-
I see there's already some comparisons to other games, neither of which I own, but I've been scouting Age of Conan and I wonder if I should make it my next purchase... or wishlist present, since Christmas and my Birthday are just around the corner
I run a gaming group in my little town and we've seen a few interesting and hefty titles go by. I got into Chaos in the Old world after finally seeing it in action at Kublacon. Chaos, Arkham Horor, and games like Fury of Dracula have a level of 'heft' I find appealing, and the gameplay experience in them is incredibly satisfying one way or another. So now I'm looking at Age of Conan with a few questions, wondering how it'll play.
I typically go for empire-building world conquest games. War-themed games are pretty much my entire personal inventory (with the sole exception of Carcassonne...), so Age of Conan will not be out of place. My biggest concern is some reports here of diminished player-v-player actions, like fighting other empires. Just how diminished are these? Beyond the first age?
I can stand games like Settlers of Catan, which doesn't have much in the way of player competition other than stealing people's resources and cutting them off. I would hope to expect more player involvement than this in AoC, but is it?
I enjoy games like Risk, Chaos in the Old World, and Arkham Horror. Based on these things will I enjoy Age of Conan?
-
Jan Ozimek
Denmark
Aalborg
Must resist M:tG. Boardgames are my methadone :)
-
AoC is fairly similar to CitOW. The areas you typically control are less dynamic, and more risk style with attacking adjacent regions.
There is plenty player interaction and conflict. The Conan figure is travelling around the board semi-autonomously and gives some advantages to the player currently controlling Conan.
-
James
United States
Midlothian
Virginia
-
I am really the target demographic for Conan and it didn't quite click for me. I love asymmetric sides and empire building; I love the Howard Conan stories and reread them frequently.
YMMV, of course, but I found player interaction not to be as involved as I was hoping. It came in the third age which can (experiences may vary) also be after two hours have already passed in the game. When it happened, it seemed like the dice were more important than my strategic and tactical decisions. Finally, the sides didn't seem all that asymmetric on balance, not as much as I was hoping, anyway. When I got CitOW I found almost exactly what I was hoping Conan would have been and I haven't played AoC since.
That said, I don't want to give up on AoC because it's a beautiful game to have on a table; the designer showed such care for the source material. I really love the theme and the kind of game it seems to want to be. I had hopes for an expansion to get it farther to that end but it doesn't look likely to materialize. I am hoping that if an expansion isn't published that some variants could be posted so as to better realize the promise of the game. I'm glad I own it, I want to love it, but I just can't, at least not without some tweaking which I haven't seen yet. It would be great to have my mind changed on this some day.
-
Alex H.
Germany
Würzburg / Aachen
-
ozimek wrote: AoC is fairly similar to CitOW.
Totally disagree. CitOW is a much tighter design, more interactive, more focused. Ok, both are area-control but so are many other games. AoC feels more like an empire-builder. Unfortunately, it is also not without some minor flaws (like aggression not rewarded enough by the system). CitOW feels more tactical, and - let me repeat myself - tighter.
-
Jan Ozimek
Denmark
Aalborg
Must resist M:tG. Boardgames are my methadone :)
-
Actually I agree more or less with you, James and Alex, and AoC is by no means my favourite game. I totally agree that CitOW is a tighter design, but it is also about as tight as they get.
That being said, I still think the OP wouild be likely to enjoy AoC based on the criteria he mentioned.
I think there are more significant similarities than both games being area control:
- Decks with magic powers. Different for each faction
- Different ways to take over territories
- "Neutrals" you can bash
- Fantasy theme
- Wierd victory paths/point scoring systems
- Aimed at 4 players
The point of the thread wasn't to identify the best area control game ever, but to guess if the OP would like AoC. Of course one could argue, that after trying CitOW, AoC will feel like crap... 
-
James
United States
Midlothian
Virginia
-
Fair enough, Jan. Just to be clear, AoC is definitely not "crap" and it didn't feel that way when we were playing. It's just that, after hearing the elements you describe, it sounds like the game can't be anything other than awesome. Nevertheless, those elements just have never congealed to me in a session. The investment in time and brain burning just feels unrewarded afterwards.
That said, yes, I think we mostly agree. My opinion about whether or not the OP would like the game is that they would perhaps like the game but not love it.
Some people love the game (you can check the ratings and comments). I do admit that my opportunities to play games and my ability to finance their purchase have made me very picky. Thanks for your insights, Ozimek. Maybe I can think about some house rules...
-
Harvey O'Brien
Ireland
Dublin
...easy ...easy ...eeesay...
-
I think the bottom line is it needs a fifth faction and a fourth age. I actually like the game, mainly for its care with theme (the factions having their 'style', the uncontrollable Conan messing with you even if you try to make him King), but it takes a while to warm up. You're really just getting set up when the game ends. I'd really love to see just a rules expansion by the original designer - just to finish the thought, so to speak.
I did read somewhere here about a plan for an expansion that would focus on Conan's behaviour - some kind of randomising aspect based on his emotional state - but really a full expansion needs accelerated set up (basically this is a cut down version of War of the Ring, so why not just begin with pre-set positions and be done with it?) and a better endgame (and, as noted, a fifth faction...)
Not much to ask, is it? 
-
|
|
