a huge addition of Landmarks, is giving us wildly different "shaped" tiles. In the base game tiles were either a single color or double color that was evenly split (3 sides one, 3 sides the other). In this there are a ton of tiles added with other configurations, like a three color split (2 sides each) and a double color that isn't evenly split but 4 sides and 2 sides respectively
I feel like the different terrain tiles and new scoring cards could be worth it even at low player counts, but probably not when this thing is selling for roughly as much as the base game itself (and more from some retailers).
agreed...not sure why reviewers don't consider MSRP when doing reviews, especially for expansions when you can just compare that cost to the base game itself.
Seems like a simple rule variation of making more than the player count number of landmark scoring cards available even at 2 and 3 players will fix Zee’s issue
Completly understand positives and negatives. I am just thinking that you could always put 6 landmarks cards even if you play 2-player game. Or even scoring on the cards could be somehow houseruled. Would that improve the general feeling of landmarks module ?
Good point. Maybe even let you claim more than one in a low player count game, which would “juice” up the significance of points you can get out of them.
I backed the game, getting two copies of the base game, because our group is 5. I asked how we might play with 5 first, and Beth got me the breakdown of what we needed to add from the second copy. It worked great! Our playtime was double what's stated, but that's normal for every game we play. 🙂
What I like about this more then anything else is I have a family of 5, me my wife and the 2 lads enjoy playing this now I can make it a 5 player game because my day is getting older and more involved on our game nights.
This looks cool, and as a fan of Cascadia, I will be picking this up. At the end of the day though, all I really wanted was some new animal types. I understand how difficult this would've been to do and see why they didn't do it. Still, a frog or a beaver or a lady bug would've been awesome! Thanks for the review!!!
I wish they would've separated the 5-6th player expansion parts from the landmark modules and released 2 sets - it's kind of a ripoff to pay a full box RRP if the only value I'm after is to be able to play with my family and the grandparents.
Well, I personally don't care about the landmarks module. However, too many times I wished I could introduce Cascadia to a table of 5 non-hardcore boardgamers not to get the expansion.
You can play 5 player with the base game since it comes with 5 starter tiles. You just get slightly lower scores. Play 4-player rules and go until the tiles run out. Just everyone gets 16 turns instead of 20
If you leave it all combined, bit then play 2 player, it seems as though you have a good chance of having certain land tiles being very overrepresented and others almost not found, a.k.a.out of balance.
While that's true, the mitigation to luck is pretty strong, and overrepresented tile types will lead to stronger types of animals. You're already removing so many tiles in a 2p game that the tile composition is pretty random (since youre removing about 2 players worth of tiles from the base). Making it "further" random isn't going to make it much less balanced. It's actually at 4p that I'd be most concerned with, because it will skew what was a fairly well-known tile distribution and make thay much more random.
I'm a bit confused by the evaluation here, sure Landmarks might whiff for you and 5-6 players is whatever, but the extra tiles and cards add A LOT of variety to the base game. Btw I think Landmarks work quite well at all player counts because you can build towards them even if less are available. They add a crunchy layer of decisions
I like Cascadia... If they did some new tiles and the new point scoring animal cards in a small box for max $20, it was a buy for me. Now the price is to high for what it is... For example you can buy The White Castle for $27...
Cascadia its a confort game, for 5 to 6, I would rather play party games. its a little underwhelming tbh. in something named “Landmarks”. I was expecting more art, something more unique.
Cascadia is one of my favorite easy/light games. 2 things I was not asking for with the game is added complexity or the ability to play 5-6 players. Plus the expansion is on the expensive side. Pass.
a huge addition of Landmarks, is giving us wildly different "shaped" tiles. In the base game tiles were either a single color or double color that was evenly split (3 sides one, 3 sides the other). In this there are a ton of tiles added with other configurations, like a three color split (2 sides each) and a double color that isn't evenly split but 4 sides and 2 sides respectively
Oh no... that may actually want to get me the expansion😅
That's why we have the tiles in the bag
I feel like the different terrain tiles and new scoring cards could be worth it even at low player counts, but probably not when this thing is selling for roughly as much as the base game itself (and more from some retailers).
agreed...not sure why reviewers don't consider MSRP when doing reviews, especially for expansions when you can just compare that cost to the base game itself.
Great honest review. I've been waiting for this for a while. Mostly play 2 player so looking more to just add a bit of variety.
Great review, folks. As a 2p household, I love tgat you brought the player count point into focus for a moment. Thanks!!!
Seems like a simple rule variation of making more than the player count number of landmark scoring cards available even at 2 and 3 players will fix Zee’s issue
Completly understand positives and negatives. I am just thinking that you could always put 6 landmarks cards even if you play 2-player game. Or even scoring on the cards could be somehow houseruled. Would that improve the general feeling of landmarks module ?
Good point. Maybe even let you claim more than one in a low player count game, which would “juice” up the significance of points you can get out of them.
I want an app that allows me to calculate the score from a photo. Now that would be game changing!!
I backed the game, getting two copies of the base game, because our group is 5. I asked how we might play with 5 first, and Beth got me the breakdown of what we needed to add from the second copy. It worked great! Our playtime was double what's stated, but that's normal for every game we play. 🙂
Your group is way too slow then
It is I nice addition to the base game. I do like having the ability to have 5-6 players now.
Helpful review, thank you!
great overview. We really now know what we are getting and who this is best for! Myself, I may pick it up in future if it comes down in price.
What I like about this more then anything else is I have a family of 5, me my wife and the 2 lads enjoy playing this now I can make it a 5 player game because my day is getting older and more involved on our game nights.
This looks cool, and as a fan of Cascadia, I will be picking this up. At the end of the day though, all I really wanted was some new animal types. I understand how difficult this would've been to do and see why they didn't do it. Still, a frog or a beaver or a lady bug would've been awesome! Thanks for the review!!!
Cascadia is fine as it is.
I wonder if they had issues with tiles being noticably different colors than the base game. I've heard some people had that issue.
I wish they would've separated the 5-6th player expansion parts from the landmark modules and released 2 sets - it's kind of a ripoff to pay a full box RRP if the only value I'm after is to be able to play with my family and the grandparents.
Well, I personally don't care about the landmarks module. However, too many times I wished I could introduce Cascadia to a table of 5 non-hardcore boardgamers not to get the expansion.
You can play 5 player with the base game since it comes with 5 starter tiles. You just get slightly lower scores. Play 4-player rules and go until the tiles run out. Just everyone gets 16 turns instead of 20
If you leave it all combined, bit then play 2 player, it seems as though you have a good chance of having certain land tiles being very overrepresented and others almost not found, a.k.a.out of balance.
While that's true, the mitigation to luck is pretty strong, and overrepresented tile types will lead to stronger types of animals.
You're already removing so many tiles in a 2p game that the tile composition is pretty random (since youre removing about 2 players worth of tiles from the base). Making it "further" random isn't going to make it much less balanced.
It's actually at 4p that I'd be most concerned with, because it will skew what was a fairly well-known tile distribution and make thay much more random.
I'm a bit confused by the evaluation here, sure Landmarks might whiff for you and 5-6 players is whatever, but the extra tiles and cards add A LOT of variety to the base game. Btw I think Landmarks work quite well at all player counts because you can build towards them even if less are available. They add a crunchy layer of decisions
I can't imagine playing this game with five people, let alone six.
Zee is the best!
Zee got that LeBron beard going on
Cascadi-dos
I like Cascadia... If they did some new tiles and the new point scoring animal cards in a small box for max $20, it was a buy for me. Now the price is to high for what it is... For example you can buy The White Castle for $27...
You can find it online for close to 20
Cascadia its a confort game, for 5 to 6, I would rather play party games. its a little underwhelming tbh.
in something named “Landmarks”. I was expecting more art, something more unique.
Cascadia is one of my favorite easy/light games. 2 things I was not asking for with the game is added complexity or the ability to play 5-6 players. Plus the expansion is on the expensive side. Pass.
Madonna, Prince, Cher, Camilla 😌