I am a little mystified how someone can like civ games and think Nations is too long? I mean, there are a lot of complaints that can apply to Nations, but compared to the pool of civ games out there, Nations is way shorter; I would even argue that is its strongest advantage. I don't have time for TTA, so let's fire up Nations instead! I mean, is there a Candyland civ game where you build brownie and gum drop cultures I am unaware of?
Nick Sibicky I appreciate his candor during the open discussions, but I feel like sometimes he is a bit proned to snap judgements. I don't ignore his opinion, but I filer and file it accordingly.
I think the game is great. The art work could have been a little better. Also each civilization should have had a different power like you guys said. I hope they fix that as a separate add on or the next version. I like the dice too. The whole game keeps everyone engaged to see what the other people are doing so no real down time. It's a must buy in my opinion. Great job guys, well except Sam, give it some love buddy. Just kidding your telling what you feel and that is real. Keep it up.
So I've had Roll for awhile now and just recently played Nations. They are actually pretty different. In both games, you roll dice to add different dice to your pool, but Nations has more to do with swapping and getting better dice, while Roll focuses more on building your engine as quickly as possible. Nations is deceptively simple, but in a good way, it just breaks out of the filler category and is easy enough to explain, while Roll has a tight bundle of rules to get over, and feels more like a full, mid weight, game. I personally like Roll better, much better in fact, but Nations was enjoyable, and I would definitely play it again. (IMHO, YMMV)
This game should just be approached as a Dice filler, and for this it performs well. Can't wait to get my copy, and I hope there will be expansions which will increase it to the next level.
Hard to compare. I don't remember the regular Nations game review on this channel. As a dice game it looks very simple and abstractish. Though i would probably like it as Tom for dice managing, but it looks it could get stale after a few plays.
Great review guys. The game is indeed really ugly :) I can't imagine people loving the original game going for this one. So fast and soooooo light. We like it with friends before playing something meaty.
See, this is one of those reviews that makes me lose a bit of confidence in Tom, because it comes across as saying that for him, how fast a game plays is more important in his evaluation than how good the actual gameplay is. Even if the gameplay is more-or-less mediocre, "toom-boom-boom-boomp" = two big thumbs up.
Steve Gale I think it was the dice aspect that won him over, despite the things Sam brought up. It would have been interesting to hear from someone who actually REALLY liked the original Nations game and how they feel about the quickie dice cousin.
azraelswrd Well, Tom is certainly fond of dice games, and that played a part, I think he also made it pretty clear that his approval of the game was based on how quickly it plays. That "boom-boom-boom-boomp" line is Tom's poker-tell that he's going to give a game a good review mainly based on how fast it plays. For another recent example of Tom finding a game to be sorta blah but still approving it because of the 4B factor, check out his review of Barony.
Steve Gale "how fast a game plays is more important in his evaluation than how good the actual gameplay is" - I think this comment misses the actual issue. The quality of gameplay very much depends on the amount of time a game takes to play. I think one of the best rating systems is hours of gameplay per length of game. If nations is a great 2 hour game stretched out to 2.5 hours and Nations the Dice game is a Decent hours worth of gameplay crunched into 40 minutes, then I think that recommends Nations the Dice game over nations. Furthermore there is way more leniency in recommending a short game to a longer game simply because 40 minutes wasted on a game you don't like is less damaging than 2.5 hours wasted on a game you don't like. The Onus is really on longer games to prove their worth.
Drake Depew I'm not missing any issue. I just seem to have a different standard than you--dramatically different if you'd actually rather play two mediocre games in the same span of time it would take to play one great game. It sounds like might too. To each their own, but personally, I think it's highly fallacious to judge a game for how a fleeting an experience it delivers, as if playing games is s chore. It's like preferring to slam down a bunch of greasy burgers off a dollar menu over devouring a succulent steak. Is there no onus on the burger to taste good because you didn't have to taste it for very long? Me, I'd take the time to slowly savor every morsel of that great steak.
I like Nations, but I love this. My wife keeps winning and saying "play again?"
The best dice game for me. I enjoy both the mechanics and art.
This must be the game Tom said we'd be surprised he liked on Board Game Breakfast. I'm surprised at least -- but I really enjoyed it too.
EvanoGMan It's got dice, it's fast, and it's not Forge War so not surprised Tom liked it. :p
I think the game he was referencing was The Voyages of Marco Polo. He liked it a lot and he doesn't usually like heavier euros like that.
we actually like this one better then Nations. Just for the time aspect alone.
comment i heard about the special abilities: they tried to go for it, but for balancing reasons they took it off.
Guilherme Duque but maybe they will test and balance it more for an.. expansion :)
we are huge fans of CV and thought Nations the dice game would be a good new game for us, but after watching this video we are not sure anymore.
Same here... really thought it would be soemthing, but now.... seriously need to consider the repayabality as well...
I am a little mystified how someone can like civ games and think Nations is too long? I mean, there are a lot of complaints that can apply to Nations, but compared to the pool of civ games out there, Nations is way shorter; I would even argue that is its strongest advantage. I don't have time for TTA, so let's fire up Nations instead! I mean, is there a Candyland civ game where you build brownie and gum drop cultures I am unaware of?
+TheGreatHamEl
Yeah....Sam's opinions are very inconsistent sometimes. I generally have to ignore his opinion in all of Tom's videos.
Nick Sibicky I appreciate his candor during the open discussions, but I feel like sometimes he is a bit proned to snap judgements. I don't ignore his opinion, but I filer and file it accordingly.
+TheGreatHamEl
Agreed!
I think the game is great. The art work could have been a little better. Also each civilization should have had a different power like you guys said. I hope they fix that as a separate add on or the next version. I like the dice too. The whole game keeps everyone engaged to see what the other people are doing so no real down time. It's a must buy in my opinion. Great job guys, well except Sam, give it some love buddy. Just kidding your telling what you feel and that is real. Keep it up.
I'm with Sam. Nations Dice isn't my kind of game and also liked NY 1901. :)
How does this stack up to Roll For The Galaxy? It seems more simple, but is that to its benefit? Are the two games even comparable?
That would be my question as well...
+C4Explosion00 It was weird that they didn't even named it seeing as they seem similar in some mechanics.
So I've had Roll for awhile now and just recently played Nations. They are actually pretty different. In both games, you roll dice to add different dice to your pool, but Nations has more to do with swapping and getting better dice, while Roll focuses more on building your engine as quickly as possible. Nations is deceptively simple, but in a good way, it just breaks out of the filler category and is easy enough to explain, while Roll has a tight bundle of rules to get over, and feels more like a full, mid weight, game. I personally like Roll better, much better in fact, but Nations was enjoyable, and I would definitely play it again.
(IMHO, YMMV)
This game should just be approached as a Dice filler, and for this it performs well. Can't wait to get my copy, and I hope there will be expansions which will increase it to the next level.
Hard to compare. I don't remember the regular Nations game review on this channel. As a dice game it looks very simple and abstractish. Though i would probably like it as Tom for dice managing, but it looks it could get stale after a few plays.
40 minures per player (more like 50 or 60) a long game?
I like Nations so I'll get this for my summer vacation.
Again.... Dice that do not roll. Will they ever stop producing those? Is it so hard to manufacture dice with rounded corners?
Great review guys. The game is indeed really ugly :) I can't imagine people loving the original game going for this one. So fast and soooooo light. We like it with friends before playing something meaty.
Tesla is there to pander to the kids who just now found out about him and are now experts in Tesla history. very odd choice
See, this is one of those reviews that makes me lose a bit of confidence in Tom, because it comes across as saying that for him, how fast a game plays is more important in his evaluation than how good the actual gameplay is. Even if the gameplay is more-or-less mediocre, "toom-boom-boom-boomp" = two big thumbs up.
Steve Gale I think it was the dice aspect that won him over, despite the things Sam brought up. It would have been interesting to hear from someone who actually REALLY liked the original Nations game and how they feel about the quickie dice cousin.
azraelswrd Well, Tom is certainly fond of dice games, and that played a part, I think he also made it pretty clear that his approval of the game was based on how quickly it plays. That "boom-boom-boom-boomp" line is Tom's poker-tell that he's going to give a game a good review mainly based on how fast it plays. For another recent example of Tom finding a game to be sorta blah but still approving it because of the 4B factor, check out his review of Barony.
Steve Gale or Cthulhu Realms
Steve Gale "how fast a game plays is more important in his evaluation than how good the actual gameplay is" - I think this comment misses the actual issue. The quality of gameplay very much depends on the amount of time a game takes to play.
I think one of the best rating systems is hours of gameplay per length of game. If nations is a great 2 hour game stretched out to 2.5 hours and Nations the Dice game is a Decent hours worth of gameplay crunched into 40 minutes, then I think that recommends Nations the Dice game over nations.
Furthermore there is way more leniency in recommending a short game to a longer game simply because 40 minutes wasted on a game you don't like is less damaging than 2.5 hours wasted on a game you don't like. The Onus is really on longer games to prove their worth.
Drake Depew I'm not missing any issue. I just seem to have a different standard than you--dramatically different if you'd actually rather play two mediocre games in the same span of time it would take to play one great game. It sounds like might too. To each their own, but personally, I think it's highly fallacious to judge a game for how a fleeting an experience it delivers, as if playing games is s chore. It's like preferring to slam down a bunch of greasy burgers off a dollar menu over devouring a succulent steak. Is there no onus on the burger to taste good because you didn't have to taste it for very long? Me, I'd take the time to slowly savor every morsel of that great steak.
It looks like it seriously lacks player interaction.