My question is, am I likely to even miss the extra 15 containers? I have absolutely zero frame of reference on 85 vs 100. My interest in the game is that it comes up in virtually every economic game discussion and the player-driven market is extremely, extremely up my alley.

Is there any other deviation in this version from the original that would limit the enjoyment of this game or it just the original with fewer (and much larger) components?

I love economic games and my spouse loves blinged out overproduced games. Seems like this is right in the bread basket.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Murr Rockstroh
United States
Fleming Island
Florida
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
LeHavreFanatic99 wrote:
My question is, am I likely to even miss the extra 15 containers? I have absolutely zero frame of reference on 85 vs 100. My interest in the game is that it comes up in virtually every economic game discussion and the player-driven market is extremely, extremely up my alley.

Is there any other deviation in this version from the original that would limit the enjoyment of this game or it just the original with fewer (and much larger) components?

I love economic games and my spouse loves blinged out overproduced games. Seems like this is right in the bread basket.
I never played the original either, and backed this, with the 15 extra containers. We've played it twice now with the rules as written in this version, and enjoyed it (in other words, not using the extra containers). I don't know that I'll ever bother adding in the extra containers, it didn't feel like it needed them. I can't say that won't change after multiple plays as we get better, but the game did not feel incomplete.

I will say I'm glad I have them for resale/trade value, not for playability. Doubtful though that this game will ever leave our collection
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Gregg Saruwatari
United States
Arroyo Grande
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
LeHavreFanatic99 wrote:
My question is, am I likely to even miss the extra 15 containers? I have absolutely zero frame of reference on 85 vs 100. My interest in the game is that it comes up in virtually every economic game discussion and the player-driven market is extremely, extremely up my alley.

Is there any other deviation in this version from the original that would limit the enjoyment of this game or it just the original with fewer (and much larger) components?

I love economic games and my spouse loves blinged out overproduced games. Seems like this is right in the bread basket.


My take on it is that if you have never played the game before or never play with 5 players, the extra containers will not be missed.

I have played the old version with 5 players multiple times and enjoyed the game, so I am glad I got the extra containers.

Keep in mind that you have enough containers in the new game to play the old version at 3 and 4 player counts.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
That is good to know, honestly I do not think I'll ever get 5 players.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Adam Sauinders
United States
Utah
flag msg tools
Just played the KS edition at work (with extra containers).
Seems like all the extra containers do is give you a couple more rounds of play.

We seemed to have a run on one type of container and when that goes out people rushed to buy out the second set to end the game.

So if you want the game to go just a little bit longer the extra containers are the way to go.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
A J
United States
Riverside
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Pretend the 15 extra containers don't even exist (they won't for retail) and you'll be fine. It's FOMO at its finest.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
John Di Ponio
United States
Lake Orion
MI
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Don't worry about the extra containers. This edition was not designed for them. You won't miss them. I owned the older version and I don't miss them at all in this version!
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Lane Taylor
United States
Layton
Utah
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Pretty much what every above says. If you like economic games, I'd also recommend Wealth of Nations. It's about tied with Container for my favorite economic game.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Laura Creighton
Sweden
Göteborg
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
LeHavreFanatic99 wrote:
My question is, am I likely to even miss the extra 15 containers? I have absolutely zero frame of reference on 85 vs 100. My interest in the game is that it comes up in virtually every economic game discussion and the player-driven market is extremely, extremely up my alley.

Is there any other deviation in this version from the original that would limit the enjoyment of this game or it just the original with fewer (and much larger) components?

I love economic games and my spouse loves blinged out overproduced games. Seems like this is right in the bread basket.


There is a summary of the differences in this document in the files section https://boardgamegeek.com/filepage/166736/unofficial-faq (thank you Smash62Bill)

If you play Container a whole lot you may come up with strategies that take a longer game to bring to fruition. If you discover the game isn't running long enough for you, grab some cubes from some other game and use them.
2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jeff K
United States
Garner
North Carolina
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I have the extra containers, but I have considered painting them gold to serve as the luxury containers for that add-on.

I doubt that my group will ever get good enough at this game to need the extra game length afforded by the extra containers. OTOH, I have read the arguments and do see the point of those who argued for them. I'm just not sure how many people this will actually be true for, in practice. I think we will give it some time before we make a judgement on that.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Wylann wrote:
Pretty much what every above says. If you like economic games, I'd also recommend Wealth of Nations. It's about tied with Container for my favorite economic game.


Thanks everyone, I pretty much knew I simply had to buy this.... But it's really weird. The forums on this one have seemed really tepid in their enthusiasm for the game throughout the kick starter process and even now that it's been released. It's not the normal sunshine pumping that you usually see with new games. Or maybe I've just misjudged the collective opinions on this forum.

Re: wealth of nations, that's a tempting one, along with arkwright, but I'm scared that realistically I'll never play them as they are probably on the heavier side. I've already got a large number of "maybe I'll some day find a gaming group heavy enough to play this with" titles. But I will read more into it! Thanks for the recommendation!
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ryucoo
United Kingdom
Reading
Berkshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
LeHavreFanatic99 wrote:
Wylann wrote:
Pretty much what every above says. If you like economic games, I'd also recommend Wealth of Nations. It's about tied with Container for my favorite economic game.


Thanks everyone, I pretty much knew I simply had to buy this.... But it's really weird. The forums on this one have seemed really tepid in their enthusiasm for the game throughout the kick starter process and even now that it's been released. It's not the normal sunshine pumping that you usually see with new games. Or maybe I've just misjudged the collective opinions on this forum.



Glad I’m not the only one who noticed that. This particular corner of the internet does seem incredibly dry and over-serious. And the spitting outrage at every little thing - man, Container fans have really turned me off ever designing and Kickstarting my own game.

Don’t let it put you off the game though, it’s a right smasher.

2 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Laura Creighton
Sweden
Göteborg
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
LeHavreFanatic99 wrote:

Re: wealth of nations, that's a tempting one, along with arkwright, but I'm scared that realistically I'll never play them as they are probably on the heavier side. I've already got a large number of "maybe I'll some day find a gaming group heavy enough to play this with" titles. But I will read more into it! Thanks for the recommendation!


I think a gaming group like this is easier made than found -- if it were easily found, you would have found it already. Were I you, I would make a sign saying that you were interested in starting an economics gaming group, with some of your interests, and those titles, and hang it at your FLGS (assuming you have one) and see if other interested parties contact you.

Good luck. A gaming group like this is one of the best sources of joy on this planet.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
A J
United States
Riverside
California
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
LeHavreFanatic99 wrote:
Wylann wrote:
Pretty much what every above says. If you like economic games, I'd also recommend Wealth of Nations. It's about tied with Container for my favorite economic game.


Thanks everyone, I pretty much knew I simply had to buy this.... But it's really weird. The forums on this one have seemed really tepid in their enthusiasm for the game throughout the kick starter process and even now that it's been released. It's not the normal sunshine pumping that you usually see with new games. Or maybe I've just misjudged the collective opinions on this forum.

Re: wealth of nations, that's a tempting one, along with arkwright, but I'm scared that realistically I'll never play them as they are probably on the heavier side. I've already got a large number of "maybe I'll some day find a gaming group heavy enough to play this with" titles. But I will read more into it! Thanks for the recommendation!


The game itself is solid and really good. The negatives have mostly focused on the aesthetics/components, but I honestly am pretty happy with my copy. It is true that an inexperienced player could potentially really lock themselves out of the game (there really isn't any catch-up mechanic), but that just makes it that much tighter.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ryucoo wrote:
LeHavreFanatic99 wrote:
Wylann wrote:
Pretty much what every above says. If you like economic games, I'd also recommend Wealth of Nations. It's about tied with Container for my favorite economic game.


Thanks everyone, I pretty much knew I simply had to buy this.... But it's really weird. The forums on this one have seemed really tepid in their enthusiasm for the game throughout the kick starter process and even now that it's been released. It's not the normal sunshine pumping that you usually see with new games. Or maybe I've just misjudged the collective opinions on this forum.



Glad I’m not the only one who noticed that. This particular corner of the internet does seem incredibly dry and over-serious. And the spitting outrage at every little thing - man, Container fans have really turned me off ever designing and Kickstarting my own game.

Don’t let it put you off the game though, it’s a right smasher.



Thanks. It really is a weird contrast, one that I can't quite figure out and can't recall a similar deal with any other games. Container was always among the first mentioned for true player-driven economic games, and the old version sold (new anyways) for mid $100's when it was out of print. The price for the OOP-premium always turned me off so I was excited when I heard it was coming again. Normally you'd expect a bunch of really happy people for a new reprint but this forum just seems really upset.

As I said, it's been enough to give me pause. But I'll be pulling the trigger on it later today and will report back on my thoughts!

Thanks again everyone.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
James E
Canada
Ottawa
ON
flag msg tools
mbmbmbmbmb
LeHavreFanatic99 wrote:
Thanks. It really is a weird contrast, one that I can't quite figure out and can't recall a similar deal with any other games. Container was always among the first mentioned for true player-driven economic games, and the old version sold (new anyways) for mid $100's when it was out of print. The price for the OOP-premium always turned me off so I was excited when I heard it was coming again. Normally you'd expect a bunch of really happy people for a new reprint but this forum just seems really upset.


The publisher did a horrible job with how they handled the reprint. My impression from the whole situation is that they were fixated on over sized ships but they ended up costing more than they expected so they needed to cut costs elsewhere by reducing components elsewhere and hoped no one would notice. When they got caught, they spun all sorts of bullshit about the development of the game despite none of their claims ever being brought up previously.

I wanted to get a reprint of Container when it was first announced but Mercury Games has turned me completely off with their actions. I tried the new edition a few days ago and it reinforced my opinion to avoid the reprint. The game felt too short with the missing containers and the table, which was spacious with the original container, felt entirely too small with the new edition.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ryucoo
United Kingdom
Reading
Berkshire
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmb
MisplacedWorker wrote:
LeHavreFanatic99 wrote:
Thanks. It really is a weird contrast, one that I can't quite figure out and can't recall a similar deal with any other games. Container was always among the first mentioned for true player-driven economic games, and the old version sold (new anyways) for mid $100's when it was out of print. The price for the OOP-premium always turned me off so I was excited when I heard it was coming again. Normally you'd expect a bunch of really happy people for a new reprint but this forum just seems really upset.


The publisher did a horrible job with how they handled the reprint. My impression from the whole situation is that they were fixated on over sized ships but they ended up costing more than they expected so they needed to cut costs elsewhere by reducing components elsewhere and hoped no one would notice. When they got caught, they spun all sorts of bullshit about the development of the game despite none of their claims ever being brought up previously.

I wanted to get a reprint of Container when it was first announced but Mercury Games has turned me completely off with their actions. I tried the new edition a few days ago and it reinforced my opinion to avoid the reprint. The game felt too short with the missing containers and the table, which was spacious with the original container, felt entirely too small with the new edition.


In the interest of balance, and not to pooh-pooh people who feel this way, I’d just like to say many don’t share this sentiment- the publishers/designers went big on what they thought would make the game special and cut back on stuff they didn’t think was important- the 15 containers most people don’t need to enjoy the game and actually feel the shorter game is an improvement, and the machines/warehouses 99.9% of people would never use.

I think most would have preferred a straight reprint at a standard price point of 40-50 bucks. And it is a shame that while expensive, not all the components share the same love as the containers and ships (island board, artwork etc). So I get the sort of atmosphere of sighs surrounding the release. But many seem, overall, to be chuffed with what they receive and even esteemed reviewers have been more than satisfied with the 85 container game, even preferring it. So I’m looking forward to my copy and can’t wait to play it with my group who won’t care about any of the troubled waters this game has traveled to get here.
3 
 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.