I own both Terra Mystica and Gaia Project, and I just picked up this one. While I do agree that GP does bring several cool new elements, I still found myself preferring TMs experience. The modular board is cool, and the open board does give players an alternative to the tight board experience TM offers (I personally much prefer the tight board experience over the open one), plus accounts better for different player counts. The shining beacon of GP is the tech board and the tech/advanced tech. I do very much agree with you that it's a vast improvement on the cult board and favour tiles, espeically due to being variable from game to game. I do however think that as much as the tech board gives you plenty of options on how to improve, players will have to favour two specific tracks over the others for the most part. Those two tracks being two elements that were separate from the cult tracks in TM (distance and terraforming cost). By the time you can shift attention to the other tracks you don't have a lot of the game left. So unless your faction is really good at the tracks, you aren't really getting to explore all the options of the tech board without significantly disadvantaging yourself if you ignore the two specifically mentioned tracks in favour of the others. Distance is far more a hurdle in GP with few planets being grouped together (sure the green cubes can help boost you, but they aren't that plentiful and have other great uses as well), and terraforming cost is as well due to there being no way to partially terraform in GP. As for the other differences GP brought, the gaiaforming while nice enough, tended to be a mostly ignored feature in the games I played due to once again competing with distance/terraforming cost on the tech board, plus it temporarily locked away power tokens. The resource tracks replacing regular resources was definitely a step back since a simple bump of the board could mess it up, plus left players without the tactical element of planning out their resource allocation. Also having part of the income tracks on the tech board made it easy to miss out on income since all other income happened in the player area. So I wouldn't say GP is the definite preferred game out of the two. For the more thematic crowd? Sure, I can see that. Same goes for the players who prefer an open board to a tight one. But from what I hear from other fans of these games, it does seem many people still lean more towards TM. I have yet to play or properly read the rules on Age of Innovation, I just finished sorting my copy. But my impression seems like it takes more of a middle ground between TM and GP. It takes the more variable approach in favour/tech tiles, keeps the tight board experience from TM but accounts for variable player count with the two sides. Sure, it reverts back to the cult track over the tech board, but IMO that's not necessarily a negative since it keeps all resource accounting in the player area, where I think it belongs (never really cared about theme to begin with, so what they are called doesn't really matter to me). Plus it looks to me at least that the new innovation tiles will be in some way tied to the track colours, so from what I can tell it's still a step up from the old cult tracks where you mainly moved up for positioning and to charge power (and obviously to gain end of round bonuses). I look forward to seeing how people will receive this version. Personally I don't think I will ever actually stop playing regular TM, even after 50+ games I still love going back to it (last played it yesterday). But I am really excited about the more modular elements of this one. I have my suspicions that it could wind up replacing GP for me, as much as I do enjoy GP, I mainly wanted more of a hybrid between what it was and TM, and this really looks like it could be it.
Funnily enough, I usually prioritize economy over distance and terraforming. Most of my games i barely reach the top tracks for distance and terraforming. Distance usually can be mitigated by either QIC or the +3 distance tile. If neither tiles are in the game then I'd consider the distance tracke more.
@@TheBrokenMeeplereally begs the question, what exactly do they discover through more plays?
ปีที่แล้ว +14
I agree with some of your criticisms, but mostly calling it solitaire? It is one of the most interactive Euros on the market, with lots of positive and negative interactions. By the way, you have to CONSTANTLY monitor the others and adjust your strategy to prepare for their open options. Some interactions: - side by side construction - rushing or delaying power charges with your buildings - digging away to screw up opponents' plans - hatepicking power actions - forcing the others to do some early/late building - to delay passing so that you can machinate with the round bonus tiles - competition for innovation tiles, hatepicking - knowledge (cult) tracks are multidimensional races - tons of faction and land specific interactions - etc This is my 2nd fav game of all time, so maybe I'm a little bit biased, but you're definitely missing something when you call this game a solitaire.
Other than side by side construction, nothing else is direct to other players. The taking of a tile or action spot or race to a spot is the same as any other euro game and doesn't change with having more players and thus a massive chunk of extra time length. The solo mode bot replicates all that by itself.
ปีที่แล้ว +13
@@TheBrokenMeepledoes it matter? They are all interactions by definition. And the amount of these indirect interactions make AOI interactive altogether.
I’m a big fan of Terra Mystica. I think I prefer this as it is more “fun”. I always feel I can do more and the economy is lent as tight. That being said, I often find myself doing everything in the game. Last time I played was at 3 player and I built all of my buildings but 2. Not sure if that makes for a good or bad game but it is something I’ve noticed about Age of Innovation.
Also a game with several boards sections to do stuff on letting you complete nearly everything in every game is prone to becoming a little boring after a few plays.
Great review even if I disagree completely. Personally I found this to be the almost perfect mix of the previous games. TM is so tight it can feel almost scripted with enough play, whereas GP was way to open for me and felt very much like multiplayer solitaire. For me AOI lands perfectly in between and also scales down better than previous games. The only issue I have with it is the tech tracks where I completely agree with you. It is funny to hear someone who is such a big fan of Ark Nova complain about lack of interactivity in other games. ;) Anyway very good review as usual. Love a review where the points are well argumented. Keep up the good work Luke.
Ark Nova doesn't have a ton of interacting no, but I've highlighted this as a flaw of that game. But what I'm doing is still far more interesting then in TM. Plus there's a big race aspect to the milestones and specific cards in the display, here, if I'm not near you for the purposes of cheap building I got little care for what you are doing.
@@TheBrokenMeepleDifferent strokes mate. I ended up givng away Ark Nova because I didnt really feel it warranted the playtime with that little interaction and I felt the action selection mechanic was done better in New Dawn, but I can certainly see why people love Ark Nova. If you are not building close to people in AOI and TM you will get smoked by any half decent player, because you are gimping your echonomy severely.
My friend is a big fan of TM. I find it good just because it is too complicated for most players in our circle and takes a lot of brain capacity to manage. Having played Age of Innovation a few times I prefer this version as it is not that restrictive in resource management and offers more choises. The production is "fresher" and as you mentioned the variety of factions setup offers endless possibilities. I ended up adding this game to my collection. To me this is the best one of them all (TM, TN, GP).
@@TheBrokenMeeple the economy in this game allows you to accumulate more. In TM you always lacking and feel tight. In AofI you still have to manage them wisely but you are not as tight. Maybe it's just so happened in games we played 🤷♀️
@@chuckm1961 well, not most, more like a half. The other half me included don't feel that intimidated and can enjoy the puzzle. I like thinky games and will always have them in my collection
Hey thanks for the review! Looks like a great new edition, but I'll probably stick with Gaia Project. I see Ceres behind you! I just got my copy. Looking forward to hearing your opinions on that. I struggled with the AI, but I think it'll play pretty great when I get a group together.
I like heavy Euros but I had never played Terra Mystica before. So I bought Age of Innovation and after 10 plays I can say this game is truly amazing! So many strategic options and every time the set up is different so you have to plan accordingly. After every play I always ponder on what I could have made differently to get a better result either I win or lose. The rules are not that difficult to digest and the play time for two persons is from 1h 30min to 2 hours. The biggest drawback of this game is that you need 20+min for the set up and another 15+min to put it back in the box. Apart from that the game shines in its category. That's why I believe that this review score is very unfair. You are not reviewing the game itself but the game as an evolution of Terra Mystica. It's at least an 8/10 in my opinion if putting Terra Mystica out of the equation. Except that the rest of the review is very accurate. Thank you for the detailed job on your reviews and for helping us to pick games that suits our style.
I don't already have Terra Mystica or Gaia Project, never even played them, so Age of Innovation brings something new to me. Also, not so expensive at 60 EUR, there is a lot in that box, so price is fair. I like it and I want to play it some more (only 2 plays so far)
Thanks for the review Luke. I was very interested in this one because though I have Gaia Project, Terra Mystica always fascinated me but the tracks in it are really bland and I was hoping (like you) they would revitalise them with a bit of Gaia Project coat of paint 🤷♂️ I’d be interested to know how it compares to Terra Mystica + it’s two expansions or even if said expansions are somewhat playable with Age of Innovation
I feel like youre the only reviewer who always remember us colour blind players. Thank you for that. I like Gaia Project over TM because the tech track is a big improvement, but the sparseness of the map can be a bit brutal.
Another excellent review! I really do appreciate your brutal honesty in these videos. I agree with basically everything you said. I really do love the variety and assymetry that this game offers. Looks like you will never ever play the same game twice. I'm sure it has a mind blowing number of possible different variations in it which is a major plus if you love this game or system. Seems like incredible value for money. However it seems like such a major bummer that they didn't implement a similar tech track to Gaia Project. I would have preferred them trimming some of the new additions that they added to this game to implement a more interesting tech track instead. I do own both Terra Mystica and Gaia project digital (mostly solo play). And this feels very similar to both. Everyone in my 3 player group suffers from moderate to extreme analysis paralysis. So this would be more complex and time consuming than either of my mates would enjoy. Leaving me considering this game only for solo play. Even though I do love medium to heavy board games this game unfortunately, from what you discussed in this video, seems a bit more complex to run solo. Unlike other heavy board games I love solo such as Mage Knight and Spirit Island. Both of those run very elegantly for solo play. So I'm probably gonna have to wait for them to release a digital app for the game so I can enjoy this game solo 😅. I'd prefer a digital app running the aí for me. Great review again. Keep up the great work. 😊
Sorry Luke but I gotta bring this up. Ark Nova has the same run away leader issue that you mention here. And it’s long. I still think you’re on the hype train for the ol’ Nova.
Really, every time? I don't have to look at thirty different bonuses at once while planning out my whole game. Both games are long and I never said Ark was perfect, the length is a flaw, though my games are capable of not taking 3 hours like some do. What you are doing turn to turn in Ark is more interesting in general. And if only I could show you the footage from some BGA games I've played where myself or another person thought they were all ahead or in the clear and they overestimated their position.
“On the hype train” What an obnoxious, aggressive comment. What exactly does it mean for someone to be “on the hype train”? Are they under some sort of delusion, or are they just really stupid? What other possibility is there?
Oh yes, because you can't just like a game, first you have to check how many people like it and if it's too many that means it can't be something that you, a Prince of taste could possibly like.
I think that Terra Nova was the best version for me - stripped back, without a "tech track". Having said that, it's not a game I felt that I needed to own, and I haven't played Terra Mystica for years.
On a second thought i like TM over this. Here is 4 reasons why: 1. This version has production issues. The wooden pieces and faction boards are in worse quality than a copy of TM. Imagine Barrage quality. Boards are crumbling along the sides. 2. This one is much less competitive than TM. Resources are everywhere. At the end of round 5 we had all our buildings out. And nothing to strive for during round 6. 3. I once bought TM becouse i wanted an elite game, with a lot of mean take that gameplay. This version is only for Casual players and noobs. Competitive players have nothing to gain here. 4. It's fun in TM to master the different factions. It's not possible in this one with random factions all the time. 5. Merry Christmas!
Not had any production issues here and I like the openness. Tm you know if you have any chance of winning from the get go and if you don't start well then GG. Not too mention the imbalanced factions where players bid for them even. Happy holidays too!
I gave away Terra Mystica largely because it's a bear to set up let alone to teach, so that if you have even one new person you must set aside at least three hours for this game, and I'm not seeing anything in this version that would make me run out to get it to replace it. And I don't like the game online because I feel like I need to see all those components at the same time in order to make a decision sometime today. I doubt that anyone I play with is going to spend the money to get this, but if they do, I'll help set up as long as I don't have to teach.
Prefer Gaia Project, great solo mode and fewer options, played it many times solo then sold it on . AoI went on way too long, no theme and too many icons and options.
I really dislike this game. There is no theme, the game is long and boring, and there is no interaction with other players. The strategy is derived from noticing the optimal combination of a myriad of factors. The design is colourful but really off-putting as it's not aesthetically pleasing. The design is dominated by the overused iconography. I'm not interested in playing this game again.
Thank you but not agreeing with the review. This is one of the best games in the market, as the preceding versions were too. This one enhanced those versions plus gave us 1-5 players over Gaia Project. The depth of the game is outstanding.
I rate Terra Mystica a 6 and Gaia Project a 9. The reasons being the aforementioned tech track , but also I find Terra Mystica far more restrictive and punishing than Gaia Project. In Gaia Project if you end up clashing with another player for territory, there are ways around it. In Terra Mystica if you get cut off you're done, there's no coming back and I hated that. This version looks like more of the same to me.
All of them feel the game to be in terms of restrictiveness. GP just has the tech tracks though honestly not all of them are worth focusing on. Certainly wouldn't Jack the game up by 3 whole points just for that.
@@TheBrokenMeeple just my experiences with each game. Gaia Project I felt like I had more freedom to expand and I had a great time pre-planning my turns. Terra Mystica I got pushed up against a river and the lead player bought all the bridges before I had a chance to get to them, so then I was stuck. Maybe it was just the groups I played each game with.
I own both Terra Mystica and Gaia Project, and I just picked up this one. While I do agree that GP does bring several cool new elements, I still found myself preferring TMs experience. The modular board is cool, and the open board does give players an alternative to the tight board experience TM offers (I personally much prefer the tight board experience over the open one), plus accounts better for different player counts.
The shining beacon of GP is the tech board and the tech/advanced tech. I do very much agree with you that it's a vast improvement on the cult board and favour tiles, espeically due to being variable from game to game. I do however think that as much as the tech board gives you plenty of options on how to improve, players will have to favour two specific tracks over the others for the most part. Those two tracks being two elements that were separate from the cult tracks in TM (distance and terraforming cost). By the time you can shift attention to the other tracks you don't have a lot of the game left. So unless your faction is really good at the tracks, you aren't really getting to explore all the options of the tech board without significantly disadvantaging yourself if you ignore the two specifically mentioned tracks in favour of the others. Distance is far more a hurdle in GP with few planets being grouped together (sure the green cubes can help boost you, but they aren't that plentiful and have other great uses as well), and terraforming cost is as well due to there being no way to partially terraform in GP.
As for the other differences GP brought, the gaiaforming while nice enough, tended to be a mostly ignored feature in the games I played due to once again competing with distance/terraforming cost on the tech board, plus it temporarily locked away power tokens. The resource tracks replacing regular resources was definitely a step back since a simple bump of the board could mess it up, plus left players without the tactical element of planning out their resource allocation. Also having part of the income tracks on the tech board made it easy to miss out on income since all other income happened in the player area.
So I wouldn't say GP is the definite preferred game out of the two. For the more thematic crowd? Sure, I can see that. Same goes for the players who prefer an open board to a tight one. But from what I hear from other fans of these games, it does seem many people still lean more towards TM.
I have yet to play or properly read the rules on Age of Innovation, I just finished sorting my copy. But my impression seems like it takes more of a middle ground between TM and GP. It takes the more variable approach in favour/tech tiles, keeps the tight board experience from TM but accounts for variable player count with the two sides. Sure, it reverts back to the cult track over the tech board, but IMO that's not necessarily a negative since it keeps all resource accounting in the player area, where I think it belongs (never really cared about theme to begin with, so what they are called doesn't really matter to me). Plus it looks to me at least that the new innovation tiles will be in some way tied to the track colours, so from what I can tell it's still a step up from the old cult tracks where you mainly moved up for positioning and to charge power (and obviously to gain end of round bonuses).
I look forward to seeing how people will receive this version. Personally I don't think I will ever actually stop playing regular TM, even after 50+ games I still love going back to it (last played it yesterday). But I am really excited about the more modular elements of this one. I have my suspicions that it could wind up replacing GP for me, as much as I do enjoy GP, I mainly wanted more of a hybrid between what it was and TM, and this really looks like it could be it.
Interesting read, thanks!
Funnily enough, I usually prioritize economy over distance and terraforming. Most of my games i barely reach the top tracks for distance and terraforming. Distance usually can be mitigated by either QIC or the +3 distance tile. If neither tiles are in the game then I'd consider the distance tracke more.
Absolutely agree with you! That is exactly what I think about those three games, and GP being amazing game, I still prefer TM!
This game becomes rewarding the more you play it. There are so many depths
That's a general cop out for most games.
@@TheBrokenMeeplereally begs the question, what exactly do they discover through more plays?
I agree with some of your criticisms, but mostly calling it solitaire? It is one of the most interactive Euros on the market, with lots of positive and negative interactions. By the way, you have to CONSTANTLY monitor the others and adjust your strategy to prepare for their open options.
Some interactions:
- side by side construction
- rushing or delaying power charges with your buildings
- digging away to screw up opponents' plans
- hatepicking power actions
- forcing the others to do some early/late building
- to delay passing so that you can machinate with the round bonus tiles
- competition for innovation tiles, hatepicking
- knowledge (cult) tracks are multidimensional races
- tons of faction and land specific interactions
- etc
This is my 2nd fav game of all time, so maybe I'm a little bit biased, but you're definitely missing something when you call this game a solitaire.
Other than side by side construction, nothing else is direct to other players. The taking of a tile or action spot or race to a spot is the same as any other euro game and doesn't change with having more players and thus a massive chunk of extra time length. The solo mode bot replicates all that by itself.
@@TheBrokenMeepledoes it matter? They are all interactions by definition. And the amount of these indirect interactions make AOI interactive altogether.
What is your #1 Favorite game of all time?
@@coltonbeatty6117 Dune Imperium: Uprising
My problem with playing games sporadically is correctly remembering the rules.
Welcome to my world!
That's why I prefer simpler deep "super midweight/gateway" games
I’m a big fan of Terra Mystica. I think I prefer this as it is more “fun”. I always feel I can do more and the economy is lent as tight. That being said, I often find myself doing everything in the game. Last time I played was at 3 player and I built all of my buildings but 2. Not sure if that makes for a good or bad game but it is something I’ve noticed about Age of Innovation.
Having a bunch of extra bonus tiles can make it feel a little easier as you get more rewards during the game.
Also a game with several boards sections to do stuff on letting you complete nearly everything in every game is prone to becoming a little boring after a few plays.
Great review even if I disagree completely. Personally I found this to be the almost perfect mix of the previous games. TM is so tight it can feel almost scripted with enough play, whereas GP was way to open for me and felt very much like multiplayer solitaire. For me AOI lands perfectly in between and also scales down better than previous games. The only issue I have with it is the tech tracks where I completely agree with you. It is funny to hear someone who is such a big fan of Ark Nova complain about lack of interactivity in other games. ;) Anyway very good review as usual. Love a review where the points are well argumented. Keep up the good work Luke.
Ark Nova doesn't have a ton of interacting no, but I've highlighted this as a flaw of that game. But what I'm doing is still far more interesting then in TM. Plus there's a big race aspect to the milestones and specific cards in the display, here, if I'm not near you for the purposes of cheap building I got little care for what you are doing.
@@TheBrokenMeepleDifferent strokes mate. I ended up givng away Ark Nova because I didnt really feel it warranted the playtime with that little interaction and I felt the action selection mechanic was done better in New Dawn, but I can certainly see why people love Ark Nova. If you are not building close to people in AOI and TM you will get smoked by any half decent player, because you are gimping your echonomy severely.
My friend is a big fan of TM. I find it good just because it is too complicated for most players in our circle and takes a lot of brain capacity to manage. Having played Age of Innovation a few times I prefer this version as it is not that restrictive in resource management and offers more choises. The production is "fresher" and as you mentioned the variety of factions setup offers endless possibilities. I ended up adding this game to my collection. To me this is the best one of them all (TM, TN, GP).
Yes, there is nothing more appealing than a game that is “too complicated for most players in our circle.”
????????
Feels the same resource wise, they don't exactly give you extra.
@@TheBrokenMeeple the economy in this game allows you to accumulate more. In TM you always lacking and feel tight. In AofI you still have to manage them wisely but you are not as tight. Maybe it's just so happened in games we played 🤷♀️
@@chuckm1961 well, not most, more like a half. The other half me included don't feel that intimidated and can enjoy the puzzle. I like thinky games and will always have them in my collection
Hey thanks for the review! Looks like a great new edition, but I'll probably stick with Gaia Project. I see Ceres behind you! I just got my copy. Looking forward to hearing your opinions on that. I struggled with the AI, but I think it'll play pretty great when I get a group together.
Just finished editing the review, that one is coming next!
I like heavy Euros but I had never played Terra Mystica before. So I bought Age of Innovation and after 10 plays I can say this game is truly amazing! So many strategic options and every time the set up is different so you have to plan accordingly. After every play I always ponder on what I could have made differently to get a better result either I win or lose. The rules are not that difficult to digest and the play time for two persons is from 1h 30min to 2 hours. The biggest drawback of this game is that you need 20+min for the set up and another 15+min to put it back in the box. Apart from that the game shines in its category. That's why I believe that this review score is very unfair. You are not reviewing the game itself but the game as an evolution of Terra Mystica. It's at least an 8/10 in my opinion if putting Terra Mystica out of the equation. Except that the rest of the review is very accurate.
Thank you for the detailed job on your reviews and for helping us to pick games that suits our style.
Thank you very much for watching! :-)
the lack of theme is so true lol，still love the mechanism
Love Terra Maystica and Age of Innovation. Gaia Project fell flat for me. The production, color scheme, and scrunched together icons were negatives.
All basically the same game, just a difference of graphic design.
I don't already have Terra Mystica or Gaia Project, never even played them, so Age of Innovation brings something new to me. Also, not so expensive at 60 EUR, there is a lot in that box, so price is fair. I like it and I want to play it some more (only 2 plays so far)
Yeah if this is your first entry, this will do you fine.
I might have missed it but how does this compare in play time to Gaia Project?
On par really.
“If you can this on sale at a good price, you are getting a great deal here’ 😂
Well you get what you paid for normally as it's got a high MSRP.
Thanks for the review Luke.
I was very interested in this one because though I have Gaia Project, Terra Mystica always fascinated me but the tracks in it are really bland and I was hoping (like you) they would revitalise them with a bit of Gaia Project coat of paint 🤷♂️
I’d be interested to know how it compares to Terra Mystica + it’s two expansions or even if said expansions are somewhat playable with Age of Innovation
never played TM with both expansions fully.
"Age of Innovation" is an ironic title? You realize that's the name, not the description, right?
The key point is the word "innovation"
When/Are you going to review Apiary? i only trust your opinion!
Review is recorded, need to edit it, should be next week!
@@TheBrokenMeeple thanks!! cant wait
I feel like youre the only reviewer who always remember us colour blind players. Thank you for that.
I like Gaia Project over TM because the tech track is a big improvement, but the sparseness of the map can be a bit brutal.
My pleasure!
Another excellent review! I really do appreciate your brutal honesty in these videos. I agree with basically everything you said.
I really do love the variety and assymetry that this game offers. Looks like you will never ever play the same game twice. I'm sure it has a mind blowing number of possible different variations in it which is a major plus if you love this game or system. Seems like incredible value for money.
However it seems like such a major bummer that they didn't implement a similar tech track to Gaia Project. I would have preferred them trimming some of the new additions that they added to this game to implement a more interesting tech track instead.
I do own both Terra Mystica and Gaia project digital (mostly solo play). And this feels very similar to both.
Everyone in my 3 player group suffers from moderate to extreme analysis paralysis. So this would be more complex and time consuming than either of my mates would enjoy. Leaving me considering this game only for solo play. Even though I do love medium to heavy board games this game unfortunately, from what you discussed in this video, seems a bit more complex to run solo. Unlike other heavy board games I love solo such as Mage Knight and Spirit Island. Both of those run very elegantly for solo play.
So I'm probably gonna have to wait for them to release a digital app for the game so I can enjoy this game solo 😅. I'd prefer a digital app running the aí for me.
Great review again. Keep up the great work. 😊
Thank you!! There's some more brutal honesty to come . . . . ;-)
Sorry Luke but I gotta bring this up. Ark Nova has the same run away leader issue that you mention here. And it’s long. I still think you’re on the hype train for the ol’ Nova.
Really, every time?
I don't have to look at thirty different bonuses at once while planning out my whole game.
Both games are long and I never said Ark was perfect, the length is a flaw, though my games are capable of not taking 3 hours like some do.
What you are doing turn to turn in Ark is more interesting in general.
And if only I could show you the footage from some BGA games I've played where myself or another person thought they were all ahead or in the clear and they overestimated their position.
In Ark Nova you can pull back from a bad start. But you'd better do that fast :)
“On the hype train”
What an obnoxious, aggressive comment.
What exactly does it mean for someone to be “on the hype train”? Are they under some sort of delusion, or are they just really stupid? What other possibility is there?
@@chuckm1961 sounds like someone else is on the hype train…
Oh yes, because you can't just like a game, first you have to check how many people like it and if it's too many that means it can't be something that you, a Prince of taste could possibly like.
I think that Terra Nova was the best version for me - stripped back, without a "tech track".
Having said that, it's not a game I felt that I needed to own, and I haven't played Terra Mystica for years.
On a second thought i like TM over this. Here is 4 reasons why:
1. This version has production issues. The wooden pieces and faction boards are in worse quality than a copy of TM. Imagine Barrage quality. Boards are crumbling along the sides.
2. This one is much less competitive than TM. Resources are everywhere. At the end of round 5 we had all our buildings out. And nothing to strive for during round 6.
3. I once bought TM becouse i wanted an elite game, with a lot of mean take that gameplay. This version is only for Casual players and noobs. Competitive players have nothing to gain here.
4. It's fun in TM to master the different factions. It's not possible in this one with random factions all the time.
5. Merry Christmas!
Not had any production issues here and I like the openness. Tm you know if you have any chance of winning from the get go and if you don't start well then GG. Not too mention the imbalanced factions where players bid for them even.
Happy holidays too!
@@TheBrokenMeeplei prefer GP more when i want more openess. I will probably sell this one again. In 20 years TM will be remembered, not this one 🙂
I gave away Terra Mystica largely because it's a bear to set up let alone to teach, so that if you have even one new person you must set aside at least three hours for this game, and I'm not seeing anything in this version that would make me run out to get it to replace it. And I don't like the game online because I feel like I need to see all those components at the same time in order to make a decision sometime today. I doubt that anyone I play with is going to spend the money to get this, but if they do, I'll help set up as long as I don't have to teach.
It certainly is a lot to teach and set up for really brand new players.
Prefer Gaia Project, great solo mode and fewer options, played it many times solo then sold it on . AoI went on way too long, no theme and too many icons and options.
Fair enough!
I really dislike this game. There is no theme, the game is long and boring, and there is no interaction with other players. The strategy is derived from noticing the optimal combination of a myriad of factors. The design is colourful but really off-putting as it's not aesthetically pleasing. The design is dominated by the overused iconography. I'm not interested in playing this game again.
Thank you but not agreeing with the review. This is one of the best games in the market, as the preceding versions were too. This one enhanced those versions plus gave us 1-5 players over Gaia Project. The depth of the game is outstanding.
Got bored of the previous two a while ago, this one at least improved on a few factors even if it literally was a copy paste job.
I rate Terra Mystica a 6 and Gaia Project a 9. The reasons being the aforementioned tech track , but also I find Terra Mystica far more restrictive and punishing than Gaia Project. In Gaia Project if you end up clashing with another player for territory, there are ways around it. In Terra Mystica if you get cut off you're done, there's no coming back and I hated that. This version looks like more of the same to me.
All of them feel the game to be in terms of restrictiveness. GP just has the tech tracks though honestly not all of them are worth focusing on. Certainly wouldn't Jack the game up by 3 whole points just for that.
@@TheBrokenMeeple just my experiences with each game. Gaia Project I felt like I had more freedom to expand and I had a great time pre-planning my turns. Terra Mystica I got pushed up against a river and the lead player bought all the bridges before I had a chance to get to them, so then I was stuck. Maybe it was just the groups I played each game with.
Certainly a few expected TM fan trolls for this one, but that is very much a "them" problem. 😏