Whiz Bang surprises with its play

I recently posed a question with the Abstract Nation on Facebook asking what were three games players preferred on an 8x8 checkerboard.

Not surprisingly there was a lot of commonality in answers and IMHO a few gems missed.

So over the coming weeks I’ll offer a few short reviews of what I see as the best games to be played on an 8x8 checkerboard with the added constraint you have only two sets of 24 pieces – basically you buy two matching common checker sets.

This is #20

I mentioned when writing about Gorgon a couple of games ago that Chris Huntoon games would feature again terms of ‘Project 8x8 &48’ and here we go again with his 2009 design Whiz Bang.

Now I will admit I much prefer one word names for abstract strategy games; Dameo, Yinsh, Hive, and while there is actually a reason behind the name Whiz Bang it does not exactly catch attention as a serious game.

A bit of the story behind the name is taken from Board Game Geek; “rapid advancements in artillery during the late 19th and early 20th century meant that when Word War I broke out, the nature of war would be changed forever. That war marked a shift from the infantry charge of old to the modern artillery barrage. Pieces ranged from small mortars to powerful Howitzers. The larger, more complex the ordnance the more soldiers it required in the gun crews to properly fire it. These pieces usually shot exploding shells - called 'Whiz-Bangs' by the troops.”

Once you know that the name starts to take on some interest, as Whiz Bang tries to recreate the trench warfare of the first World War.

The game is played on an 8x8 board, with each player having 16 pieces aligned on the two rows closest to them.

The centre two rows in Whiz Bang are designated as 'No Man's Land' – which the BGG page notes was “the deadly wasteland that existed between the two sides trenches.” Since the two centre rows are obvious there is no real need to specially mark them.

In Whiz Bang the first player to safely get a ‘soldier’ (a piece) across No Man's Land and into enemy territory wins.

That sounds like a simple goal even though a ‘Soldier’ can move only one step in any direction. A line of Soldiers can also be shifted one space in the direction of their line – which reminds quite a bit of David E. Whitcher’s well-respected game Cannon.

But as in the ‘Great War’ soldiers face a barrage in attempting to cross ‘No Man’s Land’.

In Whiz Bang Soldiers attack by firing shells. The direction and range is determined by how many Soldiers are working together. Two Soldiers connected in a line can attack up to two spaces away in the direction that their line is aimed at. Three Soldiers in a line can attack up to three spaces away, and so on. A lone Soldier can attack any neighbouring space. When an attack is made, none of the attacking Soldiers are moved. The opponent's captured Soldier is removed from the board. Again, reminiscent of Cannon.

Whiz Bang is very much a game of attrition. You must occasionally send a soldier forward into the fray, knowing it will not make it.

You need also to keep defensive structures which as flexible – able to alter direction – to be effective.

It’s all about balance, and ultimately survival.

Whiz Bang accomplishes a ‘sort’ or feel of trench warfare reasonably well, while offering up a solid board game challenge too.

Gekitai a neat fit on 6x6

I recently posed a question with the Abstract Nation on Facebook asking what were three games players preferred on an 8x8 checkerboard.

Not surprisingly there was a lot of commonality in answers and IMHO a few gems missed.

So over the coming weeks I’ll offer a few short reviews of what I see as the best games to be played on an 8x8 checkerboard with the added constraint you have only two sets of 24 pieces – basically you buy two matching common checker sets.

This is #19.

While using our board as a 6x6 adds only a few viable options to ‘Project 8x8 & 48’ Gekitai, a 2020 design from Scott Brady is one of them.

In Gekitai each player has eight coloured markers and takes turns placing them anywhere on any open space on the board.

When placed, a marker pushes all adjacent pieces outwards one space if there is an open space for it to move to. If the space is occupied then it cannot move. Pieces may be pushed off the board. Pieces shoved off the board are returned to the player.

The first player to either line up three of their pieces in a row at the end of their turn -- after pushing -- or having their eight pieces on the board – again after the push action -- wins.

The game is super simple, and plays quickly, and still maintains some interest in terms of depth – planning is important – while also being fun.

There is a second version of Gekitai, but it requires additional coloured pieces so falls outside the parametres of ‘The Project’ although it is marginally a better game.

Ringo perfect coffee time diversion

Right from the start of play, Trevor and I were absolutely surprised, and in the most positive way with Ringo.

This one comes from designer Julien Griffon and designer Steffen-Spiele (www.steffen-spiele.de) via Ilo307.com in Canada, and isn’t a game you might expect to impress as much as it did.

The goal is a familiar one, and one that typically doesn’t create game play which rises above average at best – get four-in-a-row and win.

But Ringo offers a refreshing take on the old standard.

The game starts with a playing field consisting of eight rings: four red and four blue.

Now I must pause here to say just how nice the metal rings are. Just pure wow for a game of this kind – huge marks for the overall components in Ringo with the rings top-shelf.

On a turn, the active player places a disc of their colour in any ring – yes either player’s colour which is another neat twist here -- then moves the ring to a position adjacent orthogonally to another ring. There is no board with Ringo so games can develop in some pretty interesting ways.

If you have placed all your pieces – nice wooden ones by the way – you then begin using one already in play.

Whoever first creates a row of four discs or four rings – orthogonally or diagonally so again a neat twist -- in their colour wins.

Ringo is sort of a sister game to Stakko, (soon to be reviewed), and Nonago reviewed previously which was a solid little game, but this one is far better – one that will be in our thoughts for top-five game of the year come Christmas.

Adh Mor far more fun than anticipated

 

Up front Adh Mor, it apparently means "Good Luck" in Irish, was not a game that was on my radar.

And when I opened the small box and saw that you rolled dice my interest didn’t tick up even a little bit.

Then Trevor and I set up the game, read the rules and started rolling dice – about five-minutes from box opening to that first dice roll.

Immediately, we were captivated by this one from prolific game designer David McCord and publisher NewVenture Games.

So to begin with, as are most of the games from this publisher, Adh Mor has a solid wood board, and nice wooden pegs. It comes in a small box as many from this publisher does, so it’s highly portable -- so ideal for a coffee shop.

In terms of game play it’s about as simple as you can get. The game begins with just four of each player's pieces on the 6x6 board, (each player has 18).

There are two dice, one a common D6, the other with three white faces and three black.

A roll of the unique dice dictates the choices available to place or move a peg, so if you roll white you must move a peg which starts on a white space.

A piece moves any combination of directions based on the D6 – without moving through the same spot twice.

The exception is a roll of six, which means you add a peg to the board.

Obviously, the more pegs there are on the board the less move options you will have on a roll.

The game is for two, and plays in 20-minutes according to the box, but it tends to play longer it seems – almost to the point of seeming just a bit draggy in mid game. Early there are numerous moves, and late you hope for low rolls and longer moves, which become difficult on a more crowded board. That middle game play seems just a bit slow, although not so much so that it drops this game more than a smidge for Trevor and I.

A most pleasant surprise to be sure – maybe the biggest positive surprise of the year to date

Adh Mor is just a fun little dance in a phone booth which is easy to recommend.

 

Gorgon is a surprisingly solid 8x8

I recently posed a question with the Abstract Nation on Facebook asking what were three games players preferred on an 8x8 checkerboard.

Not surprisingly there was a lot of commonality in answers and IMHO a few gems missed.

So over  the coming weeks I’ll offer a few short reviews of what I see as the best games to be played on an 8x8 checkerboard with the added constraint you have only two sets of 24 pieces – basically you buy two matching common checker sets.

This is #18.

Gorgon is a 2001 design from Chris Huntoon which is certainly part of the broader checker family.

I would be remiss if I did not start here with a big tip of the chapeau to Huntoon whose design efforts will pop up again before Project 8x8 & 48 comes to its end. While not a lot of designers seem focused on the checker-game and its potential, Huntoon has done just that and he has created some very interesting games as a result.

In Gorgon each player starts with 16 ‘Gorgons’ – yes just common checkers - eight on each of the two back ranks.

On each turn a Gorgon moves diagonally forward, sliding to an adjacent empty square, again just straight old checkers at this point.

Where Gorgon ramps things up is that they may petrify an opponent’s Gorgon by jumping over it to an empty space on the other side. A petrified Gorgon is unable to move and blocks the space it occupies for the remainder of the game. This is a game changer in terms of tactics, especially as the first player who cannot move loses.

To mark a petrified piece flip it over.

The standard game is played without forced jumps, with forced jumps suggested as a variant.

Jumps may be in any of the five non retreating directions: vertically, diagonally forward, and sideways. Multiple jumps are possible.

Another interesting aspect of Gorgon in that the first and last row of the board are considered to be connected. A Gorgon leaving one edge will be re-entered at the appropriate space on the other edge.

A checker player will adapt to this game with ease, but the impact of areas of the board being blocked is fresh enough to make it a must try. Nicely done Mr. Huntoon.

This one is a near 8x8 classic

I recently posed a question with the Abstract Nation on Facebook asking what were three games players preferred on an 8x8 checkerboard.

Not surprisingly there was a lot of commonality in answers and IMHO a few gems missed.

So over the coming weeks I’ll offer a few short reviews of what I see as the best games to be played on an 8x8 checkerboard with the added constraint you have only two sets of 24 pieces – basically you buy two matching common checker sets.

This is #17.

Breakthrough was designed by William Daniel 'Dan' Troyka in 2000 and was apparently originally played on a 7x7 board.

After the size of the board was changed, it won the 2001 8x8 Game Design Competition, sponsored by About Board Games, Abstract Games Magazine and the Strategy Gaming Society.

Winning the 2001 contest really makes it an obvious inclusion for ‘Project 8x8 & 48’ and certainly the game scores highly in terms of its pure simplicity – although that does not mean strategy and tactics come easily here. (It should be noted this one can be played on a 10x10 board, each players having 30 pieces.)

In Breakthrough, players each start with 16 pieces aligned on the two rows closest to them – a very standard starting array in many games here.

Players alternate moving one of their own pieces per turn, trying to reach the opposite side of the board. The first player to do so wins.

A piece can move forward or diagonally forward to an adjacent empty cell. Alternatively, it can capture an enemy piece diagonally forward.

Captures are not compulsory – which is a tad different from most ‘checker-esque’ games.

Captures cannot be chained either in Breakthrough.

This game is all about positional play as the two forces approach each other. There is something of a feeling of ‘detente’ as forces drudge toward the eventual battle line.

Then one player will make the plunge and the battle is fully on. The first to break the line and get a runner to the other side will win most times.

This game resonates less with me personally than many in this project. The start a bit slow, the end a bit anticlimactic for me. Still Breakthrough is one players need to try for themselves as many do like it quite a lot.

 

Abande is a solid little stacker

I recently posed a question with the Abstract Nation on Facebook asking what were three games players preferred on an 8x8 checkerboard.

Not surprisingly there was a lot of commonality in answers and IMHO a few gems missed.

So over the coming weeks I’ll offer a few short reviews of what I see as the best games to be played on an 8x8 checkerboard with the added constraint you have only two sets of 24 pieces – basically you buy two matching common checker sets.

This is #16.

So, a few reviews back I noted how easily our 8x8 games can be used to play a game needing a 6x6 board, (it was India), going as far as to mark the board with a thin black felt marker to define the smaller area.

Now that the 6x6 area is defined without really taking away from the overall look in IMHO, we can use the points to play 7x7 games just as we use the full board to play 9x9 games such as Renpaarden and Fianco already part of ‘Project 8x8 & 48’.

The first 7x7 offering is Dieter Stein’s 2005 creation Abande.

Abande is a versatile little gem that also plays fine on a 37-space hexagonal board, and other configurations too.

Each player starts with 18 stackable pieces held initially off-board.

Players in turn enter new pieces on the board or move pieces already placed to capture opponent pieces (thus building stacks).

The trick here is that pieces on the board must always be connected -- adjacent to other pieces.

When all pieces are placed and both players pass their turn in sequence, points are collected for pieces and stacks.

In Abande pieces are placed on the intersections of the lines, so a perfect fit here.

Initially the board is empty.

Players take turns to;

• enter a new piece on the board, or
• move a stack already on the board on top of an adjacent opponent stack, or
• pass the turn, which is possible only if you have no more pieces in hand.

The game ends if both players pass their turn in sequence.

You may enter a piece as “long as you have pieces in your hand and you do not wish to or cannot move a stack on the board, you must enter a new piece on an empty space connected to the band,” notes the designer’s game page.

Instead of entering a new piece you may also move a stack under your control on the board. As in most stacking games, the top most piece determines the owner of a stack.

Stacks – a single piece is a ‘stack’ which moves one space into any direction, they cannot be split.

Stacks capture by moving on top of an opponent stack. They cannot move to an empty space or on top of a friendly stack.

Stacks cannot grow larger than three pieces high.

Moving is allowed only after Black has entered the second piece, which means Black cannot directly capture White’s reply to the initiative.

The game is over when both players pass their turn in succession.

When scoring, players may remove all stacks not connected to an opponent stack, because each stack not connected to a stack controlled by the opponent is worth zero points.

All other stacks count towards a player’s score:

• Add 1 point for every single piece of your colour
• Add 2 points for every double stack you control.
• Add 3 points for every triple stack you control.

This is a tricky one because making a stack of two makes it an immediate target for the opponent to control a three high stack, and you can’t add to a stack you control. There is a real element of ‘chicken’ here, to see who makes that first move to create stacks.

Once a three stack is made you immediately look for how you might isolate it so it does not count at game end.

A real nice option for this little project.

 

Surakarta worth play based on its historic nature

One of the strengths of abstract strategy games is how the varied ‘mechanics’ utilized across the genre often make you think in a decidedly different way.

That is certainly what Guilder Trevor and I found as we cracked the box on a NewVenture Games version of Surakarta.

Surakarta is an Indonesian abstract strategy board game for two players, named after Surakarta, Central Java, featuring as noted, an unusual method of capture. It is different enough Wikipedia noted the method of capture “is "possibly unique" and "not known to exist in any other recorded board game".”

Well whether it is the only game using it or not, it is rare enough among games that it had Trevor and I scratching our heads more than a few times trying to ascertain exactly what was the best move to make, and realizing our previous game experience didn’t offer us much in terms of insight with Surakarta.

Again from Wikipedia, it is noted, “the name of the game in Indonesian is permainan, which simply translates as ‘the game’. In Java, the game is also called dam-daman. It was first published in France in 1970 as ‘Surakarta’. The game is called ‘Roundabouts’ in Sid Sackson's The Book of Classic Board Games.”

It is background I found interesting in as much as I would have assumed a very ancient game, which it likely is, but is obviously only in the last 50 years or so that it has gained an audience outside its home area.

Surakarta is a two-player game, with the object of the game to capture all 12 of the opponent's pieces; or, if no further captures are possible, to have more pieces remaining in play than the opponent.

Pieces always rest on the points of intersection of the board's grid lines.

On a turn, a player either moves one of their pieces a single step in any direction (like a chess king in that regard) to an unoccupied point, or makes a capturing move special to Surakarta, which is the mind twister of this one.

“A capturing move consists of traversing along an inner or outer circuit around at least one of the eight corner loops of the board, followed by landing on an enemy piece, capturing it,” notes Wikipedia. “Captured pieces are removed from the game.”

The corner loops certainly give the board a different look, and having to envision capture approaches using them is a rather fresh challenge you should appreciate if you like abstract strategy gems.

Any number of unoccupied points may be travelled over, before or after traversing a loop. Only unoccupied points may be travelled over; jumping over pieces is not permitted.

Capturing is also always optional which is not unique but rather unusual for a game of this type which tend to enforce capture.

This is a game that fits into the broader checker family in my view, and so checker fans will certainly want to check Surakarta out.

As for a broader audience this is different enough for two players to recommend, and the all wooden board and pieces from www.newventuregames.com is so nice, it is certainly worth consideration.

 

Crossings a game that deserves play time

I recently posed a question with the Abstract Nation on Facebook asking what were three games players preferred on an 8x8 checkerboard.

Not surprisingly there was a lot of commonality in answers and IMHO a few gems missed.

So over the coming weeks I’ll offer a few short reviews of what I see as the best games to be played on an 8x8 checkerboard with the added constraint you have only two sets of 24 pieces – basically you buy two matching common checker sets.

This is #15.

Talk about a game that seems like it was created for ‘Project 8x8 & 48’

Crossings by designer Robert Abbott is actually far from a new game. In fact this is actually one of the older games in the ‘Project’ dating back to 1969, clearly making it a vintage game being more than 50 years old.

Interestingly, Crossings is quite obviously the root for the highly touted Epaminondas released by the same designer in 1975 with the same basic ideas involved albeit on an expansive14x12 board.

In pure abstract strategy terms Epaminondas is arguably a deeper game, but it is also more inaccessible – meaning it is more difficult to get your head around play on the big board whereas Crossings is a simpler game to absorb, while still offering a nice challenge.

Crossings has had its share of press too including being published in Sid Sackson's A Gamut of Games and Stephen Addison's 100 Other Games to Play on a Chessboard.

Each player starts with 16 pieces in the two rows closest to them.

The object of the game is to reach the opposite side of the board with a piece, while preventing the opponent from doing the same, by moving checkers in ‘phalanx style.

As noted Crossings is an ancestor of Epaminondas, but with two significant differences;

*When phalanxes collide, only the front piece is captured. This is huge because in the big brother game you can lose whole swathes of pieces and feel devastated. Here there is a more subtle give and take in-game.

* Successfully ‘crossed’ pieces are immobile and can't be captured.

Movement has a group; a series of one or more same-coloured stones adjacent to one another in a line (diagonal, horizontal, or vertical). A stone may belong to one or more groups. (From Wikipedia);

*A player may move a single stone, an entire group, or a subgroupA group consisting of a single stone may move one space diagonally or orthogonally into an empty square.

*A group must move along the line which defines it. It may move a number of spaces equal to the number of pieces in that group.

*When part of a group is moved (a subgroup), it must move along the line which defines it. It may move a number of spaces equal to the number of pieces in the subgroup.

*When a subgroup is moved it must involve one of the end stones.

*Pieces may not move onto an occupied square.

Capturing an enemy stone;

* If the first stone in a moving group encounters a single enemy stone, the group's movement stops there, and the enemy stone is captured.

* If the first stone in a moving group encounters an end stone of an opponent's group, it can capture that stone if the opponent's group is smaller.

* If it cannot capture the end stone because the opponent's group is the same size or larger, it is not allowed to move on to that square.

End of the game;

*A player possibly wins the game if they get a stone on the home row, or row furthest from their side. If the opponent cannot get a stone of their own onto the first player's home row in the next move, the first player wins. Otherwise, those stones are ‘locked’; they cannot be moved or captured. The next attempt at crossing, as this is called, will determine the winner (unless it, too, is immediately followed by a counter-crossing, and so on).

It is the locking of pieces, and the ability to respond with a follow-up Crossing which make it feel like you can comeback and win late, keeping you focused here.

This is an ideal ‘Project’ offering, and very much worth playing.

'Bloody' fine miniature set

Head over to heliostabletop.ca and if you are into gaming minis you will be in for some very big smiles.

This Canadian crew is doing some very sweet miniatures with an eye to them being perfect for D&D-style role playing games.

Each month they are offering up a small box of themed minis which actually come with ‘an encounter’ gamers can use to insert into their campaigns meaning the minis can hit the table without the GM having to bodger up an encounter and create a stats package etc – that can come later though.

Now some of the mini packs are a tad more versatile too – including the Haemoturgy Lab set being reviewed here.

As the name implies these are some blood-themed baddies, and they come looking decidedly dastardly, if not outright evil.

Now you might open a dungeon door in a D&D-style campaign and find theses blighters waiting to bleed you dry, but they would be equally fine on a post apocalyptic setting, or a gothic horror RPG, or one were vampires abound. There is some really nice flexibility in this set, and gamers will appreciate that as we don’t usually play only D&D RPGs.

So to get some insight to these minis – which I should note Jordan one of our gaming gang’s more enthusiastic painters fell in love with before they even arrived – I turned to Joel, the lead encounter designer and of the in-house DMs at Helios for some insights into the creation of this box.

Canadian designer

“One of my favourite things to do, and a strength of my DM’ing is creating fun, engaging and challenging combat encounters that get the players working together to succeed,” he offered via email. “Combat in 5e can be a slog if it involves standing still and hitting a sack of hit points turn after turn. That's why it's my goal to provide interesting objectives, difficult choices and ways to interact with the terrain to keep the players engaged during combat. 

“The first thing I like to do for inspiration is to look closely at the miniatures. That gets my imagination going, and allows me to start thinking about the overall theme. I also try to incorporate small details of the miniatures themselves into the stat blocks and overall objective/mechanics of the combat encounter.”

You can almost see the gears turning for Joel coming at the process from the perspective of a player with a design flair.

“With the Haemoturgy Lab, the first thing that stood out to me was that the minis we chose all had a certain level of human features to them,” said Joel. “This immediately made me think that a good narrative would be that these creatures had once been human, and had suffered some form of strange mutation. I noticed that the creatures had biological texture and bodies also had a blood/gore type appearance, along with shards and spikes that were protruding. So in my mind, this was some type of blood magic experiment that had gone wrong. The encounter begins with the players arriving at the abandoned lab. On the map that I designed, the sterile white tiles are covered in blood in places, and some stasis pods are broken open, with corpses half falling out of them. It immediately sets the scene that something bad has happened, and may well happen again...”

Here you can see the versatility that is inherent to this box from Helios in terms of crossing genres more easily than say the kobolds we recently reviewed which are typically D&D fare and not much beyond that.

As for the creatures, the Haemolyser is large, covered in spikes and looked brutish and reckless to me.

“I wanted it to be mobile, and have it feel cinematic as it crashes through players and the operating tables/stasis pods with its reckless charge feature,” said Joel. “Considering how much larger it is than the other creatures, I also wanted to incorporate a story reason for this within its stat block.

“That’s where it’s “Flesh Consumption” feature originated. The idea is that it can consume organic biomass (aka PCs in this case) in order to grow bigger and stronger. This ability is also fun because it creates a game play loop within the encounter, in which party members can deal slashing damage to the Haemolyser in order to try and cut open the monster to free their trapped allies.”

Here is a strength of Helios, the minis come as more rounded creatures ready for game play, not just a plastic mini to paint.

“The Blood Symbiotes are a fun way to balance the encounter by turning up the stakes as the Haemolyser gets more injured,” continued Joel. “After certain thresholds of damage are reached, they slough off the body of the Haemolyser and come to life. They can both heal allies and hit the PCs with ranged attacks while slithering up the walls to stay out of the way. This gives players another problem to overcome, and allows ranged characters or spellcasters to shine.”

The ‘encounter’ for this one really is a moody one in the sense it fits the creatures like the proverbial glove.

“To add some randomness and a dynamic element to the encounter, the ‘Failed Sanguinations’ are randomly introduced to the battle on initiative count 20. A d12 is rolled to determine which stasis pod they burst out of,” explained Joel.

“For added fun, I like to let each player have a turn at rolling this d12 to determine their spawn location. These creatures are designed to grapple and debuff the party with their infectious bites, creating attrition and dividing attention away from the Haemolyser. They have relatively low health, so it is up to the players on whether they think it is worth focusing on the big boss, or taking down these creatures before they debilitate the party too much. 

“Adding decision trees into every combat is something that I love to do, because I think it makes things more interesting for the players. Instead of the barbarian standing still and hitting every time, they now need to choose between options such as: Do I try and kill the big damage dealing Haemolyser? Do I save my grappled wizard from the bites of the Failed Sanguinations? Should I smash the stasis pods to prevent new enemies appearing on the battlefield? Should I change from my Warhammer to my battleaxe to free the fighter who is currently stuck inside the boss and being dissolved? Etc. I think the Haemoturgy Lab encounter does a great job of being both fun and engaging, while also telling a cohesive story through the battlemap and stat blocks. The fact that it was also designed specifically around the appearance of the miniatures we provide also gives it that added level of verisimilitude, because the players can connect what they see on the table, to exactly what is happening to their heroes." 

Now in general terms the Helios minis are excellent and the encounters such a great add-on that it’s easy to suggest taking time to look through what they offer if you mini game – but Haemoturgy Lab is just a smidge above the average making it one to definitely search out.

Yahoo for Gee Haw!

It’s sort of a weird thing, I don’t usually go looking for solo games yet in the last few weeks two excellent ones have hit my little ‘in front of TV’ game table.

The first was Cavern Shuffle: Maze of the Minotaur by Canadian game designer Ryan Dawson, and now Gee Haw from veteran game designer David McCord.

While Cavern Shuffle used a special deck of cards it was very much a game built on the foundation of Patience.

With Gee Haw, McCord uses a standard 52-card deck but created a very different solo challenge.

“I had been brainstorming the use of standard playing cards for non-standard uses,” via email. “‘Cause…why not? At the same time, I’d been thinking about solo games and how patience-style card games worked. As such thoughts swirled around in my head, somehow the notion of red/right and black/left came together. A few hours of noodling around — et voila! — the game was born.”

When asked what were you trying to achieve with game? McCord replied, “Firstly, I guess, simply striving to create a unique solo game.

“Also, portability is always an element that I pursue in my designs. Most of my friends know that I’m the game guy, and I always have an emergency game case in my car. So using a standard card deck (which is already in there), all I need to carry is the peg board and 10 pegs. Gee-Haw fits nicely in little acrylic box or even a zip-top baggie. Slips right into a pocket, too.”

In addition to the deck of cards Gee-Haw has a very nice wooden score board and pegs -- rather standard fare from NewVenture Games in a very positive way.

Here the challenge is to get all 10 pegs – valued ace to 10 -- to either the red or the black side of the score board, based on the suit colour of the numbered cards and the ‘wild card’ powers of the face cards – kings and queens allow you to move any peg, jacks allow the movement of two pegs. You decide how to utilize most of the card values – so a 10 can be a lone 10 peg move, or a peg combo which totals 10.

You play through the deck hoping to win, but most often coming to the end of the deck singling another loss – yes Gee Haw is a tough one.

McCord did note, “a shuffled poker deck provides nearly limitless replayability. Even considering the probabilities offered by 52 cards, Gee-Haw can be won about 30 per cent of the time, which is a pretty good rate for a pocket-size solo game.”

So far I am apparently a below par Gee Haw player, but it’s quick and I will challenge it again with some vigour. As McCord also noted Gee Haw is “easy on the brain. “Relaxing, not taxing.”

McCord said he was surprised I had not asked about the name of the game (as most people do). He explains it in a how-to-play video, but being a farm boy I caught on before that.

But I will let the designer explain.

“I know a lot of horse people, and somewhere along the line I learned the Gee and the Haw use to drive a team of horses. The teamster is telling the horses to turn left or right, and left or right is what the game’s all about,” said McCord.

Ultimately Gee Haw is so different as a solitaire game – at least to me – that it’s an easy high recommendation. Simple rules and yet challenging time burner. Check it out at ww.newventuregames.com

Diploe 'stacks-up' well as part of 8x8 Project

 

I recently posed a question with the Abstract Nation on Facebook asking what were three games players preferred on an 8x8 checkerboard.

Not surprisingly there was a lot of commonality in answers and IMHO a few gems missed.

So over the coming weeks I’ll offer a few short reviews of what I see as the best games to be played on an 8x8 checkerboard with the added constraint you have only two sets of 24 pieces – basically you buy two matching common checker sets.

This is #14.

Dipole, a 2007 release from Mark Steere is basically an annihilation-style game in as much as you win if all of your opponent's checkers are removed from the board.

In Dipole each player starts with a single stack of 12 checkers. If you have chunky checkers like mine it’s a huge stack, but fortunately you will quickly be deconstructing the stack into smaller stacks.

A stack, or a portion of a stack, is moved a distance equal to the number of checkers in the moved stack. So, as an example a three-stack, can be moved a distance of three squares, and the initial 12-stack can’t be moved in its entirety.

Non-capturing moves must be made forward or diagonally forward – in a straight line, no changing direction.

Interestingly, in Dipole stack movement is not obstructed by intervening stacks, regardless of size or colour.

Capturing moves can be made in any of eight directions, but a stack can capture only equal size or smaller stacks.

To facilitate capture as a game continues stacks can be moved onto other, like-coloured stacks. Merging moves can only be made in the forward or diagonally forward directions as well.

This one won’t be mistaken for the best of ‘Project 8x8 & 48’ but is certainly worthy of inclusion with some interesting decisions in terms of building and deconstructing stacks, and limited move options unless capturing.

 

Simple rules but Stakko leaves one wanting more

 

Stakko – you might have heard of it under the name 27 – is a small box, two-player abstract strategy game from publisher Steffen Spiele.

You might think of Stakko, by designer Laurent Escoffier, at least the version reviewed here, as a sister to Ringo and Nonaga, and is also the weakest of trio.

Each player has a stack of pieces at opposite ends of a nine-disc pathway – all the pieces are wood here and in that regard Stakko is very nice.

A player’s discs must be moved to the other end – basically crossing the field to the spot your opponent starts.

Pieces are moved based on the number of stacks you control.

If you land on an opponent’s stack you end up controlling that stack as your piece is on top.

This one should have been a fun ‘coffee break-style’ filler, based on easy rules, nice game pieces and quick play – but it wasn’t.

This one just never rose above, it's too quick to get into, at least for Trevor and I.

In Canada you can find Stakko at ilo307.com

Solo game drips steampunk theme

 

If you are into solo gaming, and you enjoy a darker world to explore then you might want to look at Clockwork Insanity : A Solo Steampunk Card Game.

This one drips atmosphere albeit a bit of a mixed bag in that regard.

At it’s heart it looks and feels steampunk, but there is a healthy dose of gothic, and a full dash of horror in this one too.

So what of the story here?

“While deployed as a guard to suppress a riot at the Claybury Asylum for the Criminally Insane you discover you are trapped by the automata of the notorious inmate Dr Von Klutzn,” notes its Kickstarter page.

“Can you escape from the asylum by journeying through its dark halls and cells to discover the 5 keys needed to successfully exit the building while maintaining the precious air supply that powers your pneumatic suit and weapons, or will you become yet another victim of the mechanical monsters roaming the asylum?”

This is a nice build as a Print n Play, card driven you can sleeve the game driver rather easily, and then the rules which I at least prefer in print rather than on a screen. The cards here fits the theme, being steampunk through and through but they are AI if that is a factor in your game buying decisions.

From there game play is straightforward and rather well-laid out too.

“Clockwork Insanity is played through a series of rounds which represent the areas of the asylum you are searching for a key,” notes the KS page. “The end of each round is triggered when you retrieve a key, (you are seeking five), within the Exploration deck. The last round is completed once you have retrieved the final key and played to the end of the Exploration deck to successfully escape from the asylum. . .

“Once you have acquired the fifth key you play to the end of the Exploration deck to complete the final turn. If you succeed in reaching the end of the Exploration deck with the five keys you have still succeeded in escaping from the Claybury Asylum for the Criminally Insane.”

This is very much a theme-driven one, that you best be into before hitting print, but once into it Clockwork Insanity is a solid little time burner.

Fianco a 2005 design by Fred Horn

I recently posed a question with the Abstract Nation on Facebook asking what were three games players preferred on an 8x8 checkerboard.

Not surprisingly there was a lot of commonality in answers and IMHO a few gems missed.

So over the coming weeks I’ll offer a few short reviews of what I see as the best games to be played on an 8x8 checkerboard with the added constraint you have only two sets of 24 pieces – basically you buy two matching common checker sets.

This is #13.

Back a few when I added Renpaarden to the 8x8 & 48 project because 9x9 games work so nicely using the checkerboard intersections I said there would be another game or two that used that little trick.

Well here is the next on; Fianco a 2005 design by Fred Horn, and a production board produced at one point by Gerhards Spiel und Design.

Fianco, which I have seen online is Italian for ‘side’ or ‘flank’, has a rather unique initial lay out – see photo – with the simple goal to be the first player to move one of your pieces to the opponent's back line.

The rules here are rather straight forward too, making it an easy try with your own 8x8 & 48 Project set.

On a turn, you move or jump with one of your pieces either forward (whether orthogonally or diagonally) or sideways. In this one backwards movement is not allowed.

You can capture in Fianco too – in fact you must if possible.

You capture by jumping (diagonally forward) over an enemy stone – so very much like regular checkers -- landing on the immediate empty cell.

While capturing is mandatory as noted multiple / maximum is not enforced.

Fianco is not particularly unique, but you start from a very different formation, that provides just enough difference that it’s a good one to add into a play mix.

Generatorb more game than expected

I recently posed a question with the Abstract Nation on Facebook asking what were three games players preferred on an 8x8 checkerboard.

Not surprisingly there was a lot of commonality in answers and IMHO a few gems missed.

So over the coming weeks I’ll offer a few short reviews of what I see as the best games to be played on an 8x8 checkerboard with the added constraint you have only two sets of 24 pieces – basically you buy two matching common checker sets.

This is #12.

This one is interesting as it reminds me how long I have been reviewing board games.

It was back in July 2015 I first reviewed Generatorb for Yorkton This Week.

I liked Tim Schutz’s 2001 well-enough back then, and it remains solidly interesting today.

Generatorb is a game of jumping and capturing where you attempt to get one of your own pieces in your opponent's generator square – basically across the board which is positioned as a diamond between the players.

The orientation of the board, while not unique to Generatorb, is not used too often, so it gives this abstract strategy game an unusual visual playing field. It makes you visualize moves in a slightly askew fashion from the norm.

Each player requires 24 stackable game pieces – so the max for the 8x8 & 48 Project.

The playing pieces are called Orbs.

Orbs move by jumping in a straight line over another playing piece to the empty space behind it. Orbs can go in any of the eight directions when moving, but must jump over a piece to move. Orbs can do multiple jumps if it is possible, similar to a checkers jump.

With four pieces starting on the board the remaining 20 are held in reserve off the board.

After an Orb moves out of the Orb-Generator and vacates a space, a new playing piece is placed in the empty space. This is done at the end of a player's turn. It's not considered a turn to create a new Orb. Only one new Orb can be created per turn. Players may leave a space in the Orb-Generator empty until another turn if they so desire.

Capturing opponent pieces is an element of Generatorb. Orbs capture by jumping over a playing piece onto your opponents playing piece. Orbs can only capture Orbs not Spheroids.

So what is a Spheroid you ask?

Spheroids are two Orbs stacked on top of each other to create one playing piece. They are created by jumping an Orb over another playing piece onto one of your own Orbs.

Spheroids are more versatile pieces as they can move two ways, either like an Orb or one space in any direction. Similar to a Chinese Checker.

Spheroids capture by landing on your opponent's piece. Spheroids can capture Orbs and Spheroids.

To split a Spheroid move the top piece like a Spheroid and leave the bottom piece behind. You can split a Spheroid as a move or as a capture. Yes, a splitting Spheroid can capture another Spheroid.

That was basically the game when created.

However, good games evolve, and Generatorb did just that, becoming much more in the process of that evolution.

A few years after creating the game Schutz revisited his creation and added a third piece; the Globe.

Globes are a stack of three same coloured game pieces and are created by stacking an Orb on a Spheroid, a Spheroid on an Orb or by splitting a Spheroid and stacking half of it onto another Spheroid.

Place a stack of three pieces two spaces in front of your Orb-Generator … each player starts with a Globe.

Globes have several rules attached to them which add depth to the game.

Only your own orbs and spheroids may use your globe to jump over as a move.

Globes move along the board like a queen in chess, giving them significant freedom in terms of traversing the board.

Globes cannot jump over other game pieces.

Globes cannot be placed on an Orb-generator core, but may be placed onto any other Orb-generator space.

Globes cannot be captured or capture other game pieces.

Globes cannot be placed or created orthogonally next to another globe regardless of what colour the other globe is.

Once created, Globes cannot be split into its component parts.

The abilities and limitations of Globe pieces add much to the game.

In addition, a new win condition was added as well.

You win by taking control of five of the Front Line spaces. This is the line of eight spaces across the middle of the diamond.

With the revised rules Generatorb goes from the rather mundane, to a game that edges its way into comparisons with some of the best alternative games for your checkerboard, in the conversation with great games such as Lines of Action and Dameo.

This is certainly more game than I think most might imagine and deserves some play exploration.

 

Fine art enhances game play of Embers

 

When it comes to 18-card game offerings nobody produces more games on a regular basis than Button Shy.

And more often than not the games they release are ones you will want to take a look at.

Now you can add Embers to that list.

Embers comes from designer Steven Aramini, and artist Steven De Waele.

And we must start with a tip of the hat to the artist for doing a really fine job on this one. I get a Norse mythology vibe off it, although I believe there is no specific culture this one is tied too. Still the art works.

As for the game play, well to start with this is a solo game of survival – and the copy I am reviewing was Print n Play. At just 18-cards it’s a quick print, cut and sleeve affair.

In Embers you are using your heroes to defend against waves of encroaching monsters and to keep your campfire lit. It’s a simple enough premise, but it works.

You have a band of heroes and through the game you will use each hero's unique strengths and movements to defend the fire from attack and prepare for the next onslaught.

The fire is ultimately the key. If it dies --- well so do you.

As you might expect though monsters tend to be relentless critters, and in each turn of Embers new monsters spawn – again not new but then you must have a challenge for it to be fun.

In the game you spend each hero’s action points to move heroes around the campfire, attack monsters, upgrade abilities, support each other, and forage for material to keep the fire going. Herein lies the meaty part of the game. There are decisions to be made and never enough action points to do everything you want to. Making the right choice at the right time is crucial to a player’s success.

After the heroes act, the monsters strike: damage the nearest hero or even the fire itself.

When the night card appears, a new round begins. Survive four full rounds without the fire being extinguished to win.

A compact game supported with fine art making Embers a great solo option as evenings darken sooner as fall arrives.

Check it out at www.buttonshy.com

Sneak through or blow things up

 

I recently posed a question with the Abstract Nation on Facebook asking what were three games players preferred on an 8x8 checkerboard.

Not surprisingly there was a lot of commonality in answers and IMHO a few gems missed.

So over the coming weeks I’ll offer a few short reviews of what I see as the best games to be played on an 8x8 checkerboard with the added constraint you have only two sets of 24 pieces – basically you buy two matching common checker sets.

This is #11.

In terms of ‘Project 8x8 & 48’ few have more straight forward rules than Boom & Zoom (Second Edition) from designer Ty Bomba and released in 2018.

This is a much more basic design in terms of components than the first edition, making it perfect here.

Each player has four towers, three pieces high, as seen in photo of the game’s starting position.

From there, on a turn players do one of two actions; they can ‘boom"’ (fire) or ‘zoom’ (move). In both cases the action is the number of spaces equal to the tower's height. The move is in a straight line.

Pieces can zoom or boom in all eight directions, and ultimately you want to get pieces across the board and off so they count at the end of a game.

Along the way you get to blow up pieces. If you are in range you simply remove the top piece of any opponent tower. You want ‘fork’ situations where a boom hits more than one stack.

The twist here is that the game ends when only one player's pieces remain on the board, and the player who managed to exit the most pieces off of the opponent's side of the board wins.

Therein lies the crux of Boom & Zoom, finding a balance of getting pieces through to score, while maintaining some forces to defend against your opponent getting too far ahead.

Games are generally close and you can find yourself facing decisions about whether to boom a piece as it would bring the end of the game closer, and you can see you are behind.

This one plays fast, but there is more depth, and strategy than a first look might suggest.

A most-pleasant surprise to explore.