Andrew Rae
New Zealand
Wellington
-
My friend picked this up based on the Rio Grande label but has had some struggles getting her husband to play. Enter stage left the local gaming geek to provide a second opinion.
Alexandros comes in a reasonably tidy little box that fits with Lost Cities on your shelf. It is compact with small sized cards and a minimum of wooden components. The most common is the thin black rails that you may have seen in transamerica, and they are used in a similar way here.
The art is a fairly non descript affair with bright colours mixed onto yellowish pallet. Not particularly thematic, though fairly functional. All in all an underwhelming exdperience, yet on balance reasonably good value for money and supportive of the mechanics.
Alexandros is an area control game based in Ancient Near East in the era of Alexander the Great in about 400-500 BC. Players move Alexander
around the board, slicing off areas of territory which they can then claim for their own by placing one of four guards. Being a time of war and conquest players may attack opponents areas taking them for their own. Players score points when they choose to use an action to score, yet when they score everyone scores. A player may reinforce their territory by using one of their precious guards, however a reinforced province will not score and they will need to remove a guard before they can again score with it.
Alexandros is a game that could require considerable thought, however I beleive such an experience would be slow and laborious. And perhaps this is my major dissapointment with the game, in that it requires considerable thought for very little return. The game requires considerable computation and significant posturing and yet ultimately the game is in the hands of other players most of the time. Such is the combative nature of the game that you can be powerless before the other players.
Overall the Aexandros experience left me wanting just a little. I have no doubt that in the right company this would be a satidfying game, especially with some familiarity that would reduce the playing time. Still for me there is too much thinking for not enough game, the rate of return is just a little lacking.
So as much as I hate to I am left agreeing with the my friends husband, and I fear I won't be popular as a result. But on balance Alexandros wasn't to my liking. Still this is only after one play and I am happy to give it ago another time. Afterall one taste is never enough to know.
-
Dany Simard
Canada
Gatineau
Québec
-
My feeling about the game is the same. Too much thinking for a little game but not enough deep for a big game. It's after only one game too. I consider to give it a second chance.
-
Richard Berg
United States
South Carolina
-
"Alexandros is an area control game based in Ancient Near East in the era of Alexander the Great in about 400-500 BC. "
Alexander's campaigns were in the 330s BCE . . . so much for even vaguely thematic relevance.
RHB
-
Drew
United States
Eau Claire
Wisconsin
-
In many ways, I see this game as Colovini's first stab at a design that ultimately let to Masons. But whereas Masons isn't all that confrontational, Alexandros definitely has confrontational elements. Both games contain the one scores/all score system, but the difference is that in Masons you have a hand of cards for scoring, hidden from other players. In Alexandros, what everyone will score at any given time is wide open. So you probably wouldn't trigger scoring unless you currently had the most points on the board.
I like Alexandros. I particularly like the way the cards are used: take cards into your hand to specify the location to which Alexander will move; play cards from your hand to claim areas, call for scoring, or attempt a takeover of someone else's province. There is an almost hidden hand-management aspect to the came.
Also, the rules for attacking a province are different depending on whether you're playing two-player or three/four player. In a two player game, you just discard the cards you're using for the attack. With three or four players you must give cards to the opponent you just defeated.
On our first game, we did get a few rules wrong -- the game is different enough that it's easy to make mistakes about how Alexander can move and the situations in which you use cards. Once we cleared up some confusing, the follow-up game was tense and thinky, and I rather enjoyed it quite a bit.
-
Gordon Adams
United Kingdom
-
I am planning to buy this game because I collect any game that has Alexander the Great ....my historical hero. but need to be sure of a few things before purchasing it.
From what I have so far read, it does not seem tactically deep. Well, maybe a little AP may loom its ugly face at some stage but personally I do not mind that. I do wander about the tactical element in the game and how others might not appreciate it.
Yes, I am also aware that this is not a war game (those I love), but I would like to introduce an element of war gaming without the complexities of GBoH and one that can be finished in one evening's play.
Do you think that non-war gamers might go for this if they are interested in Risk type of games but not the GBoH series ?
Since I am planning this game for next Saturday night, I really would appreciate your comments regarding the type of gamers you played it with.
Thanks in advance.
-
-
Thank you for the review. I purchased this game because of the Alexander theme. I always have been interested in the Hellenistic Age (323 BC to 30BC) and this game covers the period slightly prior. Overall I enjoyed the game and will play it again. I scored the game a 6.2.
JMJ
-
|
|
