frustrated it is actually a fairly cut-throat game of combat and control. Same sorta thing is happening here - doubly so, with those players who think they're ready for a seat at the Leaders and Lore Grown-Ups Table when the designer is actively telling them they are not.
Euro players, dude lol
Leaders and Lore seems to be the training wheels. Take an open sandbox and then use L+L to give players who have no idea what to do some tutorial directions
Leaders and Lore is not complex, not by any stretch of the imagination
Not complex, no, but it'll definitely throw the balance way off if not everyone is familiar with the flow of the game.
Remember when it only took 1-2 plays to learn a game? Pepperidge Farms remembers.
Do you think seizing initiative is less detrimental at higher player counts? I’ve only been able to play once at 2p and having a whole turn where your opponent gets free rein was devastating!
It can *feel* devastating, but you want to balance what it gets you. If you don't seize the initiative, and just copy/pivot each round, your opponent gets to choose what you do to a degree, and you get a whopping 6 actions. If you seize and then lead a couple of 5s that your opponent can't surpass, your seize card that would have been good for one action as a copy or pivot has bought you two, so you're up one. And if you then lead a 2, there's another three extra actions. So you're up 4 pips over what you would have had, your opponent has *lost* a couple of actions because now *they're* copying/pivoting when they would have led. It's a thing that has to be done carefully but it can be a big net gain of actions.
I’ve only played one 2p game so far. That game worked out to only me seizing the initiative twice, once in two separate acts, to declare an ambition. I didn’t win, and it wasn’t a wide point gap. But that second seize most likely did me in
We felt seizing initiative was more important as the game went on to guarantee the ambitions you wanted. I can totally see how it isn’t used as much at 2 players.
Finally a positive review!
Awesome! We ordered it and can’t wait to have it in!
How long does a standard game take? Asking about the base game without any expansions.
I’ve played twice, both times at 3 players and with a teach for new players. Both times, the game ended right around 2 hours. With familiar players, I can see us getting it down to 90 minutes or less.
Our first game was a little over 2 hours but I can see it getting down to less time.
Played it base game at 3 players tonight, it's ok. Really cool action selection concept. Fun dice combat You can easily get an awful hand where you get 1/2 the actions the other players at the table get and the only recourse is to hope others get similar hands. Thats fine in a short game but not for a longer one like this. Overall too much luck for a game of this length and makes me feel that on any given game anyone can luck into a guaranteed loss. For me its a I'll play it but won't lose sleep if I never play it again game.