Thanks John! I just played this solo also today with the both of the expansions and have share similar thoughts. I do like the fact that the court of progress board gives you opportunities for some nice one time benefits and scoring opportunities, but from a solo stand point I dont think it is absolutely necessary. I'm sure these are much more interesting in a multiplayer experience. Thanks for the great content.
Thanks for the review John! You clearly articulated pros and cons, so nothing wrong with being on the fence; appreciate it! I am very curious that more workers wasn’t a thing. I thought that by including 2 extra workers per player, they basically were saying you will get more per game via some mechanism. From your review though, it sounds like the new tiles, court spaces, etc do not serve that function though. Perhaps the game is seeking to strengthen the “convert uranium to worker” option then, expecting a Court strategy to include mining-converted-to-workers?
@JohnLaRuffa Techs E1, E5, and E7 are all ways to generate workers, via levels 1, 2, and 3, but E1 is via the conversion of nucleum to worker. I don’t do that much in the base game, but at least for Experiment E (which I have not played but have sitting on the table for my first game soon), that seems like the approach to try. Not sure for other experiments, as this will be my first play with the expansion.
@@JohnLaRuffa To follow up, I was able to be quite successful in solo with converting Uranium to workers in the early game, getting the E1 tech right away to maximize workers, and minimizing rail connections. Acquiring more Court actions was also necessary. Of course the Baron can function quite differently from one play to the next so YMMV, but for me that led to a win and 21 points for E8. I still need to play with the Court but not Experiment E…there I suspect much less interaction with the Court.
@mrsamtheman80 good work! I played with Experiment F and there is definitely much less interaction with the Court and I also did a lot better. I think it is just going to take me a while to get used to the new feel on how to play this expansion.
Court of Progress is good, I must admit, particularly for the fact that it does something different instead of adding more of the same. I wouldn't always play with it, however, because it changes the feel of the game (not the flow, like some other commenter on here said). There's a difference there. When I feel like using the expansion, I add it in. When I don't, I don't. It's a matter of what game feel you're in the mood for, and I'm glad the expansion gives you that option.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, John! Neither of the expansions really appealed to me so I passed on them. The base game is still plenty enjoyable and has a high degree of replayability, in my opinion.
Thanks for the video. I've thought about this one a lot (I really like the base game), but I just wasn't sure it'd be a good fit for me. It sounds like I was right. As much as I would like to try it, my rotation is pretty full, and I don't think I'll get a meaningful return on a "sometimes" expansion vs playing other games in my collection or the games that will be here soon. It does sound interesting, though. Maybe I'll get a chance to try it out someday.
Thanks for the coverage. I’ve tried Australia map a few times and actually prefer the original. I felt like it was too constricting or something. And I didn’t find the boats or mines too interesting. Sometimes it’s hard to know if you just need to try something more. I’m on the fence with this expansion. I agree the base game is a 10
Ha! That was my conclusion after reading the rules and watching some vids. Felt like it ruins the flow of the original game...hence didn't get it. Also those patrons seem to push the bot into uncomfortably cheaty and unfair waters, which I hate...
@@realdealastrology9 I never said I have played it - I don't own this particular expansion as from all I have read and seen, it looked to me like a misstep, hence decided to stick with only Australia one.
@@boriskirov3953 my mistake. Don't know where I thought you played it. The expansion appealed to me more after implementing this from a BGG'er: " if you are smart enough to lock down some fuel generators, you can absolutely energize way more buildings that I believe you could reasonably do in the base game." This is a pretty significant piece of advice.
Thanks John! I just played this solo also today with the both of the expansions and have share similar thoughts. I do like the fact that the court of progress board gives you opportunities for some nice one time benefits and scoring opportunities, but from a solo stand point I dont think it is absolutely necessary. I'm sure these are much more interesting in a multiplayer experience. Thanks for the great content.
Thanks for watching!
Thanks for the review John! You clearly articulated pros and cons, so nothing wrong with being on the fence; appreciate it!
I am very curious that more workers wasn’t a thing. I thought that by including 2 extra workers per player, they basically were saying you will get more per game via some mechanism. From your review though, it sounds like the new tiles, court spaces, etc do not serve that function though.
Perhaps the game is seeking to strengthen the “convert uranium to worker” option then, expecting a Court strategy to include mining-converted-to-workers?
Perhaps on the uranium side. But I was not flowing in that either so I am not sure. It is an interesting thing for an expansion to do. Most just add…
@JohnLaRuffa Techs E1, E5, and E7 are all ways to generate workers, via levels 1, 2, and 3, but E1 is via the conversion of nucleum to worker. I don’t do that much in the base game, but at least for Experiment E (which I have not played but have sitting on the table for my first game soon), that seems like the approach to try. Not sure for other experiments, as this will be my first play with the expansion.
@mrsamtheman80 That makes sense, but if you play with other experiments, you won’t have those available. Either way, I hope you enjoy the expansion.
@@JohnLaRuffa To follow up, I was able to be quite successful in solo with converting Uranium to workers in the early game, getting the E1 tech right away to maximize workers, and minimizing rail connections. Acquiring more Court actions was also necessary. Of course the Baron can function quite differently from one play to the next so YMMV, but for me that led to a win and 21 points for E8.
I still need to play with the Court but not Experiment E…there I suspect much less interaction with the Court.
@mrsamtheman80 good work! I played with Experiment F and there is definitely much less interaction with the Court and I also did a lot better. I think it is just going to take me a while to get used to the new feel on how to play this expansion.
Court of Progress is good, I must admit, particularly for the fact that it does something different instead of adding more of the same. I wouldn't always play with it, however, because it changes the feel of the game (not the flow, like some other commenter on here said). There's a difference there. When I feel like using the expansion, I add it in. When I don't, I don't. It's a matter of what game feel you're in the mood for, and I'm glad the expansion gives you that option.
Agreed. It certainly is not an auto add for every game.
Thanks for sharing your thoughts, John! Neither of the expansions really appealed to me so I passed on them. The base game is still plenty enjoyable and has a high degree of replayability, in my opinion.
@@laurencesingh3948 I can see that. I think that between the Australia and the normal map there is a lot to enjoy solo.
Thanks for the video.
I've thought about this one a lot (I really like the base game), but I just wasn't sure it'd be a good fit for me.
It sounds like I was right. As much as I would like to try it, my rotation is pretty full, and I don't think I'll get a meaningful return on a "sometimes" expansion vs playing other games in my collection or the games that will be here soon.
It does sound interesting, though. Maybe I'll get a chance to try it out someday.
Thanks for the coverage. I’ve tried Australia map a few times and actually prefer the original. I felt like it was too constricting or something. And I didn’t find the boats or mines too interesting. Sometimes it’s hard to know if you just need to try something more. I’m on the fence with this expansion. I agree the base game is a 10
Thank you for your honest opinion, i will stick with the base game.
Ha! That was my conclusion after reading the rules and watching some vids. Felt like it ruins the flow of the original game...hence didn't get it. Also those patrons seem to push the bot into uncomfortably cheaty and unfair waters, which I hate...
It doesn't ruin the flow at all. Maybe you were playing wrong.
@@realdealastrology9 I never said I have played it - I don't own this particular expansion as from all I have read and seen, it looked to me like a misstep, hence decided to stick with only Australia one.
@@boriskirov3953 my mistake. Don't know where I thought you played it. The expansion appealed to me more after implementing this from a BGG'er:
" if you are smart enough to lock down some fuel generators, you can absolutely energize way more buildings that I believe you could reasonably do in the base game." This is a pretty significant piece of advice.