Having seen Sam mainly in the Top 10 videos, man, does he crank up the showmanship in solo mode: so evocative and full of energy, smiling all the time. I am enamored!
Thanks, I could see my son really enjoying this game. Granted, it would be completely unnecessary, but I like the idea of purchasing miniature model trees to replace some of cardboard components. You could even have someone play the oaks, another the pines, etc. I'm sure this is overkill though. 🙄😉
Each round takes exactly 6 turns. Round (and game eventually after 18 or 24 rounds) will end before the sun spot marker on board. Not like you said on about 10 minute marker.
Great review Sam! Really liked it : ). Now, what separates an abstract strategy game from a non-abstract strategy game? I always thought it was thin or non-existent theming that did so, and so this one doesn't feel abstract at all to me, I have my trees which are throwing seeds and growing, it's not like a knight jumps over a pawn and "eats" a tower.
At 6:18 you placed a seed two spaces away at an angle. Is it really legal to place it two spot away in an angular direction sort of like a Knight moves?
Nice review, very helpful. Was looking forward to seeing what this one was like because of the theme, now I know to deffinatly give it a go. I am glad you don't have to use the sun tiles to ' cast shadows.' Like templates. I like that its cardboard, not unnecessarily fancy. Although are the trees as fiddley as they look? Do they fall apart as you move them? p.s thank you for randomly stopping for a quick natter at ukge :)
The trees are actually pretty well done. That said, there is one in my set that falls apart semi-frequently...not every time you move it, mind you, but sometimes. Thank you for stopping by! We truly enjoy meeting those who benefit from our efforts!
Since there is room in the box to put them in assembled, you could glue them together. I have to glue together my potion explosion ramp for similar reasons. Not sure what glue would work the best, I am going to try a white glue like elmers carefully applied first.
Arnaud Verbeeren the strategy doesn't change drastically. Something not mentioned is when a stack of scoring chips runs out, future large trees being scored take from the next highest scoring stack. In a 2p game, the highest tiered stack (which would be for the center location on the board) is removed entirely, making the center less lucrative. This plays really well at 2, almost chess-like
hsqr I have played Santorini for many times but never played Photosynthesis. I came out with this statement based on some reviews I have watched so far.
I like it, but, at 3:23, if the second tree in the line is in the shadow of the first, then the third would not be in any shadow. The reason being if the second tree is in a shadow, it can't cast a shadow. Also will a medium tree with a small tree in front of it gain any light points? Sounds dumb but that thematic break might irritate me a little too much. I really need to try this one to see.
A line of trees (IRL) will indeed make a line of shadows, the shadows don't stop after the first tree's shadow is cast. As it is in the game. Both small trees in the line after the first would not score "light points". A small tree in front of a medium tree does not block it from scoring it's full amount of light points. Nor does a medium tree block a large tree. However, a large tree that's three spaces behind another large tree is blocked from scoring any light points. It really is a WONDERFUL game.
Theme feels a little against the shade rules. So weird that a tree in the shadow of another tree casts a shadow. Um... if it is casting a shadow it is getting light and therefore NOT in a shadow.
Alluvian think about the trees lining your street (albeit abstractly, but the point will make sense, hopefully). The first tree getting the first morning rays at the beginning of your street will cast a shadow onto the next. Is there a shadow cast by that second tree? Not a direct silhouette of course, but indeed the shade is an accumulated shadow made by the group of trees. Right?
@Alluvian: so, by your logic, if I place two cubes of the same size one next to the other; and then turn a light next to one of the cubes, there shouldn't be a shadow behind the second cube. The second cube (as is the second tree, in this game) "prolongs" the first cube's shadow.
only if the second cube is also getting light from the lightsource, and hence not in complete shadow. All I am saying is that an object only casts a shadow if there is light falling on it. So in this game and your cube example, the objects are in partial shade. It is a fairly abstract game with a theme thrown in that fits better than most.
in my eye I justify that the entire tree needs light to produce, but it will cast a shadow even if the sun only glances the top of it. because the sun isnt actually level with the board in reality.
I did an experiment just now with stacks of quarters and a flashlight and this is what I found. The tallest stack put a shadow over the medium stack but the medium stack, although in a shadow itself, still cast a shadow over the smallest stack. I angled the light to make sure each shadow was distinct. Also the smallest stack cast a shadow itself which means it was still receiving light. In nature, every tree is getting some light, obviously but the game simply has a neat mechanic that trees can block other trees from receiving "more" light depending on the time of day the sun is shining.
Am I the only person who knows the term as "so on and so forth," not "so forth and so on." The Dice Tower guys seems to use the latter. It bothers me more than it should.
Wow, the stark contrast between box art and the actual game look. That's deceiving 😀 Also, too many publishers playing with foil elements on the boxes..
I'm pleasantly surprised, Sam digs the theme that much! Really thought, photosynthesis would be one of the topics, he can't believe in, because they are not mentioned in the bible.
Sure, but cell phones were invented end of 20th century, photosynthesis wasn't. Told it, I'm glad, that you like the theme, and I mean this honestly and without offence. Thing is, you did make the impression, that you are somebody, who does not "believe" in global warming, neglects evolution, because god refused putting any scientific knowledge into the bible, which he'd rather like humans themselves to discover or would probably argue, that Jonah was not swallowed by a whale, but rather a big fish.
Markus Schmidt Your assertion that I wouldn't believe in something that wasn't mentioned in the Bible is what I wasn't going to let slide, that's all. I don't care for sweeping generalizations. No offense taken, mind you...I just wasn't going to let you get away with pigeon-holing me into a category in which I don't find myself. Not believing in something that isn't mentioned in the Bible, but is commonly witnessed and experienced on a daily basis is much different than not believing in something that isn't mentioned in the Bible and not commonly witnessed and experienced on a daily basis. Again, no offense taken, but please don't put words in my mouth.
I'm a Christian myself. Yet I always feel awkward, when fellow believers come with the "not a whale, a big fish" argument. Beware, I'm not arguing, that it couldn't have been a tuna or halibut, or even an anchovy, though the later would hardly be referred to as "big" fish. Given Jesus' parable with the camel and the eye of a needle, this certainly would have been possible! Yet believing, it had been a whale (like I do) makes much more sense. At the time, the book of Jonah was written, nobody knew about whales, even in 19th century, most people considered them being fish rather then mammal. God gifted mankind with ratio and scientific interest, and that's what progress of humans come from. He did not want to put "spoilers" into his book for any scientific findings, humans can discover themselves. He just put it in words, people even at that time could apprehend. That's why in my opinion, he wrote about a "big fish", not a "big seaborne mammal". I think, very much why the medieval times are referred to as "dark age", and there was hardly any progress in mankind at that time, lies in the fact, that people were taking words in the bible literal, which were not meant by God to be taken that way! Granted, the fish vs. mammal debate is hardly a centerpiece of our faith. It is actually rather negligible. Yet it gives me the creep, that people calling themselves Christians put even today so much effort in "defending" the literal meaning against the common sense. I don't THINK this is beneficial to spread the word, and I don't BELIEVE this was the intention of the Lord.
I was interested in hearing the concept and seeing the box....then I saw the board...then I saw that silly sun piece....then he started talking about determining shade. Cool idea totally wasted.
Well the board and sun design is certainly not really too great. The board would have to beo something else than square i suppose. Apart from that I still think its a beautiful game.
Take a table lamp and use it instead. FFS people are way too whiny these days.
6 ปีที่แล้ว +1
what is the problem with the sun piece, I do not follow. I also do not follow why the board is not well designed: the graphical design or the game design?
Having seen Sam mainly in the Top 10 videos, man, does he crank up the showmanship in solo mode: so evocative and full of energy, smiling all the time. I am enamored!
Forget the expense. I would love to see this game made from wood.
Good energy in review. Great job.
Thank you!
Man, I want a deluxe edition of this game, with plastic trees
Thiago de Souza you mean... Fake Plastic Trees?
That deluxe edition will be contrary to the theme implied by the game: life cycle, recycle and ecology.
This is the Spiel winner for 2018...
Currently my favourite boardgame.
wow what an amazing review from Sam here! I'll try this one for sure
Thanks, I could see my son really enjoying this game. Granted, it would be completely unnecessary, but I like the idea of purchasing miniature model trees to replace some of cardboard components. You could even have someone play the oaks, another the pines, etc. I'm sure this is overkill though. 🙄😉
The different player "characters" (trees) are indeed different tree types!
Thanks for the review Sam. Really enjoyed it! You're so right - it really does *pop* on the table :-) Can't wait to try this one. Jonathan.
Zee nailed it describing this game.
wroot Sam
alpha1beta1gamma No, he's referring to Zee. Sam told us how Zee described this game in this video.
alpha1beta1gamma 11:10
Each round takes exactly 6 turns. Round (and game eventually after 18 or 24 rounds) will end before the sun spot marker on board. Not like you said on about 10 minute marker.
Great review Sam! Really liked it : ).
Now, what separates an abstract strategy game from a non-abstract strategy game? I always thought it was thin or non-existent theming that did so, and so this one doesn't feel abstract at all to me, I have my trees which are throwing seeds and growing, it's not like a knight jumps over a pawn and "eats" a tower.
Skarpo this is clearly not an abstract game. Not sure why they stuck that idea in their heads.
Knowing Sam, it's because you're not rolling dice. Or perhaps because it's not TI4.
It's classified as an abstract on BGG, by votes of users. Probably because there's no chance elements, and no hidden information.
as a hortist im quite interested and as a gamer who loves strategy and economy games im verrrry excite to get my hands on this
Are they Life points or Light points? He kept switching terms during the video.
Great game review and description!
Do the trees fit in the box assembled?
Yes.
Trees do. Other elements do not.
everything fits.
At 6:18 you placed a seed two spaces away at an angle. Is it really legal to place it two spot away in an angular direction sort of like a Knight moves?
Nice review, very helpful. Was looking forward to seeing what this one was like because of the theme, now I know to deffinatly give it a go. I am glad you don't have to use the sun tiles to ' cast shadows.' Like templates. I like that its cardboard, not unnecessarily fancy. Although are the trees as fiddley as they look? Do they fall apart as you move them? p.s thank you for randomly stopping for a quick natter at ukge :)
The trees are actually pretty well done. That said, there is one in my set that falls apart semi-frequently...not every time you move it, mind you, but sometimes.
Thank you for stopping by! We truly enjoy meeting those who benefit from our efforts!
Since there is room in the box to put them in assembled, you could glue them together. I have to glue together my potion explosion ramp for similar reasons. Not sure what glue would work the best, I am going to try a white glue like elmers carefully applied first.
How's this game as a 2 player game? More starting trees? Or just more space to grow at the start of the game with fewer players?
Arnaud Verbeeren the strategy doesn't change drastically. Something not mentioned is when a stack of scoring chips runs out, future large trees being scored take from the next highest scoring stack. In a 2p game, the highest tiered stack (which would be for the center location on the board) is removed entirely, making the center less lucrative. This plays really well at 2, almost chess-like
Curtis Cushman thanks for the answer!
It works really well as a two player game as the board still feels restricted due to the shadow rules as trees grow.
Really want a map pack for this
I’m thinking....is it replayable once you figure out the sweet spot and timing of the game?
Is 2017 the year for abstract strategy? I mean Element, Tak, Santorini, And Photosynthesis.
Imho, Santorini is way better than this.
Did you try both? Btw I never tried Santorini but I know the rules.
hsqr I have played Santorini for many times but never played Photosynthesis. I came out with this statement based on some reviews I have watched so far.
Well play it first, I mean I wasn't tearing down Santorini it's one of my new favorites
I am confused about how this is abstract
Is the start of the game the only time you place a small tree onto the board without upgrading a seed?
Sam where did you get those cool large dice on your shelf?
when is this damn game coming out! wonderful. I don't see pre-orders anywhere
Was wondering the same thing. Can't find info. anywhere. Maybe Sam knows???
Gencon for the US and Essen for Europe.
I like it, but, at 3:23, if the second tree in the line is in the shadow of the first, then the third would not be in any shadow. The reason being if the second tree is in a shadow, it can't cast a shadow. Also will a medium tree with a small tree in front of it gain any light points? Sounds dumb but that thematic break might irritate me a little too much. I really need to try this one to see.
A line of trees (IRL) will indeed make a line of shadows, the shadows don't stop after the first tree's shadow is cast. As it is in the game. Both small trees in the line after the first would not score "light points".
A small tree in front of a medium tree does not block it from scoring it's full amount of light points. Nor does a medium tree block a large tree. However, a large tree that's three spaces behind another large tree is blocked from scoring any light points.
It really is a WONDERFUL game.
Theme feels a little against the shade rules. So weird that a tree in the shadow of another tree casts a shadow. Um... if it is casting a shadow it is getting light and therefore NOT in a shadow.
Alluvian think about the trees lining your street (albeit abstractly, but the point will make sense, hopefully). The first tree getting the first morning rays at the beginning of your street will cast a shadow onto the next. Is there a shadow cast by that second tree? Not a direct silhouette of course, but indeed the shade is an accumulated shadow made by the group of trees. Right?
@Alluvian: so, by your logic, if I place two cubes of the same size one next to the other; and then turn a light next to one of the cubes, there shouldn't be a shadow behind the second cube.
The second cube (as is the second tree, in this game) "prolongs" the first cube's shadow.
only if the second cube is also getting light from the lightsource, and hence not in complete shadow. All I am saying is that an object only casts a shadow if there is light falling on it. So in this game and your cube example, the objects are in partial shade. It is a fairly abstract game with a theme thrown in that fits better than most.
in my eye I justify that the entire tree needs light to produce, but it will cast a shadow even if the sun only glances the top of it. because the sun isnt actually level with the board in reality.
I did an experiment just now with stacks of quarters and a flashlight and this is what I found. The tallest stack put a shadow over the medium stack but the medium stack, although in a shadow itself, still cast a shadow over the smallest stack. I angled the light to make sure each shadow was distinct. Also the smallest stack cast a shadow itself which means it was still receiving light. In nature, every tree is getting some light, obviously but the game simply has a neat mechanic that trees can block other trees from receiving "more" light depending on the time of day the sun is shining.
This game is too "light".
#rimshot
Am I the only person who knows the term as "so on and so forth," not "so forth and so on." The Dice Tower guys seems to use the latter. It bothers me more than it should.
We could change it to "on so and on forth" or "forth so and on so", if you'd like...lol.
Wow, the stark contrast between box art and the actual game look. That's deceiving 😀 Also, too many publishers playing with foil elements on the boxes..
Ha! Definitely looks a little different.....
Yes the box art looks amazing
I'm pleasantly surprised, Sam digs the theme that much! Really thought, photosynthesis would be one of the topics, he can't believe in, because they are not mentioned in the bible.
Markus Schmidt That's such a ridiculous comment to make! The Bible doesn't mention cell phone technology, either...please!
Sure, but cell phones were invented end of 20th century, photosynthesis wasn't. Told it, I'm glad, that you like the theme, and I mean this honestly and without offence.
Thing is, you did make the impression, that you are somebody, who does not "believe" in global warming, neglects evolution, because god refused putting any scientific knowledge into the bible, which he'd rather like humans themselves to discover or would probably argue, that Jonah was not swallowed by a whale, but rather a big fish.
Markus Schmidt Your assertion that I wouldn't believe in something that wasn't mentioned in the Bible is what I wasn't going to let slide, that's all. I don't care for sweeping generalizations. No offense taken, mind you...I just wasn't going to let you get away with pigeon-holing me into a category in which I don't find myself. Not believing in something that isn't mentioned in the Bible, but is commonly witnessed and experienced on a daily basis is much different than not believing in something that isn't mentioned in the Bible and not commonly witnessed and experienced on a daily basis. Again, no offense taken, but please don't put words in my mouth.
I'm a Christian myself. Yet I always feel awkward, when fellow believers come with the "not a whale, a big fish" argument.
Beware, I'm not arguing, that it couldn't have been a tuna or halibut, or even an anchovy, though the later would hardly be referred to as "big" fish.
Given Jesus' parable with the camel and the eye of a needle, this certainly would have been possible! Yet believing, it had been a whale (like I do) makes much more sense. At the time, the book of Jonah was written, nobody knew about whales, even in 19th century, most people considered them being fish rather then mammal. God gifted mankind with ratio and scientific interest, and that's what progress of humans come from. He did not want to put "spoilers" into his book for any scientific findings, humans can discover themselves. He just put it in words, people even at that time could apprehend. That's why in my opinion, he wrote about a "big fish", not a "big seaborne mammal".
I think, very much why the medieval times are referred to as "dark age", and there was hardly any progress in mankind at that time, lies in the fact, that people were taking words in the bible literal, which were not meant by God to be taken that way! Granted, the fish vs. mammal debate is hardly a centerpiece of our faith. It is actually rather negligible. Yet it gives me the creep, that people calling themselves Christians put even today so much effort in "defending" the literal meaning against the common sense. I don't THINK this is beneficial to spread the word, and I don't BELIEVE this was the intention of the Lord.
so whats a leviathan?
I was interested in hearing the concept and seeing the box....then I saw the board...then I saw that silly sun piece....then he started talking about determining shade. Cool idea totally wasted.
Well the board and sun design is certainly not really too great. The board would have to beo something else than square i suppose. Apart from that I still think its a beautiful game.
Take a table lamp and use it instead. FFS people are way too whiny these days.
what is the problem with the sun piece, I do not follow. I also do not follow why the board is not well designed: the graphical design or the game design?
Have a go, it's a lot better than you probably think it is. It's an amazing game, very elegant and plenty of strategy but not too heavy either.
Looks like a nap. And a total random nap. Don't see how you could make any plans or control anything with a rotating board and more than 2P.