Recommend
3 
 Thumb up
 Hide
19 Posts

Innovation» Forums » General

Subject: I liked 7 Wonders but.... rss

Your Tags: Add tags
Popular Tags: [View All]
Andre Lucato
Brazil
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
..whenever I play it, I can't help but think that Innovation may feel slightly similar, with added bonus of chaos and fun.

I know both game mechanics differ a lot, however, in terms of civilization card game, do you think that Innovation can be enjoyable for someone who likes 7 Wonder, but would rather play something nastier instead?

edited: grammar
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Ian Klinck
Canada
Toronto
Ontario
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yeah, it might work for you.

Innovation's a little more complex, but it sounds like you might enjoy it. (Innovation and 7 Wonders are both high on my favourites list...)
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tadeu Zubaran
Brazil
Porto Alegre
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
They have absolutely nothing to do with each other except they are card games with civ themes. IMO innovation is much better than 7 wonders, innovation plays best with 3 players.
6 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Matthew Tadyshak
United States
Dallas
Texas
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmb
Innovation is the anti-7 Wonders. 7 Wonders plays well with big groups, while Innovation is only good with 2-3.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jaded Lounges
United States
Vashon
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
Noli me tangere, Caesaris sum.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
tkzubaran wrote:
They have absolutely nothing to do with each other except they are card games with civ themes. IMO innovation is much better than 7 wonders, innovation plays best with 3 players.


Concur. Innovation has little or no appeal for non-gamers and light gamers, but it is a more interesting and deeper game than 7 Wonders, which isn't necessarily saying much since the games are so different.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Mike Smith-Stoe
United States
Maple Valley
Washington
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Yeah, the games really aren't that similar. 7 Wonders is lighter fare that expands well to 7 players (though I still prefer 3 or 4 players just for the added knowledge from drafting what cards you could get to choose from at the end of each round). Player interaction in 7 Wonders is minimal.

Player interaction in Innovation is through the roof. That highly tactical quality and the array of decision making available make Innovation a much deeper game than 7 Wonders.

The current poll shows Innovation playing best with 2. I would agree. I would rate 4 player teamed games a very close second. 3 players is certainly enjoyable. 4 player individual games are bound to less fun for at least one player. So for player expandability 7 Wonders wins out. But again these are very different games. Comparing them almost abstracts their qualities beyond meaningfulness.
5 
 Thumb up
0.01
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Willie Illie
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
chibigouazou wrote:
Innovation has little or no appeal for non-gamers and light gamers, but it is a more interesting and deeper game than 7 Wonders, which isn't necessarily saying much since the games are so different.

I disagree with this statement. I've had better luck introducing non-gamers to Innovation than 7 Wonders.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Hunter Bennett-Daggett
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
SurfinDecoy wrote:
The current poll shows Innovation playing best with 2. I would agree. I would rate 4 player teamed games a very close second. 3 players is certainly enjoyable. 4 player individual games are bound to less fun for at least one player.


I strongly agree. I love Innovation as a 2 player game and like it as a 3-player and 4-player team game. 4 players without teams can be OK or very frustrating, depending on whether you're the person getting left behind.
 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
SoCal
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
AndreKada wrote:
..whenever I play it I can't help but think that Innovation may feel slightly similar, with added bonus of chaos and fun.

I know both game mechanics differ a lot, however, in terms of civilization card game, do you think that Innovation can be enjoyable for someone who likes 7 Wonder, but would rather play something nastier instead?

edited: grammar
Similarities include they're both games where one spends each turn scrabbling to build up your resources and improve your situation and they're both civ buildging theme games.

Innovation can fit your bill.... 7W can be nasty but except for military, it's subtle (burying a desired science card) and short, so any nastiness shouldn't feel as bad. Innov has some cards that steal cards from players' (tableau) piles and score piles. Eurogames reaches a level nastiness when you can directly attack a player's progress/infrastructure in that manner.

chibigouazou wrote:
tkzubaran wrote:
They have absolutely nothing to do with each other except they are card games with civ themes. IMO innovation is much better than 7 wonders, innovation plays best with 3 players.


Concur. Innovation has little or no appeal for non-gamers and light gamers, but it is a more interesting and deeper game than 7 Wonders, which isn't necessarily saying much since the games are so different.
I'd have to agree here as well. The following reasons include but aren't limited to:
--I've sat through and even have tried my hand at teaching both games
7W is no more than half the teaching time than Innov. For many games, but especially when you're dealing with non/light gamers, anything explained after an arbitrary 10-15 min. mark will go "over their heads".
--I'd gander alot of newbies will build science cards anyways even though they won't fully understand the scoring. In INnov, many newbies are likely to outright ignore special achievements. Just playuing the game and reading each card is enough to keep them busy.
--7W games last 30m to over an hour. Innov games last up to 2 hours.

--if you're dealing with nongamers who think eurogames like Ticket To Ride, Settlers Of Catan, and Kingsburg are too complicated (I have met such folks before), or it's been a long workday of which otherwise perfectly capable people would've been fine, then I'd dare say even 7W may be pushing it.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oliver Paul
Iceland
Reykjavik
None
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
I think calling Innovation a civ-themed card game is a bit of a stretch. It's basically an abstract about matching symbols.
4 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Martin G
United Kingdom
Bristol
flag msg tools
badge
Don't fall in love with me yet, we only recently met
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
murksofus wrote:
I think calling Innovation a civ-themed card game is a bit of a stretch. It's basically an abstract about matching symbols.


If you'd said that about 7 Wonders, I would agree.
7 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Oliver Paul
Iceland
Reykjavik
None
flag msg tools
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
qwertymartin wrote:
murksofus wrote:
I think calling Innovation a civ-themed card game is a bit of a stretch. It's basically an abstract about matching symbols.


If you'd said that about 7 Wonders, I would agree.


7 Wonders gets a pass for purdy pictures
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Willie Illie
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Good post. My experience and opinion differ from yours, so I'm offering some counterpoints.

ackmondual wrote:
--I've sat through and even have tried my hand at teaching both games
7W is no more than half the teaching time than Innov. For many games, but especially when you're dealing with non/light gamers, anything explained after an arbitrary 10-15 min. mark will go "over their heads"

I find the teaching times to be about the same. 7W uses a lot of symbols that have new players constantly referring to the rulebook, whereas Innovation can be played with just the language on the cards once new players understand the basic concepts of melding, tucking, splaying, icon counts, scoring, and achieving. Both games have a similar learning curve in terms of the number of games needed before new players can have a chance of winning due to purposeful actions.

ackmondual wrote:
--I'd gander alot of newbies will build science cards anyways even though they won't fully understand the scoring. In INnov, many newbies are likely to outright ignore special achievements. Just playuing the game and reading each card is enough to keep them busy.

Yes, new players will make mistakes in either game. Specifically targeting special achievements in Innovation represents intermediate play, IMHO. I'm not sure exactly what your broader point is here, if any.

ackmondual wrote:
--7W games last 30m to over an hour. Innov games last up to 2 hours.

I tend toward a bit of AP with Innovation, and don't really see 2 player games going over an hour. Maybe 3 and 4 player free-for-all games. One bonus is that Innovation has the potential to end more quickly (in defeat) for new players, whereas 7W is fairly fixed-length no matter how large the experience delta is.

ackmondual wrote:
--if you're dealing with nongamers who think eurogames like Ticket To Ride, Settlers Of Catan, and Kingsburg are too complicated (I have met such folks before), or it's been a long workday of which otherwise perfectly capable people would've been fine, then I'd dare say even 7W may be pushing it.

Innovation has a few more concepts to understand before a game can be played, true. There's a lot of text to read, but at least it's all right there on the cards. 7W is a clear winner for folks whose native language doesn't match the language on the version of Innovation available, owing to it's lexicon of symbols. While new 7W players could theoretically keep and use any available card each turn (discarding if they mistakenly can't afford to build), Innovation lacks a cost-calculation element. New Innovation players might not pick the best option from the few cards they're likely to have in their hand, but they don't have to pore through a huge hand to determine whether they can even build any cards before making their choice. Just telling new Innovation players to try for icon superiority of a certain suit and then meld and dogma cards that leverage that can be enough to get them over the beginner hump.

My dozen-or-so experiences teaching Innovation have taken just a few minutes longer than (the same number of times) teaching 7 Wonders. If it takes longer than 5 minutes to explain either, you may be going into too much detail, relishing the microphone too much, or starting gameplay much later in the tutorial than necessary. The caveat here is that teaching 3- or 4-player Innovation is harder than teaching 2-player, whereas playgroup size doesn't factor in to teaching 7W.

I think the gamer vs.non-gamer spectrum is the wrong one to differentiate on here. Better would be to differentiate on: direct vs. indirect attacks (note no explicitly targeted attacks in Innovation), language dependency, number of players, available playing time, love of pretty pictures, and possibly some other factors.

It should be noted that gamer vs. non-gamer doesn't play into the above list of comparison spectra much at all. For some, more direct attacks is actually a plus. Playing time and pretty pictures are in 7 Wonders favor, though. I couldn't tell you what any of the pictures on 7W cards look like -- maybe this is just something about me that tips things in favor of Innovation...I just don't value art much when evaluating a game. Mechanics are king for me.

I'm a fan of both games, for the record, but Innovation is definitely closer to my heart.
5 
 Thumb up
0.02
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Tadeu Zubaran
Brazil
Porto Alegre
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
murksofus wrote:
qwertymartin wrote:
murksofus wrote:
I think calling Innovation a civ-themed card game is a bit of a stretch. It's basically an abstract about matching symbols.


If you'd said that about 7 Wonders, I would agree.


7 Wonders gets a pass for purdy pictures


Iello's Innovation production, art and graphic design is as good if not better than 7 wonders.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
United States
SoCal
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Ouhhhh, Counter-counterposts....

illest503 wrote:
Good post. My experience and opinion differ from yours, so I'm offering some counterpoints.

ackmondual wrote:
--I've sat through and even have tried my hand at teaching both games
7W is no more than half the teaching time than Innov. For many games, but especially when you're dealing with non/light gamers, anything explained after an arbitrary 10-15 min. mark will go "over their heads"

I find the teaching times to be about the same. 7W uses a lot of symbols that have new players constantly referring to the rulebook, whereas Innovation can be played with just the language on the cards once new players understand the basic concepts of melding, tucking, splaying, icon counts, scoring, and achieving. Both games have a similar learning curve in terms of the number of games needed before new players can have a chance of winning due to purposeful actions.

There aren't really that many relevant symbols though. Just like how in Innov, you don't need to know what leaves or lightbulbs represent (environmentalism and ideas respectively? Again, who cares*) you don't need to know what many of the symbols in 7W are. For the standard and process resources, all players are doing are matching glass tubes or stone with other stone icons they see needed to build cards. Ditto with sciences, as you just need to be able to recognize them as sciences (green background helps with that) and tell them apart. The only unique symbols with functionality are the ones on wonders, and those that give you points. That's it.

In Innov., the text gets burdensome on new players in its own way since some while some cards are easy peezy like draw three 1s, other cards take a whole minute to read up on, and even then, they'll end up showing you and asking about just how this would work with such and such situation. Asking an experienced players is on par with looking up things in the rulebook. And having 7 cards to choose from vs. even 3 cards in Innov can still be off, as having 3 cards with long text can be more timeconsuming than a choice of 7 cards with a single icon on them. In innov. you can end up with many more cards too.

Don't get me wrong, all that extra stuff in Innov. is exactly why I like it. It's just that it tends to complicate things real fast.


illest503 wrote:
ackmondual wrote:
--I'd gander alot of newbies will build science cards anyways even though they won't fully understand the scoring. In INnov, many newbies are likely to outright ignore special achievements. Just playuing the game and reading each card is enough to keep them busy.

Yes, new players will make mistakes in either game. Specifically targeting special achievements in Innovation represents intermediate play, IMHO. I'm not sure exactly what your broader point is here, if any.
In my games, newbies often IGNORE special achievements since they may be way in over their heads with just the game itself. You don't need special achievements to play the game, but it'll take several more games before they know the cards and mechanics well enough to take advantage of special achievements and compete effectively on that level.

illest503 wrote:
ackmondual wrote:
--7W games last 30m to over an hour. Innov games last up to 2 hours.

I tend toward a bit of AP with Innovation, and don't really see 2 player games going over an hour. Maybe 3 and 4 player free-for-all games. One bonus is that Innovation has the potential to end more quickly (in defeat) for new players, whereas 7W is fairly fixed-length no matter how large the experience delta is.
Unless the OP provides more detail about his player ranges, then for 2p, I'd prefer INnov., 4p 7W, and I go either way at 3p. Push dome to shove, I woudln't minld going against my preference if that's what the group wants instead. However, since 2p games are much less chaotic, and I do my fair shar or 3p Innov, games will take longer for me.. at least for MY groups anyways.
3 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Willie Illie
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
Have a thumb for a great response.
ackmondual wrote:
Unless the OP provides more detail about his player ranges, then for 2p, I'd prefer INnov., 4p 7W, and I go either way at 3p. Push dome to shove, I woudln't minld going against my preference if that's what the group wants instead.

We agree 100% here.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Andre Lucato
Brazil
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
illest503 wrote:
Have a thumb for a great response.
ackmondual wrote:
Unless the OP provides more detail about his player ranges, then for 2p, I'd prefer INnov., 4p 7W, and I go either way at 3p. Push dome to shove, I woudln't minld going against my preference if that's what the group wants instead.

We agree 100% here.


I was expecting to be able to play it with more than 2 players (usually 3), as long as the playing time would not go past 30min. The people I play with are usually two work colleagues during our lunch break.

edited: Thanks everyone for the opinions so far.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Willie Illie
United States
Portland
Oregon
flag msg tools
badge
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
AndreKada wrote:
I was expecting to be able to play it with more than 2 players (usually 3), as long as the playing time would not go past 30min. The people I play with are usually two work colleagues during our lunch break.

With 3 players who've played 10+ previous games and are consciously playing fast with no AP problems, half of your games might come in under 30 minutes, but none should go over about 40 minutes. Rough estimate only, take with grain of salt, your mileage may vary, etc.
1 
 Thumb up
 tip
 Hide
  • [+] Dice rolls
Jaded Lounges
United States
Vashon
Washington
flag msg tools
badge
Noli me tangere, Caesaris sum.
Avatar
mbmbmbmbmb
AndreKada wrote:

I was expecting to be able to play it with more than 2 players (usually 3), as long as the playing time would not go past 30min. The people I play with are usually two work colleagues during our lunch break.

edited: Thanks everyone for the opinions so far.


The time needed to set up and break down 7 Wonders substantially exceeds that for Innovation, in my experience. I neglected to mention in my earlier post that I much prefer Innovation to 7 Wonders, but have a harder time persuading people to play Innovation.

 
 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.