Last night Jonathan and I met up for a game of his recently arrived Kickstarter edition of Chocolate Factory.

I’d last played the game back in February at the Alley Cat game day. Back then it was still a prototype waiting for the Kickstarter to be done.

Naturally the final components are a lot better than the prototype (which btw was pretty good quality for a prototype).

What I hadn’t appreciated back then, but was blatantly obvious to Jonathan and myself what a lot of set up is required for this game, and how much space it takes up on the table.

It’s a relatively quick game to play, basically seven rounds. It took roughly just over an hour to play.

As engine builders go, Chocolate Factory is an above average game. It’s fine.

There are pockets of down time during the game. These tend to happen during the running the factory phase. All the players do this simultaneously. So if one player gets stuck in mentat mode (sorry for the Dune reference), the other players are left hanging around waiting for that player to complete their turn.

The components are really high quality. The factory and the sliding crates is a neat novelty mechanic. The theme is fun, and unique. Not many games out there about running a chocolate factory.

But at the end of the day I don’t think there is enough here to warrant going through all the flaff of setting up (and tearing down) to get this game out on a regular basis.

Afterwards Jonathan and I started talking games, and particularly Wingspan and the “broken” Raven cards (image below nicked off bgg).

I personally thought it was a none issue. And people should stopped whining about it. It is such a situational thing, you need them very early on in the game, ideally starting hand. I don’t think I’ve seen the cards come out in the games I’ve played (granted not many, especially compared to some).

There are 170 birds if I remember correctly in the base game. And two of them are particularly good if you get them at the start, and really good if you get both. Oh come on. Plus with the new expansion adding more cards plus a take that mechanic where you can take food from another player (oh wait until some-one gets these Ravens and a take that card at the start, watch the uproar).

Is it really a problem that needs dealing with? I don’t think Stonemaier Games need to ban them. If it upsets some players remove them from the game. Simple. Maybe errata the card to as Jonathan suggested take the food token from the feeder instead of the general supply.

But as I pointed out to Jonathan there seems to be a trend these days on line with people playing a new game and declaring it broken or needing more play testing before it was published.

I tend to put this argument in the camp of “I don’t like X therefore it has to be broken, I demand you fix it”.

There have been similar grumbles about another Stonemaier game Tapestry. Particularly with certain civilizations, or they don’t like the random nature of certain aspects of the game.

I don’t mind comments of “I don’t like this much randomness in a game”, that’s fair enough. Not every game is for everyone. But to declare a game is broken, and then go on to say they “fixed it”. Just gets my heckles up.

I think from time immemorial players have house ruled games. Nothing stopping players doing that if they don’t like an aspect of a game. Heck does anyone play Monopoly properly using the actual rules?

Heck with Tapestry we hand out three civilization cards to each player to chose from. Do I shout out about it online that I “fixed” the game? No.

Some players in Wingspan draft their cards at the start. Which is fine. It adds to the play time, and is great for players that have played the game a lot, but new players are at a disadvantage. Maybe something that could be added to the rules as a variant for more experienced players. But it fixes nothing. It wasn’t broken.

Don’t get me wrong. There are games out there that are broken. Or have elements that are. It’s pretty obvious which games these are, everyone is talking about them (when they occur). But in the cases above and the trend I’m seeing it’s a handful of people. Some passionate fans of the game, that are doing it from a position of love for the game. Although some have other motives, and use it as an excuse to knock the game or publisher. But what they are really doing is expressing an opinion about an aspect of the game. Some may agree, others will not. I just think they need to rephrase their words, from “this is broken” to “I didn’t enjoy this aspect” or “I didn’t like”.

Last night Jonathan and I met up at the nearly newly refitted The Luxe to play his latest addition to his collection Undaunted: Normandy.

This game caused a bit of shock, and banter when Jonathan said he was getting it. Mainly because it is a deckbuilder. Jonathan doesn’t do deckbuilders. More accurately it’s a mechanic that would fail to make his top 100 mechanics. But would easily make his top 5 mechanics he does not like.

But the theme and the board/missions tempted him to part with his money.

We played the introductory mission, I was the allies, while Jonathan played the axis forces.

For the history books I won. And afterwards we discussed how we felt about the game.

I felt the game was ok. It wasn’t an unpleasant experience.

The deckbuilding side was ok. But not great. I really enjoy deckbuilders, like Star Realms/Hero Realms, Valley of the Kings, Legendary Marvel. Undaunted doesn’t come close to them. It’s not as bad as the World of Tanks deckbuilder (which was dire) and I’d put it above Thunderstone. What I missed was being able to combo cards. The nearest you get really is being able to bounce a played card back to your hand to be replayed. One tactic I did like was being able to force fog of war cards into your opponents deck. They are basically dead cards. So watering down your opponent’s deck is a great way to throw a spanner in the works.

The combat element really did feel tacked on. I didn’t use it once, but Jonathan did, and the dice just made it too random. I think out of 6 or so attacks he succeeded twice.

The missions, that are area control is an interesting idea. But for me makes the game more like Memoir 44. It’s cool that there are a load of different missions for players to play, great variety.

The theme of the game could be anything really. It is literally non-existent.

I almost feel that Undaunted couldn’t decide if it wanted to be a deckbuilder or a Memoir clone. And that indecision has hurt it overall. It doesn’t achieve either.

Having played the game I don’t get all the buzz it has been getting on the Facebook groups.

Have you played it? And if so what did you think?

Game played: Undaunted: Normandy

The draw back of gaming at Spoons on a Friday evening is not only is it busy, but also noisy. However that is the situation Jonathan and I found ourselves in for a bit of light two player gaming.

Naturally the tables at Spoons are suitable for drinking, but not really for gaming. So our gaming options were limited. Which isn’t a problem we have plenty of two player games that don’t require lots of table space in our collections.

Our first game amongst the Friday evening drinking community was Tiny Epic Galaxies. Records show I hadn’t played the game for 2 years.

After refreshing our memories, play commenced. Earlier in the week Gamelyn Games announced there will be a week long Kickstarter soon for Ultra Tiny Epic Galaxies. The second Ultra Tiny game they will have produced.

Where as I could see Ultra Tiny Epic Kingdoms being suitable for the further miniaturisation. I’m not convinced that is the case for Galaxies. And my main reason for this is the dice. I just can’t imagine rolling little wooden cubes as dice being a pleasant experience. I tried rolling the cubes in the game and it was horrid.

I think Tiny Epic is the smallest this game can and should go. And it’s why I won’t be buying backing or later buying the Ultra Tiny version.

However I still really enjoy this game. It was nice getting it back to the table. Made even more sweet with getting the win.

Our next game of the evening was Hanamikoji. This really is such a nice game. It’s a favourite of both of us.

This game is so underrated. And is so simple and fast to play. We knocked out 3 games in a row. Which were 3 wins for me.

Jonathan and I had chatted, enjoyed some games. But after about an hour of gaming we called it a night. Jonathan hadn’t been feeling great for a large chunk of the day. So I was fortunate that he felt able to come along in the first place. The less than ideal environment didn’t help.

I’m definitely getting old, because some of the young ladies did not look old enough to be in an establishment that sold alcoholic beverages. But it’s so hard to tell the age of some-one these days.

But despite that realisation and feeling my age. I had a brief but great time with a great friend.

Games Played: Tiny Epic Galaxies, Hanamikoji

Earlier in the week, might have been Monday actually, Penny Lane drop through my letter box.

I had asked Jonathan if he was free to get a learning game in. But events at work mean that was not going to happen. So yesterday afternoon I was pleasantly surprised to get a call asking if I wanted to meet up in the evening for a drink and play a game.

So we both met up at Spoons to play some games and enjoy a beverage or two. First up on the table was, you guessed it Penny Lane.

Penny Lane is designed by Justin Blaske (creator of Mint Works) and Mel Primus. I don’t usually mention the game designer in these little “five minute” reviews. But it’s kinda relevant really when we look at Penny Lane.

When I was looking at the rules initially after it arrived my first thought was this sounds a lot like Mint Works. Which when I checked can be easily explained. As I pointed out above one half of the design team for this game was responsible for Mint Works. So that would explain it.

But Penny Lane isn’t just a larger, prettier Mint Works.

Although the game plays the same. There are a couple of additional mechanics that expand the game and tactics.

So the theme is you are trying to build the most prosperous city avenue.

There are two phases to a round. The action phase and the upkeep phase. In the action phase players take actions until all players have passed consecutively. Then in the upkeep you check for the end of game conditions, tidy up, and gather resources.

The actions you can do are determined by the 8 cards that make up the Main Street. The majority of the actions require coins to activate the action, whilst a couple of them require a worker to be placed there.

The new parts that lift this game above Mint Works are to do with the worker meeples and the tableau building.

Some of the buildings you can buy come with workers, and some buildings need workers on them to activate the buildings abilities. Those that come with workers once the worker has been moved to another building to activate its ability reveal a victory point. But you can’t just move workers willy nilly. You need to spend 2 coins on selecting the appropriate action on the Main Street.

Buildings also have links on them. There are two types of links. Money and victory points.

As you can see in the photo above the links on the building are only half of the icon. If when you place the building complete an icon you get what it represents during upkeep.

If your lane has 10 victory point icons in it, made up from completed links, revealed worker spaces or building abilities, or buildings that just have victory points on them the end of the game will trigger at the start of the upkeep.

Otherwise during upkeep you get a coin for each completed coin link, card ability that generates them.

So you are having to not only think about what the building does, but also what links it has and where you will place it in your lane.

The additions are nice and add a little more depth to the game. But not so much that it slows the game down. Penny Lane still plays quickly.

So what are the bad points of the game? Well they are production,graphic design ones that are minor in the grand scheme of things.

For instance some of the Main Street cards have a little top hat symbol on them which indicates which side is used based on the number of players. The size of this makes the number unreadable! Why they just didn’t just make it a bit larger and more readable I don’t know. Or just put the icon on the side that is used in a 2/3 player game I don’t know.

The none standard card size used for the Main Street cards is annoying. I was able to sleeve the building cards no problem. But the Main Street cards are approx 10mm too tall to fit in 70mm by 110mm sleeves that I had on hand. Why not just go with the “standard” digit card size? The player boards only thing I can think for them is to laminate them.

I’d also liked to have seen the Main Street cards thicker, or even cardboard. I did notice one or two of the cards warp on the table. So they will have to be sleeved. I’d have liked to seen the player boards use thicker card stock too.

If you like Mint Works you will love Penny Lane. Jonathan and I both really liked this. I’m going to go as far as to say it replaces Mint Works for me. Ok the box is larger. Not by a great deal. Still very portable. But I like the little extra it brings to the table. It’s fun. Quick. And scratches that worker placement itch when you don’t have that much time. Hopefully this will get a bit of buzz when it hits. It deserves it.

The history books will record that I won both of our games.

Our final game of the evening was the classic two player Jaipur. That after a very close first round where a point separated us. Jonathan widened the gap he had and won.

A great unexpected evening gaming. A fantastic way to end the week.

Games Played: Penny Lane, Jaipur