Rat-a-Tat Cat - the little card game that just keeps going

Rat-a-Tat Cat has been my mind as of late. Part of that is because I saw some kids playing it at a recent gaming event. Part of it is because I looked through the rules of Play Nine to see if it's a game I'd be interested in and the rules reminded me of it. 

That's because both Rat-a-Tat Cat and Play Nine harken back to the traditional card game Golf. (In fact, Play Nine is basically Golf with golf themed cards) In all three games, you have a tableau of cards face down and you swap out cards from either the draw pile or the discard pile, trying to get the lowest total value

Rat-a-Tat Cat actually breaks from the mold more. It's simpler with only four cards and a simpler (and kind of more brutal) scoring system since you don't cancel out pairs. Plus, it has action cards. 

Has it really been twelve years since I wrote a review of Rat-a-Tat Cat? Sweet Garfield and Heathcliff, it has. https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/75341/flexible-filler-2-6 My word, my sense of short games has changed since I wrote that.

The game has been in my collection for quite a while and I have played it a fair bit over the years. And, as much as I dislike the term filler, I have really Rat-a-Tat Cat to fill time. The vast majority of my games have been played waiting for people to show up or waiting for food to show up or squeezing in one last game in the night.

As I talk about in the review I wrote so long ago with thicker and darker hair, one of the keys is that you can end the game whenever you want. You can play as many rounds as you feel like and a round ends when someone knocks. Which could be the kiss of death in a game of any weight but is actually a virtue in this light, little game.

Compared to Golf, Rat-a-Tat Cat is both lighter and more random. You have a tableau of four cards compared to eight. You have those action cards. Heck, you have extra nine-value cards which messes with the odds.

But I'm pretty sure it's been close to twenty years since I've played Golf. And Rat-a-Tat Cat, I've been a fair number of plays of it over the last twelve years. It's a simple card game with silly art but it has kept on delivering. 

I don't go looking for games with the goal of filling time. I do like short games but I want them to have depth and interesting decisions. Rat-a-Tat Cat isn't the kind of game that I look for. But it has kept delivering.

Of course, you also have to take into account that it is a children's game. As a game for grown ups, it works. But Rat-a-Tat Cat is pretty brilliant for the under ten set. Simple rules that still makes them think. Push your luck with a decent amount of control.

I don't need another game like Rat-a-Tat Cat. It has kept on doing what I need it to do.

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/3837/rat-tat-cat

Ricochet - not a great game but I keep it around

Ricochet or Leonardo or Picus isn't a particularly good game. However, it fits enough niches that it has stayed in my collection.

I first came across it as Ricochet so that's what I'm going to call it, although I have also played the Leonardo version as well. Frankly, the pinball theme of Ricochet probably fits it best but the theme doesn't really matter.

Regardless of its theme, Ricochet is a real time, turn-less puzzle game. Which means everyone is trying to solve the puzzle at the same time. There are other games out there that do the exact same thing, like Ricochet Robots or Set or Spot It.

The whole thing is just a deck of cards, which is why it's still in my collection. Each card, in the pinball version, shows four pinball bumpers, along with a pinball. The bumpers are red, blue, yellow and green (and contrast well enough my color blind eyes can tell them apart) and have numbers on them. The pinball is either big or small in one of the four colors.

Here's the game. Lay down five cards in a cross formation. The starting point is the center card. The color and the size of the pinball will tell you the next card in the sequence. The color tells you what bumper to look at and the size tells you if you are looking for the largest or smallest number. You then look at that card's pinball for to figure out the next card.

Every card can only be used once in a sequence and turn. There are no duplicate numbers so any given layout can have only one sequence. Whoever figures out what the last card in the sequence is wins that turn.

As I mentioned earlier, there other games that same trick of being puzzles that everyone is trying to figure out the same time. And, quite frankly, many of the ones that I have played have been better. Ricochet Robots offers up some very fascinating puzzles. Spot It is an ingenious design as well as a crowd pleaser. Jungle Speed is a raucous party. (Set, by the way, is very unfriendly to my color blind eyes and so I cannot physically put it.)

Still, it's stuck around on the shelf.

Well, the fact that it's just a deck of cards and takes up almost no storage space goes a long way to why It's still here. Ricochet Robots is a better game but a much bigger box so it ended up being purged. (There is a Looney Pyramids variation I've been meaning to try, though)

Games like Ricochet have an unusual learning curve compared to most board games. They reward reaction time and pattern recognition. And the only way to get better is raw practice. So different skill levels tend to be pretty significant. People who are better will constantly beat weaker players.

You can say that about any game. But lost a game of Go to a stronger player often teaches you something. Losing a game of Ricochet or other games like it is just practice. When they have a twist like Jungle Speed or Spot It, it adds that extra bit of fun. Still, I don't tend to play games like this. (Sorry, Ricochet Robots)

Most of the time Ricochet has come out, it has been as something for folks to do in other games with player elimination. It works well for that sort of thing, particularly since it is so relatively simple, even compared to other speed puzzles.

And, when the toddler is just a little bit older, it might be the quiet thoughtful activity to keep them occupied at restaurants or waiting rooms or the like. Make him think without getting him too excited. It might end up seeing some decent play then.

Memories of Bang, fun but imperfect

I have had a copy of Bang in my game collection for a long time. In fact, I wasn't even collecting games the first time I got to play it.

Bang is a little card game about living out a Spaghetti Western. Everyone gets a character with a special power that gives them some kind of special advantage. Different cards gave you access to guns and horses and beer and the ever popular barrel of dynamite.

But, the real heart of the game is the secret roles. Everyone gets a role card which gives them different winning conditions. The sheriff and the deputies want to kill the bandits and the renegade. The bandits want to kill the sheriff. And the renegade wants to be the last person standing, having killed everyone else.

I had played secret role games before, Mafia and Werewolf. Bang, however, gave me a much more meaningful way to interact with the other players, as well as more than just pointing at people to figure out who was what.

And the western theme of Bang made it an easy sell to get people interested in playing and for them to really get into the game.

But Bang has some major issues as well. The biggest one being that the game can really drag and it has player elimination. I have seen folks get killed before they even got a turn and then have to wait at least a half an hour for a new game to start.

Really, I can see setting up a game of Ricochet Robots on the side for all the folks who get eliminated.

There are other fiddly issues with Bang. While the cards aren't complicated, particularly for experience gamers, you do need to consult the rules on what they do. That can be an issue with people who don't play games, one of my target audience is for Bang. And there are balance issues for both the character powers and the roles. Winning as the renegade is an impressive feat.

Some of my earliest exposures to designer games like Settlers of Catan or Puerto Rico or Carcassonne or even Fluxx have continued to hold up over the years, Bang really hasn't. The issues that it has overshadow the positives.

However, it has survived purge after purge.

Frankly, the biggest reason is because it is so small. The box is the size of two deck of cards and that he gets it a lot of leeway when it comes to clearing out shelf space.

Nostalgia also plays a part. I do have a lot of good memories of playing it. Heck, when I was first exposed to it they were a couple of times we played it for hours.

And, when the game does go well, it is fun. But part of the problem is that the more experienced people are playing it, the longer the game can drag. (I've found it it's the opposite case with Fluxx. People who understand the basic strategy of deck milling and know the goals make that game go a lot faster.)

I haven't played Bang the Dice game yet. From what I have read, it solves a lot of the problems. I hope I have a chance to play it and make up my mind for myself.

For now, though, when I am reaching for a light card game that has conflict and theme, I reach for Guillotine and leave bang with the happy memories.

Modern Art the Card Game - all the flavor with none of the auctions

Modern Art the Card Game, also published as Masters Gallery for them who like classic artists, is quite literally Modern Art after Reiner Knizia took a chainsaw and hacked off the auctions.

Yeah, he removed the single most defining element of the game. And, Sweet Sackson, it still works!

In Modern Art, paintings in the form of cards are auctioned off. After one artist has had six paintings sold in one season (round), the paintings of the top three artists are sold for the profit of the players. If an artist was in the top three in a previous round, their paintings are more valuable. However, even if an artist's paintings would be worth an astronomical some things to previous rounds, they only get so if they're in the top three.

Modern Art the Card Game takes that formula and ditches the auctions. Instead, players just play cards from their hands in front of them. You don't by paintings from auctions and you don't get to pocket the profits from your own auctions.

There are still a few clever little bits, though, to help keep everyone on their toes. Some of the cards have special powers that go off when you play them. These include the power to play another card by the same artist at the same time, to draw a card into your hand, to increase the value of an artist, or to lay down a card facedown in order to keep everyone guessing.

Another twist is that you get dealt increasingly fewer cards as the rounds go by, getting no new cards on the last round. Which means that you got to start planning your long game right from the start.

What you get, at the end of the day, is a lighter and shorter game than the original. However, it's still a tense little game with plenty of room for clever play. 

While you don't have the direct interaction of auctions, you still have the constantly changing, silent alliances since you can't put one artist on top by yourself. In fact, since you don't get the profits from auctioning paintings, these unspoken alliances are even more important.

When Modern Art the Card Game first came out, it's spent a couple months in constant rotation in my gaming group.  And this was at a time when we were constantly playing new games (an unnamed member of the group, perhaps one that keeps a blog, kept buying new games) and a game getting played twice in succession was pretty impressive. So that much steady play is quite the compliment for the game.

Modern Art the Card Game isn't as good as its parent game. The original game is such an amazing auction game. However, the card game is still plenty of fun. It takes up even less storage space, which is always nice. It plays down to two, which the original game definitely couldn't do. And it plays pretty darn quick.

It does what a card version of a board game should do. It gives you a condensed experience while still being true to the original and fun. 

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/40381/masters-gallery

San Juan opened doors for me

San Juan was my first real experience with a card game adaptation of a board game.

It certainly wasn't the first one out there. I knew that Monopoly's Free Parking game came out back in 1988. And Settlers of Catan and Starfarers of Catan had their two-player card versions out as well.

Still, San Juan was ahead of the pack of turning board games into card or dice games.

And San Juan definitely has its own identity outside of its parent Puerto Rico. It shares a theme and the mechanic of role selection with Puerto Rico but it also helped create the genre tableu builders as well as multi-use cards. San Juan has its own legacy.

I first played it very early in my gaming experiences. I'm not sure I had even started collecting games at the time. It was after I had been introduced to Puerto Rico and was playing it with a small circle of friends at least once a week.

Since we already knew Puerto Rico so well, we were able to pick it up almost immediately. At the same time, cards being buildings, money and goods was amazing. (Truth to tell, still is)

In fact, I ended buying San Juan years before I bought Puerto Rico, because it was portable and played down to two and everyone else had a copy of Puerto Rico.

San Juan led the way for other tableu building games with multi-use cards, Race for the Galaxy and Glory to Rome being two of the highlights. I've played a lot of both of those games and I would not only describe them as deeper and more complex but actually better than San Juan.

Not because San Juan is simpler and lighter. Neither of those two traits makes a game worse, although I have friends who would tell me I'm wrong. No, it's because I've found San Juan has really one fundamental, overriding strategy. Getting big buildings out. And luck

of the draw plays a big part in who gets a chance to play them. (Both Race for the Galaxy and Glory to Rome avoid this by having multiple ways to get points)

Despite what I do think is legitimate flaw, I have gotten a lot of play out of San Juan and I have had a lot of fun with it. It is still in my collection and it is a game that still calls out to us to get played.

Frankly, that's because it is lighter and shorter. Between the different roles and the different powers of the buildings, it offers a lot of choices and different experiences in that short playing time. In addition to being a great game to help teach other games like Race for the Galaxy, San Juan gives me the experience of playing a big game in a short amount of time.

San Juan isn't a perfect game. However, the richness and fun of its play vastly exceeds the flaws. I have had over a decade of fun with it. It was one of the first games that opened my eyes to the possibility of how a boardgame could be adapted to a card game. At the same time, San Juan is not Puerto Rico the card game. It is its own fascinating beast.

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/8217/san-juan

When boards and pawns get replaced by dice and cards

ReAs I have grown older, card and dice adaptations of board games have become more of a focus for me. Part of this is because they've become more and more common. They are also an interesting exploration of game mechanics. How do you change and distill a game to adapt it? And, plus, they're handy when you have less gaming time and storage space :D

There are three questions I usually ask myself when I look at a card or dice adaptation.

1. Is it any good as a game?

Seriously, that's the basic question you have to ask about any game. There's plenty of criteria to apply. Is the game fun to play? Does it offer an interesting experience? Does it offer interesting decisions?

I can't tell you what makes a game good. We wouldn't have such a variety of games out there if there was a single answer. But a game has to be good for me and the folks I play with to get played more than once.

2. Does it take up less space or take less time to play?

If the card or dice version takes up less storage space, that's a plus for me. If it has a smaller footprint on the table or takes less time to set up or breakdown, that's good too. And these days, when life has me busy in a lot of other ways, a shorter playing time is also a big selling point.

Of course, as our son gets older, some of those things might not be quite so big a deal. On the other hand, having shorter, simpler versions of games to reach him will become handy.

3. Does it capture the feeling of its parent game?

Truth to tell, this isn't a deal breaker. If we enjoy playing the game and the shared name is just branding slapped over the top, I don't care. Still, it is nice when it happens. And, in some rare cases, makes me feel okay about having the card or dice version and not the board version.

A good example of a game that has stayed in my collection is Euphrates and Tigris: Clash of Kings. It is not as good a game as it's boardgame parent, Tigris and Euphrates. It also takes about as much space on the table. However, it is still a good game and it takes up a fraction of the storage space. For as often as I have ever played Tigris and Euphrates, the card version is an acceptable alternative in my collection.

Back in 2002, Hasbro put out card versions of several classic games.

These versions of Battleship and The Game of Life are still in my collection and I'd much rather play them than the originals.

In most cases, there is a tradeoff when a game or at least the theme is taken into a new medium. Sometimes, you lose more than you gain. However, at least for me, it's at least worth looking into.

Why I keep Euphrates and Tigris

As I am shuffling through my game closet again, working on another purge, I know that storage space is a driving force in my decisions. After all, one of the reasons we need to keep purging is so our toddler can get his closet back :D

So smaller games get an easier time than big ones. Which is why Verrator, only the size of a deck of cards, is probably never going to get purged, even though it hasn't seen play in close to ten years :P

This has led me to comparing Tigris and Euphrates with Euphrates and Tigris:Contest of Kings, otherwise known as Tigris and Euphrates the Card Game. 

Tigris and Euphrates is widely considered to be Reiner Knizia's masterpiece. It's the game that officially pushed him from the guy who did auction games to the guy who made heavier games with lots of interesting math. It's a genuinely brilliant game where you juggle your hand of tiles, your scoring cubes, your board position and your conflict with your opponents.

But, the truth of the matter is that I've never gotten a lot of play out of it. While a couple of my friends owned copies of it, those copies almost never came out. Honestly, most of our plays were at convention board game rooms.

Frankly, we never played the game enough for anyone to really get the nuances of it. If we had, it probably would have become a regular game in the rotation. We never got far enough long the learning curve. In other words, we would have needed to play the game more in order to want to play the game more :D

In comparison, Euphrates and Tigris: Contest of Kings does away with the board, just using columns of cards to define the areas. This creates a vaster simpler spatial component. Even more importantly, the cards double and scoring cubes as well as tiles, so hand management and luck of the draw are both more important.

I don't think anyone would argue that Contest of Kings is a weaker game then the original Tigris and Euphrates. A bunch of columns doesn't create the tactical and strategic play of the board. Needing to be able to both place and score from your hand seriously increases the power of luck of the draw. And, quite frankly, it ends up taking even more space than the board game in play.

However, particularly after I stored it in a photo case that's close to a quarter the size of the original box, Contest of Kings takes up a fraction of the storage space that Tigris and Euphrates would take up. And it is still a good game that gives me that T&E flavor. It doesn't just stand up well to its profoundly good big brother.

So, while I know it is heresy to some gamers, Contest of Kings really fulfills all my T&E needs and can justify its storage space. I don't foresee getting the board game anytime and I don't see myself getting rid of the card game.  

http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/42/tigris-euphrates

http://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/19419/euphrates-tigris-contest-kings

Elevenses-For-One, surprisingly fun for organizing a tea cart

My recent kick of making Print-and-Play solitaire games got started with Elevenses-For-One, the thematic sequel to Elevenses, which I've never actually played.

11s-4-1 (an abbreviation that makes the game sound like its about filling out tax forms) was well regarded as a Print-and-Play, nominated for a Golden Geek in 2014. So I made sure to download the files for my records. However, when it got Kickstarted, I decided it was time to take a closer look.

Thirteen cards, including the two timer cards. Cut out the cards and laminate them, boom, done. Low ink images, five minutes of crafting and probably not even a quarter's worth of materials. And there not even any extra parts like dice or tokens.

In 11a-4-1, you play the role of an Edwardian maid who has to get a tea cart ready in fifteen minutes. Which reminds me that I still haven't made good on my promise to my mom to watch Dowton Abbey.

Two of the cards serve as a timer and the number 1 card, the tea trolley, acts as a place holder for stacking the cards. The actual gameplay is made up of the other ten cards, makes 2 to 11. You're trying to put them in numeric order after shuffling them into a row. They all have special powers, some of which will hurt you. You rearrange the cards by doing things like discarding them or flipping them over to use their powers or actually adding them to the stack. Most actions will tick the clock down a notch.

The game will end with either the clock running out or getting all the cards down, with your score based on how many cards you stacked up and how much time you have left.

It amuses me that, when you strip away the hoighty toighty theme and the special powers of the cards, you have the perfectly standard solitaire framework of putting cards in order. Not that that is a bad thing. A solid foundation is important.

And, while solitaire games aren't really my thing, I found 11s-4-1 to be an interesting little five-minute puzzle. Fun and easy to craft and amusing to play.

I don't see myself buying the game when it comes out in punished form but I figure I will keep playing it occasionally.

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/158882/elevenses-one

Aquarius - a simple, cute game that I've been playing for over ten years

While Fluxx is the flagship of Looney Labs and the Looney Pyramid system is their signature item, Aquarius is the little card game that has kept on trucking along since 1998. 

I picked up my first copy of Aquarius before I even started collecting games seriously. And I've been playing Aquarius off and on ever since then.

Aquarius is a game of hidden goals, laying out cards like dominos and a certain amount of chaos.

The original artwork of Aquarius  is a colorful series of retro art images of the four different elements, plus outer space. It looks like something out of the Yellow Submarine. There is also a dragon themed version of the art but I like the extra groovy original artwork. 

 

The deck is made up of goal cards, action cards and element cards. Even the later addition, which adds a number of cards, is easily small enough to fit into a coat pocket.

At the start of the game, everyone is dealt a random goal card. The card shows one of the five elements. You win the game by connecting seven symbols of the element on your goal card.

Everyone gets a handle of three and a turn consists of drawing a card and playing a card.

The element cards make up most of the game. You lay them out in the grid, as if they were dominoes. When you place an element card, at least one symbol on the card has to touch another symbol that's already in play. Only edges, diagonals don't count.

The action cards are where things get really crazy. The action cards let you move cards, swap hands with another player, or change the goal cards around. That last part is particularly important, since that means your goal might change during the game.

As I already mentioned, when you can trace the path of seven symbols that match your goal card, you win.

Aquarius is a very colorful game, as well as a game plays pretty quick. However, it's virtue that has proved the most important for me is that it is very accessible.

While I do like Fluxx, it's ever changing rules can be hard for some folks to enjoy or even grasp. By playing with some of the basic paradigms of games, Fluxx can be a hard sell.

In comparison, it's really easy for me to teach Aquarius. Just about anyone can grasp it. The fact that it is colorful and pretty only helps.

That is why Aquarius has often ended up in my game bag when I've been to going to conventions or such. It isn't always there, like Pico 2 or Slide 5, but it often gets packed and regularly gets played.

I know that Aquarius is going to stay in my collection. I also know that it will be a race between Aquarius and Treehouse to see what Looney Lab game my son plays first.

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/814/aquarius

Lamarckian Poker - a true diamond in the rough

Lamarckian Poker, occasionally published as Darwinian Poker, is one of my favorite games from Cheapass Games. And it isn't one of their 'official' games, just a rule set that's been on their website and other places.

All you need is a deck of cards. You don't even need a pencil and paper to keep track of scoring. Since a deck of cards is my minimal game kit, it's a perfect travel game.

In a nutshell, Lamarckian Poker is a fishing game that uses poker hands and simultaneous play. Truth to tell, I didn't know what a fishing game was before I played Lamarckian Poker, although I then realized I had already played some!

The goal of Lamarckian Poker is to 'evolve' your starting hand into the best poker hand you can make. Yeah, what it really is all about collecting cards :D (The first time I read the rules, all the evolution terminology completely baffled me. Jargon can be the enemy of communication, particularly when you're talking about a pretty simple game)

Everyone gets dealt out a hand of four cards and then four cards on the table. Then, everyone chooses a card from their hand that they will use to try and grab cards.

Starting with the high card, everyone takes turns claiming cards from the table. You get every card that matches the rank and suit of the card you played but the card you played goes on the table, up for grabs. 

The cards you claim go into your hand for future turns but it is possible to claim no cards, just adding a card for other folks to have a chance at getting. If you run out of cards, you've gone extinct and are out of the game.

After everyone has gone, the table is wiped and four more cards get laid out. When the deck runs out, whoever has the best poker hand wins.

I have played Lamarckian Poker at restaurants, gaming conventions, waiting for D&D sessions to start and while just hanging out. I've played it old friends and complete strangers. And, every time, everyone has had fun.

Easy to teach, quick to set up and dynamic to play, Lamarckian Poker ticks off a lot of things. It takes a deck of cards and gives me a game that feels like a designer game without feeling busy or forced. Instead, it gives me a light, quick game that folks want to play again immediately.

I think the key is the simultaneous play. That makes Lamarckian Poker feel fresh and it definitely keeps the game exciting. It keeps everyone active in the game and make the decisions a lot more interesting.

Lamarckian Poker mashes together three different ideas (fishing, simultaneous play and poker hands) with a rule set that takes up one page and uses a regular deck of cards that everyone has. And the results are genuinely brilliant.

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/3270/lamarckian-poker

http://cheapass.com/freegames/pokersuite

What is a micro game?

What exactly is a micro game?

Micro games are a concept that has fascinated me pretty much from the start of my interest in boardgames. Before I helped create a regular board gaming group, a lot of my gaming was done at restaurants or coffee shops or the like. Games that didn't take up much space and were easy to teach and quick to play for something that I was looking for.

And, quite frankly, something that has kept on being pretty darn handy.

The concept of micro games has been around since the 1970s, when pocket-size wargames started coming out with Ogre being the first and still one of the most famous. More recently, the tiny card game Love Letter has inspired a wave of little games aimed at hobby gamers.

Frankly, I'm not going to say that size or portability is the distinguishing feature of the micro game. a travel chess set is pretty darn portable but it is not a micro game. It is everything that a regular chess set is, just smaller. A regular deck of cards can fit in your pocket but I don't think anyone would consider that a micro game.

(Of course, I own a travel chess set and decks of regular playing cards and am glad of them. They just don't really fit into this particular discussion)

If you were to play a game of Ogre and a game of Love Letter back to back, they would be completely different experiences. The only thing that would be similar about the two games is that they would be fairly small. Ogre is a more complex game with more pieces and definitely takes longer to play. Since I've already ruled out size, what makes both of them definitively micro games?

This is what I think is the real defining aspect. They both have fewer pieces then you would expect. Ogre is an old-school wargame but it only has one small sheet of counters. Love Letter consists of just sixteen cards, plus some cubes for scoring. For their genres, they just don't have a lot of components.

And it really depends on the genre. You don't need anything to play charades and no one will be calling that a micro game.

Mind you, what is important is that micro games, as a concept, have been around since at least 1977. Probably longer but that's when the name got minted with Ogre. And, over the course of nearly four decades, a lot of micro games have been developed and made. And there are enough of them that are good, even great, to make them worth playing and enjoying.

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/5206/ogre

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/129622/love-letter

Lost Cities continues to be a good game

Since I've found myself reminiscing about Reiner Knizia, I have asked myself where to start. Over the years, I have played a lot of his games and I'm sure I'll play plenty more in the years to come. And he has made so many games I've enjoyed.

So I've decided to start with the first game I ever played by him, which has to be Lost Cities. 

I'm not going to try and summarize how to play Lost Cities. Lots of people have already done that. Come to think of it, I've been one of those people: https://boardgamegeek.com/thread/76880/simple-yet-deeply-rewarding-game

Wow. I wrote that over ten years ago.

There are two things I remember about my initial impressions of Lost Cities.

First of all, it was one of the first German Family Games I ever got and I remember how impressed I was by the components. Honestly, it would not be so cool today but a board that had been cut to lie perfectly flat and large cards with detailed, mature artwork in full color that look like they could have come out of an illustrated edition of a Jules Verne novel. That was a step into a whole new world of production values for me.

The other memory is one I mentioned in that old review. I read through the rules and found myself thinking that's it? This is the game I have read people rave about on the Internet? Then I dealt out two hands and tried playing Lost Cities against myself. And even playing the game click for me. I went from underwhelmed to impressed.

That was one of my first lessons in how simple rules can still create tough decisions. How simple rules can create complex situations.

(A few years later, when I spent some time playing Go, I realized that on a whole new level)

Over the years, I have played literally hundreds of hands of Lost Cities. I'll admit that the game doesn't interest me as much now. There are other, similar games that interest me more now. Emu Ranchers, Balloon Cup and Keltis the Card Game are three that come to mind.

But two of those games were openly influenced by Lost Cities and Balloon Cup at least owes some popularity from Lost Cities. Some of these games wouldn't exist without it. More than that, I don't know if I'd have played them without my Lost Cities experiences.

More than that, all three of those games offer more flexible choices. I do wonder if the greater restriction and card placement in Lost Cities creates a more tense game or just a more luck sensitive game.

Lost Cities isn't just a good game to introduce folk to the broader spectrum of games. It's a good game that also happens to be very accessible. After more than ten years, I'd still play it.

https://boardgamegeek.com/boardgame/50/lost-cities