|
Benjamin Hoy
Canada
Guelph
Ontario
-
The Golden City
Players: 3-4
Playing Time: 60 min
Contents: 1 game board, 72 businesses (in 4 colors), 4 decks of cards, 100 paper money and a few misc coins
In the Golden City players are competing to build up their trading empires and to build their fortunes on a fabled island.
Game Mechanics
The game mechanics are quite simple. Each turn has 4 phases: a scoring card for the turn is revealed, resources are bid on, buildings are built, and scoring for that turn occurs. The game ends when either the scoring cards run out or one player has placed all of their businesses. Whoever has the most “letters of business” (victory points) wins the game.
Scoring Revealed:
At the start of each turn a scoring card is revealed which shows a region and which kind of good will be scored that turn.
Bidding
Pairs of location/landform cards are then turned up which players bid on. These landform cards are necessary to build businesses. It is free to bid on an uncontested pair of cards. Players can also claim a pair contested cards by paying gold. Players can continue to fight over what pairs they want as many times as they'd like but the cost increases very quickly. Eventually the cost will become too high and one player will take the only remaining unoccupied pair. Each player will end up with one pair of cards at the end of this phase.
Building
Players then build businesses. Coastal businesses have no restrictions and require only 1 coastal landform card to play. Every other location requires the player to spend 2 of that resource to build there. They also need to be able to connect the business by a road to one of their preexisting trading posts. Two identical landform cards can be used as a single card of another color (eg. 2 water can be substituted for 1 meadow). Through this method players can build between 0-2 businesses per turn. In the inner area of the golden city, players require two resources + a key to build there.
This is where the game gets interesting. Each location that can be built on provides the player with a different advantage. Players can gain gold (to help in the bidding phase), landform cards (to build more businesses), Goods cards (which are crucial during scoring), bonus cards (which are worth victory points), keys (which allow you to move into the most valuable parts of the city), or straight up victory points. In the city locations the first player to a spot gains a very substantial bonus but the second player there also receives victory points. Elsewhere on the map only one player can build on one location. The key to winning is claiming the right type of locations at the right time. Goods cards and extra landform card locations are often great at the start of the game but are less useful later on. Keys are useful during the mid to late game once you have pushed forward into the city. Bonus cards are useful at any point but are extremely valuable during the end of the game. Finally, victory points are always useful. Having to strike a balance between all of these options is the key to victory.
Scoring Occurs
After players have built they receive victory points based on the card that was turned over at the start of their turn. Players will receive between 0 and 8 victory points per turn based on whether they possess buildings in the region highlighted on the card or possess the good on the card. Bonuses are also given to the player with the majority of either the territory or the good on the scoring card. Each round the areas/goods scored change but do so in predictable patterns. All 4 regions score equally so even if the forests scored frequently early in the game, the other regions will score better later on in the game. This helps to balance the game and ensure that luck doesn’t disproportionately affect one player.
Art and Theme
Overall the art of the game is fantastic. The board is beautiful as are most of the cards. The only two components I didn’t find appealing were the bidding hands which artistically didn’t really fit the rest of the game and the paper money. Not only did the paper money look a bit ugly but the use of hidden victory points detracted from the game in my opinion. Many of our games ended with no one really sure who had won even in games where the point distributions were fairly divergent. Keeping track of each player's points is difficult at best. Scoring can occur as many as 3 times a turn (twice on the scoring card and once if player builds in the city). With 3 players and 10+ turns this means there 100 or more separate instances in which one player can score. With four players it is even worse. Having a scoring track would make it clear who was in the lead (allowing players to conspire against them) and would make the end game more satisfying. It is one thing to have a surprise at the end of the game based on something a player has done or some kind of combination they’ve secretly acquired. In this game, however, players are simply overwhelmed by the number of victory points that are passed out in the course of the game and lose track of the score. I’ve found this makes for an anticlimactic end game in which a players score feels disconnected from the game that was just played.
The theme for the game is also a bit thin. By the end of the first few games I was calling the businesses houses (they resemble Settlers of Catan pieces), the paper money victory points, and the landform cards resources. Golden City is at its heart a Eurogame. It isn’t that the theme is absent it just doesn’t feel like it impacts the game play at all. Players try to acquire the most goods or territory but I never once felt like I was a trader. The game would have worked equally well as a game of conquest in which military supplies were substituted for tradable goods and military posts put in place of trading locations. This isn’t necessarily a bad thing but if you are looking for a game with a strong theme, this one might not be for you.
Overall
Overall I like this game quite a bit. The game is fast to play (approximately 1 hour), quick to teach, and has a reasonable amount of depth in terms of the strategies you can take to try to win. There is no player elimination and everyone feels like they could win up until the last turn. The rules are generally good although needed clarification on a few points, such as whether opponents businesses block the continuity of roads. The artwork is wonderful and the components on the whole are well made. The game contains an element of luck but I felt it influenced who won the game.
Value:
Most retail stores sell Golden city for 15-25$. At that price I think it is a great purchase for just about anyone who likes Euros (especially light to medium weight ones). I picked up my copy of the game for 15$ and I'm pleased to say I expect it will continue to hit the table frequently.
Pros
Fast and easy to pick up
Artwork is fantastic
Reasonably little luck
Cons
Theme feels a bit tacked on
Paper money looks lame
Would have been more exciting with a visible score track rather than hidden paper money
A few rules could have been clearer in the rule book
A little annoying turning lining up region scoring cards against the board to see which regions score
-
Andy Andersen
United States
Newark
Delaware
-
Good review. Thank you.
-
Jeff Shoot
United States
Southfield
Michigan
-
Very helpful review and thanks for writing it!!
I guess I have to say that this isn't the first time when a reviewer seemed to point out more negatives than positives, and then goes on to say he likes it! 
I realize that certain aspects carry more weight than others, for sure, so I hesistated to post this. But as a teacher who has to evaluate writing, I guess I fall back into that mode sometimes, and I have just come away with the distinct feeling that there are more things wrong than right about this game. (See especially the two paragraphs under "Art and Theme".)
Again, this is a good review and covers a lot of differenct angles. But the fact that this is a recurring phenomena, (I mean, I can even feel the reviewer's enthusiasm at points, and then later it sounds more like frustration) has now gotten my attention...
Perhaps there's just something about a game that makes it "fun" or "likeable" that simply cannot be articulated well?
Or was it that you were trying really hard to be objective about something that you really like anyway?
Well, either way, it seems to give a great picture of what the game is like, and that's why I read it... so please, this is not a complaint!
Thanks again!
-
Aaron Hitson
United States
Oregon
-
It's kinda funny that you do the same thing in your assessment of the review as you said the reviewer had done.
I noticed that you pointed out a "flaw" in his writing, and then went on to say that you weren't complaining and really liked the review. Left me thinking that you were being critical but trying to soften the blow.
That's not to say I didn't enjoy your post!
(This post is intended to be a ludicrous pun).
-
Benjamin Hoy
Canada
Guelph
Ontario
-
Thanks for the comment Jeff. I think you are correct that reviewers (myself included) tend to point out the negatives in a game more frequently than the positives because they are easier to spell out. I have a harder time, for example, describing what gives a game its "fun factor" than I do explaining that the paper money seems out of place. In my future reviews I'll try to preface more of my issues with some indication of weighting to help balance this out. Golden city is inexpensive, beautiful, and fun to play. The lack of theme, paper money, and hidden victory points are minor detractions compared to those positives.
-
Roger Howell
United States
Lenexa
Kansas
-
I would have to disagree. My experience has been the vast majority of reviews in general favor the game (in spite of the few negative comments.) The negative comments actually are very helpful. When I review a game it's because I am seriously considering a purchase and I really want to know "the bad" as much as possible.
A review is a person's opinion. I never understand it when a person criticizes a review.
Thanks for the review here. I will be receiving this game soon in a trade I made.
-
Jeff Shoot
United States
Southfield
Michigan
-
AaronJH wrote: It's kinda funny that you do the same thing in your assessment of the review as you said the reviewer had done. I noticed that you pointed out a "flaw" in his writing, and then went on to say that you weren't complaining and really liked the review. Left me thinking that you were being critical but trying to soften the blow. That's not to say I didn't enjoy your post! (This post is intended to be a ludicrous pun).
Wow... you got me!
I enjoyed your review of my review of a review... whew!
Seriously, (now that's an ironic word to use...) you made me laugh..
And I actually agree with your point! Well, sort of. I WAS complaining about the dichotomy is his review... but you're right about 'softening the blow'... because I really appreciated the review! Now that that's clear...
It reminds me of the line from Fiddler on the Roof...
"He's right, and he's right? They can't both be right!"
"You know, you are also right...." 
-
|
|
|
Posted Fri Sep 16, 2011 6:22 pm
