Great review guys! Looking forward to getting this one. I also really like two of you reviewing it. I always enjoy both of your solo reviews but the differences in opinion on certain aspects works well (like in your top tens). So more of that where possible please.
My favorite version of Azul. Easy to teach, both sides of the board are fun, getting negative points doesn’t feel forced by other players but a mistake you made as a player.
I liked the review (though how to place tiles confused me at first), but at first sight the first one stills looks the better to me, both in looks and in actual gameplay, so much simpler and direct.
I've played all three versions of Azul extensively and the first, original version is still the best. It might be the hardest to explain scoring but Summer Pavilion and Stained Glass don't really scratch that puzzle itch. And it's not just me who feels that way. Every group I've played these series of games with have stated as much too.
It wasn't clear during your explanation why you were paying 6 tiles to place that first orange tile. Even as someone who has played the original Azul extensively, I didn't spot the little numbers on the flowers, and it wasn't clear to me from your narration where you got 6 from. I figured it out about a minute later when you started putting down more tiles for cheaper. Nice video though. I'm torn as to whether to pick this one up...it actually seems rather similar to the first one to me, except that instead of placing tiles in a "workspace" as you get them, you spend them in between each pair of rounds. The bonuses etc. don't really wow me very much.
Same thing happened to me, I thought "oh, you need 6 to put one ok", then I thought "Oh, maybe you need as many as spaces are left without one?". It took me a minute or so to understand that there were numbers in the board and that's what signaled how many you needed. Good thing I wasn't watching it on my mobile!
My wife and I have played dozens of games of Azul 1 and have introduced several people to the hobby with it. Stained Glas was ok for us, but we left it in our holiday flat. One or two plays a year is enough. This one is much more brainy than the other ones, but I can see it will get a lot of love in the next months. I think with the mini-expansion your fear of replayability is not so much an issue. Great review.
We just got this one, we've only had the first version. We really liked the first one. Until we did some Black Friday game shopping we didn't know there was more than one version. Haven't played yet, I'm sure we'll love it. BUT...I feel like the tiles aren't as nice as the first version. They don't have that heft, or the same feel as the first one. The score board is also super dinky and flimsy, it seems like almost card stock.
Only the first edition of the first one had a cardboard token. So many people complained, including creating briefly a market for 3D printed replacements, that they clearly decided to fix that in the reprint. Although the box insert does still have a space for the cardboard tile that doesn't exist.
Does anyone remember the iOS game, Frenzic? It’s been a while since I played it, but I think there are a lot of similarities between how that game played and this.
Good review but the placing of the tiles, on the stars, was explained incorrectly. You only put one tile down at a time and you must have enough to meet the number required for each spot. So spot 3 requires three times, one gets put down and two have to go to the tower
I agree, having the wild color randomized each game (but still being able to see them ahead) and the bonus points to match would improve replay-ability.
With an equal number of tiles for each color and the same victory points based on order, the only difference would then be the colors themselves. It wouldn't actually change any part of gameplay. It would basically just be moving around variables in an algebraic equation.
@@johnallenii9279 It might change it on the non blank side of the board, since the different colours are positioned at specific places in respect to each other.
Can I ask why you only put one orange on the board and threw away the other ones? Wouldn't you want to keep those to continue getting points on that orange flower? (Sorry, I've never played, just looking to buy it and wanted to see reviews first)
The cost to put ONE tile is written on the board. It goes from 1 tile of that colour to 6 tiles of that colour. So for the location of this one tile, he needed to pay 6 orange tiles (he paid 5 orange and 1 wild). He discarded the cost and placed a orange tiles on the location where it was written 6.
My group really enjoys a game of Azul from time to time. This one looks good and seems like I might prefer it over the original. My only issue with the Azul series is that they're more like variants of the same game, so there's really no reason to own more than one of them. While $30 is definitely on the cheaper side of games these days, if you're like me and are still filling your shelves and don't really get involved in trading or reselling, there's not much reason to buy a new Azul when they all scratch the same itch. I guess not feeling the need to spend more money isn't really an issue for me, but it certainly seems like it would be for the designer and publisher.
@@stefanvansteenberge Good point. Azul works well as a light borderline-filler game that still manages to be engaging for heavier gamers I've played with. Making it heavier and longer would probably get it to the table a lot less because then it's competing for time with more thematic and complex games.
I you were waiting until the factories ran out to take from the middle in the previous games, you were playing way wrong. Not only was there benefit to making sure you could go first if you were the first to take from the middle but there was also planning against your opponents to make sure you were grabbing from there whenever it was safe while still getting the most bang for your buck or know when to grab from there to minimize your losses. In our games of both the original and the stained glass versions of Azul, the middle sees a lot of play even well before the factories have run out. Waiting until the factories are out is just a bad idea and generally means you're progressing too slowly.
6x6Majin I came here just to say this. We use it quite frequently as well because it often fills a whole two of 3 or 4, sometimes 5, but most often is used as a first pull to fill out the row of 5 on round 2+. If the net gain of points scored for that row is positive, then it’s well worth pulling the -1 tile as the first player to pull from the middle.
You can also hate draft the tiles when you know someone is waiting for a certain # of tiles in the middle to pull and complete a row, in the first game. Sometimes it’s advantageous to draft from the factories in a manner that tosses more than what the other person needs into the middle, so they’re forced to take an even bigger loss when they pull from there. Of course, this can often backfire too. That’s why I love the first game. It’s VERY strategic and tactical. I definitely agree that the guys just aren’t playing ‘correctly’ if they don’t see the benefit of how the middle plays in the OG.
I like the first one and hated the second one (too random and you can be screwed purely by what windows you currently have) but I liked the mechanics in this one more despite feeling like a cash grab. However one point you both didn't touch on which kills the game for me ....... Game length. The lack of simultaneous play or resolution means the game takes twice as long as a normal game of Azul. 75 min at least with 4 players and that's too long for a simple gateway game.
I agree. The original Azul is still in my eyes, one of the best lower complexity puzzle board games of all time. These newer versions just seem like uninteresting variants with lower component quality and longevity. Where OG Azul is a 9.5/10, Summer Pavilion is a 6 and Stained Glass is a 5.
This is my favourite of the 3. It can be pretty cutthroat once you see a player has finished with a certain colour. You can try making them take useless tiles in the last couple of rounds.
What? I think you play Azul weirdly, everytime I play there's always someone who takes from the center ASAP, because being first player is such a HUGE advantage, that 1 vp loss is just nothing.
Depends on game to game...many games I play there’s no reason to grab from the middle and loose 1pt when you have exactly what you need on the outside. Also if the middle looks that good for others, push more unwanted tiles in the center. Players that go first will have more negative points due to the matter. Summer Pavilion might be the best in the series.
Have not played this game, and after this review I'm not sure if I care to even try. Azul 1 and Azul 2 are not my favorite games, but the one thing I like about them is that they have this tense player interaction of who takes what pieces and can you force your opponent to take bad pieces etc. This new Azul seems to be the most laid back easy going Azul. There is not that much of a penalty for taking bad pieces, and you can even save some for the next turn. This seems to have lost all the player agency that the previous games had. Also the second "phase" seems to be turn by turn just for the sake of keeping everyone one honest. I didn't spot any other reason why people can't just simultaneously put their tiles the way they want, except that in turn order you can make sure players don't cheat. Overall seems meh.
I can't believe they didn't put the numbers between 1-5 etc. on the scoring board AGAIN. Azul is the only game I played where it's the case and everyone I know hates it.
This Azul is programmable - even more so then the first Azul, which makes it a no for me. Even the blank side won't change anything but faster grabbing combos and ruin the choice stress through out the game. The game also takes longer then any other Azul. The Workshops are setup so that the 2nd player if no1 takes mid will be the next first player. The only possitive I see here are the jokers and middle star. That said the scoring gives no satisfaction - it's just 1-2-3-4-5-6 without any smart setup etc. For me it's simply the worst Azul although the direction of the game mechanics is going in a better way - just fix the map layout and scoring..
It's incredibly well designed as it allows multiple ways to strategize or divert to another strategy mid-game. You're never really screwed over like you can be in the first Azul.
![Carabao Tawandang x NR ศึกแมนเชสเตอร์ดาร์บี้ [ให้คุณดูบอลเป็นเพื่อนเรา]](http://i.ytimg.com/vi/svxMn8PEl9g/mqdefault.jpg)
I liked the back and forth of the two reviewers.
Would love to see future Dice Tower reviews with Tom and Zee ...
Especially after Sam leaves homestead 🥺
Great review guys! Looking forward to getting this one.
I also really like two of you reviewing it. I always enjoy both of your solo reviews but the differences in opinion on certain aspects works well (like in your top tens). So more of that where possible please.
My favorite version of Azul. Easy to teach, both sides of the board are fun, getting negative points doesn’t feel forced by other players but a mistake you made as a player.
I liked the review (though how to place tiles confused me at first), but at first sight the first one stills looks the better to me, both in looks and in actual gameplay, so much simpler and direct.
I love the combo of Tom and Zee! They complete each other!
I've played all three versions of Azul extensively and the first, original version is still the best. It might be the hardest to explain scoring but Summer Pavilion and Stained Glass don't really scratch that puzzle itch. And it's not just me who feels that way. Every group I've played these series of games with have stated as much too.
I agree, and Summer Pavilion is second place.
Azul base game is really cool, Stained glass is niet zo good, have not played Summer palace yet. But I will soon, heared good reviews of it.
It wasn't clear during your explanation why you were paying 6 tiles to place that first orange tile. Even as someone who has played the original Azul extensively, I didn't spot the little numbers on the flowers, and it wasn't clear to me from your narration where you got 6 from. I figured it out about a minute later when you started putting down more tiles for cheaper.
Nice video though. I'm torn as to whether to pick this one up...it actually seems rather similar to the first one to me, except that instead of placing tiles in a "workspace" as you get them, you spend them in between each pair of rounds. The bonuses etc. don't really wow me very much.
Same thing happened to me, I thought "oh, you need 6 to put one ok", then I thought "Oh, maybe you need as many as spaces are left without one?". It took me a minute or so to understand that there were numbers in the board and that's what signaled how many you needed. Good thing I wasn't watching it on my mobile!
I loved azul and I think this is even better
Resuming about the blank side is, this blank side is a lot easier. In the first one the blank side is very challenging for no to mess up.
At 2:30 could he have taken the three purples, instead of the green and a purple.
My wife and I have played dozens of games of Azul 1 and have introduced several people to the hobby with it. Stained Glas was ok for us, but we left it in our holiday flat. One or two plays a year is enough. This one is much more brainy than the other ones, but I can see it will get a lot of love in the next months. I think with the mini-expansion your fear of replayability is not so much an issue. Great review.
Is there a mini expansion for summer pavilion? What's it called?
whens the expected (uk) release of this?
Thanks for the review! I like the other two a lot but never owned either. This might be the one I actually get. Seems less punishing.
I liked this before watching it just because I am excited about you guys reviewing this game.
We just got this one, we've only had the first version. We really liked the first one. Until we did some Black Friday game shopping we didn't know there was more than one version. Haven't played yet, I'm sure we'll love it. BUT...I feel like the tiles aren't as nice as the first version. They don't have that heft, or the same feel as the first one. The score board is also super dinky and flimsy, it seems like almost card stock.
I like how they made the 1st player marker a tile this time.
Prop Wash
My copy of the first Azul has an actual 1st player tile. ..not cardboard like I’ve seen in other copies
@@guillermoz4914 yuppp mine too
Only the first edition of the first one had a cardboard token. So many people complained, including creating briefly a market for 3D printed replacements, that they clearly decided to fix that in the reprint. Although the box insert does still have a space for the cardboard tile that doesn't exist.
@@WanderingLunatic Just noticed my Azul Sintra has a tile marker, not cardboard. Never complained about muy cardboard marker on my 1s Ed. copy lol.
With Sam gone is Miami Dice gone too?
I'm interested in this one too..
Does anyone remember the iOS game, Frenzic? It’s been a while since I played it, but I think there are a lot of similarities between how that game played and this.
In the original why would you NOT take from the center??? There you could take 2-3-4 pieces at once instead of 1-2 from the factories ...
Evgeni Dimitrov keep playing and you will figure it out.
@@chuckm1961 I have 45 games of it with 24 wins
@@evgenidimitrov7790 Just means you're playing with newbies :)
@@nicholastang242 no it means that we try to win by how much points we make, NOT with how much negative we can give to out oponents
Good review but the placing of the tiles, on the stars, was explained incorrectly. You only put one tile down at a time and you must have enough to meet the number required for each spot. So spot 3 requires three times, one gets put down and two have to go to the tower
He actually did explain it correctly…
I agree, having the wild color randomized each game (but still being able to see them ahead) and the bonus points to match would improve replay-ability.
With an equal number of tiles for each color and the same victory points based on order, the only difference would then be the colors themselves. It wouldn't actually change any part of gameplay. It would basically just be moving around variables in an algebraic equation.
@@johnallenii9279 It might change it on the non blank side of the board, since the different colours are positioned at specific places in respect to each other.
I am a little surprised that there aren't tokens, in the game, to do this.
Can I ask why you only put one orange on the board and threw away the other ones? Wouldn't you want to keep those to continue getting points on that orange flower? (Sorry, I've never played, just looking to buy it and wanted to see reviews first)
The cost to put ONE tile is written on the board. It goes from 1 tile of that colour to 6 tiles of that colour. So for the location of this one tile, he needed to pay 6 orange tiles (he paid 5 orange and 1 wild). He discarded the cost and placed a orange tiles on the location where it was written 6.
My group really enjoys a game of Azul from time to time. This one looks good and seems like I might prefer it over the original. My only issue with the Azul series is that they're more like variants of the same game, so there's really no reason to own more than one of them. While $30 is definitely on the cheaper side of games these days, if you're like me and are still filling your shelves and don't really get involved in trading or reselling, there's not much reason to buy a new Azul when they all scratch the same itch. I guess not feeling the need to spend more money isn't really an issue for me, but it certainly seems like it would be for the designer and publisher.
this one takes quite a bit longer to play so not as interesting to play as a light/medium weight as '1' and '2'.
@@stefanvansteenberge Good point. Azul works well as a light borderline-filler game that still manages to be engaging for heavier gamers I've played with. Making it heavier and longer would probably get it to the table a lot less because then it's competing for time with more thematic and complex games.
Rules mistake at 3:00 you took 4 tiles, so you must lost 4. The 1st player token counts as a piece.
no it does NOT counts as a piece. You can read the example in the rule book.
I you were waiting until the factories ran out to take from the middle in the previous games, you were playing way wrong. Not only was there benefit to making sure you could go first if you were the first to take from the middle but there was also planning against your opponents to make sure you were grabbing from there whenever it was safe while still getting the most bang for your buck or know when to grab from there to minimize your losses. In our games of both the original and the stained glass versions of Azul, the middle sees a lot of play even well before the factories have run out. Waiting until the factories are out is just a bad idea and generally means you're progressing too slowly.
6x6Majin I came here just to say this. We use it quite frequently as well because it often fills a whole two of 3 or 4, sometimes 5, but most often is used as a first pull to fill out the row of 5 on round 2+. If the net gain of points scored for that row is positive, then it’s well worth pulling the -1 tile as the first player to pull from the middle.
You can also hate draft the tiles when you know someone is waiting for a certain # of tiles in the middle to pull and complete a row, in the first game. Sometimes it’s advantageous to draft from the factories in a manner that tosses more than what the other person needs into the middle, so they’re forced to take an even bigger loss when they pull from there. Of course, this can often backfire too. That’s why I love the first game. It’s VERY strategic and tactical.
I definitely agree that the guys just aren’t playing ‘correctly’ if they don’t see the benefit of how the middle plays in the OG.
Exactly! Nobody waits for the factories to be empty to go to the middle in my games! Never!! Makes no sense....
That really depends on the board and number of players
I've never been interested in any Azul games until now. Plus, this will be easy to teach children and I think they will like it.
The colors on the board are far prettier than the tiles colors.
Disagree. I like the color scheme I’m the original. Feels more unique.
I like the first one and hated the second one (too random and you can be screwed purely by what windows you currently have) but I liked the mechanics in this one more despite feeling like a cash grab.
However one point you both didn't touch on which kills the game for me ....... Game length. The lack of simultaneous play or resolution means the game takes twice as long as a normal game of Azul. 75 min at least with 4 players and that's too long for a simple gateway game.
I really like the new broken meeple logo.
@@nelsongalvan2178 Thanks! Was scary to do it but it got good feedback! 😃
I hope you don't watch any Marvel movies, Luke, they're all cash grabs.
@@kchorst5037 I also don't pay £30-40 for each one though! Luckily we get cheap £5 cinema tickets our way! 😁
I agree. The original Azul is still in my eyes, one of the best lower complexity puzzle board games of all time. These newer versions just seem like uninteresting variants with lower component quality and longevity. Where OG Azul is a 9.5/10, Summer Pavilion is a 6 and Stained Glass is a 5.
Not that it matters, but was expecting Seal of Excellence.
This is my favourite of the 3.
It can be pretty cutthroat once you see a player has finished with a certain colour.
You can try making them take useless tiles in the last couple of rounds.
I wasn't interested in Azul but this one looks intriguing.
What? I think you play Azul weirdly, everytime I play there's always someone who takes from the center ASAP, because being first player is such a HUGE advantage, that 1 vp loss is just nothing.
More so in the first game than the second one I feel
Depends on game to game...many games I play there’s no reason to grab from the middle and loose 1pt when you have exactly what you need on the outside.
Also if the middle looks that good for others, push more unwanted tiles in the center. Players that go first will have more negative points due to the matter.
Summer Pavilion might be the best in the series.
I feel like getting the first place tile is only adventitious when all other major options on the market are exhausted.
I agree, in the first Azul being first is a huge advantage, the 1 vp penalty is nothing.
Why not give Azul a seal of excellence?
Have not played this game, and after this review I'm not sure if I care to even try. Azul 1 and Azul 2 are not my favorite games, but the one thing I like about them is that they have this tense player interaction of who takes what pieces and can you force your opponent to take bad pieces etc. This new Azul seems to be the most laid back easy going Azul. There is not that much of a penalty for taking bad pieces, and you can even save some for the next turn. This seems to have lost all the player agency that the previous games had.
Also the second "phase" seems to be turn by turn just for the sake of keeping everyone one honest. I didn't spot any other reason why people can't just simultaneously put their tiles the way they want, except that in turn order you can make sure players don't cheat. Overall seems meh.
Bonus purposes
Tom did you say you were playing this solo?
I can't believe they didn't put the numbers between 1-5 etc. on the scoring board AGAIN. Azul is the only game I played where it's the case and everyone I know hates it.
I find this one very appealing to me, we pre-ordered it!
getting this tomorrow, excited to bring it out for gamenight
Tom and Zee long reviews? You should call it Miami Dice Machine!
In first Azul if you didn't take the 1st player token from the middle actively, you'll lose.
not true from my experiences
I feel that the first one is the most simplistic and appealing to me. This one doesn't interest me
Saame!
Can't agree more.
This Azul is programmable - even more so then the first Azul, which makes it a no for me. Even the blank side won't change anything but faster grabbing combos and ruin the choice stress through out the game. The game also takes longer then any other Azul. The Workshops are setup so that the 2nd player if no1 takes mid will be the next first player.
The only possitive I see here are the jokers and middle star. That said the scoring gives no satisfaction - it's just 1-2-3-4-5-6 without any smart setup etc.
For me it's simply the worst Azul although the direction of the game mechanics is going in a better way - just fix the map layout and scoring..
What do you mean by "programmable"?
the worst of the four azul in my opinion: 1)orginal azul, 2)Queen's garden, 3)sistra 4)summer pavillion: boring soon, all plays are similiar.
this is one of the laziest design i ever seen...
Why?
It's incredibly well designed as it allows multiple ways to strategize or divert to another strategy mid-game. You're never really screwed over like you can be in the first Azul.
TangTang Productions hmm ok 🤷🏽♂️