I love this game, but I don't hate this review. I didn't really think Tom would like this game, not because I didn't think he'd be smart enough to understand it or any of that, but he generally likes games with a bit more theme and more fun mechanics. I wish people would stop holding Tom's opinions up on a pedestal, like they're the official word on whether a game is good or not. Yes, he's a very informed board-game critic, but he has a particular taste, just like everybody, so if he doesn't like a game that you don't like, it's no big deal! And it doesn't mean he doesn't "understand it" or "get it". Thanks for the honest review Tom, love your channel :)
This review is an example of why I enjoy Tom's reviews so much. Regardless of whether I agree or disagree with him, he gives me enough information that I can make an educated decision on if the game is for me or not. Keep up the great work!
As a gaming community we need more honest and informed reviews of games like this one. You did a great job of defining who would like this game and who will not.
Sorry for commenting 5 years ago here but with Gaia Proyect in the boardgamming scene, do you still stick to these words? BTW. I am half german :P Un Ich wohne in Tenerifa (Kanarischen Inseln)
I'm a thematic gamer at first, I usually need a fun theme to stick with a game, but I love the mechanisms in Terra Mystica. It moves quickly, the game is very involved and the assymetric forces are cool too. I really love the game.
Joachim Erdtman Agreed. I find the mechanics of the thing extremely engaging. I think it's a wonderful game. Very Euro. Very complex. I think the whole theme (which I was suspect of from the get go) was very much overhyped, which disappointed a lot of folks. I just love this game though.
I'm surprised at the number of comments saying this game is too convoluted mechanically and has no theme. On the topic of theme, while it is very light on theme, the theme that is there is extremely well integrated into the mechanics. I think it's beautifully done (witches fly, giants can live anywhere, dwarves can tunnel, etc.). Second, regarding it being convoluted (like the magic pools, for instance) my 8 year old nephew understood the reasons behind the designs pretty much on the get-go and loves the game. And he's hasn't played any Euros except for Settlers! In my humble opinion, I feel the game is a lot stronger than the comments are making it out to be.
Dude (DIDL), that's hardly fair. It's a complex game with a lot going on and even though some mistakes are made, that doesn't mean it's gone over his head or that he can't handle these kind of games. Have you seen some of the Euro games Tom likes? I own this game and I love it (check out my review at The Broken Meeple) and I like a wide variety of games. However even I have to agree that some parts are a bit weird. The Power system for example, even though I'm fine with it, is a bit "odd and gamey" as Tom says. The theme is also "tacked" on but there's enough of it there thanks to the really cool player boards and race variation that I'm fine with that. After all Lords of Waterdeep had a similar theme issue but I love that game also. I wasn't expecting this review to be praising it loads, it's certainly designed for a particular niche of gamers, but I felt the criticisms were fair and they have come up when I've played the game with others before. Glad you got it out in the end Tom!
I know you shared more about this game later. So it's been 2 1/2 years and I have been avoiding this game because I trust your judgment. But as time went on, I did see it was popular, so I knew that one day I would try it, reluctantly and expecting to dislike it, but possibly being surprised and like it. Well, last nite was that time. We had a small group show up for our meetup. Only 5. There was a request to play this, so I let them twist my arm. 5 might be crazy even to folks who like this game, but long games don't usually bother me. It took a half an hour to learn the game and I was tired, and began regretting it right away. Then we started playing the game. And my thought process was, this game stinks, I am not even gonna try, And I might even do some king making. In my 1st move I placed a building to allow 3 people to get "power". For the 1 third of the game I didn't even try. But slowly I started to get the hang of the game and started developing a strategy and decided to try. 1 got 2nd place out of 5, and 3 of the other players had played the game before. It reminded me of my play in Through the Ages, where I hated the game but won, against 2 opponents who had played and liked the game before. I will admit there was some fun, but the work outweighed the fun, and the theme was thin and practically non existent. I played the dwarves and not once did I feel like a dwarf. I have participated in arguments with Euro gamers before about theme. But compared to some Dungeon Crawls or an adventure game, this had zero theme. Now I have played Euros with good theme: Belfort, Carson City, and so on. But not here. It felt a little like Tzolkin, which I like much better, and that has more theme and is my 2nd favorite heavy Euro. Sadly Terra Mystica will go onto my "never to play" again list. Which now has 12 games.
Since "heavy" is debatable, I will just list my top Euros in order, and you can decide which are heavy and which are true Euros: 2. Tikal 3. Trias 9. Above and Below 13. Blood Rage 18. Belfort 26. Ad Astra 27. Islebound 28. Takenoko 32. Isle of Skye 35. Ra 38. Carson City 39. Evolution 40. IKI 42. San Juan 43. Power Grid 45. Carcassonne: Hunters and Gatherers 46. Pillars of the Earth 49. Imhotep 50. Automania 51. Terraforming Mars 55. Havana 62. New York 1901 63. Res Publica 66. Castles of Mad King Ludwig 68. Cleopatra and the Society of Architects 69. Tempus 75. The Gallerist 76. The Manhattan Project
Games I do not want to play: 1. Cards Against Humanity 2. Arkham Horror/Eldritch Horror (or any Cthulhu games) 3. Kingdom Builder 4. Antike 5. Through the Ages and perhaps most detailed/long Civilization style games 6. Village 7. Monopoly 8. Terra Mystica 9. Chess 10. Race for the Galaxy 11. History of the World 12. Battleship
I'm german. So I grew up playing a lot of Euro Games. And I don't really get why a theme in a boardgame is so important. If the gameplay is amazing (like it is in TM), why do you need a theme? When I play a boardgame, what I DO has to be fun and the interaction with the other players (this is why the neighbour-system of TM is so great), but it's not like i'm reading a book, or watching a movie that I want to be drawn into the world. Off course that's just my opinion and experience. So I'd like to know, what is your goal, when you play a boardgame?
I 100 percent agree that the game sheep herds you into a strategy and that the factions are not developed enough to make a difference, i might strongly suggest anyone play the game with a few house rules that me and my wife have used that drastically improve the game play. Each time you terraform a tile for your fraction you also get one cult point designated to your faction, for instance if you are the witches i believe at the beginning of the game you start out with one earth and one wind so each time you terraform for the witches you can choose one from either the earth cult or one from the wind, this should create more involvement with your faction, development and some strategy. We also have the priests worth more the just a worker, you can trade a priest for one worker and one gold coin. Each time you build a dwelling or any building you acquire the materials immediately for doing so... Let me know if this helps.
Fyi, when using the rules mentioned above my wife played as the aurens and i played as the giants, the house rules seemed to work well, we had good development which i thought the game lacked before we started using our house rules, it also didn't make it too easy to max out our buildings. We also have a round zero that only allows you to develop before round 1 when you can receive benefits for each round.
+KimoBliss I think gaining resources as soon as you build something would break the game. You'd have all of your buildings out well before the last round.
Yeah nah, the races aren't balanced that is true, just use a VP bidding system if you like. But you can still make awesome engines with Aurens and Giants (both races I have ended the game with only four buildings left, could potentially do even better) it's just their points that suffer. Certainly don't need to give them more resources. If you are playing two player, maybe the problem is you aren't close together, therefore have to spend more money and don't have as much energy? In which case I highly recommend playing with two races each. Just be ready for a long game (but a great one).
Great Review! Having had someone who loves this game and really wanted me to join them, they throw it at me and tell me to learn the rules and then join in.... so I had to go through the really lengthy process of discovering the high number of nuances of this game on my own after several playthroughs... and I had come to the EXACT same conclusions that Tom Vasel did.
After all this time I was expecting you to slam the game. I really thought you'd put it off because you were desperately searching for something positive to say! I think you have been very fair. I am glad that this game wasn't a complete miss for you.
I think it's a great review. I think he is honest about both his reaction to it and doesn't hesitate to say that if you are a euro gamer fan...there is nothing you should dislike about this game.
Personally I love this game, but I really struggle to get it to the gaming table. The trouble with it is the fact it's so heavy AND has no theme. This in itself doesn't bother me, but most of my group find it too much. Heavy game? Fine. No theme? Fine. Heavy game and no theme? Most of my group aren't interested. I agree with Tom, love eurogames, you'll enjoy this, but I would definitely recommend playing it before you buy it.
The thing about this game is that its much more fun than it actually seems. I've watched video and read about it and I was uninterested/meh. Then I got the chance to play it with some friends and its actually quite fun and very enjoyable! The re-playability is also quite high; there are 14 possible factions for a maximum of 5 players in each game. But yea there isn't really much artwork and they could've used more vibrant colors. It seemed dull when I first opened the box.
I just bought this for my gaming group yesterday, and we played tonight. I am VERY new to board gaming btw. I will explain it like this. Terra Mystica is a "Strategic, Resource Management Game" I can say this, my group was super impressed by the gameplay and mechanics. This game has 1 goal (GET VICTORY POINTS) but it gives you 5 different ways to get there! So if someone gets out the gates early and starts doing 1 strategy faster than the other, you can switch gears mid game and go for a different strategy to get points. It is a SUPER COMPLEX version of Settlers of Catan. Yes, the "fantasy" theme really isnt there, but I can see why they used it.
Being a big fan of Terra Mystica, and reading the comments on this video as I began to watch, I was dreading what might be said in this review. Turns out it's actually very reasonable. "An exceptionally designed game", but just not his thing.
I usually play Ameritrash, but I also enjoy light/medium euros. Played this last week and I agree this is for euro gamers. I can't remember what place I finished neither do I care. I virtually ignored the magic track because after several explanations I still was not 100 percent sure how to use it.
I would say conservatively that I've played Terra Mystica well over 100 times (possibly more than 200). I definitely lean pretty heavily towards eurogames and more abstract strategy games. Tom clearly doesn't, which is why I take this review with a grain of salt and want to share my own thoughts. For me theme, story, quality of components and production is a lot less important than game play/mechanics, strategic depth, interaction, replayability etc. Tom's review is a pretty solid first impression, although he's honest enough to acknowledge that he hasn't played it enough to really know the depths of the strategy in the game. It's kind of the curse of a game reviewer who plays so many different kinds of games. A game with a lot of strategic depth that takes a while to master, is probably going to be harder to properly review as a result, especially if it's a game type that you're not particularly fond of. One key aspect of game strategy he doesn't mention is turn order, which makes or breaks a lot of games (assuming you have players of relatively equal ability) because it effects which bonus tiles are available to you (and your opponents) and who gets first crack at the power spending actions along the bottom of the board, as well as competition for terrain hexes. His "criticism" that the game sort of shepherds you along a certain path is not what I would call a criticism, but a preference for a particular style. I think it makes the game more challenging and for new players may seem to spoil the fun because they're looking at their race's unique abilities and building castles in the sky only to be brought back to earth by the demands of the round bonuses and the specific opportunities and restrictions offered by the particular bonus tiles available. Some games there's a lot more money available, in others it's tough to make end of round points because those tiles aren't in the game, in still others there's little or no power available from bonus tiles. The point is you have to adjust your strategy accordingly. And that means you have to understand the races you're playing pretty well and the game mechanics. The path is different every time you play, and the combination of races you're competing against is different every time. The advantages of developing next to players (trading house upgrades cost 50% less gold, you gain power when they build or upgrade buildings next to you, but you may have to sacrifice points to do so) is balanced by competition for terrain types or key hexes that you need to complete cities and establish adjacency for your whole network. With the random mix of bonus tiles, turn bonuses, and races you're never going to play the same game twice. It takes a fair number of replays to get comfortable with all of this, and some people never really do. It's what makes this game so highly strategic and replayable, probably the most replayable game I've ever played. It takes a long time to master playing all 14 races that come with the base game (another six with the Fire and Ice expansion - that also offers two new maps). One key to maximizing strategic choices in the game is for players to select races AFTER the bonus tiles and round bonus tiles are layed out and do it based on initial turn order. Some races fit better than others with particular combinations of those tiles, BUT players choosing later in the order gain the advantage of choosing races that are the best counters to those already selected (because of terrforming abilities, ability to compete on cult tracks, ability to compete on turn order, ability to steal cheap terraforms because of where they are on the terrain circle relative to opponents and so on). Tom's comment about point salad is actually quite misleading and contradicts his description of the game has being "tight" and feeling shepherded along a particular path. It's indicative of someone who hasn't really played the game enough to understand that where you get your points in any particular game is going to vary a lot, but it's never a free for all (although he does point out that it takes skill to get points). Some times it's focused endgame, other times it's focused on point bonus on a particular key turn, other times it's focused on a particular racial ability (some races gain a lot of points for specific types of actions) and still others it's all about tapping the bonus tiles with scrolls by manipulating turn order. Some games you will have one or two turns where you make all your points. Sometimes you'll see players who lag far behind suddenly jump a huge number of points to take the lead because of a well planned build up. Sometimes slow and steady, trying to maximize the point bonus every turn wins the day. Some times it's the player who dominates the cult tracks and sometimes it's the player who builds the most cities and/or the largest network. And in the best games unique strategies result in first, second and third place being only a few points apart, where you can point to one or two key decisions or actions that really made the difference. Tom's comments about gaming the power system are also indicative of someone who hasn't played enough to know how to finesse this. You can burn power, but it's a common mistake for players to burn too much power and be left short mid and late game as a result. Timing your burns is key and depends on how it affects turn order (it means additional actions that leave you later in turn order next round) and whether the jump on development is worth the reward. So is leaving some flexibility. If both bonus tiles that give 3 power on income phase are in play, you can easily end up in a situation where taking those tiles gives you no bonus because you already maximized it from your trading houses and or ovals (from building temples). For some races and/or strategies and depending on how much power is available from the bonus tiles, it is a much better strategy to build up your power generation early on and then dominate mid to late game on the power actions (turn order again, being crucial). Engineers for example can generate a ton of power with a second temple (5 power income) and the 4 and 1 power bonus from respective ovals. So too can alchemists if they get their fortress and bump their terraforming tech up early and use the 1 and 2 shovel actions along the bottom of the board that cost power and generate power at the same time. Burning power early with these races can severely limit their strategy later on.
I have watched many of your reviews and this is the best one I have watched. You did an exceptionally superb job explaining your response to the different aspects of the game that you liked and didn't like. I love how you played it a few times or more and you still couldn't decide if you like the game or not. I feel the same way after one play. It is a difficult to explain situation--that you ended up explaining well-- how the quality of the components is quite good and the player mats are attractive and the game has the varied bright colors, yet the appearance of the game overall when it's being played is drab and doesn't command players' attention. I love Euro games and I am--for sure--the target audience for this game, but I do not feel wowed or won over, like I felt when I played Belfort or Antike, for example; those other games made me flush with anticipation for the next time it hits the table.
I feel like if you dont play this constantly you will forget or mess up the rules all the time...I like the idea as a whole, but the mechanisms and execution seem way to finicky for most people, or if not played all the time.
Each to their own. I disagree with the guy on virtually every point but that's fine; it's just one man's opinion. My casual gaming wife had no problems grasping the rules and thoroughly enjoys it, so it really can't be that complicated!
This is not possible. I play a LOT of games, and I don't like this game at all I've played it multiple times, and every time I play I have no clue what I'm suppose to be doing or how to go about it.
Denver Boyd Not sure what is not possible? The instruction book is very clear on every aspect of the game. The images on the boards tell you exactly what everything does, so you don't even have to particularly memorise anything.
Denver, I find it really odd that you think because you don't know what you are doing, that that makes the game bad and other people have that experience. Well obviously not, because it is a super highly ranked game with tournaments and everything. Other people obviously have a feel for the game. Maybe you just suck at it.
This game has hit the table and filled all 5 seats every week since our play group got it (about 2 months). Then we got a second copy and played 2 tables. That is how popular it is with our group. I have never seen any game get this many plays in this short of a time period. What Tom said is not wrong at all - I can understand all his hesitations. It's not for everyone, but for those who enjoy it, it is a magnificently deep rabbit hole that my group of about 10 gamers has been enjoying immensely. If you enjoy heavy euros that reward experience with no random elements after initial setup, then I wholeheartedly recommend it. Just give it a few games to really bloom.
I love it too, for the same reasons. Don't suppose you have any recommendations for games along the same lines? I'd recommend Caylus to you, if you haven't played that already :)
I've never played anything quite like TM, but other favorites in our group that are "heavy euro" in nature are Troyes, Tammany Hall, T'Zolkin, and Agricola. That's more a list of "other great games" than "games like TM" though.
It's NOT overhyped, it's just a Euro game which a lot of gamers prefer to Ameri. Also, it's a really really good euro game, one of the best there is. Now, if Tom doesn't like that style of games, that's fine, but that doesn't mean the game itself is overhyped.
If the hype just amounted to "it's a really good euro game", then it wouldn't be overhyped. However, that gamers evangelize about TM like it revolutionized Euro games, and that it's place on the BGG list is only exceeded by Puerto Rico and Agricola is excessive.
Hmm. Well, just off the top of the head, I'd say Le Havre, Trajan, Dominant Species, and Castles of Burgundy have all earned a higher spot IMO. Thing about TM is that it achieved its place on the BGG list before it was even in wide circulation (which it's only been for a few months now). Few people had it, yet everybody loved it. Of the dozen or so folks I've introduced it to, I can't say anyone's been truly blown away. A friend got a copy for Christmas and brought it to our New Year's Day super-session. He mentioned that while he liked it he was disappointed after everything he'd heard had led to such a big buildup. TM has its share of flaws, like Tom's observations about how the scoring tiles herd players, and how the cult track feels unrealized. Personally, I'd rather that the scoring tiles not provide VP's directly, but rather other bennies. And I'd rather favors be unlocked by moving up the cult track, and temples provide a benefit that incentivizes players to build more than just the one they need to get a sanctuary.
Love this game. I like games where the main board is SMALL, and the player's board is not big. I like board games where there are NO HAND CARDS, and there is NOTHING to READ as you play along (unlike many games, which need read text on cards every turn). If you like ZERO randomness, this is the game to go, as there is no dice rolling, and EVERYTHING (yes, everything) is REVEALED/VISIBLE PRIOR to game begin, there are no random cards to draw every turn, and there is absolutely nothing hidden in the game. If you like this game, check out HEGEMONIC, a space abstract euro game that some people said is comparable to TERRA MYSTICA. I love them both, BEST GAMES of the year (although I also voted Battlelore 2nd Edition my favorite of the year)
Thought it was overhyped. Looks like a solid euro but not one for my collection (and I'm a euro gamer at heart) Wish they'd not bothered with the fantasy theme though. It feels even more tacked on than, say a trading theme.
Have you even played it? I don't understand how you can say the theme is tacked on. Maybe the theme doesn't meet your expectations, but without the theme, many mechanics wouldn't make any sense and the game would be worse for it.
***** The theme is as tacked on as the one is in Lords of Waterdeep only it works for that game (in my opinion) but not for Terra Mystica. I think (again, for me) a more traditional style euro-theme would work better in this case I'm not suggesting the game has no theme - I really don't like most abstract games - but it appears this game is quite decisive. If people like it then that's great. Enjoy.
@@lordsplodge I know this is an old comment, but why should it be a bad game cause of the theme if you are an euro gamer anyways. Now we got Gaia Project, other theme and for me the little bit better game. A trading theme wouldnt work here and we really got trading over and over. If you implement trading in a siedler of catan way, you change the game drastically
I really enjoyed it personally, but I agree that it IS hard and you can kind of get shoehorned into a specific strategy. That being said, I like the fantasy theme. It's not tied very well into the game itself, but I would not be as interested in the game if it didn't have the fantasy theme. I know it's just a paint job, but it's an important paint job for me.
Catan or Waterdeep are casual funsies pastimes nobody really cares about in my group(especially Catan due to being luck-driven), Terra Mystica really makes our brains boil which makes it much better in comparison to those two.
Robert Chmielecki why is luck driven a bad thing when long term variance always causes the best player to win. For example, I never thought about poker variance as a bad thing since I made thousands of euros with it. The best player will always win, it's not as if a better play causes someone to lose in the long run with either Catan or poker. Boring however is boring and tm is the epitome of hours long drag of boredom with zero interaction.
It's not a bad thing per se, it's a matter of preference. My group prefers games based on skill not luck and we often introduce house rules to limit the impact of luck in other games (for example always play Agricola with drafting, not dealing cards) We don't really care about luck becoming even in some long term league or something, because we want the current game, here and now NOT be decided by something out of our control. When, every now and then, we play a luck-driven game , the attitude is mostly "whatever, who cares who wins this funsies child's play" but with game like Terra Mystica it's always tooth and nail, brains boiling affair. Basically when we can say "a fine move!" instead of "you lucky bastard!" we're happy with the game we're playing. Your groups' attitude may vary and fortunately there are games for both kinds of groups.
If you lose a game due to a unlucky roll of a dice while the move was +ev, you didnt lose at all. Maybe it is just a matter of redefining what it means to win. If i lose a 1000$ pot with a preflop AA where i totally outplayed my opponent and i lose, i didn't actually lose. I just lost due to short term fluctuations, but i won long term (aka 89% vs random hand, ill win 890 out of 1000 hands in the same situation on average). I don't mind losing in that case at all, because it really isnt losing. It also helps ofcourse to keep players in the game to play with. If they can win sometimes (while losing long term), they will continue to play with me (for example Catan). I played another game of Terra just yesterday btw, and i do like it. But for what it is, i like some luck (while letting the better player win more on average) more, because i can always find people to play with. I Still wouldnt call TM Catan x 10, since Catan clearly is a simpler, better designed game. TM just seems complex to make it complex from time to time(its deepness comes from 1000 of options, not necessarily from player interactions or complex strategy), while Catan has player interaction, trading. Psychology plays a huge part, as well as long term strategy and... a bit of luck (to keep the pool of players coming), i'd say that long term, the best player will always win on average in Catan. maybe it is just preference.
I really agree that it is a very fancy version of Settlers of Catan. It is a really good game from my one play, but I think that it's probably too long for what it is. I thought the bowl thing was a neat idea, but I didn't game it enough at the beginning to get as much benefit out of it as I should have. It's a fun game, but it's not something that I would put into my collection right at this time.
It really isn't. There is too much randomness in Catan, and Catan is characterized by trading. This game though is purely about planning and outplaying your opponents.
Sindaurion I agree. Mechanics-wise, there's not all that much that's similar between Settlers and Terra Mystica. There's WAY more randomness in Catan, for a start. I think the only similarities really are that the settlements and roads look like the dwellings and bridges, and you place them on hexes. I don't enjoy Catan nearly as much as Terra Mystica.
I don't think it's anything like Settlers. There is zero randomness or luck in this game. The Settlers comparisons are a bit ridiculous, and a seem tad dismissive. And why do people keep saying this game is long? Our 3 player games go from 45 minutes to a little over an hour. That's about 20 mins per player, which I think is exactly what it says on the box.
Yeah, comparing this to Settlers really makes me think people completely misunderstood this game. It has zero gameplay similarities with Catan. There IS an element of luck, but it's minimal - the bonus powers and the scoring tiles that you use. Other than that, there's zero luck and hidden information.
Colm McCarthy Because it is long. It's not just 20 mins per player because you actually have to calculate not only what you might do, but what other people might do, what you can do, and how that changes from turn to turn. For what it is, it is long when you have to consider multiple options and try to optimize your moves and play with first time players. Unless your game group plays this all the time, you're going to probably attract one or two new players every once and awhile.
The review was well done. Tom could see that the game is good. Some of the aspects just didn't appeal to him. I love this game and those same aspects Tom wasn't fond of, I think are great.
Excellent Game. I wasn't excited about it after my first play. Thought it was okay. But after multiple plays, I began to like it more and more. There's something about the design, different factions, strategic depth that makes me come back for more. After multiple plays, I can tell you the factions are not balanced so keep it in mind when choosing. Your starting placement of dwellings can also lose you the game. That's how brutal and unforgiving this game is.
I think he is dead on. I expected him to gush over it because it's so highly rated, but I think it's just a bit overrated. I now realize I have more in common with Tom as I am getting tired of these "point salad" games. The game just takes elements of a zillion other games and meshes them together. At least, that's my impression. I rather try some innovative concept, even if it's considered "light" or "filler".
i want to like this game... but between downtime and complexity, i just don't think i could find anyone to play. That's if i could ever figure out the rulebook :/
It's really not, and that's not what he said. It's just not a kind of game he likes. Now, I enjoy both euro games, and ameritrash from time to time, but they're a completely different experience, and I understand people that only love one or the other.
I'll have to disagree, Tom. I've logged almost 50 games. While I agree the theme is embarrassingly tacked on, the game is not as one-tracked as you think. I've won against experienced players without doing anything the scoring tiles tells you to build, so there's enough freedom where you can win via other ways (cult track, bonus tiles, favors). I've won against experienced players without winning much of the cult track either, as long as you're not last in everything. I've used the same races in different games, but I rarely ever repeated my strategies because of the randomization of the scoring tile and bonus tiles. The game is surprisingly not that long either; game length is 20-25 minutes per player (at least in my game group). The power bowls are strategically deeper than you think. Knowing when to remove power to gain that one extra is important. Sometimes you're missing that one coin that you just need to build that Stronghold to get both the 5 points and a town key. I'll admit, you need a lot of plays to catch these nuances, and I respect your opinions; but if you have the time (which I assume you don't, since you're a busy worker), please play some more. The game is a very flexible game, especially so for a Euro. Hopefully you'll see that the game isn't as herded as you think; maybe you just caught onto more obvious strategies? :P
I'm not quite sure on what point you're disagreeing with Tom's review. He said it was a well-designed game. Why are some folks speaking as If this is a negative review? I guess it's just the nature of the internet: things are either awesome or awful. Moderation is a sign of weakness. Tom's assessment of the scoring tiles is correct: they tend to herd players, and are ignored at one's own peril. In particular, the ones that score for strongholds/sanctuaries can be decisive because it's a nice chunk of points and you're only got a couple of shots at qualifying. I'd love to see an expansion with replacements that provide benefits other than victory points. Having said that, I agree that if you take scoring tiles are out of the equation, it's a very open-ended game, a VP-salad games tend to be. Oddly, Tom actually criticizes this as well even as he criticizes it for being too rigid.
Steve Gale Fair enough, but didn't Tom himself say his opinions on his review swayed towards the negative? I totally respect his opinions; I never once claimed he was wrong. I only implied that there were some aspects of the game that are not noticeable until many, many plays. If it's wrong for me to disagree with his opinion, should I say that it is wrong of YOU to disagree with my opinion on Tom's opinion? I'm a rational person. I know Tom enough to know Terra Mystica is not his type of game, but it's also unfair to him to call out negatives that (at least for me anyways) that do not exist. Going back to scoring tiles: again, I have played many games where I barely focused on the scoring tiles. Stronghold/Sanctuary scoring tiles at most only give you 10 points. But keep in mind that those buildings are very expensive to build (usually 4 workers, 6/8 gold), and the income that it gives are generally very mediocre. I'd much rather focus on founding multiple towns with those recources. Not only do I work towards securing the Largest Number of Indirectly Adjacent bonus, I'll get a Town key which allows me to secure some Cult tracks too. Getting some favors that give you points along the way is a huge bonus as well. Both strategies could work more or less equally well, it only depends on what the specific circumstances are (bonus tiles available, space), in which the current situation would make one strategy better than the other. That's why the game insists that scoring tiles AREN'T the only ways to score points. I'll definitely concede that if scoring tiles were the ONLY WAYS to score, then yes, the game would essentially be herding you. But keep in mind that the game comes with many other ways to score: upgrades, favors, bonus tiles, racial powers, cult track, biggest numbers, town keys, residual resources. In the end though, I'm happy to agree to disagree with you. We all have our own thoughts on this game, but this is opinion is mine, and and only mine. Hopefully others can respect that as well as I respect your's and Tom's. I'm only here to give a sincere defense on what I believe is one of the most well-designed Euros recently, for the sake of others who may have been put off by Tom's opinions. I do not want people to miss the opportunity to play this outstanding game. I shall end my argement with a sincere and non-passive-aggressive smiley.:)
Toan Tricky question. Their stronghold is really tempting, but I favor building temples asap. I lean towards the temples to nab the choicest double favors first. Climb all four cult tracks, and realize that they are at a disadvantage in needing a town key to claim the 10 spot (as they only start with one dwelling on the map They need some sailing to found additional towns, so save priests for that.
In principle, I agree with the criticism that the game is a point salad. I like games where you acquire resources to build buildings, which produce more resources, which you use to build more buildings, etc. I like when there are diverse ways to acquire resources and complex ways to use them, while the path toward victory points is simple. Terra Mystica is the opposite -- there are relatively few resource types but a ton of different ways to score points. Like Tom says, the challenge is less to figure out how to optimize production and more to align your strategy with the path that the game shepherds you down. Despite that, the game just *feels* very fun for me to play. And all that really matters in a game is if you have fun playing it.
Tom, I have the game. I have played many times, and shown it and played it with many non-gamers who learnt on their first play through comfortably. Everything you have said about it I feel isn't right, I think that the attention to detail, the board and everything about it feel well made, nice to hold, and the game itself has a good amount of immersion to it. Though the fact that I own it does give me a bias point of view. But the fact that I disagree with you, and many others do in the comments, does not grant anyone the right to call this a bad review. All the idiots saying this review is bad should rethink what they said, Tom gave a review to what his opinion is, and an individual's opinion is always true to them. It is how he found it, how he experienced it and how he thinks of it. He is not saying how you will feel about it, or what the game is. Only what he thinks. Making the review 100% correct, true, accurate and just another good review to consider when looking at terra-mystica. (also before buying games i always watch the bad reviews first).
Many things Tom like, such as different boards and races, resources that are shown on the player board when you uncovered them, they are all present in Eclipse...
I found my sentiments about this game echoed by Tom in this video. The theme comes across as rather weak, there are not many fun mechanics, the cult tracks and round bonuses feel like a one-dimensional reward. There are not many clear trade-offs, so I got this feeling of not knowing what i'm doing.
Id say its a very anticlimactic game, what you think you should be rewarded for you arent really and vice versa insignificant things may be rewarding in a big way. So you may feel like you've done a lot and somehow you only have 6 VPs while someone else has like 30. So I see what Tom is meaning by the shepherding, you are dictated by whats going to give you the most VP during a round. In the game I played I was first on two cult tracks and second in number of buildings but I still manged to be last somehow. Thats where it gets really euro-ish as Tom was saying you're rewarded for just plugging away at trifling nuances. For ex: if you get 1 vp for every shovel you do in that round, you may terraform with no purpose at all other than to get VP that round.
This is, I have to admit, my one gripe with the game, but having said that it doesn't always work out that way. A great engine might get beaten by a points opportunist, but not always. And maybe that is actually a strength of the game; when to sacrifice engine for points, and when to just build.
Please, please do a review of Through the Ages: A Story of Civilization! It's #2 of all time on BoardGameGeek, but there isn't even one good review of it on RUclips. You can't even find it in any shops in my country and just hardly on eBay. It seems like it's has just come and gone, but that can't be right. One of the best board games ever, if you can believe BGG's list, can't just fade away like that! I want to know what the game is all about before I'm brave enough to buy it. So, a review, please kind sir!
Go check out rahdo runs through videos. He has done one with the Through the Ages. There is a "review-ish" segment in form of a final thoughts, but the runthrough is quite excelent, and it's quite easy to see if you would enjoy the game or not. Really, if you have not seen it and want to check out the game, I highly recommend it. I was in exactly the same spot at one point :)
Perhaps I am a bit spoiled being in this area but just about every flgs within 100miles has it in stock. I love TTA though in my experience it tends to be divisive (thankfully those i play it with nowadays love it)
Just play it for the first time and I hate it. It feels like Sim City on an abstract board game. Here is why this sucks: - It is way too complex to learn to play the game. It took 30min to explain the game without expansion, the rule book feels like a book, and the rules are even more complex than 7 Wonders. - The theme is useless. I didn't care I was the mermaids. All I saw was I was a blue board vs a red and a green and a brown. - The game takes 2-3 hours, and then you need time to score. - It takes more than one game to learn the strategy. Seriously, you will need to play this at least twice to learn how to play it and another game play to learn the strategy. Verdict: Definitely ONLY for HARDCORE Europlayer players. You will have a very hard time to find new players. Definitely not for party. Everyone will leave after 5 minutes. And if you want to make everyone leave in less than 1min, add the expansion to the mix.
I wanna like this so bad but I've never really played an eurogame before and this seems too dense for a starting choice. Am I wrong, should I try another one like Agricola or Caylus?
Greg Webb Disagree Alhambra is "super" fun. I have no problem with highly "technical" games but Alhambra feels pure technical and just pointless to me. Agricola is a great game and despite its friendly appearance is technically agonizing. It just feels like there's never enough time to do what you want. This sense probably disappears after a few dozen games as you get a better handle on how much is possible for you to accomplish during a game and then just work on optimizing your path from there. If you want to get into gaming and pull your friends in with you, I think the funnest game with serious depth and infinite novel replayability, while arguably not euro-ish in a strict sense, is Dominion. *Everybody*, even girls and nongamers love it and get addicted instantly and you will too. I highly recommend using Dominion as your entry game. Get one or two expansions with it too, depending on how much more you want to spend. Have one of them be the Prosperity expansion, and maybe Seaside or whatever other ppl suggest to you or you read in reviews. If you've never played Settlers of Catan, it's a "fun," elegant, and of low-moderate complexity eurogame that everyone likes and is considered the most popular Euro gateway game for good reason. Nongamers love it too and is perfect to suck them into your world with. One of my personal favorites for "fun" while being very interesting is Chaos in the Old World. My group refers to it as "Chaos Gods" for short. Find some reviews on youtube or boardgamegeek.com to see if you might like it. Find forums on boardgamegeek.com for beginner Euro recommendations. If you want a pure specimen of a Eurogame that's interesting, take a look at Puerto Rico which spent a long time at the very top of the boardgamegeek.com list and for good reason. It's considered the prototypical "Eurogame" possibly more than any other title. There's a start for you :) Happy gaming! I welcome feedback from others about my suggestions here.
Alex Serrano I forgot to respond to your Caylus suggestion there too. I think Caylus is a fantastic Euro and def embodies what a Euro is all about. Interestingly, it's a perfect information game but feels open-ended enough that unless you're experienced, allows for a lot of play that you can't just calculate out perfectly, but will be rewarded for calculating out as far as you can. If you're a thinker I think Caylus is great. If you lean more to the casual and aren't likely to be the type who stares intensely at the gameboard with your elbows on the table and your face in your hands as if you're playing a serious chess match, then it may not be as right for you.
Clark Potter Hey Clark! We're already avid Dominion players in my group of friends (it's my favourite game without a doubt) and own Catan and Carcassone as well. We also play Citadels, Bang or Mission: Red Planet occasionally... Reading my OP again I realize that it was so misleading because I really meant to say I've never played one of those generally considered 'hardcore' eurogames such as Caverna, Agricola (A feast for odin? This really caught my attention), Terra Mystica, Caylus or something of the sort and been looking for one of these longer and heavier games since I'm a bit tired of the simpler games I'm familiar with. I'll definitely get Puerto Rico as an introduction and I'm more than willing to check out any other heavy and long eurogame if you recommend it. Thank you so much for your reply!
I just tried it for the first time a few weeks ago, and a hated it, far to leghty and it is a really hard game for first timer. It took me 2 of the six turns to understand what is going on. Plus all thing said and done when you have a poor man's turn you don't get to play for 20 or 30 minutes. It is easy to not enjoy yourself. I COULD learn to like it, but it doesn't seem to worth the effort. But I agree with you it is a solid game with good design.
= worker-placement, gather ressources, convert ressources, buy, trade. If it has a lot of economic elements it it, it's Euro. Because we Europeans don't like conflicts - on a wider scale. We like sanctions instead of bombs. It's a history thing.
It was originally used to describe a type of board game which were popular in Europe (Germany). Now they're used to describe a classification of board games that share the following mechanics and traits. 1. No direct conflict against other players 2. Very little randomness (dice rolling, card draw, etc) 3. Resource management tends to be the core mechanic in most euro games. Most of the conflict generally revolves around being the first player to monopolize a particular resource and build a strategy around it.In my opinion, this makes most euro games very "mathy" where you'll spend most of your time crunching numbers in your head to figure out exactly how you can get the most victory points. 4. Theme tends to take a back seat to "gameplay." In that, theme seems to only exist to attempt to try to disguise the core mechanic as something other than well... math.
I'm sure you've been told this by now Tom but you don't cycle power any faster by sacrificing power. No matter how many power discs you have, every power you spend always costs you two power to recover.
Point Salad is my new favorite expression. I get why others like this game so much but I've played over a dozen games at this point and no matter what race I choose I am never able to make much improvement in my gameplay. It just failed to capture my imagination. I'd never buy it and I'd be willing to play it if everyone else in my group was super keen to do so, but it would never make my list of preferred games and I'm done trying to get good at it.
I think Tom's review is fair. Some of the things that he dislikes about it I enjoy, but I mean it is subjective. Perhaps the review is very off putting for people who find this game to be a Holy Grail because of the half baked explanation of the game. Tom did warn us about it. Placing the wrong colors on the wrong hexes is a good example of that, and I am sure some people might mistake this for him not knowing the game well enough to give a solid review. Here is my problem with reviews for a game like this; If you don't like it, you wont be able to play it enough to give a solid review of it. And if you do play it enough to give a solid review, you probably love it. Honestly without sufficient plays it would be hard to be able to articulate what you love, or hate about this game. Bottom line, don't trust reviews for this game. If you can, play before you buy. If you cannot, I would suggest buying this game only if feel like you are missing this type of game in your collection and no one else in your group will buy it. Fortunately for me 3 people in my game group have it, and they are 3 of the few people I'd want play this game with.
Having played and owned the game, I think this review doesn't do Terra Mystica justice. I am aware that this isn't Tom's type of game from his past reviews but the way he has reviewed this one leads me to the general feeling he wasn't getting all the strategy or he didn't go over it or explain it well.This may be because of all the reviews he has been trying to catch up on. I think the theme is fine, you could strip out a lot of the mechanics and apply it to other themes easily though. He did mentioned that he didn't give a full review of the rules so I won't complain about that, nor will I nitpick nuances like mixing up land types\factions or using wrong names. I will nitpick the play time stated on the intro though, 2 hours is not accurate, once you and your fellow players know the game it is about 20-30 min per player. Now where he starts talking about you can go rounds without doing anything, I have never had that issue except when I first started playing. This is a game that grows on you and you really need to look ahead, see what the bonuses for future rounds are, and plan things out before you move, one thing he didn't explain well is that each round you can keep acting until you have no more actions to take, which goes back to good planning. I have never really felt prodded, but it is fair to state there are certain actions that are more productive then others, especially with the choice of faction you are playing, but that goes back to strategy. I will also stat the factions are not 100% balanced for newcomers, some are easier to play then others, my recommendation if you are just learning the game stay away from the Black and Red factions, these factions aren't gimped, but the strategy needed to win requires some abstract approaches to win and it can be an uphill battle, Before passing judgment on the game, I would recommenced viewing Ryan's review of Terra Mystica although I disagree with his opinion on the cult track as it makes a big difference depending on the faction you play. I do agree with Tom in that this game isn't for everyone. If you are not a fan of planning 2-3 moves ahead or resource management, this game is not for you. If you are fan of games like Lords of Waterdeep but think that they are not deep enough and can get past the light theme, get this game, you will love it. Terra Mystica is easily one of my favorite euros.
I'd actually recommend Caylus if you think Lord of Waterdeep is too light, but then again, if you like Caylus (like I do) you'll probably like Terra Mystica :)
Do not pass on this one, euro lovers. Some of the comments here do scratch both faults and highlights of the design (or attitude towards this particular review / Tom's opinion). The game is not restrictive or shepherdy at all - you can skip whatever you like and still win, provided you have a plan (you do, don't you?;). Also power bowls system provides a major control aspect of the game and I do get the impression that Tom did not fully comprehend its influence over the gameplay. On the other hand - the theme is totally pasted on and I would compare Terra to Catan+ (with the caveat that I dislike Settlers a great deal and find Terra Mystica a supreme design) and mention Feld's Salad as a cream on top as well.
I'm surprised he criticizes it for being too shepherdy, when Agricola (one of his favorite games) seems infinitely more shepherdy than Terra Mystica. Yes, you should probably go after the points on the turn tiles, but there is enough variance and choice in Terra Mystica that you don't have to. Agricola seems very rigid in the choices and moves you can make. Do this or starve. I love both games, by the way.
Hello to me from the past :) Played it in the meantime and... I liked it! Normally heavy euros are so not my alley, but this one is just a joy when it comes to design and mechanisms or maybe just my evolution of taste in boardgames. Such a clear and self-explanantory layout of... well everything. Of course all the mechanisms and iconography are a big spoon full to swallow for someone new to the game... or genre. But the same time it is easy to understand and remember, when it comes to abilities and rules (which is often a problem for me). I thought it is only fair to mention my rather rare turnaround of opinion on this one. Try it, maybe there is a surprise waiting for you, like it has been for me :)
Wow. Looks like a really boring, over-complicated, and fiddly euro. Pass. I didn't even like Dominant Species. That game was boring to me. The most euro I get is Lords of Waterdeep. And Ticket to Ride of course.
I find point salad is a term used by people who like shitty games it's this big group think thing. Not every game has to have a super action adventure dungeon crawl super hero battle theme with a lot of dice and rules exceptions. Just b/c a game gives you a multiple scoring avenues doesn't mean it has no direction, they just don't hold your hand. I don't mind Toms negative responses to this game, I've been watching his videos for a long time so I know how he reviews and what he likes. It is important to remember that he is not the end all be all or at least we don't need to let him be. Honest opinions or not he has a taste and that is fine just don't let his taste change yours.
Point salad is a great term for the incentivization structure behind these sorts of games. In some direct confrontation games like Kemet, the goal of certain actions is to acquire a certain strategic advantage. In some negotiation games like Archipelago, resources are acquired for the leverage they may give later. In point salad games like Terra Mystica (which I do own and like, though I'm not clear enough on the rules from my play with a friend to run my own copy yet), the goal of almost every action in the game is to gather points. Every action you take directly provides points, and the fascination lies in how to optimize your point-gathering machine or how you can manipulate systems to produce more points than your opponent's different machine. Points are the be-all, end-all incentive. So it's a categorical criticism, not one specific to Terra Mystica. I think it's a valid one: placing points as the end goal can often feel like painting in one color.
I think Tom is getting old now. or probably because of trying to play every game out there to review, he dont spend enough time to play new good games. Tom gave same type of review for 2 of the best games of 2013 Tzolkin and Terra mystica. both are defiantly heavy euro games but so is Agricola. the best part of these 2 games are there are lot of options and strategies in these 2 games so by playing them lot of times u don't get bored. but i think Tom is getting old and trying too much time to learn new heavy Euro games is now don't seem good idea to him. i played Tzolkin again and again and every time i tried new strategies and i still feel like playing it more find new strategies.
He did say that it is a very solid heavy euro game and everything you said probably isn't news to him. But the theme still is badly implemented. You can't get around that fact. I like the mechanics myself although i feel the game may be a bit too complicated for it's own good. But that's okay, no big deal. What is a big deal for me is how the game depicts nothing. It's an abstract game that clearly tries to be thematic but the mechanics don't make sense a lot of the time. With that in mind i can't say that it's a very good game. The mechanics are good but the whole game isn't. It's okay, PERHAPS leaning toward good but nothing more.
Michael Arnold I don't believe that's true. Nobody said it's easy to design a game that's fantastic mechanics-wise as well as theme-wise and i'm not sure if a game like that already exists but that doesn't mean it can't be done.
Yeah, I guess it is a mixture of primarily two things: Preference and investment of time. Not only for Tom, but for everyone of us. And the time investment is often directly, but not entirely, related to our taste or preferences. And having said that, I think playing (having to play) so many new releases in a given and limited time frame does often leave not enough space for exploring the necessary depths of some more complex titles, especially when our preferences are not adding the energy through enthusiasm to do so :) Which is a pity in this case as the land of Terra Mystica is a complex or better diverse landscape full of very clear and clever sign posts helping you to enjoy your journey rather than getting lost.
Well it is a heavy euro. It's not for everyone. The theme is pretty much irrelevant and it lacks a cohesive mechanics. For instance Chess is another game with poor theming, but it has elegant design on the mechanics (everything is movement/removal). Terra Mystica lacks that simplicity that chess has, you are always overwhelmed on options and objectives.
I love this game, but I don't hate this review. I didn't really think Tom would like this game, not because I didn't think he'd be smart enough to understand it or any of that, but he generally likes games with a bit more theme and more fun mechanics.
I wish people would stop holding Tom's opinions up on a pedestal, like they're the official word on whether a game is good or not. Yes, he's a very informed board-game critic, but he has a particular taste, just like everybody, so if he doesn't like a game that you don't like, it's no big deal! And it doesn't mean he doesn't "understand it" or "get it".
Thanks for the honest review Tom, love your channel :)
+1 to everything that you've said in the second paragraph!
More fun mechanics? That sounds a bit subjective. I can't think of any games with more fun mechanics than Terra Mystica, with maybe one exception.
This review is an example of why I enjoy Tom's reviews so much. Regardless of whether I agree or disagree with him, he gives me enough information that I can make an educated decision on if the game is for me or not. Keep up the great work!
As a gaming community we need more honest and informed reviews of games like this one. You did a great job of defining who would like this game and who will not.
Well said!
His review was honest and it's a matter of taste.
"Terra Mystica" is my favourite game of all time, but i'm german :)
Sorry for commenting 5 years ago here but with Gaia Proyect in the boardgamming scene, do you still stick to these words?
BTW. I am half german :P Un Ich wohne in Tenerifa (Kanarischen Inseln)
I'm a thematic gamer at first, I usually need a fun theme to stick with a game, but I love the mechanisms in Terra Mystica. It moves quickly, the game is very involved and the assymetric forces are cool too. I really love the game.
I really think I would love this game if it were just a bit more thematic... The artwork and pieces are just so drab.
Yeah it's definitely a eurogame first and foremost, CorpsmanPrivateer, just like Tom Vasel points out. Still, I find it very engaging to play.
Joachim Erdtman Agreed. I find the mechanics of the thing extremely engaging. I think it's a wonderful game. Very Euro. Very complex. I think the whole theme (which I was suspect of from the get go) was very much overhyped, which disappointed a lot of folks. I just love this game though.
We're exactly on the same page then Colm McCarthy.
I'm surprised at the number of comments saying this game is too convoluted mechanically and has no theme. On the topic of theme, while it is very light on theme, the theme that is there is extremely well integrated into the mechanics. I think it's beautifully done (witches fly, giants can live anywhere, dwarves can tunnel, etc.). Second, regarding it being convoluted (like the magic pools, for instance) my 8 year old nephew understood the reasons behind the designs pretty much on the get-go and loves the game. And he's hasn't played any Euros except for Settlers! In my humble opinion, I feel the game is a lot stronger than the comments are making it out to be.
"Point Salad"... I'm gonna hafta write that one down. Excellent phrasing, and thanks for the honest review!
Dude (DIDL), that's hardly fair. It's a complex game with a lot going on and even though some mistakes are made, that doesn't mean it's gone over his head or that he can't handle these kind of games. Have you seen some of the Euro games Tom likes?
I own this game and I love it (check out my review at The Broken Meeple) and I like a wide variety of games. However even I have to agree that some parts are a bit weird. The Power system for example, even though I'm fine with it, is a bit "odd and gamey" as Tom says. The theme is also "tacked" on but there's enough of it there thanks to the really cool player boards and race variation that I'm fine with that. After all Lords of Waterdeep had a similar theme issue but I love that game also.
I wasn't expecting this review to be praising it loads, it's certainly designed for a particular niche of gamers, but I felt the criticisms were fair and they have come up when I've played the game with others before. Glad you got it out in the end Tom!
I know you shared more about this game later. So it's been 2 1/2 years and I have been avoiding this game because I trust your judgment. But as time went on, I did see it was popular, so I knew that one day I would try it, reluctantly and expecting to dislike it, but possibly being surprised and like it.
Well, last nite was that time. We had a small group show up for our meetup. Only 5. There was a request to play this, so I let them twist my arm. 5 might be crazy even to folks who like this game, but long games don't usually bother me. It took a half an hour to learn the game and I was tired, and began regretting it right away.
Then we started playing the game. And my thought process was, this game stinks, I am not even gonna try, And I might even do some king making. In my 1st move I placed a building to allow 3 people to get "power". For the 1 third of the game I didn't even try. But slowly I started to get the hang of the game and started developing a strategy and decided to try.
1 got 2nd place out of 5, and 3 of the other players had played the game before. It reminded me of my play in Through the Ages, where I hated the game but won, against 2 opponents who had played and liked the game before.
I will admit there was some fun, but the work outweighed the fun, and the theme was thin and practically non existent. I played the dwarves and not once did I feel like a dwarf.
I have participated in arguments with Euro gamers before about theme. But compared to some Dungeon Crawls or an adventure game, this had zero theme.
Now I have played Euros with good theme: Belfort, Carson City, and so on. But not here. It felt a little like Tzolkin, which I like much better, and that has more theme and is my 2nd favorite heavy Euro.
Sadly Terra Mystica will go onto my "never to play" again list. Which now has 12 games.
really interesting story. what is your number 1 heavy euro?
What are the other 11?
Since "heavy" is debatable, I will just list my top Euros in order, and you can decide which are heavy and which are true Euros:
2. Tikal
3. Trias
9. Above and Below
13. Blood Rage
18. Belfort
26. Ad Astra
27. Islebound
28. Takenoko
32. Isle of Skye
35. Ra
38. Carson City
39. Evolution
40. IKI
42. San Juan
43. Power Grid
45. Carcassonne: Hunters and Gatherers
46. Pillars of the Earth
49. Imhotep
50. Automania
51. Terraforming Mars
55. Havana
62. New York 1901
63. Res Publica
66. Castles of Mad King Ludwig
68. Cleopatra and the Society of Architects
69. Tempus
75. The Gallerist
76. The Manhattan Project
Games I do not want to play:
1. Cards Against Humanity
2. Arkham Horror/Eldritch Horror (or any Cthulhu games)
3. Kingdom Builder
4. Antike
5. Through the Ages and perhaps most detailed/long Civilization style games
6. Village
7. Monopoly
8. Terra Mystica
9. Chess
10. Race for the Galaxy
11. History of the World
12. Battleship
I'm german. So I grew up playing a lot of Euro Games. And I don't really get why a theme in a boardgame is so important. If the gameplay is amazing (like it is in TM), why do you need a theme? When I play a boardgame, what I DO has to be fun and the interaction with the other players (this is why the neighbour-system of TM is so great), but it's not like i'm reading a book, or watching a movie that I want to be drawn into the world.
Off course that's just my opinion and experience. So I'd like to know, what is your goal, when you play a boardgame?
I 100 percent agree that the game sheep herds you into a strategy and that the factions are not developed enough to make a difference, i might strongly suggest anyone play the game with a few house rules that me and my wife have used that drastically improve the game play. Each time you terraform a tile for your fraction you also get one cult point designated to your faction, for instance if you are the witches i believe at the beginning of the game you start out with one earth and one wind so each time you terraform for the witches you can choose one from either the earth cult or one from the wind, this should create more involvement with your faction, development and some strategy. We also have the priests worth more the just a worker, you can trade a priest for one worker and one gold coin. Each time you build a dwelling or any building you acquire the materials immediately for doing so... Let me know if this helps.
Fyi, when using the rules mentioned above my wife played as the aurens and i played as the giants, the house rules seemed to work well, we had good development which i thought the game lacked before we started using our house rules, it also didn't make it too easy to max out our buildings. We also have a round zero that only allows you to develop before round 1 when you can receive benefits for each round.
+KimoBliss I think gaining resources as soon as you build something would break the game. You'd have all of your buildings out well before the last round.
Yeah nah, the races aren't balanced that is true, just use a VP bidding system if you like. But you can still make awesome engines with Aurens and Giants (both races I have ended the game with only four buildings left, could potentially do even better) it's just their points that suffer. Certainly don't need to give them more resources.
If you are playing two player, maybe the problem is you aren't close together, therefore have to spend more money and don't have as much energy? In which case I highly recommend playing with two races each. Just be ready for a long game (but a great one).
Great Review! Having had someone who loves this game and really wanted me to join them, they throw it at me and tell me to learn the rules and then join in.... so I had to go through the really lengthy process of discovering the high number of nuances of this game on my own after several playthroughs... and I had come to the EXACT same conclusions that Tom Vasel did.
After all this time I was expecting you to slam the game. I really thought you'd put it off because you were desperately searching for something positive to say! I think you have been very fair. I am glad that this game wasn't a complete miss for you.
I think it's a great review. I think he is honest about both his reaction to it and doesn't hesitate to say that if you are a euro gamer fan...there is nothing you should dislike about this game.
Personally I love this game, but I really struggle to get it to the gaming table. The trouble with it is the fact it's so heavy AND has no theme. This in itself doesn't bother me, but most of my group find it too much. Heavy game? Fine. No theme? Fine. Heavy game and no theme? Most of my group aren't interested. I agree with Tom, love eurogames, you'll enjoy this, but I would definitely recommend playing it before you buy it.
A similar game that is in my opinion more fun is "Clans of Caledonia" and it definitely engrosses you in its theme.
The thing about this game is that its much more fun than it actually seems. I've watched video and read about it and I was uninterested/meh. Then I got the chance to play it with some friends and its actually quite fun and very enjoyable! The re-playability is also quite high; there are 14 possible factions for a maximum of 5 players in each game. But yea there isn't really much artwork and they could've used more vibrant colors. It seemed dull when I first opened the box.
More vibrant colours? I don't know many games that have more vibrant colours. The whole thing looks beautiful.
I just bought this for my gaming group yesterday, and we played tonight. I am VERY new to board gaming btw. I will explain it like this. Terra Mystica is a "Strategic, Resource Management Game" I can say this, my group was super impressed by the gameplay and mechanics. This game has 1 goal (GET VICTORY POINTS) but it gives you 5 different ways to get there! So if someone gets out the gates early and starts doing 1 strategy faster than the other, you can switch gears mid game and go for a different strategy to get points. It is a SUPER COMPLEX version of Settlers of Catan. Yes, the "fantasy" theme really isnt there, but I can see why they used it.
Being a big fan of Terra Mystica, and reading the comments on this video as I began to watch, I was dreading what might be said in this review. Turns out it's actually very reasonable. "An exceptionally designed game", but just not his thing.
I usually play Ameritrash, but I also enjoy light/medium euros. Played this last week and I agree this is for euro gamers. I can't remember what place I finished neither do I care. I virtually ignored the magic track because after several explanations I still was not 100 percent sure how to use it.
Thanks for your honest reaction Tom. It is good to know that you can say it when a game is not in your list.
I would say conservatively that I've played Terra Mystica well over 100 times (possibly more than 200). I definitely lean pretty heavily towards eurogames and more abstract strategy games. Tom clearly doesn't, which is why I take this review with a grain of salt and want to share my own thoughts. For me theme, story, quality of components and production is a lot less important than game play/mechanics, strategic depth, interaction, replayability etc. Tom's review is a pretty solid first impression, although he's honest enough to acknowledge that he hasn't played it enough to really know the depths of the strategy in the game. It's kind of the curse of a game reviewer who plays so many different kinds of games. A game with a lot of strategic depth that takes a while to master, is probably going to be harder to properly review as a result, especially if it's a game type that you're not particularly fond of.
One key aspect of game strategy he doesn't mention is turn order, which makes or breaks a lot of games (assuming you have players of relatively equal ability) because it effects which bonus tiles are available to you (and your opponents) and who gets first crack at the power spending actions along the bottom of the board, as well as competition for terrain hexes. His "criticism" that the game sort of shepherds you along a certain path is not what I would call a criticism, but a preference for a particular style. I think it makes the game more challenging and for new players may seem to spoil the fun because they're looking at their race's unique abilities and building castles in the sky only to be brought back to earth by the demands of the round bonuses and the specific opportunities and restrictions offered by the particular bonus tiles available. Some games there's a lot more money available, in others it's tough to make end of round points because those tiles aren't in the game, in still others there's little or no power available from bonus tiles. The point is you have to adjust your strategy accordingly. And that means you have to understand the races you're playing pretty well and the game mechanics. The path is different every time you play, and the combination of races you're competing against is different every time. The advantages of developing next to players (trading house upgrades cost 50% less gold, you gain power when they build or upgrade buildings next to you, but you may have to sacrifice points to do so) is balanced by competition for terrain types or key hexes that you need to complete cities and establish adjacency for your whole network. With the random mix of bonus tiles, turn bonuses, and races you're never going to play the same game twice. It takes a fair number of replays to get comfortable with all of this, and some people never really do. It's what makes this game so highly strategic and replayable, probably the most replayable game I've ever played. It takes a long time to master playing all 14 races that come with the base game (another six with the Fire and Ice expansion - that also offers two new maps). One key to maximizing strategic choices in the game is for players to select races AFTER the bonus tiles and round bonus tiles are layed out and do it based on initial turn order. Some races fit better than others with particular combinations of those tiles, BUT players choosing later in the order gain the advantage of choosing races that are the best counters to those already selected (because of terrforming abilities, ability to compete on cult tracks, ability to compete on turn order, ability to steal cheap terraforms because of where they are on the terrain circle relative to opponents and so on).
Tom's comment about point salad is actually quite misleading and contradicts his description of the game has being "tight" and feeling shepherded along a particular path. It's indicative of someone who hasn't really played the game enough to understand that where you get your points in any particular game is going to vary a lot, but it's never a free for all (although he does point out that it takes skill to get points). Some times it's focused endgame, other times it's focused on point bonus on a particular key turn, other times it's focused on a particular racial ability (some races gain a lot of points for specific types of actions) and still others it's all about tapping the bonus tiles with scrolls by manipulating turn order. Some games you will have one or two turns where you make all your points. Sometimes you'll see players who lag far behind suddenly jump a huge number of points to take the lead because of a well planned build up. Sometimes slow and steady, trying to maximize the point bonus every turn wins the day. Some times it's the player who dominates the cult tracks and sometimes it's the player who builds the most cities and/or the largest network. And in the best games unique strategies result in first, second and third place being only a few points apart, where you can point to one or two key decisions or actions that really made the difference.
Tom's comments about gaming the power system are also indicative of someone who hasn't played enough to know how to finesse this. You can burn power, but it's a common mistake for players to burn too much power and be left short mid and late game as a result. Timing your burns is key and depends on how it affects turn order (it means additional actions that leave you later in turn order next round) and whether the jump on development is worth the reward. So is leaving some flexibility. If both bonus tiles that give 3 power on income phase are in play, you can easily end up in a situation where taking those tiles gives you no bonus because you already maximized it from your trading houses and or ovals (from building temples). For some races and/or strategies and depending on how much power is available from the bonus tiles, it is a much better strategy to build up your power generation early on and then dominate mid to late game on the power actions (turn order again, being crucial). Engineers for example can generate a ton of power with a second temple (5 power income) and the 4 and 1 power bonus from respective ovals. So too can alchemists if they get their fortress and bump their terraforming tech up early and use the 1 and 2 shovel actions along the bottom of the board that cost power and generate power at the same time. Burning power early with these races can severely limit their strategy later on.
I gotta give him props for his honesty.
I have watched many of your reviews and this is the best one I have watched. You did an exceptionally superb job explaining your response to the different aspects of the game that you liked and didn't like. I love how you played it a few times or more and you still couldn't decide if you like the game or not. I feel the same way after one play. It is a difficult to explain situation--that you ended up explaining well-- how the quality of the components is quite good and the player mats are attractive and the game has the varied bright colors, yet the appearance of the game overall when it's being played is drab and doesn't command players' attention. I love Euro games and I am--for sure--the target audience for this game, but I do not feel wowed or won over, like I felt when I played Belfort or Antike, for example; those other games made me flush with anticipation for the next time it hits the table.
I feel like if you dont play this constantly you will forget or mess up the rules all the time...I like the idea as a whole, but the mechanisms and execution seem way to finicky for most people, or if not played all the time.
Good review, Tom! I think I share your sentiments about this one.
Thank you, Tom for this video. My friends told me about this game and now I have a good idea of what it is about! Hi from Argentina :D
Each to their own. I disagree with the guy on virtually every point but that's fine; it's just one man's opinion. My casual gaming wife had no problems grasping the rules and thoroughly enjoys it, so it really can't be that complicated!
This is not possible. I play a LOT of games, and I don't like this game at all I've played it multiple times, and every time I play I have no clue what I'm suppose to be doing or how to go about it.
Not complicated, but lots of moving parts. It is "work".
Denver Boyd Not sure what is not possible? The instruction book is very clear on every aspect of the game. The images on the boards tell you exactly what everything does, so you don't even have to particularly memorise anything.
Denver, I find it really odd that you think because you don't know what you are doing, that that makes the game bad and other people have that experience.
Well obviously not, because it is a super highly ranked game with tournaments and everything. Other people obviously have a feel for the game.
Maybe you just suck at it.
This game has hit the table and filled all 5 seats every week since our play group got it (about 2 months). Then we got a second copy and played 2 tables. That is how popular it is with our group. I have never seen any game get this many plays in this short of a time period. What Tom said is not wrong at all - I can understand all his hesitations. It's not for everyone, but for those who enjoy it, it is a magnificently deep rabbit hole that my group of about 10 gamers has been enjoying immensely. If you enjoy heavy euros that reward experience with no random elements after initial setup, then I wholeheartedly recommend it. Just give it a few games to really bloom.
I love it too, for the same reasons. Don't suppose you have any recommendations for games along the same lines? I'd recommend Caylus to you, if you haven't played that already :)
I've never played anything quite like TM, but other favorites in our group that are "heavy euro" in nature are Troyes, Tammany Hall, T'Zolkin, and Agricola. That's more a list of "other great games" than "games like TM" though.
Thanks for the honest review. .I had a feeling this was over-hyped on the BGG Hotness list and you just confirmed it...I'll pass.
It's overhyped, but then again that's more to do with the hype being so excessive. It's still a good game if you enjoy thinky Euros.
It's NOT overhyped, it's just a Euro game which a lot of gamers prefer to Ameri. Also, it's a really really good euro game, one of the best there is. Now, if Tom doesn't like that style of games, that's fine, but that doesn't mean the game itself is overhyped.
If the hype just amounted to "it's a really good euro game", then it wouldn't be overhyped. However, that gamers evangelize about TM like it revolutionized Euro games, and that it's place on the BGG list is only exceeded by Puerto Rico and Agricola is excessive.
So what euro games would you rate higher than TM?
It doesn't have to revolutionize to earn that rating, it just does so many thinks exactly right!
Hmm. Well, just off the top of the head, I'd say Le Havre, Trajan, Dominant Species, and Castles of Burgundy have all earned a higher spot IMO. Thing about TM is that it achieved its place on the BGG list before it was even in wide circulation (which it's only been for a few months now). Few people had it, yet everybody loved it. Of the dozen or so folks I've introduced it to, I can't say anyone's been truly blown away. A friend got a copy for Christmas and brought it to our New Year's Day super-session. He mentioned that while he liked it he was disappointed after everything he'd heard had led to such a big buildup.
TM has its share of flaws, like Tom's observations about how the scoring tiles herd players, and how the cult track feels unrealized. Personally, I'd rather that the scoring tiles not provide VP's directly, but rather other bennies. And I'd rather favors be unlocked by moving up the cult track, and temples provide a benefit that incentivizes players to build more than just the one they need to get a sanctuary.
It'd take 20 minutes to explain the whole game? What difference would 5,5 minutes make?! Thumbs up for the whole explanation! :-)
VisualGourmet Well he only spends about 7 minutes explaining the rules, so the video would be 13 minutes longer.
Teddy Wansink Yah, I referred to the total length of the vid... -,-
HI Tom! I would say the get your buildings on the board to get ressources part is akin to eclipse population cube wouldn't you think?
Love this game. I like games where the main board is SMALL, and the player's board is not big. I like board games where there are NO HAND CARDS, and there is NOTHING to READ as you play along (unlike many games, which need read text on cards every turn). If you like ZERO randomness, this is the game to go, as there is no dice rolling, and EVERYTHING (yes, everything) is REVEALED/VISIBLE PRIOR to game begin, there are no random cards to draw every turn, and there is absolutely nothing hidden in the game. If you like this game, check out HEGEMONIC, a space abstract euro game that some people said is comparable to TERRA MYSTICA. I love them both, BEST GAMES of the year (although I also voted Battlelore 2nd Edition my favorite of the year)
Thought it was overhyped. Looks like a solid euro but not one for my collection (and I'm a euro gamer at heart)
Wish they'd not bothered with the fantasy theme though. It feels even more tacked on than, say a trading theme.
Have you even played it? I don't understand how you can say the theme is tacked on. Maybe the theme doesn't meet your expectations, but without the theme, many mechanics wouldn't make any sense and the game would be worse for it.
***** The theme is as tacked on as the one is in Lords of Waterdeep only it works for that game (in my opinion) but not for Terra Mystica. I think (again, for me) a more traditional style euro-theme would work better in this case
I'm not suggesting the game has no theme - I really don't like most abstract games - but it appears this game is quite decisive. If people like it then that's great. Enjoy.
@@lordsplodge I know this is an old comment, but why should it be a bad game cause of the theme if you are an euro gamer anyways. Now we got Gaia Project, other theme and for me the little bit better game. A trading theme wouldnt work here and we really got trading over and over. If you implement trading in a siedler of catan way, you change the game drastically
I really enjoyed it personally, but I agree that it IS hard and you can kind of get shoehorned into a specific strategy. That being said, I like the fantasy theme. It's not tied very well into the game itself, but I would not be as interested in the game if it didn't have the fantasy theme. I know it's just a paint job, but it's an important paint job for me.
Nothing angers board game snobs like someone not gushing over a heavy euro. This comment section is a perfect example.
Basically, Terra Mystica = (Lords of Waterdeep + Catan)*10
and x10 less fun than either one of those games. Id rather play Catan or Waterdeep then TM tbh.
Catan or Waterdeep are casual funsies pastimes nobody really cares about in my group(especially Catan due to being luck-driven), Terra Mystica really makes our brains boil which makes it much better in comparison to those two.
Robert Chmielecki why is luck driven a bad thing when long term variance always causes the best player to win. For example, I never thought about poker variance as a bad thing since I made thousands of euros with it. The best player will always win, it's not as if a better play causes someone to lose in the long run with either Catan or poker. Boring however is boring and tm is the epitome of hours long drag of boredom with zero interaction.
It's not a bad thing per se, it's a matter of preference. My group prefers games based on skill not luck and we often introduce house rules to limit the impact of luck in other games (for example always play Agricola with drafting, not dealing cards)
We don't really care about luck becoming even in some long term league or something, because we want the current game, here and now NOT be decided by something out of our control. When, every now and then, we play a luck-driven game , the attitude is mostly "whatever, who cares who wins this funsies child's play" but with game like Terra Mystica it's always tooth and nail, brains boiling affair. Basically when we can say "a fine move!" instead of "you lucky bastard!" we're happy with the game we're playing.
Your groups' attitude may vary and fortunately there are games for both kinds of groups.
If you lose a game due to a unlucky roll of a dice while the move was +ev, you didnt lose at all. Maybe it is just a matter of redefining what it means to win. If i lose a 1000$ pot with a preflop AA where i totally outplayed my opponent and i lose, i didn't actually lose. I just lost due to short term fluctuations, but i won long term (aka 89% vs random hand, ill win 890 out of 1000 hands in the same situation on average). I don't mind losing in that case at all, because it really isnt losing. It also helps ofcourse to keep players in the game to play with. If they can win sometimes (while losing long term), they will continue to play with me (for example Catan).
I played another game of Terra just yesterday btw, and i do like it. But for what it is, i like some luck (while letting the better player win more on average) more, because i can always find people to play with. I Still wouldnt call TM Catan x 10, since Catan clearly is a simpler, better designed game. TM just seems complex to make it complex from time to time(its deepness comes from 1000 of options, not necessarily from player interactions or complex strategy), while Catan has player interaction, trading. Psychology plays a huge part, as well as long term strategy and... a bit of luck (to keep the pool of players coming), i'd say that long term, the best player will always win on average in Catan.
maybe it is just preference.
I really agree that it is a very fancy version of Settlers of Catan. It is a really good game from my one play, but I think that it's probably too long for what it is. I thought the bowl thing was a neat idea, but I didn't game it enough at the beginning to get as much benefit out of it as I should have. It's a fun game, but it's not something that I would put into my collection right at this time.
It really isn't. There is too much randomness in Catan, and Catan is characterized by trading. This game though is purely about planning and outplaying your opponents.
Sindaurion I agree. Mechanics-wise, there's not all that much that's similar between Settlers and Terra Mystica. There's WAY more randomness in Catan, for a start. I think the only similarities really are that the settlements and roads look like the dwellings and bridges, and you place them on hexes. I don't enjoy Catan nearly as much as Terra Mystica.
I don't think it's anything like Settlers. There is zero randomness or luck in this game. The Settlers comparisons are a bit ridiculous, and a seem tad dismissive.
And why do people keep saying this game is long? Our 3 player games go from 45 minutes to a little over an hour. That's about 20 mins per player, which I think is exactly what it says on the box.
Yeah, comparing this to Settlers really makes me think people completely misunderstood this game. It has zero gameplay similarities with Catan. There IS an element of luck, but it's minimal - the bonus powers and the scoring tiles that you use. Other than that, there's zero luck and hidden information.
Colm McCarthy Because it is long. It's not just 20 mins per player because you actually have to calculate not only what you might do, but what other people might do, what you can do, and how that changes from turn to turn. For what it is, it is long when you have to consider multiple options and try to optimize your moves and play with first time players. Unless your game group plays this all the time, you're going to probably attract one or two new players every once and awhile.
The review was well done. Tom could see that the game is good. Some of the aspects just didn't appeal to him. I love this game and those same aspects Tom wasn't fond of, I think are great.
Excellent Game. I wasn't excited about it after my first play. Thought it was okay. But after multiple plays, I began to like it more and more. There's something about the design, different factions, strategic depth that makes me come back for more. After multiple plays, I can tell you the factions are not balanced so keep it in mind when choosing. Your starting placement of dwellings can also lose you the game. That's how brutal and unforgiving this game is.
Not the kind of game my gaming group would play. I might try it, but they would not. I think you were right on Tom. Good review.
I think he is dead on. I expected him to gush over it because it's so highly rated, but I think it's just a bit overrated. I now realize I have more in common with Tom as I am getting tired of these "point salad" games. The game just takes elements of a zillion other games and meshes them together. At least, that's my impression. I rather try some innovative concept, even if it's considered "light" or "filler".
Then do away with all of the other point salad games and just play this, because it does it best. It's the perfection of the system.
i want to like this game... but between downtime and complexity, i just don't think i could find anyone to play. That's if i could ever figure out the rulebook :/
I'll play
For me "The legends of Andor" was the game of the year
Tom Vasel... the go to board game review guy!
Agree completely. This game is just average with a pasted on theme
It's really not, and that's not what he said.
It's just not a kind of game he likes.
Now, I enjoy both euro games, and ameritrash from time to time, but they're a completely different experience, and I understand people that only love one or the other.
I'll have to disagree, Tom. I've logged almost 50 games. While I agree the theme is embarrassingly tacked on, the game is not as one-tracked as you think. I've won against experienced players without doing anything the scoring tiles tells you to build, so there's enough freedom where you can win via other ways (cult track, bonus tiles, favors). I've won against experienced players without winning much of the cult track either, as long as you're not last in everything. I've used the same races in different games, but I rarely ever repeated my strategies because of the randomization of the scoring tile and bonus tiles.
The game is surprisingly not that long either; game length is 20-25 minutes per player (at least in my game group).
The power bowls are strategically deeper than you think. Knowing when to remove power to gain that one extra is important. Sometimes you're missing that one coin that you just need to build that Stronghold to get both the 5 points and a town key.
I'll admit, you need a lot of plays to catch these nuances, and I respect your opinions; but if you have the time (which I assume you don't, since you're a busy worker), please play some more. The game is a very flexible game, especially so for a Euro. Hopefully you'll see that the game isn't as herded as you think; maybe you just caught onto more obvious strategies? :P
I'm not quite sure on what point you're disagreeing with Tom's review. He said it was a well-designed game. Why are some folks speaking as If this is a negative review? I guess it's just the nature of the internet: things are either awesome or awful. Moderation is a sign of weakness.
Tom's assessment of the scoring tiles is correct: they tend to herd players, and are ignored at one's own peril. In particular, the ones that score for strongholds/sanctuaries can be decisive because it's a nice chunk of points and you're only got a couple of shots at qualifying. I'd love to see an expansion with replacements that provide benefits other than victory points.
Having said that, I agree that if you take scoring tiles are out of the equation, it's a very open-ended game, a VP-salad games tend to be. Oddly, Tom actually criticizes this as well even as he criticizes it for being too rigid.
Steve Gale Fair enough, but didn't Tom himself say his opinions on his review swayed towards the negative? I totally respect his opinions; I never once claimed he was wrong. I only implied that there were some aspects of the game that are not noticeable until many, many plays. If it's wrong for me to disagree with his opinion, should I say that it is wrong of YOU to disagree with my opinion on Tom's opinion? I'm a rational person. I know Tom enough to know Terra Mystica is not his type of game, but it's also unfair to him to call out negatives that (at least for me anyways) that do not exist.
Going back to scoring tiles: again, I have played many games where I barely focused on the scoring tiles. Stronghold/Sanctuary scoring tiles at most only give you 10 points. But keep in mind that those buildings are very expensive to build (usually 4 workers, 6/8 gold), and the income that it gives are generally very mediocre. I'd much rather focus on founding multiple towns with those recources. Not only do I work towards securing the Largest Number of Indirectly Adjacent bonus, I'll get a Town key which allows me to secure some Cult tracks too. Getting some favors that give you points along the way is a huge bonus as well.
Both strategies could work more or less equally well, it only depends on what the specific circumstances are (bonus tiles available, space), in which the current situation would make one strategy better than the other.
That's why the game insists that scoring tiles AREN'T the only ways to score points. I'll definitely concede that if scoring tiles were the ONLY WAYS to score, then yes, the game would essentially be herding you. But keep in mind that the game comes with many other ways to score: upgrades, favors, bonus tiles, racial powers, cult track, biggest numbers, town keys, residual resources.
In the end though, I'm happy to agree to disagree with you. We all have our own thoughts on this game, but this is opinion is mine, and and only mine. Hopefully others can respect that as well as I respect your's and Tom's. I'm only here to give a sincere defense on what I believe is one of the most well-designed Euros recently, for the sake of others who may have been put off by Tom's opinions. I do not want people to miss the opportunity to play this outstanding game. I shall end my argement with a sincere and non-passive-aggressive smiley.:)
What's the best strat for Chaos Magicians?
Toan Tricky question. Their stronghold is really tempting, but I favor building temples asap. I lean towards the temples to nab the choicest double favors first. Climb all four cult tracks, and realize that they are at a disadvantage in needing a town key to claim the 10 spot (as they only start with one dwelling on the map They need some sailing to found additional towns, so save priests for that.
In principle, I agree with the criticism that the game is a point salad. I like games where you acquire resources to build buildings, which produce more resources, which you use to build more buildings, etc. I like when there are diverse ways to acquire resources and complex ways to use them, while the path toward victory points is simple. Terra Mystica is the opposite -- there are relatively few resource types but a ton of different ways to score points. Like Tom says, the challenge is less to figure out how to optimize production and more to align your strategy with the path that the game shepherds you down.
Despite that, the game just *feels* very fun for me to play. And all that really matters in a game is if you have fun playing it.
Great review.
Tom, I have the game. I have played many times, and shown it and played it with many non-gamers who learnt on their first play through comfortably. Everything you have said about it I feel isn't right, I think that the attention to detail, the board and everything about it feel well made, nice to hold, and the game itself has a good amount of immersion to it. Though the fact that I own it does give me a bias point of view. But the fact that I disagree with you, and many others do in the comments, does not grant anyone the right to call this a bad review. All the idiots saying this review is bad should rethink what they said, Tom gave a review to what his opinion is, and an individual's opinion is always true to them. It is how he found it, how he experienced it and how he thinks of it. He is not saying how you will feel about it, or what the game is. Only what he thinks. Making the review 100% correct, true, accurate and just another good review to consider when looking at terra-mystica. (also before buying games i always watch the bad reviews first).
Many things Tom like, such as different boards and races, resources that are shown on the player board when you uncovered them, they are all present in Eclipse...
played at dicecon 2014; game did not live up to my expectations. falls into the category of group think/overhyped games such as: seasons, 7 wonders.
No it really doesn't.
I found my sentiments about this game echoed by Tom in this video. The theme comes across as rather weak, there are not many fun mechanics, the cult tracks and round bonuses feel like a one-dimensional reward. There are not many clear trade-offs, so I got this feeling of not knowing what i'm doing.
Id say its a very anticlimactic game, what you think you should be rewarded for you arent really and vice versa insignificant things may be rewarding in a big way. So you may feel like you've done a lot and somehow you only have 6 VPs while someone else has like 30. So I see what Tom is meaning by the shepherding, you are dictated by whats going to give you the most VP during a round. In the game I played I was first on two cult tracks and second in number of buildings but I still manged to be last somehow. Thats where it gets really euro-ish as Tom was saying you're rewarded for just plugging away at trifling nuances. For ex: if you get 1 vp for every shovel you do in that round, you may terraform with no purpose at all other than to get VP that round.
This is, I have to admit, my one gripe with the game, but having said that it doesn't always work out that way. A great engine might get beaten by a points opportunist, but not always. And maybe that is actually a strength of the game; when to sacrifice engine for points, and when to just build.
Such a GREAT Game! Dont listen Tom, just get it. One of the best games EVER!
Why can't I see Tom's comments?
Driest of the dry. Or maybe not, but surely in top 5.
Please, please do a review of Through the Ages: A Story of Civilization! It's #2 of all time on BoardGameGeek, but there isn't even one good review of it on RUclips. You can't even find it in any shops in my country and just hardly on eBay. It seems like it's has just come and gone, but that can't be right. One of the best board games ever, if you can believe BGG's list, can't just fade away like that! I want to know what the game is all about before I'm brave enough to buy it. So, a review, please kind sir!
Go check out rahdo runs through videos. He has done one with the Through the Ages. There is a "review-ish" segment in form of a final thoughts, but the runthrough is quite excelent, and it's quite easy to see if you would enjoy the game or not.
Really, if you have not seen it and want to check out the game, I highly recommend it. I was in exactly the same spot at one point :)
Toms Grinbergs Thanks for the suggestion, it had somehow gone under my radar. Will definitely check it out! :)
Perhaps I am a bit spoiled being in this area but just about every flgs within 100miles has it in stock. I love TTA though in my experience it tends to be divisive (thankfully those i play it with nowadays love it)
Just play it for the first time and I hate it. It feels like Sim City on an abstract board game. Here is why this sucks:
- It is way too complex to learn to play the game. It took 30min to explain the game without expansion, the rule book feels like a book, and the rules are even more complex than 7 Wonders.
- The theme is useless. I didn't care I was the mermaids. All I saw was I was a blue board vs a red and a green and a brown.
- The game takes 2-3 hours, and then you need time to score.
- It takes more than one game to learn the strategy. Seriously, you will need to play this at least twice to learn how to play it and another game play to learn the strategy.
Verdict: Definitely ONLY for HARDCORE Europlayer players. You will have a very hard time to find new players. Definitely not for party. Everyone will leave after 5 minutes. And if you want to make everyone leave in less than 1min, add the expansion to the mix.
I explained the game to someone in a few minutes, not that hard really.
I wanna like this so bad but I've never really played an eurogame before and this seems too dense for a starting choice. Am I wrong, should I try another one like Agricola or Caylus?
Terra Mystica is super complicated. Alhambra would be a great starting game and is super fun.
Greg Webb Disagree Alhambra is "super" fun. I have no problem with highly "technical" games but Alhambra feels pure technical and just pointless to me.
Agricola is a great game and despite its friendly appearance is technically agonizing. It just feels like there's never enough time to do what you want. This sense probably disappears after a few dozen games as you get a better handle on how much is possible for you to accomplish during a game and then just work on optimizing your path from there.
If you want to get into gaming and pull your friends in with you, I think the funnest game with serious depth and infinite novel replayability, while arguably not euro-ish in a strict sense, is Dominion. *Everybody*, even girls and nongamers love it and get addicted instantly and you will too. I highly recommend using Dominion as your entry game. Get one or two expansions with it too, depending on how much more you want to spend. Have one of them be the Prosperity expansion, and maybe Seaside or whatever other ppl suggest to you or you read in reviews.
If you've never played Settlers of Catan, it's a "fun," elegant, and of low-moderate complexity eurogame that everyone likes and is considered the most popular Euro gateway game for good reason. Nongamers love it too and is perfect to suck them into your world with.
One of my personal favorites for "fun" while being very interesting is Chaos in the Old World. My group refers to it as "Chaos Gods" for short. Find some reviews on youtube or boardgamegeek.com to see if you might like it.
Find forums on boardgamegeek.com for beginner Euro recommendations.
If you want a pure specimen of a Eurogame that's interesting, take a look at Puerto Rico which spent a long time at the very top of the boardgamegeek.com list and for good reason. It's considered the prototypical "Eurogame" possibly more than any other title.
There's a start for you :)
Happy gaming!
I welcome feedback from others about my suggestions here.
Alex Serrano I forgot to respond to your Caylus suggestion there too.
I think Caylus is a fantastic Euro and def embodies what a Euro is all about. Interestingly, it's a perfect information game but feels open-ended enough that unless you're experienced, allows for a lot of play that you can't just calculate out perfectly, but will be rewarded for calculating out as far as you can.
If you're a thinker I think Caylus is great. If you lean more to the casual and aren't likely to be the type who stares intensely at the gameboard with your elbows on the table and your face in your hands as if you're playing a serious chess match, then it may not be as right for you.
Clark Potter Hey Clark! We're already avid Dominion players in my group of friends (it's my favourite game without a doubt) and own Catan and Carcassone as well. We also play Citadels, Bang or Mission: Red Planet occasionally...
Reading my OP again I realize that it was so misleading because I really meant to say I've never played one of those generally considered 'hardcore' eurogames such as Caverna, Agricola (A feast for odin? This really caught my attention), Terra Mystica, Caylus or something of the sort and been looking for one of these longer and heavier games since I'm a bit tired of the simpler games I'm familiar with.
I'll definitely get Puerto Rico as an introduction and I'm more than willing to check out any other heavy and long eurogame if you recommend it.
Thank you so much for your reply!
the game isnt complicated. the rules sound brutal, but when you are playing it, you see that the game runs by itself.
I just tried it for the first time a few weeks ago, and a hated it, far to leghty and it is a really hard game for first timer. It took me 2 of the six turns to understand what is going on. Plus all thing said and done when you have a poor man's turn you don't get to play for 20 or 30 minutes. It is easy to not enjoy yourself.
I COULD learn to like it, but it doesn't seem to worth the effort.
But I agree with you it is a solid game with good design.
It's worth the effort.
Thank for review. Can somebody tell me what is Euro game? what´s the difference between euro and not euro game. Thanks
= worker-placement, gather ressources, convert ressources, buy, trade. If it has a lot of economic elements it it, it's Euro.
Because we Europeans don't like conflicts - on a wider scale. We like sanctions instead of bombs. It's a history thing.
Kristian Jensen The Huns. [=
It was originally used to describe a type of board game which were popular in Europe (Germany). Now they're used to describe a classification of board games that share the following mechanics and traits.
1. No direct conflict against other players
2. Very little randomness (dice rolling, card draw, etc)
3. Resource management tends to be the core mechanic in most euro games. Most of the conflict generally revolves around being the first player to monopolize a particular resource and build a strategy around it.In my opinion, this makes most euro games very "mathy" where you'll spend most of your time crunching numbers in your head to figure out exactly how you can get the most victory points.
4. Theme tends to take a back seat to "gameplay." In that, theme seems to only exist to attempt to try to disguise the core mechanic as something other than well... math.
My FLGS had it on sale 25% off for a month! yawn. Didn't bother.
It happened!
I'm sure you've been told this by now Tom but you don't cycle power any faster by sacrificing power. No matter how many power discs you have, every power you spend always costs you two power to recover.
I really cannot believe that he is a math teacher, isn't he?
Point Salad is my new favorite expression. I get why others like this game so much but I've played over a dozen games at this point and no matter what race I choose I am never able to make much improvement in my gameplay. It just failed to capture my imagination. I'd never buy it and I'd be willing to play it if everyone else in my group was super keen to do so, but it would never make my list of preferred games and I'm done trying to get good at it.
I said the same thing about the"Super Catan". Not a bad game. Not the best either.
"The... fakers...."
I figured if Tom took so long to review this game he wouldn't be a big fan of it. It was sitting on his shelf for a long time.
Everytime we play it takes more than 4 hours... (two players).
I think it's because the other player is an overthinker...
I did a 3 player full introductory game, 2½ hours. How 1 player can overthink for 1½ hours is beyond me :)
Did you just say "Point Salad"?
I think Tom's review is fair. Some of the things that he dislikes about it I enjoy, but I mean it is subjective. Perhaps the review is very off putting for people who find this game to be a Holy Grail because of the half baked explanation of the game. Tom did warn us about it. Placing the wrong colors on the wrong hexes is a good example of that, and I am sure some people might mistake this for him not knowing the game well enough to give a solid review.
Here is my problem with reviews for a game like this; If you don't like it, you wont be able to play it enough to give a solid review of it. And if you do play it enough to give a solid review, you probably love it. Honestly without sufficient plays it would be hard to be able to articulate what you love, or hate about this game.
Bottom line, don't trust reviews for this game. If you can, play before you buy. If you cannot, I would suggest buying this game only if feel like you are missing this type of game in your collection and no one else in your group will buy it. Fortunately for me 3 people in my game group have it, and they are 3 of the few people I'd want play this game with.
I trust reviews by Tom
Having played and owned the game, I think this review doesn't do Terra Mystica justice. I am aware that this isn't Tom's type of game from his past reviews but the way he has reviewed this one leads me to the general feeling he wasn't getting all the strategy or he didn't go over it or explain it well.This may be because of all the reviews he has been trying to catch up on.
I think the theme is fine, you could strip out a lot of the mechanics and apply it to other themes easily though. He did mentioned that he didn't give a full review of the rules so I won't complain about that, nor will I nitpick nuances like mixing up land types\factions or using wrong names. I will nitpick the play time stated on the intro though, 2 hours is not accurate, once you and your fellow players know the game it is about 20-30 min per player.
Now where he starts talking about you can go rounds without doing anything, I have never had that issue except when I first started playing. This is a game that grows on you and you really need to look ahead, see what the bonuses for future rounds are, and plan things out before you move, one thing he didn't explain well is that each round you can keep acting until you have no more actions to take, which goes back to good planning.
I have never really felt prodded, but it is fair to state there are certain actions that are more productive then others, especially with the choice of faction you are playing, but that goes back to strategy.
I will also stat the factions are not 100% balanced for newcomers, some are easier to play then others, my recommendation if you are just learning the game stay away from the Black and Red factions, these factions aren't gimped, but the strategy needed to win requires some abstract approaches to win and it can be an uphill battle,
Before passing judgment on the game, I would recommenced viewing Ryan's review of Terra Mystica although I disagree with his opinion on the cult track as it makes a big difference depending on the faction you play. I do agree with Tom in that this game isn't for everyone. If you are not a fan of planning 2-3 moves ahead or resource management, this game is not for you. If you are fan of games like Lords of Waterdeep but think that they are not deep enough and can get past the light theme, get this game, you will love it. Terra Mystica is easily one of my favorite euros.
I'd actually recommend Caylus if you think Lord of Waterdeep is too light, but then again, if you like Caylus (like I do) you'll probably like Terra Mystica :)
Do not pass on this one, euro lovers. Some of the comments here do scratch both faults and highlights of the design (or attitude towards this particular review / Tom's opinion). The game is not restrictive or shepherdy at all - you can skip whatever you like and still win, provided you have a plan (you do, don't you?;). Also power bowls system provides a major control aspect of the game and I do get the impression that Tom did not fully comprehend its influence over the gameplay. On the other hand - the theme is totally pasted on and I would compare Terra to Catan+ (with the caveat that I dislike Settlers a great deal and find Terra Mystica a supreme design) and mention Feld's Salad as a cream on top as well.
I'm surprised he criticizes it for being too shepherdy, when Agricola (one of his favorite games) seems infinitely more shepherdy than Terra Mystica. Yes, you should probably go after the points on the turn tiles, but there is enough variance and choice in Terra Mystica that you don't have to. Agricola seems very rigid in the choices and moves you can make. Do this or starve. I love both games, by the way.
I disliked it from the start... Theme is truly interchangeable and I like my games more accessible. Life is hectic & complicated enough I guess :)
Hello to me from the past :) Played it in the meantime and... I liked it! Normally heavy euros are so not my alley, but this one is just a joy when it comes to design and mechanisms or maybe just my evolution of taste in boardgames. Such a clear and self-explanantory layout of... well everything. Of course all the mechanisms and iconography are a big spoon full to swallow for someone new to the game... or genre. But the same time it is easy to understand and remember, when it comes to abilities and rules (which is often a problem for me). I thought it is only fair to mention my rather rare turnaround of opinion on this one. Try it, maybe there is a surprise waiting for you, like it has been for me :)
Looks to hard for me
Wow. Looks like a really boring, over-complicated, and fiddly euro. Pass. I didn't even like Dominant Species. That game was boring to me. The most euro I get is Lords of Waterdeep. And Ticket to Ride of course.
I feel for you. Not being able to enjoy euros must really suck.
@@TeChNoWC7 Well, I like a euro's but he's not wrong. TM is boring and fiddly.
@@drizzle952 if by boring and fiddly you mean mechanically brilliant and fun, sure
@@TeChNoWC7 Each to their own I guess..
yes ill be playing the race of "fakers"
Hexes... yikes!!
Nice review Tom, this game is really bad and unnecessary..
..to some people. To others, it's excellent :)
I find point salad is a term used by people who like shitty games it's this big group think thing. Not every game has to have a super action adventure dungeon crawl super hero battle theme with a lot of dice and rules exceptions. Just b/c a game gives you a multiple scoring avenues doesn't mean it has no direction, they just don't hold your hand. I don't mind Toms negative responses to this game, I've been watching his videos for a long time so I know how he reviews and what he likes. It is important to remember that he is not the end all be all or at least we don't need to let him be. Honest opinions or not he has a taste and that is fine just don't let his taste change yours.
Point salad is a great term for the incentivization structure behind these sorts of games. In some direct confrontation games like Kemet, the goal of certain actions is to acquire a certain strategic advantage. In some negotiation games like Archipelago, resources are acquired for the leverage they may give later. In point salad games like Terra Mystica (which I do own and like, though I'm not clear enough on the rules from my play with a friend to run my own copy yet), the goal of almost every action in the game is to gather points. Every action you take directly provides points, and the fascination lies in how to optimize your point-gathering machine or how you can manipulate systems to produce more points than your opponent's different machine. Points are the be-all, end-all incentive.
So it's a categorical criticism, not one specific to Terra Mystica. I think it's a valid one: placing points as the end goal can often feel like painting in one color.
I think Tom is getting old now. or probably because of trying to play every game out there to review, he dont spend enough time to play new good games. Tom gave same type of review for 2 of the best games of 2013 Tzolkin and Terra mystica. both are defiantly heavy euro games but so is Agricola. the best part of these 2 games are there are lot of options and strategies in these 2 games so by playing them lot of times u don't get bored. but i think Tom is getting old and trying too much time to learn new heavy Euro games is now don't seem good idea to him.
i played Tzolkin again and again and every time i tried new strategies and i still feel like playing it more find new strategies.
He did say that it is a very solid heavy euro game and everything you said probably isn't news to him.
But the theme still is badly implemented. You can't get around that fact. I like the mechanics myself although i feel the game may be a bit too complicated for it's own good. But that's okay, no big deal. What is a big deal for me is how the game depicts nothing. It's an abstract game that clearly tries to be thematic but the mechanics don't make sense a lot of the time. With that in mind i can't say that it's a very good game. The mechanics are good but the whole game isn't. It's okay, PERHAPS leaning toward good but nothing more.
Michael Arnold I don't believe that's true. Nobody said it's easy to design a game that's fantastic mechanics-wise as well as theme-wise and i'm not sure if a game like that already exists but that doesn't mean it can't be done.
Yeah, I guess it is a mixture of primarily two things: Preference and investment of time. Not only for Tom, but for everyone of us. And the time investment is often directly, but not entirely, related to our taste or preferences. And having said that, I think playing (having to play) so many new releases in a given and limited time frame does often leave not enough space for exploring the necessary depths of some more complex titles, especially when our preferences are not adding the energy through enthusiasm to do so :) Which is a pity in this case as the land of Terra Mystica is a complex or better diverse landscape full of very clear and clever sign posts helping you to enjoy your journey rather than getting lost.
Well it is a heavy euro. It's not for everyone.
The theme is pretty much irrelevant and it lacks a cohesive mechanics.
For instance Chess is another game with poor theming, but it has elegant design on the mechanics (everything is movement/removal). Terra Mystica lacks that simplicity that chess has, you are always overwhelmed on options and objectives.
Lol this looks so good to me haha
'em fakers!
Really missed the mark on this one.
So the criticism here is: this is a euro, it's not ameritrash. Fair enough, but come on.
Did you just say "Point Salad"?