Race for the Galaxy

I don't know but somehow I'm addicted to this game. I really think its fun. It also doesn't have any cubes in it, so I definitely not suffering from Cube Confusion. Although I don't own the game, I play it at the game group almost every week.

There has been a lot of discussion about interaction in this game. The only interaction you get is guessing what another player might do. Thus there is none, but somehow I don't care. I'm still confident the game could be upped to something truly epic, basically by allowing players to vie (political/economic/military) control over the planets. I have no idea how to implement that, but I'm not a game designer.

I also don't think the game such noob-unfriendly. I came in third in my first game (with the optimized starting hand though) and won my third game (with the economy strategy, which the BGgeeks think of as "advanced").

Anybody else here played it? How does it compare with San Juan (better/worse)?

It is San Juan. It has removed the interaction of San Juan and the more interesting buildings. That is how I see it. Yes, it is a reasonably good game but it is just San Juan but not as good to my mind. I don't think the variety of different planets introduced by Race for the Galaxy is interesting variety. The planets seem dull compared to the likes of the Library.

I just love how this game's staunchest defenders argue that watching what another player does is interaction...that's not interaction at all, that's observation. This game has zero interaction, but plenty of observation. Which is boring.

Of course, RFTG was designed to be the PUERTO RICO card game so inevitably it compares to SAN JUAN. However, I think SAN JUAN is much better. It's fun and fast and it doesn't get so bogged down in mathy efficiency crap like RFTG does. And strangely, it feels more thematic. All of that fancy art and it still feels like crunching numbers, not racing for the titular galaxy.

The thing is, RFTG _could_ have been great. The complete lack of interaction kills it right off.

Michael Barnes wrote:

I just love how this game's staunchest defenders argue that watching what another player does is interaction...that's not interaction at all [...]

I hope you did't see me as a staunchest defender, as I said:
The only interaction you get is guessing what another player might do. Thus there is none [...]
But I'm still puzzled on why this doesn't affect. It might be because it is a card game and it reminds me of those good old days playing Schafkopf.

Citadel wrote:

It has removed the interaction of San Juan [...]

So what interaction was there in San Juan?

Puerto Rico is boring.

San Juan is boring.

Haven't played RftG, but if I'm going to be bored anyways I'd rather have the scifi artwork to look at.

If you have played Puerto Rico, San Juan has the same role selection mechanism so you can select the builder when noone but you has enough to build, trade when everybody is out of goods, produce when everybody else's factories are full and take the prospector to snub everyone else. Race for the Galaxy has taken this out by having everyone choosing from their own little pool. After I had played a few games of Race for the Galaxy, I didn't think you could predict what role people would play because you have no idea what they have in their hand and you more often than not screw yourself when you get it wrong. Race for the Galaxy is OK and basically show that San Juan is a good game beyond the role selection mechanic. I also didn't like the "variable starting positions". It is a cool idea that is great in many AT games but in Race for the Galaxy your starting hand is more important in determining where your game will go than the starting planet so it is just a gimmick. I also don't like the differences in the buildings/planets. The "military" has the insipid flavour of pasted on maths. And where did the classics like my much loved Library and Chapel go.

Race for the Galaxy is way overhyped. It is another terrible victory for the cult of the new. It is so close to San Juan that Andreas Seyfarth should be getting paid royalties. To me, the people who say Race for the Galaxy is better than San Juan are the same as people who say the Hives are a better band than the Stooges, clueless idiots. Not yourself Schweig!: you haven't played San Juan.

To me, the people who say Race for the Galaxy is better than San Juan are the same as people who say the Hives are a better band than the Stooges

Who the fuck are these people? Do I need to beat them to death with a copy of "Funhouse"?

Michael Barnes wrote:

Who the fuck are these people?

The kids of today. (rolls eyes)

Saying that I went to see Xiu Xiu last week and 95% of the audience were teenagers. Nice.

Michael Barnes wrote:

The thing is, RFTG _could_ have been great. The complete lack of interaction kills it right off.

RFTG is great. But if you need more interaction, just wait a couple expansions.


-Clueless idiot

OK, I've had enough of this Race From the Galaxy and Sans Juan shit.

Glory to Rome beats both of those games up and throws them out back for the lions.

Not only does it have actual player interaction in the form of Legionaries (you did what to my patron?), not only does it actually feel like you're building something (amazing what adding building types and materials does), but the most important part of the game, the special powers of the buildings, is sheer awesome. Half the buildings are overpowered if used correctly, the other half are useful some or most of the time, and the third half are combo-riffic and blow the power level up even more. And they're interesting, not wussy boring shit like "+1 to selling radioactive waste" and "I'm balanced to within an inch of my life" but instead "When you build this building, immediately do 12 things for free if you've planned ahead, but you still might not win because who the hell knows what crazy shit the next guy has going, here have a beer."

I played Sans Juan and the Magic part of my brain was like "this is OK" and then I played 10 times and I was done. Then I played Race From the Galaxy and the Magic part of my brain was like "Hey this is more complicated maybe it will be better" and then I played twice and the Magic part of my brain fell asleep.
In between I played Glory to Rome and the Magic part of my brain was like "Holy shit! These cards do cool shit! There's combos here! They're not all immediately obvious and/or boring as hell! This rocks!"

The end.

I have been wanting to try Glory to Rome for a while. How does it work? I had been put off by how closely it gets compared to San Juan. Is it the same kind of use cards as money for buildings and selecting roles like in San Juan or something very different?

I just played Roma for the first time yesterday. It was great. Easily one of the best two player Euros I have played and I think you could count it as a hybrid as half the time you are killing your opponents guys, burning down his buildings and stealing his stuff. It was fast and light. Each game was about 15-30 mins. Got to warn that it is a workers are dice placement game and it has unintellegable icons to tell you what the cards mean. We also had a laugh because the rules are mangled "German in English making".

Really the only reason Glory to Rome gets compared to San Juan is because the GtR developers have said they wanted to develop a more complicated SJ. The games end up playing completely differently.

Every card is a role, a building, and a material. To do anything you have to play a card as a role. To start a building you play one of the roles that let you do that, select a building in your hand you want to start, and play it on the right kind of site. Then you have to get the right kind and number of materials to actually build the building. In the meantime there's several other things going on.
It's one of those games that's strange enough it takes 1-2 games to figure out what the hell is going on.

Give it a try; if you don't like it I'll buy it off you. I've been meaning to get a copy of 2nd edition anyway.

Roma always struck me as a CCG-wannabe, but I never have played it.

I like Roma. Sometimes you know you'll lose as soon as you see your opponents setup, but mostly not. My favourite memory of the game was an hour long struggle that went back and forth - brutal stuff.

That does make Glory to Rome sound even more tempting. Trouble is, I am planning to move soon so I have sworn of buying new games till I have done the move.

Roma is CCGish terms of having cards that each represent a character or place with a special ability and it has a small amount of comboing. The gameplay is not very CCGish. You don't have the open ended freedom of a CCG because the dice limit which actions you can select. The combat has dice rolling to try and beat the defense value of the opposing card. I must say I love CCG style gameplay in a non collectable game. There aren't many that do it well.

I will request someone from my game group to bring San Juan, so I can make up my mind.

Glory to Rome sounds real cool, I might check it out.