This is exactly what I was going to write. Luke covers a lot more aspects of the games he reviews. The player scaling is something I really appreciate.
I’m actually back watching this review AGAIN! Who does that? Lol. It’s just great to see some sanity in the world. Also my opinion of all those other reviewers has gone way down. Dice tower just feels like they’re a money making scheme now rushing through as many reviews as possible “for the algorithm” I guess… and Tom just looks jaded. At least he didn’t give it a 10, but still he scored it way too high.
That’s the great thing about boardgames. We all have different tastes. I have really enjoyed this so far. It is an efficiency puzzle, like Scythe, the thing I like about this game though is that you can’t math out a victory with optimum turns from round one. The game grows gives you a nudge with your mech or your starting cards and then it’s all about what you can find and how you link them together. There is a sense that it is a race, which is the idea I guess. I like it, but I wasn’t a big fan of Scythe. I really enjoyed your break down of the game though Luke, your reviews whether I agree or not are always well thought out and detailed. Many thanks.
@@TheBrokenMeeple I played again yesterday and just because of some of your comments decided to play differently and didn’t go for Meeples. Instead I explored and gained cards. Two stars down I gained a couple of Meeples started vanquishing and solved four quests for a quick end to the game. We finished a four player game in about 75 minutes. I’m convinced getting four quests is the “end the game quick” strat when some one else is building an engine looking to Meld etc. the more I play this game the more I realise there is more to it.
I really love Tapestry solo with the expansions. Aside from that, thanks for an honest review, and I hope Jamey Stegmaier from Stonemaier Games saw this (I'm 99.9 percent sure he did). Oh, and that's great how you showed short clips of some well-known reviewers in the beginning. I'd love to see more footage like that in future reviews to show stark contrasts.
@@realdealastrology9 There's a point in the video where he eludes to the fact that he used to get review copies from Stonemaier but they stopped. I'll try to find it.
A house rule I am considering is to just give every player the two workers that are on their starting cards. I have only played this solo and enjoyed it so far but I think you make some good points here about the scaling. Also definitely agree about never doing more than 3 quests. The rewards for quests themselves probably needed to be better so they were worth it on their own, or the bonus points should have increased with a 4th quest instead of maxing out at 3.
That would at least mean that players don't get totally screwed over for sure. Might even speed the game up as you can get started on your cards better. I think thats worth a punt.
In Scythe you start with two workers a character an animap companion, but no mech. Since this is a sequal to scythe it would make more thematic sense to start that way 🤔. Maybe a fan made expansion would be like tuscany or euphoria where you get recruits, and the recruits do different thematic things like fix all the issues we have with the game 😂
I appreciate that thanks! This is a game where Critic scores will far exceed Audience scores I bet. No-one wants to bad mouth a Stonemaier game. Just wait for the other friends to show up, TT for example and all that gang who never have a bad word to say for SM games. I'm betting 9's and 10's across the board.
Always! Pretty sure there was never a bridge to begin with! Besides he's always said and quoted that he doesn't watch reviews and doesn't mind criticism for his games. So if that's true that means all is well! :D
Love the review! I had even commented on one of the Facebook posts by Jamie for this game that I thought the mechs were unbalanced, and slightly so on the character and pet cards as well. His comment back was something along the lines, “that’s not shown in our research data.” Well only four games played myself and I know which mech I want and which will surely cost me the game. My fiancée and I mostly play by ourselves, we’ve played it once at three player, but will never play a higher player count. And she and I have tried to come up with some house rules for the weaker mechs, like starting with a few extra cards or being able to move onto a space already occupied. But after your review, I think we will also consider adding some kind of initial bonus to players that go after the first player. Really have enjoyed your reviews so far, thank you for your honesty!
He always claims research data - but given how unbalanced this game is and how broken Tapestry is, I think the researching process needs a bit of tweaking. Even Apiary has balance issues with the paths to victory.
Love this take! Finally someone speaks out what I thought when I read the rulebook. Small and Insanely repetitive gameplay loop. No breakout moments, no excitement. It’s a efficiency puzzle where you are moving up and down two resources a million times. Nothing feels distinct here, no memorable moments. I doubt anyone will be able to distinguish session 5 from session 8. And those map tokens? Looks like they ran out of ideas after they established the very core. And you can tell. It’s not streamlined. It’s barren.
This review is spot on, just played my first 3 player game, it played like 3 people playing their own solo engine builder game with no interaction, and anyone who gets their engine up before the other two will win. Won’t be playing it again.
Played this at a convention, was looking forward to it as it sounded interesting. Five player game. After an hour I was wishing someone would pull the fire alarm or something. If it wasn't for the wonderful gentleman sitting next to me giving me a great conversation I may have just left. I've never tried it at a lower player count but my experience (and the price on the game) have convinced me to never touch it again. Spot on review!
To stay consistent, let me first say I always appreciate that you will tell it like it is, regardless of what others think. You provide examples for why you feel the way you feel, which adds strength to your arguments. Having said that, starting this review by showing the Dice Tower, Boardgameco, and others sends the wrong message. Your review stands as it is and speaks for itself, starting it by pointing out that others loved the game doesn't mean the game is bad and you are wrong, or that they are wrong and you are right. It feels a bit cheap to start in this manner. The same with always mentioning that Stonemaier didn't give you a copy. In reality, we know this by virtue of the fact that you didn't disclosed that you received a review copy. I will always support your reviews and opinions, even if I disagree with them. I just don't think you elevate yourself by pointing out that others really liked the game. Almost back door suggesting that their love of the game is somehow not genuine or hides ulterior motives. You have such great views and opinions and I would simply ignore the others and continue to stand apart for what you do with your brand.
If the FTC rulings are to be believed, we have to make it pain stakingly obvious whether or not we've received review copies. The starting gag is to show I don't get where the high scores are coming from ,hence the phrase "did I miss something?" straight after. It's not suggesting anyone is wrong or the game is bad solely by that part.
@@TheBrokenMeeple I assumed that is what you meant, but it may not be 100% obvious that is what you meant. I often feel this way about stuff like gloomhaven, that everyone likes and I really dislike. Were I to review it I would simply stick to my thoughts and feelings and let them stand. Like I said, just trying to stay consistent. I will always say that mentioning other content creators in your content is simply not necessary.
@@npckse8508 I've said the same thing on this channel several times. The content is great so I keep coming back, but I've dropped other channels for having a similar vibe.
@@npckse8508 I think it's ok. He's calling out early in the video that his opinion goes against the grain of the rest of the community. This way, the viewer can decide early on if they're interested in a completely different take, or if they're going to disagree so hard with the rest of the video that they'd rather move on. When brutal honesty (from his perspective) is supposed to be a natural draw of his channel, putting that front and center isn't a problem for me. But maybe that's just me!
I think you are missing that this is a race game. There is no way it should take 3 hours to play a 5 player game. Experienced players can easily play a 4 player game in 90 minutes. As far as balance goes, how many times have you played? The ability to trash map tokens for money (points) or the power/guile you need is incredibly powerful. Also, if you haven't melded 5 meteorites that you've maximized yet, then you haven't seen the power of that mech.
I know that 5 meteors is good BUT that's ALL the board lets you do. 5 quests is pointless. 5 upgrades is rubbish. You HAVE to do 5 melds - the board literally pigeon holes you and even then it's no guarantee you'll even win if someone gets a good quest-rush strategy going. The map token mech is OK but SITUATIONAL. In a mass player game it's shockingly bad as you have to gain your map tokens from a location tile just for the occasional 1 boost which if you're playing efficiently, you shouldn't need to rely on a map token for. Remember that other abilities get to trigger far more often like being able to move 4 every turn! Also I've NEVER seen a 4 player end in 90 minutes - exceptions to the rule may apply, but the general norm is 30 minutes per player. And yes, plenty of 5 player games taking 3 hours - doesn't matter if it's a race game, the race only plods along at the speed of 5 players doing actions non-simultaneously.
Glad to hear your thoughts. Just received mine but haven't unboxed it yet. I was bummed to hear other reviewers say they prefer it at higher player counts and I will mostly be playing at 2 and sometimes 1 and I think I'll align with your opinions here.
If other people are claiming it's better at higher player counts, I'm sorry but that's just (edited) "impossible to believe outside of a jumbled up multiverse where all possibilities can exist, but the likelihood of this one occuring is just too much for the human mind to comprehend".............. No player scaling and 30 minutes per player for a solitaire engine builder - in what universe is that better at high player counts? You'll be perfectly fine at 2 my friend I can assure you!
@@TheBrokenMeeple It feels really weird to accuse people of outright lying because you disagree with their opinion that the game is better with more players. I understand having a difference of opinion but accusing folks of outright lying is strange behavior.
@@samwise222 It's hyperbole! But I'll amend it for those taking it too literally! Though still I do question what universe 5 player Expeditions is better than 1-2 Player..
What is your take on the theme ? I thought this is an exploratory theme but then there seem to be elements like workers and fighting corruption (?? In the Tundra/Taiga ? Amongst the artic foxes?). That seems to be completely out of theme ?
Fun, honest review. I traded for the Ironclad edition recently -- not regretting what I traded away -- and many of your comments stood out for me playing solo. I knew the metal mechs would be overkill to own with the game. They are cool to look at, but they are such little paperweights that knock the tiles around unless you perfectly place them straight down on the hex tile or have a textured game mat. The solo game grew on me slightly after a few plays, but thematically there is not much going on other than pleasant artwork to look at. If I end up keeping the game, it will be because of the card play. Not because it stands above other games I own, but just enough to make it a little interesting. However, if melding meteorites is the only way to win consistently, then it will have a short lifespan for me. I really don't get the lack of riser in the mech mats for locating cards underneath per the rules. This is a big production miss to me. They almost feel like an afterthought when considering the rest of the components. My copy had a small sheet of adhesive "riser" stickers that you couldn't fit a gnat's fart underneath.
The comment about the bear on the cover 😹🐻 Very informative video, thank you! I haven’t played this game. Have played a few significant Stonemaier games, and the only one I really love is Libertalia. Viticulture is still on my Shelf of Shame though 🙈
We played a five player game last week. I did feel a little long but overall was still enjoyable. I had the mech with the 5 ability which I’m glad I got because I was the only one who had played before . It wasn’t as bad as I thought it would be it just pigeonholed me in to melding five meteorites. I finished third but all the scores were close. I think a easy fix to the length would have been a double side to the final scoring making each boasting easier to get. Like having five workers or three map tokens etc.. I’m surprised they didn’t do that especially considering it is double sided but the same on both sides.
That would involve them attempting to balance their games! :P 3+ hours is pretty "big" long with the rinse/repeat gameplay. I think one thing that really hurts the game is the silly boast rule which honestly I wish I'd mentioned in the review. Why do you need to boast to get a star? You didn't have to in Scythe. All it does is elongate the game as you spend time doing other things rather than getting your stars.
People can have various opinions on Expeditions, but my experience with it was: I played it the first time and after that I only want to play this game! It’s just crazy. There’s something about it. Totally loved it. Yes I would like the game to be shorter. And I hope they release a sort of “Prelude expansion” as TM did, to quick-start the game. Very glad to hear that the solo mode is great! C’mon you now! Cheers
Update on this. I played the solo Automa mode and I became a solo play lover! Wow I didn’t know you can enjoy a game solo this much! I’m happy 😃. Expeditions made its way to my top ten now!
I got copy of the Iron Clad edition (second printing). It was $5 more than the regular edition. Also the tiles come to the very top of the insert; there isn't anymore room for tiles.
I think this game is excellent at 2 players… the design flaws at the higher player counts don’t really apply. Agree completely that the game is not designed well for 4 or 5 players. I think it would play well at 3 (since there’s the starting tile adjacent to one of the worker tiles), but would need to try it first. For someone who mostly wants games that play great at 2, this is a great game for me! If someone wants a game that plays great in larger groups, I’d stay away.
What do you mean by "there's the starting tile adjacent to one of the worker tiles." Setup is random for each respective region. I just realized there's a chance the tile that allows you to gain 1 benefit from an adjacent location may not be adjacent to any of the worker tiles which would compound the issue of getting your engine started with workers, especially at higher player counts where there is more blocking.
Thank you Luke for the review that is why i sub to your channel. Cuz your not afraid to say if the game is bad. Unlike other paid BG ytuber out there. Anyway thsi game is on my buylist but im gona sa pass after watching your review thanks Luke save me time n money. More power to your channel
The player mat unbalance is a great call out. My first game I got the "you can have 5 cards of stuff" and a few minutes into the game I felt I will finish last. I did.
Yeah that board is so bad - it's basically MELD x 5 and nothing else. I mean 10 seconds of playtesting would have shown the imbalances and yet somehow a famous publisher didn't know or didn't care.
@@TheBrokenMeeplet would be so nice if the 5th quest increased glory scaling, especially since doing 5 of a thing most likely means you'll be getting less stars for that multiplier. Items are a tough call, so variable whether they're worthwhile, but I can imagine games where it's useful - Maybe doubled VP for the 5th item could be a fair tweak. Melded meteorites are truly insane in comparison though, potentially 15vp for that last meld is wildly strong (Hell, with the stupid '1VP/player' meteorite you could go even more absurd).
100% correct! You notice the clip at the start where despite all the negatives, still wanted to own the game? Even those who weren't great fans of it still gave essentially 8s. There's still more "Friends of SM" to review this though, can't wait for those 10s
I held onto this in case the expansion fixed some issues. Loved the card play but the moving around and map tokens was lacklustre (would agricola/caverna style worker placement be better and more honest?). Will be interesting to see if the tweaks with extra worker etc. help enough. I mostly play at 2 so that's perfect for us.
The expansion has been announced and honestly it sounds like the game won't get any better - hell they want to add a 6th player as if anybody asked for that.
First playthrough with group was with 4. I played with Tanaka at 4th position. We all had fun, but aren't the types that can't handle or get bored with a measly 2hr long first playthrough. I did win even with a slow start not getting access to workers on the first turn. I decided to take a powerful meteorite from the grab a card tile, and just got a worker the follow up turn. It's really not as big a deal as it was made out to be here. Same with the maps, which share the bonus star location with workers so you can only do one. Workers are demonstrably more useful to pick up and you'll definitely have 7 by the end. Maps are only good for specific cards that let you trash or build points from them, but you're not really losing much by not collecting 4 maps fast just for a bonus star. If anything everyone else focused on collecting maps as a priority early opened up the game for me to strategize better than them, and build power more effectively to vanquish one they were forced to move off the tile the following turn. Its definitely by no means well balanced (especially the move an extra space guy is so weak lol), but it's still a good time had by our group.
Some will enjoy it for sure - but but 2 hours for a first play is actually pretty short compared to most people's 1st playthroughs. And even then, this game does not warrant 2 hours - it's rinse repeat the entire game with no real sense of "game arc" developing.
Just played this for the first time with 5 players and it took us from 7pm - midnight, five hours. That’s including me learning the game ahead of time and teaching everyone
@@TheBrokenMeeple after playing the game and watching your critiques, it totally resonates with me the player count, scaling and imbalance issues. I still enjoyed the game but it rates at a 7.2 / 10 for me due to these issues
I am confuse how a game can be criticised as multilayer solitaire then criticised that different player's counts break the game and turn order matters. To me that is a contradiction?
Not really though I can see your confusion. The puzzle you are doing is basically a solo puzzle. But because the game is a race, anything that stops the race being fair has a massive impact. Also the added players don't just affect balancing, they affect the game length too. 3 hours compared to 60 minutes.
I've played some solo and enjoyed it so far. But I have to admit I'm really a sucker for Rozalski's art style, which imo is the only justification for the large tiles. However, despite the phenomenal artwork the game itself feels a bit mechanical unfortunately. I'm going to test this with 4 players next week and I'm curious. I can see your point/s - especially the ones related to balancing. Maybe one way to mitigate the issue with the workers on the first turn (I can see this being particulary frustrating since you can block the worker recruitment tiles for turn two as well by simply skipping the move action) would be to draft the mechs starting with the last player. Or houserule in some compensation - maybe in the form of workers from the start for players 3, 4 (and 5?). However, this should be the designers' job, not the players'.
His art is fantastic, no doubt. But you can only rate a game so high from looking good. Someone had a house rule to have players start with their respective colour workers for their cards - which isn't a bad idea at all, though you still have the turn order issue. I think starting with some workers is a basic essential for every player and then compensation in the form of workers/cards/money should fall in - but again, you'd think that designers and publishers would think of this stuff themselves you know?
I only have one question. A very important one for me. If you were to play at 2 players, which would you choose: A. Scythe B. Expeditions C. Neither, I would always choose this euro over A and B at the 2p count Thank you :)
@@TheBrokenMeeple Thank you! My wife loves Viticulture and Wingspan. We have been avoiding Scythe because when comes to euros or anything more complex than Ticket to Ride, we only play at 2p. Was hoping Expeditions would give us a taste of Scythe, but oh well. We have plenty of euros we love anyway. Ark Nova, Lost Ruins, etc.
This is no more “real” review than any other. Hyperbolic click bait trashing of popular games for views is a real turn off. It’s one thing to not like a game, but to bash and berate (in my opinion unjustifiably) is not a good look.
You use the word "click bait" - i do not think it means what you think it means........... Also it's not bad mouthing for views, it's called critcism of a product. Every other reviewer who can't bare to say anything negative about games most of the time, especially SM games. If a game is truly great, it gets the praise, but try to justify where balance issues, a lack of player scaling, a pasted on theme, a lack of excitement in the gameplay and zero need to play with more than 2 players is worthy of a 10/10.
@@Stormzbowler if you find my comment youll see i like the game. that said, the critiques he made are pretty much on point. when you see a reviewer say what you are thinking on almost every point, there has to be some truth to it. i play it solo mostly, so the imbalance in the mechs just gives my games variability but it still exists. meteorites and quests are pretty much a must from a scoring standpoint and item upgrades are only really useful if you can get them very early on. as far as player scaling, i cant fault him for his opinion. seems pretty logical just from a basic design standpoint. so imo, and im just attempting to be fair, calling this clickbait is unnecessary and not at all accurate.
I played as 5th player in a 5 player game and even a score of 1 would be too high. The game design and balance can easily leave the 4th and 5th player out of a game with zero chance of posting a score close to those that play early. I think with three players you have the tile placement fix as you put forward and in addition I would add, draft the mechs in reverse player order and then draft the leaders/pets in player order. That way the third player can take a worker of a colour that he can get in the early game. As for the game itself MELDING is the big component of a players score almost to the point where your turns are scripted in to gathering meteors. Which is to say if you don't gather meteors you don't have a chance, not too sure why there are other scoring mechanisms though, as they just don't have the same impact. Collecting Missions, Upgrading Items are mostly not worth the same points as 4 (or 5) meteors. I tend to collect games and this one will probably be shipped off to a new home.
I totally agree with your analysis. I have just played a 5 players game and I am absolutely not convinced by Expeditions. Turns were too slow, there was very minimal interactions and the balance problems were staggering. At one point I asked myself "Am I having fun?" And the answer was a vibrant "NO!" Now, I am questionning the other RUclips reviewers (yes, even those from Dice Tower!). Do they really test fully the games they review? Are they paid by the publishers? Anyway, thank you for your honnest work.
Good review. The only thing I would disagree with is the play time. We did a teaching game for 5 players and it came in just shy of 2 hours. If anything it sped up in the last half once everyone had a better idea on which stars to focus on themselves.
A big exception to the rule though - most others do not get 5 in 2 hours - and if people were knew, they likely weren't taking time to consider the implications of their actions.
Let's be fair, there isnt a vast decision space in the game and the players (an 18xxer, a eurogamer, 2 40k players and someone who just likes to play with his mates) never felt the decisions were too difficult. Outside of having a space blocked.
The last Stonemeier game I bought was Tapestry and that had so many of the same issues. It does suggest they either need some fresh playtesters or to start listening to the playtesters.
It's imbalanced as can be for a board game! Errata pack!! Errata!! I'm pretty sure SM at this point doesn't have a play testing team or if they do, it just feels like they have to stick to a deadline to get a game out and can't afford to spend time .........well............play testing.
Thanks for the coverage. This is a game I've been disinterested in from the start, and the more I see/read the more I'm glad I didn't order it. You actually have increased my desire to try it, as I do enjoy a good solo experience. This is something I'd be happy to try at some point, but I'm not gonna look to purchase.
An exception to the rule in sorry to say. New players will either drag the game like crazy through indecision or go at lightning speed because they don't know what they are doing.
We all love other reviewers and we all know that sometimes hype is so big that can impact their grade (not marketing alone). All we need to do is decide for ourselves and have many points of view. Golden rule is - do not buy games in first year after their release and wait till hype vanish to see what that game really is (ever reviewers should back to each game after a year or so... some channels do this) Still, most of us wants to have games asap so...
Any thoughts on theme / lack thereof? I played a friends copy once last week and despite the art and ties to Scythe I felt ZERO theme coming through, just chasing symbols to take the actions that get the most $ until game end. Names of locations and cards meant virtually nothing, which I've seen nearly no one comment on in any reviews. Maybe I'm on an island on that one. There wasn't much of an Exploration feel as all the same tiles will be revealed by the end of the game and there's no surprises to pivot around just, "oh here's #20", and despite the thought of corruption and meteorites it's still just "most money wins" which doesn't really fit. It fit in Scythe as it was a measurement of your country's rebuilding post war, taking into account military strength, popularity with the people, etc as one country eventually reaches the point of the new superpower. In Expeditions, I just felt it was symbols for money because reasons. I'll play it again, but I don't see buying this one.
Yeah there's no sense of exploration here - you take a token and flip a tile to see an ability - that's literally it. Even Scythe at least had those cards which is better than nothing. Here there is no theme. If this game didn't have the Scythe IP painted on it, this game would have bombed hard and had no buzz about it at all. I guarantee it.
Great review. I saw the "Watch it Played" on this and it seemed like a garbled mess. You nailed it when you mentioned the scarcity of worker spaces and the scaling issue. I think the weird terminology doesn't help matters.
The second time we played this game was at two players, and came in at 2 hours. I looked at the 60-90 minute playtime and said, is that supposed to be per player? We played it 3 times at two players, and still decided to sell it even after the 3rd play taking us just over an hour. It’s way too long and big for the experience it gave us.
We’ve been playing this primarily with 2 (just Bethany and I), and we’ve actually been enjoying it and able to get a game down to about 45 minutes. But we noticed early on, that we had ZERO interest playing with more than 2. Thanks for confirming! We’ll still probably attempt it with 4 or 5 just so we can use more than anecdotal data for our own review. But I’m not looking forward to it. Lol
My buddy got this game for his birthday last week as his all-time favorite game is Scythe; so we played a 4 player game the next evening. All of us were new to the game, but are experienced board gamers x many decades. It took us about 3.5 hours, including some rule checks. We think that with time we can bring that number down, but I doubt it will ever fall under 2 hours for 4P with this group, despite none of the players being overly prone to AP. The sameness of the actions does make the game drag--it feels longer than it needs to be. I noticed the imbalance issues, but imbalance is not necessarily a deal breaker for me. Sometimes I rather enjoy it. Sometimes you have to puzzle your way out of it. The biggest knock I have on this game is THEME. With all that greasy art and supposed world-building, I did not EVER get a sense of exploration, expedition, threat, etc. There was no THEME at all. That alone brings my score down. So, after only one play, I would probably give this in the 6.5/10 range…but I always reserve the right to tweak that number with more experience, and I enjoyed Expeditions “enough” to warrant another play.
Great review and very helpful! I've been pondering this game and debating if it is worth owning. Very interesting that it's soooo long at 5 players. I was fortunate to playtest this one and our 4 player game took 7 hours! We gave the appropriate feedback and I wondered if any adjustments would be made and choose not to back it for this very reason.
How different is the rinse-repeat gameplay similar to other action selection games like Scythe? I'm used to multiplayer euro games taking hours, but the gameplay should scale well.
Scythe can be done in a quicker time with more players then Expeditions can. The actions also get better in Scythe as you upgrade them. Here you don't make your actions better, you just gain an extra "power" from a card play eventually.
Talking about SM games, Wingspan is one of my favorite games for the mechanics & components. Yet, birds have clear unbalance issues: some birds are obviously OP (if you face them against in the first round you are almost sure to lose), and many birds are too weak to be played, with only few rare exceptions.
@@TheBrokenMeeple lol, ok mate. Although I like Ark nova so much more than Wingspan, I guess every card there is super balanced. Another super biased opinion, stated as fact. That's why I can't take any of your reviews seriously. Cheers, it seems there are plenty of people who enjoyed them though, so no hard feelings. I guess you can almost say that not everything is for everybody without some definitive descriptions.
@@rumennenov7569 at what point have I said that Ark Nova is super balanced? That being said I haven't seen many occasions where a single card or power has essentially the reason for a game win. Expeditions had to balance five powers. That's it. Five. And it failed to do even that. 🤔 Love how any bad thing said about the SM messiah is seen as biased. 😏
Just played a teaching game for myself, playing a 2-player game while managing both players to learn how to play. I loved it!! I mostly play 2 player games (with my spouse), so I typically only buy games that play well at 2. This should play really well at 2! I definitely thought that it would play very differently at 4 and 5 players… I probably wouldn’t want to play it at 5 players. TBH there are very few games I want to play above 4 players… I’m not a huge fan of party games or hidden role games, and euros take a long time at high player counts.
@@TheBrokenMeeple Is it? First, should 1-2 player games be cheaper? Also, most big solo games like those from DVG or even GMT are 50 to 100% more expensive and of similar size :)
Thanks for the reviews Luke. Wonder what your thoughts are about Unmatched Adventures? I can't seem to see you've ever looked into unmatched at all...but unmatched adventures seems something you would really like. Multiple modes of play, simple system, easy set up and breakdown, and incredibly thematic and tactical play. You make me wanna look into hegemony...never ever thought id be interested in something like this...but wow...looks very intriguing. Happy xmas man. Have a good one and a blessed time. Til next year...i look forward to your top 100. Wonder if spirit island will retain its crown? I absolutely LOVE that game!!!
Thank you!! Unmatched I think it's two player only right? Those games I would find very difficult to get to the table as I tend to play in groups. Maybe I might like it but it's never been something I've been tempted to buy. They didn't seem like lookers either.
@@TheBrokenMeeple It's 2 player competitive mainly. Can be played 2v2, or up to 4player free for all. Unmatched adventures turns it into coop!! You can play it solo, and up to 4 player coop. It's genuinely one of the cleanest systems, and as for looker...dude...quite possibly one of the greatest collection of art on cards ever. Genuinely stunning!! And the minis are exceptional. I'm a UK boy. If I'm ever in Portsmouth again, I would gladly come to your local game group and teach it you. I think it's a sleeper that you haven't unlocked yet...and genuinely I think you might love it. Think of a combo between sentinels, and that streets of rage game you love so much. I personally prefer the 1 v 1 competitive mode...it can be played at a very high level if you know the ganr, but equally in a fun easy way as well. But i must admit, the coop mode in unmatched adventures makes the game a lot more appealing to so many more people...and it's all backwards compatible. It's a set collection thing like sentinels, and you can mix and match any and all, and the same goes for adventures. Not trying to push you in any way...just really appreciate how youve helped open my eyes to some of your top games...games inwould never have considered (like sentinels...wow...what a cool game!!) And i genuinely think we have similar likes/dislikes in games...i suspect you might genuinely enjoy it. Anyway, i hope you have a wonderful relaxing chrimbo and have a blessed time!! Genuinely hoping santa has brought me jagged earth and sentinels definitive this year!! Pretty sure i was a good boy!!
I was super excited for Expeditions when I first heard about it, but as gameplay info trickled out I quickly lost interest. It looked far too rinse and repeat as you are describing, plus it is way to big table wise for what it is and does. I'm glad I passed on this one.
Great review, thanks. We need more critical reviews. I need to be picky when choosing board games, because I don't have as much time or money as I'd like. It gets frustrating when certain reviewers gush out nothing but praise for every game they review. The job of a reviewer should be to be balanced and critical where necessary.
Great to have reviews that get a 7 or 8 BUT that clearly state the negative/critical stuff. It gives me more/better information to show why a game misses a 10 instead of just showing the great stuff that makes a game a 7 or higher. In times where most games are somehow good it's important to show exactly the things that might make you love or hate a game. I play so many games, that after 2 or 3 plays show real issues. In so many reviews nobody talks about those. In your reviews I can be certain to be informed even about little issues. ;-) Important: that doenst mean that somebody thinks in a negative way. It's much more important to see what still can be improved instead of just resting on laurels! ;-)
I have played Expeditions two times now, one with 4 and other with 5 players. Gamelength is no joke. I would only play this with 3 at max. I enjoy this game though.
on the one hand, I agree, solo works very well, playing with two people is great. I love the atmosphere of this game, that's why I give it 8/10 and I also understand your objections. However, I have one more game syndrome thanks to this game. I'm having a lot of fun with it.
Auto subscribed! Love your work Luke - telling it like it is. I bought this game and haven’t been more disappointed in a game ever. Some serious dollars were ploughed into this amazing production… only for the game itself to be really really poor. Just like high budget movies these days that rely on an established IP and glorious production but zero plot. Comes off as a money making scheme - even though this has a little more love than those movies - it still misses the mark by a similar long way. Love the previous comment about “no memorable moments”. This is just a dull, solo plod though a gorgeous environment were you don’t interact with anything of consequence or anyone at all… until someone has “collected the most money or whatever”… sigh
A shame you forked out money on this - hopefully you can recoup it back! This is why many games are sent out to reviewers long after people have already pre-ordered or only sent to specific reviewers who won't say a bad word in advance. To be honest and open about my criticisms shoots me in the foot for sure, but I would never back down from doing it this way unlike many others. You're right on the scheme - this would have had zero buzz if it didn't include the Scythe IP! And thank you for the sub! :-)
First, you do an excellent job of reviewing games. Onto Expeditions, I played this with 5 players and I had the you can do 5 quests, 5 upgrades and 5 melds mech. It was totally worthless, as I never could get meteor cards and barely got 3 quests and 4 upgrades. It took forever, I finished a distant 3rd just a few points behind 2nd and ahead of 4th. The winner was 28 points higher than 2nd. By about the fourth turn you could see the winner running away with the game. You really called it with saying this is a solo game design with players added.
Great review. I always enjoy hearing your thoughts. (Gave you a thumbs up on BGG as well). I've been really looking forward to this one! It's definitely of the Scythe universe like you said. I recently played The Rise of Fenris. In it, the story of Scythe unfolds even more. So if you enjoy the story, I'm guessing there is more tie-in here. I like the story, I love Jakub's art, and I enjoy solo so this is a must have for me. (I wonder if you can use the metal coins from Scythe. )
I wasn't too interested in this game to begin with but I still enjoy hearing people's opinions on it. Can you see why someone would absolutely love this game? I've seen some reviews from those who will probably put it in their top 3 at the end of this year.
Pretty much! Or those who can't bare to say a bad word about a game or in this case simply haven't played it enough times or at high player counts. Curious if the people at the beginning played it with more than 2 people at a time. And even then, how forgiving are they of the lack of any player scaling and the unbalanced gameplay and abilities? One of the clips at the start "despite having all the negatives of the group, he still wants to own this game"..........wait what?!
@@TheBrokenMeeple Its this speculation right here in this comment that I would avoid, were I you. It speaks to motives of people and you simply have no idea why anyone rates anything the way they do. If this is the case, let others draw that conclusion, in other words, unless being attacked, stay above the fray.
I assume shuffling the mech boards to hand them out goes out the window? Edit: the more I watch this, I may actually cancel my preorder once and for all. I've never been so torn on a board game. I got caught up in the hype, I think it's a blessing I messed up and pre-ordered at retail by mistake. The bits about balance are the real killer... playing this at 3/4 players sounds like a nightmare, and guaranteed there will always be 2-3 players pissed off for having a bad mech board, having less workers, etc etc...
The kingmaking problem is down to being blocked, but being blocked is usually by accident. You don't aim to go somewhere to screw over one player alone on purpose, you just block someone by doing what you're doing. But in a multiplayer game that relies on people racing for efficiency, being blocked is a killer. And when players actively block each other, the one player who isn't blocked simply rocks on to victory and it happened in most games I played in.
What is it with British reviewers using the term "rinse and repeat" so often? Luke must have said it five times within in few minutes. Chairman of the Board also uses it frequently. Is this a very common expression in Britain?
Was going to buy this just for the art. But keep putting it off. Great review. Why can't they make board games that cross over. Two separate type of games but in the same universe, swapping mini's ,cards but a stand alone game. Sort of L.O.T.R Hobbit type thing. Side adventure that can effect both games.??
I sort of felt a bit left out since Scythe is now such a huge investment so when this game was annouced i thought. Yes, great! Even after several reviews and couple of playthroughs i was even more sold. Until this video. I usually play with one friend or three. I could definitely play this with one. But hearing how this game manages 3-5 players. I've should have taken the hint that those playthroughs was only with two players. So yeah, this time I'm keeping my money. Thank you so much for this review and my wallet is thanking you as well. S
Great review Luke. I would love the artwork soo much, but I still haven't played Fenris solo. Maybe I still want this as a (solo- and) 2-plauer game anyway? I will think about this more. On the artworks - are they mainly new or repeat from Scythe and all expansions?
None of the Stegmeier games have been balanced though. Viticulture, Scythe, Tapestry, Charterstone, Red Rising. They are all imbalanced. It's one of his design flaws, which is mostly from asymmetry and unique cards you draw. The games involve a lot of luck often too. It's just a design characteristic of his games. Another design characteristic is lacking enough testing playthroughs to fix issues. Customers end up being the play testers. Just look at Viticulture, Scythe, Tapestry, Red Rising. Again, this is just what always happens. It's to be expected. Maybe the already planned expansions will address the issues.
@@PurpleSmurfProds Do explain the lies? I own all those games, played all those games. I already own Expeditions Iron Clad edition. So what is the lie?
@@ScytheNoire It's a lie that they are all imbalanced. It's also a lie that there is not enough testing. Each games goes through hundreds of playtests.
So hundreds of playtests and yet Tapestry required a full errata pack in less than 2 months to balance out the hurrendously imbalanced faction abilities and even AFTER the pack, they STILL aren't balanced. 🤔 Viticulture as much as I love the game does not have balanced visitor cards. Wingspan I adore and yet they didn't balance the starting bonus cards well enough - i have to introduce a house rule from Ark Nova to fix that - and Oceania had to fix the player boards to balance food and eggs. Scythe as much as I like the game, does not have balanced factions or exploration cards - remember that some combinations of boards are BANNED in official play! Red Rising, Pendulum........well they just suck who cares if they're balanced? :P If they have hundreds of playtests, then frankly they suck at their job.
@@TheBrokenMeeple What "full errata pack" are you talking about? 2 weeks after release? This is not a thing that exists. When you make things up, it's hard to take your opinion seriously.
Seems to me, you're just trying too hard to find reasons to not like the game. Having played over 500 games of Scythe, I really don't find the issues with balance. Maybe in a 2 or 3 player game, but I tend to play 4 or more player games, which balance itself by the players itself. Sure, Crimea might be a but stronger, but when every player on the table know what they are doing, I don't think there is a problem. In the last 10 games, Nordic has the most wins, followed by Vesna and Saxony. To not be complete off-topic, in Expeditions there is very easy solution for this "balance issues" Let the last player in TURN order, choose the mech mat first, or just play the mech mats, as if they have no different powers. In the end, not everybody have to like the same games, cheers, just my two cents on the subject.
Yes not everybody has to like the same games - which means people can say what they like about those games ;-) You say when EVERYONE knows what they are doing in Scythe - I'm glad you have a dedicated group of 5-7 people who play Scythe religiously (500 times seems a little farfetched but if you're solo-ing the digital version all the time above all other games that could work), but most don't. Nordic is not balanced because it requires a specific way to play it, not to mention a decent board to go with it. It's therefore a harder map to win with - not impossible, I know from experience, but it's still much, much harder. That solution won't work - people will simply choose the same mech mats in the same order every game. And removing the powers is basically removing content from the game to fix a problem that shouldn't have existed in the first place. In any case, it's not our job to fix a game post release - board games should not be like live service video games.
I count online games in 2020,during the pandemic. With my group, we have maybe around 100 games, and I stand by my opinion that in 4+ player games balance is not an issue, as I said last 10 games, 3 different players won the game with what you said is very difficult to play Nordic faction, all with different player boards. It seems you figured out this game to the core, to know exactly which mech would be selected in every position... To be clear, I don't think Expeditions will become one of my favourite, or for that matter even liked games /too little player interactions, for example my favourite games are Dune imperium, Scythe, Clash of Cultures ME and Twilight imperium 4e/. So far from 3 plays, all at 4 players, I like the game just fine, and think the RNG of cards offers Great replayability.
I agree that the player boards are very mismatched. However, I’m not sure I agree with the player scaling. We play with 5. If you go last and don’t get a worker, you can instead get cards and next turn get workers. Worst case: 1/2 the players get cards they can’t fully use and 1/2 get workers without cards. In that way it is even. Or a player can go ‘rogue’ and start hoovering up maps.
The two tiles could be separated enough though to ensure that even if PLayers 3 & 4 wait, Player 5 is still screwed, and that's assuming players don't go off exploring tiles.
In my case, I find that the solo after more or less mid game becomes boring... I still have 2 levels to try, but after some time you just keep moving mechs right and left because they don't have anything more to do... I think it would be better with something that resembled more an actual opponent. As for the problems with balancing, I didn't see that much in 2 or 3 players (didn't tra 4/5)... Quests were not that influencial, and I think if you manage to pair well the cards with your mech ability, they don't seem that unbalanced. I find it a game lite enough to enjoy without relying that much on strategy, as the board in 3 players already could change completely before it's your turn again (so I can understand also the frustration for a higher player count). To wrap up. I think it's a great 2 player game, and I enjoy it also with 3 players, but hope they'll make it more interesting for solo and 3+ players with the expansions...
Alright, played a 4-player game last night and I've come around on the game; thanks for showing me the light. Definitely overstayed it's welcome and leaving my collection. Should be able to get my money back unless all potential buyers see this review 😂 Did you know that there's a handful set combos of cards that can trigger an infinite money making loop? Apparently a clarification didn't make it into the rulebook before printing and someone discovered it after two games. Btw, Jamey, in his recent FB live cast, is concerned about your emotional well-being and thought about reaching out to you.
@@TheBrokenMeeple In his live cast, he seemed genuinely concerned that there was something amiss resulting in the "anger" you expressed in your review. Perhaps I read too much into it. Glad y'all had a conversation.
I agree with many of your negatives but our first play was a blast at 5-players. It did take 2.5 hours but then game night is usually 4. Everyone wants to play again tomorrow. I played with the player board that traded in exploration tokens and used them to vanquish at a location that allowed me to boast right away with my card; only used the ability once but a power move that helped me win the game. I was 3rd in player order and the 4th and 5th player came in second and third. Agree that the 5 meld/quest/item board is the worst. The player board that allowed for up to 4 moves was useful in a 5-player game because there was a lot of blocking. Still would hesistant about playing at 5; scalability is really an issue. Enjoying the solo mode tremendously; I started immediately at L4 and seem to be holding my own. Looking through the comments, maybe a houserule to start everyone with a worker might not be a bad idea.
Whatever two cards they have, start everyone with the two workers they need for them - I think that's a solid beginning, however there still needs to be some player turn order balancing thrown in. As for the mech abilities, not much we can do about those except demand another errata pack! :P I just can't fathom 5 players being better than 1-2 in the long run. This is a rinse and repeat style engine builder. Engine builders are very susceptible to outstaying their welcome as you don't want an engine that goes on far longer than it deserves (cough cough Great Western Trail). Here 60 minutes, 90 at the absolute max is as long as I want to keep going "move cube here, move cube there, move cube here" etc.
@@TheBrokenMeeple Yeah, let's see if we can get it down to 90-min with 4 players with repeated play. May leave the collection, just like Scythe, at that point though once the shine loses its luster. To address the player turn order issue a little, I'm thinking of also reverse drafting the mech boards now that we've played before. Maybe even the character/companion. Hopefully the expansion will address these issues like add more worker hexes and more hexes in general that you can scale the map to player count.
great review. for me personally, your channel has grown to be a top tier one. honest, clear and to the point and enjoyable.
This is exactly what I was going to write. Luke covers a lot more aspects of the games he reviews. The player scaling is something I really appreciate.
Awww guys! :D Thank you!
Man, your honesty is striking in a world where most reviewers are just marketing new games. Keep up the great work!
I appreciate that!
Thanks for emphasis you place on player scalability in your reviews.
My pleasure! I'm staggered that others don't take it more seriously! 9 and 10 out of 10 when this kind of player scaling is present.
I thought I clicked on the DT review on accident lol. Nice intro.
I went forward and back a few times before I realised it wasn't my phone glitching lol
Ha ha!! Hoped the music would stop that, but yeah, I tried to keep the clips short enough to get past attention spans! :D
Me too hahaha
“By accident”
This is exactly the kind of review I would like to watch. This is a masterpiece of a review
AWWWW THANK YOU!! 😍😍😍
I’m actually back watching this review AGAIN! Who does that? Lol. It’s just great to see some sanity in the world. Also my opinion of all those other reviewers has gone way down. Dice tower just feels like they’re a money making scheme now rushing through as many reviews as possible “for the algorithm” I guess… and Tom just looks jaded. At least he didn’t give it a 10, but still he scored it way too high.
That’s the great thing about boardgames. We all have different tastes. I have really enjoyed this so far. It is an efficiency puzzle, like Scythe, the thing I like about this game though is that you can’t math out a victory with optimum turns from round one. The game grows gives you a nudge with your mech or your starting cards and then it’s all about what you can find and how you link them together. There is a sense that it is a race, which is the idea I guess. I like it, but I wasn’t a big fan of Scythe.
I really enjoyed your break down of the game though Luke, your reviews whether I agree or not are always well thought out and detailed. Many thanks.
Thanks again! :-)
Also "nudge with the mech" - unless you get the one that demands you get 5 Melds' that's more of a cattleprod then a nudge! :P
@@TheBrokenMeeple I played again yesterday and just because of some of your comments decided to play differently and didn’t go for Meeples. Instead I explored and gained cards. Two stars down I gained a couple of Meeples started vanquishing and solved four quests for a quick end to the game. We finished a four player game in about 75 minutes. I’m convinced getting four quests is the “end the game quick” strat when some one else is building an engine looking to Meld etc. the more I play this game the more I realise there is more to it.
I really love Tapestry solo with the expansions. Aside from that, thanks for an honest review, and I hope Jamey Stegmaier from Stonemaier Games saw this (I'm 99.9 percent sure he did). Oh, and that's great how you showed short clips of some well-known reviewers in the beginning. I'd love to see more footage like that in future reviews to show stark contrasts.
Takes a while to extract those! :P
Jamey says he doesn't watch reviews for their games but if Stonemaier has stopped sending Broken Meeple review copies, someone must be.
@@Wingsplain did they stop sending him review copies?
@@realdealastrology9 There's a point in the video where he eludes to the fact that he used to get review copies from Stonemaier but they stopped. I'll try to find it.
@@realdealastrology9 its at 1:30
It's always fun to listen to your rants :)
I'm glad! 😜
A house rule I am considering is to just give every player the two workers that are on their starting cards. I have only played this solo and enjoyed it so far but I think you make some good points here about the scaling. Also definitely agree about never doing more than 3 quests. The rewards for quests themselves probably needed to be better so they were worth it on their own, or the bonus points should have increased with a 4th quest instead of maxing out at 3.
That would at least mean that players don't get totally screwed over for sure. Might even speed the game up as you can get started on your cards better. I think thats worth a punt.
In Scythe you start with two workers a character an animap companion, but no mech. Since this is a sequal to scythe it would make more thematic sense to start that way 🤔. Maybe a fan made expansion would be like tuscany or euphoria where you get recruits, and the recruits do different thematic things like fix all the issues we have with the game 😂
Chef's kiss on this episode! I have too many big box solo games already as well. Thanks Luke!
Any time!
Refreshingly honest/critical review to compliment all the overwhelming positive ones. Thanks and keep on making the good content.
I appreciate that thanks! This is a game where Critic scores will far exceed Audience scores I bet. No-one wants to bad mouth a Stonemaier game. Just wait for the other friends to show up, TT for example and all that gang who never have a bad word to say for SM games. I'm betting 9's and 10's across the board.
If you’re looking for other solid critics who will give honest takes, I highly recommend the So Very Wrong About Games podcast.
Oooh, you really are burning your bridges with him, eh? 😂
Well, staying true to yourself is a great thing. Keep it up!
Always! Pretty sure there was never a bridge to begin with! Besides he's always said and quoted that he doesn't watch reviews and doesn't mind criticism for his games. So if that's true that means all is well! :D
@@TheBrokenMeeple He's actually one of the few publishers who made such open and antagonistic comments about podcasters etc. So... :)
Love the review! I had even commented on one of the Facebook posts by Jamie for this game that I thought the mechs were unbalanced, and slightly so on the character and pet cards as well. His comment back was something along the lines, “that’s not shown in our research data.” Well only four games played myself and I know which mech I want and which will surely cost me the game. My fiancée and I mostly play by ourselves, we’ve played it once at three player, but will never play a higher player count. And she and I have tried to come up with some house rules for the weaker mechs, like starting with a few extra cards or being able to move onto a space already occupied. But after your review, I think we will also consider adding some kind of initial bonus to players that go after the first player. Really have enjoyed your reviews so far, thank you for your honesty!
He always claims research data - but given how unbalanced this game is and how broken Tapestry is, I think the researching process needs a bit of tweaking. Even Apiary has balance issues with the paths to victory.
Great review Luke! Finally, a thorough review of a game I care about. It's been awhile. Thx!
Glad you liked it!
Love this take! Finally someone speaks out what I thought when I read the rulebook. Small and Insanely repetitive gameplay loop. No breakout moments, no excitement. It’s a efficiency puzzle where you are moving up and down two resources a million times. Nothing feels distinct here, no memorable moments. I doubt anyone will be able to distinguish session 5 from session 8.
And those map tokens? Looks like they ran out of ideas after they established the very core. And you can tell. It’s not streamlined. It’s barren.
💯!!
Given that there's no theme or sense of exploration or anything, for sure they just ran out of ideas, hence using the Scythe IP as a paste job.
This review is spot on, just played my first 3 player game, it played like 3 people playing their own solo engine builder game with no interaction, and anyone who gets their engine up before the other two will win. Won’t be playing it again.
It's a big miss.
Played this at a convention, was looking forward to it as it sounded interesting. Five player game. After an hour I was wishing someone would pull the fire alarm or something. If it wasn't for the wonderful gentleman sitting next to me giving me a great conversation I may have just left. I've never tried it at a lower player count but my experience (and the price on the game) have convinced me to never touch it again. Spot on review!
To stay consistent, let me first say I always appreciate that you will tell it like it is, regardless of what others think. You provide examples for why you feel the way you feel, which adds strength to your arguments. Having said that, starting this review by showing the Dice Tower, Boardgameco, and others sends the wrong message. Your review stands as it is and speaks for itself, starting it by pointing out that others loved the game doesn't mean the game is bad and you are wrong, or that they are wrong and you are right. It feels a bit cheap to start in this manner. The same with always mentioning that Stonemaier didn't give you a copy. In reality, we know this by virtue of the fact that you didn't disclosed that you received a review copy.
I will always support your reviews and opinions, even if I disagree with them. I just don't think you elevate yourself by pointing out that others really liked the game. Almost back door suggesting that their love of the game is somehow not genuine or hides ulterior motives. You have such great views and opinions and I would simply ignore the others and continue to stand apart for what you do with your brand.
If the FTC rulings are to be believed, we have to make it pain stakingly obvious whether or not we've received review copies.
The starting gag is to show I don't get where the high scores are coming from ,hence the phrase "did I miss something?" straight after. It's not suggesting anyone is wrong or the game is bad solely by that part.
@@TheBrokenMeeple I assumed that is what you meant, but it may not be 100% obvious that is what you meant. I often feel this way about stuff like gloomhaven, that everyone likes and I really dislike. Were I to review it I would simply stick to my thoughts and feelings and let them stand. Like I said, just trying to stay consistent. I will always say that mentioning other content creators in your content is simply not necessary.
@@npckse8508 I've said the same thing on this channel several times. The content is great so I keep coming back, but I've dropped other channels for having a similar vibe.
@@thecuriousboardgamer I don't think he is trying to be a bad actor here, just don't think it is a good look.
@@npckse8508 I think it's ok. He's calling out early in the video that his opinion goes against the grain of the rest of the community. This way, the viewer can decide early on if they're interested in a completely different take, or if they're going to disagree so hard with the rest of the video that they'd rather move on. When brutal honesty (from his perspective) is supposed to be a natural draw of his channel, putting that front and center isn't a problem for me. But maybe that's just me!
I think you are missing that this is a race game. There is no way it should take 3 hours to play a 5 player game. Experienced players can easily play a 4 player game in 90 minutes.
As far as balance goes, how many times have you played? The ability to trash map tokens for money (points) or the power/guile you need is incredibly powerful. Also, if you haven't melded 5 meteorites that you've maximized yet, then you haven't seen the power of that mech.
I know that 5 meteors is good BUT that's ALL the board lets you do. 5 quests is pointless. 5 upgrades is rubbish. You HAVE to do 5 melds - the board literally pigeon holes you and even then it's no guarantee you'll even win if someone gets a good quest-rush strategy going. The map token mech is OK but SITUATIONAL. In a mass player game it's shockingly bad as you have to gain your map tokens from a location tile just for the occasional 1 boost which if you're playing efficiently, you shouldn't need to rely on a map token for. Remember that other abilities get to trigger far more often like being able to move 4 every turn!
Also I've NEVER seen a 4 player end in 90 minutes - exceptions to the rule may apply, but the general norm is 30 minutes per player. And yes, plenty of 5 player games taking 3 hours - doesn't matter if it's a race game, the race only plods along at the speed of 5 players doing actions non-simultaneously.
(Can confirm, it took us 3+ hours for us with 5, although I'm confident that'll be 2-2.5 for future plays, 1.5 feels...unlikely).
@@ChrisSmithSmooth Wheres that Skywalker "That's very unlikely" meme when I need it?
Glad to hear your thoughts. Just received mine but haven't unboxed it yet. I was bummed to hear other reviewers say they prefer it at higher player counts and I will mostly be playing at 2 and sometimes 1 and I think I'll align with your opinions here.
If other people are claiming it's better at higher player counts, I'm sorry but that's just (edited) "impossible to believe outside of a jumbled up multiverse where all possibilities can exist, but the likelihood of this one occuring is just too much for the human mind to comprehend".............. No player scaling and 30 minutes per player for a solitaire engine builder - in what universe is that better at high player counts? You'll be perfectly fine at 2 my friend I can assure you!
@@TheBrokenMeeple It feels really weird to accuse people of outright lying because you disagree with their opinion that the game is better with more players. I understand having a difference of opinion but accusing folks of outright lying is strange behavior.
@@samwise222 It's hyperbole! But I'll amend it for those taking it too literally! Though still I do question what universe 5 player Expeditions is better than 1-2 Player..
This is the first time in my life that I see a review of something and I 100% agree with every single word in it. Great job.
Thank you!
I am lucky that I specifically picked this up for solo play 😊
VERY!!
What is your take on the theme ? I thought this is an exploratory theme but then there seem to be elements like workers and fighting corruption (?? In the Tundra/Taiga ? Amongst the artic foxes?). That seems to be completely out of theme ?
There is no theme in this game whatsoever.
Fun, honest review. I traded for the Ironclad edition recently -- not regretting what I traded away -- and many of your comments stood out for me playing solo. I knew the metal mechs would be overkill to own with the game. They are cool to look at, but they are such little paperweights that knock the tiles around unless you perfectly place them straight down on the hex tile or have a textured game mat. The solo game grew on me slightly after a few plays, but thematically there is not much going on other than pleasant artwork to look at. If I end up keeping the game, it will be because of the card play. Not because it stands above other games I own, but just enough to make it a little interesting. However, if melding meteorites is the only way to win consistently, then it will have a short lifespan for me.
I really don't get the lack of riser in the mech mats for locating cards underneath per the rules. This is a big production miss to me. They almost feel like an afterthought when considering the rest of the components. My copy had a small sheet of adhesive "riser" stickers that you couldn't fit a gnat's fart underneath.
For a game this expensive, any production faux pas is unacceptable.
The comment about the bear on the cover 😹🐻 Very informative video, thank you! I haven’t played this game. Have played a few significant Stonemaier games, and the only one I really love is Libertalia. Viticulture is still on my Shelf of Shame though 🙈
And Libertalia wasn't even their original game!
We played a five player game last week. I did feel a little long but overall was still enjoyable. I had the mech with the 5 ability which I’m glad I got because I was the only one who had played before . It wasn’t as bad as I thought it would be it just pigeonholed me in to melding five meteorites. I finished third but all the scores were close. I think a easy fix to the length would have been a double side to the final scoring making each boasting easier to get. Like having five workers or three map tokens etc.. I’m surprised they didn’t do that especially considering it is double sided but the same on both sides.
That would involve them attempting to balance their games! :P 3+ hours is pretty "big" long with the rinse/repeat gameplay.
I think one thing that really hurts the game is the silly boast rule which honestly I wish I'd mentioned in the review. Why do you need to boast to get a star? You didn't have to in Scythe. All it does is elongate the game as you spend time doing other things rather than getting your stars.
People can have various opinions on Expeditions, but my experience with it was: I played it the first time and after that I only want to play this game! It’s just crazy. There’s something about it. Totally loved it. Yes I would like the game to be shorter. And I hope they release a sort of “Prelude expansion” as TM did, to quick-start the game.
Very glad to hear that the solo mode is great! C’mon you now!
Cheers
A prelude style expansion would be good, but also they need to errata the player scaling and mech abilities.
Update on this. I played the solo Automa mode and I became a solo play lover! Wow I didn’t know you can enjoy a game solo this much! I’m happy 😃. Expeditions made its way to my top ten now!
@@marcosseven8872 it only works really in 1-2 player.
I got copy of the Iron Clad edition (second printing). It was $5 more than the regular edition.
Also the tiles come to the very top of the insert; there isn't anymore room for tiles.
You were fortunate to get only five dollar increase!
I think this game is excellent at 2 players… the design flaws at the higher player counts don’t really apply. Agree completely that the game is not designed well for 4 or 5 players. I think it would play well at 3 (since there’s the starting tile adjacent to one of the worker tiles), but would need to try it first. For someone who mostly wants games that play great at 2, this is a great game for me! If someone wants a game that plays great in larger groups, I’d stay away.
Indeed - 1 or 2 players is the only way to play this.
What do you mean by "there's the starting tile adjacent to one of the worker tiles." Setup is random for each respective region. I just realized there's a chance the tile that allows you to gain 1 benefit from an adjacent location may not be adjacent to any of the worker tiles which would compound the issue of getting your engine started with workers, especially at higher player counts where there is more blocking.
@@LeeKenshin7 yeah I meant that time that rewards the benefit of an adjacent tile
I've been on the fence with this one since the announcement. Thanks for saving me time.
Glad I could help!
Thank you Luke for the review that is why i sub to your channel. Cuz your not afraid to say if the game is bad. Unlike other paid BG ytuber out there. Anyway thsi game is on my buylist but im gona sa pass after watching your review thanks Luke save me time n money. More power to your channel
Thanks for the sub and kind words! :-) And definitely not afraid to say it, always got to be honest which just isn't seen enough these days.
The player mat unbalance is a great call out. My first game I got the "you can have 5 cards of stuff" and a few minutes into the game I felt I will finish last. I did.
Yeah that board is so bad - it's basically MELD x 5 and nothing else. I mean 10 seconds of playtesting would have shown the imbalances and yet somehow a famous publisher didn't know or didn't care.
Maybe you're just bad at the game?
@@TheBrokenMeeple Oh of course, that must be it. Stonemaier didn't playtest! You are so smart.
@@TheBrokenMeeplet would be so nice if the 5th quest increased glory scaling, especially since doing 5 of a thing most likely means you'll be getting less stars for that multiplier.
Items are a tough call, so variable whether they're worthwhile, but I can imagine games where it's useful - Maybe doubled VP for the 5th item could be a fair tweak.
Melded meteorites are truly insane in comparison though, potentially 15vp for that last meld is wildly strong (Hell, with the stupid '1VP/player' meteorite you could go even more absurd).
@@PurpleSmurfProds yeah I am for sure.
Thank you for the honest review pointing out both pros and cons. I felt the other channels have spared the critique since it's a Jamie game.
100% correct! You notice the clip at the start where despite all the negatives, still wanted to own the game?
Even those who weren't great fans of it still gave essentially 8s. There's still more "Friends of SM" to review this though, can't wait for those 10s
I held onto this in case the expansion fixed some issues. Loved the card play but the moving around and map tokens was lacklustre (would agricola/caverna style worker placement be better and more honest?). Will be interesting to see if the tweaks with extra worker etc. help enough. I mostly play at 2 so that's perfect for us.
The expansion has been announced and honestly it sounds like the game won't get any better - hell they want to add a 6th player as if anybody asked for that.
@@TheBrokenMeeple but there seems to be a way to skip the first turns and directly start with some basic things done already... Curious 🙂
First playthrough with group was with 4. I played with Tanaka at 4th position. We all had fun, but aren't the types that can't handle or get bored with a measly 2hr long first playthrough. I did win even with a slow start not getting access to workers on the first turn. I decided to take a powerful meteorite from the grab a card tile, and just got a worker the follow up turn. It's really not as big a deal as it was made out to be here.
Same with the maps, which share the bonus star location with workers so you can only do one. Workers are demonstrably more useful to pick up and you'll definitely have 7 by the end. Maps are only good for specific cards that let you trash or build points from them, but you're not really losing much by not collecting 4 maps fast just for a bonus star. If anything everyone else focused on collecting maps as a priority early opened up the game for me to strategize better than them, and build power more effectively to vanquish one they were forced to move off the tile the following turn.
Its definitely by no means well balanced (especially the move an extra space guy is so weak lol), but it's still a good time had by our group.
Some will enjoy it for sure - but but 2 hours for a first play is actually pretty short compared to most people's 1st playthroughs. And even then, this game does not warrant 2 hours - it's rinse repeat the entire game with no real sense of "game arc" developing.
Really honest and objective review. Really liked the perspective.
Much appreciated! It's how I roll!
Just discovered you and loving your approach. Subscribed!!
Awesome! Thank you!
I have to say your reviews are awesome! Great opinion and super fun to watch! Thanks Luke!
Thank you so much!
Just played this for the first time with 5 players and it took us from 7pm - midnight, five hours. That’s including me learning the game ahead of time and teaching everyone
Jesus!!!!
@@TheBrokenMeeple after playing the game and watching your critiques, it totally resonates with me the player count, scaling and imbalance issues. I still enjoyed the game but it rates at a 7.2 / 10 for me due to these issues
I really apreciate Your honest review, keep up the good work You do. 🎉😊
I appreciate that!
I am confuse how a game can be criticised as multilayer solitaire then criticised that different player's counts break the game and turn order matters.
To me that is a contradiction?
Not really though I can see your confusion. The puzzle you are doing is basically a solo puzzle. But because the game is a race, anything that stops the race being fair has a massive impact.
Also the added players don't just affect balancing, they affect the game length too. 3 hours compared to 60 minutes.
I've played some solo and enjoyed it so far. But I have to admit I'm really a sucker for Rozalski's art style, which imo is the only justification for the large tiles. However, despite the phenomenal artwork the game itself feels a bit mechanical unfortunately.
I'm going to test this with 4 players next week and I'm curious. I can see your point/s - especially the ones related to balancing. Maybe one way to mitigate the issue with the workers on the first turn (I can see this being particulary frustrating since you can block the worker recruitment tiles for turn two as well by simply skipping the move action) would be to draft the mechs starting with the last player. Or houserule in some compensation - maybe in the form of workers from the start for players 3, 4 (and 5?). However, this should be the designers' job, not the players'.
His art is fantastic, no doubt. But you can only rate a game so high from looking good.
Someone had a house rule to have players start with their respective colour workers for their cards - which isn't a bad idea at all, though you still have the turn order issue. I think starting with some workers is a basic essential for every player and then compensation in the form of workers/cards/money should fall in - but again, you'd think that designers and publishers would think of this stuff themselves you know?
I only have one question. A very important one for me. If you were to play at 2 players, which would you choose:
A. Scythe
B. Expeditions
C. Neither, I would always choose this euro over A and B at the 2p count
Thank you :)
C because there are far better and cheaper euros or two player games in general then Expeditions and Scythe doesn't work with two players.
@@TheBrokenMeeple Thank you! My wife loves Viticulture and Wingspan. We have been avoiding Scythe because when comes to euros or anything more complex than Ticket to Ride, we only play at 2p. Was hoping Expeditions would give us a taste of Scythe, but oh well. We have plenty of euros we love anyway. Ark Nova, Lost Ruins, etc.
Folks, this is what a real review looks like. He took a decent justified shit on a game.
I will tell it how I see it honestly every time! Sugar coating is not something I like to do. It's not good for my fat %! :P
This is no more “real” review than any other. Hyperbolic click bait trashing of popular games for views is a real turn off. It’s one thing to not like a game, but to bash and berate (in my opinion unjustifiably) is not a good look.
@@Stormzbowler Yep, the Stonemier cultists are coming out of the woodwork.
You use the word "click bait" - i do not think it means what you think it means...........
Also it's not bad mouthing for views, it's called critcism of a product. Every other reviewer who can't bare to say anything negative about games most of the time, especially SM games. If a game is truly great, it gets the praise, but try to justify where balance issues, a lack of player scaling, a pasted on theme, a lack of excitement in the gameplay and zero need to play with more than 2 players is worthy of a 10/10.
@@Stormzbowler if you find my comment youll see i like the game. that said, the critiques he made are pretty much on point. when you see a reviewer say what you are thinking on almost every point, there has to be some truth to it.
i play it solo mostly, so the imbalance in the mechs just gives my games variability but it still exists. meteorites and quests are pretty much a must from a scoring standpoint and item upgrades are only really useful if you can get them very early on.
as far as player scaling, i cant fault him for his opinion. seems pretty logical just from a basic design standpoint.
so imo, and im just attempting to be fair, calling this clickbait is unnecessary and not at all accurate.
I played as 5th player in a 5 player game and even a score of 1 would be too high. The game design and balance can easily leave the 4th and 5th player out of a game with zero chance of posting a score close to those that play early.
I think with three players you have the tile placement fix as you put forward and in addition I would add, draft the mechs in reverse player order and then draft the leaders/pets in player order. That way the third player can take a worker of a colour that he can get in the early game.
As for the game itself MELDING is the big component of a players score almost to the point where your turns are scripted in to gathering meteors. Which is to say if you don't gather meteors you don't have a chance, not too sure why there are other scoring mechanisms though, as they just don't have the same impact. Collecting Missions, Upgrading Items are mostly not worth the same points as 4 (or 5) meteors.
I tend to collect games and this one will probably be shipped off to a new home.
5 player is just a waste of time and space. I'm already selling this one off.
I totally agree with your analysis. I have just played a 5 players game and I am absolutely not convinced by Expeditions. Turns were too slow, there was very minimal interactions and the balance problems were staggering. At one point I asked myself "Am I having fun?" And the answer was a vibrant "NO!" Now, I am questionning the other RUclips reviewers (yes, even those from Dice Tower!). Do they really test fully the games they review? Are they paid by the publishers? Anyway, thank you for your honnest work.
You're very welcome! And honestly I think most just don't want to say bad words on SM games.
Good review. The only thing I would disagree with is the play time. We did a teaching game for 5 players and it came in just shy of 2 hours. If anything it sped up in the last half once everyone had a better idea on which stars to focus on themselves.
A big exception to the rule though - most others do not get 5 in 2 hours - and if people were knew, they likely weren't taking time to consider the implications of their actions.
Let's be fair, there isnt a vast decision space in the game and the players (an 18xxer, a eurogamer, 2 40k players and someone who just likes to play with his mates) never felt the decisions were too difficult. Outside of having a space blocked.
Watching him not know how to open the cover was pretty funny.
If it doesn't come off first time, it gets what it deserves
@@TheBrokenMeeple Gotta use those 2 holes in the top!
@@ianoble I know but in the heat of the moment.....
The last Stonemeier game I bought was Tapestry and that had so many of the same issues. It does suggest they either need some fresh playtesters or to start listening to the playtesters.
Tapestry is great though.
It's imbalanced as can be for a board game! Errata pack!! Errata!! I'm pretty sure SM at this point doesn't have a play testing team or if they do, it just feels like they have to stick to a deadline to get a game out and can't afford to spend time .........well............play testing.
@@TheBrokenMeepleYou might want to do a bit of research before throwing out incorrect accusations like this. Just a thought.
Thanks for the coverage. This is a game I've been disinterested in from the start, and the more I see/read the more I'm glad I didn't order it. You actually have increased my desire to try it, as I do enjoy a good solo experience. This is something I'd be happy to try at some point, but I'm not gonna look to purchase.
Glad I could help!
I played 5 players with 4 brand new players in 2 hours to the minute. It felt pretty snappy and quite enjoyable.
An exception to the rule in sorry to say. New players will either drag the game like crazy through indecision or go at lightning speed because they don't know what they are doing.
@@TheBrokenMeeplemaybe your long play is the exception to the rule. Or have you even played it with 5players?
@@330nate Play(s) 😉 Also many more other people's experiences. And reviewers experiences too. So no. Sorry. Not the exception.
@@TheBrokenMeeple that’s still anecdotal, and doesn’t establish a “rule”
Wow taking the definition to its most literal form I see . 😮💨
We all love other reviewers and we all know that sometimes hype is so big that can impact their grade (not marketing alone). All we need to do is decide for ourselves and have many points of view. Golden rule is - do not buy games in first year after their release and wait till hype vanish to see what that game really is (ever reviewers should back to each game after a year or so... some channels do this) Still, most of us wants to have games asap so...
Hey I watched your cosmic encounter videos and saw the custom box you use to store the game and expansions. Where can I get something like that?
Folded Space are the best insert makers around I find. Not sure who made that original one I had.
Any thoughts on theme / lack thereof? I played a friends copy once last week and despite the art and ties to Scythe I felt ZERO theme coming through, just chasing symbols to take the actions that get the most $ until game end. Names of locations and cards meant virtually nothing, which I've seen nearly no one comment on in any reviews. Maybe I'm on an island on that one. There wasn't much of an Exploration feel as all the same tiles will be revealed by the end of the game and there's no surprises to pivot around just, "oh here's #20", and despite the thought of corruption and meteorites it's still just "most money wins" which doesn't really fit. It fit in Scythe as it was a measurement of your country's rebuilding post war, taking into account military strength, popularity with the people, etc as one country eventually reaches the point of the new superpower. In Expeditions, I just felt it was symbols for money because reasons. I'll play it again, but I don't see buying this one.
I think you make a valid point, I was disappointed the "encounters" system wasn't a focus/part of this game. Seems like a missed opportunity to me.
Yeah there's no sense of exploration here - you take a token and flip a tile to see an ability - that's literally it. Even Scythe at least had those cards which is better than nothing. Here there is no theme. If this game didn't have the Scythe IP painted on it, this game would have bombed hard and had no buzz about it at all. I guarantee it.
Great review. I saw the "Watch it Played" on this and it seemed like a garbled mess. You nailed it when you mentioned the scarcity of worker spaces and the scaling issue. I think the weird terminology doesn't help matters.
For me, what every new Euro feels like, a Solo puzzler with Multiplayer on it. Where are the real competitive ones? Great review.
The second time we played this game was at two players, and came in at 2 hours.
I looked at the 60-90 minute playtime and said, is that supposed to be per player?
We played it 3 times at two players, and still decided to sell it even after the 3rd play taking us just over an hour. It’s way too long and big for the experience it gave us.
Couldn't agree more!
We’ve been playing this primarily with 2 (just Bethany and I), and we’ve actually been enjoying it and able to get a game down to about 45 minutes. But we noticed early on, that we had ZERO interest playing with more than 2. Thanks for confirming! We’ll still probably attempt it with 4 or 5 just so we can use more than anecdotal data for our own review. But I’m not looking forward to it. Lol
Glad you enjoy it! But yeah, stick with two!!!
My buddy got this game for his birthday last week as his all-time favorite game is Scythe; so we played a 4 player game the next evening. All of us were new to the game, but are experienced board gamers x many decades. It took us about 3.5 hours, including some rule checks. We think that with time we can bring that number down, but I doubt it will ever fall under 2 hours for 4P with this group, despite none of the players being overly prone to AP. The sameness of the actions does make the game drag--it feels longer than it needs to be.
I noticed the imbalance issues, but imbalance is not necessarily a deal breaker for me. Sometimes I rather enjoy it. Sometimes you have to puzzle your way out of it.
The biggest knock I have on this game is THEME. With all that greasy art and supposed world-building, I did not EVER get a sense of exploration, expedition, threat, etc. There was no THEME at all. That alone brings my score down.
So, after only one play, I would probably give this in the 6.5/10 range…but I always reserve the right to tweak that number with more experience, and I enjoyed Expeditions “enough” to warrant another play.
Great review and very helpful! I've been pondering this game and debating if it is worth owning. Very interesting that it's soooo long at 5 players. I was fortunate to playtest this one and our 4 player game took 7 hours! We gave the appropriate feedback and I wondered if any adjustments would be made and choose not to back it for this very reason.
The most you can do is have players start with some workers - that's it. But it won't speed the game up enough. AND JESUS! 7 hours!?!
@@TheBrokenMeeple Yeah. I'll probably try it again soon. But after that experience my wife won't touch it with a ten foot pole
I'm so happy I didn't pre order this game 😂
How different is the rinse-repeat gameplay similar to other action selection games like Scythe? I'm used to multiplayer euro games taking hours, but the gameplay should scale well.
Scythe can be done in a quicker time with more players then Expeditions can. The actions also get better in Scythe as you upgrade them. Here you don't make your actions better, you just gain an extra "power" from a card play eventually.
Lol, "There was no buzz about this game before they announced it."
What??
Talking about SM games, Wingspan is one of my favorite games for the mechanics & components. Yet, birds have clear unbalance issues: some birds are obviously OP (if you face them against in the first round you are almost sure to lose), and many birds are too weak to be played, with only few rare exceptions.
Every Stonemaier game is Unbalanced in some way, that's their nature sadly.
@@TheBrokenMeeple lol, ok mate. Although I like Ark nova so much more than Wingspan, I guess every card there is super balanced. Another super biased opinion, stated as fact. That's why I can't take any of your reviews seriously. Cheers, it seems there are plenty of people who enjoyed them though, so no hard feelings. I guess you can almost say that not everything is for everybody without some definitive descriptions.
@@rumennenov7569 at what point have I said that Ark Nova is super balanced? That being said I haven't seen many occasions where a single card or power has essentially the reason for a game win. Expeditions had to balance five powers. That's it. Five. And it failed to do even that. 🤔
Love how any bad thing said about the SM messiah is seen as biased. 😏
I was avoiding this... But considering it is best with 1 and 2 I might actually get it!
It's still pretty expensive and large for a 1-2 player game .
Just played a teaching game for myself, playing a 2-player game while managing both players to learn how to play. I loved it!!
I mostly play 2 player games (with my spouse), so I typically only buy games that play well at 2. This should play really well at 2! I definitely thought that it would play very differently at 4 and 5 players… I probably wouldn’t want to play it at 5 players. TBH there are very few games I want to play above 4 players… I’m not a huge fan of party games or hidden role games, and euros take a long time at high player counts.
@@TheBrokenMeeple Is it? First, should 1-2 player games be cheaper? Also, most big solo games like those from DVG or even GMT are 50 to 100% more expensive and of similar size :)
@@mikolajwitkowski8093But they are different though, they're not a Stonemaier game 🙄😉
For comparison, your game description reminds of the board exploration in Vindication.
Thanks for the reviews Luke.
Wonder what your thoughts are about Unmatched Adventures? I can't seem to see you've ever looked into unmatched at all...but unmatched adventures seems something you would really like. Multiple modes of play, simple system, easy set up and breakdown, and incredibly thematic and tactical play.
You make me wanna look into hegemony...never ever thought id be interested in something like this...but wow...looks very intriguing.
Happy xmas man. Have a good one and a blessed time. Til next year...i look forward to your top 100. Wonder if spirit island will retain its crown? I absolutely LOVE that game!!!
Thank you!! Unmatched I think it's two player only right? Those games I would find very difficult to get to the table as I tend to play in groups. Maybe I might like it but it's never been something I've been tempted to buy. They didn't seem like lookers either.
@@TheBrokenMeeple It's 2 player competitive mainly. Can be played 2v2, or up to 4player free for all. Unmatched adventures turns it into coop!! You can play it solo, and up to 4 player coop. It's genuinely one of the cleanest systems, and as for looker...dude...quite possibly one of the greatest collection of art on cards ever. Genuinely stunning!! And the minis are exceptional. I'm a UK boy. If I'm ever in Portsmouth again, I would gladly come to your local game group and teach it you. I think it's a sleeper that you haven't unlocked yet...and genuinely I think you might love it. Think of a combo between sentinels, and that streets of rage game you love so much. I personally prefer the 1 v 1 competitive mode...it can be played at a very high level if you know the ganr, but equally in a fun easy way as well. But i must admit, the coop mode in unmatched adventures makes the game a lot more appealing to so many more people...and it's all backwards compatible. It's a set collection thing like sentinels, and you can mix and match any and all, and the same goes for adventures.
Not trying to push you in any way...just really appreciate how youve helped open my eyes to some of your top games...games inwould never have considered (like sentinels...wow...what a cool game!!) And i genuinely think we have similar likes/dislikes in games...i suspect you might genuinely enjoy it.
Anyway, i hope you have a wonderful relaxing chrimbo and have a blessed time!!
Genuinely hoping santa has brought me jagged earth and sentinels definitive this year!! Pretty sure i was a good boy!!
@@chosenoneunmatched4617 He he cool! I'll certainly have to try it some time.
These past few years Many hyped-up new games have dropped off our radars… … time will tell
I doubt this one will rise to the same heights as others.
I was super excited for Expeditions when I first heard about it, but as gameplay info trickled out I quickly lost interest. It looked far too rinse and repeat as you are describing, plus it is way to big table wise for what it is and does. I'm glad I passed on this one.
Fair enough! Glad you did your research and made the right decision for yourself.
Love your grumpy reviews. At least I know they are honest! 😊
Glad you like them! I like to think critical rather than grumpy 🤣
@@TheBrokenMeeple That's fair enough. I meant to wink, 😉
Great review, thanks. We need more critical reviews. I need to be picky when choosing board games, because I don't have as much time or money as I'd like. It gets frustrating when certain reviewers gush out nothing but praise for every game they review. The job of a reviewer should be to be balanced and critical where necessary.
Thank you so much and I totally agree! But I seem to be one of the few who will go critical.
Thank you for your review. Nice to see somebody being this open about the negative.
My pleasure!
Great to have reviews that get a 7 or 8 BUT that clearly state the negative/critical stuff.
It gives me more/better information to show why a game misses a 10 instead of just showing the great stuff that makes a game a 7 or higher.
In times where most games are somehow good it's important to show exactly the things that might make you love or hate a game.
I play so many games, that after 2 or 3 plays show real issues. In so many reviews nobody talks about those.
In your reviews I can be certain to be informed even about little issues. ;-)
Important: that doenst mean that somebody thinks in a negative way. It's much more important to see what still can be improved instead of just resting on laurels! ;-)
It's important to give weighting to pros AND cons and not just gloss over the negatives to maintain a positive relationship.
I have played Expeditions two times now, one with 4 and other with 5 players. Gamelength is no joke. I would only play this with 3 at max. I enjoy this game though.
Great review from Luke as usual. SM games have also been a hit and miss for me.
You and me both!
Great review. Baffling that balance is still an issue. It's a huge red flag for me.
Yeah I think they spend 10 seconds developing balance in their rules because they know fans will just eat it up.
@@TheBrokenMeeple You want me to take you seriously as a reviewer with comments like this?
@@PurpleSmurfProdsany dissenting opinion is invalid, obviously
@@Kensai_ you think it's a valid opinion that they spend "10 seconds" on balance?
@@PurpleSmurfProds it was sarcasm
on the one hand, I agree, solo works very well, playing with two people is great. I love the atmosphere of this game, that's why I give it 8/10 and I also understand your objections. However, I have one more game syndrome thanks to this game. I'm having a lot of fun with it.
Auto subscribed! Love your work Luke - telling it like it is. I bought this game and haven’t been more disappointed in a game ever. Some serious dollars were ploughed into this amazing production… only for the game itself to be really really poor. Just like high budget movies these days that rely on an established IP and glorious production but zero plot. Comes off as a money making scheme - even though this has a little more love than those movies - it still misses the mark by a similar long way. Love the previous comment about “no memorable moments”. This is just a dull, solo plod though a gorgeous environment were you don’t interact with anything of consequence or anyone at all… until someone has “collected the most money or whatever”… sigh
A shame you forked out money on this - hopefully you can recoup it back! This is why many games are sent out to reviewers long after people have already pre-ordered or only sent to specific reviewers who won't say a bad word in advance. To be honest and open about my criticisms shoots me in the foot for sure, but I would never back down from doing it this way unlike many others.
You're right on the scheme - this would have had zero buzz if it didn't include the Scythe IP!
And thank you for the sub! :-)
First, you do an excellent job of reviewing games. Onto Expeditions, I played this with 5 players and I had the you can do 5 quests, 5 upgrades and 5 melds mech. It was totally worthless, as I never could get meteor cards and barely got 3 quests and 4 upgrades. It took forever, I finished a distant 3rd just a few points behind 2nd and ahead of 4th. The winner was 28 points higher than 2nd. By about the fourth turn you could see the winner running away with the game. You really called it with saying this is a solo game design with players added.
Thank you so much! And glad to see it's not just me missing something - players are experiencing this themselves.
Great review. I always enjoy hearing your thoughts. (Gave you a thumbs up on BGG as well). I've been really looking forward to this one! It's definitely of the Scythe universe like you said. I recently played The Rise of Fenris. In it, the story of Scythe unfolds even more. So if you enjoy the story, I'm guessing there is more tie-in here. I like the story, I love Jakub's art, and I enjoy solo so this is a must have for me. (I wonder if you can use the metal coins from Scythe. )
I wasn't too interested in this game to begin with but I still enjoy hearing people's opinions on it. Can you see why someone would absolutely love this game? I've seen some reviews from those who will probably put it in their top 3 at the end of this year.
Those from the Stonemier cult where Jamie does no wrong.
Pretty much! Or those who can't bare to say a bad word about a game or in this case simply haven't played it enough times or at high player counts. Curious if the people at the beginning played it with more than 2 people at a time. And even then, how forgiving are they of the lack of any player scaling and the unbalanced gameplay and abilities? One of the clips at the start "despite having all the negatives of the group, he still wants to own this game"..........wait what?!
@@TheBrokenMeeple Its this speculation right here in this comment that I would avoid, were I you. It speaks to motives of people and you simply have no idea why anyone rates anything the way they do. If this is the case, let others draw that conclusion, in other words, unless being attacked, stay above the fray.
FWLIW, I found it harder to get cards than workers. Because I would ignore any ability that allowed me to gather just one random card.
I love it but will only play it at 2. I can see this going up with expansion content.
We'll need more fixes then just more cards though.
@TheBrokenMeeple we're gonna need a bigger board -Jaws
I assume shuffling the mech boards to hand them out goes out the window? Edit: the more I watch this, I may actually cancel my preorder once and for all. I've never been so torn on a board game. I got caught up in the hype, I think it's a blessing I messed up and pre-ordered at retail by mistake. The bits about balance are the real killer... playing this at 3/4 players sounds like a nightmare, and guaranteed there will always be 2-3 players pissed off for having a bad mech board, having less workers, etc etc...
But then some poor sod gets the horrible ones.
@@TheBrokenMeeple thanks for saving me $108. Got my refund.
Im confused by the comment that the game is multi player solitaire but also has kingmaking issues. Can someone elaborate?
The kingmaking problem is down to being blocked, but being blocked is usually by accident. You don't aim to go somewhere to screw over one player alone on purpose, you just block someone by doing what you're doing.
But in a multiplayer game that relies on people racing for efficiency, being blocked is a killer. And when players actively block each other, the one player who isn't blocked simply rocks on to victory and it happened in most games I played in.
What is it with British reviewers using the term "rinse and repeat" so often? Luke must have said it five times within in few minutes. Chairman of the Board also uses it frequently. Is this a very common expression in Britain?
I thought it was a common expression generally honestly! 🤷
Was going to buy this just for the art. But keep putting it off. Great review. Why can't they make board games that cross over. Two separate type of games but in the same universe, swapping mini's ,cards but a stand alone game. Sort of L.O.T.R Hobbit type thing. Side adventure that can effect both games.??
I sort of felt a bit left out since Scythe is now such a huge investment so when this game was annouced i thought. Yes, great! Even after several reviews and couple of playthroughs i was even more sold. Until this video.
I usually play with one friend or three. I could definitely play this with one. But hearing how this game manages 3-5 players. I've should have taken the hint that those playthroughs was only with two players.
So yeah, this time I'm keeping my money. Thank you so much for this review and my wallet is thanking you as well.
S
Ha ha thanks for watching!
Great review and my word what a big bax!
Great review Luke. I would love the artwork soo much, but I still haven't played Fenris solo. Maybe I still want this as a (solo- and) 2-plauer game anyway? I will think about this more. On the artworks - are they mainly new or repeat from Scythe and all expansions?
They are indeed new artworks because they are "trying" to continue a story.
None of the Stegmeier games have been balanced though. Viticulture, Scythe, Tapestry, Charterstone, Red Rising. They are all imbalanced. It's one of his design flaws, which is mostly from asymmetry and unique cards you draw. The games involve a lot of luck often too. It's just a design characteristic of his games.
Another design characteristic is lacking enough testing playthroughs to fix issues. Customers end up being the play testers. Just look at Viticulture, Scythe, Tapestry, Red Rising.
Again, this is just what always happens. It's to be expected. Maybe the already planned expansions will address the issues.
Just straight-out lies in the comments, cool.
@@PurpleSmurfProds Do explain the lies?
I own all those games, played all those games. I already own Expeditions Iron Clad edition.
So what is the lie?
@@ScytheNoire It's a lie that they are all imbalanced. It's also a lie that there is not enough testing. Each games goes through hundreds of playtests.
So hundreds of playtests and yet Tapestry required a full errata pack in less than 2 months to balance out the hurrendously imbalanced faction abilities and even AFTER the pack, they STILL aren't balanced. 🤔
Viticulture as much as I love the game does not have balanced visitor cards.
Wingspan I adore and yet they didn't balance the starting bonus cards well enough - i have to introduce a house rule from Ark Nova to fix that - and Oceania had to fix the player boards to balance food and eggs.
Scythe as much as I like the game, does not have balanced factions or exploration cards - remember that some combinations of boards are BANNED in official play!
Red Rising, Pendulum........well they just suck who cares if they're balanced? :P
If they have hundreds of playtests, then frankly they suck at their job.
@@TheBrokenMeeple What "full errata pack" are you talking about? 2 weeks after release? This is not a thing that exists. When you make things up, it's hard to take your opinion seriously.
awesome work
Thanks a lot!
Seems to me, you're just trying too hard to find reasons to not like the game. Having played over 500 games of Scythe, I really don't find the issues with balance. Maybe in a 2 or 3 player game, but I tend to play 4 or more player games, which balance itself by the players itself. Sure, Crimea might be a but stronger, but when every player on the table know what they are doing, I don't think there is a problem. In the last 10 games, Nordic has the most wins, followed by Vesna and Saxony. To not be complete off-topic, in Expeditions there is very easy solution for this "balance issues" Let the last player in TURN order, choose the mech mat first, or just play the mech mats, as if they have no different powers.
In the end, not everybody have to like the same games, cheers, just my two cents on the subject.
Yes not everybody has to like the same games - which means people can say what they like about those games ;-)
You say when EVERYONE knows what they are doing in Scythe - I'm glad you have a dedicated group of 5-7 people who play Scythe religiously (500 times seems a little farfetched but if you're solo-ing the digital version all the time above all other games that could work), but most don't. Nordic is not balanced because it requires a specific way to play it, not to mention a decent board to go with it. It's therefore a harder map to win with - not impossible, I know from experience, but it's still much, much harder.
That solution won't work - people will simply choose the same mech mats in the same order every game. And removing the powers is basically removing content from the game to fix a problem that shouldn't have existed in the first place. In any case, it's not our job to fix a game post release - board games should not be like live service video games.
I count online games in 2020,during the pandemic. With my group, we have maybe around 100 games, and I stand by my opinion that in 4+ player games balance is not an issue, as I said last 10 games, 3 different players won the game with what you said is very difficult to play Nordic faction, all with different player boards. It seems you figured out this game to the core, to know exactly which mech would be selected in every position... To be clear, I don't think Expeditions will become one of my favourite, or for that matter even liked games /too little player interactions, for example my favourite games are Dune imperium, Scythe, Clash of Cultures ME and Twilight imperium 4e/. So far from 3 plays, all at 4 players, I like the game just fine, and think the RNG of cards offers Great replayability.
You forgot Euphoria...where did that fall on your list? :)
Meh and even that has balance and luck swing issues.
I agree that the player boards are very mismatched. However, I’m not sure I agree with the player scaling. We play with 5. If you go last and don’t get a worker, you can instead get cards and next turn get workers. Worst case: 1/2 the players get cards they can’t fully use and 1/2 get workers without cards. In that way it is even. Or a player can go ‘rogue’ and start hoovering up maps.
The two tiles could be separated enough though to ensure that even if PLayers 3 & 4 wait, Player 5 is still screwed, and that's assuming players don't go off exploring tiles.
I think they need completely different score cards based on the number of players.
Eye opening review. Thanks.
In my case, I find that the solo after more or less mid game becomes boring... I still have 2 levels to try, but after some time you just keep moving mechs right and left because they don't have anything more to do... I think it would be better with something that resembled more an actual opponent.
As for the problems with balancing, I didn't see that much in 2 or 3 players (didn't tra 4/5)... Quests were not that influencial, and I think if you manage to pair well the cards with your mech ability, they don't seem that unbalanced.
I find it a game lite enough to enjoy without relying that much on strategy, as the board in 3 players already could change completely before it's your turn again (so I can understand also the frustration for a higher player count).
To wrap up. I think it's a great 2 player game, and I enjoy it also with 3 players, but hope they'll make it more interesting for solo and 3+ players with the expansions...
Stick to the 2-3 player count.
Alright, played a 4-player game last night and I've come around on the game; thanks for showing me the light. Definitely overstayed it's welcome and leaving my collection. Should be able to get my money back unless all potential buyers see this review 😂 Did you know that there's a handful set combos of cards that can trigger an infinite money making loop? Apparently a clarification didn't make it into the rulebook before printing and someone discovered it after two games.
Btw, Jamey, in his recent FB live cast, is concerned about your emotional well-being and thought about reaching out to you.
My "emotional well being"? He did reach out and we have messaged, though nothing was mentioned about emotional well being?!
@@TheBrokenMeeple In his live cast, he seemed genuinely concerned that there was something amiss resulting in the "anger" you expressed in your review. Perhaps I read too much into it. Glad y'all had a conversation.
@@LeeKenshin7 He certainly kept that quiet......
I agree with many of your negatives but our first play was a blast at 5-players. It did take 2.5 hours but then game night is usually 4. Everyone wants to play again tomorrow. I played with the player board that traded in exploration tokens and used them to vanquish at a location that allowed me to boast right away with my card; only used the ability once but a power move that helped me win the game. I was 3rd in player order and the 4th and 5th player came in second and third. Agree that the 5 meld/quest/item board is the worst. The player board that allowed for up to 4 moves was useful in a 5-player game because there was a lot of blocking. Still would hesistant about playing at 5; scalability is really an issue. Enjoying the solo mode tremendously; I started immediately at L4 and seem to be holding my own.
Looking through the comments, maybe a houserule to start everyone with a worker might not be a bad idea.
Whatever two cards they have, start everyone with the two workers they need for them - I think that's a solid beginning, however there still needs to be some player turn order balancing thrown in. As for the mech abilities, not much we can do about those except demand another errata pack! :P
I just can't fathom 5 players being better than 1-2 in the long run. This is a rinse and repeat style engine builder. Engine builders are very susceptible to outstaying their welcome as you don't want an engine that goes on far longer than it deserves (cough cough Great Western Trail). Here 60 minutes, 90 at the absolute max is as long as I want to keep going "move cube here, move cube there, move cube here" etc.
@@TheBrokenMeeple Yeah, let's see if we can get it down to 90-min with 4 players with repeated play. May leave the collection, just like Scythe, at that point though once the shine loses its luster.
To address the player turn order issue a little, I'm thinking of also reverse drafting the mech boards now that we've played before. Maybe even the character/companion. Hopefully the expansion will address these issues like add more worker hexes and more hexes in general that you can scale the map to player count.