So yeah, Smash up is a solid game with some good gameplay and a really neat central idea. Buried under wave after wave of expansions. I really do recommend playing it, just be very careful that its business model is "buy all the things" and that those things don't necessarily make the game any better.
If i may, i respectfully disagree. At least in part. Smash Up is in my top 3 games of all time. While yes the expansions are not "necessary" they most certainly make the game better ! "Rushed and poorly designed", do you have an example on this ? You are of course entitled to your opinion and this isn't me going "how dare you not like what i like", i honestly am curious. I love this game and i would be glad to introduce it to more people and hopefully make them fall in love with it as i have. Something that can be perceived as a flaw but is somewhat unavoidable with long running games imo is that Smash Up has power creep with its expansions. That doesn't mean that core decks are useless, on the contrary some of them remain among the strongest in the game ! But, it does mean that if you pick Core set only decks you might have trouble going up against newer ones. If you mix them together (eg one core set deck with one expansion deck) that problem goes away.
You kinda answered your own question with talk of power creep. It sounds like you fundamentally agree with my assertion, but because you still like the game you are excusing it. Which is fine. But its not exactly a strong argument against the idea that adding more sets can make the game wobbly.
@@3MBG Well, do you know a long running game that they added mechanics to make it more interesting, but it hasn't been plagued by power creep ? Every card game i can think of does that and it's even more difficult if you can't do what CCGs do with set rotation and banned cards and stuff to keep it in check. Again, i don't want to make you like it, i'm just discussing your point here.
Again, nothing in there contradicts that i think about the power creep and imbalance. Just because it happens in other games doesn't invalidate that it happens here.
these videos are great. It gives a perfect encapsulation of all the crucial bits. Very easy to follow along with. Very concise. Makes it much easier to see what I may be interested in. Thank you kindly. Miniatures market rocks!
I have a completely different take on this, I see the expansions as typically much more balanced than the original. Robots, Zombies, and Aliens were all woefully strong, while most of the other factions were severely under powered. Wizards are pretty much the only balanced faction in the entire base game.
I'll point out with Smash Up Disney Edition 'The Nightmare Before Christmas' and 'Beauty and The Beast' are among the actual names of factions now. Meaning you can have 'Beauty and the Beast Zombies' or 'Dinosaurs The Lion King' as potential weird sounding deck names. You didn't mention titans, which came out in a relatively early expansion, Big In Japan.
This game is very prohibitive to new players though. It's incredibly unbalanced until you figure out how to counter each other and have synergy with certain decks.
E Solo is right. In some ways i wish the smash up premise was on a less wobbly game. I'm stunned it hasn't been copied more. It is like a dialed up version of the small world system, but i just havent seen many games let you combine powersets.
Not to jump on a bandwagon or anything, but I think your central conclusion is wrong. The general consensus is that the expansions, especially the more modern expansions in the later half of the game’s life after developing real playtesting protocols, are significantly more balanced than earlier sets. The core set in particular has some of the worst balance in the entire game, with Aliens, Robots, and Zombies still being three of the strongest decks that have been made. The first few expansions varied pretty wildly in power level but starting around post Pretty Pretty I would say it has stabilized a lot. There are still odd outliers (some of the new Disney decks are extremely strong from the looks of it) but the expansions are really the main draw to playing the game long term as each one arithmatically increases the number of possible combinations. One other minor point, the Homeworld base ability you showcase should have applied to the winning player (Pirates) instead of to the Wizards who came in second
Also, i showed exactly what expansions i had in the video. So any analysis of what's not there is outside my scope. But based on my numerous plays, and with the sets i have. I felt the game got wobbly the more you added to it. And yes, you note that Aliens, Robots, and Zombies are strong, but as its normally played 3 player, with the core each person can choose 1 if they want. And, the more sets you have, the easier it is for experienced players to absolutely punish lesser experience players, because knowing all 100 odd decks is a huge advantage. No, i stand by my comment. If you add a lot to the game, it becomes less refined. And anyone picking it up now, jeez. Talk about a knowledge gap to overcome.
Ah, the homeworld base thing, yep, good spot. I originally was going to have the wizards player win the base, but then had time for the pirate move. Didn't update the script to reflect that later on.
OK, all I can tell you is that there was a significant step change in deck playtesting and quality post Pretty Pretty. Hard with a living game like this to give a full reflection of the entire game, but it is somewhat disappointing to see the entire modern era of the game ignored in a review, including the most innovative and interesting decks. The Core Set led to an unfortunate “Take That” reputation while the game has steered very far away from that as it has evolved, becoming more tactical and refined instead of chaos.
The general consensus in the community is that the more players you add the worse the game plays. 2P is a very tight and good duelling experience. 4 is utter chaos and you’d be better off doing two games of 2P. More than 4 is not supported by the rules and will turn people off the game forever.
So yeah, Smash up is a solid game with some good gameplay and a really neat central idea. Buried under wave after wave of expansions. I really do recommend playing it, just be very careful that its business model is "buy all the things" and that those things don't necessarily make the game any better.
If i may, i respectfully disagree. At least in part. Smash Up is in my top 3 games of all time. While yes the expansions are not "necessary" they most certainly make the game better ! "Rushed and poorly designed", do you have an example on this ? You are of course entitled to your opinion and this isn't me going "how dare you not like what i like", i honestly am curious. I love this game and i would be glad to introduce it to more people and hopefully make them fall in love with it as i have. Something that can be perceived as a flaw but is somewhat unavoidable with long running games imo is that Smash Up has power creep with its expansions. That doesn't mean that core decks are useless, on the contrary some of them remain among the strongest in the game ! But, it does mean that if you pick Core set only decks you might have trouble going up against newer ones. If you mix them together (eg one core set deck with one expansion deck) that problem goes away.
You kinda answered your own question with talk of power creep. It sounds like you fundamentally agree with my assertion, but because you still like the game you are excusing it. Which is fine. But its not exactly a strong argument against the idea that adding more sets can make the game wobbly.
@@3MBG Well, do you know a long running game that they added mechanics to make it more interesting, but it hasn't been plagued by power creep ? Every card game i can think of does that and it's even more difficult if you can't do what CCGs do with set rotation and banned cards and stuff to keep it in check. Again, i don't want to make you like it, i'm just discussing your point here.
Again, nothing in there contradicts that i think about the power creep and imbalance. Just because it happens in other games doesn't invalidate that it happens here.
Yep. And i've made the mistake of playing 5 player before. That took WAAAY too long.
these videos are great. It gives a perfect encapsulation of all the crucial bits. Very easy to follow along with. Very concise. Makes it much easier to see what I may be interested in. Thank you kindly. Miniatures market rocks!
I have a completely different take on this, I see the expansions as typically much more balanced than the original. Robots, Zombies, and Aliens were all woefully strong, while most of the other factions were severely under powered. Wizards are pretty much the only balanced faction in the entire base game.
I loved getting it out....putting the two groups together...laughing about it and then putting it away. :D
I'll point out with Smash Up Disney Edition 'The Nightmare Before Christmas' and 'Beauty and The Beast' are among the actual names of factions now. Meaning you can have 'Beauty and the Beast Zombies' or 'Dinosaurs The Lion King' as potential weird sounding deck names. You didn't mention titans, which came out in a relatively early expansion, Big In Japan.
Really well done review!
Superb explanation! I truly hope the best for you channel! Subscribed
Actually the first set and chutlhu are the rushed ones. But many of the recent ones are quite lackluster.
I just got the "Awesome Level 9000" expansion, and I figure maybe that's enough. Besides, Ghosts + Zombies is really OP.
Ghosts in general are pretty damned strong.
This is easily one of the greatest games out there today. I just wish that more people knew about it.
Well, a few more will know from this :)
This game is very prohibitive to new players though. It's incredibly unbalanced until you figure out how to counter each other and have synergy with certain decks.
@@esolo114 That's why new players start with just the original factions. ☺
E Solo is right. In some ways i wish the smash up premise was on a less wobbly game. I'm stunned it hasn't been copied more. It is like a dialed up version of the small world system, but i just havent seen many games let you combine powersets.
We enjoyed this game with a couple of early expansions over the pandemic; we played a lot. We out grew it and moved on.
Not to jump on a bandwagon or anything, but I think your central conclusion is wrong. The general consensus is that the expansions, especially the more modern expansions in the later half of the game’s life after developing real playtesting protocols, are significantly more balanced than earlier sets. The core set in particular has some of the worst balance in the entire game, with Aliens, Robots, and Zombies still being three of the strongest decks that have been made. The first few expansions varied pretty wildly in power level but starting around post Pretty Pretty I would say it has stabilized a lot. There are still odd outliers (some of the new Disney decks are extremely strong from the looks of it) but the expansions are really the main draw to playing the game long term as each one arithmatically increases the number of possible combinations.
One other minor point, the Homeworld base ability you showcase should have applied to the winning player (Pirates) instead of to the Wizards who came in second
Pretty Pretty was about where i checked out after having enough of it.
Also, i showed exactly what expansions i had in the video. So any analysis of what's not there is outside my scope. But based on my numerous plays, and with the sets i have. I felt the game got wobbly the more you added to it. And yes, you note that Aliens, Robots, and Zombies are strong, but as its normally played 3 player, with the core each person can choose 1 if they want. And, the more sets you have, the easier it is for experienced players to absolutely punish lesser experience players, because knowing all 100 odd decks is a huge advantage. No, i stand by my comment. If you add a lot to the game, it becomes less refined. And anyone picking it up now, jeez. Talk about a knowledge gap to overcome.
Ah, the homeworld base thing, yep, good spot. I originally was going to have the wizards player win the base, but then had time for the pirate move. Didn't update the script to reflect that later on.
OK, all I can tell you is that there was a significant step change in deck playtesting and quality post Pretty Pretty. Hard with a living game like this to give a full reflection of the entire game, but it is somewhat disappointing to see the entire modern era of the game ignored in a review, including the most innovative and interesting decks. The Core Set led to an unfortunate “Take That” reputation while the game has steered very far away from that as it has evolved, becoming more tactical and refined instead of chaos.
The general consensus in the community is that the more players you add the worse the game plays. 2P is a very tight and good duelling experience. 4 is utter chaos and you’d be better off doing two games of 2P. More than 4 is not supported by the rules and will turn people off the game forever.
Why is the art style so trashy? It's a turn off.