Post originally by Daniel Strain at 2004-06-16 17:37:29
Converted from Phorums BB System
When we first heard about this review I must say we were quite surprised. Of course, there are always going to be individuals who won't like a particular game, but this review has been so far askew of the vast majority of response on Smugglers that I think it behooves us to give some input on many of these points.
BALANCE:
We have played extensively and seen the game played extensively and there have been successful plays with all of the characters. Most of their abilities are designed as a "spice" to the game but even Xun, with his substantial ability to draw 2 cards and discard one, has a tough time winning because of his extremely high bounty. The only character which we've heard anything different on has been Mikk Staygo, and we have seen otherwise in our games and games we've observed. Nevertheless, we'll continue to evaluate him. I think if you played more games you'd see that the characters are a lot more balanced than the review thinks they are at first glance.
TRADING:
One of the most praised aspects of Smugglers by fans has been the ever-changing map. While the reviewer liked our trading system, she thought that there should have been hard-set places on the map to develop trade routes. This is exactly what should be avoided, or else the trading would have been a repetitive back and forth trip. Confusingly, she says at another point that the trading was repetitive and bemoaned the fact that you could be heading somewhere and someone beats you to the sell, thus sticking you with a load of cargo. This, in fact, is one of the best aspects of the game because it forces you to keep an eye on what the other players are doing, and then race them to the best deals. Then, in the event that you lose that race, you'll need to have a backup plan (i.e. strategy). A game with set trade routes and no ability for other players to beat you to the punch would be a game that could only be played once. Instead, Smugglers can be played a million times with diverse combinations and options each time you play.
STRATEGY & RANDOMNESS:
The reviewer seems to prefer non-random, highly strategic games. The presence of randomness seems to be a common complaint from her about many games...
Cosmic Encounter:
“Quite Random: The draw of the aliens, the encounter cards, and the order disks can all have massive effects on the game. I tend to think these even out, particularly because the game plays so fast, but it can irritate players who need more control or strategy.”
Car Wars (card game):
“The random factor is extremely high”
Munchkin (card game):
“The randomness is my single biggest complaint.”
I do not bring these up as an Ad Homonym, by any means. Many people just don't like randomness in a game and that's perfectly fine for them. There are "chess people" and "poker people" one could say. We call Smugglers an "adventure board game" rather than a "strategic board game" to emphasize that, like poker, Smugglers is about half random half strategic. For example, deciding whether you'll go for a short moderate-profit run or a longer high-profit run. Or deciding whether you'll go for a trade run that someone else may be going for, on the bet that you'll get there first. Or, what and when to trade with others or, how to put your character's abilities to the best use. Or, when to go for an illegal offer and when not to. As even the reviewer points out "you have to balance upgrading your ship... with other factors" or in other words, strategize.
Having witnessed enough games and seen different play styles, I can safely say that there are many places in Smugglers where strategy is not only possible, but key. But, like life, it's about making backup plans and how you handle the hand you're dealt. So, for those looking for an isolated controlled environment in which only their personal intellectual skill is measured, Smugglers does not apply - it's much more like the adventurous and unpredictable life of the space smuggler. But that doesn't mean that there isn't also a skill to it as well. The reviewer's claim that the game is "almost entirely random" is severely overstated.
BOUNTIES:
Some, wanting to blast others to oblivion instantly, have reacted to having to chip away at another player over several turns. But this is the result of allowing full and free movement between players. If the rules allowed for Bounty collection upon one simple win, then those with bounties would find themselves pecked to death, with no hope of surviving. It should be hard to collect a bounty on a player (which are generally higher value than those of non-player pirates). This gives the game a flavor of "cat and mouse" as the hunted has a chance to go off and try to build his/her defenses and get away - a theme much more like the ongoing conflicts between well known movie space smugglers and their pursuant bounty hunters.
CONCLUSION:
There is a lot more we could respond to, but the general idea is that you can't please everyone. Having said that it seems to us that, albeit meaning well, the reviewer has not done enough homework. She makes self-contradictory criticisms throughout and, in our view, hasn't taken the time to adequately study what the implications of her proposed rules changes would be to the game balance and play. It's perfectly fine to say that "this type of game doesn't suit my personal tastes" or that "I played a few times and didn't like it", but it seems that the reviewer should have put more effort into studying a game before making such broad and absolutists statements about design and balance as were made here.
We appreciate all reviews and respect the rights of people to voice their opinions. In fact, we love to hear any sort of constructive feedback. But much of what is here simply required some sort of response (or correction in some cases). As mentioned, this reviewer's comments, while certainly legitimate for her, do not at all reflect the overwhelming number of positive (and in many cases ecstatic) comments we've received from players of the game both over emails and in person at conventions. For a review more in line with the mainstream reaction, I would recommend one that appeared here on rpg.net at
http://www.rpg.net/reviews/archive/10/10395.phtml
(this reviewer has no connection to us whatsoever, for the conspiracy-minded out there, hehe)
Thanks much!
Sincerely,
Daniel Strain
Playus Maximus
www.playusmaximus.com
Post originally by Daniel Strain at 2004-06-16 20:48:43
Converted from Phorums BB System
Really sorry - I don't mean it as a personal attack, simply that I think more exposure is needed before drawing some of the conclusions you did. I tried to elaborate on that more in the surrounding comments - sorry if it came off that way
Post originally by Chris at 2004-06-16 22:05:35
Converted from Phorums BB System
Can I hear a review from someone who has WON the game? lol. I personally love this game. Being American (I guess that's a bad thing) I don't know what the author means by classifying this as an "American game design" and why that's significant.
I have to strongly disagree with the author. She says that there is no strategy to the game because of randomness. Randomness is actually required for strategy. If I played a game knowing what my opponent was going to do and what was going to happen, my actions wouldn't be strategic, they'd just be based on logic. Dealing with random events and adapting them or yourself to turn it into a positive outcome for yourself IS strategy.
I think the author saw little strategy in the trading (such as obviously going the best trade on the board). This would be true if you played by yourself. This game has short strategic elements to it. In other words, instead of having one strategy and spending two hours to find out if it works, you constantly are having to come up with new methods, new ideas to compensate.
I've played the game 4 times since I bought it (obviously more than the author seeing as how she didn't dispute the creator's guess) and I love it. Personally the author's comments about it being too random sound an awful lot like a sore loser’s comment (which explains my opening question). Also I haven't won the game yet, even though it belongs to me, so this isn't a winner's comment either.
If you take out, what seems to be the retyped rule book, in the review, all you get is "this is too random, it's typical of an American manufacture, and the board isn't made out of admantium". Those aren't exact quotes lol.
If it seems like I'm offended, it's only because I don't drink beer and I don't like pretzels, but I somehow still like this game. That's the worse possible adjective you could apply to this game. Picturing red-necked beer bellied beer drinking, chips eating, burping hill billies playing this game is like looking at a painting of dogs playing poker.... it's ridiculous.
If you refuse to get a game because the card's edges are not rounded and you can't read everything on the board 20 feet away, then this isn't the game for you I guess. Otherwise, check it out.
Post originally by Shannon Appelcline at 2004-06-17 00:38:05
Converted from Phorums BB System
Chris No Last Name,
"Beer and Pretzels" is a general category of game that includes classics like _WizWar_, _Cosmic Encounter_, and _Illumanti_. As I said in my review, they tend to be theme-heavy games--nothing to do with your racist stereotypes of "hill billies".
As for the rest: try rereading the review if you think my only complaints were about rounded card corners and non-adamite boards, and also note that I said that if you liked very random games, it might suit your fancy.
Post originally by Ralf Wagner at 2004-06-17 03:33:01
Converted from Phorums BB System
Chris wrote:
-------------------------------
If it seems like I'm offended, it's only because I don't drink beer and I don't like pretzels, but I somehow still like this game. That's the worse possible adjective you could apply to this game. Picturing red-necked beer bellied beer drinking, chips eating, burping hill billies playing this game is like looking at a painting of dogs playing poker.... it's ridiculous.
-------------------------------
The expression "beer and pretzels game" does not have any racial/derogatory connotations for me (I'm a German). My friends and I, we use it simply to distinguish more strategic/tactical/rules-heavy games from more random/rules-light ones.
Examples of our favourite b&p games: Guillotine, Family Business, Bohnanza...
Post originally by Daniel Strain at 2004-06-17 05:11:07
Converted from Phorums BB System
Chris, I'm thrilled you love our game - thanks much for your business! But let's not get mean
We don't think there's anything racist (or "culturist" you might say?) about the "beer & pretzels" phrase - just a little surprised that Shannon says this like it's a bad thing, haha
Anyway, different people like different types of games. As with movie reviews, it tends to serve folks best to find reviewers that fit their personal preferences.
Daniel Strain
Playus Maximus
www.playusmaximus.com
Linear Mode
