We've been playing this one lately as well and it's definitely on the lighter side but has enough meat to keep us all engaged. My whole table wanted to play this one again after the first play of it because it's such a quick play. Great review.
Very expensive to get now but glad i bought it. Looks a good solid game than plays in under an hour, with a good area control mechanic and rondel mechanism.
At 2:40 -- Slight correction on wedges with two actions. You DO NOT have to assign tokens to both actions... You can do either of them solo.. HOWEVER, you must assign at least ONE token if you want to get any of your upgraded bonuses for that action.. IE.. if you've upgraded travel, you can just use the upgrade as "free travel" you have to assign at least one token, then ADD the bonus to that token.
I agree! I don't think it has a ton of legs, I've been careful not to "outplay it", but for a game that plays so quickly, I think its' a good bit of fun. It feels like constant rewards over 45 minutes.
Trajan is one of my family's favorites and find the action selection puzzle intuitive. We appreciate the surface area of that decision space. This one being simplified is a turn off, but it looks like a pleasant game for others.
Yeah, Trajan is one of my favorite games. I love the idea of customizing your own mancala, but this doesn't sound very deep in the long run. I hope it does well, though, so that more mancala games get made.
I don't see the need to compare this to Trajan honestly. They both have a Mancala but use them in massively different ways. Do you compare every Mancala game to Trajan? I enjoy this game because of it's simplicity. It's great after a long day at work, a quick-playing, softball puzzle that feels like you're constantly rewarded every turn.
So eurogames with mancala as their action selection mechanism are ubiquitous and the comparison is meaningless? It's true this mancala is basically just a rondel without a strict cadence on the number of spaces you can move. The player board with bonus actions for removing pieces and the circular action selection gimmick remind me of a Stefan Feld game. The rondel actions fueling a military conquest of the board reminds of a Mac Gerdts game. But the marriage of these two styles into a shorter, lighter game is not appealing to me; it just reminds me I'd rather play Imperial or Trajan or a different light eurogame.
@@benfoster6715 I didn't say it's meaningless, I just don't see any similarity what so ever to Trajan. Yes they have a Mancala, but they even implement that in completely different ways. I agree that it's closer to a Mac Gerts game in theme and complexity. I think Crusaders is pretty unique in the efficiency engine it's built around the Mancala itself, the rest of the game is light and that's what the designer aimed for. It doesn't need to be compared unfavorably against a much heavier game in my opinion. It's nice to have an easier introduction to the mechanic.
If you find it too confrontational, focus on your movement speed and get away from others. You can also win by going heavy into building and focusing on the weaker foes. All in all, I'm glad I bought it. It is a very well built game and the author put in a good effort to make it feel intuitive (ie he put lots of player aids into the design). Really quite a good product though they might have considered adding more than the cutoff number of victory points. I've added "20 point" gemstones to my copy to make up for this oversight.
I like the game, but I have the same feeling I had for Endeavor, its a little too short on play considering the set up time and the lost potential for deep strategy.
really really wanted to love this game but the game really just felt like it played itself. You almost always have two of your wedges with a bunch of your cubes on it so it becomes obvious what you have to do each turn for the most part. Never felt like I could do what I wanted but rather had to find a way to use the wedge with all my cubes even though I didnt want to use it that turn.
Yeah, it's an efficiency game, that's kind of what they're all like. What's the best I can do with what's available to me at the time. I do feel like that detracts somewhat from the Mancala idea of setting yourself up, the way this game kind of flips the Mancala system upside down where you're pulling form a spot rather than moving to a spot. I like that decision though, "Do I make the best use of what's available to me, or take a slightly less strong action now, or do an upgrade action and reset my board to some degree." I like the pace of this game a lot.
At 2:40 when Tom is talking about actions on upgraded sections he says you have to assign action tokens to both. I'm pretty sure this is wrong. You can assign all the action tokens to either action, or spread them around. But if you want to do an action you must assign an action token to that action, even if your bonuses for that action are already enough. Let's say you upgraded the section that lets you travel and build and you have only 1 action token there, but you have +3 build bonus. You can't use the action token to move into a hex and then the +3 build bonus to build because you only had 1 action token. I absolutely love this game.
As a Historian, I would just be irritated the whole time by the placememt of the enemy pieces. If they had zoomed the map out a bit, they could add more strategy and replayability by having Saxons, Saracens, and Slavs be in different (and maybe historically accurate) areas each with varying payoffs. So, even within the attack-centered strategy, you could decide between the Saxon, Saracen, or Slav route. I kind of feel like they just kept things in Europe to keep it somewhat more PC than actually sending guys to the Middle East, which seems silly if that's what they did. If you want PC, probably don't have the Crusades as your theme. As far as whether or not these guus would be considered "the good guys" at the time...yes and no. (Like I said, I'm a Historian, so I am duty-bound to give ambivalent answers to these kinds of questions.) The Crusades, in general, received broad support from all levels of society, though there were always some critics, and the criticism increased over the centuries as the cause continued to result in repeated dissapointments. However, the Crusaders themselves were often considered, especially by religious writers and the common people they came across, as morally unfit for their supposedly divine mission. There were constant complaints about the moral failings of these men from all quarters. Also, though some rulers did get credit for going on Crusade themselves, the issue was also about as likely to hurt their public image as help it as many monarchs and nobles tried to put off the expensive and impractical venture as long as they could even after being pressured to swear an oath to "take up the cross." This meant rulers and nobles risked looking like impious and hypocritical cowards if they hesitated to undertake an expedition that would certainly be financially ruinous and most likely a strategic failure. But they went anyway, because...Deus Vult!
I can see it bothering some people a little, but Honestly, it doesn’t bother me, the game is super abstract. There’s no action where you “go forth and slay the heathen unbeliever” . And it’s all a mixture of timelines since not all the factions were active at the same time, the game is super fictional in that regard. If you gave me a themed game like “Hate” with cannibalism and you have actions where you’re murdering and eating the opponent’s character to level yourself up then yeah I may have a problem there. This game not so much.
The "Christian version of ISIS" was rescuing people from slavery and the only reason you aren't in a hovel beating your 4 wives right now and hoping you can find a gay person to shove off a building or a disbeliever to murder in order to guarantee you place in paradise.
@@jasongrundy1717 Since your particular form of bigotry only allows for EXACT comparisons, then how about the pogroms against Jews, where thousands were massacred by Crusading Christians? When not viewed from such a self-blindered vantage point, Crusaders were people encouraged to murder at the behest of a religion. Just like ISIS! To not understand this simple fact makes one wonder why you are so pro-Crusades?
The theme is historical, but that's all the good I can say about it. Meh. Games about religious wars that are so abstracted seem uninspired. At least with GMT games you get a history lesson when you play. "Space Crusaders"? I'd be all over that.
seems like fun; the knight art is everything my inner child wants
We've been playing this one lately as well and it's definitely on the lighter side but has enough meat to keep us all engaged. My whole table wanted to play this one again after the first play of it because it's such a quick play. Great review.
This mancala version of an action wheel sounds amazing
Great game. I have the deluxified version. Love the plastic minis. Easy to play. A must buy.
Very expensive to get now but glad i bought it. Looks a good solid game than plays in under an hour, with a good area control mechanic and rondel mechanism.
At 2:40 -- Slight correction on wedges with two actions. You DO NOT have to assign tokens to both actions... You can do either of them solo.. HOWEVER, you must assign at least ONE token if you want to get any of your upgraded bonuses for that action.. IE.. if you've upgraded travel, you can just use the upgrade as "free travel" you have to assign at least one token, then ADD the bonus to that token.
Sounds like a play-but-don't-buy game to me. [Edit: After playing it, I was wrong. I think this one is worth owning.]
I agree! I don't think it has a ton of legs, I've been careful not to "outplay it", but for a game that plays so quickly, I think its' a good bit of fun. It feels like constant rewards over 45 minutes.
I love that I can just hear Sam about to say "You know Claymores are a type of sword, right?"
Trajan is one of my family's favorites and find the action selection puzzle intuitive. We appreciate the surface area of that decision space. This one being simplified is a turn off, but it looks like a pleasant game for others.
Yeah, Trajan is one of my favorite games. I love the idea of customizing your own mancala, but this doesn't sound very deep in the long run. I hope it does well, though, so that more mancala games get made.
I don't see the need to compare this to Trajan honestly. They both have a Mancala but use them in massively different ways. Do you compare every Mancala game to Trajan? I enjoy this game because of it's simplicity. It's great after a long day at work, a quick-playing, softball puzzle that feels like you're constantly rewarded every turn.
So eurogames with mancala as their action selection mechanism are ubiquitous and the comparison is meaningless? It's true this mancala is basically just a rondel without a strict cadence on the number of spaces you can move.
The player board with bonus actions for removing pieces and the circular action selection gimmick remind me of a Stefan Feld game. The rondel actions fueling a military conquest of the board reminds of a Mac Gerdts game. But the marriage of these two styles into a shorter, lighter game is not appealing to me; it just reminds me I'd rather play Imperial or Trajan or a different light eurogame.
@@benfoster6715 I didn't say it's meaningless, I just don't see any similarity what so ever to Trajan. Yes they have a Mancala, but they even implement that in completely different ways. I agree that it's closer to a Mac Gerts game in theme and complexity. I think Crusaders is pretty unique in the efficiency engine it's built around the Mancala itself, the rest of the game is light and that's what the designer aimed for. It doesn't need to be compared unfavorably against a much heavier game in my opinion. It's nice to have an easier introduction to the mechanic.
The game is great, the theme is awesome!
If you find it too confrontational, focus on your movement speed and get away from others. You can also win by going heavy into building and focusing on the weaker foes. All in all, I'm glad I bought it.
It is a very well built game and the author put in a good effort to make it feel intuitive (ie he put lots of player aids into the design). Really quite a good product though they might have considered adding more than the cutoff number of victory points. I've added "20 point" gemstones to my copy to make up for this oversight.
I like the game, but I have the same feeling I had for Endeavor, its a little too short on play considering the set up time and the lost potential for deep strategy.
This game sounds really great, I was watching it on Kickstarter but eventually didn’t back. I hope my flgs opens a copy for demoing so I can try it.
really really wanted to love this game but the game really just felt like it played itself. You almost always have two of your wedges with a bunch of your cubes on it so it becomes obvious what you have to do each turn for the most part. Never felt like I could do what I wanted but rather had to find a way to use the wedge with all my cubes even though I didnt want to use it that turn.
Yeah, it's an efficiency game, that's kind of what they're all like. What's the best I can do with what's available to me at the time. I do feel like that detracts somewhat from the Mancala idea of setting yourself up, the way this game kind of flips the Mancala system upside down where you're pulling form a spot rather than moving to a spot. I like that decision though, "Do I make the best use of what's available to me, or take a slightly less strong action now, or do an upgrade action and reset my board to some degree." I like the pace of this game a lot.
7:40 Sam's face 😂
At 2:40 when Tom is talking about actions on upgraded sections he says you have to assign action tokens to both. I'm pretty sure this is wrong. You can assign all the action tokens to either action, or spread them around. But if you want to do an action you must assign an action token to that action, even if your bonuses for that action are already enough. Let's say you upgraded the section that lets you travel and build and you have only 1 action token there, but you have +3 build bonus. You can't use the action token to move into a hex and then the +3 build bonus to build because you only had 1 action token.
I absolutely love this game.
Pretty sure that's what he meant since it was prefaced with "You can do one of the actions or both, but you have to..."
I've tried the 6 action point power three times and I still haven't been successful.
I had fun though!
Next time I play I'd like to try them.
Great yawn @ 13:09!
Seems enjoyable, but I think it's a try before you buy game for me
As a Historian, I would just be irritated the whole time by the placememt of the enemy pieces. If they had zoomed the map out a bit, they could add more strategy and replayability by having Saxons, Saracens, and Slavs be in different (and maybe historically accurate) areas each with varying payoffs. So, even within the attack-centered strategy, you could decide between the Saxon, Saracen, or Slav route. I kind of feel like they just kept things in Europe to keep it somewhat more PC than actually sending guys to the Middle East, which seems silly if that's what they did. If you want PC, probably don't have the Crusades as your theme.
As far as whether or not these guus would be considered "the good guys" at the time...yes and no. (Like I said, I'm a Historian, so I am duty-bound to give ambivalent answers to these kinds of questions.) The Crusades, in general, received broad support from all levels of society, though there were always some critics, and the criticism increased over the centuries as the cause continued to result in repeated dissapointments. However, the Crusaders themselves were often considered, especially by religious writers and the common people they came across, as morally unfit for their supposedly divine mission. There were constant complaints about the moral failings of these men from all quarters. Also, though some rulers did get credit for going on Crusade themselves, the issue was also about as likely to hurt their public image as help it as many monarchs and nobles tried to put off the expensive and impractical venture as long as they could even after being pressured to swear an oath to "take up the cross." This meant rulers and nobles risked looking like impious and hypocritical cowards if they hesitated to undertake an expedition that would certainly be financially ruinous and most likely a strategic failure. But they went anyway, because...Deus Vult!
Just way too light for what we were expecting.
The game looks awesome, but the theme does put me out unluckily u.u.
I don't think I'd want to stare at the lack of decent aesthetics all game though. That board is hedious.
Yeah, the red board was a deal breaker for me.
Not sure how I feel about a game that simulates the Christian version of ISIS. Sam to his credit did kind of acknowledge this.
I can see it bothering some people a little, but Honestly, it doesn’t bother me, the game is super abstract. There’s no action where you “go forth and slay the heathen unbeliever” . And it’s all a mixture of timelines since not all the factions were active at the same time, the game is super fictional in that regard. If you gave me a themed game like “Hate” with cannibalism and you have actions where you’re murdering and eating the opponent’s character to level yourself up then yeah I may have a problem there. This game not so much.
The "Christian version of ISIS" was rescuing people from slavery and the only reason you aren't in a hovel beating your 4 wives right now and hoping you can find a gay person to shove off a building or a disbeliever to murder in order to guarantee you place in paradise.
Jason Grundy wow, that escalated quickly... you ok there buddy?
HAHahah theres always some SJW who has hurt feelings by themes of a GAME!
@@jasongrundy1717 Since your particular form of bigotry only allows for EXACT comparisons, then how about the pogroms against Jews, where thousands were massacred by Crusading Christians?
When not viewed from such a self-blindered vantage point, Crusaders were people encouraged to murder at the behest of a religion. Just like ISIS! To not understand this simple fact makes one wonder why you are so pro-Crusades?
The theme is historical, but that's all the good I can say about it. Meh. Games about religious wars that are so abstracted seem uninspired. At least with GMT games you get a history lesson when you play. "Space Crusaders"? I'd be all over that.