StormKnight
07-25-2005, 10:31 AM
I played the new Robo-Rally last night.
There was a lot I liked compared to the old version. The player boards were ncie for organizing things, and I think they were very helpful for the new players. The addition of a Power-Down token was very handy. I like how the new robots had clear arrows on them (not a big deal for me, since I painted the old robots and put a big yellow triangle on the front of each robot's base, but handy for people who don't want to do that!) I love the new flags. I'm a little dissapointed with board quality, but that's not a big deal.
There are two things about the new design that I'm just not happy with though. I thought I would see what other people's opinions are.
The first was the starting board. Now, I never liked virtual, but at least it provided a level playing field at the start of the game. With multiple positions on the starting board, its almost certain they will be unbalanced. This was definetly the case in the game we played. (It was an early beginner scenario using just the Exchange board). From the set up, it was clear that position 2 would have a huge advantage. It gave a clear shot across the boards to the flag, with a straight run onto a conveyor belt going in the right direction.
Now, Robo-Rally has a lot of uncertainty in it, and the luck of the cards can throw anything into chaos, but it doesn't get much easier than a straight shot with conveyors to help. Get lots of moves and your set. Get lots of turns, and pretty much the worst that happens is that you lose a little time spinning in place.
Sure enough, the robot from position 2 had reached flag one before some robots even made it off the starting board. She had won the game with only one other robot making it to flag 1.
This just seems like it will always be a problem with this game - some positions will be so much better or worse that it will drastically effect the outcome of the game.
The second problem was with the sand timer. While I've often contemplated how Robo-Rally might be better with a time limit, I've usually dismissed that as a bad idea. It sure seems to be here.
The first problem is that it actually seems to make the game longer. In old style Robo-Rally, players can start planning as soon as they get their cards. This tends to reduce the total amount of time it takes from dealing the cards to being programmed, especially if the dealer is one of the more skilled players. (A clever group could even have the most experienced player deal out the cards, and try to put the new or slower players on her left (receiving cards first) and the experienced or faster players on her right (receiving cards last))
With a timer, we needed to enforce that players could not look at their hands until all the hands were dealt, and it seemed to have the overall effect of dragging the game down.
It also seems to cause a problem in that, except for the slow player, you usually need more time when you are in a really bad spot. So the timer rewards a player who has a nice easy move, and hurts players who are already in a bad position.
Finally, if there is one slower player, that player is likely to keep getting cut short on moves, which will probably frustrate that player a lot. Its possible this will persuade the player to play faster, but it seems equally likely this will just persuade them to play something else. While weeding out some players might not be a bad thing, it just doesn't seem like a good trend overall.
Anyone else have thoughts or opinions on these?
There was a lot I liked compared to the old version. The player boards were ncie for organizing things, and I think they were very helpful for the new players. The addition of a Power-Down token was very handy. I like how the new robots had clear arrows on them (not a big deal for me, since I painted the old robots and put a big yellow triangle on the front of each robot's base, but handy for people who don't want to do that!) I love the new flags. I'm a little dissapointed with board quality, but that's not a big deal.
There are two things about the new design that I'm just not happy with though. I thought I would see what other people's opinions are.
The first was the starting board. Now, I never liked virtual, but at least it provided a level playing field at the start of the game. With multiple positions on the starting board, its almost certain they will be unbalanced. This was definetly the case in the game we played. (It was an early beginner scenario using just the Exchange board). From the set up, it was clear that position 2 would have a huge advantage. It gave a clear shot across the boards to the flag, with a straight run onto a conveyor belt going in the right direction.
Now, Robo-Rally has a lot of uncertainty in it, and the luck of the cards can throw anything into chaos, but it doesn't get much easier than a straight shot with conveyors to help. Get lots of moves and your set. Get lots of turns, and pretty much the worst that happens is that you lose a little time spinning in place.
Sure enough, the robot from position 2 had reached flag one before some robots even made it off the starting board. She had won the game with only one other robot making it to flag 1.
This just seems like it will always be a problem with this game - some positions will be so much better or worse that it will drastically effect the outcome of the game.
The second problem was with the sand timer. While I've often contemplated how Robo-Rally might be better with a time limit, I've usually dismissed that as a bad idea. It sure seems to be here.
The first problem is that it actually seems to make the game longer. In old style Robo-Rally, players can start planning as soon as they get their cards. This tends to reduce the total amount of time it takes from dealing the cards to being programmed, especially if the dealer is one of the more skilled players. (A clever group could even have the most experienced player deal out the cards, and try to put the new or slower players on her left (receiving cards first) and the experienced or faster players on her right (receiving cards last))
With a timer, we needed to enforce that players could not look at their hands until all the hands were dealt, and it seemed to have the overall effect of dragging the game down.
It also seems to cause a problem in that, except for the slow player, you usually need more time when you are in a really bad spot. So the timer rewards a player who has a nice easy move, and hurts players who are already in a bad position.
Finally, if there is one slower player, that player is likely to keep getting cut short on moves, which will probably frustrate that player a lot. Its possible this will persuade the player to play faster, but it seems equally likely this will just persuade them to play something else. While weeding out some players might not be a bad thing, it just doesn't seem like a good trend overall.
Anyone else have thoughts or opinions on these?