5) Game play. I am not going to call it “multi-player solitaire”, mainly because it’s not. But one thing seemed to come to the fore – there seems to be little interaction and the few times someone “hinders” you it’s almost accidental. They are more optimizing their own position – hindering another player occasionally is a mere coincidence. The few times it can be intentional is almost annoying, simply for the fact that the opportunity to “return the favor” will likely not arrive. As such the interaction is just odd – it’s a little too much for a “personal optimization” game or too little for true a “interactive” experience in a typical game.

6) Down time. Well, if you like time to go get something to eat or drink or just shoot the breeze with others (assuming they are not AP-ing at the table) – you’ve got it. Down time is pretty high. Nothing like sitting and waiting – only to realize what you had planned to do has to change.

7) Learning Curve. I touched on this in a way with the rules – but Agricola is just plain “fiddly” in every sense of the word you can think of – rules, set-up, tear down, scoring. It’s just too much work – and not enough payoff in the game itself.

Looking at your grading in bgg I could tell you you probably wouldn't like Agricola.
Your top graders are almost solely light wargames and ultra light euros with very shallow strategic depth ...

you're not smart enough to like MY games

You are reading to much on my comment. I know very smart people that prefer lighter games. I think a minimum intellectual capacity is a requirement to like heavy games, but not liking them does not imply your are stupid.

The bolded is my point - we do not "prefer" lighter games. We prefer games we enjoy. I happen to own and rank a lot of lighter games because I play them with my family - sadly, it was you who read too much into my review when you looked through my rankings/collection and decided that I don't like games with "strategic depth" simply because I happen to own many games that do not have it.

The group of friends I played Agricola with has enjoyed many games with strategic depth - some (according to BGGs depth rankings) even heavier than Agricola (as mentioned above).

We don't like the game Agricola because we don't like the game - not because we don't like strategic depth. We simply don't like the way Agricola implements it.

Going back to the analogy of hot dogs and ketchup - we like hot dogs (games), we like ketchup (strategic depth) - but Agricola puts them together in a way we don't like. We like hamburgers (other games) with ketchup (again, strategic depth). Please stop telling us we don't like ketchup simply because we don't like hot dogs with ketchup and you do.

The point of this review was to point out to people who do like ketchup, why they may not like it on Agricola

The bolded is my point - we do not "prefer" lighter games. We prefer games we enjoy. I happen to own and rank a lot of lighter games because I play them with my family - sadly, it was you who read too much into my review when you looked through my rankings/collection and decided that I don't like games with "strategic depth" simply because I happen to own many games that do not have it.

The group of friends I played Agricola with has enjoyed many games with strategic depth - some (according to BGGs depth rankings) even heavier than Agricola (as mentioned above).

We don't like the game Agricola because we don't like the game - not because we don't like strategic depth. We simply don't like the way Agricola implements it.

Part of the problem is that you said you like (or are perfectly tolerant of) the same things in the games you play that are not named Agricola and you can't articulate why (eg, "fiddlyness", weak theme, heavy ruleset). So we have to assume it's because you're biased against it.

You may just hate worker placement games period. This is perfectly fine. You may hate Agricola because it's Agricola. This is also perfectly fine, but you haven't really explained what makes it different. You've explained things that you do like.

FWIW, I can understand why people don't like it. You may hate the scoring mechanism because you don't feel a sense of satisfaction (some people like looking at the farm at the end of the game, some don't). You may hate that your best-laid plans are done in by somebody inadvertently picking up that Clay pile you wanted (I'm decently good at doing this, and it's actually on purpose.) It may feel like work because of the shame of picking up a begging card means you inadvertently take 10 actions to pick up enough food for your family. You may hate the whole "non-direct player interaction" thing (but I think most of the time someone doesn't like it it's an excuse that they can't grief other people when they do the whole "inadvertently pick up the thing you wanted" thing. It's a natural feeling somewhat. One of my friends doesn't like that type of game because of that. But if I arrange for you to be in a multiplayer game where everyone picks on you, I can probably get rid of that feeling fairly quickly.)

PS I would suggest you not get Innovation either - as it has the same "tactically strong but strategically chaotic" feeling. When I play both games, 90% of the time I just "go with the flow of gameplay" which means I let the game state dictate my strategy (but there are exceptions, like growth which I try to aggressively get until I figure out better when it's not necessary) the reason I like those games is that it means there are lots of ways to win and so I need to constantly find the way that works best.

So anyways, that giant wall of text, and really I have 2 things:

1) You seem to hate games where people compete for limited resources with no recourse, and in particular Agricola does this so that it seems accidental (though I would argue it's not especially with better players in the game. More beginner players tend to have a 1-track strategy.)
2) You seem to dislike games that make you adapt quickly due to changing circumstances. I'm not quite sure about this one, but I think this is correct. RftG and other "multiplayer-solitare" games don't make you change your whole strategy at the drop of a Settle action being called by another player. Neither do wargames much, I think (I said "at the drop of a hat" - your strategy may change but it isn't drastic).

I don't think Agricola is the game for you. #1 will not change except in 2-player, where blocking is very direct and against good players you will find yourself repeatedly "griefed" until you find a way out or you do the same to them. I used to dislike 2p for that reason but actually I've turned around on it.

The blocking is the number one reason. Sometimes it's deliberate, and sometimes it's accidental. It's always annoying as hell

But my second biggest gripe about Agricola - and something starkly absent from games I like - is the enforced diversity.

I have high hopes for Ora et Labora, because I appreciate Agricola is a well-designed game. I even acknowledge that it's a good game. I just hate it.

I've played Agricola at least 6 times, and agree with most of the OPs points. Both Agricola's & Puerto Rico's theme are rather meh! But in Puerto Rico I feel like I have a chance at success. In Agricola, it bothers the hell out of me that everyone starts with different cards, and yet somehow this is "supposed to be balanced". Really??? I'm sure it's just my poor play, but it doesn't seem balanced when someone has cards that work with each other and I don't.

Agree with the components. Look what you get for Age of Empires III: Age of Discovery components for $40.

Of course, to each his own, and AoE III is way better (to me) in every way over Agricola.

In regards to point 2) - the worse part is that the "having to change your plans" is often not because the other players have intentionally done something to you to - more inadvertantly totally torpedoed your plans. I understand that it is occasionally an intentional block - but it's similar to a game where a single die roll can change the outcome...that is, if it doesn't happen often enough, it can't even out. Thus it doesn't feel balanced.

But nicely put.

[q="Neo_1"]the rulebook frustrates me somewhat

But my second biggest gripe about Agricola - and something starkly absent from games I like - is the enforced diversity. Your farm never ends up looking any different, You are penalised so hard by the scoring for specialisation most of the time that no other broad strategies are even possible. I know cards ameliorate this but they substantially unbalance the game in the process. This also exacerbates problem #1 - everyone NEEDS to get vegetables at some point, but only one person can get vegetables per round. It's not fun, it's just annoying as hell.

I think Agricola has excellent value for the money. It is a top notch production with top notch art, graphic design and components. I am really demanding in terms of component quality and I think Agriocla's production is just fantastic.
Buy Ora et Labora, which costs the same, and see what is an overpriced, terrible quality component game for the exact same price.

Oddly, my experience is the exact opposite on nearly all points. Great components, set-up in 2-3 mins, no downtime, love the theme (always feels very much like managing a farm/family). Get the Agricalc app for your iPhone and scoring is a snap. Almost endless replayability.

You're right on the stress level, though, but that's part of what makes it such a great game.

But my second biggest gripe about Agricola - and something starkly absent from games I like - is the enforced diversity. Your farm never ends up looking any different, You are penalised so hard by the scoring for specialisation most of the time that no other broad strategies are even possible. I know cards ameliorate this but they substantially unbalance the game in the process. This also exacerbates problem #1 - everyone NEEDS to get vegetables at some point, but only one person can get vegetables per round. It's not fun, it's just annoying as hell.

This review lost any value for me the moment the reviewer, who says he is an experienced gamer and wargamer, had 90 minutes to play a game of AGRICOLA.

Ummm...sorry? A couple of us had a previous commitment to get to, but we wanted to try this highly touted game - so we set up and played until we ran out of time. If being a responsible group of adults who stick to our commtiments disqualifies our group and our opinions in your mind, I can live with that.