I've played several games of Star Trek Ascendancy (three player and four player)...it's a phenomenal game! It is exactly what you'd expect from a great 4X game with a STRONG Star Trek theme! It's a long game, but it's not as long as TI3.
I usually never use the like/dislike buttons, but had to do it because of that terrible comment about the Star Trek series... It's ok if you don't like it, but that doesn't mean it's bad. GREAT show.
Thanks for the review guys! Doesn't sound like there's room on my shelf for this with Fleet Captains, TI3, and Forbidden Stars already there. And not just because their boxes are so big.
This game is awesome... "Down time" is a relative term. It is the expanse of chronoparticles you expend to nerd out about the probability of Seven of Nine implants, B'Elanna Torres ridges and the forgotten lore on Dax symbiont. Hard core gamers will, rightly, point out to the flaws on the game, as Tom and Jason so eloquently do. But, Trekkers of the world hear me out, this game was designed with you in mind. 3 hours will go fast, next time you play the game you will make it longer.
I dont care much about this particular game, but have a comment about video itself. Liked very much the screenshots of the game unfolding while talking about it. I think its great to include in the most of future reviews. Maybe as a bonus for certain games to show the final state of that game and to talk about what different players tried to do.
I'd love to hear a review from a Star Trek fan. I'm glad they said it isn't a trash game. I love firefly and tom doesn't so I still have hope for this one!
I'm so very excited for this game. With regards to the comments on the randomness within the game - that's why it's three players. With exactly three players, the game is self-balancing, as you can play a little 2 vs. 1 until each player is on an equal footing again.
I feel like the downtime with the right group can be significantly mitigated. The two games I've played have been a ton of fun and I'm looking forward to the expansions. I agree the luck factor is a slight problem, and I got wrecked one game by something bad happening early, but you're supposed to stack the planet deck for the first few turns and the only bad things come from exploration cards. Granted, the exploration cards can swing wildly. I'm personally much more high on this game. The components and flavor are huge wins. The asymmetric races are a win. I'd give it at least a 7.5, maybe even an 8.
I think the downtime in the beginning can be corrected through the simultaneous turn thing. It doesn't seem like it really matters until First Contact is made. Then i would believe that build turn might matter.
The turn order cards aren’t for 10 players! There’s some sort of variant where you deal in two cards for each player and then each player gets 1. Since the expansions allow for five players that’s why there’s 10
Love Star Trek Fleet captains. For me that;s the tv series in a box. Should i get this,or stick with fleet captains. Although,this will have more fractions.
Rikki Krystal I have played Fleet Captains and I bought it for my cousin who is a huge Star Trek fan and has since played it many times more and bought the expansions. We both played Ascendency and we were both overall disappointed by it. We both felt that the downtime and random events and lack of real trading brought the experience down. I also wasn’t a fan of the way Ascendency uses one mechanic for invasion, one for hegemony and one for space combat - it’s difficult to get a handle on. I didn’t really think the tech tree upgrades were even worth investing such scarce resource in either. I’d say play it if you can, but otherwise Fleet Captains remains the superior Star Trek Game and IMO, is one of the better boardgames available in general for a 4X feel.
I like both, they’re different enough to be different game experiences, and are both enjoyable. Bottom line, this game is meant to be multiplayer, haven’t played enough Borg to make a judgement on solo or two player, while FC is best at two players to me. So, two players STFC is my game, three plus it’s Ascendancy for me.
I am always a fan of the show and ALMOST didnt play this game because of this review. Very happy to say this time I didnt agree with the review. Game wasnt to long and the downtime was not all that bad. A few minutes. Just enough to get my master plans into play! Love the channel and the reviews. Thought it might be good for someone who doesn't mind a 5-10 minute downtime to give a thumbs up to the game so maybe a few wont skip it like I almost did!
if you want a wild swing that's insanely over powered there us a borg tech that lets you research any tech from any faction you own that isn't currently in the game, so if you have all 7 factions and 4 of them aren't being used that player has 5 tech trees to research.
I played this and enjoyed it. I agree the downtime might be an issue but I like Tom's possible fix of everyone builds together then takes one action at a time. I think I might wanna try that. Quick question for those who have played it: Do you think combat is necessary for victory? Our group felt it was and a friend who bought this at GenCon was told by the guys at the booth that it wasn't. He was kind of upset when he heard that and just wanted to know if our impressions were correct or not. Thanks for the review Captain Tom & Acting Ensign Jason!
I haven't played it yet, Chuck, but I've followed closely the coverage of the game and have read the rules. I've read at least one session report where a player won without ever even making "first contact" with the other two players, so clearly combat was not required in that case. That said, it seems like some civilizations are more suited to non-combat culture generation than others. I think it would be tough to win as the Klingons without combat, for example. In any case, it seems like at least being READY for combat is a must, even if you don't intend to invade the other civilizations. Which is pretty much like how the Federation handles things in the show!
Generally yes you will have to fight at some stage, it is very usual not to. The game follows explore, develop, then the last stage is either hunker down, or launch strikes trying to stop others winning by getting enough culture.
There are some very important gameplay reasons why the game is run around using batches of commands. You might get away with using 1 at a time in your first game whilst everybody learns the game.The randomness and slow start can be very much reduced with a house rule, and a special set up. The time between turns is an issue, but the trade off is what you do on your turn is very important. Plus it make the turn order bid important in the mid-later part of the game.
It depends on the race you choose. The Klingons, and to a lesser extent the Cardassians, get bonuses from combat so they are more likely to want to get into it. The Ferengi on the other hand rely on trade negotiations and alliances to profit the most, so they are the least likely to enter combat. It is entirely possible to play the entire game and not do any combat, though a lot of the time, you might not want to but someone else will engage you and you have to defend yourself. Also, breaking the turns up by spiting the commands breaks a lot of the core elements that make up the game. It ruins most of the good strategies and elements of the game that rely on you being able to use multiple commands together. Honestly, other players turns rarely take more than 5 minutes or so. If that is too much downtime for you, 4x is probably not the right game genera for you in the first place.
Tom, if you house ruled those changes you mentioned (everyone doing the build phase simultaneously, then each player doing one command at a time), would your rating go up? And if so, by how much?
Playing the building phase simultaneously isn't an option. Ist would spending resources in turn order loose it's meaning because zur defender could build Up defenses before the attack.
Wow 1st time watching everything is awesome episode did not realize there is critical reviews here. I thought this series was for games that were only awesome. Good segment makes me think twice on if this game is for my group!
I know this is an older video, but man I disagree with a lot of their ideas. Even in a game with new players, player turns rarely take more than 5 minutes or so. If that is too much downtime for you, board games really aren't for you. Compared to some other games out there where the downtime is 3x or 4x longer than this one between turns, Star Trek Ascendancy has rather quick turns with very little downtime. The funny thing is that Tom loves Xia: Legends of a Drift System (which is an awesome game), which has at least double the downtime that this does and he barely even mentioned it in the review for that game. We play the game with 5 players regularly and there is no real issue. The only time that the downtime between turns can hurt is late in the game when people can bid on turn orders. If you are fist player in one turn and end up being last player in the next turn, that can be a little much. Breaking up the turn order by each player taking a phase, as they suggested, completely changes the entire game. The whole point of each player taking their entire turn before moving on to the next is that it allows players who get later turn orders a chance to react to what the other players are doing. If one player is building up a large fleet and powering up their weapons, then you are likely to build up a defense against that just in case they move to attack you. Taking your turns simultaneously or out of the normal order would ruin that ability and the whole strategy of reacting to your opponents. Overall Game length is a lot shorter than they hinted at. It is well under an hour per player once you get used to the game. I think the hour per player was for new players learning the game where they have to read each card and think about what they are going to do. The Borg that just got released also added a solo and 2 player co-op variant to the game. My only complaint about the game is the time it takes to research projects. There are optional rules in the rule book to compensate for that though.
Trueflight Silverwing people complained about time of the daleks down time. I honestly didn’t find any down time as we was all engrossed in each-others turns. I bet this is the same thing.
From what I've read on boardgamegeek not so much. It's too easy to have a run away lead with one of the players as negotiations are gone if the game doesn't fall flat first because of the lack of negotiations or having that 3rd player to help keep each other in check.
Not so much in the core game as it depends a lot on interaction and trade agreements between the players. With the new Borg expansion that just came out, it now supports solo and co-op 2 player though.
I have only played this once, but I agree with this review: massive downtime between player rounds, harsh randomness and swingy luck... no, this game was a missed opportunity. My overall feeling is that I’d much rather play Star Trek Fleet Captains which is a far better game with a whole bunch more theme and better gameplay crammed in for your playtime.
After reading the rules I wasn't too excited about this game. It seemed too generic, mainly depending on random card draws for thematic effect. Of course, I may still like it if I play it, but the rules didn't scream "play me" like some games do.
Downtime is overly exagerated by dice tower if you have experience players there is barely any downtime bc players already know what they are going to do. They have reveiwed games that have longer downtime and have lived them. The randomness of the game is what is great and every game is different.
"if you have experience players there is barely any downtime" That is the case for basically every game. The first time I played Puerto Rico with my friends it took us over 3 hours. A couple years later, me, my wife and a friend of mine got through an entire game including set-up in 45 minutes. If downtime is punishing enough (as is the case with this game), many will never get it to the table often enough to get to that everyone-knows-what-they're-doing point. I know I was never able to for exactly that reason.
I hear you think each player's turn is way too long, have you found some ways to make it better? (like I guess you said instead of having one character do all his actions have him do one action then the next one his action ...)
Patrick Sayet we found same issue. Felt in some ways like game wasn't quite complete... like initial ideas were there with a first pass to implement game play but then didn't go through further testing Prior to release...
@@wroot_lt Yeah. Zee gets impatient during tic tac toe. The ball in cup game is paint drying to Zee. I recommend his two minute video review of paper-rock-scissors. It is a bit long winded for Zee's reviews. But it is a great, in-depth analysis of a quick, fast playing game.
The opponents even out the possible lucky draws of cards, by ganging up on the lucky person. I don't understand why it's not too random for me to roll well, but it is too random for me to draw well.
While dice are random, when the game gives you the ability to upgrade things which in turn give bonuses to your die rolls, you are in fact having some control over the random die roll. Whereas a random event that effects you regardless of any planning you have done, I can see as more annoying. It also seems like the random events in this game can be way overpowered either negative or positive and there again, I don't mind random, but it belongs in the subtle effects area of a game, not game changing.
I agree that being hosed by a card can suck, but they should even out, just like dice rolls. And like I said, if a card gives you a good ability, then you now have a target on your back. The dice, however, are constantly being rolled throughout the game, and can hose you no matter how well you plan (especially since your opponents are planning as well, to offset any bonuses you've accumulated). I also prefer randomness to be low, and mitigatable through effort, so I think we're on the same side. However, I think having a free tech early, is no less game changing, than rolling lot's of 1's on a couple of turns. Distinction without a difference.
Yep, I hear you. I guess not actually playing this game, limits how much feel I can have for these events and how much swing they give and therefore my only reaction can be based on how the reviewers perceived such events.
@@michaeloffgrid Neither. The review is fine. The only people still playing this game 6 years later are the hardest of the hardcore fans so they're not going to like reviews that critical (even if the review overall is pretty positive). If you loved the base game, the expansions give you more of what you love. If you didn't like the basegame, the expansions, if anything, slightly exacerbate the problems raised in this review.
With Borg expansion you can play solo and co op. Most epic 4x games suffer with downtime, if you are enjoying the game, it is of little consequence. Fantastic game, not the best review, but the guys did try to be fair. This is one of the best 4x games ,period....
Eric Finley Trade would work better with 4, someone can get bullied by not trading with them, while the other 2 reap the rewards. With 3, when someone gets ahead, the other 2 beat them up, if there was 4, it would be a lot more balanced. The game works fine with 3, but would be much much better with 4.
guys guys guys.... This game have SOOOO WEAK theming... and thats why I could like it =) Dont listen to them becouse if you love Star Trek.. THere is no theme here at all
Seems too long and random to be an enjoyable game. Also I feel that the game would have been better with a generic sci-fi theme, and not a licensed IP. For example I like Eclipse because it has generic races, art and feel.
I've played several games of Star Trek Ascendancy (three player and four player)...it's a phenomenal game! It is exactly what you'd expect from a great 4X game with a STRONG Star Trek theme! It's a long game, but it's not as long as TI3.
I usually never use the like/dislike buttons, but had to do it because of that terrible comment about the Star Trek series...
It's ok if you don't like it, but that doesn't mean it's bad.
GREAT show.
Thanks for the review guys! Doesn't sound like there's room on my shelf for this with Fleet Captains, TI3, and Forbidden Stars already there. And not just because their boxes are so big.
This game is awesome... "Down time" is a relative term. It is the expanse of chronoparticles you expend to nerd out about the probability of Seven of Nine implants, B'Elanna Torres ridges and the forgotten lore on Dax symbiont. Hard core gamers will, rightly, point out to the flaws on the game, as Tom and Jason so eloquently do. But, Trekkers of the world hear me out, this game was designed with you in mind. 3 hours will go fast, next time you play the game you will make it longer.
I dont care much about this particular game, but have a comment about video itself. Liked very much the screenshots of the game unfolding while talking about it. I think its great to include in the most of future reviews. Maybe as a bonus for certain games to show the final state of that game and to talk about what different players tried to do.
Tom, add some house rules to make the game faster. It sounds like your turn idea works without hurting the game mechanics.
I'd love to hear a review from a Star Trek fan. I'm glad they said it isn't a trash game. I love firefly and tom doesn't so I still have hope for this one!
I'm so very excited for this game. With regards to the comments on the randomness within the game - that's why it's three players. With exactly three players, the game is self-balancing, as you can play a little 2 vs. 1 until each player is on an equal footing again.
I feel like the downtime with the right group can be significantly mitigated. The two games I've played have been a ton of fun and I'm looking forward to the expansions. I agree the luck factor is a slight problem, and I got wrecked one game by something bad happening early, but you're supposed to stack the planet deck for the first few turns and the only bad things come from exploration cards. Granted, the exploration cards can swing wildly. I'm personally much more high on this game. The components and flavor are huge wins. The asymmetric races are a win. I'd give it at least a 7.5, maybe even an 8.
A quick game of Twilight Imperium? lol
It's sarcasm.
Do you think you could house rule that everyone takes one action and moves to the next player or would that change up the gameplay too much?
Hear hear!
I think the downtime in the beginning can be corrected through the simultaneous turn thing. It doesn't seem like it really matters until First Contact is made. Then i would believe that build turn might matter.
The turn order cards aren’t for 10 players! There’s some sort of variant where you deal in two cards for each player and then each player gets 1. Since the expansions allow for five players that’s why there’s 10
Love Star Trek Fleet captains. For me that;s the tv series in a box.
Should i get this,or stick with fleet captains.
Although,this will have more fractions.
Rikki Krystal I have played Fleet Captains and I bought it for my cousin who is a huge Star Trek fan and has since played it many times more and bought the expansions. We both played Ascendency and we were both overall disappointed by it. We both felt that the downtime and random events and lack of real trading brought the experience down. I also wasn’t a fan of the way Ascendency uses one mechanic for invasion, one for hegemony and one for space combat - it’s difficult to get a handle on. I didn’t really think the tech tree upgrades were even worth investing such scarce resource in either. I’d say play it if you can, but otherwise Fleet Captains remains the superior Star Trek Game and IMO, is one of the better boardgames available in general for a 4X feel.
I like both, they’re different enough to be different game experiences, and are both enjoyable.
Bottom line, this game is meant to be multiplayer, haven’t played enough Borg to make a judgement on solo or two player, while FC is best at two players to me.
So, two players STFC is my game, three plus it’s Ascendancy for me.
I am always a fan of the show and ALMOST didnt play this game because of this review. Very happy to say this time I didnt agree with the review. Game wasnt to long and the downtime was not all that bad. A few minutes. Just enough to get my master plans into play! Love the channel and the reviews. Thought it might be good for someone who doesn't mind a 5-10 minute downtime to give a thumbs up to the game so maybe a few wont skip it like I almost did!
The four player game I played ran about 4:30hrs....close to what they suggest for that player count.
So, the question remains: Best "Star Trek in a box" game: This, Frontiers, or Fleet Captains?
Fleet Captains it sounds like
Star Trek Adventures.
if you want a wild swing that's insanely over powered there us a borg tech that lets you research any tech from any faction you own that isn't currently in the game, so if you have all 7 factions and 4 of them aren't being used that player has 5 tech trees to research.
I played this and enjoyed it. I agree the downtime might be an issue but I like Tom's possible fix of everyone builds together then takes one action at a time. I think I might wanna try that. Quick question for those who have played it:
Do you think combat is necessary for victory? Our group felt it was and a friend who bought this at GenCon was told by the guys at the booth that it wasn't. He was kind of upset when he heard that and just wanted to know if our impressions were correct or not.
Thanks for the review Captain Tom & Acting Ensign Jason!
I haven't played it yet, Chuck, but I've followed closely the coverage of the game and have read the rules. I've read at least one session report where a player won without ever even making "first contact" with the other two players, so clearly combat was not required in that case. That said, it seems like some civilizations are more suited to non-combat culture generation than others. I think it would be tough to win as the Klingons without combat, for example. In any case, it seems like at least being READY for combat is a must, even if you don't intend to invade the other civilizations. Which is pretty much like how the Federation handles things in the show!
Generally yes you will have to fight at some stage, it is very usual not to. The game follows explore, develop, then the last stage is either hunker down, or launch strikes trying to stop others winning by getting enough culture.
There are some very important gameplay reasons why the game is run around using batches of commands. You might get away with using 1 at a time in your first game whilst everybody learns the game.The randomness and slow start can be very much reduced with a house rule, and a special set up. The time between turns is an issue, but the trade off is what you do on your turn is very important. Plus it make the turn order bid important in the mid-later part of the game.
It depends on the race you choose. The Klingons, and to a lesser extent the Cardassians, get bonuses from combat so they are more likely to want to get into it. The Ferengi on the other hand rely on trade negotiations and alliances to profit the most, so they are the least likely to enter combat. It is entirely possible to play the entire game and not do any combat, though a lot of the time, you might not want to but someone else will engage you and you have to defend yourself.
Also, breaking the turns up by spiting the commands breaks a lot of the core elements that make up the game. It ruins most of the good strategies and elements of the game that rely on you being able to use multiple commands together. Honestly, other players turns rarely take more than 5 minutes or so. If that is too much downtime for you, 4x is probably not the right game genera for you in the first place.
Thanks for reviewing this game!
Tom, if you house ruled those changes you mentioned (everyone doing the build phase simultaneously, then each player doing one command at a time), would your rating go up? And if so, by how much?
There's no way to know, I'd have to play it that way to see.
Tom's suggestion is a proven system, too. I'll call it Starlight Trekperium
I've played lots of this game and absolutely love it! One of the best Star Trek games out there. 😁👍😁
Playing the building phase simultaneously isn't an option. Ist would spending resources in turn order loose it's meaning because zur defender could build Up defenses before the attack.
I would like to hear Tom's opinion on Ascendancy VS Exodus Proxima Centauri w/ EOE.
Wow 1st time watching everything is awesome episode did not realize there is critical reviews here. I thought this series was for games that were only awesome. Good segment makes me think twice on if this game is for my group!
The Expansions are out. How do they change the game?
It should have the Borg (as a random encounter that randomly moves around the board) and the Gorn as a playable faction.
I know this is an older video, but man I disagree with a lot of their ideas. Even in a game with new players, player turns rarely take more than 5 minutes or so. If that is too much downtime for you, board games really aren't for you. Compared to some other games out there where the downtime is 3x or 4x longer than this one between turns, Star Trek Ascendancy has rather quick turns with very little downtime. The funny thing is that Tom loves Xia: Legends of a Drift System (which is an awesome game), which has at least double the downtime that this does and he barely even mentioned it in the review for that game.
We play the game with 5 players regularly and there is no real issue. The only time that the downtime between turns can hurt is late in the game when people can bid on turn orders. If you are fist player in one turn and end up being last player in the next turn, that can be a little much.
Breaking up the turn order by each player taking a phase, as they suggested, completely changes the entire game. The whole point of each player taking their entire turn before moving on to the next is that it allows players who get later turn orders a chance to react to what the other players are doing. If one player is building up a large fleet and powering up their weapons, then you are likely to build up a defense against that just in case they move to attack you. Taking your turns simultaneously or out of the normal order would ruin that ability and the whole strategy of reacting to your opponents.
Overall Game length is a lot shorter than they hinted at. It is well under an hour per player once you get used to the game. I think the hour per player was for new players learning the game where they have to read each card and think about what they are going to do.
The Borg that just got released also added a solo and 2 player co-op variant to the game.
My only complaint about the game is the time it takes to research projects. There are optional rules in the rule book to compensate for that though.
Trueflight Silverwing people complained about time of the daleks down time. I honestly didn’t find any down time as we was all engrossed in each-others turns. I bet this is the same thing.
16:30 hegemony. soft G, stress on 2nd syllable. hedge-EH-money
Dont expect americans to know how to pronounce english words :-)
Karakoth England is to America what Greece was to Rome.
Actually isn't it heh-JEH-mah-nee?
Been waiting for this review.
Is this game playable with two players?
From what I've read on boardgamegeek not so much. It's too easy to have a run away lead with one of the players as negotiations are gone if the game doesn't fall flat first because of the lack of negotiations or having that 3rd player to help keep each other in check.
Not so much in the core game as it depends a lot on interaction and trade agreements between the players. With the new Borg expansion that just came out, it now supports solo and co-op 2 player though.
Is this a Fleet Captains Killer for you tom?
It is not.
That's good to hear. I love fleet captains.
Have you watched the review? :P
Lame Jason. You did the LLAP hand sign wrong.
I have only played this once, but I agree with this review: massive downtime between player rounds, harsh randomness and swingy luck... no, this game was a missed opportunity. My overall feeling is that I’d much rather play Star Trek Fleet Captains which is a far better game with a whole bunch more theme and better gameplay crammed in for your playtime.
So CAN this game be played with just 2 players or not? Or would it not be worth playing with only 2? Anyone?
After reading the rules I wasn't too excited about this game. It seemed too generic, mainly depending on random card draws for thematic effect. Of course, I may still like it if I play it, but the rules didn't scream "play me" like some games do.
Downtime is overly exagerated by dice tower if you have experience players there is barely any downtime bc players already know what they are going to do. They have reveiwed games that have longer downtime and have lived them. The randomness of the game is what is great and every game is different.
"if you have experience players there is barely any downtime"
That is the case for basically every game. The first time I played Puerto Rico with my friends it took us over 3 hours. A couple years later, me, my wife and a friend of mine got through an entire game including set-up in 45 minutes.
If downtime is punishing enough (as is the case with this game), many will never get it to the table often enough to get to that everyone-knows-what-they're-doing point. I know I was never able to for exactly that reason.
I hear you think each player's turn is way too long, have you found some ways to make it better? (like I guess you said instead of having one character do all his actions have him do one action then the next one his action ...)
Patrick Sayet we found same issue. Felt in some ways like game wasn't quite complete... like initial ideas were there with a first pass to implement game play but then didn't go through further testing Prior to release...
Why is this not a Miami Dice!? :D
Probably because Jason Levine looks nothing like Sam Healy.
Sam is a SW fan and Zee... Well, this one is a bit too short for him :D
@@wroot_lt Yeah. Zee gets impatient during tic tac toe. The ball in cup game is paint drying to Zee. I recommend his two minute video review of paper-rock-scissors. It is a bit long winded for Zee's reviews. But it is a great, in-depth analysis of a quick, fast playing game.
The opponents even out the possible lucky draws of cards, by ganging up on the lucky person. I don't understand why it's not too random for me to roll well, but it is too random for me to draw well.
While dice are random, when the game gives you the ability to upgrade things which in turn give bonuses to your die rolls, you are in fact having some control over the random die roll. Whereas a random event that effects you regardless of any planning you have done, I can see as more annoying. It also seems like the random events in this game can be way overpowered either negative or positive and there again, I don't mind random, but it belongs in the subtle effects area of a game, not game changing.
I agree that being hosed by a card can suck, but they should even out, just like dice rolls. And like I said, if a card gives you a good ability, then you now have a target on your back. The dice, however, are constantly being rolled throughout the game, and can hose you no matter how well you plan (especially since your opponents are planning as well, to offset any bonuses you've accumulated). I also prefer randomness to be low, and mitigatable through effort, so I think we're on the same side. However, I think having a free tech early, is no less game changing, than rolling lot's of 1's on a couple of turns. Distinction without a difference.
Yep, I hear you. I guess not actually playing this game, limits how much feel I can have for these events and how much swing they give and therefore my only reaction can be based on how the reviewers perceived such events.
I did not know this series was reviews
MUST GO BACK AND WATCH EVERY ONE
This game seems like Master of Orion the PC game, but as a board game with Star Trek theme!
Wow there's a review that's aged poorly. Still known as the best Star Trek game and one of the best games period.
Did expansions fix the issues, or is this review just off-base?
@@michaeloffgrid Neither. The review is fine. The only people still playing this game 6 years later are the hardest of the hardcore fans so they're not going to like reviews that critical (even if the review overall is pretty positive). If you loved the base game, the expansions give you more of what you love. If you didn't like the basegame, the expansions, if anything, slightly exacerbate the problems raised in this review.
With Borg expansion you can play solo and co op. Most epic 4x games suffer with downtime, if you are enjoying the game, it is of little consequence. Fantastic game, not the best review, but the guys did try to be fair. This is one of the best 4x games ,period....
I found it super swingy to be honest, not super awful but a lot more random chance then i like in a game that takes this long.
This game sound exellent.
Joshua Frye
I'm a very luck man from a long and glorious line of lucky people. If I wan't a Christian I probably would have been a gambler.
Tom Vassel is to board game reviews what Bruce Lee was to board game reviews.
Huh? Are you being facetious? Or is this comment a typo?
Took us 9 plus hours and still didn't finish (as a 5). As a 4 took 4 hours
Your group must be very selfish taking that long in their turns. I wouldn't play with people like that.
The game mat is ages 12+ but the game itself is ages 14+
WHAT THE HECK
This review pretty much matches my opinion of this game. Too much randomness for such a complicated and long game.
Eclipse >> Star Trek Ascendancy. I like Ascendancy but this game just doesn't compare, and Eclipse plays much faster and is more interactive.
Too bad, at first thought, I would've gotten this game, but the downtime would kill it for my group of 3 that would play this.
Glad I read the rules to this game before deciding to buy this game, or in this case, not to buy the game.
heh-JEM-uh-nee
This game seems needlessly complicated.
It is actually pretty simple to play, but is un-balanced with 3 players
Why is it unbalanced with 3 players? I considered buying it but I have heard it's best with 3.
Eric Finley Trade would work better with 4, someone can get bullied by not trading with them, while the other 2 reap the rewards. With 3, when someone gets ahead, the other 2 beat them up, if there was 4, it would be a lot more balanced. The game works fine with 3, but would be much much better with 4.
Bort Henderson Thank you.
I have a feeling Gene Roddenberry is rolling in his grave.
guys guys guys.... This game have SOOOO WEAK theming... and thats why I could like it =) Dont listen to them becouse if you love Star Trek.. THere is no theme here at all
You need to look up what theme means. English looks like your second language.
Sounds awful. So much randomness. Maybe if I was a Star Trek fan this would be good.
So you don't play other games with dice rolls and cars draw?
Seems too long and random to be an enjoyable game. Also I feel that the game would have been better with a generic sci-fi theme, and not a licensed IP. For example I like Eclipse because it has generic races, art and feel.
Random events and dice rolling in a long game. Screw that completely. Give me my 18XX if I have to play that long anyway.
You really want a strategic simulator from an action adventure sci-fi theme?
They're very different games.
this looks a lot lice Eclipse.
Play a quick game of TI? What nonsense
It's sarcasm.
Even if the gameplay is good:
- Screen capture photos on the cards.
- Mediocre Next Generation instead of awesome classic Trek.
Pass