$10.00
Recommend
32 
 Thumb up
 Hide
20 Posts

When Lions Sailed» Forums » Reviews

Subject: Verdict: No. rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Andrew Kluck
United States
Hudson
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
I've sworn off S&T games for some time, in the past I've felt them to be at best unoriginal and at worst unplayable. However, the early European colonial expansion is a passion of mine, particularly the rise of the Dutch empire. When Lion's Sailed is a multiplayer political/military game focusing on the Anglo-Dutch wars, the fading Spanish and the struggling French. It couldn't have appealed to me more if Miranda had read my personal wish list. Turns out a neighbor is a wargamer too, owned it and wanted to play as well, so I printed off rules for two more friends and a week later the four of us sat down to play. Six hours later we had all agreed on a few points.

It is incomplete: The rules refer to rules that don't exist, for example, Potentate Ports are discussed in rule 29.1, the rules only go up to 26.5.

It is broken:
-There are potentially 20 turns in the game, my friends and I all read the rules and are experienced wargamers and we quit playing after 6 hours on turn 3.

-The amount every nation receives is so large not only are there no difficult choices past the first turn no matter how badly you play your power is going to run out of things to buy. The amount in your bank can determine the winner at the end of a close game, but like Monopoly, I expect most people will just stop playing before it ever gets to that.

-An all out attack against the Dutch ports early will end the game for them as they cannot construct ships while the English are hovering out at sea and cannot make respectable ships in their colonies, bad game mechanic, bad simulation.

Many aspects of the game are nonsensical:
-There is no reason to split up your ships. 'The Meatball' tactic is a telltale hallmark of a broken game and it took us one battle to figure out getting every ship you have in a ball, toting a Treasure Fleet for cheap activation,holding the 'Gunnery' chip and sending them out like the Death Star was the only way to get anywhere. Because there is no limit to your activations there's no limit to the amount of damage you can do.

-Ports and colonies initially appear to be useful because activating ships in them is cheaper, making and maintaining a chain of them becomes a critical strategic objective in the struggle for global domination. Which is as it should be. However, in WLS they're vulnerable as hell making them essentially immobile drowning rats in a sea of sharks. The best fort in the game with a full compliment of crack soldiers, carefully and painstakingly prepared, will be lucky if they even get a shot off on a fleet parked outside that doesn't even need to land to destroy them. No French and Indian War here, Quebec was not even a speed bump in our game the Brits hadn't fired their third ship before A Few Acres of Snow was red with blood.

-Each turn represents a year, yet players may move their ships as much as they want as long as they pay a paltry amount. In our game, on turn three the British and Dutch threw down and in that turn alone each had sailed around the world multiple times in order to get a better position.


What I did like:
-The Spanish and Dutch get a choice of where to initially place some of their ships, I really liked that aspect because it opened up a much broader range of opening strategies and alliances. I wish the English and French could have done that as well.

-The chip pulls for skills was cool, many did have an effect that made them worth obtaining, however a few were pretty worthless and the Gunnery skill in particular was far too powerful. The bidding process was silly though, who but those Storage Wars clowns bid on unknown objects?

-On the first turn money was tight and players had to make difficult decisions about which fleets to move, how to make the most of the few resources available, and how they were going to leverage that towards a better position next turn.....then the cash phase happened later that turn and money was never a problem again.



Honestly, after playing this game I had formed a pool of bile I was going to spew out on the BBG, but a week later I barely care enough to throw it away. The articles in the magazine were ok, but learning and playing WLS is just a waste of time and effort. We have since discussed a bit on how to improve the game, coming up with:
-point to point map or larger squares along favorable trade routes. Global winds are capricious but seasons and current were not completely unknown in this time, rolling for movement should be saved for Clue and Shoots & Ladders.
-Land forces should be easy to entrench and difficult or impossible to dislodge when attacked only with fleets. Colonies at this time period were indeed fragile, but so were ships cast out to sea with no supply depots, few if any maps, shaky alliances, rampant disease etc. If we aren't going to limit the ships you have to make the colonies self sufficient.
-Limit the cash, and current forces should require cash to maintain.
-Limit the movement, requiring multiple smaller fleets to protect multiple global interests.
-Attacking home ports should just be impossible, the focus of this game is on the colonies and the resources used to sustain them. Keep it that way.

I don't want to put it all on Miranda, clearly this isn't how any designer anywhere envisions a complete product. But still, in the end, I didn't see any unique mechanics or insightful historical comments to salvage, a better game should start fresh.
19 
 Thumb up
1.00
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Leo Zappa
United States
Aliquippa
Pennsylvania
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
In the old days, I could always tell which S&T games were OK, because Avalon Hill would buy them and turn them into bookcase games (Panzergruppe Guderian, Panzer Armee Afrika, etc). Unfortunately, that barometer to S&T quality is no longer available to us. At least we have brave souls like yourself to review a few for us. This only confirms my decision to never subscribe to S&T for the games (though I do enjoy the magazine itself).
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lewis Goldberg
United States
Arnold
Missouri
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Funny how experiences can differ so much. I almost think the OP was playing a different game than the WLS I played.

First thing to consider is that this is not (in my opinion) purely a wargame. It is a multi-player political game with some wargame mechanics. My group had a great time with it, and I look forward to playing it again.

This is one game that I have begged Joe Miranda to issue as a deluxe boxed game. I think it's that good.

Like with GMT's Conquest of Paradise, the ability to wage war is present in the rules, but it is not the point of the game - it is an option that is available to you. Nor was it the point of the European powers to wage war while they were exploring the world - they wanted to increase their land holdings and get rich. You can do that in WLS almost without firing a shot (save at the pesky pirates that pop up), and that is the key to success. Just like in real life, waging war is sometimes necessary but wastes resources. Read the victory conditions - it's been a while, but I bet there's no points for sinking enemy ships.

My assessment of the review above: they played it wrong while following all the rules. Yes, that can be done, and I have done it with other games, so I know.
11 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Kluck
United States
Hudson
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
lgoldberg wrote:
Funny how experiences can differ so much. I almost think the OP was playing a different game than the WLS I played.

First thing to consider is that this is not (in my opinion) purely a wargame. It is a multi-player political game with some wargame mechanics. My group had a great time with it, and I look forward to playing it again.

What is here but war? What other elements in the game offer opponents opportunities or rewards for compromise or at least different forms of conflict? I agree a game for this period in history shouldn't just be about war. I agree players in the game can do other things than war, but within this rule set and their objectives tell me what room they have for compromise. If this is a 'political game' so is Risk.

lgoldberg wrote:
My assessment of the review above: they played it wrong while following all the rules. Yes, that can be done, and I have done it with other games, so I know.

Four people who are all experienced with difficult games read the rules independently and gathered on a free sunday to play this, my review is our assessment of our experience. 'We played it wrong while following the rules' is a statement I can't even address.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lewis Goldberg
United States
Arnold
Missouri
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Sitnam wrote:
If this is a 'political game' so is Risk.


In Risk, there is ONLY war. There is absolutely no way to win but by waging war, and besides reinforcements, there is no room on the turn sequence for anything but war - and you won't have to fiddle with reinforcements for too long if you fail to wage war.


Sitnam wrote:
Four people who are all experienced with difficult games read the rules independently and gathered on a free sunday to play this, my review is our assessment of our experience.


And that's fair, but I think that these four people were looking for a different game, didn't find it, and are now blaming the game.
5 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Kluck
United States
Hudson
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
lgoldberg wrote:
Sitnam wrote:
If this is a 'political game' so is Risk.


In Risk, there is ONLY war. There is absolutely no way to win but by waging war, and besides reinforcements, there is no room on the turn sequence for anything but war - and you won't have to fiddle with reinforcements for too long if you fail to wage war

In Risk you can make alliances, agree to clobber a third party, agree to disarm tense borders, which is useful to complete your hidden victory condition card found in later versions of Risk.

Risk is a shallow playing experience, I wouldn't call it a political game, but if WLS is so is Risk.

You can like the game, no one is saying you can't. But to handwave away the many obvious faults in its design with, "they played it wrong while following all the rules" is absurd. The onus is on the designer to create the atmosphere of play using rules and objectives, that I found both lacking is hardly my fault. Especially since this period of history is so interesting to me and there is a dearth of games covering the topic.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lewis Goldberg
United States
Arnold
Missouri
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Here's the longer version then:

sitnam wrote:
I've sworn off S&T games for some time, in the past I've felt them to be at best unoriginal and at worst unplayable. However, the early European colonial expansion is a passion of mine, particularly the rise of the Dutch empire. When Lion's Sailed is a multiplayer political/military game focusing on the Anglo-Dutch wars, the fading Spanish and the struggling French. It couldn't have appealed to me more if Miranda had read my personal wish list. Turns out a neighbor is a wargamer too, owned it and wanted to play as well, so I printed off rules for two more friends and a week later the four of us sat down to play. Six hours later we had all agreed on a few points.


I agree that not all S&T games scream "play me", but I continue to subscribe because my tastes change, and I like the idea of all that gaming potential in my filing cabinet. WLS was one game that was screaming to get on the table from the moment it came out of the envelope.

sitnam wrote:
It is incomplete: The rules refer to rules that don't exist, for example, Potentate Ports are discussed in rule 29.1, the rules only go up to 26.5.


All wargames, and magazine games even more so due to the tight production schedule, have errata, and that both the WLS errata and downloadable living rules are easily accessible on ConsimWorld, and the strategyandtacticspress.com website. It sounds like you may have missed that.

sitnam wrote:
It is broken:

-There are potentially 20 turns in the game, my friends and I all read the rules and are experienced wargamers and we quit playing after 6 hours on turn 3.


I and two of my kids, ages 12 and 9, played at roughly twice that speed, and managed to finish the entire game.

sitnam wrote:
-The amount every nation receives is so large not only are there no difficult choices past the first turn no matter how badly you play your power is going to run out of things to buy. The amount in your bank can determine the winner at the end of a close game, but like Monopoly, I expect most people will just stop playing before it ever gets to that.


We did not experience this flood of currency. Doing "too much" depletes your treasury. Players get to the point that they want the turn to end so they can replenish. Moving across the high seas can be very expensive - costs 4 bucks a shot, and if you roll low a lot, you don't get very far for your money. We experienced the full gamut of "luck" in this regard.

sitnam wrote:
-An all out attack against the Dutch ports early will end the game for them as they cannot construct ships while the English are hovering out at sea and cannot make respectable ships in their colonies, bad game mechanic, bad simulation.


Sounds like what would happen in real life if the British were to do that. In real life, the Dutch would also probably form an alliance with another nation - bribe them with future percentages of a gold mine. Something besides sit there.

sitnam wrote:
Many aspects of the game are nonsensical:

-There is no reason to split up your ships. 'The Meatball' tactic is a telltale hallmark of a broken game and it took us one battle to figure out getting every ship you have in a ball, toting a Treasure Fleet for cheap activation,holding the 'Gunnery' chip and sending them out like the Death Star was the only way to get anywhere. Because there is no limit to your activations there's no limit to the amount of damage you can do.


That would work only if everyone else sat on their hands and did nothing. That's probably what would happen in real life too.

sitnam wrote:
-Ports and colonies initially appear to be useful because activating ships in them is cheaper, making and maintaining a chain of them becomes a critical strategic objective in the struggle for global domination. Which is as it should be. However, in WLS they're vulnerable as hell making them essentially immobile drowning rats in a sea of sharks. The best fort in the game with a full compliment of crack soldiers, carefully and painstakingly prepared, will be lucky if they even get a shot off on a fleet parked outside that doesn't even need to land to destroy them. No French and Indian War here, Quebec was not even a speed bump in our game the Brits hadn't fired their third ship before A Few Acres of Snow was red with blood.


We generally used ships to help protect the colonies.

sitnam wrote:
-Each turn represents a year, yet players may move their ships as much as they want as long as they pay a paltry amount. In our game, on turn three the British and Dutch threw down and in that turn alone each had sailed around the world multiple times in order to get a better position.


It's been a while since I played, but that seems pretty extreme. I remember being stingier with my resources, and I think there was good reason for it. Sorry - I don't have details.

sitnam wrote:
What I did like:
-The Spanish and Dutch get a choice of where to initially place some of their ships, I really liked that aspect because it opened up a much broader range of opening strategies and alliances. I wish the English and French could have done that as well.


Joe would have to speak to that, but it was probably a play balance thing

sitnam wrote:
-The chip pulls for skills was cool, many did have an effect that made them worth obtaining, however a few were pretty worthless and the Gunnery skill in particular was far too powerful. The bidding process was silly though, who but those Storage Wars clowns bid on unknown objects?


There were a lot of chits that I didn't bother using because I couldn't see why it'd be worth it. Room to explore next time, I guess.

sitnam wrote:
-On the first turn money was tight and players had to make difficult decisions about which fleets to move, how to make the most of the few resources available, and how they were going to leverage that towards a better position next turn.....then the cash phase happened later that turn and money was never a problem again.


Truly we didn't experience the cash surplus of which you speak. I'm half-way wondering if you weren't doing something erroneous.

sitnam wrote:
Honestly, after playing this game I had formed a pool of bile I was going to spew out on the BBG, but a week later I barely care enough to throw it away. The articles in the magazine were ok, but learning and playing WLS is just a waste of time and effort. We have since discussed a bit on how to improve the game, coming up with:



sitnam wrote:
-point to point map or larger squares along favorable trade routes. Global winds are capricious but seasons and current were not completely unknown in this time, rolling for movement should be saved for Clue and Shoots & Ladders.


Rolling for movement is quaint, but it adds some lack of certainty to the game. I thought it worked well.

sitnam wrote:
-Land forces should be easy to entrench and difficult or impossible to dislodge when attacked only with fleets. Colonies at this time period were indeed fragile, but so were ships cast out to sea with no supply depots, few if any maps, shaky alliances, rampant disease etc. If we aren't going to limit the ships you have to make the colonies self sufficient.


Combat is quite abstract in this game. With the forces represented by generic "points", and turns spanning an entire year, I see no problem with it.

sitnam wrote:
-Limit the cash, and current forces should require cash to maintain.


Paying for actions is the maintenance.

sitnam wrote:
-Limit the movement, requiring multiple smaller fleets to protect multiple global interests.


Not sure what is meant by that.

sitnam wrote:
-Attacking home ports should just be impossible, the focus of this game is on the colonies and the resources used to sustain them. Keep it that way.


I think you would have even more people up in arms if you couldn't attack home ports.

sitnam wrote:
I don't want to put it all on Miranda, clearly this isn't how any designer anywhere envisions a complete product. But still, in the end, I didn't see any unique mechanics or insightful historical comments to salvage, a better game should start fresh.


In the end, I thought WLS was fun, had plenty of flavor, and did what it was intented to do. I think you want a game that does other things. This just isn't your game. I wish you could just leave it at that without feeling compelled to say that it's broken. This wargamer assuredly says that it isn't.

4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Kluck
United States
Hudson
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
lgoldberg wrote:
I wish you could just leave it at that without feeling compelled to say that it's broken. This wargamer assuredly says that it isn't.

I have no doubt you'd feel differently if one of my group sat down with you and your children. But it won't be me cause I'll never play it again.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lewis Goldberg
United States
Arnold
Missouri
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
If we're ever in Wisconsin, I'll be sure to tote my copy along
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rich Horton
United States
River Falls
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
lgoldberg wrote:
they played it wrong while following all the rules. Yes, that can be done, and I have done it with other games, so I know.


I too have seen this happen, but its not what happened in this game. (I'm the neighbor mentioned in the review.)

It's funny because the game we played the following weekend, AH's classic "Kingmaker" is a perfect example of a game that gets played wrongly but by the rules. As many Kingmaker games wind down someplayers tend to stop playing to win, afraid any seige or battle will kill a "too big to fail" noble. Get enough players who continue to play to win and the game works.

That's not the case with WLS. Sure, you can play without creating the "meatball", but if you are behind why would you do without it? It is clearly the best strategy, particularly if no one else is doing it. First off, pirates become completely unimportant. And Second, there is no cost for doing it. One could try to argue, "If you combine your forces then your outposts will be more vulnerable." How? Against any sizeable force a fort and/or troops are completely SOL, and that wouldn't change just because you add a 5th rate fleet there.

I think the game would have worked better if the European part of the game was presented more abstractly. Have force boxes for the four powers from which limited resources are directed towards colonial efforts.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rich Horton
United States
River Falls
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
lgoldberg wrote:


All wargames, and magazine games even more so due to the tight production schedule, have errata, and that both the WLS errata and downloadable living rules are easily accessible on ConsimWorld, and the strategyandtacticspress.com website. It sounds like you may have missed that.


No. We checked. (And I just checked again.) There is reference to "Optional Rules" but they have not been added to the living E-Rules. (Miranda seems to have 20 designs going at once, so this may have been a simple oversight.)

In particular the rules for Potentate Ports seem like there is someting missing. One of the chits allow one player to kick another out of a Potentate Port. So what? Where exactly is the benefit or the disadvantage to the player you are using this chit against? It feels like there shoiuld be some rule (for example a rule that might prohibit attacks on other forces while they are in neutral potentate ports?) that would explain or give a reason for this chit's existence. Until we have such a rule, its pretty pointless.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lewis Goldberg
United States
Arnold
Missouri
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
I compiled a Q&A from the sum of questions that was asked in the WLS folder on CSW. If you want it, Geekmail me your email address and I will send it. All the answers are from Joe himself.

 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Rich Horton
United States
River Falls
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
lgoldberg wrote:
I compiled a Q&A from the sum of questions that was asked in the WLS folder on CSW. If you want it, Geekmail me your email address and I will send it. All the answers are from Joe himself.



Why not post it as a file here?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lewis Goldberg
United States
Arnold
Missouri
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
rhorto01 wrote:
Why not post it as a file here?


It's not my work. I'll pass it on, but it's not cool to get GG for something someone else put together.

EDIT: You know, upstream I took credit for making it, but I was confusing the one I did for AmRev, another Miranda game, and just a couple of issues later. Sorry for the confusion.

I'm sure this is one of those times that people wish they could suck thumbs out of your account. soblue
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
paul
United States
Baltimore
Maryland
flag msg tools
mbmb
Sitnam wrote:

It is broken:

Many aspects of the game are nonsensical:
-There is no reason to split up your ships. 'The Meatball' tactic is a telltale hallmark of a broken game and it took us one battle to figure out getting every ship you have in a ball, toting a Treasure Fleet for cheap activation,holding the 'Gunnery' chip and sending them out like the Death Star was the only way to get anywhere. Because there is no limit to your activations there's no limit to the amount of damage you can do.


hi, i think you missed a rule. if your Fleet contains a Treasure Fleet then it can not enter squares with enemy ships or attack enemy land units.

Quote:
23.3
Treasure Fleets
23.4 Movement
In general, treasure fleets move like ship units, but with the following exceptions:
4) Restrictions.
A moving force containing one or more treasure fleets may not enter a square containing enemy ships, nor may it attack enemy land units unless they’re in a square that’s a friendly home port for that nation. Enemy forces may enter normally, and engage in combat normally, any square containing a treasure fleet.
2 
 Thumb up
0.25
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lewis Goldberg
United States
Arnold
Missouri
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
poeppaul wrote:
Sitnam wrote:

It is broken:

Many aspects of the game are nonsensical:
-There is no reason to split up your ships. 'The Meatball' tactic is a telltale hallmark of a broken game and it took us one battle to figure out getting every ship you have in a ball, toting a Treasure Fleet for cheap activation,holding the 'Gunnery' chip and sending them out like the Death Star was the only way to get anywhere. Because there is no limit to your activations there's no limit to the amount of damage you can do.


hi, i think you missed a rule. if your Fleet contains a Treasure Fleet then it can not enter squares with enemy ships or attack enemy land units.

Quote:
23.3
Treasure Fleets
23.4 Movement
In general, treasure fleets move like ship units, but with the following exceptions:
4) Restrictions.
A moving force containing one or more treasure fleets may not enter a square containing enemy ships, nor may it attack enemy land units unless they’re in a square that’s a friendly home port for that nation. Enemy forces may enter normally, and engage in combat normally, any square containing a treasure fleet.


I knew there was something wrong going on with their game, but couldn't put my finger on it. Thanks for this post.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Chad Gilbert
United States
Overland Park
Kansas
flag msg tools
I'm disappointed to hear all this as I recently purchased this game. A great idea. Maybe someone will issue fixes?

I'd like to up a plug in for an S&T game that really didn't get the notice it deserved. South Seas Campaign. It covers the key Pacific campaign that decided the war and does so elegantly and I think with subtle system design that avoids rules clutter. I've played it many times and am always happy. The results have been different and there are different strategies to win. Give it a try.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lewis Goldberg
United States
Arnold
Missouri
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
budrou wrote:
I'm disappointed to hear all this as I recently purchased this game. A great idea. Maybe someone will issue fixes?


I don't think you read the last post correctly. The guys that did the review played it wrong. WLS is a fine game, and I wish they'd do a deluxe boxed edition.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andrew Kluck
United States
Hudson
Wisconsin
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
lgoldberg wrote:
budrou wrote:
I'm disappointed to hear all this as I recently purchased this game. A great idea. Maybe someone will issue fixes?


I don't think you read the last post correctly. The guys that did the review played it wrong. WLS is a fine game, and I wish they'd do a deluxe boxed edition.

Perhaps we missed the need to separate the treasure from the Death Star before attacking. The treasure fleet 'backpack of cheap wind' is still a flawed mechanic.

And it's not even top 10 of why this game is messed up.

Continue to hand wave away all the other issues I addressed in my review if you like. I'm not interested in discussing this game any longer.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lewis Goldberg
United States
Arnold
Missouri
flag msg tools
designer
mbmbmbmbmb
Sitnam wrote:
lgoldberg wrote:
budrou wrote:
I'm disappointed to hear all this as I recently purchased this game. A great idea. Maybe someone will issue fixes?


I don't think you read the last post correctly. The guys that did the review played it wrong. WLS is a fine game, and I wish they'd do a deluxe boxed edition.

Perhaps we missed the need to separate the treasure from the Death Star before attacking. The treasure fleet 'backpack of cheap wind' is still a flawed mechanic.

And it's not even top 10 of why this game is messed up.

Continue to hand wave away all the other issues I addressed in my review if you like. I'm not interested in discussing this game any longer.


If literally no other person that has played this game has reported the problems you guys had, I would look to examining what you did, not what the others did. Not trying to be mean - that's just logical.

It's just sad that a poor AAR has already dissuaded one person from buying S&T ever again (if the post above is to be believed).
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Front Page | Welcome | Contact | Privacy Policy | Terms of Service | Advertise | Support BGG | Feeds RSS
Geekdo, BoardGameGeek, the Geekdo logo, and the BoardGameGeek logo are trademarks of BoardGameGeek, LLC.