I cannot express how these reviews with 2, 3, 4 people are fantastic. For me Dice Tower has always been fantastic content, even when a lot of the reviews were done by Tom or Zee alone. The alone reviews are still fantastic, Tom and the others are extremely talented. But these reviews with several reviewers take this channel to a whole new level in terms of how much I enjoy the reviews.
In Toms and Zee's camp, I enjoyed this one. Not sure I'd want to play with 4 particularly, but the solo mode works and 2-3 players is a great experience.
I played the game once in a convention, and what i miss from the review is that the game's learning curve is on the steeper side, i feel. Not ruleswise, they are pretty straightforward, but the card abilities. I remember sitting at the table shuffling through my cards clueless, to even decide what card should i play, in which position, then what other card can i combo it with. Then do I have the needed rersources, if not, how can i get them. This means you have many options for your turn, which can be intimidating to some, and result in AP. I think it would have been something worth emphasizing that it's a game that needs more than one play to really grasp it, and to understand the comboing possibilities.
Many battling card games are like you describe. Actually, many medium weight and up games are like this, in general. The first time I play a medium weight + game, I expect to be sorta lost, and the goal is to just get comfortable with the rules and flow of the game, and start putting some strategy together for the second go of it.
No one mentions how close to 51st State this game feels like. I love 51st State, I love this game. Zee loves 51st State, he loves Evenfall. Demonstration done.
Do the people you're playing with also are enthusiast? I feel like geek sisters and women friends might appreciate it. It's true I'm hanging with a lot of illustrators and animators, but anyway, I was wondering...
I don't see many similarities other than it's a card driven, engine builder and the players are entities, and there are resources involved in getting points. I know there are components called Places of Power, but the actual gameplay seems very different imo
How do the tokens fall off the track? That is ridiculous. Then you are playing by bumping the table a lot. That is a you thing Tom. Also you dont get the tokens from the battle for spending the most mana but for the most strentgh. The tie breaker is the person who spend the most mana.
That's correct. Usually the person who spends the most mana has the most strength. And it's not really a "me" thing, everyone I played with in each game complained about the track.
Guys, I use to love dice tower videos and watch almost all of them, but the quality of the reviews have been decreasing for a time now. It seems like every problem a game can have is an illustration or iconography problem, you spend so much time talking about an icon that made you confuse, or something you believed was something and is something else. These aren't really problems, you were just a little bit confused because something wasn't what you initially expected. I'm not saying component problems shouldn't be mentioned, but only when it is actually a big problem, otherwise, I truly believe there a things more important to talk about. Analysing a game and finding its problems is a difficult task, but it seems like you don't have time to do that anymore so now y'all are just nitpicking whatever is most obvious (i.e. iconography and components) to justify your scores. I'm really sorry if I'm being harsh, I say this as a constructive criticism because I used to love your content.
Maybe you've just gotten better at iconography? I think it's a valid criticism to make. I think it's very fair to talk about illustrations and icons in games. And it's not even the main focus of our reviews, but I think it's worth mentioning.
@@thedicetower it is fair, but "I thought it was a 1 and it's a portal" is absolutely irrelevant, it's not a problem with the game whatsoever. And it is just one exemple from this video, almost every other review has something similar said
@nreekm I can't speak for them all, but I shared that thing about the 1 vs portal because I thought it was a funny anecdote. It wasn't a criticism, just an odd observation. I'll try to be more clear in the future so it doesn't come across as something to dislike in the game.
I've been watching DT reviews for at least 12+ years, and don't understand the quality decreasing comment. The gained experience shows in the reviews with the available points of reference and knowledge accumulated. Iconography is a huge aspect of any and all boardgames, if someone had an issue and didn't mention it, wouldn't that be a disservice and missing the point of what a review is supposed to do, which is give information based on a certain perspective which especially after becoming familiar with tastes of individuals, give you a way to make informed decisions of buying/playing a specific game? You say constructive criticism, but I guess I see it as nonsensical to get on to people for sharing their experience with the iconography or illustrations of games. It's like saying hey, do your job a bit less or worse, because I personally don't get why you would point out iconography issues you experienced, etc, because I'm (apparently) really good at understanding these things. Good for you I guess? I don't understand how the that specific criticism can possibly be 'constructive'. Should they stop commenting on iconography? Box art? Rulebooks? What is the analysis you say is missing? The review talking points have been similar for years, and have only varied with more points of views with multi person reviews, I don't understand what you imply is missing vs 'back in the day'. Don't get it.
I cannot express how these reviews with 2, 3, 4 people are fantastic. For me Dice Tower has always been fantastic content, even when a lot of the reviews were done by Tom or Zee alone. The alone reviews are still fantastic, Tom and the others are extremely talented. But these reviews with several reviewers take this channel to a whole new level in terms of how much I enjoy the reviews.
Nice Pearl Jam reference in the video title.
Ditto!
Evun fo-hul
The song popped in my head, then I saw the title, then this comment!! Nobody has disappointed!
I do miss Guitar Hero.
In Toms and Zee's camp, I enjoyed this one. Not sure I'd want to play with 4 particularly, but the solo mode works and 2-3 players is a great experience.
I played the game once in a convention, and what i miss from the review is that the game's learning curve is on the steeper side, i feel. Not ruleswise, they are pretty straightforward, but the card abilities. I remember sitting at the table shuffling through my cards clueless, to even decide what card should i play, in which position, then what other card can i combo it with. Then do I have the needed rersources, if not, how can i get them. This means you have many options for your turn, which can be intimidating to some, and result in AP. I think it would have been something worth emphasizing that it's a game that needs more than one play to really grasp it, and to understand the comboing possibilities.
Many battling card games are like you describe. Actually, many medium weight and up games are like this, in general. The first time I play a medium weight + game, I expect to be sorta lost, and the goal is to just get comfortable with the rules and flow of the game, and start putting some strategy together for the second go of it.
Coven is pronounced like oven.
th-cam.com/video/Ydg9QjVpm1w/w-d-xo.htmlsi=xiqyIuVXSXNp39Mn
No one mentions how close to 51st State this game feels like. I love 51st State, I love this game. Zee loves 51st State, he loves Evenfall. Demonstration done.
100% agree
How is this like 51st state. Sorry i dont see it and it is not true
Amazing artwork on this one. Really digging the vibe
Same.
Yay! Have been waiting for this review!!!
I´d say after Zee plays this more he will like it better than 51st State - at least thats the case for me as a big 5st State Fan.
Considering 51st state is is reigning #1 game of all time, I find that hard to believe
Great review! Thank you!
The title to this review is genius!
It is similar to oaks , which I love,too
I can't wait to try this game. I like the artwork and the content of the cards you've shown. It will inspire my clothing style and larping, for sure.
Great Game. played it 3 times and i really like it :)
This is one of the better 2 player games released this year, for sure!
It shines beter at 3
I'm addicted to this game :)
Do the people you're playing with also are enthusiast? I feel like geek sisters and women friends might appreciate it. It's true I'm hanging with a lot of illustrators and animators, but anyway, I was wondering...
Amazing title. 😂🎸
Can't wait for the "Chris loves everything" guy to see this! 😛
He won't see it because he ignores me anyway :)
-Chris
With Chris on this one. Very unremarkable game
Evenfall, Everfall, Everdell, Everfall... I'm so tired of these generic mishmash titles.
I had the same problem with Cloudy titles lately... Ha ha.
"Evenfall" seems like a very convoluted "Res Arcana".
Both are convoluted imo, and I love it!
I don't see many similarities other than it's a card driven, engine builder and the players are entities, and there are resources involved in getting points. I know there are components called Places of Power, but the actual gameplay seems very different imo
They're on different planets
How do the tokens fall off the track? That is ridiculous. Then you are playing by bumping the table a lot. That is a you thing Tom. Also you dont get the tokens from the battle for spending the most mana but for the most strentgh. The tie breaker is the person who spend the most mana.
That's correct. Usually the person who spends the most mana has the most strength. And it's not really a "me" thing, everyone I played with in each game complained about the track.
TH-cam video title Hall of Fame nominee.
I simply cannot the hard first syllable of CO-ven. It's just so distracting and bothersome.
Guys, I use to love dice tower videos and watch almost all of them, but the quality of the reviews have been decreasing for a time now. It seems like every problem a game can have is an illustration or iconography problem, you spend so much time talking about an icon that made you confuse, or something you believed was something and is something else. These aren't really problems, you were just a little bit confused because something wasn't what you initially expected.
I'm not saying component problems shouldn't be mentioned, but only when it is actually a big problem, otherwise, I truly believe there a things more important to talk about.
Analysing a game and finding its problems is a difficult task, but it seems like you don't have time to do that anymore so now y'all are just nitpicking whatever is most obvious (i.e. iconography and components) to justify your scores. I'm really sorry if I'm being harsh, I say this as a constructive criticism because I used to love your content.
Maybe you've just gotten better at iconography? I think it's a valid criticism to make. I think it's very fair to talk about illustrations and icons in games. And it's not even the main focus of our reviews, but I think it's worth mentioning.
@@thedicetower it is fair, but "I thought it was a 1 and it's a portal" is absolutely irrelevant, it's not a problem with the game whatsoever. And it is just one exemple from this video, almost every other review has something similar said
@nreekm I can't speak for them all, but I shared that thing about the 1 vs portal because I thought it was a funny anecdote. It wasn't a criticism, just an odd observation. I'll try to be more clear in the future so it doesn't come across as something to dislike in the game.
I've been watching DT reviews for at least 12+ years, and don't understand the quality decreasing comment. The gained experience shows in the reviews with the available points of reference and knowledge accumulated. Iconography is a huge aspect of any and all boardgames, if someone had an issue and didn't mention it, wouldn't that be a disservice and missing the point of what a review is supposed to do, which is give information based on a certain perspective which especially after becoming familiar with tastes of individuals, give you a way to make informed decisions of buying/playing a specific game? You say constructive criticism, but I guess I see it as nonsensical to get on to people for sharing their experience with the iconography or illustrations of games. It's like saying hey, do your job a bit less or worse, because I personally don't get why you would point out iconography issues you experienced, etc, because I'm (apparently) really good at understanding these things. Good for you I guess? I don't understand how the that specific criticism can possibly be 'constructive'. Should they stop commenting on iconography? Box art? Rulebooks? What is the analysis you say is missing? The review talking points have been similar for years, and have only varied with more points of views with multi person reviews, I don't understand what you imply is missing vs 'back in the day'. Don't get it.