Recommend
74 
 Thumb up
 Hide
40 Posts
1 , 2  Next »   | 

Railroad Revolution» Forums » Reviews

Subject: Roelovich's quick point by point review of Railroad Revolution rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Roel Vaneerdeweg
Belgium
Mechelen
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
In this point-by-point review, based on limited experience with the game, I try to give an overview of what I think are strengths and weaknesses of the game. I hope you find it helpful.

The Positive
(+) This essentially is a real point salad game, but it is a very balanced one, offering many strategic approaches in order to try to steal away the victory. The one who holds true to his/her strategic path (the game offers many, and I don't think there is one dominant path) and executes it in the most efficient way will win.

(+) The game is strikingly easy to learn: players take turns clockwise and you get to take one of four actions by using a (specialized (4 different types) or non-specialized) worker. Depending on the worker your choose, you are able to get an additional bonus-action. That's it. Yet, despite the rules being simple and the game being easily structured, there is more than enough interesting decision making to be had.

(+) This is a real strategy game, much more than a tactical one (it has its tactical opportunistic moments, but all in all this is a long-term strategy game). I love strategy games and there are too few of them out there!

(+) The setup is very random: the benefits for building stations, telegraph posts, starting resources, starting milestones (company goals allowing you to score big points when reaching them), starting specialized worker, ... - this is all layed out differently in each game, which means players will need to assess the best strategic paths to follow at the start of each new game. This will ensure replayability.

(+) The gameflow is rather smooth and quick with very little downtime. Players stay involved during other players turns because of a mechanic called 'deals', which can trigger a phase at the end of an opponents turn in which all players who own shares can participate.

(+) The game engine is simple and elegant but offers much more freedom than eurogamers are used to. Yes, this is worker placement, but there are no limitations as to where you can place them (multiple workers allowed in the same action-spot). There is no area majority aspect which only allows one or two players to score points: everyone scores according to their own performance. There is no cutting other players off on the map: getting somewhere first will grant you a benefit, but further there is no stress of getting stuck. This 'freedom' makes playing this game a breeze and makes sure there is a relaxed atmosphere around the table despite players doing some serious thinking.

(+) Mechanic-wise this game does not offer much new (see 'the negative'), but I do appreciate the way your workfoce gets built up and the 'deck building' aspect with worker pawns the game uses (they get recycled after they all got used). I haven't seen this implemented in such a 'stressless' way in other games and it works nicely. I enjoyed managing where and when to use specific workers.


The Negative
(-) I very much like the box art and the art on all the tiles, but the art on the game board doesn't get my heart pumping. Of course this is a matter of personal taste, and I do have to say that all the components, including the game board are cleverly designed and very functional, as is the case with all What's Your Game-titles.

(-) There is very little player interaction in this game. Personally, I don't mind this, in many occasions I appreciate a game which offers me the opportunity to work out my own strategic plans and to test them against the way others plan their game without interfering each other, but I can see this might be a problem for some. This is not to say there is no player interaction (there is some in trying to be the first to reach certain destinations or plant telegraph posts, timing triggering deal phases when opponents are out of shares, etc), but player interactions is really limited here. For me personally no big deal, but I suspect it could be for others.

(-) My only real problem with this game is that to me it lacks some character. Yes, this is a masterfully executed point salad game which runs smoothly and which turns all the right dails and pushes all the right buttons to make it work perfectly but it doesn't introduce any bold new mechanic giving this game a unique flavor.

Conclusion
Railroad Revolution is an heir to an impressive line of nothing less than fantastic euro games having been released by What's Your Game in the past few years: Vinhos, Madeira, Zhan Guo (by the hand of the same designers as Railroad Revolution), Nippon, Signorie, ... these are all games that I own and cherish and it's not easy to hold your mettle when compared to these titles. Railroad Revolution probably is the easiest and most accessible of this line-up, also the shortest in playtime.

In its core, this game is an excellent point salad game which offers a variety of strategic options with no apparent dominant strategic path. The designers clearly knew what they were doing when developping this game and did their math right. The game challenges players to stay true to their strategy and to implement it in the most efficient way possible, using a fun mechanic in which players have to manage their workforce carefully.

People who thrive by player interaction should best avoid this title, as it offers very little in that regard, but for those who don't mind this, this game ensures a 'relaxed' playing experience between players, despite being challenging enough as it comes to playing it right.

Railroad revolution is probably one of the best designed point salad games I have played in quite some time: it is easy to learn, runs smoothly, keeps all players involved until the end, is strategically balanced, doens't take too long to play and rewards clever execution of actions. The only thing that really does annoy me in this title is the lack of character: without the introduction of a daring new mechanic driving this game, playing it doesn't feel like a new experience. Due to all the reasons mentioned above I very much like playing this game, but compared to previous 'What's Your Game' releases, this one falls a little short for me and I wouldn't rate this game as high as the predecessors I mentioned before. However, if you are looking for an accessible medium-weight eurogame which revolves around strategic plans in the form of a masterfully executed and balanced point salad, chances are high that Railroad Revolution is the best game in this catagory that got realeased this year.

The Verdict

7,5/10

Tips for those going in
(*) There are a lot of points to be had! Aim high (> 240 points and probably much more with experienced players).
(*) There is some engine building to be had, especially with obtaining specialized workers. At the start of the game it is best to put some focus into obtaining those colorful workers as they will allow for more powerful actions during the course of the game. Go for this early by building stations on the right spots and by using purple workers on the telegraph action in order to exchange white workers for specialized ones.
(*) Shares are not worth any points in this game, but they are important as it comes to making deals. Always try to have at least 1 available share to make sure you can benefit from an opponent triggering a deal-phase. These are often useful in order to obtain or use trains, progress on the performance tracks (which leverages your point scoring engines!) or to increase your workforce. Being left out too often when deal phases present themselves is harmful.
(*) Money is very tight, especially in the beginning of the game, and you need it badly - especially to build railroads, but also to enjoy many additional specialized worker abilities and other benefits which require payment. At the start of the game your finances are problematic and one way to handle this is to obtain a $600-train in order to power up the trade action.
(*) Multiple strategic paths to victory are possible, best is to focus on a few key-items, rather than trying to score on everything.
(*) The milestones are a very significant points generator which should not be neglected. However, they tend to break down on your engine by sucking up your specialized workers and when putting some focus on them, it is easy to run out of workers. Make sure to build up your workforce first.
(*) At the end of the game, money isn't worth points. If you are rich and the game is nearing its end, it might sometimes be a good tactical option to hire an extra worker for $800.
(*) Starting tiles which offer to build a station or a telegraph office for free but without getting the benefits seem to be the least valuable (why would you deny yourself the opportunity of getting those benefits during the course of the game?). An exception could be if an (expensive!) station on a starting ('1')-city is required for your milestone.
76 
 Thumb up
8.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
Aventura
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb

As always a very informative review. I can't wait to see your analysis of other Essen games on my radar. Thank you very much!



1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jo Bartok
Germany
Zwingenberg
Hessen
flag msg tools
Interaction leads to Immersion.
badge
Immersion leads to Fun.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Sounds like I'd strongly dislike the game

Quote:
(-) There is very little player interaction in this game. Personally, I don't mind this, in many occasions I appreciate a game which offers me the opportunity to work out my own strategic plans and to test them against the way others plan their game without interfering each other, but I can see this might be a problem for some. This is not to say there is no player interaction (there is some in trying to be the first to reach certain destinations or plant telegraph posts, timing triggering deal phases when opponents are out of shares, etc), but player interactions is really limited here. For me personally no big deal, but I suspect it could be for others.


But it also sounds like you are writing up great reviews!
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nicola Bocchetta
Italy
Milano
MI
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Quote:
(*) Money is very tight, especially in the beginning of the game, and you need it badly - especially to build railroads, but also to enjoy many additional specialized worker abilities and other benefits which require payment. At the start of the game your finances are problematic and one way to handle this is to obtain a $600-train in order to power up the trade action.


I don't know if it's available in every game, but there is also a Telegraph Road bonus which gives you 600$

Quote:
(+) This essentially is a real point salad game, but it is a very balanced one, offering many strategic approaches in order to try to steal away the victory. The one who holds true to his/her strategic path (the game offers many, and I don't think there is one dominant path) and executes it in the most efficient way will win.


In our first game, not knowing how to play well, three of us ended up at 1 VP distance of each other. The fourth one won with 50 VPs more than us (telegraph road strategy + a lot of unflipped trains).

Anyway, it's too balanced in my opinion.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
C├ędric V
Belgium
Bruxelles
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmb
I am not capable to write a review but if I had too, it will be really close to this one. I agree fully except that is for me to early to say that Railroad Revolution is the best game in this catagory that got realeased this year.
Too many games released during the spiel that I have not yet tested and I expect a lot Great Western Trail for example which is a valid competitor in the same category...
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roel Vaneerdeweg
Belgium
Mechelen
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Faso74it wrote:
Quote:
(*) Money is very tight, especially in the beginning of the game, (...)


I don't know if it's available in every game, but there is also a Telegraph Road bonus which gives you 600$


Correct, taking this option (especially with a blue or grey specialized worker) as an opening move seems to be a powerful opening: gaining shares (which can be converted into money when required) and $600 or $800 depending on the worker used. This allows for a good headstart at the beginning of the game. Each player however can only make such a move once and I can see multiple strong opening moves.

Faso74it wrote:

Quote:
(+) This essentially is a real point salad game, but it is a very balanced one, ...


In our first game, not knowing how to play well, three of us ended up at 1 VP distance of each other. The fourth one won with 50 VPs more than us (telegraph road strategy + a lot of unflipped trains).

Anyway, it's too balanced in my opinion.

When we tried the game, the winner (242 points) got 6 points more than the 2nd player, who got 3 points more than the 3rd player. All very close. The last player was 39 points behind the 3rd one. All players followed a different approach with the winner going for all the telegraph posts (and maximizing the corresponding performance track so each post was worth an additional 9 points) and a rather strong focus on the milestone cards.

I can see why you would call the game 'too balanced', as in the end it might feel that it doesn't matter what you did, you score points with each and every thing anyhow - but I don't think this is correct, certainly with more experienced players. The fact that scores are close even if players followed a radically different approach proves that all strategic paths are viable in order to win, which is a good thing. In our game at the beginning not many points were scored in each turn, but the last 5-6 turns the points came reaping in (with easily 25 - 50 points per turn!), greatly benefitting players who needed less time in order to get their affairs in order. In that way I do believe that despite being balanced, the game does reward the player who gets the job done in the most efficient way.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roel Vaneerdeweg
Belgium
Mechelen
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
o0FrenchFrog0o wrote:
I am not capable to write a review but if I had too, it will be really close to this one. I agree fully except that is for me to early to say that Railroad Revolution is the best game in this catagory that got realeased this year.
Too many games released during the spiel that I have not yet tested and I expect a lot Great Western Trail for example which is a valid competitor in the same category...


Thanks for your reply! I have yet to test The Great Western Trail, and I also have high expectations of that game. However, at this time I don't really see tGWT as a medium-weight highly accessible point salad game, but time will tell. If necessary, I will make the necessary adjustments
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Darrell Goodridge
United States
Windsor Locks
Connecticut
flag msg tools
badge
I don't want it, I don't need it, but I can't stop myself. - Stabbing Westward
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
To me, I'd much rather have a game of 240 points to be decided by inches rather than miles. An example of the difference being miles is another railroad game, Russian Railroads. The difference between places could be 80-100 points. That's not fun in my opinion. The situation you described where the winner was within 10 points of third and the fourth place way behind is much more fun. (Even if I'd be the fourth way behind)

Thank you for this excellent review!
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Cardboardjunkie wrote:
To me, I'd much rather have a game of 240 points to be decided by inches rather than miles. An example of the difference being miles is another railroad game, Russian Railroads. The difference between places could be 80-100 points. That's not fun in my opinion.


If the score differences are consistently small, doesn't that mean that there's less skill in the game? The point difference between two players is going to be the sum of the skill difference and the random variation between games. If the score difference is consistently small that means that both the skill difference and the random variation must be small, so it's easy for the random variation to overcome the skill difference. If you want the skill difference to be dominant when one player plays much better than another, then the score difference due to skill has to be large compared to the random variation.

Obviously it's not the case that every game with large score differences must have high skill. It could just be that it has a lot of randomness. But it does seem to be the case that every game with consistently very small score differences must have low skill.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Darrell Goodridge
United States
Windsor Locks
Connecticut
flag msg tools
badge
I don't want it, I don't need it, but I can't stop myself. - Stabbing Westward
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
If there was no skill involved, why did the fourth place player finish over 40 points behind? That's almost 20%. It's possible that all paths are equally rewarding, but that's just good design. I recently traded away Mombasa, because the Bookkeeping track was NOT equally rewarding as the Diamond track, no matter how many times people tried to use it. You'd probably just say that was a matter of skill, but I see it as a design choice. If indeed all paths are equally rewarding, then wouldn't the person who eked out that 6 more points be more skilled?

By ceding the fact that the inverse is not true, why would your initial statement be true?
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Cardboardjunkie wrote:
By ceding the fact that the inverse is not true, why would your initial statement be true?


I don't really understand most of your response, but the fact that the inverse of a statement may be false and the statement itself may be true was well understood thousands of years ago. Concluding that a statement is false because its inverse is false is the fallacy known as Denying The Antecedent.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roel Vaneerdeweg
Belgium
Mechelen
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DaviddesJ wrote:

If the score differences are consistently small, doesn't that mean that there's less skill in the game? The point difference between two players is going to be the sum of the skill difference and the random variation between games. If the score difference is consistently small that means that both the skill difference and the random variation must be small, so it's easy for the random variation to overcome the skill difference. If you want the skill difference to be dominant when one player plays much better than another, then the score difference due to skill has to be large compared to the random variation.

Obviously it's not the case that every game with large score differences must have high skill. It could just be that it has a lot of randomness. But it does seem to be the case that every game with consistently very small score differences must have low skill.


All of us were more or less equally skilled (and rather good if I may say so myself ) players, which could also explain end scores being close to each other. I wouldn't worry too much about the game not rewarding skill due to the fact that multiple aspects score points because of the reason I mentioned above: with the right set-up the really big points are coming in only at the last 5 or 6 turns of the game. Building up to this requires skillful play and I'm pretty sure that failing to set up correctly for this during the game will leave you with a score significantly behind the winner.

Please remain courteous to your fellow boardgame geeks, we're all here for the love of games after all! kiss
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
David desJardins
United States
Burlingame
California
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Roelovich wrote:
All of us were more or less equally skilled (and rather good if I may say so myself ) players, which could also explain end scores being close to each other.


I just find this extremely hard to believe. It's virtually never the case that several people all play about equally well, especially when they are learning a new game. On top of the inherent differences between people's aptitudes, some people also pick up new games much more quickly than others, or simply happen to latch onto a better rather than worse strategy more quickly. If you assert that everyone played almost exactly as well as each other, I wonder what evidence you have for that.

You seem to be suggesting that it's discourteous to suggest that some people play better than others. That may be why you feel that everyone plays about equally well, because asserting differences in skill makes some people feel bad. But it can be true whether it makes people feel bad or not, and besides, I think there's no reason to feel bad about it. Everyone is better or worse at different things. There are plenty of things that I'm much worse at than most people.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nicola Bocchetta
Italy
Milano
MI
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DaviddesJ wrote:
Roelovich wrote:
All of us were more or less equally skilled (and rather good if I may say so myself ) players, which could also explain end scores being close to each other.


I just find this extremely hard to believe. It's virtually never the case that several people all play about equally well, especially when they are learning a new game. On top of the inherent differences between people's aptitudes, some people also pick up new games much more quickly than others, or simply happen to latch onto a better rather than worse strategy more quickly. If you assert that everyone played almost exactly as well as each other, I wonder what evidence you have for that.


In my game, the group was composed by two frequent players, a guy that rarely plays, and another one that plays often, but has some games that she "understands well"/"feels comfortable with" and games that she doesn't.

This last one was the winner, but she admitted that did most of the actions she understood well.
I went for a "build many stations" strategy, coupled with the relative technology track and some milestones; the other two players went for the longest route strategy maximising the realtive technology track.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Peter D
United Kingdom
london
UK
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Cardboardjunkie wrote:
If there was no skill involved, why did the fourth place player finish over 40 points behind? That's almost 20%. It's possible that all paths are equally rewarding, but that's just good design. I recently traded away Mombasa, because the Bookkeeping track was NOT equally rewarding as the Diamond track, no matter how many times people tried to use it.


How funny: in my many games of Mombasa the book track has been the winning strategy in most of the games, followed by shares, followed by the diamond track. These have all been 4players though. I have heard from others that at 2p the diamond track is more dominant. Maybe you play 2p?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roel Vaneerdeweg
Belgium
Mechelen
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
DaviddesJ wrote:

I just find this extremely hard to believe. It's virtually never the case that several people all play about equally well, especially when they are learning a new game. On top of the inherent differences between people's aptitudes, some people also pick up new games much more quickly than others, or simply happen to latch onto a better rather than worse strategy more quickly. If you assert that everyone played almost exactly as well as each other, I wonder what evidence you have for that.


Apart from the fact that the players who I was playing the game with are friends and veteran players with whom I have played a wide variety of games for many years so I can say I know them quite well, I'm afraid I can't prove that we are more or less equally skilled. I 'm only doing my best to formulate my hopefully substantiated opinion when I say that I do believe that this game rewards skillful play (because I know you have to set up correctly in order to start scoring the big points in time) and I expect that an experienced player who plays more skillful than a starter will end up with the highest score. I understand the reasoning in your first post, but I don't think this is appicable to this game as I don't think scores will consistently be close to each other if there is a meaningful skill difference between players, but of course that is just my personal opinion.

DaviddesJ wrote:

You seem to be suggesting that it's discourteous to suggest that some people play better than others.

Don't worry, I didn't take offence to your post.
6 
 Thumb up
0.05
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shane Larsen
United States
Salt Lake City
UT
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
You described the game as a "point salad" game 5 times in your review. You seem to feel strongly about this. So, to clarify, will you please define "point salad" for me? Your interpretation may be different from mine and I want to best understand what you mean when you say it.

Thanks for the review!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nicola Bocchetta
Italy
Milano
MI
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I feel the same about the game, though I know that "point salad" is not the right term to define it.

In this game you don't even count points untile the end of the game!

The main reason to call this a "point salad" is that almost all the things you can do give you points.
You can get different amount of points from:
- building your railroad network
- building stations in cities
- building telegraph stations
- achieving personal milestones
- having an unflipped train

In the game you have 4 actions to choose from:
- building a piece of a railroad
- building a station
- building a telegraph station
- buying a train

As you can see, the four actions are all directly related to the point-giving criteria of the end game. So, whatever action you choose, it takes you a little more near to a higher Vp total. From this point of you, the "point salad" definition fits.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roel Vaneerdeweg
Belgium
Mechelen
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Faso74it wrote:
I feel the same about the game, though I know that "point salad" is not the right term to define it.

In this game you don't even count points untile the end of the game!

The main reason to call this a "point salad" is that almost all the things you can do give you points.
You can get different amount of points from:
- building your railroad network
- building stations in cities
- building telegraph stations
- achieving personal milestones
- having an unflipped train

In the game you have 4 actions to choose from:
- building a piece of a railroad
- building a station
- building a telegraph station
- buying a train

As you can see, the four actions are all directly related to the point-giving criteria of the end game. So, whatever action you choose, it takes you a little more near to a higher Vp total. From this point of you, the "point salad" definition fits.


Correct, the fact that virtually everything scores points makes this a 'point salad' for me.

It also has that typical point salad feel in which every action and especially the end game strongly revolves around weighing actions in terms of relative point difference which can be assessed exactly ('going for option A nets 30 points if this happens or 35 points if that happens and going for option B nets 25 points if this happens or 40 points if that happens...').
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shane Larsen
United States
Salt Lake City
UT
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I'm glad I asked. According to what you're saying here, it's not what I would call a point-salad game.

Thanks again for the review! Very informative.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Derek H
South Africa
Pretoria
Gauteng
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
thedacker wrote:
I'm glad I asked. According to what you're saying here, it's not what I would call a point-salad game.

Interesting, because his description fits the commonly held (but admittedly loose) definition used here on BGG. What is yours?
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Y P
United States
Mississippi
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
gamesbook wrote:
thedacker wrote:
I'm glad I asked. According to what you're saying here, it's not what I would call a point-salad game.

Interesting, because his description fits the commonly held (but admittedly loose) definition used here on BGG. What is yours?

Curious to know as well. I'm always interested in learning how people use terms differently.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Shane Larsen
United States
Salt Lake City
UT
flag msg tools
designer
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
FWIW, I don't think it meets the regular definition used here on BGG. But that's always a moving target, so we won't go there. I can only tell you where my thoughts come from.

For me, if a game has no in-game points, it's usually not going to be a point-salad game. And if there is a game that is truly a point-salad game and the points are only scored at game's end, I would ask the question, "why?".

If this statement by the OP is true:

Roelovich wrote:
('going for option A nets 30 points if this happens or 35 points if that happens and going for option B nets 25 points if this happens or 40 points if that happens...')


...then the values of your actions can change by what happens after the actions are taken. This makes the game something more than a point-salad game, because now, what you and your opponents do is what determines your end-game points. Point-salad games don't work that way. In point-salad games, you get a set amount of points for essentially every single action you take, and those points can be--and should be--calculated immediately, because they won't change.

A few games I don't consider point-salad games, but many people do for whatever reason:

Caverna: The Cave Farmers - Similar to how it sounds this game works, it's possible to score points in every objective, but not have a point-salad game.
Russian Railroads - It's possible to score a large number of points, and not have a point-salad game.

I could tell you more about why this is part of my definition for point salad, but I really don't want to derail the thread with a topic of "what is Point Salad". I'm sure the OP would not appreciate that.

I just thought it was fair to let others know that depending on how you define point-salad games, this may or may not be a good descriptor.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Nicola Bocchetta
Italy
Milano
MI
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I agree that Railroads Rev. is not a point salad game, for the reasons explained above.

But to me it felt like one, as there are no actions that just build your infrastructure without really netting you points (well, yes, the reailroad construction doesn't give you points until you reach level 5 cities... but anyway if you want those points you need to build a railroad).
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Roel Vaneerdeweg
Belgium
Mechelen
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
thedacker wrote:

For me, if a game has no in-game points, it's usually not going to be a point-salad game. And if there is a game that is truly a point-salad game and the points are only scored at game's end, I would ask the question, "why?".

If this statement by the OP is true:

Roelovich wrote:
('going for option A nets 30 points if this happens or 35 points if that happens and going for option B nets 25 points if this happens or 40 points if that happens...')


...then the values of your actions can change by what happens after the actions are taken. This makes the game something more than a point-salad game, because now, what you and your opponents do is what determines your end-game points.


Thanks for sharing your view on the term 'point salad'. RR indeed has no scoring whatsoever during the game, all points get calculated at the end. However, every action will net you a fixed maximum ('best case'), easy to determine amount of points which can not change during the game and some actions, especially in the 2nd half of the game will offer a fixed amount (for example putting a telegraph post next to another one). Moreover, opponents can do very little to nothing to influence the value of the actions you previously took expressed in victory points.

In that sense the game will probably more or less feel like a point salad, also in your definition. I wouldn't compare the experience of playing Railroad Revolution to that of Russion Railroads.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
1 , 2  Next »   | 
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.