So we played The Princes of Machu Picchu last night. I had a good time. Of the Mac Gerdts games, this is the first that I've been wishy-washy about whether I like it or not; I immediately liked Imperial and immediately disliked Antike and Hamburgum. I'm lukewarm on Machu Picchu.
Reflecting on this, I think I have come to an insight into my game preferences. I'm calling Machu Picchu (and Hamburgum) "conversion" games. That is, you get something, you turn that into something else, and then turn that into points. I'm beginning to suspect that this type of game will ultimately never be much more than "meh" to me. This may explain why Caylus Magna Carta pretty quickly ran out of gas for me (I also don't like economic snowball games like Phoenicia and Race for the Galaxy, but I already knew that. Very abstract games like T&E are a hard sell, too.) Thus ends the soliloquy. Except for a reminder of some of my current favorites (with dominating mechanism) which I realize now is also very insightful: Crokinole (dexterity) Brass (placement?) Struggle of Empires (area majority/waro) Imperial (investment) Steam (routes) In the Shadow of the Emperor (area majority) Perikles (area majority/blind bidding) Oltre Mare (set collection) Hacienda (routes) Ra (press your luck/auction/set collection) Battle for Hill 218 (placement?) --~--~---------~--~----~------------~-------~--~----~ You received this message because you are subscribed to the Google Groups "utah county boardgamers association" group. To post to this group, send email to [email protected] To unsubscribe from this group, send email to [email protected] For more options, visit this group at http://groups.google.com/group/ucboardgamers?hl=en -~----------~----~----~----~------~----~------~--~---
