indepth - libo · 2013. 6. 27. · f carcassonne players score rating andrew 62 3 debbie 60 5 chris...

2005: Volume 3, Issue 3

INDEPINDEPTHTHGame Reviews & Reports

Game Review. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . PageEditor’s Note. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Carcassonne. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 3Power Grid . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 4Medici. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 6Member of the Month . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 8Louis XIV . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 9Goa. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 10Niagara . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 12Traders of Genoa . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 14St. Petersburg. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15Taj Mahal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16El Grande . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18Trias . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20Big City. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21Ra! . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21Twilight Imperium . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22Hannibal. . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24San Juan . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26Puerto Rico . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26LIBO Ratings . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27Group Statistics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28

Table of ContentsTable of Contents

2 INDEPTH 2005 July

Copyright on all contributions rests withthe original authors and material from

these pages may not be reproduced with-out the author’s permission and without

acknowledging its prior publication here.

Editor’s NoteEditor’s Note

CarcassonneCarcassonne

INDEPTH 2005 July 3

elcome to the “official” first edition ofINDEPTH – the official publication of theLong Island Boardgaming Organization

(LIBO). I say “official” because, although there havebeen seven previous editions, this is the first being pre-pared directly following a GameDay. The previousseven editions were prepared from archives, merely asa way to keep copies of the session reports available.

But, unlike those efforts, this edition is a full-fledged magazine. While the subject matter is, ofcourse, the results of games played by LIBO, there’sstill great information to be gleaned. Every gameplayed at a GameDay has a session report; many havereviews, and all have a handy little box that providesall the nitty-gritty information about the game.

But, for those interested in following along withLIBO’s endeavors, there’s also individual scoring andratings for each game and a detailed statistics page toshow who is leading in each category. We also spot-light a “Member of the Month” each issue.

Along with the launch of this publication, there is adecided improvement in the actual writing. While noneof us is a professional writer (oh, wait, that’s right, Iam…okay “MOST” of us aren’t), the new focus onreviews AND session reports should result in a markedimprovement in the overall writing.

The eventual hope would be to showcase variants,strategy articles and the like – your feedback and com-ments are definitely appreciated (just remember, thispublication is a labor of love…and it’s free!)

Our website (www.libogroup.com) will not be for-gotten, however, as there will still be quick-and-dirtyrecaps placed there after each GameDay. But, goingforward, the bulk of the information will be containedin these publications. Initially, I had intended to offerthe publication in two formats - 8.5 x 11 and 8.5 x 14,but I’ve elected to keep it only as 8.5 x 11. If peoplewish to print it out and hole-punch it or insert it into afolder, all the better, but, in this way, the pages retaintheir size and look, which I considered a more impor-tant concern.

It’s our hope that the information contained in thesepages will be relevant to all readers. And, if readers arealso entertained by the personalities that compriseLIBO, that is even better. It’s not such a bad thing toaspire to be both informative and entertaining.

W

rom the beginning,the differences inpeople’s strategies

were apparent. Chris Mwent for farms hoping forthe end-game payout.Jeremy and Andrew madesmall cities and roads forimmediate payoffs. Debbiespread herself out lookingfor cloisters, farms androads to get instant payoffsand long term planning.

After a few roundsChris M started to changehis strategy realizing thathe needed to collect some

points. He started to go forcities as well. He placed atile that would preventJeremy from ever finishinghis big city costing him alot of points.

A few turns later ChrisM was able to place a per-fect tile which completed acloister and gave him ahuge amount of points.During the final scoringAndrew was way out in thelead until the farms werescored, then Anna Mariaand Chris M left him intheir dust. —Debbie Dozier

F CarcassonnePlayers Score RatingAndrew 62 3Debbie 60 5Chris M. 70 4Anna Maria 71 5Jeremy 65 4

Overall Rating: 4.2Our time: 45mRules explanation time: 5m

4 INDEPTH 2005 July

Power GridPower Gridower Grid is a multi-playergame of power plant con-struction and, well, power

grid expansion on a national scale.The game has some simple butinteresting mechanics that tie nice-ly to this theme, and it is easilyplayable in about 2 hours.

The game features a nice dou-ble-sided playing board. Players caneither play on the US map, or flipthe board over to play in Germany.For the group’s first game, theychose the US. The nation is dividedinto seven regions, with the numberin play depending on the number ofplayers. There were four players(Brian, Chris P., Bill and Michael)which left two regions off limits(ultimately the Southeast andSouthwest).

Each region contains cities con-nected to each other by power“pipelines”. Each of these intercityconnections carries a value rangingfrom 3 to 28, depending on the dis-tance; the value represents the costof linking a new city to the electri-cal grid. The cities themselves addto this cost ($10, $15, or $20)depending on the number of playersalready linked to city. A maximumof three players can have any givencity connected to their grid.

The players began by choosingtheir regions. Brian chose the GreatPlains states in the northern centralUS, beginning in Minneapolis.Chris chose the Midwest, withDetroit and Chicago as key cities.Bill went with the Northeast and itsclosely spaced megalopolis.Choosing fourth, Michael wentwith the Northwest, because theother areas seemed too crowdedand contentious; he didn’t noticethat the power connections in theWest were generally much moreexpensive than those in the East.

Each playerstarts with one cityand a modestamount of money.The money is usedto bid on powerplants, buy fuel, andpay the costs to con-nect to and add newcities to the grid.Players earn moneyat the end of the turnfor powering cities(i.e., those cities thatare both connectedto their grid andwithin the capacity limits of theirpower plants.) The goal of game isto supply the most cities withpower at the end of the turn inwhich any player adds the 17th cityto his/her grid. To do this, playersmust balance power plant invest-ment, fuel purchases, and gridbuilding.

The turn starts with players bid-ding on new power plants. Eightpower plant cards are revealed froma deck of power plant cards. Eachcard has an illustration of the plant,a minimum bid cost, icons showingthe amount and type of fuel neededto power it,and the num-ber of cities itcan powerwhen fueled.The cards –and the bid-ding for them– are at theheart ofPower Grid.The playerslike the illus-trations of thevarious plants,whichappeared to be

unique for each card. The fuel typesinclude coal, oil, uranium, andgarbage. Some hybrid plants canburn multiple fuel types. There arealso some ecological and futuristicplants – wind turbines and fusion-powered – that don’t require anyfuel at all. Natural gas is strangelyabsent from the fuel mix; someoneshould tell Friedemann Friese thatnatural gas supplies a large percent-age of the nation’s electricity – atleast on the US side of the board.

The eight power plant cards arerevealed in two rows of four cards,arranged in ascending order. Thetop row, which contains the four

P Power GridPlayers Score RatingMichael 18 5Bill 17 4Chris 16 4Brian 15 4

Overall Rating: 4.3Our time: 3h-14mRules explanation time: 30m

INDEPTH 2005 July 5

Power GridPower Gridlowest cards, are the four availableplants representing the current mar-ket; the bottom row represents thefuture market. Players can bid onand buy one plant each turn, andown a maximum of three plants.They can add generating capacityonly by upgrading an existing plant– that is, replacing it with a moreefficient plant as these becomeavailable in the bid pool. An oil-fired plant that can supply twocities with one oil, for example, canbe replaced with one that power 5cities with two garbage. Knowingwhen to upgrade – and how toselect and bid on plants – is the piv-otal strategy of the game.

In the second phase of the turn,the available fuel, represented bywooden tokens, is placed each turnin boxes along a cost track. The lessa particular fuel is bought, the moreis available at lower cost. As eachplayer buys fuel from the lowercost boxes, however, the priceincreases. The game has a nicemechanic in that leading players (asmeasured by number of cities) bidon power plants first, but buy fuellast, allowing lagging players tostay in the game and sometimesthwart leading players by raisingtheir fuel costs.

This same turn order is used forthe third phase, in which playersessentially buy the grid connectionsbetween cities and pay for the citiesthemselves. Expansion through anopponent’s city is possible, but isoften so costly that it is not practi-cal. Very careful money manage-ment is required to negotiate the tri-angle of plant upgrades, fuel pro-curement, and grid building. All areessential for success.

Bill became the master ofgarbage plants, while Brian andMichael tried to balance coal, oil,

then nuclear plants. Brian, Bill, andChris vied for the best connectionsand cities in the East, whileMichael slowly and quietly builtmy grid in the Northwest – anexpensive proposition, but one thatbecame more affordable with eachnew city I supplied. Bill made twosuperb moves that catapulted himinto first place. First, he broke outfrom his hemmed-in position in theNortheast by connecting throughChris’s cities and into the virgin ter-ritory of the South Central US(Kansas City and then Texas).Second, he realized the 50 – FusionPlant card – the prize of the powerplant deck, was the last remainingcard, and he wisely dropped out ofplant bidding in such a way as toraise the price for everyone elsewhile ensuring that he would havethe Fusion Plant card at the entrycost of $50. Nicely done.

His Achilles Heel, however,was his reliance on coal to fuel hisother two plants (along with a well-earned reputation for winning). OnMichael’s turn, he managed to buy

up all the remaining coal, leavingBill unable to achieve the generat-ing capacity he needed subsequent-ly. Michael was fortunate to haveexactly 17 points of generatingpower, three fully-fueled plants, andenough money to buy the four citieshe needed to get him from 13 citiesto the 17-city requirement for end-ing the game. It was a nasty trick,to be sure; but one he was able todo unto others before they did untohim!

Overall, the groupliked PowerGrid, but some thought the abilityto strip an opponent of any chanceof winning in the final turns mightbe a bit of a problem, particularlywhen there are no more power plantcards and no way to increase gener-ating capacity. However, since thiswas the group’s first game, it mightalso be that they were slow to rec-ognize this aspect of the fuel mar-ket; had they foreseen this, theymay have played more defensivelywhen buying fuel, or diversifiedmore when upgrading plants.

—Michael Albergo

6 INDEPTH 2005 July

MediciMedicihe game Medici is basedon the Renaissance Italy.The overall goal of the

game is to bid on cards that rep-resent goods that would havebeen used and traded, and gatherthe most goods to earn florinsand bonuses.

The game board has five pic-tures on it, each one representingone good. There is one represent-ing cloth, spice, dye, fur andgrain.

Around the outside of theboard there are numbers startingat 0 and going up to 99. This iswhere the amount of florins eachplayer has is depicted.

On each of the five goods inthe middle of the board, there isa pyramid with bonuses on thetop three spots. During the gameplayers will have pieces move upthe pyramid, hopefully to thebonuses.

There is a deck of cards, eachcard representing one of the fivegoods. The cards have numberson them from 0 to five, there aretwo fives for each good. There isalso one ten gold card that does-n’t represent a good but helps inanother way that will beexplained.

Each player has a small boardthat represents a ship that willcarry her goods. Each ship canonly carry a maximum of fivegoods.

The first player starts by turn-ing over one, two or three cards,the choice is up to her. The nextplayer starts the bidding for thosecards.

If a playerdoes not haveenough room onher boat to fit thenumber of cardsturned over thenthat player maynot bid.

Each playerplaces a bid orpasses keeping inmind that theamount of florinsbeing bid comesfrom the sameamount that constitutes the play-er’s game score.

Each player can only bid onceand the bidding ends with theplayer who turned over the cards,initially. If everyone passes onthe cards then the last player maytake the cards for one florin.

When bidding on the cards,players are trying to collectmatching cards such as twospices because later these pieceswill move up the pyramid thenumber of spaces equal to thenumber of like cards.

Players also need to look forhigh number amounts on thecards, since this will give theplayer a high overall score and adifferent bonus. This is where thegold card could help to give aplayer the highest overall score,since it is worth 10.

After every boat is full withfive cards or the deck has beenexhausted, the players add uptheir score from the cards ontheir boat.

The player with the highest

score gets a bonus of florins andthe next player also gets a bonus.

Sometimes it is worth biddinga little more for cards with ahigher number or the gold if itseems likely that the player willget the bonus to make up for thehigh bid.

After the boats are scored fortotals, the goods for each playerare moved. Each players’ piecesare moved up on the pyramidsthat correspond to their goods intheir boats.

Then the pyramids are scored.The player whose pieces arehighest on the pyramid gets tenflorins and the next player getsfive.

If two players tie in firstplace on the pyramid then theywould each get seven florins. Iftwo players tie in second placeon the pyramid then they wouldeach receive two florins.

After all the pyramids arescored, the deck is reshuffled.

The game is comprised ofthree rounds, in total. The player

T MediciPlayers Score RatingDebbie 195 5Joe 131 5Chris M. 141 4


INDEPTH 2005 July 7

MediciMediciwith the highest score at the endof the three rounds wins thegame.

Medici is a game of toughdecisions. First, the players haveto decide how many cards to turnover.

Depending upon what isturned over, the player then mustdecide whether to continue toturn over more cards to add tothe mix or take a chance that thenext card might not be a card theplayer wants.

Worse, it may be a cardanother player wants, and – werethis player to receive this card –the reward would be exponential.These are tough choices and theyare continuous throughout thegame.

Another tough decision ishow much to bid on a set ofcards. This is one of the toughestdecisions because if a playeroverbids (which is a very com-mon error), it can cost that playerthe game.

It is always better to be aleader in the first round but notby much or the other players arelikely to try to run up the bids onthe goods that player wants andneeds.

All of the bonus amounts andstarting values change dependingon the amount of players playingthe game.

Chris M started off the gamewith a pretty good hand: a 5 fur,a 5 cloth and a 2 cloth.

He paid 12 florins for it andthat was what it was worth.

Then Joe turned over threecards and took them.

Next was Debbie’s turn andshe lucked out getting 3 graincards worth 13 for 1 point. Shewas also able to get another grainand cloth for 1 point.

Chris M was able to pick upanother cloth although it was the0 cloth but it did give him 4cloths total.

Debbie got the bonus for thelargest boat which gave her thelead, which she never relin-quished. Chris M got the secondbonus. Debbie’s boat total was23, Chris M had 15, and Joe had10.

Next round Chris M was ableto get an additional cloth andDebbie was able to get anothergrain and 3 furs.

She also got the bonus againso there was no stopping her. Atthe end of the second roundDebbie had 141, Chris M had105 and Joe had 74.

The last round, she was ableto get additional grain and fur soshe was able to pick up thebonuses from the pyramids.

Chris M tried to get some dyesince nobody had any. Again,Debbie received the largest boatbonus and Chris M got the sec-ond one. Chris won 2 pyramids,Debbie won 2 and Joe got thelast one.

Ending scores were- Debbie195, Chris M 141 and Joe 131.

This is an excellent game thatis highly recommend. It is greatto be able to play a strategicallydeep game that will not bog play-ers down for hours.

It can support 3-6 players andaverages a 45 minute playtime.—Debbie Dozier

HUNGRYFOR

LIBO NEWS?Visit

www.libogroup.comfor the latest

information, reports,ratings and

standings from theLong Island

BoardgamingOrganization’s

sessions.

INTERESTEDIN JOINING?

Email Chris([email protected])to get the ball rolling!

8 INDEPTH 2005 July

Q. How Long Have You Been Gaming?I grew up during the heyday of Avalon Hill and

SPI. For some reason I was attracted to the SPI games,and I still haven’t played many of the AH classics. Myfavorite AH game was PanzerBlitz, and my favoriteSPIs were Global War, Invasion America, World WarIII, NATO and Outreach. I didn’t know anyone elsewho played these games, so I spent many playingthem solitaire – first one side, then the other.

Q. Brief History of Your Gaming ExploitsIn one game of PanzerBlitz, back in high school, I

stole a victory even though I was being shellackedbecause I realized the scenario conditions only requiredme to get some tanks off my opponent’s end of theboard. Then there was that 5-hour game of World WarIII that I was winning hands down, but ultimately lostbecause I nuked my helpless opponent for good meas-ure, triggering Armageddon.

In college I was introduced to Dungeons andDragons and role-playing dominated my gaming forthe next few years. When Milton Bradley came outwith its GameMaster series, my college pals becamehooked on Axis and Allies. I love games like A&A thatare asymmetrical yet balanced. My most memorablegame was one in which I surprised two much betterAxis players by shooting down the Luftwaffe overKarelia and succeeding with a surprise (and unlikely)invasion of Japan.

My best games are usually ones that have a man-ageable luck factor and a good element of diplomacy,which I enjoy. For that reason, I have a slight prefer-ence for multiplayer games, rather than 2-playergames, as the former tend to give me more time tothink about my moves.

I’ve since been playing both Eurogames and con-flict simulations with all three circles of friends: highschool, college, and LIBO. Lately I’ve been enjoyingHeroscape – a simple game with beautiful pieces thatplays very quickly..

Q. Favorite Board Game – All TimeI really like Axis & Allies, Cosmic Encounter (the

Mayfair edition), Settlers of Catan, Battle Cry, Memoir’44, Battle Line and Advanced Civilization. I also likeLost Cities (though it’s a bit short), and Puerto Rico(perhaps a bit too much like chess in that it requiresdeep look-aheads, at which I’m pretty poor.)

I’d probably have to say that Advanced Civilization

is my all-time favorite – apart from itslength, it may be the perfect game, atleast for me: highly strategic, multiplay-er, elements of luck and diplomacy, cul-ture and empire-building, all with ele-gant mechanics. It’s definitely one of thebest games ever.

Q. Least Favorite Board GameThe least favorite ever is EuroRails.

There’s nothing more boring than drawing lines with agrease marker on a map of Europe so your train candeliver oranges from Spain to Sweden. Not to mentionthe fact that although the game is lengthy, you canprobably tell after the first 30 minutes where you’regoing to finish. In LIBO, my least favorite isCarcassonne. I still don’t understand how this game isscored. I think I’ve played it four times, and I’ve been“lapped” on the scoring track at least twice. I don’thave any clue what to do with my gingerbread man,and I can spend all game developing a strategy arounda tile that doesn’t exist.

Q. Game Most Looking Forward to PlayingHannibal. I did play this once with John at

WarGameDay. But I made key rules errors and lost soquickly that I really didn’t have a chance to experiencethe game! My other choice would be Queens Gambit.

Q. Hall of Fame Moment from a LIBO GameThe moment during the 2004 Advanced Civ day

when I realized I was going to win, and there wasnothing that anyone could do to stop it. This was thegreatest boardgaming moment of all time for me. Ihadn’t played this game in about 15 years, and the lastfew times I’d played it, my college friends had usedme as punching bag!

This game started out badly – I was 7th out of 7players for choosing a starting nation. I chose Crete,made careful moves, good trades, smart purchases –and played very diplomatically. Somehow, after morethan 14 hours of play, I managed to overcome somevery good playersand take first place.I thought about it formany days after-ward, and became alot more confidentgoing forward.

Member of the MonthMember of the Month

To see Michael’sINDEPTH

Stats and Ratings,turn to Page 27.

MichaelAlbergo

INDEPTH 2005 July 9

Louis XIVLouis XIVlthough no one of thegroup had played the gamebefore and the mechanics

are not always completely intu-itive, the game went smoothlyenough and everyone had begun tosee the basic tactical decisionsmore clearly after the first round.

The first round saw some ten-tative play on everyone’s part andended with Bill, who by his posi-tion at the table was able to makethe last play of the round, addinghis influence markers to the king’sspace in a last minute grab for twomission chips. This enabled Bill tocomplete two missions that round,while each of the other playerswere only able to complete one.

One of Bill’s mission cardsgave him the power to exchange aninfluence card once per turn andthis power functionally allowed himto postpone his final play eachround, thus maximizing his final

move over the nextthree rounds as well.Andrew was able toscore the card withthe king after Round2, but Bill stillretained a slight leadin completed mis-sions with 3 toeveryone else’s 2.

Later roundsshowed differentstrategies at work.Darren had collect-ed 3 intrigue cardswhich he was ableto use to gain majorities on severalboards on his final turn and hadselected a mission card from thedifficult stack which promises agreater reward but a greater levelof difficulty to fulfill. John hadcollected an influence card on twodifferent turns which allowed himto take the last turn of the round

and had also accumulated missioncards that enabled him to moveinfluence markers from the generalsupply to his personal supply moreeasily. Bill had tried to accumulateenough markers in subsequentrounds to fulfill two missions butonly proved successful in this onhis final turn when he had selectedtwo of the easiest mission cards tofulfill because the more challeng-ing cards would not have providedany additional benefit at thegame’s end.

By the end of the fourth turn(the end of the game), Bill hadcompleted 6 missions for 30 pointswhile everyone else had completed3 missions for 15 points. Andrewhad collected the most coats-of-arms throughout the game andheld a majority of two types. Thefinal scores were Bill (42),Andrew (30), Darren (27), andJohn (27). Darren won thetiebreaker with John because hehad more influence markers in hisown supply at the conclusion ofthe game.—Bill Herbst

A Louis XIVPlayers Score RatingAndrew 31 3Bill 42 5John 27 5Darren 28 3

Overall Rating: 4.0Our time: 2hRules explanation time: 30m

10 INDEPTH 2005 July

GoaGoahe subtle complexity ofGoa cannot be adequatelyconveyed in a single

review, and it is this fact thatbestows upon it the mantle ofgreatness.

Many boardgames are con-structed in such a way as to ren-der actions inevitable for theattentive player; the choice ofcards in El Grande, for example,can often be obvious based onthe flow of the action to thatpoint.

In Goa, such inevitability isabsent – a player’s options are

vast, and each choice holds someelement of potential, such thatthe notion of the obvious or“right” move is almost eliminat-ed from play.

Occasionally, a certainsequence is essential to maximizeproduction, but more often thannot, the player is challenged todetermine which of many actionswill best further his goals. Eventhe definition of these goals canshift from phase to phase, as dif-ferent things matter differently toplayers at various times.

Prioritizing needs and

addressing shortcomings in one’splantation structure are vital toeffective Goa play.

The latest LIBO GameDaymatched Joe, Brian, John andDarren in plantation developmenton the island.

Of the four, only Brian was anewcomer to the game, thus theother three arrived with differingdegrees of predetermined tenden-cies and preferred strategies, oneof which, it can be argued,specifically contributed to thesuccess of the victor.

John’s predilection for pursu-

T

INDEPTH 2005 July 11

GoaGoa

ing the Starter’s Flag, evident ina recent Goa match and account-ed for once again on this day,seemed to prove an apt strategyand once again spearheaded hisdominating march to victory.

The Starter’s Flag embodies ahost of interesting advantageswhose impact is not always evi-dent to the novice.

Offering a goodly sum ofducats for a tile which does nothold commodities, generatewealth (at least not directly) orotherwise provide any sizablebenefit can seem foolish to thoseunfamiliar with the dynamics ofthe game, but its value becomesapparent with additional consid-eration and, certainly, withrepeated play.

The Flag awards primacy ofaction to its holder, allowing himto select the starting point for afuture auction and, in so doing,to have an opportunity to directthe flow of resource availability(though a concerted effort bysubsequent players can minimize

the effectivenessof this placement).

More subtly,however, theowner of the Flagholds dominionover TWO auc-tioned tiles,whereas the otherplayers each con-trol one. Thus, theFlag holder canreceive funds fromtwo auction sales,or wield “the ham-mer” on two tiles

that he requires, or some combi-nation thereof.

No other player can so bene-fit from a single auction.

Finally, possession of theFlag awards a free action, aresource rare and valuableenough to fetch great cost in theopen market, and one whoseimportance only increases as thelatter turns arrive and opportuni-ties diminish.

John chose to advance hisTaxes marker faster and furtherthan his competitors, giving himthe lead in funds which he fun-neled into auction, securing theFlag and completing fourcolonies (a feat matched only byDarren, who pursued an evenadvancement and erroneouslyinterpreted the Free Actionbonuses given for all-categoryadvancement).

Joe matched John in empha-sizing Taxes, but did not place agreat deal of value on the Flag,missing chances at double pay-

ment or acquisition through thegame.

The two, however, amassedvast wealth while Brian laggedfar behind in spices, though hebuilt the first 8 colony amongstthe players.

Joe pursued a late-gameExpedition Card gambit, collect-ing cards at a prodigious rate.These allowed him to vault overDarren, whose equally late misson the founding of Calicut with arare double-1 Colonist drawsealed his third-place finish.

Brian, despite hitting the “2in every category” bonus first,continued to suffer from his earlylack of spices, and drew up therear.—Darren Velez

GoaPlayers Score RatingJoe 32 3John 40 5Brian 29 4Darren 30 5


IN THENEXT ISSUE

LIBO pays tributeto an influentialcompany and aninfluential past

convention(Avaloncon) during

Avalon HillGameDay.


NiagaraNiagarahe 2004 Rio Grande gameNiagara truly can be saidto be grounded in a unique

theme. Niagara is set in the dan-gerous world of a rushing water-fall. Although not essential to thegame itself, Niagara actuallyboasts some actual events in histo-ry as the back-story for the themeand game play (a trait that is rarein lighter, “fluff” games of thistype).

In the late 18th century,Shawnee and Iroquois Indianswould routinely mislead whiteadventurers and treasure-seekersby directing them to hidden cachesof valuable gems, in the hopes ofturning them on each other andmisdirecting their typical expan-sionist tendencies. Players inNiagara actually assume the rolesof these adventurers, attempting toobtain or steal various gems thatare hidden along the bank of arushing waterfall.

The first thing to note aboutNiagara is the game board itself,which also gets points for itsuniqueness. The game board isconstructed by first opening thegame box, flipping over the gamebottom, and resting it side by sidewith the game box top, construct-ing a rectangular shape. Then acardboard overlay, which repre-sents the river itself, is placed ontop of the boxes. The overlay islonger than the game boxes,resulting in one end of the river“falling off” the game boxes, sim-ulating the actual waterfall. 5 dif-ferent types of crystal “gems”(seven of each: pink, blue, white,purple, and gold) are then placedin areas along the banks of thewaterfall. The final part of setup

involves placing plastic transpar-ent discs end to end, along thecourse of the river. During thegame, these discs are actually ableto simulate the flow of the river,since placing a new disc at themouth of the river will “push” allof the other discs along the river,with discs closest to the waterfallfalling off the game board (alongwith any of the discs occupants!).The river forks near the end, giv-ing players a choice of rivers totravel along (and two waterfallsfor it’s occupants to plunge down).

The game mechanics are quitesimple. Each player is allocated 2canoes, which represent theiradventures. The game is won bythe first player who, during agame round, is able to successful-ly have their canoes bring to shoreeither 5 gems of a different color,4 games of the same color, or 7gems of any color.

At the start of a game round,each player is given 7 small card-board cards which they will useeach turn to determine how manyspaces along the river they wishtheir canoes to paddle, or to alterthe current of the river. The cardsare denoted with either the num-bers 1 through 6, or a cloud sym-bol. At the start of a turn, eachplayer secretly picks one of hisremaining cards and places it facedown on the game board. Playersthen simultaneously flip theircards, indicating each player’saction for the turn. If a playershows a numbered card, on histurn that player must move hiscanoes up or down the river (butnot both ways on the same turn)the number of spaces indicated onhis/her played card. If the player

chose to play the cloud card,instead of moving his canoes thatturn, that player can eitherincrease or decrease by 1 the num-ber of spaces the river will flow atthe end of each turn.

The normal rate of river floweach turn is the lowest number ofall the cards the player’s playedfor that turn, but by playing thecloud card, a player can choose toeither increase or decrease theflow by 1 (to a maximum of plusor minus 2). Once a particularcard has been played in a gameturn, it cannot be replayed untileach of the individual 7 cards aplayer has have been used, soadventurers soon learn the valueof playing the right card at theright time.

As players move their canoesdown-river, they can choose toexpend 2 of their movement pointsto grab one of the many gems thatsit along the river bank, as long asthe tile their canoe is on is adja-cent to a gem holding area.Players then place the gem insidetheir canoe, and beginning on theirnext turn, may attempt to bringtheir canoe back up-river wherethe gem can be safely depositedon shore. Alternatively, a playerwhose canoe is empty can steal agem from an opposing canoe if thestealing-canoe ends his turn on thesame water tile as the gem-filledcanoe. Playing the right movementcard at the right time is the key tosuccess, as all canoes MUSTmove the exact number of spacesthat is shown on the card for theturn, so planning out your movesin advance is essential.

In the final phase of each turn,the river is moved the number of

T


NiagaraNiagaraspaces equal to the lowest cardplayed that turn, plus or minus thecurrent rate of river flow, asexplained above. This can result inthe river, along with its occupants,to move down the game board atvery fast rate.

In the event that a player’scanoe falls off the end of the gameboard (goes over the falls), thatplayer then must play the gamewith 1 less canoe, unless hechooses to return one of his cap-tured gems back to the riverbankto reclaim his lost canoe. This is acostly price to pay indeed, asgems, especially in the later partsof the game, are hard to come by.In the event that a player has lostboth of his canoes, and does nothave at least 1 gem to pay for areplacement boat, one boat isawarded to him for free, to keepall players in the game.

In the game played by Jeremy,Debbie, Darren and Andrew, itquickly became apparent that mostpeople were trying to get a quick 4gems of the same color, as theblue and white gems (which arethe easier ones to obtain) werequickly running out of supply. Atthe end of the first round, thegame was dead even: Andrew hada blue and white gem, Debbie hada pink and purple gem, andJeremy had a blue and white gem.

With the game tied up, thegame went into Round 2. Round 2saw Debbie take an early lead get-ting 2 more purple gems, nowneeding only 1 more purple gemto win the game. Players routinelystole gems from each other inround 2, with Darren stealing fromboth Andrew and Debbie.

Round 2 was harsh for Jeremy,

who made a bold play to get thevery hard to reach gold gems situ-ated right next to the waterfall.Early in Round 2, Jeremy lost hisfirst canoe over the falls, anddecided to play on with only 1canoe.

In the later stages of round 2,he again tried to a gold gem andagain the river changed course andsent his last canoe over the falls.With no canoes left in stock,Jeremy was forcedto hand in one ofhis hard-earnedgems to get one ofhis canoes back intoplay.

Jeremy was notable to recoverfrom this setback.

As the playersentered Round 3, itbecame apparentthat no one wasgoing to be able toget the harder toreach gems. It alsobecame obviousthat no one was going to be ableto get 4 of a kind, since all playershad made attempts for the samecolored gems, which were nowexhausted. Therefore, the gamebecame a race to see who couldacquire the last win condition (7gems) first.

In the end, it was Andrew whowas able to cross the finish linefirst with 7 gems, but it was aclose race. Debbie also had 7gems, and finished right behindAndrew. Darren came in thirdplace with 6 gems, and Jeremytrailed the others with 4.

The game is deceptively morecomplex than the fun, light theme

and game board would suggest.Players must try to decide early onwhich of the victory conditionswill they try to obtain. Will theytry to grab 4 of the same colorgem (not an easy task since thereis only a limited number of gemsof each type, and all players arevying for them), 1 of each kind(again, harder than it sounds, sincesome of the gem types are placedprecariously near the waterfall’s

edge, easily sending a player’scanoe who didn’t plan wiselyenough over the falls), or grab any7 gems that they can? Should theytry to avoid the other players andsimply race up and down the rivergrabbing the gems they need, orshould they attempt to steal thehard-earned gems that other play-ers are trying to get back to shore?

Each player must make thesedecisions, and more, during thecourse of a game of Niagara. Whatat first glance might appear to be asimple child-like game, Niagara isactually a cleverly fun game ofplanning and strategy.

—Andrew DiGregorio

NiagaraPlayers Score RatingAndrew 8 3Debbie 7 4Darren 6 4Jeremy 5 4



Traders of GenoaTraders of Genoaarey’s early acquisition ofseveral commodities whilethe other players struggled

to amass as many as two or threemade him the marked man in theearly going. This resulted in Joeand John declining his bribe offers

in an attempt to defuse his pre-sumed bid for a large order.Nevertheless, Carey managed tocomplete such an order in Turn 4,then followed this coup withanother large order one turn later,causing a general sense of agita-tion amongst the others, who stilldwelt in the lower strata of com-modity-garnering.

Difficult to ascertain, but cer-tainly relevant to the final score,however, was the cost Carey paidto complete his orders. While itappeared that Carey footed a sub-stantial bill to incline others to dohis bidding, Joe, for example, low-

balled the entiregame, rarely offer-ing more than 10 to15 bills, keeping hisoutlay low whilestill managing to fillorders in a timely

fashion.Furthermore,Joe and Johnwere the onlyplayers to useBuildingAction tokensas an alternatesource ofincome, bene-fiting from theactions of the

others as they traipsed across theboard.

Darren pursued the path ofPrivilege, scoring a hefty 170points witha chainacross theleft side ofthe board,but fell farshort ofJohn (540points)and, espe-cially, Joe(715points),

who scored an amazing, lopsidedand utterly unexpected victory.Without a direct tally of whereeach player stands, determining theleader in ToG is calculated guess-work at any point, and none wouldhave chosen Joe as the runawaychampion, as he had completedfew large orders and made fewobvious splashes during the game.However, the stealthy accumula-tion of income from Buildingmarkers and a wise frugality madefor a convincing win.

—Darren Velez

C Traders of GenoaPlayers Score RatingJoe 715 4John 540 4Darren 500 4Other 375 4



St. PetersburgSt. Petersburglay order is decided by ran-domly handing out 4 tokenswhich each represent who

will start the particular deck theyare on. Once that player goes,player order continues in clock-wise fashion. The player orderended up being put out in counter-clockwise order so one playerstarted the green deck, the playerto the right of him started the bluedeck, player to the right started thered deck, etc. This meant that theplayer order basically went likethis for the player starting thegreen deck: first, second, third,fourth; next round: last, first, sec-ond, third and so on.

The rules to this game suggestthat on the first round every playerpurchase 2 workers, AM took 1worker instead and Brian pickedup a third. All three were FurTraders which ended up costinghim a total of 6 but made him 9 so

a net gain of 3whereas the otherplayers ended uplosing some moneyon the deal. He tookthe strategy of buy-ing workers and try-ing to buy aristo-crats (wasn’t suc-cessful for a littlewhile) while havingone or two build-ings to build upsome victory pointswhile the rest of theplayers concentrated more onbuildings that would earn thempoints throughout the game.Everybody seemed to play thegame with the idea of improvingtheir position first rather than look-ing at how they could preventsomeone else from improving. Asthe game went on, Brian waspulling in a lot of money and had

improved some of his buildings sohe was earning a large amount ofvictory points every building phaseand start to close the gap that hadbeen created throughout the game.However, Michael and AM hadbuilt up a decent amount of aristo-crats that would end up beatingBrian, but he was able to gettogether enough aristocrats tomatch or beat them.

The final scoring:Michael: 77Chris: 61AM: 67Brian: 95

Unfortunately, a big mistakewas made near the end of the game.It was about midnight at this timeand all players were tired and forgotto move the player markers at leasttwo rounds in a row! This certainlychanged how the game would haveended up, especially since Brianneeded to get aristocrats to win andhe would have been going lastrather than second on the aristocratsphase.—Brian Stone

P St. PetersburgPlayers Score RatingMichael 77 5Anna Maria 61 5Chris 67 4Brian 95 5



Taj MahalTaj Mahalaj Mahal, a Reiner Kniziaclassic, is a game that hasmore subtlety and strategy

than initially perceived. At its core,the game is basically a game of“Chicken”, as players have to gaugethe return on investment for theircardplay. When one considers theopportunity to lose big is very real,on a turn by turn basis, it’s easy tosee how heady the game can actual-ly be. It’s a tremendous hit for ourgroup, since we enjoy being sur-prised by a game’s depth.

The goal of the game, is to scorethe most victory points, throughacquisition of linking spaces, tilesand other ‘goods’ pieces and cards.If it sounds like a lot, it is – thereare multiple ways to score victorypoints in this game.

In a nutshell, the game starts offwith 12 regions, – each of whichhas at least one ‘fortress’ hex, wherea ‘special’ bonus piece will go. Eachregion also has a province tile – anumbered token that is randomlyplaced in each region. On the bot-tom of each token are symbols, indi-cating “goods” (there are four dif-ferent kinds, – but they’re immateri-al, except that set collection isimportant (more on that later)).

The game lasts for 12 rounds –one round per region. Regions areplayed in numerical order (which,due to the random placement ofprovince tiles, changes each game).The starting player rotates eachround, and he can choose to playcards or withdraw, and the optionrotates around the table.

The players receive cards, whichare VERY valuable (and, normally,in scarce supply). The cards come infour main colors (red, yellow, green,violet) and bonus cards in white.

The colors of the cards areimportant, because each player must

ONLY play one color per turn. Thefigures on the cards are important,because having the plurality of aspecific figure will win a player therespective prize:

Having a plurality of elephantswill win the player the province tile(and respective goods). Having aplurality of Grand Moguls will winthe player the crown, which allowsthe player to place a palace on anyspace in the region; even one whereanother palace is already played.

Having a plurality of any of thefour colored figures will win theplayer a tile corresponding to thefigure (two ofthese tiles can becashed in for aspecial card thatcan be playedeach round…atleast, until some-one else cashesin the same twotiles), and theright to place apalace on theboard.

If the playerchooses to playcards, he canplace one col-ored card AND up to one whitecard. On his subsequent turns, hemust continue to play the samecolor card (and additional whitecard, if he can/has one/wishes to),but the color of the cards must stayconsistent.

At any time, on his turn, theplayer can choose to withdraw,rather than play a card. When heopts to withdraw, a check is made todetermine if – at that time – theplayer holds a plurality in any of thesix contested prizes. If the playerdoes, he wins that prize.

If the player has won one of the

four figures the player can nowplace a palace. This is done whenthe player withdraws (so, again, ifachieving a specific location for apalace is important, there is definitewisdom in withdrawing early,EVEN if the cards a player is hold-ing could win more than one prizein a given region…sometimes,smart play involves withdrawing toensure the player definitely getswhat’s important to him).

Additionally, all but the lastplayer to withdraw will receive theirchoice of two cards to replenishtheir hand (from cards that have

already been revealed each round).The last player to withdraw gets butone card. There is also a bonus forthose players who wish to withdrawbefore playing a single card – inaddition to the two cards of theirchoice, they also receive one card atrandom from the top of the deck.

It’s easy to see that it is incredi-bly difficult to remain competitivein each round of scoring. On somerounds, it becomes absolutely neces-sary to simply bow out of combatbefore placing a single card.

There are a few different waysto score – which should, in turn,

T


Taj MahalTaj Mahaldictate to a player which rounds hehas FAR less to gain than others(and, obviously, should to bow out).

A player receives one point ifhe’s able to place a palace (whichmeans he held the plurality in one ofthe four figures). A player receivesone point for every region his‘chain’ of palaces travels through –any empty spaces or enemy palacesbreaks the chain. This is where theGrand Mogul comes in quite handy,since the player can place a palacewhere one has already been placed.

The scoring for goods is cumula-tive and somewhat complex. Thereare advantages towards collectingthe same type of goods, since scoresgrow exponentially (each subsequentround, goods received earlier arescored again, provided at least onegood of that type was collected inthe current round). Thus, the ele-phant plurality has wavering impor-tance to various players. Sometimes,when the province tile and/or thebonus fortress tiles do not have thegoods needed, it makes sense to bowout of combat.

At the end of the game, playersreceive one point for each card ofthe color they have the most of – so,if a player ends the game with 1 red,2 violet and 4 yellow cards, hewould receive an additional four

points. White cardsare also counted, andeach adds one pointto the player’s score.

In truth, the gameis not so much strate-gic as it is tactical(and, in responding tothe tactical changes,it does become strate-gic again!), and thesetup is chock full ofrandomness:

1. Each of the 12region cards is shuf-fled and randomlyplaced on the board.

2. Each of the ‘special’ pieces isshuffled and randomly placed on theboard, on a city space.

3. Oh yeah, there’re cards too.With so many different options

to gain victory points, the ability todiagnose the most lucrative opportu-nities is what separates the winnerfrom the loser in this game.

However, the risk of losing toomuch in one province is very real,as indicated in a recent play. And,suffering a huge loss – too manycards for no reward – has manydamning effects that can effectivelynullify any chance of victory.

In the recent game, Chris took afew early provinces, which provided

him with a diverseholding of goods.Anna Maria contin-ued securing themogul, whichallowed her to cre-ate a lengthy chainof palaces. Slowlybut surely, Chris M.began taking certainkey provinces, etc.,while Debbie lin-gered behind.

In the 6th

province, Chris decided to pushAnna Maria, hoping he’d break her(leaving him with many prizes,including the elephant and 3 of thefigures). Instead, he misjudged howmany cards she had and she forcedChris to withdraw, instead. Heexpended five cards, and receivednothing, putting him in a deep hole.

Anna Maria secured the goods,while Chris M capitalized on thelack of cards held by both players,taking multiple prizes from the nexttwo provinces, and leaping out to ahuge lead.

Chris looked for an opportunityto score points, but even that wasshut out, when Chris M selected thefour point victory point tile to placehis palace, as compared to breakingAnna Maria’s chain of palaces.Chris M won handily with Chrisbehind him, his scoring augmentedheavily by four yellow and twowhite cards he was holding at theend of the game.

Ultimately, the loss in the 6thprovince was far too debilitating torecover from, for Chris. Chris Mutilized the lack of cards for AnnaMaria and Chris to seize goods andpalaces, which catapulted him intothe lead, where he never lookedback.—Chris Palermo

Taj MahalPlayers Score RatingDebbie 35 4Chris M. 57 4Anna Maria 35 4Chris 45 4



El GrandeEl GrandeEl Grande was one of theearliest German games toreceive widespread apprecia-

tion among American gamers in themid to late 1990’s. It is one of therare classics that not only meets butgenuinely exceeds its own reputa-tion for excellence through its ele-gant design, tense decisions andoverall balance.

Each player in El Grande drawsa card that signifies his originalhome region into which he placeshis Grande (a large block indicatinghis “home” territory) and severalcaballeros (smaller wooden blocksthat are used in determining thescoring or each district). Each play-er has a hand of 13 power cards thatare marked with a number (1-13)and icons depicting the number ofcaballeros that he is allowed tomove from his stock to his “court”which is the area from which hemay play onto the board on his turn.The higher numbers are necessaryto gain control of the turn order andchoose the best action cards eachround. The lower number cardsallow one to introduce morecaballeros into the court. This ten-sion between the ability to drive thegame through taking the mostadvantageous action cards and the

necessity of havingaccess to your stockof caballeros is oneof the key elementsfrom which thegame’s many strate-gic and tactical deci-sions arise.

Similarly, one isalso confronted withdecisions on theaction cards them-selves. Every turnfive cards are avail-able; the most pow-erful cards, however,generally allow one to place thefewest caballeros on the board soagain a balance must be achieved inwhich long- and short-term goalsare fostered by the action choiceeach round.

The game is played over thecourse of nine rounds. In eachround, players play a power card,take their caballeros, and select anaction card in the order specified bythe number of their power card.Players may choose the order inwhich they enact the action on thecard and place the stated number ofcaballeros on the board. In additionto placing caballeros in the variousregions of the board for scoring pur-

poses (only thoseregions next to theking are legal forplacement), play-ers may also electto place somecaballeros in theCastillo which willbe scored as welland then allow agroup of caballerosto be placed intoone region of theboard itself duringthe scoring round.

The scoring rounds occur afterevery third round, although there arealso special scoring opportunitiesallowed by the play of specificaction cards. At the beginning of thescoring round, each player secretlychooses a region into which all ofthe caballeros that he placed in theCastillo will be relocated. Then,after the Castillo itself is scored, theactual distribution of caballerostakes place and the regions are allscored. Points are generally awardedfor having either the most, secondmost, or – sometimes – third mostcaballeros in a certain territory.Occasionally movable tiles mayhave been played during the actioncard phase and these can significant-ly alter the scoring opportunities forthe affected regions.

While El Grande is quite acces-sible, it is a fairly deep game thatrequires its players to be attentive tolarge strategic goals while also man-aging to take advantage of smarttactical plays in he turns immediate-ly before the scoring rounds.General strategic principles call fora varied strategy in which one man-ages the supply of caballeros inone’s court well and only plays thehigh power cards when the actioncards available call for decisive

E El GrandePlayers Score RatingAndrew 105 5Bill 119 5Jeremy 94 5Other 104 4



El GrandeEl Grandeaction to ensure that one will finishon top during the scoring round. Itis obviously wise to be as efficientas possible in the dispersal of one’scaballeros and to ensure that everycaballero on the board is contribut-ing to a first, second or third placemajority holding in its territory.

The Castillo is uniquely power-ful in that it allows one potentiallyto score twice for each caballeroinside (once with the Castillo itselfand once in its new territory).However, it is important not to relytoo heavily on plays to the Castilloas those caballeros are not availablefor special scoring of regions inbetween the scoring rounds. It isvery important to gain the 2 pointking and grande bonuses on a regu-lar basis and to use the placement ofthe king for both defense of yourown majorities and to threaten themajority holdings of others.Achieving the delicate balancebetween all of these elements simul-taneously has the potential to yieldgreat pleasure and satisfaction to allgamers who are interested in anintellectual challenge with only aminimal reliance on luck.

The game began slowly as threeof the participants (Bill, Carey andAndrew) had never played beforeand one (Jeremy) had only playedonce. In the first round, Jeremychallenged Bill’s “home” region inSeville by playing a movable scor-ing tile on the region that onlyallowed for the first place holding inthe region to be scored and by mov-ing a number of caballeros into theregion to take a slight majority overBill. Bill responded by playing sev-eral caballeros to the region toretake control rather than by movinghis Grande because it was a relative-ly low scoring region and seemedless likely to spark a fierce conflict

than the otherregions inwhich he hadholdings. Atthe end ofround one,Bill choseSeville toward off anattack onSeville byJeremy butthe anticipatedattack nevermaterialized.This gave Billa huge major-ity in Sevillewhich sat there for most of thegame uncontested but its inefficien-cy cost him in that he was not ableto dominate as many regions as heotherwise would have. At the end ofthe first scoring round Jeremy hadearned a slight lead with Carey andBill trailing slightly and Andrew ina somewhat distant fourth place.

During the next three roundsBill managed to hold onto the king’sregion of Aragon and once againearned the 2 point king bonus in thesecond scoring round. Carey hadbeen quietly amassing his caballerosin some high scoring point regionsincluding the hotly contestedValencia. By the end of the secondscoring round, Bill was in first,Carey had moved to second, withJeremy in third and Andrew fourth.

The final three rounds saw someexciting twists of fate. In round 7Carey made a brilliant move thatallowed him to score the region ofValencia for himself and earned 10points because of the high value ofthe region and the king and Grandebonuses. The move was also veryeffective in bringing him up theleaderboard into a tie with Bill as

the second and third place scoringfor that region was split betweenAndrew and Jeremy and no pointswere awarded to Bill.

In the power card play portionof the 8th round, Bill capitalized onhis position to play the highest cardat the table and scored the five pointregions in which he had strongholdings and his main rival at thetime (Carey) had little. Careyremarked that he had intended tothwart that move by taking thataction card himself and electing notto execute the action. At this point,greater attention was given toAndrew who had used some timelyaction card play to rocket himselfback into contention.

In the final turn of the game,Bill divested himself somewhat inthe overstocked region of Sevilleand made some conservative movesas he was content to take secondplace in several of the regions inwhich he held majorities as hebelieved the second place awardswould be sufficient to keep him infirst place if he could use hiscaballeros from the Castillo to gaina foothold in one extra high scoringprovince. —Bill Herbst


TriasTriasanagea drifted apart to form separate conti-nents. The dinosaurs migrated to the new conti-nents before drifting and scored points based on

the size of the continents and the number of dinosaurseach player had.

Joe was able to drift a large continent on his ownwith 8 land tiles which he had alone. He got 2 pts forforming the continent and 8 pts during final scoring.

John was able to drift a continent with 7 land tilesfor 2 pts to form the continent and, eventually, 7 ptsfor final scoring.

Chris M. and Joe fought over asmaller continent, and Joe had themajority of dinosaurs on it. Thecontinent had 3 land tiles on it. Joescored points also for forming conti-nent. Chris got half of the pts forthe continent.

Anna Maria was able to get acontinent to drift to the north ofPanagea with 7 land tiles worth 7pts., though some of her dinosaurswere split from the continent andforced to swim. She was unable torescue some as the adjacent tile wasmoved to add to a continent.

P TriasPlayers Score RatingJoe 17 2Chris M. 15 2Anna Maria 12 3John 16 3


Finally, Chris and John had dinosaurs onone continent with 8 tiles. Chris had amajority of dinosaurs and got the points formajority as well as 2 pts for foundingcolony. John got half the points for the con-tinent.

—John Reiners


Big CityBig Cityusinesses took priority overthe residential sector earlyin the game. It was not

until Anna Maria was able to buildCity Hall that the fun began.

New Christhrew out the firstcurve ball by plac-ing a park that vir-tually cut off all

access ofthe stationcars untilthe end ofthe game.Therewerenumeroussingle unitbuildingsgoing up,as it felt as though thecard selection went veryquickly with no onebeing able to find theright combinations tobuild larger buildings.

The factories werenot used until the veryend of the game and had

little impact on the results of thegame. However, New Chris andJeremy unknowingly were helpingAndrew placing station cars toextend the game, and on the lastturn of the game, Andrew placed ashopping center, breaking a first-place tie with Jeremy to show thefinal difference.—Jeremy Waite

B

Ra!Ra!his game began with a rela-tively evenhanded firstepoch degenerated into a bit

of a landslide as Darren benefitedfrom a costly but persistent accu-mulation of Nile tiles.

During the second epoch,

Darren chose tooverpay for a sizablelot of these rivertokens, downgradinghis Sun tiles signifi-cantly, but uponsecuring the critical

Flood afew auc-tions laterand addinga pair of Gold tiles, hemanaged to distance him-self from Andrew andJohn.

For their parts, theother two players acquit-ted themselves well,building Monuments at a

prodigious pace, but time ran outtwice as both attempted to improvetheir holdings, and neither was ableto match Darren’s vast Nile hold-ings, which spanned well into thedouble digits while Andrew andJohn were both shy of 10.

—Darren Velez

T

Big CityPlayers Score RatingAndrew 68 3Debbie 28 4Chris M. 20 3Anna Maria 19 3Jeremy 40 3


Ra!Players Score RatingAndrew 54 3John 39 5Darren 95 5



Twilight ImperiumTwilight Imperiumost players enjoyed thisgame, although it seemeddifficult to grasp exactly

how to go about forming a strate-gy. It being the first time any of us(we had 6) played the game wedidn’t know what any of theObjective or Action cards did andhad a somewhat firm grasp of whatthe Strategy cards did. To add tothe confusion of this game, theDistant Suns option was also used.Suffice it to say that it seemed likea good idea, at the time, but, afterthe game, most of us felt it wassomething that should be used bymore experienced players of TI3.

Round 1: Brian as the firstspeaker took the ISC, Andrewgoing second took the Initiative.Expansion began and with the

Distant Suns option being played itadded a little bit of excitement.This worked out for everyoneexcept Brian as every player eitherreceived trade goods or free tech-nologies. Chris was the majorbenefactor as he received two freetechnology advances. Some trades

are arrangedbetween all players.Rd 1 Score:Brian: 2Andrew: 0Chris: 0John: 0Michael: 0Bill: 0

Round 2:Andrew takes theISC but Chris doesnot take theInitiative as expect-ed, John takes itinstead. Chris con-tinues to expandwithout any problems from randomtiles and reaches MR. Chris claimstwo Public Objectives and Andrew

claims one.More tradesare arrangedand cashed inon. Brianattempting toexpand con-tinues to havebad luck withthe randomtiles, threeplanets havehostile localsand one ofthose planets

wins the invasion.Rd 2 Score:Brian: 2Andrew: 3Chris: 2John: 0Michael: 0Bill: 0

Round 3: Chris begins to buildup on MR. Almost all players fulfillpublic objectives, John has ISC.Rd 3 Score:Brian: 3Andrew: 3Chris: 3John: 2Michael: 2Bill: 2

Round 4: Michael gets ISC.Chris fulfills his secret objective ofhaving 1 space dock on MR and 2technologies in 3 different colors(those two free technologies in thebeginning certainly were a greathelp in this). Brian finally over-comes the hostile locals with aninvasion force of 6.Rd 4 Scores:Brian: 3Andrew: 3Chris: 5John: 2Michael: 4Bill: 2

M Twilight ImperiumPlayers Score RatingMichael 13 4Andrew 12 3Bill 8 3Chris 15 3John 10 4Brian 11 4

Overall Rating: 3.5Our time: 9hRules explanation time: 1h

Round 5: Andrew builds firstWar Sun. The public objective forcontrolling MR comes up thatround while Chris is still there.Bill gets ISC.Rd 5 Scores:Brian: 3Andrew: 3Chris: 6John: 3Michael: 5Bill: 4

Round 6: Much discussionhappens about how to slow Chrisdown. He has already accumulatedseveral victory points, and is theonly player to have fulfilled hisSecret Objective. Chris promisesto leave MR but none of the play-ers believe him. All of the otherplayers are poised to attack Chrison MR (all players were now look-ing to have control of MR whetherChris was there or not so manyships were ready). Chris realizingwhat was going to happen takesthe Diplomacy strategy card andchooses Brian, who has the largest

fleet and thespecial abilityof a +1 on com-bat rolls. Billattacked first,knowing hewould lose andlands only threehits, all of hisships aredestroyed.Andrewattacked nextwith his WarSun and severalother ships and

eliminates Chris’s entire fleet butloses his own fleet in the process.John movesin but doesnot succeedin an inva-sion sonobody hasMR. Briangets ISC.Rd 6 Score:Brian: 6Andrew: 3Chris: 6John: 3Michael: 6Bill: 4

Round 7: John takes MR.Andrew has ISC when the PoliticalCard “Checks and Balances”comes out. Card is passed becauseChris is the speaker and wouldhave gotten the ISC twice to winthe game. Brian begins to try andcomplete his Secret Objective ofhaving a ship in every area with aWarp Hole. Michael sees this and

attacks Brian but Brian’s fleet winsthe battle.Rd 7 Score:Brian: 7Andrew: 7Chris: 7John: 5Michael: 7Bill: 5

Round 8: Imperium Rex cardcomes up. Scores and ties weredecided based on number of objec-tives fulfilled.

Many opinions about this gamecame up in discussion. Some play-ers believed that attacking was acompletely unnecessary strategy

for the game. Other playersbelieved that it was key.

The overall consensus was thatthis game was trying to take on toomuch. There were too manyoptions between the Action Cards,Political Cards, Technology Cards,Strategy Cards and the limitedactions per turn.—Brian Stone


Twilight ImperiumTwilight Imperium


HannibalHannibaln preparation for the Omenstournament preceding WBC,Michael needed to learn the

rules for Hannibal. He’d onlyplayed once, last year at LIBO’swargame day, during which timeJohn disposed of me quickly, onaccount of Michael’s not under-standing the rules (of course, Johnhadn’t even read the rules and wasoperating on very little sleep, sogo figure.).Anyway, Bill agreed to come byand work through a game withhim. Michael played Carthage,and Bill played Rome. The fullgame is 9 turns, and they complet-ed 7.

On the first turn, Michaelpromptly played a Forced Marchcard and sent Hannibal with his 10combat units (including 2 ele-phants) racing toward the Alps.When he crossed the Alps with thenext card played, Michael rolledwell on the attrition table, andHannibal arrived in northern Italy(Gallia Cisaplinia) having lostonly one combat unit and no ele-phants! You could almost smellthe Romans wetting their pants.

Bill, believing the best defenseto be a good offense, dispatchedone of the Roman generals direct-ly to Carthage to sack it for aneasy victory. Only it turns out thatsieging a city – especially Romeor Carthage – is very difficult andtakes a long time. Bill recognizedthis quickly, and redirected histroops to land in Spain – an equal-ly important power base for theCarthaginians.

He played a good event card

that wiped out a bunch of politicalcontrol (PC) markers in Spain,which gave Michael quite a scare.The two played cards at oneanother, vying for superiority inseveral provinces, until Michaelmanaged to gain the upper hand inthe provinces, although the Romangeneral still had more troops thanHasdrubal (the Carthaginian gen-eral in Spain).

The combat system gaveMichael an edge in battle cards, sohe attacked, and the Romans tookit on the chin. After that, withsuperiority in troops and politicalcontrol of the provinces, Michaelused the Roman army in Spain ashis personal punching bag for afew turns, until they finally hadenough and shipped their sorry-sandaled feet back to the EternalCity.

Meanwhile, things in Italywere not going any better for theRomans. Hannibal is an awesomegeneral, with flexibility, battlestrength, and the ability to movealmost all the time. At fullstrength, and with 2 units of ele-phants, he is nearly unstoppable.Michael didn’t lose a single battle.Over the next few turns, theprovinces in Italy began fallingone by one.

They fell not by conquest butby political control (card play toplace political markers); but thesemarkers can only be placed aftermilitary units have cleared enemyPC markers. So the game playrequires both subtlety and force-fulness. At the end of each gameturn, the players tally the

provinces under their control, andthe losing player removes PCmarkers equal to the differencebetween the tallies. This meantthat Roman influence was slowlybeing eradicated from the board asthe Carthaginians took control ofItalian provinces - aided byMichael’s usual luck in drawingvery good event cards forCarthage.

As the Roman player, Bill hadto cope with an ever-shifting trioof 2 consuls and a proconsul toserve as his generals.Unfortunately, their ability tomove and battle is hamstrung bythe rules, to simulate the wackyRoman system of the Senate put-ting political leaders in charge ofarmies.

Bill, however, knows hisRoman history very well. (Wouldyou expect any less from a Latinteacher?). He was FabiusMaximus incarnate. He knew thathe had to hang on and wearHannibal down with attacks by hisconsular armies, and he succeededin doing so.

He selectively attacked theweaker Carthaginian generals(Mago and Gisgo), and doggedHannibal as Michael marched thelatter around Italy in search ofeasy provinces. Although theRomans took a pounding, theyreanimate like a George Romeromovie.

They can take all 5 of theirreinforcements in Italy, while theCarthaginians get one in Africa,two in Spain, and only one withHannibal. Despite terrible cards

I


HannibalHannibaland a rapidly deteriorating situa-tion, Bill managed to placeenough PC markers and clean upenough of Hannibal’s messes tohang on until...until...

Turn 6. Gulp. That’s whenScipio Africanus shows up, alongwith five Roman reinforcements.He big. He bad. He just as good asHannibal.

Now things turn around,because although Rome is stillreeling from the lost provinces,the PC markers start to flow theother way, and Hannibal’s army istoo weak to put a stop to it. Whatappeared to be a solid victory forMichael – who would win outrightif he controlled all of Italy, evenwithout sacking Rome - began toslip away.

Michael knew he would neverget any stronger in Italy, and thathe would soon be a sittingCarthaginian duck for Scipio.Michael figured the only thing todo is take him out – unlike theother generals in the game, ScipioAfricanus does not return if hisarmy is eliminated in battle. SoHannibal, with 6 combat units,made a beeline for Scipio and his5 fresh Roman recruits. The planwas to put an end to Scipio’s illus-trious career before it got started.

But Bill took a page from theCarthaginian playbook and did oneof those pre-battle interceptionmoves, bringing his armies togeth-er to outnumber Hannibal. And thistime - for the first time - Hannibalfaced an equal general. The resultwas a defeat that left Hannibal with3 combat units, on dangerous

ground, and Michael in a desperatesituation with little chance ofimprovement. As they say, desper-ate times call for desperate meas-ures. Since he wouldn’t be gettingany stronger in Italy through rein-forcements, Michael had to bringin troops from elsewhere.

He sent Mago, who is good atnaval movement, back to Spain topick up 10 combat units and takethem on a perilous voyage back toItaly. This ship had a 2 out of 6chance of being sunk, a 1 out of 6chance of being forced to return,and 3 out of 6 chance of making itto southern Italy - a relatively safevoyage, by Carthaginian navalstandards. He succeeded!

Now Hannibal is stronger thanever in Italy, and the tide hasturned yet again - things lookbleak for Bill. In fact, they look sobleak that Scipio flees to Rome,leaving the other Roman generalsstomping around in southern Italy.It’s actually even worse than Billrealizes, because Michael’s justbeen dealt a hand of killer cam-paign cards.

He considered his options atthat point, and there seemed likeonly one thing to do: spread threecombat units through Lucania andApulia to regain control of thoseprovinces, and march a max-strength Hannibal to sack Romeitself! (Okay, two things.)

Claiming the provinces was aninsurance play. By sieging Rome,Michael could prevent Scipio fromcausing any more mischief, andwin the game if he could get thethree siege points required. It

would be tough, but he had 10combat units and a big old stack ofstrategy cards. How could he miss?

Well, for starters, Bill hadwatched Michael overrun his indi-vidual combat units earlier in thegame, and he hadn’t forgottenabout that tactic – though Michaelhad. Bill wiped out two of thethree units in Lucania and Apulia,and sent Gisgo fleeing toHannibal’s side like a frightenedterrier. Still didn’t bother Michael,though. He made my first siegeroll, taking two casualties, butdoing one siege point of damage.Two more to go.

He missed the next siege roll.And then the next.

Sadly, those two points wouldnever materialize. Bill marchedhis generals up from southern Italyand attacked Michael’s besiegingarmy. Now he had the advantageof the local militia in Latium, andan edge in combat cards. Result:Hannibal flees to Capua withSPQR tattooed on his ass. Bill andMichael were just about tied inpolitical points at the end of theturn, but the writing was on thewall: Carthage would be forced tosue for peace in two turns.

This was a great game, anddespite the usual cognitive break-down at the 2/3 mark (not coinci-dentally around 2am), the lengthof the game was primarily due toexploring the rules and theoptions. One missed rule losses inbattle cause the loser to lose PCmarkers – that might have made adifference, but it’s hard to say forsure.—Michael Albergo


San JuanSan Juanill built a Prefecture whichallowed him to hold onto anadditional card. Joe was

smart and built a Tobacco Storagequickly, this way when the groupproduced and traded, he had a prod-uct that was worth more to trade.

Bill also built aCity Hall and GuildHall. Chris M built aCity Hall and Joehad a Guild Hall,while Debbie hadnone.

These cardsgave Bill anextra 14 pointsin the endwhich gavehim the game.

AlthoughChris M, Joe

and Debbie all had a Chapel, whichallows the player to put cards underit to count as victory points, Debbiewas the only one who took advan-tage of this by putting a total of 10cards under it. Chris M had 3 andJoe only had 5 cards.

—Debbie Dozier

B

Puerto RicoPuerto Ricohe game started out quitetypically. Brian and Chriswere producing quite a bit of

goods and got the Wharf andMarkets early in the game and start-ed collecting victory points rightaway. Michael was also producing,but did not have a warehouse tostore goods and ended up losingmany during the Captain phase.

Unfortuantely, AM made twocrucial errors, which – it seemed atthe time – ensured Brian a win.While Chris was Governor, shedecided to craft on her turn (whichended the round). This allowedBrian to Captain during his turn andcollect victory points. After the sec-ond time she was scolded, shedecided to pay more attention.

About 3 or 4 rounds before the

actual end of thegame, Michael wasgoing to Mayor,depleting thecolonists and endingthe game, since hefelt he could notachieve any morepoints, and thoughthe had second placelocked up, behindBrian. He was talkedout of it by the others. At that point,AM was in last place with 19 victo-ry points and Michael was in sec-ond place (the players secretly kepttrack of their victory points forcomparison purposes later).Ironically, Chris – who talkedMichael out of Mayoring, wouldhave won. After that, AM managed

to make enough money to buy twolarge buildings. Those two build-ings sealed up the win for her.

Moral of the story: When Chrisand Brian encourage you not to endthe game, they have something uptheir sleeves...but never underesti-mate the silent wife :)

—Anna Maria Palermo

TPuerto Rico

Players Score RatingMichael 27 5Anna Maria 52 5Chris 42 5Brian 39 5


San JuanPlayers Score RatingDebbie 30 5Joe 34 5Bill 33 4Chris M. 29 4



LIBO RatingsLIBO RatingsGAME NAME AVERAGE PUBLISHER # OF PLAYS

Babel 5.0 Rio Grande Games 2

Battle Line 5.0 GMT Games 1

Iliad 5.0 GDW (Game Designers Workshop) 1

Memoir '44 5.0 Days of Wonder 1

Puerto Rico 5.0 Rio Grande Games 3

Settlers of Catan 5.0 Mayfair Games 1

Tigris & Euphrates 5.0 Mayfair Games 2

Advanced Civilization 4.8 Avalon Hill 1

Age of Steam 4.8 Warfrog 1

El Grande 4.8 Rio Grande Games 1

Hammer of the Scots 4.8 Columbia Games 2

War of the Ring 4.8 Fantasy Flight Games 1

St. Petersburg 4.7 Rio Grande Games 2

Medici 4.7 Rio Grande Games 2

Silverton 4.7 Mayfair Games 1

Atlantic Storm 4.5 Avalon Hill 2

Carcassonne: The Castle 4.5 Rio Grande Games 3

Goa 4.5 Rio Grande Games 2

Heroscape 4.5 Hasbro 1

Lost Cities 4.5 Rio Grande Games 5

San Juan 4.5 Rio Grande Games 1

The Year’s Top Rated Games

Top Rated Games Top Rated Games (2+ Plays)

Worst Rated Games

Games Michael Plays Best(2+ Plays)

Games Michael Plays Worst

The Year’s Worst Rated Games

GAME NAME AVERAGE PUBLISHER # OF PLAYS

Inkognito: The card game 1.4 Fantasy Flight Games 1

Burn in Hell 2.4 Steve Jackson Games 1

Halunken & Spelunken 2.5 Mayfair Games 1

High Society 2.5 Uberplay 1

Trias 2.5 Rio Grande Games 1

Deadwood 2.7 Cheapass Games 1

Lord of the Rings 2.7 Decipher 1

Hoity Toity 2.8 Uberplay 1

Munchkin 2.8 Steve Jackson Games 1

Family Business 2.8 Mayfair Games 1

GAME NAME PUBLISHER RATING # PLAYS

Advanced Civilization Avalon Hill 5.0 2

Age of Steam Warfrog 5.0 2

Air Baron Avalon Hill 5.0 1

Attila Rio Grande Games 5.0 1

Battle Cry Avalon Hill / Hasbro 5.0 1

Battle Line GMT Games 5.0 3

Cosmic Encounter Mayfair Games 5.0 1

El Grande Rio Grande Games 5.0 1

Hammer of the Scots Columbia Games 5.0 1

Hannibal Avalon Hill 5.0 1

Heroscape Hasbro 5.0 1

Lord of the Rings Decipher 5.0 1

Medici Rio Grande Games 5.0 4

Memoir '44 Days of Wonder 5.0 1

Modern Art Mayfair Games 5.0 1

Power Grid Rio Grande Games 5.0 1

San Juan Rio Grande Games 5.0 1

Settlers of Catan Mayfair Games 5.0 2

Settlers of the Stone Age Mayfair Games 5.0 1

St. Petersburg Rio Grande Games 5.0 1

Taj Mahal Rio Grande Games 5.0 1



Age of Steam Warfrog 5.0 2


Medici Rio Grande Games 5.0 4



Citadels Fantasy Flight Games 1.0 1

Mutual Mania #N/A 1.0 1

Babel Rio Grande Games 2.0 1

Burn in Hell Steve Jackson Games 2.0 1

Dragon Master E.S. Lowe 2.0 1

Junta West End Games 2.0 1

Monsters Ravage America Avalon Hill 2.0 1

Sleuth Face 2 Face Games 2.0 1

GAME NAME PUBLISHER SCORE # PLAYS


Atlantic Storm Avalon Hill 0.23 2


Tony & Tino EuroGames / Descartes 0.15 2

Shark Flying Turtle Games 0.14 2

Lost Cities Rio Grande Games 0.06 2


Guillotine Wizards of the Coast 0.01 2

GAME NAME PUBLISHER SCORE # PLAYS

Sleuth Face 2 Face Games -0.86 1

War of the Ring Fantasy Flight Games -0.56 1

Heroscape Hasbro -0.54 1

Doom: The Boardgame Fantasy Flight Games -0.50 1

Mare Nostrum EuroGames / Descartes -0.50 1

Carcassonne Rio Grande Games -0.48 1

San Marco Rio Grande Games -0.43 1

Bazaar 3M -0.41 2

Dragon Master E.S. Lowe -0.37 1

Junta West End Games -0.32 1

Member of the Month’s Ratings and Stats

LIBOLIBO StatisticsStatistics


Ran

k

Ran

k

Ran

k

Ran

k

Ran

k

Ho

urs

Ran

k

Ho

urs

Ran

k

Ran

k

Ran

k

Ran

k

Ran

k

Ran

k

Ran

k

Mike Albergo 84% 7 84% 6 80% 4 175 2 198 2 75h-56m 2 85h-53m 3 4.04 10 8 6 26 6 30.8% 8 4.19 3 100.0% 1

Andrew DiGregorio 94% 5 94% 4 85% 2 107 6 124 6 71h-0m 4 82h-21m 5 4.10 7 12 3 40 4 30.0% 9 3.43 13 95.0% 9

Deb Dozier 53% 11 53% 9 40% 9 51 13 66 12 19h-35m 11 25h-9m 11 4.30 2 8 6 23 7 34.8% 3 4.05 6 95.5% 6

Joe Dozier 73% 8 73% 7 55% 8 109 5 125 5 38h-16m 8 43h-35m 8 4.10 8 8 6 21 9 38.1% 2 3.70 11 85.0% 12

Bill Herbst 95% 4 95% 3 90% 1 114 4 130 4 77h-44m 1 89h-10m 1 4.17 4 14 2 41 3 34.1% 5 3.76 10 95.1% 8

CK 40% 12 40% 11 30% 11 90 9 116 7 22h-30m 10 28h-58m 10 4.40 1 5 10 15 11 33.3% 6 4.14 4 78.6% 13

Chris Matusiak 100% 1 13% 13 10% 13 53 12 66 13 5h-19m 14 6h-33m 14 4.17 5 1 13 6 13 16.7% 12 3.50 12 100.0% 1

A.M. Palermo 88% 6 88% 5 70% 6 71 10 86 10 43h-47m 7 53h-3m 7 4.08 9 12 3 37 5 32.4% 7 4.03 7 87.9% 11

Chris Palermo 100% 1 100% 1 85% 2 98 7 115 8 75h-18m 3 88h-15m 2 3.91 11 16 1 46 1 34.8% 3 3.81 9 89.4% 10

John Reiners 100% 1 100% 1 80% 4 97 8 115 9 70h-53m 5 84h-3m 4 4.14 6 8 6 44 2 18.2% 11 4.07 5 100.0% 1

Brian Stone 72% 10 72% 8 65% 7 181 1 212 1 66h-22m 6 77h-41m 6 4.23 3 9 5 22 8 40.9% 1 4.48 1 95.2% 7

Darren Velez 73% 9 53% 9 40% 9 129 3 162 3 34h-29m 9 43h-19m 9 3.81 12 2 12 16 10 12.5% 13 4.00 8 100.0% 1

Jeremy Waite 31% 13 31% 12 25% 12 71 11 82 11 16h-33m 12 19h-10m 12 3.36 13 4 11 14 12 28.6% 10 4.38 2 100.0% 1

Total

Atten.

(All events)

Total Game

Time

With Rules

Total Game

Time "Yes" Pct

Players Total Total Game

Per Game Wins Games Rating

Winning

Percentage

Total Avg. Avg

GameDays Plaque (Game) (Rules)

PlayAtten.

Atten.

Mins Minsfor

Average RepeatAvg

Ran

k

Ran

k

Ran

k

Ran

k

Ran

k

Ran

k

Ran

k

Ran

k

Ran

k

Ran

k

Ran

k

Ran

k

Mike Albergo 28.5% 3 0.60 9 2.3% 8 ### 4.7 6 #### -0.07 8 #### 0.22 9 #### 0.97 9 ####

Andrew DiGregorio 27.3% 7 1.08 8 2.7% 7 ### 4.4 8 #### 0.01 5 #### 0.36 2 #### 1.76 3 ####

Deb Dozier 24.4% 12 2.39 3 10.4% 2 ### 4.8 4 #### 0.05 3 #### 0.36 1 #### 1.86 2 ####

Joe Dozier 27.7% 5 2.18 5 10.4% 3 ### 5.2 3 #### -0.01 6 #### 0.23 8 #### 1.00 8 ####

Bill Herbst 26.1% 9 3.29 1 8.0% 4 ### 5.4 2 #### 0.06 2 #### 0.32 5 #### 1.38 5 ####

CK 24.0% 13 1.41 7 ### 9.4% 1 ### 5.2 1 ### 0.04 1 #### 0.43 1 ### 2.03 1

Chris Matusiak 24.7% 11 -0.48 10 ### -8.1% 3 ### 0.7 3 ### -0.03 2 #### 0.33 4 ### 1.49 2

A.M. Palermo 27.4% 6 1.86 6 5.0% 5 ### 4.4 7 #### -0.05 7 #### 0.28 6 #### 1.22 7 ####

Chris Palermo 29.8% 2 2.30 4 5.0% 6 ### 4.8 5 #### 0.04 4 #### 0.24 7 #### 1.25 6 ####

John Reiners 26.6% 8 -3.69 13 -8.4% 9 ### 4.0 9 #### -0.08 9 #### 0.33 4 #### 1.44 4 ####

Brian Stone 26.1% 10 3.26 2 14.8% 1 ### 5.7 1 #### 0.19 1 #### 0.36 3 #### 2.21 1 ####

Darren Velez 28.1% 4 -2.50 12 -15.6% 10 ### 3.8 10 #### -0.13 10 #### #### 0.37 2 ### 1.49 3

Jeremy Waite 32.6% 1 -0.57 11 ### -4.0% 2 ### 4.2 2 ### -0.04 3 #### 0.33 3 ### 1.26 4

Win %

Above Exp.

(ineligible)

Expected Wins Win %

Win Above Above

Percentage

Gamer Total Gamer Dominance

Gamer Points Gamer Ranking Percentage % Dom. Dominance Over Avg.

Expected Expected Points (ineligible) Over Avg. (ineligible)Ranking (ineligible) Domination (ineligible)

Rank

Rank

Rank

Rank

Rank

Rank

Rank

Rank

Rank

Rank

Rank

Rank

Mike Albergo 6 5 56.9% 3 53.8% 5 -3.1% 7 8 7 28.5% 3 30.8% 9 -2.3% 9 2.38 6 54.4% 5 ### 8-10-8 40.2% 8

Andrew DiGregorio 8 4 54.6% 8 50.0% 7 -4.6% 8 10 10 27.3% 7 25.0% 7 2.3% 8 2.45 8 53.2% 6 ### 12-18-10 40.7% 7

Deb Dozier 3 10 48.8% 12 47.8% 10 -1.0% 6 8 7 24.4% 12 34.8% 11 -10.4% 12 2.65 10 50.0% 8 ### 8-7-8 41.4% 6

Joe Dozier 6 5 55.4% 5 66.7% 1 11.2% 1 3 2 27.7% 5 14.3% 1 13.4% 1 2.24 4 60.0% 3 ### 8-10-3 49.5% 2

Bill Herbst 12 2 52.3% 10 63.4% 2 11.2% 2 9 9 26.1% 9 22.0% 5 4.2% 5 2.34 5 57.7% 4 ### 14-18-9 44.3% 4

CK 3 10 47.9% 13 53.3% 6 5.4% 4 3 2 24.0% 13 20.0% 4 4.0% 6 2.40 7 ### 58.8% 1 5-7-3 43.1% 5

Chris Matusiak 2 13 54.8% 6 50.0% 7 -4.8% 9 1 1 24.7% 11 16.7% 2 8.1% 2 2.67 11 ### 47.4% 3 1-4-1 32.1% 11

A.M. Palermo 5 7 54.8% 6 45.9% 12 -8.8% 11 14 12 27.4% 6 37.8% 12 -10.4% 13 2.49 9 51.8% 7 ### 12-11-14 39.6% 9

Chris Palermo 11 3 59.5% 2 58.7% 4 -0.8% 5 11 11 29.8% 2 23.9% 6 5.9% 4 2.15 2 60.4% 2 ### 16-19-11 45.6% 3

John Reiners 13 1 53.1% 9 47.7% 11 -5.4% 10 15 13 26.6% 8 34.1% 10 -7.5% 10 2.73 12 44.9% 9 ### 8-21-15 29.4% 13

Brian Stone 4 9 52.1% 11 59.1% 3 6.9% 3 4 4 26.1% 10 18.2% 3 7.9% 3 2.14 1 64.8% 1 ### 9-9-4 50.1% 1

Darren Velez 5 7 56.3% 4 43.8% 13 -12.5% 12 4 4 28.1% 4 25.0% 7 3.1% 7 2.75 13 37.8% 10 ### 2-10-4 29.7% 12

Jeremy Waite 3 10 65.2% 1 50.0% 7 -15.2% 13 6 6 32.6% 1 42.9% 13 -10.2% 11 2.21 3 ### 48.5% 2 4-4-6 39.1% 10

Players Def.

(ineligible)

Expected Actual 1st & 2nd % Better % of W-M-L% of

Total 1st & 2nd 1st & 2nd % Above Total Expected Actual Than Average Players Record &

2nds % % Expected Place Defeated PercentageLasts Last % Last % Last

indepth - libo · 2013. 6. 27. · f carcassonne players score rating andrew 62 3 debbie 60 5 chris...

Documents